Ask Steve Perry

Started by Corporal Hicks, May 06, 2007, 09:22:14 PM

Author
Ask Steve Perry (Read 188,645 times)

echobbase79

echobbase79

#135

Damn, you taking heat too?  :-\

Hang in there.  ;)

Corporal Hicks

Corporal Hicks

#136
You know, I seem to be able to get people SiL doesn't like onto the board.

steveperry

steveperry

#137
Hey, no problem, I'm a big boy, I can take care of myself. But if we are going to have a debate, I need to see a reason to put any kind of stock in somebody's stand-alone opinion.

If somebody wants to lecture me on what a story or better writing is, that's okay, but they need to demonstrate that they know more about it than I do.

So far, I ain't seen it from SiL. His opinion and a dime will get him ten pennies, if somebody wants to bother to make change.

Truth is, so will mine. You know what opinions are like ...

However: While I don't claim to be a great writer, I do have thirty years' worth of professional credits to back my observations about the process, so I figure that gives my opinion maybe a tad more weight on that subject.


Corporal Hicks

Corporal Hicks

#138
Think it comes from the fact that your Alien novels are old. And with that age comes the blandness in your writing. Looking back, Earth Hive isn't a very inspired or well written novel compared to some of the new ones. Same goes for most of the old A/v/P novels. You're best work in said franchise were the team ups with Stephani or Diane, whatever she's going by these days?

I'm looking forward to reading Turnabout to see how you've developed.

Gates

Gates

#139
I have a question, but it's more of a general question regarding the book publishing process...I'm sure it's been a long time since you were in this situation, so please bare with me...

How exactly does an unknown person, with no connections in the business, get about to having a manuscript published?

What are the steps? Does one need an agent first or do you bring your work straight to a publisher and hope for the best?

Forgive my ignorance on this, but I'm an avid hobby writer and I'm looking to possibly bring it to the next level. Any information you could share with me on this would be greatly appreciated.

SiL

SiL

#140
Quote from: steveperry on Nov 01, 2007, 09:02:00 PM
You read both scripts? Speaking here as a pro, Cameron's script was better, hands down, across the board, pick a spot.
Depends on two things:

Firstly, whether you mean O'Bannon's script or the Hill/Giler script. If so O'Bannon's, no argument.

Secondly, how you decide to define 'better'.

You may have 30 years' professional credit behind you - I don't even have 30 years of existence behind me, so you pretty solidly win that round - but you still define better as what appeals to you.

So how do we see better in this context? More memorable, or more realistic?

If we're going by more memorable, then certainly. The fantastical will always stick in our mind more than real things will, by and large, and it's almost always more entertaining unless you happen to live with happy drunk acrobatic circus midgets.

Cambo's characters are loud and self-important and spew cheesy one-liners like they were going out of fashion. They carry big guns and use big vehicles and blow shit up constantly. They're the cool people at parties, always entertaining, except for people like Drake and Vasquez who you avoid for fear of your life. Trivial things like physics and logic often take a back seat to the theatrical experience. His movie also leaves you feeling all warm and happy inside because everybody's saved and that annoying little thing called post traumatic stress is just something nasty people tell small children to scare them into being good.

If we look at 'better' as more realistic, then no, Cameron's script isn't better. The characters of Alien are much more down to earth and life-like. Not every line of dialogue is some memorable one-liner which you can casually drop into a conversation. Reading the script I was given a genuine sense of creeping dread, that things were going from bad to worse and were only going to keep getting worse until the Alien was dead, or everyone else was. The environment and the technology was given less attention and less of a chance to wander off into fantasy land. It was grounded and, largely, ignored when unneeded.

The script of Alien actually creeped me out. Even in text form it drew you in with its realistic space truckers and shoved you into their circumstances, and made you, the reader, feel it when bad stuff started happening. Yet the script of Aliens failed to evoke any emotion at all - Or, in fact, any other script I've ever read.

Quoteyou don't like what I write, no problem.
I liked Nightmare Asylum ... Some bits I thought could've been left out, but I realise they were necessary to pad out the length. And I've never read anything of yours outside the Alien material, so I can hardly say you're a bad writer.

Quotegiven as how it must be so much superior to what's out there.
Never claimed to be a better writer. But does that mean I should commit genocide before criticising Hitler? I only know one Jew in my area - Would that make a good start?

Kimarhi

Kimarhi

#141
I do agree with Sil that Alien is more believable, while Cameron's is more fantastical, and with its pacing, much easier to get into.

However, Alien is the superior film, and I don't think its quite the idiot plot that its made out to be and think that Aliens might be slightly MORE guilty of following the idiot plot over Alien.

Nostromo is rerouted to Acheron.
Crew listens to beacon.
Crew force to land or forfeiture of money will occur.
Crew having already been forced planetside, must investigate ship.
Crew pokes around ship under company orders.
*potential idiot plot moment*

Kane pokes around eggs.  Gets facehugged. 

However, this is something any human with a curious nature could do.  I was in the boyscouts at one time.  We were ditching our merit badge classes because they were dull and walking around in the woods away from adult authority was rad.  We came upon the "carcass" of a wildcat.  I hung back, being suburban with country roots, I know a wildcat can mess you up despite its size.  Other kids kept going foward.  Poked wildcat with stick.  I don't know if it was sick, or just old, or injured, but it wasn't dead.  We booked.

*potential idiot moment*

Crew lets Kane back on ship.  Some crew resist the idea.

It doesn't matter how sick one of your loved ones are.  Your going to check on them.  Mom has a kid with the flu, she risk exposure to the flu to check on the kid.

*potential idiot moment*
Crew lets Kane live.  Attempts to mess with facehugger.  It bleeds acid.  It's a psychological issue that a person is many times more likely to help a friend or someone in trouble when he's FORCED too because there is nobody else around to put it off on.

Crew decides to leave Ash in charge.  Bad idea.  But nobody is thinking corporate sabotage at the moment.

Crew eats super.  Worse idea.  Chestburster pops out.  Everybody is "oh shat!"  Nobody but the sabotuer suspects anything.  But thats the thing with sabotage, you don't know who is doing it, or it wouldn't be sabotage.

*potential idiot moment*
Crew looks for alien.  However, when they see it last, its is smaller than my willy.  Human overconfidence.  Brett is whacked.

*potential idiot moment*
Crew gets nervous, but arm themselves with flamethrowers.  Alien shows no need to use technology.  Advantage human?  No.  Dallas is whacked.

*potential idiot moment*
Crew thinks about using the same idea.  REALLY BAD IDEA.  Unfortunately/fortunately Ripley is spared the trouble when Ash and the company plot are revealed.  Ash is wasted.  Plans change.

*potential idiot moment*
Going for the kill instead of leaving the romo to drift in space with creature.  But we understand this.  There is a word for it in the english dictionary.  Revenge.  And to an extent, to make sure future people don't die like the romo crew.  Understandable.

*potential idiot moment A*
Crew splits up.  But they have jobs.  Lambert and Parker too get coolant for the three of them.  Ripley to prep shuttle/self destruct.  Understandable as it would move faster, but less numbers proves a disadvantage when the Alien puts itself inbetween Lambert and Parkers flamer.  Both are wasted as a result.  Plus, ripley no longer needs coolant.

*Potential idiot moment B*  Rip goes for the cat.  Cat worth human life?  Some people think so.  But I think that cats resting in peoples laps are a comforting thought, and the cat represented peace and future security.  As a symbol I can understand why she went for it.

*Potential idiot moment*
Ripley sees parker and lambert and activates the self destruct.  Tries to go to shuttle.  Sees Alien (can't shoot because when you burn you DO bleed).  Forced back.  Goes to turn self destruct off, can't.  Runs back to ship.  Understandable, what could she have done different?  Tried to go to a different deck and climb up/drop down a different way and go from that way?  Still would have went to the same place.

*Potential idiot moment*.  Ripley assumes creature dead.  Not case.  Alien lives, but can't kill it because of acid.  Blows it out into space.  Don't know where she gets backup air, but hey, maybe she needed only enough to get in the cryotube or the ship had more than just recycling air systems.

Fin.

I feel that while some things DO stretch it a bit in the typical horror movie sense (horror characters must act like they haven't seen a horror movie before) most of the time its our own unrealistic expectations that make them seem stupid.

If I'm looking for a cat, and a penis with teeth, I don't expect the penis with teeth to suddenly be eight foot tall.

When I have a flamethrower, the ship has been my home, I don't expect an alien to outflank me.

I don't expect somebody to withold information that would potentially save the crew and undermine my efforts.

I don't expect two people to get whacked at once, when the Alien had established itself as a pattern killer by taking one person earlier in the movie.  etc etc etc.

They might not have always been the smartest lot, but they weren't unrealistically stupid either, and not slasher film "idiots."  They did the best space truckers could do.

I'll let Sil point out logic gaps in Aliens.

SiL

SiL

#142
We'd just end up running in circles.

"Idiot plot!"
"Idiot plot!"
"Idiot plot!"
"Idiot plot!"
"I'm a pro writer!"
"Idiot plo ... damn."

Bug Hunt

Bug Hunt

#143
Guys lets not be rude about Steve Perry, none of you guys have any published novels.

He is right Aliens is better than Alien, fact!!!

echobbase79

echobbase79

#144
Quote from: To The Death on Nov 02, 2007, 05:16:33 PM
Guys lets not be rude about Steve Perry, none of you guys have any published novels.

He is right Aliens is better than Alien, fact!!!

Opinions aren't facts. It's you're opinion that Aliens is better than Alien. Which I don't agree with.

Don't get me wrong though, both are well made films.

steveperry

steveperry

#145
What sparked this was that somebody asked me which of the movies I favored. I offered them up, and why I liked them.

No problem with folks who have different favorites, but trying to convince me that my choices are wrong is a waste of bandwidth.

Ask any writer who has worked in Hollywood at all what an idiot-plot is, and if Alien qualifies. I've talked to more than a few, and that's the consensus. It's a 1930's Universal horror movie, beat-for-beat.

There are conventions in genre writing. Cameron likes science fiction and it shows. O'Bannon has said he doesn't really care for the stuff, and that shows, too. I'm not trying to tell you which movie you should like, only that if you hand the scripts to people who know what the SF conventions are, more of them are going to pick Aliens over Alien. Cameron is better at the form.

Read both scripts, you can't miss it. If you did, you don't know what to look for.

Yeah, you don't need to be a world class gymnast to notice when somebody falls off the bar. But you need to know a lot more about it to be an Olympic judge, and put up a score, than somebody sitting at home  watching it on the tube who doesn't know exactly what every deduction is.

I'm not attacking you personally, I'm questioning your credentials. Do you have any that pertain to the subject of writing? I'll stipulate that there are a lot of people out there who know more about the Aliens and the Predators than do I; then again, there aren't a lot of people who have written more about them than I and been considered worth publishing. Not a brag, just how it is.

So, do I believe my opinion on this outweighs yours? Yep ...



steveperry

steveperry

#146
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Nov 01, 2007, 11:05:48 PM
Think it comes from the fact that your Alien novels are old. And with that age comes the blandness in your writing. Looking back, Earth Hive isn't a very inspired or well written novel compared to some of the new ones. Same goes for most of the old A/v/P novels. You're best work in said franchise were the team ups with Stephani or Diane, whatever she's going by these days?

I'm looking forward to reading Turnabout to see how you've developed.

Save your money. If you didn't like the old ones, I wouldn't expect you to like the new one.

Fitzley

Fitzley

#147
Quote from: steveperry on Nov 02, 2007, 07:47:12 PM
There are conventions in genre writing.

Read both scripts, you can't miss it. If you did, you don't know what to look for.

Since I do not know what these conventions are...could you elaborate on this a bit? How did O'Bannon miss them? Or how did Cameron hit closer to mark?

Thanks in advance.

SiL

SiL

#148
Wait, wait -- Since when did following genre conventions start being seen as a good thing?

And why is it all sweet and neat when Cameron follows science fiction conventions, yet a bad thing when O'Bannon and co. follow horror movie conventions?

steveperry

steveperry

#149
Quote from: SiL on Nov 02, 2007, 08:16:44 PM
Wait, wait -- Since when did following genre conventions start being seen as a good thing?

And why is it all sweet and neat when Cameron follows science fiction conventions, yet a bad thing when O'Bannon and co. follow horror movie conventions?

All good genre stories can be explained with one line. Eight words. You know what that line is?

Knowing this and how to use it properly is not only a good thing, it's the only thing.

If you step away from what is acceptable story-telling -- form, format, areas of conflict, characters, resolution, your story falls flat and nobody wants to read it. You know what the three basic plots are? The three kinds of conflict? How a three-act structure works?

Horror movie conventions are fine, if you are making a horror movie. If it is supposed to be a science fiction picture -- you know, space ship, aliens, other worlds -- then you have to speak to those aspects, otherwise, why set it there? Why not just make it a trapped-in-a-haunted-mansion story? Then it becomes The House on Haunted Hill, or maybe even Mary Roberts Rinehart's "The Bat." Good scary stuff. Not science fiction.

In A2, the science is part of the movie. The reason the marines have to rack their guns. The reason the corporation is there. That they could find Ripley years afterward. The story works on an SF level. That's because Cameron knows the form and likes it, and O'Bannon doesn't.

In A1, other than that the thing is set on a spaceship, it's a gotcha-movie, and the science isn't necessary because you could have made exactly the same movie on Earth, circa 1935. Just substitute a werewolf for the alien, there it is.

Is it scary? Oh, yeah. It works. But it's not good science fiction. A2 isn't the acme of the genre either, but it's much better.

If you knew this stuff, we wouldn't be having this discussion.







AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News