Review: Snow White and the Huntsman -- Part 1

A little over two weeks after its release, I finally saw Snow White and the Huntsman. I wasn’t expecting a lot going in; I was pleasantly surprised by the experience. The movie cleaved fundamentally to the traditional Snow White story (not to be confused with the Disney animated classic circa 1937). It also extended the original story in ways that encouraged thinking long after leaving the theater.

Feeling Deja Vu

The film, starring Kristin Stewart who most moviegoers will recognize as Bella from the Twilight movies, uses several devices which echo the Twilight books and movies.

-- An apple featured early in the film may remind one of the Twilight book cover, although apples appear frequently in several versions of the Snow White legend;

-- Snow White jumps into the ocean at 0:18, mirroring Bella’s New Moon cliff diving;

-- Snow White also wanders lost in the woods, looking for help and escape, conjuring Bella’s abandonment in the woods in Twilight’s New Moon.

The evil stepmother Queen Ravenna might also be considered a vampiric entity. While she does not suck blood, she does feast on the life force of maidens, leaving them a withered husk.

All of these features could make a Twilight fan feel right at home as they view this movie.

Factors of Production

SWatH possesses a lovely, gritty feel; one can almost smell the dank of the dark forest and the salt of the ocean surrounding the castle. CGI elements are solid and appropriate to each scene; they’re unobtrusive, with the exception of the fairies. These unfortunate little creatures feel like something cropped out of Avatar, bleached and shrunken to fit SWatH. One can’t help but notice them as objects of CGI. In contrast, the troll actually feels like it is a member of the cast, albeit a very minor character.

FanFiction.net and the "missing" posts

On May 30th, Twilight fan fiction authors were concerned over the removal of posts by host site FanFiction.net (FFn).
Authors' and readers' Twitter chatter suggested two possible problems:

• Summaries for posts may not have been K-rated (all audiences), as required under the Terms of Service (ToS);

• Posts may have been MA-rated (equivalent to MPAA's NC-17 rating) and therefore out of compliance with the site's ToS.

Additionally, unspecified and unannounced formatting changes deleted punctuation from a number posts. Specifically, dashes and some quote marks were deleted. Because so little data has been offered, it's not clear what kinds of punctuation may have been impacted; it's possible these were non-ASCII marks. At least two users posting content using WinPCs with Google Chrome browsers have had no obvious changes to their posts' punctuation, but this is not enough data to indicate a consistent problem. Whatever drove this formatting change muddied the picture with regard to the fan fiction content pulled by FFn.
Doing some homework on available data for the top three FFn fandoms, the following numbers suggest the problem is relatively isolated:

Wikipedia notes 200,159 Twilight fics published under Books on 28-MAY. FFn shows 198,677 today under books. That's 1482 diff, 0.7% change. [Source:Tweet] 
Wikipedia notes 594,940 Harry Potter fics published at FFn on 28-MAY under Books. FFn now shows 593,674. Diff: 1266 or 0.2% change. [Source:Tweet]
Wikipedia shows 304,957 Naruto fics published under Anime/Manga on 28-MAY. FFn now shows 302,955 under same. Diff: 2002, or 0.6% change.  [Source:Tweet]

What little data is available regarding the works pulled by FFn suggests that this was not a widespread housecleaning. In at least one case, the author's summaries were ToS compliant, but only one of several M-rated stories were pulled. One of the works not pulled was of a very similar nature in terms of content and theme to the one pulled. The randomness of this work's removal suggests a complaint may have been received about one piece, but no further information is available to confirm or rebut this possibility.
Whatever the reason FFn pulled works, it's critical that FFn users do not misinterpret the reduction in fiction post counts:

IMPORTANT: Reductions in FFn fic counts may not be due to FFn pulling a few fics, but pulling by authors of entire account's worth of fics.  [Source:Tweet] 

It's also in FFn's best interest not to touch any fan fiction authors have rated as M  content:

If Twilight>Books>M-rated equals 34.6% of current total fics under that category, total number/percent pulled by FFn or authors still small. [Source:Tweet] 

The percentage of M-rated Twilight-Books posts was determined by using search feature by rating only and noting total number of posts offered under that criteria, against total posts of all ratings under Twilight-Books category. The number of Harry Potter and Naruto M-rated fan fiction works was not determined; it's likely the percentages are very similar, particularly in Harry Potter since the Twilight and Harry Potter fandoms have large overlaps in memberships.

Ultimately, FFn relies on M-rated content, whether fully compliant or not with its ToS. It's difficult to imagine FFn deleting as much as 30% of the content which drives its traffic and therefore advertising income. This same 30+% of content may also drive far more than 30+% traffic since lower rated content may not receive the same brisk traffic.

Finding the "missing" talent in a technology-rich present

Filmmaker David Schmüdde wrote at Beyond The Frame about director Peter Webber’s latest post for Directors.UK.com. Webber discussed film and technology in his entry, The Newest New Wave; he lamented that in spite of the quantity and quality of technology available today, new filmmaking genius has not emerged:

“…there is a limit to what can be expected from this democratisation of the means of film production. The most important commodity in all of this is not in fact the technology but the talent.”

Director Aaron Stewart-Ahn’s recent comments informed Webber’s post:

"...we don’t see films as brave, funny, entertaining, ambitious or unashamedly intellectual as the ones they [Godard, Coutard] made together....Nowadays there seems to be an overall diminution of ambition, an unfortunate limiting of horizons."

Is this true? It may be more accurate to say we’re prevented from seeing clearly the heirs of Godard/Coutard:
1) The US is now a culture of amateurs. Anybody with a digital camera/videocam, camera phone, tablet with camera--but without any additional training--is a potential creator of video for publication/distribution. Much of what appears in public online video repositories is produced by the untrained but highly motivated user. It may not look like the product of seasoned creators.
2) Education in the US places a premium on analysis (and not storytelling) in preparation for the workplace, not on analysis for the creation of better art. However, analysis is taught, and it may yield content that looks very different from Godard/Coutard's generation. What narrative emerges will also look very different.
3) Venues for sharing/publication/distribution like YouTube and Vimeo receive and warehouse so much content that it's unfathomable how even the existing film industry could drink from this firehouse and find satiation. There's just so much content that it swamps whatever is really good; how do we find the needle in the haystack?
4) Success breeds contempt; The Blair Witch Project neutralized the indie creator space for quite some time. Commercially-funded cinema has mimicked independent film to the point of discouragement (see Cloverfield [2008] for the use of cinéma vérité complete with jump cuts as an example, applied in a sci-fi/fantasy production). The product of blowback against earlier real and faux indie efforts may look quite different as it rebels against past success.

Entertainment Industry and the Truth About Information: It's the Experience, Stupid

I’ve been stewing over a post by Steve Blank retweeted earlier today by director Peter Webber. Blank discusses the reason why the movie industry can’t innovate, pointing to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) as one of the firewalls the movie industry bought to prevent incursion on the industry’s intellectual property.
SOPA is a cheap method for the industry to avoid more expensive innovation and take a less risky action: sue the fuck out of anybody who might find a way to tweak their output and make yet another product, especially products from which they can’t reliably draw income. Bottom line, it’s not about creativity or protecting it; SOPA is about protecting monetary turf on the cheap while avoiding any expense-incurring risk.
But the movie industry will have to deal with reality sooner or later--better now, while the current business model still brings in tons of money as Steve Blank pointed out. They can afford the luxury of experimentation to the benefit of their shareholders, versus later when the truth becomes crystal clear to the public.
The truth, which all industries built on replicable human knowledge must face, is that information is a commodity in the age of the internet. It wants to move freely, and it will. For most of human history, information was corralled and controlled; money could be extracted by gatekeepers who controlled the medium. In the age of the internet, gatekeepers no longer have control. Networks attached to the internet are leaky--and information will take advantage of these leaks to move as it’s like air, hard to maintain in a vacuum of any scale. [cont'd.]

Refinery29.com and the fall of western women's civilization spawned by Twilight -- Not

There've been a rash of opinion pieces all over the internet bashing the Twilight saga. Some make effective points; most don't, like the latest at Refinery29.com. It reads like a piece one might pull out of their butt to make a managing editor happy by driving up traffic through angered readers. (Believe me, I'm quite familiar with this kind of crap as a former managing editor--been there, applauded it.)
This particular piece was so thin and inflammatory that it deserved a comment. Here's what I posted:
__________
Bottomline, Neha Gandhi argues this kind of modern myth is bad for US culture, right? We can ignore the fact that other cultures have built entire religions and ethical foundations on similar archetypes, yes?
We should just ignore the fact that billions (yes, with a B) of Indians, Nepalese and other near-Asian peoples over the past 2000+ years have enjoyed the epic Ramayana, whose god Rama and demigod/avatar Hanuman share characteristics similar to Edward Cullen and other male members of his family. Here's Jambavantha (a supporting character in the Ramayana) reminding Hanuman of his powers:

You are as powerful as the wind;
You are intelligent, illustrious & an inventor.
There is nothing in this world that’s too difficult for you;
Whenever stuck, you are the one who can help.

Yeah, the super-intelligent, incredibly strong, psychic immortal Edward, right there -- virtually another avatar of Rama/Hanuman.
And what of Sita, Rama's wife? An "abandoned child" or "orphan child" archetype, she's not unlike Bella in that they share rather thin parental oversight. She's supposed to model all that is the epitome of virtuous femininity as a model wife, although under threat from outside forces she cannot control (like kidnapping by god Ravana).
The Ramayana isn't the only mythic epic with parallels in the Twilight saga. One could make the case that many of our familiar fairy tales, Disney-fied for our modern western consumption, offer very similar archetypal models. But nobody's pointing out that Snow White--who lives unmothered and selflessly for seven little men while waiting for a prince to rescue her from evil--offers a similarly "bad" and eerily similar model of femininity as Bella does in the Twilight saga.'
Heck, no, let's not dig too deep there at the risk of pissing off Disney's lawyers, or hurting access to the actors, director and production companies behind the impending Snow White and the Huntsman.
Myths have been critical to the formation of human culture including its ethos since humans could tell stories. We've survived these many incarnations of the same archetypal models of masculinity and femininity for thousands of years. Yet this op-ed proposes young American women are suddenly going to emulate crappy models of femininity because of one author's myth-like books? Yeah. I don't get it. Weakly argued.
[Comment originally posted at: http://www.refinery29.com/twilight-breaking-dawn-bella-swan-role-model#commen...]

Fan Fiction Story Translation Policy

I've received requests to translate my stories in languages other than English, in which I draft my works.

At this time translations are NOT authorized for the following reasons:

-- English is my primary language; I am not prepared to do a thorough job of auditing translated works for their faithful duplication of the original work.

-- I am not prepared to audit the translators for performance if more than one request is made for a single non-English language.

-- Translators' work is voluntary and uncompensated, and therefore completely at the whim of the translator; I cannot assure that translation work will be completed fully and on a timely basis for readers of my work.

I'm very sorry for the inconvenience this causes my readers whose first language is not English.

Thank you for understanding.

Book Club: Ulysses, by James Joyce

I'm participating in the 1Book140 book club reading of Ulysses by James Joyce. This is a massive undertaking, in part because the book is so dense and chewy, and in part because there's so much material out there to read about this classic.
[Note: 1book140 is a monthly online book club hosted by Jeff Howe and The Atlantic. The November 2011 selection is Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut. More about the book club's launch at this link. To join the book club (whether you choose to read Ulysses or not), use this link.]
I expect to write from time to time about Ulysses and the experience of reading it with a virtual book club. If you have any interest in Ulysses or are interested in joining along with the book club, the following resources may be of use to you:
Some additional resources:
Ulysses eBook - Project Gutenberg
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/4300
Multiple formats available; keep in mind that this work is still under copyright in the EU into 2012. The HTML version does not provide breaks or headings at points where previous Episode ends and a new one begins.
- - - - - - - - -
Ulysses (novel) - Wikipedia entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulysses_(novel)
Worth reading for the history, context and outlines, overview of Episodes.
- - - - - - - - -
Ulysses in a Nutshell (Shmoop-based summaries and analysis)
http://www.shmoop.com/ulysses-joyce/
Note the links to Intro and each of the Episodes; each Episode has both a summary and an analysis.
- - - - - - - - -
Ulysses audiobook - Archive.org
http://www.archive.org/details/Ulysses-Audiobook
Note downloadable versions as well as embedded player; the downloads and player are divided by episode.
- - - - - - - - -
Ulysses audiobook - LibriVox.org
http://librivox.org/ulysses-by-james-joyce/
Compare and contrast with the Archive.org version which has near-commercial production values. Also note backstory about LibriVox's production at:
http://librivox.org/2009/11/22/about-that-ulysses-recording/
- - - - - - - - -
Twitter tags: Book Club, Ulysses - #occupyulysses Book Club, all - #1book140
It's worth noting that Ulysses was written over a seven-year span. It may not be unreasonable to think it will take as long to fully grasp this work.