.jpg)
It's been more than six months since my last post. My wife and I have left Hong Kong and have settled back in NY. There's definitely less sunshine and no trips to exotic destinations in our new life. But we've been blessed with a new addition, our newborn son ISAIAH PARK.
Moreover, thanks to all who followed through and made requests, the Hong Kong Public Library has recently added my first novel BOY GENIUS to its holdings. If you're curious about this novel, you can now get it for free from the public library.
Click to view HKPL catalog listing
My life is vastly different now from what it was in Hong Kong. I've taken a brief break from blogging and shooting films to help take care of our son. There are definitely plenty of times when we miss Hong Kong, but we're also very happy to be back in NY. And I try to keep up my Cantonese by listening to the Cantonese radio--1480 AM--here.
Anyway, that's my two bits for this final post. I'm so happy that a part of me--this blog and my novel BOY GENIUS--remains in HK. Thank you again.
That's all for now. BYE BYE!!!
Showing posts with label novel writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label novel writing. Show all posts
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, December 22, 2008
TWILIGHT (2008) aka Book Proves Secret Fear of Writers to be True
There are some immensely popular books that seem to be fluff but are so well written that even if the material isn't one's cup of laai cha, one can’t help but feel a begrudging respect. For me, the Harry Potter series is an example of this. I just don't care for wizards, magic and spells. It's a matter of personal preference. Still, it's clear those books are writen extremely well.
Then there is TWILIGHT, a bestseller by Stephenie Meyer which has now spurned a film adaptation. So Jene, who loves the Harry Potter series and has introduced me to many books that I would have otherwise skipped, suggested I read the book as an exercise to see how it would be adapted for the screen.
Adapting a very popular novel to the screen is always difficult since a strong fan base demands that the film not deviate from the book even if this strict adhesion to the source material works against the film. On the other hand, it also means a minimum x number of fans of the book will flock to theaters regardless of how the adaptation is done.
At the risk of being called out for sour grapes (which I must harbor at some level since my own books haven't sold well), my main impression of the novel is that it seems to have been written by an 11-year-old for other 11-year-olds. The sentences are clunky and scenes go on for much too long. The vampire story seems to be rehashed from existing works of that genre and there's very little that could be called complex or sophisticated. I can't quite understand how any grown-up could derive enjoyment from this piece of junk.
The remarkable success of a book like this makes me question my own sanity. To me, it's so evident that this book is so unbelievably lacking in every way, yet it has somehow won the praise of hundreds of thousands of readers. It's enough to make a writer lose faith in the reader and wonder why he or she even bothers.
Whenever I read a complete piece of rubbish like this that's sold millions of copies, I can't help but think back to the writers I've known in my life (most whom I met when I was in university or freshly out of university). In their unguarded moments, nearly every writer I know has told me that as cynical as it sounds, deep down he or she has come to accept that the worst most talentless writers are the ones who make it commercially.
I don't agree with this view since it's a blanket statement and it's clear that there are exceptions. But TWILIGHT certainly seems to providence ammunition for such a claim. Sure not every novel has to say something serious or important, and there is a place in this world for fluff. But this book isn't even good fluff.
That said, the only sense I can make for how and why this book works(and rather well obviously given its success) is that it does, in its inane, childish and clumsy way, try to tell an earnest story of incredibly intense first love. BELLA, the narrator and main character, sees and studies the beautiful EDWARD, who is actually a vampire, as no one else at her school does. The bulk of the book is long passages of Bella obsessing and agonizing over the meaning behind Edward's tiniest gestures, words, and actions.
As for the film adaptation, this is precisely where it fails. Without the film equivalent of Bella's obsessing over the object of her first love, the intensity of the obsession/first love doesn't come through on screen. It also doesn't help that the film treats these scenes of fascination-turning-to-obsession-to-purest love quickly and as merely a means to get to some special-effects-driven good vampire vs. bad vampire fight sequences.
Despite this shift in focus, which I can only guess must have been made to try to add production value to the film and make it feel more like a movie, the special effects are poor and there’s very little to distinguish the film from a small TV show except that Robert Pattison plays the moody vampire. Overall, the film plays worse than most recent TV shows about supernatural elements mixing with the ordinary populace set in high schools, which as a TV genre, tends to be far more witty and sophisticated.
The classic BUFFY THE VAMPIRE series, which also featured a moody vampire love story, epitomizes this. The genius of that series and its creator Joss Whedon is that each episode also worked as social commentary about familiar issues in high school life (eg. Eating disorders, cliques, losing one’s virginity…)
Lacking this sophistication in the source material, the film adaptation of TWILIGHT also disappoints because it fails to show the earnest obsessive intensity of first love that is the book's focus and main strength.
Then there is TWILIGHT, a bestseller by Stephenie Meyer which has now spurned a film adaptation. So Jene, who loves the Harry Potter series and has introduced me to many books that I would have otherwise skipped, suggested I read the book as an exercise to see how it would be adapted for the screen.
Adapting a very popular novel to the screen is always difficult since a strong fan base demands that the film not deviate from the book even if this strict adhesion to the source material works against the film. On the other hand, it also means a minimum x number of fans of the book will flock to theaters regardless of how the adaptation is done.
At the risk of being called out for sour grapes (which I must harbor at some level since my own books haven't sold well), my main impression of the novel is that it seems to have been written by an 11-year-old for other 11-year-olds. The sentences are clunky and scenes go on for much too long. The vampire story seems to be rehashed from existing works of that genre and there's very little that could be called complex or sophisticated. I can't quite understand how any grown-up could derive enjoyment from this piece of junk.
The remarkable success of a book like this makes me question my own sanity. To me, it's so evident that this book is so unbelievably lacking in every way, yet it has somehow won the praise of hundreds of thousands of readers. It's enough to make a writer lose faith in the reader and wonder why he or she even bothers.
Whenever I read a complete piece of rubbish like this that's sold millions of copies, I can't help but think back to the writers I've known in my life (most whom I met when I was in university or freshly out of university). In their unguarded moments, nearly every writer I know has told me that as cynical as it sounds, deep down he or she has come to accept that the worst most talentless writers are the ones who make it commercially.
I don't agree with this view since it's a blanket statement and it's clear that there are exceptions. But TWILIGHT certainly seems to providence ammunition for such a claim. Sure not every novel has to say something serious or important, and there is a place in this world for fluff. But this book isn't even good fluff.
That said, the only sense I can make for how and why this book works(and rather well obviously given its success) is that it does, in its inane, childish and clumsy way, try to tell an earnest story of incredibly intense first love. BELLA, the narrator and main character, sees and studies the beautiful EDWARD, who is actually a vampire, as no one else at her school does. The bulk of the book is long passages of Bella obsessing and agonizing over the meaning behind Edward's tiniest gestures, words, and actions.
As for the film adaptation, this is precisely where it fails. Without the film equivalent of Bella's obsessing over the object of her first love, the intensity of the obsession/first love doesn't come through on screen. It also doesn't help that the film treats these scenes of fascination-turning-to-obsession-to-purest love quickly and as merely a means to get to some special-effects-driven good vampire vs. bad vampire fight sequences.
Despite this shift in focus, which I can only guess must have been made to try to add production value to the film and make it feel more like a movie, the special effects are poor and there’s very little to distinguish the film from a small TV show except that Robert Pattison plays the moody vampire. Overall, the film plays worse than most recent TV shows about supernatural elements mixing with the ordinary populace set in high schools, which as a TV genre, tends to be far more witty and sophisticated.
The classic BUFFY THE VAMPIRE series, which also featured a moody vampire love story, epitomizes this. The genius of that series and its creator Joss Whedon is that each episode also worked as social commentary about familiar issues in high school life (eg. Eating disorders, cliques, losing one’s virginity…)
Lacking this sophistication in the source material, the film adaptation of TWILIGHT also disappoints because it fails to show the earnest obsessive intensity of first love that is the book's focus and main strength.
Friday, November 28, 2008
New Creative Thanksgiving Juice
I know there's a lot going on in the world right now, but life goes on and I just can't help but be concerned with realtively small things.
Today, on the day after Thanksgiving, I'm thinking mostly about these two things:
1) MOJO TANGO -- Jonny Stranger, who was at NYU with me in the MFA program and is now based in Austin, TX sent me a DVD of his second feature. I think the film is still not locked down (it's still being edited), but the version I saw blew me away.
I watched it once. Then, in the middle of the night (4AM), watched it again. It has its flaws and needs a few adjustments (some scenes need to be cut and a few scenese need to be added), but it is going to be a real crowd pleaser at festivals.
Here is one of Jonny Stranger's other works, a short animated film that is a sample of his creative visual sense. Enjoy.
As for MOJO TANGO, he has done an amazing job of making a really entertaining and hip film about two friends and their relationships with women. I've seen lots of indie no-budget films shot on digital video about floundering 20somethings and 30somethings that have since been labeled as mumblecore, most notably THE PUFFY CHAIR, FUNNY HA HA, KISSING ON THE MOUTH, and Jonny's movie is way better than all those. And those movies were reviewed in the NY TIMES.
I tip my hat to you, Jonny Stranger, for persevering and getting your second feature made under remarkable duress. You are a true independent filmmaker. I can't wait for you to experience the love of the audience at festival screenings, especially since the film also authentically captures the hipster Bohemian scene of Austin. If anyone hasn't been there, the hype is for real. It is one cool city, still great for artists and slackers in general.
Anyway, being witness to Jonny Stranger's struggle and now seeing the fruit of that struggle has been humbling and enlightening. I will follow your example.
Now, the second thing.
2) I've been busy since returning to Hong Kong doing Korean-to-English translations. I did the translation (English subtitles) for an old-school Korean television mini series (all 16 episodes). This entails watching the episodes and coming up with English dialog that has same or similar meaning but that also matches the relative length of the original. It's not that difficult, and I'm pretty good at it--I'm relatively good with languages. But it still takes time. It doesn't pay much (especially now since I get paid in Korean won and that currency has plummeted), but it's work I can do at a very flexible schedule and without having to schlepp around.
Because of that job, I really haven't had time to do much else. So, it wasn't until this morning that I realized that the laptop that was stolen from our luggage in the Maldives contained the latest file of the novel that I've been working on--more fitting description is the novel that's been kicking my butt-- for the past 3, 4 years.
I thought I'd backed it up to an external hard drive that I have at home, but it turns out I hadn't. So basically, what I do have of that novel is an old draft from about a year ago before a major rewrite.
I'm not even sure what the point of this is. I'm not really sad about it. It's more like begruding acceptance of a situation.
Basically, I didn't lose it all, so if I can go on and finish the novel, losing the laptop will make for a good making-of overcoming-obstacles story.
On the other hand, it's as if this novel, a hip mystery, is giving me a way out, tempting me to take the easy way out and abandon it.
I ought to, as I know its flaws already, but I've invested so much in it already, that I just couldn't do that.
Anyway, this is what it feels like sometimes to write a book.
On a positive note, I got an e-mail from out of the blue from some prof at UC Berkeley who tracked me down to tell me she is teaching my book BOY GENIUS to her class of 40 students this semester.
This happens to me about once a year, but this is the first time from a really big name school. Very gratifying feeling.
I guess one has to find encouragement in all things.
Today, on the day after Thanksgiving, I'm thinking mostly about these two things:
1) MOJO TANGO -- Jonny Stranger, who was at NYU with me in the MFA program and is now based in Austin, TX sent me a DVD of his second feature. I think the film is still not locked down (it's still being edited), but the version I saw blew me away.
I watched it once. Then, in the middle of the night (4AM), watched it again. It has its flaws and needs a few adjustments (some scenes need to be cut and a few scenese need to be added), but it is going to be a real crowd pleaser at festivals.
Here is one of Jonny Stranger's other works, a short animated film that is a sample of his creative visual sense. Enjoy.
As for MOJO TANGO, he has done an amazing job of making a really entertaining and hip film about two friends and their relationships with women. I've seen lots of indie no-budget films shot on digital video about floundering 20somethings and 30somethings that have since been labeled as mumblecore, most notably THE PUFFY CHAIR, FUNNY HA HA, KISSING ON THE MOUTH, and Jonny's movie is way better than all those. And those movies were reviewed in the NY TIMES.
I tip my hat to you, Jonny Stranger, for persevering and getting your second feature made under remarkable duress. You are a true independent filmmaker. I can't wait for you to experience the love of the audience at festival screenings, especially since the film also authentically captures the hipster Bohemian scene of Austin. If anyone hasn't been there, the hype is for real. It is one cool city, still great for artists and slackers in general.
Anyway, being witness to Jonny Stranger's struggle and now seeing the fruit of that struggle has been humbling and enlightening. I will follow your example.
Now, the second thing.
2) I've been busy since returning to Hong Kong doing Korean-to-English translations. I did the translation (English subtitles) for an old-school Korean television mini series (all 16 episodes). This entails watching the episodes and coming up with English dialog that has same or similar meaning but that also matches the relative length of the original. It's not that difficult, and I'm pretty good at it--I'm relatively good with languages. But it still takes time. It doesn't pay much (especially now since I get paid in Korean won and that currency has plummeted), but it's work I can do at a very flexible schedule and without having to schlepp around.
Because of that job, I really haven't had time to do much else. So, it wasn't until this morning that I realized that the laptop that was stolen from our luggage in the Maldives contained the latest file of the novel that I've been working on--more fitting description is the novel that's been kicking my butt-- for the past 3, 4 years.
I thought I'd backed it up to an external hard drive that I have at home, but it turns out I hadn't. So basically, what I do have of that novel is an old draft from about a year ago before a major rewrite.
I'm not even sure what the point of this is. I'm not really sad about it. It's more like begruding acceptance of a situation.
Basically, I didn't lose it all, so if I can go on and finish the novel, losing the laptop will make for a good making-of overcoming-obstacles story.
On the other hand, it's as if this novel, a hip mystery, is giving me a way out, tempting me to take the easy way out and abandon it.
I ought to, as I know its flaws already, but I've invested so much in it already, that I just couldn't do that.
Anyway, this is what it feels like sometimes to write a book.
On a positive note, I got an e-mail from out of the blue from some prof at UC Berkeley who tracked me down to tell me she is teaching my book BOY GENIUS to her class of 40 students this semester.
This happens to me about once a year, but this is the first time from a really big name school. Very gratifying feeling.
I guess one has to find encouragement in all things.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Which is harder, writing a novel or making a film?
My friend Philippe, who is a huge Satyajit Ray fan and is one of seven people who has actually seen the Calcutta trilogy in addition to the Apu trilogy, is in town with his wife Amanda. I met up with him yesterday and had a long talk about various things while walking around Tsim Sha Tsoy and Jordan.
At one point, he asked me, Which was harder, writing a novel or making a film?
It got me thinking...
Here is a long-winded response.
As a novelist, I guess I would be called a mid-career writer on grant applications and such due to my age, the fact that I have accomplished a few things despite how shabby these things all look to me when I get down on myself every now and then. Still, whatever the case, no matter how obscure and seemingly insignificant, the fact is I am the author of two serious novels that have won me a modicum of recognition, no matter how brief and fleeting. And as comical as my royalty checks are at times, I know that there are lots of would-be aspiring novelists out there working away on their babies who would die to get their first book published.
As a filmmaker, I have far fewer credentials. Sure I made an indie 16mm feature film back in the 1990s straight out of NYU, but that feature went nowhere and was lackluster on many fronts. Since then, I've made a couple of short films that are about 20min. long. I've written a couple of screenplays, managed to sell one for a little bit of money (it never got produced). Now, I'm in Hong Kong and I've begun making very short art films (1 min. long), which I post on this blog and on youtube.
For all intensive purposes, my claim to the title filmmaker seems tenuous at best. Still, as annoying and insignificant as making little films and posting them on youtube may seem, I do it because: a) it keeps me in practice (framing shots, shooting, editing etc.); b) These little films do get seen by a handful of people; c) It's immediate. I can shoot, edit, and post the films without having to first gain the permission of some board of self-important censors to give me their approval.
Writing is different. Unless you're writing in a journal for your eyes only (which this blog sort of is), writing entails jumping through a lot of hoops. There was a time when I was a lot more eager about accepting how things were done to make it as a writer. I was more in love with the idea of writing and being a writer in general back then. So I wrote short stories, submitted them to numerous literary journals, wrote to agents, and amassed a pile of rejection letters before a confluence of little miracles got my first novel BOY GENIUS published by an edgy small press in NY.
But boy did I get sick of all those little hoops you had to jump through. Waiting for someone else's permission gets real old real quick.
And sure, with feature films, you have to go through similar things with finding distributors and 'winning their permission', but it's different with a film.
Even the worst film ever made that doesn't win distribution and simply peters out, offers pleasant things: camaraderie with cast and crew, funny anecdotes, and some cool memories.
A failed novel is a totally different animal.
There's nothing as shabby and unpleasant as a failed novel, aka, an unpublished manuscript. All you have is a bunch of pages that's not a real book and the only memories from it is of a schmuck and a typewriter.
Just ask anyone who's tried to write a novel and is now stuck with an unpublished manuscript. It's ugly.
Anyway, that's my three cents. Writing vs. Filmmaking.
The winner is Mothra.
At one point, he asked me, Which was harder, writing a novel or making a film?
It got me thinking...
Here is a long-winded response.
As a novelist, I guess I would be called a mid-career writer on grant applications and such due to my age, the fact that I have accomplished a few things despite how shabby these things all look to me when I get down on myself every now and then. Still, whatever the case, no matter how obscure and seemingly insignificant, the fact is I am the author of two serious novels that have won me a modicum of recognition, no matter how brief and fleeting. And as comical as my royalty checks are at times, I know that there are lots of would-be aspiring novelists out there working away on their babies who would die to get their first book published.
As a filmmaker, I have far fewer credentials. Sure I made an indie 16mm feature film back in the 1990s straight out of NYU, but that feature went nowhere and was lackluster on many fronts. Since then, I've made a couple of short films that are about 20min. long. I've written a couple of screenplays, managed to sell one for a little bit of money (it never got produced). Now, I'm in Hong Kong and I've begun making very short art films (1 min. long), which I post on this blog and on youtube.
For all intensive purposes, my claim to the title filmmaker seems tenuous at best. Still, as annoying and insignificant as making little films and posting them on youtube may seem, I do it because: a) it keeps me in practice (framing shots, shooting, editing etc.); b) These little films do get seen by a handful of people; c) It's immediate. I can shoot, edit, and post the films without having to first gain the permission of some board of self-important censors to give me their approval.
Writing is different. Unless you're writing in a journal for your eyes only (which this blog sort of is), writing entails jumping through a lot of hoops. There was a time when I was a lot more eager about accepting how things were done to make it as a writer. I was more in love with the idea of writing and being a writer in general back then. So I wrote short stories, submitted them to numerous literary journals, wrote to agents, and amassed a pile of rejection letters before a confluence of little miracles got my first novel BOY GENIUS published by an edgy small press in NY.
But boy did I get sick of all those little hoops you had to jump through. Waiting for someone else's permission gets real old real quick.
And sure, with feature films, you have to go through similar things with finding distributors and 'winning their permission', but it's different with a film.
Even the worst film ever made that doesn't win distribution and simply peters out, offers pleasant things: camaraderie with cast and crew, funny anecdotes, and some cool memories.
A failed novel is a totally different animal.
There's nothing as shabby and unpleasant as a failed novel, aka, an unpublished manuscript. All you have is a bunch of pages that's not a real book and the only memories from it is of a schmuck and a typewriter.
Just ask anyone who's tried to write a novel and is now stuck with an unpublished manuscript. It's ugly.
Anyway, that's my three cents. Writing vs. Filmmaking.
The winner is Mothra.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
SOMEBODY'S OLD CHEESE
I forgot that I never posted SOMEBODY'S OLD CHEESE on this blog. It's an 8-minute film that prompted the response video from Jonny Stranger.
Its genesis was a trip I took to Austin, TX two summers ago. I went to visit Jonny Stranger and to make a film with him there based on one of my old plays.
That film never came through in the week I spent there. Still, Jonny and I took turns interviewing each other and thus came SOMEBODY'S OLD CHEESE.
By the way, the woman in the photo above is Elizabeth Regen, who is a terrific actor and writer. I met her when we were both writers at NYU. She played the older sister to Natalie Portman's character in Luc Besson's THE PROFESSIONAL back in the day. She appears in TV shows from time to time. Most recently, she was in the movie BEER LEAGUE.
The guy in the photo is Jerry Ongkeo, a talented rapper from NYC. I've lost touch with him. I hope he is well and wish him the best. I remember eating at his house a few times when I was very broke.
I'm doing some translation work right now. Tonight, So Jene and I will go see a Kim Ki Duk film in a movie theater in Kowloon Tong. I'm very excited. I'm a huge fan of Kim Ki Duk and believe that he is one of the most original and unique filmmakers in the world today. The closest thing to a Kim Ki Duk even in the history of cinema is Fassbinder, and Kim Ki Duk is more original, more intense, and more creative, and more maverick than Fassbinder.
Kim Ki Duk's aesthetic can best be described as most original and most disturbing but not perverse for perversion's sake. And the guy is prolific with barely any misses. Nearly all his movies are captivating. And he writes every one of his own movies. How he manages is beyond me. The guy is unbelievably talented.
That said, I've only seen Kim Ki Duk movies through DVD. Tonight will be the first time I get to see one of his movies on the big screen. It's being shown as part of an Asian Film Festival here in HK.
Its genesis was a trip I took to Austin, TX two summers ago. I went to visit Jonny Stranger and to make a film with him there based on one of my old plays.
That film never came through in the week I spent there. Still, Jonny and I took turns interviewing each other and thus came SOMEBODY'S OLD CHEESE.
By the way, the woman in the photo above is Elizabeth Regen, who is a terrific actor and writer. I met her when we were both writers at NYU. She played the older sister to Natalie Portman's character in Luc Besson's THE PROFESSIONAL back in the day. She appears in TV shows from time to time. Most recently, she was in the movie BEER LEAGUE.
The guy in the photo is Jerry Ongkeo, a talented rapper from NYC. I've lost touch with him. I hope he is well and wish him the best. I remember eating at his house a few times when I was very broke.
I'm doing some translation work right now. Tonight, So Jene and I will go see a Kim Ki Duk film in a movie theater in Kowloon Tong. I'm very excited. I'm a huge fan of Kim Ki Duk and believe that he is one of the most original and unique filmmakers in the world today. The closest thing to a Kim Ki Duk even in the history of cinema is Fassbinder, and Kim Ki Duk is more original, more intense, and more creative, and more maverick than Fassbinder.
Kim Ki Duk's aesthetic can best be described as most original and most disturbing but not perverse for perversion's sake. And the guy is prolific with barely any misses. Nearly all his movies are captivating. And he writes every one of his own movies. How he manages is beyond me. The guy is unbelievably talented.
That said, I've only seen Kim Ki Duk movies through DVD. Tonight will be the first time I get to see one of his movies on the big screen. It's being shown as part of an Asian Film Festival here in HK.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Birth of Mhgoi.blogspot.com
Hi,
This is a blog that I've started after being in HK for 10 months. It will feature random snips about life in HK for a Korean-American from NYC.
I am also a writer and indie filmmaker.
I will often post links to books and movies.
Here are links to my two novels, both published by Akashic Books in NYC.
http://www.akashicbooks.com/BoyG.htm
http://www.akashicbooks.com/lascucarachas.htm
This is a blog that I've started after being in HK for 10 months. It will feature random snips about life in HK for a Korean-American from NYC.
I am also a writer and indie filmmaker.
I will often post links to books and movies.
Here are links to my two novels, both published by Akashic Books in NYC.
http://www.akashicbooks.com/BoyG.htm
http://www.akashicbooks.com/lascucarachas.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
