Final project!

It's up.

http://mason.gmu.edu/~bcosby1/finalintro.html

Revised Manifesto!

Alright, so I might not become the most awesomest screenwriter ever. I should still be pretty decent, though.

I still have a lot to learn and a lot to experience. My writing often follows the same basic themes and archetypes, which is something that I need to force myself out of. I've lived too long in my comfort zone and awesomeness won't be achieved unless I start taking risks.

As for my principles (doing something old exceptionally well or doing something completely new incredibly well), I still stand by them. I understand now that it will take some time and a great deal of efffort, however.

Awesome writers don't form over night. But I should still be fairly awesome in 3-4 years.

Critique Four!

"Facade"

The group project takes the idea of digital media -- telling a story while exploiting the unique abilities of digital media.

Its concept is simple, tell a (fractured) story about how what we experience may not be as simple as what we see. Aptly named "Facade," it's a mostly visual experience, getting its metaphorical points across with literal effects -- for example, text exploding off the page. Each page gives us a bit more information, ambiguous but thoughtful and entertaining.

What's most remarkable about the project are the effects that it employs. They are flashy, fascinating, and a perfect example of something that can only be done digitally. While they may be simply a gloss, they are a very entertaining and effective gloss.

Overall, a fantastic project by Justin and Shane. Very well done.

Critique #3!

Anderbo is an online journal that specializes in fiction, poetry, "fact," and photography. It provides a platform for artists to present their work and it does an good job doing so. The site provides a simple, clean environment with an effective, if simple, presentation. It doesn't provide too much, but it does not need to.
As for using the electronic format effectively, it does not seem to exploit its full potential. As is, it is merely a journal on a computer screen, text or photos against a white background. It is something that can exist on a page without losing much of his impact.
I would like to have my work published here as it seems professional and filled with some decent work. I feel like I would be in good, if not superior, company.

Group!

For the group project, David Greene and I will be working together. We haven't quite settled on a concept, but we will soon.

Remix critique!

Elizabeth Kimbell's remix project was superb. It combined text, audio, and image together in one cohesive, entertaining project.

Overall, the project has a distinct look -- helped by the faded colors of the paper and the Courier typeface -- something that sets it apart from others. If that wasn't enough, the watermarked images on the page and the audio clip of FDR at the beginning, drive home the look of the project.

As for what I would change -- nothing much. It works wonderfully, it feels complete, and it has an artistic value. Overall, it's an excellent project.

Critique #1!

Melinda Rackham and Damien Everett's "Carrier" is... creepy. The work is entirely interactive and very lo-fi. The piece attempts to personify the hepatitis C virus and bring a face to it.

It's simple and grimy approach gives an appropriately disgusting spin on a very horrible disease. The entire piece plays under a moody, wallowing soundtrack -- once again giving further emphasis the caustic disease.

Beyond the grungy aesthetic however, the piece becomes even more disturbing through its interactivity. Early on, the virus asks for your name. After that point, it will address you by name and ask you to chose your next step. These choices are engrossing and enhance the viewer's experience.

I'd say that I enjoyed the work but why? These new pieces with their radically different styles and approaches are not easily measured with the metrics of static literature. One basic measurement that does not change, however, is wether or not it affects the reader. If it leaves any sort of (positive) lasting impression, I'd say its job is done.

In this case, it's been done well.

Manifesto!

I will be the most awesome screenwriter ever. My writing will inspire the future and change the present. My words will be notes to a symphony that will affect and move people in ways unimaginable. My talent is great and my followers will be legion.

Now, some questions may follow. One: Why are you in English 344 if you wish to be a screenwriter? Two: How will you do it?

The answers to both are simple.

Firstly, despite my cinematic ambitions, the screenplay is still a written document. It is composed of words and sentences and characters and settings, even though it will be eventually transformed into a visual experience. Yet, at its core, it must still be well-written.

Now, to create the most awesome screenplays ever, I must become the most awesome writer ever. And to do so, I must grow and expand. I must go through a rigorous education. I must absorb all aspects of writing as an art and transform myself into a better writer. English 344 is key to that.

Secondly, in order to change the world of screenwriting, I must do things differently or better.

Cinema has fallen into a dirge of uninspired, over saturated crap. The direction is lazy and the words unoriginal. It will be my goal, as an amazing writer, to change that through two different (if not related) methods.

Luckily, they fit nicely into two numerical points. They follow:

1. Write something different. Expand. Change the meaning of words. Change the meaning of situations. Do something completely unexpected and create new genres with new expectations and shatter notions of what's expected.
   
   Now, this may be a little difficult but for a writer of my capacity it should only take, say, nine months to do.
   
   My point is that screenwriting has become a stale art form. Be it because of the easiness of replication or the demands of the industry, moviegoers are assaulted with endless derivative sequels and uninspired rip-offs. Doing something new may not be the hard part (after all, all one must do to achieve something new is to take a look at what has come before and avoid it) but the trick may be in doing it well.
   
   After a few strikes, I'm sure I'll have something.
   
   But instead of reinventing genres, I could go for something different --
   
   
   
2. Do something familiar, but do it differently. Say for instance that I feel inclined to write a sci-fi horror/thriller set on a deserted space station lazily orbiting the third moon of Iota Gamma II. Instead of simply rehashing Alien and filling the station with one monster or a dozen, I could venture to do something a bit different. Instead of remaking Solaris for a third time by introducing a psychological element, I would instead want to do something surprising.
   
   In opposition to Point 1, this approach takes comfort in the confines of genre, realizing what works and what doesn't. Instead, it achieves something special and notable through its new themes, crisp subtext, crisp dialogue, and layered characters. I would infuse the screenplay with ideas not usually found in the genre and then proceed to do it all to perfection.
   
   Essentially, it's goal is not to do one thing stunningly well, but instead to make every little component of the screenplay exceptional. With this approach, a screenplay would likely fall into previously-known categories, but it would exist as an exceptional entry.

Most of this may seem obvious. I disagree. This must have never occurred to many before, because if it had, we would see better-written films. Instead, we get trash.

Yes, there are half a dozen winners each year but, on the whole, of the thousands of films released commercially in a twelve month span, most of them suck. They should be unfamiliar. Or, they should be familiar but exceptional.

The writing can be better. And it will be better once I become awesome.

Then, I'll do something about the crappy direction.