From page to screen

I saw The Hunger Games last night.

 vs 

And just like I expected from devouring all three books in a matter of days, it was epic. It was awesome. And I loved every minute of it.

I know people who have debated the finer details of the plot that the book left out or changed. "This didn't happen..." or "Why did they change that?" So many people discredit a movie because it's not as good as the book. That may be true in many places, but in my mind, the book and the movie are two different types of media and can't be transitioned from page to screen. Or vice versa (I've read some novelizations that have expanded upon the original movie and I appreciate the extra insight into characters). So I tend to try and take them as separate entities.

Here's why: so long as the original essence of the book is correct and true to its fans, little changes like that have never bothered me. If there's a plot difference that makes you feel differently about a character, or something happens that completely changes how things end, then that's more up for discussion. As it is, I like it when directors bring their own vision to the screen, but it has to be the essence of the source material.

Granted, I've never had a book I've written be butchered by a movie, but I'm also not great when it comes to film, as my efforts during school have proved (oh school projects, how horrible you turned out). But, as I see it, movies from books should not be literal adaptations. I'd hate to hear every single thought the main character has or how this thing was just a tiny bit different. If it helps move the plot along, I just don't mind. Many times a book needs to be updated for the current audience.

So I absolutely loved The Hunger Games in its own right and I can't wait for the next one, when my favorite character makes his appearance (Finnick, my hero!). I can't wait to see how they treat him.

I've always found the first two Harry Potter movies to be the most boring out of the entire eight-movie series. That's because they were absolute literal adaptations of the books, just so it didn't offend any fans. They were overlong and dragged when the plot needed to move along. When The Prisoner of Azkaban came out, it was like a breath of fresh air. Alfonso Cuaron imbued life into the book and made an entertaining movie that never dragged. I won't say all of the movies were perfect in that respect - having characters like Cho in the movies do something she'd never do in the books was a jolt for such faithful adaptations. But they were all overall a good job.

Same for The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. I've only seen the Swedish version, the American version, and read the first book, so I can only speak about the that first storyline (and with a hazy memory). I'd have to say, I liked the American version better. David Fincher put his own brand on it, and while there were some changes, they didn't change the overall outcome. Same for Baz Luhrman's Romeo + Juliet - the story changed somewhat, but the soul was still there. At least I think so.

Even Stanley Kubrick's version of The Shining, however different it was from the source material, has its own merit. This is one of the instances where I definitely liked the book better than the movie, but to each his own, right? The movie was spectacular and I did see it before reading the book. It's just one of the those things where I like the medium of a novel moreso than its screen counterpart.

The Mist? Yes, it had a different ending, but it felt so perfect, no one really complained.

Instances where book to screen transitions didn't work too well for me include Ella Enchanted (oh my God, what they do to it?), and some others that aren't coming to mind at the moment. If a movie adaptation is going to converge so much, why even give it the same title? Movies have changed their titles from their book counterparts - do that for all those films that will give fans a WTF? moment so we don't have a false sense of security.

The only movie based upon a book that I'm afraid to see is David Lynch's version of Dune. The book is my all-time favorite book, and I hear conflicting (and mostly bad) things about its screen adaptation. I'm trying to dredge up the courage to watch it, but it might be one of those instances where I can't separate it from my expectations of the novel. I'll let you know what I think when I do. Honestly, at the moment, there are far more movies that I have more interest in seeing.

On a closing note, I saw a trailer for Nicholas Sparks' new adaptation, The Lucky One. Seriously, how does this guy get funding for his movies? I've only seen The Notebook and read the book and I was nearly bored to tears (which was coincidentally when all of my friends started crying during a viewing, so they thought I was going along with it).

JUST LIKE EVERY MOVIE FROM NICHOLAS SPARKS, I'M TELLING YOU!! 

So what if it has Zac Efron??

And with that, good night. At the request of some of my friends, my next blog post will be a departure from the usual fare and will be about my cooking misadventures. I'm a terrible cook. As you'll find out.

Thanks, guys!

x Erin

The importance of reading when you're a writer

I've always been a voracious reader.

I remember being in second grade and I finished my first long chapter in a day - The Boxcar Children. I devoured it in a matter of hours, not even going to recess that day. I was so excited about the series that I went out and bought the next six in the series. But the appeal of their story ended there.

I credit my nerdy fascination with sci-fi and fantasy with the first time I watched Star Wars when I was 9. I was over at a friend's sister's birthday party - her name escapes me now - and she loved the series, so they watched the whole original (best) trilogy over the course of the party. I hadn't seen it before because I tried watching Star Trek and, well, it just seemed so weird to see aliens like that. They were ugly and their storylines were so confusing. But watching Star Wars - that was a turning point for me.

Suddenly, I wanted to continue that that universe, to tell my own stories of stuff that doesn't happen in our world. I sat down and crafted out stories about Luke Skywalker and his enduring adventures with Ewoks (hey, I was a little girl, after all and the Ewoks had this whole teddy bear appeal for me).

In fourth grade, I was introduced to the Redwall series when my teacher purchased The Outcast of Redwall, featuring a ferret on the cover. I had no idea what it was about, but I wanted to know. So I bought the first book - at three hundred odd pages, it felt like such a huge read for me. I read them every chance I got. During recess, after school. I fell into a rhythm and I bought the next book in the series every weekend.

From there, I graduated to other books. The Chronicles of Narnia, The Dragonriders of Pern, The Sword of Truth series (which I was way too young to read at the time), Ender's Game, Anita Blake, Stephen King... the list goes on and on.

And, as strange as it was, I would write my own stories. First, it was just expansions of the universes created in the books I was reading, but then I moved on and started writing books with my own characters and my own stories to tell. I'd shut myself up in my room and would clink at my keyboard for hours. I think that's part of the reason why I can type so quickly.

But above all else, I knew that I wanted to tell my own stories. I knew what I wanted to read, I had my own preferences with how things were written. I knew styles. I had my own pet-peeves of what other authors did.

I took all of their inspiration and mistakes and fused it with my writing. And I think that helped me more than any writing class ever would. Reading, that is.

Unfortunately, I had the bad habit of starting a story and then never finishing it, whether or not it was because it took me so long to write the books or I lost interest or my writing style changed. I have a print out of all of these old books in a binder at my parents' house. Probably only two living souls have seen these stories.

And then I fell out of practice with it. I went to college. Suddenly, I had a myriad of other things keeping me from writing. Projects, tests, exams. My very future depended upon how well I passed my classes. Reading took a back seat. So did writing. After all, so very few people actually got published, how could I ever make a living doing it?

And then, the strangest thing happened. Last year, my parents bought me a Kindle for Christmas. At first, it was a toy, just a strange thing that I never really used. But then, I bought a book on it for $.99. That's right, less than a dollar. It wasn't until I read that book (thank you, Rhiannon Frater, for Pretty When She Dies) and I started researching the writer that I realized she was self-published.

And I looked into it. The world of digital publishing meant that I didn't have go through a publisher. It meant that I could tell my own stories, the way I wanted. I had tried sending stuff off to publishers before, and I had always been rejected. But with this whole self-publishing thing - I didn't have to worry about it.

Suddenly, something clicked. This is something I want to do, have been preparing for it ever since I sat down to write out how Luke Skywalker ended up with a girl who was raised by Ewoks.

And so, I'm trying this out. Going back to what I enjoyed doing when I was little. Sure, I'm not making a living doing it. Right now, I'm averaging about 5 book sales a day. But Chris hears about each sale as it happens, usually through email and we have our little :-) celebrations.

It means a lot to me that I'm writing. And it means a lot to me that people are reading it.

Thanks for the support.

P.S. I've spent this entire post talking about writing in the past, I just wanted to give a quick update on my next book. I'm at 52k words right now and should been done with a first draft by the end of the month and then I'll send it off to some friends to edit it. So give me until March for Extraordinarily Average.