Giving the reader some emotion

If it hasn't become obvious to you, I love The Hunger Games. The whole trilogy. Everything. And upon watching the movie for the fourth time or so, something that bothered me finally clicked as to why it did.

In the book, right after Peeta's reaped, Katniss describes in detail how he saved her life by giving her bread and hope. In the movie, there's a brief flash of the two in the rain, but without context of what's actually going on.

Why does this bother me so much? Because in the book, we're given a strong characteristic as to who Peeta is. We see that he's kind and willing to sacrifice for others (his mom beats him because of what he did). Right away, the readers like Peeta, and the situation of the two going into the games gets more complicated.

In the movie, we get none of that. He's just a boy Katniss will have to fight against. Of course, those who read the books know about the bread, but those who haven't don't care. There's no emotion or connection between the two, and it takes a while to see Peeta's goodness come through the movie. And by then, most people will already have their feelings about him sorted.

This made me think of how important it is for us as writers to set up our character's personalities sooner rather than later. We can make the reader love (or hate, depending) the character with even a sentence, and hopefully within a scene. The bland characters, without their good or bad qualities coming through immediately, won't grasp the reader and then they won't care.

Sure, there are characters you can grow to love/hate, but the sooner the connection the reader has to them, the better. The sooner they'll think to themselves One more page, and get sucked in.

What do you do to make a reader instantly have an emotional reaction to your characters?

Movie Review: The Hunger Games

This is a SPOILER FREE review, so if you haven't seen it yet, no sweat. However if for some reason you haven't read the books yet, this might not be the best one for you.

Review:
The Hunger Games is my favorite book series of all time. And, I think given the way it could have turned out, this overall is an excellent adaptation. It really captures the horror of the situation, and how awful the Capitol is for using this as entertainment. I thought the world-building was done very well.
There can't be enough praise for Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss. She owned the role, and if you had any doubts about her, don't fear. Other wonderful performances: Elizabeth Banks as Effie, Amandla Stenburg as Rue, Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman, Donald Sutherland as President Snow, Woody Harrelson as Haymitch. In general a really good cast. Josh Hutcherson did a better job of Peeta than I was expecting, however, there were times when I thought he lacked a certain Peeta-ness present in book-Peeta. I felt he either got it on the nose, or else made me go "eh." And all the chemistry between him and Jennifer, it was really carried by Jennifer, what bit of it they had. Liam Hemsworth did a good job as Gale, however, you tend to forget about Gale as soon as Katniss leaves him. Lenny Kravitz did better as Cinna than I expected, and even though he didn't act in quite the way I thought of Cinna, he definitely had the magnetism for the role and I see why Gary Ross gave him the role.
I felt a deeper connection with Prim in the movies than in the books. Willow Shields and Jennifer Lawrence had great sister chemistry, and unlike the other person Katniss left behind (Gale) you really remember Prim.
There are extra scenes that don't appear in the book, and I think they did a lot to add to the story behind The Hunger Games. Very good stuff. They also added a lot more depth to Cato's character.
However, the last third of the movie. Once Rue dies, the movie is much too rushed. Which is strange to think, considering the movie is 140 minutes long, it doesn't feel like it. I think they could have cut down the beginning to add more time at what happened to the end of the Games. In general, the relationship between Peeta and Katniss was half-baked. The bread scene was presented in a confusing way, and if you haven't read the books, you won't get it. And all of the parts in the book where they build their relationship had been cut down to near oblivion.

Did you see The Hunger Games? What did you think?

Announcing A Writer's Guide to The Hunger Games!

I've been a huge fan of The Hunger Games for a long time now, in case you haven't noticed. And whenever we're given the advice to "see how published books have done it" I've always flipped back to The Hunger Games Trilogy. And so earlier this month I decided to start a blog just on that--seeing how Suzanne Collins manages to capture her audience in this series.

This week I made my first two posts on it. So if you're a fan of The Hunger Games or just want to get insight into how Suzanne Collins manages to hook so many readers, be sure to follow my new blog--A Writer's Guide to The Hunger Games.

In other news, I'm now 62k words into my W.I.P. with three more chapters, two more days, and three thousand more words to meet my goal.

What book do you always look at to see how the author did it? How's your W.I.P coming along?

It's for the Kids

I don't know about you, but I've been following news for The Hunger Games movie since...well, since it was announced that it was opted for film. And I've loved seeing big news companies covering the story. I always get really excited and read through the articles and the comments, too. And, amongst all of the hyped-up fans, I've always noticed a different kind of comment: "This is just Battle Royale for kids." Followed by more snark about how it isn't violent enough and it's toned-down and dumb.

Ok, even if I wasn't Peeta-crazy, say what now?!

I am very much aware of the similarities between Battle Royale and The Hunger Games, although I haven't ever read the former. But I really think this is just one of those ideas that gets used a lot, so there's no way to really say the idea was "stolen."

However my main beef with these types of comments is the dismissal of it being "for kids" in such a condescending way. I'm 19, so maybe I get riled up at this comment because I'm in limbo between childhood and adulthood and get in the defense about that part of me still in kid mode. But I'd hope anyone would look at these comments in a similar way that I do. And that's "well, why shouldn't there be a version of this for kids?"


There are concepts, themes, and ideas in The Hunger Games that kids should learn and be exposed to. I admire Suzanne Collins' skill, because while she does portray the horror of the situation, she doesn't do it in a way to alienate a majority of the YA audience with vast depictions of violence (depending on the kid, I'd think anywhere from ages 12-14 they could read this book). If she had created another Battle Royale, then I don't think the book would have reached as many kids (or adults), even with the same themes and storyline.

I feel the same way with Speak. It took me a long time to read Speak because before I thought, "Ew, rape. It's going to be so graphic!" But I finally decided to read it, and Laurie Halse Anderson is able to talk about rape in a way that doesn't mask the troubles and terrors that come with rape, but she also doesn't make it into a big scene that scarred me with too many details.

I know some people have a much more relaxed view of what kids should be exposed to. And I know some people are stiff-necked about it. I fall in the middle. Laurie Halse Anderson explained in a note at the end of my copy of Speak that, "America's teens are desperate for responsible, trustworthy adults to create situations in which they can discuss the issues that are of high concern for them." I don't believe in making an overly-graphic novel for a YA audience (and I don't consider The Hunger Games to be overly-graphic, so I wouldn't exactly say I'm a prude about it), but I don't believe in covering up subjects, either. It all comes down to the "responsible, trustworthy" part. Kids are expecting truth, but they're expecting it in a form they can become comfortable with the issues. And that's where books like The Hunger Games and Speak come in. Two different genres, two different subjects, but both targeting to YA and their needs.

So, to those negative commentors, yes, The Hunger Games can be seen as a Battle Royale for kids, but I don't think that makes it worse. I think it makes it even better.

The kids in books grown up

Ok, so my posts are very geared toward plotting and writing out a first draft of a book right now because, well, that's the stage I'm in with my writing, I have a WIP. When it's done and I start revising, you'll probably see a shift in subject.

So what else has kind of been floating around in my mind is this:

Not the movie. Well, okay, I am super excited about that and it has been floating around in my mind. But what I've been thinking about is if in books for the younger crowd having the characters grow up, get married, and have kids, is something they want to see.

Now, I'm fine when I read a book and I get an epilogue that shows the characters in the future. But, for some reason, I also think that authors get backlash from the young fans of the series (a good portion readers of children's books are also adults) if they do this.

Harry Potter. We get an epilogue. I've heard complaints about it. Although, I don't think it's because it shows the kids as adults, married, with their children. I think for Harry Potter, it was more of the fact that everything seemed overly cheerful, perhaps, after such a dark journey.

However, there are definitely two YA novels that have gotten some backlash from fans in this sense. Breaking Dawn and Mockingjay.

Breaking Dawn does not have an epilogue, but the fact that Bella and Edward have a baby was definitely a turn-off for some Twilight fans. Maybe it's because two thirds of the book dealt with this child in some form, readers were overdosed with it, opposed to another series which will mention children for a few pages at the end. But I did notice in my days of Twilight craze (yes, I admit that I was once obsessed with this series) most of the people who had problems with this plotline were teens. Bella and Edward suddenly had a disconnect from them. They were parents. I'm not sure what they're saying about teen pregnancy these days, but I'd wager most of the teens who read Twilight were not teen mothers. The older fans, it didn't bother them as much as, say, the absence of an epic battle at the end. But the older fans were generally mothers or close to motherhood and thinking about it more (sorry if you're a Twiguy and I'm leaving you out with most of these "how fans react thing" by referring to them all as female). Anyway, point: pregnancy and babies seem to estrange readers in the YA range when they are heavily dived into. Marriage...at least in Breaking Dawn, I don't think as much.

Mockingjay is very, very, very, very different from Twilight. But, it too got some backlash from fans and part of that was the (in my humble opinion) brilliantly beautiful epilogue. Katniss ends up with Peeta, and they have two children. Right as soon as I discussed the book with other fans, the epilogue was slammed as being horrible and unnecessary, and oh my gosh Suzanne Collins, you shouldn't have even written it! There were children. How could Katniss possibly have children? I think part of it may have been the fact that through the series, Katniss thinks she's not going to have children. Period. End of story. And then at the end, we find out Peeta's talked her into having kids. Now, I dug it because to me the kids showed how much their world had changed, that Katniss felt safe enough to have children. But some people didn't like it. And, again, I feel most of those people were teenagers and I think most of those people in general did not want children in the first place, so a point that they connected with Katniss had been severed.

So, my conclusion: Young adult readers can handle epilogues with their characters married and with children, just don't make it sappy. However, teens do not always bode well with reading extensively about life changes that they are not familiar with, like children. As for marriage, I'm not as sure how much a YA audience could handle. Generally, if a character gets married, it's at the end of the book and it's just the wedding. I've yet to see YA that delves into the realm of marriage in and of itself (Breaking Dawn mostly focuses on Renesmee). And, finally, readers don't like to see huge character changes in epilogues, even if they're amazing and make perfect sense (I mean really, I don't think Suzanne Collins could have done the epilogue better, I don't understand why some people don't get it. If you can't tell I love Mockingjay's epilogue).

As to where this leaves me...well, I don't know. Once I finish my WIP I'll still have two more books until I get up to this point and make a decision.