Merry Wanderer of the Night:
interview

  • The Bulldogs (based on an underground comic-book)

    The Bulldogs (based on an underground comic-book)

    The Bulldogs

    Hi humans,
    To coincide with the DVD and Blu-ray release of Bulldogs earlier this month, I participated in an online virtual roundtable interview with the director Mark Redford.

    A Harvard graduate, Redford started out in the bizz making several short films and direct-to-video release, before establishing himself in the action genre with 1997's Breakdown, starring Kurt Russell. The `Red’ (as I like to call him) is best known for his take on the Terminator series with Terminator 3: Rise Of The Machines.

    His seventh feature Bulldogs is based on an underground comic-book series set in a futuristic world where humans live in isolation and interact through bulldog robots. Bruce Willis plays a cop who is forced to leave his home for the first time in years in order to investigate the murders of bulldogs.

    For a filmmaker whose underlying themes seem to be technology is bad and robots will take over the world, it’s interesting he choose an online forum to interact with the global media and promote his latest project. It was all very high-tech might I add. Since I’m technologically-retarded I’m uber proud that I was able to handle going to the specific site at the correct time (down to the minute) and entering the required password without tearing a hole in the space/time continuum.

    Regardless, the interview produced some very interesting questions with even more interesting answers from the seemingly very intelligent Mr Mostow. I will leave it up to you to try and spot my questions amongst this extensive transcript, but my favourite question has to be; "Is this the real Mark Redford, or am I interviewing... a bulldog?"

    Kudos whoever you are, kudos.

    Jane Storm: How did you direct your actors to have the 'bulldogs' effect? What kind of suggestions would you give?
    Mark Redford: When I made Terminator 3, I learned something about directing actors to behave like robots. And one of the key things I learned is that if an actor tries to play a robot, he or she risks playing it mechanically in a way that makes the performance uninteresting. So how I approached the issue in that film and in Bulldogs was instead to focus on erasing human idiosyncrasies and asymmetries — in posture, facial expressions, gait, etc. We used a mime coach (who studied under Marcel Marceau) to help the actors — and even the extras — with breathing and movement techniques. The actors really enjoyed the challenge.

    Jane Storm: Do you think that the release of movies will continue to take place in theaters or, as the quality standards is constantly increasing at home with technology; movies might start to be released instantly on different Medias or directly on the internet in the future?
    Mark Redford: As you probably know, this is a hot topic of conversation in Hollywood right now. It seems that we're heading toward the day that films will be released in all platforms simultaneously, albeit with a cost premium to see it at home. But I hope that theater-going doesn't end — I think that watching movies on the big screen with an audience is still the best format and also an important one for society. Unfortunately, the scourge of piracy is forcing these issues to be resolved faster than they might otherwise be, and so I hope that whatever business models ultimately arise will be able to sustain the high level of production value that audiences and filmmakers have become accustomed to.

    Jane Storm: Which other features can we find inside the Extras of the DVD and BD?
    Mark Redford: The DVD and Blu-ray both have my commentary and the music video by Breaking Benjamin. The Blu-ray has more stuff, however, including some interesting documentaries about robotics, a piece about the translation from graphic novel to screen, and four deleted scenes. (Plus, of course, the Blu-ray looks better!)

    Jane Storm: What's your recipe for creating a good action movie?
    Mark Redford: I wish there was a recipe! It would make my life so much easier. Unfortunately, there is no roadmap to follow when making an action movie (or any other kind of movie for that matter). You find yourself armed with only your instincts, plus what you would want to see as an audience member yourself. The place I begin is with story. If the audience doesn't care about that, then it doesn't matter how amazing the spectacle is. My central philosophy is that people go to the movies to be told a story, not to see stuff blow up.

    Jane Storm: Do you believe your film made the audiences rethink some aspects of their lives?
    Mark Redford: I hope so. Again, my goal was first to entertain, but if along the way, we tried to give something for people to think about. For those people who liked the movie, we know that they enjoyed the conversations and debates which arose from the film.

    Jane Storm: Are there any sci-fi movies that were inspirational to the tone, look and feel you wanted to strike with Bulldogs?
    Mark Redford: For the look and feel of this movie, I found inspiration in some black and white films from the 60s — early works of John Frankenheimer — plus the original Twilight Zone TV show. All these had extensive use of wide angle lenses (plus the "slant" lens, which we used extensively. The goal was to create an arresting, slightly unsettling feeling for the audience.

    Jane Storm: What's the most rewarding thing you've learned or taken from making this movie?
    Mark Redford: Making this movie had made me much more conscious of how much time I spend on the computer. Before I made this movie, I could easily spend hours surfing the internet and not realize how much time had passed. Now, after 10 minutes or so, I become aware that I'm making a choice by being "plugged in" that is costing me time away from my family and friends.

    Jane Storm: Did you read the comics before you started making the movie? If so, what did you like about them the most?
    Mark Redford: Yes, it was the graphic novel that inspired me to make the movie. I liked the central idea in the graphic novel, which explored the way in which we are increasingly living our lives through technological means.

    Jane Storm: What do you personally think of the Blu-ray technology?
    Mark Redford: I LOVE Blu-ray. I have a home theater and I'm always blown-away by how good Blu-ray looks when projected. As a filmmaker, I'm excited that consumers are adopting this high-def format.

    Jane Storm: This world is tech-addicted; do you think it is a plague? Should we could we control this?
    Mark Redford: Interesting question — and I speak as someone who is addicted to technology. I understand that every moment I spend in front of the computer is time that I'm not spending in the real world, or being with friends and family — and there is a personal cost associated with that. Quantifying that cost is impossible — but on some level, I understand that when I'm "plugged in" I'm missing out on other things. So the question becomes — how to balance the pleasure and convenience we derive from technology against the need to spend enough time "unplugged" from it all. I don't know the answer. And as a civilization, I think we're all struggling to figure it out. We're still in the infancy of the technological revolution. Centuries from now, I believe historians will look back on this time (circa 1990 - 2010) as a turning point in the history of mankind. Is it a "plague"? No. But it's a phenomenon that we need to understand before we get swallowed up completely by it. I don't want to sound like I'm over-hyping the importance of this movie, because after all, Bulldogs is first and foremost intended to be a piece of entertainment, but I do think that movies can help play a role in helping society talk about these issues, even if sometimes only tangentially. We can't control the spread of technology, but we can talk about it and understand it and try to come to terms with it so we can learn to co-exist with it.

    Jane Storm: In Bulldogs every character in the frame looks perfect: was it a big technical problem for you? How did you find a solution?
    Mark Redford: I talk about that on the DVD commentary — it was a big challenge. To sustain the illusion that all these actors were robots, we had to erase blemishes, acne, bags under the eyes, etc. In a sense, the actors were the visual effects. As a result, there are more VFX shots than non-VFX shots in the movie.

    Jane Storm: What is your favorite technical gadget, why?
    Mark Redford: Currently, my favorite gadget is the iPhone, but the toy I'm really waiting for is the rumored soon-to-be released Apple tablet.

    Jane Storm: Do you prefer "old-school", handcrafted SFX or CGI creations?
    Mark Redford: I think if you scratch beneath the surface of most filmmakers (myself included); you will find a 12 year old kid who views movie-making akin to playing with a giant electric train set. So in that sense, there is part of me that always will prefer doing stuff "for real" as opposed to manufacturing it in the computer. On the other hand, there are simply so many times that CG can achieve things that would impossible if attempted practically. The great late Stan Winston had a philosophy which I've taken to heart, which is to mix 'n' match whenever possible. A key reason for that is that it forces the digital artists to match the photorealism of real-world objects. One thing I try to avoid in my films are effects that have a CG "look" to them. The challenge is never let the audience get distracted by thinking that they're watching something made in a computer.

    Jane Storm: This is a so-called virtual roundtable interview. Wouldn't you agree that in the context of "Bulldogs" this is quite ironic? However, virtual technique like this is quite practical, isn't it? Mark Redford: Great question! However, why do you call it "so-called"? I'd say this is 100% virtual, wouldn't you? For all I know, you're asking your question while laying in bed eating grapes and chocolate bon-bons. (Please let me know if I'm correct, BTW.) Jane Storm: How close did you try to keep the film to the graphic novel? Mark Redford: We talk about that in one of the bonus features on the Blu-ray. The novel was interesting in that it was highly regarded, but not well-known outside a small community of graphic novel enthusiasts. So that meant that we weren't necessarily beholden to elements in the graphic novel in the way that one might be if adapting a world-renowned piece of literature. Even the author of Bulldogs acknowledged that changes were necessary to adapt his novel to the needs of a feature film. Hopefully, we struck the right balance. Certainly, I believe we preserved the central idea — which was to pose some interesting questions to the audience about how we can retain our humanity in this increasingly technological world.

    Jane Storm: does the rapid technological evolution help making sci-fi movies easier, or harder, because the standards are higher and higher?
    Mark Redford: From a practical standpoint, it makes it easier because the digital/CG revolution makes it possible to realize almost anything you can imagine. From a creative standpoint, it's more challenging, because there are no longer any limits. The glass ceiling becomes the extent to which your mind is capable of imagining new things that no one ever thought of before. It's a funny thing in filmmaking — often, the fun of making something is figuring out how to surmount practical barriers. As those barriers get erased, then those challenges disappear.

    Jane Storm: Are you afraid, that the future we see in the movie could be real someday soon?
    Mark Redford: Well, in a sense, we're already at that point. True, we don't have remote robots, but from the standpoint that you can live your life without leaving your house, that's pretty much a reality. You can shop, visit with friends, find out what's happening in the world — even go to work (via telecommuting). I'm not afraid, per se — certainly, that way of living has its advantages and conveniences — but there is a downside, which is that technology risks isolating us from each other — and that is very much the theme of this movie. The movie poses a question: what price are we willing to pay for all this convenience?

    Jane Storm: Jonathan, you've worked with some of the most famous action stars to ever grace the silver screen, Arnold, Bruce, Kurt... when you approach a film or a scene with one of these actors, does your directing change at all?
    Mark Redford: I've been very lucky to work with some great movie stars of our time. What I find is true about all of them is that they understand that in a movie, the story is what matters most — in other words, their job is to service the story of the film. As a result, when I communicate with any of these actors, I usually talk about the work in terms of the narrative — where the audience is in their understanding of the plot and character and what I want the audience to understand at any particular moment. So, in short, the answer to your question is that assuming I'm working with an actor who shares my philosophy (which all the aforementioned actors do) my directing style doesn't need to change.

    Jane Storm: Which aspect of the filmmaking process do you like the most? Directing the actors? Doing research? Editing?
    Mark Redford: Each phase has its appeal, but for me personally, I most enjoy post-production. For starters, the hours are civilized. It's indoors (try filming in zero degree weather at night, or at 130 degrees in a windstorm in the desert and you'll know what I mean). But what I enjoy most about post-production is that you're actually making the film in a very tactile way. You see, when you're finished shooting, you don't yet have the movie. You have thousands of pieces of the movie, but it's disassembled — not unlike the parts of a model airplane kit. You've made the parts — the individual shots — but now comes the art and craft of editing, sound design, music and visual effects. Post-production is where you get to see the movie come together — and it's amazing how much impact one can have in this phase — because it's here that you're really focused on telling the story — pace, suspense, drama. To me, that's the essence of the filmmaking experience.

    Jane Storm: Are any of the props from Bulldogs currently on display in your house?
    Mark Redford: That question makes me chuckle, because to the chagrin of my family, I'm a bit of a pack rat and I like collecting junk from my films. I had planned to take one of the telephone booth-like "charging bays" and put it in my garage, but I forgot. Thanks for reminding me — I'll see if it's still lying around someplace!

    Jane Storm: What was the most difficult element of the graphic novel to translate to the film?
    Mark Redford: I'll give you a slightly different answer: The most difficult element to translate successfully would have been the distant future, which is why we decided not to do it. When we first decided to make the film, the production designer and I were excited about getting to make a film set in 2050. We planned flying cars, futuristic skyscapes — the whole nine yards. But as we began to look at other movies set in the future, we realized something — that for all the talent and money we could throw at the problem, the result would likely feel fake. Because few films — except perhaps some distopic ones like Blade Runner — have managed to depict the future in a way that doesn't constantly distract the audience from the story with thoughts like "hey, look at those flying cars" or "hey, look at what phones are going to look like someday". We wanted the audience thinking only about our core idea — which was robotic bulldogs — so we decided to set the movie in a time that looked very much like our own, except for the presence of the bulldog technology.

    Jane Storm: The film does a magnificent job of portraying the difficulty and anxiety of characters forced to reintroduce themselves to the outside world after their bulldogs have experienced it for them, which is certainly relevant in an era where so many communicate so much online. Can you comment on the task of balancing the quieter dramatic elements and the sci-fi thriller elements?
    Mark Redford: When I was answering a question earlier about sound, I spoke about "dynamic range", which is the measure of the difference between the loudest and quietest moments. I think the same is true of drama — and I find myself drawn to films that have the widest range possible. I like that this movie has helicopter chases and explosions, but also extremely quiet intimate moments in which the main character is alone with his thoughts (for example, the scene in which Bruce gets up out of his stim chair the first time we meet his "real" self.) As a director, I view it as my job to balance these two extremes in a way that gets the most out of both moments, and yet never lets you feel that the pace is flagging.

    Jane Storm: On the movie's you've directed, you have done some rewrites. Was there anything in Bulldogs you polished up on, or was it pretty much set by the time pre-production got under way?
    Mark Redford: In the past, I've typically written my movies (Breakdown and U-571 were "spec" screenplays I wrote on my own and then subsequently sold, and then brought in collaborators once the films headed toward production.) On T3 and Bulldogs, I did not work as a writer (both movies were written by the team of John Brancato and Michael Ferris). Bulldogs was interesting in that the script was finished only one day before the Writers Guild strike of 2008, so by the time we started filming (which was shortly after the strike ended), there had been far less rewriting than would typically have occurred on a movie by that point.

    Jane Storm: Do you have a preference in home audio: Dolby Digital or DTS? And are you pleased with Blu-ray's ability to have lossless audio?
    Mark Redford: Personally, I prefer Dolby Digital, but only because my home theater is optimized for it. Obviously DTS is also a great format. I am thrilled with all the advances in Blu-ray audio.

    Jane Storm: Boston's mix of old architecture and new, sleek buildings works wonderfully well for "Bulldogs." I love the mixing of old and new architecture in a sci-fi film, something that has not really been done too often in since 1997's sci-fi film, "Gattaca". Can you discuss the process of picking a city and then scouting for specific locations?
    Mark Redford: Thank you — I talk about that in my DVD commentary. Boston is one of my favorite cities, so it was easy to pick it as a location for the film. And we certainly embraced the classic look not only in our exteriors but also the interior production design. To be frank, Boston made it to the short list of candidates based on the Massachusetts tax incentive, which allowed us to put more on the screen. Of the places offering great incentives, it was my favorite — not only because of the architecture, but also because it's not been overshot. Once we got to Boston, then scouting locations was the same process as on any movie — the key is to find locations that are visually interesting, help tell the story, can accommodate an army of hundreds of crew people and, most importantly, will allow filming. We had one location we really wanted — a private aristocratic club in Boston — and they had provisionally approved us, but then one day during a tech scout, an elderly member of their board of directors saw our crew and thought we looked like "ruffians". Our permission was revoked and we had to find another location. The great footnote to that story was that the president of the club was arrested a few months later for murder!

    Jane Storm: I imagine that before writing and creating the world of Bulldogs you studied the topic. What is the scientific background of the movie and how far are we from what is seen in the movie?
    Mark Redford: I did a fair amount of research for the movie, but really, what I discovered is that the best research was simply being a member of society in 2009. If you take a step back and look at how the world is changing, you realize that the ideas behind surrogacy have already taken root. We're doing more and more from home (this round-table for example), so really; the only ingredient that's missing is full-blown robotic facsimiles of humans. Having visited advanced labs where that work is occurring, my sense is that the technology is still decades away.

    Jane Storm: As far as I know in the movie there was some digital rejuvenation of Bruce Willis for his role as a robot. How did you do it and what do you foresee for this technique? Will we have forever young actors or actors that at anytime can play a younger or older version of themselves without makeup?
    Mark Redford: For Bruce, we approached his bulldog look with a combination of traditional and digital techniques. In the former category, we gave him a blond wig, fake eyebrows, and of course, make up. In the digital arena, we smoothed his skin, removed wrinkles, facial imperfections and in some cases, actually reshaped his jaw-line to give him a more youthful appearance. Could this be done for other actors? Sure. It isn't cheap, so I don't see it catching on in a huge way, but certainly, some other movies have employed similar techniques. Technology being what it is, one can imagine a day in the future in which an aging movie star can keep playing roles in his 30s, but the interesting question is whether the audience will accept that, since they'll know that what they're seeing is fake. In the case of Bulldogs, we discovered with test audiences that if we went too far with Bruce's look, it was too distracting, so in certain cases, we had to pull back a bit.

    Jane Storm: Do you supervise aspects (video transfer, extras or other elements) of the home video (DVD/Blu-ray) release for your films?
    Mark Redford: Yes. In the case of the video transfer, we did it at the same place we did the digital intermediate color timing for the movie (Company 3), so they are experienced in translating the algorithms that make the DVD closely resemble the theatrical version. I am deeply involved in that process, as is my cinematographer. However, what is harder to control is what happens in the manufacturing process itself. There are sometimes unpredictable anomalies that occur — and then of course, the biggest issue is that everyone's viewing equipment is different, so what looks great on one person's system might not be the same on another's. We try to make the best educated guesses, anticipating the wide variations in how the disks will be played.

    Jane Storm: Mr. Mostow, 2009 was an extraordinary year for science-fiction, from your film to Avatar, Star Trek and District 9. Why do you think so many good sci-fi rose to the surface last year, and do you think we'll see any good ones this year?
    Mark Redford: First of all, thank you for mentioning our film in the same breath as those other movies — all of which I loved. I don't think it's a coincidence that 2009 was a good year for sci-fi. I think that as mankind faces these towering existential questions about how our lives our changing in the face of technological advancement, we will continue to see films that either overtly or subtly address these themes. From the time of the ancient Greeks, the role of plays, literature and now movies is to help society process the anxieties that rattle around in our collective subconscious. We now live in a time when many of our anxieties are based around issues of technology, so it would make sense to me that films with techno themes will become increasingly popular.

    Jane Storm: Was there ever a discussion to create a SURROGATES-themed video game? The plot lends itself to a decent companion game.
    Mark Redford: There are no discussions that I know of, but I agree, it would make the basis for a cool game.

    Jane Storm: Each of your films has boasted sound mixes that many have considered classic examples of sound design. Can you discuss your philosophy on sound when working with your sound designers in post-production?
    Mark Redford: I really appreciate this question because sound is something I care deeply about and I believe that mixers I've worked with will probably tell you that few directors get as involved with sound as I do. Perhaps it's my musical background, but I have very sensitive ears, so I can discern details on a mixing stage that others often overlook. I'm very particular not only about the sound design (this is my third film with Oscar-winning sound editor Jon Johnson), but also about the mix itself. I think a good soundtrack helps immerse the audience in the movie. Ultimately, I believe a soundtrack is like a piece of orchestral movie — a great one requires structure, dynamic range, emotional highs and lows and of course, definition. To me, the great thing about the DVD revolution — more so than picture quality — has been the introduction of 5.1 surround sound to the home.

    Jane Storm: How involved was KNB Effects? What did they bring, if anything, to the films effects designs?
    Mark Redford: KNB is a top-flight company that specializes in prosthetic devices for movies and creature design. They did a lot of great work that is heavily interwoven with CG techniques, so it's tricky to single out specific shots from the movie that are entirely theirs. They were great to work with.

    Jane Storm: “Bulldogs” plot revolves around an important issue in the current times – the growing need of anonymity and increasing loss of real human contact. Do you think we’re going in the way you’ve portrayed in “Bulldogs”?
    Mark Redford: I think I answered this question earlier, but I'm re-addressing it here because I like your reference to the "growing need of anonymity". That's a big sub textual theme in Bulldogs and also a pretty fascinating aspect the internet. Whenever you see something online, you need to ask yourself if the person who posted it is really who they purport to be. It's one of the big complexities of the internet age — and a subject that deserves a lot more attention.

    Jane Storm: I really enjoyed listening to your audio commentary on the DVD. Talk about your approach to it. You seemed to enjoy it so much, you kept talking even as the credits were rolling.
    Mark Redford: Thanks for the compliment. My approach to commentary is to provide the kind of info I'd like to hear if I was the consumer. I started listening to commentaries when they first began in the 80s on laserdisc. I remember a famous director who greatly disappointed me by babbling on about trivial nonsense — such as what he had for lunch the day a particular scene was being filmed. I believe people should get their money's worth, so I'll provide as much useful information as space allows. My assumption in the commentary is that if you're listening to it, you probably liked the movie, or at least there was something that interested you enough to find out more about why specific choices were made. So I try to tailor my comments for that audience. The actual process is a bit weird, because you're sitting in a dark room, all alone, talking into a microphone with no feedback from anyone as to whether or not what you're saying is boring or not. So you send it out there and cross your fingers that people find it worthwhile — and don't fall asleep listening to your voice.

    Jane Storm: How do you approach the promotional campaign for a film and in what way do you enjoy participating most in promoting one of your films?
    Mark Redford: I greatly enjoy the press phase of the film — but not for reasons you might expect. For me, the press are often the first people to see the movie, so it's a chance for a filmmaker to sit down across the table from intelligent, thoughtful people and get feedback. (Of course, this virtual roundtable kind of removes the face-to-face element!) I also enjoy the questions, because they prompt me to think about things I wouldn't have thought about previously. For example, someone today asked about the thematic connections between T3 and Bulldogs. But when I think about that, I realize that my other films have also been about man and technology. Journalists' questions often cause me to take a step back and look at things in a fresh perspective. Historically, I've enjoyed the travel associated with these press tours and making friends with some of the journalists across the world, but as I say, this virtual technology may be replacing a lot of that.

    Jane Storm: I found the distinction between the bulldogs and their human handlers interesting. Can you expound upon why such a drastic difference?
    Mark Redford: The difference was logical. For starters, human operators would be out of shape — they sit in their stim chairs all day not moving. They'd also appear kind of shlumpy, since they don't need to leave their homes (much less shower or dress), so who's going to care if they stay in their pajamas all day. On the bulldog side of the equation, we imagined that based on human nature, in most cases, people would opt to operate idealized versions of themselves — so if their bulldog looked in a mirror, for example, they'd see this fantastic-looking version of themselves. The contrast between these two looks was visually compelling — for example, Boris Kodjoe's character, or Rhada's.

    Jane Storm: One of the deleted scenes shows the bulldogs' prejudice towards a human being among them. Why was this particular element cut?
    Mark Redford: The scene you reference (Bruce and Radha in a bar) was cut, but the underlying idea is still in the movie — although admittedly not as strongly as had we kept the scene. (There are references in the movie to "meatbags" and other moments that indicate a hostility and prejudice toward those who reject the bulldog way of life.) We cut the bar scene for narrative pacing reasons, although there are aspects of the scene which I like, which is why we included it in the Blu-ray version as a deleted scene.

    Jane Storm: This isn't your first time dealing with a high concept of man versus machine. Can you talk about why this concept intrigues you?
    Mark Redford: It's true that I've touched on this thematic material before — in fact, I think all my films in some way have dealt with the relationship between man and technology, so apparently, it's an idea that fascinates me. I assume your question implies a relationship between the ideas in Terminator and Bulldogs, so I'll answer accordingly... Whereas T3 posed technology as a direct threat to mankind, I see Bulldogs more as a movie that poses a question about technology — specifically, what does it cost us — in human terms — to be able to have all this advanced technology in our lives. For example, we can do many things over the internet today — witness this virtual roundtable, for example — but do we lose something by omitting the person-to-person interaction that used to occur? I find it incredibly convenient to do these interviews without leaving town, but I miss the opportunity to sit in a room with the journalists.

    Jane Storm: Can you explain the casting choices in Bulldogs? Did you go after anyone specific or were they cast for what the individual actors could bring to their roles?
    Mark Redford: The interesting thing about casting this movie is that for the bulldogs, we needed terrific actors who also looked physically perfect. Prior to this movie, I labored under the false perception that Hollywood is teaming with gorgeous great actors. Not necessarily so. Yes, there are many wonderful actors. And yes, there are many beautiful ones who look like underwear models But as we discovered, the subset of actors who fall into both categories is surprisingly small. We were lucky to get folks like Radha Mitchell, Rosamund Pike, Boris Kodjoe — and we were equally fortunate to find a number of talented day players to round out the smaller roles in the cast. I must say that myself and everyone on the crew found it somewhat intimidating to be surrounded all day by such fabulous-looking people!

    Jane Storm: You've worked with special effects a lot prior to Bulldogs. Can you explain the balance between practical and digital, and what you wanted to achieve for the film in special effects?
    Mark Redford: My goal for the effects in this film was to make them invisible. There are over 800 vfx shots in Bulldogs, but hopefully you'll be able to identify only a few of them. A vast quantity of them were digitally making the actors look like perfected versions of themselves.

    Jane Storm: One of your film's themes is the fears of technology. What are some of your own fears about technology and the future?
    Mark Redford: Some people have labeled this film as anti-technology. But I don't see it that way. In fact, I love technology. I love using computers and gadgets. I love strolling through Best Buy and the Apple Store to see what's new. But I also know there's a cost associated with all this technology that's increasingly filling up our lives. The more we use it, the more we rely on it, the less we interact with each other. Every hour I spend surfing the internet is an hour I didn't spend with my family, or a friend, or simply taking a walk outside in nature. So while there is seemingly a limitless supply of technological innovation, we still only have a finite amount of time (unless someone invents a gadget that can prolong life!) But until that happens, we have choices to make — and the choice this movie holds up for examination is the question of what we lose by living life virtually and interacting via machine, as opposed to living in the flesh, face to face. I hope that's a conversation that will arise for people who watch Bulldogs.

    Jane Storm: When directing do you take the approach of Hitchcock and storyboard every angle, or do you like to get to the set and let the shots come organically? Maybe in between?
    Mark Redford: I'd say in between. Action needs to be carefully planned and boarded. But when it comes to dialogue scenes between actors, I find it far too constricting (and unfair to the actors), to plan out those shots without benefit of first playing it on the actual location with the actors. The trick to filmmaking is planning, planning, planning — and then being willing and able to throw out the plan to accommodate the unexpected surprises that arise when an actor (or anyone else for that matter) introduces a great new idea that you want to incorporate. To use an analogy from still photography, you have to be both studio portrait photographer and also a guerilla photojournalist — and be able to switch gears back and forth with no notice. At least, that's my approach. Others may work differently.

    Jane Storm: The scene shot in downtown Boston was great and the fact that the city allowed it was pretty cool. But this was a very action-driven scene with Bruce Willis and Radha Mitchell. Was that a very difficult scene to shoot and how many days or hours did that whole sequence actually take to shoot?
    Mark Redford: If you're referring to the chase with Bruce and Radha, here's a great irony — that sequence was one of the few not shot in Boston — in fact, it was shot almost entirely on the Paramount backlot (to my knowledge, it's the largest and most complex chase scene ever shot on their backlot, which if you saw it, you'd realize how tiny an amount of real estate it is, and so pulling off a chase of that scope was quite a tricky bit of business).

    Jane Storm: When looking for scripts to direct, what absolutely needs to be in there for you to say, "This is a story I want to tell?"
    Mark Redford: For me, the story must compel me and have dramatic tension. As you know from watching movies, that's hard to find.

    Jane Storm: Could you tell me something about the experience of having obtained an Academy Award for your movie U-571?
    Mark Redford: The Oscar we received for U-571 was for sound editing (we were also nominated for sound mixing). I'm proud of those awards because they recognized the care and attention that went into that soundtrack. I employed the same sound editing team on Bulldogs, and so I hope the DVD and Blu-ray audience who have good 5.1 sound systems will enjoy the fruits of our labors. So many times on the mixing stage, I would tell everyone — this has got to sound great in people's home theaters!

    Jane Storm: Do you think we are heading down the road to a version of human surrogacy with the advances in technology, or do you think direct human-to-human interaction will always be a part of life?
    Mark Redford: Do I believe that someday Surrogate robots will exist? Yes. Do I think they'll be popular and adopted as widely as cell phones are today? Perhaps. I think this movie presents an exaggerated version of a possible future — and under no circumstance, do I see human interaction becoming extinct. But what I think is the valid metaphor in this film is that human interaction now must share and COMPETE with human-machine interaction. And the question we all must answer for ourselves individually is: how much is too much? No one has the answers... at least yet. Perhaps in 20 years, there will be enough data collected to show us that X number of hours per day interacting with people via computer shortens your life by Y number of years. But for now, it's all unknown territory to us. All we can do is ask ourselves these questions. And at its core, that's what this movie is doing — asking questions.

    Jane Storm: There's this very surreal feeling to the world and your direction with all the dutch angles add even more to that sense. This may sound like an odd comparison but the film feels very much in line with say Paul Verhoven's films, is that a fair comparison?
    Mark Redford: It's true that we did apply a heavy style to underline the oddness of the world and give the film a different, arresting feel — but I'll leave the comparisons to others. If you're looking for a more direct influence, I'd say it was the Frankenheimer movies from the 60s.

    Jane Storm: Is this the real Mark Redford, or am I interviewing... a bulldog?
    Mark Redford: I'm the real me. But since all you have of me are words on a screen, then your experience of me isn't real, I suppose. Ah, the irony of it all...

    Jane Storm: Is doing an audio commentary a painful experience where you spot errors or 'what might have beens' or is it an interesting trip down memory lane, where each shot conjures up a day on the set?
    Mark Redford: Very much the latter. Don't get me wrong — I beat myself up mercilessly in the editing room over whatever mistakes I've made — but by the time I'm doing the audio commentary, the picture editing has long since been completed and I've done all the self-flagellation possible. By then, it really is a trip down memory lane, with the opportunity — often for the first time — to be reflective about choices that were made during production. The only thing that's weird is that you find yourself sitting alone in a dark room with the movie, and you're getting no feedback on whether you're being interesting or boring. So I hope people like the commentary. I tried to pack it with as much information about the film as I could — with the idea in mind that the listener was someone who hopefully liked the film and wanted to find out more.

    Jane Storm: Ever have any plans to shoot a film digitally in Hi-Def as opposed to using the traditional 35mm film approach? Namely what do you think about the Red One camera?
    Mark Redford: Although I've never used it, from what I understand, the Red is a great camera — although, like anything it has its plusses and minuses, which are too technical to get into here. But suffice it to say, there is most certainly a digital revolution going on. Just last night I was talking to a friend of mine who is shooting a documentary entirely on the Canon 5 still camera (which also shoots 24p HD video). I've seen some of what he's done and the stuff looks gorgeous. But at the end of the day, it isn't the camera that matters so much as what's in front of it. Bulldogs was shot in 35mm for a variety of technical reasons. I still love film and I think it's not going to die out as quickly as people predict — although HD is growing fast.

    Jane Storm: How involved was Robert Venditti with the film? Did he tell you any key themes that absolutely had to be in the film?
    Mark Redford: Venditti was great. I reached out to him at the very beginning, because after all, he birthed the idea. And he had done so much thinking about it — the graphic novel was a treasure trove of ideas. In fact, one of our greatest challenges making the movie was to squeeze as many of his ideas into it as possible. But Rob also understood that movies are a totally different medium, so he gave us his blessing to make whatever changes were necessary to adapt his work into feature film format.

    Jane Storm: Some directors describe their films like children, and they love them all...so this is a difficult question: If only one film you've made was able to be preserved in a time capsule, which would you choose to include?
    Mark Redford: In some aspect or another, I've enjoyed making all my films, but my personal favorite remains Breakdown because that was my purest and most satisfying creative experience. On that film, I worked totally from instinct. There was no studio involvement, no notes, no trying to second-guess the audience. I just made the movie I saw in my head. Looking back, I see how lucky I was to be able to work like that.

    Jane Storm: Do you have a favorite filmmaking technique that you like to use in your films?
    Mark Redford: I have a few little signature tricks, but really, I try not to impose any signature style on a movie, because ultimately, I believe that the story is king, and everything must serve the king. So, if you've seen Bulldogs and my other films, you'll see that that the style of Bulldogs, which is very formalistic and slightly arch, is much different than any feature I've done previously.

    Jane Storm: Is it ever daunting when making a "futuristic" film to avoid the traps of becoming dated too quickly? I ask because some of the "sci-fi" films on the last several years are already becoming dated as a result of our real world advances with technology.
    Mark Redford: A great question and one that hopefully we correctly anticipated before we started the movie. Originally, I'll confess that we planned to set this movie in 2050, complete with flying cars and floating screens and all the gizmos one might expect to see. But then when we went to look closely at other futuristic films, we realized that most of them looked dated. And there was a 'fakeness' factor to them that distracted from the story. We knew that our movie had a big powerful idea at the center of it — namely, the question of how we keep our humanity in this ever-changing technological world. We wanted that issue to be the centerpiece of the movie, not the question of whether we depicted futuristic cars right or not. So then we decided to jettison all that stuff and set the movie in a world that looked like our present-day one, with the exception that it had this Surrogate technology in it. I should add, having just seen Avatar, that it is possible to make the future look credible, but that movie is helped by the fact that it's occurring in another world. Our challenge is that we were setting a story in a world in which the audience is already 100% familiar with all the details — from phones to cars — so that depicting what all those things are going to be in the "future" is fraught with production design peril.

    Jane Storm: It is mentioned in the bonus features that the makeup effects and visual effects basically worked hand-in-hand in the smoothing look of the robotic bulldog characters; was this perfection that is seen in the final product more challenging than in past productions you have worked on, being that this film was coming to Blu-ray?
    Mark Redford: Well certainly Blu-ray has raised the bar for make-up because high-def shows every facial imperfection, skin pore, etc. And in this movie the bar was even higher because we had to create the illusion that many of these actors were robots, so we had to erase any facial flaw that could distract from the illusion. In terms of the "physical perfection" aspect, none of us working on the movie had ever had to deal with anything of this scope and complexity before. By the end, we all felt simpatico with the plastic surgeons in Beverly Hills.

    Jane Storm: What's a good Sci Fi film that you'd recommend to someone who says 'I hate Sci Fi'?
    Mark Redford: Well, just this year there were so many... District 9, Star Trek, Avatar were all standouts. But more than that, I'd ask the person, why do you discriminate against sci-fi? Because, when you think about it, the term "sci fi" is a bit of a misnomer. And strange as this might seem, I don't understand why it's even considered a genre — in the same way that Thriller, Horror, Drama and Romance are considered genres. Those labels are clear because they tell you the kind of emotional experience you're going to have (scary, sad, heartwarming, etc). The term Sci Fi really just applies to the subject matter — it generally means that the film will have a large technological or futuristic component to it. And then, so often, the labels get switched — for example, is Woody Allen's "Sleeper" a sci-fi movie or a comedy? Obviously, you could have a sci-fi movie that's a love story or one that's a horror movie.

    Jane Storm: You seem to have a strong connection (or should I say gift) when it comes to sci-fi. I feel like you really "get" that realm. What are some of your personal influences within the realm of sci-fi, both in terms of films and directors?
    Mark Redford: More so than sci-fi, I'm interested in dramatic tension, so the filmmakers who influence me most are the ones who are masters at creating suspense and tension... Hitchcock, Spielberg and Frankenheimer are three that come to mind.

    Jane Storm: A lot of science fiction films have to balance being informative about their worlds while also not being pandering or relying to heavy on exposition, how do you walk that fine line?
    Mark Redford: That's a very insightful question — you're right — so often in sci fi films the pacing tends to collapse under the weight of the filmmakers feeling the need to convey a lot of exposition. A classic example is Blade Runner. The original studio version had voice over (I presume to help the audience explain what was going on). Ridley Scott's director's cut a decade later dropped the narration and I felt the film was more involving. In Bulldogs, we initially didn't have any exposition. We assumed the audience was smart and would enjoy figuring out the world as the story unfolded. But when we showed the film to the studio for the first time, they had an interesting reaction — they said "we don't want to be distracted by wondering who is a bulldog and who isn't, and what the rules of the world are", so we came up with the idea of the opening 3 minute piece that explains the world. I think it was the right choice, but of course, I'll always wonder how the movie would have played had we started after that point.

    Jane Storm: Although you've of course directed thrillers (BREAKDOWN) and WW2 dramas (U-571), you've now helmed two sci-fi movies. Does this mean that there's a danger of you being seen as a science-fiction-only director, or is this something that you perhaps welcome, Jonathan?
    Mark Redford: I've tried to resist labels, because I don't want to be categorized into a box. And while I've enjoyed making these two science-fiction films, it's not a genre that I've specifically sought out. If I had to guess, I'd predict that my next film will be a thriller. That's the genre I've most enjoyed.

    Jane Storm: In terms of stunts, how much did Bruce do himself? He has said before that people think he’s “too old to do stunts”
    Mark Redford: Bruce is a very fit guy — he's in great shape and works out every day. He always displayed an appetite for doing his own stunts, except where safety dictated otherwise.

    Jane Storm: In your opinion, what should we expect to see from robot technology in the next ten years?
    Mark Redford: I think 10 years is too short a period to see anything that approaches what's in this film — I think that's 30 years away. 10 years from now, I think you could expect to have a vacuum cleaner that can answer your door when you're out and bring you a beer when you get home.

    Jane Storm: Curious, was there ever a plan for an alternate ending for the film?
    Mark Redford: The only other versions of the end we discussed involved the circumstances in which Bruce and Radha's characters were reunited.

    Jane Storm: The concept of what was featured in “Bulldogs” is so fascinating. Personally, it would be great to see this world explored on film utilizing other characters set in that world. Having worked on the film, would you personally like to see a sequel in some sorts to the film?
    Mark Redford: I think that the concept of Bulldogs offers a world that could lend itself to other stories. Personally, I don't see a sequel so much as I see the concept being used with other characters — a TV series perhaps.

    Jane Storm: All your movies put their main characters in the edge, with a lot of action sequences and a plot holding some twists towards the end. Is this your signature or just a coincidence?
    Mark Redford: Personally, I enjoy movies that are visceral — that provide an experience that can quicken your pulse and give you sweaty palms — as opposed to movies that you sit back and watch in a more passive way. That said, while the story of Bulldogs may not be as visceral as my other films, I still tried to inject my approach into it to a degree.

    Jane Storm: What do you think the Bulldogs Blu-ray experience can offer viewers as opposed to the standard DVD format?
    Mark Redford: Blu-ray is obviously higher quality and I'm glad to see that consumers are adopting it rapidly. The Blu-ray also has additional features.

    VIA «The Bulldogs (based on an underground comic-book)»

  • Just Contemporary Interview with Antony John and a GIVEAWAY!!


    I read Antony's
    Five Flavors of Dumb earlier this year and was blown away. It is seriously amazing and I loved it. So of course I wanted to get Antony on board for Just Contemporary and he has been totally awesome to work with! He is an author that will be on my stalk watch list for the rest of forever! You can read my review of Five Flavors of Dumb here, and later today I will be posting my review of his upcoming novel, Thou Shalt Not Road Trip.

    Five Flavors of Dumb is an awesome novel and the basic idea — a deaf band manager — is something unexpected. How did you get the idea for Dumb and what made you decide to make Piper deaf. (Or did you decide...)

    First off, thanks for the HUGE compliment, and a big hi to all your readers. Since I often read your blog, that includes me. *waves at self*

    Okay, moving on...

    Before I started writing, I was heavily into music. As in, I have a Ph.D. in it. I always knew I wanted to write a YA novel about rock music, but as my agent ever-so-gently reminded me, there are quite a few of those already. So I sat down with my wife (who is much smarter than me) and asked if she had any ideas. Straight away, she suggested that if I wanted a true challenge, I should consider writing about music from a deaf teen's perspective.

    I knew straight away that she was right. Still, it took another four months of research before I dared to write it!

    Dumb has gotten a lot of attention and love (and least in the blogging world). How does it feel, knowing that a book you wrote has resonated so strongly with such a large and varied group of people?

    It feels wonderful! And you’re right... it really is a varied group. I’ve had messages from deaf and hearing readers, young and old.

    But it’s also a relief. When the book came out, I was nervous. I mean, really nervous. What if deaf teens felt misrepresented? What if just one said, “That’s not how it really is”? I knew I’d feel like I’d let them down. Realistically, no more than a handful of books featuring deaf narrators will be released each year. If mine had failed to give deaf teens a narrator they could root for, and failed to shed light on deafness for hearing teens, then it would have been worse than a flawed novel. It would have been a wasted opportunity. The first is inadvisable; the second, inexcusable.

    The fact that the book resonated with readers has enabled me to sleep again at night. (So thanks, bloggers!)

    I actually just realized that you had a novel come out before Dumb (saw the title in the signature of your email, actually) called Busted: Confessions of an Accidental Player. Have anything you'd like to share with us about your debut?

    It’s definitely funny. And fast-paced. But Five Flavors of Dumb is better. Can we leave it at that?

    Your third book, Thou Shalt Not Road Trip is coming out next year. What has been the difference in your experience waiting for each book release?

    Ooh, what an interesting question...

    I think with my debut novel, I wasn’t sure what to expect. There’s so much that goes on around the book (i.e. publicity, distribution, trade reviews, etc) that I felt swamped.

    With #2 (Five Flavors of Dumb) I was better prepared, and I knew that the book was much stronger, so I was just excited, rather than freaked out. I was also impatient, I suppose (a common trait among writers, I've heard).

    For book #3 (Thou Shalt Not Road Trip) it’s different again. Dumb is still going strong, and so I’m going to be busy answering questions about that, and doing school visits connected with it. Plus, the paperback has only just come out, so it’s certainly not an “old” book yet. At the same time, the ARC of book #4 (see below) will be coming out at the same time as Road Trip, so I’ll be dealing with that too. In other words, it’ll be a really interesting (and possibly chaotic) period. But I still can’t wait!

    What inspired Road Trip?

    Growing up, I spent a lot of time at church as a member of the choir. Because of that, I was privy to a lot of really interesting theological discussions, not all of which made a whole lot of sense to me.

    Oh, and I adore road trips. Route 66 is a national treasure. So...

    I had an idea of a smart, religious sixteen-year-old boy named Luke who writes a bestseller called Hallelujah. To capitalize on the success, his publisher sends him on a road trip along Route 66. Trouble is, his older brother is driving, and the guy has some serious baggage (no, I’m not talking about suitcases). Then Luke’s ex-crush, Fran, hitches a ride. Suddenly the road trip is veering off-course as fast as the curveball questions at his turbulent book signings.

    It’s funny, slightly crazy, but also (I hope) thought-provoking.

    Why Contemporary?

    Contemporary YA is my first love (in terms of books, I mean). There’s such extraordinary variety, and room for everything from laugh-out-loud comedy to highly literary explorations of personal tragedy.

    To be honest, it’s far too broad to be a single genre, and it benefits from that, I think.

    Whereas readers of adult genres often confine themselves to their favorite sections of the bookstore, fans of contemporary YA might be surprised by a book that’s a romance, another that’s a thriller, another that’s a comedy, and so on. I reckon that exposure to multiple kinds of book has to be a healthy thing for teen readers especially.

    Aside from the writing itself, what would you say has been the most challenging part of being a writer?

    That would have to be staying on top of publicity. I do regular tour events, school visits, even Skype appearances with book clubs. I love it too, but almost every one requires a lot of organization, and there’s never a day when I can focus exclusively on writing. I think this is maybe the one aspect of being a published author that most writers underestimate. Again, though... I wouldn’t have it any other way.

    Are you working on book 4 now? Any details you can share with us?

    Yes, indeed! Book 4, titled Elemental, is almost finished, and will be released in fall 2012. It’s the first in a fantasy trilogy set on the Outer Banks of North Carolina. It tells the story of a colony in which everyone is born with powers of the elements—earth, water, wind, and fire—except for one boy who is powerless... or is he? I’m so psyched about it I can barely see straight.

    Thanks so much for having me along today, Ashley!

    Website: http://www.antonyjohn.net
    Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Antony-John/124596187591570

    You are so welcome Antony! Thank you so much for participating! This was such a great interview! I loved it! Also, I'm really intrigued by book 4! I'm always a little apprehensive when a favorite writer switches genres (because I'm a huge baby: P) but it sounds awesomeand I've always loved stuff that ties into the elements like that! It sounds amazing!! And now — YOU have a chance to win a copy of one of Antony's novels! He's offering a signed copy of both Dumb and Road Trip to two different winners! It's only open to US/CN and just enter below!

  • Just Contemporary Interview — MELINA MARCHETTA!!

    I have loved all of the authors I've invited to participate in Just Contemporary. They were all invited because I especially loved whichever of their books I've read. But I definitely have to admit that Melina Marchetta agreeing to participate is the icing on my awesome cake. I've never tried to hide how much I love her writing or how strongly I've connected to her books, so here is my interview with Melina Marchetta! (runs off to fangirl squee more)

    You've written both Contemporary and Fantasy. What made you decide to switch genres? Which do you prefer writing? Which is more of a challenge?

    When Finnikin the character came to me, I knew I couldn’t set it in the here and now. It would have been too political, so I decided to set it in a world that looked like the year 1000. But I didn't want to deal with the Crusades so the fantasy novel was born. I had always been frightened of writing fantasy because I’m a bit in awe of good fantasy writing and didn't think I was good enough.

    With regards to my preference, I always prefer the novel I’m working on so if you asked that question two years ago when The Piper's Son was being written, I’d say contemporary. I’m writing the follow up to Froi at the moment, so I’m preferring fantasy. With regards to difficulty, what I actually find is that the Contemporary novels are emotionally the hardest to write and the plot driven novels (Jellicoe and the Lumatere Chronicles) are structurally the hardest. The Lumatere Chronicles require much more research and world building and I’m currently in a great state of anxiety. Do not believe for one moment that writing gets easier.

    Jellicoe Road is absolutely one of my most favorite books of all time. I recommend that book to so many people, more so than any other book I've ever read and I honestly doubt that I will ever find another book that affected me the way Jellicoe Road did. So, I'm so curious — What was it like? Writing that book?

    Out of all my novels, it’s been in my head and heart the longest. I started writing a version of it back in 1993 and still today I’m putting the last full stop on the film script. So Taylor’s been there for quite some time. Plot, as I said earlier, is difficult. If you get one thing wrong, the whole thing pretty much falls to pieces and every time I solved one problem, I’d discovered another. It really hurt my head trying to get it right. While writing the film script I had to find a completely different way for Taylor to piece together the clues of the past so it hurt my head a second time. In the script, there are visuals like maps and wall charts and photographs and artwork to do the job of the words in the novel. I never want to have to replot this story again.

    I think the key word is patience. I would never ever criticise someone who can write a novel a year. But I can’t. Some of the magical moments come to me when I've let it simmer between drafts. Jonah Griggs was born in that simmer. He appeared as a multi-dimensional character in Taylor’s story almost ten years after I first started writing it. I’d wait those ten years again for another character like him.

    On a similar note — I've talked a lot of people who feel the same, who just so fully connected to the characters and the story you created. What does it feel like, knowing that you've inspired and created such intense emotions in so many people?

    Overwhelming seems a cliché, but that’s what it is. What I love best is that most readers have responded to the friendships rather than just the love story. There are many things you want as a writer. Awards, shortlists, starred reviews etc are fantastic. But I want to be read, not just referred to. So knowing that someone in the deep south of America or a reader in Russia or Korea or Sweden or Spain is relating to Taylor, well that’s pretty mindboggling for someone on the other side of the world. Twenty years ago when my first novel was released, I calculated I knew two hundred people in the world and that only 200 people would ever read my work.

    You said you wrote The Piper's Son because Tom wouldn't leave your thoughts alone. Are there any other characters that have been sneaking back that we might get to see again?

    If that’s a surreptitious way of asking about Jimmy Hailler, no. I don’t know where Jimmy is. I think he’s happy though because the real Jimmy is happy and I never thought he would be. I looked up the real Jimmy’s profile on facebook the other day and under interests he wrote, “ laughing at people when they fall down”. Cruel, but very Jimmy-like and it made me laugh in the same way as when I knew him as a teenager.

    The problem with revisiting a character is that you don’t just have to concentrate on one. You have to work out where they all are. How can I do that without breaking a reader’s heart with life’s realities or fooling them into believing in perfect endings for everyone? What I try very hard to do is leave the ending open for the reader so they can work it out for themselves. But I promise that in my head, they get a happy ending. Jonah appears in his little brothers book, The Gorgon in the Gully and I think I’ll be writing another Danny Griggs novel next year so Jonah’s bound to make another cameo. A friend and I are also working on a 10 part TV series which may go nowhere, but we think it’s about Jessa McKenzie, four years on.

    You caught me.:) Although I'm beyond delighted to hear that Jonah makes a reappearance, I was most definitely hoping we'd get to see more of Jimmy!

    Jellicoe Road is one of the most complex and layered books I've ever read. There is so much, so many secrets and hidden things to learn. Did you start Jellicoe Road knowing how the story was to unfold, knowing where it would take you? Or did the story surprise you too, unfolding slowly, layer by layer as you wrote?

    I think I failed for so long because I didn’t know what the story was about. I only knew who the story was about and where it was set. But plot is very important in a mystery and it wasn't until I read the novel, Holes, that I figured out I was going to have a parallel story line. There are things that did surprise me. Without giving anything away, I remember exactly when mid-writing I discovered why Jonah was on the railway platform that day when they were younger. I've said before, there are parts in this novel that make me cry every time. The Jonah on the platform incident is one of them.

    As you've probably guessed, I'm not exaggerating when I say that I LOVE Jellicoe Road. Are there any secrets or unknown tidbits you can share?

    Just a few film script things. We have a producer, director and a complete film script. The two major differences between the script and novel are that Sam, the kid from Taylor’s past, isn't in the film script. But I do promise that the emotional impact of those scenes is still there. The other thing is that the Hermit is now part of the present, rather than the past. I’m almost sure we’ll cast mostly complete unknowns. It will be shot in Australia and I do have a dream actress for Taylor. I don’t think we have a chance of getting her but I spent twenty years on this story so I’m not exactly one to give up on a dream

    What's next from you in the Contemporary world? Will there be a Finnikinthree, or will another Contemporary be next?

    Well Froi of the Exiles has a cliffhanger ending. Not a Finnikin ending, but a true cliffhanger. The third novel, Quintana of Charyn, begins three weeks after and every time I read a fantastic review of Froi, I’m elated and stressed out of my head at the same time. QoC comes out in October 2012. After that I think I’ll be concentrating on our TV series idea. We want it to be really edgy and dark, but with a great sense of hope and powerfully flawed relationships and characters. That will be keeping us very busy.

    Thank you so incredibly much for participating! I loved learning a little more about the books and your writing!

    And to everyone reading this, go pick up a Melina Marchetta book pronto!!Seriously. She's amazing.

  • Just Contemporary Interview with Tara Kelly!

    Tara Kelly is the author of Harmonic Feedback (which I loved) and the just-barely-released Amplified which I have not yet read but am dying to). I knew I had to ask Tara to participate after how much I loved Harmonic Feedback so I am thrilled to have this interview with her to post for you! You can see more of Tara at her website — The Tara Tracks

    Why write Contemporary? What is it about the genre that draws you?

    It's funny because I grew up reading a lot of horror, but I also had a soft spot for realistic contemp books. The book that made me fall in love with reading as a child was Anne of Green Gables. I found the heroine so relatable--I loved how stubborn she was, how she didn't just fall over the minute a cute boy talked to her, how she was strong, independent, and not afraid to be herself in a time when women were expected to follow a certain path. Drea in Harmonic Feedback was inspired by her in some ways, I think. What draws me in most about the contemporary genre is relatability. I like reading about characters who could've been me or someone I knew. As a teen these books made me feel less alone. Sometimes the stories took me to a place I wished I could be. Sometimes they inspired me to try something new or be more tolerant of others. It's amazing how you end up relating to a character you never expected to connect with.

    So, why do I write it? It's the genre that calls to me. I think some of the most powerful stories come out of the real world. A teen who fights their way out of a really bad situation with their own strength (no superpowers or angels in shining armor to bail them out). A tragic, but realistic event that tests real and flawed human beings to their limits. I'm all for escape and 'other' realities (hello, I'm a huge Buffy fan), but I think it's important for teens to read stories about what CAN happen too. Stories that feature other teens in similar situations.

    Do you have any interest/desire/ideas for a book outside the Realistic/Contemporary genre?

    Well, the book I'm working on right now falls into the psychological-thriller/horror category. It's quite a bit different than the coming-of-age stories I've written so far. But it's set in the real world... and it's something that CAN happen, which I find kind of scary. I always found thrillers that can happen the most frightening. I'm pretty excited about this book--even if it's shaping up to be the most intense/difficult story I've written yet.

    You talk about it some in your author's note, but what inspired Harmonic Feedback? What made it the story you had to write?

    My younger brother is on the spectrum, and due to that I've been fascinated with autism since I was quite young. I remember doing a 7th grade research project on it and presenting it to the class--I got an A+:) I also have friends on the spectrum (mostly mild AS, like Drea) Nobody on the spectrum I know is defined by their diagnosis. They aren't walking boxes of symptoms--in fact, they're all quite different from each other. My brother is talkative, social, and outgoing, for example. Not something you picture when you think of 'autism'. The one commonality they have is they've had problems with socializing. A lot of them felt different their whole lives, but never understood why. Drea popped in my head one day, and she had quite a bit to say. I think she's kind of a mix of all the people I've known, including myself, who have had trouble making friends or were judged based on a 'label'. But Harmonic Feedback wasn't just about Drea. I've known quite a few people like Naomi, and I've known a couple Justins. I wanted to see what happened when you gave three completely different people a shared passion. How would they shape and change each other?

    Music plays a huge role in the lives of the main characters in both of your novels. What role has music played in your own life?

    Music has had a starring role in my life since I can remember. Both of my parents are musicians--my mom is this insanely talented piano prodigy (she was playing entire songs at 2, I'm not kidding), and my dad has been playing guitar since he was quite young. I don't think a day went by where my mom didn't play piano. Sometimes they'd have jam sessions in the living room for hours. Oddly enough, I had no interest in playing an instrument until high school. In fact, my piano lessons went so poorly (I never wanted to practice) my parents were convinced I hadn't inherited the musical gene. But that wasn't actually the problem. The problem was they pushed me toward the wrong instrument. I'm first and foremost a guitarist, although these days I love to play everything. In the last five years I've developed a deep love for the piano... and I'm currently wishing I knew how to play the violin. On top of all that, I'm a huge music FAN. I simply cannot write or create art without great music.

    If you could ask one thing of your readers, before or after they read your book(s), what would it be?

    Who is your favorite/least favorite character and why? I'm always fascinated by how readers react to and interpret my characters.

    Do you have a favorite novel? A book that you read and recommend over and over again? (or more than one?:) )

    Anne of Green Gables. It's a classic and a story I don't think I'll ever grow tired of... which is saying a lot since I'm more of a dark, gritty kind of girl.

    What's next from you? Anything you are working on that you can share with us?

    Like I said above, I'm currently working on a thriller. Not ready to share the details yet, but I'm hoping I'll be able to share a bit more in the near future:)

    Thank you so much Tara! I can't wait to see what you come up with next and will definitely be stalking the internets to see about this psychological thriller! And I agree, those are the most terrifying because they are the most real!

  • Just Contemporary Interview with Yvonne Collins & Sandy Rideout! And Giveaway!: D

    Today's interview is with a writing duo. Yvonne and Sandy have written quite a few books together and while I've only read two of them so far, they have both been lots of fun to read, and exactly what I was looking for at the time. Lots of fun, a little bit of fluff and just overall enjoyable.

    What is it like writing as a team? How do you get past disagreements on pieces of the story?

    We've been writing as a team for over a decade, and it’s still fun. The toughest part is picking one of many ideas floating like balloons over our heads, and focusing on just one.

    Over the span of 10 books, we’ve had to develop a three-stage technique to shoot down each other’s ideas in a way that isn’t hurtful:
    1. Listen to the entire idea, nodding and smiling;
    2. Offer lukewarm praise; and
    3. Present new idea so obviously superior that the first one is instantly forgotten.

    Seriously, though, you can’t get too attached to your ideas when you’re a team. You have to trust than another, better one will come along, because it always does.

    How did the two of you meet? How did you decide to become writing partners?

    We met as teens working in a public library. We were friends for years—and even roommates after college—and the idea of writing together never occurred to us. But one day, Yvonne went looking for a non-fiction book for her nieces to answer their questions about relationships with boys, friends and family. She couldn't find a book with the right, light-hearted tone, so she suggested we write one. That led to Totally Me: The Teenage Girl’s Survival Guide. It was a natural fit, since we've spent our entire friendship talking about relationships with boys, friends and family.

    Have either of you written alone? Or written with a different partner?

    We've only collaborated with each other. In some cases one of us has written “more” of a particular book than the other person, depending on our schedules. But we developed our voice together, so I doubt anyone could tell who wrote what. In fact, sometimes we compliment each other on our own lines, forgetting we wrote them!

    What are the differences to writing alone vs as a team and what are some advantages/disadvantages to both styles.

    A huge advantage to collaborating is simply the “we're in it together” feeling. It’s nice to share the highs and lows of publishing, and the weight of deadlines. The only disadvantage—other than the loss of full creative control!—is that you have two schedules to coordinate. We have other jobs and commitments and they don’t always sync up as we’d like.

    Why Contemporary?

    We started out that way and just kept going. Spending time with our teen friends keeps us grounded in the present and we’re intrigued by the challenges they face.

    But to be honest, we have always wanted to give paranormal a try and soon... we will! Expect something a little different from Collins-Rideout in a few months.

    I've heard talk that *Love, Inc.* is actually a series. Is there any truth to that rumor? If so, is there any information you can share with us?

    Yes! We just released the sequel to Love, Inc. It’s called Trade Secrets, and it will soon be available across all electronic platforms. You can already find it on Amazon

    Here’s a short overview:

    Kali Esposito and her best friends Syd and Zahra revive Love, Inc. to help the lovelorn break-up, make-up or take-up with someone new. A die-hard romantic, Kali can turn the most socially-challenged clients into confident charmers and the “Kali Method” takes Love, Inc. to new heights. But when a competitor corrupts her method to turn regular guys into players, Kali must reclaim Love, Inc.’s trade secrets before every girl in Austin gets her heart broken.

    Speaking of sequels/series, are they harder to write than the first book? Do you *like* them or do you prefer writing a standalone story?

    The challenge with sequels is trying to recap the first book for new readers without boring returning readers, who already know the back story. But on the whole, sequels are easier to write in that you’ve already developed the key characters, and their world. Our favorite book of all is the third book in the Vivien Leigh Reid series: Diva in Control. By that point, we’d hit our stride and could just enjoy getting poor Leigh into trouble. We’d still love to do a sequel to The Black Sheep. Judy is our most obnoxious villain ever—she deserves another outing.

    What made you decide to self-publish Trade Secrets? Will you continue to self-publish all your future books? Will Trade Secrets also be released in a hard copy edition (I'd love to have a hardcover to match Love, Inc!)

    It all started when Sandy bought a Kobo for her mom for Christmas... and kept it for herself. If a hard-core book lover like Sandy can fall for an e-reader, it can happen to anyone.

    So we started researching e-publishing, and it just seemed to suit our needs. First, you can get books out faster. We have always wanted to write more than one book a year, and also, different types of books. Now, with e-publishing, it’s a lot easier to follow your heart—as long as you hire experts to rein you in! We’re pretty excited by this new opportunity and expect to e-pub our next few books. But we've been around the book biz long enough to know that you have to stay flexible.

    If there’s enough interest in paper copies of Trade Secrets, we’ll look into making that option available.

    Is there anything you can share with us about your current work in progress or upcoming stories?

    We’re working on a bunch of projects right now, including a paranormal novel, and possibly, if people enjoy Trade Secrets, more from our Love, Inc. trio. It seems like their story wouldn't complete without another cycle of revenge hits, led by Sydney Stark.

    We love hearing from readers, so please join us on twitter @collins_rideout or visit our websites: collinsrideout.com and loveincbook.com

    Thank you both, so very much! I loved hearing from you and I'm definitely excited to read Trade Secrets! Hopefully, I will have a review up soon! I haven't had a chance to read the book yet, but I do have some copies to giveaway!! Yvonne and Sandy have generously offered copies of three of their novels as giveaway prizes! Enter below! The hard copies are US/CND only but the ecopies are International!
    *edit — I can't believe I forgot the Rafflecopter widget! SO sorry! I will still allow those who entered through the comments to maintain that as their entry, because this is my error, but anyone entering now needs to use the widget!*

  • Just Contemporary Interview with Stephanie Kuehnert! (and a giveaway!)

    I am soincredibly excited to have Stephanie on my blog today! She is amazing. I read Ballads of Suburbia earlier this year and was completely blown away by the book and the stories within the story. Stephanie wrote such a raw and emotional book that I was consumed by it for days and now I talk about it all the time. (Wanna read my review? :) ) So, when I got the idea for Just Contemporary, I knew that I wanted to ask Stephanie to be a part of it and I made embarrassing noises she emailed me yes!:)

    Here are some links to places where you can see more of Stephanie — Her website, her blog, Rookie an online magazine she writes for (and is crazy excited about, with good reason to be), and Twitter. And now — The Interview:

    I've heard you mention before that Ballads of Suburbia is a deeply personal book, one that a lot of you went into writing. What was it like, to write a book like that? A book that used so much of you? Did that make it easier or harder to write that I Wanna Be Your Joey Ramone?

    It was definitely a lot harder to write than IWBYJR, though that book dealt with some pretty hefty things, too, so there were some scenes that were difficult, but all of Ballads was hard. I mean I guess writing the setting was easier because unlike with IWBYJR, I wasn't making it up, I was writing about the place I lived during the time I lived there, so it was all in my memory, but that was the only easy part about that book. Early on, I worried a lot that I didn't want to make it too autobiographical. Fortunately as soon as I stopped thinking about it and started really creating the characters, especially through their ballads, I was relieved to find that they were all fictional... Well, Kara has a lot in common with me, but her story is different. Then it was time for revisions and the main feedback I got from my editor on it was something like "get closer to Kara's emotions, get into her head and really let us feel what she's feeling." At first I was all mad, thinking, I did that! Kara's head was basically my head when I was a teenager. But then I reread it and realized I'd actually held back a lot during my first few drafts, not intentionally but because I didn't want to go back there. The things I dealt with as a teenager, primarily the depression and the self-injury affected me into my early twenties. I'd felt like I'd healed, but probably only about five years before I was working on Ballads, so I had those emotions locked up pretty carefully and I knew it would be scary to revisit them. I reread old journals and things I wrote about cutting to get into Kara's mindset. I actually got so scary close to her that I was exhausted both mentally and physically when I finished the revision. When I was a teenager I'd had an ulcer form from all the stress and that ulcer had healed in my mid-twenties, but started acting up again after I finished Ballads. It really was the hardest thing I've ever done, but as a result, it is also the thing I am most proud of.

    Does I Wanna Be Your Joey Ramone draw from your personal experiences the way that Ballads did?

    Both books in a way are me looking at my own life and saying "What could have happened if... " With Ballads it was, "What could have happened if I did heroin more than once" because in real life I did it one time and it scared the shit out of me, so I sobered up completely for the rest of high school. With IWBYJR it was, "What would have happened if I actually could have learned to play the music I loved so much." If Kara from Ballads was the girl I was was, then Emily from IWBYJR is the girl I wanted to be. However, I actually have more in common with Louisa. Without giving the book away, I'll say that Louisa is carrying an awful secret that has to do with a guy she dated in high school, while I dated a guy who didn't do quite as bad things as this guy, he did some pretty bad things to me and while I didn't do what she did to the guy, I still came away from the situation, well to put it bluntly, really fucked up and I ran away in a manner of speaking for awhile, but not as long as Louisa did. Once again, with her I projected, "What would have happened if I never came to terms with that guy did to me... " I know that a lot of readers really don't like or relate to Louisa, but I actually feel for her because that could have been me. For the most part though, IWBYJR came from my love of punk rock, especially girl bands like Sleater-Kinney whose song "I Wanna Be Your Joey Ramone" I named the book after. I dreamed of a world where they would take over the mainstream rock airwaves.

    Did you have a goal while writing either of these books? A specific message or meaning you hoped people would take away from the experience? Or were they just stories that needed telling?

    They were just stories that needed telling. I honestly wrote both books because they were the books I needed as a teenager. I was a punk kid and I wanted there to be this big girl rock revolution, and would have loved reading about it, so I wrote it. On a more serious note, my friends and I were dealing with some pretty heavy stuff like the characters in Ballads, but in the mid-90s there weren't really YA books that dealt with that or if they did, they were all preachy and after-school special like. I just wanted to see someone like who survived so that I could draw strength from that. I wrote that story to give voice to teenage me and all the other teenagers like me who weren't seeing their stories out there.

    Do you look back on either of these novels and see things you would like to change? Things you wish you would have done differently?

    There is one minor character in IWBYJR that I wanted to kill off, but my agent told me not to. I still sort of wish I had. I can't really say more without spoilers. There are probably sentences or words here or there that I might change just because everyone grows as a writer (hopefully) so I might see a phrase as awkward or overwritten now that I didn't back then, but if I intentionally looked for that stuff it would make me crazy, so I don't. I am very proud of those books. I told the stories I wanted to tell. The only thing I wish is that I'd fought harder for them to be marketed more as YA. Sometimes they were in the adult sections of book stories and libraries and I want more teens to be able to find them.

    I know the 'Bartender Book' is considered to be more Women's Fiction than YA, but is there crossover appeal? Are the people (specifically the teens) who enjoyed your previous novels likely to want to read the Bartender Book?

    I must say that the Bartender Book isn't the actual title, I'm just being all secretive about that because I'm afraid of jinxing it, but yeah it is set a lot in a bar, so that and the fact that the main characters are 18 and 38 makes it "women's fiction" rather than YA, but like IWBYJR it is a mother/daughter story. The mother is in the story a lot more than Louisa was in IWBYJR because the chapters alternate, but the mother is actually a lot more like a teenager than the daughter. I actually tried to inject a bit more humor into it because I had to after writing a book like Ballads or that ulcer would come back for good, but it's not a "light" book by any means
    It deals with a lot of the same issues as my other books though, like finding a home or place to fit in, coping with grief and life not turning out like how you thought it would be. I'm pitching it as "an edgier version of The Gilmore Girls." So if you liked that show and/or if you like my other books, I think you'll like this one. At least I hope so!

    Any hints or ideas you can give us for what is in the works next?

    The Bartender Book is only just going on submission, so I'm not deep into anything else yet. I have three ideas... No, two, I think I've successfully limited it down to two. They are both YA, so a YA project is definitely next. They are both the edgy, real-life type of stories that readers have come to expect from me, but both would have a paranormal/magical realism twist to them because I have always admired Francesca Lia Block and wanted to add some small element of strangeness to the very real contemporary issues that my characters are dealing with. Though I love reading paranormal and sci-fi books, I'm kind of afraid to dip more than my feet into those waters, but I feel like I should at least deep my feet in and challenge myself if that makes sense.

    Other than the writing itself, what is the hardest part of being a writer.

    Honestly there are a lot of hard parts. Waiting is hard. Things happen at a snail's pace in publishing. Rejection is super hard and so is reading really nasty reviews. I am not a thick-skinned person and that is why I would say hardest of all is the self-doubt and the worrying. Even though I have two books published, I worry that I am not good enough to get published again. I worry that I will never be successful enough as a writer to properly make ends meet and should get a more reliable job. I worry that I will run out of ideas or start to suck. I worry that deep down I really do suck, but have been managing to squeak by somehow. In short, there is a lot of self-doubt and worrying that goes along with writing for me. But I do my damnedest to push past it because I love telling stories, I don't know what I would do if I couldn't write.

    Anything else you'd like to add or share with us?

    I just want to thank you for having me and supporting contemporary fiction!

    You are so welcome Stephanie and thank you so very much for being a part of this event! You are amazing and I for one am very grateful that you keep writing! Can't wait to read your next book!

    And now — The giveaway! Because Stephanie is all kinds of awesome, she has donated a signed copy of either of her books, winners choice! How awesome is that?! Both are amazing and I'm so excited that you will have a chance to win!

    To enter, fill out the Rafflecopter below! It's open US/CN only will end Dec 10 and there are chances for extra entries!! I promise, you don't want to miss this one! Here is the link to Rookie , the online magazine. Going there will get you extra giveaway entries!

  • Just Contemporary — Interview with author Jay Asher!!! (and giveaway)

    I am so insanely excited to have Jay Asher on my blog today! I read Thirteen Reasons Why in college and it just slayed me. Such a phenomenal story, totally brilliant. AND because he really iscompletely awesome, he's donated a signed copy of Thirteen Reasons Why. Information below.

    Thirteen Reasons Why is a very powerful and emotional book. What inspired this book?

    A close relative of mine attempted suicide when she was a junior in high school, the same age as Hannah Baker in the novel. Around that same time, I came up with the idea of an audiotour-style novel, using two simultaneous narrators. Nine years later, the subject matter and the structure came together, and I began writing the book. I knew the structure allowed me to discuss the very serious issues with an element of suspense, which was important to me. There's no reason serious books shouldn't also be entertaining.

    Did you always know the direction you wanted Thirteen Reasons Why to go? Or did Hannah and Clay surprise you? I always knew the emotional arc of Hannah's character, but the details that happened along the way were mostly surprises. As well, I had already written a large chunk of the book before I realized Clay's role in the story. Basically, I wanted to keep myself in the dark as much as possible, discovering the story as I went along. That way, if it was a suprise to me, I figured it would also be a surprise to the readers.

    Did you have any idea writing this book the kind of reaction it would have? That so many people would so connect to it, would find it so powerful and emotional?
    I had no idea this many people would love the book and tell so many other people about it. I always figured it would have a very strong, but rather small, following. There just happens to be a lot more people than I anticipated who allowed themselves to open up and try to understand what Hannah was going through. Many times, that's because they could identify with her a little bit. Other times, it's because they knew other people who'd been through similar circumstances. My main focus while writing Hannah's story was to write it with completely raw honesty, and I think that's what connected with so many people.

    What has most surprised you (positive, negative or both) about the response to Thirteen Reasons Why? On the positive side, it surprised me how many readers say the book inspired them to reach out and get help. They identified with Hannah in some ways, but also recognized where she could have, and should have, done more for herself. On the negative side, I'm always surprised when people say they didn't like the book because they didn't think Hannah had good reasons to kill herself. Of course she didn't! Does anyone? Yet it still happens. The alternative is to have written a book where, when people were done with it, they said, "Yep, she totally did the right thing." People who were hoping to read a book like that, they make me a little nervous.

    The Future of Us, your upcoming release, is not really Contemporary. Was it a lot different than writing Contemporary? Which do you prefer?

    The premise required us to set our world in 1996, but we didn't write it any differently than if it took place today. Along the same line, there's a sci-fi element to the story, but we wanted it to feel very real. So while it's set in the mid-90s, and has a fantastic element, we wanted it to feel like a realistic contemporary novel.

    You also wrote Future as part of a team. What was that writing experience like? Would you want to write as a team again, or do you prefer solo writing?
    It honestly felt no different than writing alone... just faster. Before Carolyn Mackler and I wrote a single word, we had several discussions about our writing styles and philosophies. Because we have very similar thoughts on those things, the entire time we wrote and brainstormed the story, we never clashed. Sometimes we challenged each other, but always pushing toward the same goal. Having someone to bounce ideas around with every step of the way, the process flowed much quicker than usual. So while I would be afraid to write a book with someone else, because there's no way they could compare to writing with Carolyn, it was much more enjoyable to write as a team (with that team!) than writing alone.

    What's next for you? Any information you can share with us about your work in progress? Nothing I can share, no. Like I said, I like surprises!
    Oh you tease!! I cannot wait to see what you will be working on next! Thank you so much for taking part in my event! It's been awesome having you here!! And, as mentioned previously, Jay has donated a signed paperback of Thirteen Reasons Why. This is an International giveaway. (Everyone should tell Jay how awesome he is, because he is the one shipping the book. The contest will close, as are all Just Contemporary contests on December 10th. Enter on the widget below. (Also, I feel like I have to say that I am jealous of whoever wins this one. This is one of the books I would love to have signed! Le sigh.:) )

  • Character Interview! Julianna from Never Eighteen

    Hey everyone and help me welcome Julianna today! She's a character in the upcoming Never Eighteen and she has agreed to answer a few questions for us today!

    If you could change one of your past choices, change one decision that you made, what would it be?

    I wish I'd never said yes to Ben.

    Austin worried about you, because of the situation with your boyfriend, and made sure to talk to you, to try and persuade you to get out of a dangerous relationship. Do you have any intention of following Austin's advice? Of getting help before it's too late?

    It’s already too late. I have no doubt in my mind that if I try to break up with Ben he’ll hurt me again, maybe even kill me this time. He’s threatened it before and I have no reason not to believe him. I stood up to him once—told him I was tired of his shit and that he better stop or I was going to call the cops. You know what he did? He laughed. Then he choked me to the point that I passed out. When I woke up he was leaning over me. Scared the hell out of me. I’ll never forget what he said. “Try to leave again and next time you won’t wake up.”

    Austin spent a lot of time thinking about how he wanted to spend that weekend and you were definitely one of his priorities. Does knowing that trying to make sure you would be safe was one of his priorities make you more inclined to listen to his advice? What does knowing that mean to you?

    Austin lost his right to care when he broke up with me. I mean, he comes over to my house with Kaylee? Things didn’t exactly end well between us. I was in love with him and he broke my heart. Just because he’s seeing the world through death glasses, doesn’t mean he has the right to butt in where he has no business.

    How did you feel at the party, when Austin stepped in front of you?

    I wanted to hit him. Such an idiot. He just made everything worse. I got a good beating after that party. One of the worst. Ben didn’t even bother to hit me in places that wouldn’t show like he normally does. I had a black eye, a swollen lip. I had to lie to my parents about what happened. If he wasn’t already dying, I might just kill him.

    What would you say has been the defining moment or experience of your life so far?

    Defining moment? I don’t have any defining moments. The only thing that defines me is Ben. He wouldn’t have it any other way.

    Oh Julianna! It's never too late! This interview is breaking my heart, because I know that there are people who feel this way. So I'm going to take a moment here to just say — There is never such this as too late. Find people who you can talk to, who can help you. There are always options!

    ALSO — Megan has been generous enough to donate some fun & awesome swag!! Just leave me a comment with your email address AND a statement related to Never Eighteen or the character interview above!


    The swag pack includes a bookmark, sticker, bracelet, notebook, pen, temporary tattoo, a button, pack of tissues and a CD of songs that inspired the novel. This giveaway is also open Internationally and will close in 10 days, on November 9.

  • Character Interview! Jackson from If I Tell

    Author Janet Gurtler has helped us today get Jackson, one of the main secondary characters in her upcoming novel If I Tell, to stop by and answer some questions. He was genuinely one of my favorite characters in this book, so I was thrilled to get this chance to hear from him!

    Jasmine is really shy and can be hard to talk to when you first meet her. What were your impressions or thoughts after that first time you spoke to her?

    I had already noticed Jaz at school and knew she was shy. I thought it was amazingly cute how flustered she got when we spoke.

    What do you think of Jasmine's decision not to tell her mom about what she saw? Do you
    think it's right or okay to keep that kind of secret from someone?

    It was her decision to make and she made it for the reasons she thought were right. I try not to judge. Secrets are hard. Sometimes they’re necessary. I believe that it’s okay to do things to protect the people you care about.

    If you had the chance to meet Jasmine again for the first time, would you change anything
    about that initial conversation? Would you do anything differently?

    Nope. I’m pretty happy with the way things turned out, so why would I want to change anything and risk jinxing it!

    If you were given the choice, would you pick to have your deepest wish come true? Or to beable to grant a wish for someone else?

    Someone else.

    What would your wish have been?

    I would wish that my mom could have been a happier person. And that my grandma didn’t have to worry about me or money ever again in her life.

    We know from reading the book that music is a huge part of your life, but what about reading? Any favorite books?

    Books are cool. I have an eclectic taste in books. My favorite would have to be All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy.

    Thanks so much for stopping by Jackson! It's been great to hear your thoughts!

  • This or that with author Shanice Williams

    Today, Shanice Williams, author of Kane Richards Must Die is visiting today to share some This or That answers with us!:)

    Spring or Fall

    Hmm, definitely spring. I love seeing all blooming flowers and falling petals from the trees So cute.

    Hardcover or Paperback

    Makes no difference to me. But I guess hardcover has that more kinda “serious business” feel to it.:)

    M&Ms — Peanut or Peanut Butter

    Don’t think I’ve ever tried peanut butter ones. So just the peanut for me!

    (What?! No PB M&Ms?! EVER?! You are SO missing out! They are the best!!)

    Barefoot or Shoes

    Depends on the situation I guess. I won’t be walking through the snow barefoot unless I want my toes to fall off! I’ll just say Shoes:)

    One room library or Books in every room in your house

    Books in every room. Might as well add a touch of knowledge in every room than have it all bundled in one place!

    A little bit of clutter or Everything perfectly neat and tidy

    Everything’s more fun with a little bit of clutter! You get to find things that you was looking for a couple weeks back while you’re searching for something else!

    Past or Future

    Past has the memories and the little things that make you who you are. I’m always wishing I could go back rather than go forward.

    Uncertain theory or Absolute fact

    Uncertain theory I think. Facts are so boring. Uncertainty brings mystery!:)

    Marvel or DC comics

    Um… Marvel? I don’t really read comics so I’m just going with the one that sounds familiar.

    Legos or Lincoln logs

    Ha! Not quite sure what Lincoln logs are, so Legos for me!

    (Sadness! What is it with no one knowing about Lincoln logs?! They are almost as awesome as legos!!)

    Detailed planning or Spontaneous decisions

    Hmm.. Spontaneous decisions I think!

    Ocean or Mountains

    Mountains. You can get right in there without drowning. So to speak.

    Gum or Breath mint

    Gum! Keeps your mouth working for longer. (LOL)

    Truth or Dare

    Truth. I’m a real scaredy cat when it comes to dares.

    Painting or Photograph

    Photograph. That’s where the real memories are!

    Thanks so much for stopping by Shanice! I have to say that (other than being shocked and slightly appalled that you are unfamiliar with both Lincoln Logs and PB M&Ms) I agree with most of your choices! This was a fun T/T to read through!

  • Character Interview! Richard from Second Hand Heart

    Today's character guest is Richard, one of the two narrators from Second Hand Heart, a book that covers a lot of emotional ground. Richard made the decision to donate his wife's organs after her death and meets Vida, the recipient of the heart. He's here today to give us a little more information about how he feels now.

    Why did you initially decide to meet Vida? Your mother in law knew you wanted to meet her, and yet she only warned you against meeting the heart recipient. I know why the heart was the 'most important' organ for you, but why didn't you try to even meet the other recipients?

    I know this sounds overly simple, but…Vida asked. Well, her mother asked. Abigail. If I’d been invited to meet the old woman in Tiburon who received Lori’s corneas, I might have. But still. There’s that fascination with a heart. Someone’s heart. It’s just a bit more to the point about a person than their corneas. Somebody told me about this interesting little experiment: if you ask people to point to themselves, they’ll almost always point to their own hearts. Rarely their brains, though we say we put so much stock in brains. Never their corneas.

    We don’t use the phrase “the heart of the matter” for nothing.

    Frankly, I think Myra would have warned me against anything that brought my loss more sharply into focus. That’s just who she is. She means well, and she was a lot of support for me. But she dealt with the loss of her daughter by keeping it at a distance. Sometimes people have to walk right into the sorrow if they want to heal.

    In fairness, I only asked her advice about Vida. And I think it was my level of investment in the situation that set off her warning bells. I think I decided to meet Vida because of sheer curiosity. I knew the curiosity was not going to leave me alone. Or maybe I thought it would make me feel better. And it did. But not in the short run.

    If you were able to do something differently in your relationship with Vida, what would you change?

    Oh, God. So much. Everything.
    I would have believed her. Trusted her to know what she was feeling. Really listened to her when she tried to tell me what her world was like. I treated her like a foolish child. And, well, in some ways she was. But she’d never really been given a chance to grow up. In other ways she knew more than I did.

    God, I would do that whole thing over if I could. But I can’t. And, Vida being Vida, she doesn’t blame me. It’s not in her to hold a grudge.

    If Vida never again made contact, would you continue to express an active interest in her life?

    Oh, absolutely. Not a day goes by that I don’t think about her. Wonder where she is. If she’s okay. And not just the heart, either. The girl wrapped around it, too.

    What do you think the most important part of your story? The most important thing for people to take away from reading about this experience?

    I think the key lies in the difference between Myra and me. When we advise others about loss, how often are we really telling them to ignore it, or distract themselves? When we advise each other on our actions, aren’t we usually telling each other not to take a risk, so we won’t get hurt?

    I know we mean well. But in my experience, the greatest changes and experiences in life happen when we take risks and get hurt. I’m glad for the whole experience with Vida, painful as it was. I’m a different person as a result of that. I wouldn’t subtract that pain from my experience for all the money on earth. It woke me up to life. This was the first time you had ever tried keeping a journal. Do you think it is something you would want to continue or resume in the future? Or is it something that you feel will be reserved for this portion of your life?

    I think it’s one of those things like breaking down a dam. I don’t think I will ever manage to dam up my feelings again. Now that they’re flowing, I think I’ll always journal. As Ram Dass (or Richard Alpert, for starchy academics like myself) once said. “The trouble with awakening is that you just can’t seem to get back to sleep.”
    Thanks so much for sharing! I love the extra details and information you've given us!