This little gif from my presentation shows an attempt to fix the rhythm and timing problem in motion comics from Marvel.

We see the animation pause, like Zack Snyder's speed up slow down – although I feel this is used to create a false attraction to comic readers by replicating the same enforced timing of the comic frames. I wish to address that, although the argument in favour of Zack Snyder's work could be that he is playing to his audience – and that is nothing to be ashamed of. He knows that his audience is primarily comic readers and that they expect a certain 'comic' sensibility to the affair. My problems stem with using this to – I feel – cheapen the graphic novel medium further. Motion comics could represent a culmination of narrative and visuals enhanced by sound, and I don't think that emulating the problems with the old media are helping the argument at all.

This all ties into my annoyance at the constant linking of comics or graphic novels with superheroes and the childish nature they maintain – where 'mature' means blood, guts and female objectification. I don't think they have to mean that at all, I think the story defines what is mature – not the amount of gore spilled.

Lovecraft fits the ideal I am aiming for, as a mature story – but not a 'mature' comic (If I was speaking I would be doing air quotes) there is no need for gore and no need for objectification, and it could prove the motion comic as more than a delivery vehicle for well established tropes that already exist.

presentation

So at today's presentation I was confronted with a few problems form the lecturers, the main one being the amount of work I need to produce and the approach to producing that amount. 80 minutes is a lot to produce, the lecturers seemed shocked at the idea of just fifteen!

To be honest,I think I can do it. Large goals have always helped me focus and stay true to what I have set out to do, and I'm tired of half finished pieces; unintelligible fractions of work that really mean nothing without me standing there and explaining it to the viewer.I want this to stand on it's own, I want something I can be proud of creating for once. I can always pare it down to a single fifteen minute chapter, but that really is the lowest I mean to go.

I want to prove that I can produce finished work, that I can start a project and see it through to its end. In my creative writing I have found that the most satisfying feeling did not come from what people thought of it, or what it said as a whole – it came from staring at a complete, finished piece. That's what I am setting out to create here. After writing three books and receiving some middling feedback on them I chose to remove them for extensive reworking and rewriting – because I wanted to. The problems within them could not be seen in their individual parts, they could only be seen as a whole. Probably only by me as they had only been read by three or four people, but I digress.

I will take this onboard, as the important thing to understand is not to cheapen what I am doing by demanding quantity over quality. Experimentation is still important, as this is for my portfolio.

Back to my presentation

Another aspect that was really helpful was in whittling down my question, the idea of transformative media – so here goes!

*Clears throat*

How can a writer deal with the challenges faced when translating an existing work to a new medium?

This encompasses the ideas I have had, on the way that movie translations and motion comics try t replicate the flaws of comic rather than building upon the reasons that forced them in the first place.

Keep working!

This counts as a motion comic, with the only interaction required on the reader's part is scrolling down. I warn you, this one is loud and will scare you.

http://comic.naver.com/webtoon/detail.nhn?titleId=350217&no=31

Although it relies on a one time 'gimmick' that never works perfectly again, it shows what can be done with the reader's expectations when presenting digitally. Even within an entirely digital space we expect certain rules to be followed for no real reason.

This raises the idea of rhythm within the narrative world, something that many comics rely upon. You cannot control how fast the reader will read the pages, but you can control the tempo that they will read it at – large open panels two or three a page will be read quickly and skimmed over, while small intricate panels will be read at a slower pace and tend to be good for characterisation and plot delivery. With webcomics this is actually removed and changed, as the reader is now at the mercy of the comic creator when it comes to even the tempo and speed of reading

http://xkcd.com/1190/

http://geekwagon.net/projects/xkcd1190/

Randall Munroe's XKCD is a webcomic I find has outlasted it contemporaries and still manages to deliver thought provoking arguments and ideas despite its science heavy themes. In an earlier project I drew attention to a clever comic that contained a world inside a panel, that was explorable by dragging the mouse – this gave me thought about the need for panels within comics and the idea of exploring within them.

His comic Time is another thought provoking idea in comic form, a single frame that changed every half hour for 3099 frames, the images being stored nowhere except for the readers to store themselves (I have linked one of the viewers that allow you to read at your own pace, although some of the panels are disputed) He created something that had to be read at the speed he decided and was truly one of a kind. The story is quite simple, but very clever and deep – dealing with Earth far in the future, but you'd never know it without following the little clues, such at the changed night sky.

N

A motion comic written by Stephen King, with a nice direction to it. Less technologically advanced than other examples, but I think it works better.

http://www.stephenking.com/n/

The Marvel comics are straying a little too close to just being animation in my opinion.

http://youtu.be/O490WDOoiuM?t=9m19s

There is an argument there, over the point of definition between motion comic or animation that I won't be exploring. I just think the slower style of the Stephen King work fits the tone better, and lip syncing looks out of place when the rest of the animation is quite reserved.

That's not to say the Stephen King one is perfect - for one thing the backgrounds have a distinct 'photoshop filter' look to them that makes it seem a little cheap in places. 

Case Study: The Lord of the Rings trilogy

What I feel is a good example of a transformative media is this trilogy, one which I feel is successful in capturing the tone of the original work over the three films. One of the aspects that I feel helped this is the structure of the films themselves within the trilogy – that each film follows it's own tone and structure while fitting the general theme of the trilogy as well

Looking at it from a purely academic standpoint the film itself supports the generalised screenplay model perfectly, changing the original book where necessary to make it contemporary while staying true – one case is its bombastic introduction, added for the film but fitting perfectly within the whole storyline while adding immensely to the original.

As said by Syd Field in Screenplay:“If you can't get the audience's attention in the first ten minutes, you're not going to get it at all.” For a trilogy that spans more than nine hours in its uncut forms (Although I'm looking at the theatrical versions, only a scant two and a half hours each) getting the audience onboard in the first film is essential – the star wars prequels did not suffer from this problem, but the originals did. There will be more discussion on this when I perform a small case study on them.

For those that haven't seen these films (Both of you!) the introduction for the movie skips the long build of the books initially to deliver a jaw dropping battle scene, the battle that set up all the events that the books lead onto. In the original book it is more than a hundred pages of character building before we get to the explanation, something that fit's the more sedentary pace of a novel and the deep character work that is needed.

For a restless audience in a theatre though, the film chooses to move this forward – and rather than relating it as a story told by Gandalf they show you it in all its glory, the old screenwriter's adage “Show, don't tell” Cinema is a visual medium and they choose to play to the strengths they have rather than try to tell it factually. They may have changed the content but they retained the tone.

A shot of the 'Battle of Mordor' introduction sequence

 

From there the story settles into the same format as the book, other than the omission of Tom Bombadil (Something I covered in my presentation), keeping the tone of an introduction while using the structure of a single film, but still fitting that structure into a trilogy.

Syd Field's screenplay model from Screenplay. I used a camera so as not to break the spine on my book!

In the film alone, this and the scenes after in the shire serve as Act 1, the Set up. Plot point one is the wearing of the ring at the Prancing Pony inn, and the attack - this sets all the players in motion and reveals the true danger to the audience. Act 2 starts and features weathertop, the battle against the Ringwraiths and Frodo almost dying - plot point 2 is the forming of the fellowship at Rivendell. Act 3 as a resolution shows the journey through Moria and the fall of Sean Bean's character, Boromir.

As difficult as it is to fit the first part of a trilogy into a set and understandable screenplay model, it also fits in the trilogy. Do not think this laziness on the film-maker's part - this screenplay model is not used to spare original thought, but because it works.

Within the trilogy as a whole, this model still applies - Fellowship is Act 1, setting up the story to follow and with the fall of Boromir and Gandalf becoming plot point one - no one is invulnerable to the lure of the ring and the forces that have amassed to capture it. The Two Towers is Act 2, with the confrontation of Saruman and the battle at Helm's Deep becoming the main thrust of the film. One description for Act 2 of a screenplay is that the problem that is introduced in Act 1 is attempted, but failed - also part of 'the hero's journey', refusing the call (Aragorn refusing to become the king he is). At the end of the second film one enemy has been defeated, but the audience is left in no doubt that a stronger enemy remains. Plot point 2 is the arrival of Frodo and Sam at the gates of Mordor, setting the scene for the next film (Or final act, if you will). Return of the King completes the hero's journey (Aragorn answering the call to become king of Gondor) and resolves the  storyline with the defeat of Sauron's forces and the destruction of the ring. The importance of tonally keeping the film together is important at the end, the destruction of the ring and Frodo's success is directly tied into the success of Aragorn and the people of Gondor. Splitting these elements would distract from the tone of completion and success, so it is paramount that this becomes the final arc of the story, barring the epilogue.

Tonally the films hold their own as part of a complete trilogy - Fellowship is hope, continuing even after the fellowship has broken. The Two Towers is defiance and resistance against a stronger and unbeatable foe and Return of the King is victory, the reuniting of the fellowship and the defeat of evil. All in all it is a simple story really, but told with consistency and direction - making it a succesful adaptation in my eyes, a successful example of transformative media.

That was a lot longer than I thought it would be, but fun! I'll continue with case studies, looking at other transfomative works and how I feel they have worked.