vern wrote:You're too young to remember the best western of all time...
LOL, yep, that would be up there somewhere in the OK Coral in the sky. Take care. Vern
Hmm, no proof? PLEASE read the below article on the subject. But, I do give you credit for your youthful enthusiasm as Tombstone is listed way down there in the top ten if you read all the way through. Oh, and just as another counterpoint, if you watched westerns all day every day of your life and someone a bit older did the same, I think it obvious who would smoke the field. He walks into the sunset. Take care. Vern
SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., June 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- SHANE, director
George Stevens' classic 1953 movie about a weary gunfighter caught up in a
land war between Wyoming ranchers and farmers, is the greatest Western
movie of all time, Western Writers of America has announced.
For top honors SHANE, which Pulitzer Prize-winning Western novelist
A.B. Guthrie Jr. adapted for the screen from Jack Schaefer's novel, edged
HIGH NOON, the 1952 movie that won Gary Cooper his second Academy Award as
Best Actor.
Western Writers of America, a nonprofit organization of more than 600
professional writers, founded in the 1950s to promote and honor the best
literature about the American West -- including screenwriting -- announced
the 100 Greatest Western Movies of All Time on Thursday, June 12, at
Scottsdale's Chaparral Suites during the association's annual convention.
"This year has been incredible," WWA Executive Director Paul Hutton
said. "Cormac McCarthy's brutal little contemporary Western NO COUNTRY FOR
OLD MEN did great at the box office, taking in over $60 million and was
nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Directors Joel and Ethan Coen got
nominations, too. Paul Thomas Anderson also was nominated for THERE WILL BE
BLOOD, his amazing adaptation of Upton Sinclair's 1927 novel Oil, with his
lead actor Daniel Day-Lewis winning the Oscar."
Members voted on their top 10 Western movies, and the ballots were
tabulated at the WWA offices at the University of New Mexico.
No. 3 was THE SEARCHERS, director John Ford's powerful 1956 story about
a vengeful Texan's quest to find his two nieces, taken by Comanche Indians,
based on Alan LeMay's novel. No. 4 was BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID,
the 1969 movie that first teamed Paul Newman and Robert Redford. Kevin
Costner's Academy Award-winning DANCES WITH WOLVES (1990), from Michael
Blake's novel, rounded out the top five.
Rounding out the top 10 were director Sam Peckinpah's bloody,
end-of-the-West opera THE WILD BUNCH (1969); Howard Hawk's first Western,
RED RIVER (1948), which gave John Wayne one of his best roles; the surprise
cult O.K. Corral favorite TOMBSTONE (1993), starring Kurt Russell and Val
Kilmer; THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (1960), a Western retelling of Japanese
director Akira Kurosawa's brilliant SEVEN SAMURAI, and OPEN RANGE (2003),
which starred Robert Duvall in another Costner-directed movie.
"It's not the Top 10 I would come up with," says incoming WWA president
Johnny D. Boggs, "but that's the fun of lists like these. It prompts lively
debate, and members of Western Writers of America can be as passionate
about Western film as they are about literature of the West."
WWA's membership roster is filled with writers who are no stranger to
Hollywood, including screenwriters Kirk Ellis, Steve Harrigan, C. Courtney
Joyner, Andrew J. Fenady, Stephen Lodge, and Miles Hood Swarthout, whose
father, the late Glendon Swarthout, wrote the novel THE SHOOTIST, which
became John Wayne's last movie. Bill Gulick (BEND OF THE RIVER, THE
HALLELUJAH TRAIL) and Max Evans (THE ROUNDERS, THE HI-LO COUNTRY) saw two
of their novels adapted for the screen. Hutton, Boggs and fellow members
Michael F. Blake, Win Blevins, Brian Garfield, and Arthur Winfield Knight
have written extensively about Western film.
In 2009, WWA plans to announce the 100 Greatest Western Television
Movies, Series and Miniseries of All Time during the convention in Oklahoma
City.
The best western of all time is Tombstone.
Ahh, but you haven't lived long enough to have experienced a valid sample size. I, on the other hand, have seen both the "contenders" and can say with complete unvarnished truth that "Tombstone" wouldn't even have been imagined without the previous fame of "Shane", yeah, not even a trailer, lol. Take care. Vern
(Vern, nothing comes to mind when I see your response. I don't know what you're referencing
You're too young to remember the best western of all time (Shane) of which that quote comes from the closing scene. It may be a stretch, but I was playing off the "back" part of the backwards and forward aspect of aibohphobia. I'll chalk it up to too much Twilight Zone during my formative years. Take care. Vern
Come back Shane!
Mommycock
sorority
Joe
Bit him
vern wrote:If you just ignore them, you can pretend the "little people" don't exist.
Do you remember me griping at the old forum a few years ago (I can sense you nodding, please allow me to finish), because the little peep hole on the front door of every house I've lived in is too high for me to reach, and this makes no sense, because tall people can stoop, while tiny people always have to go get a stool or hop, and it's all very illogical, so why don't they put the peephole lower for us small folk? And you reminded me that if manufacturers lowered the peephole, all a person would see when they look out is the groin of an average-sized person? Which made me laugh, and laugh hardily, and it resolved my lifelong irritation with the peephole dilemma, for your logic is sound.
I won't explain why I'm reminding you of this. I'll just leave you with an uncomfortable silence.
To answer your rhetorical question, yes, I remember and am very honored to have evoked a hardy laugh; a greater compliment, I could not receive. Take care. Vern
If you just ignore them, you can pretend the "little people" don't exist.
What happened to the new writing contest? Did I miss something? Haven't heard anything about it in ages.
Should be learning the winner(s) soon; it typically takes about a month after closing deadline and that time frame has now passed.Take care. Vern
Congrats! Keep "riding". Take care. Vern
Congrats? All authors should experience the birth of their first "child." Take care. Vern
From my observation, the posts only disappear from the front page once I've opened them and otherwise stay until they are displaced by other newer ones up to the box limit. Of course, I could have special appeal which makes them want to hang around until I've read them -- kind of like that commercial about the most interesting man in the world. Take care. Vern
Edited to correct spelling of "of".
A lot of people may be heavily committed in recip relationships. If they look at your work and decide they have nothing to offer it, they might choose not to waste your time as well as theirs.
So what's the point? Say I receive 100 reviews from different people and I don't care to start another recip relationship, then I simply click the response box and say "Thank you for the review. My plate is full and I can't take on any further reviews at this time." Now, yes, it might take you a few seconds to type that the first time, but once you've done so, you can simply copy it and paste it in all the rest. Conversely just type an X in each response and the message should be clear. Oh, wow, in either case that took about five minutes of my precious time to inform 100 people I don't want to be bothered. Maybe I should just post at the beginning of all my work that I'm not interested in any more reviews and save all that wasted time. Oh no, another five seconds wasted. Take care. Vern
I don't see a huge problem here. You review, expecting feedback; when you don't get it, you move on and forget about that author. No big deal. Coercion is not the answer, in my view.
There's no more coercion involved here than putting out a story looking for a review and then not responding. The story itself is a form of coercion for the reviewer -- and for anyone who thinks the points is payment in full, perhaps you'll loan me a few million bucks and I'll promise to pay you back someday with no interest.
Like I've stated before, it's not a big deal for me if they don't respond since I automatically don't review the offenders again, but if you want to talk about no "big deal" then you might also say it's no "big deal" for the folks to click on the response to let the reviewer know they have at least seen the review and then no one is waiting around to see if they are dealing with someone they wish to continue reviewing. The reviewer is not a guilty party here, the non-responder is to those fair souls who have a bit more tolerance for that sort of thing than I do.
I have another not so politically correct suggestion: Create a more even playing field by posting in big red letters on the front page the names of those who do not respond so that others have the option to opt out before wasting their time on a review. You don't want to respond, you are not seeking reviews. Put it in bright lights. Take care. Vern
From time to time I find I've missed a review in a flurry. A reminded would be enough for me.
What happens if I'm getting ready to paste a chapter in when a review comes in? Does the paste fail? Does the chapter refuse to update because of one--or several--reviews that come in just at that moment? What if I'm running on a laptop with a limited battery runtime?
There was/should be a time lapse to avoid such scenarios as you state. I don't recall the time differential, but I think something along the order of three days or a week even should be plenty of time to respond; however, that's just me and the exact timing isn't really the point. If one couldn't post a chapter or whatever because of not responding to a review, then all they would have to do is respond; I mean how long does it take and would another instantaneous posting be that critical (to ignore a review) in the grand scheme of things. To each their own; I've solved the dilemma to my satisfaction as stated previously. Take care. Vern
Once upon a time, if you didn't respond to a review, then you couldn't post any writing until you did, but I don't know if that is still the case. Actually, I'm sure it is not since I have done a review which has not been responded to in quite some time and the author has definitely posted again. So, I suppose, that is my way of saying that the more things "improve" the worse they get in some situations. One thing is perfectly clear from my perspective, if an author doesn't respond within a reasonable time and they are clearly still on site and posting (not out sick or dead), they will absolutely get no further reviews from this perhaps not so politically correct reviewer. Take care. Vern
Edited to add PS: BTW, ignorance of not knowing you have a review you haven't responded to is no excuse since all you have to do is look at your list of reviews if you've been absent for a while and it will tell you if you have responded or not. AND not knowing that option is not an acceptable excuse either.
I'm pretty sure that before the sentence in question comes up in a reasonable situation, the message has been discussed between the parties so there should really be no need to muddy the waters with their names and occupations and the accompanying comma confusion.
My take: "They considered the message a prank so ignored it."
Take care. Vern
I'm pretty sure if everyone stopped using the internet entirely for say about a month and then explained in the surveys which would ensue to find out why, that we would no longer put up with the crap produced, the powers-that-be would come up with a quality solution. But I'm not holding my breath on either count. Take care. Vern
Ouch! I made a last-minute entry (at about 23:35) and realized I'd omitted something, so I edited the version out there. The edit was completed at about 23:53. Does the contest get the edit or not?
As long as any edit is in before midnight (the deadline) it should and always has been good to go. You can still edit after the deadline, but the judges won't (should not) see those changes. That's how it has been and I assume will continue to be until/unless we are notified otherwise. Take care. Vern
Congrats! Take care. Vern
vern wrote:Really? 4 days and still only 4 entries. I'm liking those odds, but geez folks/writers, you ask for contests and then sit on the sideline. Oh well. Take care. Vern
Comment from the side-lines. (Warning; subjective opinion is expressed).
We do ask for competitions, and as you know, I’m always usually up for them. The occasional competitions are possibly the only factor that persuade me to continue my subscription here nowadays. However, this particular competition is not for me. It has strict, specific genre and plot requirements. I’m not knocking that; the few people that asked for such exacting story requirements and criteria are obviously up for it and are happily knocking one out.
However, I don’t think the few who asked for it should ask why ‘others’ are sitting on the side-lines.
I did actually give this competition a go; ideas formed and I even put pen to paper. The classic ‘locked room’ mystery has two main elements the ‘whodunnit’ and the ‘howdunnit’.
IMO the howdunnit without the whys and wherefores of the whodunnit is a half inflated balloon.
The ‘whodunit’ requires a lot of preparation with characterization, character back-story, actions and foreshadowing. The misdirection, the red-herring, the subterfuge and stratagem. The revealing of the perpetrator should be un-obvious and a shock, yet with hindsight the evidence is hidden but readable when carefully back-tracked.
I found (quite quickly) that I couldn’t condense my story into 15,000, let alone 5,000. Deliberately writing something that I, the author am not happy with, is a big compromise, is a non-starter. Time and creative effort are better spent elsewhere.
Fair-play to those who asked for the competition criteria and who entered. It is your competition and you are entitled to enjoy it.
From the side-lines, I’ve had a look at the entries (doesn’t take long) and as much as imaginary worlds populated by biologically diverse intelligent alien lifeforms, talking dragons, naked gnomes and such is so not my thing (or within my comfort zone), I found that the entries all came across as a rushed ‘howdunnit’ with little or no developed ‘whodunnit’ element. A non-descript perp of convenience is hurried-in as the curtain closes.
Personally, I like the traditional more 'general' kind of competition that might ask for (with a finger in the air), maybe a ‘Winter based murder mystery’ within 5,000 words. Or a Summer based story that involves treachery between siblings or blood relations… or something very broadly of that nature. It is non-restrictive allowing all genres, styles and preferences to enter; from off-world fantasy to real-world factual. Heaven forbid, but it would also include poets. Writers would pile into a competition like that. It would guarantee some really good entries too.
In the meantime, I’m on the bench with the people on the side-lines happily letting this particular competition pass by unacknowledged and thinking, “hey-ho; no matter, maybe next time.”
I certainly respect your opinion and obviously would expect no one to enter any contest in which they weren't comfortable. I would add that my statement referred to people asking for "contests" in general not this specific one -- not sure anyone asked for this specific scenario in all it's detail. Although the number to enter this contest is extremely low, it appears to me that most contests in general these days receive less entries than in times past. Although several have stated the strict requirements as a reason for not entering, I'm not sure that small relative number is more a factor than the seemingly diminishing participation overall. Other contests such as drabbles about time travel would seem just as restrictive but received many more entries. Just my observation. Take care. Vern
Got a headache just trying to plot this one out in my head, so kudos to the brave and creative souls who entered. On a positive note, there's been some exceptional world-building and creativity in the small group of entries, especially when it comes to the identity of the required "deaf, mute, or blind" main character.
Just for the record, the contest lists "dumb" as an option which adds a different dimension than the PC "mute". Take care. Vern
