Readers, I need your help!

Hello all!

So I'm close to the home stretch for my newest project, the first book in a series about a young woman who is trying to find herself, but finds lost children instead.  I'm using places in the Upper Midwest, starting with Manitowoc, Wisconsin, and I'm using alliteration in the titles.  Now I've been working with the title "Missing in Manitowoc" but as I look at one of the characters, I'm starting to wonder if "Monster in Manitowoc" works better.

Here's a rough draft of the cover:

What are your thoughts?  Which title would you be more likely to look at?

A review you can use: the Best Picture nominees I've seen so far.

Good morning!

Well, the Oscars are about three weeks away, and I've manged to see roughly half of the Best Picture nominees.  I' know I've mentioned my feelings about them one way or another, but I thought now is a good time to give you a proper review of the four films I've seen thus far.  And I'll put them in order from worst to best:

4)  Birdman:

I was really prepared to love Michael Keaton's return to a major role in "Birdman."  In fact, I had a very long conversation with the popcorn lady at the theater right before I went in to see the film and we both decided, having not seen the film, that this might just be the best picture of the year, since we both loved Michael Keaton.

Then I saw the film and put it at the bottom of the list. This quite possibly is the worst 2014 film I've seen. 

Birdman is the story of a washed up movie star (Keaton) whose biggest role was that of a superhero.  Now, this Hollywood has been is trying to make it big on Broadway, sinking everything he has, his money, his talent, his writing skills into a play he not only adapts, but also directs and stars in.  Of course Broadway hates him because he's Hollywood, so in spite of his best attempts, his play cast (lead by one of my personal favorites Edward Norton)  his rehabbed daughter (Emma Stone)  and his lawyer (Zach Galifianakis)  all seem to plot and scheme against him, making his triumphant play seem like a failure before it opens.  

Let's put aside the fact that this movie underscores the fact that New York and LA pretty much thinks they are the only two cities in the country...that theme is made obvious by the clash of culture between movies and culture and how those of us who aren't living in those two cities haven't a clue about what's good and what isn't.  (For the record, I did like Keaton's speech to the theater critic about how being a critic costs the critic NOTHING...sure, I write movie reviews.  But I do it so bad movies don't cost anyone else anything.  I believe those of us who have an opinion should use it to help our fellow man.  So no, writing a review costs a critic very little.  But it might save those who have little from wasting what they have.)  Let's instead turn our focus on what an egocentric, narcissistic, completely without point this plot is.  Hey, Hollywood, yah know what's better about plays?  PLAYS HAVE TO MAKE SENSE!  This movie makes zero sense in the final analysis.  Sure, there are great themes, (power vs. prestige, what is art, family vs. work)  but they are lost, much like the viewer is, in endless, endless, ENDLESS characters running up stairs and around halls, all set to a mind rattling, annoying sound track of nothing but ad lib drumming.  

I probably would have liked this movie, I may have even loved it, but the ending completely, utterly, and without conscience betrays the viewer.  All the themes build to a moment, and the moment is the ending and the ending is utterly head scratching.  

What does this all mean?  Probably means it'll win.

3)  Grand Budapest Hotel

I do not understand Wes Anderson.  I've said it many times.  I don't get assembling a huge cast of awesome actors and then telling a completely addled story.  That said, I was excited to see Grand Budapest Hotel, a frantic, colorful story about a hotel concierge (Ralph Fiennes) and his lobby boy as they try to find a stolen painting in 1930's Europe.  It's a very colorful, fast paced film, and I will give it points for bringing life and color to the screen.  And there are funny moments.  And again, Edward Norton is there.  All good stuff.  But the movie, for me, simply does not come together in any sort of cohesive anything.   

I'm told I'm wrong for not loving Wes Anderson.  Well, that means this film will probably win.

2)  Boyhood

Boyhood is a family drama filmed in real time over twelve years.  In all honesty, if director Richard Linklater hadn't decided to film the movie over the course of twelve years, this movie would not have been nominated.  It's a nice family drama, well acted.  Ethan Hawke and Patricia Arquette are solid as the divorced parents of Mason,(Played by Ellar Coaltrain.), a boy who seems to wander through life as things happen around him. Boyhood doesn't make much comment on anything, just points an unblinking camera at the family and lets it go.  It's heart tugging, and it's a good movie.  But the magic in this film is the fact that you see the actual actors age in real time.  Ellar Coaltrain goes from being an adorable little boy and we get to watch him go through his awkward years, his thorny years, until he grows up into a high school graduate. It's really nice, one could even call it art.  It's certainly an original idea. Best picture of the year? Well, I don't think so, so it'll probably win.

1)  The Imitation Game.

I was so wild to see this film after I'd seen a documentary about Alan Turing.  It simply does not matter what side of the homosexuality issue you fall on, Alan Turing's story is one of a hero who was treated horribly.  Very reminiscent of "A Beautiful Mind"  (one of my all time favorites,)  this film pictures Turing (Cumberbatch) as a misunderstood, barely tolerated genius who is brought in to help the British Government crack the Nazi codes.  (And not that I'm comparing homosexuality to schizophrenia, but the idea of a misunderstood genius who is socially awkward is undeniable between the two films.) Turning invents the machine that cracks the Nazi code, saving thousands of lives ultimately. (He's also known as the father of the modern computer.)  Later in his life, however, he's arrested and convicted of gross indecency because he's homosexual.  The movie barely touches on this, but the documentary, Codebreaker, goes into great detail the special sort of hell the British government heaped on this war hero because of his sexual orientation. The comparison to "A Beautiful Mind" might hurt "Imitation Game's" chances...but I hope not.  This is a beautiful film that again reminds us that not everyone is cute and cuddly, not everyone is "normal" but everyone can contribute to the greater good and should be honored for their contributions...not judged for how they live. And, since I loved it, it doesn't have a prayer of winning!

So there you go, four reviews.  I have four more films to see before the 22nd.  I can't remember the last time I saw all of the movies BEFORE the winner was announced so I'm sort of excited about completing this goal.

Seeing our society's sensibilities through commercials...and the hidden message in Bud Light.

Good morning!

For those of you who follow American Football, yesterday was the Superbowl and therefore the official end of a sport season that is uniquely American.  I love American football, I really do.  It's a game that hearkens back to a time when men were fighting machines, gladiators.  Sure, not so terribly pretty in this day and age of men being in touch with their feminine side but it's still a magnificent spectacle.  

Looking at how sensibilities have changed, one doesn't have to look much beyond the commercials in the Superbowl.  Many non football fans will turn in to the game because of the commercials. Companies pay millions for a 30 second spot in the big game and ad agencies pour blood, sweat, and tears into a Superbowl ad that will stick in our memories.  Some hire big name celebrities.  Some use sex.  Some go for the funny bone.  But all of them are a comment on society year by year. 

This year was no different, but for some reason I was more aware of what a changed world we are in  Many of the commercials dealt with men...being less violent (nomore), being more in tune with their families (Nissan, Toyota), just being more of a solid, team player who works hard and is gentle with those around them.  (Dove, go daddy)

We really looked at society in a different way.  There were multiple commercials involving people with artificial legs.  (Microsoft, Toyota) I loved those ads for how touching and amazing they were, but now seeing how Amy Purdy goes through her day really sent me into a depression about myself.

There were the product folks who have always been on the side of loving each other, and they didn't surprise.  Coca Cola put a 2015 spin on their much beloved "I'd like to teach the world to sing" ads from my childhood by showing Coke changing the endless stream of negative social media messages into positive messages.  Weight Watchers jumped into the ring by acknowledging that losing weight in a world full of "all you can eat" is hard.  (I found that one funny as I stuffed another chicken wing into my face.)  And McDonald's unleashed it's "Pay with Lovin'" campaign.

Celebrities came in with a bang in some ads and not so much in others.  I loved Liam Neeson (Clash of Clans) and Danny Trejo (Snickers.)  I know the Pete Rose ad (Sketchers) might not sit well with some, but I liked it.  Jeff Bridges (foursquare) however was a dud...I was really hoping we'd be seeing a reprisal of his "Dude" from "Big Lebowski" but not so much.

Maybe I'm partial, but since my website is through Wix, I really did enjoy the "Farve and Carve" ad. 

Nationwide, a massive sponsor for the NFL, came up with two memorable, solid ads.  Mindy Keiling, in "Invisible Mindy" was cute and funny.  "The Boy Who didn't Grow" sort of took all those "dad is totally awesome" warm fuzzy ads from earlier in the game, burned them, then tore a hole in our hearts.  

And there were funny ads that featured not so attractive folks (Dodge, Locktite) but they were hilarious.  And yes, I really did love the Avocado ad with the "First Ever Draft." I think Skittles may have had the most laughs per second with their arm wrestling spot.

So what was the best commercial and what was the worst...and what does it all say about society?

Well, for me, the best was Budweiser's lost puppy.  For all the commentary on how men need to be softer and girls need to be more confident and we all need to bully each other less and eat less crap, the ad that won my heart was that lost puppy and the Clydesdales.  

And funny?  I laughed out loud at many of them, but I think for

shear cleverness coupled with surprise value I'm going with "Missing Mindy" from Nationwide.  (Snickers gets a very close second with their Brady Bunch spot.)

The social commentary, both positive and negative, abounded, but the one that struck me was the ad I waited the longest for:  Bud Light.  Bud Light typically scores early and often in the Superbowl...this year they waited until deep in the second half with their new "Live Pac Man" ad.  The spot is funny, following a formula they've had for about a year of regular folks proving they're "Up for anything" after drinking Bud Light. This time around some dude gets to play a life size Pac Man game, where he's the Pac Man.  What's telling...and honestly I don't know if the execs at Bud light meant for this to happen, is that at the end of the game Sweaty Dude is handed a Bud Light.  Under the announcer's voice you hear Dude say, "That's all I get after all that?"

Yes, on a commercial day full of serious messages that was Bud Light's:  After playing a very fun game, somehow a beer is not enough compensation..
I'm going to hold on to the other messages of the day and just chalk that one up to poor editing.

To see the other ads, or rewatch them , click here to read Time Magazine's take on the commercials.

Some thoughts about what "best picture" might mean.

Good morning!

The Oscars are coming, the Oscars are coming!

Each year I do my best to see all of the Best Picture nominees.  I will say this to Hollywood:  It's hard for those of us who don't live in LA or New York to actually see all of the nominated movies for actor and actress nominations when they aren't released to regular folks until AFTER they've been nominated, if at all.  I mean, hey, you want us to tune in to the 9 hours of coverage on Oscar day, how about if you give us a chance to care about who's nominated and why?

Okay, rant over.  I'm focusing on the Best Picture nominees.  Each year I try to see them all.  Granted, that doesn't happen always before the nominations are out, or before the awards are handed out.  Why?  Three reasons:

1)  Many of the Best Picture nominees aren't available to fly over country before they are nominated.

This is problematic for one main reason:  Are these movies really good, or does Hollywood figure no one is going to see them if they aren't nominated for Best Picture?  For many years there were only five films nominated and everyone pretty much had either seen those films or knew of them.  Since 2009 we've nominated 9 or 10 films and some of them are really, really, really small films that never hit theater screens outside of "limited release."  Therefore most of us have to wait for the video release which often doesn't happen before the Oscars are handed out. This leads many of us to wonder if Hollywood really thinks these movies are the BEST or if they're just trying to generate interest in films that would never be seen if not nominated.

2011 comes to mind as a year that made us wonder.  Of the nine nominated films I watched five from start to finish.  Two I tried, I really did, but the Best Picture winner, "The Artist" angered me and "Tree of Life" confused me beyond words.  I'm not a snob and if a non English speaking movie is truly the Best Picture, it should be crowned as such.  But "The Artist" was a silent film, in black and white, with a cute dog...it was like they tossed all the gimmicks they could into one movie and then put wildly annoying music into it and tah dah, best picture.  Yeah, not so much in my opinion.

A couple good surprises from this expanded nominations list came in 2010 "Winter's Bone" and 2013 "Nebraska."  These are quiet films with solid casts that tell smaller, intimate family stories.  Sure, "Nebraska" is in black and white.  Just proves I'm not anti black and white movies.  Both are genius films and neither would have much of an audience if Oscar hadn't included them on the Best Picture list.

2)  Movies are expensive and it's easier, cheaper, and all around a better experience to stay home and rent the DVD.

When I was younger, and let's go back as far as 1993 before I had kids, I saw every movie released, and I saw them in theaters.  Between 1982 and 1993 there just weren't many movies I didn't hit.  Why?  Going to a movie was social, it was a pretty decent date, and it was fairly inexpensive. For a couple bucks you could get to a movie share a popcorn and soda with your date or friend, and it didn't eat up your entertainment budget.  Now, movie tickets range upwards up $10 a piece.  Not a huge investment compared to live plays or concerts, true, but since going to a movie is a crap shoot, half the time you walk out saying, "So, I had to put in two hours at a job I hate to pay for that movie ticket to a movie I didn't like."

Matinees aren't the bargain they once were, either.  They used to be half price if you got to the movies before 6 Pm. Now, you still get to pay $8 before 4 PM.  More, if you wind up in a 3D or Ultra screen movie.

Conversely, buying a DVD/blu ray with a digital copy generally maxes out at $30.  You can watch it a million times and the popcorn is free.  With advances in TV picture quality and the explosion of surround sound systems, it just makes more sense to stay home and watch the movie.  Besides, if you really hate the film, you can sell it back to the second hand market, recouping a couple bucks.

3)  Blockbusters are a thing of the past...and nothing stays in theaters very long.

Excellent Best Picture

When I was in high school, "ET" was in theaters for an entire summer and beyond.  Kids would sit around saying, "What ya wanna do tonight?  Let's go to ET."  Popular movies stayed in theaters for a long, long, long time.  When"Dirty Dancing" came out, one of my friends and I spent every Tuesday ($2 Tuesdays) and Saturday afternoons sitting in the dark confines o the theater...for several months.  That just doesn't happen anymore.  Movies go from "oh it's the opening weekend, it's going to be packed, let's wait a bit" to "Wait, it's not playing anymore?" in a matter of a couple weeks.  Case in point, the movie "Big Eyes," one of the darlings of the Golden Globes. I didn't even know that was a MOVIE until I passed a poster in my local theater.  A few days later, I could no longer see the film.  It was in theaters for less than a week.  

Massive blockbusters are few and far between  "Titanic"  "Avatar" are probably the last two truly universal massive films that have been nominated.  "Titanic" is almost twenty years old and "Avatar" is six.  Other movies in recent history have done well, but where's the "Oh you have to see this movie, everyone's seeing it" movie?


But what does any of this mean within the question of what is a "Best Picture?"

Well, as writers, we'd like to see a movie that's written well, with few mistakes and great dialogue.  We'd like a good story well told.  Sure, costumes, editing, cinematography are all vital, but a movie starts, first and foremost, as a story.  

So far I've seen three of the eight nominated films this year, and I plan to see one more today.  I've seen "Grand Budapest Hotel, "  "Boyhood," and "The Imitation Game."  If I had to pick from those three it would be "The Imitation Game" hands down.  Why? Two reasons:

1) "Grand Budapest Hotel" is a Wes Anderson film. The man who brought us "The Royal Tennebaums" and "Life Aquatic with Steve Zizzou."  I get it that people love his films. I do not.  I think they are the equivalent of the worst kind of name dropping.  Anderson writes small parts for a hundred people and gets big name actors to work for five minutes.  So he gets all the huge names in his movies, which brings people in, but his films are incoherent and narcissistic.  If we give him an Oscar that will only encourage him to do more.  I know I'm in the minority with this opinion, but I've stood by this opinion for decades. Incoherent storytelling is not a best picture.

2)  "Boyhood" is a truly original concept:  Filming a family drama that covers twelve years of a family's life...and do it in real time with the same actors.  No one's done this before because no one's taken the time to do it.  It's fascinating to watch the child actors, especially, grow up before our very eyes.  There's a certain sense of reality attached to it, and that's fresh and original.  The movie itself, however, is not fresh or original.  It's another family drama about a broken family, a single mom, the kids' struggling through teen years.  So, on story merit, this is not a best picture.

Is the "Imitation Game" a best picture?  It hits all the marks for me, but I haven't seen all the competition yet.  That'll be a project between now and the 22nd of February.  I'm just not sure I'll have access to all the films...

oops, they did it again.

Well friends, they've gone and done it again.

Remember when I went on a rant about "Jersey Shore" dipweed Snooki publishing a book? Well, here you go...read it now, we'll wait.

Welcome back.  See...that was my rant against Snooki.  Well guess what?  I just heard, and then read, a report that makes Snooki, as an author, look like the second coming of Oscar Wilde.

Kim Kardashian is publishing a book...if you can call it that...containing her "selfies."  Don't believe me, Check out the report.

So...traditional book publishers and brick and mortar book stores are failing left and right.  Well, hey, no wonder, when what you give the American reader is complete and utter crap.

Let's think about the amount of talent or effort this particular best seller idea involved:  Kim Kardashian, a woman famous initially for a leaked sex tape and then because she had a nice butt, and then because her family is a hornet's nest of self indulged, vapid, mirror watchers...she looked at the pictures she took OF HERSELF WITH HER PHONE and she said, "This is a book."  And a publisher agreed.

I'm starting to wonder if anyone knows what the word "book" means.

I am angry about this, but not because this no talent culture cancer has a book deal and a lot of hardworking, talented, dedicated authors don't.  This is a really good example of what's happening in publishing today, and it's the biggest red letter headline announcing the death of traditional publishing and book and mortar stores.  

Book publishers might as well be standing on street corners shouting, "We've given up and we're only going to publish books by people we've seen naked.  And the fewer actual words involved the better."

And they wonder why they keep failing and failing and failing and more and more authors, new, unknown, and well known, and best sellers, continue to flood to self publishing and e-publishing.  

Books are important to our culture and to future generations.  Sharing ideas, sharing stories, sharing humor and tragedy and drama and social commentary is all important, even vital, to the world culture.  If we have no need to read, then we take a monumental step backward into the Dark Ages.  Publishers, if they hope to survive, need to think about the content of their offerings as much as they think about the "shock value dollar" they'll garner from a project like this one.  

If the only thing book publishers are going to give us as readers are third rate novels upchucked by fourth rate celebrities, or, worse yet, cell phone pictures of said fourth rate celebrities...then those of us who need to tell the stories, need to share the drama, the humor, the social commentary, then we need to go someplace else and be heard.

Or maybe I could just start shooting naked pictures of myself to publishing houses.

EVERYTHING IS ON SALE!

GOOD AFTERNOON!

I've decided to lower my e-book prices for a while so more of you can enjoy my books for less!  Not all the pricing has completely uploaded, but it should in the next 12-24 hours.

So, if you want to read one of my "Rock Harbor Chronicles"  books  (Formerly my "wicked Women" series), or either of the Elsie W. books, and you buy your e-books on Amazon, CLICK HERE to check out the new prices!

If you have a Nook and you get your e-books from Barnes and Noble, CLICK HERE for novels by Sarah J. Bradley and for the Elsie W. books, CLICK HERE to check out the new prices!

Now, if you read your books on any device other than a kindle or a nook, then you're still in luck!
CLICK HERE for Sarah J. Bradley novels .  For the Elsie W. books CLICK HERE to check out the new pricing!

I know that's a ton of info, but I'm really excited about lowering the prices on my books because it means one thing:  We are now just a short time away from seeing a new book!

Oh, and yes, Rick Springfield fans, all new pricing also applies to "Dream in Color," all of the sites.  YAY!

This is honestly the lowest price I'm going to be offering for the rest of the year, and it will be for a limited time.  How long that limited time is, I have no idea.  I'm not that organized!

Remember, if you read my books, or any books by an independent author, please leave a positive review.  (If you hated the book, however, feel free to NOT leave a review!  LOL!)  
Reviews and word of mouth are still the best, and sometimes the only, way an author can continue to do what they are doing.  It's not just so I can sit at my desk and spin yarns.  It's so this planet, our culture, can continue to hear stories from voices that have not been pigeonholed by big publishing.  

As they used to say in those great Bartles and Jaymes wine cooler adds:

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT!

What do Cinderella and my new book have in common?

Good evening!

I've been buried, like many people, under post holiday blech the last week.  Monday, as some might know, was "Blue Monday," i.e., the most depressing day of the year. (Being the first Monday after all the holiday cheer is over.)

So glad we get that out of the way right away.  Now we can focus on the many months of cold, cold, winter sans Christmas lights.

Well, I, for one, have been busy.  My New Year's resolutions have nothing to do with weight loss for the first time in more than a decade. If I lose weight this year it will be 1) a miracle and 2) a happy by product of the other health related things I'm doing for myself this year.  I made an appointment to see my hand surgeon because the non sense ends in 2015.  I'm 47 and far too young to be dealing with the kind of pain I'm having.  Also, I scheduled a dentist appointment.  Not because I'm having any pain...but because I've put that scolding off long enough and it's time to just get the cleaning over with and be done.  Also in my plans are such super exciting things as a mammogram and most than likely a trip to a therapist for my own brain now that everyone else in the house seems to be fixed.

More importantly, however, I've been working, sporadically, yes, but working, on the new novel, "Missing in Manitowoc:  A Nora Hill Mystery".  I have a solid team lined up in support and a plan for this thing.  The first draft is done and now I'm in the very fun part of writing when you have the blank pages filled with words and now you get to add MORE words.  Basically, I'm accessorizing...and what girl doesn't love that?

It's like that moment in Disney's "Cinderella" when the Fairy Godmother gets her dress all on her. I'm starting with sort of a raggedy piece of writing and with the wave of a magic wand...or in this case a lot of talking out loud...I manage to put a ball gown on my plot!

This might seem like a tedious exercise.  For writers starting out, you get to the end of your first draft and you feel like you've just birthed the most perfect baby that's ever been born.  Until your writer's group or your critique partners get hold of it and start asking you to fill in the truck sized plot holes (see what I did there? I didn't call them POT holes, I called them PLOT holes!) and you then go home thinking you're the worst person who ever put words to blank space.

Take heart because while you did not birth the most perfect baby in all the world, neither are the worst writing in history.  A first draft is just that.  No one, and I really mean no one, puts out a clean perfect, readable book in one draft. No one.  And if they tell you they did, they are lying and you should bop them on the head with a feather duster.  (You don't HAVE a feather duster?  What do you use to bop liars on the head with then?)

So I'm at that Cinderella moment in my story when I not only still love it, I want to make it more beautiful than it already is in my eyes.  And that's the most fun a writer can possibly have, that beautiful moment between complete blank space and the dreaded line edit.

So friends I'm off to accessorize my heroine Nora Hill...and you should go forth and WRITE!