squeetus

DVDs, supporters and users, and many astounded men

Thanks to everyone who helped kick off the Austenland DVD/Blu-Ray release! And for all the happy notes expressing love for the movie.

I went to three Sundance screenings last year, and afterward people would come up to me to gush about the movie. The women all seemed pretty certain that they were going to love it, and unsurprised when that turned out to be the case. But the men were astounded. I had at least 20 conversations like this.
MAN: I loved that movie.
Me: Thank you!
MAN: No, you don't understand. I loved that movie. Like I laughed through the entire thing.
ME: That's awesome, thanks so much!
MAN: No, you DON'T UNDERSTAND. I LOVED THAT MOVIE. I don't laugh like that ever. And it was supposed to be a chick movie. And I laughed so hard I was crying. Like it was actually honestly one of the funniest movies I've ever seen in my entire life!
And he stares at me, eyes wide, willing me to understand that this is a shocking outcome that I really really need to understand.

And still months later I kept meeting people who saw Austenland at Sundance, and what they want to tell me is. 1. they loved it, and 2. their husband loved it so so much and can't stop talking about how unbelievably funny it was.

I think part of the shock comes from the costumes. Some of these men were not fans of the period dramas they'd been dragged to in the past and they're expecting that again, and when it turns out they laugh and thoroughly enjoy the movie, their minds are so blown they can't quite recover.

Jerusha and I from the beginning thought the movie would work on two levels: as a love letter to Austen fans like ourselves and a love letter to those who think Austen fans are funny.

And thanks to all who are buying the movie or checking it out from the library and not pirating it. I found this exchange on tumblr recently, and I really appreciate the person who runs this tumblr site for their thoughtful, kind response.

"Do you have a link to watch Austenland online??" Asked by Anonymous [EDIT: to clarify this question was posted before the video release, so the only online links would have been to illegal pirated copies]

Austenland Movie Fans tumblr: "You guys realize that watching movies online is stealing right? Believe me I understand the desire to watch things now, I live in America and love a lot of British shows. But rather than going and finding them online illegally I wait. Why because I want more shows like those. I want to say, yes I like this can we please get more. Don’t steal from what you love guys in the end you really end up robbing yourself."

Anonymous: "You realize how elitist and rude it is to tell people not to watch things online? Some people can't afford to go see a movie in theatres, some people will never have access to this movie at all."

Austenland Movie Fans tumblr: "I completely understand not everyone can afford to go see movies in the theater. But they can wait to rent the movie or borrow it from the library. It is not just rich actors you are stealing from, what about the make up artists, caterers, camera guys, and accountants. Stealing is stealing no matter how you try and justify it."

When I was in high school/college I knew people who worked parttime jobs just to earn money to buy music CDs. Now I hear of high school/college-age people who have never purchased an album (or even a single) in their lives. Why buy it when you can download it (illegally) for free? I wonder if those people have noticed how many groups produced one or two albums and nothing after. Because they didn't make enough money making music. Because people stole the music.

I find the argument interesting: "some people can't afford to see a movie." Some people. This person? I've had people argue with me that they pirate ebooks all they want because "what about poor children who can't afford to buy books and don't have access to a library?" Sure, if you're a poor child with no access to a library (but somehow access to a computer, internet, ereader, digital music player) then you get a free pass.

But for the rest of us, please don't be a user. Please support the arts. We do not have the right to have everything we want when we want it for free. We can be a part of art creation by supporting the stuff we like with our purchase money or library patronage. All the cool kids are doing it.

Photos from our own little Austenlands

Tomorrow Austenland releases on DVD & Blu-Ray! And it's already available for digital download from iTunes and Amazon. To celebrate, on Friday authors and bloggers and book fiends across the country held Jane's Night In parties. Here are a few photos from my party and others, and check my twitter feed for posts.

My friend put framed #Austenland photos out. She found one with me in the background!

Ally Carter and Jennifery Lynn Barnes served high tea for their party. Check out the spread!

Tea service ready! My friend did this. I swear I don't decorate with my own books.

Becca Fitzpatrick's party was comfy cozy pajama style. These ladies are ready to watch the flick.

We had a special guest at our party. (not me)

Decor musts: Jane Austen, JJ Feild, and taxidermy birds.

Keeping our pinkies up.

Thats-normal.com is ready for their movie party.

libba bray ‏2nd time watching #AUSTENLAND & I laughed just as much as the 1st time. DVD comes out 2/11, people. Tallyho!

Ally Carter ‏Can honestly say that @AustenlandMovie is even better the 2nd time! Laughing so hard

Several bloggers held a google hangout with Stephenie Meyer about the movie. Tiff from Thats-normal.com took a selfie with her.

Britten Amber Harmon ‏Stephenie Meyer says one of her favorite memories filming #Austenland was the play until 4 or 5am laughing their guts out.

Director Jerusha Hess with Erica Elmer at their fancy dress-up party!

And they had gentlemen callers

At Margaret Stohl's and Melissa de la Cruz's party in LA.

PageToPremiere.com ‏Playing #austenland bingo with Sweethearts! I think I'm winning!

(check out the Austenland pinterest page to download these cute Austenland bingo cards plus other party ideas)

Mundie Moms ‏LOVE this movie! You guys have to pick it up on Tuesday! It's HILARIOUS!

Becca Fitzpatrick ‏ party wrapping up. Had so much fun. Everyone agreed - #Austenland is best viewed in a group. The more laughter, the merrier.

Margaret Stohl ‏So fun! Hate to wrap up #janesnightin #austenlandmovie - so proud of you @haleshannon - DVD out on Monday!!!

Ally Carter ‏Once again, I ADORED @AustenlandMovie! So proud of @haleshannon & the team who made it!

Jennifer Lynn BarnesJust got a call from my brother. He is watching @AustenlandMovie. Sis-in-law loved it so much she went home after girls' night & bought it!

Thank you so much to everyone who hosted and attended the parties and everyone who is helping get the word out about the video release. Check my twitter feed for chanced to win a DVD this week, and enjoy the movie. Tallyho!

Jane's Night In

Austenland releases on DVD/Blu-Ray/VOD on February 11!

To help get the word out, several people active in social media, including myself, have been asked to host a pre-viewing party of the video on Friday, February 7 and live tweet the event. Follow me on twitter or check back here next Monday for a post about the event.

Here are some YA authors who are hosting their own Jane's Night In parties all over the US:

Jerusha Hess - Austenland director, tweeting from the official movie account

Margaret Stohl - author of Icons and co-author of Beautiful Creatures

Melissa de la Cruz - author of Witches of East End, Frozen, Blue Bloods

Becca Fitzpatrick - author of the Hush, Hush saga

Ally Carter - author of the Gallager Girls and Heist Society series

Jennifer Lynn Barnes - author of The Naturals and Raised by Wolves

Libba Bray - author of The Diviners, A Great and Terrible Beauty, Going Bovine

Barry Goldblatt - my illustrious agent

Check out these fabulous bloggers, readers, and movie watchers who will be hosting and tweeting:

Fangirlish

Twilight Lexicon

That's Normal

Twilight Moms

Mundie Moms

A Day in Motherhood

Page to Premiere

Reel Life With Jane

Friday evening, check twitter for #JanesNightIn or #Austenland and join us for some laughs, photos, and vicarious festivity!

 

And a special plea: please don't pirate this movie. If you can't afford to buy or rent it, please request it from your library, thereby supporting the filmmakers and your local library. Hollywood measures success by $ made, and if movies like this don't make money, it makes it harder for other movies like this or other movies by women to get made.

AUSTENLAND video release announced

Sony Pictures Classics announced Austenland DVD and Blu-Ray release in the USA on February 11, 2014. I know many of you are disappointed and were hoping it would come out in time for Christmas. But hey, pre-orders make great presents too! (sort of? Not quite as cool as a DVD in hand but almost?) The good news why it isn't coming out earlier is because it's still in some theaters. Thank you for coming out to see our flick.

You can pre-order the video now and plan on the best Valentine's Day ever. I know I will.

In the meantime, those of you who have seen it, would you mind giving a one sentence blurb of what you thought about it in the comments? I'll use some of your blurbs in a post about the DVD release in February.

Tallyho!

On not mocking Austen (but laughing all the same)

So, people are complex. You just never know how they will respond. When I published Austenland in 2007, I was caught totally off guard by the first "you should be ashamed of this smut" email I received. I honestly didn't consider Austenland a trashy book. But many did. Here's my favorite of the angry emails:

I just read Austenland and was so disappointed.  I loved your other books and had come to trust you to keep things clean.  I bought Austenland on Amazon for my teenaged daughter for Christmas because she is a huge Pride & Prejudice fan.  I'm glad I decided to read it first, because it would have totally traumatized her.  I buried it [in] my kitchen trash can under a pile of wilted celery, where it should feel right at home.

I don't want to mock the writer of that email. Everyone has the right to their own reaction (though I do wonder sometimes what motivates the need to email the author your negative reaction). Still, I didn't see this coming.

The most surprising response I received for Austenland (and really any of my books) was:

"The way she mocks Austen fans is just insulting."

What?

Not just one such response but many. I never anticipated that fellow Austen fans would think that I was insulting them. After all, I am one. It's one thing to love Austen's novels (which I do) but at the point I became obsessed with the DVDs of Pride & Prejudice, I thought, this is getting funny. Isn't it okay to laugh at this? At my weird obsession? And how I have the tendency to fall in love with fictional characters? Can we still be amused by a thing and love it at the same time?

Once the movie came out, that reaction only magnified. Many people thought we were mocking Jane Austen readers in an ugly and mean-spirited way. I felt like I'd had the wind knocked out of me.

Of course not everyone responded that way, and it was lovely and reassuring that many people (Austen fans and non-readers) let us know how much they loved what we did. I read one simply gorgeous review of the movie from a major online magazine, and was so relieved that at least someone got it! After the writer and I corresponded a bit. She wrote:

"I'm so grateful for writers who are doing work that's full of love and warmth and isn't cynical. I get enough of that."

Yay! Not everyone misunderstood! I forwarded the note on to the director, Jerusha Hess, and she responded, "Yes!  It was full of love."

If we made it in love, full of warmth and fondness and well-intentioned humor, how did it come across to many as just the opposite?

I don't know, but I've observed some things about the Hesses' movies. Some people who saw Napoleon Dynamite thought that the movie was mocking a rural west culture, and yet I've never met anyone from Utah or Idaho that felt mocked by the movie. I read reviews of Nacho Libre (reviews written by white US guys) who thought the movie was mocking Mexicans, and yet the movie did great in Mexico and was largely received with love and laughter. I have no doubt that there was a loving and celebratory spirit in the Hesses making of these movies.

In those cases, it was outsiders who feared the mockery, while those supposedly being mocked got the humor and laughed with the movie. Yet with Austenland, many of the insiders--the Janeites--felt unkindly mocked. I don't know why this happened.

Christopher Guest movies also come to mind. I don't know if certain musicians felt mocked by Spinal Tap. I heard that some dog showers did by Best In Show, which surprised me, because as an outsider it seemed clear to me that the movie wasn't trying to make fun of all dog owners and dog shows, nor to definitively define what such people must all be like. I grew up doing community theater, and everyone I know in theater absolutely loves Waiting for Guffman. We didn't feel mocked by it. We felt lovingly tributed and enjoyed the inside jokes only we would get, laughing at the absurdities we saw in ourselves and in our theater world as well as laughing at the parts the movie exaggerated for humor. I came away from it not thinking, "Yeah, community theater is lame," but "That was hysterical! I love theater!"

And I guess that's how I assumed my fellow Jane Austen lovers would react too. If anyone might misunderstand and think we were mocking Janeites, it would be the outsiders, certainly not the insiders, certainly not those who loved Austen--her humor, her snark, her insight.

I do know we were walking that fine and wonderful line: to be the thing and make light of the thing at the same time. That's the only way to do a loving comedy. And there is a chance it can be misunderstood. I just didn't think it would, not by my own peeps.

Some people couldn't go there with us, and that's okay. Art is personal. But the accusations of mean-spiritedness or malicious intent are totally, completely wrong. Every actor, every producer and writer and all involved had a fondness for the characters and the story and wanted to make something that made us laugh, made us swoon, made us smile, in the very best spirit possible.

I don't know why it failed some people, but it is a potent reminder that nothing is more perilous than comedy.

Literary pumpkin carving

Pumpkin sorceress Laura has done it again! I'm so honored to have been part of her yearly carving extravaganza.

Ooh, a lovely homage to Ever After High. So happy that The Storybook of Legends has been a New York Times bestseller for four weeks now! (Just to clarify, Mattel invented the world, made the dolls, and asked me to write a book, not the other way around. Gotta give credit to the great creative team at Mattel for the concept.)

In celebration of the Austenland movie! Some three months later, it's still in some theaters and moving into the discount theaters. I imagine the DVD will be released in early 2014. It looks to me like it did really well for an indie movie.

Look at this gorgeous symbol from the cover of Dangerous! The date's been moved up, so it releases the first week of March. I'm so excited to share this book with you all.

Thank you for the pumpkins, Laura! And thank you to all the readers who allow me to keep writing and publishing books so that Laura can carve them into pumpkins.

How has having a movie changed my life?

So this August, about five times in the same week, people in my neighborhood asked me, "So how's it going" as if asking about something specific. I answered, "It's tough with twins! I've cleaned up so much pee this week, but I think they're kind of getting it. Sort of."

I began to notice a slightly bewildered expression in response and it occurred to me that maybe "how's it going?" wasn't in reference to potty training my twins. The fifth time, the woman said, "No I meant the movie." You know, that movie that was made from my book that was currently in theaters. I know that should have been such a big deal that it was constantly in the forefront of my mind, but honestly, the potty training was so much huger in my life than the movie I was barely thinking about the latter.

Maybe that's disappointing. Maybe people would be happier if the truth was that my life was transformed and all was glamour and riches and excitement now. At a Q&A after one screening of Austenland, someone asked me, "How has having a movie made from your book changed your life?" And I couldn't think of any ways.

It's a legitimate question, and it reminded me that before all this, I would have assumed that such a thing would be life changing.

Things having a movie made from my book has not done:

Not made me rich
Not changed my career
Not changed my daily life
Not changed how the people in my life see or relate to me
Not changed how I write
Not opened doors to me that were previously closed

What has it changed? Well, it was an experience. I had a fantastic experience. And life is all about experiences. Living, seeing things, meeting people. That's cool. In the way that a great time at summer camp is cool. I got to co-write a script with Jerusha Hess, who has become a friend, and meet other cool people who are now friends, and friendship is something precious to me. I got to be on set and watch a movie get made. I got to attend screenings and hear people laugh and sigh at lines I wrote and characters I created. That was really, really amazing and something I will always treasure. But it hasn't changed my daily life. I'm still stressed about a writing deadline, I never seem to have enough time to clean my house and it gets dirty and cluttered again 10 minutes after I do clean it, my kids have struggles that I ache to see them go through, I don't workout enough/cook enough/clean enough, etc., it seems like someone in the family is always upset, and I'm constantly trying to find that writer/mother balance and do my best and not feel like I'm failing in everything. Normal life.

Please know I'm not complaining. I LOVE my life. As crazy and chaotic and unchanged as it is.

I say all this because a decade ago I read an article that changed my perspective. One writer was lamenting always being a mid-lister. Her friend writer hit the New York Times best seller list, and she told her something like, "My mom's still disappointed in me, I haven't lost any weight, my rent is still going up, I don't have a boyfriend. Don't waste your life pining for bestsellerdom. It doesn't change anything real." I read that and went--Oh! 'Cause I'd had this weird, magical idea that becoming a best selling writer would somehow change everything.

Having a movie made from my book hasn't transformed me fundamentally as a person or changed my life. I'm a mom and a wife and a sister and a daughter and a friend and I write books. And I saw a movie based on one of those books. That was very cool, but nothing really important has changed.

It makes me realize that this is life--what I have right now. Not wishing for something huge and marvelous and magical that might or might not happen in the future. Now. Scraping together spaghetti for dinner, cleaning more pee off the floor, snuggling in a chair and reading to my kids, almost managing to clean off the kitchen counter before I collapse into bed. This is it. This is the magic.

Thank you all for supporting the movie. 11 weeks later it's still in some theaters! I believe it's done really well for a small, indie movie, and I know that's due to so many of you making an effort to go see it. It doesn't matter that it's not life changing. I'm so proud of what we made and had a lot of cool experiences doing it, and hopefully as it continues to do better than expected, maybe the Hollywood number crunchers will give another female filmmaker a break in the future. Now if they could just do something about all this peeing...

Votes for women! (in Hollywood)

In August, I wrote a post, asking you to see Austenland in the theater, if possible, in order to show Hollywood that women-made-and-led movies can be profitable. At the time, squeetuser Melanie Nichols made a comment I thought was worth discussing, though I thought I'd wait a bit first so the focus could be less on any particular movie and more general. From Melanie:

"I have to say that I love Austenland and I'm dying to see it (I'm hoping it'll make it's way up to Alaska!), but without wanting to sound rude, I don't agree with this post. I don't mean this as a criticism. I read this post and really wanted to take a moment to look at it from a different angle.

"In essence, you're saying that Hollywood ignores or downgrades movies that are female centric, yet you're pleading with us to see it because of that reason. It seems a bit hypocritical. If the issue is sexism, the answer isn't to do the same in reverse.

"You ask us to go see your movie and City of Bones, not because they have compelling plots, they're entertaining, or well made. You ask us to go because they're about women and written by women...

"I don't want this to sound overly critical, but as a woman I dislike the "girl power!" attitude. It shouldn't matter the gender of the actors, characters, writers, directors, etc. I am a woman. It's a huge part of who I am and I love being one, but it rankles to be compartmentalized by my gender for good or bad. I'm publishing my first novel in the next few months and I don't want people buying it because they want to read something from a female author. I want readers who enjoy the product."

Thanks for this, Melanie, and for your kind words too! *smooch* I think you bring up very valid points. (The term "girl power" also makes me shudder--no offense to those who love it. Power on!) I totally get what you’re saying about the hypocrisy. And in a fair world, I’d agree 100%. But we don’t live in a fair world. I believe that we need to talk about this and create awareness of the deep gap between women and men in the film industry. And since Hollywood runs on money, I believe we actually need to make an effort to monetarily support films made by women so that more can get made until eventually we don’t have to talk about it anymore.

I think there’s a lot of room for debate on this. For example, I’ve heard people make the case that affirmative action is unnecessary or even counter-productive. I’ve also heard others make the case in favor of all the good affirmative action has done. These are good discussions. And I think this is a good discussion too.

The loudest question I heard from your comment was, is my request that you go see Austenland because it’s made by women inherently sexist?

I don’t think that’s the only reason to go see it--I also think it has a compelling plot, is entertaining and well made, but I took for granted that was understood. So if I haven't gushed enough about the film's merits on its own, I'm always happy to do so more: It's hysterical! It's sweet and charming and swoony! The performances are awe-inspiring, the cinematography and art production took my breath! And I mean that sincerely.

I don’t think that because the movie was made largely by women that means all women will automatically like it, just as all men don’t automatically like every one of the 90% of films that were largely made by men. But with that post I did hope to educate some who don’t know how Hollywood often works so that they might understand just how much voting-by-money matters in movies. We often talk about how sad it is that there aren’t more women’s voices heard in media, but many don’t realize just how important buying tickets to the female-created and/or female-led movies matters. Even if viewers don’t notice the gender of the filmmakers or stars, Hollywood does, and they do make decisions based on how much money female-created and female-led films make. If Austenland succeeds, another female filmmaker that no investor wanted to take a chance on before will have a better shot. I wish that wasn't how it works, but I'm afraid it does.

Celluloid Ceiling released a recent study of filmmaking in the US:
“In 2012, women comprised 18% of all directors, executive producers, producers, writers, cinematographers, and editors working on the top 250 domestic grossing films. This represents
no change from 2011 and an increase of 1 percentage point from 1998.”

And it’s not getting better. “A historical comparison of women’s employment on the top 250 films in 2012 and 1998 reveals that the percentages of women directors and editors have not changed. The percentages of women writers and producers have increased slightly. The percentages of women executive producers and cinematographers have declined.” And while those numbers haven’t improved in the past 15 years, the percentage of female characters in films has even declined.

Those are the numbers representing scattered female involvement, but what percentage of films were written, directed, produced by and starred women? Hollywood has noticed Austenland’s female-heavy creation, and it will note how it performs. (For one example of Hollywood noticing a film's performance when women are involved, read this Deadline Hollywood article. It would be interesting to look at the films produced by that studio in the past five years since the article and see how many, if any, had female leads.)

I want to emphasize: I do not think that everyone in Hollywood is inherently sexist. I do think they make decisions based on the data at hand. And with so few female-made movies to look at, one underperforming movie has a huge ripple effect. Here's another article, this one about why a Wonder Woman animated feature can't use her name in the title. Interesting to note that the DVD they mention sold relatively well--but not well enough. Female-led titles have to be outstandingly successful in order to prove the old order wrong. It's not fair. It's hypocritical. It's how it works. (and note that although the DVD All-Star Superman underperformed, no one said, "That's it, no more Superman movies," or even more ludicrous, "That's it, no more male-led movies." When a movie with a female lead underperforms, the gender of the lead is blamed, while the reverse is not true for male-led movies.)

I personally wish change came organically because we’re all just looking for a great story and it doesn’t matter who made it. When buying books, I don’t care if the writer is a man or a woman, because of books published, the spread between men and women writers is pretty even (although review coverage and awards greatly favor male writers, especially with grown up titles). But when deciding which movies to support with my money, I do make a conscious effort to look for films with some female actors and a female writer or director, because I want to support them. And filmmakers of color too. There are voices not being heard, not because they don’t have great stories to tell, but because money talks, and so far in the movie industry, money favors one kind of person over another. Because so far, by the numbers, that’s the least risky investment.

Again, I am not suggesting that just because women made a movie that means all women must love it (or by extension all men must hate it). But yes, I am suggesting, the next time you're trying to decide between two movies to see in the theater, and one has a female director or writer or lead, and the other doesn't, choosing the former does matter, not just to that film but to future films. Box office sales numbers matter so much in Hollywood. Your ticket matters. I hope you'll ponder this for the future. If you're ever vacillating between going to see a female-made movie in the theater or waiting, your trip to the theater means something. Or buying a DVD too, for that matter. Your purchase means more than simply watching a really great movie. With a compelling plot. And memorable characters. And honest laughter. And really great writing. The number crunchers in Hollywood will read the money you spent as a vote. And I'm boldly asking you to vote for variety.

So, what do you think?

Lost in Austenland

It’s the late 1990s, and everyone I know is obsessed with the Pride & Prejudice miniseries starring Colin Firth. I don’t use that word lightly. Obsessed. We hum the songs from the ball. The words creep into our everyday dialogue—we say things like, “Make haste!” and, “Now that’s a fair prospect!” We have daydreams about a fictional character and sigh out loud.

We are completely and utterly ridiculous. But it’s so much fun.

I just wish that there were a way to actually step into Austen’s story, try it on and see how it would fit. Would living in the Regency era, being loved by Mr. Darcy, really be as ideal as it seems? I start to write a book about a character like me and my friends, who goes on vacation to an English resort where tourists can put on the corset and empire-waist gowns, live in a manor house, and interact with actors playing gentlemen who woo them in their own custom storylines.

(By the way, no such place actually exists—but it should, shouldn’t it?)

I spend seven years, off and on, composing Austenland, trying out different characters, writing and rewriting different endings, before I come to the story of Jane Hayes and her jaunt in an immersive Austen resort. It is completely and utterly ridiculous, and also so much fun.

Jumping ahead a few years, I meet screenwriter Jerusha Hess, who co-wrote Napoleon Dynamite and Nacho Libre. She reads Austenland and wants me to collaborate with her on the screenplay. Jerusha responds not just to the Austen obsession but more generally to Jane Hayes’ geekiness. Everyone has their own geekdom—Star Wars, Twilight, superheroes, science, Dr. Who, classic Greek literature—whatever it might be. She’s sure most anyone could relate to Jane’s trip down the rabbit hole, even the un-Austen-ed.

We spend a year and a half on the screenplay (and laughing, usually while eating milk shakes). Jump ahead again.

I’m in England, sitting on one of those camp chairs with members of the film crew. It’s our first day
filming on the grounds of the English estate that will be our Austenland. And across the lawn walks the actor JJ Feild in full costume. Boots. Breeches. Cravat. Riding jacket. Top hat. I’m amazed at how much he looks like the character of my imagination. The resemblance is uncanny.

But then the most extraordinary thing happens. This figment, this character I dreamed up in my brain, turns, sees me, looks right at me, and smiles.

I no longer feel the camping chair beneath me. I seem to be falling into my own story. I watch the scene play out on camera—Keri Russell, Jennifer Coolidge, James Callis, speaking lines I wrote, just the way I’d imagined and yet adding so much more. It is almost real. Surreal.

Later, I find out the costume coat and hat JJ Feild is wearing are the same ones Colin Firth wore in Pride & Prejudice. Somehow, I’ve managed to enter Austenland. It’s ridiculous. And it’s so much fun.

 

The photo is of me and Jane Seymour on set, dressed for the ball scene. The film is in limited release now in US, UK, and Canada. The book is available online and from fine booksellers everywhere.

The one sentence that has earned me the most enemies

"The person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good novel, must be intolerably stupid."
Northanger Abbey

I'm still getting this question a lot, and since I haven't explained in a few years, I thought I'd do so again. Yes, It's regarding that seemingly innocuous line that has given me so much grief over the years. From Austenland:

Sure, Jane had first read Pride and Prejudice when she was sixteen, read it a dozen times since, and read the other Austen novels at least twice, except Northanger Abbey (of course).

The truth is, I very much like Northanger Abbey. I took a class in college where we studied gothic romances, sentimentalism, and the emergence of realism as the dominate literary style. It was fascinating, my favorite literary theory class of all time. Northanger Abbey is a parody of gothic romance, a very popular style of novel in Austen's day. As a general rule, I'm a big fan of parody. I also love Austen and highly enjoy gothic romance, so all that adds up to a book that is quite my cup of tea. So much so, in fact, that it was the inspiration for the Austenland sequel (or companion book I guess), Midnight in Austenland.

So why that line in Austenland? Because if you were to take a poll of non-scholarly readers of Austen, those who read her for fun, the one book that most of them won't have read or else won't have enjoyed as much as the others is Northanger Abbey. (Quite often I find they will have started it but never finished.) I actually thought that other Austen readers like me might chuckle about that line. "It's so true!" they'd say. "That's the one people just don't get!" I never imagined they would say instead, "Why did Hale write that? Surely it means she hates that book, and therefore I must hate her. Grab the pitchforks! Light the torches!"

(btw, here's a post on how the narrator and the author are different)

The misunderstanding of this line is just one example, but I've received more angry emails and reviews on this book than any other. Quite often those unhappy ones attribute to me opinions that I don't hold and believe I'm displaying contempt that I in no way feel. What I wrote led them to those conclusions, even if they're not true.

When I wrote Austenland, I wrote it for myself, like I do all my books. But I also wrote it for my friends, those like me who got way too obsessed with Mr. Darcy but had so much fun doing it all the same. I thought I was writing for like minds, so I wasn't cautious. You know how when you're with your friends, they know you, so you don't overexplain your opinions? You're more relaxed, you know they'll take what you say in the best light, they get you. They love you. I assumed that readers of Austenland would be like minds, friends, people I could relax with, people who would give me the benefit of the doubt. I was mostly right, but I was also sometimes wrong. I took too much for granted. Still, I'm glad I was able to write in that bubble. If I'd known what I do now, I'd be tempted to overwrite. Perhaps then no one might mistake my words for other than what I mean, but then the story might be stilted and sad. Misunderstanding is one price to pay for writing with the voice I chose for this story.

Also btw, Henry Tilney is the bomb. (you know that JJ Feild, who played Mr. Tilney in Northanger Abbey, plays Mr. Nobley in Austenland, right?) He's the funniest of all the Austen heroes, and just charming and darling and sweet. But he doesn't have near the following that Mr. Darcy has. My theory on this is you can't separate Darcy from Elizabeth, Tilney from Catherine. It's not just Mr. Darcy who we love, it's also Elizabeth. I identified with her. I wanted to be her. I wanted the guy who saw in her what I hoped someone would see in me.

Once again, the list of upcoming cities where Austenland will premiere. It looks like it hasn't updated since last weekend so look at the dates. Thanks to all who made the effort to see it already! Hopefully with all this support we'll see more release cities announced soon!

What will you think of Austenland?

The reviews are in!

The Village Voice: "Austenland is a Rom-Com With Uncommon Spirit and Wit...the cast dishy fun, and Jerusha Hess and Shannon Hale's breeze of a script (based on Hale's novel) is smart about the allure of fictional romances."

USA Today: "Austenland has sense of humor and literary sensibility...Based on the novel of the same name by Shannon Hale, who co-wrote the script with first-time director Jerusha Hess, Austenland is spirited and gently witty. But its biggest asset is Russell, whose easy charm and down-to-earth Everywoman quality keeps us rooting for her. In essence, this is a light parody of Austen's novels, and fans will enjoy the subtle allusions and knowing winks....A humorous chick flick for well-read audiences, Austenland is a novel concept."

Lovely! And then...we get reviews like the one from a little known paper with hardly any influence or reputation whatsoever that surely no one has ever heard of let alone pays any attention to (The New York Times) that gave it 1 of 5 stars and ripped it apart at every turn. Blerg.

The NYT wasn't the only negative review (though it was by far the worst), and last week I started to feel disheartened. When looking for films to see, I often look at the combined review ratings of sites like Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic, and though Metacritic's is slightly better, Rotten Tomatoes score was decidedly rotten. Our baby! Rotten!

Was I wrong? Was the movie actually not as funny and delightful as I'd thought? I began to scour Twitter to see what strangers were saying.

Jenn Lapp: "i don't want to live in a world where austenland only gets a 33% on rotten tomatoes."

Adam Cwiklinski: "Austenland was a hilariously pleasant surprise. Ignore rotten tomatoes on this one."

Ah, bless you, strangers Jenn Lapp and Adam Cwiklinski! And because I'm naughty, I kept searching Austenland on Twitter. Sometimes I found things I didn't like (and naturally went into deep mourning), but overwhelmingly the opinions of the common man and woman were really happy.

Connieonnie: "Austenland one of the few movies I didn't leave disappointed...it was everything I dreamed and MORE...sad I have to wait a month to see again."

Julie: "I really, really loved Austenland. Did not expect to laugh as much as I did."

Amy Mills: "LA peeps: Run don't walk to see Austenland. AWESOMESAUCE!!!"

Stephanie Ruble: "Saw the awesome Austenland movie tonight. Hoped it would be like the book (it was & so much more). A little bit of romance & lots of laughs"

Sarah Shumway Liu: "This weekend I saw AUSTENLAND on the big screen. I giggled and giggled and swooned...even my non-Austenfan husband laughed and enjoyed! Jennifer Coolidge did it for him!"

Darcy Lueking: "My entire screening of Austenland actually went "awwwww" and burst into applause at the end of the movie. Solid Sunday"

Jake Abel (actor, star of Percy Jackson): "Ladies, go check out Austenland if it's playing in your city. You'll laugh your balls off.... wait."

Libba Bray: "AUSTENLAND is absolutely delightful! @haleshannon did a fabulous job on the screenplay. You will laugh AND swoon. #Darcylicious"

Stacy Whitman: "Just got out of Austenland. Verdict: HILARIOUS. The whole theater was laughing the whole way through."

So the question remains...will you only be 33% pleased, like the aggregate of Rotten Tomatoes? Or wish you could give it less than 1of5 stars like that hardly-respected-or-heard-of-whatsoever-institution The New York Times? Or will you agree with stranger tweeter Simini Blocker: "Austenland was FANTASTIC. So so funny. To echo a comment I keep seeing— Can't remember the last time I laughed so much in a movie." What will your verdict be? The suspense! Dun dun DUN...

This weekend Austenland is open in select cities in UT, CA, DC, AZ, MD, IL, and still in NYC and LA. If your city isn't on the initial release list, hopefully it will be soon! Salt Lakers, I'll come do either a pre-or-post movie Q&A with the audience at four Austenland showings this weekend. Thank you so much to all who came out in NY and LA to see our little flick. Your support means the world, and your ticket purchase brought up our theater average to the very best but one in the entire country! I'm not a numbers person, but I know numbers are crucial in Hollywood. They will notice.

Watching Austenland: A moral imperative

Hey.

Thanks for stopping by. You look great. How's the family? Also, I really need you to go see Austenland.

I know that sounds self-interested, but it’s not as much as you might think. Yes I wrote the book (and co-wrote the screenplay) but no writer can claim ownership of any product. Even though I write every word of my books, there are still a team of people involved who have a rightly earned piece of its success: editor, copy editor, publisher, agent, publicist, distributor, bookseller, etc. A movie likewise is not an author’s but is a huge team effort, and in movies, the team is much, much larger. So many people are involved in making a movie. Austenland is not mine.

Did you know most writers are paid a flat fee for their book option or screenplay and won’t make more money regardless if the movie is a great success? But sure, I still have some interest in it. For one thing, if the movie does well, the book Austenland will probably sell more copies. Also it’ll be more likely that my other books might be made into movies.

Still there’s a larger question here that’s really important to me. Stay with me, I'm about to lay down a little Derrida.

French philosopher Jacques Derrida spoke about binary opposites (good & evil, up & down, light & dark) and whenever we have binary opposites, we tend to put them into a hierarchy, one dominating the other.

Between comedy and tragedy, tragedy is considered more important.
Between romance and realism, realism is considered more important. (btw Romance in its truest form includes fantasy.)
Between men and women, men are considered more important.

(If you’re skeptical about this, look at lists of awards for movies and books. Realistic, tragic movies and books that are by and about men will greatly outnumber everything else, except in children's novels, where realistic/historical/drama will still dominate though there are more females involved.)

So we made a comedic, romantic movie by/about women. Three strikes against it. I anticipate: it will earn little respect; many reviewers will dismiss it; probably all awards will ignore it. Most who like it--even love it-- will likely add a caveat, because our society mocks anyone who claims to be an intellectual and/or a feminist and still admits to enjoying an estrogen-drenched romantic comedic movie.

Additionally, this is a movie written, directed, produced by, and starring women. This is extremely rare in Hollywood. Like four-leaf-clover rare. Big Foot sighting rare. Prime rib rare. Me-in-a-bikini rare. (feel free to add your own rares.)

In general, Hollywood is reactionary. Hollywood follows the money. When deciding which movies to back, Hollywood looks at how like-movies have performed (or what it considers like-movies). Hollywood is built by investors who naturally want to put money behind what is least risky with the highest profit potential--and that means backing what has proven successful in the past. And Hollywood doesn’t have enough data on female-made-and-led movies. There just aren't enough of them. There are some obvious blockbusters, but Hollywood is wary of those.

Twilight: a fluke (yes, after five films people are still saying this)
Harry Potter: yeah it was written by a woman but it stars a boy so it doesn’t count
Hunger Games: Katniss is a masculine girl and the story is action/violence driven so counts as a guy movie (yes, people really say this too)

There are so many movies written by and starring men that have succeeded that if a few flop, it doesn’t worry the Hollywood numbers. But there are so few movies written by and starring women that if even one underperforms, suddenly you will see all other female-written-and-featuring projects pulled before they get a chance to be filmed. (this has happened many times and is currently happening this year.)

Please, go see Austenland. Vote with your wallet. Please, go see The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones. Encourage those skeptics in Hollywood. Convince them that backing something with a few women in it and written by women isn’t such a huge risk. People do want variety. They do want to hear women’s voices. They do want to see actual real women on the screen doing things besides just getting saved in the end and kissing the male star.

Ladies, go have a girls’ night. Or take your men along. It’s good for them. Men, be not afraid of girl cooties. The more voices the better. When women get the chance to make movies too, more voices are heard. Hollywood hears money louder than any other voice. We need your ticket. New York and Los Angeles, if you go see a movie this weekend, please make it Austenland. Next week City of Bones opens nationally and Austenland opens in select cities. Sony Pictures Classics has released a preliminary schedule of theaters and dates, hopefully with more announced soon. So go, if you must, out of a sense of equality and charity and goodwill. But stay for an outrageously funny and sweet natured and heart-poundingly romantic flick.

We are a bunch of chicks. And we made a really fun movie.