One of the hot deals that happened late this summer was a reported seven figure deal for three books by the creator of CSI. Dutton won the fierce auction, beating out six other houses.
Par for the course, right?
Well, this one is different. The “author” of the project is not really going to be the author. Anthony Zuiker is going to be more like a producer/director, and he’ll hire a novelist to write the books. At the end of every five chapters there will be a code in the book that, when you go to your computer, will take you to a two minute filmed vignette that will provide a “cinematic bridge” to the next five chapters. Zuiker will outline the series and direct the vignettes, hoping eventually to turn the project into a feature film.
This isn’t the first interactive novel, but it’s a pretty big investment, and the fact that such big names are involved gives it buzz.
So… what do you think??
bryan russell says
For my taste, it’s kind of silly, but then I’m not really a technoguy. Frankly, I think the concept would annoy me as a reader, if at the end of chapter five, while riding the train to Toronto, I had to start checking out the other passengers to see whose laptop would be the easiest to steal…
It just doesn’t seem like something for me. If I want a book, I’ll read a book (a complete one). And if I want a film, I’ll watch a film (a complete one). Really, I don’t see what the hybrid can offer aside from complications. I mean, I read along, a vision of the character and story in my head… and then I turn on my laptop and suddenly find Ben Affleck imitatating the MC?
There’s too many great books and great films out there for me to spend my money on something that seems like a gimick. And, in my opinion, books are already interactive – they require your imaginative involvement to function properly. Sticking in film bits merely cuts holes in the middle of the reader’s interactive engagement with the story.
Just my take. Everyone’s tastes differ, and ain’t it a fine old world on account of that?
Margaret Yang says
It kind of reminds me of a video game, where the gameplay and the storyline go hand in hand. But in this case, it’s the book and internet hand in hand.
I wonder, what is the audience for this? Is primarily TV watchers/game players, who are more visually oriented, or is it primarily book readers, who are more tuned to words?
Anonymous says
I think it’s too much work…when I find the time to relax and read, I like to get comfy and lose myself in a great story…if I had to make sure my laptop was close by so I could go online and see what happens next….um, just don’t see that happening…I personally, would not spend the $$ on something like that.
Margaret Yang says
Ewww, and the article says, “You’ll watch a live snuff film, then you’ll give the killer your phone number….”
No I won’t watch a live snuff film! Anyone else bothered by this?
7-iron says
I agree with Bryan.
The concept seems innovative, but really when it comes down to it, I read because I like to form my own images… I feel cheated when my imagination doesn’t do the work.
Sheila says
This is going to be marketed to adults?
I could see kids doing this. In fact, I think Rick Riordan is doing something like this with his 39 clues series.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to have to break the flow of reading to watch something. Suddenly, the pictures I’ve created in my head are now given to me on the screen. That’s not what I read a book for.
K.C. Shaw says
I guess it’d work for people reading it on ereaders. I wouldn’t want to bother, though. I don’t like to stop reading to have to interact with the book in any way. Not to mention the danger that after I watch the online clip, I’d have to check my email, and answer my emails, and watch the YouTube video a friend forwarded, and watch something else that caught my eye on YouTube, and check my email again, and–oh yeah, wasn’t I reading a book?
Natalie says
Interesting. I could see this working if e-readers took over the world. Then it would be easy to see the clip and go back to reading.
But reading the actual book, having to stop and go look up some code on the net, and then going back…seems cumbersome.
Anonymous says
Hmm. What an interesting and thoroughly depressing article.
Storytelling 2.0, as directed by a man who says he can’t finish a 250 page book?
Is there a big audience for “cases that are too grim and graphic for CSI?”
The advertising advantages are big, but you have to capture that audience first.
markwise says
This has got to be one of the lamest marketing ploys in the history of books.
One of the beaty’s of books is that you envision the story how you want it to run – Not how a TV director envisions the story.
Secondly, how long will the video segments remain on the Net? Once they come down, you will be left with only half a story and a bunch of gaps.
Insane.
Dori says
I have to agree with a lot of the comments already posted. When you read a book, you want to read a book.
However, I watched the N. series of vignettes for Stephen King. That was quite enjoyable. So, I see the potential for something like this. The interactive quality is something that may pull in the younger reader.
I think interrupting the reading process is going to be downfall of this project, though. If the bridges were between short stories or between books, it would work better. It would become an enhancement of the reading experience. But asking someone who is reading a non-digital book to run to their computer so they can complete the next five chapters is a recipe for the reader to put the book down and not pick it up again.
I thought one of the author’s jobs was to keep the reader from putting the book down in the first place. Seems a little counterintuitive.
Susan Helene Gottfried says
Eh, no thanks.
Like others have said, I want to sit and read a book, not jump up and play online. Lately, reading is my break from long hours in front of the screen.
Moth says
I don’t get it. Why would I want to stop reading, get on the computer and watch a “cinematic bridge”? thanks I’d rather keep reading actually. It just seems like a really weird concept. Maybe there’s something I’m not getting.
Anonymous says
Can’t see it as a winner. But then again, hard to figure at this early stage. Doesn’t appeal to me, but perhaps to the younger generation it may fly. Time will tell.
sex scenes at starbucks says
I think it sounds annoying if the book sucks and fun if the book is really good. I do hate watching stuff on my computer, though. And I agree, books are the ultimate interractive art form already.
Conduit says
I’m all for new technologies and innovative thinking, but unless there’s something we’re all missing here, it’s a no thanks from me too. It almost seems like a throwback to the earliest days of CD-ROM when we were all ooh-ing and aah-ing at the novelty of watching jittery, stamp-sized videos on our computer screens. Except it’s more hassle.
Anonymous says
I think it’s kind of interesting. Obviously, it isn’t going to be like reading a normal book so in some ways it probably won’t appeal to a lot of people, and I think its definitely for the “younger” reader.
I like the viral marketing being done for things like the TV show Lost and the movie Cloverfield, and I think this is probably another variation of that concept. It’s will allow publishing companies to see how popular a book is based not only on sales, but on things like hits to the website and sign-ups. They’ll also be able to collect information (e-mails) to use later on in advertising other product. Like anything else, though, if the story/content is garbage then it will be a big flop.
If they took something similar to Twilight and used this concept it would be huge. Imagine Stephanie Meyer’s next book including internet video clips – I think her readers would be all over watching every five chapters.
Josh
JES says
It’s not a bad idea as ideas go. It sucks that it’s being pitched as a “book,” though. As Mr. Zuiker says, perhaps it “offers publishing a chance to catch up with the YouTube generation that has lost passion for reading.” I doubt that it will do much to increase anyone’s passion for reading, though.
It’s highly reminiscent of a series of computer games from a few years ago. I don’t remember the titles now, but the general idea was that you solved a mystery by providing e.g. email address, fax #, phone #, and so on, and various robots masquerading as characters would contact you with clues. And you could go to a Web site to get additional info, see how others were progressing, and so on. Again, this is cool. And I might play this game. But it’s not a “book.” It’s not even a “book” in quotes — it’s like a meta-book, a “‘book'” in both external and internal quotes.
The Dutton publisher says, “Zuiker ‘is bringing a great deal of creative energy to this project.'” Methinks the primary draw for Dutton isn’t Mr. Z’s energy, so much as his built-in audience. (The omnipotent “platform.”)
I’m a tech guy as well as a reader, but sheesh…
Susan says
I like books but sometimes enjoy technology, so for me, it would come down to the story it’s telling.
This doesn’t sound like my kind of story!
But, I’m planning an e-book anthology with a nonprofit I work with, and am planning a few fun and interactive elements for it. I imagine that e-books may evolve that way…which is great, I think; technology gives them an edge over the printed book to let them claim a market share of their own.
But a real book is still (sorry Coca-Cola) the Real Thing. I’ll always take a printed book with a great story to tell, over any gadget or gimmick.
Although, I can remember my father who thought pens with ink *already inside them* were nifty…so maybe it’s just a case of Time Will Tell.
Wanda B. Ontheshelves says
Aren’t people who have read the novel and then go see the movie, always saying, “the movie left so much out?” So having the chapters interspersed with scenes, all that left-out stuff gets put back in.
I’m not too interested in the crime/violence aspect of it. But I can see that someone who can write AND direct – and sets out at the tender age of 13 or something to become a…what would you call such a person? An interactive author…after they made 10 such – the word Frankenstein comes to mind – 10 such interactive books, they might come up with some really exciting ideas, tease out some of the creative possibilities we of the “strictly fiction” crowd can’t see…
If you could throw in, submit your address and get really cool things in the mail – like, an embroidered velvet bag with seeds in it that you can plant – and some plant breeder had come up with striped daisies, or blue sunflowers, and these weird flowers were part of the story, and you can grow them in your garden – your friend comes over and says, “oh, you’re reading (viewing? participating in?) The Flowers of Zora, cool! I was wondering what they looked like!” – the possibilities are endless, as they say…
Not good: It seems like part of the motivation for this is to get advertising in front of the reader/viewer…one thing I think most people like about books…NO ADS…so having ads as part of the visual segment, I think, would be a big turnoff…or anywhere in the book…yuck – when you download a text on Kindle, are there ADS??? Maybe they’ll start selling Kindle downloads in two versions: with ads (cheaper) and without ads (more bucks).
Erik says
Silent movies were far from the final word on what the industry would become. They relied heavily on pantomime and stage settings. But they eventually created an entirely new genre of art.
This doesn’t sound to me like a great thing, but it may be something DW Griffith might cook up if he were around today.
Wanda B. Ontheshelves says
P.S. The editor of Twelve was on C-Span, Sunday I think, and they ran it again last night.
Michelle Miles says
I think it sounds awesome. It sort of reminds me of the choose your own adventure books except this time you get to SEE the action. Kinda cool.
By the way, I would be interested to hear your thoughts on product placement in novels.
Anne Dayton says
I think it sounds interesting. I’d check it out. It might suck, but it might be really cool. It’s worth a shot.
Mystery Robin says
Awesome! But they should do it for Lost. 🙂 Someone go tell JJ!
Lisa says
that would annoy me. i want to curl up with a book to get AWAY from a computer screen. lol. i hope this doesn’t change every book to something like this…
Anonymous says
I think it sucks.
Anonymous says
I agree with most of the comments here. I read because I like to read – period. The world is in my head.
Maybe kids would like this, but it’s not for me. It’s clunky.
I rate books in terms of how engaged I become as I read them. Is the author taking me on a journey to this place? Are the characters real to me? Is the author gifted enough to make me see, smell, taste, feel the world he/she has created? Did I want to stay up all night just to finish the book? Did the story “haunt” me long afterwards? The great ones do this.
My nephew (teenager) told me yesterday that one of his friends is reading my first book. His friend’s comment was that he could not put the book down. That was one of the best things I could have heard.
Last thing I want to do is pick up a “book” and then HAVE to put it down to go to the net and watch a video. I love the net, but hey, if I’m reading, *I’m reading!!!*
J.F.
Other Lisa says
Ick.
I doubt if something “written” this way will be interesting writing at all.
Nothing against movies and TV shows; I like ’em. But books are great technology. Some sort of weird hybrid like this seems like it would do nothing particularly well.
Kat Harris says
I’m going to join the chorus. It’s an interesting idea, but too much work.
Call me lazy but when I pick up a book, I want to be lost in the story. I don’t want to have to work to get it.
Bernita says
What do I think?
Bleath.
Laurel Amberdine says
It… probably… isn’t as stupid as it sounds. Some stories are better told in video, some are better told in text, and I can see that some might benefit from both media.
I couldn’t tell from the article what the “digital” nature of this “digital novel” is. Will it be on a website? Is it a paper book? Is it a download from iTunes or Amazon?
Like everything, it’ll all come down to the story. I hope it’s good.
M Clement Hall says
I have an interest in forensics but can’t be bothered with the trivialities and repetitive “it’s a match” of CSI.
Seems people who read are universally against the idea. But people who watch TV don’t read.
Going on the natural law of life, if everyone is so opposed to the idea, it will become a resounding success — as is CSI.
Adaora A. says
I don’t know what to think. I guess there is that pesky thing about who gets their name in bigger print. The interactive book idea is pretty interesting, but it makes me think of book packagers…
JeanieW says
It sounds like a cinematic bridge to nowhere. A whole lot of money going into a project that doesn’t seem to have that much of a point. Just think of all the other books that could have gone into production instead.
abc says
I think it could work. It is 2008 and the time for new media. But frankly, I’m too lazy for that stuff. I’d probably never get around to watching the cd.
Ulysses says
I’m sorry? I’m reading a book, and you want me to get up in the middle to go on-line?
Um… I read books in odd places: restaurants, busses, the bathtub, supermarket lines. If I have to put the book down until I find myself in the neighborhood of a computer, I’m likely to be so annoyed that I won’t pick it up again.
This idea’s not for me.
bunnygirl says
It doesn’t sound like my cup of tea, but I’m sure there’s a market for it.
What I do like, though, is the recognition that storytelling media is changing. I have some multimedia ideas of my own, but they’re less interactive than this.
Eric says
If this takes off then maybe there is hope after all for my groundbreaking concept of theatrical movies interspersed with chapter reading breaks every three or four scenes.
Not annoying in the least. Now everyone please sit quietly while we wait for the rest of the audience to finish chapter six.
Chatty Kelly says
As someone completely addicted to CSI (Las Vegas), I love it! I love reading, and I can’t say I’d run to the PC to check it, but I probably would at some point watch the bridge. I think it’s cool and innovative. I suspect you don’t HAVE to watch the PC clip, but just that it would give a visual enhancement to the book.
I say Kudos. Thinking outside the box got a 7-figure deal. How big a deal did anyone else get this week? This month? This year?
CC says
A fierce auction… a seven figure deal… seven major pub houses vying for it.
Heck, that’s a lot of work for something so gimmicky, isn’t it? Oh, and the “author” isn’t even the “author” but will hire one?
Let me see, maybe I should try this… I’e got an idea, but no, it’ll involve me not writing it, I’ll produce it, that’s it!
Is it my imagination, or does all of publishing seem more enamored with people that AREN’T authors than the ones that are?
I agree with most of the other commentors — I read to get away from the influx of media screaming at me. This entire concept strikes me as ridiculous.
Anonymous says
The article states that it will bring reading to a “mulit-platform” experience.
Um, if you are doing it right, reading already is a multi-platform experience.
I read with my eyeballs, form the setting and characters’ images in my brain, feel the text in my heart, and let the plot’s twists and turns sink into my blood. How many more “platforms” do you need to reach?
I suppose I could French-kiss the book after I was done?
Anonymous says
(I’m Anon 12:18, again…)
AND the guy doesn’t have the attention span to READ a 250 page crime novel, but he thinks he’s got the moxy to write a 60 page outline and “surpervise” a real writer to finish it? I’m sorry, that is the most condescending thing I’ve heard since I don’t know when.
Supervise, yes, that’s exactly the person I want telling be what to do as a writer — someone who thinks reading a 250 page book is a chore. Oh, and since when are crime novels 250 pages? I’ve got David Baldacci’s novel, STONE COLD, sitting right here, next to my computer. Let’s see… no, it’s 388 exactly. A full 138 pages too long.
Stuff like this makes my blood boil, I don’t even know why.
Anonymous says
Has this created any buzz from your side of things, Nathan? Are you looking for projects that have multi-media possibilities now? What is your take?
Seven figures. That’s a lot of figures.
Gwen says
Hmm, I must say that it sounds intriguing. If the book awakens a hardcore following, it would be a fabulous way to keep the fan base interested and it would also help them to feel involved in the whole process/book-reading experience/what have you.
Points for originality. Or, ingenuity.
Just_Me says
Pointless.
Why would I want to stop reading to fire up my computer and watch a 5 minute movie? I’d rather just turn the page.
But I expect it will generate interest because it’s hype-able.
150 says
Gut reaction? Gimmicky and annoying.
terryd says
If it was limited only to e-gadgets, and turning the “final” page of text automatically brought the video portion, I think it might be kind of cool.
I think it would lend itself quite well to horror, etc.
Maybe also begin the “book” with a video portion, so the reader isn’t jarred too badly, mid-story, with video-supplied sensory details?
Lynne says
I don’t *think* so. Big ‘no’ to snuff film, thank you Margaret. Yay, Casey!
Horrible visual: kids who are computer smart would be targeted as prime market. IOW, they would not learn how to read. Welcome, “Brave New Illiterate World.”
Linnea says
I think the hook to this may be that you get to come up with new characters and storylines but who wants to give away their good ideas to someone else?
And who doesn’t LOVE the idea of product placement in the book they’re reading. Ugh. One of the nice things about a book is that it’s entertainment WITHOUT advertising.
If the poor man doesn’t have enough of an attention span to read a good book I’m not sure I’d depend on him to know a good book when he sees one. I’ll pass I think.