WAGSTAFF

A Voice vs. An Echo

2010-12-20T16:41:00.000-06:00

True artists have their D.N.A. imprinted on their masterworks. You can recognize the work of a master painter immediately. Same with a writer. Rare are unique voices -- distinct and resonating -- in any artistic field.

The average pro screenwriter has a career of 3-5 years. Read that some time ago and wondered, "Why?" Because most in any artistic field are echos. They copy the fad of the day and enjoy a brief bit of popularity before fading out. Or the energy to sustain their unique voice consumes then and they have brief, yet brilliant, careers.

The first dozen screenplays you write will likely not be that good. The first few you'll finish and think they are ready to shop and give you quick success. After fighting through script after script, you can reflect back and realize how you were fighting through your influences and notions of what's "commercial" and can get attention. You have to burn out the dross before you develop your craft to a professional level.

There are exceptions: Artists who have early work that meets with success. Yet they have difficulty sustaining this because they haven't put in the hours and paid the dues necessary. A previous blog discussed the 10,000 hours necessary to master any subject. Better to put those hours in before success comes your way.

Success can be viewed as the residue of past failures. By the time acclaim or a sale comes your way, you're miles ahead working on new things and pushing to develop your talent. The book THE WAR OF ART by Pressfield is one I recommend frequently. Be in for the long haul. Show up. Continue showing up.

Another year nearing conclusion, I can see how far I've developed as a writer and how far the road is ahead. Become a voice. Work your way through the mediocre ideas and echos. Be a professional.

Happy Holidays and here's to a great 2011!

One year to go before the world ends. Make the best of it...

The Revengers Downsize (Avengers Spoof/Comedy Short Film)

2010-12-17T15:34:00.002-06:00

EXPOSED (Dark Comedy Short Film)

2010-12-17T15:30:00.000-06:00

Exposed from Matt Williams on Vimeo.

Handling Notes

2010-12-14T16:53:00.002-06:00

Getting notes on your work is a big part of the job of a screenwriter. You'll be collaborating (you hope!) with producers, directors, and actors in the future. How you handle notes as an amateur, reflects the professionalism and devotion to the craft you have at this level. If you can't handle them now, you won't handle them later and you'll blow opportunities or have a short lived career.

Amazon Studios and other peer review sites provide the opportunity to get feedback from fellow aspiring writers. The are several pro writers on the boards as well making themselves available for notes. So what do you do with the notes once received? After having spent the last couple of years on peer review sites and working with professional readers I can give you what I do:

1. Have the right attitude reading the notes. Don't be super defensive. Don't argue with the note giver on every point, especially if it's a freebie. Read the notes and set them aside.

2. Get several viewpoints on your script from trusted sources. There are some people who "get it" when it comes to your writing. You want those that appreciate what you do well (yes, some encouragement is good for us all) but also are able to pinpoint weaknesses. Usually this takes getting multiple takes. This will also let you know if a problem area consistently raises red flags for readers. If 4/4 readers have the same reaction, rethink your position.

3. Do the 'Quick fixes' first -- typos. Easy to repair errors or dialogue issues (joke that falls flat or on the nose.

4. On the bigger notes (reworking a character, major plot revision, tone, etc.) make sure the notes is helping you do a better version of YOUR script. Many writers giving notes will pull you in a direction, "Well this is how I'd write the script." These notes can have you heading in directions that are inconsistent with the story you wanted to tell and your voice as a writer.

5. Don't get discouraged. There are many, many drafts on the road. The script is never done until the film is shot. Even then there are reshoots and the editor will shape the final product. You can write a draft trying a different approach and jettison it. You can ignore notes if you feel they detract from your story.

6. Often a note about something not working in act 3 is due to a problem in act 1 -- wasn't set up properly. Be careful of following "effect" notes and look for the root cause. Could be your protagonist or story setup is off early making the later payoff fall flat or off key.

7. Cut, cut, cut. Early drafts are overwritten. Cut scenes down to the essentials. Many writers say cutting the first and last lines in a scene is their first rewrite. Cut out opening chit chat and long dialogue down to size. Show, don't tell, if possible.

8. A table read with actors is a good way to check dialogue and see how your script goes over. Take copious notes.

9. Remember one reader's opinion is just one take on your script. Half the movies on RottenTomatoes are under 50% from critics and those are finished films. Not everyone is going to love your work.

10. Don't ignore format, typos, and other essentials. Sweat the small stuff. It's a sign of a professional.

Finally, rewriting is essential. Many writers avoid the rewriting process thinking, "They'll buy it and fix it" or "I'll fix it when they pay me" or "I'm off on the next script." The real magic happens during the rewrite.

Hemingway once said, "The first draft of anything is shit." True! Now, if you're 16th draft is shit... you might have problems.

Good luck! Keep at it! Feel free to add your thoughts on rewriting and your approach to the process.

IS IT A MOVIE?

2010-12-09T14:11:00.000-06:00

A checklist for your screenplay:

1. Clearly defined genre. Horror, comedy, western, thriller, etc. Do we know what it is? BTW, drama is a tough sell, as are period pieces or bio pics.

2. Marketable concept. Typically referred to as a "high concept" -- a unique hook. Can we SEE the movie poster? Easily think of a tag line?

3. Is there a clear protagonist? Ensemble pieces are a hard sell. Is the protagonist's flaw evident the first 5 pages? Can we turn to the last 5 pages and see the character's arc -- how the protagonist has changed after going through the trail of your story?

4. Is there a clear antagonist? Not "fate" but a person (you can personify a force -- greed, fear, etc. -- but should be a character in your script). Does the antagonist in some way mirror your protagonist?

5. Does the central emotional response from your genre come through to a reader? If it's a comedy, are we laughing? If it's a thriller, are we on the edge of our seat? If it's horror, did you scare the shit out of us? If not, rewrite.

6. Budget. Two ways to go here: (1) Write big -- big expensive film = better pay day for the writer, though they'd likely replace you if you're new; or (2) go modest budget and you can shop it down the producer food chain and get an actual screen credit. Better usually to think big and rewrite to small.

7. Page count. 115 is the new 120. 95-100 is better for a comedy/horror/thriller -- what you should be writing as a newbie.

8. What's unique? Don't retread something we've seen... but, flipside, can't go too far off the beaten path. Better to take something existing and do your new take.

9. A CLEAR GOAL for the protagonist. Stakes should be high and we should know what your protagonist WANTS.

E.g. TAKEN. Protag wants to find his daughter. Stakes are life and death (her friend is made a drug addict/dies).

500 DAYS OF SUMMER scrambled the chronology of a standard rom com (but stayed within the traditional beats) and had a down ending. Something familiar; something new.

SOURCE CODE. GROUNDHOG DAY-style loop as a thriller. ALL YOU NEED IS KILL. GROUNDHOG DAY-style loop done as sci fi actioner. THE DAYS BEFORE. GROUNDHOG DAY-style loop done as sci fi actioner.

Even something like MALL COP. DIE HARD in a shopping mall with a mall cop protagonist played for laughs. We get it. We got it and went. (All the laughs in the movie were in the trailer unfortunately. But... it made a bundle.)

So ask yourself, "Is it a movie?"

Would you plop down $12 or even $1 at Red Box to watch the film version of this screenplay?

Feel free to post your logline here and tell us why it's a movie, or add to this list of factors to consider.

Q&A With Television Writer/Producer Alan Cross

2010-09-13T13:50:00.001-06:00

QUESTIONS BY STEPHEN HOOVER. ANSWERS BY ALAN CROSS.

Where'd you grow up?

I grew up about as far away from Hollywood as you can get: Anchorage Alaska. As a kid, I related more to Woody Allen than the hunters and fisherman who populated Alaska. (I’m not Jewish, but I’ve never been athletic or a “gun guy” or a wilderness enthusiast. I liked to watch TV and go to the movies.)

Don’t get me wrong. I loved living in Alaska. I had a great family, and an amazing mom. My mom was terrific for many reasons, but significantly because when I told her what I wanted to do with my life (become a TV writer) she absolutely encouraged and supported me. There was no hesitation. No “Gee, Alan, are you sure you really thought this through?” No. She knew I could do it and believed in me one hundred percent.

So here’s what I believe: Everyone needs someone like that in their lives – someone who supports their career ambition and embraces their dream. If you’re surrounded by negative people, get away from them! Now! Life is too short.

Develop a positive mental attitude. Hollywood can be a cruel town. You have to be strong. Persistent. Thanks, Mom.

How'd you wind up in LA? First "big break"/writing gig?

I came to Los Angeles to go to the University Of Southern California. I initially got rejected by their Film School but accepted by the University. So I went anyway because I discovered you could take a lot of film classes without being in the actual film program. And, when I tried a second time to get into USC film school, I was finally accepted.

Three years later I left USC and started working in the Los Angeles area. If you’re very fortunate, coming out of USC, you direct a great student film that gets you noticed by Steven Spielberg and you live happily ever after. And if you don’t, you become a Runner. Which is what I did. A friend hired me for a runner job with the television accounting department on the Disney Lot in Burbank. The runner gig eventually led to a job as a Story Analyst for the Disney Sunday Movie department. I read hundreds of movie scripts and realized a simple truth: Yes, screenwriters have a lot of competition. But the number of people who write screenplays well, who know structure and can write good dialogue, is a much smaller number.

During my career as a Story Analyst I was always writing TV specs, by myself and with writing partners. With time and persistence, I figured out how much plot I needed for my story. I figured out how to write a smart joke. My partner and I finally figured out a story with a strong comedic hook that got us our first professional job as staff writers on a half hour sitcom called CITY.

Television vs. film. What are the Pros and Cons of each medium?

The advantage of writing for television is the short amount of time between writing your script and seeing it filmed and aired on TV. I’ve often joked that it’s the closest thing to being God. Because something you imagined, just an image in your head, is quickly and professionally created – made real - just a few days later.

The cons of television writing? There are a few. Mostly the long hours. Especially if you’re working on a sitcom. Why? Because your success depends on the jokes being funny. But the power and freshness of a joke weakens with repetition. After you’ve heard the same joke in rehearsals five or six times, you begin to doubt whether or not the joke is still funny. So new jokes are created to replace the original joke. In short, there’s a lot of probably needless re-writing. It’s just the nature of the sitcom beast.

Group writing in a sitcom is necessary. But in-group rewrite sessions you can be rewritten to the point where there’s very little left of your original material, even though your name still goes on the script! For example, your favorite sitcom writer, whose episode of TWO AND A HALF MEN you love, may only have had a handful of their lines make it into the final, aired version of the teleplay.

The pros of feature writing? Well, the paychecks are bigger and the high-end production values look great. Everyone wants to make a feature because of the prestige that is associated with a successful commercial film. The biggest con to being a feature writer is that it’s a director’s medium. The writer can be treated badly, ignored, barred from visiting the set, and rewritten to the point where you lose final screen credit. Also, it can take years to get your writing made. The time frame in television is much faster.

How do you land a TV staff job? Tips?

In my experience, if you go on to actually GET the staff job you interviewed for, you almost have it before you walk in the room. That’s because the Executive Producer has already read your material and loves it. They’re looking forward to meeting you and hope you’re not a jerk in person. All you really have to do is not be an asshole in the meeting, show a genuine interest in the show, and you’re hired.

The big tip: If the show is already on the air, WATCH THE SHOW before your interview. Be able to reference episodes/scenes you like. (If you really need the job, yet hate the show, FAKE your enthusiasm and sell it!) If it isn’t on the air yet, get a hold of the pilot or pilot script. Be able to talk about it in glowing terms. FIND SOMETHING you like about it. Anything. During the interview it helps to match the Executive Producer’s energy level. If they’re quiet and low-key, then being loud with relentless energy won’t go over well. Or the reverse: if they’re high energy and restless, being quiet and soft-spoken certainly won’t win them over. Know how to read the room and adjust.

So in the end is it wise to “just be yourself?” Yes. Absolutely. Be yourself. Don’t come across as phony (especially if you’re faking your sincerity!). But get a bead on the Executive Producer’s personality and try to emphasize the part of yourself that seems to be the best fit.

Should a new writer write a spec TV pilot?

The current wisdom is ‘yes.’ This hasn’t always been the case. Unlike features, newbie TV writers have to prove that their one killer spec script wasn’t a fluke. You usually have to write at least one other great sample. If you have two specs written for existing TV shows, then it proves you can mimic another writer’s voice, which is an essential part of the staff writer’s job. So far, so good. Writing an original spec pilot is an opportunity to show off YOUR voice.

And, if your original TV pilot turns out really good, and fits the needs of a network, it’s an opportunity to leap frog the standard job ladder and wind up with your OWN show on the air. So, yes, write an original spec script. (And if you get your own show on the air, hire me!)

What’s the hierarchy of the television staff room? What are the various jobs? How do you move up?

Well, first, the obvious things: You move up by working hard, getting along with the other staff writers, contributing great ideas that can actually be used in the show, and respecting the leadership and final word of the show runner. A tip I would give a beginning writer: When you’re in the writers room make positive contributions. It’s EASY to point out the problem in another writer’s pitch (“Sorry, but that idea won’t work because it’s too unbelievable for the character, etc.”)

If you disagree with another writer’s pitch, don’t just shoot it down, propose what you think is a BETTER idea. (“I’m not sure our hero would do that, but if you take the first part of what you’re pitching, and you change the second part so that the hero DOESN’T see the knife, then you’ve got some real suspense!”) Be supportive. Don’t tear down other writers contributions without offering your own, hopefully better, alternative.

The Staff Writers

The staff writers are the people on the bottom of the ladder. Staff writers are the new guys. This is their first job. They’re the least paid. But they don’t care. They’re just happy to be there. They’re on staff to learn and hopefully say something occasionally smart enough to justify their presence. Still, there’s not a whole lot of pressure on a staff writer on a daily basis.

No one necessarily expects great story ideas or jokes from a staff writer. So if you manage to impress people at this level, great! Your time to impress your boss comes when you’re given your first script assignment and, hopefully, knock it out of the park. This is how you keep your job and move up the ladder.

Story Editors/ Executive Story Editors

These are staff writers with at least one show hire, or one season on a writing staff, under their belts. They’re still considered beginners. No leadership role is expected at this level. Frequently, mundane writing tasks are assigned to Story Editors, such as writing episode summaries or putting together a show bible. The pay’s better though no one expects too much of you yet. You ARE expected to contribute ideas in the writers room. Here’s a tip: If you can’t contribute good ideas, then dance. One writer I knew did this. He called it the “End Of The Night” dance. He’d get up on top of the boardroom table and strut like he was at a dance club. Everybody loved him! (He was talented too, which always helps.)

Producer/ Supervising Producer/ Consulting Producer

These are fairly nebulous titles. Usually, they indicate you’ve had some experience. Maybe you’ve been on staff for a couple seasons. Or you’ve worked on a handful of other shows. Your salary quote is higher than a Story Editor or Staff Writer. And thus the expectations for the quality of your work are adjusted upward. You haven’t priced yourself out of the market yet, so it’s still fairly easy to find work. No real leadership abilities are asked of you. Though you may get invited to sit in on an editing session for your episode. (At least you can ask.)

The only real wild card here is the Consulting Producer title. Let’s say you’ve actually been an Executive Producer on another show. But that show went off the air and you need another job. There’s a new show you want to write for but they don’t have the money match your pricey Executive Producer salary quote. You don’t want to work with a lesser title. What to do? To make you happy, the studio will call you a Consulting Producer. There are some hour-long shows with LOTS of Consulting Producers. They’re usually high-end guys who agreed to the Consulting Producer title and lower pay, in order to get on a writing staff.

The Co-Executive Producer

The Co-Executive Producer is often designated as the Second In Command (not always, sometimes it’s just your title). They run the writers room while the Executive Producer (EP) is in casting or editing, etc. It’s a lot of responsibility.

And it’s a hard job to get. But it’s rewarding. Leading the writers’ room is challenging. But the moment you find the emotional arc of an episode, or figure out the moment that makes a story click, it makes the frustration and stress worth it. So does the paycheck.

You’ll have to pitch the scenes you’ve written to the Executive Producer when they return to the room. And you hope they like it. And if they don’t, you have to be able to accept their word and go back to the drawing board if you have to.

(Did I mention that you really hope they like it?)

The Executive Producer (EP)

This is the person who created the concept and wrote the pilot script that sold the show and got it on the air. Or, this is the seasoned pro who the network trusts and hires when the original, newbie writer was deemed “not ready yet” to run their own show. The EP is hired to have a vision for what the show should be. They have final say about every creative aspect of the show (assuming they’re in sync with what the studio and network execs want. If not, it can get ugly quick.)

The EP is sought after by every show department head for their guidance and approval in making decisions. This makes the EP’s time extremely valuable. They are constantly being tugged in different directions. Naturally, they are often out of the writers room for hours at a time, leaving the Co-EP and the writing staff to beat out the next episode of the show on their own, armed only with a rough idea of what the EP wants (because even THEY don’t know what they want yet).

Some writing staffs will decide whatever direction the EP gave them no longer works. Or they’ve stumbled on to a better idea. Left on their own, the staff will beat out a story they believe in, only to have the EP return, hours later, and become angry that their staff strayed from their original mandate. Or, the writing staff stays true to the direction the EP gave them, only to learn the EP has changed their mind about the direction of a story the staff spent five hours developing while they were gone. Frustrating? You bet. But this frustration is a part of your job. You want to be an EP yourself someday. The only way to get there is to please the EP you’re working for now.

Learn to be flexible if you want to survive and get ahead in the business.

Are we in a Golden Age of television?

Yes. I say ‘yes’ only because of the wide range of high quality, scripted, television worlds. These are worlds we’ve never seen before on TV. Everything from the sci-fi exploration of LOST, the desperate despair and frenzy of BREAKING BAD to the insightful elegance of MAD MEN. This is great TV. You may not like all these shows, but they are all executed with first class production values, great acting, and powerful dialogue that equals and often exceeds what you experience at the movies.

That’s not to say that crappy shows have gone away. They’re still here. And some of them do great in the ratings.

Many top screenwriters have moved to television? Why?

Because a lot of TV executives wish they were making movies. They want to be associated with successful people. (And to be fair, in concept, who doesn’t?) Successful movie stars, directors, and screenwriters have an allure to TV networks and studio executives. They are more likely to buy a pitch from McG than the same basic pitch from an unknown writer. McG has been successful in the past. His success immediately brings buzz to a TV project and raises expectations of movie-quality production values.

Top screenwriters, who are often treated like second-class citizens in the movie world, find that they are kings in television. The directors work for THEM, and not the other way around. Which is reason enough to move into television.

Should your original TV pilot have 4, 5, or 6 acts?

A few years ago I wrote a one-hour drama pilot for a major network. I got a few meetings off of the script. One of the meetings was with a development executive at another studio. Fox Studios. The Fox executive told me that when he was sent my pilot script, there was no attachment that identified which studio my pilot had been written for. But he knew, as soon as he finished it, which studio had commissioned the script.

“ABC, right?” He asked. Yes. He was correct. I asked him how he knew.

“Because it’s written in five acts,” he told me. And then went on to explain that

ABC was the first studio that developed the Five Act structure, simply to squeeze one more set of commercials out of an hour of television. Genius! Or maybe I should put that in dubious quotation marks: “Genius?” Yes. Much better.

So how many acts should your one-hour spec script have? Here’s what I’d do: If you’re writing for an existing show, get one of their production scripts and see how many acts they use. Then plot your spec script with that same number of acts in mind. Simple! If you’re writing an original pilot spec? I’d shoot for five acts. It shouldn’t be that hard to do. The fifth act is, essentially just picking a moment in the fourth act and splitting it in two. If the studio loves your pilot, and wants to buy it, only to notice it doesn’t have a sixth act, I can’t imagine they’d change their minds and pass. They’ll buy your pilot and ask you to create a sixth act out of your fifth.

Thanks to Stephen for the great questions. I hope my answers have helped someone somewhere get a better sense of the TV world and I wish everyone the greatest success in selling their work to the Studios and Networks.

Alan Cross September 13th, 2010

http://www.alancrosswriter.com/

My E-Zine Article for PAGE International

2010-09-03T14:19:00.002-06:00

Link here:

http://pageawards.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/logline_septemberoctober10.pdf

Book Review: THE STARTER SCREENPLAY by Adam Levenberg

2010-09-02T19:02:00.000-06:00

I know what you're thinking already: Another screenwriting book!? I've got a shelf full already. Me, too.

But here comes a new book unique from all the others currently on the market: THE STARTER SCREENPLAY by Adam Levenberg.

Hollywood executive and consultant Adam Levenberg has a unique book out with great information. THE STARTER SCREENPLAY is told from the POV of a creative exec that may be buying your material. How to avoid the big, "No."

The value of this book comes from Adam's experience as a Hollywood executive who spent thousands of hours speaking with unrepresented screenwriters. What do you need to learn to have a shot at success. It's in the book!

An alternate title might be, WHAT SCREENPLAY NOT TO WRITE. This is the first book to specifically identify types of movies that are difficult for new screenwriters to deliver. For example, he suggests avoiding an ensemble drama like CRASH. Why? Because ensemble movies are exponentially harder to write than a "single hero" movie.

The chapter on "What Not To Write" is the most expansive resource out there on how the majority of amateur screenwriters are DOA at the concept level. They start out on the wrong foot and never recover. This wastes months, if not years, and prevents most amateurs from breaking into the pro ranks.

Adam is a huge fan of Blake Snyder's SAVE THE CAT and has created a companion piece from the executive's perspective. New screenwriters often get hung up on describing their ideas as "this meets that." Adam lays out exactly how to use existing movies as templates while incorporating your own creativity and ideas to create something original. He calls this adding value to your story.

The book is a fast, easy read that delivers essential information on virtually every single page. Overall, THE STARTER SCREENPLAY is groundbreaking because it delivers information you can't find in other screenwriting books. If you feel you have advanced as a writer but are hitting a career brick wall, give this one a read.

Should You Get a MFA in Screenwriting?

2010-08-24T16:25:00.002-06:00

(My guest blogger today is award-winning writer Steven Arvanites. I met Steven at the Atlanta Screenwriting Competition workshop -- we both were winners last year. Nice guy and a unique talent.)

If you have any aspirations to teach it's definitely of enormous benefit. Also, it marks you as someone who is dedicated and serious about the craft. Additionally, it opens professional doors through your teachers and mentors. This is especially true for screenwriting programs at UCLA and USC, and Hollins too. However, you can win an Academy award with only a G.E.D. high school diploma. It's all about your passion and dedication to the screenwriting and the wacky business. But if you are looking for a higher degree I definitely recommend Hollins. It has much to offer.

In conclusion, I grew as a writer from by teaching, learning from my students and the plethora of guest speakers. For you are constantly exposed to ideas, structure, dialogue and character development it eventually seeps into your own writing. That was true for me.

In the summer of 2009 I was invited by the Hollins Universityscreenwriting summer program director, Dr. Klaus Phillips, to teach two workshops. My topics were: Reaching Your Creative Goals and How to Pitch. Both were successful and the students enjoyed learning how to pitch their scripts. Afterwards, Klaus took me to lunch and offered me a teaching job for the following summer's screenwriting program. I immediately accepted. This would be a great opportunity to expand myteaching credentials and to spend the summer on the bucolic campus of Hollins University in Roanoke Virginia.

After two delayed flights on United Airlines -- The Greyhound Bus of The Sky -- Klaus picked me up from the airport. Before checking into my housing he took me to lunch. Has anyone ever say no to free food? In reflection, I think Hollins works so well because his leadership. He's not only generous and magnanimous, but he knows exactly how to make students and faculty feel at home, and at ease to do their best work. In other words, a Mensch!

I wandered the sprawling Hollins campus with its antebellum buildings coupled with their state-of-the-art Visual Arts Center and the magnificent $14 million Robinson Library. (It would become my "office" for the summer.) My housing was located across the Highway, but centrally air-conditioned, and had a brand-new TV/DVD player thanks to Klaus.

That evening I met the other members of the faculty. It was serendipitous for we got along extremely well. The other faculty was: Tim Albough, Christa Maeker, Joe Gilford, Stephen Prince and Seth M. Donsky (who will be teaching a workshop for NYC screenwriter in October). All talented teachers; and great fun too!!

My class was intimate, only five students. I had three women and two men. The requirement for my advanced class was the first-year basic screenwriting course. Each student had their own unique voice and great stories to tell. However, we got off to a slow start due to Logline Trauma. It is amazing how difficult one sentence can be to create. But after some rewrites the students quickly caught on and we flew for the rest of the term. In the very first class, I laid down my Rules of Critiquing. In previous teaching situations writer comments were dismissive and non-constructive. I determined it was not going to happen again. This class needed to be a "safe place" where students can make mistakes and not only learn from them, but flourish. The first round of criticism must be entirely complementary.

What did you like about the writing?
What did you like about the characters?
Are there particular moments in the writing that delighted you?

Then we did our second round of critiquing -- the criticism. Criticism is not a dirty word. It is vital to receive criticism in order to make you a better screenwriter. Surprisingly, my class had a difficult time in praising and an easy time criticizing. But soon all balanced out and everyone's script was better for it.

Each student was required to write seven pages a week. Next a short movie clip demonstrating "High-Concept". E.g. - Liar, Liar -- the lawyer's son makes a wish that his father must tell the truth for 24 hours. Please click on my VLOG for an expanded definition.

Also, I was a worksheet monster. Each session had at least one in-class worksheet and several informational take-home worksheets. The three hours usually flew by and so did six weeks.

However, teaching only occupied a minority of my time. With the help of my wonderful and talented friend Hillary Homzie (a professor on the children's literature side) I accepted a personal challenge and wrote a script in two weeks entitled, Mafia In A Dress. I needed new material for the CineStory Writers Retreat (co-sponsored by the Academy Awards) in September. Location: Idyllwild, California.

I had written a High-Concept script, Mafia In A Dress, two years ago. The concept was great. My execution stank. Not wanting to abandon such a good idea, I rewrote 97% of the original screenplay. I trudged to the library every day (with the heat hovering at 100° it was a no-brainer) and to my favorite computer terminal and turned out the pages. It was the ultimate Butt In Chair Time. In two weeks I was finished. I'm ecstatic at the finished script, and eagerly anticipate my CineStory mentor's critique.

Another benefit of the Hollins M.F.A. screenwriting program are the informative workshops offered. My lecture was: How To Make A Film for under $10,000 and Win At Two Film Festivals. I'm officially in love with PowerPoint!

Among the other lecture guests was Scott Kosar the screenwriter of: The Machinist, Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Crazies. What a fascinating story on how, The Machinist got made via the connections he fostered through his UCLA masters degree. Additionally, screenwriting guru Hal Ackerman spoke about his famous book and his newly published novel; and, finally, Peter Riegert of Animal House fame. The cumulative experience was a 24/7 screenwriting paradise!

Remember, keep writing!

there is an accompanying VLOG @:

http://www.youtube.com/user/NYCscreenwriter

NYCscreenwriter.org

Ten Scripts and Ten Years

2010-07-10T12:17:00.000-06:00

A pro writer told me he was at a conference and one of the panelists (working screenwriter) was asked if he had any advice to new writers. "Quit." After the laugh from the crowd subsided the writer explained, "It's damn hard work. The odds are against you. Spend time with your friends and family. Exercise. Do anything else if you can."

The average pro takes ten scripts and ten years to break into screenwriting.   Saw Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot speak at the Nashville Conference (great event) in '09. They gave themselves ten years to break in. Wrote ten scripts they never showed to anyone before they had one they felt was ready. They broke in the business in five years -- well ahead of schedule -- and went on to write Shrek and Pirates of the Caribbean.   

10,000 hours.

The excellent book THE OUTLIERS by Malcolm Gladwell has a chapter discussing the early years of The Beatles. Grinding it out hour after hour in seedy Hamburg clubs is where the developed into pros. Studies show it takes ten thousand hours to master something -- anything.   

So if you write 10-20 hours a week (assuming you have a day gig) that's ten years of consistent effort to hot those 10,000 hours.   If you can go at it fulltime -- average working year is 2,000 hours -- you can get there in five years.   Are you writing this many hours?

If someone asks you, "How can I become a screenwriter?"... Now you know what to tell them.   

Ten years. Ten scripts. Ten thousand hours. Or you could just tell them to quit...

Ten Tips to A Better Screenplay

2010-07-05T20:10:00.000-06:00

(Guest Blogger/Consultant Julia Bergeron provides these tips. Good advice!)

1. Make your protagonist active. So easy to say, so important to do. Passive protagonists who don’t have a goal and/or don’t pursue their goal are the downfall of potentially great dramas. Don’t let that be the downfall of your script. Let your hero act.

2. Show don’t tell. I know, I know. You’ve heard that before and plenty of times. That’s because it’s so important. Film is visual therefore creating strong images is a key to writing a solid screenplay. Rather than use exposition to have a character tell us, “Cora is the world’s best sharpshooter,” show a scene where Cora makes an extraordinary shot. Show. Don’t tell.

3. Write in the active present tense. It’s, “Jericho kicks the door in.” and not “Jericho is kicking in the door.” Screenplays unfold as we read them and the active present tense reinforces that impression.

4. Spell check. Format check. Script writing software makes it easy to do it. The other guy will. You should too.

5. Read your script out loud. There is no better way to develop an ear for on the nose dialogue than to hear your script out loud. So, read it aloud. Better yet have friends read it out loud while you sit silently and listen. Oh, you’ll want to jump in, to correct them, to explain. Don’t. Don’t correct them, don’t interrupt, don’t defend your script. Just listen to it. If your readers make mistakes, the readers you submit your script to just might make the same errors. Fix the errors; don’t blame “bad” readers. In fact, thank them. They are allowing you to hear your script’s weaknesses. A decent actor can make bad dialogue sound reasonable. But you aren’t writing your spec script for a “decent” actor, are you? I’m writing mine for Penelope Cruz! And we are all writing for the reader.

6. Between the truth and the legend, tell the legend. This means don’t overwhelm the story with factual, but boring, details. Alfred Hitchcock said, “Drama is life with all the boring parts cut out of it.” Cut out the boring bits. While it might be true that it takes a half hour to saddle up a horse, adjust the stirrups, put the bit in, etc., the fact is you are not writing a horse-care manual. You are writing a screenplay. When it comes to it, just have the cowboy hop on the horse and go.

7. No chitchat. Films are expensive to make. The average cost to make a studio film in 2006 was $65 million (it’s more now) plus marketing. That’s easily $500,000 per page. It’s unlikely that a producer is going to pay that much money for “Hi, Bob, nice to meet you.” And when it’s an independent film on a tight budget, there is even less money to spend on chitchat. So eliminate it. Enter as late as possible; leave as early as possible for each scene. Words are money. Make them count.

8. Steer clear of “talking heads” scenes. What are those? That’s when two characters sit around and talk. Maybe they eat or drink but basically they aren’t doing much. Usually they are just telling all about themselves. You’ll often find these in the first draft of a “date scene.” Remember: telling = dull. Dull = no sale. However… If you must include a “talking heads” scene, make it active. The characters can be doing something totally unrelated to what they are talking about. And you can use that activity to reveal completely new and interesting information. For example, if it’s a date scene, rather than have the date happen in a restaurant, figure out a hobby or an interest that your character has. Maybe tennis. Or making sushi. Or skeet shooting. Every scene is another opportunity to create something visually interesting. Use every opportunity to put something visual on the page.

9. Grab us emotionally. In important moments, slow down and let the reader see and feel how those moments or events affect your character. For example, if two characters kiss for the first time, don’t have them kiss and then immediately race on to the next plot point. Show the reader how the characters feel about that experience. We want to know what happens, but we also want to how the characters feel about what happens. Show us what they feel.

10. Last tip. Have fun! Love your characters. Love the story that you’re telling. If you love it, the chances are much higher other people will too. And if they don’t, well, you had fun writing it. And now, if you’ll excuse me, I am off for some “fun” writing of my own!

To contact Julia email her: thescriptconsultant@gmail.com

The Revengers Downsize -- (Avengers Parody)

2010-07-03T20:26:00.000-06:00

Avengers spoof I wrote for fun.

The Revengers Downsize -- (Avengers Parody) - watch more funny videos

Scripped.com

2010-06-11T09:01:00.002-06:00

How had I not heard about this website? It’s now the top-ranked traffic count screenwriting website out there.

What is it? Free screenwriting software. Okay, you may already have that. How about an online community of writers to share reads? Groups to discuss a variety of screenwriting-related topics.

And how about… contests. I discovered the site entering the Ed Burns Scripped contest (Ed is on the board of the Scripped company). Contest assignment was to write the first fifteen pages based on a setup they provided. Then this month they are running a Spike-TV contest. Chance to have your pilot air on network television.

Turns out all the contests are free if you’re a subscriber to Scripped’s pro service. Check out the site. 60,000 users already and growing.

Table Read Your Screenplay

2010-06-11T08:55:00.002-06:00

Couple of weeks ago I found out I’d won the Grand Prize in the Table Read My Screenplay contest. Being flown out to L.A. next month and should be fun.

What is a table read? A table read is a group of actors brought together to go through a script. Each actor is assigned character or several characters.

Why do this? Screenplays should contain realistic dialogue. A table read allows you as writer to hear the work performed and make adjustments. Actors may trim words or take approaches to the character. Certain lines will appear redundant or on the nose. All of these improvements can springboard from a table read.

There are additional benefits depending on the genre. For example, a talented comic actor may get into character and improvise creating usable material.

How to do this?

1. Location. Pick a location where you have some degree of privacy. You want the actors to let it rip. If they get in character and begin yelling or moving about you’ll quickly become a distraction, if not annoyance, to a public location. Classroom, private room at a restaurant, or your home are suggestions.

2. Pay. Actors appreciate a show of respect for their effort. Some nominal pay (20-30 bucks) is good. Or just offer to buy dinner if you meet at a restaurant. Everyone will be more likely to show up and come back for the next one. You want trained actors. If a scene is flat or dialogue sloppy, you’ll know it’s on you as the writer rather than an amateurish performance.

3. Pre-Read. Send the scripts to the actors ahead of time or hand them a copy. Want them to have a chance to read through it and annotate their lines

4. Incentive for Actors. If you are a filmmaker or producer as well it’ll help you network with actors. Lead to future rules for them.

5. During the read. I suggest taking a food break in the middle of the read or at least a bathroom break. May take two hours to go through a script.

6. TAKE NOTES. If possible, have someone else read the narration. You want to be marking up your script and taking notes. You may also wish to video or audio record the performance to play later.

7. It’s a wrap. Pay everyone if you agreed to do so. Pick up the tab. Email ‘thank you’s. You’re creating your team.

Best of luck. Look for the video posting from my contest win in the months ahead at tablereadmyscreenplay.com.

Creating TV series ideas on spec

2010-06-05T11:09:00.001-06:00

(Guest Blogger Erik Bork explains creating a new TV series. Erik has a free initial consult offer right now. The half hour/one page is great to brainstorm BEFORE you write it, saving you many drafts. Please mention I referred you. Thanks.)

Here’s something that comes up a lot when I work with writers who have original series ideas, and spend time mapping out multiple episodes, character breakdowns and “show bibles”…
If you’re not yet established and not yet represented, your spec pilot is primarily a WRITING SAMPLE. Yes, of course you hope that the idea sells and gets produced and becomes a series, but that is such a million-to-one shot (even for those of us who do this for a living and sell pitches to networks on a regular basis), that it’s more realistic to focus on first things first — which is for this pilot script to get you noticed, advance your career, possibly get you representation and meetings. Beyond that, who knows? But the networks aren’t looking for spec pilots from unknown writers that they might produce, nor is the possibility of producing it independently as realistic as in features (although with web series, that is changing somewhat).

This is not to be discouraging at all — a spec pilot can be a very viable writing sample, and you never know what could happen beyond that. Make it the best writing sample you can, that achieves what a good pilot script should achieve. Which is what?
Well, the script needs to stand on its own. You will not be asked about what will happen in future episodes, or have the opportunity to illustrate that through a separate document. Your job is to make sure that the pilot script suggests and implies that there are endless great future episodes in this SERIES CONCEPT, because what you’re presenting in the pilot illustrates an ENDLESSLY REPEATABLE “FRANCHISE” for what happens in an episode.

“What’s the franchise?” is a common thing you hear T.V. agents, producers, and executives asking. Look at any successful series, and you can probably explain in a paragraph the template for what an episode always includes, in terms of story structure — hopefully a template that’s compelling, entertaining, believable, and somewhat fresh. Think of LAW AND ORDER, BUFFY, STAR TREK, EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND, etc. A typical episode’s story usually involves “X” kind of problematic situations that resolve through “Y” kinds of actions and “Z” kinds of conflicts for your characters.

Your pilot script should clearly illustrate what “XYZ” are for your concept.
Understand that no matter how serialized the overall series will be, and how much the pilot needs to set up the basic concept (and how these characters and situation come together), the pilot should also contain within it a sample of the kind of story we’ll see each week — the kind of case, or finite example of the conflicts and problems this series will showcase, with a clear beginning, middle and end.

Buyers don’t usually like what they call a “premise pilot,” where the entire pilot episode only focuses on setting up the series, but doesn’t include a “sample story” that shows them what future episodes will look like. Most pilots now set up the basic series premise stuff quickly in the first act, then get to a sample story that takes the rest of the pilot to play out. OR, they interweave “premise” elements within such a sample story.

I could go on, but these are the basic thoughts I wanted to put out there. Please feel free to comment or ask questions if you have any!

Free Consult with Emmy Winner Erik Bork

2010-06-04T17:44:00.000-06:00

Previous guest blogger, Erik Bork (BAND OF BROTHERS) is doing some FREE phone consults:

http://www.flyingwrestler.com/free-consulting-coaching/

Can't beat that price. Tell him Stephen Hoover sent ya...

Stretching Exercises

2010-05-31T00:20:00.002-06:00

We've all heard the phrase "one-joke idea", and it's invariably used as a put-down.

But sometimes a one-joke idea can be innovative and experimental writing, in addition to being funny.

This is an SCTV sketch from the late 1970s, a spoof of the old game show What's My Line, here renamed What's My Shoe Size?:

For more than half its length, this is a straight parody of the old show, with a number of jokes (such as Bennet Cerf's overflowing vocabulary) dependent at least in part on your familiarity with the original. It's more than three minutes before we get to the sketch's basic gag, the overspecific game show premise (a frequently-used technique in game show spoofs). We watch the distinguished Broadway types trying to figure out a guy's shoe size, the absurdity of the activity made even more ridiculous by the questioning process of the show.

The writers made the decision not to stress the shoe size bit, almost as if they were somehow afraid of committing to the idea. So they are careful to space shoe size gags with jokes based on the original logistics of What's My Line, some of them admittedly very funny (such as Dorothy Kilgallen neglecting to remove her blindfold when shaking hands).

What is in my opinion a much more innovative and, in performance terms at least, more courageous sketch had been done on the Peter Cook and Dudley Moore BBC-TV series Not Only But Also in 1965:

This sketch is sometimes erroneously credited to Cook himself, but it was actually written by a Cambridge classmate of his for a university revue in the late 1950s (those intrigued by Cook's personality quirks may wish to note how he seems to be almost hiding from the camera in this musical number -- compare his reticence to the enthusiastic up-front mugging of Dudley Moore).

The bit opens like a standard Robin Hood take-off. Yes, they're singing about Alan-A-Dale, but we know they'll get to the Robin Hood jokes soon. Well, eventually anyway. I mean, they are going to get to the main sketch aren't they? How long is this stupid intro going to go on???

Of course, we eventually realize, that's the whole point. I think everyone who watches "Alan-A-Dale" finally gets the joke, and then thinks, if only subconsciously: How long can they stretch this out?

Personally I think the sketch would've been even funnier, if riskier, with a standard leading man as Alan-A-Dale, rather than the comedian that was used. He would function as a stand-in for the audience, clearly in discomfort and confusion wondering when they'll get to his adventure.

I also think the bit could have been stretched out even further, with more "Alan oh Alan"s etc. But the fact that it lasts four minutes, with only a few other non-premise jokes (Dudley bumping into the lens, Alan being blocked in his entrance) is extraordinarily impressive. It's almost like a blues jam, as everyone watches to see how far the performers can go within the self-imposed limits of the material.

Peer Review Websites: Great Place to Start

2010-05-18T20:06:00.000-06:00

Occasionally I'll meet new writers he blow hundreds (thousands?) on screenwriting contests and ... go nowhere. Don't place. Booted out early. Nothing to show for their entry fee if they didn't pay for notes.

Before spending money on contests or hiring professional readers, consider joining and becoming active on FREE screenplay peer review websites.

Why?

Reading scripts -- pro scripts, amateur scripts, anything you can get your hands on -- makes you a better writer. That's the idea behind peer review websites: Learn by reading scripts from other writers. You give notes and, in exchange, receive notes. Much cheaper than paying consultants for early drafts.

You can network with a community of writers. Form friendships and a circle of trusted readers. Invaluable and free feedback. These writers will move up with you through the ranks and you can form your own long-distance screenwriters group.

There are producers associated with or trolling the sites. One may find your script and want to make it. Or a young filmmaker may want to make your short and enter it in festivals. Your work it out there -- and if it's good, things can happen.

Why not?

There is a danger of receiving notes that send you in the wrong direction. Another amateur writer may not give you notes that are helpful and you may be too new and 'chase notes' -- rewriting your script where it becomes something you don't want.

Does take hours to review script after script. That's time that you could have spent writing.

The reviews on several sites are public. I suggest you get your notes and take down that draft. Repost the script and repeat the process. Don't want old versions of your script out there on public websites.

Some of the reviewers are obnoxious jerks. Welcome to the writing world. However, most are extremely helpful to new screenwriters and give great notes. It's a mixed bag -- just like the quality of scripts you'll review on the sites.

Many new writers are worried someone will 'steal their idea.' Chances are that idea has already been written by many other writers. It comes down to the execution: Did you nail the script? If it's a comedy, is it funny? Horror, did it scare me?

If you do have a million dollar high concept that's great but never been done, yes, keep that under wraps. Pay some consultants for feedback instead. But you can't copyright and IDEA. You have to have a great script to back up the concept these days. Much of the paranoia of new writers is wasted energy. You're selling your ability to write a script more than a 'great idea.' You have to get your work out there eventually to sell it.

How do you get started?

Go to the websites. Sign up for free. Visit the boards. Click on "GET ASSIGNMENT" and start doing reviews. Download the script, read through it making notes in a separate word processor document, and then cut and paste it onto the site. Circalit doesn't require posted reviews to participate but the more active and respected members give notes.

What's the best that could happen?

Your script could make it to the top on the site and, like in any contest, be read by a producer or director who wants to make it. Could lead to an option, sale, or assignment on another project.

Which website:

I've been active on a few and here's what I've found:

1. TriggerStreet.com. Notes on your script are open for members to read. There are 'Daily Favorites' -- recently reviewed top 10. Through that process a Screenplay of the Month is nominated (3 finalists) and one chosen.

The good: Some excellent reviewers on the site. Experienced writers that take time and care to give notes. Many pro writers, on the verge writers, filmmakers, and film nuts make it a fun place to be. Useful info on the boards. Overall, great site.

The bad: Any peer site will have newbies that give bad notes. TriggerStreet has an appeals process to remove useless reviews. The Screenplay of the Month process encourages old drafts of scripts to be left up as you can't replace drafts without losing your 'place in line.'

Again, well-run site with some talented folks.

2. Zoetrope.com. Closed process (not just anyone can see the notes you receive). I've found it a more artsy crowd there than the other sites. But some solid notes and may be a good fit.

The good: Associated with a production company that actually reads the winning scripts and considers them for option.

The bad: Site can be difficult to navigate.

3. Circalit.com. This is a new site and a bit of a sleeper. I've had two filmmakers request scripts from here in my first couple of weeks of posting there.

The good: Easy to use. Industry people and pros populate the ranks.

The bad: No required reviews or tests to assure scripts are read. A group of friends could easily push up a script in the rankings. Not sure why someone would want a pro reader to review a script that way but it's a possibility given the format. Site is in the beta-phase though and these issues will be addressed.

Only see it getting better. Good place to get in early.

4. Talentville.com. Started by the co-founder of Final Draft, this website is easy to use. Nice design. You post scripts 'for free' but then add 'dollars' (earned from doing reviews) to your script to get reviews.

The good: Quality of the reviews I've received to date have been very good. Pro readers are on the site and there are industry members.

The bad: New site and word has to get out. Will see how it develops.

They've brought in many industry people and want scripts from the site to become films. One to watch.

In summary...

Becoming active on any peer review site is a good way to form a group of screenwriting friends and keep on top of what's going on via the discussion boards.

Reading and reviewing scripts (doing coverage) is an excellent way to improve your own writing. You will raise your standards. Pay your dues. Put in the time it takes to develop your draft.

There's a chance on any site that you may be 'discovered' or make a connection that springboards your career. More important, rewrite and rewrite your script through many drafts.

All of these sites will show you what you thought was the 'final draft' is nowhere close. A good lesson to learn early.

From there you can go to pro consultants if you want to get an idea of what a production company coverage of your script would find. See if it's ready to shop.

Then when you shop the script or enter contests it'll be with a solid draft: No typos, no format errors, no gaping plot holes. Your script won't be tossed aside in the first round or immediately booted by a production company as unprofessional.

You'll have a solid spec, the best version of YOUR SCRIPT (make sure it stays yours through all the notes and rewrites) possible. Now go enter contests and make your pitch phone calls with confidence knowing you've got a script you want the world to see.

If you are not active on a peer review site, sign up today! Best of luck.

(You can add me as a friend me on circalit: stephenhoover; Talentville: stephen_hoover; Triggerstreet: toddh99.)

Script Readers are Detectives

2010-05-17T09:17:00.004-06:00

By Julia Bergeron

I’m a detective. Actually, I’m a script consultant. Which is pretty much the same thing.

Okay, not exactly the same thing. But there are some similarities. Knowing them has made me a better writer. I’m sharing them with you so you can help your first audience – the reader – “get” your screenplay quickly and easily.

As a reader, I’m like a detective in several ways. A detective has to solve a mystery. So do I. A detective has to figure out the “who,” the “what” and the “why” of a crime. I have to figure out the “who,” the “what,” and the “why” of a script. The detective is curious. So am I.

When I get a script to read, I have no idea what story the writer is going to share with me. It’s a complete mystery. This means that as I read, I am looking for clues that will answer some fundamental questions.

Who is the story about? What is it about? What’s the genre? Where is the story going?

As a reader, that is my mindset – figuring out the story. Knowing the reader’s mindset can shape decisions about when and how we introduce the protagonist. It can help us decide what pieces of information have to be setup early and what can wait. And what needs to be cut completely.

Let’s look at this in more detail.

As a reader, the first clue I have to your story is the title. Titles are a quick glimpse that tells us a lot. Is it a comedy? Is it a thriller? Hopefully the title gives the reader an indication. I know, I know. This sounds almost too simplistic, but titles set the stage. A title delivers information even before the reader opens the script. Deals have been made on the title alone. “Forty Year Old Virgin” anyone? A title can make a big difference in how quickly a reader “gets” your story. So create the best title you can.

The next clue is the look of the script on page one. Is it formatted correctly? Is there a nice balance of dialogue and action?

I know what you’re probably thinking. “Not another diatribe about formatting!” Okay, no. Not a diatribe. Just a word to the wise. Proper formatting is almost invisible. It’s true. Proper formatting allows the reader to focus on the story, while bad formatting calls attention to itself. Typos and formatting errors are like potholes. You can get past them, but it’s going to be a bumpy ride! Let your formatting be invisible so the reader can pay attention to the heart of your script – the story.

The next clue as to what your story is all about is the opening image. Many writers speed past this or give it very little thought. But when you watch a film, you can be sure the director thought long and hard about that first image. As writers, we have to put as much energy into that image as the production company will. For the reader, the opening image can help identify the genre, maybe the tone and sometimes the protagonist. It’s a hugely powerful moment and when it works well, it helps hook the reader right into your story. In just a few lines, they start to “get” it.

Naturally, one of the first things I want to know when I read a script is who the story is about – who is the protagonist? Until I know who the protagonist is, every named character is a suspect – any one of them could be the protagonist.

And even more specifically, in terms of identifying the protagonist, the first character who speaks is my prime suspect. Rightly or wrongly. And I keep my eye on that person.

This means, if the first person who speaks is not your protagonist, they should probably be important. That character has the reader’s full attention. So you might as well use that fact to introduce an important character and not a walk on.

Remember, the first characters I meet get my full attention. I automatically assume they are important.

Another thing to bear in mind is that if you surround your protagonist with lots of other named characters, particularly in the first ten pages, it’s hard for a reader to keep track of them all and to separate the protagonist from the crowd.

It’s much easier for a reader to identify the protagonist if the protagonist is not part of a cast of thousands. Again, it might sound simplistic but often we want to show the protagonist in action. And sometimes that means surrounding the protagonist with staff, helpers, a few henchmen, minions, whatever. If that’s the case with your script, try to make sure the protagonist stands out from the crowd. Give them a protagonist’s entrance or moment so the reader “gets” it right away. Help the reader solve the “who” early.

By making it clear early who the story is about, the reader can focus on finding out what your story is about. This is sometimes a little harder than it looks.

Often as writers we are told to be lean and mean and that readers don’t like to read lots of details and action. This is partly true but maybe not for the reasons you might expect.

When I read a screenplay, I pay close attention to every detail. Like a detective, I have to assume all the information is important since I wouldn’t want to miss a clue as to what the story is about.

You see, I don’t know which detail is a setup, which is an important character trait, or what piece of information will payoff off at the end. So, to me, it’s all equally important. But obviously just like in any mystery, it isn’t actually all equally important. Some things are crucial, some are interesting and some are distractions. Some things, like red herrings, are distracting on purpose. And some are distractions the story can do without.

Here’s an example. Suppose you write a scene where a guy cleans his kitchen after a dinner party. Around ten p.m., he puts away all the food, sweeps, and loads the dishwasher. He carefully puts all the knives in the dishwasher with the tips facing down. All but one. One knife he places tip up. As a reader that knife is like a bright, shiny object to a monkey! It’s fascinating. It grabs my attention and holds it for the entire script. I am waiting for somebody to use that knife, or slice their hand on that knife. I am waiting for the knife to payoff.

But what if the writer only put that knife in the scene to demonstrate the character was not detail oriented? And there is no knife payoff, ever. Here’s me: “Sad. Sniff. No knife payoff? But I was sure...” No, actually, I was just a monkey distracted by an interesting detail. Don’t turn your reader into a distracted monkey by including fascinating details that don’t pay off.

The thing is, for most readers it is simply not possible to retain page after page of tremendous detail. Not that the details aren’t interesting, imaginative, or accurate. Often they are all those things. And that’s part of the problem. Details can be overwhelming. When that happens, the reader will automatically try to retain the details we think are most important. And we’re not always right.

Let’s take the same scene above with the knife. Suppose this was a murder mystery and a crucial detail in that scene was that the food was put away at ten p.m. But, me, distracted as I was by the very interesting (and shiny!) knife, didn’t notice the time. I’m waiting for the knife to pay off but meanwhile the writer was trying to setup the time. I missed that important detail. So when the payoff for ten p.m. comes, it won’t have the punch it could have, because the setup was missed.

This is why we are advised to be lean and mean and to include only what is necessary to move the story forward: because the reader is trying to sort out the important clues. Therefore when you only include the important information, you eliminate the possibility of the reader making a wrong choice and focusing on the wrong detail. They won’t be confused and “the what” will be much clearer, much earlier. So being lean and mean is a great tool to help your reader “get” your story.

That’s not to say you can’t include red herrings or take some poetic license here and there. You can and you should. But do know that it’s up to you to direct the reader’s attention and make sure you help them solve the “mystery” of your script.

Once I’ve gotten the genre, the who, and the what, I’m good to go. You’ve hooked me and I am ready for the ride. I love discovering where the story goes, seeing if the setups pay off and how, and seeing what outcome the author has in store for the protagonist.

I get to solve a mystery every time I open a new script. It’s fascinating and fun. And what’s even better is that unlike a detective, I don’t have to have a mustache.

QUICK DOs and DON’Ts:

Do come up with the best title you can.

Do grab the reader’s attention with a well thought out opening image.

Do introduce your protagonist to the reader right away. We want to know who the story is about, so let us know early.

Don’t overwhelm your reader with dozens of named characters in the first ten pages. I couldn’t remember everybody I met in college and I’m not better at names now.

Do use proper formatting.

Don’t overwhelm us with cool details that don’t move the story forward. Focus the reader’s attention where you want it – not where our own distractible brains might take us.

Do remember, most readers love stories. I know I do. Help us fall in love with yours by giving us the clues we need to “get” it and by giving us those clues as early as possible.

And most of all, do keep writing!

Ms. Bergeron is a script consultant with Script Savvy.
For more information, visit: http://www.scriptsavvy.net/96501.html
Email: thescriptconsultant@gmail.com

2010-05-15T13:19:00.003-06:00

Writing Dialog
by Cat Stewart

It’s one of the trickiest parts of writing screenplays. You might soar at novel dialog, sing at short story dialog, or thrill friends and family with dialog you roll off at the dinner table but when it comes to a screenplay, you choke.

You don’t think you choke, but when you read your dialog and then read dialog written by say, William Goldman, it’s almost painful. Screenwriting gurus carp all the time about how you can’t teach anyone to write good dialog. Is that because they lack the ability to do it themselves?

To start with, you really have to study the way people talk. Eavesdrop like crazy. I keep a journal of turns of phrase or subject matter that I think would make for good dialog. Take it one step further. Go to a coffee shop with a notepad. Sit next to a table of people that are talking. Jot down everything you assume about them based on what they say.

Dialog is not conversation. If you were to tape record two people talking and put it down word for word on a paper it would fair poorly. Dialog is simulation of conversation that passes on information we need for the story.

So without a primer, I set out to figure out the trick on my own. Here are my discoveries:

Step one – Read it out loud. If you tongue trip and gasp for breath midway through the two inch stack of words you put on the page, so will Brad Pitt.

Step two – When you have made it something you can read without turning blue, record it. Then put your favorite movie on you MP3 player. Alternate back and forth listening to the two when you are driving to the market.

Step three – Now that you’ve revised your dialog to sound more like something that is actually spoken in a produced screenplay, figure out what it says. What it probably says is:

ROBERT

Hi, Jana. How are you today?

JANA

I’m fine Robert and you?

ROBERT

I’m going to go get something to eat.

JANA

Robert, that sounds lovely.

ROBERT

Well Jana, you could come along.

JANA

I need to wash my hair, Robert.

ROBERT

I see. Well have a nice night, Jana.

Okay, wake up. The dialog is short, direct, all the things they say it should be with one cardinal sin that most new writers make….using names excessively. Even if you do it in real life, don’t do it in your screenplay. What the dialog isn’t is interesting. This is the type of dialog that readers would term “on the nose.” I know what you’re thinking, there’s no way to make that interesting.. Oh yeah? Well watch me.

The only two ways you have to create a picture in the mind of your reader is to write scene description and your dialog. If you write long, flowing scene description with asides that tell the reader what your character is thinking, your script will be 300 pages and in the bottom of the script dumpster. So guess what. That leaves us with dialog.

What does the dialog above say? Only that Robert wants to take Jana to dinner. We can assume this is a date, but could be Robert’s a serial killer looking for his next victim, (that’s not going in the action line or set description) a lawyer trying to woo the prosecutor into a light sentence, a dorky teenaged kid talking to the prom queen on a dare.

If the dialog was well written you wouldn’t need a slug, an action line or description of the characters to determine which of those it is. The dialog would tell you everything you need to know. So step three is simple, yet hard to do. Step three is that the dialog should tell us so much more than Robert and Jana won’t be eating together.

The things it should tell? Something about our character’s personality, age, status, a window to who that character is. Is he shy? Is he bold? Slick or sincere? The dialog should tell us something about what’s to come, why this scene is happening. The dialog should tell us something about the relationship of these two people. Nasty tall order for a few words on dinner.

So let’s try again.

ROBERT

Hi Jana.. How are you today?

JANA

I’m fine Robert and you?

ROBERT

I hear you are a big fan of blackened shrimp.

JANA

Haven’t had a decent one since I left New Orleans.

ROBERT

Then you should join me at Sousa’s.

JANA

I need to wash my hair, Robert.

ROBERT

Well if that’s what it looks like dirty, I can’t wait to see it clean.

What do we see now? One, it is more likely that Robert is looking for a date. Glad we got that cleared up. How do we know? Well he wasn’t likely to make a comment about here appearance if he was looking for a business favor. Yet if that’s what this turns out to be, a business proposition, we just learned something about the character that isn’t written in action. That would make him slick, maybe inappropriate, definitely bold. We know that he’s asked around about her, we know she’s from out of town.

Let’s try harder.

ROBERT

Hey, Jana isn’t it?

JANA

Yes and you’re….Robert.

ROBERT

I’m starving after that six hour deposition.

JANA

Feuding spouses can have that effect.

ROBERT

You should join me at Sousa’s; great blackened shrimp.

JANA

You’ve done your research, but I don’t think we should.

ROBERT

Maybe not in the Big Easy, but here the opposing part stops at the door.

Okay, loads more information. Admit it. You want to know who these people are now, don’t you? You want to know if they are going to go to dinner, wind up in love, or if he’s going to screw her over to win her case. Because in a similar amount of words on the same subject as the first try you just found out:

1. They are divorce lawyers on opposite sides of the same case.
2. They’ve noticed each other
3. Robert is the home town favorite and Jana is an outsider from New Orleans
4. He’s checked her out and she’s interested in him, but has strong business ethics.
5. Robert has a lot of confidence, he’s hitting on the opposing attorney.

Can we do more? It will take a few more words, but lets try. Short snappy dialog that really moves the story forward.

ROBERT

Well Jana, that was one hell of a opening question.

JANA

You countered it well….Robert, right?

ROBERT

At your service. Six hour depositions leave me dehydrated and starving. I hear you’ve been looking for a decent blackened shrimp.

JANA

I haven’t had a decent one since I left New Orleans. Although it looks like the specialty around here is shark.

ROBERT

Spending your time with spurned women sharpens your teeth. Did I mention Sousa’s has the authentic hurricane recipe?

JANA

Is that your strategy? Ply opposing counsel with booze and blackened shrimp?

ROBERT

Around here the word opposing ends at the courtroom door. It has to. With the hours we work, the lawyer would becomeextinct if it didn’t.

What more does this tell us about the characters. Well you figure that out for yourself. It’s how you learn to write great dialog after all. Check out the dialog in your writing buddy’s script. Don’t read anything but the dialog. Write down everything you know about the character based only on that for the first ten pages. Now apply what you just learned to your own work.

"(Cat Stewart is a freelance writer currently living in Nashville, Tennessee. Cat completed the certificate program in Feature Film and Television writing at UCLA extension and is currently a Writer’s Bootcamp Fellow.)"

Replicants Are The Sincerest Form Of Flattery

2010-04-30T14:50:00.000-06:00

Recently I DVRed this micro-budget oddity on AMC. Seeing the tacky color sets and that the leading man was B-western 2nd henchman Don Megowan (a dead ringer for B-western legend Rod Cameron -- did they ever play brothers? They should have), thinking it'd be good for a few laughs and decided to watch a couple of minutes.

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Instead I stayed with it to the end, fascinated. The plot deals with humans who have invented androids that are so perfect -- and lifelike -- that they threaten mankind's power and very existence. So paranoid humans set up a resistance movement.

Sound familiar? This is 1962 remember, a full 6 years before Philip K. Dick would publish his brilliant novel Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? and two decades before that book would be filmed as Blade Runner.

COTH even shares that film's plot twist,
[SPOILER ALERT]
in which the robot-hating protagonist turns out to be a robot himself.

Philip K. Dick's was a fan of pulp science fiction and may have seen the film. Or maybe not. Perhaps COTH's premise was old-hat in SF literary circles of the 1950s (it owes a not inconsiderable debt to Karel Capek's 1920s play RUR). That doesn't alter the fact that it still predates Dick.

The film also bears a strong resemblance to the 1st season Star Trek episode "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" But whereas Star Trek regarded the idea of humans being transferred to "perfect" robot bodies for virual immortality as a horrifying and inhuman disaster which Kirk must stop at all costs, in COTH it is fascinatingly treated as a happy ending.

COTH's curious makeup -- in which several actors have Larry Semonish pasty-white faces, but unmade-up necks -- is by Jack Pierce, who in better days created Karloff's look for Frankenstein. The cinematography, incredibly, is by Oscar winner Hal Mohr (who in 1935 shot A Midsummer Night's Dream for Max Reinhardt). Perhaps Mohr's presence kept the film was stumbling into Ed Wood territory (despite the presence of Plan 9 vet Dudley Manlove, who's rather more restrained here).

An interesting side-note: This film was made in 1962. At one point the main character mentions opposing "integration" with robots, and the derogatory slur for androids is "clickers." It is not uncommon for science fiction to be used as social criticism, such as the apartheid parallels in the recent DISTRICT 9.

One last thing I noticed. This film uses the word "humanoid" as a combination of human and android (which I presume was the original meaning). By the latter half of the '60s Star Trek was using the word to describe human-like life-forms.

COTH should be seen by all Blade Runner fans, and by any movie buff intrigued by poverty row auteurs trying to do something different on a grade Z budget. It cries out for cult status.

Comedy Set-Ups: The Audition Scene

2010-04-29T13:31:00.000-06:00

OR... Please leave your name at the desk, we'll call you if something comes up...

A comedy technique popular in recent years is the audition.

Its beginnings seemed harmless enough. The Marx Brothers did one in their breakthrough show, the 1924 revue I'll Say She Is!, which they would film in the early '30s for a Paramount promotional film:

The Three Stooges used the idea several times in their shorts, and there was a funny version in the 1976 Saturday Night Live episode hosted by Peter Cook and Dudley Moore. Cook played a theatre director who visits a prison (to stage an all-inmate production of... Gigi!) Various convicts (played by the then little-known Not Ready For Prime Time Players) try out for the show. Clearly, the audition device was very convenient when you had a group of comedians -- it allowed you to let them do their things without requiring a lot of exposition.

But there had been a more significant version of the bit in 1968, in Mel Brooks' The Producers.

In 1931, all people did was laugh with the Marx Brothers and the crazy antics they pull on the producer. But by 1968, audiences were expected to laugh at the auditioners, and voyeuristically enjoy their humiliation. It may be no coincidence that 1968 also saw the premiere of the first mockumentary, Pat Paulsen For President.

These two forms, the audition and the mockumentary, would eventually become closely linked. In 1979 Albert Brooks did an audition scene in Real Life. Not surprisingly Brooks, who specialized in being an ironist rather than simply a comedian -- many of his standup bits were commentaries on comedy itself, and he even wrote a self-help parody for Esquire called "The Albert Brooks School For Comedians" -- chose to emphasize his own "weirdness", and let the audience identify with the "normal" people on the committee
judging him.

In the nineties, when the audition would be become a fixture in the mockumentaries of Christopher Guest, the mockumentary form itself became more and more popular. It's easy to make and cheap to produce, so certain filmmakers liked it as well. Coming to prominence at the same time was something called "reality television", where viewers get to voyeuristicaly enjoy the humiliation of people being judged by a committee. Networks loved "reality", since It's easy to make and cheap to pro-- you get the idea.

This link had already been established in 1979, as Brooks' (Albert, that is) Real Life was a parody of the famous PBS series An American Family (yes, voyeurism and humiliation started on Public TV. So that's where my pledge money is going).

The cheerleading film BRING IT ON popularized the audition scene most recently. One wannabe cheerleader after another doing their failed attempt to make the squad. Easy set-up and provides a context to introduce a parade of colorful characters.

It was spoofed later in the underrated film NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE:

Take that set-up -- a number of colorful characters parade by in quick cuts -- and put it in a new setting and you've got the speed dating scene from 40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN. (Written by Judd Apatow and Steve Carell.) Shows the formula can be used in other situations and generate big laughs.

Just another weapon in your comedy arsenal: The Audition.

One-Downmanship

2010-04-28T08:36:00.000-06:00

The little-remembered film Luv was released in 1967. It was based on the 1964 play by Murray Schisgal that was half conventional comedy, half Theatre of the Absurd. So you can imagine how disastrous the film version is.

But the "Neil Simon" first half of the film is often pretty funny. Reviews claimed the direction is heavy handed (this is true -- it's New York material, so for some reason they chose an Englishman to direct) and the three leading roles were miscast. Admittedly the extremely whitebread Jack Lemmon isn't always comfortable in the lead (the role was originated on stage by Alan Arkin), but I thought Peter Falk was great and Elaine May was almost as good. The best parts come across as strung-together Nichols and May sketches.

The reason I bring it up is because of what IMO is the film's best scene (which I presume was in the original play), where Lemmon and Falk try to top each other on who had the more miserable childhood:

FALK: My father beat me.
LEMMON. Mine beat me too. What'd yours use?
FALK: (smugly) A strap!.
LEMMON: (quietly taking pride in his victory) Chains.

What legendary English comedy sketch does that remind you of?

While the movie version of Luv debuted in the summer of '67 and At Last The 1948 Show had premiered in February of that year, the play opened in 1964 and probably played in London at some point. Even if it hadn't, John Cleese was based in NY in 1964-5 and could have seen it. Intriguing, at the very least.

Also intriguing is the short story "Self Made Men" by the Canadian humorist Stephen Leacock (a favorite writer of Robert Benchley, Groucho Marx and Jack Benny), published in 1910:

"Draught!" sneered the other man, with a provoking laugh,"draught! Don't talk to me about draughts. This box I speak of had a whole darned plank off it, right on the north side too. I used to sit there studying in the evenings, and the snow would blow in a foot deep. And yet, sir," he continued more quietly, "though I know you'll not believe it, I don't mind admitting that some of the happiest days of my life were spent in that same old box. Ah, those were good old times! Bright, innocent days, I can tell you. I'd wake up there in the mornings and fairly shout with high spirits. Of course, you may not be able to stand that kind of life--"

"Not stand it!" cried Robinson fiercely; "me not stand it! By gad! I'm made for it. I just wish I had a taste of the old life again for a while. And as for innocence! Well, I'll bet you you weren't one-tenth as innocent as I was; no, nor one-fifth, nor one-third! What a grand old life it was! You'll swear this is a darned lie and refuse to believe it--but I can remember evenings when I'd have two or three fellows in, and we'd sit round and play pedro by a candle half the night."

"Two or three!" laughed Jones; "why, my dear fellow, I've known half a dozen of us to sit down to supper in my piano box, and have a game of pedro afterwards; yes, and charades and forfeits, and every other darned thing Mighty good suppers they were too! By Jove, Robinson, you fellows round this town who have ruined your digestions with high living, have no notion of the zest with which a man can sit down to a few potato peelings, or a bit of broken pie crust, or--"

For those who prefer to look at things from a psycho-sociological perspective, "Self Made Men" and "Four Yorkshiremen" are bits of witty silliness and gradually increasing absurdity you don't take seriously, while in the New York variation of Luv you can actually feel the pain of childhood traumas and alienation... Both spoof the stock characters (their pomposity or self-pity increases the humor) but from a unique perspective.

This is yet another approach for the comedy writer to consider: Create an upside down world. Characters topping each other based on how low their pasts were is a reversal of the norm. Take the audience's expectations and... do the opposite. This is the first rule of comedy. And the second for some reason.

Comedy Techniques: The Immediate Reverse

2010-04-27T13:50:00.000-06:00

a/k/a Reversal Of Fortune

Stan Daniels (1934-2007) was a comedy writer and producer, best-remembered for his work on The Mary Tyler Moore Show and Taxi.

From Daniels' Wikipedia page:

Daniels' influence in comedy is noted by the joke setup credited to him ("Stan Daniels turn") wherein, "a character says something and then does an immediate 180-degree shift on what he just said," according to The Simpsons producer Al Jean. An example of this may be Tony Blair claiming that the Good Friday Agreement is not a day for soundbites, then, immediately going on to say that he, "feel[s] the hand of history on [his] shoulders."

When I was a college student, studying comedy in my spare time and going through various joke structures, I noticed this structure and labeled it the "Instant Reverse" or "Immediate Reverse."

The joke that was a real eye-opener for me is from a 1976 Mary Tyler Moore Show episode where Ted has recently auditioned to host a game show in New York. Thinking he's lost the job, and smiling through tears, he tells Mary and Murray that they are like family to him, and he could never leave this small Minneapolis TV station. It's his home.

The phone rings -- Mary answers. "Ted, it's for you. New York calling"

Ted immediately switches from tear-filled joy to deadly serious determination: "Good, maybe that's my ticket out of this dump".

The first time I saw this episode in re-runs, when I was very young, I literally laughed until my sides hurt. Baxter was a great character and Ted Knight's delivery flawless. Perhaps it was because this joke structure:

1. Heartfelt sincerity from A.
2. Influencing action.
3. A is revealed to feel completely the opposite of #1.

... was so rare at the time. It was rare - maybe that's how it ended up named after Stan Daniels. But it was not unknown.

I can think of examples from Get Smart, the 1969 British spy spoof and cult film Otley, and even 1776. There's a version as early as The Paleface (1948):

BOB HOPE: (Smugly proud of himself): "Before we go on I'd like to say a few words."
OLD-TIMER: "We better get out of here before them murderin' Injuns come back."
BOB HOPE: (suddenly realistic and unsmiling): "Those are the words."

There were some done on Daniels' later series Taxi -- one in "Tony The Boxing Manager" recycles a variant that had been used in the 1972 Burt Reynolds private-eye movie Shamus.

BURT (indignantly): "You think you can buy me??"
GANGSTER: "I'll pay you $25,000 cash."
BURT: "Congratulations. You just bought me."

And of course Cheers -- an MTM show in all but name -- would do one every episode:

FRASIER (pompously): "A psychiatrist must always be there for his patients."
(His beeper goes off)
FRASIER (grumpily sarcastic): "Great. I bet this is important..."

Eventually some sitcoms began doing 4 or 5 a show -- especially after the Frasier character made "The Pompous Guy" a fixture on sitcoms -- and weakened the effectiveness of the joke through overuse.

Too bad Daniels didn't get a royalty.

Used sparingly and in the proper situation the Immediate Reverse can get a huge laugh... and maybe it'll be my ticket out of this dump.

New Sheriff In Town

2010-04-26T15:41:00.002-06:00

"Sheriff Who?" was a failed sitcom pilot that was broadcast precisely once, on September 5, 1967. To the best of my knowledge, it has not been shown publicly since then.

The rather whacked-out premise was -- get this: Evil Roy Slade, the meanest outlaw in the west, rules over a small western town. Every week some passerby gets suckered into taming the town and bringing Roy to justice -- and every week Roy runs him out of town.

This is what I call a "3 AM idea" -- it sounds brilliant after a long night of writing, but when you wake up the next day you realize it's unworkable.

It's hard to believe this premise even got to the writing-the-pilot stage. Even in a zany sitcom, I can't see it working. It's a bit like making Siegfried the star of a sitcom called "KAOS!" and having him kill a new Control agent every week.

The closest equivalent I can think of in a series would be Police Squad always killing off their "Special Guest Star" in the credits. But that was irrelevant to the plot, and we all know how long PS lasted anyway.

The thing is, those fortunate few who saw "Sheriff Who?" in its only airing claim it is one of the funniest half-hours of all time. Dick Shawn plays Crawford Offwhite, "The fastest interior decorator in the West", who is conned into becoming sheriff. John Astin is Evil Roy Slade and the script is by Garry Marshall and Jerry Belson.

Marshall and Belson would try again a few years later, making two hour long pilots with Astin as Evil Roy Slade. Shawn is back but plays a different character, sort of a combination of Roy Rogers and Paladin. These pilots were edited into a two hour movie and aired in 1972. This version is now available on DVD. It has some classic gags and Shawn is hilarious.

http://www.youtube.com/v/sM7GSi7ZuIc&hl=en_US&fs=1&">

There are some slow spots (inevitable given its editing) and frankly, I would've preferred casting a real western villain as Slade rather than Astin. Perhaps Neville Brand. Still, there are enough great moments to make it must viewing for comedy fans.

And someday maybe, just maybe, we will get the chance to see "Sheriff Who?"

2010-04-24T08:40:00.002-06:00

SO, WHAT’S THE STORY?

Written by

Screenplay, Novel & Career Consultant

MICHELE WALLERSTEIN

     Every agent is waiting for you to bring them the next big saleable screenplay that will knock the business off its axis. They want you to show them that piece that will have producers and studios panting at their doors with huge offers of money and multiple deals of future movies. Agents want the best for you, because it means the best for them. I happen to believe that this relationship is a great one. It is an honest quid pro quo - if you are successful…I am successful. How bad is that?
     OK, so how do you make that happen? How do you deliver the perfectly written project that will make the town sit up and take notice? It’s not as difficult as it sounds. The first thing you have to do is STOP thinking that you have to write the most unusual script of all time. This kind of thinking will destroy your chances of not only selling the script, but of keeping your agent. I’ve found that new writers often have the tendency to try to impress people by “thinking outside the box”. Well folks, the “box” is there for a reason, it works. Throughout movie history, audiences have loved certain types of films. They go to see them over and over again. When you are working to get in to the business, go with the flow. Perhaps, after you’ve established yourself as a player, you might be able to expand your horizons, but it’s not the way to get into your chosen field.

Insofar as your early spec scripts are concerned, here are some rules to live by:

     1. No Togas. By this I mean to say period pieces. Keep your early scripts contemporary. Period pieces are extremely difficult to sell. They go in and out of favor with the studios by the minute. You never know whether you are too early or too late with your piece. They are not good as writing samples since they are too specifically time/era dependent. This means manners, customs, morals, societal relationships, styles of speech, etc… . Oh, and by the way, try to stay on this planet.

     2. Keep it simple. Stay away from twins. Don’t make a script too complicated to produce. As soon as a development executive or producer sees this they will toss it into the “circular file”. It is too much of a pain in the neck. Try not to write a script that is so complicated that it would make the casting a horror. Another example, besides twins, is a multi-generational story of the entire cast. This means a nightmare of casting as well as costume and set changes that are a financial pain. Don’t go there. Besides, no one really wants to watch Brad Pitt or Ashton Kutcher age before their eyes.

     3. Keep ‘em young. If you really want to kick start your writing career, try to have your early scripts feature a fairly young cast. In my mind the term “young” means any age up to 29 years old. Not one minute older. The youth market is what is the most viable today. Actually if you can write a script for 9 year old boys, you are really in good shape. The research shows that those boys will return to see the same film over and over again with different friends and family members. Recidivism is the word. Let’s not forget our little friend, Harry Potter.

     4. Location, location, location. This is not simply a rule in real estate. This is a real consideration in movie making. A studio never has a problem putting their money in a viable movie star who can “open” a movie. That means that any movie starring a particularly huge actor is guaranteed a certain bottom line of huge dollars at the box office in its opening weekend. Foreign or multiple locations do not promise this type of money for the film and they are very expensive. It is not a hard and fast rule to keep everything set in one location but simply something to keep in mind. You always want to be realistic in your writing. Think bottom line.

     5. The Star. Here are the rules for your main character and they are hard and fast. These points apply to all genres. Do not try to change them for any reason.

a. The Star’s character is on every page.

b. The Star’s character resolves the problem

c. The Star’s character has the most lines

d. The Star’s character gets the girl (or the guy)

e. The Star’s character is the smartest person in the cast

f. The Star’s character has the last word in the film

g. The Star’s character must grow as a person

h. The Star’s character must learn something about him/herself

     6. Coincidences. They only complicate the plot. Coincidences never, ever resolve the problems. When you have a coincidence resolve a plot point the audience feels cheated.

     7. Depressing/Dramas? There is a fine line between being depressing and being dramatic. You need to understand the difference in your early writing career of dramatic film writing. I love a good dramatic relationship film. I hate depressing movies that have no other saving grace but to be sad. “HUD” was a great drama starring the late Paul Newman, another great drama was the 1957 film titled “A FACE IN THE CROWD” starring Patricia Neal and Andy Griffith. These are films that must be seen by serious film writers. As an agent, some years ago a client brought in a brand new script that he had never discussed with me. He proudly handed over a large box of them, with leatherette covers with gold embossed titles. This sent a clear message that I was not to give him any notes and that he wanted them to be sent out just the way they were. The story in those scripts was about the murders of elderly, helpless people in an old age home. It was so depressing that I could barely read it. Not only couldn’t I submit this well-written script, but I had to let the client go.

     8. Choices. Write a contemporary drama, comedy, suspense, thriller, murder/mystery, teen-comedy, romance, etc… . Keep your characters interesting and believable- make us care what happens to them. Try to write “up” to the audiences’ intellect and emotions. We want to leave the movie theater feeling like we were entertained and that we learned just a little bit about the human condition. The movie studios like this too.

Michele Wallerstein is a former Literary Agent who now works as a Screenplay and Novel Consultant.
Email: novelconsult@yahoo.net
Website: www.Novelconsultant.com

Today's guest blog is by Michele Wallerstein.

2010-04-19T14:21:00.005-06:00

HOW TO BE AN AGENT’S DREAM CLIENT

Michele Wallerstein

An agent works very hard to guide a writer’s career. We help them with their material, we set up important meetings for them, and we see that their material is read by the right people, we negotiate their deals, we share information with them and we even listen to their personal problems. Is that enough? OK, we also show an interest in their spouses and children, we try not to hurt their feelings when their work is rejected; we are loyal and often very caring. We keep our eye on the ball and an ear to the ground. We know what’s going on in the business and who’s buying what. Is that enough?

But……then we must let the writers go out into the world by themselves and we pray that they do not do themselves harm. This is the most daunting of our tasks.

Here are ten (10) things that clients mustn’t do:

1. Getting stuck on one idea. I’ve had clients that have written the same basic story in novel, screenplay and theatrical play form. This is an incredibly huge waste of time.

2. Thinking everyone is wrong, except you. When your project has been turned down by more than five (5) companies, chances are it won’t sell. This can happen with a pitch or a completed novel or screenplay. Right or wrong, they aren’t buying and there’s nothing you or your agent can do about it.

3. Ruining a meeting. Are you talking too much or not enough? Are you listening to the principal person in the meeting? Did you arrive late? Did you dress inappropriately? Did you argue too much? Did you stay too long?

4. Missing your big chance. I’ve represented many writers who really wanted to direct. In one specific case the writer became a producer on various TV series over the years. I kept telling him to direct some episodes, but he said that he was too busy. He never became a director.

5. Calling your agent too often or not often enough. If you don’t seem interested in your career, why should your agent. If you are calling every day without new material or ideas, you are nagging. Big no-no.

6. Not showing appreciation to your agent, manager, and lawyer. Yes we all get paid, but sometimes that isn’t enough. Everyone wants to feel approval. We all want someone to simply thank us for a job well done. Take them to lunch; buy them a simple birthday or Christmas gift. Say “thanks.”

7. Changing agents. Most of the time when clients change agents it’s because they aren’t getting work or selling their material. Is that really your agent’s fault or are you not doing your job very well? Have you brought in new ideas and scripts? Are you keeping up relationships with people you’ve met via your agent? Are you doing everything you can to further your own career? Remember, you get to keep 90% of the money.

8. Moving from a small agency to a very big one. Bad idea. If a small agency has worked hard to build your career, you can bet a larger one will come along and make tremendous promises to lure you over to their client list. Invariably, you will be ignored, forgotten, mistreated and overlooked.

9. Demanding too much. This can mean time from your agent, producer, development person, manager or lawyer. It can mean money for your project that may not warrant as big a deal as you want. Once you earn it….you’ll get it all.

10. Drugs and alcohol. They will ruin your career.

Getting into the world of screenwriters and published authors is difficult enough. Making the mistakes listed above is a sure-fire way of losing any toe-hold that you may gain, at any time. All too often I’ve seen successful writers fall off the “hot writer” list in Hollywood because of any of the above errors. Don’t let it happen to you.

Email: novelconsult@yahoo.com
Web site: www.Novelconsultant.com
Copyright 2009 Michele Wallerstein. Not be used without written permission from Author.

Michele Wallerstein’s new book titled:

“Mind Your Business: A Hollywood Literary Agent’s

Guide To Your Writing Career”

Will be in book stores on July 1, 2010. The book covers all you need to know about the business side of your writing career. It includes chapters on the agent/client relationship, how to network successfully, the differences between agents, personal managers, business managers and lawyers, the right query letter and much, much more. There is no other book on the market that covers the insider information that you need to know to have a successful career as a film and television writer.

Pre-order now at: Amazon.com

Email Michele at: novelconsult@yahoo.net

WGA REGISTRATION vs. COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION

2010-04-16T08:17:00.008-06:00

For screenwriters who use the latest version of Final Draft ® to help write their script, one nifty feature is the ability to register the screenplay with the WGA-West Intellectual Property Online Registry with the touch of a button. Many (if not most) screenwriters register all of their scripts with the WGA Registry, and, believing that they have done all that is necessary to protect their script, they neglect to register the script with the U.S. Copyright Office of the Library of Congress (http://www.copyright.gov).

Imagine their surprise when someone steals their screenplay and they learn for the first time that, other than establishing a date of creation, the WGA registration gives them almost no benefits at all. In fact, relying solely on the WGA registration can prove extremely costly for the following reasons.

First, although copyright protection exists at the moment of creation, registration with the Copyright Office is required before a lawsuit can be brought. Because it can take up to six months from the time the application is mailed to the Copyright Office until the application is processed and returned, if the writer needs to immediately file a lawsuit (i.e., in order to enjoin the movie's distribution), he must apply for an expedited registration, for which the Copyright Office charges an additional $760.

Second, if the writer registers the script with the Copyright Office only after the infringement has taken place, he will be barred from recovering attorneys fees or statutory damages in the lawsuit.

Third, if the script is registered prior to or within five years of its publication, the registration acts as prima facie proof of ownership of the script in the event of a trial. There is no such benefit from the WGA registration.

The only real advantage of the WGA registration is that, in the event of a lawsuit or a credit arbitration, the WGA will have an employee appear and testify concerning the date of the registration. But this is rarely an issue during litigation.

Therefore, if you are a screenwriter wondering whether to register with the WGA or the Copyright Office, the answer should be clear - always register your script with the Copyright Office, and, if you have the extra $10 or $20, register with the WGA as well. And if you have scripts in your drawer that you registered in the past with the WGA, but never bothered to register with the Copyright Office, now is the time to do so. Before the work is infringed. .

	WGA Registration	Copyright Registration
Cost	$10 WGA members $20 non-members	$35
Duration of Protection	5 years, but renewable for additional 5 year terms	If author is a natural person – author’s life plus 70 years; If author is a corporation, anonymous or pseudonymous, then 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter.
Allows Immediate Access to Court?	No	Yes
Allows for Attorney’s Fees If Infringed?	No	Yes, if registered prior to infringement or within 90 days of publication
Allows for Statutory Damages If Infringed?	No	Yes, if registered prior to infringement or within 90 days of publication
Will Accept Submissions Over The Internet?	Yes	Yes
Acts as prima facie proof of ownership?	No	Yes
Will have employee appear in court to testify about date of submission?	Yes	No

Larry Zerner is an entertainment attorney in Los Angeles who specializes in copyright infringement litigation. He can be reached by email at Larry@Zernerlaw.com or by phone at 310-203-2299.

Ian Fleming Interviews Raymond Chandler

2010-03-21T23:31:00.002-06:00

Nice rare BBC archive find a friend located on the net:

http://riordansdesk.markcoggins.com/2007/03/his-masters-voice.html

Kevin Brownlow re Abel Gance

2010-03-21T23:28:00.017-06:00

Noted film historian Kevin Brownlow discusses Abel Gance. Nice rare footage of Gance directing.

Don't think SAG would allow the pistol firing on the set...

Ten Key Principles Successful Writers Understand

2010-02-02T21:38:00.004-06:00

(Emmy winner Erik Bork is back with a follow-up article. Erik's website is www.flyingwrestler.com. I've worked with Erik in the past and he's provided excellent notes at a great rate. He's motivated to help new writers develop and I wish him all the best.)

TEN KEY PRINCIPLES SUCCESSFUL WRITERS UNDERSTAND

1. Concept, then story, come first
2. “Compelling, unique, real and entertaining”
3. Stories consist of constant conflict
4. Stick to a clear and singular point-of-view
5. Entertainment is about emotion
6. “It’s real” or “it’s cool” is not reason to include it
7. Get feedback from the right people and use it
8. You must have passion for what you are writing
9. Our intellectual mind doesn’t create
10. Seek more “to give,” than “to get”

(1) CONCEPT, THEN STORY, COME FIRST. People tend to think writing is about the words on the finished page, the surface product that others will read (and possibly use as a blueprint for production). But those words on the page are the final and least important step in a process that begins when you start thinking about what your story is going to be about. The invisible underlying choices behind the words are what really matter, and the bigger the choices are, the more important to the success of the work. The first decisions about basic premise matter the most, and have by far the most leverage in determining whether your work will “work,” or not. The secondary choices in turning that premise into a story (and ultimately outline) come next. The final choices of specific description, action and dialogue come last.

This is reflected in the way Hollywood does business. Concept is king, in both film and television (as well as commercial fiction), and it is the basic idea for your story or series that sells it – the “logline,” if you will. An idea that the marketplace would see as viable invariably sounds very intriguing in just a couple of sentences – it sounds like something fresh, entertaining and compelling, that we can imagine paying money to see or read. Agents and managers will advise their clients against writing any spec feature or pilot that does not meet these criteria. But it’s rare that a concept really “sings,” just as it’s rare that a piece of writing does. It can take a significant amount of time and energy to craft such a premise. But that’s where you have the most leverage, and it’s what you should make the biggest priority. It's worth getting quality feedback on it, just like you would on a finished draft before sending it out. In fact, it’s more important to get it then.

If concept is what sells, “story” is what decides if a piece of writing is going to be “good” or not, whether it’s really going to work. By story, I mean all those choices made before writing a single word that a reader will ever see. The underlying architecture of “what happens,” scene by scene, that adds up to a complete and satisfying piece of literary material, is far more important than how “what happens” is written down and described. When a story really works, writing (or rewriting) the words on the page is SO much easier. They even call it “polishing” when you rewrite virtually every word of a script, but don’t change any of the story choices – and you usually won’t get a share of writing credit for that. That’s because something like 90% of what matters in the execution of a concept – to the business, and to the public – is contained within these “invisible” story and scene decisions that are behind what’s on the page.

I’ve learned this lesson over and over again – through mistakes and mis-steps that mentors, partners, and colleagues have pointed out. Now when I read others’ work, I’m always reacting first to the core idea, and then to the story choices. Often the execution of the script on the page is almost irrelevant, in comparison to the vast importance of these two elements. And this is how professionals who evaluate writing for a living look at a piece of material. So when I work with a writer I always start out by focusing primarily on these two things – usually more than they’ve ever done before – just as a writer’s representative, producer, or buyer would typically do.

(2) There are four qualities I think every good concept, story, and even scene should possess. I use the acronym “CURE” as shorthand for:

COMPELLING, UNIQUE, REAL, and ENTERTAINING

Virtually every criticism about a piece of writing has to do with the perceived lack of one or more of these qualities. But when all four are consistently present throughout, success is virtually inevitable.

First it must be COMPELLING. Do we care about the main character and their predicament? There are usually two reasons why we don’t: (1) we’re not “inside” the character emotionally (we don’t have to love them, we just have to feel what they’re feeling and relate to it on a human level), and/or (2) what’s coming against them isn’t clear enough or large enough in terms of the stakes: what they have to lose (or have lost), and what they could gain.

Secondly, it’s UNIQUE in some key way, preferably a “fresh twist on something familiar,” that we haven’t seen a million times before in too similar a form. Of the four qualities, this is the least crucial one, in that projects do get made and succeed that seem awfully derivative of their predecessors. But the best ones, the biggest successes, usually break new ground in some way. And when you’re trying to get noticed as an unknown writer, you definitely want your work to be perceived as original, and never tired.

Third, what’s happening needs to seem REAL. We must believe its events could reasonably happen, and the characters must do and say things that seem believable, given the circumstances. Even in a fantasy premise, once the initial “rules” are established and accepted, the story and scenes must be grounded in what’s real, given the circumstances (which is often also the best place to look for what should happen next in your story). Nothing alienates an audience faster than not buying into what’s happening, and thinking the writer contrived it for entertainment’s sake. Always err on the side of recognizable, understandable human behavior, because we’re ultimately most entertained by that.

Which leads to the last, and perhaps most important quality: it must be ENTERTAINING. It’s easy to forget this, even though it’s called the “Entertainment Business,” and it’s what people ultimately are paying us for. Many scripts don’t seem to be trying to deliver real entertainment value, and writers don’t always make this a priority, or understand what it means. My simple definition of entertainment is this: it makes us feel more alive in some way that you want to feel – fascinated, amused, scared, passionate, moved, inspired, etc. You are really well-advised to consider which of these you’re trying to give to your audience, and how you’re going about doing it – and to make sure that you’re succeeding, all along the way! It’s not enough to be interesting, true, unique, or even emotionally compelling, though all of these are important. Our audiences and our buyers are most looking for material that entertains.

It’s a tall order, achieving all these things at all points throughout a project. And I don’t mean to pile on the challenges, or imply that absolute perfection is possible or necessary. But I do suggest using these qualities as a guideline, and seeking to maximize them in your concept, your story elements, and your scene writing. Because whether it’s put in those terms or not, these are the central criteria your work will be judged on.

(3) Stories consist of CONSTANT CONFLICT. We like to watch people trying to solve problems, with other people and situations opposing them. Even in sports and in the news, conflict is what compels us – and certainly in fiction, movies and television. George M. Cohan described a three-act story this way: Act One, Get the hero up a tree. Act Two, Throw rocks at him. Act Three, Get him out of the tree. That “tree” and those “rocks” are the main things we create as storytellers. As a beginning writer, I thought “conflict” wasn’t so interesting, because I thought it only meant “arguments and fights.” Later, I realized that any time your character doesn’t have what they’re after, that’s conflict. It’s about unfulfilled desires. Conflict means problems.

The key to understanding what makes a good scene is conflict/problems. A worthwhile scene begins with a conflict which is its focus, and reason for existing. This conflict connects to the MAIN PROBLEM of the story – that primary question we’re reading or watching to see answered, which won’t be resolved until the end. As it’s explored in the scene, there is eventually a “turn” or change of some sort, which results in new, different (and usually more) conflict. The scene (every scene) thus ends with a new “status quo” regarding the story’s main problem – things are not the same as they were. There’s a new state of conflict that leads to the next scene(s). And then the process begins all over again.

I almost never read a story or a scene that seems to have too much conflict. It may not be Compelling, Unique, Real, or Entertaining conflict, but the problem is almost never “too much conflict.” But there is often not enough “story,” which means not enough conflict, enough problems, enough tension that builds. When people are happy and things are good – or even when the conflict isn’t changing and advancing – the story goes slack, and we quickly get bored. We don’t want to watch people enjoying themselves, or things to stay the same. We want to see people deal with an endless stream of problems that grow continuously and coherently to a climax – and don’t stop until “The End.”

(4) It’s almost always best to stick to a CLEAR AND SINGULAR POINT OF VIEW. I believe our first job as writers is to make an audience care about what’s happening, and to make them feel like they are experiencing the story from the inside – to get them fully emotionally invested in it. To do that, it’s essential to pick a main character and tell the story from their perspective – so that we see things the way they see them, feel what they feel, and thus look at the other characters (and events of the story) through their eyes.

This means we have to be with them more than any other character, and rarely (if ever) have scenes they’re not central and present in. It means we’re clear on what they’re feeling at all times – and events are told in such a way that their meaning to this character is emphasized. We don’t need to be “inside” any other characters, and in fact shouldn’t try to be – it will only confuse things, and decrease our investment. Other characters we WITNESS; this main character, we BECOME.

Are there exceptions to this? I think they’re more rare than you might think, at least in terms of big commercial successes that really worked as a complete and satisfying emotional experience. One exception I know of is THE BIG CHILL – where each of the group of characters has their own story (or you could say the story is about the group as a whole), with no one person becoming the clear and primary emotional point-of-view.

I did a blog post on this topic, which you can find at:
http://www.flyingwrestler.com/2009/11/main-characters-and-dramatica/, where I discussed how the Dramatica theory of story (and software) has influenced my thinking on this. (I recommend their free online comic book, explaining the basics of their theory, at: http://www.dramatica.com/downloads/Dramatica_Comic_Book_2004.pdf.)

Dramatica says that great stories have a “main character” and “impact character” whose individual and relationship “throughlines” interweave with the larger overall story, making for four throughlines in all. I recently met its co-founder Chris Huntley, and he helped me see that even romantic comedies, which you might think have two equal main characters, usually don’t (one of the two is generally the impact character).
He also told me about a partial exception in the form of one of my favorite movies, JERRY MAGUIRE. E-mail me if you’d like me to explain…

One of the most common flaws in scripts that I read is that the story plays out too “objectively” – where I’m not clearly inside a main character’s perspective, and thus don’t get nearly as emotionally involved as I would like to. It’s relatively easy to fix, if you understand the importance of this, and make it a priority. And it can make a huge difference in the impact of what you write.

The first script I ever wrote professionally had this exact issue (Episode 9 of FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON), which was the main thing I had to work on to improve it…

(5) ENTERTAINMENT IS ABOUT EMOTION. As writers of stories, our mission is not so much to engage people’s minds by presenting them with things which are interesting. Our primary job is to stimulate them to feel something – and that’s they pay us to do. At the end of the day, we all want to be uplifted into states of greater joy, greater passion, and greater aliveness. We want to feel part of something we care about, relate to and feel connected with, and through that, to experience big emotions that will provide a release and escape.

Along the way, if we are intellectually engaged and informed, that’s great – but it’s a side benefit. It’s not the main event. I learned this writing for the HBO miniseries FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON – a project that originated with Tom Hanks’ personal fascination with both the big achievement and the specific details of the American space program. It came on the heels of the successful movie APOLLO 13, which took the most viscerally emotionally compelling story within that program, and turned it into a wildly entertaining movie.

But the other missions didn’t have those kind of big, obvious emotional elements. The underlying life-and-death stakes they contained usually didn’t amount to real tension that could sustain a story. They did, however, have unique details and problems differentiating them from each other, and that’s where we started in turning them into one-hour scripts. But because things didn’t tend to “go wrong” in the kind of coherent and compelling fashion like they did on Apollo 13, it was sometimes a struggle to find a way to make an audience FEEL something. I didn’t initially understand the importance of this, and set about trying to communicate the most interesting details of these missions, only to be pushed by the producer who mentored me through the project to look for and mine the emotional content, as my first priority.

What was driven home for me was that we all look to movies, television, books and other art forms primarily to have an emotional experience – to be transported through story into feeling something powerful. We may want to be interested and informed as well, but what really drives and motivates us is about emotion. When you can deliver a compelling emotional experience that lifts people out of normal life in some way, yet feels real, then you’re really onto something that can both advance your career, and be of real value to readers and audiences.

(6) “IT’S REAL” OR “IT’S COOL” IS NOT REASON ENOUGH TO INCLUDE IT. We all have ideas for scenes and moments in a story that on their own, seem interesting, and may even be Compelling, Unique, Real and Entertaining – but if they don’t connect to and advance the basic problem of the story, they will likely siphon off the emotional connection and investment the reader is feeling. And this is the last thing we want to do! That investment is everything to us – we want people to always be engaged, and always wanting to know “then what?”

To keep that investment, every scene ideally should change the status quo on the central driving question that forms the spine of the story. It can be hard to stick to this, and often the reason is that we truly have a shortage of “story” – we don’t have enough developing conflicts and “status quo changes” to continuously advance the problem all the way to the end. This is very common. We tend to be shocked at just how much “story” we really need, and how quickly pages can eat it up, and demand more. I’m often coaching people to front-load elements of their story so they happen more quickly than they originally envisioned – which results in them needing even more! But this is not as hard a problem to solve as it might seem. When you don’t know what could happen next, the answer (if you have a robust basic concept and structure) always comes from asking what each of the different characters’ attitudes, points of view, and desires are. As you check in with them, and think through what they believably would do next, you invariably come up with ideas for more scenes, more conflict, and more “story” to keep it moving forward. This is one of the main things I help writers do.

Another reason we get “off spine” is because we’re including the “real” and the “cool” even though it doesn’t clearly and compellingly move things forward. This is especially a potential issue in adapting true stories, where all the “highlights” of what “really happened” seem to demand inclusion in the story. I have made this mistake and seen it made a lot on such projects (including on BAND OF BROTHERS), and have concluded that our job as writers is to find our own unique “take” and point-of-view on a true story, which turns it into something that could exist as a fictional piece and still really work. That means that we decide that our “true story” is really “a story about x,” where “x” equals a compelling character and central problem/question that propels us through the entire narrative.

If you’ve read SAVE THE CAT (which I highly recommend), you know about the ten basic story templates (and their five sub-types in SAVE THE CAT GOES TO THE MOVIES), which the late Blake Snyder discovered are repeated over and over in the most successful and beloved movies. I suggest that even with true stories, it’s worthwhile to find which of these “genres” your take on the material is best suited to, and then STICK TO THAT. This decision, about what the central thrust of your story really is, will then inform what events are worthy of inclusion, and which aren’t.

Ideally, they should advance the central story. But all good scenes serve multiple purposes, and there can be room for informational, interesting, “real,” or just “cool” elements that don’t develop the main problem, as long as they are weaved into something that does –which should probably make up the main thrust of the scene.

A compelling emotional journey with a coherent emotional impact is our goal. If everything we include is in service to that, we’ll be in good shape – and we’ll have a clear direction to help us through each stage of the writing.

(7) GET FEEDBACK FROM THE RIGHT PEOPLE AND USE IT. I’m not a big believer in “natural talent,” or that “some people have it, and some don’t” (I have a blog post about this at http://www.flyingwrestler.com/2009/05/talent-is-overrated/.) What I think makes the difference between success and failure – and what “talent” really is all about – is a combination of passion, persistence, and openness to feedback – through which one continues to improve their craft.

But who do you get feedback from, and what do you do with it? Ideally, you get it from others who write or work creatively with writers on a professional level, or as a serious avocation – and whose opinion you trust and respect. Friends and lay people who don’t meet this criteria will tend to be vague, too soft (or too hard!), and not particularly helpful, because they don’t really understand what you’re trying to do and how to assist you.

If you don’t know any professional writers, directors, producers, book editors, creative executives, or writers’ representatives, and can’t or don’t want to hire a pro to evaluate your work, then I think it’s key to find peers – fellow writers or people aspiring to be one of the above, who are at your level and thus willing to barter serious feedback on your work for whatever value you can provide them. (It’s important to realize how big an imposition it can be to ask someone to read your material and give a detailed and honest reaction to it – it can easily take the better part of the day, may not be enjoyable to them, and they risk alienating you with what they have to say about it.)

As writers, we definitely need encouragement along the way. And hopefully the people who read your work will be constructive and find things to praise. Getting demoralized about your work and your abilities is not helpful. But at the same time, we need a reality check and perspective from others – all of us do – and that can often be a big “ouch” to hear. But that’s how you grow. I recommend encouraging your readers to hold nothing back – and not punish them if they do just that.

That does not mean you have to agree with everything they say, and follow their specific guidance. But being defensive or trying to explain and convince them just shuts them down and makes them not want to give more. Your job is to get as much out of them as they can, collect the information, and then later decide what you want to do with it.

It helps to have multiple readers, and look for what there’s a consensus about. It also helps to ask yourself what you, in your heart of hearts, really believe isn’t working, after collecting feedback. The key is not to get distracted by their suggested “fixes.” Instead, seek to get at what the problems are that they’re trying to fix. You have to ask them, and be willing to hear the difficult answers, like “I didn’t care about your main character.” You may even have to ask such things, point blank: “Did you find x to be compelling or entertaining? If not, why not?” Sometimes they will be unwilling or unable to identify what the reasons are that they have certain negative comments or suggested fixes. But that’s really what you’re looking for, and have to ultimately decide on – “Where is this work falling short in being the things I want it to be? Why is this happening with readers?”

And then, YOU decide how to fix that, through the filter of your sensibility. You want others to help you find the problems, period. Only use their suggested fixes if you really believe in them. If not, find your own. They may be trying to help with suggestions, but it’s not their project, it’s yours.

Of course, you may disagree even with the perceived problems people are observing, and there is a time and place for ignoring criticisms and keeping things, because you think they work, regardless of what others think. But I think stubborn defensiveness stops writers from growing, and it’s better to err on the side of humility and acceptance that there is probably more work to be done, and gratitude for others’ help in identifying the problems. If you take that attitude, people will want to work with you more, as well.

Your work has to please you first, but its ultimate goal is to have a positive effect on others. Getting quality feedback is essential to achieving this.

(8) YOU MUST HAVE PASSION FOR WHAT YOU ARE WRITING. You can’t successfully create something that isn’t “you” – that you don’t truly believe is good, and don’t really care about. That doesn’t mean you’ll love every moment of working on it (that’s rarely the case), or think it’s good while you’re writing it (also rare), or fully understand what it’s ultimately going to be, and what its value might to be others (ditto). But you can’t be disinterested, disengaged, and doing it only because someone else wants you to, even if they’re paying you. For it to be good and succeed, you have to be truly interested in it. It has to be something you would want to read or watch. You have to give it your all, and make it “yours.”

We each have a unique point-of-view, voice, and set of interests, and that’s really what we are best-suited to deliver to the world. When we’re doing something that is not that, at all, it will usually not be successful in its impact on anyone else. We may be tempted to work on something for the money, or because other people believe in it and want our help, or because we want to please someone else, or fulfill their vision. But if we don’t find a way into it that excites and engages us, that we creatively vibe with and think makes sense, then we are destined to fail, and be miserable along the way.

Write what you wish there was more of, what you would like to watch, what you love. Find your unique “take” on your material that really grabs you and works for you. We’re not mechanics assembling a product, according to a manual. You can’t entertain people and compel people, and seize their emotional connection, if you don’t have it, yourself.

It’s good to consider how your work will impact others – even essential. It’s not “just for you.” But it has to please you first. Others may be paying you to deliver what they think it needs to be. But if we don’t fully buy into that, too, it will show – and it will end up not pleasing anyone. Always look to find a way into it that you fully believe in, and can be personally passionate about. And deliver that.

That’s our job. And that’s what people ultimately want and need for us to provide. And only we can do that in our own unique way.

(9) OUR INTELLECTUAL MIND DOESN’T CREATE. In the daily process of developing our material, generating ideas, writing and rewriting, our tendency can be to try to “figure it all out” – to wrestle story questions to the ground, if you will, by using the logical left brain. We would like writing to be less mysterious and more concrete, to make constructing a story predictable and manageable. With screenwriting, especially, which has a big structural component, and where pre-planning is essential, we may feel our main resource is our intellect – and its ability to compare and contrast, analyze and critique, order and arrange.

While there is definitely a place for these capacities in the writing process, none of them are really “creating.” They are about working with something that has already been “created” – ideas that have come to us, at some point, which intrigued, inspired, and compelled us. These ideas need structuring and development with the intellectual mind, but without them, we have nothing to work with, because this reliable “left brain” is just not set up to generate new material that grabs us emotionally (and can grab others).

So what part of us is? I know what Mozart said about this: “When I am, as it were, completely myself, entirely alone, and of good cheer - it is on such occasions that my ideas flow best, and most abundantly. Whence and how they come, I know not, nor can I force them...” I don’t think he was just talking about the initial inspiration for a project. He was talking about the daily process by which ideas were “downloaded” to him for him to record. Julia Cameron’s The Artist’s Way says, "Writing is about getting something down, not about thinking something up." I agree. Receiving ideas from wherever they come is the first and most important part of the creative process. And I mean every kind of idea, every day – whether it’s about a character, a scene, or a line of dialogue. I suggest our top priority is to be a conduit for those flashes of insight that just come to us, and feel right – and keep the intellect in its rightful secondary position as a tool that can then work with these ideas, once we’ve received them. That is true creativity.

(10) SEEK MORE TO “GIVE,” THAN TO “GET”. This is an overall practice and approach to a writing career (and life) that is perhaps the hardest, but most important thing I have learned in my ten-plus years doing it for a living. It’s ironic that it seems as though the only way to really achieve what you want is to put your energy into continuously bettering yourself, your craft and your work, and trusting that the rest will take care of itself.

Like all these principles, I say this not from the perspective of one who has mastered it, and preaches “perfection” (which is an impossible and therefore unworthy goal), but as one who has learned the lessons of it, over and over again – and continues to see it as a best practice, though a very difficult one.

A writer told me recently that he asked one of the head feature literary agents at CAA (coincidentally the agency I’m with) what they needed to do to get their attention, and get a good agent or manager to want to represent them. The simple, but hard-to-hear answer was: “Nothing. We’ll find you.”

This agent’s point is that the industry is forever seeking writers and writing that they believe to be viable in the marketplace. Our job is to work on our writing until it meets that criterion. When it does, there is no stopping it – doors start to open when they didn’t before, with less effort. When it doesn’t, there is little that can be done to successfully “market” it.

Of course, we don’t know when we’re ready, or how close we are, which is why we depend on others to give us perspective and guidance. And there are no hard and fast rules on this – it is a subjective undertaking. But when I’m asked the biggest mistake writers make, my answer is always that we tend to underestimate the amount of continuous forward motion that is required for any project (and ourselves) to be “viable,” and focus instead on trying to market what we’ve done – to see what we can “get,” if you will. I think our energies are always better expended on diligent creative progress – with professional feedback and guidance, if possible.

We all struggle with this (self included) – no matter how many years we’ve been doing it for a living. We’re focused on getting the sale, getting the positive reaction, getting our agent to do something, etc. Getting, getting, getting tends to be our obsession. But more focus on getting almost never seems to have the desired effect.

However, continuous focus on giving – as in bettering and improving what you’re offering to the world, staying upbeat and open, never giving up, seeking to grow and serve – is always a winning approach. I’m not saying don’t try to move your career forward. I suggest taking every step that seems right to you at the time, especially if you can do it in a positive way – be it query letters, contests, pitch fests, etc. My point is that the real business of building a writing career is not about that. It’s about the writing, the craft, the creative process, and your own growth; so that what you have to give is something others find huge value in.

Screenwriting and commercial fiction writing are rarified professions, which one could argue take as much specialized training as law or medicine. The difference is there’s no clear-cut educational or employment plan one can rely on. Our only path to success is about writing and writing, and growing at it, in the way I’ve talked about. It may take just as long, and be just as hard, but it’s a lot cheaper, has better hours, and more freedom! Most importantly, for us writers, it’s a calling that feels like one of the things we were put on this earth to do. And so we keep at it – we keep giving, and hopefully, we keep growing.

Collaboration Agreements: Pre-Nup for Writers

2009-12-03T15:03:00.004-06:00

(Entertainment attorney, screenwriter, and friend Jesse Rosenblatt returns with a guest blog on the legal aspects of co-writing. Many writers team up to write screenplays and have successful partnerships. There are, however, issues to consider before doing so as Jesse explains in this informative post.)

First Things First: Why You Should Always Enter Into A Collaboration Agreement

By Jesse Rosenblatt, Esq.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen someone in a legal mess because they didn’t enter into a collaboration agreement before starting their project. This information isn’t new, but it’s so often overlooked that I feel it’s worth covering again. Hopefully the information below will resonate with you so that moving forward you can avoid often costly mistakes. The most important thing to be taken away from this article is the following:

When collaborating with someone on a project (e.g., a script, book, song, etc.), always have an experienced entertainment lawyer craft a written collaboration agreement which all parties sign before any work on the collaboration begins!
Just taking this simple suggestion can save you a ton of potential headaches throughout your career. Don’t delay.

What Is A Collaboration Agreement?

Briefly, a collaboration agreement is a contract entered into that spells out the specific terms and conditions of the parties’ working relationship, including, the disposition of the completed work, allocation of responsibilities and division of revenues derived from the exploitation of the work. Simply stated, the collaboration agreement clarifies the nature and scope of the relationship, including the ownership, business and creative controls over the work that’s jointly created. Think of it as a prenuptial agreement for creative collaborators, because just like marriages, unfortunately many collaborations end in separation, if not outright divorce.

The provisions of a collaboration agreement typically cover things like:

• Ownership Percentages In The Work (e.g., Is It 50%/50% Or Some Other Allocation?)
• Specific Responsibilities Of Each Collaborator
• How Are Monies Received In Connection With The Work Disseminated? (e.g., In What Percentages?, How Are The Collaborators’ Expenses Dealt With?, etc.)
• What Happens If One Collaborator Withdraws For Any Reason? (e.g., Can The Other One Continue Working To Finish The Project?, May The Remaining Writer Bring On Another Collaborator?, How Are The Ownership Percentages Revised As A Result?, etc.)
• How Will The Collaborators Be Credited In Connection With The Work?
• Are The Collaborators Members Of Any Applicable Guild/Union? • What Happens If The Parties Have A Disagreement? (e.g., How Are Disputes Resolved?, Will There Be A Third Party Who Resolves Them?, If So, Who Is He/She Or How Will He/She Be Selected?, etc.)
• How May Rights In The Project Be Disposed Of? (e.g., Does This Require A Unanimous Decision?, May Either Party Dispose Of Their Own Rights Or Even All Rights?, If A Collaborator Wants To Dispose Of His/Her Interest, Does The Other Collaborator Have The Right To Block The Sale (Or A Right Of First / Last Refusal)?, Is Any Third Party Authorized To Dispose Of Rights On The Collaborators’ Behalf?, etc.)

Without a signed collaboration agreement in place, questions may be raised about the ownership and control of the work, as well as the ability to dispose of any rights in the work. It is also vital in determining what happens in the event that the collaborators separate for any reason.

Forms of Collaboration
Collaborations can take many forms, even ones that you may not intend. The two most common forms of collaboration I see are:

• Two People Intentionally Collaborate From The Beginning Of A Project

This is exactly what it sounds like. You and another writer come together to create a single collaborative work and the presumption (in the absence of a collaboration agreement to the contrary) is generally that 50% of the work is owned by each of you and that both of you will share equally in any revenues from the project.

This is all well and good, assuming both parties share the same expectations about each facet of the project. However, once there’s a disagreement, a standstill or one collaborator wants to walk away for any reason, problems begin, often leading to a stalemate which freezes the project indefinitely. At that stage, unless both parties can find a way to reach an agreement with respect to each other’s rights and obligations going forward, there is often no way to proceed effectively to finish or exploit the work.

• A Solo Writer Inadvertently Lets Someone Become A Collaborator In Their Project

This can happen in a variety of ways. Letting a friend casually contribute notes/suggestions/additions/alterations, etc. to your work can create a collaboration. Incorporating a producer’s (or other third party’s) notes when conducting a rewrite can create a collaboration.

As just one common example of how this may play out, let’s say a producer is interested in your screenplay. The producer may say that they want to see a rewrite from you before deciding how they want to proceed, and, to shape the project more to their liking, the producer contributes notes/suggestions/additions/alterations to your script. Once you incorporate those notes, you have inadvertently given that producer a rights interest in your project.

Now, even if that producer elects not to option or purchase your script (or if they option it but don’t ever exercise their option), technically that producer still has rights in your material, since you incorporated and expressed their ideas in your work. There’s now the potential that if you want to option/sell your script elsewhere, this producer may fly in (often out of nowhere once they get wind of your impending deal) and demand to be compensated for their work and/or involved in the project somehow.

Whatever the case, once someone’s intellectual property finds its way into your work, that collaborator has an argument that they have an ownership interest in your project. This dilutes your absolute interest in your own work and can potentially inhibit your project from ever seeing the light of day. If a third party is excited by your work and anxious to make a deal with you, it can be problematic (and potentially expensive) to have to seek out a signed document from your collaborator granting you all of their rights. It’s also unlikely that the excited third party will wait around while you sort things out and negotiate with your collaborator. Without the ability to grant 100% of the rights in your project to a third party, you may have great difficulty finding anyone willing to offer you a deal.

What Can Go Wrong If You Don’t Have A Collaboration Agreement In Place?
Without a signed collaboration agreement in place, all of your efforts may be lost down the road if you’re unable to come to a resolution with your collaborator and your project is stuck in limbo. Your collaborator may have the ability to veto any of your decisions, since by default, sharing equal control means decisions about the work must be unanimous. There’s even the potential that the project may end up involved in a litigation if you or your collaborator wish to salvage it. In any case, the time and money spent up front to sign a collaboration agreement which addresses and provides ways to avoid these issues is almost always a preferable alternative.

To avoid the majority of issues that may arise among you and your collaborator, it’s a great idea to sit down at the beginning and negotiate all of the terms of your collaboration agreement. This will force you to discuss each element of your working relationship and to make sure that if there are any differences in your expectations, you are aware of them before the collaboration starts. If for any reason you are unable to reach a resolution on any facet of your relationship, you can step back and rethink working together before any work is done. This saves you wasting a lot of time and energy working on a project with someone only to learn much later that there are differences of opinions as to how things should proceed. Once tempers flare over disagreements, it becomes exponentially harder to reach a resolution on any matter.

For the record, there are places online or in books where you can find forms or sample collaboration agreements. I strongly recommend you avoid using them. Each project has its own set of circumstances which can lead to different terms and arrangements. An experienced entertainment lawyer should be able to assess the issues between you and your collaborator(s) and, in a relatively short period of time, craft an agreement that spells out each party’s expectations and obligations. The cost for the guidance of such an attorney is a small price when compared with the potential costs (financially and emotionally) that might arise from your project being blocked from proceeding, whether as a result of an informal disagreement or costly litigation.

Once a well-crafted collaboration agreement is in place, you can freely proceed on your collaboration with a clear conscience, knowing that if for some reason things go awry, there is a mechanism in place to sort things out and permit you to part ways in a reasonable manner. This should save you any time second guessing what your collaborator is thinking or expecting.
If you would like further information on collaboration agreements or would like someone to prepare one for you, please feel free to contact me at any time. I wish you all the very best of luck for your ever-increasing success!

Jesse Rosenblatt is the founder of the Law Office of Jesse Rosenblatt, an entertainment law/consulting firm servicing corporate and individual clients across all segments of the entertainment business. He has over 10 years experience working and negotiating with many of the most powerful players in the entertainment industry.

For more information, please visit www.jesserosenblatt.com or contact Jesse at jesse@jesserosenblatt.com.

© 2009 Law Office of Jesse Rosenblatt, PLLC. All rights reserved. This article contains information of a general nature that is not intended to be legal advice and should not be considered or relied on as legal advice. Any reader of this article who has legal matters involving information addressed in this article should consult with an experienced entertainment attorney. This article does not create an attorney-client relationship with any reader of this article. Law Office of Jesse Rosenblatt, PLLC does not represent or warrant that this article contains information that is true or accurate in all respects or that is the most current or complete information on the subject matter covered.

TwoAdverbs -- Vote Early; Vote Often!

2009-11-26T02:36:00.003-06:00

Those that enjoyed Adam's article are invited to read two more excellent posts by the same author at Chris Lockhart's blog:

http://twoadverbs.blogspot.com/

The posts are from November 19 and 21, 2009 if you have to scroll back to find them. Many other excellent articles on Chris' thread. He's activating the blog again and I suggest you subscribe.

You'll also notice my script, HORROR COMIC, is in the running in the logline contest. I'd appreciate any support as the contest is close! (You have to have been a member of twoadverbs as of 10/31/09 to vote. But the site is worth joining regardless -- and it's free.)

Visit: www.twoadverbs.com

If you are a member click on the link below, go to FORUM / Contests, Representation & Networking / Sticky at the top is SEMIFINALISTS: THE NIGHT BEFORE XMAS LOGLINE CONTEST. Then you can vote for HORROR COMIC in the poll which is on the first page of the thread.

Thanks again!

SCREENWRITER MYTH BUSTING

2009-11-12T09:01:00.005-06:00

by Adam Levenberg

www.hireahollywoodexec.com

During the past year I've spoken at length with several hundred writers trying to break into the industry. After a decade of working inside the world of development and production, it was eye opening to hear the same false assumptions repeated over and over. While I completely understand why an unrepresented writer might embrace these myths, they are simply not accurate.

As you proceed, remember that my advice is directed towards writers who have yet to secure a major literary agent or manager in Los Angeles. For those writers already employed by the studio system--why are you wasting time reading this, you're on deadline!

Myth # 1: IT'S HARD TO BREAK INTO HOLLYWOOD!

Bullshit. It's easy to break into Hollywood with a mediocre script. It's hard to write a mediocre script!

Writers love to blame the system for not recognizing their talent or making it so difficult to have a "decision maker" read your screenplay. Please believe Hollywood is desperate to find new talent, its just that few unrepresented writers come to the table with the skills to compete with professionals already in the game. Perhaps the only exception to this is with comedy writers--if you're stuff is legitimately funny on every page, someone will take notice and help you develop a spec.

If you've entered a few contests and had your scripts turned down by several legitimate, currently active production companies without receiving a long phone call where they ask you about your other ideas, chances are guaranteed that the material did not stack up. It's your job to figure out why and improve! Otherwise your next script is unlikely to overcome these shortcomings.

Hollywood studios have an incredibly democratic process for buying material--they buy the best scripts. Period. Often great material gets shelved because it's not commercial enough, or too many writers, directors, and actors requested so many changes, the material lost its original value--but these are complications that occur after the sale.

Every deserving screenplay eventually finds a buyer to option or purchase the material. There are no exceptions.

Myth #2: I'VE CREATED A FRANCHISE!

As the film development executive for the only production company in Hollywood that actually produced films and had an active video game development division at the time (others make the claim, this one was the real deal), I spent three years listening to big writers claiming their pitch would be a great movie AND a great videogame! Turns out it was never the case. Not even once. Usually the concept falls short on both counts, otherwise they'd just pitch the movie. Or the game.

Today, a client mentioned that he might continue with a problematic spec script because it would make a great tie in promotion with a mobile phone provider. Movies don't get made like this--the production costs are too high and if the movie sucks, it could damage an otherwise worthy brand. If it did work like this, wouldn't we have already seen a Ronald McDonald movie?

Promoting your concept of a franchise as a selling point in query letters is a huge mistake. Nobody cares whether you believe it could be a great movie, video game, television show, and line of toys. These spin-offs are irrelevant if the script is not great. And if it is great, it will sell for big money, so who cares if it would also make a fun theme park attraction? You can't entice someone to move your script forward by adding value to anything other than what's inside pages 1-110.

You're not a mogul, just a screenwriter. And if you can't write a great screenplay, your Count Chocula Vs. Boo Berry pitch is irrelevant.

Act like a screenwriter, write a decent screenplay that stands on its own.

Myth # 3: I CAN SELL MY OLD SCREENPLAY! JUST LET ME DUST IT OFF FIRST...AND REWRITE IT FOR THE EIGHTH TIME

Screenplays have a shelf life somewhere between yogurt and milk. The world and cinema changes and its your job to stay current, not to push some script you wrote in the late 1990's that wasn't good enough to sell back then.

So if you find yourself hitting the pitchfest with the same concept for the eighth time because some no-name producer had a free option on it back when studios wanted to make a feature with the dude who played Mr. Belvedere, its time to give it up. If you can't write a great new script this year, I guarantee your old material is not going to sell. Focus on figuring out why the new script won't sell and what you still need to learn to compete in 2009.

On the same note, a rewrite will not breathe new life into a dead screenplay--it just wastes more of your time better spent developing new scripts. One of the biggest differences between professional and amateur writers is that the pros spend three to twelve months on a spec, put it on the market, and move the fuck on. Even if it sells, the writer is no longer in the drivers seat--their job is to implement the notes of the studio, producer, or director (often, whether the directives make sense to them or not).

Unrepresented writers often think they can rewrite something over and over to "get it right". If you can't "get it right" in six months to a year, throwing another two or three seasons is not going to help. Move on, write a few other scripts and come back later when you've mastered the art of rewriting. Otherwise, your script risks getting "lost in the funhouse" which is when you've done so many drafts, you've got a library of information in your head and the pages become incomprehensible to readers.

Myth #4: MY SCRIPT WON A CONTEST. IT'S READY FOR THE SPEC MARKET!

Contest wins have NO correlation to the spec market. None, Zero, Zip, Zilch. All a contest win says to industry professionals is that your screenplay was better than the works of other unrepresented writers, including the mentally infirm and those who know just enough English to write out a check for the entry fee. I'm joking around here with the comparison. Sort of.

I have never read a contest winner that approaches the quality of the worst specs sent out by ICM, CAA, or William Morris Endeavor. I'm sure there are a few examples of contest winners that sell, but these are rare exceptions. This brings us to the ubiquitous "semi finalists" which many contests seem to give to everyone who entered, kind of like trophies in Little League.

Writers often think being a "semi-finalist" is worth mentioning in query letters. When industry professionals see this, they assume it probably sucks. And guess what: It probably does. If your script can't win a contest where the winner is not good enough to get minor league representation, I guarantee there is a lot you still need to learn about screenwriting. There's nothing wrong with that! Contests never tell people this, which would undermine their ability to sell entry fees, often to the same people submitting the same scripts year after year. I don't think there's anything wrong with contests, I just think its wrong for organizers to mislead writers into thinking they're done the learning process and their material is ready to be seen by professional companies.

This year, I read a script that was a top 5 finalist in a contest where the winner earned $20,000. Ready for the spec market? No. The writer has a lot of raw talent though. Funny thing is, I read another top 5 finalist in the same contest last year. Was it ready for the spec market? Not even close.

Myth #5: MY SPEC IS AT LEAST AS GOOD AS HOLLYWOOD MOVIES THAT SUCK!

This is the amateur's final defense of an unsellable spec. "It might not be great, but Hollywood movies suck!"

Even when a movie is dumped by a studio and butchered to ninety minutes, you're still guaranteed a hero, the hero's character arc, a villain, a romance, and life and death stakes on an adventure as the hero pursues a clear cut goal. That's a movie. Studios have at least a 99% success rate at churning out movies. Unrepresented specs rise to this level less than 1% of the time. Even in 500 unrepresented specs, you're only guaranteed to find one or two scripts that rise to the level of competent but mediocre. And that does not equate to a sale, unless the writer gets lucky.

If you could write a script with half the pizazz of complete failures like CATWOMAN, THE STEPFORD WIVES, or NEXT, you would have agencies fighting over you. Seriously. These might be critically indefensible titles, but they're unquestionably movies.

Just last week, I was channel flipping and came across Uwe Boll's DUNGEON SIEGE. For those of you unfamiliar with Boll's work, consider yourself lucky as he's the Ed Wood of video game adaptations funded through German tax loopholes. But as much as it pains me to say it, for all his incompetence, Boll outpaces the quality of 99% of unrepresented material. That said, the shooting scripts for his movies would not land you an agent if written on spec.

If you think I'm beating up on unrepresented writers and their spec scripts here, or that I'm suggesting that most unrepresented writers lack the abysmal talent of Uwe Boll, you're completely missing the point. I think most four year olds have more creative talent than Uwe Boll. But does Boll understand movies better than your average unrepresented screenwriter? Yes. And so do hundreds of other mediocre talents who have no problem getting represented by big agencies and selling their specs to studios.

Screenwriting is not just about talent. It's about effectively channeling that talent into creating fresh takes on generic situations we've seen a thousand times before. Luckily, if you have talent, you can LEARN how to write a movie and if you work smart, you can improve with each spec.

How do you memorably introduce your hero? What makes your villain so incredibly dangerous, powerful, and scary? What is exciting and new about the action sequences you've written? What are the best five lines of dialogue in your movie? If you've written a comedy, what jokes and situations do you think an agent will laugh so hard at that he'll pick up the phone and read to his friends? If you've written a drama, would the reader to be so devastated that he or she will be unable to sleep that night? And is your screenplay FUN? If it's not, why would anyone want to buy a ticket? These are all elements of VALUE that writers must bring to their screenplays, otherwise you're just trying to sell the generic framework we've already seen.

Unrepresented writers are still in the process of learning HOW to write a movie. More often than not, they exercise creativity by thinking "outside the box" when they create their plots and characters, which is a fundamental misunderstanding of what screenwriting is. Screenwriting is not about designing the framework of a house--there's ninety years of feature length cinema that has the blueprint down cold. Screenwriting is how you decorate, paint, furnish, and landscape that makes your house different than every other one on the block.

Site of the day:

Please visit Chris Lockhart's blog: http://twoadverbs.blogspot.com/

One of the foremost experts on loglines/pitches, Chris operates the best board for screenwriters on the net -- twoadverbs.com. And it's free to join.

Confessions of a Film Fest Screener

2009-11-06T20:18:00.001-06:00

Screening for film festivals is a job that is filled with hours of devoting your mind and imagination to the would be filmmakers of the world hoping to discover the next hot talent. When that happens, it’s the greatest job on earth. The reality is that for the most part, you kiss a lot of frogs.

When I sit down with a screener, I get a visual of some guy who’s blown his last dime on the Sharpie he used to carefully write the title and his contact info in nearly legible handwriting on the face of the personally burned DVD while he murmurs a little prayer to the universe for this submission to be his lucky break. With that lump in my throat, I feed this representation he so carefully constructed into my all region player and wait for magic to happen. It’s not often that my expectation plays out.

The quality of the product entered into festivals has increased tremendously, both in film quality (thanks to digital) and material. However the number one problem we continue to see is poor writing (poorly conceived characters, lousy dialog, weak plot, and structural breakdown.) This list is in order of commonness of occurrence.

Number two is poor editing. There are some amazingly well-framed shots that will never be seen because the filmmaker didn't get material to put with the eye or didn't know when to change to another well shot frame. Stare at anything for sixty seconds. Now think about looking at that thing for that period of time with no sound in the room.

Budget isn’t the problem. Some of the worst films I’ve watched had a remarkable budget. Shorts with significant special effects, perfect color correction, spot on sound. No viewer will hold it against you if you don’t have the best camera, expert lighting or dazzling CGI. What will lose them in that sixty second introduction is the appearance of nothing. No visual, no character, no sound, and no dialog to pull them into the world they are eager to join.

How to spend your money when making a film:

Hire the best film editor you can afford (hopeful one that is also an amazing sound editor). It's life and death. It would be better if that person isn’t the director or the writer. A craftsman that knows when it’s time to shift off the beautiful sunset you accidently captured and on to the actor.

If you are not a writer, get one. Hopefully you can find a really good starving writer willing to contribute a script for cred and a potential Oscar nod.

Get talent. No, Uncle Nabob cannot play the lead role. I don't care if he was lead Pilgrim in the 5th grade harvest play. Only thing worse than amateurs is bad actors doing bad dialog.
Get a director that can find his ass with both hands. He doesn't have to be perfect; he just has to understand the script.

If you aren’t a cinematographer, hire a camera guy. Students are a great resource. They have learned to work the equipment at school; they can probably turn in part of it to meet some school requirement and will generally work for food. If you must man the camera yourself, at least try to make sure that you don’t film scenes that you can’t frame. It’s harder than you think to keep up with two actors in a staged fight. Buy, rent or steal a tripod and a dolly. A variation on your mother’s advice: Don’t run with cameras!

So what should you concentrate your tiny budget and endless imagination on? Something that will make me care I watched it. A character that will move me, a plot that has a beginning, middle and an end and visuals that convey the story well enough that if they forgot to run the subtitle edit, I still get the story. Certain genres are harder to succeed in than others.

Overdone, by species:

Horror:
Lots and lots of horror, generally poorly written, crap special effects (tomato soup is NOT a good cheap alternative to makeup blood) bad acting and worse direction. That two minute hold on Angie's navel, in spite of that arts and craft belly button ring while Monster A breathes sinisterly in the background, just lost everyone. The good ones have a promising Act I then start to slide down the slope, dying quietly just before Act 3.. Asian horror is the current indy darling, with the adjectives sick and twisted always included. So the bench marks are original idea, sick, twisted and nothing too extreme: no stir fried babies. Strong second act, decent finish. Let the hero win, or the monster, just give me a reason to care which one.

Agony: I created this category to house the thousands of films where the entire crew thinks that staring at someone with a pained expression for five minutes will garner Oscar nods. This would include the love sick, the suicidal, the damaged by life, generally anyone prone to long periods of staring sadly into a camera in any location. I'm sorry grandma had to go to the nursing home. Seen that 109 times this week, truly I'm sorry but why is THIS grandmother different from the other 108? If you can tell me that, we have something to talk about.

What we'd like to see more of:

Comedy: Good comedy, any variety. A film that keeps you laughing (and not because of the terrible dialog) preferably something that doesn't have to air after 11 p.m. but there's an audience for that too. So if it’s raunchy, go for broke.

Art House: I'm not talking about somebody's rip off of another person's style, I'm talking about a true vision for a narrative approach that isn't what you'd find in a typical Hollywood film. Borrow from the masters, but don't copy them. Visually interesting in every frame, but with at least one character that is well drawn and a story line that at least has a beginning, middle, end and isn't so off the charts that you can't figure out at least what the filmmaker's impression of the story is. I think art house horror would be hot property.

Drama: Real drama. Characters we get into Situations that bring out the character's flaws and strengths. One I saw early on that has always stayed with me was Deep Shaft, a Chinese film that was so well done I quit reading the subtitles because the visuals carried the story. The premise was a couple of miners that would befriend a fellow miner with no family, then push him into a shaft and go collect his death benefit as family members. They didn't do this because they were bad, awful people. They did this to survive. Then they encounter this 16 year old boy working in the mine that fits their profile and there are no other good candidates. When it comes down to the end, there is a division between the two men about killing the boy. The boy is in the mine trying to earn enough money to go to high school because he has the grades. One of the most compelling scenes has a young girl holding up a sign begging for money to go to high school. After a brief exchange about grades, the boy takes his just cashed paycheck, drops some money into her bucket, then eats just bread instead of rice and bread like the other two men. That is universal. No need to translate.

Films that feature a mainstream gay or lesbian character: There is a separate category for G&L films at many festivals and in fact festivals that feature on films in this genre. By and large this category suffers from the same problems as all the others. With one exception; some filmmakers seem to think that this is a call for porn. Sex and nudity is okay, unless, well, that's all there is. Write a good character that happens to be gay orlesbian, back that up with a decent story and you'll be way ahead of the game.

The indy audience is smarter, hipper, looking for edgier material, a fresh voice, a new style. We get so excited when we uncover that gem in the pile of stones that we can't wait to get the other person to look at it to see if they like it too. It makes the hundreds of hours of horrible film worth watching. Which is why we keep coming back year after year to do the job again.

What is most interesting to me is that in the screening process we have a carefully selected demographic, gay, lesbian, male, female, old, young, film lovers, film buffs, film pros, conservatives, liberals, but when a film is good, it almost always gets the same rating be all of us. That speaks volumes. It’s true that personal taste accounts for something, but a well made film accounts for itself.

If you take these words into account and produce a nice little film, find a great festival and then sit back and wait to hear that you film has been accepted.

(Cat Stewart is a freelance writer currently living in Nashville, Tennessee. Her recent focus has been on writing screenplays and teleplays and putting together plans for a non-profit status production company aimed at helping filmmakers that have followed alternate career paths but have a passion for film. She also works with the film festival, screening entries for the festival’s programming needs.

Cat has published a variety of nonfiction articles and short stories through the years. Her work is currently featured in Greg and Roy Magazine and Higher Image.

In addition to freelance journalism, Cat has written ad copy for national corporations, advertising agencies and local businesses. She has written corporate manuals and technical manuals for a number of healthcare companies including Diversicare, GranCare, Inc. and SunHealth.

Cat completed the certificate program in Feature Film and Television writing at UCLA extension and plans to apply to the upcoming Master program.

Screenwriting awards:

Her spec teleplay, JAG -“Tainted Memories” placed tenth in the Writer’s Digest 74th competition, the only teleplay that was a finalist in a combined competition between original screenplays and teleplays.

Her spec short, Ashes to Anthrax, was an official selection of the 2009 GIAA film festival and is currently a semi finalist in the Expo screenplay contest and first round notification for American Gem Literary Short Contest.)

What Makes for a Great Idea?

2009-10-06T23:00:00.002-06:00

(Erik Bork, Emmy-winning writer for his work on BAND OF BROTHERS, contributes today's blog. Erik is speaking at the upcoming Screenwriting Expo.)

To my mind, there are four things a concept has to have for it to really work.

The first is, it has to be COMPELLING. By that I mean that we have to CARE about the character(s) and situation — to be emotionally involved, and to stay involved. We want to see what’s going to happen, and how it’s all going to play out. I think this is my first job as a writer — to (fairly quickly) present something that makes the reader/audience care — and to keep them caring. I don’t just mean make them interested or intrigued. I mean hook them, with something they can relate to on a human, emotional level.

Having your main character “save the cat” at the beginning can certainly be part of this: doing something that makes us think positively of them. But I’m not just talking about “rootability.” I’m talking about a problem that sets the story in motion that seems important and makes us care. It’s important to the character, and because we’re seeing things through their eyes, it’s becoming important to us. It matters. There is great conflict and we want to see how that’s going to resolve — and we are identifying with a specific person (or people) we feel a real emotional connection with.

How often do you read or watch something and put it down because you just “don’t care about these people and their situation”? It’s not big enough, important enough, relatable enough, and you don’t buy into them — it doesn’t MATTER to you whether they resolve whatever it is. Part of it could be you don’t like them (and they need to “save the cat”), but it’s often also about the nature of their situation. It doesn’t grab you. You’re not compelled to see what will happen.

Secondly, a really good story has to ENTERTAIN. That should be obvious, right? But plenty of situations that might meet these other criteria for compelling us emotionally don’t “entertain” us. What I mean by that is that they don’t make us FEEL MORE ALIVE in some way that makes them enjoyable to watch or read. Take THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS. I totally care about that character, but I’m not entertained by his situation. It’s a well-done movie, with good escalating conflict, and I’m somewhat moved at the couple of moments of victory that come, but they feel like too little, too late. It’s not the kind of story that becomes a smash hit (or gets a writer’s career started), in my opinion, because it doesn’t make the audience feel more alive — more amused, scared, excited, and/or truly fascinated. Compare this movie to I AM LEGEND or MEN IN BLACK, for example. They may not be as emotionally compelling, but boy, do they entertain.

Then there’s BELIEVABILITY. No matter how fantastic the premise might be, once we understand the “rules” (which should happen clearly and quickly), we must then feel that we’re watching recognizable human behavior. Every character at all times should behave in ways that seem real, given the situation. When they don’t, it seems like a contrivance the writer came up with to try to compel or entertain us — and it doesn’t work. We can’t care about or be entertained by something we don’t believe would really happen. This happens a lot in comedy — when characters do over-the-top things that may seem funny or silly, but in the context of a story, we don’t buy it, and so aren’t entertained by it. I think the best comedy (and every other genre) comes from identifiable and relatable human behavior, from characters who really care about something — like in EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND or FRASIER. No matter how exaggerated a character may be, once we accept their basic personality, everything they do has to be something we believe they’d do. I can’t tell you how often something I’m reading stops working for me (or never starts) because I don’t understand why a character is doing or saying something, and don’t really believe they would.

Finally, a great concept is UNIQUE. It’s fresh in some way. It probably has its roots in something familiar that has worked in the past, but it has its own new twist or point-of-view that makes it seem like something we’ve never quite seen before. Granted, there are plenty of things that get produced and published that don’t seem all that unique. If they are compelling, entertaining, and believable, that can be enough. But for something to really be great, to be hugely successful, to the point where it could get an unknown writer the beginnings of a career, for example, this freshness can be the final key ingredient.
Almost every aspect I’d ever critique about any story comes down to one (or more) of these four aspects. I think it’s true for what people would critique about my work as well.

And it’s not just about story concepts: ideally, EVERY SCENE should also be compelling, entertaining, believable, and unique — in some way. When the scenes, the story, and the basic concept all pass this high standard, then you really have something.

Please feel free to contact me with feedback or questions!

Wishing you all the best,

Erik Bork
www.flyingwrestler.com
erik@flyingwrestler.com

TWILIGHT ZONE Turns 50

2009-10-04T10:05:00.002-06:00

This past Friday the legendary television series, THE TWILIGHT ZONE, celebrated its 50th anniversary. An extraordinary conversation with series creator Rod Serling and a group of students is available on youtube. Here's the final part of that lecture series to inspire us all.

Tales from the Script (Trailer)

2009-10-04T00:18:00.000-06:00

Wilder/Diamond

2009-10-04T00:14:00.002-06:00

Billy Wilder and I.A.L. "Iz" Diamond had an amazing streak of brilliant screenplays during their many years of collaboration. Below is rare footage of them at work:

Tales from the Script

2009-10-04T00:00:00.003-06:00

(This interview comes from Michael at Script-A-Wish. Michael is an industry-respected script consultant who gives great notes and you can read more about his services at www.scriptawish.com.)

1. Tales from the Script is the title for both a film you've directed and a book you've written with Paul Robert Herman. What was the genesis of Tales from the Script, and what came first, the book or the film?

I've been writing articles and essays about screenwriting for many years -- in fact, my first book was a study of the legendary blacklisted screenwriter Dalton Trumbo -- so writing about this subject has always been an important part of my professional life. In addition to being a student of the history of screenwriting, I'm also a screenwriter. The impetus for this particular project was crossing paths with Paul, because he had the idea for a book about the rejection screenwriters face. That specific take on the subject got things started, and from the beginning the plan was to do the book and the movie simultaneously. Over the course of the next three years, the project evolved into a broader discussion of the lives of screenwriters, because my feeling was that if I only got into a room with people like Bill Goldman and Paul Schrader once, I wanted to explore a variety of topics. The conversations conducted for this project touch on rejection, but also explore a great many other subjects. The interviews reveal nearly every experience that a writer can have while working in Hollywood, so I like to think of the book and the film as records of the greatest screenwriting panel discussion imaginable.

2. The book is scheduled to come out next January. What kind of release will the film get?

The plan is for a DVD release at the same time as the book's publication. In the meantime, more festival screenings are planned for the fall, and a major screening in LA will take place on August 5 at the Egyptian Theatre, with a number of cast members in attendance.

3. What kind of response is the film getting from writers?

One of the most gratifying experiences I've had on the festival circuit occurred at the Palm Springs International Film Festival in January. After a screening, two young men approached me and explained that they were struggling screenwriters. They said that the movie told them exactly what they needed to hear about the obstacles they would face and the rewards awaiting them if they found success. More recently, I showed the film at the Writers Guild in Los Angeles, and a writer said the movie lifted his spirits after a particularly disappointing rejection -- because he realized that everyone takes the same hits, even the superstars. I've heard reactions like this again and again from beginners and professionals, and I'm very proud of that. Writers feel the movie gives a true and complete picture of what it means to be a Hollywood screenwriter. As a storyteller, of course I'm also thrilled that people find the movie so entertaining -- nothing makes me feel better than listening to an audience laugh while they watch the film. I think audiences, including writers and non-writers alike, are pleasantly surprised by how much they enjoy meeting the colorful personalities featured in the documentary.

4. What do you find to be the common element in all these successful writers?

Without question, the most important thing a Hollywood screenwriter brings to the table is tenacity. You have to believe in yourself and your talent in order to struggle through early rejection, you need confidence to pitch, and you must wholeheartedly believe that your screenplays are the best scripts on the market -- or else why bother? And then when you actually achieve success, your troubles really begin -- because the compromises that are expected of screenwriters are greater than those expected of any other writers in the world. Nobody tells a novelist to change the gender of a protagonist because such-and-such actor might be available, and nobody tells a playwright to chop the second act in half because the budget got cut. Talent, luck, and a good personality can get a writer in the door of Hollywood, but tenacity -- in terms of keeping a positive attitude while enduring abuse -- is crucial for generating any sort of career longevity. One of my goals with this project was to move past the topic most screenwriting books explore -- how to write a script that sells -- and talk about the things writers need to understand if they want their careers to last.

5. At Script A Wish, some of our notes often revolve around explaining the differences between what spec writers have to deliver in a screenplay to get their foot in the door versus what a writer with a track record can get away with, both in terms of technical aspects and conceptually. In other words, Joe Schmoe trying to make a first impression doesn't have the same leeway that a Shane Black or William Goldman might get. What are your thoughts on the major differences between the spec writer and the writer with representation and credits?

This is a bit of a trick question, because the two writers you mention have idiosyncratic styles. Their marketability is based on the uniqueness of their voices. And as we all have seen with the success of Charlie Kaufman and Diablo Cody, writers whose work doesn't sound like anyone else's work can always blaze a path. But the fact is that most writers in Hollywood are artisans rather than artists, because most of the screenplays that actually become movies have been written and rewritten by many different people, only some of whom receive screen credit. So here's where this is a trick question -- new writers have to be as unique as they can be in order to get noticed, but once they start working, their writing will inevitably become homogenized. In other words, Joe Schmoe has even more leeway than an established writer to try things that are out of the ordinary. Therefore writers should embrace their uniqueness when they're trying to get on the Hollywood map -- the scripts that get noticed are the ones that catch people by surprise, like Kaufman's "Being John Malkovich" and Cody's "Juno." In my own script-consulting work, I discourage writers from trying to follow Hollywood formulas too closely. Yes, any script presented to Hollywood needs to have three acts and contain certain familiar dramatic elements, such as a protagonist who undergoes a personal change. But if you try too hard to make your script a carbon-copy of other scripts, you will miss out on your greatest opportunity, which is to show people why your storytelling is so unique that you should be paid for your work. That's why I'm wary of offering notes that scare writers into approaching their work too conservatively. A writer named Michael January said it best in his interview: "Hollywood lives and dies on something that seems new and original, but is very much like something that made money before." A great case in point is "The Hangover," which is like a mash-up of "Wedding Crashers" and "After Hours." It's new and familiar at the same time.

6. I definitely agree that a unique voice and a fresh take on an old formula tale is valued. I guess what I'm getting at is the necessity of a relatively high concept idea since an aspiring writer without representation probably doesn't have attached talent or literary property. Would you agree that this is a significance difference between the aspiring writer and the established writer?

Everybody in Hollywood is hoping for a great high-concept idea, whether the writer in question is a beginner or a veteran, because ideas are the engines that drive the business. A great idea is the seed that survives the rewriting process, it's the concept that lures talent attachments, and it's the basis for the marketing campaign. Case in point? Larry Cohen, one of the participants in the project, has been writing for film and television since the 1950s, but the biggest splash he made in recent memory was for "Phone Booth," which was about as high-concept as it gets. So the idea that writers have to come up with great ideas at the beginning of their careers, and then get to write more esoteric stories once they become established, just isn't realistic. I think where your perception may be coming from is the fact that a lot of writers get on the map by writing an original script with a big idea, then shift into for-hire work on adaptations, etc. In essence that first spec is like a calling card that gets the writer the job of writing studio projects that are already in development. So while it's true that new writers can get noticed more quickly if they generate great commercial ideas, it's equally true that established writers are pursuing the same goal. Another factor to remember is that every screenwriter in Hollywood has written wonderful scripts that never got made. A writer's list of produced credits doesn't tell the whole story about his or her career.

7. Did the writers make any comments about mistakes that beginners make?

Absolutely. Many of the writers lamented that reading screenplays can be torture, even when the scripts are written by professionals -- because screenplays are all about forward momentum. As Goldman says in the movie and in his many brilliant books, “Screenplays are structure.” So nearly every one of the writers in this project encouraged beginners to be as ruthless as possible when editing screenplays. If you’ve written a character description that takes six lines, see if you can get it down to three. If you’ve written a monologue that takes half a page, see if you can get it down to a quarter of a page. If a block of screen direction looks dense, see if you can replace certain sentences with evocative fragments. Even though everyone in Hollywood genuinely wants to find the next great screenplay, everyone in Hollywood dreads opening a new script because it’s much more likely to be overwritten and unfocused. Professionals interviewed for this project repeatedly made the point that a screenplay is not a novel, so if you’re a writer who likes to play with long, prosaic descriptions, then you might be happier writing books. The idea of a script is to create mental images in as few words as possible so that the reader can envision the movie you’ve written -- and part of that challenge involves writing so efficiently that the script can be read quickly. If it takes more than an hour to read your feature-film script, then you’ve probably overwritten. I can’t tell you how many of the pros interviewed for this project said that their early scripts had way too much description, on-the-nose dialogue, etc.

8. How long did it take the average writer to break in?

The old rule of thumb that it takes ten years to begin a Hollywood career provides a good average, but the clock doesn't really start ticking until you're in Hollywood and trying to get meetings. It's almost impossible to break into Hollywood without living here. For instance I tried to write scripts for years living outside of LA, during which time I only picked up a couple of small jobs. But now that I've been in LA for six years, I've been hired to write a pilot, I've had an original optioned, and I co-wrote an indie feature that got made (but not released). So if you've been in Hollywood for ten years and nothing's clicking, then the universe is probably trying to tell you something. Just remember that luck is such a key factor that if you don't make it, that doesn't necessarily mean you're a bad writer. A number of the participants in this project talked about talented friends who haven't become successful, even with powerful and established screenwriters introducing them to Hollywood players. As William Goldman says in the movie and the book, "It's a crapshoot."

9. Screenwriters today are increasingly coming from a film school background as opposed to a literary background. What are your thoughts on film schools and what affect if any does this have on American film as a whole?

The impact of film schools was felt most profoundly in the late 60s and early 70s, when the so-called "movie brats" -- Coppola, Lucas, Spielberg, etc. -- attacked Hollywood armed with film-school educations and an academic understanding of not only Hollywood storytelling but the possibilities presented by ideas found in foreign films. And in fact my second book, "The Cinema of Generation X," explored the next wave of filmmakers -- Rodriguez, Soderbergh, Tarantino, etc. -- who were the first generation of filmmakers to enter the business after the introduction of movies on video. Being able to dissect films at home, thereby teaching oneself lessons about structure and narrative, had an immeasurable impact on Hollywood, because Gen-X filmmakers work almost exclusively in postmodern narrative -- movies about movies, if not literally than at least on a textural basis. In terms of where we are now, the next wave will be DIY filmmakers who grew up with DV cameras and YouTube. We're only just seeking the first inklings of what that does to narrative, in films like "Cloverfield." Ron Shelton, the writer-director of "Bull Durham," made an interesting remark during his interview -- he said that story is what matters, no matter the means by which the story is delivered. So I guess the adventure right now is waiting for the next change to take hold so that we understand how cinema storytelling will evolve.

10. Are most of the writers you interviewed in Hollywood for life, or is it possible to have a writing career outside of Tinseltown?

For most writers, living in Hollywood for at least a few years during the career-development phase is unavoidable. William Goldman was already established as a novelist when he got hired for his first movie job, so circumstances never forced him to relocate from New York to Los Angeles -- but keep in mind his career began in the 1960s, when the business was a lot smaller. Now, with the business as corporate and impersonal as it is, it's incumbent on any serious wannabe to live in LA long enough to develop a network of relationships. Once a writer gets a reputation as a moneymaker, by having written several successful films, he or she can set up shot wherever. But to begin the career, you have to live in LA unless you're already established as a brand name elsewhere -- if you're a political journalist in Washington, for instance, you might get away with selling a political script long-distance.

11. Do the pros have any thoughts or advice on writer's block?

Professionals don't have the luxury of writer's block, because they have deadlines. Plus, more often than not, professionals already have something on which to build -- a novel they're adapting, an original movie to which they're writing a sequel, a comic book that's being turned into a movie, etc. Even on original projects, professionals usually have an elaborate pitch that triggered a deal with a studio. Generally speaking, the only time professional screenwriters work on purely original spec scripts is when they're on strike, because paying work isn't available. I think the reason is that screenwriting careers can be very short for a lot of people, so once writers start working, they tend to shelve original projects for the days when paying jobs appear with less frequency.

12. Based on the trailer, disappointment and rejection seems to be a theme for many of the writers. Did you come away with any insight on how to deal with this?

There's no question that Hollywood writers are by and large an embittered population, because even though many of them are paid well, their work is not treated with the same respect afforded to the creations of novelists and playwrights. Therefore the new writer needs to understand what he or she is getting into before attempting a Hollywood career. If you're an individualist who doesn't like people changing your work, then Hollywood is not for you -- you're better off making indie movies where you can be the director and/or the producer. But if you like collaborating, and you want to help directors and producers realize their visions, then you're perfect for Hollywood. In general, the most successful writers I met during this project have all tried to claim some sort of autonomy for themselves in order to compensate for the abuse they suffer as writers for hire. Many become directors, many become producers, and many write books. Nobody avoids getting rewritten. Nobody.

13. What is the most important lesson they have for aspiring writers?

In addition to the lesson of tenacity, the writers want beginners to understand that what happens in the film business isn't personal. If an agent decides not to represent you, or an actor decides not to appear in your movie, or a studio decides not to purchase your script -- it's not personal. Movies get made because they fit the current needs of the marketplace, and the marketplace changes constantly. That's where luck comes in. If you present the right script to the right person at the right time, you can succeed. The only thing writers can control is the quality of their scripts, so remember the old saying: When in doubt, rewrite. And another thing the writers mentioned was the importance of having a network of trusted readers -- those people who review your work and give honest reactions, instead of simply saying that the work is wonderful. But many of the more optimistic writers, such as Adam Rifkin, made a point of reminding beginners that every time someone finishes a new script, he or she has created a new opportunity. In other words, keep at it until you either succeed or lose your enthusiasm.

The official site for Tales from the Script is www.TalesFromTheScript.org, and Peter Hanson’s site is www.GrandRiverFilms.com.

Bible Author Speaks!

2009-09-24T19:24:00.003-06:00

Back from a retreat at Sundance with Dave Trottier. Dave has a free newsletter and this is an excellent article:

Get in the Game Now!

Options, Options...

2009-09-24T15:15:00.002-06:00

(Writer Joshua James provides a guest blog today on the subject of options. If you enjoyed this article you can visit Josh's website: Joshua James.

Rapping On Writing - Options, We Got Options!
Okay, we’re back to Rapping On Writing!

Among other things, I had a couple screenplays optioned earlier this summer, and another one re-optioned (which means that the current option expired and a new one had to be renegotiated) all around the same time … and I realized I hadn’t really read much regarding options on the internets and thought I’d share what I know for the masses.

Anyone out there more experienced than I, feel free to chime in. But here’s what I’ve learned over time. Let’s begin.

WHAT IS AN OPTION?

Basically it’s a lease-to-own agreement on an intellectual property. Now that property can be a screenplay (and usually is) but can also be a book, a treatment, a newspaper article … a cartoon strip … a person’s life … a blog, too. Basically a person wants to exploit for profit an intellectual property and pays you rent in the form of an option for a specific amount of time to do so. During the period of the option, the person holding the option is the only person who can exploit the property (which usually means they bring in someone else, of course, but that’s the idea).

Once they get financing, they’ll purchase the property outright.

WHY NOT JUST BUY IT OUTRIGHT?

For a number of reasons, one being that perhaps it’s too costly to just purchase, therefore they pay less via an option. Or it needs work and they want to shepherd it to the point of being ready, and then buy it, but if the script can’t be whipped into shape, then they’ve saved money … or it could be that the option-er just doesn’t have the money. I’m sure there are a lot of reasons. Of course, you’d prefer to sell your script, everyone does. But an option is not a bad thing. Why?

Because when the option period runs out, the rights go back to the option-ee, the author, and if the option-er hasn’t been able to do anything, then they don’t get a return on the money they invested. So it’s smarter to invest a smaller amount. Nor is it bad for you, the author, because then it’s possible someone else can option it (I’ve had one script optioned more than once by different people) or purchase it. If they’re unable to do something with it, you get the rights back.

My understanding (and again, I could be wrong) is that most studios simply purchase properties they’re interested in, but not always. But smaller producers can’t afford to do this with every project, so it makes sense to purchase the exclusive rights for a period of time, then approach studios for financial backing.

If they go to the studios without the rights, then why should the studios (or any of the other entities who invest in such) need to deal with the producer? They can buy / option it on their own, without the person who brought it.

So many producers who have working relationships with development people will option a few properties they like, take to to them and see how well it’s liked by those who can get a movie made (which may not only be studio people, it can be a director, it can be a movie star … many people hope for a movie star) but they can’t test the water without showing it, and they can’t show it without obtaining the rights, so it’s a catch-22 for them … what if they buy it and everyone thinks it stinks?

Therefore the idea of the option, a test-drive, to see if someone falls in love with it.

FOR HOW LONG?

It can be whatever length both parties agree to … I think the standard for the screenplays I’ve had optioned is usually 18 months, with another year added on as an optional extension (paid, of course) for the option-er. It really depends, too, on the property … a book can take quite awhile before it comes out, and therefore may need a longer period …

But length of time should also depend on how much one is paid, too. If the option-ee is not making a reasonable amount, then the time period should really be shorter. Which leads us to …

HOW MUCH SHOULD I CHARGE?

That one is more difficult. Again, it can be any number, you can ask for anything, it just depends on whether or not someone wants to pay it. I’m not going to really share my own numbers, because talking about money, I never like to do. It’s a bit untoward.

It can be anything from a dollar (more on that later) to ten to twenty grand, depending on the property. The more infamous the property, the higher the price, I guess you could say. It also depends on who wants to option it, if you have two people trying to option the same property, the competition drives the price up.

But I’d recommend that, if you have a tight indie script, that you’re looking at a grand or two, depending. This is why it’s difficult, it depends on the commercial prospects of the script.

In her book KILLER INSTINCT Jane Hamshur writes about optioned a script from a then-unknown Quentin Tarantino for ten grand. While QT wasn’t famous, at that time, he had sold a spec and had a rep around LA. So she had to pay. But bear in mind, they viewed that script (NATURAL BORN KILLERS) as an independent genre film … it only became a big studio movie when they got a big name attached (Stone, Oliver) and because Jane and her partner held the exclusive rights, they were attached to the movie as producers.

it’s likely that if people thought NATURAL BORN KILLERS was a studio movie at all, it wouldn’t have been optioned, it would have just been sent by QT’s reps to the studios (who all turned it down when Jane first sent it, it only became big after RESERVOIR DOGS hit and Oliver got interested … but for more on that, read her book) and sold.

But it was viewed as an indie, so it was optioned. So it depends on the property … if the project is a quirky dark independent drama, with limited appeal, the option price is likely to be a lot less than a high concept thriller that reads like a studio movie.

In my experience, in NYC, usually screenplays would get anywhere from a grand on up … If someone offers you 1,500 for a year for your indie comedy, that’s about average (again, it depends on the script and genre) …

I will say this. No one will really get rich off of options, they’re usually modest amounts. You’re not going to be able to quit your day job because you got an option (and you shouldn’t) … of course, all monies taken in by writers are welcome, modest or not, but it’s important to know that the real money happens when a project is sold or made.

Now that being said, that brings us to …

DOLLAR OPTIONS

Which is a phrase that, if you’re writing screenplays, you’re going to hear many times.

Basically it’s an option for no money (usually a symbolic dollar, hence the name, Dollar Options) because the option-er can’t afford to pay a regular option fee to the option-ee, therefore they offer a dollar. Basically they want the same rights for nothing.

My advice is, 95 percent of the time, don’t do it. Don’t option your script for nothing. It is, 95 percent of the time, a bad idea.

It’s like you own a beach house, and someone wants to pay you a dollar to live there for a year. And while they’re living there, they’re going to have parties and invite all their friends over to stay with them.

From a business perspective, it doesn’t make sense, either. If someone pays nothing for your script, they have little incentive to make it happen. It takes a lot of energy and persistence to get a movie made, almost everyone says NO (every great script out there that was made into a great movie, was usually turned down a few times by someone else) and if an option-er knows their time is running out and they’ll get nothing on their investment (the option fee), they’ll bust a nut to make it happen.

If they risk a dollar, they can shrug and go, “Eh, maybe next script will be the one.” Because it’s just a dollar.

They’re playing Lotto with scripts rather than trying to produce them. Not good business for the option-ee. Great for the option-er, who probably has a stack of a hundred scripts they can throw out that cost them a buck apiece.

So I usually say, DON’T.

Plus, if someone wanted to option your script for a dollar, someone else who you HAVEN’T met yet may love it as well and pay you market price. On one of my first scripts, I had someone offer me a dollar option … I turned it down, and two months later, I got an offer for more from another person.

So it never hurts to say NO to a deal you don’t like, but more on that later on another post.

If the first, dollar-person shows it around to everyone (and does a bad job of it) then the opportunity is lost. So I say, 9.5 times out of 10, SAY NO to the dollar option. I’ve done it a few times, and nothing good as come from it, at least not yet.

But that doesn’t mean you should say no every single time … just 9.5 times out of 10.

WHEN SHOULDN’T I SAY NO TO A DOLLAR OPTION?

Well, it depends … there can be a lot of reasons … Let’s say you want to attach yourself as director, but that’s a hard sell. You got a producer willing to run the gauntlet for you as director, and you reward them by not charging them.

Or …

Let’s say you live in Podunk, Iowa … and you know ONE person in Los Angeles, but that person is a real producer with contacts … and you have no contacts whatsoever … then it may not be a bad idea to let him or her have the option for a short period of time while you work on your next script (and there should always be a next script, okay? Always.) … You can write a query letter to others, stating that such-and-such optioned your script, etc. Make sure you have another script ready to go. That’s something.

Other reasons? You have a relationship with someone you like, and you want to give them a chance … it’s a script you’re not really selling or optioning, its challenging material, so you’re going to let a person try and get it going.

Basically, if you know someone will bust a nut to get it made, it may be something to consider … but bear in mind, everyone will SWEAR that THAT is what they will do, when in reality they’ll probably drop you like a hot rock when the next cool thing comes along.

So it’s a real judgment call. Maybe your friend who’s dying to produce your script will be like Lawrence Bender, who was giving dance lessons and had never produced before when QT gave him a shot with RESERVOIR DOGS, and he moved heaven and earth to get the right elements attached. And succeeded.

It also depends on the material … if the script is a hard sell (tough subject, not commercial) like RESERVOIR DOGS at the time it was made, perhaps it’s something to consider. If you like them, they have good credits and a passion for it that you believe, then think about it.

But the reality is, most of the time they won’t be Lawrence Bender (sometimes he isn’t, either) so keep that in mind.

To sum up, it depends on the property and the person. But my scale still holds … 9.5 times out of 10, it’s better to say no.

If you DO agree to a dollar option, make sure it’s for a short period of time (six months, nine at the most) … they’ll kick and scream, but if they can’t do it in six months, it’s doubtful they can do it. Make that your non-negotiable point.

Trust me, you don’t want to get stuck in a bad deal for two years for a dollar. I’ve done that. It’s not fun.

Which brings us to

GET A LAWYER

My advice is, if someone asks you to option a script, is to get an entertainment lawyer to negotiate for you. They are expensive, and maybe you’ll end up paying more to the lawyer than you’ll even get for the option, but it’s worth it in the end.

Agents and Managers do know contracts, and can help, but this is what lawyers do for a living, after all. And actually, it’s a lot simpler to find a good lawyer than a good agent or manager … they bill by the hour, they’ll take your calls. While other writers may be loathe to introduce you to their agent, usually they have no problem recommending a good entertainment lawyer.

It’s especially important when negotiating the purchase price … some option contracts call for that, some do not. What that means is, if they get the property set up, they’ll know in advance what to pay for it. And you should, too. You should never agree to accept less than WGA scale (available at the WGA website) and if the option contract is going to that place, negotiating purchase price, I’d say you should get a lawyer. Soon.

But sometimes they are fairly simple things, just says the option-er is holding the exclusive rights to exploit the property for X months from option-ee …

If you’re not going to get a lawyer (and you should) then at least make sure you read everything in anything you sign very closely … you can make your demands to the option-er, and they’ll agree to them, then send a contract that says the opposite … this has happened to me (and, unfortunately, not so long ago …) and it’s on you to read the fine print.

I’ve had that happen … I’ve had offers, requested changes in the contract, the guy agreed, sent a contract and it was the exact opposite of what I asked for. I called him up and said, “Hey, this is exactly what I didn’t want,” real friendly-like, and he was like, “Oh, I’m so sorry, must of been a mistake, I’ll send another draft” and I NEVER heard from that guy again about it.

He was trying to slip it by me. It happens. That was from before I used a lawyer, of course. I think a lawyer is very necessary.

If I’d have signed without noticing, then found out about it later, he would have claimed that A) I never made that claim or B) the contract was what I agreed to, etc. That’s happened to me, too. From someone that I thought was a friend. I had emails proving otherwise, but it didn’t matter, I’d signed.

It’s especially important to have a clear, concise contract when in business with friends (as a mentor taught me). Don’t give someone the temptation of choosing between a million dollars or screwing you over … most will take the million and figure they’ll make new friends. Make the contract strong so they won’t have to make that choice. And you’ll stay friends.

So be careful when signing, but there’s no reason to be scared or nervous or paranoid … everyone wants to get the best deal for themselves that they can, and all you’re doing is coming to an accord … it’s why, in the end, it’s called an agreement.

You’ll either agree or you won’t, but don’t take it personal, either way.

Cell Phone Montage

2009-09-24T00:00:00.003-06:00

A fun link for today.

"Why don't they just call the cops?"

Many a writer has faced that simple logic problem. With cell phones it's become a bigger problem.

The most common fix?

http://fourfour.typepad.com/fourfour/2009/09/no-signal-a-supercut.html

Seeking the Magic Number

2009-09-23T15:45:00.002-06:00

("Now we're just haggling over the price." How much for your script? Guest blogger Jesse Rosenblatt gives some great info. Jesse is an entertainment attorney and a gifted screenwriter. Good guy and someone you want on your team.)

A burning question on any first time writer’s mind is – “How much will I get paid for my feature film screenplay sale?”

It’s a valid question, though a difficult one to answer. You’ve spent months, maybe even years, writing your script. You want to get paid! And you need to make sure you’re protected and don’t sell yourself short. Often times, writers are willing to forego monetary compensation in exchange for the hope they’ll receive credit on a completed film to help launch their writing career.

While I certainly understand that perspective, and in some cases it’s a valid point of view, please remember – if others are getting paid well for their contributions to the project, you should too. Every great film starts with a great script.

I want to make clear that the typical structure of a screenplay deal is not an outright purchase but rather an option/purchase agreement. Let me briefly explain what this is for those of you who are unfamiliar with the concept: an option/ purchase agreement is one where the prospective buyer (a producer, production company, studio, etc.) agrees to pay you some money (generally 10% of the potential purchase price or less) in exchange for a period of time (typically called the “option period”) where your script is off the market and the producer can develop it.

At any point during this time period (which is often a year), they may decide to exercise their option to purchase your script and acquire all your rights in it. This generally means they must pay you the full purchase price set forth in the agreement less the amount of the option payment you’ve already received.

Rather than discuss these option/purchase agreements (a topic deserving an entirely separate article), I’m just going to focus on the actual purchase price amount for your existing screenplay (not one you’re now being paid to write or rewrite).
There is no universally applied standard for the purchase price of your screenplay (although you may use the WGA – Writers Guild of America – Minimum Basic Agreement as a guideline, whether you’re a member of the WGA or not).

The amount you will receive for your first feature film screenplay sale will vary from project to project. There are several factors to consider, including:

- the demand for your script;
- who the writer is (taking into account whether the writer is in the WGA, the writer’s stature in the industry including his/her track record, etc.);
- the anticipated budget level of the film;
- if the script is based on any other underlying material;
- who the party producing the film is; and
- how many writing elements/steps the purchaser will require you to deliver (e.g., a treatment, a first draft and subsequent drafts, rewrites and polishes.

1) Fixed (or Flat) Purchase Price; WGA Minimums

For a writer seeking their first script sale, practical realities and other issues may lead smaller production companies to seek to buy your screenplay for a purchase price as low as a few thousand dollars. Whether or not to accept such an offer depends on your assessment of who the party making the offer is and your
confidence in your ability to find another buyer willing to offer more.

If the party seeking to acquire your script is a mini-major or major studio/ production company, you can expect the purchase price they’ll pay you should be at least WGA scale (e.g., the WGA’s stated minimum for its guild members), even if you’re not yet a WGA writer.

If you’re a member of the WGA, the union spells out mandated minimums to be paid for the purchase price of a screenplay by guild signatory producers. These prices currently fall between about $40,700 (for low-budget productions – i.e., less than $5,000,000) and about $113,600 (for high-budget productions – i.e., above $5,000,000). The WGA minimum schedule can be reviewed at

http://www.wga.org/uploadedFiles/writers_resources/contracts/min2008.pdf.

2) Purchase Price Tied To Production Budget

On projects set up with well established production companies or studios, often deals for screenplay purchases are done as a percentage of the budget, rather than a flat or fixed amount. So, you may expect to receive a purchase price equal to around 2.5% – 5% of the “in-going production budget” (which is typically defined as the final budget number for the film, including above and below-the-line items, less a
bunch of costs, such as overhead, completion bond fees, contingency, interest, bank/financing charges and any contingent compensation).

But if you try and apply this percentage of budget approach to a low budget feature, the purchase price amount you come up with may just seem too low (for example, for a $750,000 feature, the screenplay purchase price at 2.5% of the budget would be only $18,750 – over $20,000 less than the WGA minimum).

The purchase price is often further refined with a stated “floor” amount – maybe $25,000 – and a “ceiling” amount – maybe $150,000 – so there is a fixed minimum and maximum the purchaser knows they’ll have to pay and you know you’ll receive. The idea here is that the studio or production company is protected from overpaying and you are protected from selling your script for a price that’s too low (so if the film becomes a major production with a much larger budget, your compensation will increase accordingly).

As a general rule, no more than 5% of a production’s total budget is allotted to acquiring all of the underlying literary properties (though in the case of very low-budget or very high-budget productions this percentage may not apply). This budget item must cover the payment for any books, articles, etc. on which the script is based, as well as all payments to all writers for the initial screenplay and any
subsequent drafts, rewrites, polishes, etc. As a result, the production company must be mindful that if the“ceiling” amount is too high, this may be a hindrance in getting the movie made (since this line item in the budget will be too costly). So the purchaser will generally do their best to keep the “ceiling” amount as low as possible.

3) $__________ Against $__________

I’ve also heard it said from time-to-time that the “typical” range for new writers selling their first screenplay to an established production company or studio is $100,000 “against” $250,000 (but obviously take that with a grain of salt, particularly based on the current economic climate in the industry). This means you get paid a guaranteed fixed fee of $100,000 for your screenplay drafts (including the original draft delivered, and any additional writing steps included in the option/purchase agreement), though this fee may be actually payable in stages, with a chunk upfront and the remainder upon starting/completing writing steps.

Then, only upon some condition taking place (which condition will be stated in your
option/purchase agreement), you would get the other $150,000, which is often referred to as a production bonus.

The condition triggering this production bonus payment is usually one of the following:

- the film going into active development;
- the film proceeding to production; or
- you being the sole credited writer on the final produced film (though in this case, if you receive shared credit, you would typically only receive half of this amount, or $75,000 in my example).

The reason the production companies and studios like these structures is that they purchase many more scripts than they actually ever produce and so this protects them from overpaying for material that ends up unproduced.

4) Purchase Price As It Relates To Writing Services – Which Amounts Are “Applicable Against” The Purchase Price?

In the event that you are negotiating not only a screenplay option/purchase, but also the terms for you to render additional writing services on the same project (e.g., additional drafts, rewrites, polishes, etc.), these may be negotiated at the same time (though the terms of each may appear in separate agreements).

That said, you will need to negotiate which writing services are required from you and which optional writing steps the purchaser may elect to require from you down the road. Whatever the case, it is always important to make sure you know which of your writing steps are going to be “applicable against” your overall purchase price. This means that the purchaser will deduct the payments for those writing steps
from the overall purchase price – so when you receive your purchase price, it will be less than the amount originally stated, since you’ve received additional sums along the way as you complete writing services).

As a rule of thumb, optional writing steps are almost always applicable. But once you go beyond the required steps and optional steps set forth in your agreement, if the purchaser asks you to render further writing services, you must make sure the payments for these steps are not applicable against your overall purchase price (because otherwise, you could be in a position where you cap out and working more does not yield you any more money).

Sometimes, a purchaser will request a writer enter into an “all services deal” once the film heads into production – meaning the writer is paid a flat payment which covers all required writing services from that point forward until the film is released. These should never be applicable against your purchase price
and you should make sure some limits are placed on them so you are not stuck writing for ages if the project is dragged out.

5) Contingent Compensation (or “Back End”)

In addition to the purchase price, you can also hope that your option/purchase agreement will entitle you to contingent compensation in some form, often referred to as a “back end.”

It is not uncommon for a writer selling their first screenplay to be entitled to an amount equal to 5% of the producer’s “net profits” (or however else this concept may be defined by the party purchasing your script). This may drop to 2.5% if you receive shared credit on the finished film. Be aware that your agreement will likely grant you a percentage of the limited pool of “net profits” received by the producer rather than those of the film production as a whole.

Generally, “net profits” are monies leftover after the producer (or the production company or studio producing the film) deducts all of their expenses (whether actually paid or not). The list of deductible expenses is quite lengthy and frankly, most writers believe that you will never receive a penny from your “net profits” allotment.

In an effort to give yourself the best shot at ever seeing some money from this, I suggest you try to tie the definition of “net profits” in your agreement(s) with the same definition in the agreement of the producer and/or director, since they will likely have greater negotiating leverage based on their past precedent. The
above approach is often referred to as a “favored nations” or “most favored nations” definition, whereby your definition is ‘tied’ to that of someone else (usually the producer). This way the pool of money from which you all may receive contingent compensation will be defined, calculated and paid the same way.

Since production companies/studios have several negotiated versions of the same definition for “net profits,” you want to do your best to protect yourself from getting gypped out of money (if any is actually left after permissible deductions) which other above-the-line personnel receive.

If you’re feeling confused by all of this, you’re not alone. I urge you not to try and parse through these concepts without an experienced attorney at your side. In the event that your definition is not as beneficial as it should be and your script turns out to be a blockbuster film, this could potentially cost you millions in the long run.

In addition, you may try to negotiate additional compensation in the form of box office bonuses, which only become payable if and when the film hits certain threshold levels of theatrical box office gross receipts. In some cases, you may even be able to negotiate a bonus which is contingent upon budget level(so if the budget ends up exceeding a certain amount, you’d receive additional compensation).

In conclusion, there’s no easy way to answer the question posed, since the amount paid for any screenplay is totally determined on a case-by-case basis. Armed with the information I’ve outlined above, and hopefully a great lawyer, manager and/or agent, you’ll reach an agreement and sign a contract for your first screenplay option/purchase.

Congratulations! Going forward, the amount of your compensation from this (your most recent agreement) with be referred to as your “quote.” The next question you’ll call to ask me is “How can I raise (or “bump up”) my quote?”

Generally, as your career builds and you work on more projects, your quote should grow organically with each new deal. But three common ways to help speed up the process are:

-Have one of your screenplays green lit so the film proceeds into production and you receive credit on a completed film;
-Attract heat by selling a pitch, treatment or spec script (e.g., one written on your own with no impending buyer ready and waiting for it) in a “bidding war” where there are multiple interested parties; or
-Receive screenplay credit on a project that nets awards or has an impressive performance at the box office.

You should now have some parameters by which you can gauge your expectations. But remember, you’re a writer, not a lawyer/manager/agent – so make sure you surround yourself as early as possible with experienced and capable representation who will make your career and your success a priority. You want a team with integrity who can fight for what’s in your best interest – but only after first trying to reach a mutually amicable agreement. And let them handle all the heavy lifting. You should never try to negotiate the terms for your agreements on your own. It’s your job to write and be seen as the friendly creative force – not the negotiator.

I hope you found this helpful for providing some context to your question. I wish you all ever-increasing success!

Jesse Rosenblatt is the founder of the Law Office of Jesse Rosenblatt, an entertainment law/consulting firm servicing corporate and individual clients across all segments of the entertainment business. He has over 10 years experience working and negotiating with many of the most powerful players in the entertainment industry. For more information, please visit www.jesserosenblatt.com.

Michele Wallerstein: SOCIALIZING!

2009-09-10T13:59:00.003-06:00

(How would you like to know, before you send a script out, what a manager or agent will think of your work? With 25 years experience as an agent brokering major sales to Hollywood's top production companies, Michele Wallerstein will let you know where you are and what you need to do to get that sale. Michele has worked with me over the past year elevating the quality of my work. She's a friend, mentor, and an inspiration. Rare to find such a positive person in what can be a bleak path for the new writer. To reach Michele you can email her at novelconsult@sbcglobal.net.)

Socializing is an extension of Networking, but is not the same thing. It goes the next step in helping to ensure a longer life in professional writing. Working in Hollywood is not only about the quality of your work, but is about living in the entertainment community. You will need to become a friend and social connection with others who also live in the world of movies and television.

Networking is your first connection with the people who can give you a hand when you begin that long trek through the labyrinth that will hopefully lead you through the ubiquitous closed doors of show business. Socializing gives you the potential of establishing relationships with the Tinseltown folks who are necessary to your future. They also love the business just as you do.

You might think that writing well and even having a hit movie out is enough. Not a chance folks. One-hit wonders are a dime a dozen in every business. If you want to have staying power you’ll need friends who will open doors and give you the benefit of their knowledge and connections. Industry insiders spend an inordinate amount of time at activities that look like simple socializing interactions. The truth is that they are always working. Executives have breakfast, lunch, drinks and dinner meetings. They attend dinner parties, galas, award ceremonies, cocktail parties and screenings. Personally, I often found these events both physically and emotionally draining because while they looked glamorous and fun, they were really hard work. For example the person you are talking to may be looking over your shoulder to see who else they want to talk with. The person you want to talk with is too difficult to get close to or too busy with others. The hours are late and it’s been a long, long day. The “phonies” are all over the place and vying for your attention.

The good news is that you may run into someone who is interested in you or your project or your clients. You might meet some industry executive that you really like and will work with extensively in the future. There are endless good things that can and often do happen at these events. So, we go and go and go to as many as possible.

For writers, socializing is a combination of hanging out and going out. If you meet someone in the business that you like, you might have to make the first move and see if they want to meet for coffee or lunch. If you have the ability to throw dinner or drinks parties, then you must do so. I’ve found that mixing people who are in and out of the business is not a very good idea. People tend to want to talk to others in the same or similar fields of endeavor. Show business people talk in show business. That’s our language, that’s where we are comfortable and that’s the subject that interests us the most.

Earlier in this book I mentioned that I often orchestrated dinner parties and lunches so that my clients could meet with buyers. Not every agent does this, but it’s a good idea to ask your agent to try to put you together socially with development executives and producers. These are the people that you will need.

Whenever you are able to attend some social event you must never drink too much, talk too much or do drugs and this applies to your date or spouse who might be attending with you. This will be remembered and you will never be trusted. Certainly you will never be trusted with a writing assignment.

When you are lucky enough to attend events you will need to mention your projects. Don’t be shy about it. Everyone will want to hear about them and to put their two cents in on the creative aspects or salability of those projects. Occasionally these folks will discuss their skiing vacations or their personal lives, but not much. We all want to talk about our projects and to hear about others. Ask those questions about their work, the company and their favorite films and they will become your best friend. I don’t mean to tell you to befriend people that you don’t like. You will find there are plenty of those lurking about and you don’t need to pursue them. Find people that you enjoy and simply pursue a friendship. Remember that in business just like in childhood, it’s always good to use the buddy system.

I’ve met some of my best business friends at the aforementioned events and it has made my life easier and much more pleasant. I ask about their children and spouses, their parents and their favorite books. These are effortless ways to begin what could be very fortuitous associations.

Always keep in mind that you might be able to help someone else while you are looking for people to help you. As a writer you might have meetings where you find out information about job openings for development executives or what new projects are being developed. These are not secrets and if you share the information the recipients will “owe you one”.

All of the above presupposes that you live in Los Angeles or its environs. Obviously, if you are living somewhere that is far from the action it will be nearly impossible for you to socialize in a meaningful way. There’s always Facebook and Twitter.

It’s always possible to have a script optioned if you live anywhere. The continuation of a writing career means that you must be able to reach out and touch the right people. A writing career is not defined by selling (optioning) screenplays. A writing career means meetings, writing assignments, pitching to studio executives and to producers or development execs. It means building a foundation with your agent and others in your working world. It means getting rewrite jobs and development jobs. These are the things that will keep you in front of the pack.

For writers socializing is more difficult than writing. I understand that these pointers are hard for you to consider and even harder to do.

So……get off your duffs and call someone.

Chris Soth on MIRROR CHARACTERS

2009-09-07T14:52:00.002-06:00

(Another great guest blog from Chris Soth. As many books and articles I've read over the year on CASABLANCA, Chris provides new insight into that classic.)

MIRROR CHARACTERS OF YOUR HERO'S ARC

So, last Newsletter I was talking about how all your characters MIGHT be arranged on a "thematic continuum" where they all illustrate different aspects of your central theme –

-- and specifically, how you might create (at least) two characters as mirrors for your hero, and further, (and here's where I MIGHT be getting a bit original, at least I've never heard this said in quite this way) –

You MIGHT think of creating a mirror character at each end of your hero's character arc. That is, among your subsidiary characters might be one character who represents what your hero SHOULD BE, what he will be if s/he undergoes the change this story is driving them through, I think I called him the "YOU OUGTA BE THIS GUY" GUY, but maybe we could call him "THE SHINING EXAMPLE" – AND –

-- a character who serves as "THE CAUTIONARY TALE". That is, a guy or gal who shows us, and perhaps our protagonist, what they will become if they DO NOT change and serves as a stark warning against the folly of proceeding through life as such a flawed character.

And now, some examples:

Call me old-fashioned, but I love me the Casablanca. It's great for examples and I've learned a lot, A LOT from it, because, well...

...it's a perfect movie. It's not my favorite movie of all time, but it IS a perfect movie or as near as has ever been made, and there may not have been one since. In fact, whenever I'm stuck for a scene, or wonder what a specific Mini-Movie should be in a story, it's not long before I'm asking myself:

"What do they do in Casablanca?" And trying to apply that to the story I'm working on at the time.

But that's another newsletter...SO...

In Casablanca, we've got Rick Blaine (as portrayed by Humphrey Bogart), he's an isolationist, won't stick his neck out for nobody, and serves only his self interest, especially when it comes to the woman he loves, Ilsa…

HE OUGHTA BE: Victor Lazlo (as portrayed by Paul Henreid), a selfless freedom fighter, who sticks his neck out for everyone, everywhere – and who will gladly sacrifice anything, everything for the woman he loves, Ilsa Lund.

And in fact, it looks like this is who Rick will become as the credits roll, as his character arc has completed – "Where I go, you can't follow, etc..." he's off to become a freedom fighter, to take on the Nazis and fight for the little guy, as he used to before Ilsa broke his heart in the backstory.

But...if Rick keeps up his selfish ways, he'll never be that guy. In fact, he'll become:

THE CAUTIONARY TALE: Captain "Louie" Renault (as portrayed by Claude Rains). Here's a man who "blows with the wind" and serves only his own self-interest...and when it comes to love – Louie's happy to "whore out" any or every woman he comes across...and his doing so w/a young Bulgarian refugee serves as an object lesson for Rick at one point...

This is what Rick has to avoid – and in the end, Louie ends up changing too, and heading off into the future WITH Rick.

So, Victor Lazlo, Captain Renault...both mirrors to Rick Blaine. One is what Rick SHOULD be…the other what he COULD become...

Thanks for reading, hope this helps in your writing and thoughts about character. And if you want a brand new way of looking at story, please take a look at the eBook and DVD set at...

www.MillionDollarScreenwriting.com

Thanks "A Million",

Chris Soth

5 Easy Ways to Write Locally and Reach the World

2009-09-05T09:16:00.004-06:00

(The next two blogs will be provided by Andrew Horton. Andy is an internationally awarded screenwriter whose films include Brad Pitt’s first feature film, Dark Side Of The Sun, and the Yugoslav hit social comedy Something In Between. He is the Jeanne H Smith Professor of Film Studies at the University of Oklahoma (ahorton@ou.edu) and author of Writing The Character Centered Screenplayand Laughing Out Loud: Writing The Comedy Centered Screenplay. Andy is also the co-founder of the New Orleans Film Festival and will be honored there this October at the Fest’s 20-year anniversary.)

FIVE EASY WAYS TO WRITE LOCALLY AND REACH THE WORLD
By Andrew Horton
Oklahoma As A Case Study

This is a simple tale bout how screenwriters everywhere can write locally and reach the world. Using Oklahoma where I currently live as a case study, I am suggesting five easy approaches that can be used by screenwriters everywhere. Yes, I personally continue to work on projects in Hollywood, New York, London, Athens, New Zealand and beyond in contact with filmmakers, screenwriters, and producers. But this is my fifth year of living in beautiful Oklahoma, and I feel there is a lot in common for screenwriters here that many of you around the world share who contact me in response to my script books and workshops since I have long said that you don’t need to live in Hollywood to write and produce screenplays. My “case study” will involve my own work and that of seven local writers who I feel have a good chance to break out of Oklahoma because of their talent and because of the approaches we are pursuing.

1: SET UP AN INFORMAL SCRIPT GROUP THAT MEETS ON A REGULAR BASIS

We all need that support group we can depend on for encouragement and honest feedback! Years ago in New Orleans I taught a short script class that lasted only six weeks. The course was offered through an Arts Center and thus drew participants with a wide range of ages and backgrounds. The result was that when we wrapped up the last evening, the group on its own decided to have monthly meetings, rotating homes of the participants. I thought this was a fine idea, but figured it would last only about two or three months. I attended several of the gatherings and was impressed that they really were bringing new work to read and critique and were helping each other think of where to send completed scripts and whom to contact. Even more amazing, this original group of about 6-8 members carried on for about three years. Thus my students educated me and ever since I been encouraging other kindred souls to do the same. In Oklahoma there have already been several informal groups meeting at bookstores like Barnes and Noble and Borders, for instance, so the concept was already in place before I arrived five years ago.

But recently I have helped start up a group to bring diverse and talented folk together. To celebrate the spirit of diversity among writers, let me briefly mention some of the members. Jeff Van Hanken is a writer and filmmaker living in Tulsa who has produced films in Los Angeles, Texas and Oklahoma. For his Heart of Los Angeles Film Project, Jeff secured support from Universal Studios, Paramount Pictures, Eastman Kodak and Panavision Cameras. Another member, Gena Ellis, has served in the military and is completing an MA in screenwriting and creative writing at the University of Oklahoma and has already written some award winning screenplays. Jim Butcher is an award-winning newspaper report-editor working out of Tulsa, while Kevin Mahoney is a member of the WGA and Dramatists Guild who has returned to Oklahoma after twenty years in Los Angeles writing for Columbia Pictures, CBS Entertainment and having written plays for the Playwright’s Theatre (Los Angeles).

Two women lawyers in our group have also taken up the screenwriting calling. Sarah Lee Parrish is a staff lawyer at the Oklahoma Supreme Court by day and a screenwriter by night, and Cindy Elias has trained through the UCLA Professional Screenwriting Program and is studying acting at the same time. The only undergraduate student in the group so far is Sterlin Harjo, a Native American writer and undergraduate film and video studies student at the University of Oklahoma, who has won a Summer 2003 Sundance Script Development Fellowship. And we also have a member who has spent years in religious pursuits and as a professional hobo, Wayne Iverson. Again, the vibrant diversity of such a group is important, for it is hard to image such a variety of folk meeting as part of our or their regular daily lives. Screenwriting is what binds us together, and in person and by e-mail, we share a lot about what we are up to and what we can do with completed projects.

2: WORK WITH YOUR LOCAL FILM COMMISSION TO LIST LOCAL SCREENWRITERS AND THEIR WORK ON THEIR WEB SITES

At a recent informal meeting of our Oklahoma group, we decided to contact the Oklahoma Film Commission to see in what ways we could work together to help promote talented Oklahoma based writers. In Oklahoma we are fortunate to have Dino Lalli as the Film Commission Director. A well-known former television film critic, Dino was immediately responsive and helpful. So it is with his support that we are about to launch an Oklahoma Screenwriterssection of the Commission’s site at www.oklahomafilm.org, which should be up and running the summer of 2003.

Pull back the cameras a bit here to realize what a coup this is for local writers. You have to realize that in the United States, State Film Commissions have traditionally existed to attract big Hollywood films to their states. This seldom happens, of course. Therefore taxpayers basically pay for large parties in Hollywood where the Commissioners tell filmmakers and stars how wonderful their states are. Ditto, of course, for most national film commissions around the world.

Simply check the Internet and websites for film commissions everywhere to see how rare such listings are. But what if these commissions began to more actively help good local projects? That’s the question and really, it is an exciting new possibility for groups everywhere. At a time that some states are actually getting rid of Film Commissions— Massachusetts, for instance, the Oklahoma Film Commission under Dino Lalli’s imaginative leadership is gearing up to be very “proactive” in supporting local talent on all fronts.

A sample listing? Nothing complicated. We are thinking of simply short script summaries and briefbios such as the following: THE FANADDICT by Cindy Elias: A family drama about an Oklahoma attorney, LIZ WYATT, who is addicted to sports gambling. While working for the U.S. Attorney’s office, Liz puts her baby in a daycare located in the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. On April 19, 1995, her baby dies in the Murrah bombing. Blaming herself for the baby’s death, Liz begins gambling even more to help ease her guilt. Now in her early 40’s and an associate at a silk stocking law firm, Liz is in danger oflosing both her family and her job due to her escalating addiction. Cindy Elias has trained through the UCLA Professional Screenwriting Program. Having a talent for painting pictures with words, Cindy creates fresh characters with snappy dialogue cindykayelias@aol.com.

3: FEEL FREE TO WRITE MATRIX 5 AND DUMB AND DUMBERER, PART 4, BUT ALSO WORK ON SCRIPTS THAT COULD BE SHOT FOR A LOW BUDGET LOCALLY

Each member of our group has a script that could be done “locally,” for we realize that while writers everywhere dream of selling to the Big Guys, the fact is that there is a much better chance of getting a smaller film made and out to festivals and, hopefully, into distribution. At a recent meeting of our group, for instance, we targeted a script by Kevin Mahoney as one that could easily be shot for under a million dollars in Oklahoma. The script, Claytonis a l952 small town tale about thirteen year old Eli who is orphaned by tragedy and forced to live with relatives he has never known in Clayton, Oklahoma. Over one summer, he must come to terms with his sudden loss, gain the acceptance of a new family and survive the eccentricities of a rural Oklahoma town. Such a story has the potential of being a powerful character centered piece (do we hear echoes of To Kill A Mockingbird?!) and I think we can all see that with no “special effects,” no need for build a set, in fact, an on location shoot could be very cost effective and dramatically moving. In one sense Clayton concerns small towns anywhere and therefore could be a Kansas or Texas or Arkansas story too. But other scripts of the group are 100% tied to Oklahoma history.

Jim Butcher used to live in Pawhuska, Oklahoma where he became aware of one of the darker pages in American history: the massacre of hundreds of Osage Indians in the 20’s who owned the land with some of the best oil in the world. His script, Blood Sisters, needs a larger budget as a historical film, but we are still talking about a touching film that could be made for about the budget of MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING: Five million dollars. In my script workshops everywhere I do emphasize this point: do write at least one script that could be made without worrying about Hollywood agents, power lunches and years of optioning deals from distant producers!

4: HELP EACH OTHER FIND FUNDING FOR LOW BUDGET FEATURES THROUGH LOCAL FINANCING, PRIVATE AND INSTITUTIONAL/ GOVERNMENTAL CHANNELS

One of the recent jokes among film circles in Oklahoma is that if you had walked into one local bank a year ago and said, “I need five million dollars for a risky oil exploration deal” and another bank asking for five million to make MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING, you would have been rejected for the film investment but given the money for a shaky oil deal.

It goes with the culture and the territory, and so screenwriters and filmmakers everywhere on any local level have a job cut out for them to educate those around them about the reasons and opportunities that film investment can open up. Clearly having a few individuals with money to invest can help jump-start any project. But local screenwriters should meet up with bankers and investors and simply begin to open up a dialogue about what film investment means.

There are governmental opportunities as well. How about imitating what New Zealand has done in the past for its young filmmakers. That is, what if the Oklahoma Film Commission were funded by the State Legislature to offer a number of $100,000 “low budget” film awards each year so that a few complete Oklahoma films get made and put in festivals and theaters? We all know that New Zealand has been something of a model for attracting filmmakers and investments, but such local governmental assistance and grants have helped younger filmmakers. Such a use of taxpayers’ funds to help promote and create a local film industry can, as the New Zealand example shows, begin to bring national and international attention to your area!

5: YOU WANT TO BE A FEATURE SCREENWRITER? WRITE AND SHOOT SOME SHORTS!

More frequently these days one hears, even in Hollywood, “I don’t want to read your script unless it is sent to me by an agent, but I will watch a SHORT. What do you have?” So there is a lot to be said for feature screenwriters also writing and shooting shorts! Realize that even to say “short” is to open the door to a wide variety of possibilities, for of the many festivals specializing in shorts around the world, the definition of “short” varies from 45 minutes or shorter at a number of locations to ten minutes or less at Capalbio Fest in Italy. Think about it. In five or ten minutes you can, as in a short story, say and do a lot that exhibits your talent, interests, and potential. With the help of two of our filmmaking faculty at the University of Oklahoma—Heidi Mau and Gary Rhodes—we sent our first batch of Oklahoma shorts adding up to a 100 minute program this year to the Clermont-Ferrand International Short Film Festival in France, and we plan to continue to do so each year.

Meanwhile one in our script group has already won attention for her short script we hope will be filmed this year: ANGELA’S DECISION by Gena Ellis (short, 32 pages). Angela Jacobs, 18, has been waiting all her life in a small Oklahoma town- waiting for BILLY TURNER to come home from the Army and marry her, waiting for her mother to sober up, waiting to see if she’ll end up pregnant like most of Everly’s disillusioned young women. Angela finally quits waiting and makes a decision that will change her life. An award-winning short drama. Top 25 Winner (out of 632) in the 2002-2003 American Gem Short Script Competition. Gena is a feature screenwriter now and wants to make this a career. But her success in the short script market to date has also convinced her that she wants to continue doing shorts too. After all, don’t a lot of novelists also enjoy writing short stories?!

So there you have it … five simple ways to reach out from wherever you are living and writing! And, of course, there are more ideas, but they deserve a sequel. Meanwhile, members of our group are deciding which film festivals and summer script workshops they may attend. Write on, dear friends!

Chris Soth on WANT VS. NEED

2009-09-04T18:18:00.005-06:00

(Chris Soth, USC MFA graduate, produced screenwriter, mentor, guru, and friend is today's guest blogger. I met Chris through is wonderful mentorship program after reading his eBook. Give this a read and visit his website for more information.)

WANT VS. NEED

That's what it's all about, as far as I'm concerned. They teach this at USC... I've run across people at the UCLA Extension who've learned it there, but I haven't run across it in any of the major screenwriting books or programs – except, perhaps the ones written by the faculty I learned from at USC – take a look at David Howard's excellent books, Tools of the Screenwriter and Building a Great Screenplay. Mr. Howard is a fellow Minnesotan, and my faculty advisor while I was at USC – a disciple of the great Frank Daniel,

and a proponent of story sequencing-the parent of the The Mini-Movie Method.

So, "want versus need" – what am I talking about?

The essence of the character arc. If you visualize an actual "arc" – an arcing, curved line drawn between point A and point B (I must admit, I DO…), then…

WANT…is point A…where a character, your main character, at least, starts…

NEED is point B – where you main character will end up.

Want is point A…

Need is point B…

And the "character arc" takes your character from the first to the second…

…and if you remember your geometry, you'll know that the line defining that arc is made up of an infinite variety points
along the way.

WANT…

We should be called Human WANTS, or Human Wantings, rather than
human beings. Being is at rest, to want…is active. There is nothing more human. There is no more defining aspect of a character than what that character wants.

Just try writing a scene about a character who doesn't want anything in that scene. It's not easy. I don't want to say it's impossible, I try never to say that, but…it's tricky.

Make sure the "wantless guy" is the star of the scene – make it his/her scene…

…where's that scene gonna go?

Nowhere, right?

Because what drives the scene? Ideally, the character's want, right? Whether that's to reach out and touch someone's
heart in a love scene/love story, or to escape the gunfire of
Blofeld and his minions in an action scene…which our hero
evades because…

…he WANTS to stay alive.

The want is where character and story are inextricably bound –
what your main character wants is the engine that will drive
your story, and the more they want it, the more keenly they feel
this lack, the more monomaniacally they pursue it, the harder and
faster the story will go – so pick a great character, with a
great want and s/he will serve you well.

NEED…

…this is something of which the character is unaware. They don't want this. It's probably the last thing they want. But it's what they SHOULD want.

They need to go through this arc. They may want money, but need
love. They may want love but need to become worthy of love, they may want to become worthy of love but need to love themselves
first…

…the list goes on and on.

And even we, the audience, may be blissfully unaware of the main
character's need. But at some point – perhaps, ideally, at the same time they do, we'll become keenly aware of it -- .

IN THE TEXTBOOK CASE:

A main character pursues his want from the start of the story, or the inciting incident/call to adventure, through the body of the story…

…they do greater and greater things to get what they want, take more and more extreme measures to achieve this goal, until, perhaps, they turn a corner, and we're no longer rooting for them – we realize that achieve this WANT, without servicing this NEED would be worse than never having what we wanted in the first place…the hero realizes it too…

…and their character arc is complete. Typically at the end of what is usually called Act Two. They spend Act Three serving their need…and, usually, are rewarded with what they wanted at the very end…because they have healed their need and become worthy of it.

For more on story and how it relates to character, and the best
way of breaking a story down to its component parts, come take a
look at our ebook, dvds and seminars at
www.MillionDollarScreenwriting.com.

You may not want it yet. But you might NEED it. (Couldn't resist!).

Thanks "A Million",

Chris Soth

Emmy Winner Erik Bork: The ten most important things

2009-09-04T08:27:00.002-06:00

…that I have learned about succeeding in writing for the screen…

CONCEPT AND STORY FIRST. People tend to think screenwriting is about writing scripts (i.e. slug lines, scene description and dialogue) – those words on the page that others will read and possibly use as a blueprint for a production, in that special format unique to our medium. And yes, it is ultimately about that. But those words on the page are the final and least important step in a process that begins when you start thinking about what your script is going to be about. To put it simply, concept is king in selling your work into the marketplace, and story (the underlying choices behind what’s written on the script page) is king in deciding if it’s going to be “good” or not. The heavy lifting of screenwriting is always about these two things.
YOU MUST HAVE PASSION. When you commit to writing something, if you’re doing it for the money, and/or the desire to please and fulfill another’s vision, without having real passion and belief in what you’re embarking on, you are destined to fail. You must find your individual “take” on material that you fully believe in, and are excited about, if it’s to have any hope of working for someone else. Even if someone else tells you what they think it needs to be (and pays you to deliver that), if you don’t fully buy into that idea, too, it will show – and it will end up not pleasing anyone. You have to make it “yours.” It’s your job.
BE OPEN TO OTHERS’ FEEDBACK. There’s a specific way to do this: you don’t let “them” tell you what it should be., but you also invite real honesty from people whose opinion has earned your respect. You then look at what they have to say through this lens: “Is there an underlying concern they have that, in my heart of hearts, I agree with?” This means looking beyond their suggested “fixes” (which you should never take literally unless you love them) to find what isn’t working for them, or what the material might need to work. Especially look at issues that multiple readers share. This doesn’t mean they’re right necessarily: you have to run it all through the filter of your sensibility. But don’t be defensive, protective, and resistent. Fully weigh what they have to say, and be completely honest with yourself. Your work has to please you first, but it’s ultimate goal is to have a positive effect on others. Feedback is essential to achieving this.
YOUR INTELLECTUAL MIND DOESN’T CREATE. All it can do is record and explore and organize what has “come” to you from the source of all ideas. What is this source? I know what Mozart said: that good ideas come best when you are “completely myself, entirely alone, and of good cheer.” So a big part of the job is to do those three things, not to try to “figure out” your concept, story, character and scenes. Yes, there is intellectual work done along the way. But the receiving of good ideas is the most important “work” we ever do.
“FRESH, COMPELLING, AND REAL.” A good concept, story, character, scene, or dramatic event will ideally meet those three criteria. (1) It has to be FRESH: unique and not overly familiar – it can be familiar, but not overly familiar. Something about it should be brand new. (2) COMPELLING: It has to grab the audience and make them care about what’s happening – it must compel them to want to read or see more – and entertain them while it’s doing that. (3) REAL: It must be believable within the world where the story is set. If you don’t believe the characters would do what they’re doing, then you won’t be entertained, and you won’t care. Yes, movies and TV shows are made which don’t fully meet all these criteria, and certainly not for all audience members. But it’s a worthy mission to keep in mind.
CONSTANT CONFLICT. At every moment and in every scene there must be a problem for your characters – preferably a pressing overall story problem as well as a present-moment scene problem. There is an unanswered question that is important to them, and to us, that is driving the action forward. Whenever that doesn’t exist, the story goes slack. When characters are happy and a scene is about exploring that, the audience will always begin to yawn. There must be something threatening that happiness in the background that is still very present in our minds – and that happiness has to be partial and very temporary.
SINGULAR POINT OF VIEW. Very occasionally, a movie succeeds that is a true ensemble: a collection of mini-stories with different main characters (like THE BIG CHILL), or a “couple story” where it’s hard to define who is more central (like PRETTY WOMAN). But these are so rare, and difficult to pull off, that they are truly the exception to this rule: There must be a main character whose point-of-view we experience the story from – and whose emotions and desires we take on. Usually, they are present in (or the main topic of) virtually every scene. Be clear about whose story it is, if you want to make us care.
ENTERTAINMENT IS ABOUT EMOTION. We are not primarily trying to stimulate people’s minds by presenting them with things which are interesting. Our primary job is to stimulate them to feel something – and that’s what audiences pay us to do. At the end of the day, we all want to be uplifted into states of greater joy, greater passion, greater aliveness. We want to feel part of something we care about, relate with and feel connected to, and through that, to experience big emotions that will provide a release and escape. Some stories are about problem-solving, and some give us something useful or enjoyable that we can take into our day-to-day life. But first and foremost, we must have emotional investment to take the journey.
“IT’S REAL” IS NOT ENOUGH. Whether you’re writing about a true story, or just a type of situation or character that you know exists in the real world, every story needs to be a coherent emotional journey from beginning to end, in order to really succeed with audiences. The fact that an event was an interesting or key element that really occurred does not justify it’s inclusion. Our job is always to serve the overall concept and story, and keep the audience focused on and compelled by that. If you’re tempted to include something that wouldn’t fit into a totally made-up story, only because it’s “true” or “really happened” or seems “important” or “cool” in and of itself, but it doesn’t connect to this larger purpose, you will dilute your impact.
SEEK TO “GIVE,” NOT TO “GET.” First and foremost, what works in life also works in a screenwriting career. If your focus is on receiving money, employment, praise, or success, and you are writing in order to try to get those things, your work will never come alive and be as successful as if you are truly giving something to the world that you believe is of value, without attachment to what it might do for you. Ironically, outer success seems to always come from this pure intention, and not from trying to make something happen for yourself. It’s tempting to focus on who you can get your material to, or what you want from them, in order for you to “succeed” in your career, but you will always be better served if you focus on bettering your craft, your work, and yourself, and seeking to give something you’re excited about. Keep adjusting and adding to what you do so that you are giving more and more value, in ways that you believe in. That value will come back to you, probably through better channels than you expected: because the business – and the world – is hungry for good material.

(Special thanks to my guest blogger today, Erik Bork. Erik won an Emmy for his work on BAND OF BROTHERS. His script notes are the best I've ever received. Amazing that such a talented writer does consulting. He's reasonably priced and a nice guy. For more articles and information, check out Erik's website at www.flyingwrestler.com.)

Billy Wilder's Tips for Writers

2009-09-03T19:15:00.002-06:00

Billy Wilder is one of the all-time greats. Here are his tips:

1. The audience is fickle.

2. Grab 'em by the throat and never let 'em go.

3. Develop a clean line of action for your leading character.

4. Know where you're going.

5. The more subtle and elegant you are in hiding your plot points, the better you are as a writer.

6. If you have a problem with the third act, the real problem is in the first act.

7. A tip from Lubitsch: "Let the audience add up two plus two. They'll love you forever."

8. In doing voice-overs, be careful not to describe what the audience already sees. Add to what they're seeing.

9. The event that occurs at the second act curtain triggers the end of the movie.

10. The third act must build, build, build in tempo and action until the last event, and then -- that's it. Don't hang around.

11. You can be subtle. As long as it's obvious.

Shopping a Script Too Early

2009-09-02T22:26:00.002-06:00

A TriggerStreet poster recently asked at what point should he approach a producer. This was my response:

Wait until it's finished -- and polished (which means about 10 drafts in) before you start shopping it.

(1) If it's a great high concept you risk someone -- 'hey let me tell you about this great idea -- but the script sucks -- but listen to this!" -- hearing the idea. And using it.

(2) If they read a first/early draft and it sucks, you're out the door and the door is closed. Don't care what anyone else says on here, people in the industry (real production companies that is) work this way. They cover the script and you as a writer. If you score PASS as a writer = door closed.

BTW, early drafts always suck. Saying "I'm almost finished with this script" means "I'm about to waste your time." You want "Written and rewritten, it's polished and ready to shoot next week."

(3) The script isn't written yet and how can you pitch it if you don't know the story? You may be pitching something that's a cute concept but won't work on the page.

and

(4) Short term memory in Hollywood. From "I've got this script" to getting it on their desk -- maybe two weeks; usually one; usually the next day. So many things flying at them if you catch their attention you want to be ready to roll.

Good luck!

That post addressed this common question.

BTW, I currently have a contact to an A-list producer that would be ideal for one of my scripts. About a dozen drafts in it's still not ready. Getting notes on it form Erik Bork (Emmy winner for BAND OF BROTHERS who posted his services on DoneDealPro) and making sure it's in 'ready to film next week' shape. Producer of an Oscar-winning film.

90% plus (if you talk to people who judge screenwriting competitions it's higher than that) of the material floating around in the system should be floating somewhere else. It's not ready. May be a decent idea there or great potential but it's not executed at a professional level.

Now, Hollywood may be forgiving a bit if the script is a high concept they love. The execution can be improved by the screenwriter or someone they bring in to rewrite it (which happens often) but the concept can never be improved. This is why it is so critical to spend your precious writing time working on scripts that have a chance of getting you in the game.

Shorted Out

2009-09-02T21:57:00.002-06:00

Short scripts. Why should a screenwriter write them? And what to do with them when finished?

First, I should mentioned Zoetrope.com. That and TriggerStreet provide peer review opportunities. After you have legally protected your work (I suggest a copyright and submitting that online -- easier and safer) you can submit to these sites and trade reviews with other writers. The systems are run on a point/exchange method and both sites are run very well.

After you have completed the short you can get feedback through swapping reviews on Zoetrope or within your film community. There are books on writing short scripts (amazon.com) and make sure you nail your genre, your character arcs, and you've written it budget appropriate. There are some who spend $25,000 and up on short films but writing to budget gives you the opportunity of shooting it yourself.

With a polished short you can then do the following:

1. Shoot it yourself. With digital video the costs come down every day. You can also rent pro-quality equipment. Sound is a particular problem area with indie films so budget for that. Most actors work inexpensively/free to get a demo reel.

2. Work with an aspiring filmmaker. You can network with them by posting your script on simplyscripts.com. InkTip allows you to post a description of your short script for free. You can search "Hoover" on simplyscripts to see several of my scripts. You can search on youtube "once bitten twilight" and see two filmmakers that turned one of my scripts into short films.

3. Contests. There are contests with categories for shorts. Many of the winners have been made. Contest win attracts attention.

Ideally your filmmaker will intend on submitting the material to film festivals. IMDB allows for shorts to be posted on the site if they have been accepted into the more prestigious festivals. Start building that list of credits.

Rates vary for the price of a short. I grant permission to use my short scripts for free but retain the copyright/ownership. That's working with student filmmakers and I'm sure those intent on pursuing it further may require some type of agreement. Make sure to consult with an entertainment attorney if possible. The main issue is what happens if your short becomes a feature film? You want to retain ownership of your characters and concept and have the short film be a springboard to a feature.

Finally, screenwriting is a career of many delays. Waiting, more waiting, and waiting to wait. Having your work turned into a film is good motivation and keeps momentum moving forward. Positive things are happening and your work is getting seen.

Why You Don't Want An Agent

2009-09-02T15:32:00.003-06:00

Many new screenwriters devote time, money, and effort chasing that agent that'll get their career going. Here's my advice: Don't do this.

Cathy Tarr, head of the Script Department at C.A.A. told me a few months ago at the Nashville Screenwriter Conference (great event, btw) that, "We find you." In other words, "Pursue your craft, develop your skill, and that will lead to success. The success may be a contest win or placing or a local play produced or short film getting attention. Then when you've had that success we find you."

What you really need is to make sure your script is pro quality. Have you had it critiqued by professionals who can give you studio-style coverage so you know it's ready to compete? Remember, you're not competing against amateurs, you're script must be as good -- actually BETTER because you have no track record -- as that from a working professional.

After that you can enter contests. ScriptSavvy is a monthly contest that provides notes. Good place to test the waters. After you've written and rewritten your script 5, 10, 20 times and it's ready to go move up to other contests.

Be careful with your genre selection. Comedy, horror, and thrillers sell. Dramas don't. Period pieces don't. Female protagonists are a tough sell as well because (at least the perception is) they are tougher to market as fewer female stars can "open" films -- that all-important first day.

These scripts do get attention at contests but generate few script requests even when they finish first place. I know of one writer who won a major contest (top 5) and had two script requests because of the genre. With so many obstacles facing a new writer, why make it harder? Of course, if it's your PASSION project and a story you must tell -- go for it. It'll get attention as a great piece of writing and maybe it'll capture the attention of that A-lister that can get it made.

Many writers then begin seeking agents. Don't! What you need is a producer who is on board to make your film. Find production companies and producers, network to them through friends or consultants or contests, and get the deal in hand. Then go to the agency you want with a slam-dunk deal. Depending on the agency it will need to be more than the indie/low budget deal.

What agency do you want? Recognizing that the one person who is responsible for marketing your career is YOU -- you do the work even after you sign with a smaller agency -- the ideal agency is one that can package you with other elements. The studio is looking at this script with this actor attached. Tougher for them to pass.

Don't externalize control over your career. Saying, "If I got this agent I'd make it" or "If I had good luck or connections..." All of that is self defeating. All you need is your great screenplay that you've worked over so it's a fast / can't put it down read. With that in hand all of the doors magically open. And who has complete control over your screenplay? You do. Focus on that script (and most will tell you to have a body of work -- at least three scripts) before you break in.

Julie Gray in a conference call through the Gary Goldstein mentorship program (another great resource -- visit Gary's website) said the average screenwriter lasts 3 years and writes 3 scripts. The average professional screenwriter though takes 10 years and 10 scripts to break in. As Woody Allen said, "90% of success is just showing up."

So, show up! Be persistent. Shut out negativity and focus on ... positivity! And enjoy the ride.

I'll keep you posted here on my progress. My goal is to cut that 10-year process into 2 years. One year in and getting there!

Write on!

Advice from Agents/Managers

2009-09-02T15:30:00.000-06:00

A friend in Los Angeles sent me this:

Went to a Writer's Boot Camp agent/manager panel last night and
learned some interesting things:

- Don't write dramas. Not this year. Comedy and action are both doing well.
- Query and send your script to fifty producers. If you get a
positive response from any of them, use that as a intro to query a
manager - so and so at this company read the script and liked it...
- Don't bother trying to get an agent without serious referrals and
some credits.
- Persist, persist, persist.

Advice for Screenabes 2

2009-07-21T21:28:00.000-06:00

For query letters I notice a lot of writers include statements that carry unwanted subtext.

For example:

1. "If you've been tryin' for years we've already heard your song." ('Death or Glory' by The Clash.

This is the I've written 20 screenplays and been at this for 17 years with little or no success.

Goal of writer: To show commitment and impress them with your effort. You're in for the long haul.

Subtext: Everyone's seen my work and hated it and I'll never make it. I'm a has been before I ever started.

Fix: Better to be 'discovered' by someone and give them the satisfaction of finding the shiny new star. I wouldn't put anything on the resume' older than 2 years. You just dashed out this screenplay (your 2nd or 3rd) and you're a true find.

Of course, not true. Takes on average a decade to break in and ten scripts. Never let 'em see you sweat though.

2. The Michael Myers screenplay. This script never dies and the writer works on it only to have it show up again and again and... You get the idea.

Query will contain something like, "This script has undergone 176 rewrites. I've been working on it 3 years. 572 people have read it including 47 consultants."

Goal of Writer: Impress the reader with their effort.

Subtext: I got a stale script that everyone, including my dentist, has seen. I can't do assignment work because it takes me a week to write a sentence. I'm stuck like a skip in a CD. I may only have one idea and can't even get that right.

Fix: The script is here. They'll see the effort in the work. Here's the pitch. Read it. Less effort you appear to have done to accomplish great work implies, "Wow, some secret font of genius is there!" Michael Jordon was genius in motion because of the thousands of hours of work he put in to get there. But all we want to see is the result.

3. The "I'm not a pro" adjectives.

Writer will say something like, "I'm an aspiring screenwriter and I'm hoping you can help hand me a career on a silver platter. I've got an optioned feature screenplay."

Goal of writer: Not to appear cocky. Humble and I'm nervous even writing this letter.

Subtext: I'm a frackin' loser.

"Aspiring" = bad. Not a real pro but a wannabe.

"One option" -- for a dollar to your uncle. How about "Feature in pre-production"? Which it is technically.

"Placed third in Iowa Beefiest Screenplay Contest." How about... "Award-winning screenwriter..."?

Fix: Be cocky. You're a pro. They need you. You're the one that they make money off of -- YOU'RE the talent and creator. You ARE a screenwriter.

You are moving forward and the train has left the station. Hop on but I'm rolling down the tracks with you or without your sorry ass and you'll feel like a schmuck when you blew your chance cashing in.

A healthy dose -- not total prickdom -- of self-confidence is a sign of a professional in any field. Focus on the material -- just read this script. It'll say the rest.

4. Shotgunning.

"I have seven screenplays and here are the loglines..." BLAM BLAM BLAM! Game over.

Writer's goal: I have no idea what they want. Who knows? Fuck it. Try them all.

Subtext: I have all kinds of crap here -- all shapes and sizes -- and have no clue which you may want. I didn't go my research to know you already have a thriller about circus clowns in pre-production. Plus, I've been at it ten years and have a huge stack here. Read them all. Please!

Fix: Target ONE script with each letter. Don't want to have a dozen unsold scripts. They know you got 'em but don't say.

If other people have additional suggestions post them under COMMENTS.