As a participant in the defunct WGA
Mentor Program, I not only got questions from people who stumbled
upon my site and wanted to know where I get all my ideas, but from people
who stumbled upon the WGA site and wanted to know where I get all my
ideas.
You too can participate
in the program to get people to stop asking me the same goddam
questions.
If the question you have in mind has already been answered below,
voila,
you don't have to ask it.
Free
Poster!
My Flowchart Guide to a Screenwriter's Life
Dear
Dr:
As you can
probably gather, I'm
an aspiring scriptwriter. I love to write, love it, from thinking
something
up to writing the last line, it's the best feeling in the world. I've
written
one full-length script, one episodic drama, and have several other
works
in progress. What I need help on is how to get started. Should I find
an
agent first? If so, where should I start? Who would be a good
judge
of what I've written? Anything you have to offer would be greatly
appreciated.
J.C.
J.C.,
Basically you're
fucked. There's no way in. Forget it. Welcome to the wonderful world of
Catch 22, where you can't get an agent without credits, you can't get
credits
without a job, and you can't get a job without an agent. All you can do
is exploit whatever meager contacts you have to the fullest and don't
stop
until someone notices you. Whatever it takes. Make the news. Write a
best
selling book, but then you'll need a LITERARY agent, who won't be
interested
unless you have credits, etc.
If you love writing,
who says it has to be screenplays? Van Gogh painted more than flowers.
Write journalism, write for Madison Avenue, write press releases. A
newspaper
once assigned me to interview an actor. During the interview, the actor
actually asked me if I had a script for him. You never know where that
break is going to come from.
(this is my boilerplate signoff for every letter. I won't repeat it.)
For an excellent collection of do's and don'ts for screenwriters, including proper formatting, check out Crafty Screenwriting.
At Funds for Writers there is an amazing list of links for writers, including grants and contests.
Very useful:
Tony Bill's list of 12
things for writers NOT to do before sending a script out.
.
Also, don't miss Screenwriter's
Utopia and Screenwriters
Online, The
Scriptwriter's Network, and Ink Tip
(They have an excellent newsletter that tells you what producers are
looking
for what kind of scripts).
CS Daily at is absolutely mandatory reading. Their daily newsletter is incredibly well written, constantly fascinating, better than Variety and Reporter, and best of all, free.
At Triggerstreet, you can post your script and get feedback from other screenwriters.
For information on the interactive industry, checkout the website of Terry Borst
Most importantly, read as many scripts as you can. You can download them from Drew's Script-o-Rama, Scripts, the new Internet Movie Script Database, or buy them at Hollywood Book City.
Here's an excellent guide to web venues for filmmakers.
Ready to submit your work? Here's a list of links to producers and production companies, go to the WGA for a list of agents.
Want to just produce it yourself? Go to Film Proposals.
Want a job on a film crew? Go to Mandy.com or the Film & TV Connection.
Hey, I don't blame you. Fuck screenwriting. Go to Journalism Jobs, or write a book and go to Literary Agents.
And the single
most important piece
of screenwriting advice you will ever get?
From Strunk and White
Do not say, "He showed
satisfaction
as he took possession of his well deserved reward."
DO say, "He grinned as
he pocketed
the coin."
Good luck,
You'll need it.
Keep me posted,
MD
Hi,
I'm a sixteen
year old trying to
build a portfolio of videos that I can show to film schools
and such.
The one problem I have whenever finding a new idea is that my
brain
goes into a complete dead lock. Mainly because there are so many ideas
out there and so many variations of them. I feel I can never
be original.
Do you have any methods for thinking up an idea that I would
really
like as well as it being original? Thanks.
-Mike
Dear Dr.,
Just a short peek
at my site should indicate that ideas ain't my problem. I got a million
of them and so do most people in Hollywood. Fuck ideas. Ideas are a
dime
a dozen. Everybody's got 'em and no one wants 'em. What's important, my
dear friend, is execution. What you, and only you, can do with an idea.
It doesn't matter what the idea is or whether it's good or
bad. If
you've got what it takes to be a wordsmith, a practitioner of
sentences,
not to mention paragraphs, you should be able to take anything you
think
up yourself, or anything that anyone gives you, and make it more than
readable.
Maybe it's just
my background as a journalist talking, but I pride myself on my ability
to take any lame ass assignment from a hack editor and turn it into
gold.
That's what writing's all about. Stop worrying about whether your ideas
are any good. Take it from me. They're not. It's the way you write them
that makes them special. A narcotics officer trying to bust a drug
dealer
isn't a particularly good or original idea but take a look at what
Robert
Towne did with it in "Tequila Sunrise." Brilliant, not because of the
idea,
but because of what he did with it. "What is it, Nick, do you need some
chapstick or something, because your lips keep getting stuck to your
teeth,
or is that your idea of a smile?" would be a great line of dialogue in
ANY movie.
Here's an idea.
Take the stupidest idea you've got and just write it, or make a video
of
it. File it under "Stupid ideas." Then take some of your best ideas and
file them under "Good ideas." Then take someone else's idea and do
something
with it. They'll never notice. The best of those, develop further. Keep
going until your files are full. Practice. Develop your skills, because
whatever you're doing now, your next one's going to be better because
you
just learned from experience. You're young. You still don't know what
you're
best at, so do everything. Though it's easy to get pigeonholed, people
who hire artists generally like artists who can do anything.
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
I am
interested in making my own
films. I am looking for effective ways to write. How much stage
direction
is it a good idea to give in a script?
Gary
Gary,
There are two kinds
of scripts, the selling script and the shooting script. The selling
script
tells the story to everyone pre-production, hoping to get you INTO
pre-production.
Once you're actually making a movie, you use a shooting script which
tells
all the people involved precisely what they're going to need for each
shot.
In many cases, there's not much difference, but sometimes the
differences
are enormous, especially when the selling script is written by a
director
who intends on directing the script.
I often show people
my copies of Stanley Kubrick's script for "Full Metal Jacket," and Hal
Ashby's script for "Vital Parts." Both directors knew that they were
going
to be on the set directing the movie, so they left everything out of
their
script that they knew they would be telling the crew members
personally.
If you know you're going to be telling the actor to perform a certain
way,
why tell the producers and the cinematographer and everyone else who is
going to be reading the script? It's between you and the actor, so you
leave it out of the script. Same thing with camera moves. You're going
to be working out the camera moves with the cameraman. Why tell the
composer?
Same thing with sound cues and edit cues. Kubrick and Ashby's scripts
don't
contain ONE SINGLE stage direction. They are frustrating reads because
you haven't a clue what Kubrick and Ashby actually intended on doing
with
the script. Everything that will eventually make the film a Kubrick or
Ashby film is very deliberately left out of the script, like it's no
one's
business HOW they've going to make it work. The reader simply has to
trust
that Kubrick and Ashby know what they're doing.
You cannot afford
to do this unless you are Stanley Kubrick or Hal Ashby, or unless you
actually
have the money in place to make your movie without interference. If
neither
of these circumstances fit your bill, then what you are writing is a
selling
script, a script that quickly and succinctly describes a dynamite movie
with a minimum of flourishes, a script that isn't full of itself but
simply
tells a story that hopefully others will want to hear.
What's the ratio
of dialogue to action? The answer is more visual than anything else.
Readers
are in a hurry. They like to see space broken up into nice digestible
chunks,
just like your cat. Throw in a giant blocky paragraph that fills half a
page and no one will read it. They'll just skip ahead to the next piece
of dialogue. Sure, there are times when a whole page is just dialogue,
and there are times when a whole page is just action, but you space it
out. If a building explodes, give a whole line to
"Ker-blloooooooooooeeeeyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!"
MD
Hi
Dr. Hollywood,
I have gotten
some positive attention
from a coming-of-age comedy feature I wrote, but no sale yet. I am
concerned
with a note I received from a low-budget producer who told me that the
dialogue needed to be punched-up. I asked what he thought it needed,
and
he said, "a lot more profanity." He told me "real" teenagers cursed a
blue
streak, and mine were too mild. He added that you couldn't make a
teenage
movie without the f-word or the s-word. I promise you these kids don't
spend the movie in prayer, but I haven't found the need to use those
words
so far. Although if it meant a sale, I would probably fill the air with
profanity, but do I need to?
Thanks,
Ray
Ray,
There's no such
thing as the final version of a script. The final version of the script
is the movie. Before any of a script is committed to celluloid, it will
be constantly fine tuned down to the last minute. Maybe when writers
used
Royals, when every word they wrote was committed to paper as they wrote
it, there was a reason to believe in their work as a final product, to
be just flung into the maw of production. But now, in the land of
search-and-replace,
major re-writes can take seconds.
You got a shithead
producer who wants to liven up the goddam second act with some fuckin'
profanity? What's your fuckin' problem? Shouldn't take more than an
hour.
Give it to him. He'll fuckin' sell it or he won't. If he does, you got
a fuckin' movie. If he doesn't, you didn't fuckin' DELETE the first
version,
did you? You may end up with five versions of your script, one full of
fucks and damns, one with a totally extraneous lesbian love scene, one
in outer space, one at the bottom of the ocean, and one with a whole
new
part for the producer's girlfriend. Whatever it takes, man, whatever it
takes.
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood:
As a
screenwriter, who has yet
to sell a script, my question: is it easier to sell a TV Movie Script
or
a Feature Film Script?
Fred
Fred,
When I first joined
the WGA, I attended a meeting for new members. At the meeting, the
president
of the WGA asked all the new members who had gotten in through a
feature
script sale to raise their hands. About 1/4 did. Then he asked all the
new members who had gotten in through a TV series sale. About 3/4
raised
their hands. Then he asked all the new members who had gotten in
through
an MOW sale to raise their hands. I did.
So I would have
to say that MOWs are indeed the toughest route into the industry. All
MOWs
are written by five network approved guys. (an exaggeration, but not
much)
MOWs have a very specific format, unlike real movies where pretty much
anything goes. That isn't to say it's impossible, just that the more
likely
route would be the one I took. I sold a seven-act treatment for an MOW
that got written by one of those five guys.
Is there a basic difference in marketing strategy?
Absolutely. Films have a million markets. Though cable movies have their own criteria, network MOWs are aimed at housewives.
Is writing for TV more relationship based, character based, theme based than writing for the big screen?
Every network will
give you different answer to this question. Showtime seems sex based.
The
networks like true stories. On the big screen, anything goes.
Please don't let
any of this discourage you from writing. Just know that if you're
writing
something for television, that it will more than likely be considered
to
be a writing sample than something anyone will actually buy. It's a
tool
for getting assignments.
One strange rule
of television is that you shouldn't submit a writing sample for a show
to the actual show, i.e. submit your "Drew Carey" writing sample to
"Just
Shoot Me," not "Drew Carey." Why? Because the producers of "Drew Carey"
know so much more about the show than you do that they are much more
likely
to pick up on mistakes. You could easily have a character say something
that they know he would never say, and suddenly you're history. On the
other hand, writing for the big screen you've actually got a chance of
someone buying it and making it the way you wrote it.
MD
How do you plan out an animated feature as opposed to a live action feature?
Charlie
Charlie,
Sorry to say that
most animated features are developed "in house." That means that nobody
submitted a "Hercules" script to Disney. They were just sitting around
trying to come up with a new film, somebody got out their old mythology
book and said "Hey, what about Hercules?", and they hired someone to
write
it, probably themselves. The discussion was never open to the public.
Warners,
Fox, all of them now have animation divisions and that's pretty much
how
they work.
Now that I've discouraged
the hell out of you, I've got to say that doesn't mean you shouldn't
write
one. Just accept the fact that it will more than likely be considered a
writing sample than something anyone will actually make.
As for the actual
writing, Harry Shearer once told me that the great thing about writing
"The Simpsons" instead of any other sitcom was there were no budgetary
restraints. Putting an earthquake into an episode of "Drew Carey" would
be pretty expensive, but it doesn't cost any more to draw an earthquake
than it does to draw people sitting in their living room. Writing for
animation
gives a lot of freedom from worry about cost.
Though writing
for TV animation has very specific formatting, writing an animated film
isn't that different from writing a regular feature. Just remember to
take
total advantage of the genre. There are things you can do with
animation
that are pretty impossible with regular film, though the line is
disappearing
steadily every day. Check out "Dr. Doolittle," which, ten years ago,
would
have had to have been a cartoon.
My question is about structure for a half hour sitcom. Is it always necessary to have three acts? In my pilot, I am trying to introduce the characters AND situations, and it feels as though I only have one, long act. Also, typically, is a half hour sitcom typically about a 50 page script, or how widely will it vary depending on sight gags, dialogue, etc?
Steven
Steven,
THE ANSWER YOU WANT TO
HEAR...
Sitcoms have a
very specific formal structure. Don't follow the structure and you may
as well have the word "amateur" carved on your forehead. It's like
architecture.
There's only one correct way to format a blueprint if you want your
building
to get built. When you talk about sitcoms, you're talking about
"commercial"
television, which means that the show exists only as a means to sell
commercial
space, which means of course it has to come in acts. Not only does it
have
to come in acts, but each act except maybe the last has to end in some
form of cliffhanger so that viewers will stick around through the
commercials
to find out what happens next. And that's just one of dozens of rules
that
are absolutely inherent to the art form. You better have at least three
out-and-out gags and/or punchlines per page too. I would have to say
that
you shouldn't even attempt to write one without reading some first.
Rule
of thumb - one page of script equals one minute of screen time. By all
means, check out Sitcom
Writers: Masters of their Domain.
THE ANSWER YOU
DON'T WANT TO HEAR...
Am I to understand
you're trying to sell a PILOT? Ha! And again, HA! A pilot is something
with even more rules than a regular sitcom script. Pilots are
accompanied
by a BIBLE, which completely outlines the show, with intricate
descriptions
of all characters, sets, relationships, and a list of enough potential
plots to show that you can fill a season. Your chances of selling a
pilot
to a network without a bible or any experience writing sitcoms is
roughly
equal to your chances of being struck by a meteorite. It's like trying
to get your first job as a journalist by applying for a regular daily
column.
No editor in his right mind will give a column to someone inexperienced
with deadlines and working with the long line of editors that all
newspaper
copy must go through. Columns go to writers with proven track records
of
getting copy in on time, and TV pilots get bought from runners,
experienced
TV writers and/or producers and/or popular stand-up comics who are
teamed
up with experienced TV writers and/or producers.
Get some experience
first. Write a "Seinfeld." I know it's off the air. You're not writing
to get the script produced, you're writing to show you can write
ACCORDING
TO FORMULA. Then write a "Just Shoot Me." Show you can handle anything.
To continue with the architecture analogy, potential clients don't look
at the blueprints of architects with the idea of buying a blueprint and
building it, they look at the blueprints with the idea of hiring the
architect
to build something that they want built. Same thing with sitcoms.
You're
not trying to get your sitcom script made, you're using it to show what
you're capable of, with the hopes of getting hired to write something
else.
Once you've got a couple of dynamite writing samples under your belt,
you've
got a shot at that first job - a writing assignment where THEY will
most
likely give YOU the plot, and then they will completely rewrite you
after
you hand it in. Then, after you've got a couple of seasons of a hit
show
under your belt, maybe, just maybe, somebody in a position of power
will
agree to hear your idea for a new show. But even then, don't count on
it.
GENUINE ADVICE...
Sounds like you've
got a good idea that you're excited about. Write it. Don't worry about
commercials. Make it a script for a low-budget film. Make up the rules
yourself. Tell your story. After you're done, maybe you've got a
feature,
maybe you've got something that can be reformatted as a TV movie that
can
function as a pilot for a regular series. Get that first draft out of
the
way, THEN get technical and figure out what to do with it.
MD
ANOTHER ANSWER TO THE SAME QUESTION:
Sitcoms are precise.
Write a movie and you can get away with fucking with the formula a
million
different ways. People are going to sit through it from beginning to
end
without interruption, so you can go ahead and complicate things because
you are assured that you've got the complete attention of your
audience.
If it takes 105 minutes or 115 minutes to tell your story, nobody
really
cares. Go ahead and wait 20 minutes before introducing your main
character.
You can get away with it in a film.
But write a sitcom
that plays 35 minutes long and you will get very strange stares.
Sitcoms
are a formula that cannot be fucked with. "Married with Children" came
close to exploding every single sitcom cliche, but it did it within the
traditional boundaries.
You wanna write
a sitcom? Here's what you do. Pick your favorite sitcom, tape it, and
transcribe
the tape all by yourself. Get it down precisely. Don't go out and buy a
book on how to write. Sure, you can check out someone else's script to
learn the formatting, but if you want to do it yourself, do it
yourself.
If you wanted to learn guitar, you'd start out by learning someone
else's
song, wouldn't you? Same thing. Develop your skills by writing someone
else's script. There's no better practice. Keep it up. Pick another
show
and transcribe that. After a while you will be able to see, in your own
handwriting, what a sitcom is supposed to look like. Look at the ratio
of dialogue to action. Look where the commercials are placed. Look at
what
happens just before every commercial. Got a word processor? Time to
write
your first original sitcom? Go into overtype mode. You've got a
template
sitting right in front of you.
MD
I wrote an interesting screenplay about major institutions that all conspire unwittingly with each other to engage two brothers into a web of dishonesty. i have only submitted it to two independent companies. one said it would cost to much to make. the other said that the lead character was unbelievable. what is the key to making a believable character in a fish out of water case.
Tim
Tim,
There's no key
to making characters believable other than making them adhere to the
film's
own sense of internal logic. Characters that are believable in one
movie
would be completely unbelievable in others. I buy Rambo in Vietnam. I
wouldn't
buy him at a Manhattan cocktail party in a Woody Allen movie. The king
of "fish out of water" movies was Hitchcock. Buy them, rent them, read
them. "North by Northwest" particularly. Cary Grant was nothing like
me,
yet I identified, and so did everyone else, because of the way he
handles
his situation. Is it your character that's unbelievable or just some of
the things he does? "Fish out of water" stories are fantasy
fulfillment.
Is your character a couch potato? Make him jump off cliffs. Is he shy
around
women? Get him laid.
And who says your
character is unbelievable? A producer? This is a man you trust? Was he
just giving you the brush-off, or was his criticism valid? Only you can
decide.
MD
Hi
Dr. Hollywood.,
Please give me
one simple tip on
writing comedies. I can write drama, and tell hilarious jokes, but I
don't
know how to write comedy.
Thanks,
Omar
Omar,
I can't tell you
how to be funny. Either you're funny or you're not. But the best way to
learn anything is to copy the masters. If you wanted to learn pop
piano,
I'd recommend buying some Elton John songbooks and learning the piano
parts
verbatim. Want to learn how to write comedy? Got a VCR? Take your
favorite
comedy and transcribe it word for word. There, right in front of you,
will
be a comedy script where the action and dialogue are someone else's but
the words are yours. See how it reads. You'll find things in the movie
that are hysterical but which lie flat on the page. You'll find things
that you didn't know were funny until you wrote them down. Getting it
down
on paper is a skill that you can only learn through practice. Keep
working
on it until your script is as funny as the movie. Then start your own.
MD
Dr.
Hollywood,
I was
wondering the necessity of
transitions (such as CUT TO:) because I know that it
interrupts the
flow of reading it.
Tommy
Tommy,
CUT TOs, which
I used to use a lot, have fallen out of favor lately for several
reasons,
but one main one. It is not wise to tell the director what to do. When
directors read in a script that they are supposed to "pan left and pull
in close to the defendant's shoe," once making the film, they will
invariably
end up cutting to a close-up of the shoe instead. Directors don't like
being told how to move their camera by a script. That's a decision they
like to make on the set with their director of photography. Directors
also
don't like being told how to edit the film. Those are decisions they
like
to make with their editor. Telling the story is the writer's job.
Moving
the camera is the director's, and cutting is the editor's. Do you
really
feel cocky enough to tell an editor, who may have awards up the wazoo,
whether he should be using a cut or a cross fade between two scenes? I
think not. The fact that there's another slugline indicating a
different
location should make it pretty clear that the film is going somewhere
else,
and that there should be a cut. Leave out the CUT TOs. They're
unnecessary.
MD
Hi,
I'm adapting
my first novel into
a screenplay and I don't really want to use any narrative V.O. except
at
the end although I'm tempted to since the book is in first person. How
much of a groaner are scripts with narrative V.O. these days?
Mark
Mark,
In journalism I
use the first person all the time, but in scripts I try not to simply
because
you always end up having to defend it, no matter how justified it is.
"Police
Squad" uses narration because it's a satire of narration, so no one
complained.
"Bladerunner" used narration so it would sound like Raymond Chandler
and
everyone complained so much that the film was eventually re-released
without
the narration. (I'm one of the few who LIKED the narration)
I wrote a script
that was about me. I was the main character and I narrated. Nobody
complained,
and when it got made, after many severe rewrites, one of the few things
that survived was the narration. So there are no hard and fast rules.
If
you think the story needs it, go ahead. Just don't substitute narration
for action.
MD
Dr.
Hollywood,
Hi there, my
name is Sean. I am
a CG animator, with about five years experience in creating visual
effects
for feature films. My last project was as the computer graphics
supervisor
for my company's efforts on Armageddon. I'm also an aspiring writer,
obviously.
I have completed my third feature script, the first one that I feel I
can
show to others. I sent it to one agent at Broder, Kurland, but he
passed.
now I'm submitting it to contests and some creative execs at a couple
companies
around town.
PLOT DELETED
It's vaguely
interesting, but my
question is this. . .how do you pace the different plots? I have
several
things going on- when I try to juggle the different plots, I don't know
how to keep all the balls in the air.
Dean
Dean,
First of all, it
sounds like you've got a pretty funny idea for a movie. Just don't be
surprised
if some bright studio exec says "Can the cat be a walrus?"
Second, don't send
it out blind. You're in the biz. Use your contacts. The kinds of people
who hire you to do effects are the same ones who read scripts. Be
tactful,
but explore the possibility of giving your script to absolutely
everybody
you've ever had business contact with.
Third, but only
if it's perfect, because you only get one shot. It better be the
funniest
fucking script about three agents ever written, full of insider jokes.
It's not the idea but the execution that will get your screenwriting
career
off the ground.
How do I do it?
Lots of my scripts have multiple story lines. Sometimes I write them
separately
and collate. Usually I work it out first with cards on a wall, with
each
story a different color card, so that I can see the relationships
visually.
If one story line seems shorter than the rest, maybe it needs another
card.
Have fun with transitions
and don't be obvious. I like doing the exact opposite of what you
described.
I'll have someone say "Boy, I sure look forward to basking in the sun,"
and then cut to them locked in a freezer.
Most importantly,
use what you've got. If you've got access to high end CG equipment,
write
something that'll show off the equipment and produce a demo reel
yourself.
Nothing helps getting a project made these days more than visual aids.
Just look how much money's been made lately with a fucking talking
Chihuahua.
MD
Dr.
Hollywood:
Would you Dare
to help me with
a research paper that I have due in one week? Allow me to introduce
myself,
my name is CJ and I am a filmmaker/student at the Academy of Art
College
in San Francisco. I am graduating next spring and have the plans to
return
back home, in Los Angeles afterwards. As a filmmaker, I am interested
in
Directing & Writing for films as well as Directing Music
Videos, therefore
I need to find the following info for the two types of directors; film
and music videos. What is the average salary of the position I desire?
CJ,
Call the DGA (Director's
Guild of America) in Hollywood. They will have all your answers but you
may have to be sneaky. You could just call as yourself, a student doing
research, but my hunch is they'll blow you off. The best way would be
to
pretend you're a producer making an independent film who is about to
hire
a director. They will be much more likely to answer the question "How
much
can I expect to pay one of your members?" than "How much can I expect
to
get paid when I become a member?" They will go out of their way to find
work for their members, just as they will go out of their way to stop
yokels
like us from digging up dirt. They probably have a booklet called a
"Schedule
of Minimums." Get it. They will ask if your production company is a
signatory
to the guild. Ask for an application. You've got to be a good actor
with
a prepared back story to pull this off because you will probably get
grilled.
What SPECIFIC skills must a director in the film/music industry need to know how to do?
The most specific
skill a director in the film industry must have is the ability to have
relatives in the industry who will give him work. The most specific
skill
a director in the music industry must have is the ability to schmooze
rock
stars into believing that they are going to make them look great.
If you don't have
a resume or a demo reel, the best advice I can give you is to get
yourself
on a set any way you can so that you can actually see for yourself what
a tedious job you're going after. I got on sets as a journalist doing
stories
and interviews. You can get on because you're willing to do nothing but
get coffee or count jelly beans or whatever ridiculous task needs to be
done in exchange for nothing more than the privilege of attending the
shoot.
They're called interns, and that's what you want to be. Learn the art
of
hanging around and watching intently while not getting in anyone's way.
Soon you will discover someone on the set who is doing a job that you
know
you could do better. It might be the director, it might be the caterer,
who knows. Just send query letters to production companies who do the
kind
of work you want to do and offer your services for free as an intern.
If
you've got anything on the ball at all, I guarantee one of them will
take
you up on it.
MD
Dr.
Hollywood,
Since about
mid-April, five different
agents have had (at their request) a feature film script of mine. I
haven't
heard back from any of them. Is this normal? Is there something about
this
time of year that makes them especially busy? Should I be reading
anything
into this? Should I shut up and get working on the next two instead of
wringing my hands over the first one?
David
David,
Well enough time
has certainly gone by to justify your trying to find out what's going
on.
This is tricky. You can do what everyone else does and just call up to
find out the status of your script. You might actually find out, but
it's
always hard to assess what's actually going on. Agents make their
decisions
for all sorts of unfathomable reasons, but it doesn't hurt to just be
somebody
interesting that that they want to be in business with. Here's how I
always
handle someone who isn't replying...
I send a questionnaire.
I once submitted some work to a producer at Warner Brothers Animation.
Time went by and I didn't hear back. Finally, I sent the questionnaire
reprinted below. They called back immediately and I GOT THE JOB. You
are
not welcome to steal this questionnaire, but you are certainly welcome
to the concept. Just come up with your own questions.
|
AND RETURN IN THE ENCLOSED SASE THANK YOU We have not responded to your proposals because...
|
Dr.
Hollywood,
I have a
comedy script which is
set in a high school, two readers have said reminds them of Fast Times
at Ridgemont High-- if John Waters did it. They've passed it up the
ladder,
but it's a timely script that needs to find life very soon. I have
other
scripts, but of course, Bill Clinton won't be a good tie-in forever.
I've been
hoping to find someone
established enough who might be able to give some objective feedback as
to why the doors haven't opened for this script to act at least as a
calling
card for other work-- and whether my sensibilities are out of fashion,
my writing is too detailed, not facile enough, whatever.
Much thanks,
Christopher
Chris,
I considered my
first script a calling card. It got me through some doors while others
were slammed in my face. It was an adaptation of a novel and I soon
discovered
one thing; if the person I was giving the script to had never heard of
the book, I found myself at square one, just like every other schmuck
with
a script. But every once in a while, I would run into someone major who
would tell me "Wow, that's one of my favorite books." Voila, my job was
done without having to pitch a thing. It was pre-sold. Though the
script
still hasn't gotten made, it led to things that led to things that led
to things.
A John Waters version
of "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" sounds pretty good to me, though
there
are those it is certain to offend. Whether it's commercial or not,
whether
it gets made or not, if it's funny, it should get you more work. If you
really want to get it made, give it to the type of people who you
already
know are predisposed towards liking that kind of material. You've
already
told me about two. Get it to the producers of "Fast Times." Get it to
John
Waters. Get the producers of "Fast Times" to agree to do it if John
Waters
will do it. Get John Waters to say he'll do it if the producers of
"Fast
Times" will. Voila. A movie.
MD
Dear
Mentor,
Is there a way
to tell which literary
agents are interested in what type of material? For example, who would
be interested in material of a spiritual nature that is
Judeo-Christian?
I have written screenplays on Angels and on Israel's King
Solomon.
Thank you.
John
John,
Go to a video store
and pick up the boxes of movies that are similar to yours, or if you
already
know the names of such films, go to
http://us.imdb.com/search.html and look up the writer credit.
Call
the Writer's Guild pretending to be a producer and ask who represents
those
writers. Voila, a list of agents who handle scripts like yours.
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
I'm a
writer-director in Sacramento
polishing off the first of two screenplays, and planning four others.
The
main question bugging me over the years concerns conflicting approaches
to story structure
George Polti,
a 19th century French
dramatist, theorized that all drama can be divided into 36 basic
dramatic
situations (with the appropriate variations), and he gives examples of
each variation, though mostly from Ancient Greek Drama and 19th century
French drama. Big help!
But the
Writer's Digest series
of books -- called The Elements of Fiction Writing (specifically in
'Theme
& Structure') -- falls back on Polti's theories as a framework
from
which to construct dramatic structure, broken down into three of four
dramatic
phases, yadda yadda yadda.
Syd Field's
approach is helpful,
too, breaking story down into three dramatic acts, turning points,
midpoints,
etc.
And recently,
I saw Movie Magic's
software program Dramatica take a TOTALLY new and TOTALLY in-depth
approach
to drama, using their own vocabulary to separate out the protagonist
from
the main character (though they can be the same person), divide drama
into
an Objective Story, Subjective Story, Main Character Story, and...
damn,
I forgot the forth! It's all so complex!
MY QUESTION:
What is your
own approach to story
structure? Do you use the new software programs like Dramatica to help
detail every event in your plot, or do you reject it in favor of Syd
Field's
Aristotelian paradigm? If you do reject Dramatica, why? Have you really
looked at it? And if you use it at all, how helpful have you found it?
Yours Most
Sincerely,
Ross
Ross,
I've read the books,
taken the classes, and used the programs. The most important skill I've
developed is the ability to totally forget everything I've learned when
I sit down to write.
My favorite musician
is Keith Jarrett, a classically trained jazz pianist with unparalleled
knowledge, skill, and dexterity. He's got CDs of classics, of other
peoples
songs, and of original compositions that are mighty fine, but what
makes
him the king of the hill are his solo piano concerts. He meditates for
an hour before each concert to clear his mind of everything he's ever
played.
He steps onto the stage, sits, and literally one second before his
fingers
hit the keys, he has absolutely no idea what he's going to play. It's
the
purest form of improvisation imaginable. They recorded a tour he did in
Japan. When they listened to the tapes to figure out which night to
use,
they found that he didn't repeat himself once, so they released the
ENTIRE
TOUR as one 10 record set.
When I sit down
to type, I'm Keith Jarrett. I have no idea what I'm going to say before
my fingers hit the keyboard. That's how I write a script. That's how
I'm
writing this letter. I have no idea where it's going. Right now, all
I'm
working on is this very sentence, and I'm not going to put a period on
it until it's the very best that this sentence can be. Only when I'm
done
do I sit back, look it over, and see if it works. That's when my
knowledge
comes into play. I see what structure I have inadvertently created,
compare
it to other structures, and go back to add some filigree here, shore up
some support beams there. It's okay to use your brain while editing and
re-writing, but when you're doing the actual work, creating words that
have never existed before in this particular order, it's way too easy
to
over-intellectualize. That's what causes writer's block, thinking about
it too much.
Musicians pick
up musical instruments to play songs, but sometimes they also pick up
an
instrument just to play the instrument, to see what it sounds like. If
you're a wordsmith, then use words to express something from your
heart.
Fill pages and pages. THEN go back and look at what you've done. See
how
it fits some ancient paradigm, secure in the knowledge that all
creativity
comes from the same place. Make up your own rules. Discover the freedom
of doing whatever the hell you want. Nobody's going to grade you on
anything
other than how much they like what you have done. If you like it
yourself,
that's the only start.
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood:
I have been
told by several people
who have read some of my science fiction novel, that it reads like a
screen
play. I'm still trying to determine if that is good or not. My basic
question
is this, what make the difference between a good novel as opposed to a
good screen play? I have yet to be published in either
medium, but
wonder which I might be better suited for.
Sincerely,
Tedric
Tedric,
There are fellow
scribes who would gladly disembowel me for saying this, but a
screenplay
is not a piece of art, it's a description of a piece of art. Sure, it
takes
artistry to create that description. I'm not saying that screenwriters
aren't artists, but who created the Mona Lisa, Da Vinci or the guy who
said to Da Vinci "I want a picture of a woman sitting in a chair with
her
hands folded?"
Books are meant
to be read. While reading a book, I may say to myself "This would be a
good movie," and I might even be picturing the movie in my head while
reading.
But if the book is any good, I'll be picturing a lot of other things
too.
I like books that spin off into un-filmable tangents, where the quality
of the wordplay makes me consider EVERYTHING, the world, my place in
it,
the meaning of meaning. Sure, I'll plow through the books of Michael
Crichton
for fun because he's a master plotter. But Steven King? There's a
master
plotter who is a goddam novelist. His books always contain ten times
more
food for thought than the films based upon them. When I think of
novelists,
I think of Tom Robbins or Douglas Adams, writers whose facility with
words
totally transcends any possible transcription to film.
In the TV series
of "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," there's a scene where a
spaceship
appears. In the book, "The spaceship hung there in the air just like
bricks
don't." Try filming that. There's no way without leaving out the joke.
(Actually, in the TV version, they had a narrator say it, which was the
cheater's way of including the joke) Anyway, though novelists write
like
that, screenwriters can't afford to. They've got to know that the movie
they are describing in the script is the same one the reader is
picturing
while reading it. They can't get artsy. Novelists do the opposite, or
at
least the good ones do. Good books mean something personal and
completely
different to every reader.
A good screenplay
of an unmade movie is like a good blueprint of an un-built building. It
is, by it's very nature, unfinished. Nobody writes screenplays just to
get read, they write them to get made. Once a film actually gets made,
the script enters the junkpile of history. Other than screenwriters who
do it to learn about their craft, do you know anybody in the real world
who says to themselves "I don't want to see a movie, I think I'll read
a good script tonight?" I admire Frank Lloyd Wright's plans but I'd
rather
spend time in his buildings. I enjoy looking at the sketchbooks of
great
artists and I'll glance over the scores of great composers, but I don't
confuse them with the final product. Symphonies are meant to be
performed,
not read. I admire Robert Towne's writing, but I'd rather see
"Chinatown"
than read it any day. Published screenplays are just oddities for the
curious.
Do you write screenplays hoping that someday they'll get published? Not
me. I want my screenplays to be produced. Screenplays are an interim
art
form. Good ones can become bad movies. Bad ones can become good movies.
They are not to be confused with the complete art of filmmaking.
When I write prose,
like a short story or a piece of journalism, or even a letter like
this,
it is the finished product. It is literary because it is meant to be
read,
and only to be read, hopefully by as many people as possible.
But when I write
a screenplay, I'm describing a movie. I'm not writing it to be read by
as many people as possible, I'm writing it for the dozen or so people
who
can give it a green light. I don't want them thinking "that's a damn
fine
piece of writing," I want them thinking "that would make a damn fine
movie."
As of that point, I don't give a damn if anyone else ever reads it.
Does
anyone need to see how fine my descriptions were of scenes they've
already
seen in a movie? Not as far as I'm concerned. When I'm writing a
script,
I don't want readers, I want butts in theater seats. Sure there are
scripts
that are good reads (but only to those who aren't turned off by the
format).
Some of my own scripts are damn good reads. But I'm not fooling myself.
They're not literature.
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
My name is
Gwen. I am a former
winner of the Walt Disney Studios Fellowship, and I have recently had
my
first feature film produced. I am currently working on a screenplay
which
was inspired by actual events. Many of the participants are still
alive.
I have created a fictitious scenario and changed many of the elements
of
the crimes, but the crimes themselves are so unique that there is no
doubt
as to where it came. I have two questions:
(1) Do you
know how much I would
need to change in order not to require the permission of the survivors?
Or is this a question best asked of a Lawyer?
Gwen,
Having gone through
the process, I can tell you precisely what they're looking for so you
can
be prepared when the lawyers enter the picture. The criteria is not
whether
a third party would recognize the character but whether the actual
subject
would recognize themselves. So, unfortunately, that means you have to
change
absolutely everything. If it's a skinny white male working at a post
office,
they've got to become a fat black woman working at a brokerage house.
It's
not "the crime" that has to be unrecognizable but the people
themselves.
If you really believe that the crime itself is too unique not to be
recognizable,
then the first thing you should do is try to get the rights from
somebody
involved. I know it can feel sleazy, but if your intentions are
honorable,
why not just ask? It's not always that difficult. If the crime didn't
make
big news, you might be the only one trying. Believe me, it's worth a
shot.
If you walk into a meeting with the actual rights under your belt,
you'll
be way ahead of the game. If not, then your black androgynous male rock
star who molests little boys has got to become a Chicano bulldyke
female
construction worker who molests little girls, if you don't want Michael
Jackson to sue.
Once the lawyers
DO get involved, hold onto your hats. They will go over every single
word
of your script with the finest tooth comb you've ever imagined. My true
story was developed into a TV MOW by CBS. In the script, there was a
scene
where I went to a 7/11. They asked me if I had ever actually gone to a
7/11. I said yes. They asked me if I could secure the rights of the
clerk
at the 7/11 I normally frequent. I said no. They changed it to an
anonymous
liquor store. At one point in the script, someone parked in my
driveway.
The studio actually refused to move forward with the production until I
could get a signed release from someone who once parked in my driveway.
True stories are
a bitch. If you don't have the rights, my actual advise is to write it
as fiction and don't tell anyone.
(2) Since your expertise is in both TV and movies, you may be able to tell me if a murder mystery, inspired by actual events would be a better vehicle for a TV movie, HBO, Lifetime? Or might it work better as a feature?
Every network has
it's own criteria. The commercial networks aim their MOWs at
housewives.
Period. HBO likes controversy. Showtime likes sex. And, as you know,
even
those particulars change with the dance of the executives. TV has
almost
completely co-opted the true story. It took the producers of
"Philadelphia"
five years to get it made as a film because everyone kept telling them
it was a TV movie. So what's the difference between a TV movie and a
real
movie? Perseverance. (and Tom Hanks)
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
I am an
aspiring COMEDY screenwriter
with
5 full time years of spec screenwriting and 2 options with small Prod.
cos. in that time. After writing a number of comedies I have
still
not determined whether or not it is best to outline in detail or to
proceed
with the script with only the beginning, middle and end (more or less)
in mind.
I have tried
the scene index cards
approach making tons of notes that I usually don't use, because by the
time I get into the actual writing my characters and plot change so
much
that the notes and cards become outdated and useless.
It seems to me
that when writing
" screwball " off- beat comedy that a writer must "improvise" much the
same as a comic or actor does. Detailed outlining in comedy is like
writing
by the numbers.
Working
without a detailed outline
of some sort has gotten me into trouble with a couple of scripts but
yet
seems to work with most other scripts as I come up with funny scenes
and
plot twists that I could never dream up when outlining.
What is YOUR
approach in comedy
writing?
Irwin
Irwin,
A lot of the comedy
I write is satire, in which case the structure is already done. If
you're
writing a satire of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," you pretty much
know what direction you're headed in. If you're writing the "Airplane"
type of sketch comedy, the improv approach you talk about works pretty
well. But I personally don't think that sketch comedy translates all
that
well to the big screen. Sure, I laugh at "Hot Shots" like everyone
else,
but give me "Shampoo" or "Hannah and her Sisters" any day of the week.
Give me characters I care about, an interesting plot full of twists,
and
writing from the heart.
I don't think my
approach to comedy writing is any different from my approach to all
writing.
If you're funny, you can't help it. Whatever you write will be funny. I
can't help myself. Give me a funeral scene and it will be funny. But
producers,
God damn them, like structure. I can't tell you how many times I've had
hysterical things cut out of my scripts because they weren't integral
to
the plot. Crying "But it's funny! The audience will laugh!" always
seems
to fall on deaf ears. It works if you're writing sketches or cartoons,
but films need more. I use the cards. I always know my beginning and
end.
I construct my films like an arch, starting from either end and working
towards the middle.
I can't really
recommend this method because I always go through hell writing the
middle.
Coming up with "funny scenes" that aren't riveted to the spine of the
story
is just fruitless. Someone down the line will cut them out. That's the
challenge, making them laugh at something that can't possibly be cut.
Make
every laugh either illuminate character or move the story along. Maybe
I'm just growing up, but just making them laugh isn't enough. I want to
make them think.
MD
Hey,
Dr. Hollywood --
What
conceptual elements do you
include in a script in response to producers who say they want to see
something
new and different, yet when you show them something new and different,
they then say they want to see something that's the same as everything
else out there? Do you write from the heart, then listen to
producers?
Or do you write from the heart, then kick producers in the ass?
Thanks,
Lorenzo
Lorenzo,
Ah yes, the pain
of dealing with producers. A lot of times all they want is to leave
some
sort of imprint on the film, otherwise they feel left out.
I've found
one sure way to make them happy. During meetings, I take copious notes.
While writing, I make sure that something/anything that they said ends
up verbatim on the page. They love it. They'll leave it in. They'll
tell
you how you somehow captured exactly what they were talking about. They
will be so enamored of their own words mirrored back to them that
they'll
be like a deer staring at oncoming headlights. They won't even notice
all
the other changes you made.
As for writing
from the heart, I don't know any other way to write. Sure it pisses the
hell out of people when they get something that's not exactly what they
asked for, but every once in a while you run into an employer who
actually
digs what you do. They're out there. I don't know exactly where you are
in your career, but if you've never had anything produced, then I would
have to say it's more important to play the game than to fight for your
right to be you. Getting a film made in Hollywood is like getting a
bill
passed in DC. It's often got less to do with the quality of the writing
than the quality of the politics.
I once had a script
that was the closest to my heart imaginable. It was my story. It was
about
a guy named me and he narrated the whole thing. It was my first
professional
sale that got me in the WGA. I was almost completely rewritten by an A
list studio guy. My contract guaranteed me a rewrite. They asked for it
one week after the end of production.
When I made that
sale, I had a choice. I could take the money and sit back in amusement
to watch them rewrite my fucking life, or I could stop the film, forget
the project, blow off the money, and go on welfare. I did the former
and
I wear my battle scars proudly, sure that someday I'll be in a position
for my script to be made my way.
And I always have
my own special way of kicking them in the ass. I'm a journalist, and I
get to write about their transgressions afterwards.
MD
Hi
Dr. Hollywood,
I'm writing a
small story. A feature.
Without being too specific, I hope to follow 4 friends whose lives
intersect
as a result of a common challenge. Each going about this challenge in
their
own way, hopefully with comical results.
My question is
this.
What insight
might you be able
to impart to me with respect to Character Arc, and Protagonist and
Antagonist.
Do I have to make full arcs with all 4 characters? Is it enough that
the
"challenge" is the Antagonist?
thanks
jobaby
Jobaby,
When dealing with
multiple stories that intertwine, I find it virtually impossible to
keep
it all in my head. I need visuals. This is a case where 3x5 cards or
Post-It
Notes are absolutely essential. Write a sentence describing every
single
scene or line of dialogue you've got on an individual card, with a
separate
color for each storyline, and stick it to the wall. You should end up
with
more than 100. If you've got four storylines, that should be four
different
colors, 25 cards apiece. Play with them like a jigsaw puzzle. You'll
invariably
discover all kinds of connections you never saw before. Pull down the
cards
one at a time and write the scene.
Strangely enough,
one of my all time favorite story arcs is in "Die Hard." Despite
everything
going on concerning the Bruce Willis character, it turns out that the
most
important character arc involves a peripheral character, the black cop
who learns to use his gun. It turns out that HE'S the real protagonist.
Willis doesn't change at all. It's the black cop who learns something
and
saves the day. So in answer to your question, I've got to say that the
more character growth I see in a film, the better, even if it's just a
clerk in a grocery store who's only in the film for five minutes.
(Check
out "Grapes of Wrath" in which a grocery clerk goes through a
monumental
character arc in a matter of seconds. It's heart wrenching.)
So ABSOLUTELY give
an arc to all your characters. Don't be lazy, and don't worry about
following
some ancient paradigm of how plot is supposed to work. Follow your
heart.
MD
Dr.
Hollywood,
I appreciate
your making yourself
available to writers like myself via email. I couldn't
imagine a
DGA or especially a SAG member doing the same. But perhaps that's why
writers
are a more stable, refined lot (in most cases?).
I recently
finished a comedy spec
that really put me and my partner on the map in terms of getting a good
agent, and about 10 meetings around town.
My question to
you is: Do you prefer
pitching or specing? I know all the variables are different, but maybe
you can give me some insight into the growth of your own career!
thanks,
Seth
Seth,
Maybe it's just
the journalist in me, but what I prefer are assignments. Fuck digging
up
stories, what I like is an editor calling me up and saying we need
2,000
words on the history of bowties in movies. I've often found I do my
best
work when asked to do something that would have never occurred to me. I
like solving puzzles and making something lively out of subjects that
are
blatantly uninteresting. Also, my very first screenplay was an
assignment,
albeit one I gave myself. I read the book "Another Roadside Attraction"
by Tom Robbins, bought the rights, wrote a script, and sent it blind to
Hal Ashby, who agreed to direct. I ended up consulting with him on
several
other scripts, and for a while had a nice career as a script doctor. I
always change the ending.
That being said,
pitching can be the most exhilarating and the most frustrating activity
on earth. I love pitching to people who actually listen and are on the
same wavelength. Pitching to people who are on the phone or otherwise
engaged
makes me wish I had a knife up their nose.
I once had so many
ideas for a TV show that I just kept pitching and pitching and
pitching.
The producer couldn't believe I was still in his office. I simply
wouldn't
stop until I hit on one he liked. It worked. He finally picked one and
hired me to write it. Another time I was only half way through the
first
sentence describing a film when the producer said "Great, I love it,
I'll
set it up," and he was on the phone doing just that before I even told
him the ending. Yet another time I brought a whole bunch of cartoon
scripts
to a cartoon production company who, first thing, told me they didn't
want
anything with animals. There went 90% of what I brought. Total waste of
time. And need I mention the producer who agreed to see me, only to
tell
me first thing that he didn't hire writers? What the hell was I doing
there?
Writing spec scripts
can be pretty frustrating too, but sometimes it's the only way
something
will ever get written. Nobody in their right mind would have HIRED
Tarantino
to write "Pulp Fiction." Imagine trying to pitch that puppy. Or
"Seven?"
Yeah, great pitch. I would love to see the look on the executive's face
who heard "And it ends as the hero gets his wife's head delivered to
him
in a box." It seems if you've got anything to say that isn't totally
mainstream,
you've just got to write it for yourself and then show it to people.
The
problem is that screenplays are a hell of a lot of work, so what I've
been
doing lately is specing pitches, i.e. writing treatments for films or
TV
shows I want to write. I've written so many of them that there's a page
full of them on my website. I love writing treatments, and if I could
do
nothing more than crank out ideas for others to write, I'd be pretty
happy.
MD
Hello
Dr. Hollywood,
My question is
about dealing with
a passive protagonist in a feature. I have heard (McKee, Hunter, etc)
that
this is not a great way to grip an audience.
My
coming-of-age story is about
a young man leaving high school, fairly clueless. He sees
different
behaviors from different people, and eventually combines select aspects
from them in a different way to move on and press forward. What this
means,
though, is that for most of the film he is just watching,
listening,
observing, and so on. Which worries me.
May I ask you,
then, a two-part
question?
1) How would
you keep the interest
& momentum up for this genre of story?
Lots of ways. First
of all, there's that genre of character I like to call "The Special
Idiot,"
like Kaspar Hauser, Chance in "Being There" or Raymond in "Rainman."
They
are stabilizing factors. The film is about the world's reaction to
them,
not their reaction to the world. Chance advances in the world precisely
because there's something wrong with him. He is unflappable, and
everybody
mistakes his composure for wisdom. "Rainman" builds to a climactic
scene
where Raymond simply cannot make a decision. In both cases, it's the
simplest
decisions that become the most meaningful, like Raymond realizing that
"Who's on first?" is a joke. In the case of "Being There," it's the
world
that goes through a change, not Chance, so in a sense, the world is the
protagonist. These films aren't about their main characters, they are
about
how the world deals with people like this.
Another type of
"Special Idiot" is the character who everybody has to explain the plot
to so that idiots in the audience who can't follow what's going on can
have it explained to them without feeling patronized. Lex Luthor's
bumbling
cohorts in "Superman" and the police chief in "The Usual Suspects" are
examples of this kind of idiot. The movie is not about them. The movie
is being TOLD to them. In which case, all you need is fascinating
sub-plots
that have their own beginnings, middles, and ends.
2)
When the protagonist finally
does "make his move" and do something strong & unexpected, how
would
you "set up" or foreshadow this dynamic, so that it doesn't seem to
come
out of nowhere?
What's wrong
with coming out of nowhere?
Sounds good to me.
MD
Dear
Dare,
I'm due to
have a second-round
pitch meeting for a comedy project later this week. One of the concerns
that was raised with the development execs. was that the pitch wasn't
funny
enough. The story was all there and that's why I'm being asked back to
meet with the producer, but they said the most important thing to do is
make him laugh. So as I'm trying to graft comedy into the plot, I'm
finding
it very difficult.
Do you have
any advice on how to
really make that pitch funny and/or get the comedy juices really
flowing?
Nick
Nick,
Pot? Actually, I
knew someone who INSISTED on getting stoned before every meeting. What
a jerk. Everyone blew him off as an idiot. Get stoned AFTER the meeting.
But I know another
guy who is one of the worst writers on earth, but who always gets deals
for one reason; he cracks 'em up at the meetings. So you're certainly
right
that you can have a disproportional advantage if you're the life of the
party. I can't tell you how to be funny. You're funny or you're not.
Some
people just wing it, others have to work at it. Just practice telling
your
story. Try it out on someone on a bus and see if you can make them
laugh.
MD
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
I've sold one
script in animation
and a couple in one-hour live-action. People are warning me that I need
to focus on one venue and stick with it. I find this puzzling since, as
a new writer, I need whatever work I can get, so why not maximize my
opportunities?
Moreover, I enjoy both forms and would like to diversify even more by
branching
into interactive and features as well.
Given your
work in different genres
and formats, have you encountered this problem? Do you believe it is
necessary
to restrict yourself to one type?
Best regards,
Rodney
Rodney,
It's not necessary
to restrict yourself but it sure helps. I had a pretty good career
going
as a journalist and feature script writer. One day I decided that what
I really wanted to do was write Warner Brothers cartoons. It took me
two
years of extensive lobbying to crack that nut, basically because I was
going up against guys who had done nothing their entire lives other
than
write Warner Brothers cartoons. And the same thing is true with every
aspect
of the entertainment field. Whatever you're up for, there are guys with
unbelievable resumes who you are up against. If you were the head of a
company looking to hire an interactive writer, who would you hire, you
or the guy who wrote Myst?
Sorry, it doesn't
make me happy, but credentials are everything. Wanna get depressed?
Check
out the credits of one of the other mentors, Jeffrey Scott, at http://home.earthlink.net/~getjeffrey/.
He's your competition in animation. And there are guys just like that
in
every field. Spreading yourself thin might be good for your creativity
but it's bad for your career, at least until you're famous. Then you
can
do whatever you want.
MD
Hi Dr. Hollywood -
I'm
about halfway through the first
act of the second draft of my first screenplay and I'm having problems.
No kidding,
you say.
The problem
I'm having is very
similar to what appeared when reading the first draft to
myself.
Character voice. All of the freakin' characters sound like
me.
I'm having a hard time developing dialogue that separates the
characters
from each other. There is no way right now that this
screenplay would
pass the name covering test, where you should be able to hear who is
talking
without looking at the name of the characters.
I guess what I
really want to know
is, do you have a specific method, or any method in general for
developing
unique dialogue characteristics? I want the characters to
speak like
every day people, because that's what the story is about. But
I want
them to sound like unique individuals, because that's who they are and
that is a central kernel of the theme.
Mike
Mike,
Intelligent writers
often have characters speak with more intelligence than the actual
characters
should have. Hell look at Shakespeare, not to mention Paddy Chayevsky.
So there's nothing inherently wrong with characters who all speak with
your voice, though it tends to work better theatrically than on the
screen.
I could recognize Mamet speech patterns a mile away even if I missed
the
credits of the film, and that's not because he's bad.
That being said,
I have found that transactional analysis is one good key to inventing
dialogue.
Transactional analysis was made popular through a couple of old books
called
"Games People Play" and "I'm Okay, You're Okay," and it is
literally
a method of analyzing transactions between people, i.e. dialogue.
TA assumes that
every time someone talks to another person, they are coming from one of
three ego states: PARENT, which is everything you learned from your
parents,
CHILD, which is every emotional reaction you had to what you learned
from
your parents, or ADULT, which is rational, including your ability to
move
rationally between ego states. These are not value judgments. It's
perfectly
fine to be coming from any of these ego states, as long as the other
party
is responding from the ego state that you are addressing.
Example: If I say
"What time is it?", that is a perfectly rational question from my ADULT
to your ADULT. If your ADULT responds to my ADULT, you will say
something
like "It's five o'clock" or "I don't know."
But if, for some
reason, your PARENT responds to my CHILD, you will say something like
"There's
a clock right over there, can't you see it?" or "I'm too busy." On the
other hand, if your CHILD responds to my PARENT, you will say something
like "Why are you asking me?" or "How am I supposed to know?" In both
cases,
there is no communication. The subject has been changed from my quest
for
the right time to your ability to give me an answer.
If I want to continue
the conversation, I've got to respond from the ego state you addressed.
My PARENT must respond to your CHILD with "I'm sorry, don't you know
how
to tell time?" which could be mistaken for sarcasm, or my CHILD must
respond
to your PARENT with "Sorry to bother you." If my ADULT keeps trying to
talk to your ADULT, the lines remain crossed and the conversation goes
nowhere. It's complicated by the fact that ego states keep changing
throughout
a conversation. My ADULT talks to your CHILD, your CHILD responds to my
PARENT, my PARENT talks to your ADULT, etc. So just pick some random
ego
states for your characters and voila, dialogue.
R.L
wrote:
Could you
please define a "closed
mystery" and an "open mystery"?
R.L.
EASY ANSWER
Think of the mystery as
a case. If
a case is closed, that means everything is answered and the detective
can
get on with his life. Now think about X-Files, where the case is never
closed.
MORE COMPLEX
ANSWER
Some people define a
"closed" mystery
as one we experience entirely through the eyes of the investigator, in
which we never know more than they do. An "open" mystery is one where
we
are more omnipresent, where we know everything, where the plot is open
to us, the viewer, and we get to wait in frustration as the
investigator
catches up with us.
There are a lot of great resources on the net for mystery writing. Check out The American Crime Writer's League.
MD
Michael
wrote:
You seem very
into the business.
Can you tell me how I can get a good start into the general movie
business.
I am basically interested in all parts of making a movie.
Most likely
producing, directing, writing, or technology. Where can I
start?
Thanks!
-Mike-
Mike,
Of all that you
mention, I would have to say that technology is the most open market.
You
can be a producing, directing, and writing whiz for decades and still
not
get a break in the wonderful brick walls of Hollywood politics.
But old timers in Hollywood
hold technological wizards in awe. Since more and more movies are
relying
on more and more advanced technology, a computer whiz with a knock-out
demo reel has got a pretty good shot at a job in a special effects
company.
We're already close to the point where who needs actors, cameras, and
film?
All you need is a computer. And I do mean YOU.
MD
Just left the Juilliard School as an actor but find that writing has taken my interest. I have 1 finished script, 1/2 finished script, treatments for ten other script ideas, and other ideas on line in my head. The word is to wait until I have 3 or 4 scripts to seek representation but what if I just love coming up with ideas? I think they're great ideas but I don't know if I can translate them into scripts. Maybe I'm just an idea man and not a writer(maybe I'm in denial). Either way I want to pursue screenwriting. Do I have to wait so long to meet an agent to advise me? I figure as an actor I'm in a good position to taste test these other scripts out there and compare it to my own collection. They hold up well I think. What do I do?
-Dave-
Dave,
I started out as
an actor too but soon found myself writing simply because it was so
much
easier to practice at home. Writing at home alone feels pretty good.
Acting
at home alone feels pretty stupid. If you want to keep up your chops as
an actor, you've got to keep paying to go to the workshops when you're
not actually being paid to act. If you want to keep up your chops as a
writer, all you've got to do is write a letter.
I first got started
writing professionally with a partner. We tried to share the task
equally,
so that neither of us spent any more time on the sofa instead of the
typewriter.
When I finally got into the guild, I discovered the professional
definition
of writer - The guy doing the actual typing. The guy doing the typing
doesn't
have to be the one with the ideas. That's how we protect ourselves from
producers who ask us to make a change, then demand writing credit since
it was THEIR idea. Sorry, Buckwheat, ideas aren't writing. In the case
of producers, ideas sometimes barely qualify as thinking. Who's driving
the car, the guy with all the maps who is telling the driver precisely
what to do, or the guy actually behind the wheel? Same principle.
Navigating
ain't driving. Ideas ain't writing.
If you "just love
coming up with ideas," maybe you're a producer, not a writer. Nothing
wrong
with that. Producers are the ones who collect the Oscar for Best
Picture.
Producers personify the art of film as collaborative. The good ones
work
WITH, not on top of a writer, shaping the script, passing it out,
getting
feedback, ordering rewrites, sharing concepts, shaping the piece while
actually allowing someone else, the writer, to be the one who has to
get
it all down on paper.
As far as the scripts
that you've already written, your first task is to get someone, anyone,
preferably in the industry, to read them. Good luck. It ain't gonna be
me. Ruthlessly pursue every single contact you make as an actor. Don't
push your script upon people but put yourself into a position where
they
will ask for it. Talk about "the project you're working on." If
someone's
interested, let them ask to read it. They will. Scripts forced upon
people
end up in stacks in the corner.
MD
Dr Hollywood,
What
would you need to read in the
first five pages of a script to know that it's something you're not
gonna
put down until "FADE OUT"?
-Brian-
Brian,
One of my big problems
with a lot of scripts and movies is the offering of information before
I want it. I hate it when I know exactly what's going on or if I know
who
characters are when they enter, characters who explain or describe
themselves,
or are described by others. The answer is simple - NEVER GIVE
INFORMATION
WITHOUT SETTING UP THE DESIRE FOR THE INFORMATION FIRST. The most
obvious
way that filmmakers achieve this is by introducing someone with a shot
that starts at their feet and moves up to their face. Show me feet and
I'm immediately wondering who it is, a question that's answered as soon
as I'm shown the face. The information sticks because it was supplied
after
I was curious about it. This is a technique that works in all aspects
of
life. Think about the things that people just told you vs. the things
that
you asked about first. Which ones do you remember better? Information
only
sticks if it's setup by some form of curiosity.
So in a script,
never say here's who this is and this is what's happening. Always set
up
a question first. Who is that? Oh, that's who it is. Why are they
acting
this way? Oh, that's why. What the hell's going on? Oh, that's what's
going
on. Question. Answer. Question. Answer. A screenplay can have
hundreds
of such setups. Some questions are answered immediately, some you have
to wait till the end of the film to find out. You can look at it
mathematically.
Let's say you have nine setups in act one. Three should be answered in
act one, three in act two, and three in act three. That way the
audience
is kept satisfied by a continuous supply of answers, and kept
interested
by a continuous supply of more setups. The way I construct things is
something
like this. Setup A. Setup B. Answer B. Setup C. Setup D. Answer C.
Answer
D. Answer A.
I once wrote a
script that was completely disjointed and psychedelic. I held the whole
thing together through a simple trick. The very opening shot showed a
pair
of weird underwear falling from the sky. Then the film got on with a
story,
but underneath it all the audience was kept wondering what the hell was
going on with that underwear. Somewhere in act two, one of the
characters
dropped their pants and we saw that he was wearing the underwear that
we
saw floating down from the sky in the opening. A partial answer. The
audience
now knows whose underwear, but has no idea how it ends up falling from
the sky. Finally, at the end of act three, the character goes up in a
hot
air balloon, takes off all their clothes, and throws them overboard.
Voila.
The audience is satisfied by an answer to a question they've been
wondering
about for two hours. A question that, in fact, has absolutely nothing
to
do with anything. It's just a gimmick to keep them interested.
Wanna keep
me reading your script? Give me questions, not answers.
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
I just
sold a sizable article on a slice of history from the 1920s,
but
the subject remains stuck in my head. Rather than taking two aspirin, I
want to attempt a movie script. Now, here's my dilemma. I don't want to
be sued. The real-life characters are all deceased, (well, all but one
minor one who is 92), but the story has been written up a few different
ways in the past:
a. The
real-life protagonist published his (sketchy) memoirs back in the 30's.
His son now owns the copyright.
b. A few
books have been written about his life, including the most
comprehensive
one, which has just been published.
c. One
book has been written specifically on the event that I'm
interested
in. It tells less about the main character, but more about the
secondary
character, his competitor, also a major component.
My script is
not an adaptation of any of the above books exactly, but I've
read
them all and certainly gain insight, facts, and interesting anecdotes
from
all of them. Do I need to worry about rights? I understand
you're
not a lawyer, but how would you sort out writing a script on
a true-life
event and avoid getting sued? If I can ease my mind, I will
feel
free to write with joyous abandon.
Thanks so much.
Lise
Lise,
Thanks so much
for braving time and space to contact me. Whatever the hell it is
that's
getting in the way of your writing with joyous abandon, let's get rid
of
it. I was once ordered to stand trial for contempt of court for writing
a screenplay based upon a true legal case that was supposed to be
sealed.
I was found innocent for one reason only; the studio changed the names.
It was an interesting irony because I had fought tooth and nail against
the name change. If I'd won that battle, I could have gone to jail.
Nobody owns history.
If you've got your own take on some public figure, there's nothing to
stop
you from writing about it. On the other hand, there's nothing to stop
anybody
from suing anybody for anything. In the case of film, if it's a hit,
the
studio's going to get sued anyway unless they ran around nailing down
the
rights of everything that was ever written about the public figure, and
even then someone's bound to come out of the woodwork with a lawsuit.
No
matter what, you shouldn't let potential legal problems get in the way
of your artistry. How about a pre-emptive strike? Change the name. If
he
flies around the world, people will know it's about Lindberg. Put in a
scene that definitely isn't Lindberg. That way you can claim it isn't
Lindberg,
for, after all, Lindberg never shoved a feather duster up his ass and
ran
around the room dusting things with a can of Endust during a press
conference.
And you're writing on a computer, right? It'll take all of five seconds
to search and replace it all back to the real name.
MD
As a fellow journalist who committed to screenwriting several years back, I'm hoping you can give me some personal advice. I've been recovering from a serious illness for the past couple of years, and I don't expect to be as "normal" as I'm going to get for at least another year or two. I'll be able to do some writing this year, but the thought of going back to journalism until I make money as a screenwriter is not really what I want. Do you have any ideas for work that could blend my skills as both a journalist and a screenwriter?
Sincerely,
Wendy
Hey Wendy,
Sorry to hear about
your physical problems. Thank god writing ain't lifting boxes. Hell,
writing
is writing. Letters, journalism, screenplays, they're all just markets
for a basic skill you seem to have. As a journalist, you look forward
to
several assignments a year that barely pay the gas bill. As a
screenwriter,
you look forward to one sale every couple of years, making enough to
pay
the gas bill for a couple of years. Write a piece for Life and you
don't
get paid till publication. Same thing with film where you don't get
paid
until the first day of photography. The checks are bigger but the wait
is longer. If you want to communicate one on one, go write letters.
Then
you don't have to wait at all because no check is expected. If you want
to be read by as many people as possible, be a journalist or novelist.
If you want to be interpreted, be a screenwriter. It's fulfilling but
in
a whole other way. People aren't actually reading what you wrote,
which,
as many writers will tell you, is often the point. So as actively as I
have pursued the sale of screenplays, I can't imagine ever giving up
journalism
or fiction or all the other wonderful forms of writing available. Your
life has paralleled mine in many ways. It took me a while to learn that
journalism and screenwriting compliment each other. There's no reason
not
to do both. You want to give up journalism and write screenplays? Why
give
up anything? I started out as a screenwriter who got inadvertently
sucked
into journalism, which paid extremely little but was more than the
nothing
I was getting for my screenwriting. Then I ended up back selling
screenplays.
Then back to journalism. Don't turn down a gig, and don't throw away
credentials.
Use your journalism
to advance your screenwriting career. You've got an edge on others
who've
never made a sale, and you should use it to open doors. Face the facts.
The only way to get into Hollywood as a writer is to (a) have the right
project for someone you (b) have access to. Without both a and b, what
we're talking about here is massive blind mailings to people who
routinely
throw such stuff in the trash. It's like you're telling me that, even
though
you've never done it before, you want to enter the stock market and
quit
your day job. What should you buy? As you know, the answer to that
question
literally changes every second. When to buy and when to sell. That's
what
the stock market's all about. Same thing in Hollywood. Unless your best
friend is a staff writer on a TV show and is willing to introduce you
to
the head writer, you're fucked.
As a journalist,
at least you get to see immediate results, something out there with
your
name on it, whether you wrote it or not. At least the writing itself is
the end product. I've sold close to 2,000 pieces of journalism, and
you'd
be surprised how many of them were exactly what I wrote. Going by the
pure
pleasure of writing, journalism is a lot more fun than screenwriting,
which
demands a much more straightforward approach. Both professional
screenwriting
and journalism are collaborative, unless you're Matt Drudge or Henry
Jaglom.
How do you combine the two? Do what I'm doing (as though I need the
competition),
write about screenwriting, or at the very least, the industry. There
are
plenty of trade publications who would be more than impressed by your
Life
work. Being a journalist in Hollywood is a jolly way to meet people.
True story. I have
a friend who was given the plum assignment of interviewing Al Pacino.
At
the end of the interview, Pacino said "So, have you got something for
me?"
What do you mean? said my friend. "A script, a treatment, everyone's
got
something for me. Don't you want to give me something?" At that very
second,
my friend, who considered himself more of a journalist than a
screenwriter,
was given a once in a lifetime opportunity to change careers in an
instant,
but he had absolutely nothing to give Al Pacino, so that was it. Al
left.
My friend feels Al was sincere, that he liked him, felt a kinship, and
genuinely wanted to read whatever he might give him.
So there's your
tact. Hollywood ethics stretches in a lot of directions, and though
there
are codes of journalism where hitting on your subject for a job seems
pretty
tacky, in Hollywood (and in politics) it happens all the time and no
one
seems to mind. Hell, when I was a cub reporter for a minor paper, it
went
through my head all the time that I'd really rather be working for some
of the people I was interviewing. Journalism led to one of my favorite
jobs ever. I interviewed the producer of a TV show for Variety and
ended
up writing for the show.
Whatever you do,
don't stop writing. I don't know what subjects you're used to covering,
but try to focus on the entertainment industry. Make up a pretext to
get
Life to hire you to interview some mogul you actually want to work for.
And if they happen to say "So, have you got something for
me?", be
prepared.
MD
Will you read my script?
Thank you,
GG
Dear GG,
Thank you so much
for braving time and space to contact me. Basically when we started
this
mentor thing, we had no idea how many first questions would be "will
you
please read my script?" Here's the problem from a legal point of view.
I read your script about Christ coming back to life as a hot dog, then
years later Matt Groening hires me to write an episode of Futurama
about
Christ coming back as a hamburger. You sue Matt Groening claiming he
stole
your idea, just changing it a little, and I'm the proof, only I didn't
take your idea to Matt Groening, he came up with it on his own, and, by
pure chance, decided to hire me to write it. I assure you this sort of
thing actually happens all the time. Ideas are a dime a dozen, they're
like assholes, everyone's got one and no one wants another one. A
producer
once had me sign a contract stating that for the rest of my life, if I
was ever involved in a project involving skyscrapers that got up and
walked
around, he would own a piece of it. It's only pure luck the situation
has
never come up.
GG, as the official
mentor of this relationship, it's my duty to inform you that I am
preprogrammed
to be paranoid as hell. I once had to sign a 15 page letter of
non-disclosure
before being allowed to peek at a project (that I posted to the
internet
years later with nary a squawk). The problem is everyone's in on this.
Even this letter, these very words, this private conversation between
you
and me, could end up plastered in a Mentor FAQ. And you want me to read
your script? In front of all these people? Are you nuts?
MD
I realize that this is not the type of question for a WGA Mentor so please forgive my Email. I have completed a number of unusual, high concept, comedy feature specs. suitable for TV, Cable or Theater, all moderately budgeted. My greatest problem which I am sure you have probably experienced, is finding an agent who will devote any significant time trying to market spec scripts from a new writer. How do you get an agent to consider you?.
Irwin Cohan
Dear Irwin,
There is no such
thing as a question that ain't my type, but hoo boy have you got the
wrong
mentor. I've never had an agent. Oh, I've come close a couple of times,
once REAL close, but it just didn't mesh. I got all my first jobs
through
my journalism. People who read my film reviews in the L.A. Weekly would
call me up and hire me to write movies. Once, a producer whose last
film
I had trashed hired me to improve his next one.
The first
time a producer handed me a contract offering five hundred bucks to
write
something for him, I paid a lawyer some money to check it out for me.
He
found some problems, but I signed anyway, wasting the money I paid the
lawyer for advising me otherwise. I looked at it like journalism - you
sell a piece, they own it, they do what they want with it. I'd been
rewritten
by enough editors to come to totally expect to be rewritten, and never
to expect any more money.. I've been praised for things I didn't write
and damned for those I did.
Since I was
using these attorneys to LOOK AT the deal rather than GET the deal,
lawyers
were the obvious answer for me. I eventually got enough nerve to just
let
them do all the negotiating, and by golly I ended up with better deals,
even considering the 20% I was charged.
Which brings
us to the stunning conclusion - who needs agents? Lawyers are
preferable
in every way.
1. Agents
are inundated with lousy scripts every day. Lawyers, get MUCH less
submissions
so they're more likely to actually pay attention to yours if it gets on
their desk.
2. When an agent
looks at a script, the most he's looking at is a potential 15% of your
fee, which is the absolute maximum allowed by law. But when a lawyer
looks
at your script, he's in the catbird seat. He's looking to PACKAGE the
damn
thing, maybe executive produce it. If he's the right lawyer, he's
looking
to use as many of his clients as possible, possibly a studio, or an
investor,
or a distributor, or some actors, maybe a model or two, get a LOT of
fees.
Hey, we're talking about HOLLYWOOD lawyers here. You're not hiring them
to appear in court for you, you're inspiring them to hit the Rolodex
and
put something together.
3. Agents
have a singular focus upon you as a writer. They don't want to hear
that
you've composed a theme song and designed a title sequence. But lawyers
don't give a damn what you are as long as you can do it. Hell, the more
different jobs you get, the more they get paid. I once submitted a
script
to an attorney for him to submit to E! Entertainment. When he got back
to me, he told me they weren't interested in my script, but they WERE
looking
for a new host for Talk Soup, so he set up an audition for me THE NEXT
DAY. I didn't get the gig, but I sure as hell enjoyed sitting in Greg
Kinnear's
chair and reading lines with spoons and soup bowls floating around my
head.
If I had gotten the gig, that lawyer would still be getting checks, so
it was a smart move on his part, a move an agent surely wouldn't have
considered
for their "writer" client..
4. Lawyers get
you paid on time. They enforce the contract they negotiated. They stay
on the case. On big jobs, I instruct the lawyer that all checks are to
be made out to them, then they cut me a check minus their cut. It's a
subtle
difference but imagine the two mindsets. Which are you going to pursue
more tenaciously, a check made out to you or a check made out to one of
your clients, where you have to trust that they'll eventually pay you
your
percentage?
5. Lawyers get
you in the back door. They can often avoid regular channels, getting
your
script directly to the person it needs to get to.
6. Production companies
can be more open to submissions from lawyers. After all, if a deal is
to
be made, a lawyer is going to get involved eventually anyway. Having an
agent there can be a headache. Hey, one less middleman. Companies who
only
accept submissions from "representatives" mean lawyers too. Agents
don't
want you to know that.
How do you find
a lawyer? I hope you don't expect me to recommend one of mine. Besides,
the ones that can do you the most good REALLY don't need your business.
Getting the right lawyer is actually no easier than getting the right
agent
if you don't have any connections. Surely you know SOMEONE who knows a
lawyer. Other than an introduction, the best way to get a lawyer is
exactly
the same as the best way to get an agent. Don't approach them with
something
you want them to sell, approach them with a done deal where all you
want
them to do is negotiate for you.
How do you get
that done deal? It's do it yourself time. Pick an element who is
absolutely
perfect for your project, a director or actor who can get your script
made.
Call their agency, DGA or SAG, and find out who represents them. Make
up
a name. Call the agency and pretend to be a lawyer representing your
script,
and ask about their submission policy. They'll tell you much more than
they will if you're you. Get the name of whoever you're talking to,
plus
the name of the attorney who handles the actor/director/bigshot. Call
the
attorney and tell them the name of the person who gave you their name.
Exaggerate and say they told you to call. Say they thought he might
want
to get a look at this project. Don't call it a script. Get the script
to
him with a cover letter saying "Here's that script you asked for." When
he reads it, he will realize it's perfect for another client of his you
didn't even know he had. He gives it to them and they say yes. He calls
a studio who's been begging for a project for that client, and voila,
you've
got a deal. Ask the lawyer if he'll represent you.Watch his eyes go
Ka-ching.
MD
Bubbles
Wilkas wrote:
Hi,
I just read your
web page about family
films. Fascinating. I have several young
children who are
actors and your article was very interesting. Any
advice on
breaking my kids into the tv and film industry?
Thanks for
your time,
have a great
day
Kelly
Dear Bubbles, or
is it Kelly. So hard to tell these days.
Thank you for braving
time and space to contact me. Are you Kelly, smart, sleek Kelly,
sneaking
an e-mail into her dorm mate Bubble's laptop? I've known Kellys. Even
exchanged
letters with them. But never a Bubbles, so I hope you're Bubbles. Nice
to meet you, Bubbles. Unless the kid's name is Bubbles, then she's got
a future. I can see it up on the marquee - Tonight only, Bubbles
Flambe.
She is a she, isn't she? Because a little boy named Bubbles is going
nowhere,
jokes about popping your bubble notwithstanding.
I assume
you're applying for the position of stage mom so here's what you've got
to look forward to. Whatever competition you have ever faced in your
life
so far, I guarantee you it will be nothing compared to this. You will
have
to look at your own child as product entering a fierce marketplace. You
will have to spend a lot of money on pictures and video to even look
halfway
decent. You will have to find an agent willing to send you out on your
first audition. When you arrive at that first audition with your child,
you will find yourself in a large room with dozens of other parents
with
their children, who are all dressed exactly like your child
only
they're MUCH better looking and some of them you even recognize from
television.
Eventually you go into a room with bright lights where you meet a half
a dozen people whose secretaries are, at that very moment, taking out
trashbags
full of pictures and resumes submitted that day and, wammo, your kid's
got a minute to impress them or you're out of there. If your kid by
chance
gets cast and makes it big, you only get a third of the
money, the
rest having to be put in a special account till they turn eighteen,
whereupon
they will move out of the house and embarrass you with the ridiculous
way
they spend the money. If they become Francis Ford Coppola, they hire
you
to score their films and you win an Oscar. If they become MacCauley
Culkin,
they sue you.
Good luck,
You'll need it.
MD
Dear
MD,
Should we describe
the mood of the character or provide any kind of subtext when
writing
a reading script?
Ghostwryta
Dear
Ghostwryta,
It's very dangerous
to include things in the script that aren't in the movie. I once read a
script that contained a line like "Marsha is crying because her father
died." How the hell am I, the viewer, supposed to know why she's
crying?
The script has got to say "Marsha is sitting on the sofa crying with an
envelope in her hand. CLOSE-UP: Telegram saying 'Your father's dead.'"
So yeah, you can include subtext, but only insofar as it's part of the
film. If I can't see it or hear it, leave it out.
MD
I've got a question regarding plateaus. No, not the plateaus in those Jeep commercials (although I'm still trying to figure out how they got those cars up there in the days before digital effects). Rather, I'm asking about career plateaus (or in my case, pre-career plateaus).
In the seven years since I've started writing feature scripts, I've had one very small option, two agents, a manager, several meetings with producers and development people interested in my writing and...
Absolutely no sales.
Now, I can handle the no sales part (at least, I keep telling myself that). What's tough for me to handle is the fact that most of the above mentioned activity occurred more than three or four years ago. Over the last few years, I've been diligently studying and practicing my craft. I've been writing scripts that I think are a hundred times better than the stuff I was writing back then. But my new scripts seem to be generating a lot less interest. Have I peaked? Have I reached the top of my mountain only to discover that it's a molehill? I don't know.
I guess my question is this...
Have you ever experienced plateaus like this, and, if so, how did you get past them?
The Bickals
Dear Bickals,
Life must be lived
forward and understood in reverse, and yesterday's plateau can easily
become
tomorrow's basement. In my life, I've encountered numerous devils
masquerading
as saviors and plenty of gangplanks that sure looked like springboards
to me. Need I mention the Broadway shows that never opened or the TV
pilots
that never sold? How about the film that never went into production
because
the director died, or the gallery show that never happened because the
curator got AIDS? Never think for one moment that your talent alone is
what will get you through. Too many people without a shred of talent
are
kings of the world, and too many geniuses are serving burgers, for
anyone
to believe that skill is all that's necessary to make it the biz. You
got
some early encouragement that didn't pan out? Tough shit. We can't all
be child prodigies. Dr. Seuss's first book was turned down by more than
forty publishers. Every studio but Fox turned down Star Wars. (Maybe
your
problem is schizophrenia. You are The Bickals after all) So
what's
going to make you or break you? Tenacity, plain and simple. Ruthlessly
follow every lead. Storm the gatekeepers. Get your projects to people
who
you know will like them. Fuck the agents. Go directly to actors and
directors
and production companies. I've NEVER HAD AN AGENT. Nobody can sell you
better than you. Here's a myth worth dispelling. Agents aren't there to
sell you, they're there to fend off the offers once you're already
successful.
Agents hate making calls as much as you do, especially to pitch
unknowns.
I have no doubt you've got what it takes. Persevere.
A friend and I have created a killer concept for an animated sit-com. The pilot episode has been written, approximately 10 future story ideas have been laid out, and a full cast of characters and their environment has been designed. The concept for this animated series
is set within an extremely popular genre, with what we believe to be great merchandising potential.
Like everything else in life, timing- and who you know, are everything. Too bad I know no one, and my timing sucks. My friend and I have in our possession a million dollar idea for a series, and we don't have anyone or anywhere to take it to.
Although currently in New York, I would certainly be available to go to California at any time to pitch this particular series concept. Anything you could do, any ideas you may have, or anyone that you could put me in contact with would be invaluable.
Sincerely,
Edward Egan
THE BAD NEWS
Animated shows
aren't sold based upon scripts, no matter how good yours is. Animated
shows
are sold based upon storyboards or demo tapes. It's like songs. Ever
try
to sell one just by showing someone the sheet music? Not likely.
Anybody
interested in buying a song will want to actually hear it first.
Also networks don't
buy scripts from writers, they buy from production companies. You will
not be able to get a meeting with anyone at the WB unless you have a
production
company with you. It's like you're thinking of going to Washington DC
because
you've got this great bill you want to introduce. Sorry. Bills have to
be introduced by senators or congressmen, so that's where you start,
with
your senator or congressman. Which means if you've got a show that's
similar
to something on the air, the place to start is in the credits of the
show.
Find the producer and/or production company responsible for the show
and
try to contact them to find out their submission policy. Unfortunately,
let me warn you that you will most likely be hitting a brick wall. so
be
persistent. I don't know of a single animation production house that
will
consider looking at a script for a new show from a novice writer. Hell,
Nickelodeon wouldn't look at a script of mine, and I wrote for Animaniacs.
The only animation
shows that are "written" are ongoing productions like The
Simpsons,
where the original creator is too busy to write every episode himself.
And, as I'm sure you know, The Simpsons wasn't
created by a writer
but by a cartoonist who designed all the characters himself. Same with King
of the Hill. That's basically how it works with animation.
Shows aren't
pitched with scripts but with storyboards. The art almost always comes
first, then the writing. Think your show is right for Nickelodeon? They
won't even look at scripts from established writers. The only thing
they'll
look at is completed cartoons from established production houses, and
those
production houses are only interested in looking at complete
storyboards,
with all the characters created. Children's television is one of the
toughest
nuts to crack in the biz.
THE GOOD NEWS
Doing it yourself
isn't so hard these days. South Park was sold based upon a 10 minute
short
made by the creators at home. On his show this week, Roger Ebert said
that
the new Sony Playstation is literally as powerful as the computers that
created the movie Toy Story. Hotwired
has a superb animation site. Click on Animation Store for lots of
useful
links. Create one they like and they'll broadcast if from their site.
You've
obviously got a computer already, so if you've got a fantastic idea for
a show, don't just write it, make it.
I don't know if I am a writer and I'll say just a little bit about my doubt. I have always been a "creative type" and drew and painted as a child and adolescent, but late adolescence left visual arts behind and stories began to stir in my mind. 10 years later and a number of personality tests (and visits to psychics, embarrassingly enough) told me to stay in the arts and that writing was ideal for me. I didn't major in English and literature, while reading and story structure didn't interest me until my late teens. Furthermore I was horrible at grammar and still tremble when I use a grammar check hoping that not too many mistakes are found. Thus, my question is: How do I know if I am a writer? Did you KNOW? I just can't imagine myself doing anything else and frankly would rather be a monk thank live a "normal life with a normal job."
Daniel,
Some people do nothing but talk into tape recorders, then have their tapes transcribed by typists, and they call themselves writers. I call them talkers, but who's to judge. I'm a writer because I love the blank page. Nothing turns me on more than clicking on the REPLY button when I get a query, knowing full well that I have no idea what I'm going to say, but secure in the knowledge that I'm sure to say something. My brain is integrated with my fingers, and I love just typing away. Of course there are two ways of looking at the question of whether you're a writer or not. Looking at writing as a pure art form, anyone who sets words in type is a writer, just as anyone who plays piano is a musician. But try telling that to your mom. She's sure to be more interested in whether you've ever gotten paid for writing, and that's the second way of looking at it, writing as a profession. I'm a professional writer, not because I'm a WGA mentor, but because I've gotten paid close to 2,000 times for my writing, as a journalist and screenwriter. And that, more than anything, makes me feel secure in my craft. No, I didn't feel any sort of calling. Personally, I feel more like a musician than a writer because I'm happier at a piano than at a keyboard, but my piano playing has never made me a penny. So ask my mom whether I'm a musician or a writer and guess what she'll say.
I've been writing screenplays about two years. My writing has evolved tremendously in the seven scripts I've written and I have received high praise by everyone who has read any one of them. These include agents, managers, and WGA members. However, I have yet to land with an agency or management company. Sure, I've traded email and phone conversations that told me how talented I was, but they still wanted something better. Most of the stories are high concept action-adventures, with a low-brow comedy and television pilot and bible thrown in for good measure. So how great do you have to be before someone decides to represent you?
Will S.
Dear William,
Being great has
absolutely nothing to do with finding representation. Hollywood is like
Washington DC, where the quality of your politics completely outweighs
the quality of your talent. The problem, of course, is the sheer
quantity
of the competition. Even the lowest rent agent gets hundreds of
submissions
a week, so it's close to impossible to stand out from the crowd.
Connections
are everything, so if someone they trust hasn't recommended you, you
end
up on the bottom of the reading pile. Winning some screenwriting
competitions
or contests can help, but not much.
The answer? Fuck
agents. Go directly to the talent you think will be interested in your
project. Believe me, if you approach them right, they all have some
type
of submission policy for unrepresented projects. Agents are there to
protect
them against lawsuits. Schmooze a secretary correctly and you can get
her
to send you a release form that protects them from lawsuits and allows
them to look at your project. If necessary, lie. Whatever it takes.
I recently had
a treatment I wanted to get to Michael Douglas. I wrote a letter to the
president of his production company, they sent me a release form, and I
submitted it. They rejected it, but at least I got it through the door
without an agent.
Be sneaky. Find
home addresses. That's how I got my first job. I found out that my
favorite
director lived in the Malibu Colony. Without his complete address, I
simply
mailed a script to him care of the Malibu Colony. When I hadn't heard
from
him in a month, I sent another letter. When I hadn't heard anything in
another month, I wrote him a song complaining about the problems I was
having putting this project together and mailed him a tape. He loved
the
song and wrote me a letter giving me his home number and inviting me
out
to his house to hang out for a day. We became friends, and though he
never
did my project, he ended up hiring me for rewrites on other projects of
his.
So forget submitting
anonymously to people whose taste you know nothing about. Think about
actors
or directors whose taste is similar to yours, people who you know would
like what you do if only you could get to them. Check production
schedules
of films they're working on and get the address or phone number of the
production company they're working for RIGHT NOW and give them a call.
Be persistent, and for God sake be persistent, and if that doesn't
work,
be persistent. When they're actually working on a project, they're in
the
production office a lot. They may actually answer the phone themselves.
It's happened to me, so be prepared, and keep your sense of humor.
Sometimes
the quality of your work isn't as important as your personality. People
want to work with people they want to work with. Pound on the right
doors
and someone will answer.
MD
I've FINALLY completed my FIRST screenplay (thank you, thank you) and have received multiple favorable responses to my query letter. Is it okay in 'the business" to send the screenplay to more than one prospective agent at a time? I'd rather ask than ruin my chances right out of the chute.
Thank you.
Bob
Bob,
Here's a dirty
little secret no one admits to or talks about but it happens all the
time.
Agents, producers, and managers often don't agree to represent your
project
until they've already gotten a positive response to it. Which means
that
when you submit something to an agent, if they like it, there's a good
chance they'll go ahead and pitch it somewhere without your permission
or knowledge. If they get turned down, you get turned down. If they get
a nibble, then, and only then, do they bother to call you back and
agree
to represent the property. So the problem with multiple submissions is
that you're facing the very real possibility that your project will get
pitched twice to the same studio from two different agents. The
confusion
will cause an immediate turn-down. As unlikely and ridiculously
unethical
as this sounds, I swear to god it's happened to me. So I've got to
recommend
playing it safe and submitting your project to only one agent at a
time.
The problem then is that you can end up sitting around waiting forever
to hear back from one agent. Without sounding too pushy, put a time
limit
in your cover letter, saying that if you haven't heard back in X amount
of time, you will consider their lack of response to be a turn-down.
I intend my first scene to be in black and white and for the second scene to slowly segue to color. Is it too presumptuous for the writer to include such direction on a spec script? If it's acceptable, is there a better way to give that direction?
Thank you very much for the help,
D. Jay Williams
DJ,
Thank you for braving
time and space to contact me. For a screenwriter, telling the director
or cinematographer what to do is always a dangerous proposition. Pleasantville,
in which characters in the real world are magically transferred into an
old TV show, is just about the only example I can think of in which the
differences between what's in color and what's in black and white are
absolutely
vital to the storytelling, so they're probably in the script. But it's
NOT a case of the writer telling the director what to do since the
writer
WAS the director.
I assume what you're
trying to do is separate past from present, or fantasy from reality.
Butch
Cassidy and the Sundance Kid started in sepia and then changed to
color.
JFK seemed to randomly switch from black and white to color, as if
deliberately
trying to confuse us. In Saving Private Ryan, certain scenes were shot
with a skip frame technique, with varying frames per second, giving a
heightened
sense of reality to some battle sequences.
The point being
that there are dozens of technical choices involved in the shooting of
a movie, none of which are ever in the script. The choice of the film
stock
is not normally assumed by the writer, and any attempt to dictate what
the film looks like are generally doomed to frustration. That's why
there's an art director.
Yet I feel your
pain. You just want to visually differentiate between different parts
of
your picture, and as the writer, it seems the natural thing to do. But
you've got to be clever about it. Tell directors what to do and they
will
invariably do the opposite, because after all, why can't the PAST be
color
and the PRESENT black and white? Wouldn't that be an interesting switch?
So the idea is
to INDICATE what you want without dictating the look of the film. For
instance
you could say something like "The film changes from dream to reality,"
mundanely telling the reader that the look has changed but without
telling
him exactly how. Maybe it changes from animation to real actors. Give
the
director leeway to shoot it his way. Give the director a chance to be
creative.
That's what he's there for.
Dear
Doctor,
First, kudos
for your comedy! Now here's my Q: I'm trying to
make the leap
from award-winning unproduced writer [Chesterfield quarter- &
semi-finalist,
yadda yadda yadda*] to one with credits (and cash :)
Newsflash: I
was just hired to write a stage play based on licensed franchised
characters.
Does anyone give a #*@%? If I invite some of the
agents I've
been woo-ing, will they even show up? Am I spitting into the wind, or
what?
Sign me,
"CSD in La La
Land"
Dear CSD in La La Land,
Sounds like you're
doing all the right things, so allow me to validate your complaints
about
your headaches from banging your head against the Hollywood wall of
futility.
Whether an agent will bother to attend your theatrical presentation
will
depend entirely upon their frame of mind that day. I recommend sending
them an oz of coke and/or a hooker. (just kidding but not much)
Serious advice:
Promote the hell out of it. Come up with really clever invitations or
postcards
that you send out to absolutely everybody in Hollywood. Whether they
come
or not, make the invite something they'll remember, something they'll
tack
up to their bulletin board. Follow it up with copies of your positive
reviews.
Be relentless so that the next time your name comes up, they'll say to
themselves "Hey, isn't that the guy who keeps sending us postcards?"
and
they will hire you just so you'll stop pestering them.
Dear
Dr. Hollywood,
Why aren't there
more people in the industry willing to help a new writer get started,
beyond
answering a few questions and giving advice? Too busy or do they feel
that
everyone should have to climb the same ladder?
Darla
Darla,
It's worse than
you think. Even among "us" who have actually made sales,
there is
the 10% of the WGA membership that actually make a living, and the rest
of us who can barely come up with our dues each year. You simply have
no
idea of the magnitude of the competition. Why on earth should someone
take
a chance on an untested writer like yourself for a TV position when
there
are a dozen out-of-work "Seinfeld" writers with Emmys applying for the
same position? So there's your first hurdle, the 90% of us with
credentials
who are after the very same jobs you're after.
Then let's say
someone is willing to take a chance on someone untested. Well, who
exactly
should they take a chance on? Are they actually going to take time out
from their busy schedule to read some of the hundred or so scripts they
may get in the mail every week? I was once a reader for a producer at
Columbia
Pictures and I recommended one single script in a year of reading. If
you
think what gets made is bad, you should see what doesn't get made. It's
impossible to wade through all that shit. Columbia Pictures has more
than
a dozen full time readers who do nothing but read the hundreds of
OFFICIAL
legitimate submissions from agents each week. And of those, 99 out of
100
are garbage, and that's not hyperbole. Completely unreadable,
incompetent,
garbage. And that's from the so-called professionals. If they read
submissions
that weren't from agents, the number of scripts they would have to read
each week would be in the thousands.
One of the most
enlightening jobs I ever had was for a casting agent. Like most people
in Hollywood, he was only interested in those he personally discovered,
and people with recommendations who were already working. Every day he
got more than 50 headshots and resumes in the mail. He had one stack
where
he kept the most pathetic submissions, the ones that made you want to
laugh
and cry at the same time, the pictures of hopeless losers who shelled
out
money to photographers to make them look professional, with resumes
full
of summer stock and local commercials. Everything else went into the
trash.
But wait a minute,
I hear you cry, what about the stack of people with potential, the ones
worth saving? No such stack. Everything that came through the mail was
separated into losers (trash) and hopeless losers (stack to be made fun
of). That's how it is with actors. That's how it is with writers too.
It's
hopeless. Blind submissions go straight into the trash.
Discouraging enough
for you? The most realistic advice I can give you is to give up and get
a real job, and if you take that advice, you get what you deserve.
Real advie; keep
writing. Write short stories, write journalism, develop your chops,
submit
your stuff to newspapers, magazines, and publishers. go to literaryagents.org
and look for a literary agent. Unlike agents in Hollywood, many
literary
agents are actually open to submissions from the net.
Should I register my script with the wga, copyright it, or both?
Me
Dear Me,
Registering at
the WGA is a belt and copyright is suspenders. Registering at the WGA
is
a rubber and copyright is a diaphragm. Each have their advantages. How
safe do you want to be?
Hey
MD!
I had a 122
page screenplay titled, "Crossover," which I gave to a friend to edit
and
rewrite. When he handed it back, it was greatly improved, but it was
152
pages long. Should I chop it down to 130 max?
Keith
Keith,
Chop it down to
130? Fuck, chop it down to 100.
Look at it this
way. It's your job to read scripts. You go into work and pick up your
pile
of 10 scripts you've got to read this weekend. A couple of them are 15
page treatments, seven of them are around 90-110 pages, and there's
this
one monster that's 130 pages. What are you going to read first? The
treatments.
Get 'em over with quickly. Then the normal sized scripts. You might
finish
the first couple, but the rest you read the first 15 and the last 15
pages,
all the while nervously eying the 130 page opus, actively resenting
the
bozo who sent it to you. When you finally get to it, you read the first
page and if it doesn't grab you, you skim the rest, maybe reading the
last
page.
No joke. That's
what you've got to look forward to if you hand something in that's 130
pages. Your script will not only not get shot, it will not get read.
And
if someone DOES decide to shoot it, they will cut out 30 or more pages.
Why not save them the bother. Do it yourself. Anything that is not
WELDED
to the spine of your story, delete it. You can always put it back later
if someone asks. Leave them wanting more, not less.
What information do you need? May God bless your lives.
Steve, Jen, Mia, and Isaiah.
Dear Steve,
Jen, Mia, and Isaiah,
Thank you for braving
time and space to contact me. I don't need any information. Are you
looking
for an agent? That's what it says in the subject of your e-mail, only
it's
not a question, it's a statement. Looking for an agent. Yeah? Whatayuh
want me to do about it? What is it the four of you do exactly? Whatever
it is, let me assure you that I'm not at all prepared to represent you
to anybody. Am I looking for an agent? Is that what you meant? Sure,
why
not. Wanna represent me? To who? For what? Get outa here. Who told you
about me? Is this a joke? My lives? How many have I got?! Let's see,
there's
mine, that makes one. Where are all my other lives? Must have misplaced
them. If I were to say "God bless YOUR lives," that would make sense,
you
see? You are four, plural, whereas I am one, singular. Get my drift?
And
where does Steve fit into all of this? Steve apparently wrote a letter
signed by all four of you. Sounds like he's on some kind of power trip.
I'd get rid of him. Or is it the other way around? Should this reply be
addressed to Steve? Steve? Hello? Just in case you got this first, get
rid of the other three. They're conspiring behind your back to get rid
of you. What exactly are you looking for? Do you know who I am? If you
do, please tell me because I'm lost here. Was that a question? Am I
supposed
to be answering it? There! Consider it answered. Next question.
MD
"You miss 100% of the shots you
don't take."
-Wayne Gretzky-
