This is the continuation of What the F*ck Should I Write About?, in which I searched my notebooks for a new story idea, but only found ones that were utterly preposterous.
There are typical ways that screenwriters decide on story ideas. Often managers and agents will ask their clients to submit loglines so that they can pre-approve and co-develop the concept from the ground up. The logic is that agents and mangers have a better sense of which concepts might catch fire in the spec market and lead to a sale. The emotional downside is that writers can come to feel stifled when dozens of their ideas are shot down by their reps.
Similarly, students in classes or pros in writing groups will often pitch their ideas to their peers like a test audience. As readers of this blog know, I'm a big advocate of getting feedback at every stage of the writing process (see This Is What A Rewrite Looks Like.) What could more logical than getting out of one's head and seeing how an idea plays with smart, talented fellow writers?
The creative downside is that some stories emerge through the writing process itself. The logline of the first draft may be completely different than the logline of the 2nd or 3rd draft. Sometimes it's difficult to express why the jagged kernel of an idea is so compelling, and why a slick and snappy concept with a wicked hook inspires nothing but the urge to take a long nap.
Then of course there's William Goldman's rule, which applies to anyone who would try to tell you whether an idea is good or bad: Nobody Knows Anything.
So this time, instead of taking a poll or applying some complicated, statistical rubric, I just asked myself a simple question:
If I could only write on more spec script, what would it be?
It's a clarifying question if you ask it honestly. It doesn't need to be deeply existential, as if you found out you had a Year To Live. It's just practical. If I could write only one more movie, what elements would be most important to me? Would it be a genre movie, like so many I have written before? Would I break out and write a comedy or family drama? Would I try to reach a wide audience or some eccentric niche? Who would I write it for (because every story is a kind of love letter to our ideal audience)? Who would I write about? What would be their secret fears? What would be their deepest shame?
Of course, these questions tend to become fruitful and multiply. What kind of movie, if I could only WATCH one more, would I choose to SEE? What would it look like? How would it feel to watch it? What truths would it affirm, and what fate would it utterly deny? Would it be funny? Would it be sad? Would it be scary and sublime?
It's only natural when facing the blank page (well...blank screen) to look at the grim marketplace, to recall the movies that are actually getting made, to consider the odds, and then to think, "Why Bother?" But, there is twisted sort of Alice-In-Wonderland-thinking that can turn questions like these on their heads. 99.99% of original scripts never get made, so why not write one as if I couldn't possibly fail? It's this kind of anti-logic that ignites the passion that drove me to write in the first place.
So, I asked myself all these questions and you know what?
I got an idea.
Showing posts with label Movie Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Movie Business. Show all posts
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Friday, May 25, 2012
Movie pitches, Startup Pitches
I have developed pitches to studios, to networks and premium cable, and to "angel investors" for both startups and indie films. In the next eight weeks, I'll be pitching a TV series pilot, a feature film spec, and I will joining a larger team to pitch a startup to VC's. Quite a lot comes to mind when I compare the two worlds, especially as those worlds continue to merge.
So check out my answer on Quora to...
Venture and Investor Pitches: In what ways is a Hollywood film pitch similar to a Venture Capital pitch for a startup?
I have developed pitches to studios, to networks and premium cable, and to “angel investors” for both startups and indie films. In the next eight weeks, I’ll be pitching a TV series pilot, a feature film spec, and I will be joining a larger team to pitch a startup to VC’s. Quite a lot comes to mind when I compare the two worlds, especially as those worlds continue to merge.
Honestly, the biggest similarity is just the anxiety and dread I inevitably feel before attempting to sell myself and my idea. People attracted to screenwriting and technology (or both) tend to be introverts and not natural salespeople. Pitching to anyone about something you care deeply about can feel like going up on stage to do a tap dance routine… wearing clown make-up and a speedo.
However, my personal neuroses aside, I’ve noticed three fundamental similarities:
- You Must Tell A Story
You begin the pitch with a hook that grabs attention of your audience and moves them emotionally. They think, “Wow, this is a story I want to hear.” Then you tell a tale about people with a BIG problem and a hero with a unique solution. The story is exciting because both the hero and the people want something very, very badly, but there are seemingly insurmountable obstacles to getting it. The story ends with a payoff, punchline, twist, a solution, and the audiences say “Ahhhhh, now I understand!”
The best pitches I have ever heard seem effortless. They are delivered like a spellbinding anecdote told over martinis at a dinner party. If the pitch is for a startup, the protagonist is the entrepreneur him/herself, but the structure of the story is the same: a big problem with unique solution executed by heroes who are the only ones for the job. The “twist” or “punchline” of the story is (in startup lingo) your “secret sauce.” It’s the unique quality of hero, his or her “superpower,” that will allow him/her to save the day.
These stories are told with passion. They aim for the maximum emotional impact and personal connection with the audience. Charisma, eloquence, and authenticity are all essential when pitching your story.
However…
- It’s All About Execution
In both stcreenwriting and startup circles you often encounter the meme:Your Idea Means Nothing.
Well, this isn’t exactly true. Said Michael Wolf, “I’ve never met a VC who told an entrepreneur, ‘don’t tell me about your idea since it doesn’t matter!’” Likewise, I’ve never met a producer or studio executive who told a screenwriter, “Don’t bother pitching me your story. Ideas don’t matter. It’s all about execution!”
However, when you walk into an office to pitch a great idea, what you are really selling is your execution of that great idea.
This often comes down to who is already “attached” to the project. In movies and television, this means that a major star, a powerful producer, or a hot director has already committed to doing your project should it get set up. Likewise, in start-ups, it’s good to have a great programmer, a great marketer, proven businessman, or some other “rockstar” on your team.
For example, if you went into a room and pitched a dark tale of madness set among dancers in a production of the ballet “Swan Lake,” you would likely be shown the door. However if your director is Darren Aronofsky and your star is Natalie Portman, you have a much better shot.
Perhaps the key element in the execution piece is answering the question “How the hell does this make money?“ In movies, this often comes down to having the exclusive rights to a “property,” a popular book or famous movie that can be remade. Having a built-in audience assures the investor that that there is enough potential interest in the story to turn a profit. In startups, this often comes down to a “proprietary technology,” something that distinguishes you in an established and lucrative marketplace. In both cases, the burden is on you to convince the investor that there are actually people or businesses out there who might pay money if your idea is realized.
- Who The Hell ARE You, Anyway?
“Who you are” will set the tone, the receptiveness, and level of enthusiasm in the meeting before you even walk in the door. Often, I can sense how a pitch is going to go, just by gauging the energy of the participants in the first 60 seconds.In both worlds, it’s easiest to pitch to people who either already know you or already know you for something. Whether you have already had a popular movie, sold a spec script, been a key player in a successful company, or just have “buzz” around you and your project(s), it’s good to have “heat.”
Let’s face it, if you pitch a Question and Answer website, no matter how good your idea may sound, nobody is likely to care unless you just happen to have been players in the development of Facebook.
If you are unknown to the person you are pitching to, the first thing they will do before the meeting is google you.
For example, before a movie pitch, the executive will first look at my IMDB page and my blog, both of which (for better or for worse) show up on the first page of my Google results. Likewise in startups, your online “brand,” as defined by your Linkedin profile, online articles written about you, or your website itself, will define “who you are.”
If you are a complete unknown and have no established reputation, what matters is who you know. Someone important - a powerful agent or producer, a powerful entrepreneur or expert in your business – has to vouch for you to get you in the room.
“Who you know” is particularly important because of the notoriousnepotism and cronyism in the film and television industry. Truth be told, the best way to sell a pitch (or to become an actor, director, or producer) is to be the related to somebody famous. While connections matter in every business, the startup world is far more concerned with proven qualifications. Hollywood is NOT a meritocracy.
For example, if an entrepreneur graduated at the top of his class from Harvard, Stanford, MIT, or Caltech, with a host of awards and achievements, it would carry weight with a potential investor. Conversely, I graduated fromUSC School of Cinematic Arts, arguably the best and most Hollywood-connected film school in the world, I had close to a 4.0 grade average, and I won several awards and scholarships. Yet, while the time I spent there was invaluable to me in my development as a filmmaker, my USC degree means virtually nothing to anyone listening to a movie pitch.
- Bonus Similarity – The Rejections
Even if a pitch is ultimately bought, 99% of the people you talk to are going to say, “no.” It takes a lot of strength, dignity, and most of all, passion to weather the long storm of rejection and indifference. The King’s Speech took a decade to get funded, even with Geoffrey Rush attached.
In both worlds, the job of the people you are pitching to is to say NO. Their task is to listen to dozens of pitches a day and figure out a good reason to pass on almost all of them, because they (and their companies) can only say yes to a very limited number of projects. You can’t take it personally, and you can’t see the rejection or even many “reasons” given for a pass as indictment of your core idea. You just have to take a deep breath, make adjustments if necessary, and move on to the next one.
The only thing you have to keep you going through the long slog is the (sometimes delusional) belief in your core idea and the authenticity of your “story.”
So, as it turns out, whether or not you have hot properties, great connections, or rockstar attachments, your “story” may indeed be the most important thing after all.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Does It Have To Be Three Acts?
People get hung up on 3 Act Structure in screenplays, and all it really leads to are "problems in the second act." These problems come because the hour long "second act" has no "turning points" or "act breaks" within it as described in most screenwriting books.
The truth is that 3 Act Structure is a myth; or more accurately, it is just one way, among many, to think about "structure." You can look at movies as having four acts, or eight (usually called sequences.) In this link, a very funny blogger makes a case for the 5 Act Structure of Iron Man. A five Act structure leads to more complexity and character development. (See Film Crit Hulk)
If it was good enough for Shakespeare and Romeo and Juliet, its good enough for your rom-com. :)
The truth is that 3 Act Structure is a myth; or more accurately, it is just one way, among many, to think about "structure." You can look at movies as having four acts, or eight (usually called sequences.) In this link, a very funny blogger makes a case for the 5 Act Structure of Iron Man. A five Act structure leads to more complexity and character development. (See Film Crit Hulk)
If it was good enough for Shakespeare and Romeo and Juliet, its good enough for your rom-com. :)
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
John August asks, "Is Screenwriting Dead?"
Interesting post/podcast by John August: Is Screenwriting Dead?
It is indeed harder and harder for feature screenwriters to find work and make a living in traditional ways.
What I tell my students at USC (and what I tell myself when I face the uncertain future) is that screenwriters need to be entrepreneurs, and create their own projects and opportunities.
They also have to be willing to write for "anything with a screen." This means writing and pitching for TV, but it could also mean creating webisodes, interactive media or writing for video games, or transmedia. I've even encouraged screenwriters to write short stories, graphic novels, and even full length novels, when appropriate, instead of spec scripts, because the writer then owns the IP. There's a lot of hunger for content out there. Be proactive and connect with the people who are making it.
What's clear is the old model of taking out feature specs and pitching for feature writing assignments isn't enough to sustain even established writers. "There's just no business in it." I hear many say. So rather than be passive, we have to look at the changing media environment as opportunity.
You CAN eek together a living, you just have to be...well... CREATIVE.
It is indeed harder and harder for feature screenwriters to find work and make a living in traditional ways.
What I tell my students at USC (and what I tell myself when I face the uncertain future) is that screenwriters need to be entrepreneurs, and create their own projects and opportunities.
They also have to be willing to write for "anything with a screen." This means writing and pitching for TV, but it could also mean creating webisodes, interactive media or writing for video games, or transmedia. I've even encouraged screenwriters to write short stories, graphic novels, and even full length novels, when appropriate, instead of spec scripts, because the writer then owns the IP. There's a lot of hunger for content out there. Be proactive and connect with the people who are making it.
What's clear is the old model of taking out feature specs and pitching for feature writing assignments isn't enough to sustain even established writers. "There's just no business in it." I hear many say. So rather than be passive, we have to look at the changing media environment as opportunity.
You CAN eek together a living, you just have to be...well... CREATIVE.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Weekly Filmmaker Finds (May 20, 2012)
At least once a week from here on forward, I will be listing 10 fabulous things found on the internet related to screenwriting, filmmaking, or the future of storytelling. I will be collaborating with the mysterious, anonymous and brilliant curator "Boris," who describes himself as "author, screenwriter, filmmaker. A child of Marx and Coca Cola who strives to be Terrence Malick when he grows up (or David Lynch, he hasn't decided yet)." You should follow him on both Twitter and Tumblr.
I invite anyone and everyone to submit links, articles, or videos for Friday Finds For Filmmakers by emailing me at genrehacks@gmail.com. And so, without further introduction:
1. A shot of a script page from the original "Alien."
I invite anyone and everyone to submit links, articles, or videos for Friday Finds For Filmmakers by emailing me at genrehacks@gmail.com. And so, without further introduction:
1. A shot of a script page from the original "Alien."
This is how script pages look during the filmmaking process. They are protean documents under continual revision from concept, through shooting script, through filming, editing, and re-shoots. If you are rewriting your script, this is what your pages should look like: covered in marks, cross-outs, alternate dialogue, and notes for later. All writing is re-writing.
2. David Lynch on Stanley Kubrick.
5. Screenwriter Ernest Lehman on Alfred Hitchcock and writing ‘North By Northwest’.
Lehman received 6 Academy Awardnominations during his screenwriting career. In 2001 he received an honorary Oscar for his works, the first screenwriter to receive that honor.
7. TED Talk of the Week:
Just in case you all think I've gotten too "film-school-artsy-pretencious" with all this Kubric, Lynch and Cassavetes, here is Andrew Stanton (Toy Story, WALL-E) with tips on storytelling: start at the end and work back to the beginning.
8. Twitter Feed of The Week: |
| CLICK HERE TO ENLARGE |
2. David Lynch on Stanley Kubrick.
David Lynch tells the story of meeting Stanley Kubrick and showing him Eraserhead. It's a short but fascinating audio, and it reminds me (I worked on Twin Peaks as a set dresser), that David sounds exactly like Mr. Rogers... if Mr. Rogers ever dropped acid. Click the link HERE.
3. Christopher Nolan on shooting his first film, The Following, on “no budget.”
3. Christopher Nolan on shooting his first film, The Following, on “no budget.”
He was the Writer, Director, Producer, Editor, and Cinematographer.
"When I went to film school we had to do three short films," stated Aronofsky who sought to obtain his masters in directing at the American Film Institute, "so I started reading the short stories of my favourite authors." Here is his third, No Time (1994) which features Robert Dylan Cohen, Chas Martin and Billy Portman.
Lehman received 6 Academy Awardnominations during his screenwriting career. In 2001 he received an honorary Oscar for his works, the first screenwriter to receive that honor.
6. A rare documentary on John Cassavetes.
He acted in many Hollywood films, notably Rosemary's Baby (1968) and The Dirty Dozen (1967). However, Cassevetes was also a pioneer of American independent film by writing and directing over a dozen movies, which he financed in part with his Hollywood paychecks, and which pioneered the use of improvisation and a realistic cinéma vérité style.
He acted in many Hollywood films, notably Rosemary's Baby (1968) and The Dirty Dozen (1967). However, Cassevetes was also a pioneer of American independent film by writing and directing over a dozen movies, which he financed in part with his Hollywood paychecks, and which pioneered the use of improvisation and a realistic cinéma vérité style.
7. TED Talk of the Week:
Just in case you all think I've gotten too "film-school-artsy-pretencious" with all this Kubric, Lynch and Cassavetes, here is Andrew Stanton (Toy Story, WALL-E) with tips on storytelling: start at the end and work back to the beginning.
The Hollywood Reporter recently cited Hope and his partners as one of the twenty-five most powerful people in the Independent Film business. Says Ted, "I produce films -- and try to find a way to make indie film sustainable. We need to build it better together."
9. Short Film of the Week: The Nails
I like three things about this nifty little horror short film: It was all shot on an i-phone, the performances are oddly authentic, and its really scary.
10. Blog of the week: A Filmmaker's Life.
I like three things about this nifty little horror short film: It was all shot on an i-phone, the performances are oddly authentic, and its really scary.
So, you really want to find out what it's like to live the life of a fiercely independent filmmaker? Then follow this blog by award-wining filmmaker and Sundance alumni, Jacques Thelemaque:
Thanks again to Boris, who I hope will become a regular collaborator in my weekly filmmaker finds . And if you readers have found something cool, email me at genrehacks@gmail.com, and if I post it, I will credit you here! I believe we all should be curating great content, particularly great films and shorts, but please don't just send me your own stuff for promotion. Let's support our peers!
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
You ask,"Why is there so little originality coming out of Hollywood?"
A recent question on Quora.com: "Why is there so little originality coming out of Hollywood?
Remakes, ripoffs, adaptations, sequels and prequels. Where did the creativity and originality go?"
I would also challenge those who bemoan Hollywood's lack of originality to look beyond mainstream Hollywood, and check out the thousands of movies being made outside the Hollywood system. We live in a time when Netflix can send or stream just about any foreign film or independent that might interest you.
For example, the next time you update your Netflix Queue, check out these startlingly original films:
If like the rest of the world, you have already seen The Avengers, why not check out another movie in theaters that has a 93% fresh score on Rotten Tomatoes, the action-thriller from Norway, Headhunters?
There are startlingly original movies, both foreign and American Independent, out there in every genre, from drama to horror, thriller to comedy. You just have to dig a little deeper, do a little research, and instead of just watching any "event" film that is marketed to you, take responsibility for the media you consume, and seek out movies of high quality. I'm sure you liked Jennifer Laurence in Hunger Games, but she was better in the far more original indie-film, Winter's Bone.
Hollywood makes more of what audiences pay to see. When more people start showing up for original movies, more originality will come out of Hollywood.
Remakes, ripoffs, adaptations, sequels and prequels. Where did the creativity and originality go?"
I answered the question this way: Hollywood funds movies that are daring and original when large audiences go to see daring and original films. To some degree, this was the case in the 70's before the rise of the blockbuster (Jaws and Star Wars.) It's hard to imagine today's audiences flocking to see movies like Chinatown, Midnight Cowboy, A Clockwork Orange, or Taxi Driver.
I would also challenge those who bemoan Hollywood's lack of originality to look beyond mainstream Hollywood, and check out the thousands of movies being made outside the Hollywood system. We live in a time when Netflix can send or stream just about any foreign film or independent that might interest you.
For example, the next time you update your Netflix Queue, check out these startlingly original films:
- A Prophet
- 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
- The White Ribbon
- A Separation (With a stunning 99% critics 94% audience rating on Rotten Tomatoes)
If like the rest of the world, you have already seen The Avengers, why not check out another movie in theaters that has a 93% fresh score on Rotten Tomatoes, the action-thriller from Norway, Headhunters?
There are startlingly original movies, both foreign and American Independent, out there in every genre, from drama to horror, thriller to comedy. You just have to dig a little deeper, do a little research, and instead of just watching any "event" film that is marketed to you, take responsibility for the media you consume, and seek out movies of high quality. I'm sure you liked Jennifer Laurence in Hunger Games, but she was better in the far more original indie-film, Winter's Bone.
Hollywood makes more of what audiences pay to see. When more people start showing up for original movies, more originality will come out of Hollywood.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Adapting Your Own Work: An Interview with Ed Brubaker
Sometimes I do interviews on this blog in order to reach out to writers and filmmakers I admire. This is certainly the case with Ed Brubaker, author of the award winning graphic novel series Criminal, as well as Incognito and the recent series Fatale. He's one of those comic book writers who, as the cliche goes, "transcends the genre" and get's reviewed in the New York times. If you are a fan of hard-boiled crime fiction and loved the movie "Drive," you should click on the links above and check out his work.
Hollywood has noticed him too, and much of his original work has been bought or optioned. This is pretty common for popular novels and comics, but what interests me is that Ed himself has been hired to do the screenplay adaptation for one of his most outstanding stories Criminal: Coward.
Readers of Genre Hacks know that I'm obsessed with finding ways for storytellers to get their original work up on the screen. Ed graciously agreed to answer some questions about the advantages and challenges of adapting ones own work from one medium to another.
SH: When you started writing your Criminal series, did you think of the possibility of any of the stories eventually becoming films?
EB: Coward actually started as a screenplay idea. But I could never find the time to work on it, and I kept having other ideas for the character and other ideas for crime stories, and really wanting to do a crime comic series. So I ended up taking the basic germ of it, and using that when we launched CRIMINAL at Icon. When I wrote it, finally, like most writers, I hoped someone might like it enough to make it into a movie. But I didn't write it as a "movie pitch on paper" like you often see in comics these past few years. I was building a world and exploring characters, and trying to make the best comic story, issue by issue, that I could.
SH: In my own career I been frustrated by the industry's focus on "pre-branded" material (sequels, remakes, and adaptations.) Many writers are now writing original books or graphic novels rather than original spec scripts. I'm thinking of David Guggenheim (Safe House) made a deal to co-write his first novel, and Andrew Pyper, who just sold his unpublished book manuscript for The Demonologist to Universal. Would you recommend that writers with original story should try to prove their concepts in another medium in order to build a following and prove that the story works?
EB: Boy, I couldn't say, really. I've been writing stories and comics for most of my life, so it's kind of all I know how to do. I always envied guys like Shane Black or Scott Frank, who got to write all these cool crime movies. I just always did comics, from when I was a kid, and always wrote fiction. When I was in my 20s, I wrote movie reviews and articles for a living, while writing and drawing my own comics on the side, because it was just something I had to do.
It's odd that we've ended up in a place where comics, which is a fairly low-paying field (compared to film or tv writing) have become part of the larger pop culture in Hollywood, and I feel fortunate now that pretty much every studio or production company has a few executives that are into comics. But that's a real recent thing. I was coming down here 10 years ago, and that wasn't the case. Back then it would be someone's assistant, now it's the head of the company, sometimes.
But I've always thought, write the story in whatever medium you want to see it in. I did a pilot for Fox a year or so ago, and that was just an original idea I had for a TV show, not a comic idea or a novel idea. I think that's important, to respect the audience and the material. If you do a book or a comic that's just a movie pitch, its unlikely you'll end up with say a Megan Abbott or Joe Hill novel, or a Neil Gaiman comic. You know what I mean?
So I would say, if you have an idea, make sure it makes sense as a comic, or a novel, or a web-series, whatever. Don't just take your spec script idea and shove it into another medium. Novels and comics and movies have totally different languages, that make them all better at different things.
SH: Do you think we are reaching a time when it is common for the original writer of a book or graphic novel to also write the screenplay adaptation? (I'm thinking of Suzanne Collins are her involvement in the Hunger Games film.)
EB: I don't know. I think I would've sold some of my books a few years earlier if I didn't want to write the adaptations. INCOGNITO sold fairly quickly, and there's been not even a hint of anyone wanting me involved in the scripting. Which on that one, I was fine with. But with Coward, and most of the Criminal books, I either didn't want them adapted, or wanted to be involved, so I insisted. But I still get the sense, outside of independent producers, that screenwriting is this club that novelists and comic writers have to break into, through force of will. It's certainly not something most producers or studios will suggest. They'd always rather have their own people or a writer they know, doing that adaptation.
But you look at someone like Will Beall, who got his start as a cop writing a novel, then adapting that book - LA Rex - and then got hired on Castle, and now is a fairly hot screenwriter just a few years later. So it does happen.
SH: Your characters are seedy, complex, realistic, violent and yet morally conflicted. They are not the kind of people we usually see in mainstream Hollywood movies. This will excite many movie fans, but does it make your producers and executives nervous?
EB: Not so far. The biggest thing I kept running into early on, when having meetings with studios about Criminal, was that they weren't "high concept" enough. I remember when we had a bunch of actors and directors interested in Coward, originally, and we were taking it around, it was the same time the last Die Hard movie was a huge hit, and all the notes were - love the character and the world, but the heist isn't high concept enough, can it be about national intelligence or terrorism?
And then a few years later, you see movies like The Town or Drive get turned into fairly faithful adaptations of their source material, and do huge business. Affleck isn't stealing the Declaration of Independence or stopping a bombing plot in the The Town.
SH: Some of the best crime stories are showing up on cable TV, not in movies. In particular, I'm thinking of "The Wire" and "Breaking Bad." There seems to a greater opportunity to write three dimensional characters, long story arcs, and creatively inspired scenes of violence and sexuality. What do you think of trying to take your work and, like George R.R. Martin with Game of Thrones, creating a cable series?
EB: I would love to, or to even create an original show for cable. With Criminal, I'm pretty far down the road on it as a films, but yeah, agreed. The Wire, Deadwood, Breaking Bad, and Mad Men, those are probably all among the best writing in the US in the past decade. If HBO or Showtime had come knocking for Criminal a year ago, I'd have happily said yes to a George RR Martin-style arrangement, where I got to be involved.
SH: You are working from a medium, sequential art, that is very analogous to cinema and TV. You already have dialogue, action and structure worked out in your script for the comic/graphic novel. Your partner Sean Phillips, has already created an outstanding visualization. What is involved in writing the screenplay? Are you faithfully transcribing what you've already written/created or does a movie adaptation require you to make substantial changes to elements of story, characterization or dialogue?
EB: That's the struggle I'm in, and why I'm not going to want to adapt all my own material, I think. With Coward, the basic structure of the book is very much, straight-forward three act structure. And the director is a huge fan of the book and the way the story is told. He actually wants to be more faithful than I do. The things that change are, in the comic, there's lots of first person narrative explaining the world and the characters and the backstory, even their internal thoughts. You don't want that in a movie, not so much. You can do it, certainly Fight Club did it beautifully, and others have, as well, but for a crime movie, today, not so much. And some of the locations change, of course, and there are characters that are in the book that aren't in the screenplay, and some that aren't in the book that are in the screenplay.
And the main difference I've found from comics to screenplay with dialog is, in comics, you fake it. You try to write dialog that when read, seems in the readers head to feel realistic. But if it's said outloud, it isn't. Because you're limited by space in the panel. You don't want huge balloons or tons of them all over the page (although it works for my friend Brian Bendis) so you fake it. But with film, the dialog can be more real. It's still not actually real, because that would be really boring, but you can expand it, and find different rhythms and take more time with it. Something like In Bruges, what makes that film work, or Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (to name two of my favorites for dialog) would never work in comics. And that's why when in Watchmen, the film, when the actors said the dialog directly from the comic, it didn't sound right. Because those words were meant to be read, not spoken.
SH: Do you worry that the elements that made Criminal: Coward so effective and popular could get lost in the translation to film? What have been the biggest struggles in moving from one medium to another?
EB: The biggest struggle is second-guessing myself on every decision I made 6 years ago when I wrote it the first time. In some ways, I'd like to just pretend I never did the other version, and sometimes I'll be writing a scene, and then look at that part of the comic, and realize I did it better there. I think another screenwriter might not second-guess, and might just take the stuff directly from the book that works, because they aren't as close to the material.
My feeling is, I just want it to be a good movie. I already wrote the story one time the exact way I wanted to. Now I want the director and producer to help me realize it as a film, the best way it can be. The struggle there, of course, is they both love the book, and want to be faithful. It'd probably be easier for me if they didn't. Because I worry I'll turn in a script that's TOO faithful, and someone will think I haven't spent months agonizing over every scene. That I just cut and pasted the comic script.
And I also worry that part of what makes my comics what they are, my voice or whatever, comes in those narratives, which is what we're leaving out. I know it's not true, because Gotham Central was my voice, on my issues, at least, and we didn't use narrative on that series at all, but you know, I fear it anyway. I never want to write something that doesn't sound like me. At least, not anymore.
SH: It's extremely common for screenwriters to be rewritten by other screenwriters, especially as the project nears production and directors and stars are attached. Do you worry about your material getting changed in the development process?
EB: I do, but I'm not totally opposed to that, depending on the circumstances or the writer. My first screenplay was something I did for David Goyer about ten years ago, and after three drafts, another writer stepped in to do a pass, and it was weird. The story and dialog were all still there, but there was some new stuff, and he amped up the action and tension. I then did another pass over his pass, to make it more mine, and I learned a lot in the process.
But you know, once I'm done with my part, I know that's a possibility, at least, if not a likelihood. On Coward, I am involved heavily and working closely with the director and producer, so I haven't worried about it as much. I figure if they need to replace me, it'll be because I failed, not because they need Scott Frank to do a dialog polish.
SH: While working on Conan The Barbarian I spent a lot of time re-reading old pulp stories by Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft. I'm also a fan of crime fiction, particularly Chandler and Thompson. Tell me about how these pulp authors have inspired your work.
I grew up on that stuff. My dad was a big reader, and loved mysteries, and my uncle was a well-known screenwriter, John Paxton, who wrote The Wild One, and Murder My Sweet, and On The Beach, among others. So from a young age, I was always seeing old movies based on Chandler and Hammett books, and reading Conan comics.
As I developed as a writer, I drew from my own life, as well as all those pulp influences, to create whatever the hell it is I do. My real lightbulb moment was reading the Lew Archer books, by Ross Macdonald, because he was clearly writing about himself, while writing crime stories, too. And with Lovecraft, that's just the best kind of horror, isn't it? The kind Hitchcock would've done, where the anticipation is what drives you nuts, not the actual monsters themselves.
SH: Was the Criminal series inspired by any particular movies? Do you have any Film Noir favorites? What about current hard-boiled crime films like "Drive?"
EB: Out of the Past is probably my favorite movie. In recent years, yeah, In Bruges, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Drive, Yellow Sea, Chaser, Memento. A lot of others I'm forgetting.
But Criminal wasn't inspired by anything in specific, just a desire to have a place to tell all kinds of crime stories in comics. I was jealous of what Frank Miller had done with Sin City, but wanted to do something realistic, not over the top, and just wanted to write character-driven stories. With each Criminal story, there's a bit of trying to do my twist on a genre trope of noir, but I don't put too much thought into that side of it, honestly. I just let the characters tell their stories.
SH: One of the major reasons for Crimal: Coward's success was the outstanding art of Sean Phillips. Is he involved in the film? Do you think that graphic artists could be a benefit to film production by supplying storyboards and production illustration?
EB: Sean isn't involved at this stage, but it may be something to discuss if and when we move to production. I'd hate to take him away from our comic work, on Fatale, but I do want him to have the excitement of seeing this stuff being brought to life, that he drew. If we actually get this movie made, I'm sure we'll both be on set as much as they let us.
FINAL THOUGHTS:
Besides being a Hollywood screenwriter and USC filmschool teacher, I'm also a fanboy, and I love Ed and Sean's work. It has all the visual storytelling, complex characterization, and tension-filled plotting that I aspire to as a filmmaker. The adaptation won't be easy, but its one I'm eagerly looking forward to, and the producers made a smart move in hiring Ed to do the script.
Hollywood has noticed him too, and much of his original work has been bought or optioned. This is pretty common for popular novels and comics, but what interests me is that Ed himself has been hired to do the screenplay adaptation for one of his most outstanding stories Criminal: Coward.
Readers of Genre Hacks know that I'm obsessed with finding ways for storytellers to get their original work up on the screen. Ed graciously agreed to answer some questions about the advantages and challenges of adapting ones own work from one medium to another.
SH: When you started writing your Criminal series, did you think of the possibility of any of the stories eventually becoming films?
 |
| Ed Brubaker |
SH: In my own career I been frustrated by the industry's focus on "pre-branded" material (sequels, remakes, and adaptations.) Many writers are now writing original books or graphic novels rather than original spec scripts. I'm thinking of David Guggenheim (Safe House) made a deal to co-write his first novel, and Andrew Pyper, who just sold his unpublished book manuscript for The Demonologist to Universal. Would you recommend that writers with original story should try to prove their concepts in another medium in order to build a following and prove that the story works?
EB: Boy, I couldn't say, really. I've been writing stories and comics for most of my life, so it's kind of all I know how to do. I always envied guys like Shane Black or Scott Frank, who got to write all these cool crime movies. I just always did comics, from when I was a kid, and always wrote fiction. When I was in my 20s, I wrote movie reviews and articles for a living, while writing and drawing my own comics on the side, because it was just something I had to do.
 |
| Coward - A graphic novel |
But I've always thought, write the story in whatever medium you want to see it in. I did a pilot for Fox a year or so ago, and that was just an original idea I had for a TV show, not a comic idea or a novel idea. I think that's important, to respect the audience and the material. If you do a book or a comic that's just a movie pitch, its unlikely you'll end up with say a Megan Abbott or Joe Hill novel, or a Neil Gaiman comic. You know what I mean?
So I would say, if you have an idea, make sure it makes sense as a comic, or a novel, or a web-series, whatever. Don't just take your spec script idea and shove it into another medium. Novels and comics and movies have totally different languages, that make them all better at different things.
SH: Do you think we are reaching a time when it is common for the original writer of a book or graphic novel to also write the screenplay adaptation? (I'm thinking of Suzanne Collins are her involvement in the Hunger Games film.)
But you look at someone like Will Beall, who got his start as a cop writing a novel, then adapting that book - LA Rex - and then got hired on Castle, and now is a fairly hot screenwriter just a few years later. So it does happen.
SH: Your characters are seedy, complex, realistic, violent and yet morally conflicted. They are not the kind of people we usually see in mainstream Hollywood movies. This will excite many movie fans, but does it make your producers and executives nervous?
And then a few years later, you see movies like The Town or Drive get turned into fairly faithful adaptations of their source material, and do huge business. Affleck isn't stealing the Declaration of Independence or stopping a bombing plot in the The Town.
SH: Some of the best crime stories are showing up on cable TV, not in movies. In particular, I'm thinking of "The Wire" and "Breaking Bad." There seems to a greater opportunity to write three dimensional characters, long story arcs, and creatively inspired scenes of violence and sexuality. What do you think of trying to take your work and, like George R.R. Martin with Game of Thrones, creating a cable series?
EB: I would love to, or to even create an original show for cable. With Criminal, I'm pretty far down the road on it as a films, but yeah, agreed. The Wire, Deadwood, Breaking Bad, and Mad Men, those are probably all among the best writing in the US in the past decade. If HBO or Showtime had come knocking for Criminal a year ago, I'd have happily said yes to a George RR Martin-style arrangement, where I got to be involved.
SH: You are working from a medium, sequential art, that is very analogous to cinema and TV. You already have dialogue, action and structure worked out in your script for the comic/graphic novel. Your partner Sean Phillips, has already created an outstanding visualization. What is involved in writing the screenplay? Are you faithfully transcribing what you've already written/created or does a movie adaptation require you to make substantial changes to elements of story, characterization or dialogue?
And the main difference I've found from comics to screenplay with dialog is, in comics, you fake it. You try to write dialog that when read, seems in the readers head to feel realistic. But if it's said outloud, it isn't. Because you're limited by space in the panel. You don't want huge balloons or tons of them all over the page (although it works for my friend Brian Bendis) so you fake it. But with film, the dialog can be more real. It's still not actually real, because that would be really boring, but you can expand it, and find different rhythms and take more time with it. Something like In Bruges, what makes that film work, or Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (to name two of my favorites for dialog) would never work in comics. And that's why when in Watchmen, the film, when the actors said the dialog directly from the comic, it didn't sound right. Because those words were meant to be read, not spoken.
SH: Do you worry that the elements that made Criminal: Coward so effective and popular could get lost in the translation to film? What have been the biggest struggles in moving from one medium to another?
EB: The biggest struggle is second-guessing myself on every decision I made 6 years ago when I wrote it the first time. In some ways, I'd like to just pretend I never did the other version, and sometimes I'll be writing a scene, and then look at that part of the comic, and realize I did it better there. I think another screenwriter might not second-guess, and might just take the stuff directly from the book that works, because they aren't as close to the material.
And I also worry that part of what makes my comics what they are, my voice or whatever, comes in those narratives, which is what we're leaving out. I know it's not true, because Gotham Central was my voice, on my issues, at least, and we didn't use narrative on that series at all, but you know, I fear it anyway. I never want to write something that doesn't sound like me. At least, not anymore.
SH: It's extremely common for screenwriters to be rewritten by other screenwriters, especially as the project nears production and directors and stars are attached. Do you worry about your material getting changed in the development process?
EB: I do, but I'm not totally opposed to that, depending on the circumstances or the writer. My first screenplay was something I did for David Goyer about ten years ago, and after three drafts, another writer stepped in to do a pass, and it was weird. The story and dialog were all still there, but there was some new stuff, and he amped up the action and tension. I then did another pass over his pass, to make it more mine, and I learned a lot in the process.
But you know, once I'm done with my part, I know that's a possibility, at least, if not a likelihood. On Coward, I am involved heavily and working closely with the director and producer, so I haven't worried about it as much. I figure if they need to replace me, it'll be because I failed, not because they need Scott Frank to do a dialog polish.
SH: While working on Conan The Barbarian I spent a lot of time re-reading old pulp stories by Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft. I'm also a fan of crime fiction, particularly Chandler and Thompson. Tell me about how these pulp authors have inspired your work.
I grew up on that stuff. My dad was a big reader, and loved mysteries, and my uncle was a well-known screenwriter, John Paxton, who wrote The Wild One, and Murder My Sweet, and On The Beach, among others. So from a young age, I was always seeing old movies based on Chandler and Hammett books, and reading Conan comics.
As I developed as a writer, I drew from my own life, as well as all those pulp influences, to create whatever the hell it is I do. My real lightbulb moment was reading the Lew Archer books, by Ross Macdonald, because he was clearly writing about himself, while writing crime stories, too. And with Lovecraft, that's just the best kind of horror, isn't it? The kind Hitchcock would've done, where the anticipation is what drives you nuts, not the actual monsters themselves.
SH: Was the Criminal series inspired by any particular movies? Do you have any Film Noir favorites? What about current hard-boiled crime films like "Drive?"
EB: Out of the Past is probably my favorite movie. In recent years, yeah, In Bruges, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Drive, Yellow Sea, Chaser, Memento. A lot of others I'm forgetting.
But Criminal wasn't inspired by anything in specific, just a desire to have a place to tell all kinds of crime stories in comics. I was jealous of what Frank Miller had done with Sin City, but wanted to do something realistic, not over the top, and just wanted to write character-driven stories. With each Criminal story, there's a bit of trying to do my twist on a genre trope of noir, but I don't put too much thought into that side of it, honestly. I just let the characters tell their stories.
SH: One of the major reasons for Crimal: Coward's success was the outstanding art of Sean Phillips. Is he involved in the film? Do you think that graphic artists could be a benefit to film production by supplying storyboards and production illustration?
EB: Sean isn't involved at this stage, but it may be something to discuss if and when we move to production. I'd hate to take him away from our comic work, on Fatale, but I do want him to have the excitement of seeing this stuff being brought to life, that he drew. If we actually get this movie made, I'm sure we'll both be on set as much as they let us.
FINAL THOUGHTS:
Besides being a Hollywood screenwriter and USC filmschool teacher, I'm also a fanboy, and I love Ed and Sean's work. It has all the visual storytelling, complex characterization, and tension-filled plotting that I aspire to as a filmmaker. The adaptation won't be easy, but its one I'm eagerly looking forward to, and the producers made a smart move in hiring Ed to do the script.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Filmmaking Master Class This Weekend: April 28th and 29th
I want to put in one last plug for the Independent Film Master Class that is happening this weekend. It's a great way get some new skills, propel your project forward, and network with other like-minded filmmakers. I'm donating my time just to support the cause of indie filmmaking.
Presented by The International Academy of Film and Televisionin association with Filmmakers Alliance
REGISTER NOW!!
When: Saturday, April 28th 2012 - 10 am to 5 pm
and Sunday, April 29th 2012 - 10 am to 5 pm
Where: International Academy of Film and Television
635 S. San Fernando Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91502
Filmmakers Alliance's INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS is the complete, a definitive, step-by-step, two-day seminar for independent filmmakers giving you the KEY information you need to get your film MADE and SEEN. The INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS is a clean, clear, concise and complete independent filmmaking blueprint for your film project that will allow you to sustain your life as a filmmaker!!
DAY 1
Concept, Story and Script Development - Developing ideas and concepts that work! Then, writing that script in a way that will get your film made without compromising your vision.
Web Tools For film - New tools and programs are developing almost daily to help indie filmmakers manage every stage of a film’s life and maximize time/money. Find out about some of the best.
The Legalities - What needs to be done to get your production up and running and to avoid any legal issues at any point down the road. Private Equity Financing, Grants, Crowdfunding and Tax Credits - Where to find the money and what you need to do to get it.
Distribution Planning - What you need to do at the front end (and throughout) to prepare for the back end success of your film.
DAY 2
Pre-production and Production - How to get the most filmmaking bang from your budget - creatively and cost-efficiently managing your project. Also, how best to work with actors, crew, locations, unions, guilds, crafts to ensure your film not only gets made, but looks exponentially more than its cost.
Post-Production - New technologies and methodologies are making it easier to high end work with a low end budget. Find out what they are and what you need to do give a stunning, world-class finish to your film and how to prepare for it long before you reach post.
Festivals, Marketing Distribution - Understanding the festival circuit and how to use it to your film’s greatest advantage. And devising and executing a distribution plan that will give your film it’s best shot at success and sustain your filmmaking life!
Speakers include:
Presented by The International Academy of Film and Televisionin association with Filmmakers Alliance
REGISTER NOW!!
When: Saturday, April 28th 2012 - 10 am to 5 pm
and Sunday, April 29th 2012 - 10 am to 5 pm
Where: International Academy of Film and Television
635 S. San Fernando Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91502
Filmmakers Alliance's INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS is the complete, a definitive, step-by-step, two-day seminar for independent filmmakers giving you the KEY information you need to get your film MADE and SEEN. The INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS is a clean, clear, concise and complete independent filmmaking blueprint for your film project that will allow you to sustain your life as a filmmaker!!
DAY 1
Concept, Story and Script Development - Developing ideas and concepts that work! Then, writing that script in a way that will get your film made without compromising your vision.
Web Tools For film - New tools and programs are developing almost daily to help indie filmmakers manage every stage of a film’s life and maximize time/money. Find out about some of the best.
The Legalities - What needs to be done to get your production up and running and to avoid any legal issues at any point down the road. Private Equity Financing, Grants, Crowdfunding and Tax Credits - Where to find the money and what you need to do to get it.
Distribution Planning - What you need to do at the front end (and throughout) to prepare for the back end success of your film.
DAY 2
Pre-production and Production - How to get the most filmmaking bang from your budget - creatively and cost-efficiently managing your project. Also, how best to work with actors, crew, locations, unions, guilds, crafts to ensure your film not only gets made, but looks exponentially more than its cost.
Post-Production - New technologies and methodologies are making it easier to high end work with a low end budget. Find out what they are and what you need to do give a stunning, world-class finish to your film and how to prepare for it long before you reach post.
Festivals, Marketing Distribution - Understanding the festival circuit and how to use it to your film’s greatest advantage. And devising and executing a distribution plan that will give your film it’s best shot at success and sustain your filmmaking life!
Speakers include:
- Writer-director Sean Hood (http://genrehacks.blogspot.com) discussing concept/story development and screenwriting for Indie features.
- Entertainment attorney Michael Blaha(http://www.fringemanagement.com/michael.html) discusses all things legal.
- No-budget filmmaking specialist Mark Stolaroff (http://www.nobudgetfilmschool.com).
- Post-production expert, Michael Cioni(http://www.lightirondigital.com).
- Distribution guru Jon Reiss (http://jonreiss.com/strategy).
- Film Collaborative's Orly Ravid, discusses distribution, sales/licensing and contract/negotiation services with a focus on new media digital distribution (http://www.thefilmcollaborative.org).
The seminar also includes filmmaker case-studies and open Q&A periods, so come prepared with your specific filmmaking questions - the ones that most have you stumped - so that we can take you to the next level.
REGISTER NOW!!
REGISTER NOW!!
Ticket Prices:
$199 - General seminar fee.
$149 - Single Day seminar fee.
$274 - Includes seminar fee plus one year of Filmmakers Alliance membership.
$224 - Includes Single Day seminar fee plus one year of Filmmakers Alliance membership.
REGISTER NOW AND TAKE YOUR BEST FIRST STEP TO GETTING YOUR FILM MADE AND SEEN!!
$199 - General seminar fee.
$149 - Single Day seminar fee.
$274 - Includes seminar fee plus one year of Filmmakers Alliance membership.
$224 - Includes Single Day seminar fee plus one year of Filmmakers Alliance membership.
REGISTER NOW AND TAKE YOUR BEST FIRST STEP TO GETTING YOUR FILM MADE AND SEEN!!
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Amazon Studios 2.0 - Another Interview with Roy Price
Last year I interviewed Amazon Studios Director, Roy Price, about Amazon's commitment to "develop movies in a new way" (see: Amazon Studios: An Interview with Roy Price.) At that time there was still a lot of skepticism among screenwriters about Amazon's option policy, their relationship with the WGA, and the exposure of scripts (and ideas) to the public after uploading.
Never the less, the experience of writers and filmmakers who won prizes and entered the Amazon development and test-film process was mostly positive (see: An Amazon Studios Screenwriter.) What I found interesting about Amazon was that they were willing to adjust their policies and the process based on feedback from the writers and filmmakers themselves, which struck me as unique in the closed world of Hollywood studios and production companies.
A week ago, Amazon announced additional changes to address writers' concerns, and as a result, "Amazon Studios 2.0" (as one blogger put it) has been met with cautious enthusiasm by several of its most prominent critics (Read the reaction of The Bitter Script Reader, and listen to John August's Podcast.)
So once again, I spoke with Amazon Studios head Roy Price to gain a little insight on the studio's intentions...
SH: Last Friday, April 6, Amazon Studios announced a major revision in the deal it is offering to screenwriters and filmmakers. Does this indicate a major shift in Amazon's core philosophy and goals?
RP: Our core philosophy and goals have stayed the same--we still believe that an open door and a large
scale feedback driven development process will help us make great movies that audiences will love.
We received a lot of great feedback from writers last year, and we listened. The changes we have made
were all done to present a more desirable offer to screenwriters and filmmakers.
SH: One of the major stumbling blocks for screenwriters had been the "18 month option" that scribes had to agree to just to upload their scripts. How has that option agreement changed, and why do you think it’s a better deal?
RP: Now, when you upload your script we automatically have a 45 day exclusive option and evaluation period, instead of the 18 months. After 45 days we will either pay you $10,000, or you can take your script back. You can also stay to get feedback from the community and exchange ideas with other writers on the site, but you can take your project down at any time. You’re not tied to us. I think people will prefer that.
SH: Previously, writers belonging to the Writers' Guild of America could not submit scripts, because Amazon Studios was not signatory. This caused a lot of criticism from writers worried about residuals, screen credit, and other rights protected by the union. Now Amazon has signed with the WGA, and members can submit. What prompted this change?
RP: At Amazon Studios we have an open door for all writers and we want to make sure that any writer can share their story with us. Making our production affiliate (People’s Production Company) a signatory to the WGA allows us to hear ideas from more writers. We’re about being open to everyone.
SH: Amazon will be no longer holding screenplay contests and giving away prize money. What is the reasoning behind this shift? Was Amazon Studios being confused with traditional "screenplay contests?"
RP: We found some great projects last year through the screenplay contests and met some great people; 14 of the scripts on our development slate were award winners. We realized that we could just have an open door and option things like a normal production company. It doesn’t have to be a contest.
SH: Writers can now submit scripts to Amazon "privately." Do you expect most writers to submit this way in the future? Who would be better off submitting their screenplay "openly" so that anyone could see and comment on it?
RP: We don’t know how many people will submit privately versus publically but we heard last year that some writers would have preferred a private option, so we listened. The public submission option is great for any writer who wants to get community feedback on their script and get additional insight on how it could improve. Over the last year, we built a community of involved and active writers and they can be a great resource for someone working on a new project idea. But some people would prefer not to share their ideas that broadly, in which case the private option is for them.
SH: What is the best way for an aspiring screenwriter to get noticed on Amazon. Do positive community reviews and feedback help?
RP: The best way to get noticed is to write a great script. Public reviews and ratings are meant to give the writer feedback so they can improve their script. Good reviews can't hurt, but public reviews don’t drive stage one.
SH: A major focus of Amazon's initial approach was the "open screenplay," visible to anyone and revisable by anyone, and "test films." Have you abandoned the "crowd sourcing" approach to developing screenplays?
RP: I think the key was always that our door was open to ideas and that we would be very focused on fan feedback in our development process. This hasn’t changed.
We still believe that there is the opportunity for writers to create great screenplays by writers working together; in fact, last year we had a script win a monthly award after being improved through community feedback. However, we want writers to have the choice on how to develop their work. So, in the public part of Amazon Studios (those scripts not on the development slate), writers can set their collaboration options to open, closed or by permission.
SH: How can a writer, whether aspiring newbie or WGA vet, land a writing assignment with Amazon Studios, and rewrite one of its scripts in development?
RP: Open assignments can be found at http://studios.amazon.com/opportunities and we hope people will visit regularly.
WGA writers should have their agent contact People’s Production Company to discuss these opportunities. Non-WGA writers can upload their rewrite proposal through the site according to the instructions there. We have two open assignments now and I am sure there will be more to come.
SH: Has Amazon decided to switch its focus from "test films" to "trailers?" Are trailers a more effective way to sell the film's concept and workshop its visual design?
RP: Actually, we’re still very focused on test films. We plan to test all our movies before we make them. That’s the way we do it. But in 2012 we’re going to commission test movies rather than soliciting them through contests, meaning that we’ll provide the filmmaker with the budget. This worked well last year. We will announce commissioned test movie opportunities on our Opportunities page as Open Directing Assignments as they become available and we hope filmmakers will reach out through those listings and express their interest.
Trailer contests are our opportunity to meet new filmmakers who may be interested in future open directing assignments. But it goes a bit beyond that, too. Trailers present interesting opportunities to explore creative ideas for a project. You can look at movie ideas in different clothes by seeing different visions for the movie in trailer form, and you can test those with audiences early on. So that is useful for development. Right now we are having a contest inviting people to make a trailer for I Think My Facebook Friend is Dead, reimagining it in a more comedic vein. I hope that will be fun for filmmakers and I think it will shed light on the project.
More broadly, we believe there are many other many ways to test ideas -- trailers, posters, premises, comic books -- and we plan to use all these formats throughout the year to approach stories in different ways and learn. We are currently testing a storyboard of Zombies vs. Gladiators prepared by the great Neal Adams with audiences, and we are delighted to announce that we are working with Ron Marz, Matthew Dow Smith and 12 Gauge Comics to develop a comic book based on Blackburn Burrow, which felt like it was an interesting world that could stand to be explored in greater depth in another narrative form. The comic book will be distributed for free and we expect that Ron and Matthew, and the comic book community in their feedback, will really help give this world dimension. So we have a lot of ways to get audience feedback and we have a lot of interesting story experiments going on down in the story lab. Trailers are part of that.
You know, the other day I was speaking with a producer who said he or she had limited interest in original screenplays because the worlds of books and other properties tended to be much deeper and more thought through. We hope the process of working a story out very deliberately in various formats and media, including trailers, can help with that.
SH: This seems to be a major difference between Amazon and other film companies. Why, instead of relying on pre-branded concepts (remakes, sequels and adaptations), do you think that work-shopping original projects (via test films and trailers) will lead to more successful movies and movies satisfying stories for fans.
RP: At the end of the day people want to see great movies. They don't necessarily prefer to watch adaptations or originals. But the tough thing about making an expensive original is that the idea hasn't been tested at all. So studio executives look for signs of audience enthusiasm, and a fairly modest sign is better than none. For instance, it is not unusual to look to sales of picture books or comic books. Comic book sales are modest and it's a different medium, but it's some evidence. Evidence is good, and we think that because video production costs have declined in recent years, we can get some good evidence in new ways -- trailers, test movies, etc. -- and incorporate that into our development process. That could unlock a lot of interesting stories.
Look at the bold stories that were told and great characters created in the 70s, from Harold and Maude to Star Wars. It's not that writers can't think that stuff up anymore. The ideas are out there. Our job is to make the road smooth for them.
SH: None of the other major Hollywood studios and production companies have an "open" submission policy, allowing literally ANYONE with an internet connection to submit a script or to pitch a proposal for a writing assignment. Why are you committed to this "wide net" approach?
RP: We believe there are a lot of original ideas, but not everyone can get their work into the right hands. Good stories can come from anywhere and we can develop them. At Amazon Studios we are focused on creating opportunities for people worldwide to make better movies, a core component of making this happen is having the right story. So the more ideas the better.
SH: Many screenwriters who submitted to Amazon Studios felt that they "didn't know what Amazon was looking for." Do the changes respond to this criticism? Has AS gained clarity about just what kinds of genres and subjects they are interested in producing and will the new approach allow them to better communicate "what they are looking for" to writers?
RP: Amazon Studios is a fan-driven development process. Our Amazon.com and IMDb customers love all kinds of movies, so we don’t want to limit ourselves. Our goal is to make movies that fans love and we are open to stories from all genres.
But I would say that in the last year we have gained some clarity in a couple ways. First, we want to make movies that stand out—that really feel like they need to be made. For any movie fan, there are four kinds of movies: movies they think should not be made, movies they’re indifferent to, movies they think probably should be made, and movies that are awesome and MUST be made— we want to make that fourth movie. Taking a smart and fresh approach to a genre can be a good way to wind up with a movie that must be made. By smart by the way I mean fresh and new, not, like, intellectual. For example, I would say American Pie was a smart approach to the teen comedy.
Second, as you know we take customer feedback very seriously in development and I think we’re discovering that a large scale fan feedback system works a bit better for broadly appealing shows than ideas that attract an intense but smallish following. If you’re looking at feedback from 50,000 movie fans across several projects, it’s easier to spot broadly appealing projects like a Bridesmaids than to spot projects with narrow but intense followings like a Winter’s Bone. We’ll try to modify our system over time to be more sensitive to those projects, many of which, of course, are great.
So to boil it down: we hope to produce smart, broadly appealing movies.
Sean Hood (my final thoughts): Ultimately the success of Amazon Studios will turn on movies that actually make it to theaters, but for many screenwriters with original ideas, it is becoming a more viable and attractive option.
Here are the reasons that writers, both novice and WGA veteran, should consider submitting to Amazon Studios.
Ultimately, Amazon Studios IS experimenting with a "new approach" to development. The fundamental insight of "fan driven" development is that fans are often aspiring filmmakers, and struggling filmmakers are often dedicated fans. In an industry know for it's elitism, cronyism and nepotism, Amazon is trying a "bottom up" instead of a "top down" approach to discovering, developing and creating popular entertainment. This is the same "Long Tail" approach that has been so successful for them in other areas, and can't be dismissed as some kind of hair-brained experiment. Amazon is a serious company with a lot of money, a lot of interest in creating content for its instant video and kindle Fire, and a lot of patience. This may indeed turn out to be a "disruptive" force in the traditional Hollywood system. Anyone who hopes to be writing stories for a mass audience in the next couple decades should take notice.
Now, I'm not naive enough to think that Amazon is different than any other large corporation: there goals are ultimately profit, not art. However, if their business model is centered on original material, created by and work-shopped by filmmakers, and if the success of that model means giving screenwriters a deal that most think is fair, then its reasonable to be optimistic.
And face it, that script sitting in the bottom of your drawer isn't doing anything for the next 45 days anyway. Why not give it a shot?
Never the less, the experience of writers and filmmakers who won prizes and entered the Amazon development and test-film process was mostly positive (see: An Amazon Studios Screenwriter.) What I found interesting about Amazon was that they were willing to adjust their policies and the process based on feedback from the writers and filmmakers themselves, which struck me as unique in the closed world of Hollywood studios and production companies.
A week ago, Amazon announced additional changes to address writers' concerns, and as a result, "Amazon Studios 2.0" (as one blogger put it) has been met with cautious enthusiasm by several of its most prominent critics (Read the reaction of The Bitter Script Reader, and listen to John August's Podcast.)
So once again, I spoke with Amazon Studios head Roy Price to gain a little insight on the studio's intentions...
SH: Last Friday, April 6, Amazon Studios announced a major revision in the deal it is offering to screenwriters and filmmakers. Does this indicate a major shift in Amazon's core philosophy and goals?
RP: Our core philosophy and goals have stayed the same--we still believe that an open door and a large
scale feedback driven development process will help us make great movies that audiences will love.
We received a lot of great feedback from writers last year, and we listened. The changes we have made
were all done to present a more desirable offer to screenwriters and filmmakers.SH: One of the major stumbling blocks for screenwriters had been the "18 month option" that scribes had to agree to just to upload their scripts. How has that option agreement changed, and why do you think it’s a better deal?
RP: Now, when you upload your script we automatically have a 45 day exclusive option and evaluation period, instead of the 18 months. After 45 days we will either pay you $10,000, or you can take your script back. You can also stay to get feedback from the community and exchange ideas with other writers on the site, but you can take your project down at any time. You’re not tied to us. I think people will prefer that.
SH: Previously, writers belonging to the Writers' Guild of America could not submit scripts, because Amazon Studios was not signatory. This caused a lot of criticism from writers worried about residuals, screen credit, and other rights protected by the union. Now Amazon has signed with the WGA, and members can submit. What prompted this change?
RP: At Amazon Studios we have an open door for all writers and we want to make sure that any writer can share their story with us. Making our production affiliate (People’s Production Company) a signatory to the WGA allows us to hear ideas from more writers. We’re about being open to everyone.
SH: Amazon will be no longer holding screenplay contests and giving away prize money. What is the reasoning behind this shift? Was Amazon Studios being confused with traditional "screenplay contests?"
RP: We found some great projects last year through the screenplay contests and met some great people; 14 of the scripts on our development slate were award winners. We realized that we could just have an open door and option things like a normal production company. It doesn’t have to be a contest.
 |
| Amazon Studios' New Deal |
SH: Writers can now submit scripts to Amazon "privately." Do you expect most writers to submit this way in the future? Who would be better off submitting their screenplay "openly" so that anyone could see and comment on it?
RP: We don’t know how many people will submit privately versus publically but we heard last year that some writers would have preferred a private option, so we listened. The public submission option is great for any writer who wants to get community feedback on their script and get additional insight on how it could improve. Over the last year, we built a community of involved and active writers and they can be a great resource for someone working on a new project idea. But some people would prefer not to share their ideas that broadly, in which case the private option is for them.
SH: What is the best way for an aspiring screenwriter to get noticed on Amazon. Do positive community reviews and feedback help?
RP: The best way to get noticed is to write a great script. Public reviews and ratings are meant to give the writer feedback so they can improve their script. Good reviews can't hurt, but public reviews don’t drive stage one.
SH: A major focus of Amazon's initial approach was the "open screenplay," visible to anyone and revisable by anyone, and "test films." Have you abandoned the "crowd sourcing" approach to developing screenplays?
RP: I think the key was always that our door was open to ideas and that we would be very focused on fan feedback in our development process. This hasn’t changed.
We still believe that there is the opportunity for writers to create great screenplays by writers working together; in fact, last year we had a script win a monthly award after being improved through community feedback. However, we want writers to have the choice on how to develop their work. So, in the public part of Amazon Studios (those scripts not on the development slate), writers can set their collaboration options to open, closed or by permission.
SH: How can a writer, whether aspiring newbie or WGA vet, land a writing assignment with Amazon Studios, and rewrite one of its scripts in development?
RP: Open assignments can be found at http://studios.amazon.com/opportunities and we hope people will visit regularly.
WGA writers should have their agent contact People’s Production Company to discuss these opportunities. Non-WGA writers can upload their rewrite proposal through the site according to the instructions there. We have two open assignments now and I am sure there will be more to come.
SH: Has Amazon decided to switch its focus from "test films" to "trailers?" Are trailers a more effective way to sell the film's concept and workshop its visual design?
RP: Actually, we’re still very focused on test films. We plan to test all our movies before we make them. That’s the way we do it. But in 2012 we’re going to commission test movies rather than soliciting them through contests, meaning that we’ll provide the filmmaker with the budget. This worked well last year. We will announce commissioned test movie opportunities on our Opportunities page as Open Directing Assignments as they become available and we hope filmmakers will reach out through those listings and express their interest.
Trailer contests are our opportunity to meet new filmmakers who may be interested in future open directing assignments. But it goes a bit beyond that, too. Trailers present interesting opportunities to explore creative ideas for a project. You can look at movie ideas in different clothes by seeing different visions for the movie in trailer form, and you can test those with audiences early on. So that is useful for development. Right now we are having a contest inviting people to make a trailer for I Think My Facebook Friend is Dead, reimagining it in a more comedic vein. I hope that will be fun for filmmakers and I think it will shed light on the project.
More broadly, we believe there are many other many ways to test ideas -- trailers, posters, premises, comic books -- and we plan to use all these formats throughout the year to approach stories in different ways and learn. We are currently testing a storyboard of Zombies vs. Gladiators prepared by the great Neal Adams with audiences, and we are delighted to announce that we are working with Ron Marz, Matthew Dow Smith and 12 Gauge Comics to develop a comic book based on Blackburn Burrow, which felt like it was an interesting world that could stand to be explored in greater depth in another narrative form. The comic book will be distributed for free and we expect that Ron and Matthew, and the comic book community in their feedback, will really help give this world dimension. So we have a lot of ways to get audience feedback and we have a lot of interesting story experiments going on down in the story lab. Trailers are part of that.
You know, the other day I was speaking with a producer who said he or she had limited interest in original screenplays because the worlds of books and other properties tended to be much deeper and more thought through. We hope the process of working a story out very deliberately in various formats and media, including trailers, can help with that.
SH: This seems to be a major difference between Amazon and other film companies. Why, instead of relying on pre-branded concepts (remakes, sequels and adaptations), do you think that work-shopping original projects (via test films and trailers) will lead to more successful movies and movies satisfying stories for fans.
RP: At the end of the day people want to see great movies. They don't necessarily prefer to watch adaptations or originals. But the tough thing about making an expensive original is that the idea hasn't been tested at all. So studio executives look for signs of audience enthusiasm, and a fairly modest sign is better than none. For instance, it is not unusual to look to sales of picture books or comic books. Comic book sales are modest and it's a different medium, but it's some evidence. Evidence is good, and we think that because video production costs have declined in recent years, we can get some good evidence in new ways -- trailers, test movies, etc. -- and incorporate that into our development process. That could unlock a lot of interesting stories.
Look at the bold stories that were told and great characters created in the 70s, from Harold and Maude to Star Wars. It's not that writers can't think that stuff up anymore. The ideas are out there. Our job is to make the road smooth for them.
SH: None of the other major Hollywood studios and production companies have an "open" submission policy, allowing literally ANYONE with an internet connection to submit a script or to pitch a proposal for a writing assignment. Why are you committed to this "wide net" approach?
RP: We believe there are a lot of original ideas, but not everyone can get their work into the right hands. Good stories can come from anywhere and we can develop them. At Amazon Studios we are focused on creating opportunities for people worldwide to make better movies, a core component of making this happen is having the right story. So the more ideas the better.
SH: Many screenwriters who submitted to Amazon Studios felt that they "didn't know what Amazon was looking for." Do the changes respond to this criticism? Has AS gained clarity about just what kinds of genres and subjects they are interested in producing and will the new approach allow them to better communicate "what they are looking for" to writers?
RP: Amazon Studios is a fan-driven development process. Our Amazon.com and IMDb customers love all kinds of movies, so we don’t want to limit ourselves. Our goal is to make movies that fans love and we are open to stories from all genres.
But I would say that in the last year we have gained some clarity in a couple ways. First, we want to make movies that stand out—that really feel like they need to be made. For any movie fan, there are four kinds of movies: movies they think should not be made, movies they’re indifferent to, movies they think probably should be made, and movies that are awesome and MUST be made— we want to make that fourth movie. Taking a smart and fresh approach to a genre can be a good way to wind up with a movie that must be made. By smart by the way I mean fresh and new, not, like, intellectual. For example, I would say American Pie was a smart approach to the teen comedy.
Second, as you know we take customer feedback very seriously in development and I think we’re discovering that a large scale fan feedback system works a bit better for broadly appealing shows than ideas that attract an intense but smallish following. If you’re looking at feedback from 50,000 movie fans across several projects, it’s easier to spot broadly appealing projects like a Bridesmaids than to spot projects with narrow but intense followings like a Winter’s Bone. We’ll try to modify our system over time to be more sensitive to those projects, many of which, of course, are great.
So to boil it down: we hope to produce smart, broadly appealing movies.
Sean Hood (my final thoughts): Ultimately the success of Amazon Studios will turn on movies that actually make it to theaters, but for many screenwriters with original ideas, it is becoming a more viable and attractive option.
Here are the reasons that writers, both novice and WGA veteran, should consider submitting to Amazon Studios.
- Amazon's Policies are Transparent, and in order for their system to work, the writer must be treated with respect. The established studios, production companies, and producers in Hollywood don't publish their policies on websites, they don't read writer blogs and websites and adjust their deals based on what writers would prefer, and aren't interested if a writer feels "screwed over." They don't have to. They work top-down on branded material like Hunger Games, and have no financial motive to cater to the financial or creative concerns of screenwriters (which is why so many bitter scribes whine about being the abused stepchildren of Hollywood.) Amazon's "wide net" business model, by contrast, necessitates that a large population of screenwriters (the 99% who aren't A-list writers working with the major studios) approve of the deal they are proposing and are willing to submit and engage in their process. And when the final films are made, if writers don't like the process, or feel "screwed over" by the results, then word gets out, nobody submits, and the system collapses. If nothing else, the policy changes Amazon keeps making based on screenwriters' feedback are reasons for optimism.
- Amazon Studios is optioning and buying original screenplays; the others in Hollywood are not. For the most part Hollywood producers and executives are looking to option novels or comic books, remake rights, and established "brands" like say, Battleship or Transformers. There are still spec screenplay sales and options, usually from established A or B list writers, but the primary focus of the industry has shifted. Amazon seems to be looking to create brands, not recycle them.
- Amazon will read unsolicited material. I'm often asked by aspiring scribes, "I've finished a screenplay. Now what do I do?" Submitting your script to Amazon is not a bad place to start. Most screenplay contests don't lead to much, even if you win, and Hollywood production companies and studios won't read your script unless it is submitted by an agent.
However, Amazon Studios is not right for everyone. I would NOT recommend Amazon Studios for filmmakers who:
- Are regularly payed more than double WGA scale and/or regularly get large payments up front for options, rewrites and flat deals. By casting a wide net with the intention of building a large slate of movies, Amazon can't compete with the major studios for million dollar specs, but there are quite a number of struggling WGA writers who wouldn't turn their noses up at a $10,000 option on a $200,000 purchase price. And with work hard to find, many would jump at the opportunity to do a rewrite for WGA scale.
- Who have original material that can be shopped directly to studios by established producers or agents. If there is excitement brewing around your script, it makes sense to shop the major buyers first. You just might hit the jackpot.
- Just want feedback for a script in progress. Feedback and revision is an essential element of a "fan driven" development process. I still hope that Amazon's screenwriting/community emerges as a place to get feedback on works-in-progress, but the Amazon screenwriters I've talked to have been lukewarm about the public "reviews" they get on their work. For writers, it may make more sense to workshop the script at other websites like triggerstreet.com and only submit to Amazon's 45 day evaluation when the script is ready. For Amazon, the fan-feedback loop may be more important for test movies and trailers than for rough drafts of scripts.
- Auteur writer/filmmakers who work with unique, personal and/or difficult subject matter. At present Amazon is a fan driven, not filmmaker-driven, development process, and they are looking for films with broad, not niche, appeal. If you aspire to the Sundance Screenwriting Lab, you are probably not doing Amazon Studios Film. While this could change in the future, the development slate does seem to bent towards crowd-pleasers like "Zombies v. Gladiators." If you see yourself as as the next John Cassavetes and your favorite film in the last year was A Separation, then Amazon is not for you.
Now, I'm not naive enough to think that Amazon is different than any other large corporation: there goals are ultimately profit, not art. However, if their business model is centered on original material, created by and work-shopped by filmmakers, and if the success of that model means giving screenwriters a deal that most think is fair, then its reasonable to be optimistic.
And face it, that script sitting in the bottom of your drawer isn't doing anything for the next 45 days anyway. Why not give it a shot?
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
A Filmmaker's Life: THE INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS - April 28/29 in Burbank
I'll be joining Jacques Thelemaque and others speaking at an Independent Film Master Class later this month.
I will be covering topics on screenwriting (at the beginning of the the seminar) and then joining speakers on online tools and New Media (later in the seminar.) It's a chance for me to donate my time for the benefit of emerging artists. Check out the details, and all the other fabulous speakers by following the link below.
A Filmmaker's Life: THE INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS - April 28/29 in Burbank: complete, a definitive, step-by-step, two-day seminar for independent filmmakers giving you the KEY information you need to get your film MADE and SEEN.
I will be covering topics on screenwriting (at the beginning of the the seminar) and then joining speakers on online tools and New Media (later in the seminar.) It's a chance for me to donate my time for the benefit of emerging artists. Check out the details, and all the other fabulous speakers by following the link below.
A Filmmaker's Life: THE INDEPENDENT FILM MASTER CLASS - April 28/29 in Burbank: complete, a definitive, step-by-step, two-day seminar for independent filmmakers giving you the KEY information you need to get your film MADE and SEEN.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
A Filmmaker's Life: Filmmakers Alliance Screening at Echo Park Film Center - March 30th!
What are you doing Friday night? Want to hang out? I'll be at the Echo Park Film Center hanging with Jacques Thelemaque and the FA crew. Click the link below for details and join me...
A Filmmaker's Life: Filmmakers Alliance Screening at Echo Park Film Center - March 30th!
A Filmmaker's Life: Filmmakers Alliance Screening at Echo Park Film Center - March 30th!
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Introverts in Hollywood
America is a country the celebrates extroverts, and no American industry is more extroverted than the entertainment industry. Pitches, deals, and production are driven by charisma, slick salesmanship, and monstrous egos. In Hollywood, you are supposed to talk loud and fast with the kind of fiery-eyed passion you see modeled by Tony Robbins. In Hollywood you celebrate the man of action.
This bias towards the extroverted can be daunting for those of us (often writers and editors, but also directors, actors and production designers) who are introverts. We've been taught by our schools, our society, and our business, that our natural instincts towards inner life and solitary contemplation are flaws to be overcome.
This is unfortunate. Some of our most creative individuals (think of filmmakers like Woody Allen, David Cronenberg, Todd Solond, Charlie Kaufman or Walter Murch) tend to be introverted.
Check out this TED talk by Susan Bain on "The Power of Introverts."
This bias towards the extroverted can be daunting for those of us (often writers and editors, but also directors, actors and production designers) who are introverts. We've been taught by our schools, our society, and our business, that our natural instincts towards inner life and solitary contemplation are flaws to be overcome.
This is unfortunate. Some of our most creative individuals (think of filmmakers like Woody Allen, David Cronenberg, Todd Solond, Charlie Kaufman or Walter Murch) tend to be introverted.
Check out this TED talk by Susan Bain on "The Power of Introverts."
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Brené Brown's TED Talk - For Screenwriters
I love this TED talk, both because I find it valuable in my personal life, but also because it offers insight into how to write complex characters. Don't just ask "What does my character want" or "What does my character need;" if you really want to write a three dimensional, complexl character, ask "What is my character ashamed of" and how does the story force him or her to confront it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)