Genre Hacks

Introverts in Hollywood

2012-03-04T09:54:00.000-08:00

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."

Brené Brown's TED Talk - For Screenwriters

2012-03-03T10:16:00.000-08:00

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.

Why do studios rewrite scripts after buying them?

2012-03-02T12:40:00.001-08:00

Recently, on Quora.com, someone unfamiliar with the film business asked, "Why do studios rewrite scripts after buying them? In some cases, the script was rewritten entirely, every single word. If it's that bad, why do studios buy it in the first place?"

The problem with the question is that it assumes that scripts are rewritten because they are "bad." Here is the answer that I wrote on Quora:

Both my brother and I have had the experience of selling scripts that were completely re-written. The movie "They" was a spec script that was bought entirely as a result of the evocative and imaginative writing, yet the movie that eventually came out contains only one word from my brother's original script: the title.

The same thing happened with his second produced film, "The Deaths Of Ian Stone."

You can read his brilliant original screenplay for the movie “They” here. The spec script bears no resemblance the film that was eventually produced. Now, read his sobering interview here about the release of his follow up movie “Deaths of Ian.” The bottom line is that “they” took his screenplays, not once but twice, and rewrote every word.

This is a very, very common experience. There are a number of reasons why it happens. Here are a few...

Scripts are not rewritten because the "writing" in the original draft is bad. Scripts are rewritten because somebody on the team: the producer, the director, the Lead Actor, the various studio executives have ideas about how to make it "better." Once hundreds of "little" changes are made, everything is new, and the original script is gone. It's like the Chinese torture "death by a thousand cuts."

A Studio needs to make money. Very few people understand how astoundingly risky it is to fund a movie. (To get an idea of just how risky, read this article HERE) Often it is precisely those elements in a script that are shockingly original and evocative (the reason the script was bought in the first place,) which make it extremely risky at the box office. So those core elements are often the first things to go.

The original writer is usually replaced. Because the original writer will often be resistant to a new "take" on his or her material, the studio will hire a new writer to make the changes. Check out my friend Neal Edelstein's (Mulholland Drive, The Ring) superb answer on Quora to Why do so many big budget Hollywood movies seem to be built on scripts that lack depth and character development?

Studio executives are often replaced. Studio executives from d-girls, to VP's, to studio heads are fired and replaced as swiftly as new writers. So a script may be changed one way to suit one group, and then another way to please the next group, and then mostly likely be thrown out all together by the new guy taking charge.

Producers, Executives and Directors consider themselves "the author" of the film. When a spec script is bought, (unlike a novel or a play), the writer gives away all copyright. So the studio now can change the script in any way they see fit. The writer (usually) has little power and little say over this process. A director in particular may consider him(her)self the auteur, and make numerous changes to reflect his/her "vision."

It is to the advantage of subsequent writers to change as much as possible. I have experienced this from both sides, having had my original scripts rewritten, and having been hired to re-write other writers' work. In order to get credit on a movie, a writer must have changed at least 50% of an original screenplay. Otherwise, he or she may work months or years on a film and get no credit what-so-ever. The guy who brings the director his coffee gets credit, but the script doctor who wrote 40% of the script does not. Without credit, the writer is effectively anonymous - no acclaim, no boost to his career, no awards, no residuals on DVD sales, nothing. As a result, many writers try to re-invent the script - changing major characters, plot structure, and theme - in order to win credit.

The domino effect. Even when executives and filmmakers try to stay close to the original script, some changes just have to be made to suit the budget or the practical realities of shooting the film. However, when one little change is made, another has to be made later in the story as a result. This change necessitates reworking another scene, which no longer seems as good, and so on and so on...and the original scenes drop like dominoes.

It's just the way the movie business works, and the reason more and more screenwriters are considering writing books. :)

P.S. You can read some interesting articles on screenwriters writing books HERE and HERE.

Ken Miyamoto: How To Give Notes on A Screenplay

2012-02-29T11:14:00.001-08:00

Anyone who is serious about working in the entertainment industry - as a writer, director, producer, actor, agent or executive - needs to develop the skill of giving "notes" on a screenplay.

Recently, my friend Ken Miyamoto, wrote an answer to the question, How can I become better at critiquing screenplays? on the question and answer site Quora.com. I'm reprinting his answer in full here. Ken takes a very no-nonsense approach to giving notes which comes from years of experience reading scripts with an eye to what could actually get made by a traditional studio.

Ken Miyamoto writes:

To give effective notes, you have to do what most studio and production company readers (I'm a former studio reader myself) do: Look at a script from a somewhat objective perspective.

I say somewhat because a reader is told what the powers that be are looking for as far as genre, tone, concept, etc. So there is a slight subjective angle in that respect because there is a predetermined set of immediate likes and dislikes. If a script comes through that takes a more comical tone, when the powers that be are looking for straight on horror, thriller, or action, there's an issue and the script will likely be tossed aside.

Regardless, readers have to learn to push aside their own likes and dislikes as much as they can and look at the scripts coming through with a more objective perspective.

Will this sell?
Is my boss going to want to pump millions of dollars into this?
Is the concept original enough or is it just another knockoff of Taken?
Does it have strong leads that are going to draw in major talent?
What's the demographic for this script?
Is it contemporary and does it jive with the current industry?

These questions and SO MANY more have to be taken into account.

So, that said, if you're looking to critique screenplays better, either from a peer to peer situation (Writing groups), a mentor position (Teaching classes), or even from a professional position (Script reader, assistant, etc.), you need to take the above approach and run with it.

The key thing is, you need to disassociate your own work, your own visual styles, your own habits, and your own likes and dislikes, with this script you're reading. You need to look at it from a purely objective standpoint first and foremost.

So if you hate romantic comedies and you're reviewing a romantic comedy script, you have to look beyond your subjective viewpoint of the genre and ask yourself questions like:

Would this be a popular rom com for those that love them?
Hey, my wife loves these types of movies. Would she love it?
Is this a concept within that genre that I haven't seen before?
Are the characters in this rom com original and new, or at the very least, do they offer a different approach or different angle on what we have seen before in these types of movies?

Then you can move into...

Is the script well written?
Is it easy to follow the story and character arcs?
Is the dialogue strong?
Is there a true beginning, middle, and end or do they introduce a concept and seem to not know where to go with it?

Those are all objective questions for the most part.

Secondly...

The biggest mistake people make while critiquing scripts is when they just look for what is wrong with the script.

This especially happens in writing groups and with peer to peer or friend to friend exchanges. "Well, you do this wrong here, that wrong there, this character was written terribly, this didn't make sense, etc."
The best way to critique a script is by finding not only what doesn't work, but especially what DOES work.

"You know, you're struggling with format a bit. You need to tighten up the dialogue and scene descriptions big time. This character doesn't have a great arc. BUT, this concept is AMAZING. This other character is written perfectly and brilliantly. I like this, I like that, I LOVE the surprise in the second act, etc."

You see the difference? Instead of focusing on the negative and what they did wrong, you equalize by FINDING the strengths of the script as well. That's what real script readers have to do because if maybe the script is written horribly, but the concept and/or some character and/or the dialogue is great, then you can give it a Consider rating based on those elements. Then the powers that be can take a look and say, "Wow, love that concept, love the dialogue, love this characters, etc." That may lead to an assignment for the writer, a possible option to develop the concept further, etc.

Now, let's keep it real here folks. A vast majority of screenplays out there outside of the film industry are terrible. Some people just aren't ready or just don't understand how to concoct a compelling story with compelling characters. So that said, what you REALLY don't want to do is blow smoke up someone's ass. You don't want to sit there and tell them everything is great. Which brings up another angle to your approach...

Conversely, don't make your notes a long glowing accolade, saying how you love it all.

That doesn't help people. If anything, it destroys their chances of realizing their dreams because you didn't care for them enough to offer the truth, at least what you think that truth may be.
So find the good AND the bad. I've read thousands of scripts from novice to working writers. And even the many bad ones had some elements I could point out that worked or at least were on the right track to working. Some were batshit crazy, I'll admit, but a majority of the time you can find both the good and the bad elements.

Now, here's where the subjective part does have to squeak in a little bit...

You have to bring your passion of film into play when critiquing scripts. The majority needs to be objective, but the subjective reaction needs to be present as well. Why? Because it'll help them in the long run. It'll enhance your notes, saying things like:

"Dude, I LOVE prison movies. Love them! It's been so long since I've seen a good one, and man, you nailed it."

Or on the flip side...

"Dude, I HATE romantic comedies. Hate them! And there's a reason for it. It's always the same formula. Guys meets girl. Guy gets girl. Guy loses girl. Guy gets girl back. That's what you wrote. Frickin' shake it up, man! You know what romantic comedy I DID like? 500 Days of Summer. Why? The guy doesn't get the girl!"

If you inject that passion of film within your objective notes that point out what works and what doesn't work, you'll be like a saint to them, whether they realize it or not.

Lastly...

Know what you're talking about. If you haven't read a lot of scripts, don't watch a lot of movies, and don't know at least a little about the current film industry, just say, "Hey, I'd love to help but I just don't know enough to help you." You can do more harm than good.

And if you do know what you're talking about, at least somewhat, go into it void of any ego. Another common thing in writers groups or some similar dynamic, is that writers are writers. We're insecure, whether we want to admit it or not. So when many writers are given a script with the writer saying "I need your feedback", well, they feel it's their time to step up on that pedestal with a little power and grandeur, and they'll exploit it.

In short, don't be an ass. Reread any notes you're giving before they are given. If they aren't offered in a positive light (With both the good and the bad), are one-sided as far as just naming the wrongs, and are full of dictations as far as what direction you think the script should go and if they don't go that way, it'll fail? You're being an ass.

If you start quoting Robert McKee, William Goldman, Syd Field, and whoever else, basically trying to talk smart and position yourself on a higher plain of knowledge, well, you're being an ass.

So in short, point out what works and what doesn't work, make sure you know what you're talking about in the first place (You have to love movies, you have to know a little bit about the current film industry, and you have to be either writing scripts or have read a lot of them, preferably both), keep an objective perspective while still allowing your subjective passion for film in at times, and don't bring in any ego with you, which translates to again... don't be an ass.

P.S. Studio coverage forms are a great broad stroke approach for giving people feedback. They also allot for notes to be a little more specific on. For the Wisconsin Screenwriters Forum, I created a hybrid studio coverage form for our WSF Screenplay Feedback Program. Think of it as studio coverage on steroids, offering writers the essential guidelines and expectations that most studios and development companies are looking for.

It's a copyrighted form, so don't go charging people and using this if you like it. But it might just make your critiquing experience a little easier because it puts everything into a context and certain perspective. It's not the end-all-be-all, but it'll get writers thinking when they read the reactions to these questions.

FEEDBACK FORM

Ken Miyamoto has worked in the film industry for a number of years, mostnotably as an intern for director Randal Kleiser, as a Sony Pictures studio liaison working directly with major Film/TV productions, and then in development as a script reader/story analyst for Sony Pictures. He is currently a represented and working screenwriter with many studio meetings under his belt (Sony, Disney, WB, Universal, Dreamworks, etc.), a previous development deal with Lions Gate in 2007,and recent studio writing assignments, one of which is currently in post-production. Ken, his wife Amy and two sons, relocated back to Wisconsin in ‘06 to raise his boys close to family.

Technology and Science Documentary: Bear 71

2012-02-08T07:10:00.000-08:00

I've written a lot about how to make a better science video, and about storytelling in the age of rapidly changing technology.For all filmmakers, storytellers, and artists interested in the exciting new opportunities of emerging technology: Watch this interactive documentary told from the point of view of a grizzly bear. Not only will you be blown away by the engaging interactive elements...the story itself will make you cry.It was part of the New Frontiers section of the Sundance Film Festival this year.

It only takes 20 minutes. CLICK THE LINK BELOW!!!

BEAR 71

Interview With Todd Farmer

2012-02-06T06:44:00.000-08:00

Todd Farmer

I first became aware of Todd Farmer around 2001. I was one of the writers on Halloween: Resurrection, and he had written Jason X. Both films were coming out within months of each other, and I was anxious to see how the movies would match up, head to head. While Resurrection ultimately did better at the box office, Jason X was undeniably a better horror flick, with genuinely inventive scares. Later, as my career meandered into other genres, most recently action and fantasy (Conan The Barbarian 3D, Hercules, Rambo 5), Todd went on to become a horror legend (My Bloody Valentine, Halloween 3, Drive Angry.)

I had a chance to catch up with Todd, and ask him some questions about Horror and the craft of screenwriting. Like the very best scribes in any genre, Todd is concerned, first and foremost, with respecting his characters, maintaining authenticity, and protecting the quality of his work from "the suits."

SH: You may be the only writer to write BOTH a Halloween movie and a Friday the 13th movie. To you, what are the differences between the character Michael Myers and Jason Voorhees? Do they behave differently beyond wearing a Shatner mask and Hockey mask, respectively?

Michael - the sociopath

TF: I was just thinking about this recently. In fact, I've written for Freddy, Pinhead and the Miner as well. My first slasher work was with FREDDY VS JASON back in the pre-SCREAM days. Followed that up by strapping a rocket to Jason. Later came the Miner, Michael and recently Hellraiser outlines, I've had a pretty good run with the icons and feel honored that I have. But that said, wow. All these years and no one has ever asked that one. After so many films in each franchise, filmmaker inconsistency has left both Michael and Jason with multiple personality disorder but at their heart I think they are both different and definable.

Jason - the psychopath

Jason is a psychopath. Michael is a sociopath. Jason knows the difference between right and wrong but chooses revenge. While Michael kills without emotion or morality. Jason likes killing. Michael is indifferent. Jason's like a baby duckling which fixates on the first thing he sees except when he sees you, he's going to kill you. Michael, however, makes choices. Jason is a hunter. Michael is a prick. Jason is a wolf who stalks and kills his prey. Michael is a cat who likes to play with his food first. My opinion, of course.

SH: How is writing a horror movie different from writing other genres (Thriller, Action, Sci-Fi, Comedy, etc.)?

TF: While there's always an exception, the simplest way to define horror is to look at the villain's goal. If the villain's goal is to kill with a weapon other than a gun and/or eat the hero, then it's likely a horror. Any good horror will have elements of action and even comedy, but the line between horror and thriller is very fine. Silence of the Lambs, Se7en, Misery...thrillers as defined by agents and media but several have made the argument they are, in fact, horror. The distinction isn't story or character. The distinction is money. Production value and casting. And every year the line blurs a bit more.

While horror is funny and others push the boundaries of taste and morality, all horror should scare you. Either physically or psychologically. The misconception is that horror should be dumb. That the characters should be dumb. It and they should not. Horror should be treated with the same respect as every other genre. Moreso even as Horror tends to make more money than most other genres. Especially now.

Todd Farmer Unmasked

SH: Where do most run-of-the-mill horror scripts fail?

TF: By disrespecting character and story. By disrespecting the audience.

When I started, horror was small and most studios looked down their noses at it. Dimension and New Line were your goto studios outside the indies. Most horror was written by n00bs because back then an A-Listers didn't filth themselves in the horror genre. What this meant was, many horror flicks were written by writers still in progress. As a result characters and stories suffered. Suddenly there was this misconception that horror should be dumb. Low brow. That only the lowest common denominator liked horror.

Then SCREAM came out. And SCREAM was not dumb. In fact, SCREAM changed all the rules. A movie that flopped its first weekend. Just over 6 million. But it went on to make over 100 million. Suddenly every production company and studio had a "genre" wing. Although even while cashing the checks it was a struggle for said companies to embrace the word "horror". But "horror" kept making money. Once the Williamson ripoffs ran their course, THE RING changed the game again. Then came torture porn. Then 3D which bled into all genres. Next came found footage, started years ago by Blair Witch and re-birthed by Paranormal Activity.

These days horror is getting respect in both character and story. You wanna see a screw up? Look at Devil Inside. (SPOILER) It's a good movie. A good horror. Without an ending. It was a cheat. Good story, great characters and sets ups that never pay off because of a gimmick. You think Paramount would dare end G.I.Joe the same way? "Hey! Let's go get the bad guys!" Fade to Black. Roll Credits. Nope. Because they would never dare disrespect the audience like that. But they'll do it with the horror genre.

SH: Why do you love horror movies?

TF: I don't. I love good stories and good characters. I love great movies that manage to survive the movie-by-committee, overdevelopment industry. I have no loyalty to a sports team. I appreciate talent. No loyalty to a political party. I appreciate intelligence. Nor do I have loyalty to a genre. I have loyalty to good story telling and good characters. That said, I am a champion of both horror and the audience. It annoys me greatly that so many studios are kept afloat due to horror, yet they refuse to acknowledge it publicly. When the bombs drop and the Revolution begins, I say we eat the suits first.

Pinhead - preparing to make a "suit" suffer

SH: What are some little known horror films that have inspired your writing?

TF: Four tiny unheard of films have made me who I am: Jaws, Halloween, Alien and Aliens.

Smaller known. Hmm. In the Mouth of Madness. Audition. Suspiria. And Halloween III.

SH: What kinds of producer/executive notes can ruin a horror movie? What kind of notes can help?

TF: Ego notes are the worst. Some execs give notes because they think they have to give notes. It's transparent too because they cannot give you a logical reason. It's just this random note so that they can tell the wanna-be actress blowing them in their leased BMW, "See how Bruce Willis just climbed into that red car? Yeah, I said it should be red."

The best notes are notes that aren't at gun point. I'll take a good idea wherever I can get it. I have no ego. But film by committee is a moronic way to do it. Stories should have one storyteller. I prefer that storyteller be the director. Once in production the director should be King. Granted there are some not so great directors in positions of power but I'm currently trying to push legislation to have them all beheaded. The point is, a filmmaker should have the final say. Not an exec or producer or even the studio.

If you pay me to build a house, it's your money. I'll do what I can to make you happy but I will not sacrifice the structure of the house. Nor would you expect that. But execs don't think that way at all. While admitting they cannot write or direct they have no problems telling writers and directors what to write and what to direct with no concern for the structure of the house. "When it's your money, do what you want. When it's our money, do what we tell you."

The Miner - My Bloody Valentine

SH: Do you write scripts in genres other than horror?

TF: Not often. It's frowned upon. Writers write. Story is story. Characters are characters. But the lazier agents/exes find it easier on themselves to put writers in labeled boxes. Notice though how those same agents/execs work on all genres. I love fantasy. Grew up reading it. Playing D&D after football games. Movies like Armageddon complete me. I consider Real Steel a sequel to Rocky. Fifth Element and Princess Bride and Lonesome Dove have dinner with Empire Strikes Back, The Freshman and Groundhog Day in casa de Farmer. I brush my teeth with Defending Your Life and go to bed with Ferris Bueller. And Lussier and I wrote Drive Angry which is a genre hard to define. While I do have non-genre stuff currently moving forward, I actually have no desire to ever fully leave horror.

SH: What is the single scene in one of your produced movies that you feel is the scariest?

TF: Hmm. Had to think about that one. The scene leading up the the nitrogen face freeze and smash in Jason X is a front runner, but I'd have to say the scene in My Bloody Valentine which begins with Frank meeting the Miner. We designed the top of the scene to be utter distraction. Complete with a little dog, a little person and lots of sex and nudity. The scene was designed to be so surreal that when Frank finally opens the door to his truck the last thing you expect is a pick axe. Just my opinion but that results in an additional 5 minutes of fear for a poor naked girl. And for the record, Betsy Rue, I heart you.

SH: What unproduced original screenplay of yours are you most proud of? What is it about?

TF: So many. I love everything I've written. Otherwise I wouldn't do it. I wrote a big budget time travel action with Bruce Willis. Loved it. Lussier and I wrote Three Days of the Condor in High School for Silver Pictures but we couldn't get it past the gatekeeper. I know without question Halloween 3D is a killer script. My first spec after Jason X was called Riddle Me This. A Thriller. Hensleigh was attached to direct years ago but the option ran out while he was making Punisher. But I haven't given up on any of these stories or characters.

Good story is good story, gatekeepers come and go. We just have to wait them out.

SH: After writing horror films for so long, do horror movies still scare you?

TF: Everything still scares me. The day nothing scares you is the day you should get out of horror.

Common Mistakes of the First-time Screenwriter

2012-02-05T12:20:00.000-08:00

Over the last 25 years I've read countless first time screenplays. In my rewrite class at USC's School of Cinematic Arts, I see 8 fresh "first time" screenplays a semester. Here are the most common flaws and mistakes that I see:

The writer doesn't rewrite. (See this article on the Rewrite Process) Most first timers think their first draft is "good enough."

The writer doesn't listen to notes. Most first time writers aren't willing to listen to honest criticism. They just want to be told that their script is great. This is why most professional screenwriters refuse to read first time scribes. (See: Josh Olson's No I will Not Read Your Fucking Script)

The writer hopes his/her first screenplay will be a winner. It takes thousands of hours and years of hard work to learn the craft of screenwriting. Everyone's first screenplay...well, sucks. Have you heard a story of someone's first screenplay, one they dashed off in "21 days," selling for millions? Sure you have. Hollywood is full of stories.

The CHARACTERS are weak. More than any other specific flaw, first time screenplays have weak, underdeveloped, ill-motivated characters. Protagonists are passive. Antagonists are cliches. Supporting characters have no complexity. It is difficult to see what any of the characters' objectives are or why we should care about them.

The stories lack TENSION. The first rule of screenwriting/filmmaking is "keep them in their seats." This means keeping the audience's attention, through the emotions of hope and fear, focused on what will happen in the future. Most first time screenplays get muddled and lose tension; and then the reader tosses the script aside, not caring how it will turn out in the end.

Too much focus on "idea" and not "execution." Most first time writers think they have a "brilliant idea for a movie" and take a half-assed shot at writing the screenplay. If there is one consistent lesson to be learned on Quora, whether about startups or screenwriting, it is that "your idea means nothing." This isn't exactly true, but it's mostly true. (See: Does Your Idea Mean Nothing?)

There are lots of books out there on first time mistakes that get more specific:

Your Screenplay Sucks!: 100 Ways to Make It Great by William M. Akers

How Not to Write a Screenplay: 101 Common Mistakes Most Screenwriters Make by Denny Martin Flinn

Lastly, if you are hellbent on selling a spec, read Ken Miyamoto's advice, "Write To Sell, People!"

Ted Talks for Screenwriters and Filmmakers.

2012-02-04T08:51:00.000-08:00

I am a big fan of Ted.com, which offers 20 minute talks on a wide array of mind bending and inspirational topics. There are three talks in particular that may be of interest to filmmakers and screenwriters:

The first is J.J. Abrams's "Mystery Box."

Abrams traces his love for the unseen mystery –- a passion that’s evident in his films and TV shows, including Cloverfield, Lost and Alias -- back to its magical beginnings.

The second is Shekhar Kapur's "We are the stories we tell ourselves."

Where does creative inspiration spring from? At TEDIndia, Hollywood/Bollywood director Shekhar Kapur ("Elizabeth," "Mr. India") pinpoints his source of creativity: sheer, utter panic. He shares a powerful way to unleash your inner storyteller.

And the third is James Cameron's "Before Avatar ... a curious boy"

James Cameron's big-budget (and even bigger-grossing) films create unreal worlds all their own. In this personal talk, he reveals his childhood fascination with the fantastic -- from reading science fiction to deep-sea diving -- and how it ultimately drove the success of his blockbuster hits "Aliens," "The Terminator," "Titanic" and "Avatar."

Thanks to Mark Hughes for reminding me of these talks in his Quora Answer. Be sure to check out his blog at Forbes magazine.

"Have You Seen Notorious?"

2012-02-01T06:16:00.000-08:00

So, while teaching my rewrite class at USC, I was talking to my class about the movie "Notorious," and how the plot device (the Nazi plot involving radioactive powder in wine bottles) isn't what keeps the audience in their seats. All the audience really cares about is whether Grant and Bergman will get back together in the end.

I noticed the class staring back at me blankly, and at first I thought they had heard this worn out example of McGuffins and main tension too many times. Then I realized...

...They thought I was talking about "Notorious B.I.G." None of them had seen the Hitchcock film.

I don't know what to make of this. Am I out of touch?

Converting Your Script To A Novel

2012-01-28T08:19:00.000-08:00

So what does one do with a brilliant screenplay that never sold? For many screenwriters, from amateurs to Academy Award winners, the answer is put it in a drawer and let it gather dust. Unsold scripts have some value as a "writing sample," something to send to producers and studio executives when going out for open writing assignments. However, even a popular unproduced screenplay will never get more than a few hundred readers. Considering the years of work that might go into a single script, that's a depressing reality. I'm liable to get more readers in a single day on my blog than I've had readers for my best unproduced screenplays.

Sometimes screenwriters consider converting a screenplay into a novel, but traditionally, this process has been difficult. Mastering one medium is hard enough. Mastering two is superhuman. Unlike screenplays, novels give far more weight to characters' history and inner life. Unlike screenplays, the quality of a novel is often determined by the writer's stylistic and inventive use of language. Novels tend to be vastly more complex, and often require ten or more hours of reading, while a screenplay can be read in under two.Furthermore, the publishing world has historically been difficult to break into. Getting a book published was not necessarily any easier than getting a movie made.

However, with the advent of micro-publishers and e-readers, this may all change. What if, by spending a week or two changing formats, a screenwriter could "direct the movie in his/her head" and put it in novel form? Would movie fans like zipping through a book in two hours that gave them the experience of being in a theater watching the finished film? Would movie executives and producers prefer to read spec scripts in novel format? Could screenwriters use the medium to build a fan base online, making their story more attractive to studios?

I had a chance to interview Ed Gray, owner of Aisle Seat Books, who is doggedly pursuing this very idea of publishing scripts in the format of novels.

What is Aisle Seatt Books, and why did you decide to start the company?

EG: Aisle Seat Books is a new trade imprint of the publishing Graybooks LLC, which publishes in four fields: food, fiction, memoir, and history.

I’ve been an editor and writer all of my career, and like many print people I’ve written a few screenplays, none of which ever sold.When I heard about the Amazon Studios contests, I submitted a script, DANCASTER’S PARDON, which has been a finalist three times. So I became recognizable in that new community of writers and filmmakers and got active in the AS forums where the question arose as to whether or not a writer could publish a submitted screenplay in book or novelization form.

The legal answer -- it’s directly addressed in the AS Development Agreement -- is an unequivocal “yes.” Once I saw that possibility, I set about figuring out how best to do that using my own DANCASTER’S PARDON as a guinea pig. It worked beautifully, so I then got in touch with the other semifinalists, finalists and winners at AS and invited them to consider letting me publish theirs as well.

About half got back to me to express interest and Aisle Seat Books was launched. Right now we’ve got a dozen titles under contract and bunch more in the pipeline.

What is it like to read an Aisle Seat Book? How is it different than reading a screenplay?

EG: Reading an ASB book is like watching the movie it wants to become except that it plays in your head, not on a screen. It unfolds in the same amount of time --you can read one in 90 minutes to 2 hours. Like a movie or a screenplay, it unfolds in the present tense and includes no “unfilmables.” It’s beat for beat and dialogue line for dialogue line exactly the same as the underlying screenplay. No backstory, digressions, or internal monologue. No omniscient narrator telling the reader what a character is thinking.

What you see is what you get, or, more accurately, what you would see on the screen is all you’re going to get here. The biggest difference from a screenplay is the format -- ASB books look like books, not scripts. Dialogue is inside quotes with “he said” and “she gasped” instead of character slugs and tight indents. Action is described in normal paragraph form. Scene breaks are indicated by simple typographic arrows and the slug lines become descriptive sentences. It flows the way we’re all used to reading light fiction.

The other big difference from a screenplay is that in an Aisle Seat Book, the writer gets to direct with an unlimited production budget and full casting discretion. All those no-no’s in a spec script (physical character description, stage direction, dialogue coaching, beats and pauses, expensive locations, etc.) are all yes-yes’s here. If this little book is going to play like a movie in a reader’s head, it better look and sound like one there, too.

Who is the audience for Aisle Seat Books?

EG: Movie-goers. These are meant to be easy alternatives for movie lovers who find themselves in an aisle seat of a commuter train, bus, or airplane instead of an aisle seat in a theater. They’re also for people who want to have a vote on whether or not this unproduced movie they just enjoyed might actually get made. At the back of every one there’s a link to a web page where each reader can rate the tale and suggest a cast.

What screenwriters should consider publishing a book this way?

EG: How could it help them get a movie made? How could it help them reach an audience? Every good screenwriter should. But not necessarily with every script they’ve got. An Aisle Seat Book would be best for any script with real potential that has not yet caught traction. Aisle Seat Books are commercial products -- they’ll get widespread promotion, will be purchased, read, and discussed by paying customers, and the writer will earn some money, possibly a lot of money. And any ASB title that gets attention in the marketplace will certainly get attention from film rights acquisition folks.

Why should producers or studio executives read an Aisle Seat Book instead of a screenplay?

EG: Because it’s the same story, beat for beat, as the screenplay, but light years easier. Easier to read and much easier to get a copy. It’ll be seconds away from their iPad, Kindle, or phone, synced to each and always available where the exec left off reading. Plus there will be no releases to obtain or potential defenses to mount. They’ll just be buying a book, and a really cheap one at that. Right now an ASB ebook is $4.99 or less.

What does a screenwriter have to do to publish a book through Aisle Seat.

EG: Convince me it’s good. We’re an old-school, traditional book publisher in that regard. Writers don’t choose us, we choose writers. We pay very high royalties. If I decide to take on a title, we do all the work and front all the expenses.

What has been your most popular book so far?

EG: Some are selling better than others, but it’s way too soon to highlight them at the expense of the others. We’re still at a very early stage, building out awareness, so measuring popularity at this stage would be a bit like talking about audience metrics from a movie’s early film festival appearances rather than from its eventual box office. We’re barely past the focus group testing stage. But so far it really looks good across the board.

What is your relationship with Amazon Studios?

EG: Aisle Seat Books has none. As an individual I’m a contest entrant with three uploaded scripts. AS has been fully aware of Aisle Seat Books since I first proposed it and after hearing my pitch has unofficially indicated its general support of the concept, but beyond that we’re entirely separate and independent with no business affiliation, formal or informal. Of course the books are sold by Amazon, so in that sense I guess we’re semi-related. Second cousins by marriage or something like that.

What is the future of Aisle Seat Books?

EG: We’ll see. Right now it looks unlimited. But there are some near-term logistical barriers to beat down or evade, especially with our trade paperback versions. The old line large book publishers all got big not by carefully curating good books but by getting very good at manufacturing, warehousing, distributing, and controlling unsold returns of vast quantities of printed books. Ebooks and print-on-demand are now severing that money tree at the roots. It’s dying but not dead, and those with a lifeblood stake in its continuance defend its branches staunchly. Newcomers wanting to climb aboard and snack on a bit of that fruit don’t find many helping hands offering a boost. The answer, of course, is to find some fertile soil and plant some new trees. That’s what we’ll be doing in 2012.

What is the process of turning a screenplay into a book? What must the screenwriter keep in mind?

EG: The process is almost purely mechanical, since the hard part -- the structure, dialogue and action -- are already in place in a polished sequence that works. It’s a finished story. All that has to be done is to get rid of the screenplay-specific elements like slug lines and varying indentations. It takes a couple of working days.

The best way I've found to attack the mechanics of it is to make a new copy of the script in whatever software you use, then select all and change it all to "action" or whatever your software calls a simple paragraph describing action. Now you've got the whole thing set in prose margins. Export to Word as plain text or RTF. In Word, you then go through and (1) change all your slug lines to simple descriptive sentences preceded by ">>" as a standalone line indicating a scene change (the arrows in the paperback), and (2) delete all the dialogue character name slugs and enclose the dialogue inside quotation marks, adding "he said" or "she said" or "said Glenn" as appropriate for clarity.

The art form is in figuring out when to name a character. In a script you have to on character introduction, but that's for casting and dialogue ID. In a normal novel you can name a character any time because in a novel you can do anything you want. But an ASB book is a written movie that unfolds as if the reader is watching instead of reading -- only "filmables" are allowed. So when the blonde with the broken nose walks into the room, she's "a blonde with a broken nose," but not yet "Nancy" because that's all the audience can know at that point. Only after she's named onscreen can you call her "Nancy" in the book. BUT there are exceptions: Because your leads will be played by recognizable actors, you can name them right away, as you'll see I did with John Dancaster. There is wiggle room, but you'll find that using descriptions rather than names for minor characters is one of the real beauties of this format: Readers don't lose track of who's who the way a script reader sometimes does -- the blonde with a broken nose is the blonde with a broken nose, not "Wait, who is Nancy again?"

That, by the way, is another reason studio execs would do well to read the ASB version of a spec.

Sean Hood's take:

Having read several of the titles available at Aisle Seat Books, I can honestly report that Ed may be on to something. The novel format is much easier and more enjoyable to read than the screenplay format, and an Aisle Street Book actually gives the reader a BETTER sense of what it would be like to watch the movie.

The key is that the screenwriters aren't trying to compete with J.K. Rowling or Cormac McCarthy. The book is still a prose form of a movie; it just mimics a novel instead of a stage play. Since most movies rely on "underlying material" such as a graphic novel, a magazine article, or traditional novel, it actually may make more sense to read and evaluate potential movies this way.

My only criticism of the process is that I think that writers need to spend more that a few days switching formats. I think about two weeks would be necessary to "direct the movie in your head," adding all those nuances of image, sound, and performance that are key to the experience of watching a film, but are traditionally left out of movie scripts. I also am not a fan of the arrows used as transitions. It "takes me out" so to speak.

But the takeaway has to be that this is an exciting new option for frustrated scribes, and that a good story, well told, will always shine...regardless of format.

P.S. I apologize for the simplified format of this blog. Blogger is giving me terrible trouble, so I'm in the process of moving to wordpress.

Contagion 2: Sundance

2012-01-27T07:20:00.000-08:00

Pitch: All the major executives, producers, agents, writers, and filmmakers descend on Park City where they are are packed into tiny theaters, crowded parties, and taxis. Everyone hugs, talks and shakes hands spreading a deadly virus, which starts as a "terrible cold" but ends with sudden brain fever and death. Within the ten days of the festival, all of Hollywood is dead, and there are no more movies produced in America. The public goes back to reading books.

Why do so many movies fail the Bechdel Test?

2011-12-21T08:25:00.000-08:00

For a movie to pass The Bechdel Test, it must:

1. include at least two women...
2. who have at least one conversation...
3. about something other than a man or men.

This seems like a rather low bar and yet about half of all movies fail this test (http://bechdeltest.com/statistics/).

This question was orriginally posted on Quora; here is my answer to it:
Interestingly enough, most Horror movies (for which the primary target audience is young women) pass the Bechdel Test. Also, the movie Conan The Barbarian 3D passes the Bechdel Test, barely, because I changed one of the villains to a woman (Marique, played by Rose McGowan) and gave her a scene with the leading lady in which they talk about resurrecting a dead witch. Go figure.

I would argue that the Bechdel Test reflects what movies get greenlit and what audiences have traditionally shown up to see, not a flaw in the screenwriting or even the development/rewrite process.

In my own crreer, I've written several unproduced screenplays in which the lead character, the main supporting characters and the villain, are women. An example is Blackwell, a thriller based on a real event in the life of Nellie Bly, one of the first female investigative journalists. The movie, set in 1888, follows Nellie as she fakes insanity in order to go undercover as an inmate at Blackwell's Island, an impenetrable women's asylum. However, once inside she discovers that it is nearly impossible to get out.

Although A-list actresses such as Ellen Page and Charlize Theron have shown interest in the script, the fact that it has a "female lead" makes it difficult for my producers to set up at a studio.

The factors that make a large number of films that make it to the screen fail the Bechdel Test are:
1. Most Hollywood films have a male lead character. Statistically speaking (and Hollywood loves statistics) movies with female leads open significantly worse at the box office than movies with male leads.

2. Most (primary) villains are male. Although fabulous female villains to appear in movies, the majority of villains (people who are powerful, sadistic, violent, and otherwise bad) tend to be male. Perhaps men are generally thought to be more threatening.

3. "Character actors" tend to be male. The quirky supporting character with a funny nose, strange voice, or flabby belly, are typically dudes. Audiences (again, statistically speaking) like their actresses young and pretty. There isn't a "Steve Buscemi" among female character actors.
4. "Best Friend" or sidekick characters are usually men. Female leads sometimes have male "best friend" characters (often gay,) but Male Leads almost always have male "best friend" characters.

5. The most popular "hot female stars" (i.e. the one's on the cover of magazines) are in their twenties to thirties and most often play the "love interest." The most popular "hot male stars" (the ones on the cover of magazines) tend to be in their thirties and forties, and play lead characters.

6. Items 1 through 5 mean that most scenes between two characters in a movie will have at least one man.

7. Since protagonists and antagonists in movies are usually men, and a scene between two women is likely to be "about" the protagonist or antagonist, as they are the major characters in the story, conversations between two women are likely to be about a man or men.

8. Movies made for women tend to be Romantic Comedies or Romantic Dramas. Thus, the subject of conversations is most often tend to be about romance and relationships, i.e. men.

So it nothing to do with the screenwriting process, and everything to do with which screenplays are chosen to get made.

How To Make a Better Science Video

2011-12-20T09:12:00.000-08:00

Originally posted by Liz Kalaugher on environmentalresearchweb.org:

The S Factor: how to grab attention with your science videos

And no, that doesn’t mean including footage of people attending exercise classes. The S Factor under scrutiny in this blog is the S Factor Workshop on how to make successful science videos, held at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting in December. The event saw a panel of Hollywood professionals critique ten entries, picked from a total of 42 submissions by hopeful researchers.

On the panel were marine biologist-turned film-maker Randy Olson, author of Don’t Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style, and his former film-school classmates Sean Hood, now a screenwriter with credits such as horror movie Halloween: Resurrection and Conan the Barbarian to his name, and Jason Ensler, co-producer and director of Franklin & Bash, and director of episodes of Gossip Girl, Chuck and Psych.

The trio were cheerfully disparaging of scientists’ storytelling skills, saying that many of the videos took the approach “here’s our lab, here’s our kit, come see us some day”. But story is key - “think of it as making a trailer for science”.

One exception was San Jose State University’s Green Ninja. The panel felt this video showed good storytelling, with a character who clearly has a problem - his oversized and ever-growing feet - that he needs to solve.

A useful technique, as detailed by Nicholas Kristof, is to follow the story of one individual and, ideally, to reach an uplifting conclusion. According to Olson, Kristof argues that an article on death is depressing but an article on people fighting a disease engages. In the same way, a story about coral deterioration could be depressing or dull, but a story about a man interested in coral can catch people’s attention.

Since film is good for conveying emotion and humour but not for transmitting information, it can be useful to break your complex content down to a simple story. According to Ensler, it takes time to develop stories but they can be overdeveloped and lose some of their original spark. Hood stressed the need “to keep hold of that nugget of awe”, and that scientists should “inspire the eleven-year-old in all of us”.

It’s also worth considering changing the order of events from a “that happened, then that happened, then this happened” type of narrative. Replacing “ands” in the storyline with “buts” and “therefores” can change the direction of the story and add tension, the film experts explained. For example, in Volcano from Space, the storyline could have been “We monitor volcanoes but they’re hard to see so we need new techniques.” Arguing two sides of an issue can also create a good story.

Ensler recommended that researchers set up cameras whenever they are in the field so that they have plenty of interesting footage to use in their videos.But interesting is not enough; if somebody says interesting after Hood’s latest film pitch, he knows “I’ve failed, because I haven’t grabbed them emotionally”. People are most engaged by people talking, not things, he said, so it’s useful to show a person alongside a piece of scientific kit. Because watching a person speak in real-life is different to seeing them onscreen, if you’re filming a talking head you need multiple cameras and different angles, as per the TED talks, to stop it from being boring.

That said, many of the films submitted began with somebody speaking to camera - the panel felt there was no need for this. According to Olson, it’s good to arouse and fulfill - grab the audience’s attention, make them want, then fulfil their need. For example the Mata Eruption video from JISAO (Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean) could have put its amazing video footage of an undersea volcanic eruption right at the start of the film before answering the questions the footage raises. Alternatively, Ensler said the team could have made the audience want by promising them they were going to see some great footage but first explaining why it’s hard to obtain.

As film is a visual medium it can be helpful to see if you can get the gist of a short film without listening to the soundtrack, the professionals explained. Indeed, one of the most well-received videos - Perspective, which used animated graphics to indicate the relative energy release of large earthquakes throughout history - contained no sound at all, and was praised for its Hitchcockian withholding of information from the audience.In summary?

Every picture (should) tell a story…

A Filmmaker's Life: Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 - Part 2

2011-12-04T05:49:00.000-08:00

Reprinted from Ted Hope's Blog: Hope For Film

TED HOPE: Jacques Thelemaque returns today to complete the download of his lessons learned from Digi Hwood knowledge fest. What's the future? Does anyone know? This much I DO know: I would love to have one person cover for our HopeForFilm community all the film related seminars over the course of the year, be they in NYC or LA, and compare what can be gained from these conferences and how they vary. I wonder if we can find a sponsor... I wonder more if we could find one person who can endure -- even with the enticement of tasty sandwiches!

Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 - Part 2
by Jacques Thelemaque

The second day of Digital Hollywood started earlier, but I was there on time, excited by the film-specific panels and those bagels, croissants, muffins and pastries with my name on them....READ MORE

A Filmmaker's Life: Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 - Part 1

2011-12-04T05:42:00.000-08:00

Reprinted from Ted Hope's Blog: Hope For Film

TED HOPE: Conferences abound in the US Film Biz and sometimes seems like another example of industries that still financially prosper in a field that has regularly been headed downwards (18% drop in theatrical attendance this year anyone?). Yet, as corporate focused as they often are, they do point to a tendency to continued education. Perhaps most hopefully they point to a willingness for our industry to evolve and embrace some aspect of change. We sent Filmmakers Alliance (link) founder and past HopeForFilm contributor (link) Jacques Thelemaque to Digital Hollywood NYC to get the perspective for the truly free film community.

Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 - Part 1
by Jacques Thelemaque

I don't go to seminars and conferences as often as I used to. Mostly because getting anything beyond a sales pitch out of them is like panning for gold. I've lost patience with sitting through hours of presentations to get a single nugget of new/good information. There are exceptions, however (such as Ted and Christine Vachon's excellent master class which I will post a blog about soon), so I was genuinely excited for the opportunity to attend Digital Hollywood NYC last week. READ MORE.

A Filmmaker's Life: New World Distribution in the Old World

2011-12-02T06:29:00.000-08:00

Another great article from Ted Hope's blog, via indie guru Jacques Thelemaque...

A Filmmaker's Life: New World Distribution in the Old World

Screenwriting means writing for anything with a Screen

2011-11-20T06:30:00.001-08:00

Lately, I've been advising screenwriters to look beyond traditional movies as their platform for storytelling. You should be able to imagine writing for TV, for transmedia, for games, for e-books, web-comics, for websisodes. Your work will appear on computer screens, on tablets, on smartphones, on HDTV, and yes maybe even in the old fashioned, nostalgia-filled movie theater.

The "screen" in screenwriting means anything with a screen.

With that in mind, you should read these recent articles:

New York Times: Film Is Dead? What Else Is New?

"Are movies essentially a thing of the past? Does whatever we have now, digital or analog, represent at best a pale shadow of bygone glory?"

Forbes Magazine: Sean Parker and Jim Breyer Predict the Industries Social Media Will Reinvent Next

"Parker and Breyer were also in agreement that social technology is catalyzing complete reinventions of entire industries such as media, entertainment, music, and art. "

An Amazon Studios Screenwriter

2011-11-17T06:53:00.001-08:00

So what's it like for a screenwriter (and a director) to work with Amazon Studios?

Since its launch, Amazon Studios has been looked upon with curiosity and suspicion by screenwriters and filmmakers. Just uploading a script commits the writer to an 18-month free option, and many veteran and aspiring scribes have raised red flags. Amazon Studios is a non-union and non-signatory company, so members of the Writers' Guild of America cannot upload scripts, agree to options, or win prizes. For non-union writers, even if their script is purchased and the movie made through Amazon's deal with Warner Brothers, there is no guarantee they would be allowed to join the WGA and receive residuals for the movies they wrote. There isn't even a guarantee for screen credit. Veteran WGA members worry if this will lead to major studios bypassing the union and purchasing non-union Amazon scripts. For these reasons alone many have called it a "bad deal."

However, as Amazon gives away more and more prize money, funds test films, and builds their community, more and more writers and filmmakers who are frustrated with Hollywood are giving Amazon a shot,and the experience of those actually working and succeeding with Amazon Studios has belied much the suspicion and paranoia. Amazon Studios have shown that they are willing to listen to feedback, test and revise their system in exactly the same way that Amazon filmmakers listen to feedback, test and revise their screenplays.

For example, Alex Greenfield, who has toiled for a decade trying to get his scripts sold and movies made in the traditional way, decided to give the Amazon approach a try. He has become a kind of Amazon "poster child" for success. The many projects he is involved in have won awards for best script, best storyboard, best table read, and best test film. For Alex this adds up to nearly 40 grand in prize money, and for his collaborators this adds up to nearly $160,000 to divide between them. Most of all, it means money to make films. Beyond the cash, Alex seems to be having the best experience of his career.

I got a chance to interview Alex, and ask him about his experience.

What benefits in your career have you gained from your success at Amazon?

I've been extraordinarily fortunate in my experience with Amazon. Right out of the gate I connected with collaborators I know I'll be working with for the rest of my career. Christian Davis took a shine to the first script I uploaded and became a real creative partner on MEMORY, along with the tremendous cast of actors he put together -- Darin Cooper, Bess Harrison, Craig Woods and more. This is an ensemble I'll go to again and again. I wouldn't have met any of these folks were it not for Amazon Studios.

That AS responds to our work and has awarded us both some prize money and a production grant to make a film is pretty Goddamn awesome. I've written some movies and television shows for the paycheck that I'm... let's just say... less than proud of. But in the freelancer's life you just take the gig, you know? At AS, I feel like for the first time in my career I'm working with a group of people who really get my work. Who like it and rather than wanting to change it to fit some pre-existing template, and who are challenging me to further explore the territory that started me working in the first place.

As to the benefits to my career, that's hard to quantify in a direct way. Since Chris and I first won a prize [Best Table Read for MEMORY last January], I've booked an assignment and set up my pilot at Fox Television Studios. In both cases, the producers congratulated me on my Amazon success. In some ways, though, the best thing AS has done for my career is allow me the freedom to focus on work I want to be doing instead of hustling for day-rate production gigs or every assignment I can pitch on. I'm having a hell of a lot more fun directing THE TEMPLE and rewriting MY FATHER'S HOUSE than I would be trying to book a holiday movie-of-the-week.

Production art from THE TEMPLE motion comic

As a professionalism screenwriter, was the "18 month free option" troublesome for you? Why or Why not? Why not take the script out to producers and buyers in the traditional way?

It was absolutely a major issue and one I really had to think about. My buddy, Court Bauer forwarded me one of the first articles about Amazon Studios in the contest and it looked interesting. Then I read Craig Mazin and John August and some of their criticisms. I was really on the fence, you know? To take something out of the marketplace for a year-and-a-half is a pretty daunting prospect.

Then I thought about MEMORY. It's a script that had been sitting in a proverbial drawer since 2005. I'd always loved it and knew there was an awesome movie in there somewhere, but I never quite cracked it. My manager at the time didn't respond to the project and I was at the beginning of spending a couple of years writing and producing television for WWE. The script kind of fell through the cracks.

It was actually one of the criticisms of AS that attracted me to enter the script. I was busy and couldn't revise a script -- maybe somebody else could. Needless to say, that paid off in spades with Chris Davis. He injected life into the project. He brought it to life. I'm as proud of the film he made over the course of this year as anything I've ever been lucky enough to put my name on. Once I started collaborating with Chris and realized the reason for the eighteen month option (to ensure that a filmmaker has time to, you know, make a film), it was an easy decision to really invest in the process.

Both of my collaborations with Michael K. Eitelman on the site had been shopped a spec in the traditional way. THE TEMPLE and THE ROOF each went out wide and both came pretty doggone close to getting bought. Trying them in the Amazon process has answered some of the reasons as to why -- the test film process particularly has shown what works and what doesn't.

MY FATHER'S HOUSE, on the other hand, is brand spanking new. Our agent/manager shopped it to four producers since we finished it in February. Two passed. One made an offer and we negotiated for a month before coming to terms. The other wanted to attach and go out to directors and talent to put together a package, and we've been down that road before and know how long it takes. Ben and I talked a lot about it -- this is a big, ambitious project that doesn't fit into an easy box -- and came to the decision that the eighteen month risk is far outweighed by the potential reward. MY FATHER'S HOUSE is a very visual film -- that latter producer called it a "director's piece" -- and the test film process might be just what it needs.

Still from MEMORY, awarded Best Test Film and $100,000

How was the collaborative process been so far? How was the feedback you received on the website?

Creatively, the process of developing both with my peers through both "official" review and through superlative forums like Scott Mullen's Script Club (somewhere between a poetry slam and a colloquy where the whole community plays spitball with a given script) has been tremendous. Like you, I've developed material with producers and writers and managers and agents and studios and all the traditional forms. The AS process has been different, and thus far I'm happier with the results.

I feel like the work my writing partners and I have produced through this experiment -- from seeing what plays in the MEMORY or TEMPLE test films and adjusting the script accordingly to Ben Powell and I having one of the best development meetings we've ever had with the AS Story Department on MY FATHER'S HOUSE -- has been some of the best we've ever done.

Still from THE TEMPLE motion comic

Have "test movies" been made for your screenplays? How was the process of collaborating with directors?

The whole process of watching Chris Davis make MEMORY was tremendous. The guy's a machine. He didn't need to hire artists or photographers or green screen technicians, Photoshop experts, editors or audio engineers or After Effects magicians (all of which Ihave done on our production of THE TEMPLE). From breaking down and developing the script to creating the final credit sequence, he did it all himself. In the midst of directing a project myself (on Amazon's dime with an amazing crew and no day job or child to raise), I'm a little in awe of the guy. With not much more than sweat equity and dint of will, what he did on his own over the course of ten months blows my mind. To meet someone as simultaneously talented and creatively in sync with me through AS is pretty tremendous, and I'll work with Chris and his team again and again. When AS announced the competition for a production grant to make a test film, his was the first I listed in my production proposal to direct the voiceover session (and what I like to call the Davis Ensemble forms the spine of the cast).

Still from MEMORY, awarded Best Test Film and $100,000

What's it like to win a prize? How does Amazon compare to more traditional screenplay contests?

We've made a good spot of cash through Amazon, for sure. Every project that's won has been a collaboration. Chris's film of MEMORY has picked up Best Table Read, Best Photo Storyboard and ultimately Best Test Film -- and yes, it's been awesome to watch the film develop into what it is now. He won Best Dialogue Track for his work on Eitelman and my script, THE ROOF (Bess Harrison's preposterously good performance in the lead elevating what is essentially a creature feature into something more was a big part of that). Eitelman and I took Best Script honors for THE TEMPLE, and the production grant Amazon gave us to produce the motion comic is due in no small measure to the work of a whole lot of people not named "Alex Greenfield."

It's been really, really cool to be part of a team to receive this kind of acknowledgement both financially (which, yeah, kinda rules) and for the creative validation. I don't think Amazon Studios is really analogous to any other competition I'm aware of. The "Studios" part of the name is not a gimmick or a branding effort. It's real. Price, Lewis and the whole team are all about making movies in a new way. Their development people are passionate about the material they're working on. They are going to make movies. Frankly, they already are. The way the contest has inspired people to work is pretty absurd. I look at the stills I've seen from Marty Weiss & Hive's production of THE ALCHEMIST AGENDA and the Amazon-financed productions of L. Norgard's NEVSKY PROJECT and TOUCHING BLUE by Scott Mullen (and not to sound like a dick, but what we're getting on TEMPLE), and the line between "test film" and "movie people want to sit down and watch" is already being blurred. That's something new. I like new.

Concept drawing for the "Wall of Flesh," THE TEMPLE.

A WGA screenwriter residuals and health benefits if your script is sold. What happens if a non-WGA writer's work is made? Are they on their own?

You've just described the freelancer's life, my friend. I'm not in the WGA and since leaving WWE in 2007 (I was an employee as opposed to an independent contractor), I've had to buy my own insurance. Thing is, this is true of any writer not in the union... or a writer in the union who doesn't book enough. It's no different than budgeting in any line of freelance work.

THE TEMPLE - Voice Over session

Do you think the average writer gets a better deal at Amazon than they would at a traditional production company or studio? How do you respond to writers who have called Amazon Studios a "scam?"

I dunno, man. I listen to this criticism and it sounds naive. Who didn't do a free if/come option at some point in their career. I had this script called CHILDISH THINGS that was optioned for free by a company for eighteen months, then optioned again for free by a different company before we finally sold it for actual money. Almost every writer I know did a free option at one point or another. That's not to speak of low-pay/fifteen free rewrite assignments, of which I have done plenty. A free option is not a scam; it's a common occurrence. When you get offers like that you decide if it's worth it or not. Here's the thing: when you decide that, you know for damn sure you're not going to win thousands of dollar in prize money. At Amazon, you might. I have. I've also gotten a movie I'm proud of made and am working on another. None of that happened in any other free option I ever did.

By uploading your script, you are allowing anyone and everyone to read it. Do you worry that your ideas will get stolen?

Not at all. I *want* folks to read my script. That's why I do this: to entertain people. As to the concern about "stealing," that's always struck me as a silly concern in this business. The script I mentioned earlier -- CHILDISH THINGS -- came *this close* to getting bought by New Line. Like, meet-with-Toby close. It's a really fun horror script about an imaginary friend who turns out to be all kinds of bad. Great concept. Then New Line passed out of the blue. See, Fox announced that they were going into production on HIDE & SEEK... a movie about an evil imaginary friend. Bummer, but nobody stole anything. Our Amazon script, THE ROOF is about Yeti. The month after it made the Best Script finals and won Best Dialogue Track, Disney announced production on MATTERHORN, which features Yeti as the monsters. No theft there; just people having similar ideas.

THE ROOF, concept art

Which of your Amazon projects are you most excited about? What's the story? Where can somebody read it if they are curious?

That's like asking which of a man's kids he loves the most! It'd be hard not to say that I'm most excited about THE TEMPLE since it's pretty much consuming my life at the moment. The team of artists and technicians and magicians creating this movie are really exceeding my expectations and the whole process of making the film is really a blast. It's still gonna be a while before the film is done, but anyone interested can find all manner of production stills, art and other goodies on our Twitter, @TempleMovie. Thing is, from a purely visceral perspective the project at Amazon I'm most excited about is MY FATHER'S HOUSE.

Every breakthrough we make on TEMPLE, every new technique we refine or discover... in my head, all I can think is, "We could totally use this on MY FATHER'S HOUSE." The genre films I love the most are the ones that bury weighty issues inside deceptively simple, entertaining packages. Of all the projects I've been involved with, MY FATHER'S HOUSE is the one that I think comes closest to really tapping that vein. Ben Powell and I met as Freshman in college and have worked together off and on for twenty years. With MY FATHER'S HOUSE, I think we've found something really unique and the way we're developing the project with AS is going to make it ever better. Yep: definitely the AS project I'm most passionate about; I think it's one of the two or three best pieces of writing I've ever been involved with. If anyone's inclined and would like to check it out, they can find it here.

THE TEMPLE motion comic.

Does anyone uploading screenplays on Amazon check the box to allow ANYONE to make changes to it? What do you think of this experiment?

While the notion of other people finding ways to crack a script I couldn't was definitely one of the things that drew me to Amazon Stuios, I did like their introduction of a "By Permission" component. I love meeting and working with creative people, but hey... I also want to *read* someone before they rewrite me! A traditional studio certainly wouldn't give me that chance.

My Take On Amazon Studios
Currently, the three major concerns that writers have with Amazon Studios are the 18-month free option, the exposure of their "idea" to the public before the script is sold, and Amazon's relationship with the WGA. I should remind readers that I myself am a WGA member. So, I can't participate directly in Amazon's experiment. I have not projects with Amazon, and for now I look upon the Studio as a [mostly] neutral observer.

As to the 18-month free option, I would not be surprised if Amazon revises this policy in the future, since it spooks so many aspiring scribes who might otherwise upload their scripts. However, only the screenwriters who win prizes and accept money actually sign a written option agreement, and without a signed physical document the "18 month free option," is more of a gentleman's agreement to commit time to the Amazon development process than a binding legal contract.

If a script doesn't get attention, doesn't get a prize, and no actual document is signed, there is really is no reason a screenwriter can't delete their (registered and copyrighted) script from Amazon and go elsewhere, even before the 18 months is up. The idea that Amazon would track down and legally pursue such a writer, or that another buyer would decline to option or buy a script because it had once been uploaded on Amazon for a month, strikes me as absurd and a bit paranoid. Also, aspiring scribes should understand that even if you do take prize money and sign a written option agreement, that does not mean Amazon "owns" your script. That just means that Amazon has the option to purchase the script for $200,000.

However, I am not and attorney and I am not qualified to give legal advice, so every writer should make his or her own judgment and decision before uploading. I wouldn't advise uploading unless you are willing to commit to trying out the Amazon process.

Concerning exposing a brilliant movie idea to other screenwriters who might steal it, I would direct those concerned to my blog "Does your idea mean nothing?" and suggest that the answer to that question is [mostly] yes.

Concerning union membership, it remains to be seen what will happen when and if an Amazon film actually goes into production, but since Amazon has been so responsive to writers and filmmakers, and because the whole business model relies on their enthusiasm and engagement, I personally think that once a project does get set up at Warner Brothers, that the script will be bought through a signatory Warner's company, and that the writers and director involved will get the option to join the WGA or DGA. There is no advantage to either Amazon or Warners to NOT allow the filmmakers to do so. Given that the purchase price of scripts is 200,000 and given the way Amazon is dishing out so much prize money for screenplays and test films, I can't imagine that Amazon or Warners will try to "screw" writers and filmmakers out of union membership, residuals or screen credit if the film actually goes into production. Amazon is perhaps the only film company that actually has a stake whether the general pool writers and filmmakers are happy with their process.

But again, as with any non-signatory film company, the rights protected by the WGA - to residuals, to heath insurance, and to screen credit - are NOT guaranteed. So non-union writers should judge for themselves whether or not they are willing to take the risk.

So, while I still have nagging concerns, I am not nearly as skeptical as many of my peers. To me, Amazon isn't yet "making films in a new way" so much as experimenting with the way movies are developed. Once Warner Brothers gets involved in a particular project the traditional machinery of film production, marketing and distribution kick into gear. Furthermore, Amazon's approach to development is not new. In its emphasis on community feedback, table readings, test films, and workshops with actors and artists, they are just mirroring the creative process of an independent film. But, they are doing it on a massive scale online, and building a worldwide film community.

However, in another sense, their approach is indeed radically different from most Hollywood Studios (although not new) in that they have turned away from "pre-branded content" (sequels, remakes, and adaptations) in favor of original screenplays. What is truly new about their approach is that they are targeting the mass of writers, filmmakers, actors and artists who Hollywood generally ignores, using the power of mass collaboration and mass curation to allow the best content in this gigantic online ocean to rise to the surface. This is "bottom up" development rather than "top down," and nobody else is even trying it.

I myself think that Amazon will, eventually, completely disrupt the studio system. All traditional studios and cable companies are built on a 20th century distribution model, and right now, that distribution model is still dominant. This is why Amazon must have a deal with Warner Brothers, just like any other production company. However, once a movie or TV series can be uploaded and streamed instantly anywhere - to a theater with a digital projector, to a TV,to a laptop, to a smart phone or to a Kindle Fire - then nobody who has the money to fund a movie will need to go to a traditional studio or cable company for distribution. Amazon has the money, and they have their eye on long term trends instead of short term profits. If Amazon Studios positions itself as a world creative community center, where original stories are tested and developed, they could emerge as the studio where brands are created instead of just recycled.

NOTE: You may also want to read the comments section of this blog, where other Amazon filmmakers discuss their frustration with the process. One screenwriter called it "the youtube" of bad screenplays. The issue of curating, rating, and encouraging writers to give each other feedback is a problem that Amazon has yet to solve. Solving this problem of how to FILTER the wash of mediocrity and use the mob/audience itself to identify the best talent may well determine if the Amazon Studios experiment works.

Screenwriting, Transmedia, and The Future of Storytelling

2011-11-10T11:04:00.001-08:00

I was recently interviewed by Latitude, a company that provides "creative research and unexpected knowledge for leaders in content, technology and learning" and "using leading-edge techniques and technologies, they uncover new opportunities for growth, tied to emerging trends and user behaviors."

Here is a transcript of that interview. You can read the original post on Latitudes website HERE.

We’re glad to connect with you, Sean. We’ve been following some of your writing online, and we know you’re a very active thinker about the future of storytelling. Can you give us a little background on yourself and how you got into the “transmedia” space?

I’ve spent the last twelve years as a filmmaker. I went to the USC Graduate School of Cinematic Arts, and I’m teaching there now. Mostly, I write screenplays to make a living, but also direct my own films, and I blog about the future of storytelling and the craft of screenwriting.

In the last five years especially, it’s become more and more difficult in Hollywood to get original projects off the ground. There’s a real focus on pre-branded content. So, I keep my eyes open for other ways to tell stories in emerging mediums. Movies are so expensive that I think many Hollywood filmmakers are looking for other, cheaper ways to tell stories—whether that be through webisodes, independent films, emerging mediums on multiple platforms, or transmedia. Transmedia in particular is becoming really attractive to storytellers, I think, because there really aren’t any rules for it yet; no one quite knows what they’re doing, and people are just sort of playing and goofing around with these new ideas and formats and seeing what happens. You don’t get to do that kind of experimentation in mainstream film or TV.

As a storyteller, why do you think transmedia holds so much appeal? Where do you see the most potential for it to change the ways stories are told?

Every time a new technology emerges, artists and storytellers tend to hi-jack and repurpose it for their own ends. Right now, there’s so many new kinds of media for communication: a YouTube video, a tweet, facebook comment, a blog article, a web chat, an i-phone game, a webisode, a motion comic, an ebook—any activity on the web suddenly prompts us to ask, “How can I use this tools all-together to serve a narrative?”

Yet with all these new tools, the fundamental nature of a story remains the same. For me, a story always contains two things. One: a story is about somebody for whom the audience has some empathy. Two: that somebody has some sort of problem – something they want something very badly but are having trouble getting, and they are fearful of what will happen if they fail. With those fundamental elements, you can use almost any tool to create a world around those characters or around that situation and build out from there.

What’s also appealing thing about transmedia—and one of the reasons I got into film to begin with—is that it’s highly collaborative. Transmedia offers opportunities to collaborate not only with other artists and storytellers, but directly with the audience. Otherwise, I get lonely sitting by myself in my office with my dog.

Going back to what you said earlier about Hollywood favoring pre-branded content and franchises due to cost issues—it sounds like you’re implying that transmedia is an attractive option cost-wise from a creator’s standpoint, offering a place to really experiment freely?

That’s absolutely true. For me, transmedia is about brand creation rather than brand recycling. I mean, the only movies I’ve written that actually get made have been sequels, remakes, or adaptation—and I’m not complaining. It’s lucrative and it’s a lot of fun. But we screenwriters, filmmakers and storytellers got into the craft because we thought we had our own stories to tell. In transmedia, there’s an opportunity to start really small. Your project may eventually have seven branches in different mediums, but you start the project off on just one of those little arms to see how it takes off. Then, it can branch to another medium as it gets more and more popular and complex. If you are lucky, you get to a point where some of the more expensive medium like a movie or a TV show become viable because you’ve pre-tested the concept and built an audience.

One of the things we’ve definitely been hearing and thinking about is: is it best to conceive of a project as “transmedia” from the outset, or can you decide to go that direction later?

You have to envision a transmedia project right from the beginning. If you think of it as just telling one story in one medium and then replicating it on a bunch of others, it’s not transmedia. You have to imagine how the world of your story and how the problem of your characters can branch out - you have think about how different elements of the story can be told in different mediums, and why these branching mediums are necessary. The whole should be greater than the sum of its parts, and that takes vision from the outset.

That said, transmedia is not about pre-planning every single little piece as it extends in all these different mediums and different platforms. It’s more like crafting a little piece of DNA; you know it’s going to grow up into something really big, and you can imagine its potential in all these different realms. But once it starts growing and lots of other people get involved, you are more like a farmer growing a crop - you seed it, water it, feed it and nurture it, but you can’t completely control it, or even be entirely sure of what it will grow into. A transmedia project doesn’t just burst from your head, fully formed, like Athena from Zeus’ skull. A transmedia storyteller comes up with ideas and potentials and then works with a multiplicity of collaborators, including the audience, as it grows. It takes on a life of its own.

So why all the excitement about “transmedia” now? And is it really something new?

I think it’s because of the Internet. Even before the Web, there was always the possibility of a popular movie inspiring a line of original comic books or an original line of novels or toys. However, it was always a top-down process. Now everyone can sit in front of the computer and access all these different kinds of media. Anyone can be a writer, a filmmaker, a designer, or a visual artist and put their work in front of an audience. The internet has made us all active storytellers. This creates a different kind of opportunity for career storytellers because not only they can put all their stuff online, but they can interact directly with their audience through their phones and their pads and their computers. They can co-create. It’s a massively new feedback loop.

Furthermore, storytelling always has to reflect the lives and the consciousness of the people of its age. We’re at the point now where everyone’s consciousness is constantly being expanded, taxed, overwhelmed, and sometimes even enlightened by all these different communication mediums that we have at our fingertips. So, the stories we tell have to reflect that, and utilize these very mediums that have so deeply affected, expanded and fragmented the human experience. There is no better way to do that than with a transmedia project.

One of the most striking things for me is the role of mobile and what it enables; there’s this expectation among consumers and audiences that they can bring the story or content to a level of personal relevance that they couldn’t before. In other words, it’s not just about me going deeper and deeper into the storyworld and finding out more about a character or a storyline. In some cases, it’s also about opportunities to bring the story out into my world.

Yes, exactly. In other words, stories used to be told in such a way that either you were alone in a room with a book or you were in a dark theater watching a screen or in a living room in front of a TV set. It was sort of locked down, but now it can come out into the world. It’s going to be really interesting. Of course, there are all sorts of gimmicks and games now – from flash mobs to planking to geo-caching, but, beyond that, I think there is an opportunity for storytelling to truly leak out into the real world, not only in the sense that you’re taking it with you everywhere on your phone, but that part of the story itself is experienced in public, physical locations.

I mean, when followers of the The Dark Knight transmedia campaign were going to bakeries and finding cell phones from the Joker hidden in cakes, the “medium” of the story became the real world.

From your perspective, what makes the difference between novelty or gimmicks, as you say, and really meaningful, good experiences?

The difference is that all the platforms, gimmicks and surprises that the storyteller uses in a transmedia way has to come from the characters—whatever problems, needs, hopes, schemes or dreams the characters have. The audience should feel that they’re moving from one medium to the other because the flow of the story and the goals of the characters call for it, because the story couldn’t be told in any other way.

Then, not only does the audience accept it, they become that much more engaged because it’s reflective of the way we actually live. We live life in transmedia: We read a kindle while watching TV and are interrupted by a text. We talk on the phone while driving a car and are distracted by a video billboard. We tweet our location, share what we see, and comment on what others are doing hundreds of miles away, all in real time. So, it makes sense that fictional characters would be expressing themselves in this fragmented way, and that a story would unfold on multiple sites.

For me, the key is to think: “What are the needs of my characters, how would they express those needs and pursue their goals in today’s world, and how can that be expressed through transmedia?”

Transmedia, when it works, is not about plot. There are multiple plots all co-created and supported by the mob. Transmedia, at its best, is about the characters.

So, to what extent should the audience have input into how the story plays out?

I think it really depends on the particular project. What’s key is that the interactivity has to spring from the desire and engagement of the people involved. Otherwise it can be very disruptive of the experience. The joy of listening to a story around a campfire comes from having empathy for the characters—really feeling the joys, terrors, and heartaches of that character—and also believing in the character’s world. Too often a clumsy interactive device - a simple, choose-your-own-adventure for example – can disrupt that magical dreamstate. When I’m suddenly making a choice for my character, I’m not feeling for the character; I’m made aware that, “Oh. This isn’t a real person. This world is fake.”

So, the interactivity should be based on the audience believing – or suspending disbelief - that the characters and story are real, and specifically, that their own actions in the story have an effect on the emotional lives of the characters and the choices they are making—not that they’re making choices for the characters, but their input changes the quality of the fictional world—then that world and the people in it become more and more real. Then the audience becomes a charater interacting inside this world. Then, there’s the opportunity to become even more empathetically connected to the characters moving around the multiple mediums. The characters feel more like real people, and we feel for them more.

So, with interactivity, there’s an opportunity there to enhance storytelling, by increasing engagement and empathy, and there is an opportunity to blow it, depending on whether things are executed skillfully or clumsily.

As you said, at the fundamental core of any story is the notion of relating to or empathizing with a character. That hasn’t changed over time, but what is changing about the mechanics of storytelling, or the way we capture and unfold stories?

There is a major change that I think we’re on the brink of—closer than many people think – in the world of video games. Right now, video games are very immersive and cinematic in the way we can move through space and shoot at things, fight, manipulate objects, and so on. That kind of physical interaction with a finely detailed environment is very sophisticated. The big change happens when the user becomes emotionally involved in the unfolding action the way they do in a novel, a play or a movie .

I talked earlier about the idea of empathy. We can empathize with characters represented as simply as a scribbled cartoon—take Charlie Brown, for example. That’s because human beings can project an inner life onto almost anything – a doll, a pet, almost any object or animal. We can imagine, “what is that creature feeling?”

So, as soon as the characters in a game or some sort of interactive environment seem to have an inner life and authentic emotional reactions to the things we, the game player, do within that game, that’s going to trigger our empathy, and get us wondering, “What is that character thinking? What is that character’s intention? Is she sad? Is she happy? What is she thinking?” Suddenly, you’re not just shooting zombies. You’re not just beating up bad guys. Now you’re imagining how this pixelated figure might be feeling and motivated by, and you are becoming more and more engaged in the relationship you are forming with this character.

What do you think is the best way to get people to connect in that deeper, emotional way? Will we need more advanced technology, or is it just about conveying some other element of the narrative differently?

We don’t need hard AI driving this kind of interaction; we just need enough of those triggers in the game character we interact with to make us project onto that image the idea of an inner life. Remember, we are capable of projecting an “inner life” on a stuffed animal, a cartoon character, or a marionette. We just need the right triggers.

Filmmakers have become adept at creating these triggers. In a famous experiment, a shot of an actor with a blank expression was inter-cut in three ways: it was intercut with a beautiful woman, with a banquet tablet, and with a coffin. These three different montages were then shown to three different audiences, and the audiences were asked what the character – the man with the blank expression – was thinking. Each audience read his expression differently. One said,“Oh, that man is so in love.” Another said, “Oh, that man is so hungry.” The third said, “Oh, that man is so sad.” It’s the same completely blank expression, but we project an inner life upon it.

As of now, most of the interactive environments available now haven’t really been able to access that capacity of the audience to believe in the inner life of the characters. But, when the people who design games move away from the rendering of the physical space, and into the development characters and behavior, then you can hit a tipping point; people are going to have entirely different experience inside this virtual world because they’ll be interacting emotionally and empathically with the characters rather than just moving around in space and shooting them.

That brings up a really interesting question: is it possible that the more immersive visuals we’ve been able to create for video games have reduced the effort we put into thinking about them, and actually diminished our ability to project an inner life onto characters?Often, if you look at a character in a game, it looks really close to being human but there’s something that feels creepy about it – like a wax figure or an automaton. In robotics, they call it the uncanny valley. We may find that, in the near, a much more simplified graphic character that nonetheless behaves as though it has an inner, emotional life, will be far, far more involving and engaging. Some movies – like Beowulf and The Polar Express - have animated characters that look almost human but not quite, and to me they are creepy and off-putting. That emphatic connection is completely broken. I’m more likely to believe bugs bunny is real. So, we may find that backing off on the photorealism actually helps to cultivate empathy.

Image from Polar Express

Very interesting. Switching gears a bit, do you have any suggestions for other storytellers who are interested in or working in the transmedia space?

I’d say that no one really knows exactly what “transmedia” is yet. So, if you’re a storyteller, there is no reason you shouldn’t be telling stories and playing around with whatever you can get your hands on. We’re at a time now where digital cameras, editing software, online publishing tools, and so on, are literally free—or close to it. I think it’s too often that people write screenplays or books wait around for somebody to give them permission to publish, to produce, or to share that work with the world. There’re thousands of tools that can help a storyteller create content and reach an audience. Maybe you only get a hundred people to look at your work at first—but that’s a lot of people. To be a storyteller, you don’t have Charlie Kaufman or Steven Spielberg, you just have embrace the tools available all around you and be inventive.

P.S. Another great discussion of technology and the future of storytelling can be found on Quora.com: How will the craft of storytelling change in the future?

Advice To Those Considering A Career As A Screenwriter...

2011-11-08T11:09:00.000-08:00

(This answer was originally posted on Quora)

"Do you HAVE to do this?"

This is the question my father asks each of his trumpet students when they begin studying with him. There are SO few jobs for a classical or jazz trumpet player out there - alarmingly few ways for even the most talented musicians to make a living or to find creative satisfaction.

"I'm not asking if you like it, or if you think its fun, or if you think you have talent, or even if you happen to be a genius. If there is ANYTHING you can do besides this, you should go do it. Please."

If the trumpet student says, "No, I HAVE to do this. I can't imagine doing anything else," then my father tells him or her, "Okay. My condolences...now, lets get to work."

So, if you have to write screenplays, my condolences, and here's what I would advise:

Read Screenplays - there is no better way to learn the craft than to read both the works of master screenwriters, and the failed attempts of aspiring screenwriters. A list of scripts to read can be found here: Which screenplays should aspiring screenwriters read?

Watch and analyze films. Two useful books that can help an aspiring scribe learn how to analyze a movie from a screenwriter's perspective are: The Tools of Screenwriting, by David Howard, Screenwriting: The Sequence Approach, by Joseph Gulino.

Learn about resources available online. Check out: What are the best resources for script writers on Internet?

Join screenwriting groups, classes and workshops. Los Angeles and New York are filled with groups, classes and workshops. And many are available online. The point is not that some teacher or guru with teach "the secrets of screenwriting" but rather that the classroom environment allows you to collaborate with other aspiring screenwriters, to read and exchange feedback on each other's work, and to become part of a creative community. See: What social tools do independent filmmakers use the most, and what do they use them for?

Make "digital films." Begin with short films. Screenwriters are filmmakers, and anyone with a digital camera and a laptop can make a "film." A good screenwriter can often showcase his or her talent by making an entertaining and provocative short film or a micro-budget feature.

Study something passionately other than film. Many screenwriters went to film school, but its important to have life experience outside of the craft. See: Screenwriting: What did most screenwriters do or study before they became screenwriters?

Network and collaborate with aspiring filmmakers. Go to film festivals and screenings and talk to directors, producers and other filmmakers about their movies. If you are in Los Angeles, a great place to start is Filmmakers Alliance, run by Filmmakers Life blogger Jacques Thelemaque. See also: What tools help geographically distributed teams collaborate on filmmaking?

Enter screenwriting contests and fellowships. Anything that can get you noticed is to your advantage. See: Which are the best screenwriting competitions?

Look to new paradigms. Remember that you are a storyteller, and the the craft of storytelling is likely to change as new technologies create radically new mediums. See: Storytelling: How will the craft of storytelling change in the future?

Take advice from screenwriters on Quora. See Mark Hughes' answer to Screenwriting: What are some basic tips for writing a screenplay for the first time?Take any job or opportunity to write. Think you are too good to write some straight to video clunker? Check out Why YOU should write Stigmata 3.

Learn about story structure, but don't take "theory" too seriously. See:What is the best theory of story structure for screenwriting, and why?

Rewrite. Rewrite. Rewrite. Write one screenplay, get feedback from peers, do revisions, get more feedback peers, and repeat. Then begin the process anew. See What is the most important tool in the screenwriter's toolkit? I teach a class at USC's School of Cinematic Arts called "Advanced Rewriting the Feature Script," and I teach that...

All writing is rewriting.

Screenwriting, Startups, and Technology: Does Your Idea Mean Nothing?

2011-11-06T08:43:00.000-08:00

As I was clicking through content on The Rocket Writer Group, Quora, and various blogsites this morning I came across an theme that I see echoed again in again the the domains of Screenwriting, Startups and Technology: your idea means nothing. It's become a kind of truism, echoed over and over.

First I saw a post on ScriptFaze called, "How to Spot an Amateur," which made a point that I try to emphasize again and again to my screenwriting students a USC.

"Writers are smart people, and it is generally hard to tell the difference between someone who’s pretending, and someone who has an actual career. HOWEVER, there is one very-common point of conversation that immediately blows the top off any writer’s cover, and exposes him for the amateur he really is:

The fear of having his script STOLEN.Yup. That’s right.

If you complain to others about having your spec script ripped off, YOU ARE AN AMATEUR.Why, you ask?Because working writers know that IDEAS DON’T MEAN SHIT. Everyone has great ideas—sellable, fresh, genius, spicy, new, amazing ideas. What makes a writer a writer is how they ACTUALIZE these ideas on the page." [You can read the entire post here]

Perhaps you think that we cynical, bitter veterans are overstating things. We're not.

Here's an idea for a movie!

While working for a greedy corporation, our young, handsome hero takes on a new shape and enters an alien world filled with strange, exotic life-threatening creatures.Our hero is rescued by a sexy native and brought to her tribe where he must gain the tribe's acceptance. This sexy native's mentor is at one with mother nature. Our hero is confronted with a jealous rival for the attention of this sexy native. At the heart of the tribe's power is a tree with its own life force that affects all of the splendor and wonders of this exotic world.When the evil corporation seeks to destroy the tree without regards to the indigenous people, the hero must decide between his growing love of the indigenous people and his ties to the corporation.In the end the hero rallies the locals, including his rival, and saves the day. (Synopsis stolen from Michael Dean)

What you say you've seen that movie already? It's not original at all. It's exactly the same plot as Avatar!

Actually, I stole that story idea from Ferngully: The Last Rainforest. This animated children's film has a story that is so close to Avatar that people have done hilarious trailer mash-ups.

If you throw Pocahontas and Dances With Wolves into the mix, Avatar becomes one of the least original "ideas" in recent memory. Yet the film has made billions and billions of dollars worldwide. It did so because of its execution.

"Your idea means nothing" is a concept echoed throughout other domains. In the startup and technology world the "Fergullies" are endless.

Idea: Search the web.
Execution: Altavista v. Google.

Idea: Build a social network.
Execution: Myspace v. Facebook

Idea: Build a portable MP3 Player
Execution: Creative Nomad Jukebox v. i-pod

A hilarious description by Michael Wolf of why Dropbox has succeeded, executing an idea that had been around forever and had seemingly already been done better, can be found here: Why is Dropbox more popular than other programs with similar functionality?

But here's the twist on the concept of "your idea means nothing."

Your idea means everything.

Said Michael Wolf in answer to Which is more crucial to success: the idea or the execution?, "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!" When you walk into an office to pitch a great idea, what you are really pitching is your execution of that great idea; you are convincing the person listening that you in particular can tell this story in a unique and fabulous way. But, the idea itself still has to be great.

It is astounding how many bad ideas are pitched in Hollywood. I once had someone pitch me an idea for a horror movie that involved genetically modified goats with shark teeth. The eager and excited exec asked me if I thought his idea was scary. "Is it just the one goat?" I asked, as delicately as possible. He went on to describe a story idea that involved lots of goats, and lots of shark teeth, and he asked again if it was a really scary idea. I responded as honestly as I could, "It's definitely scarier than an ordinary goat."

If your idea sucks, you're dead.

Every great script, like every great startup or great gadget, began with a great idea. If you start out with a bad idea or even a mediocre idea, your project is doomed to fail. The point in all this is that you shouldn't be scared of someone stealing your idea. You should be pitching and testing your idea (movie, starup, gadget) to as many people as possible in as many ways as possible. Once you have gotten plenty of feedback, and you have confirmed that your idea is a great one...

Get to work and execute it! What are you doing reading this blog when you should be writing!

How I Spent My Day in Palo Alto

2011-10-31T11:01:00.000-07:00

Having a scheduled a number of meetings throughout the Bay Area, I decided that I would spend a day in Palo Alto, and drop in on my friends at Quora.

To plan my day, I did the obvious. I posed a question: How shall I spend my day in Palo Alto? I got fabulous suggestions from Will Wister,Elizabeth Baum and many others. I also got tips directly from Sid Espinosa, the mayor.

I then got in touch with Marc Bodnick, who set up a dinner for me, him,Rebekah Cox and Adam D'Angelo at Three Seasons. Quora stats savant,Stormy Shippy, set up a Quora happy hour, and invited lots of fellow Quora addicts to Old Pro.

To get psyched up for my trip, I had coffee at The Farm in Beverly Hills with producer and Quora user Neal Edelstein (Mulholland Drive, The Ring) and we schemed in a caffeine induced frenzy about the future of technology and storytelling. Exciting projects we've been talking about for months came into clearer focus, and my brain was buzzing. I was ready to venture out of Hollywood and go tech touring.

To learn how my day went, you can read the rest of my post HERE on Quora.com....

The Science and Future of 3D Films

2011-10-25T07:15:00.000-07:00

You may remember Mark Hughes did a guest blog here on Genre Hacks, Ten Comic Books That Need Film Adaptations. You may also remember that I myself have written about 3D filmmaking from the perspective of the screenwriter, Screenwriting for 3-D.

So, you should now check out Mark Hugh's Blog at Forbes Magazine:

The Science and Future of 3D Films, With Legend3D Founder, COO and CTO Dr. Barry Sandrew - Part 1

Mark Hughes writes: If you read my blog regularly, you know I’m a proponent of 3D filmmaking as an important and permanent part of modern filmmaking. This week, I’ll take a look at the most prominent 3D conversion studio working in Hollywood today. I’ll speak with them about the state of 3D filmmaking and some recent advances made in 3D technology. We’ll also talk about several complaints and criticisms of 3D, and how those problems are being solved (including some detailed discussion about the big advances made in Transformers: Dark of the Moon). Then we’ll tackle some of the “3D is dead” claims, and debunk the recent “study” that insisted 3D adds nothing to the filmgoing experience. And we’ll discuss the future of 3D in both cinema and television.

So read on for Part 1 of a three-part discussion with Barry Sandrew, Founder, COO and CTO of Legend3D…

Check out the interview HERE, and look for parts 2 and 3...

What is the most important screenwriting tool?

2011-10-24T03:44:00.000-07:00

This post was orriginaly an answer to the Quora question: What is the most important tool in the screenwriter's toolkit?

For me, a "tool" is some process, habit or approach that can be taught. When I teach screenwriters at USC's filmschool, I can't help the students with talent or luck, which are by far the two most important factors in a screenwriter's success, but I can give them tools.Likewise, I can't really teach imagination, stamina, or even self delusion (important as these three are). Practical knowledge of industry standards as well as willingness to listen to honest feedback, are certainly necessary, but I expect both of these when a student walks into the classroom or an aspiring screenwriter asks me for advice. What I try to teach is a process.

So, the most important tool in the screenwriters' toolkit is...

The Rewrite Cycle

Anyone who takes screenwriting seriously must commit to a continuous, circular process of collection, collation, execution, and presentation.

Collection

In this phase the writer must be extremely open to ideas. When first looking for stories to tell, he or she must write down any an all impressions, images, jokes, fragments, and half-baked schemes that could be the seed of a film. Whether the writer collects ideas in a paper notebook, a voice recorder, or Evernote, he or she must collect everything. I liken it to carrying around A Bucket and picking up and collecting anything that is shiny or odd (see The Bucket)

In later cycles of the rewrite loop, collection is the phase in which a writer patiently collects every note, suggestion or criticism he or she gets from people who have read the current draft. Some notes will seem helpful, some will seem unhelpful. Some will be exciting and others infuriating. The key is to collect them all patiently and without judgment. Write them all down. Treat every single note as a gift, one that will be unwrapped and examined sometime later.

Collation

When first starting a screenplay, the collation phase involves sifting through all the ideas collected in notebooks and "buckets." Which ones have potential? Which ones trigger excitement? Which ones keep the writer up at night? The idea is then fleshed out into a treatment or beat sheet. This is a more focused and analytical step in the process, in which the writer uses knowledge of structure, tension and characterization to build the armature of a complete story.

In later cycles of the rewrite loop, collation is the phase in which the writer takes all the notes received from readers, collaborators and/or employers and sifts through them all. Too often beginning screenwriters either accept every note they get without question, or stubbornly refuse to take any at all. A veteran screenwriter does neither.

Instead, the veteran organizes notes according to character, structure, tone, and clarity. He or she looks for notes that come up repeatedly for every reader, and notes that some catch but most miss. Rather than reject suggestions that make the him bristle, the writer looks for deeper meaning behind the note. If the readers aren't getting what was intended, does something earlier in the story need to be clearer? Does plot complexity need to be simplified? Are the readers tracking the main tension? Conversely, rather than take a note that initially strikes her as clever, the writer must ask herself if the change might require further adjustments throughout the script, perhaps creating more problems than it solves.

No note or suggestion can be taken at face value; the writer has to work and sift and ponder.

Ultimately, the writer comes up with a game plan for the rewrite. This often takes the form of a new beat sheet or treatment to organize all the changes. I like to use colorful index cards and map out the entire revision on a 5'x5' cork board on my office wall.

Execution

This is the part that involves a lot of typing, coffee, and returns to earlier steps. The writer pounds out the draft based on all the notes and ideas he or she has collected and collated. The writer keeps at it until it is in good enough shape to hand off to his readers...

Presentation

This could mean handing in the script to a professor, delivering the script to a studio, passing it out to a writer's group, or just showing the pages to Mom. The important thing is that this should be the writer's best attempt at a "finished" draft. But alas, no script is ever finished. The writer will get notes, and return to the collection phase as he gets more and more feedback......and the cycle is repeated, again and again and again.

The Cycle

This Rewrite Process begins with the first draft and goes on with the second and third. If the writer gets a manager or agent, they will also get notes. If the screenplay is optioned or sold, the buyers will have additional thoughts and the cycle continues. If an actor or director is attached to the project, they will have new suggestions. As the project goes into pre-production, adjustments and compromises will need to be made due to budget, schedule, unforeseen opportunities and unmitigated disasters. As the project is edited and re-shot in post, further changes must be made. The script will likely go through rewrite after rewrite, churning through the cycle, all the way up to the premier.

The better the screenwriter can navigate this process, the faster and more effectively the writer can move through this cycle again and again, shepherding the core story so that each loop improves and clarifies the work, the better the screenplay will be.

Nested Cycles

What I have found is that not only do effective screenwriters work this cycle, but that they work on multiple projects at the same time...

Red - IdeasScreenwriters collect ideas while in the shower, driving their car, or reading the paper. They collate these ideas, sift through them and mull them over in their offices. They execute and present these ideas to friends and collaborators, usually over drinks and coffee and get feedback. They always have a bag of ideas brewing.

Blue - Pitches and TreatmentsSimultaneously, the writer is working on ideas that have been fleshed out into treatments and worked up into formal pitches. These too are distributed and rehearsed, tweaked and re-imagined, presented to buyers and collaborators, only to get more feedback and more loops in the cycle.

Green - First Drafts and Spec ScriptsWhile ideas are brewing and pitches are performed, the writer is simultaneously polishing and rewriting completed drafts, hoping that just a few more turns of the wheel will make it good enough to sell.

Pink - Scripts in ProductionSimultaneously the writer is working on projects that are actually in production. These could be short films, indie features, webisodes, or the current episode in a TV series. These projects are getting feedback from producers and directors and unit production managers, and the script is changing to fit the reality of filmmaking on the ground.

So, when one stage is done, another begins. Once a film is made, the writer must be ready with a new script. Once a script is sold, the writer must be ready with a new pitch or treatment. Once a pitch is abandoned, the writer must be ready with a new idea. All these cycles have to happen simultaneously.

Software engineers will recognize the screenwriters' rewrite process as just a specific example of a general feedback loop, one that can be applied to any creative endeavor.

A recent article Wired Magazine, Harnessing the Power of Feedback Loops, suggested that feedback tools can be used to make just about any human activity more effective.

But as I am only a screenwriter, not an engineer, a psychiatrist or a cognitive scientist, I'll just leave it at this... "all writing is rewriting."

“What One Learns About Film Financing From Film Financing Conferences”

2011-10-23T20:31:00.000-07:00

Quick...follow this link:

A Filmmaker's Life: “What One Learns About Film Financing From Film Financing Conferences”

VisionFest 2011: Films, Food, Drink, Fun and Christine Vachon

2011-10-13T06:15:00.000-07:00

REMINDER:

VisionFest 2011 is ONE WEEK AWAY!

Don't miss this amazing event on October 19th! Details below...

Tickets are now on sale. There are a limited amount of discounted tickets available for our FA Family. Please go here: http://visionfest-2011.eventbrite.com/. Enter the discount code: FriendsofFA

See you all there!

Filmmakers Alliance Presents

VISIONFEST 2011

2011 will be our 14th Year of VisionFest, Filmmakers Alliance annual screening and celebration bringing together the best of LA’s independent film community and regularly attended by overflowing audiences and press.

The evening begins with the presentation of the NILSSON AWARD, curated and presented by the award’s namesake and inaugural recipient, ROB NILSSON. The award acknowledges and celebrates bold, direct, honest and aesthetically challenging filmmaking that is often unrecognized by the mainstream independent film community. This year's Nilsson Award recipient is Turkish filmmaker Semih Kaplanoğlu.

Next is the presentation of the VISION AWARD to an established filmmaker whose artistic ambition and consistent filmmaking excellence provides artistic inspiration to emerging filmmakers all around the world. Past recipients include MIke Figgis, Terry Gilliam, Wim Wenders, Allison Anders, Alexander Payne, David O. Russell, Werner Herzog, Mark and Michael Polish, Kevin Smith, Ted Hope and last year’s recipient, Nicolas Winding Refn.

2011 Vision Award Recipient
CHRISTINE VACHON

Independent Spirit Award and Gotham Award winner Christine Vachon co-founded indie powerhouse Killer Films in 1995 with producing partner Pamela Koffler. Based out of New York, Killer has produced more than 45 acclaimed independent films including Todd Haynes' Venice Film Festival Award-winning I'M NOT THERE and last year's Best Canadian Feature at TIFF, CAIRO TIME. Over the past decade and a half the two have produced some of the most celebrated American indie features including Academy Award-winning films FAR FROM HEAVEN, BOYS DON'T CRY, ONE HOUR PHOTO, HEDWIG AND THE ANGRY INCH, HAPPINESS and SAFE. In television, Vachon executive produced the Emmy-winning program, This American Life, for Showtime and more recently the two have collaborated on the upcoming miniseries Mildred Pierce for HBO. Killer Films was honored with a 10 year retrospective at the New York Museum of Modern Art in 2005.

PURCHASE TICKETS HERE: http://visionfest-2011.eventbrite.com/

The presentation of awards will be followed by a program of some of the best short films produced in the previous year. We are pleased to announce the following films:

Inside This World of Mine (3:59) by Sean Morris

The Wanderer (14:30) by Aaron Garcia

The Director (1:30) by Destri Martino

Debutante Hunters (12:42) by Maria White

White Knuckles (3:46) - 3D Director Eric Kurland

Abigale (16:00) by Robert Machoian and Rodrigo Ojeda-Beck

All Is Not Lost (3:24) - 3D Director Eric Kurland

The Legend of Beaver Dam (12:00) by Jerome Sable, Produced by Michael Blaha

Total program length: 68 mins.

And we will have a special Public Service spotlight on Tamika Lamison'sMake A Film Foundation with a screening of the org's new film Deep Blue Breath directed by Patricia Cardoso.

PURCHASE TICKETS HERE: http://visionfest-2011.eventbrite.com/

The evening finishes with a high-energy party on the rooftop of the Downtown Independent Theater catered by some of Los Angeles' best restaurants. Lots of delicious food and drink until late into the night.

VISIONFEST 2011 SPONSORS INCLUDE:
HBO
Focal Press
SAGIndie
Kodak
Zooppa
International Film and Television Alliance
WGA
Singha Beer
Tres Sietes Tequila

My Favorite Thing to Say about Hollywood

2011-10-11T09:27:00.001-07:00

"Hollywood was once a dream factory, but it has become a recycling center."
- Sean Hood

It's my favorite saying, and perhaps my one and only quotable quote. Share it. Tweet it. Pass it on...

Amazon Studios: An Interview with Roy Price

2011-10-10T08:35:00.000-07:00

In 2010 Amazon.com launched Amazon Studios and promised to "develop movies in a new way." They had strange new ideas about mass collaboration, a focus on original content from unknown filmmakers, and lots and lots of money to spend on prizes, test movies, and eventual script purchases.

Screenwriters by nature are a cynical and skeptical lot and Amazon Studios was initially met with some jeering and incredulity. Major screenwriting bloggers such as John August, Drew McWeeny, and Julie Gray all seemed to think the whole project was "positively batty." (See John August's thoughts HERE).

However, unlike a traditional studio, Amazon spent a lot of time an energy listening to screenwriters and filmmakers, and the studio made adjustments and changes in their approach. To me, this in itself - a studio listening to the opinions of screenwriters - is positively surreal... and encouraging. A year later, those who signed up seem pleasantly surprised by both the quality of the screenplays and the usefulness creative feedback they get from other Amazon filmmakers. Naturally, those who are winning prizes seem more enthusiastic than those who are still struggling and revising, but for many writers and filmmakers with original ideas who feel shut out of the Hollywood system, Amazon Studios' "new way" is creating an exciting and ever-growing community. Despite the initial criticism, filmmakers are showing up, and viable projects are emerging. The initial skepticism about certain elements of Amazons' approach have not disappeared (See discussions in the comments section of Go Into the Story), but as one more sardonic, veteran screenwriter on Amazon put it, "They have money," and the New Way has a lot to do with how they are spending it.

I myself became interested in Amazon Studios because of its focus on original ideas (rather than remakes, sequels and adaptations) and its focus on unknown screenwriters from around the globe. In order to check up on Amazon Studios progress, and see how there "new way" is working out, I interviewed it's director, Roy Price. Here is what he had to say...

Sean Hood: In what fundamental ways is Amazon Studios different from a traditional Studio?

Roy Price: First, we have an open door to new ideas. Anyone can upload a script or a full-length test movie to the Amazon Studios site. By uploading your project to the site you can receive feedback, collaborate with others and can win money. We have had winners from Zimbabwe, London, Shanghai, Roswell, Georgia and, of course, LA. We turn the most promising scripts into early prototype movies to see how the story plays on its feet. Have you ever thought “if people could only see it on screen they would love it”? Well, let’s find out. We also share the test movies with audiences and the results significantly influence our development and production decisions. We’re really not about the guru or Irving Thalberg model of movie development. It’s not about me and it’s not about you. It’s about the work, the audience and the numbers.

SH: If my script or test film is developed through Amazon Studios, does Amazon own the rights? Is this a good deal?

RP: When you upload, we get an option on the script. You retain ownership of the script. If it doesn’t go
anywhere, you get it back same as it was and are free to take it somewhere else. If we make the theatrical
movie, we have to exercise the option which means we pay $200,000 and then add a $400,000 bonus if
the movie makes $60 million or more at the US box office. 34% of movies released by major studios with
budgets of at least $10 million between 2005 and 2009 hit the $60 million mark at the US box office so there
is a decent chance of getting the bonus. For a writer in the earlier stage of their career, that’s a good deal.
Normally you wouldn’t get $200,000 up front and then you wouldn’t get any big bonus or other participation
in success.

SH: Why is Amazon Studios a good step for an emerging filmmaker?

RP: First, we’re giving away over $150,000 per month in prizes, which is a lot of money for a script and movie contest. We are also a production company looking for new and original material. There is exposure and opportunity for the taking.

SH: How can more established and experienced filmmakers benefit from Amazon Studios?

RP: For anyone that has an idea or script they haven’t been able to get off the ground, they can use Amazon
Studios to find out if people like their project. Or maybe this is just an opportunity to mentor and give others
good advice. Amazon Studios is a great way to network and discuss ideas among a collaborative community.

SH: Why should Hollywood producers, agents, managers, and executives follow projects being developed on Amazon?

RP: It’s a great place to find talent. Several of our users have met with agents and managers and have signed with representation after they succeeded on Amazon Studios. If you’re an agent Amazon Studios is a great place to discover new talent and award winning scripts. We do the filtering, you sign the clients.

SH: Most Traditional studios are focused on "pre-branded content" (adaptations, sequels, remakes, and franchises). Why is Amazon focused on original scripts and movies?

RP: We believe in original stories. Screenwriters and filmmakers come to Hollywood with original ideas burning to get out. We believe that screenwriters can come up with ideas for movies just as well as the novelists, toy designers and comic book creators who come up with them today. The risk aversion associated with pre-existing stories is financially understandable, considering movies have such high budgets, but we hope that giving original ideas exposure and testing them can make original content a viable economic proposition again.

SH: How will Amazon benefit me if I'm not chosen as one of the few "winners"? Is this just another script/film contest?

RP: If a project does not instantly become a semifinalist, we hope it will get lots of feedback from the community and improve. Amazon Studios can be like the world’s biggest writer’s group. We had a script that won in August 2011 after having been on the site for nine months getting feedback and being rewritten by the writer. It eventually made it to the top. That’s what we hope to see more of. We think we can all help each other along.

SH: What’s up with the mass collaboration idea?

RP: When you upload your script you can set revisions to “open,” “closed” or “by permission” so you can pretty much arrange collaboration however you want. We have had some people find great collaborators on the site and others prefer to go it alone. We want to enable any of those approaches.

SH: Will Amazon Studios expand to develop and produce other types of media like TV series or Webisodes?

I don’t have anything to announce today about TV series or Webisodes but it’s an interesting idea. We are always looking at ways to make Amazon Studios even more compelling for users.

SH: What is your background? What led to you heading up Amazon Studios?

RP: In 2000 I was at Disney happily running TV Animation series development (Kim Possible, Teacher’s Pet, Buzz Lightyear, House of Mouse).I became interested in the growth of the Internet and how it was going to revolutionize our consumption of TV and movies. I went to McKinsey & Co., and, a few years later, Amazon.com asked me to run their new digital video business, so I came to Seattle. A few years into that, we came up with Amazon Studios. Now our team is a fascinating mix of software engineers, interactivity designers, production managers and story analysts and it is just as exciting as I could have hoped.

SH: What are three exciting projects to follow at Amazon Studios?

RP: Well, I hesitate to name just three but I would like to know what people think of our test movies at the end of the year. Right now, 12 Princesses, Memory and Sky Pirates are strong test movies. Touching Blue, Super Bowl Sex Party and Zombies vs. Gladiators are a few of many promising scripts.

SH: How soon will I see an Amazon Studios film in theaters?

Soon we hope!

SH: How has Amazon Studios evolved since launch?

RP: Following the launch in 2010, we made revisability a setting so that you control who you collaborate with.
Since then we have focused on making it easier for people to turn scripts into test movies. We added useful, free assets such as music and sound effects, and created incentives for people to contribute just parts of a film without having to make the whole film. At launch you had to upload a whole test movie lock stock and barrel to be eligible for a film prize, but now we have prizes for components that can be uploaded individually: best dialogue track, best actor, best trailer and we just launched a poster contest. We also made it possible to upload the dialogue track for just an individual character at a time; now, a director can go to a project page and “cast” the movie based on uploaded dialogue tracks without having to organize actors etc. We want people to be able to put in the amount of time they are comfortable with, and to work together without necessarily having to tightly coordinate schedules. We look forward to lots of great test movies.

Sean Hood (finalthoughts): Ultimately the success of Amazon Studios will turn on the movies it produces that actually make it to theaters, but for so many screenwriters and filmmakers who wonder what to do with their original ideas, Amazon Studios is one the few options out there. Hopefully, there will emerge a way for non-WGA screenwriters to join the union, should their work be produced, guaranteeing them residuals, health care and screen credit. The Devil is always in the details. However, unlike some of my peers, I am hopeful and optimistic about Amazon Studios.

Hollywood was once a dream factory, but it has become a recycling center. I for one, hope some unknown filmmaker far, far outside the system is able to emerge on Amazon and put up something original and unexpected on the silver screen.

Screenwriting FAQ

2011-10-03T16:11:00.001-07:00

Here are some of my answers to frequently asked questions by aspiring screenwriters (click on the links to see my answers):

In movie credits, when there is more than one writer, how can I tell which writer did what?

What is wrong with American screenwriting today? What can be improved about American screenwriting today, if anything?

What are some great movie scenes with little to no dialogue?

How do screenwriters feel about bad reviews, in particular claims of formulaic writing?

What's it like to have your film flop at the box office?

Why should screenwriters, filmmakers and film buffs join Quora?

What are the risks in writing a screenplay from a book to which you don't own the rights?

What are the best Conan the Barbarian stories written by Robert E. Howard, and which story would be the best to adapt as a motion picture?

What are the best examples of "Plant and Payoff" in well known movies?

How do I write a screenplay?

What advice would you give to someone pursuing a career as a screenwriter?

What's it like to watch a movie as an experienced screenwriter?

Which screenplays should aspiring screenwriters read?

What is the best theory of story structure for screenwriting, and why?

On average, how long does it take to write a movie script?

In a movie or screenplay, what does it mean to “raise the stakes?”

Why is it a bad idea to write specific song choices into my script, or have a character sing a Lady GaGa song in the shower?

What are the best books, blogs, and online references for screenwriting or script-writing?

Conan Interviews With Screenwriter Sean Hood

2011-08-18T13:50:00.000-07:00

(Sean Hood being me... sorry to write about myself in the third person)

Edit 10/12/2011 - Perhaps the most widely read piece I wrote about Conan turned out to be:

What is it like to have your film flop at the box office?

So I thought I'd tally up some of the interviews I've done that have come out regarding Conan The Barbarian. For those who are sick of reading about Conan, I also talk about Blackwell, a grim psychological thriller with feisty female protagonist, and Rambo: Last Stand, a grim action-thriller with feisty, and far better known, male protagonist. These Interviews just came out today:

Previous interviews

Long Answers to Specific Questions:

And last but not least, for those who are wondering if they should see the movie on DVD, I give my honest answer to...

Why should we watch the new Conan the Barbarian?

FILMMAKERS ALLIANCE NEWSLETTER #29

2011-08-02T19:20:00.000-07:00

Lots of great information for filmmakers in the latest FA newsletter. Check it out...

FILMMAKERS ALLIANCE NEWSLETTER #29

Conan.com Questions and Answers

2011-07-29T12:05:00.000-07:00

The fans on the Conan.com forum asked me a number of questions about the upcoming movie Conan The Barbarian 3D. Here are my answers:

1. I know that you know the original stories and the Conan character as good as any. Which part of the script would you have loved to change but weren't allowed/able to because whatever reason? And what would you have changed it to?

When I started the bulk of my work on the film, there were only two weeks until shooting was scheduled to begin. Sets were already built, characters were cast, stunts were choreographed, and special effects were pre-visualized. Although a lot of scene, story and character elements ultimately changed, I had to work within some very tight parameters under intense pressure to deliver pages quickly. Production rewrites are sometimes described as “changing the wheels on a moving car.”

To get an idea of what kind of Conan film I’d make if it were just me writing for myself, check out this answer/link:

What are the best Conan the Barbarian stories written by Robert E Howard and which story would be the best to adapt as a motion picture?

2. There has been a ton of disputes here (Conan The Movie Blog) about the look of Conan in the 2011 movie and I was wondering why he doesn't have the blue eyes that R. E. Howard gave him? It just seems like that was the one main missing feature that really stood out.

It was my understanding that Conan was going to have blue eyes, and yes I think he should have had blue eyes. Ultimately, I heard that there were problems with both the blue contacts and the digital effect changing Momoa’s eye color. I don’t really know anything more about the technical details.

3. How many humans does Conan slay in the film?

More than John J. Rambo kills in Rambo 4.

4. How many monsters does Conan slay in the film?

Only a few, but they are fierce, Lovecraftian nightmares.

5. How many women does Conan kiss in the film?

More than Khal Drogo does in Game of Thrones… and yes, Conan does a lot more than kiss them.

6. Have you been asked to develop ideas for a future Conan sequel?

I have NOT yet been asked to write a future Conan film. But you can get an idea of the kind of movie I’d like to write by following the link to question #1.

7. How much of the Donelly/Oppenheimer story is left on the final screenplay?

About 50%, and their early drafts laid the bedrock for the story and characterizations. Their names appear before mine in the credits because the WGA determined that their contribution ultimately was larger than mine, and I agree.

8. How much of the Andrew Lobel draft is left on the final screenplay?

According to the WGA arbitration not enough to get credit on the film, but a number of key lines (“How many names do I need?”), memorable locations, and general concepts of Andrew’s remain in the final shooting script. Lobel is a talented and humorous young writer and you will hear more from him.

9. How many of the "new" elements of the script are from Marcus or the producers and how many are your own invention?

Filmmaking is a collaborative effort, and I there were a lot of people – from producers to studio executives to actors to the director himself – who were giving notes and making suggestions. Many of the elements of the action/fight scenes were choreographed by stunt coordinator David Leitch before I even got there. The idea for the climactic moment on a bridge came from Marcus Nispel. I also worked very closely with producer Boaz Davidson.

However, the writer must ultimately take responsibility for everything that goes down on the page, and since many of the “notes” I was getting from all the different sources were wildly contradictory, I had to trust my own instincts, and write what I believed was best (given the realities of shooting and limitations of what had already been set in stone.)

I would say that most of the “new” elements on the pages of the shooting script did originate from me. However, the film you will see on screen is definitely Marcus Nispel’s.

10. This is your first "Big Budget" movie. The responsibility is difficult to handle?

The movie had an estimated budget of some 80 million dollars, so yes, it is by far the largest I have ever worked on as a writer (although as a prop guy and set dresser I worked on some big ones like Fight Club and True Lies). The pressure of writing while shooting was in progress was intense, but it was also exhilarating.

11. What is your favorite Conan story? Why?

My sentimental favorite is Red Nails, because that was the first one I ever read as an 11-year-old boy. (You can read more about that by following the link from question #1.)

12. What is, for you, the most important part of Conan's psyche? What are his traits, virtues and ideals?

I tried my best to make sure that in the shooting script, Conan’s character reflected the vision of REH. In my opinion, Conan has few “ideals.” While he shows fierce loyalty to friends, a hatred for the practice of slavery, a respect for female warriors, and a disdain for "civilization," he is not driven by a "higher purpose." I would call him “amoral” in that he is not concerned with traditional issues right and wrong.

As far as his virtues, unlike some heroes who "learn a lesson" or "grow" in the course of a story, Conan is compelling precisely because - despite enormous danger and pressure - he stubbornly refuses to change. So his virtues are strength, stamina, and cunning. He is after all a thief, a pirate and a slayer.

Other words I'd use to describe his traits are:

- Charismatic and lusty. He likes drink heavily and carry off naked, eager slavegirls.

- Brutal and a bit bloodthirsty. He loves "the feasting of swords!"

- Dark and brooding. He's prone to deep melancholy.

Ultimately, I think that Conan, as he appears in the Robert E. Howard stories and in the new movie, lives in the moment. This is why you hear him say, in the trailer, "I live, I love, I slay. I am content."

13. What part of the hyborian world do you find more interesting?

Robert E. Howard was a history buff, and enjoyed writing historical fiction. What I enjoy about the Hyborian age is that every race, every country, every conflict and every individual story contains a shadowy reflection of our own history. For example, in Red Nails, we have the idea that civilizations, in their corrupt mismanagement and feuding over precious natural resources, carry the seeds of their own destruction. That’s an idea I see echoed in books like Guns, Germs and Steel.

14. It seems that there are a lot of Lovecraft elements in the representation of Acheron. Why did you take that approach? Did you include any further references to the "mythos"?

I didn’t refer to Lovecraft directly, but stories like Rats in the Walls were favorites of mine growing up, so there may have been some influence in the depiction of Acheron and in monsters like The Dweller.

15. What was the most difficult scene to write and which was the most fun?

The most difficult sequence involved the Artus’s pirate ship and the battle at sea. The sequence changed many times and many elements were ultimately cut. It also came about two thirds of the way through the second act, a notoriously tricky place in any script, where a story can easily drag.

The most fun scenes to write involved Khalar and Marique, because I was able to explore their twisted relationship. They are each so narcissistic and deliciously perverse.

16. Whiat was your approach to the villain's motivations and personality? Why you took that approach?

When writing a villain, even one as sadistic and brutal as Khalar Zym, it is important to give him an authentic and almost sympathetic motivation. Khalar doesn’t see himself as a villain. He thinks he is avenging a horrific murder, and resurrecting the woman he loves. Even if it means torturing and slaughtering thousands of people, he feels he is perfectly justified.

Likewise with Marique: underneath the sadistic, perverse sorceress is a little girl who just wants daddy’s attention.

17. What was your approach to the old-fashioned dialogue of the hyborian age?

Distillation. I wanted the dialogue to have that Hyborian age flavor, but there is no time in an action film the long, portentous speeches and grim histories recounted in Howard’s dialogue. I did my best to lift actual lines from his stories and work them into the film.

18. How important was being faithful to Howard's canon to you?

Conan The Barbarian 3D is not a direct adaptation of a specific REH story, but I took great care making sure that both the Conan character and details of the Hyborian age were true to Howard’s vision… at least in the script. Two of the producers Fred Malberg and Dan Rosenfeld, both of whom are die-hard Howard fans, were deeply involved in the actual shooting. Each would send me volumes of notes every week to make sure that every detail fit with “the Howard cannon.” Fred himself was present on set to be sure that the cities, tribes, costumes and behavior were in tune with the source material.

19. How important was being faithful to Howard's main theme (barbarism vs civilization) to you?

It is a major element in the conflict/relationship between Conan and Tamara. I gave the character Artus a short speech describing Conan’s disdain for the “civilized world.”

20.Why does a character shown in the trailer refer to the world as "Hyboria"?
You know the Hyborians are a racial stock, right? It's akin to saying "Europeans". We don't refer to the world as Europe or Europa or Europia. Why would you have a character refer to Conan's world as "Hyboria"?

It’s true that REH never used the word “Hyboria” to describe the world, but it’s become quite common in current video games, comic books, and maps made of the Hyborian Age: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Chrysagon_Hyboria_1024.jpg

When characters refer to “Hyboria,” they are referring to the continent dominated by Hyborian peoples during the Hyborean age. It’s meant in the same way Asians might refer to Asia, Africans might refer to Africa, or REH’s own Atlanteans might have referred to the continent of Atlantis. It doesn’t necessarily refer to the entire globe, just to the “civilized world” of Hyborian nations that dominate that particular continent at that time.

Would the Picts or the Cimmerians or Stygians have a problem with the entire continent being named after the Hyborians? Yes, they probably would, just as Native Americans probably wonder why the two continents they settled 14,000 years ago are named after Amerigo Vespucci.

21. Now that Fassir is telling Tamara that she is destined to meet Conan, how will Mitras's request to Yasmela be handled if Black Colossus ever gets translated to film?

In Black Colossus, queen Yasmela prays to Mitra, and she is told to go out into the streets and hand over the defense of her kingdom (that is being attacked by a 3000 year old sorcerer) to the first man she meets. This turns out to be Conan, who already has a position in her army but is then promoted. These circumstances are quite different from those in the film, so I see no reason why a future adaptation couldn’t remain faithful to Black Colossus.

22. Why do they feel so at liberty with a character that is not their own, to make fairly egregious changes that in actuality do not really advance the plot or story, nor enhance the original character, but speak rather to the perceptions they have of their audience?

My ten-year-old daughter asked me the same question after we saw the most recent Harry Potter film. She’s a fanatic for the books, and the simplification of the climactic battle between Harry and Voldemort didn’t sit well with her.

The question contains two assumptions that make it hard to answer.

One assumption is that all changes to a character that first appeared in a book or graphic novel are always unwarranted and “egregious.” That judgment really depends on the movie. I don’t think Nolan/Leger’s and reinvention of the Joker was egregious, even though it was far different than Bob Kane’s original character. Would many people want to see a James Bond movie that was perfectly faithful to Ian Flemming?

The other is assumption is that there is a particular person or persons who arrogantly decide that that “they” can do better than a famous author like REH.

To whom does “they” refer? There are they studio, production company executives who work for years, and in the case of Conan decades, to get a movie greenlit. “They” often are working under the thumbs of larger corporations who are only concerned with the bottom line. If an 80 million dollar film flops, it can bankrupt entire companies, ruin careers, and make stock values to plummet.

“They” could also refer to distributors, marketers, DVD manufacturers, cinematographers, actors, editors, production designers and other collaborators whose livelihood depends on the success of the movie.

I imagine that you are referring specifically to decisions made by the director, Marcus Nispel, and the screenwriters on Conan, and that you hate the changes you imagine we made to REH’s Conan. All I can tell you, is that whole hordes of people weigh in on these decisions, that none of us set out to make a bad movie, that none of us think we are somehow “better” than REH, but that yes, ultimately the tastes of a wide audience come into play when making a Hollywood movie.

Lastly, if anyone on Conan.com has 80 million dollars to spend on a faithfully adapted Conan film, please, PLEASE contact me. I would be more than happy to write a faithful adaptation for you, and I work for cheap. J

Does the success of such movies and works as LotR, the upcoming Hobbit, Harry Potter, even Twilight and True Grit, and now Game of Thrones inform their decisions at all, and if not, why don't they?

Anything that is successful will affect “their” decisions, whoever that nefarious and mysterious pronoun refers to. I happen to think that the best and most sophisticated medium for adapting novels is television. I loved Game of Thrones. With lower budgets, better actors and writers, and 10-13 hours to work with, TV series just do the best job of it.

Did anyone, at any point, advocate for a direct adaptation?

The producers at Paradox Entertainment, Fred Malberg in particular, have always advocated for direct adaptations, and will continue to do so for future films.

And if they still think they can improve on the original, why then do they not just take their own story and create their own character?

I myself am an advocate for original screenplays, but because a fantasy film costs between 50-250 million, studios are only willing to risk the money on characters and stories that audiences are already familiar with – so-called “pre-branded” material.

This isn’t a “lack of originality” so much as it’s an investment strategy. Audiences flock to “Spiderman” and “Batman” and other big brand names. If mass audiences reliably went to see “original” films, that’s what the people holding the purse strings would invest in. But at the moment, people flock to Transformers, so that’s what they get.

But believe me… if by “they” you mean writers and directors, we would all rather be doing something original – conceived and executed for the silver screen.

23. Why haven't they been more engaged with the crombots?

Again, I’m not sure who you mean by “they.” I myself have done my best to engage with REH fans, even when they are critical, because I think the discussion can help make for better REH inspired films in the future.

24. I noted how similar the Picts in the film are to their depictions by the Keegans and Manchess in the Del Reys, not to mention how they're depicted in the Conan roll playing game (1st edition). Other people have noted the simularities the look of the film has to the Age of Conan video game, which I really can't comment on because I haven't played it. Is this mere conicidence, or is a part of a greater effort on the part of CPI to make Conan's world look uniform across several forms of media?

That’s really a question for Fred Malmberg and Paradox entertainment, who oversee the development of REH based media.

25. If a person's introduction to the character is the 82 film, the original stories are a shock to them because the character is so different than how he's depicted on film. Will people who are led to the original stories by thenew film have a similar reaction, or do you feel that the transition will be more seamless this time? Can someone read The Pheonix on the Swordand imagine Momoa in the role with no cognitive dissonance on their part?

Yes. I believe that the new Conan film will bring a whole new generation of readers to REH’s stories. Everyone who reads a book may have a different vision of what the character looks like, but Momoa is the best we’ve had yet.

26. From what I know about the script, there is a gap in time between the destruction of Conan's village and when Momoa emeges onscreen as a full grown adult, where he apparently has several adventures already under his belt. Without giving too many plot points away, how is that transition handled? Are REH's writings acknowledged to account for this gap in time? ie. Did Conan spend time with the Aesir? Was there a battle of Venarium? Did he spend time as a thief in Zamora?

I made several references directly from REH including the battle of Venarium and Conan’s days as a thief in Zamora. Micheal Stackpole expands on them in his novelization. Not all the references made it into the final cut, but it’s clear that the adult Conan has had a number of adventures under his belt.

26. What ethnicity is Khalar Zym? What country does he hail from? Assuming he's from the far East, how could he possibly move an entire army across several sovereign nations in order to invade Cimmeria?

Originally, the character was named Khalar Sing and he was from Vendhya, producers were going to get an Indian actor to play him, but the role was cast with Steven Lang. Since Steven doesn't look like he's from Vendhya, Khalars ethnicity was changed to Nemedian and his last name was changed to Zym.

27. Judging by the trailer and the most recent promotional materials, there seems to be a big effort on the part of the producers to attract the "300" crowd. How important was this demographic when putting the film together?

Again, in order to justify the expense of the movie, especially since the director/producers demanded an R-rating, considerations and comprises had to be made in order to reach a wide audience, most of whom don’t know Aquilonia from Aquafresh, Crom from Chronic. That said, the film does NOT! have the look or style of 300, and the music in the trailers isn’t the music you will hear in the final film.

(Thanks to John Prejean for setting up this fan Q&A)

Why Screenwriters and Filmmakers should join Quora

2011-07-26T10:35:00.000-07:00

There are quite a lot of websites, blogs, and forums on the internet related to screenwriting, filmmaking, and movies. There are also quite a lot of social networks, most recently Google+, that allow filmmakers and movie buffs to share links, tips, and build filmmaking communities. What then is Quora, and why should filmmakers use it?

"Quora is a continually improving collection of questions and answers created, edited, and organized by everyone who uses it. The most important thing is to have each question page become the best possible resource for someone who wants to know about the question."

For a longer explanation read Quora's about page. I myself learned about Quora from a Wired magazine article, Does Quora Really Have All The Answers?

Here are the reasons that screenwriters, filmmakers, and movie buffs should join Quora:

To Read Knowledgable Answers: Quora has already attracted quite a number of working professionals from the film industry who have written stellar answers to wide variety of filmmaking and screenwriting questions. Check out the shear volume of answers on the topic pages for Screenwriting and Movies. Read Neal Edlestien's (Producer of Mulhuland Drive, The Ring) answer to What are common mistakes made by new screenwriters. Read answers by working hacks like Mark Hughes, Ken Miyamoto, or James Kelly, or indie filmmakers like Jacques Thelemaque, or film experts like Audry Kelly (editor of Fade In Magazine)

To Read Celebrity Answers: Do you have a question about the movie Super-8? Why not read answers by J.J. Abrams himself? Want to know if it's fun for movie stars to kiss other movie stars on-screen? Read what Ashton Kutcher has to say, and ask a follow up question.

To Ask Specific Filmmaking Questions: Since quite a number of experienced screenwriters and filmmakers are on Quora, you can ask very specific questions and get quick detailed answers by people who know what they are talking about. I myself will drop by Quora almost daily and answer specific questions such as Who wrote Thor? Which writers did what? or In a screenplay, can a scene qualify as a Save The Cat scene without the hero taking any significant action? or Can I do a film adaptation of a short story or novel without obtaining the legal rights?

To Share your knowledge: No matter how much or how little experience you have writing, filmming, or watching movies, you likely have specific experiences and bits of knowledge that you can share with people who need the answers. For example you might know Who the primary contacts for anybody seeking to film a feature in Romania ? You might have a specific opinion on What franchise could replicate the success of the Harry Potter movies? or What are some great movie scenes with little to no dialogue?

To Curate: I maintain that it is the job of filmmakers, film lovers, and film critics to actively curate and promote amazing films that few people have scene. Why not stop complaining that you hated Transformers 3 and start reading and adding to lists of truly amazing and frequently neglected films? Start with What are the best movies nobody has heard of?

To Research: Where do you start if you are writing a story that involves a subject you know very little about? Need to know what's its like to be a private detective or a catholic priest? Do you have a very specific question about bio-engineering or the manufacture of candy? Do you want to know where a character in Chicago might go for breakfast? Someone on Quora is liable to have the answer, and you can often ask an "expert" directly. Ultimately, Quora hopes to grow into the Wikipedia of question/answer websites.

To Network: On of the most important aspects of working in a creative industry is developing a circle of fellow writers and filmmakers with whom you can exchange knowledge and ideas. Recently I wanted to know the answer to Who are the best movie directors working today for stories involving madness, psychological tension, and dark subject matter? I got a bunch of amazing answers and suggested them to my producer.

...Because its Fun and Addictive: Many, many answers are just fun to read, such as Mark Hughes' answer to Given our current technology and with the proper training, would it be possible for someone to become Batman? Answering questions yourself and watching them get up voted by grateful readers is as addictive as eating Pringles sprinkled with cocaine (not that I advocate the latter.)

...So you can Follow Me: I enjoy answering questions on a variety of film-related topics, and I enjoy getting feedback. Find me here: Sean Hood.

...So that I can Follow You: I suspect that you yourself have personal experience and knowledge that I'd benefit from reading about. Join up and share what you know. I personally would love to read your answers.

Bad Reviews

2011-07-06T10:59:00.000-07:00

My favorite website of late is called Quora, and I spend a lot of time there answering question and reading spectacular answers by experts on subjects I'm curious about.

Today I saw this question: How do screenwriters feel about bad reviews, in particular claims of formulaic writing? The questioner continued: For example, this week's The New Yorker rips apart Bad Teacher("Academic Questions," July 4, 2011) and even says that one scene was lifted from Cool Hand Luke.

NOTE: my answer has been revised in light of the flurry of bad reviews for Conan The Barbarian. Read it here:

How do screenwriters feel about bad reviews, in particular claims of formulaic writing?

"So What are You Working On?"

2011-06-26T11:06:00.000-07:00

I hear the question all the time. "So what are you working on?" Do you really want to know? For me, as it is for most professional screenwriters, the question has an absurdly long answer. You can read all about it on Quora:

Which Quorites have screenwriting projects in progress?

A Filmmaker's Life: Towards A Sustainable Independent Film Community

2011-06-23T13:46:00.000-07:00

Check it out...

A Filmmaker's Life: Towards A Sustainable Independent Film Community

Support Truly Independent Film

2011-06-22T07:50:00.000-07:00

I wanted to make one last plug for the non-profit group Filmmakers' Alliance and their quest to build free websites and web tools to benefit truly independent filmmakers who are overlooked in the Hollywood system. By donating even $1, you can help the quest to give voices to those talented filmmakers who toil in obscurity.

Remember, the film you save may be your own!

http://filmmakersalliance.org/Crowdfunding_Campaign.html

Conan will be Rated-R

2011-06-17T12:11:00.000-07:00

For those who didn't believe me when I promised that the upcoming Conan The Barbarian 3D will be rated R (I answered a question on Quora LINK,) here is a link to the red band trailer. Blood and boobs a plenty...

Red Band Trailer for Conan The Barbarian

Is the Internet Good for Horror?

2011-06-17T10:09:00.000-07:00

Adam Gierasch and Jace Anderson are a horror filmmaking team (Night of the Demons, Fertile Ground). Recently Adam wrote a blog article that touches upon a subject that I am preparing to blog about myself: the relationship between fan-boy fan-sites and filmmakers.

Specifically Adam wonders "Is the internet good for Horror?" It's a question that I would expand to all genres. But more on that later. In the meantime, click on over to Creepymofo by the link below.

Is the Internet Good for Horror?

A Filmmaker's Life: THE LA FILM FESTIVAL IS HERE!!

2011-06-14T12:37:00.000-07:00

Will you be there? I will... (click the link below)

THE LA FILM FESTIVAL IS HERE!!

Why We Need More, Not Fewer, Comic Book Film Adaptations

2011-06-13T09:00:00.000-07:00

After last weeks article in genre hacks by Mark Hughes, Ten Comic Books That Need Film Adaptations, a number of readers asked the question, "do we really need MORE comic book adaptations?"

You can read Mark Hughes passionate answer in his Forbes Magazine blog:

Why We Need More, Not Less, Comic Book Film Adaptations

Ten Comic Books That Need Film Adaptations

2011-06-10T05:12:00.000-07:00

Before being screenwriters and filmmakers, "genre hacks" were fanboys. Our chosen profession only allows us to enjoy or beloved films and books more deeply, and as a result, we tend to be fiercely opinionated, blindly optimistic, and wildly enthusiastic about potential projects and adaptations. My friend Mark Hughes, a screenwriter and entertainment blogger, and lifelong film and comic book fan, graciously agreed to do an article for Genre Hacks to on the subject of...

Ten Comic Books That Need Film Adaptations

By Mark Hughes

While some folks probably think there are already too many comic book film adaptations, some of us think there aren't nearly enough. The truth is that for all of cinema's history, adaptations of other works -- novels and plays, for example -- have been crucial to supplying material for our movies. Comic books, as the modern incarnations of mythology and a blend of traditional pictorial storytelling with the written word, are just as valid and rich as any other.

So here are my picks for the ten comics most in need of adaptations to the big screen.

The Sandman -- One of the greatest, most acclaimed comic book series in modern history, Neil Gaiman's supernatural horror-fantasy tale about the master of dreams embodied in human form. Get someone like David Lynch or David Cronenberg to direct, or perhaps go a different direction with Peter Jackson. It's shocking that a book this rich in story and imagery has yet to be adapted to film. But this much surrealism and weirdness, written this well and with such grand ideas, can't be kept from film for much longer or fans are going to burst into flames spontaneously around the world. So really, getting this adaptation made is in everyone's best interests, right?

Green Arrow -- Somewhere out there, lost in Hollywood it seems, is a screenplay about the superhero archer Green Arrow who begins his career as a vigilante but soon finds himself arrested and locked up in a supermax prison designed to hold costumed heroes and their arch enemies. A prison break sets the main plot rolling, and there you have one of the most innovative takes on a superhero film that I've ever heard of. Green Arrow is cool beyond words, and there's always the unexpected route of developing a film in which he's already a grizzled veteran crime fighter who has gone "underground" and finally returns to help defeat some major threat, and of course the only man to consider casting in that kind of Green Arrow film is Sam Elliot (complete with goatee and long hair).

Moon Knight -- Marvel seriously needs to get a Moon Knight film up and running. Sometimes dismissed by non-fans as too similar to Batman, this is in fact a character with a great origin story and one of the coolest costumes in comics. Yes, there are similarities to Batman, but Moon Knight is a unique character with great stories to tell, and he is the perfect vehicle for Marvel to explore a darker solo franchise apart from their on-screen linked universe. A former mercenary who believes he died and was revived in order to serve as the human manifestation of vengeance, Moon Knight is openly and unapologetically crazy, and has serious identity issues as well. He also has an awesome arch nemesis in the form of Bushman, an equally insane former soldier with teeth chiseled into fangs and a death mask tattooed on his face. Because that's what it takes to be Moon Knight's archenemy, because Moon Knight is that cool.

Wonder Woman -- No excuses here, folks. With so many comic book characters getting their shot at fame and fortune on the big screen, it's a shame that no female characters have really had the chance to fly solo, and an even bigger shame that someone as iconic as Wonder Woman still hasn't had a chance. It's particularly jarring in light of how many great ways this character could be portrayed on film, due to a plethora of strong storylines and different ways to re-imagine her for film. With so much potential and so many great writers eager to develop her to the screen, it's inexcusable that Wonder Woman has languished in development hell. Recently, she got a shot at the small screen with a pilot episode for TV, but it went nowhere and appears DOA. Which, hopefully, will revive her odds of a film adaptation -- but I see one obstacle standing in the way, and that's the perception of "target audiences." So long as young male fans are considered unlikely to show up in sufficient numbers to films featuring female lead action heroes, studios tend to be reluctant to produce those kinds of films, since they think female audiences won't show up for that kind of film. But they are wrong, on both counts actually. Movies like "Salt" show that it's possible to get your audience if the product is high quality and your concept has a strong hook. Female audiences in particular are ready and waiting for material that speaks to them and gives them heroes and adventure, and who better to deliver it to them than Wonder Woman?

Suicide Squad -- Come on, it's "Dirty Dozen" with super-villains as the anti-heroes. If that concept doesn't say everything you need to make you want to see this film right now, today, then I don't even understand you at all. It's a team of super-villains, incarcerated and given a reprieve if they accept suicide missions (missions with high likelihood of not coming back alive, that is). Right now as I'm typing this, I just thought of 18 million stories you could tell with that premise. Wait, now it's 19 million. That's how incredible this concept is, and why it needs to be turned into a film franchise as fast as possible.

Dr. Fate -- I have so much to say about why Dr. Fate needs a movie, it's hard not to just write an entire article simply about that topic. Consider that this is a chance to adapt H.P. Lovecraft stories as a foundation around which the rest of the film revolves, a macabre mixture of fantasy and horror into which this extraordinary sorcerer-superhero delves to save all that exists from a terrible predestined fate. But can Dr. Fate truly stop destiny? That's the way my friend, writer Robert Reineke, envisions a Dr. Fate film, and his ideas blew my mind. If you liked what Guillermo del Toro did with the "Hellboy" films, you'd love what he could probably do with these Dr. Fate concepts Robert came up with. The point is, Dr. Fate has an incredible mythos that are aching to be properly adapted into something transcending the superhero film genre, and I hope it happens someday.

Aquaman -- Stop it, I'm serious here. Yes, Aquaman, because he has so much great potential that is simply not appreciated. The jokes in mainstream pop culture about him merely "talking to fish" are humorous, sure, but they are dead wrong. What if he can control water, too? What if his Empire of Atlantis has water-based technologies like those undersea aliens from "The Abyss," too? Think of something like "Avatar" underwater, with a touch of wild seafaring adventure like a modern-day "Pirates of the Caribbean" thrown in on the surface of the seas. Re-imagine Aquaman on screen so that he perhaps has some slight physical traits that distinguish him as an Atlantian (slightly webbed fingers and toes, a bluish tint to his skin in some places, bright yellow irises), give him long hair woven into long, slim braids all over his head, and I think you've got a heckuva start for a great series. Aquaman lives at sea, and few other comics or superhero films will have a similar setting, so take advantage of how unique he is and how cool and big his world can be. And stop those damn jokes about talking to fish!

Ronin -- Before there was "The Matrix," and before there was even "Ghost in the Shell," there was Frank Miller's stunning vision of a future in which a sort of intelligent nanotechnology tries to spread and take over Earth, using a young boy with psychic powers and turning his samurai daydreams into "reality" in order to control the boy's powers and use them to help engulf humanity in fantasy and nanotechnology. The boy, a quadriplegic, believes himself to be possessed by the spirit of a powerful ronin (masterless samurai, as if anyone reading this doesn't already know that) who is tasked with saving the world from an ancient demon unleashed in the dystopian future setting. The story is told through use of parallel settings -- sometimes in the machine-dominated futuristic wasteland, other times in feudal Japan. It's incredible and marked Miller's turn toward heavy influence of Japanese manga in his own artwork, this graphic novel resembling the artistic style of the brilliant series "Lone Wolf & Cub" (which, in its U.S. printing, featured great cover art by Miller). Imagine if "13 Assassins" got mixed into "The Matrix" and you have the beginnings of an idea of what this film could be like. Oh, did I mention that the ronin, since he inhabits the body of a boy who has no arms or legs, is a CYBORG samurai? Yeah. Your brain just exploded from awesomeness overload.

Y the Last Man -- If guys think that being the only male left alive on a planet full of women would be some kind of dream come true, think again. Society starts to collapse, and every government and organization wants to capture you to try cloning you and turning your body into a sperm production plant for fertilizing women. This is one of the coolest dystopian future concepts I've read, similar in very vague conceptual ways to "Children of Men" but also entirely different. It could make either a terrific film franchise (with a lot more than just a trilogy) or a television series (which was the most recent rumor about the project), but it's been in limbo for several years now. Please, please get this one into production before some cheesy porn producer decides to try and make "XXX the Last Man" (not to be confused with some perverse sequel to the "xXx" film franchise).

Those are the top comics that I think are most deserving of a film adaptation. So get to work, Hollywood!

Other MUST READ articles by Mark Hughes:

Why we need MORE, not fewer, comic book movie adaptations.

Could you really become Batman?

What does it feel like to have giant retractable adamantium claws?

What are the best Conan The Barbarian comic books and why?

A Filmmaker's Life: Our Kickstarter Campaign - Support Your Passion!

2011-06-02T07:44:00.000-07:00

Filmmakers Alliance is an Los Angeles based non-profit organization. Without them, I could have never made the films that are dearest to me and (perhaps as a result) most difficult to make. Please check out their kickstarter campaign!

The filmmaker you save may be yourself!

CLICK THIS LINK: Our Kickstarter Campaign - Support Your Passion!

A Filmmaker's Life: A Call For Creative Invention

2011-05-13T19:49:00.000-07:00

As usual, Jacques Thelemaque writes passionately and insightfully about "creative invention" in filmmaking. Click the link below:

A Call For Creative Invention

Untangling Writing Credits

2011-05-13T19:01:00.000-07:00

In movie credits, when there is more than one writer, how can I tell which writer did what?
To answer the question, let's look at a specific example. On the movie Thor (2011), the writing credits read:

screenplay by

Ashley Edward Miller & Zack Stentz and Don Payne

story by

J. Michael Straczynski and Mark Protosevich

To untangle these credits, there are a number of points to you need to understand:

When two names are separated by an ampersand (&), it designates a writing team. So Ashley Edward Miller & Zack Stentz are two writers who work as a team.

When two names are separated by "and" that means that the writers did not collaborate as a team, but rather contributed to the script at different times during development. Perhaps one rewrote an earlier draft by the other.
The order of names indicates the weight of the writer's contribution to the final shooting script. The name that comes first contributed more.
Sometimes credit is split into "story by" and "screenplay by." The WGA defines "story" as a contribution "distinct from screenplay and consisting of basic narrative, idea, theme or outline indicating character development and action."
On a script (like Thor) that has been in development for many years or even decades, dozens of different WGA writers may be hired to work on the script at different times, but only two writers (or writing teams) can get credit. In the case of Thor, a writing team and a single writer split screenplay credit, and two writers split story credit.
When a screenplay is non-original (based on underlying material, as Thor was based on a comic book), a credited writer must have contributed 33% or more to the final shooting script. For "screenplay by" credit the writer must contribute 33% in the areas of character, structure, dialogue, and "new and original scenes."
When a screenplay is original, the first writer gets sole credit, unless a subsequent writer has contributed 50% or more to the final shooting script.
When a credit reads "written by," it means that the writer(s) is responsible for both story and screenplay. For example, on Conan The Barbarian 3D, the credits read: written by Thomas Dean Donnelly & Joshua Oppenheimer and Sean Hood. So, the writing team Donnelly & Oppenheimer share both story and screenplay credit with Sean Hood (me.)
Often final credits are determined by the WGA in a grueling and complex arbitration process. (See Screenwriting Credit System)

In the case of Thor in particular, I know that Mark Protosevich was hired by Marvel Studios to write the script in 2006, and he did another draft in 2008. However, when Kenneth Branagh was hired to direct it, other writers were hired to do rewrites. Also Thor had been "in development" since 1990, so its possible that some of the writers who worked on scripts before Protosevich were eligible for credit. Since Protosevich did not get "screenplay by" credit it seems that only some general elements of "story" remained in the final shooting scripts after many rounds of rewrites.

But who is really responsible for what? Having been through several WGA credit arbitrations (including one for Conan The Barbarian 3D) I can say that each writer may have very, very different ideas about who deserved credit for what, and who "really" wrote the script. Check out this New Yorker article on credit battles.

Also, check out this story: George Clooney was furious when the WGA decided not to award him credit on Leatherheads, a script that he claims he completely rewrote: WGA, Clooney at odds over credit

Melancholy Baby Redux

2011-05-09T08:11:00.000-07:00

For those of you who only think of me as a guy who writes about muscle men with swords, teenaged girls possessed by demons, and shy entomologists who transform into grotesque bugs, I offer you a completely different side of my filmmaking. Click HERE to watch my 14 minute short film Melancholy Baby:

Related Articles:

Which screenplays should aspiring screenwriters read?

2011-05-01T11:57:00.000-07:00

Screenwriters are filmmakers. So, in the same way that aspiring architects study buildings, aspiring screenwriters should study, first and foremost, the films themselves. A book like Screenwriting: The Sequence Approach, by Paul Gulino, has beat by beat analysis of well known movies that illustrate story structure, sequencing, plant and payoff and other techniques.

That said, there are a number of scripts that beautifully illustrate how screenwriters use the written word to indicate visuals, tone, style, pacing, structure, character, tension and action: words that define the finished movie like the lines of an architect's blueprint.

It is also very instructive to look at early drafts of screenplays to discover how the film was changed and revised during production. Sometimes brilliant scripts were made into mediocre movies. Sometimes problematic scripts were solved in the process of shooting and editing.

Here is a list of feature scripts that agents, executives, film school professors, and screenwriters themselves often cite as influential and instructive to aspiring screenwriters.

Five mainstream Hollywood scripts often cited as perfect in style, structure, content, and execution are:

Chinatown
Die Hard
Unforgiven
Groundhog Day
American Beauty

Since so many movies are adaptations, it is instructive for screenwriters to read the underlying material (usually a
novel), and then read the screenplay adaptation. Five scripts often recommended are:

Adaptation
Cider House Rules
Silence of The Lambs
The Shawshank Redemption
The English Patient

Classic Scripts most often recommended:

Treasure of The Sierra Madre
The Sweet Smell of Success
Some Like It Hot
Casablanca
His Girl Friday

Taste in indie film is more eccentric and subjective. But I would list these independent voices as instructive to ALL screenwriters:

Ronnie Rocket (unproduced script by David Lynch
Memento
Mystery Train
Lone Star
The Spanish Prisoner

There are certain celebrity screenwriters who are able to write in such a way that reading the script is an enjoyable and enlightening experience, separate from the experience of watching the film. Love them or hate them, it’s instructive to read scripts by:

Paul Shrader
William Goldman
Charlie Kaufman
Shane Black
The Coen Brothers

Female scribes are often neglected in these lists, but men and women alike can learn from the unique voices of:

Norah Ephron
Sophia Copola
Callie Khouri
Allison Anders
Diablo Cody

Here is the WGA’s list of the 101 Greatest Screenplays with links to read them:

Some recently written Hollywood scripts that have caused a stir, and are often cited as examples of the kind of style and content “that sells” are:

The Oranges, by Ian Helfer (dramedy)
Killing on Carnival Row, by Travis Beacham (fantasy)
Broken City, by Brian Tucker (Crime)
The Blade Itself (Thriller)
Bad Teacher, by Lee Eisenberg (comedy)

(However, you’ll need tomake friends with an agent, manager or film executive to get your hands on copies of the above.)

Every year “The Blacklist” is compiled by hundreds of film executives, each of whom contribute the names of up to ten of their favorite unproduced scripts of the year. 2010’s list can be found HERE:

In general, in order to getcopies of screenplays on the net, go to:

My pdf scripts

Simply Scripts

The Internet Script Database

(Also see answers to the related question: Screenwriting: Where can I download screenplays of films to read / study?)

The key is to look for EARLY DRAFTS OF THE SCREENPLAY, not just the official “shooting script” which is often a simple transcription of the finished film.

Even maverick writer-directors working outside the Hollywood system and writers who want to challenge mainstream formulas of three-act-structure, conflict-centered storytelling, and concept-driven subject matter would do well to study these scripts. A screenplay is ultimately a communication tool, like a blueprint, to be given to actors, cinematographers, production designers and editors. Even if you aspire to make movies like Tarkovsky and HATED Lethal Weapon, you can still learn from the way successful screenwriters clearly and competently convey style and cinematic action to their collaborators.

As a final note, perhaps the best place to start is to read the screenplays for a couple of your favorite films. Reading them will feel like play rather than work. And there is no faster way to learn the format and tools of the screenwriter's craft.

A Filmmaker's Life: FA Screening at Echo Park Film Center May 9th!

2011-04-23T08:24:00.000-07:00

Jacques Thelemaque puts together fantastic programs of short films. These events are a great place to hang with fellow filmmakers. A motivating and inspiring night:

A Filmmaker's Life: FA Screening at Echo Park Film Center May 9th!

TEDxUSC 2011: a filmmaker's call to Action

2011-04-13T10:59:00.000-07:00

Because I am both an alumni and a faculty member at USC's School of Cinematic Arts, I decided to attend this year's TEDxUSC 20011, which is a independent spin off of the wildly influential TED.com. Now, why would a guy who writes Hollywood action movies (Conan The Barbarian, Hercules) and horror movies (The Haunting in New York, Masters of Horror) attend a conference about science, emerging technology, music, and social advocacy? Well, what got me in the door was just raw curiosity, but I was shocked by how every speaker, whether a bio-engineer or a circus performer, had something to stay that was directly and concretely applicable to the practice of filmmaking. In fact, I'd argue that the entire conference was about creativity and storytelling... as well as the director's call to "ACTION."

Here are seven provocative and challenging ideas, or rather ACTIONS (with lots of links!) that could inspire your filmmaking.

Collaborate

Much of the conference trumpeted the power of working in groups rather than in isolation. I was inspired by playingforchange.com, which allows musicians from around the globe to play together in real time, creating ethno-cultural-musical mash ups of delightful beauty. I was intrigued by the work of Jennifer Pahlka, director of Code for America, who has assembled groups of computer-savvy millennials to find new ways for citizens to work together in online communities. Overall, I was struck by how each speaker trumpeted the creative power of groups made up of people from wildly different backgrounds and different areas of expertise.

To me this is a challenge to filmmakers to stop thinking of their "film by" credit and fantasizing about their Oscar acceptance speech, and start looking for new ways to collaborate in groups. What musician, scientist, historian, social worker, or circus performer can you work with create exciting and unexpected projects? What kind of filmmakers OUTSIDE of the Hollywood bubble can you connect with to develop strikingly original stories?

A great place for a filmmaker to start is STROOME.COM, where you can upload, edit, remix both your own footage and other footage, and join mass collaboration projects, all for FREE.

Play

Early in the conference, Dale Dougherty, founder of Make Magazine, reminded us that the fundamental drive of a creative person is just to tinker, play, and make stuff that doesn't necessarily serve any purpose what-so-ever. He showed us how to make conductors out of playdough and breathalysers out of household batteries. Amazingly, as the TEDxUSC participants learned later, this kind of childish tinkering is exactly what young bio-engineers are doing - restructuring DNA and building molecular toys at the nano-scale.

The lesson to filmmakers is to remind themselves to play. Too often we read books, go to seminars and listen to "experts" to figure out which stories to tell, how to tell them, and how to be "successful" at it. This is much like the adults who need a manual to figure out how to use their i-phones. A child just PLAYS with her phone until she figures out what to do with it, often discovering entirely unexpected ways to be creative.

With that in mind check out this short film, shot and edited on an i-phone, an i-phone that was strapped to a model train: Apple of my Eye. The point is to go out with a movie camera and just play. Play with actors. Play with editing. Play with storytelling. Don't do it for any other purpose other than to have FUN.

Hack

At the conference, Jose Antonio Rosa showed us the amazing creativity of the poor in Chile, Colombia and the Dominican Republic, who re-purpose trash and discarded objects into bells, hammocks, sculptures, and magical household appliances. Alan Horsager showed us how re-purposing the DNA of photo-sensitive algae could one day cure blindness. Rick Nahmias showed us how harvesting the oranges in your backyard in the San Fernando Valley could feed the poor. This is a generalized kind of "hacking," taking the objects in front of you and reworking and redesigning them for some surprising new purpose.

So, how can you take the common components of filmmaking (the camera, the actor, found footage) and use them in ways they haven't been used before? For example, check out The Mother of All Funk Cords, a short film and musical composition made entirely out of clips from youtube.

Curate

Every filmmaker wants to be a star. They want their film to "go viral." But one of the biggest responsibilities you have as a storyteller and an expert on cinema is to help other unknown-but-brilliant films find the light of day. Instead of spending all your time focused on self-promotion, serve your audience by helping them find the kind of films that you yourself value and aspire to make.

For inspiration check out this HILARIOUS talk and clip from Derek Stivers, How to Start a Movement. He suggests that true leadership comes NOT from the "leader," but from the first person who is brave enough to follow.

Remember that you are not just a filmmaker. You are a sophisticated film VIEWER. Instead of complaining that the masses don't understand you, have the courage to curate, and teach others how to follow great films.

Communicate

Storytelling was a big theme of TEDxUSC, not only telling our own stories, but taking the time to listen to and empathize with experiences that are not our own. By listening to stories at sites such as onevoiceatatime.org you could experience a revolution in consciousness and inspire youself to use your filmmaking skills and tools to empower those whose voices are not usually heard.

In general, Filmmakers and fans like to complain about the lack of creativity in Hollywood, while at the same time ignoring the thousands of wildly original films being made around the world outside the Hollywood bubble. The TEDxUSC conference challenged me to look to the edges and borders of the world, where the truly creative work is being done.

Change

In general, the TEDxUSC experience changed my perspective; it allowed me to step out of my little world and look at things, not as a filmmaker or screenwriter, but as a scientist, a government activist, a poor woman in central america starting a business making soap, and even a circus performer (you MUST check out Troupe Vertigo.) Dr. Jill C. Carter, director of the Center for SETI research, reminded us that we live on a tiny spec in the universe, a universe that is likely to be teaming with extra-terrestrial life. Jose Antonio Rosa reminded us that we live on one side of the "Political Equator," and that on the other side live "the other four billion" people who survive on less than two dollars a day.

The traditional perspective of Hollywood is driven by profit, competition, and top-down thinking. A little shift reminds us that the most original and groundbreaking ideas come from the bottom up. The most successful projects are done in collaboration. And the most rewarding experiences come from work done for no money at all.

Teach

Whether working with with young actors at Deb Lemen's Acting Studio, or lecturing to eager young screenwriters at USC, I love to teach. By sharing your knowledge of storytelling and filmmaking you expand your influence beyond the selfish goals of your own career, and empower others to do good work.

Take the example of Andrew McGregor, founder of The Tiziano Project, which provides training, digital video equipment, and affiliations to citizens in conflict and post-conflict areas around the globe, so that they too can tell their stories. By teaching the skills of filmmaking to others, you (yes YOU filmmaker-boy) could change the world.

Finance

Filmmaking is a kind of start-up venture, and like any start-up, it needs to be financed. Too often filmmakers go to traditional sources of financing, the studios or to independent financiers who are dubious about the risks of original ideas, or filmmakers attempt radical financing options such as "crowdfunding" that bear disappointing results. These strategies ignore the fact that 80% of the funds for most small start-ups and independent films come from friends and family. These are the same friends and family who show up on the set to do craft service and doggedly promote your film on facebook.

Wouldn't it be great if you could create a community of investors around your film? A community that would be directly involved in the production and share in the hope and excitement of its success? Wouldn't it be great if there were a simple way to structure the legalities of such a tightly knit investment community?

Take a look at PROFOUNDER.COM which offers just such a service. Don't just create a movie. Create a community and a movement around your film. This is especially exciting for anyone who is telling stories about specific ethnic, economic, or underrepresented communities - communities who would be eager to invest in stories that speak directly to them.

The Big Picture

The message of TEDxUSC for filmmakers is ultimately to move beyond the blinders of ego, celebrity, and recycled, worn-out stories. Collaborate, communicate, hack and play. Look beyond yourself for inspiration. Go forth and call "ACTION!"

Genre Hacks

Introverts in Hollywood

Brené Brown's TED Talk - For Screenwriters

Why do studios rewrite scripts after buying them?

Ken Miyamoto: How To Give Notes on A Screenplay

Technology and Science Documentary: Bear 71

Interview With Todd Farmer

Common Mistakes of the First-time Screenwriter

Ted Talks for Screenwriters and Filmmakers.

"Have You Seen Notorious?"

Converting Your Script To A Novel

Contagion 2: Sundance

Why do so many movies fail the Bechdel Test?

How To Make a Better Science Video

A Filmmaker's Life: Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 - Part 2

A Filmmaker's Life: Digital Hollywood NYC 2011 - Part 1

A Filmmaker's Life: New World Distribution in the Old World

Screenwriting means writing for anything with a Screen

An Amazon Studios Screenwriter

Screenwriting, Transmedia, and The Future of Storytelling

Advice To Those Considering A Career As A Screenwriter...

Screenwriting, Startups, and Technology: Does Your Idea Mean Nothing?

How I Spent My Day in Palo Alto

The Science and Future of 3D Films

What is the most important screenwriting tool?

“What One Learns About Film Financing From Film Financing Conferences”

VisionFest 2011: Films, Food, Drink, Fun and Christine Vachon

My Favorite Thing to Say about Hollywood

Amazon Studios: An Interview with Roy Price

Related articles

Screenwriting FAQ

Conan Interviews With Screenwriter Sean Hood

Why should we watch the new Conan the Barbarian?

Related articles

FILMMAKERS ALLIANCE NEWSLETTER #29

Conan.com Questions and Answers

Why Screenwriters and Filmmakers should join Quora

Related articles

Bad Reviews

"So What are You Working On?"

A Filmmaker's Life: Towards A Sustainable Independent Film Community

Support Truly Independent Film

Conan will be Rated-R

Is the Internet Good for Horror?

A Filmmaker's Life: THE LA FILM FESTIVAL IS HERE!!

Why We Need More, Not Fewer, Comic Book Film Adaptations

Ten Comic Books That Need Film Adaptations

A Filmmaker's Life: Our Kickstarter Campaign - Support Your Passion!

A Filmmaker's Life: A Call For Creative Invention

Untangling Writing Credits

Melancholy Baby Redux

Which screenplays should aspiring screenwriters read?

A Filmmaker's Life: FA Screening at Echo Park Film Center May 9th!

Related articles

TEDxUSC 2011: a filmmaker's call to Action