The Screenwriters League

Crazy Heart, Dull Story

2009-12-15T14:14:00.006-05:00

There’s a strong possibility that Crazy Heart will finally give the accomplished yet underrated Jeff Bridges his first Oscar. I have mixed feelings. On one hand, the fallen country star Bad Blake is tolerable because Bridges can find the humor in a lonely, pathetic situation. What’s more, he effectively balances a deteriorating physical condition with an unwavering talent. But too often the film falls back on shots of Blake’s fat gut or scenes of him weeping over broken whiskey bottles. Some will call them dull; others will call them Oscar moments.

It’s a conventional story: a broken-down drunk rides his broken-down truck through a series of small-venue bars scrounging what little cash (and ass) past fame can afford him. He meets a woman named Jean who’s way too hot for him and he’s off on the road to redemption. That Maggie Gyllenhaal - as the single-mother Jean - is about 30 years younger than Bridges is beside the point. It worked last year in The Wrestler. Marissa Tomei connected with Mickey Rourke as failed parents and through shared experiences as showpieces. It also didn’t hurt that Rourke had a six-pack.

In Crazy Heart, Jean seems to fall in love with Blake due to that undying female instinct to save a man who needs saved. That, or she possesses a crystal ball that shows Blake eventually bonding with her toddler son. Gyllenhaal gives a solid performance, but the script doesn't give her much beyond a role as Blake’s love interest. Nor does it spend enough time on the relationship between Blake and Tommy (Colin Farrell), a headliner who offers his mentor a life raft by commissioning him to write a few songs. We learn that the two had a falling out, but the rift and its speedy resolution lessens the complication.

First-time writer/director Scott Cooper reduces Jean and Tommy to stepping stones for Blake’s road to sobriety. The road offers no alternative destination and plods through several obligatory scenes, and it’s to the actors’ credit that the film remains engaging. Additionally, the original music by T-Bone Burnet and Stephen Bruton is pitch-perfect, never sounding too on the nose, compensating for lags within the story.

I am a big Jeff Bridges fan. The Dude is obviously a cultural staple, but my favorite was his high school football star in The Last Picture Show, an understated portrayal of a guy who loses his sense of masculinity. Such performances are why Bridges has remained underrated despite accruing 4 Oscar nods. He delivers again here, but it’s disappointing to see him possibly nabbing the gold for a weaker film that seems like Oscar bait.

Oh, well. As Martin Scorsese knows, sometimes Oscars are career achievement awards.

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 102 - What are you Trying to Accomplish with your Re-Write?

2009-12-14T16:38:00.000-05:00

Last week at this time, I was working on my revised first act, and it was a struggle. What I was grappling with, but perhaps hadn't really realized at the time, was that I was being asked to fix something that wasn't broken. At least not in the traditional sense.

One of the two major notes that I got from the Production Company I'm working with was that they wanted me to push the Armageddon events in my post-Apocalyptic spec up in the world's time-line. Whereas the draft they first read has an unwritten yet implied time frame and the story starts about five years after the earth was rocked by devastating events, the new draft takes place only a year or six months out. While this might not at first seem like a major change (though, there were some natural and sociological effects on the planet that I was worried would be lost), it was in fact quite a major rewrite.

I'll be honest in saying that I didn't at first see how much would be different, probably because the re-writes would all be in the details. I was free from having to make any substantial structural changes; in fact, my producer agreed that the structure would basically go untouched. What would change, though, would be almost every line of dialogue and detail within the scenes. The ways in which people would respond and think about their situation would be completely different. It was hard for me to accept that the re-writing (for once) meant not altering structure, but rather the look and feel of each scene. Like a house whose interior is being completely redesigned, but all the walls and fixtures left exactly in place, I had to go through and re-imagine everything. 

When my producer called me on Wednesday after reading the first round of "fixes" on Act One, she wasn't thrilled with the work. The changes, she rightly said, felt more like they were tacked on to an existing script, rather than integrated naturally into a new one. Her comments sunk in the next day, and I was able to give her a new 11 pages that felt much more organic, and she took to them. We agreed to go forward in that fashion, and my plan is to send her the rest of the act tonight. Sometimes, I guess, it helps the writing when you're knocked down a peg and have to figure out what you're really trying to accomplish with your revisions.

Black List '09 Released: Hollywood's Favorite Unproduced Screenplays

2009-12-11T12:34:00.001-05:00

Here you have it, folks! Hollywood development and creative executives' choices for their favorite unproduced screenplays of 2009. It's an honor for any writer to have a project on the Black List, as it gains them both industry recognition and is validation of their abilities.

Entertainment Weekly just released the following top 10, which you can find here. Nicole Sperling of EW.com writes, "This year’s list consists of 97 scripts with 311 people contributing to the ranking — up from 260 in 2008. The top 10 (actually, 11, thanks to a tie in 10th place) is filled with mostly up-and-comers, with the exception of Aaron Sorkin and David Scarpa. All of the scripts are in some stage of development around Hollywood, with two of them currently in production. Take a look and beginning stages of what will be coming to a theater near you, some day." This year's choices are:

1. The Muppet Man
By Christopher Weekes
What it’s about: The life and times of the late Jim Henson (pictured), the man behind Sesame Street and The Muppets.
What it’s like: The Andy Kaufman biopic Man on the Moon, but with puppets. This moving story depicts the life of a creative genius, with occasional surreal appearances by the likes of Kermit and Miss Piggy.
Status: Set up at The Jim Henson Co.

2. The Social Network
By Aaron Sorkin
What it’s about: Chronicles Mark Zuckerberg’s complicated journey towards creating Facebook. Sorkin depicts both the founder’s motivations for starting the largest social network in the world and the human casualties that came with his profound success.
What it’s like: The fascinating biographical elements of Shattered Glass meets the courtroom drama of Kramer vs. Kramer, without the tears. Sorkin cuts between Zuckerberg’s heated depositions with his former Harvard colleagues who claimed he stole Facebook from them and the chronological retelling of the company’s trip to becoming a billion-dollar enterprise.
Status: In production for Sony Pictures. Jesse Eisenberg plays Zuckerberg while Justin Timberlake portrays Sean Parker, one of the founders of Napster and Zuckerberg’s idol. David Fincher is directing.

3. The Voices
By Michael R. Perry
What it’s about: Jerry, a schizophrenic worker at a bathtub factory, accidentally kills an attractive woman from accounting. While trying to cover his bloody tracks, Jerry starts taking advice from his talking (and foul-mouthed) cat and dog.
What it’s like: Watching the lovable pig from Babe join forces with American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman. Some may be turned off by the script’s twisted sense of humor — Jerry has friendly conversations with his victim’s severed head — while others will get a kick out of its sheer audacity.
Status: Vertigo Entertainment is trying to package the film with a lead actor. Mark Romanek (One Hour Photo) is developing.

4. Prisoners
By Aaron Guzikowski
What it’s about: When his young daughter and her best friend vanish on Thanksgiving Day, a Christian survivalist named Keller Dover takes matters into his own hands, imprisoning and torturing a suspect whom the police have set free. But does Dover have the wrong man? And if he does, who really has his little girl?
What’s it like: Silence of the Lambs meets Mystic River. A terrifying, riveting read. Vivid, unforgettable characters, a bullet-fast plot, and scenes that mine our deepest psychological fears. Lock the doors and windows (and go to the bathroom) before turning the first page.
Status: Antoine Fuqua (Training Day) directing for Alcon Entertainment and Warner Bros.

5. Cedar Rapids
By Phil Johnston
What it’s about: Tim Lippy is a small-town insurance man who’s somehow made it to middle age without having quite done anything. Everything changes when he unexpectedly gets the chance to represent his company at the Cedar Rapids insurance convention, where comedy ensues, of course.
What it’s like: The 40-Year-Old Virgin meets Napoleon Dynamite. A sad, but not pathetic, middle-aged man comes of age in the Midwest. A speedily told story with romance and action and some legitimately funny jokes.
Status: In production, with Miguel Arteta directing and Ed Helms playing Lippy. John C. Reilly, Alia Shakwat, Anne Heche and Sigourney Weaver co-star.

6. Londongrad
By David Scarpa (The Day The Earth Stood Still and co-wrote The Last Castle)
What it’s about: An adaptation of Alan Cowell’s 2008 book The Terminal Spy: A True Story of Espionage, Betrayal and Murder, chronicling the life and strange death of Alexander Litvinenko. Remember in 2006, when that ex-Soviet spy was allegedly poisoned with radioactive tea at a London sushi joint? That’s him.
What it’s like: The script evokes Born of the Fourth of July, Silkwood, and Robert DeNiro’s history-of-the-CIA saga The Good Shepherd — but in Russia, with spies. Using Litvinenko’s final days as a framing device, Scarpa’s script flashes back to pivotal passages of Alexander’s adult life: training and serving as a KGB agent; trying to staunch the growing influence of Russian mobs as a Russian super-cop after the fall of Communism; and boldly deciding to publicly accuse his superiors of trying to assassinate a Russian business tycoon, as well as facilitating the rise of Russian president Vladimir Putin through acts of terrorism.
Status: Warner Bros. has optioned the script.

7. L.A.Rex
By Will Beall (based on his novel of the same name)
What it’s about: Rookie LAPD officer Ben Halloran gets partnered with scarred and tobacco-spitting Officer Marquez, and the unlikely team hit the streets of L.A. on the brink of a gang-rivalry explosion. Amid run-ins with the Mexican mafia, brutal gang murders, and corrupt cops, we soon find that Halloran may not be as squeaky clean as his brand new badge.
What it’s like: Training Day combined with the brutal violence of The Departed. L.A. Rex is as much a cop story as it is a graphic portrait of underground crime in Los Angeles.
Status: Paramount Pictures has optioned on behalf of producer Scott Rudin.

8. Desperados
By Ellen Rapoport
What it’s about: Wesley Robbins, a 30-something single attorney with an unhealthy obsession with coupling up, thinks she’s found the perfect man. But when he doesn’t call for days after the first time they sleep together she freaks out and sends him a scathing email, only to learn he’s been laid up in a Mexican hospital with some broken bones. On a whim, she and her girlfriends travel down south to erase the email before she ruins what she believes could be her one true love.
What it’s like: The Hangover meets The Sweetest Thing, but in a good way. This equal parts raunchy and sweet script has LOL moments and the potential to be a big hit, especially with audiences loving movies today with complicated female protagonists.
Status: Isla Fisher is attached to star with Mark Gordon and Jason Blum producing at Universal

9. The Gunslinger
By John Hlavin
What it’s about: When a Texas Ranger is horrifically tortured and killed, his sharp-shooter older brother, Sam Lee Hensley, plots revenge against the mysterious, sadistic leader of a notorious drug cartel. Sam Lee’s quest for vengeance will cost him seven years in prison, his right hand and one eye. It will imperil his young nephew and wreak havoc on the lives of those who love him. And it will not bring him peace.
What it’s like: No Country For Old Men fused with Death Wish, graced by the melancholy of Unforgiven. Violent, macho, and action-packed, it’s as fun as a Dirty Harry script, but the remorse and grief of the central character linger long after the final gunshot.
Status: Warner Bros. and Andrew Lazar producing

10. (tie) By Way of Helena
By Matt Cook
What it’s about: Set in the south at the turn of the century, Texas Ranger David Kingston and his Mexican bride are sent down to the mysterious town of Helena to investigate the multiple Mexican bodies washing up in the river. What they discover is an idyllic-like town where everything is not as it seems.
What it’s like: Pleasantville meets High Noon where dueling-pistol showdowns take on a whole new meaning and the definitions of righteousness and morality are twisted into unrecognizable concepts.
Status: Purchased by Russian filmmaker-producer Sergei Bodrov (Kavkazskiy plennik)
10. (tie) The Days Before
By Chad St. John
What’s it about: A man from the future keeps hopping one successive day into the past desperate to stop a vicious race of time-traveling aliens from wiping out humanity.
What’s it’s like: This lightning-paced, time-travel adventure is Back to the Future meets Independence Day meets Demolition Man accompanied with a gargantuan production budget.
Status: Warner Bros. has optioned it and a few big-time action directors have circled it but no one is yet attached.
(Reported by Sean Smith, Adam Vary, Jeff Jensen, Josh Rottenberg, Paige Parker and Chau Tu)

UPDATE: Nikki Finke has the full list here (this includes all selections, in addition to those that ranked 1 through 10.

From the official Black List blog, here's how a script goes about getting on the Black List:

On November 6 executives at Hollywood film studios and production companies are asked to submit the names of no more than ten screenplays with the following characteristics:

1. They love the script

2. The script was written, or somehow came to the collective conscience of the Hollywood community, in that calendar year.

3. The film version of the screenplay will not be in theaters before December 31, 2009

Immediately after voting closes on November 20 those submissions are tabulated. The scripts are ranked by the total number of votes. In 2008, a script needed at least four mentions to be included on the list.

So there you have it. Congratulations to all 2009 Black Listers.

Cake Man's List for the Top 10 Movies of the Decade - part 2

2009-12-10T15:49:00.001-05:00

As promised, here are my choices for Top Ten of the Decade numbers 5 through 1.

5. THE WRESTLER (2008). The Wrestler caught me completely by surprise. I had an opportunity to attend an advance screening, which was followed by a Q&A with director Darren Aronofsky. As a major fan of Requiem for a Dream (coughNumberThreecough), I went mostly for the chance to hear him talk. What I got from the viewing by itself was more value from the experience than I had hoped to get from the night.

It’s not often that I feel as though a drama has just hit me in the gut. Most dramas that don’t easily fall prey to obvious melodrama (and those are few and far between) tend to get weighed down by their characters’ obstacles, emotions, or the director and/or screenwriter’s goals. As a viewer, it’s easy to guess what’s coming around the corner or to feel let down by events that you know will happen. The Wrestler surprised me on multiple occasions. When Mickey Rourke’s The Ram – his professional wrestler alias – suffers a heart attack and is told he has to get out of the ring, that’s immediately what he does. I’ve been so accustomed to characters always acting in their own worst interest in dramas that I was taken aback by his health-conscious decision. But that did more than surprise me; it got me on board with the protagonist. Here’s a guy who is just trying to keep himself going (physically, emotionally, mentally) that we want to see him succeed. When he fails and is upset, we’re upset. When he’s happy, we’re right there with him. The Wrestler culminates in one of the most poignant, touching, and memorable scenes I’ve seen in years, and probably longer than that if you only consider movies I’ve seen in theatres. It was a punch to the gut that floored me – in a good way – and instantly cemented itself on this list the moment the credits rolled.

4. MAN ON FIRE (2004). Man on Fire, starring Denzel Washington and directed by Tony Scott, is not only a revenge thriller, to me, it is one of the definitive revenge thrillers. Set in Mexico City, a city rampant with kidnappings, the film stars Washington as ex-mercenary John Creasy, an alcoholic former warrior who is deeply haunted by the ghosts of his past. When a business man (Marc Anthony) hires Creasy in what promises to be an easy job protecting his daughter, Pita, Creasy finds himself growing unexpectedly attached to the girl in his care. Therefore, when Pita is kidnapped and apparently killed in a kidnapping gone awry (one that leads Creasy to multiple injuries), war is on.

Man on Fire had to be on this list, because it’s something that I can watch almost any time of day. If I’m sitting at home channel surfing, and this happens to come across the screen, I’ll stop and watch – at least for twenty minutes. This movie is more than just a good revenge flick, though. (That said, anyone looking to make a Punisher or Taken or The Brave One should watch Man on Fire. A lot.) The acting is incredibly solid. The relationship between Creasy and Pita feels natural with very little of the almost requisite cheese. Of course, the action and “I’m gonna kill them all” attitude is explosive (sometimes literally). On top if it all, the soundtrack, which includes the ever beautiful vocal work by Lisa Gerrard, is stirring. At almost two and a half hours, Man on Fire isn’t short, yet the running time never once deters me from throwing this into the DVD player. At the end of the day, I think that it’s the mix of incredibly strong action with at times quite moving emotion that earns Man on Fire a high spot on my list.

3. REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (2000). Talk about a difficult watch. Darren Aronofsky’s second film on this list (hmmm… a pattern, perhaps?) is perhaps the most visually stunning films about drug addiction that’s ever been made. It’s also one of the least compromising. So filled with imagery and stories about the horrors that drug addiction can lead to is Requiem for a Dream that I honestly believe it should be shown in high school health classes. If ever there was a movie that turned me off to drugs, this was it.

Jennifer Connelly and Jared Leto play Marion and Harry, a young couple deeply in love and enjoying their life together. Their friend Tyrone (an amazing job by Marlon Wayans – one of the only things I’ve liked a Wayans brother in) and Harry’s mother Sara (Ellen Burstyn), round out their happy little family. Over the course of the 102 minute runtime, all four key characters go from happy go luck to deeply troubled (and in trouble), all because of drugs. Harry and Tyrone’s pot use leads to dealing and to heroine addiction. Marion’s demons drive her to whoring herself out for toxins, and Sara’s addiction to medication (which have been overprescribed to her) land her mentally crippled in a hospital. What’s most amazing to me is how much I feel for all of these characters every time I watch the film and how beautiful the finished product is. Requiem is unquestionable evidence that Aronofsky knows how to set up a shot and tell a compelling story. This choice, along with The Wrestler (not surprisingly) is one of the most dramatic films on my top 10 list, and it never fails to move me. While not one that I can watch over and over due to the incredibly heavy content, Requiem for a Dream in infinitely rewarding each time I do decide to embark upon it again.

2. TSOTSI (2005) South African. Full disclosure: I love South Africa. I’ve been there twice now, and I hope to have a home there some day. That said, I can’t remember how I first heard about the 2005 Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Language Film. I think I might have watched it on an airplane to South Africa. Whatever the case might be, I was instantly taken with Tsotsi. “Tsotsi” means “thug” and is the protagonist’s street name in the stirring film about a street tough who carjacks a car, shooting the female passenger in the process, only to discover the woman’s baby in the back seat shortly thereafter. Set in the shantytowns of Johannesburg and directed by Gavin Hood (who would go on to be involved in the problematic Wolverine Origins), Tsotsi is ultimately about redemption.

As a human being, Tsotsi is trouble. Not only does he unflinchingly paralyze a woman while stealing her car, but he beats one of his own friends to a bloody pulp. However, we also get the sense that he’s someone who wants to change; only he doesn’t know how. The baby that winds up in his care becomes that opportunity for him, one that he truly begins to reform for. Like many of the films on this list, Tsotsi has a great soundtrack. South African native singer Zola adds a number of tracks, while Mark Kilian and Paul Hepker contribute the more melodic tracks featuring Vusi Mahlasela. The final scene in the film is also undeniably the most powerful, and the stirring vocal work elevates the last beat to great filmmaking. If you haven’t seen Tsotsi, please do yourself a favor and do so. Though the realistic portrait of life in Johannesburg can be difficult to take at times, the film transcends the culture gap and earns itself a top spot on any list of notable movies. It is touching, moving, and very pretty – both on the eyes and the ears.

1. GLADIATOR (2000). “And the Oscar goes to…” Gladiator blew my mind when I saw it in theaters as a high-schooler. The action not only looked amazing on the big screen, it deserved the big screen. For 2 and a half hours, I sat, jaw open, eyes wide as Maximus fought his way through gladiator after gladiator to the evil emperor. I was riveted, and it is because I’m still riveted every time I watch Gladiator to this day that it’s my favorite movie of the past decade.

As a pretentious film student going to college in New York City, I felt I had to hide my love for this movie. Sure, it won the Academy Award and was frequently referenced in film texts and magazines, but it was a big-budget action movie. It didn’t have subtitles or black and white art shots or unknown actors or achingly dark portrayals of a modern family at the brink of destruction. Therefore, it was wrong to love. One day, though, I realized that none of that mattered. Every time I channel surfed and found Gladiator, my plans were set. If I was staying in on a Friday or Saturday night with nothing to do, I would pop Gladiator in and be good to go. More than that, I studied Gladiator for its structure and dialogue, since it presented itself as the perfect learning tool for a number of scripts I was working on. When I’m not watching it, I still allow it to influence me audibly – I listen to the soundtrack (more Lisa Gerrard) while writing pretty regularly. Ridley Scott knows how to make a movie, that’s not up for debate. When he got a hold of David Franzoni’s script, he turned out one of the best epics in recent decades and reinvigorated Hollywood’s interest in a period long-forgotten by filmmakers. Gladiator is worth studying, worth watching, and worth loving. I’m so glad that Maximus killed that pretentious film student that was afraid to love this movie and freed the writer who was willing to embrace it. Yes, Sir Ridley Scott, to answer Maximus’ question, I am entertained.

So there you have it, my top 10... er 11. Just a few fun connections to point out:

                1. Heath Ledger – The Dark Knight and Brokeback Mountain
                2. Lisa Gerrard on Soundtrack – Gladiator and Man on Fire
                3. Directed by a Scott Brother – Gladiator and Man on Fire
                4. Directed by Darren Aronofsky – The Wrestler and Requiem for a Dream
                5. Mickey Rourke – The Wrestler and Man on Fire

And finally, here are a few films not in the top 10 (or even top 20 necessarily) that I just wanted to point out for various reasons or elements: HALF NELSON for a great scene; MEMENTO for a really original way to tell a story; WALL-E and TRIPLETS OF BELLVILLE for great (and very dialogue free) animated films; MONGOL for a wonderful and gorgeous epic; HEAD-ON a German Turkish film that's a great look into another culture; UNBREAKABLE for an amazing twist (what can I say, I'm a comic book fan); and LOVE LIZA for great writing and superb performances by Philip Seymour Hoffman and Kathy Bates.

Cake Man's List for the Top 10 Movies of the Decade

2009-12-08T21:41:00.004-05:00

Inspired by Backer, I've decided to include my picks for the Top Ten Films of the Decade. This isn't my list for what I think are the ten most technically successful films, but rather my favorite ones, the ones I've watched the most or enjoyed my most. It's an odd list; some of the choices even surprised me. Anyway, without further delay, here are choices 10 through 6 (5 though 1 coming on Thursday).

10. THEY CAME BACK (2004) French, a.k.a. Les Revenants. Even I was a bit surprised when this made it onto my list, but I knew it belonged because I just couldn’t feel comfortable with it being relegated to the runner up section. A little seen film (to my knowledge), it tells the story of a small French town that suddenly has to deal with the unexplained return of all its recent dead. A zombie movie in the least conventional sense, the dead in They Came Back are thinking beings that retain a number of the memories of their past life. They recognize their loved ones and do their best to return to daily life, even going so far as to taking up their old jobs. Nearly a fifth the town’s population is made up of the returned deceased, and while all seems right on the surface, just the slightest bit of observation shows that it’s not. The dead aren’t nearly as smart or capable of independent living as they were when they were alive, but their defects don’t stop the flood of painful emotions that their loved ones experience upon suddenly having their wives, husbands, parents, and children back from the grave. Before the shock of having deceased family members back has subsided, it becomes obvious that the dead have their own agenda, though what it is is unclear.

Every time I rewatch They Came Back, I’m reminded of how slow portions of it are. Its 103 minute runtime definitely drags in places. However, I can’t stop it from popping into my mind every now and then. Though I think the film could have done more to explore the “what if” scenario of having your loved ones return (semi-amicably) from the dead, I think that They Came Back does a great job at least probing the question, and it gets me thinking enough to earn a spot at number ten.

9. Stranger Than Fiction & Wristcutters: A Love Story (both 2006). Ok, I cheated a bit, but I had too hard a time choosing between these two to bump either rout of the running. Stranger Than Fiction is probably the smartest film I’ve seen Will Ferrell star in. It was also one of the most refreshingly clever films I saw while in school. Will Ferrell plays an IRS agent who suddenly begins hearing a voice (Emma Thompson), which narrates his life and informs him that he’s unaware that he’s going to die soon. It turns out that the voice he hears belongs to a novelist who has invented a character that is Ferrell – from his name and job down to his every move. With the notice of his impending death looming over his head, Ferrell casts off his rigid, IRS agent lifestyle, and makes time for life, excitement, and love.

It’s hard for me to put my finger on Stranger Than Fiction’s appeal to me, but the voiceover and Ferrell’s response to it, the unfolding love story between an IRS agent and a hippie baker delinquent on her taxes (played by Maggie Gyllenhaal), and the literary references and intelligence from writer Zach Helm all come together beautifully. Will this go down as a classic? No, probably not. It’s more likely to be forgotten. But the strong performances, excellent comedic timing (Dustin Hoffman is hilarious as a literary professor who Ferrell turns to for help and guidance – his advice is to go ahead and die, since Ferrell is living the author’s masterpiece), and the smart, smart writing earn Stranger Than Fiction a (shared) ninth spot.

Wristcutters: A Love Story is another off-beat comedy with somewhat dark subject matter. Patrick Fugit plays Zia, a young man whose disappointments and boredom in life have driven him to suicide. After killing himself (during the opening credits), Zia winds up in a purgatory of sorts populated only by suicide victims in an afterlife that is “like life, only worse.” The suicides wind up in a New Mexico-esque desert that’s unending in every direction. Soon, Zia – who is stuck working a crappy job at Kamikaze Pizza – befriends Eugene, an Eastern European failed rocker who lives with his entire immediate family. When Zia finds out that his girlfriend (a large factor in his suicide) has also offed herself, he and Eugene hit the road to find her.

Wristcutter’s charm is in its off-beat humor and the close, real connections that develop between its characters. At its core, this is a road buddy movie mixed with a romantic comedy. Of course, there’s another girl and that leads to the inevitable realization that what we once had might not be what’s best for us now. While nothing groundbreaking there, perhaps, Wristcutter’s real strength is the new approach it takes in creating worlds and embedding an element of the paranormal and the offbeat. Eugene’s car has a giant void under the passenger’s seat, which transports anything dropped on the floor to a different dimension (a gag that remarkably doesn’t get old). Most characters Zia meets along the way are accompanied by a flashback showing how they got to the suicide world. This is a smart, fun, and certainly rewatchable film. And, perhaps surprisingly, it generates enough discussion and deeper thinking about the “what ifs” associated with it to keep it alive after the final credits role.

8. Sunshine (2007). The sun is dying. This is true. Of course, none of us will be alive to experience the effects that will have on the Earth. In Sunshine, though, the sun’s life is rapidly fading, and with it, goes any hope of survival. Cillian Murphy plays Capa, part of a team of scientists charged with taking a year and a half long flight across the solar system on a mission to reignite the sun. They’re actually the second team to embark on this perilous quest, as the first one mysteriously went off the grid a couple years ago. Stranded in space, millions and millions of miles from earth, they have nowhere to turn if things begin to go wrong. And, because they’re millions and millions of miles from earth on a mission that determines the fate of all life on the planet, things inevitably begin to go wrong.

I’m not an overwhelmingly huge sci-fi fan, but Sunshine is hands down one of my favorite recent films. The allure of the planets, stars, sun, and solar system that my pre-K teachers instilled in me still hasn’t worn off, so Sunshine instantly gets bonus points for placing me in the middle of it all. (There is actually only one, very short scene that takes place on earth. The rest of the movie is either set on the ship, just outside the ship, or in very close proximity to the ship. It’s dark. It’s space. It’s a giant void. And it works perfectly.) The movie also begins to shift from pure sci-fi (think 2001 but more active) to a bit more comic-booky at the end. Granted, those two are not often unrelated, but that’s the feeling I get when watching Sunshine. It’s also a great example of post-apocalyptic or other heightened disaster scenario films (one I’ve actually used with my producer and manager). The audience is never told why the sun is about to burn out in 2050; we’re simply told that it is going to happen and we’re on board from there. Sunshine is fun, smart, and engaging. Director Danny Boyle recently made a major splash with Slumdog Millionaire (and he was unquestionably a big presence before that, too), but I wonder if even he has forgotten about this one. Having earned just barely $32 million worldwide (not even 3.7 domestic), Sunshine was by no means a hit. Except, of course, with me that is.

7. The Dark Knight (2008). Since everyone in the world saw this movie three times (in theaters), I think I can bypass the quick synopsis. For me, The Dark Knight has an instant, undeniable bias that propels it toward the top of my favorites list – full disclosure: I am a HUGE Batman fan. By that, I mean that I have over 150 Batman trades (most of which I got for free… I promise). I love Batman like Onyx loves Predator, UFOs, and ninjas combined. So, when Chris Nolan – whose Batman Begins was hard not to include on this list – made one of the darkest, most chaotic Batman anythings last year, I was hooked. The heart of The Dark Knight, of course, is Heath Ledger’s creepy and devilishly, successfully heinous Joker. Every minute mannerism, tick, and blink conveyed an infinitely deep, disturbed persona belonging to someone who had no end to the joy that he derived from generating chaos and fear. The Joker was brilliant as an antagonist, driving the protagonist so close to the breaking point that not only the audience, but the protagonist himself begins to doubt that victory is possible. Heath Ledger’s performance and the Nolan brother’s script instantly places the Joker among the ranks of the best on-screen villains ever, and the sense of overwhelming chaos and futility that the film exudes is almost palpable.

As much as I love The Dark Knight, I should admit that my first reaction to it was split. On the one hand, I had found a new favorite villain and dreamed of the day that a character I write can stand up next to the Joker and attain the same levels of cinematic infamy. On the other hand, there were certain elements that just didn’t work for me. Gordon’s “death” for example never seemed to fit in as anything other than a red herring for the audience. I didn’t and still don’t feel that was earned in the movie. It didn’t seem natural or to work, technically. The more I think about The Dark Knight, though, and the more times I rewatch it, the less those unsuccessful elements matter. In the end, when the fat is boiled away, what’s left is a thrilling, fast, gripping action film that’s smart and has one of the best villains of the past decade, and many might say, of movie history.

6. Brokeback Mountain (2005). When Ang Lee’s multi-Oscar winning Brokeback Mountain first came out, it earned a lot of buzz as one of the first (and certainly more successful) mainstream Hollywood films about an openly gay couple. Lee didn’t shy from his subject matter, and he didn’t expect the audience to, either. With beautiful, heart-breaking performances by Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger, the film embraced its subject matter with fully formed, believable characters. Add to it Gustavo Santaolalla’s score, the supporting performances, desolate setting, and deliberate pacing, the nuances and often subtle gestures throughout the film make for an amazing final product.

Of course, the first reaction to Brokeback was often that it’s the “gay cowboy movie.” I remember being annoyed by the audience I saw it with, an audience that seemed to have no appreciation for the depths of the film, but was rather there to giggle uncomfortably at the sight of two grown men kissing passionately. It doesn’t take much, though, to recognize what Brokeback Mountain really is. Sure, the love story is between two men. But, at its core, that’s what it is. A love story. Universal in the emotions and complications that come with loving another human being, Jack and Ennis experience a love so rife with obstacles that it becomes impossible. The times they live in, the people in their world, their jobs and lifestyles, and even their own stubbornness all conspire to keep these two soul mates apart. Ledger’s performance as the softspoken Ennis Del Mar is one of the most moving I’ve seen on the screen. He yearns for nothing more than to take a chance on the life that Gyllenhaal’s Jack proposes they share, but he cannot allow himself to do so. At the end, when he holds the late Jack’s bloodied shirt to himself and utters those three simple words, “Jack, I swear,” we know that he’s aware his only chance for happiness is gone forever. One of the most devastating and honest love stories, Brokeback Mountain is sure to live past this decade and survive the test of time.

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 101 - Revised First Act on a Blank Deadline

2009-12-07T15:16:00.000-05:00

Because the development deal I've entered into is for no money, there aren't any official deadlines or time frames on either party's part. I can take as much time as I need to in order to rewrite the script (though it's in my best interest to work quickly), and the Production Company I'm working with has as much time after I turn in the revised script to decide what if anything they want to do with that. This scenario is both good and bad.

On the one hand, as I said, I have the time to think things out and really make sure that every word I put down on the page belongs there. At the same time, though, I'm acutely aware that the opportunity handed to me is rare and that I really have to nail it, and do so professionally. People's retention spans are only so long, and since there's no financial pressure on the part of the Production Company, if I fade too far from sight, I might not be able to get back. That is why when it was suggested that I turn in a revised first act a week or two after my last development call (which was just before Thanksgiving), I got back into the swing of things immediately.

Normally, I'm not a big fan of outlines. Well, I should clarify. I truly believe in the benefits of outlining; I just find actually sitting down and writing an outline to be an incredibly difficult task. Of course, this is because outlining means figuring out the skeleton of your story, while sometimes allowing wiggle room and natural changes later on during the actual writing process. With doing these re-writes, though, I knew that in order to get this script into the hands of people willing to pay me for it, I had to take the outlining and re-writing incredibly seriously. The result - I wound up spending more time on the outline than I had expected, almost a week past when I intended to begin reworking Act One.

The changes to the first act so far have not been very extensive. Structurally, the first 25 pages are essentially unchanged. It's in the dialogue and the visuals that certain tweaks have been made. However small they may seem, I hope that my producer (who I emailed the pages to last night) feels that they do the trick. In reality, it probably won't be until I've had a chance to move from outline to actual writing of Act Two that I'll better know whether Act One is working. Either way, I'm eager to get into Act Two and do some major re-writing (it's almost like writing a new script)!

Should you Bother with Brothers?

2009-12-04T11:39:00.000-05:00

Even before it was released, Jim Sheridan's BROTHERS was getting buzz as a potential Oscar contender. A remake of a 2004 Danish film by the same name (only... in Danish), Brothers tells the tale of two, you guessed it, brothers, played here by Jake Gyllenhaal and Tobey Maguire.

Tommy Cahill (Gyllenhaal) is newly out of jail right around the same time that his brother Sam (Maguire) is shipping off to Afghanistan for the second time. Aimless and at odds with his father (played by Sam Shepard), Tommy seems to drag baggage and hostility wherever he goes. He's clearly in need of a second chance, and he gets that when Sam's helicopter is shot down and the marine goes missing, presumed dead.

Brothers isn't a war movie, or even very political despite the nature of the characters' lifestyles. Rather, it's a family drama about what happens when Grace, a mother and wife (played by the ever more attractive Natalie Portman) loses her husband, yet gains his brother. Tommy becomes surrogate dad to his nieces in Sam's absence, and we're left to see whether or not he'll also become a surrogate lover for Grace. While these relationships are developing, we see Sam doing everything he can to be strong while suffering torture and torment at the hands of his Afghan captors.

It's hard to deny that the cast and crew put everything they could into this film, which is why it's unfortunate to have to admit that I just was not that into it. Portman, Gyllenhaal, and Maguire all do incredibly strong work, but it's in a film that seemed to lack the necessary sparks that make an alright movie great. The big beats - news about Sam's death, for example - went the more subtle, quietly dramatic route. Presumably, Sheridan directed his cast this way to avoid cliche and over-the-top melodrama, but I found myself wanting more out of these moments than I got. While watching, I was fully aware that Sam was alive and would be returning to his family soon, and the characters seemed aware of it, as well. Grace refuses to believe that her husband is dead due to her wife's intuition, but as a viewer I felt that I was just killing time with her until Sam showed up again.

There are so many character evolutions that have to take place over the course of the film, that a few of them were rushed to me. Tommy and Grace go from disliking one another, yet standing one another as far as family goes, to appearing the perfect (albeit platonic) couple in really very little time - both on screen and within the world of the film. Sam is not gone for too long a time, yet Grace and Tommy seem to grapple with, accept, and move on from his death in that short window. (Of course, to say they overcame his death completely is to simplify things, but the acceptance and moving on phases seemed to come particularly quickly.) I'm aware that the timeline of the film was an important part, yet Portman's Grace is played with a subtlety that left me wanting a bit more, which is how I felt about the film overall.

Would I bother with Brothers knowing what I do if I hadn't seen it yet? Maybe as a DVD rental, but I'd rather spend the $12.50 on dinner or a different movie.

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 100 – Analyzing Films as Guidance

2009-11-30T18:14:00.002-05:00

One of the first things that we were taught to do in our Dramatic Writing department at school was to analyze scripts and films as a way to help us in our own development. With classic examples such as Casablanca, our professors tried to lay down a solid foundation of story structure and character development for us. This was a tool more frequently used in the early years of our college careers. Later – though professors did occasionally still screen movies for us to study – these skills were ones we were supposed to use increasingly outside the classroom. 

Whenever I see a movie, at least for the first act of it, I try to split my viewing into two modes: entertainment and study. It’s hard to do both simultaneously, as a particularly entertaining movie can cause me to forget to study it (the same can be said for an excruciatingly u-entertaining movie). Throw in a few screenplays that I’ll read here or there, and I like to think that I do a fair share of studying. However, it’s not an exercise that a screenwriter can ever do too much of, and I’ve done a lot of it for my post-Apocalyptic spec recently.

I’ve been concentrating heavily on re-working my second act, as that’s where most of the notes I’ve gotten have been. Act Two is almost any writer’s big nightmare, and I’m certainly no exception. Pages 60-70 have got to be the worst ten pages I ever have to write. Luckily, the script I’m working on is main-stream enough that there are a number of great examples out there for me to study. Most recently, I’ve re-watched MINORITY REPORT and CHINATOWN (taking notes the whole time), and have archived notes from a viewing of CHILDREN OF MEN not too many months ago. When watching these, focusing primarily on Act Two, I try to break down the structure. Where does the protagonist go at the end of Act One? What info does he get there, and how does that lead him to his next location?

CHILDREN OF MEN and MINORITY REPORT were both pretty easy. They each featured six of seven main beats throughout Act Two in which their protagonists went from point A to B to C (etc.) gathering bits of pieces along the way. Virtually every big beat came with action and some sort of reveal. CHINATOWN had a lot more shorter beats, with info coming in fast and furious. (I don’t know if this is because CHINATOWN is much older than the others, or if the other two just fit more stylistically, but it was interesting to compare them.) Having already seen all three movies, focusing while in study mode was much easier. 

Whatever the reason for the differences and similarities, I already found myself coming up with more streamlined solutions to some of the problems I have to address. Reconceived scenes in which the protagonist had to witness someone’s treachery were quickly tweaked to place him in immediate peril as a result of those betrayals. The other characters’ actions continually turn our hero’s world upside down, leading him on a number of quests to find out what is really going on. Of course, in studying these other films, I have to be sure not to adhere too closely to their structure, or my script will be little more than a combination of them. Still, studying other movies is a great practice, and one all writers should do as often as possible.

Happy Thanksgiving

2009-11-26T11:07:00.000-05:00

From all of us here at The League, happy Thanksgiving and happy writing!

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 99 - Attacking Act Two (Again)

2009-11-24T13:51:00.000-05:00

Five more weeks left to go in the year. Can that really be right? My calendar seems to indicate it is. Of course, these five weeks are almost a cheat. I think I'll be at work for maybe 3 and a half of them. That means, with vacations and in irregular schedule, I will have to work extra hard to maintain a regular writing routine. Unlike many years, though, this one demands a routine.

In accepting a recent offer to do development work for a large Production Company on my post-Apocalyptic spec, I have been given notes and a new direction to take the material in, but have no official timeline in which to do all that. Granted, the market will determine a bit about when we take the script out to studios (the other factor is the head producer's enthusiasm about the material). The holidays are a tricky time. Development (where not intentionally frozen) tends to stop a couple weeks into December. A lot of people are gone for Thanksgiving around now, and when they come back, they're close to dry on funds. So December is a relatively slow development month. Not a lot of sales being made then, which means not a lot of pressure on me to have the script all polished and ready to go then, either.

That said, I think the unspoken hope is that I'll have this draft done and ready to go early into January, so that we can be at the head of the sale season again. Also, the sooner I get it ready, the sooner the next step of my career can begin. So there's a clear incentive on my end, as well. What's there to hold me back, you ask? Act Two. The Dreaded Act Two, as we refer to it here at the League.

The majority of notes I got required a huge overhaul of Act Two. Despite three years out of school and three and a half in school, Act Two is still pretty problematic for me. I think I stared at a blinking cursor on a blank page more in the past two weeks while trying to figure out Act Two than I have in the past two years. Sure, I've made some breakthroughs, but it's tough. I know what my character's goals and obstacles are, where he is and where he has to go, but it's just difficult letting the pieces come together. Or is it more that I'm forcing them to come together? I've even determined roughly how many pages I'm completely writing from the ground up again, then evaluating what they used to do - all the while reminding myself that the new ones will be completely different - in an attempt to work Act Two. The key to Act Two, of course, is Act One. But that's not changing too wildly.

Anyway, I know what I have to do (stop procrastinating for one) and hope to come out of Thanksgiving weekend with that outline in hand. Act Two... One day I hope we can be friends.

Technical Difficulties

2009-11-23T11:22:00.000-05:00

We just wanted to apologize for the blog's appearance right now. We're not quite sure why the formatting has switched around, but we're trying to fix it. Please bear with us.

Or, as Zombie says, "Sorry our blog is fugly."

The League Interviews - Filmmaker Christopher Golon

2009-11-20T15:20:00.008-05:00

The League recently had the opportunity to watch independent filmmaker Christopher Golon's feature film, KNOCK 'EM DEAD, KID. Knock 'Em Dead, Kid follows Bret, a young man hoping to make it as a filmmaker through the summer leading up to his departure for college. With his friends in tow, Bret faces hurdles from all directions - a new girl who disrupts his long-term relationship with his girlfriend, a friend's arrest for drug dealing, and assault charges - as he struggles to shed the skin of his small home town and make something of himself.

Shot on a shoestring budget, KNOCK 'EM DEAD, KID is a lesson in independent filmmaking. The League had a chance to ask writer/director Christopher Golon a bit about his film and his background.

First, Chris, we wanted to thank you for taking some time to talk with The Screenwriters League about your feature film, Knock ‘Em Dead, Kid. To kick things off, why don't you tell us a bit about your background as a filmmaker - where you went to school, what got you interested in making movies, and where it all began for you.

It all began when I was a kid, I was 7 and my family and I had basic cable - one weekend we got a free weekend of ‘The Movie Channel.’ After that weekend, we got ‘The Movie Channel’ and my brother and I would spend hours watching whatever was on. We were both hooked, hooked on that channel. We watched everything we were allowed to (R rated movies were off limits) and sometimes we would sneak the R rated stuff. This really helped to get me into loving movies. But I thought that was that - I wanted to be a pro baseball player, who doesn’t, right?

I never really looked into making movies, not until about 8 months after graduating from high school. I had read about film schools so I looked into what schools were the best, but first I decided to enroll in a university closer to me, to knock out the general education credits, and then transfer. Thus began the long, strange road, which continues to this day.

So, my plan was to end up at USC. Being young and naive, my plan was good in theory but then I learned that I really couldn't afford, even with loans, to attend USC. The killer for me was that I was accepted to USC, not the film program, but the university itself and I just couldn't afford it.

After that, I needed a new plan of attack. I had done a lot of reading about filmmaking and trying to break in to Hollywood so I decided to try and write my way in, as everything I read mentioned that it was an easier route. So, I got my pen and my notebook and the writing began. Looking back now, my first few scripts are awful, just awful. But at the time, I though they were great, oscar worthy, like Ralphie in ‘A Christmas Story.’ But in retrospect, I didn’t understand how to write dialogue.

So, with more time came a better understanding, and in 2001, I finally had a screenplay good enough that it was optioned by a Producer in LA. This experience was a huge, huge learning experience. I learned how the whole Hollywood system really worked. And how scripts can be taken away from the writer, mismanaged, and how writing isn’t very fun. Over time, the deal fell through, and after that, I realized that I needed to try and make my own films. This was I was in control - but if only I could find a producer...so I continued on with my writing and between the years 2002-2004, I had the privilege of dealing with managers and entertainment attorneys and I generated some minor interest in one of my scripts but nothing ever came of it. Besides the scripts I had for sale, I had my pet project ‘Knock ‘Em Dead, Kid’ that I wanted to make but I never showed this to anyone, not even as a spec, I was too protective of it.

So where did the idea for Knock ‘Em Dead, Kid come from? Was this a long time in the making? Talk a bit about your writing process and how long it took you to achieve the final draft of the script. How do you get in-the-zone when you write?

The original idea for ‘Knock’ came from a mix of real life and reel life. I took elements of my life, my friends lives, and mixed it with cinema - the only problem was - I added scenes with guns and knives, scenes that couldn’t have been more false. I mean, I dealt with violence growing up, I went to a tough middle school, very tough, but I somehow avoided most of the trouble directly. So, I had this script which was about 110 pages and it felt more reel than real.

I read an article in which a filmmaker, I don’t remember his name, stated that younger filmmakers/writers should write what they know - not ‘hip-hop gangster scripts’ dealing with guns and situations they know nothing about. That started the wheels turning and I decided to overhaul the script.

The script was tweaked, rewritten, and changed A LOT over 12+ years. It had numerous titles, pretentious ones like ‘Once Upon a Summer in Connecticut,’ I guess that was my attempt at a Sergio Leone homage, and finally the story started to become more concrete.

Originally I sketched out the story, sat down, and wrote free hand on a notebook. But as time went on, it was time for the changes, so I used my PC and made the story more grounded in reality - no guns - and it took shape. The script that is closer to the finished film came from 2001 - and it dealt with me trying to prove a point to myself. My mystery script had been optioned and the producer was telling me things that didn’t make sense - and then getting mad at me after his suggestions were being rebuffed by someone else - and I sat down one Friday night and by Sunday night - less than 48 hours later - ‘KNOCK ‘EM DEAD, KID’ was born. Like I said, it was a mix of previous ideas and stories from the previous drafts, but this was me writing what I liked and how I liked.

From 2001-2007 I tweaked the script, slaved over some lines, I mean, there were some lines I couldn’t let go and had to have, no matter what, but I would say the movie itself was born in 2001.

Ok, now you have your script, you’ve been working on Knock ‘Em Dead for a while… where do you go from there? What were the next steps you took in getting to the production stage? I guess the first thing to answer here is, was this your first feature? If not, what did you learn from doing that, which helped you go forward with this one?

Good question, where do you go? I had attended the New York Film Academy in LA during the fall of 2007. This helped show me that I didn’t need a huge budget to pull off my idea - just ingenuity. I had made an experimental feature (that was a project that had been off and on for years and then put together and to say more would give away more of the ‘secret’ of that film, entitled ‘Visions of Violence’ and there’s more info for that on imdb.com) prior to film school and then made numerous shorts and a good thesis film at NYFA. All of this combined set me up to make ‘Knock.’

So, I sat down and had a look at the script, which was 212 pages, that’s way over 3 and 1/2 hours, and scale it down. I got it down to 165 and then 140 and then 80. The main location that I knew I could never secure, especially with NO budget, was an ice cream parlor where the leads worked. So, that was gone right away. I removed any expensive sets, consolidated some characters since the original script had 35+ speaking parts down to 20, and made the locations more ‘on the cheap.’ Next was where to shoot - in Connecticut? - where I’m from, or back in LA? I figured LA, since I like it, the talent pool is huge, and I had good luck at NYFA there.

Knowing the script was ready and tailored to a much lower budget, pretty much a zero-budget, and having the ‘where’ of where filming would take place - all I needed was a DP and my actors. And back to LA I went...

I had placed ads on craigslist and LA Casting seeking talent and a DP (Director of Photography aka cinematographer) and when I got there - the next day I had meetings/interviews/auditions all set up. I auditioned actors for 2 weeks and the DP I found the first day. All of the budget went to the DP and the tape needed as I shot on Digital Video with a Panasonic DVX.

Did you know your cast and crew? If not, where did you find them? How instrumental were they in developing the material, if at all? How collaborative was the process – and how long did you shoot for?

I cast one minor character with an actor I went to NYFA with (Nathan Yoder) - he would’ve had a bigger role but this was only due to age not ability. Everyone else came from craigslist and LA Casting as I needed people who looked 18-20.

Pretty much, the script was the blueprint and everyone stuck to it. There was improv, usually at the end of scenes or in scenes that were originally short but expanded. This helped enhance the scenes and the improv plus the script worked.

The shoot was to last 2 weeks but instead it lasted 3. Things come up, unforeseen circumstances occur, and nothing goes as planned - such is the life of an independent filmmaker - I’m sure anyone who’s made a film can relate to that statement.

Like many young filmmakers, you and certain Leaguers have or are working on producing their own material. I think that one of the biggest obstacles people in this boat face is funding. How did you go about raising funds for the film? What budget were you working with and did you have a lot of in-kind donations?

I didn’t raise funds - it was limited money that I had or was ‘donated’ by family. The total budget was $3000 and that included the DP, the tape, and where I was staying in LA.

You play a lot with flashbacks and jump cuts and other techniques that continually tie the past into the present in the film, while including concrete chapter headings detailing what day it is. Can you talk a bit about your decision to cut the film this way, weaving everything together while definitively illuminating the timeline?

Stating what day it is within the story was always a part of the script. That goes back to 2001, not sooner than that, but to that point. As for the jump cuts, I usually try to employ them into my editing to help the story move along. It makes it more cinematic.

The flashbacks - that’s a different story - that was a happy accident. What happened was this: I edited a rough cut of the film and realized that some scenes were to pedestrian and close to being boring. So, I started inserting other scenes, bits of scenes, and unused footage into those scenes which needed that something extra and that’s how the flashbacks became used. The flashbacks greatly enhanced the scene in which Bret comes clean to Veronica about cheating on her - without those scenes interspersed, the scene wouldn’t feel right.

I feel that by using those scenes in other scenes, it helps to show a character’s memory or the film’s memory, know what I mean? It keeps things fresh instead of stagnant.

What was the worst thing about shooting? The best? Is there anything you learned from this production that you’d like to do differently in the future? Anything you wish you had done that you didn’t?

The worst thing about shooting without a budget is twofold - time and money. If you had money then you’d have more time. If you had more time then people would be able to get deeper into their characters. That’s tough to do when you have to shoot around work schedules, etc. everyone did the best they could but more time would have made it a much easier shoot and a much more polished shoot.

The best part of shooting is...that’s a tricky question. I would have to say that working in a collaborative medium, like filmmaking, is the best part - you get to try different things (when time permits) and everyone brings energy to the set.

Every film is a learning experience just like every life experience is something to learn from. Every personality is different and making a film is like trying to run a circus - different tents, lots of hats, the clown car, etc. in other words - a lot to manage.

I do wish I took the time to manage some scenes better. But time restrictions really put a damper on that.

Can you talk a bit about you the writer versus you the director? Did anything change from page to screen for you? Were there other people whose feedback you relied heavily upon?

The writer creates a vision and the director has to execute that vision. Obviously what you’ve dreamed up is from the mind of the writer and what you’re left with on film (or digital video) is the life of the director. Some things can translate from your mind to reality - others, not so much. But this could be due to time or money.

“The script is what you’ve dreamed up. The film is what you are left with.” George Lucas was quoted as saying this and I agree with this 100% percent.

A lot changed from the page to the screen. Sometimes it was a simple nuance, other times it was a line of dialogue that said by one’s self while writing sounds good, but when the camera’s rolling, didn’t sound quite right. The scenes and the story itself didn’t change or deviate all that much from the original shooting script. No one really gave that much input as far as changing the script, the script was really what I used for making my film be my film.

Is there anything you would like to say to all of our readers who are thinking of shooting their own feature films? Any advice or cautionary tales? What about choosing and using or licensing music?

Making a film is a huge commitment. If you aren’t passionate about it, then you shouldn’t be doing it. It’s time consuming and it really needs all of your mind in order to succeed. Try and make a film with something to say - don’t just make a stupid horror film or flavor of the month just because. Let’s say you want to make a horror film, make one, but make it unique, make it yours. Be different. People can say what they want about my films but in most cases they cannot be compared to whats come before.

Casting is the most important thing - build relationships and trust with your cast. This is most important. Listen to everyone and always be open to trying a scene a new way.

And if you make the film - finish it. See it through to the end. Even if it looks bad, finish it. You can always save a project in the editing room and even if you can’t - at least you’ll have a finished film. If I can finish my films then you can make yours.

As for music, I put an ad on craigslist stating that I was looking for music from anyone that wasn’t on a label. I ended up using music from people that I met online. They gave me their consent after I sent them the trailer and I gave them full credit for their contributions to the film. In the end, the soundtrack works and helps the film move along.

So what's next, both for Knock ‘Em Dead, Kid and for you?

‘Knock ‘Em Dead, Kid’ isn’t dead yet. The film is for sale on amazon VOD for rent or purchase and I am still actively seeking distribution for it. The fact that it ended up winning Honorable Mention and an official selection at this year’s Twin Rivers Media Fest was a testament to the film itself. I am still trying to find an audience for it and I am hopeful it will find a home somewhere. Without gratuitous nudity and violence, it has had some difficulty finding a home.

As for me, I shot a new feature this past September on HD. Once again, I went to LA, shot a film, this time in 2 weeks, and this time I made something distributors want. The two leads are female, they wear very little, and the story is more based on sex. There is a unique story, one that is very different, but this time I have a story about two LA girls instead of three Connecticut guys. Fingers crossed, this one too, will find an audience. I am just starting to edit this new film so watch for it in 2010!

Top Ten of the Aughts (Part II)

2009-11-18T10:26:00.017-05:00

If I learned anything from making my list, it’s that it's hard to write a short blurb about a favorite movie. These films are my favorites precisely because their appeal can’t be reduced to four sentences. And while I can fill page after page with a film’s qualities, whatever I came up still feels insufficient. Like anything else, a favorite movie will grab me for reasons I’ll never truly understand.

Observing the list, I realize that as much as I can appreciate a good performance or the texture of a shot, I am drawn to good stories. There’s no getting away from it: without a good screenplay, you can’t make a good film. And, man, this decade had some bad movies. But as Hollywood continues to churn out remakes, sequels, and derivative garbage, it becomes clear that now more than ever there is a need for good stories well told.

(For Part I, #’s 10-6)

5. Sideways

Miles is a forty-something failed writer who teaches 8th grade English. He does the New York Times crossword on his steering wheel and casually inserts French into everyday conversation. He’s a wine snob who attends a few too many tastings. Recently divorced, he hesitates in making a move on Maya (Virginia Madsen) because, though interesting and attractive, “she works for tips.” Or is that just an excuse for his lack of confidence?

Though the complex Miles is perfectly observed by the writers and Paul Giamatti, his is a character incapable of advancing a plot; that distinction goes to the childish Jack, in a career performance by Thomas Hayden Church. Miles takes his soon-to-be-married buddy on a tour of California’s wine country, but Jack envisions a less sophisticated sendoff: getting both of them laid.

In doing so, Jack boosts Miles’ credentials, telling Maya that his novel is being published; and, obviously, Jack plays down his upcoming wedding while eying Maya’s friend Stephanie (Sandra Oh). Jack succeeds in his goal…and embarks on a fling that becomes more serious than it should. Miles and Maya tag along to complete the quartet, and as their relationship becomes more intimate, the lies become more and more difficult for Miles to live down.

Wow, the broad strokes of this film would hardly make it seem like a comedy, even though it contains some of the funniest moments I have ever seen. Some are in plot payoffs, like when Jack, who suffered a broken nose through his exploits, crashes Miles’ car into a tree to substantiate another lie. Some are in the interactions between Jack and Miles, and how we suspect Miles has maintained this friendship for the sake of validating a sense of superiority. Some are sight gags, as when Miles breaks into a house to reclaim Jack’s wedding ring and is chased down by a naked beast of a man.

Some people call this film depressing. Understandable. Essentially, it’s a film about characters coming to terms with who they are not, leaving them with less to veil their insecurities. But as they are pathetic at the beginning, at least they aren’t hopeless at the end.

4. The Lives of Others

The film begins with a member of the Stasi, Gerd Wiesler (Ulrich Mühe), interrogating a suspected political prisoner. This scene is intercut with him teaching a class on interrogation methods. He uses a recoding of the interrogation, showing how the deprivation of sleep and repetitive questioning can effectively extract information from a prisoner. He stops the tape, adding commentary when necessary. The students write notes, judiciously. He might as well be teaching physiology.

It's rare for a film to have deep political resonance without skewing its argument with didactic heroes and villains. Wiesler is a nationalist with firm socialist ideals, believing in the GDP and the Stasi. As such, he bugs the apartment of playwright Georg Dreyman (Sebastian Koch) to protect the State. But in learning a committee member is having an affair with Dreyman’s actress girlfriend (she does so to avoid interference with her career), Wiesler realizes Dreyman’s imprisonment would rid the committee member of a rival.

A clear abuse of power, Wiesler’s same uncompromising sense of duty leads him to intervene in ending the affair. But as the intervention becomes more personal, he discovers the beauty in the couple’s relationship and realizes that is worth protecting.

This is a complete film with a meticulously plotted screenplay. Writer/director Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck provides authentic settings and gives attention to most minute detail, evoking a neorealist feel not unlike The Battle of the Algiers. All of this is strung together by an incredible performance from Ulrick Mühe, whose actions and mere facial expression rarely deviate from that of a calculating professional. So uncommon are his physical reactions that a simple frown commands the audience’s attention. Mühe allows the context of the story to dictate the emotions; consequently, it isn’t until the last frame when he says, “No, it’s for me,” that he is fully understood.

3. Adaptation.

This needs cleared up: just because a film can discuss screenwriting and Hollywood does NOT make it a good screenwriting resource. For an aspiring writer looking for a clear example, Charlie Kaufman’s non-linear screenplay about Charlie Kaufman writing a screenplay about Charlie Kaufman’s difficult adaptation of Susan Orlean’s The Orchid Thief would hardly provide clarity. If used as a teaching tool, it should be used to exemplify the apex of a craft.

Charlie Kaufman (Nicolas Cage) loves Susan Orlean’s book and embraces the idea of writing the world’s first film about flowers. Just flowers. No sex or drugs or car chases or underdogs overcoming huge obstacles. “The book isn’t like that and life isn’t like that. It just isn’t.”

Then what is life about? While unable to adapt the book, Charlie’s life entails complaining about things he should do, fantasizing about women he should hit on, and criticizing people he should not have to endure. Like his twin brother Donald, who one day declares, “I’m gonna be a screenwriter!” and conceptualizes a completely unfeasible thriller that eventually sells for a million dollars. The Orchid Thief, a beautiful composition without a story, is a validation of Charlie’s life…but it also serves as a mirror for his own shortcomings.

The film intercuts between Charlie’s struggles and Susan Orlean (Meryl Streep). A writer for The New Yorker, Orlean ventures to Florida for a story about John Laroche (Chris Cooper), a conservationist known for poaching rare orchids. He’s a fascinating individual whose intelligence escapes Orlean, who can’t get past his toothless grin and Southern twang; when she returns to New York for a cocktail party, all she can talk about is the smell and appearance of his truck. Orlean visits again. As he describes how a moth developed an elongated nose to pollinate a special breed of orchids, she becomes entranced by his passion and fulfillment…but realizes her own superficiality and emptiness.

While engaging and entertaining, Kaufman and Orlean’s stories show how the orchid exists not to accommodate but to make the moth adapt. How a two-hour film can tell such a story with no missteps, with subtle commentary on perception and racism, high-brow and low-brow cultures, New York and Hollywood, with moments that are tender and others that are hilarious, and still include sex and guns and car chases is beyond comprehension. Nicolas Cage effectively differentiates Charlie and Donald, and Spike Jonze magnifies all the humor and irony in the screenplay. But this one goes to Charlie Kaufman.

2. In America

This is a film that grabs you from the start.

An Irish family – Johnny (Paddy Considine), Sarah (Samantha Morton), and their two young daughters (Sarah and Emma Bolger) – drives across the Canadian border, hoping to move into the States illegally. Before hitting the border police, Johnny reminds his daughters, “Remember, we’re on holiday.” As an officer approaches the car, the girls quickly exclaim, “We’re on holiday!” The officer nods as he scans their passports. The youngest daughter, Ariel, a spark plug, adds, “Yeah! And my dad’s not workin’!” Several officers surround the car, asking rapid-fire questions.

Concerned, the oldest daughter, Christy, begins her narration of the film - her little brother Frankie once said she has three wishes; right now she wishes they get across the border. The officer scans their documents, “How many children do you have?” Three, Johnny replies. Two, Sarah corrects him. This confuses the officer. “It says three here.” Johnny replies, “Yeah. We, uh, lost one.” The officer looks at the hopeful faces, hesitates, and then smiles. “Welcome to America.”

The first scene, no longer than three minutes, foreshadows everything about the film. It’s a story with humor, despair, realistic complications, and elements of mysticism, that also manages to see the good in people.

Director Jim Sheridan shares credit for the screenplay with his daughters, Naomi and Kristen, inspired by their own immigration to America following the death of their brother, Frankie. This is understandable, as the film takes its time and moves naturally; it’s almost like a filmed journal of moving to Manhattan, watching it go from abrasive and scary to warm and inviting. What’s impressive is that something so organic can be orchestrated by such meticulous craft.

The family is poor. Johnny has failed his lone Broadway audition and, gallantly as he tried, was unable to air condition their sweltering apartment. Ariel is also sad, missing Ireland and her dad’s old playful spirit. To relieve the stress, the family goes to a carnival. An ET doll catches Ariel’s eye, and Johnny decides he’ll win it for her. The scene is so carefully constructed that what begins with Johnny playfully trying to please his daughter becomes about proving he can take care of the family or losing everything. How many films can effectively pull that off?

Even fewer are the films that mix such grim complications like AIDS and poverty with something as intangible as magic without being sentimental. And then there’s the emotional climax that shows little more than the movement of a hand. The film is filled with great performances and wonderful moments that continuously build without feeling manufactured. And when it’s all said and done, it shows the difficulty in letting go of the past, and the necessity of moving forward.

1. Almost Famous

At some point, everyone feels like an outsider.

William’s mother (Francis McDormand) has the family celebrate Christmas in October when it’s less commercialized. While his middle school peers grow facial hair, William stands a foot shorter. When he asks why, his mother informs him that he’s eleven, not thirteen. His sister Anita (Zooey Deschanel), fed up with the unorthodox lifestyle, leaves home to become a stewardess. She leaves William her record collection and looks into his eyes: “One day, you'll be cool.”

He wants to believe her.

Almost Famous is a story about how William (Patrick Fugit) at fifteen lands a dream job at Rolling Stone, then goes cross-county with the up-and-coming rock band Stillwater as he tries to score an interview with the elusive guitarist Russell (Billy Crudup). It’s a story about first experiences and desperately trying to be cool - cool enough to belong in the rock ‘n’ roll community, to hang out with a band like Stillwater, to spark the interest of Penny Lane (Kate Hudson).

A great coming of age story, it’s about how William comes to realize he’s not cool…but who is? Penny Lane commands a room with her looks and charisma, hops seamlessly from band to band, and does it all without opening up, not even revealing her real name…but even she isn’t above heartbreak. Millions of Americans love Russell, who’s handsome, meets the likes of Bob Dylan, and can even unlock Penny Lane…but not even he can bullshit William’s mother. And then there’s the band as a whole, whose growing popularity has earned them the cover of Rolling Stone magazine…but they deny the facts of William’s story, as even they have insecurities about status and perception. Lester Bangs – played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman, as the poor man’s Obi-Wan Kenobi – observes it perfectly: “The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with somebody when you’re uncool.” And Lester is admittedly not cool.

Like any great movie, you remember the film for its moments. Like when Stillwater brings William backstage or when he deepens his voice on the phone for his editor. Or when Stillwater’s plane is about to crash, and the drummer breaks his silence - “Fuck it! I’m gay!” - only for the plane to steady. Russell on the roof of a high school party: “I am a golden god!” The reconciliation of Anita and her mother – “I forgive you.” “I…never said I was sorry”. And, of course, when the inner conflicts plaguing the group are resolved as they sing along to Elton John’s “Tiny Dancer”.

Loosely based on Cameron Crowe’s own experiences, it’s a film that’s written without feeling written, where every character has a distinct point of view and the actors disappear in their roles. It’s a film of bright colors, a portrait of an America united to a soundtrack of Bowie and Zeppelin and Cat Stevens. It’s a film with a heart, embracing people for who they are.

William ends up getting his interview, but he asks his big question not as a reporter but as a star struck fan: “What do you love most about being a rock star?” And Russell leans forward, glowing like a child, “To begin with…everything.”

Same for this movie.

* * * * *

Best of the rest… The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Bowling for Columbine, City of God, Closer, The Dark Knight, Eastern Promises, Flags of Our Fathers, The Fog of War, Grizzly Man, Harold and Kumar go to White Castle, High Fidelity, A History of Violence, In Bruges, Intermission, Kill Bill: vol 1, Let the Right One In, Minority Report, No Country for Old Men, Pan’s Labyrinth, Rachel Getting Married, Requiem for a Dream, Shallow Hal, Shrek, Sin City, Slumdog Millionaire, The Squid and the Whale, Traffic, Wall-E, You Can Count on Me

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 98 - Took the Offer

2009-11-16T16:35:00.003-05:00

After about a week and a half of time to think it over and digest the notes, my manager, producer, and I have decided to take an offer we were given. A producer at a rather prominent Production Company (known simply as "Production Company" for the time being) read my post-Apocalyptic spec and really liked it. She thought it was exciting, moving, and (sometimes odd for its genre) smart - i.e. it was about something more than just a body count. However, she did have notes on it, and was not prepared to offer any money for it in its current state.

On Tuesday of last week, I had a conference call with her and Gretchen, the original producer. The call went really well, and I got two major notes from the Production Company. These were big notes, both focused on rebuilding Act Two. As the representative for this Production Company put it, Act One is really strong and sets up a lot, but Act Two derails. (I'll admit that it's not a perfect second act, but we were hoping that it was strong enough to not ward off potential buyers. Guess it wasn't.) The representative had two ideas for the script, one that would make it more active throughout Act Two, and the other that would lighten the tone a little bit. In its current state, the script is very dark. Part of the rewrites would involve taking the audience to a time before so much hope was lost, to a point where people were still trying to go about their daily lives and carry on as best they can. The goal is to not only make the film less depressing, but also to involve the audience more by allowing them to play along with the "what would I do in this scenario?" game while watching.

This offer I got came at a particularly interesting time. The morning of the call, I read two articles in the most recent draft of Creative Screenwriting Magazine, which seemed extremely relevant to my situation. The first was a short piece about an NYC based writer who recently sold his first spec and continues to work from NYC. It's more about how to go about getting recognized while being on the East Coast - query letters, competitions, etc. While it was interesting, it wasn't really anything new. (Read the archival Writing Weeks, and you'll see that I cover the exact same things as I live them.)

The second article was much more intriguing. It was all about the state of the spec sale market and the greater Hollywood industry in general. In short, what it said was that it's next to impossible for new writers to break in nowadays. Established writers are having trouble getting work, and when they do, they're frequently having to work for below their normal going rate. With studios freezing development, things aren't looking good. Agents and managers are having trouble, because no one is buying. And production companies are getting away with spending a lot less on material - or, in cases like mine, spending nothing up front in transactions that used to cost them money. Basically, this article (I read between the lines) said that if a writer has a large and respected producer or production company backing their work and has the ability to get to a studio, they should take the deal, as there aren't many other options these days. (Granted, there are always exceptions to the rule, so no need for added concern if you're trying to make a sale. Just be aware of the situation.)

With that info, and with this Production Company behind me if I nail the rewrites, I decided that there was no way I could pass up the opportunity. Sure, some of the rewrites will be a challenge, but even if the Production Company decides not to pursue the material, I'll have a stronger script (hopefully) and more contacts in the industry that could lead to further work. Plus, with no one else biting at the moment, I didn't have a ton of other options. So... back to writing.

Top 10 Films of the Aughts (Part I)

2009-11-11T16:34:00.011-05:00

The period between 1990 and 1999 was great for movies. Pulp Fiction, Shawshank, Hoop Dreams – that's 1994 alone. There are times when I think the quality of films (especially domestic films) has degenerated as I’ve grown more familiar with writing and filmmaking. But then I thought about it, and, man, some really great movies came out this decade.

So here are #'s 10 - 6... (#'s 5 - 1 coming soon...)

10. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind

Charlie Kaufman won a much-deserved Oscar for the most original concept in recent memory. Break-ups hurt because of loss – the loss of a comfort zone, the loss of someone else, the loss of someone else’s feelings. To prevent this feeling of loss, what if a medical procedure could erase that person from your memory?

The premise is ingenious, but the film stands out for depicting a universal relationship between Joel and Clementine (Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet), told from beginning to end. The break up scene is most relatable, as Joel and Clemantine each say hurtful things that can't be unsaid. Whereas most movies capture romance with sparkling jewelry and huge set pieces, the most romantic scenes involve throwing leaves at each other, falling on the ice, or lying on the couch. And of course, the film does a commendable job in showing that pleasure from the good times ultimately outweigh the eventual pain.

Joel wants to procedure to stop, but is powerless as his body is knocked out. In Joel’s final memory, he and Clementine sit on the beach, completely aware that the incident is going to be erased: “This is it, Joel. It’s going to be gone soon.” “I know.” “What do we do?” “Enjoy it.”

9. Inglourious Basterds

Quentin Tarantino might be gimmicky. He might be completely full of himself. He might be a narcissist, a sexist, a thief.

He can be all of those things, but he can still be an expert craftsman.

A farmer stands on his front yard filling buckets of water. In a car in the distance, two guards approach with a Nazi colonel (Christoph Waltz). The farmer looks to his house, to his three teenage daughters. He pours some water over his face.

In the house, the colonel takes off his hat and smiles. “Do you know who I am?” The farmer nods. The colonel motions for his guards – equipped with machine guns – to step outside, but they remain visible through the window. The colonel acknowledges the daughters and their beauty. He asks if they would mind stepping outside. They look to their father, who nods, nervously. They step outside.

In the hands of a lesser writer/director, the subsequent scene between the colonel and farmer would be rushed and expositional; with Tarantino, the talky scene plays secondary to the tension of the guards in the window and the mere fact that we don’t know anything.

To arouse the curiosity of an audience without making it question the logic - that is tough. And, man, he makes it look easy...

8. Brokeback Mountain

It took a while for this film to set in. I think that’s a testament to Heath Ledger, the screenwriters, and Ang Lee, who collectively take a subtle story/protagonist and make it fly.

The premise by nature leads to a reactive story, one that studies a cowboy Ennis (Ledger) who lacks the ability to love. Whether it’s his wife, daughters, or Jack (Jake Gyllenhaal), the one person with whom he connects, he never allows more than five consecutive words to escape his tight-lipped demeanor. When someone notices a hint of transparency, he responds aggressively, like when he attacks Jack and ends up with a bloodied lip. He pushes himself into seclusion.

Jack is killed, and though the cause of death is ambiguous, the film sets up that he was possibly murdered for being homosexual. Through Jack’s ex-wife (Anne Hathaway), Ennis learns that Jack wanted him to scatter his ashes. When going to Jack’s parents for the ashes, he finds intertwined with one of Jack’s shirts is his blood-stained shirt from their fight years earlier. He holds them up to his face.

It’s subtle and fantastic.

7. Match Point

Though elements are borrowed from his Crimes and Misdemeanors and Hannah and Her Sisters, this is the most unique of Woody Allen’s canon. For starters, there is no Woody Allen, meaning neither himself as an actor nor a neurotic character in the cast. Secondly, this was the first of his films to take place outside of New York.

For a writer, the film is an education on economy and precision. Allen equips the hero of the story, an Irishman from a poor family Chris Wilton (Jonathon Rhys Meyers), with two gifts: skill with a tennis racket and good looks. Though he never climbed the ranks in professional tennis, his skill enables him to become an instructor at a country club. There, he befriends club member Tom Hewitt (Matthew Goode) and is able to use his other gift to catch the eye of his sister Chloe (Emily Mortimer). He charms his way into her heart and into the good graces of her wealthy parents, virtually guaranteeing him a fruitful life. But there is one problem: Tom is engaged to an American, Nola Rice (Scarlett Johannson), a failed actress pulling the same stunt as Chris.

Though the outsiders are experts in their roles, their obvious similarities and sexual attraction complicates their didactic plots. An affair is unfeasible, but proves unavoidable. And that’s the first act of a film that manages to explore themes of luck, hard work, and love without seeming implausible and still deliver a twist ending that hits just the right note.

6. Love Actually

How can you think of this film without smiling? Whether it’s the cheery score, that “Christmas is all around me!”, or that even a Hugh Grant or Colin Firth can act like a complete spazz when face-to-face with that flashy-eyed girl, this is one of those movies that will always put you in a good mood.

But how is it that Love Actually avoids being cheesy? It’s because the brilliant writer/director Richard Curtis explores the flip side of the coin. A workaholic (Laura Linney) finally has the chance to romance her crush, but a call from her hospitalized brother prevents it from happening. Daniel (Liam Neeson) is in constant grief after losing his wife to cancer. And, of course, the most heartfelt scene in which Karen (Emma Thompson) realizes her marriage is over after opening a Christmas gift.

The lows also accentuate some wonderful “movie moments”. There’s the porn star “rehearsing” with his female costar while having trouble asking her on a date. There’s Jamie (Colin Firth) and his Portuguese servant in the water saying the same things in different languages. There’s the controversial Billy Mack (Bill Nighy) on television: “Kids: don’t buy drugs. [a sigh of relief from the hosts] Become a pop star and they give ‘em to you for free!” And, my personal favorite, Mark spilling his heart out to Juliet (Keira Knightley) via poster cards though he has nothing to gain.

How did this film not get a screenplay nod?

* * *

(Hm. Noticing a theme, my revised #1 of the decade is now Terminator Salvation.)

Logline Central - Source Code

2009-11-10T16:53:00.004-05:00

Logline Central is an irregular segment that takes a deeper look at loglines of scripts or projects that have just been purchased, as listed on DoneDealPro.

Ok, this week's Logline Central was picked in part for its familiarity.

Title: Source Code

Logline: A soldier wakes up in the body of an unknown commuter and is forced to live and relive a harrowing train bombing until he can determine who is responsible for it.

Writer: Billy Ray

More: Rewrite of spec script by Ben Ripley. Mark Gordon and Vendome's Philippe Rousselet & Jordan Wynn will produce. Duncan Jones will direct. Jake Gyllenhaal will star. Firs set up in January 2007.

Back in 2007, I was being what can best be described as "passively courted" by a manager at a respectable LA based company. He'd read my comic book style spec, and was interested in what else I had or could do. Mildly interested, since none of the few phone calls we set up ever happened. It was a lesson in frustration at the time, but in hindsight, a pretty good (though disappointing) introduction to the industry and trying to get a foot in the door as a young writer.

Anyway, he was looking for tent-pole action writers at the time (people who could churn out Will Smith's big summer blockbusters as quickly as he could star in them), and was cultivating me to be one of those writers. So, he sent me a few scripts as samples of what was getting recognition around the industry in that genre.

I read the first writer's draft back in the summer of 2007, and I have to admit that I loved it. I had no idea how that script could ever become a major summer blockbuster. It was too intimate (very few character... maybe 4) and too convoluted for mainstream audiences. The entire script took place either in the military's tech room where this soldier is hooked into the computer or on the ill-fated train. It was much more akin to the wonderful PRIMER and SLEEP DEALER (both worth watching for examples of small-scale sci-fi) than to MINORITY REPORT or other big-budget, sci-fi mind-benders. Of the three scripts that manager sent me, this was hands down my favorite.

The plot revolved around a soldier who realizes that he's forced to relive a terrorist train bombing time and time again until he can figure out who was responsible. Of course, there's a woman on the train who piques his interest, as well as a man he becomes convinced is the bomber. I forget the specifics, but there might have been an element of the soldier having been on the train, with his brain kept alive just long enough to get the info from it, before the military lets him succumb to injuries he received in the explosion. Whatever the exact plot and setup, I really dug the script. I'll be keeping an eye on this one. I wonder if this is going through development again to extend its mass appeal.

(Quick ending note: newly appointed writer Billy Ray has the credits under his belt to make me think this could be doable. I caught his FLIGHTPLAN on TV the other night and got his SUSPECT ZERO through Netflix a while back. Both were OK. I really enjoyed SHATTERED GLASS, though, which he has a "written by" credit on. And, he's doing the new WESTWORLD, so we'll see.)

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 97 - Prepping for the Phone Meeting

2009-11-09T15:39:00.000-05:00

Tomorrow's going to be an interesting day - and the next biggest step for me as I try to break into the film industry as a screenwriter. Mid-last week, Gretchen - the independent producer who optioned my script back in June - informed me that one of the top producers in Hollywood was interested in my script. His Production Company (to be referred to as that until we make a deal) has some big ideas for what they want to do with the script, but there's some development work they want done first. So, we set up a call with the Production Company, more specifically with the producer there who read the script and wants to work on it.

The point of tomorrow's call is two-fold. First, though Gretchen already told me a bit what to expect in terms of notes from the Production Company, tomorrow is about the specifics. We haven't made any concrete deals yet, and tomorrow's call is an opportunity for all parties to get on the same page about what exactly this company thinks the script needs. It's also an opportunity for me to ask any and all questions I have about their notes and to emphasize any points I think are crucial to consider when re-working the material.

The second part of tomorrow's dialogue is just as important. The call is also about introductions, and more specifically, me introducing myself to a major player in the industry as an up and coming writer. Yes, hopefully everyone will want to work together on this project. But, if all goes well, I'll have planted the seed in this producer's mind that I'm a writer that she can work with down the line, as well. That means, of course, being open to notes, listening to everything she says, and not being afraid to chime in with my impressions. I'll have to be on my toes - asking insightful questions, processing what she's saying at a mile a minute, taking notes - but that shouldn't be a problem. It's been going on almost two years that I've been working on this script now, and I know that this could be a major break both for me and for it.

I'm excited about tomorrow's call, for sure. The impersonality of the phone means I can focus exclusively on what's being said, rather than obsessing about every gesture and mannerism. It'll be a big day, one I'm eagerly waiting for (can't you tell?).

Museum of the Moving Image - Variety screenings announced in NYC

2009-11-03T16:47:00.003-05:00

The Museum of the Moving Image has a new batch of Variety screenings, featuring key crew or cast members in attendance. Here's the current lineup:

Variety New York Screening Series
Through December 31, 2009

For all Variety screenings, tickets are $20, $15 for Museum members. Members at the Sponsor-level and above receive free tickets. Call 718.784.4520 for more information or to order tickets.

Under Our Skin Under Our Skin with director Andy Abrahams Wilson in person
Wednesday, November 4, 7:30 p.m.
Landmark Sunshine Cinema, 143 East Houston Street

2009, 104 mins. Open Eye Pictures. Directed by Andy Abrahams Wilson. A gripping tale of microbes, medicine and money, Under Our Skin exposes the hidden story of Lyme disease, one of the most controversial and fastest growing epidemics of our time. Each year thousands go undiagnosed or misdiagnosed, told that their symptoms are "all in their head." Following the stories of patients and physicians fighting for their lives and livelihoods, the film brings into focus a haunting picture of the healthcare system and a medical establishment all too willing to put profits ahead of patients.

The Hurt Locker The Hurt Locker with director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal in person
Wednesday, November 11, 7:30 p.m.
Landmark Sunshine Cinema, 143 East Houston Street

2009, 131 mins. Summit Entertainment. Directed by Kathryn Bigelow. With Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, Brian Geraghty. From visionary filmmaker Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker is based on first-hand observation by journalist and screenwriter Mark Boal who was stationed on assignment with a special bomb unit. Starring Jeremy Renner (The Assassination of Jesse James), Anthony Mackie (Half Nelson) and Brian Geraghty (Jarhead), the film couples grippingly realistic action with intimate human drama to portray soldier psychology in a high-risk profession where men volunteer to face deadly odds.

The Road The Road with Viggo Mortensen in person
SOLD OUT
Wednesday, November 18, 7:30 p.m.
Landmark Sunshine Cinema, 143 East Houston Street

2009. The Weinstein Company. Directed by John Hillcoat. With Viggo Mortensen, Charlize Theron, Robert Duvall. Based on Cormac McCarthy's beloved, best-selling and Pulitzer Prize winning novel, Academy Award nominee Viggo Mortensen leads an all-star cast in the big screen adaptation of The Road. This epic post-apocalyptic tale traces the journey taken by a father (Mortensen) and his young son (newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee) across a barren landscape that was blasted by an unnamed cataclysm that destroyed civilization and most life on earth. This event is sold out.

Check out their website for details.

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 96 – An Offer on the Table

2009-11-02T14:46:00.004-05:00

Last Wednesday was one hell of an interesting day. It involved a bit of daily life in NYC – an unfortunate man was having a seizure on the sidewalk outside my office building right as I had to go to an appointment – and ended with some news on my script. At about 9:30pm, my producer called me with an update. One of the bigger Hollywood producers was interested in my script.

It’s annoying that I have to be vague about the specifics, but my manager, producer, and I have not yet made any agreements, so I can’t mention names. Anyway, this Producer and his Production Company are apparently very interested in my post-Apocalyptic spec. However, they think that the second half needs some work. Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time we’ve gotten this note, so they might be onto something. Their proposition is an exclusive developmental deal, whereby they come on as co-producers with Gretchen (who initially optioned the material) and work with me on developing the second act further. Once that work is done, they take it out through their first look deal with one of the major studios, and try to make a quality action picture.

The obvious pros to doing this are many. For one, the Producer is a bit of a power player, Oscar Nominated hyphenate who has also written and directed. Not only would working with him help ensure a larger sale (though that’s never a certainty) with an impressive name attached, but doing so my first time out of the gate would be impressive for me as a new writer. My current producer was very excited about the prospects that such a partnership could provide for a rookie scribe, and I can’t deny it, either. He’s done some quality pictures – every one of them a recognizable success – and I’d love to get the opportunity to work with him. Beyond that, the woman who works for his Production Company who would head up the project is pretty confident in her ability to do something with it – provided I do a good job with the rewrites – and to make a quality film we could all be proud of. It all sounds good.

The downside of the deal? Right now, there’s no money involved in the offer. Of course, this isn’t an immediate deal-breaker. However, since the agreement would be exclusive in nature, we wouldn’t really be able to capitalize on any other offers. Taking the offer – we’d have a phone call first to make sure everyone’s on the same page – would mean potentially another few months of unpaid development work, but the payoff after could be quite worth it. If we go out too many more places with the script as is, we risk overexposing it. The offer takes it off the market for a while, but since there’s no money, I have as much or as little time as I need to make the necessary changes and get it ready to go out again. My hope would be to have it ready before the holidays, though the end of December can be a bad time to try to make a sale.

I have a call with my producer and manager tonight to discuss the offer. I don’t know how common these no money development offers are, and that’s one thing I intend to find out. I don’t doubt that the Production Company can do something with the script if it’s stronger, but I’m not inking anything yet.

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 95 - Stop Waiting Idly

2009-10-26T16:53:00.004-04:00

It's been about two weeks since we went out to a former employer of mine who works at an NYC based production company and a few agents with my script. Two weeks might be a bit long (though I'm not completely sure) on the production company end, but is far from worry-territory with agents. Regardless of what traditional wait times might be, I'm trying to be patiently optimistic. Hard as that might be (and these past two weeks, the compounded stress of work and other things have made it quite difficult), I know the perfect distraction: more writing.

One of the greatest things about writing is that it is the solution to its own problems. Hiccups in the script and other walls we hit are only fixed by writing. The same goes for a writing slump. I spent the past few weeks allowing myself to be discouraged (unnecessarily, probably) for the first time in a while. I go back periodically and re-read old blog posts. As much as they make me cringe, they paint the picture of a young writer as unsure in his future as he is in his ability. Since December, I've had people in the industry encouraging and promoting my work. It's now October, and the fairy tale of the overnight hot-shot screenwriter has died, taking with it some of the confidence I had gained.

I'm not sure why I allowed myself to become so disgruntled. A few tough days here and a rejection from an agent there, a failed attempt at a screenplay competition, and I was ready to feel bad for myself. I wouldn't say I was ready to quit - I wouldn't be cut out for this who career path if I was - but I was facing some of the same futility that I felt more than a year and a half ago. This weekend, I did what all writers have to at some point. I started writing again.

It's amazing how quickly actually putting words to the page can completely redirect all emotions. That discouragement went away as the creative juices started flowing again. I was able to divert my energy from thinking about the script that's currently out of my hands to one that is one hundred percent in my control now. There's a new script to focus on now, and it's a fun one. I managed four solid pages of notes, questions, and ideas this weekend. They are four glorious pages.

Logline Central - C.O.D.

2009-10-23T10:45:00.004-04:00

Logline Central is an irregular segment that takes a deeper look at loglines of scripts or projects that have just been purchased, as listed on DoneDealPro.

I saw an interesting logline earlier this week. It's nothing wildly earth shattering, but it did grab my attention - for both good and bad reasons.

Title: C.O.D.
Logline: A New York City bike messenger is forced to deliver three bombs under threat of his family receiving one. He must avoid capture by not only the authorities but also by an entire nation looking to stop him.
Writer: Carl Ellsworth
More: Rewrite deal. Original script was written by Lars Jacobson Barry Josephson and Royal Prospect's Neal Flaherty will produce. The project was picked up in March 2008 by DreamWorks.

What I like about this is the unlikely hero. A bike messenger - living in NYC, I see and meet plenty of them, so I'm already feeling a bit connected - has to deliver three bombs, while his family is held hostage (presumably). I'll go out on a limb and assume that he doesn't want to deliver these bombs - not a difficult assumption to make. Essentially, we have an Average Joe type guy who finds himself in less than desirable, dangerous circumstances where his actions lead to the endangerment of innocent or at least unknown people. COLLATERAL, anyone? Very much yes, but in a good way. Collateral was fun, and C.O.D. sounds like it has the potential to be, as well.

It sounds that way, that is, until you read the second half of the logline, "He must avoid capture by not only the authorities but also by an entire nation looking to stop him." I get the authorities bit. Once that first bomb goes off - if they're planned to go off separately, that is - the authorities will be all over this. Even if they don't, it's New York, and someone will find out something's up. If being New York isn't enough, then the fact that this is a movie will push it over the edge. What I don't think I'm on board with, though, is the part about the "entire nation looking to stop him." Which nation? The U.S.? Why is an entire country trying to stop him? Is he nowhere near as innocent as the previous sentence leads us to believe?

Tying an entire nation into this throws a big red flag up for me. It might make perfect sense in a 100 page screenplay. But in a two sentence logline, I get worried. Am I supposed to have images of every Tom, Dick, and Harry on the streets of New York trying to run this guy down and pull him off his bike? It's one hell of a big obstacle to throw in there, and it has me concerned. I'm still very curious, but now that's not just in a good way. Nonetheless, Carl Ellsworth gave us such thrillers as RED EYE, THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, worked on DISTURBIA, and seems to be attached to Y: THE LAST MAN. So time will tell.

John August's Post about Pitching

2009-10-20T10:45:00.003-04:00

If you're like me at all (for your sake, hope it's only a tiny bit), you're curious about pitching. What it's like. How it happens. How long it takes. How nervous you'll be. When you'll get to do it.

I've read a few books that glaze over pitching and have spoken with writers and other industry people who participate in pitches about their experiences with them. However, you can never get too much info ahead of time. John August recently had a short yet great post about pitching Prince of Persia that walks readers through the entire meeting (20 minutes) with a brief play by play. I've pasted his pitch timeline below, but I suggest reading the whole post.

Introductions. Apologies for keeping us waiting. (1 minute)
John hyping Jordan’s prestigious videogame background. (1:00)
Play the video. (2:10)
Jordan describes the world of the Persian empire, using artwork. (:30)
John pitches Prince Dastan, using artwork of him. (:30)
John and Jordan alternate pitching story, introducing character/prop artwork as new things come up. (6:00)
Questions about story, tone and scale. “Somewhere between Pirates and Raiders. It’s not Lawrence of Arabia.”(3:00)
Promises that they’ll follow up. (1:00)

The Writing Week (Vol. 2) part 94 - Familiar Rejection

2009-10-19T16:51:00.003-04:00

Last Monday, I was supposed to have a call with my manager and producer to update me on the status of my script at the top four agencies – WME, CAA, ICM, and UTA. The call was pushed to Tuesday to give agents extra time to read. Unfortunately, bumping it back a day didn’t really yield any extra results, and the one bit of information that I did get wasn’t the best. We only heard back from CAA, and the agent there passed on the script.

It’s an odd feeling to be experiencing rejection (from an agent) at this stage of the game. It’s also usefully humbling. I think that I had allowed myself to think beyond agents to the next step – actually making a sale – to such a degree that I needed something to ground myself and my expectations a bit. To be honest, I’m still not wedded to the notion of having an agent on board (that is, after all, an additional 10% out of my sale). However, my manager and producer think that an agent can help solidify a sale, so I’ll go with the flow.

I had previously thought that having a manager and a producer attached to a spec would make it a stronger case for an agent, especially if there’s already a laundry list of places we’re thinking of sending it out to. That’s obviously not the case, though. Breaking in, no matter how good other industry people might think your script is, is still no walk through the park. It’s easy to get aggravated by the sometimes seemingly insurmountable obstacles new writers face when trying to get into the industry. Especially in light of the number of terrible movies getting made and the cringe-worthy scripts we read as interns or readers, frustration is easy to succumb to. The key though, is to move past that.

My one large concern – if you can call it that – that came out of the CAA rejection was the feedback that came with it. The agent who read the script thought that the first half was great, but that the second half was just more of the same old. Setting aside the fact that once you break in, the same old is what every company wants from you (an exaggeration, perhaps, but not by much), the note was troubling from a developmental point of view. I’m not sure I agree with the note (or see exactly where it’s coming from), so I don’t yet know how I’d approach it without further insight from the source. When I asked my manager about it, he said to just treat it like one person’s opinion for now, and that the agent acknowledged that other agents might jump at the opportunity to tie themselves to it.

Oh well. The wait continues.

Logline Central - Untitled Loeb Project and What's He Got?

2009-10-16T11:47:00.006-04:00

Logline Central is an irregular segment that takes a deeper look at loglines of scripts or projects that have just been purchased, as listed on DoneDealPro.

Let's take a look at two sales that were both logged yesterday.

Title: Untitled Loeb Project
Logline: A jilted lover must disguise himself as a woman and befriend his ex in order to win her back.
Writer: Allan Loeb
Price: High six figures against seven figures
More: Pitch. Working Title's Eric Fellner & Tim Bevan, Dark Trick's Jonathon Komack Martin and Scarlett Fire's Steven Pearl will produce. Liza Chasin, Ryan Reynolds and Allan Loeb will executive produce. Reynolds will also star.

Title: What's He Got?

Logline: After he loses his girlfriend to a lovable loser, a guy seeks the loser out to find out "what's he got."

Writer: Kevin Bisch

Price: $900,000 against $1.6 million

More: Pitch. Walt Becker, Andrew Panay and Category 5's Brian Sher will produce. Becker will also direct. Josh Duhamel will star.

I think the similarities are obvious enough to not linger on them too long. These are both romantic comedies. Both are about guys who have to win their exes back. And both - amazingly - were bought for high six figures against seven figures. (If you're wondering what the "against" means, the writer gets the higher sum when the movie is made. So Kevin Bisch, for example, sold WHAT'S HE GOT? for 900K, and will get another 700K when the film is made. Pretty sweet.) Neither writer is new to the game (Bisch did the Will Smith hit HITCH, and Loeb has a few more credits to his name on imdb with 21 and WALL STREET 2, among others), but the sales are still impressive.

When I read these two loglines back to back, they were similar enough in both concept and deal for me to wonder (albeit only briefly) if the same script had been logged twice. Of course, they're not the same. In one, Ryan Reynolds has to dress like a woman in order to woo his ex back. In Bisch's script, a guy has to learn what he's lacking and (supposedly) steal his girlfriend back from the more lovable guy she's now with.

What's really incredible is the first word under the "more" category for each. Pitch. In my mind, that translates to "spec." As writers, we have to love the fact that two specs collectively went for almost $2 million, with potential to bring in almost another $1 mil. Equally exciting is that both of these already have people attached to star. The fact that someone like Ryan Reynolds, whose $40 million rom-com THE PROPOSAL took in over $163 million domestically, is attached to Loeb's script certainly pushed that price tag up a bit. The lesson this week is that an idea (both could be funny, but neither seems to be breaking new ground) can go a long way and increase its value with the right people attached. Packaging a project is a beautiful thing when its done correctly.

What, When, Where this Weekend - FilmLinc's Scary Movies Series

2009-10-14T16:08:00.002-04:00

The Film Society of Lincoln Center has a great slate of horror films screening right now - lots of cult classics and new favorites. I wish I had the time and money to check out a bunch of these on the big screen, but I'll give a few of my recommendations below. (You can read the full list of screenings here.)

An American Werewolf in London - One of the few great werewolf movies made after the classic Universal-era films. (The only other great ones that come to mind are the first "Howling" and "In the Company of Wolves" - any others?) Writer/director John Landis will be present for a Q&A on Thursday. (I wonder how long it'll take before he gets his first "Thriller" question of the night?)

The Brood - When you try to rank your favorite David Cronenberg movies and this one lands around sixth or seventh on the list - it's just a reminder of how many strong films the guy's made. This is one of his weirdest ones - and that's saying a lot, considering he would go on to direct Videodrome just a few years later.

Phenomena - I feel the same way about Dario Argento that I do about Cronenberg - he had such an incredible streak of moviemaking in the 70s and 80s, particularly from Suspiria to Opera. In this movie, a young Jennifer Connelly talks to insects to solve murders. Also, there's some business with a deformed little person and a highly-suspicious chimp. Really, I don't know how to properly explain this movie, but I enjoyed it.

Dead Alive - One of the funniest zombie movies out there, made long before Shaun of the Dead or Zombieland. Also, one of the bloodiest. So, so much blood. Still not sure how Peter Jackson went from this to Lord of the Rings, but I'm glad he did. Highly recommended.

Night of the Living Dead 1990 - Remakes rarely live up to the original film, but this Tom Savini-piloted remake of George Romero's classic does enough differently to make things entertaining, especially if you've seen the original a dozen times. The more familiar you are with the first one, the more this one'll toy with your expectations. The only negative thing to say? They somehow managed to make the new Cooper even more grating.