As the end of the year approaches, films are released at a furious pace and I start noticing more popping into theatres for which I read the scripts. Some of these might be playing at your local theatre, so I figure I'll toss in my two cents. Keep in mind, the translation of script to screen can improve or diminish what is on the page:
"Mr Magorium's Wonder Emporium." Here's the only one from this list that I've seen so far, and I must say it's a bit of a disappointment. I thought the script was very imaginative, but the film emphasizes too much "wonder" and not enough of the characters. I also didn't like Dustin Hoffman's interpretation of the title character. On the other hand, my kids loved it.
"Into The Wild." Already on many "Top Ten" lists, I found the script to be tedious, but what really turned me off was the main character. To me, he was too self-involved to be of interest. Most of the reviews I've read have emphasized how beautiful it all looks. I always hesitate when the main thing I take from a film review is "the pictures are pretty."
"Juno." Another well-reviewed film, I liked the characters a whole lot. A nice variation on the typical "high school movie."
"Thirty Days of Night." Good premise for a horror-thriller, but becomes repetitious after awhile. Of interest for those who like scares, but probably not for others.
"3:10 To Yuma." Just a dang good ol' fashioned Western.
"Dan In Real Life." This might be gone already, but I found it to be a sweet script about a man trying to deal with life. That said, it's just the type of story that can go wrong in translation. (Reviewers have been generally harsh.)
"The Diving Bell and the Butterfly." Another one that film critics are falling all over themselves to praise, the script felt one-dimensional and claustrophobic (which, granted, is part of the point). Not something I plan to see until it's on cable.
"I Know Who Killed Me." I'd be surprised if you could find this still playing. I didn't buy into the premise at all.
"Love In The Time of Cholera." People love the book (which I've never read), but critics find the movie too slow. This is the type of film that I always try to be aware of whether or not a critic has read the book. Expectations can be too high for them. As for the script, I thought it was well done, though I can see how it might be considered "slow," but my take is that's how it's supposed to unfold,. Probably something just for those who really like romantic movies.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
The Last Script in Hollywood
Dateline, July 17, 2014. With the Writer's Guild strike in the middle of its seventh year, and talks suspended after a food fight broke out between the sides at the last negotiating session, Hollywood faces the final crisis of the strike. For though the TV networks have changed and survived, unproduced film scripts are about to run out.
Reworking old formulas and ideas has kept new programming on the TV airwaves. The CW, which had been seen as a floundering network prior to the strike, found an unlikely source of surprise hits based on its 2009 offering "The Bob Show," where random people named Bob were followed around by cameras and the audience voted a prize for the person with the most interesting life (this fall's versions will be "The Dwayne Show" and "The Debra Show"). CBS decided to cash in on a long-time joke at its expense with the reality "CSI: Fargo" and has breathed new life into its "Big Brother" and "Survivor" skeins. Where those shows formerly would attract aspiring actors and actresses hoping to get noticed, now well-known stars vie for slots on the shows as a way to keep their names in the public eye. The latest edition of "Big Brother" features members of the casts of the three scripted CSI shows, "Cold Case" and "NCIS" in a special "season of investigations." NBC has followed in a similar vein, casting actors looking for new careers in their "Apprentice" series. In addition to the two Donald Trump versions airing Wednesdays and Thursdays, this fall will see both a Steve Jobs version and one where the contestants compete for a government job, hosted by Vice President Barack Obama. ABC continues in its quest to match up every unmarried person in the U.S. with its expanded "The Bachelor" series and created variations on both "Extreme Makeover" ("Extreme Makeover: Hotel Edition," "Exteme Makeover: Unoccupied Loft Space Edition" and "Extreme Makeover: Fido's Doghouse") and "Dancing With the Stars" ("Dancing With Captains of Industry," "Dancing With Your Congressman"), while Fox sticks to what worked before the strike, "American Idol" and its animated shows that aren't covered by the WGA contract.
But for the theatrical film side of the business, the crisis has arrived. After scripts judged "ready for production" ran out in 2009, Hollywood studios reverted to remaking old scripts with no revisions. That policy led to the disastrous "less than one billion dollar summer" of 2010, so they retrenched and began making films of the scripts they had bought, developed and then abandoned for one reason or another. Executives' days were filled with phone calls and conferences over which of the dozens of drafts of these projects was best. Attempts to piece together "one great draft" from pages of many proved to be unworkable, as continuity suffered. Even inserting a car chase, fight or explosion every fifteen pages didn't help many of these scripts.
Now, all but one of the backlog of abandoned scripts has been produced. A feature film adaptation of "What Makes Sammy Run?" that has been on the shelf of many studios over the years will go into production in August as a joint venture of Warners, Disney, Universal, Fox, Paramount, Sony and MGM. Starring roles haven't been cast yet, but word has it that actors are offering to not only slash their fees, but possibly work for free just to have something to do. Once this film is complete, most of the last offices of each of the film companies will shut down until the strike is resolved. Oddly, considering the issues of the strike, the sole office open at many studios will be the one handling residuals.
Looking back over the years of this strike, one has to wonder if the writers are finally going to back down from their stance of "we're not going to let them tell us what to do anymore," which was their battle cry after the DGA and SAG both came to agreements with the producers back in 2008 and tried to convince the writers to follow suit. As many have said for years, it's not money that runs Hollywood, but ego.
Reworking old formulas and ideas has kept new programming on the TV airwaves. The CW, which had been seen as a floundering network prior to the strike, found an unlikely source of surprise hits based on its 2009 offering "The Bob Show," where random people named Bob were followed around by cameras and the audience voted a prize for the person with the most interesting life (this fall's versions will be "The Dwayne Show" and "The Debra Show"). CBS decided to cash in on a long-time joke at its expense with the reality "CSI: Fargo" and has breathed new life into its "Big Brother" and "Survivor" skeins. Where those shows formerly would attract aspiring actors and actresses hoping to get noticed, now well-known stars vie for slots on the shows as a way to keep their names in the public eye. The latest edition of "Big Brother" features members of the casts of the three scripted CSI shows, "Cold Case" and "NCIS" in a special "season of investigations." NBC has followed in a similar vein, casting actors looking for new careers in their "Apprentice" series. In addition to the two Donald Trump versions airing Wednesdays and Thursdays, this fall will see both a Steve Jobs version and one where the contestants compete for a government job, hosted by Vice President Barack Obama. ABC continues in its quest to match up every unmarried person in the U.S. with its expanded "The Bachelor" series and created variations on both "Extreme Makeover" ("Extreme Makeover: Hotel Edition," "Exteme Makeover: Unoccupied Loft Space Edition" and "Extreme Makeover: Fido's Doghouse") and "Dancing With the Stars" ("Dancing With Captains of Industry," "Dancing With Your Congressman"), while Fox sticks to what worked before the strike, "American Idol" and its animated shows that aren't covered by the WGA contract.
But for the theatrical film side of the business, the crisis has arrived. After scripts judged "ready for production" ran out in 2009, Hollywood studios reverted to remaking old scripts with no revisions. That policy led to the disastrous "less than one billion dollar summer" of 2010, so they retrenched and began making films of the scripts they had bought, developed and then abandoned for one reason or another. Executives' days were filled with phone calls and conferences over which of the dozens of drafts of these projects was best. Attempts to piece together "one great draft" from pages of many proved to be unworkable, as continuity suffered. Even inserting a car chase, fight or explosion every fifteen pages didn't help many of these scripts.
Now, all but one of the backlog of abandoned scripts has been produced. A feature film adaptation of "What Makes Sammy Run?" that has been on the shelf of many studios over the years will go into production in August as a joint venture of Warners, Disney, Universal, Fox, Paramount, Sony and MGM. Starring roles haven't been cast yet, but word has it that actors are offering to not only slash their fees, but possibly work for free just to have something to do. Once this film is complete, most of the last offices of each of the film companies will shut down until the strike is resolved. Oddly, considering the issues of the strike, the sole office open at many studios will be the one handling residuals.
Looking back over the years of this strike, one has to wonder if the writers are finally going to back down from their stance of "we're not going to let them tell us what to do anymore," which was their battle cry after the DGA and SAG both came to agreements with the producers back in 2008 and tried to convince the writers to follow suit. As many have said for years, it's not money that runs Hollywood, but ego.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Don't Annoy The Story Editors (or whoever is in charge of the readers)
Whether it's because reading is an isolating job and my social skills have diminished since I began this work or whether I just didn't have great social skills to begin with, every once in a while I speak without thinking. In general discourse with friends, such is understood and everyone moves on. However, when I do it in conversation with a Story Editor or Creative Executive, I get the feeling the comment isn't so easily dismissed.
There have been a number of instances in my past where, I believe, a simple comment led either to a dismissal of my services or a negative impression on a Story Editor that has kept me from future employment.
The first was the simplest. I had been reading for this company for about a month when the Assistant Story Editor bluntly told me to "proofread your coverage." I told him I did proofread my coverage and asked what the problem was. The "problem" turned out to be that the Story Editor hated typos and had found a few in my coverages. I tried to explain the difficulty in proofreading one's own work. It's always best to get a different set of eyes when it comes to proofreading, as the writer will...that's about as far as I got before the ASE interrupted with "just do it." I shot back "I do" and left. About a week later, I was told they had "too many readers" and didn't require my services any longer. I truly believe I'd still be working there if I'd just said, "I'll strive to do better" rather than return the ASE's dismissive attitude.
So, rule #1. Be nice to them, they have the power.
In another instance, I had finally, after many years, landed a gig at a studio (well-paying, benefits, consistent work). Two other Readers were there with me at the orientation meeting. At one point, the Story Editor made a mention of how he had "heard a lot about all of us." I snorted. You know, a short semi-laugh that is usually interpreted as being derisive. Why did I do this? I just couldn't imagine that Story Editors spend a lot of time talking amongst themselves about Readers. Of course, if I had just thought about it for a second, I would have realized that I had submitted a resume and he might of actually have called a few places I worked for references. End result, I worked one week and then was let go. Could the two events be unrelated? Possibly, but why take the chance?
Rule #2. Control yourself. Derisive attitudes don't make the best first impression.
Finally, I was present in a discussion of a new contract the Reader's union had signed that included a provision for employers to work a Reader "any 8 of 24." I.e., awork day could be any eight hours, not just daytime hours. It's a way of getting rid of overtime, as you just assign a reader or two to work a 8 p.m. to 4 a.m. shift and they read overnight scripts without getting extra for them. The Story Editor in the conversation was extolling this as a wonderful idea. I pointed out that a it was likely that a Reader was likely to just want to get done with the work and get to bed, leading to hastily-written coverage that could have used more time for thoughtful analysis. During the day, you know you're there for eight hours and can possibly put the script aside after reading it or synopsizing it to ponder it. At night, most (night owls being an exception) just want to get to bed. You hardly consider "Great, I have until 4 in the morning to finish this." (Actually, you would have until seven or eight, since no one is sitting up at 4 waiting for the coverage, but that's another discussion.) The Story Editor's response was that you're being paid for eight hours, so you have an obligation to use the entire eight hours to work. I argued that this thinking went against human nature. When she went back to her argument, I knew further argument was futile and dropped it. For whatever reason, I've never been hired by this Story Editor, but I've always assumed it had to do with this discussion, which might make it seem, in her eyes, that I would be argumentative and not want to do my work.
Rule #3. Don't make it seem like you don't like to work.
Now, I might just be paranoid and nothing I said had anything to do with my losing or not getting a job in these instances. On the other hand, they just might be out to get me.
There have been a number of instances in my past where, I believe, a simple comment led either to a dismissal of my services or a negative impression on a Story Editor that has kept me from future employment.
The first was the simplest. I had been reading for this company for about a month when the Assistant Story Editor bluntly told me to "proofread your coverage." I told him I did proofread my coverage and asked what the problem was. The "problem" turned out to be that the Story Editor hated typos and had found a few in my coverages. I tried to explain the difficulty in proofreading one's own work. It's always best to get a different set of eyes when it comes to proofreading, as the writer will...that's about as far as I got before the ASE interrupted with "just do it." I shot back "I do" and left. About a week later, I was told they had "too many readers" and didn't require my services any longer. I truly believe I'd still be working there if I'd just said, "I'll strive to do better" rather than return the ASE's dismissive attitude.
So, rule #1. Be nice to them, they have the power.
In another instance, I had finally, after many years, landed a gig at a studio (well-paying, benefits, consistent work). Two other Readers were there with me at the orientation meeting. At one point, the Story Editor made a mention of how he had "heard a lot about all of us." I snorted. You know, a short semi-laugh that is usually interpreted as being derisive. Why did I do this? I just couldn't imagine that Story Editors spend a lot of time talking amongst themselves about Readers. Of course, if I had just thought about it for a second, I would have realized that I had submitted a resume and he might of actually have called a few places I worked for references. End result, I worked one week and then was let go. Could the two events be unrelated? Possibly, but why take the chance?
Rule #2. Control yourself. Derisive attitudes don't make the best first impression.
Finally, I was present in a discussion of a new contract the Reader's union had signed that included a provision for employers to work a Reader "any 8 of 24." I.e., awork day could be any eight hours, not just daytime hours. It's a way of getting rid of overtime, as you just assign a reader or two to work a 8 p.m. to 4 a.m. shift and they read overnight scripts without getting extra for them. The Story Editor in the conversation was extolling this as a wonderful idea. I pointed out that a it was likely that a Reader was likely to just want to get done with the work and get to bed, leading to hastily-written coverage that could have used more time for thoughtful analysis. During the day, you know you're there for eight hours and can possibly put the script aside after reading it or synopsizing it to ponder it. At night, most (night owls being an exception) just want to get to bed. You hardly consider "Great, I have until 4 in the morning to finish this." (Actually, you would have until seven or eight, since no one is sitting up at 4 waiting for the coverage, but that's another discussion.) The Story Editor's response was that you're being paid for eight hours, so you have an obligation to use the entire eight hours to work. I argued that this thinking went against human nature. When she went back to her argument, I knew further argument was futile and dropped it. For whatever reason, I've never been hired by this Story Editor, but I've always assumed it had to do with this discussion, which might make it seem, in her eyes, that I would be argumentative and not want to do my work.
Rule #3. Don't make it seem like you don't like to work.
Now, I might just be paranoid and nothing I said had anything to do with my losing or not getting a job in these instances. On the other hand, they just might be out to get me.
Before I Was So Rudely Interrupted
No, it wasn't a misprint in my last entry. I fully intended to post on 8/13, not wait until 9/13. However, when I tried to log on after my vacation (a wonderful time, BTW), the great gods of the blogworld wouldn't allow me.
I got a variety of reasons, from "e-mail address doesn't exist" to "wrong password" (even though my e-mail address certainly does exist and I keep a list of my passwords, so that was not likely to be wrong since it worked 20 times before) and then got lazy about trying to figure out the problem. Finally, I found a "back door" entry and now it all works again.
Let's see if I still have anything to say.
I got a variety of reasons, from "e-mail address doesn't exist" to "wrong password" (even though my e-mail address certainly does exist and I keep a list of my passwords, so that was not likely to be wrong since it worked 20 times before) and then got lazy about trying to figure out the problem. Finally, I found a "back door" entry and now it all works again.
Let's see if I still have anything to say.
Thursday, August 2, 2007
On Hiatus
Well, it has become so-o-o-o-o-o-o slow here in the dog days of summer, that I'm packing off for a vacation myself.
I'll dig up a new story or what-not upon my return, August 13.
I'll dig up a new story or what-not upon my return, August 13.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Two Movies To Check Out
Loved these two the first time I saw them and have watched them repeatedly. As the years pass, I meet more and more people who haven't seen them or even heard of them, so I'm giving them a shout out here. Both are from 1980:
"The Stunt Man" starring Peter O'Toole, directed by Richard Rush, written by Lawrence Marcus and Richard Rush.
"Breaker Morant" starring Edward Woodward, directed by Bruce Beresford, written by Kenneth Ross and Jonathan Hardy.
The latter is a military courtroom drama set during the Boer War (look it up in Wikipedia if you've never heard of that particular conflict...the movie is based on a true story), the former a story of an arrogant director doing everything in his power, including covering up the death of a stunt man and replacing him with an escaped convict, to finish his film.
"Morant" is a great example of how to open up a stage play for a film. "Stunt Man" has wonderful theme music.
Check 'em out.
"The Stunt Man" starring Peter O'Toole, directed by Richard Rush, written by Lawrence Marcus and Richard Rush.
"Breaker Morant" starring Edward Woodward, directed by Bruce Beresford, written by Kenneth Ross and Jonathan Hardy.
The latter is a military courtroom drama set during the Boer War (look it up in Wikipedia if you've never heard of that particular conflict...the movie is based on a true story), the former a story of an arrogant director doing everything in his power, including covering up the death of a stunt man and replacing him with an escaped convict, to finish his film.
"Morant" is a great example of how to open up a stage play for a film. "Stunt Man" has wonderful theme music.
Check 'em out.
Dog Days of Summer
There are a few times during the year when the work slows down. The most obvious one is the end of year holidays. Whether celebrating Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa or some other religious or secular holiday, mid-December, when office parties are in full swing, to the first week of January is a time of little work. Late July and early August are also a few weeks of lull, then there is Cannes (depending on the company, either during the festival or just after) and Spring Break week. It all adds up to about six weeks a year when little or no work comes in. Such requires expert budgeting of moneys to cover expenses during the lean times.
Like many, I have no patience for budgeting of money. When things are slow, I simply don't eat.
As for filling the time. Working on those scripts that just about any Reader worth his/her salt has stashed in a drawer is always a good idea. Or, if you're really ambitious, continuing work on your version of the Great American Novel. (Note: Philip Roth already wrote a book with that title. If you like baseball, it's a hoot. Can't say there is much potential as a film in it, though.)
But what we live for, like many Writers, is procrastination. Should be rewriting that sitcom spec? Gotta shop for groceries first. Get new batteries for your watches. Mow the lawn. Edge the lawn. Consider buying lawn seed for the bare patches. Hey, there's a "Law and Order" on A&E I haven't seen before.
I'd start writing now, but it's almost lunch time and I want to have a clear three or four hours with no interruptions.
Lunch is over. Gotta watch "NFL Live" on ESPN.
Damn, the rug looks dirty, better vacuum it. Forgot milk at the store, better go before it's too crowded.
Wow, I just got a great idea for a topic for my blog! Better write it before I forget.
A bit hot today. Think I'll wait 'til things cool down before starting on any real work.
You know, "Full House" is a really funny show. And they show four episodes back-to-back on Nickelodeon.
I should check iTunes to see if they have any new music for my iPod. Wow, it's getting near dinner time. The kids come home, the wife comes home. Gotta relax with the family.
But, first thing tomorrow, chapter four of my novel.
Like many, I have no patience for budgeting of money. When things are slow, I simply don't eat.
As for filling the time. Working on those scripts that just about any Reader worth his/her salt has stashed in a drawer is always a good idea. Or, if you're really ambitious, continuing work on your version of the Great American Novel. (Note: Philip Roth already wrote a book with that title. If you like baseball, it's a hoot. Can't say there is much potential as a film in it, though.)
But what we live for, like many Writers, is procrastination. Should be rewriting that sitcom spec? Gotta shop for groceries first. Get new batteries for your watches. Mow the lawn. Edge the lawn. Consider buying lawn seed for the bare patches. Hey, there's a "Law and Order" on A&E I haven't seen before.
I'd start writing now, but it's almost lunch time and I want to have a clear three or four hours with no interruptions.
Lunch is over. Gotta watch "NFL Live" on ESPN.
Damn, the rug looks dirty, better vacuum it. Forgot milk at the store, better go before it's too crowded.
Wow, I just got a great idea for a topic for my blog! Better write it before I forget.
A bit hot today. Think I'll wait 'til things cool down before starting on any real work.
You know, "Full House" is a really funny show. And they show four episodes back-to-back on Nickelodeon.
I should check iTunes to see if they have any new music for my iPod. Wow, it's getting near dinner time. The kids come home, the wife comes home. Gotta relax with the family.
But, first thing tomorrow, chapter four of my novel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)