I just finished reading a few hundred scripts for one of those "searching for new talent" programs, where aspiring writers send in samples of their work in the hope of being one of the five or six chosen for the mentoring program.
It's a wonderful way to identify new talent among those who don't have "connections" in the business and over my years of doing it I've seen a sharp increase in the quality of scripts. When I started doing this, at least half were sub-par efforts, the work of people who seemed to think that putting dialogue on a page was the proper way to write a script. Now, the proliferation of books and classes about TV and screen writing has made hopeful writers much better at the basics. It still comes down to creative talent, can you capture the essence of your characters and tell a good story, but the great majority of the script now cluster around the mid-level of the scale rather than the bottom.
So, what's my complaint? The little things that just show you didn't do your homework or are careless. If you've read other entries in this blog, we'll call it "Jimmy Hendricks Disease." No one wants to hire a lazy writer and when I come to the end of an act on a "CSI: Miami" spec script and the writer types "zinger before the commercial to come" rather than actually creating a zinger, I'm tempted to just put the script aside at that point and move on. You're being judged on what you can offer, if you offer nothing, don't expect the judges to think, "well, maybe he/she can come up with something later." This is your shot, take it. To use a baseball metaphor, go down swinging, not looking.
I also read a "Grey's Anatomy" where the writer didn't think to check the name of the hospital ("Seattle Grey's" rather than "Seattle Grace") and a "Desperate Housewives" spec where Bree's children were labeled merely "Boy" and "Girl." Go on IMDB.com and check a cast list! Come on! Show me some effort!
This particular program was for TV writers, so I was amazed by how many people thought sending in something other than a TV script was proper. Even if the program allows other types of writing for the submissions, don't forget what you're shooting for. If you're allowed to submit two samples and want to show off your "range," submit a comedy and a drama script. You've entered the program because you want, in this case, to be a TV writer. Are you telling me you've never written a TV script? Then how passionate are you about this type of writing? Again, take the time to show me that you've made the effort.
Just in case you're thinking I might arbitrarily dismiss short stories, plays and feature submissions, I don't. In fact, some of them got passed along to the next level. However, if you're on the borderline, chances are an average TV script (showing that you've paid attention to TV enough to get characters, tone, story type and details right) will get higher marks than an average short story (which might be creative, but has no dialogue, so how can I give you good marks for that?)
The programs are looking for passionate, creative, driven individuals who want to put the time and effort into becoming a success in a demanding field. Show that you want it, not that you're just submitting whatever you've written lately.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
Boy am I a lazy blogger. What follows is something I dashed off and submitted to "McSweeney's." An interesting site if you've never been there. They turned it down, but I figured I could put it somewhere for my vast audience here.
Pop-Wow
“Here they are again,” thought Sandy.
Another Wednesday, another meeting of the “Plotters to Overthrow the Present World Order of Worthlessness.” Or POP-WOW, for short. The five members came up with the name when they were seven years old. Now they’re all thirty-two, but are still plotting to take over the world and refine their plans over weekly breakfasts at Arnie’s Midnight Diner. Breakfasts of blueberry pancakes and three side orders of bacon.
“Because blueberries are brain food,” claims Dorothy Lemberson, mother of seven. “Bacon contains the fat that is an essential ingredient for lubricating a body’s joints. Jewish people can substitute lamb and goat fat, but vegetarians are just out of luck. That’s why they are so grumpy.”
Each member of POP-WOW has at least five kids. Sandy believes part of the plot has something to do with re-populating the world with their own families. The waitress in their section (for they sit at the same table, even waiting for it if it’s occupied) for the past ten years, Sandy has picked up bits and pieces of their plans as she takes orders and delivers the plates and refills. They’ve come to trust her, content in the opinion that she is just not smart enough to comprehend their plans.
Oh, she’s smart enough all right. Smart enough to comprehend that they’re fully-functioning delusionals. It’s a side effect of a dose of radiation the received one day when they were all three years old. Of all the horrific claims scientists have made about exposure to radioactivity, the one that affects these three is never mentioned. Sandy knows, she’s checked dozens of websites dedicated to the topic on the Internet. They suffer no physical abnormalities, just two mental ones. Delusions of grandeur and an inability to stay on topic.
The story of these five begins in March of 1979, when the nuclear power plant at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania leaked radiation into the atmosphere. Through a trick of nature, a dose of this radiation was swept up above the clouds, floated north and deposited itself on the playground of the Mildred Middlestone Preschool in Williamsport, PA. Most of the kids were inside, but Dorothy (then Sanders) and four of her playmates were lollygagging by the sand box and were dosed with a powerful dose of radiation. Their teacher, Miss Cleoletta Ferndale, noticed they glowed when they came inside. Other than a quickly fading electro-magnetism that tugged at the metal on anyone who approached them, doctors at Williamsport Community Hospital couldn’t find anything wrong and their parents, striving to not frighten the children, told the kids that they had had magic fairy dust sprinkled on them and were now exceptional children. As three-year-olds, the kids didn’t know what to make of this. By age seven, they had decided it meant that they would rule the world. It seems that Brently Krawonski had seen Madonna proclaim on the old TV show “American Bandstand” that her ambition was to “rule the world” and that sounded like a good idea to Brently and his friends.
Over the years, the plans had evolved from hording apples to throw at anyone who tried to stop them, a plot exposed when Dorothy’s older brother Kent got hold of her journal and took to the story to the local paper, which did a “human interest” on the eight-year-old girl, to the present plot, which has something to do with jet packs and convincing governmental leaders to hire the five as consultants. Once they are imbedded in various world governments, or possibly the United Nations to make it simpler, they will take over.
How the five remain convinced that they are capable of leading the world has been reinforced by seminal events in their lives. Dorothy was president of her sorority at Slippery Rock University, thus feels she’d be an excellent World President. Byron Peters was the QB for Williamsport High’s football team in 1992 and 1993 and sees himself as “Commander of the Newly Assembled Armed Forces,” despite the fact that his leadership skills on the football field resulted in a record of 0-18. Brently has invented 124 different useful gadgets for the home such as the “sock vacuum” and the “hanging cat hotel.” None of the 124 has attracted any interest from investors, but Brently remains convinced he’s a genius. After all, that is what his mother always told him and she promised to never lie to him. He’s in line to become “Commerce Commander of the Colonies.” Sally Wiggins has chaired committees for the PTA and her church guild every year since high school graduation, thus will make a perfect “World Events Coordinator” and looks forward to adding knitting and candle making to the Olympics. Finally, Daniel Beaulieu will use the knowledge he gained in the Boy Scouts, where he earned a merit badge in forestry (his only merit badge), to reverse global warming.
Sandy’s opinion of the plan is that it seems rather silly, but the group insists that sounding silly will help them catch the world unaware. However, the inability to stay on topic manifests its by making the five to be agreeable on every idea that one of them brings forth, without debating or discussion of anything. Thus, when one comes up with a plan, they all immediately agree. When one of them suggests a change, they again agree. So, the plan is constantly in flux, destined to never be fulfilled.
This “agreeableness” might also explain why they all have five or more kids.
So, for now, Sandy serves them their pancakes and bacon and they launch into the latest variation on their plot. Daniel has just suggested putting a video on YouTube to explain their plan to the masses. The suggestion has been unanimously approved. As they do every week, they invite Sandy to join them so they can have an opinion of the “common woman.” She thanks them for the offer but turns it down. She has other tables to tend to and knows they’ll give her a big tip, as the five never were very good at math. To figure out a 15% tip, they multiple the bill by 15, rather than. .15.
Though no one takes POP-WOW seriously at present, if someday a plot for world domination has its genesis in Williamsport, PA, don’t say you haven’t been warned.
Pop-Wow
“Here they are again,” thought Sandy.
Another Wednesday, another meeting of the “Plotters to Overthrow the Present World Order of Worthlessness.” Or POP-WOW, for short. The five members came up with the name when they were seven years old. Now they’re all thirty-two, but are still plotting to take over the world and refine their plans over weekly breakfasts at Arnie’s Midnight Diner. Breakfasts of blueberry pancakes and three side orders of bacon.
“Because blueberries are brain food,” claims Dorothy Lemberson, mother of seven. “Bacon contains the fat that is an essential ingredient for lubricating a body’s joints. Jewish people can substitute lamb and goat fat, but vegetarians are just out of luck. That’s why they are so grumpy.”
Each member of POP-WOW has at least five kids. Sandy believes part of the plot has something to do with re-populating the world with their own families. The waitress in their section (for they sit at the same table, even waiting for it if it’s occupied) for the past ten years, Sandy has picked up bits and pieces of their plans as she takes orders and delivers the plates and refills. They’ve come to trust her, content in the opinion that she is just not smart enough to comprehend their plans.
Oh, she’s smart enough all right. Smart enough to comprehend that they’re fully-functioning delusionals. It’s a side effect of a dose of radiation the received one day when they were all three years old. Of all the horrific claims scientists have made about exposure to radioactivity, the one that affects these three is never mentioned. Sandy knows, she’s checked dozens of websites dedicated to the topic on the Internet. They suffer no physical abnormalities, just two mental ones. Delusions of grandeur and an inability to stay on topic.
The story of these five begins in March of 1979, when the nuclear power plant at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania leaked radiation into the atmosphere. Through a trick of nature, a dose of this radiation was swept up above the clouds, floated north and deposited itself on the playground of the Mildred Middlestone Preschool in Williamsport, PA. Most of the kids were inside, but Dorothy (then Sanders) and four of her playmates were lollygagging by the sand box and were dosed with a powerful dose of radiation. Their teacher, Miss Cleoletta Ferndale, noticed they glowed when they came inside. Other than a quickly fading electro-magnetism that tugged at the metal on anyone who approached them, doctors at Williamsport Community Hospital couldn’t find anything wrong and their parents, striving to not frighten the children, told the kids that they had had magic fairy dust sprinkled on them and were now exceptional children. As three-year-olds, the kids didn’t know what to make of this. By age seven, they had decided it meant that they would rule the world. It seems that Brently Krawonski had seen Madonna proclaim on the old TV show “American Bandstand” that her ambition was to “rule the world” and that sounded like a good idea to Brently and his friends.
Over the years, the plans had evolved from hording apples to throw at anyone who tried to stop them, a plot exposed when Dorothy’s older brother Kent got hold of her journal and took to the story to the local paper, which did a “human interest” on the eight-year-old girl, to the present plot, which has something to do with jet packs and convincing governmental leaders to hire the five as consultants. Once they are imbedded in various world governments, or possibly the United Nations to make it simpler, they will take over.
How the five remain convinced that they are capable of leading the world has been reinforced by seminal events in their lives. Dorothy was president of her sorority at Slippery Rock University, thus feels she’d be an excellent World President. Byron Peters was the QB for Williamsport High’s football team in 1992 and 1993 and sees himself as “Commander of the Newly Assembled Armed Forces,” despite the fact that his leadership skills on the football field resulted in a record of 0-18. Brently has invented 124 different useful gadgets for the home such as the “sock vacuum” and the “hanging cat hotel.” None of the 124 has attracted any interest from investors, but Brently remains convinced he’s a genius. After all, that is what his mother always told him and she promised to never lie to him. He’s in line to become “Commerce Commander of the Colonies.” Sally Wiggins has chaired committees for the PTA and her church guild every year since high school graduation, thus will make a perfect “World Events Coordinator” and looks forward to adding knitting and candle making to the Olympics. Finally, Daniel Beaulieu will use the knowledge he gained in the Boy Scouts, where he earned a merit badge in forestry (his only merit badge), to reverse global warming.
Sandy’s opinion of the plan is that it seems rather silly, but the group insists that sounding silly will help them catch the world unaware. However, the inability to stay on topic manifests its by making the five to be agreeable on every idea that one of them brings forth, without debating or discussion of anything. Thus, when one comes up with a plan, they all immediately agree. When one of them suggests a change, they again agree. So, the plan is constantly in flux, destined to never be fulfilled.
This “agreeableness” might also explain why they all have five or more kids.
So, for now, Sandy serves them their pancakes and bacon and they launch into the latest variation on their plot. Daniel has just suggested putting a video on YouTube to explain their plan to the masses. The suggestion has been unanimously approved. As they do every week, they invite Sandy to join them so they can have an opinion of the “common woman.” She thanks them for the offer but turns it down. She has other tables to tend to and knows they’ll give her a big tip, as the five never were very good at math. To figure out a 15% tip, they multiple the bill by 15, rather than. .15.
Though no one takes POP-WOW seriously at present, if someday a plot for world domination has its genesis in Williamsport, PA, don’t say you haven’t been warned.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Rhetoric of the Writer's Strike
This on-going work stoppage has done little more than hurt people in the short-term and make both sides look like children with their immature "we're trying so hard and they're doing nothing" outbursts.
The latest is an entry on a strike blog site (I don't know the legalities of copying blogs, so I won't cut and paste the relatively brief diatribe) where a blogger, whom I presume is a writer based on the post's POV, rants about executives from CBS/Paramount going on a retreat this weekend. The angle of the post is that the execs are basking in luxury while the downtrodden writers are beating the pavement and struggling to pay their bills.
Of course, the blogger neglects to bring up the fact that such retreats are regularly scheduled no matter what is going on at the company. The blogger would like the reader to believe that the negotiations are being put on hold for this, but there is no evidence that any sessions have been scheduled (both sides seem more interested in putting off negotiating than actually doing any and always blaming the other side) or that anyone going has anything to do with the negotiating.
It's also been the WGA stance that the majority of their member writers make little money most years, basically waiting for that "big break" that brings in the bucks. Thus, the fact that the WGA is on strike really shouldn't have much impact on most members. The idea that they're all "struggling to pay their bills" seems to be a way of life for a member, based on their own words since the strike began. The only ones being hurt are the successful ones, as they're not drawing a paycheck.
The latest is an entry on a strike blog site (I don't know the legalities of copying blogs, so I won't cut and paste the relatively brief diatribe) where a blogger, whom I presume is a writer based on the post's POV, rants about executives from CBS/Paramount going on a retreat this weekend. The angle of the post is that the execs are basking in luxury while the downtrodden writers are beating the pavement and struggling to pay their bills.
Of course, the blogger neglects to bring up the fact that such retreats are regularly scheduled no matter what is going on at the company. The blogger would like the reader to believe that the negotiations are being put on hold for this, but there is no evidence that any sessions have been scheduled (both sides seem more interested in putting off negotiating than actually doing any and always blaming the other side) or that anyone going has anything to do with the negotiating.
It's also been the WGA stance that the majority of their member writers make little money most years, basically waiting for that "big break" that brings in the bucks. Thus, the fact that the WGA is on strike really shouldn't have much impact on most members. The idea that they're all "struggling to pay their bills" seems to be a way of life for a member, based on their own words since the strike began. The only ones being hurt are the successful ones, as they're not drawing a paycheck.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Recent Movies I've Read
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.
"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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)