Blog Talk with Mystery Man on Film A Look Back on 2007
Mystery Man on Film and I discuss 2007 screenwriting and film.
MM asked:
My first question to you, Unk, is how did you feel about 2007 in terms of screenwriting in general and the movies that were released?
The big problem for me here is that I have yet to see many of the supposedly better films of 2007. I feel unqualified to say that 2007 was an above average year.
The only 2007 films I felt compelled to watch were as follows:
Definitely better than its predecessor and defininitely worth watching. I would have tweaked the story just a bit and instead of having Crowe’s character talk about his mother throughout the film, substituted his father since Bale’s son is along for the ride. I think having Crowe talk us through fond memories of his father and then pulling the rug out from under us by telling us his father left him at the train station would have hit audiences harder…
But what do I know?
Casey Affleck can act.
I’m a huge fan of the original and in fact, it is one of my top ten favorite films. This one doesn’t even come close.
I had to see Costner make the stretch of being both good and bad guy since 3000 MILES TO GRACELAND bombed.
Maggie can act too.
What screenwriter wouldn’t want to see the 4th in the series that redefined action films? But to be honest, it was a bit dumbed down for my taste. I’d rather hear McClane say “Yippee ki-ay, motherfucker!”
The scene with the old man at the counter and the flip of the coin is worth the price of admission.
Yawn… I almost fell asleep.
Yawn again… I didn’t fall asleep but I sure as hell laughed my ass off when at least half of the audience left the theater after PLANET TERROR.
I just didn’t buy Hopkins’ “quinessential smart guy” character not being prepared for what happens at the end.
Touted as a modern remake of REAR WINDOW, also one of my top ten favorite films, I obviously had to see it. Wasn’t bad but wasn’t for me. The kids in the theater however, loved it.
I didn’t buy Smith being in his 50s. They showed him being either a Colonel or Lt. Colonel in the Army in a flashback sporting a beard. Shit like that takes me out of the movie. Why wasn’t he clean cut in the Army and sporting a beard in the aftermath? I could barely stand the CGI zombies as they looked CGI to me. I guess I liked THE OMEGA MAN too much. Take THAT story and stick it in I AM LEGEND and then I would have been impressed.
Underrated little action thriller. Decent story but could have been better.
Missed opportunities.
Joe… Never lose the hunger.
Yawn again.
I did see more films but nothing worth mentioning here… I have yet to see JUNO or THERE WILL BE BLOOD and a few others but as always I will eventually get to them. I don’t want to review any of the above films or spoil them for anyone that hasn’t seen ‘em yet.
From my above list however, the question remains…
I feel that screenwriting is on automatic pilot and it seems to come down to this…
- Pro screenwriters don’t care about being derivative
- Pro screenwriters think they have to be derivative
- The studios want derivative
- Pro screenwriters don’t continue to learn more about the art and the craft
Of course I’m talking about the overall aspect of screenwriting. I am highly aware that there are a couple of handfuls of Pro screenwriters out there trying to push the limits of their screenwriting but more than that?
I’m not too sure.
The proof is definitely not in the pudding which is one of the reasons I think screenwriting blogs are becoming more popular. When you read through a lot of the books and articles — by and large, there’s not a lot extra being taught. Purchase several of the best books on screenwriting and you pretty much have read most of what’s out there to learn.
The basics.
And you can tell from reading 99% of the scripts out there from people trying really hard to become a professional screenwriter — that they definitely know the basics. The basics are everywhere and can be easily learned but it’s that microcosm of scripts that you read that really seem to get it.
If that many… LOL.
A book or an article says to reveal character through action and dialogue. We get it. We know it. We’ve read it a hundred times yet we still forget to do that with our scripts.
Why?
Because it’s not the “basics” — rather, it’s one of those little extras that help separate the Pros from the wannabe pros. There’s just not enough information out there that covers those little extras that truly help pull a script up by its story and improve the writing. On top of that… When someone — a screenwriting blogger does finally attempt to reveal something they feel is a little extra, they still seem to leave something missing.
Which is one of the reasons I try to reply to any comment that asks for clarification… I know MM does that too but let’s face facts… It’s not done a lot.
I’m not saying that a post I make is even one of those little extras but I do try to write them in such a way as to generate thought and discussion and by no means am I always the answer man. I wholeheartedly welcome comments from anyone willing to join in with something worth reading.
So I guess I would say that the state of screenwriting in 2007 was interesting because believe it or not… Screenwriting blogs have some people a little scared. Some people that might be making money or trying to make money from selling their screenwriting knowledge.
But they aren’t the only ones… Other pro screenwriters — not the A-List but those lower on the totem pole are getting a little scared at some of the little extras that pop up on screenwriting blogs. Of course I have absolutely no real proof of that except maybe 50 plus emails I’ve received from supposed pro screenwriters since June 2006 complaining to me.
I find it bizarre that a mostly liberal mindset community would ever have a problem with others trying to help someone come up through the ranks so that everyone is on a level playing field and may the best man or woman win.
I’ve even shared some of my own stuff with a few pro screenwriters that I have not yet posted here and have had those screenwriters ask me not to share it. LOL.
I fucking hate that.
How are we ever going to push screenwriting back to where going to the theater to watch a movie is special again if we don’t try to help each other out? As far as I’m concerned, it should simply be a battle of imagination. Those that can come up with the best stories — win — all things being equal.
And in my own humble little way, I’m just trying to help make the playing ground equal.
Unk
EDIT: I almost forgot MM’s last question…
So, my last question to you is how much do you enjoy your anonymity? Is it a warm, protective blanket or a lonely, prison cell? How would your life change if your anonymity got stripped from you? Ya know, everything changes when people know who you are…
Well even if everyone knew who I was, I’d still be rather anonymous… Meaning that not a lot of screenwriters ever get catapulted into the limelight. So I’m happy with it. I’m not so sure I would be happy not to be able to walk down the street. It’s not a warm protective blanket — at least I don’t consider it that at all. I’m more or less a private kinda guy.
If people knew who I was — even from this blog — I’d be getting even more email than I get now that consistently keeps me from getting work done. It’s definitely no prison cell.
I like flying under the radar.
It’s who I am.
Comments
35 Responses to “Blog Talk with Mystery Man on Film A Look Back on 2007”
Leave a Reply
-
Find It
-
Recently Written
-
Categories
-
Screenwriting Stuff
- Script Secrets
- Word Play
- Screenwriter's Utopia
- StoryLink
- Screenwriting Expo
- Celtx
- Cinergy
- Zhura
- Scripped
- Plotbot
- Script Buddy
- StorYBook
- FreeThesaurus.net
- Mobysaurus
- Open Office
- Open Office Screenplay Template
- Abiword
- U.S. Copyright Form CO
- U.S. Copyright Form CO Instructions
- WGA West Registration
- WGA East Registration
- ScriptGirl
- Simply Scripts
-
Scribosphere
- 101
- Ann Wesley Hardin
- Bamboo Killers
- Borderline Inappropriate
- Brook Brannon
- Burbanked
- Carlo Conda’s Blog
- DanielMedley.com
- Dreams of a Nobody
- Fencing With The Fog
- Holy Embers Of Dreams
- I Write With Pictures
- If It Ain’t On The Page
- LAZY SCREENWRITER
- Living The Romantic Comedy
- ME
- My Excellent Adventures
- My Next One Will Be Better
- Mystery Man On Film
- Nicolle C. Jones
- On The Scene
- Our Man In Los Angeles
- Overheard Lines
- Paul Zadie
- Pimped Fiction
- Planet Pooks
- Pro Screenplays
- Red Right Hand
- Revealing Of The Soul
- Running Ahead Of Me
- Screamwriter
- Screenwriting For Hollywood
- Screenwriting Manifesto
- Script Notes
- Sex In A Sub
- Shouting Into The Wind
- Supergun Cinema SuperBlog
- The Moviequill
- The Poke Show
- The Scherer Joy Of Writing
- The Screenwriter’s League
- The Story Department
- The Unemployment Cafe
- The Word Demon
- Things They Won’t Tell You In Film School
- Think Virtue!
- Uninflected Images Juxtaposed
- Writer Joshua James
- Writing & Building
- Writing On Spec
-
Most Popular Posts
-
Monthly Archives
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
-
-
Blog Talk with Mystery Man on Film A Look Back on …
Bookmarked your post over at Blog Bookmarker.com!
I just watched the new 3:10 to Yuma. I liked it a lot, but agree the ending didn’t quite work as well as it could have.
SPOILERS
I thought they could have set up Crowe’s change of heart better (changing the mother to the father would have helped, I think). the biggest problem to me is that when they left for the station, I didn’t see that Crowe was turning and I didn’t buy that he would help Baile get to the station. Now, they only show him helping him after he tells him about his foot, but I didn’t buy that story turning him either.
I didn’t buy that he wouldn’t have killed him right there.
But the biggest thing for me is, why didn’t Crowe stop running as they’re making their way to the station? He could have easily stopped or ducked into a building isolating himself from Baile. I think the only way that ending could have really worked is if they better showed Crowe was turning on his guys and AT LEAST showed that he wanted to see Baile get him to the station, and he’d take his chances from there.
But, aside from that, I thought it was great. Hit it’s high point when Baile steps up and decides to bring Crowe to the station.
Great stuff, Unk.
We want a revolution in storytelling, we do.
One thing I also can share, now that I got a couple projects going through casting, is that notes you get back from certain actors of a certain weight, notes that have impact because they come from “talent” (acting as opposed to writing) those notes also push a project closer to derivative . . .
I don’t have a problem, per se, with derivative, as I mentioned before, and I agree with your definition of it (derivative vs homage) just wanted to note that there’s always a ton of pressure from non-writers, be it actors, directors, producers (and some times pro readers) for a writer to change what they wrote, and quite a lot of the time (not all) the changes they want are not positive ones, overall.
Other than that, really agree with much of what you wrote. And I loved 310 TO YUMA. I also loved ONCE, if you haven’t seen it, check it out (I blogged about it, too).
Best to ya, Unk, you DA MAN, you are.
I was in the same boat. 3:10 was the only movie I (truly) anticipated. However, I’m surprised so many people felt stretched to believe in the ending. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it’s GREAT the way that it is b/c it didn’t make that list - it earned a spot on my GOOD list. Still, I wasn’t bothered by what bothered many.
I want to challenge changing Crowe’s Mommy to his Daddy. Chekov wrote something before I was born that I read years ago and always carry with me.
Don’t be afraid to be awkward.
What this means to me is that a writer is impelled to tie all the bows pretty, to wrap her work in a tidy package, and make her work look (seemingly) perfect.
Now, I think it would be cleaner to change the mother to the father for obvious reasons. It would be easier for the audience to juxtapose Crowe’s disposition toward Batman - him having a son and all. It’s easy to see that narrative gear spinning in the back of Crowe’s mind when he continually assists Batman in his own incarceration.
However, this is why I liked that it was his mother. Instead of using that opportunity to make the motives behind Crowe and Batman’s relationship punch, the writer used the opportunity to deepen Crowe.
For a story about a guy dealing with the most masculine of thematic problems, there’s a lot of stuff in there that deals with themes that are typically feminine.
Batman’s been emasculated and now has an opportunity to imprint a counter impression upon the beans of those closest to him - including his own.
Of course he’s initially baited by the need for money (providing for ones family/masculine whateverness) but (this was mentioned by Tom’s high comment) that petty objective is transcended. Batman’s truth is not about providing for one’s family. Batman realizes that the opportunity to crystallize the essence of what a true family man is - to those closest to him - is more valuable than money. He’s found what he’s willing to die for.
What pushes all this meat down our throats is the conflict between him and Crowe. Now, if Crowe had seen this unfolding - batman’s transformation - and was impelled to act based upon the fact that it was his father who left him at the station - this would be a straight line. Nothing wrong there. Crowe would(more effortlessly) serve the theme. It would be more convenient.
However(because character is action serving the throughline)Crowe’s role as an adversary would be less. There would be less contrast to Batman. Less conflict with Batman. Less temptation to kill Batman. Less depth. And many of the adversarial elements (crowes gang, Batman’s son etc.) that plague batman wouldn’t have Crowe as a spokesman.
Batman serves as a loyal well meaning father - fallen on hard times and plagued by short comings, lack of respect, and low stature - for a son who has found no father figure in his own father.
Crowe serves as a bad father but a great provider for a gang of never-should-have-been-borns. If you look at that kid from the X-men who had wings, his role is the negative echo of Crowe’s son. He has total admiration for his father (Crowe) and remains loyal when he shouldn’t.
When he shouldn’t - Crowe shot a member of his own gang. He’s not to show weakness - a thing that Batman’s image is soaked in. Still, his son shows loyalty and is never tempted to serve Batman. And, yes, I know, that kid with the wings is not really his son.
Now, what does this have to do with the whole mother thing? Well, what drives these men to be the men they are? Well, according to 3:10, their parents.
Crowe was left by his mother, ironically, at the train station. He’s been a gangster ever since.
Batman’s father country or motherland - whatever LOL stretching here - abandoned him too, been a sorry SOB ever since.
Crowe draws nudes, birds, whatever. He is in constant detached observation (would make a great artist). There’s this whole feminine underbelly to what makes him tick. Also, he’s got that kid with the wings whose sexuality is questioned in the film, who is well aware that he looks up to him. He KNOWS that the gang is coming for him but the only guy who actually WANTS to go and get the boss - is The Kid with the Wings.
So you have all these feminine traits bestowed upon the(seemingly masculine) Crowe and all these masculine traits bestowed upon a seemingly emasculated.
I want to take a bold leap and play Freud. Crowe becomes the big bad boy who no one can hurt and everyone is afraid of because in all actuality, he’s just a scared little boy who wants his Mommy. lol - ugh. When he comes across a father figure who is (he’s observant enough to see this) showing him what a real man is as opposed to a young boys dream of what man is (and ultimately what he believes drove his mother away), he SECRETLY admires him - batman.
How f***ed up is that? It’s sick.
There are NO men in this movie except the hero and he doesn’t know it. When, with the help of all the little f’d up boys, he sacrifices himself in order to embody the idea of MANLYHOOD (so not a word).
Anyway, I thought that the mother bit added a bizarre humor and sense of depth there that we usually don’t see in action dramas let alone Westerns.
Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to call this Brokeback Yuma but when I looked at the themes and all the little gears
I was really surprised to find how many were pink.
–
I think that the problem with most pro writers is that they are well aware that to get a draft past the suits, they’ve got bury, hide, suggest, quietly sneak in a lot of the dangerous, complicated, challenging, artful, ambitious STUFF. When they punch up more of what they obviously would LOVE to explore further - they lose the suits. So they bury the baby in the cake and make sure the trick candles are lit.
And agree UNK, you provide a way to level the playing field by creating a rich resource for writers to go to.
And to the complainers that the field is being leveled…
The folks that are going to be breathing down your necks sooner or later are going to breathing down your necks regardless of Unk’s blog. It’s just that, thanks to blogs like Unk’s, they’ll be breathing down your necks sooner rather than later.
3:10 to Yuma was the kind of story I’d love to write. I never thought about the whole father / mother thing, but I think you’re right. Still, I loved that movie so much.
You almost fell asleep during Zodiac. I did fall asleep during Zodiac. When I woke up my friends started to explain what I missed but I cut them off because I didn’t care.
So Unk, help me out here: Is it wrong that I’m *in love* with the brand of crazy Costner sells in 3000 MILES… Haven’t seen MR. BROOKS but I was considering it for this very same reason.
JUNO- Meh, chinese food. But I will continue to pay just to hear JK Simmons’ voice.
Also 3:10 TO YUMA- Goddamn what a movie! “defininitely worth watching” indeed! I don’t know that a change in the mother/father would have added any gravitas for me. I really enjoyed the subtle arc and the way Wade (Crowe’s character) seems almost fully formed and methodically gets bits & depth revealed along the way, in contrast to Evans (Bale), who is the major external transformative anchor to my thinking. It really puts the heart of the film as Wade recognizing and appreciating what Evans is trying to be. If the ending at all felt incomplete then I easily took it as a strong echo of Wade & Evans. Fucking good stuff.
What I’d like to know is the chances your screenplay will become a movie if it’s better than ‘derivative’ stuff that’s put onscreen nowadays.
Are producers making these half-arsed scripts into movies because there’s nothing better available? Or are the producers truly interested in the marketability and dumbed-down nature of crappy derivative sequels, remakes, videogame-to-movies, and so forth?
Curious I be.
You didn’t answer MM’s questions about Diablo Cody… it’s interesting to see the screenwriter (as opposed to the actors) get so much press!
Tom,
Agreed.
Josh,
I STILL DA MAN?
Ryan R.,
Differing opinions always welcome… I’ll agree to disagree. While I do agree with the “content” of your reply and Crowe’s character’s feminine side, I still think audiences would have been hit just a little harder if that had been tweaked a bit more. Yes, it might be an obvious tweak but what’s wrong with that if that particular tweak hits the audience harder?
Of course we will never know… LOL.
emily,
Okay, I might have blacked out a few minutes during Zodiac… LOL.
nicolle,
You’re still alive!
3000 MILES TO GRACELAND is one of my own guilty pleasures. I think it works. So no, you’re not wrong at all.
Haven’t seen JUNO but I’ve seen enough clips to get the gist. Not nearly my kind of movie so I’m in no real hurry to see it.
Loved 3:10 TO YUMA as well. I think the movie works and like anyone who wants to be a screenwriter, I think we all tend to think about those particular areas where we think the material could have been tweaked to work just a little better with the audience. But even so, I liked it a lot. I love westerns anyway and the reason I would have liked to see 3:10 do even better at the boxoffice is so that westerns could come trickling back to life.
Unfortunately, THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES died hard so it’s a wash at this point.
Carlo,
Great question… It’s a fine line and one that’s so fine that it’s blurred… LOL. I do think that above average imagination combined with a well written screenplay rises to the top like cream. A lot of the movies being made are in fact because there’s nothing better out there but let me clarify that. That’s the blurry line… LOL. We seem to be immersed in a pile of derivative shit or stuff that’s so artsy fartsy that it’ll never make any money.
The middle ground is almost non-existent which is why great screenplays get sold — plain and simple. The middle ground being seemingly non-derived material that’s not only well written but displays sophisticated imagination that is commensurate with the ticket-buying demographic.
Stuff that sells and does good boxoffice.
Ally,
You’re right… I somehow missed answering that question but I’m actually glad I did because earlier today, I caught Diablo Cody on Oprah as I was scrolling through my satellite channels.
MM said: “Do you think Diablo Cody is worthy of all this attention she’s getting?”
On one hand, I think it’s great any time a screenwriter enters the limelight. Just that alone does wonders for screenwriters overall. So in that respect, I think she’s worthy but MORE THAN THAT, I think screenwriters are worthy.
Without a screenwriter, THERE IS NO MOVIE.
Without an actor, there is still a movie. You can get another actor.
Without a director, there is still a movie. You can get another director.
Without a screenwriter, THERE IS NO MOVIE.
Of course I’m talking original stories…
On the other hand, her interview didn’t impress me. To me, she TRIED to come off as this seemingly natural talent that just popped up one day. She just started writing and bam, knocked out this fantastic screenplay.
To say that I’m skeptical would be an understatement and trust me, that’s not professional jealousy… I wish her nothing but the best and I actually THANK her for being yet another screenwriter that made it into the limelight.
That fact alone serves screenwriting and screenwriters very well.
And let’s face it, the combination of her having been a stripper and phone sex girl is the kind of stuff that makes stories that people sit up and listen to.
Nobody wants to hear about some poor mom or dad who raised 3 kids, went to work every fucking day — paid their taxes, served their country, yada yada yada… LOL.
Diablo Cody is the stuff that reality shows are based upon. Here today. Tomorrow?
Time will tell.
Unk
Still alive. Got onto a Japanese kick, there was lots and lots of sake and I ended up passing out at O’Hare on a layover during the holidays. Always fun! Now I’m thinking I should start drinking & catching flicks with Ryan. In the meantime looking forward to catching up on the structure posts and jumping back into the grind.
And I’m going to think of you fondly when those five-hundred laser sights draw down on Murphy next time I watch it.
Nice thoughts Unk.
Funny thing how DERIVATIVE is coming up so often these days. A guy at worked who asks me about my writing once and a while, asked me today why so many movies are coming out that seem to be just the same as every other movie? His prime example was P.S. I LOVE YOU, which he compared to be a rehash of THE NOTEBOOK. And my response was, “Just because it was a sappy romance designed to make you cry doesn’t make it The Notebook.” I actually saw P.S. I LOVE YOU, and to me that was one of the best films I saw last year. Could be because it made me fall in love with my wife all over again, even though it was filled with moments designed to make you cry and squeeze your date’s hand and force you to let out that tiny little high pitched wheeze as you try to be manly and hold in that cry.
But isn’t that the point? To get that raw emotional response?
I have to say that that is what really makes the best movies for me. When I go into that world and I look at my lap at the end of the movie and notice that my popcorn bag is still full, and not because I was watching SAW 3 when a guy’s skull getting drilled open made me so sick I couldn’t eat. It’s movies that make me change the way I look at life.
All of the movies toted as “best” gave me different responses, like:
MICHAEL CLAYTON: What the hell was the big hype about this film, just so I could see Sydney Pollock deliver a great line or two?
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN: What just happened there? I’m lost, who was the dead guy in the hotel room doorway. Um, hello? What the hell? Where’s the trick ending I expected? Hello? Better stay until after the creidts in case they threw something in…
I AM LEGEND: Where’s the volleyball that he is supposed to be talking to like it’s a person?
BOURNE ULTIMATUM: Now this is a fuckin’ movie! Let’s go home and play Jason Bourne!
I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s those movies that take us into a world and make a real emotional impact that I think are worth the film they’re printed on. I haven’t seen 3:10 to Yuma yet, but I plan to. And if anyone hasn’t seen SHATTERED yet, rent it. It’s a movie about a guy who kidnaps a couple’s child and puts them through hell, but it’s not what you expect, and the twists and jaw drop moments come in staccato fashion. And again, it affects your world, makes you think, oh, is this really a good decision, and how will it affect my world?
Just my two cents,
Scottie screenwriter.
We aren’t using the word ‘derivative’ to mark movies that are ’similar’ to one another. We’re using that word to mark movies that are based on books, older movies, videogames, and so forth - these movies hapen to be around 75-85% of movies nowadays.
The point we were discussing was that there aren’t any good original ideas that are being put onscreen. Rather, we’re seeing mostly old rehashed ideas, ideas that aren’t put to full use (I am Legend… last man on Earth. HELLO. This movie was way too average to do its logline justice), ideas from other mediums, and just plain marketable dumbed-down crap. Any of the above can ge grouped together to mark a truly time-wasting movie.
And such is the inspiration for aspiring screenwriters. The famous confidence-boosting line, “if this is the best they’ve got, I can do better”, actually doesn’t sound too unrealistic.
As for all of the Juno hoopla, I must say that it was a good movie and it had heart, but the dialogue was simply too spot on; especially for a 16 year old girl in 2007. Essentially the movie felt like an 80’s movie set in 2007. Juno was waaaay too hip to be a teen today. She even goes head to head with Jason Bateman’s character over Dario Argento movies and music that simply pre-dated her by, oh, 25 years.
I realized after I saw “I am Legend” that the public will watch just about anything now and it will make money, no matter how blaise it is. I realized after watching the “Pirates of the Carribbean” movies, that all a “big budget” movie has to do now is keep pushing forward and splash some special effects around. Essentially the Pirates movies never really stop long enough for the audience to figure out how crappy they are.
I am Legend really pist me off with it’s lazy writing. Human beings cannot survive with a temperature of 106 degrees or higher; the central nervous system is ravaged at such temperatures, as well as the circulatory system, let alone the brain. Furthermore, even if a virus gave humans the ability to operate at such temperatures, infected humans would have to consume a lot of water or suffer dehydration. Then there is the “Spiderman” effect the virus had; the freakin’ zombies were bouncing around like Spiderman and were performing superhuman feats that almost rivaled that of Spiderman. Then there was the inconsistency in the zombie’s ability to detect anything. One scene Will Smith stumbles upon a coven of zombies, yet they can’t see him 5 feet away, but can smell blood at a distance of several square miles a few scenes later. Then there is the “Where the fuck did you come from lady?” super lazy scene where the woman and the kid appear from nowhere and fend off a whole cadre of zombies and the zombie leader with a handheld UV flashlight. Lastly, the sound design of the zombies was just plain lazy. The zombies sounded like a mix of the T-Rex from Jurassic Park and a Freight Train dropped off the Empire State Building when they yelled. Human lungs and human vocal chords can only do so much regardless of any virus. Still, the average joes and janes at work LOVED the movie. Sigh…
Also, I just wrote a blogpost pertaining to the whole derivativeness of movies and shows and the popular “X meets Y” line.
http://www.carloconda.blogspot.com
Putting that in a comment post would’ve been way too long. Haha
nicolle,
I love the twist at the end with Kurt Russell being Elvis’ illegitimate son.
I thought Costner did a great job… But I have to say that. LOL.
Scott,
You said, “But isn’t that the point? To get that raw emotional response?”
Absolutely! Early this morning while I was writing, an old B movie came on that really surprised me. I’d seen it many years before but it certainly didn’t hit me back then, the way it did today. EDDIE MACON’S RUN with John Schneider of the original DUKES OF HAZZARD television show. He even sings a couple of songs in the background. Really cheesy movie but really works on certain levels i.e., the emotional response you’re talking about. Not a particularly well written film but even so, parts written well enough to tug on the old heart strings.
As long as you have a heart that is…
I AM LEGEND… I think the mannequins were Smith’s version of Wilson.
Carlo,
When I say derivative, I’m specifically talking about how a movie comes off feeling like I saw the same thing in another movie i.e., HARDCORE and 8MM. If anyone is familiar with HARDCORE at all, you can’t help but see extreme similarities to HARDCORE when you watch 8MM.
But I see what you’re saying as well.
neil,
Almost every one of those thoughts went through my mind as I watched I AM LEGEND.
Nuff said.
Carlo,
I’ll definitely read it.
Unk
Wow, I missed a bunch. But in my defense I have been studying Hitchcock lately.
As far as the “derivative” notion, I think Alfred said it best when he said, “It’s not the content but the technique that people go to see.”
I think that hits Juno right on the head as the execution was super, even though I felt that there was no romance that I could find. I found the dialogue pretty good. There were a few “over-dramatized” parts like “thx for inviting me and my irresponsible daughter to your home.”
I think 2007 was a great year because I started writing screenplays. Great for me anyway.
Anyway, that was a good list of movies and I definitely agree about the Hitcher. I haven’t watched the remake yet but Rutger Hauer spewed gold with that role. He was so delightfully demented it gave hitchhiking a new meaning.
As far as the “Diablo Phenomenon,” there is word that “Jennifer’s Body” doesn’t quite reach the heights of Juno. I guess it kind of shows why writers stick with one genre.
The funny thing is that so far, there are ONLY tentpoles coming out this year. Some have potential to be really profound (Iron Man - exploring the mind of a rich drunk is always great or perhaps a character study of the tortured soul of Ed Norton’s Bruce Banner) but I like to watch movies that don’t try to be anything but what they are.
Well, that’s it for today. Time to trudge to the subway.
Niel:
That’s pretty much how I feel.
Unk:
You BETTER read it! OR ELSE!
Or ELSE!…
Or else… maybe I’ll write a crappy movie you someday have to see…! Yeah you heard me!
Different timezones for the win. Haha
Howell, who I posted before, yet my comment appears after him:
Yes, execution is important, but the bottom line is that we aren’t seeing anything excitingly original in the theatres. This isn’t about derivativeness being separate from whether or not a movie is good or not.
I’m sure we can all agree that a derivative movie can still be entertaining and fun. However, entertaining and fun is seperate from ‘good’ and ‘original’.
When I watch a movie, I can admit it’s entertaining, but that doesn’t mean I would consider it “good”, nor does it mean I will remember the movie after a week passes. I don’t hand out the title ‘good movie’ or ‘good show’ out like parking tickets.
Heroes, I am Legend, and so forth are popcorn entertainers, but I will never consider them “good”. For example, I’d rather do something else than watch them.
They are like filler episodes in a good TV show. The problem is that it seems as if there are more of the filler ‘episodes’ than the good, meaningful, plot-developing episodes that make the show worthwhile.
Carlo,
Yeah, strange how that works… LOL.
I absolutely agree that derivative movies can still be entertaining and fun.
Having said that…
One could say that because we have a hell of a lot more people writing screenplays these days — THAT is the reason we see so much derivation.
Then of course, one could say that we see so much derivation because too many screenwriters have become lazy and don’t worry about it.
We’ll never really know because I have yet to speak to a screenwriter that admits to the derivative nature of their script. LOL.
I try NEVER to do it myself.
Unk
“We’ll never really know because I have yet to speak to a screenwriter that admits to the derivative nature of their script. LOL.” - Unk
I know what you mean. I still don’t know who to blame - the writers or the execs. Are movie writers crappy nowadays or are execs making derivative marketable crap cause it’s making an assload of money in the box-office? (read: Spiderman 3, Pirates, I am Legend)
Ah yes… I do have MY suspicions though… LOL.
On an off topic note (or is it?), the directors announced a new three-year tentative agreement with the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers:
DGA locks down deal
Unk
Derivative?
Shit. I admit it. There, how do you feel now? Am I the first?
I think maybe the wgaw and wgae might want to consider a deal derived from the dga.
I’m going to try and be less lazy but it can be hard when they throw the money at you.
You’re making me feel guilty.
Yeah, I saw it on another blog (yay for Google Reader).
I hope it’s a decent deal for the writers to accept, or else we’re going to have to experience more failed attempts at ‘the table’.
I’m off to the subway now, so this near-instant messaging will have to come to a pause. Haha
bobbie,
You are the first. LOL. And you know what else? You should be ashamed of yourself.
Unk
Well, quite the bashers of “I Am Legend”…I admit, though it was not the greatest movie to ever hit the big screen and had a better predecessor movie in “Omega Man”…I still kind of liked it. Truthfully, the First two acts were really great and Will Smith did an excellent job to keep people into the movie…it kind of fell off in the third were the woman and the kid came and never really picked up from that point.
And To answer Neil…I don’t really remember the “Zombies” so to say doing any amazing tricks other than running really fast…and they were in the buildings when indeed it was that hot…and who is to say they didn’t dip into the grocery store at night to get some fine H20 lol.
As far as the Woman finding Willy when he was in need of help…they can easily play if off by what he says over the radio that he will be at that location from noon to dawn or something along those lines…and also she kind of said something in her dialogue where it was an act of god yada yada yada…so that really didn’t bother me all too much…
…But do not get me wrong, it had it’s mistakes in the film, as UNK said in his post with the CGI that I couldn’t even get past…but with all that said, I still kinda liked it. And well, people still buy into that whole last man on earth angle…and with the nice gross that is made in december…I think it is safe to say, it certainly won’t be the last time we see another one of these.
Mike J,
Bashing? Maybe. But hey, this isn’t a fan site unless we’re bashing the screenwriting… Which we have not done.
I think spending your $7 plus might give you the license to bash.
Or not.
I can’t remember a lot about the zombies because I’m trying NOT to remember… LOL.
Although, one of the scenes that took me right out of the movie (again), was one of the zombies climbing up some pole like a friggin’ chimpanzee… No strike that.
A SUPER CHIMPANZEE.
Another thing that took me out was the scene where the zombies set a trap for Neville but just about everywhere else in the movie (at least to my recollection), the zombies could only work en masse.
And MAYBE the thousands of them DID in fact have a hand in setting that trap for Neville. We’ll never know, right? LOL.
But it sure FELT like only one or two might have put their heads together to formulate that plan.
The trap-setting scene TO ME, took me out of Neville’s ordinary world.
No big deal… Smith pulled it off. They will recoup their $200 Mil budget in DVD if nothing else.
It’s okay to like it. Hell, I like Will Smith and that’s ONE of the reasons I went to see the film and I do think it’s worth seeing.
But wow… Can you imagine taking THE OMEGA MAN story and tweaking in this movie and combine it with some of the GOOD stuff that was in it?
Could’a been a contender…
Unk
Maybe Bashing was not the right word…let’s say, Not Being very polite to the movie.
Ouch, I forgot all about that scene where he climbs the pole, but hey I use to climb tree’s when I was younger maybe the guy just never grew out of climbing things.
As for the other scene…it was one of those scenes where it kind of confused alot of people, I so happen to be one of those people. It could so happen that those albino super mutants have enough memory in their head that they could think of that clever snare trap to capture Willy (which was only the one that was the observer when Willy did it) or It could have been a Mistake on Will Smith’s part where he was marking off the destination’s and forgot about his own trap…or maybe I’m just thinking to hard about it. But if anything, I think it is them trapping Willy, but I know after that moment, people were just oozing to yell, PLOT HOLE!!! PLOT HOLE!!!. Hell I even do it from time to time.
And What about that Dog…If there is any Dog that should deserve a supporting actor award…I think we found that dog.
I Definitely agree about putting some of the story of “Omega Man” into “I am Legend”…and really, it wouldn’t be that hard to do so…LoL, maybe someone is doing it right now for all we know.
Mike J,
———-I AM LEGEND SPOILERS———-
If I remember the pole-climbing scene correctly, it was nothing that any normal human could have done. Of course we were led to believe that these creatures do in fact have super-strength so I let that scene go even though it was just a little over the top for me personally.
And you’re right about the trap scene. What distinguished it for me was the mannequin. We are led to believe that Neville has all these mannequins strategically staked out to help ease his isolation. So far (as per my recollection), we were not led to believe that he was losing his mind.
Hence, I took that scene as a trap set by the mutants… Or maybe he did set the trap and the mutants strategically placed the mannequin there to get him to inspect.
Either way, it took me out of the story at that point. But like any good audience member, I went ahead and tapped into my seed of blind faith and jumped right back into the story if for no other reason than to give the rest of the film a chance.
And my blind faith was ever so slightly rewarded when, at the end of the film, he gives his blood to the girl and decides to stay back.
He’s lucid enough to give her the blood yet at the same time, I don’t think HE really thought there was a survivor colony. That act alone revealed the possibility of him “possibly” being affected by all the isolation and realizes he can’t move forward. There is no future for HIM.
Unk
At the end of the movie the Zombies in I.A.L. make their final “surge” and attack Will Smith’s house, they jump like 15 feet onto the building and scamper like insects. Once they break into the house/fortress, the Uber Zombie Alpha Male bounces off of the staircase like Spiderman and literally climbs the ceiling.
I could have dealt with the zombies if they were a government experiment gone awry, ala Resident Evil, but the movie tried to be “realistic” in the reason why the zombies are zombies, but was horribly inconsistent and illogical. Furthermore, when Will Smith finds the apparent cure and injects it into the female captive zombie, I don’t see why it would reverse the disfiguring effects of the virus. If you get smallpox and the pustules develop and then are administered a cure, you still are going to have the horrific scarring. In the movie the virus re-writes the genetic structure of man to an extreme point. That damage and restructuring of the body and nervous system would be irreversible.
Does anyone remember how the woman and her son got on Manhattan Island? I can’t remember.
Truth be told, the infected were simply vampires, more than zombies.
Another Zombie movie I hated was 28 weeks later. I liked the first movie and the implementation of the “RAGE” virus, although I thought that rage was WAY to fast to infect it’s hosts. In 28 weeks later the incubation time is like instantaneous; almost like possession.
neil,
She — gulp — heard Neville broadcasting on the radio. LOL.
I would have enjoyed it more with popcorn.
Unk
“Yes, it might be an obvious tweak but what’s wrong with that if that particular tweak hits the audience harder?”
Unk, totally agree. Nothing wrong. I was just defending the choices the creators made b/c the choices didn’t fit usual mold.
This is one of the reasons I’m drawn to bad movies - love them in fact - because my mind immediately goes into rewrite mode. Anyhow, totally agree.
I AM LEGEND
I could rant on CGI for hours. The minute I saw the cougar or whatever that thing was in the trailer, I knew that it was a tortilla chip movie. Tortilla chips, to be eaten at home, crunchy and distracting. Yet, yummy.
To survive today’s movies you HAVE to clean out a special place in your brain in which to stuff movies that fall into the IT IS WHAT IT IS category. Otherwise you won’t be able to enjoy. It’s like going to a restaurant where you pay twelve dollars for a so-so cheese burger. You’re paying for the privilege to eat there - nothing more.
I mean, come on, Blockbusters are a genre in and of themselves.
When an audience go see one of these things - they don’t care that all of the sutures are showing and the thing walks with a limp, has a gapping hole in its mid-section, and smells like last weeks super. They will applaud Frankenstein so long as there is a fireworks finale, a trick pony, clown, magic act, prat fall, midget, whatever.
Nothing wrong with that. It’s entertainment. If that’s how some screenwriters roll, that’s how they roll. Besides, they have to pay those stupid high property taxes, pay for relatives to go to college, and cure cancer.
ON DERIVATIVE
Everything is derivative, no? Ecclesiastic whateverness. Nothing new under the sun. Same story, new day. Deja Woo.
DGA
How long before they came to an agreement? Please, for the love of Aristotle, why can’t we just sacrifice the reality and animation cow? Slit its throat. Give them blood so we can continue on fucking up our culture as the good Lord intended.
I’m for the residuals and the internet crumbs but if the AMPTP and the WGA continue to go against nature I fear an earthquake or worse - more reality tv and talk show host programing. Why won’t they just die?
Die I Love New York!
Die Bret Michaels!
Die Snoop and the Orange Country house hussies!
You plague my home!
Die Tyra and Regis and Kelly!
Die wife swap, trading spouses, and Super Nanny!
Die Super Model wannabes, photog wannabes, stylist wannabes, and high fashion wannabes - save Project Runway
(so I like that one, sue me)
I don’t even watch tv shows but if they get replaced by reality tv programs and talk shows and lord knows what other god forsaken formats, I’m going to start reading books.
Just think about that WGA/AMPTP. A country driven to read books. AMERICANS reading books. Think about it and get back to the table before the country goes to pot.
Hi
Interesting post.
I think it’s interesting that Hollywood is becoming ever more derivative, at the same time cheap digital production is becoming a credible force… and, that studios are backing away from production in favor of distributing externally funded product.
We are living in interesting times.
I hate derivative, formula movies… and the older I get, the less entertaining they are… and yet, at the same time I believe conventional structure is the backbone of any movie and even classic characters can be reworked, made fresh and interesting.
More and more I’m coming to the conclusion that it’s ALL about character.
Where much modern screenwriting seems to fail, is in even a basic understanding of what makes people tick, on an emotional level.
“Rear Window” is a perfect example of a film that retains it’s power, simply because the central character is credible. We can take the emotional journey with him, because he’s got a degree of vulnerability you rarely see in modern protagonists. It seems to me, that it’s this lack of vulnerability which forces films into a ever more plastic, downward spiral into CGI and yet another pointless gun-fight.
So, in 2007 I barely paid attention to Hollywood’s output… I wasn’t that impressed. All the interesting films were going straight to the Arthouse cinema.
Julie Delphy’s “Three Days In Paris” struck me as one of the best… and a Romanian film “12.08 East of Bucharest” gave me the most entertainment last year.
Now, I like art house films… but I also used to love the blockbusters as well.
What I can’t figure out, is why there hasn’t been a film as good as “French Connection” or “To Kill a Mockingbird” or “Cape Fear,” in the last five years.
But, on the other hand… the fact there hasn’t been is all good news to me… less competition.
Hey Unk and everyone,
Okay, so from what I can see, the problem with movies this year and the last couple as well is that rehashes and sequels and adaptations have taken over. There are only a handful of good, original, HIGH CONCEPT movies that have come out that are worth watching. Where are all of these original high concept movies that draw the audiences to the seat?
I think we don’t see them as much anymore because… 1) The writer has a great idea but it isn’t pulled off well.
2) The writer writes a great story but the idea isn’t interesting enough to draw in a crowd.
I think the big problem is that the industry is flooded with such shit, and in ridiculous volume, that the golden scripts that pull it all together can’t seem to get through. Readers and producers, at least most of them, are so jaded by the shit they get thrown everyday that it makes it harder to get that great script up there to the right desks. When I think of high concept films that were pulled off in both idea and execution are like CELLULAR and RED EYE, both scripts were original ideas, not adaptations, and could be summed up and seen in your mind’s eye after hearing the single sentence logline.
I miss those days. Although… JUNO is a nice high concept idea in itself that was executed fairly well. And if you don’t agree it’s high concept simply because it’s an independant art house, think about the logline: A teenager finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy and decides to audition infertile couples to find the perfect adoptive parents. That’s a great idea, and it could have gone so many ways, drama, tragedy, romance, comedy. But the writer chose the right direction, followed the right lines and someone took a chance and GOLD! Maybe even Oscar gold. It makes me think I should put my writing on pause for a couple months and go be a stripper, although I would probably be even more poor than I am now the way I look… remember Chris Farley’s Chippendale’s skit… well not that bad but I digress.
All I’m saying is that all SPEC screenplays need to be written to blow the socks off of everyone who reads them. If we want to change the industry and stop the crap coming out and see some original, damn well written and executed scripts that have an idea to pull us to the theatre, then we better damn well start writing them!
I’m trying to.
Just my two cents,
Scottie screenwriter
Ryan R.,
They’re supposedly going back to negotiations next week. I guess everyone’s busy this weekend.
Clive,
LOL. You are exactly WRITE. I mean RIGHT. There’s not nearly as much REAL competition as everyone thinks. We already know WHY.
Scottie,
Agreed.
Thanks for all the comments everyone. Much appreciated. We even had several producers email me and ask how come they’ve never heard of this site before.
See what happens?
Unk
Interesting as always UNK. You talk about the difference between basics and more advanced screenwriting…developing the story through action and dialogue…can you point to some of your “more advanced” screenwriting posts (dealing with this material) and any other blogs that you think also reveal the secrets of screenwriting as such. Kudos for your support and integrity.