Popularity: 37%

Concept and Execution

4occhi Got an email recently from a regular reader who sent me an excerpt from an interview with a producer… I won’t mention the producer’s name nor do I have a link to the interview but none of that really matters anyway because we’ve all read this same interview before.

Over and over and over and over again.

Yet many of us still just don’t fucking get it.

Concept and execution.

Let me see if I can try to get you to think a little differently… Head on over to Google and perform an image search for “concept .”

See what comes up? Images of concepts based on something we’ve already seen before yet drastically different. We know what a basic automobile looks like yet the automobiles that come up in the results of the above search are drastically different than what we’re used to seeing on the road MOST OF THE TIME.

Get it?

Same goes for motorcycle concepts, cellphone concepts, bicycles, watches, and hell, just about anything you can think of over at LikeCool.com in the Gadgets section.

So now for lack of a better understanding of what concept actually means, let’s head on over to Dictionary.com and see what they say… i.e., let’s find the right definition of concept for US:

concept con·cept (ko(n’se(pt’)

An abstract idea or notion.
an idea of something formed by mentally combining all its characteristics or particulars; a construct.
an abstract or general idea inferred or derived from specific instances.

Now I am trying to keep this as simple as possible but let’s head on over to Wikipedia anyway:

Concept on Wikipedia

Now just from a quick scan, here’s what stands out to me:

a concept denotes all of the entities, phenomena, and/or relations in a given category or class by using definitions.
Concepts are abstract in that they omit the differences of the things in their extension, treating the members of the extension as if they were identical.
Concepts are expected to be useful in dealing with reality.
A concept is basically the main idea.
According to Locke, a general idea is created by abstracting, drawing away, or removing the common characteristic or characteristics from several particular ideas.
This common characteristic is that which is similar to all of the different individuals. For example, the abstract general idea or concept that is designated by the word “red” is that characteristic which is common to apples, cherries, and blood. The abstract general idea or concept that is signified by the word “dog” is the collection of those characteristics which are common to Airedales, Collies, and Chihuahuas.
The conception originally found its way to us as the result of such a comparison.
The logical acts of the understanding by which concepts are generated as to their form are: (1.) comparison, i.e., the likening of mental images to one another in relation to the unity of consciousness; (2.) reflection, i.e., the going back over different mental images, how they can be comprehended in one consciousness; and finally (3.) abstraction or the segregation of everything else by which the mental images differ. In order to make our mental images into concepts, one must thus be able to compare, reflect, and abstract, for these three logical operations of the understanding are essential and general conditions of generating any concept whatever. For example, I see a fir, a willow, and a linden. In firstly comparing these objects, I notice that they are different from one another in respect of trunk, branches, leaves, and the like; further, however, I reflect only on what they have in common, the trunk, the branches, the leaves themselves, and abstract from their size, shape, and so forth; thus I gain a concept of a tree.

If that revs up your appetite at all, head on over to Schema (Kant) — also on Wikipedia.com.

I guess it all comes down to GIVE ME THE SAME BUT DIFFERENT. Let me give you an excerpt from the producer’s interview:

If I never read another screenplay where the female characters are strippers or prostitutes, or if I never read another screenplay about the Mafia, I’d be happy. If aliens looked at America cinema, they’d think that 90 percent of the women are strippers and 90 percent of the men are Russian Mafia workers.

The email I received about this interview asked me if I agreed or disagreed with what the above producer said… I should also add that the reader that sent me this email, said he found what is excerpted above as “very insulting to screenwriters around the world.”

I wholeheartedly agreed with the producer.

Why?

Because of a few reasons but the two big ones right off the top of my head are money and reputation as in do you want to continue to work in this business? In other words, right off the bat, a spec that places the main female in a stripper or prostitute role OR is about the Mafia — either traditional or Russian is going to get a pass — probably without even reading the Goddamn thing.

Why?

Execution. Do we need to look it up?

execution ex·e·cu·tion [ek-si-kyoo-shuhn]

the act or process of executing.
a mode or style of performance; technical skill, as in music: The pianist’s execution of the sonata was consummate.
the act of performing; of doing something successfully; using knowledge as distinguished from merely possessing it; “they criticised his performance as mayor”; “experience generally improves performance”
The act of executing; a carrying into effect or to completion; performance; achievement; consummation; as, the execution of a plan, a work, etc.
The act of the mode of performing a work of art, of performing on an instrument, of engraving, etc.; as, the execution of a statue, painting, or piece of music.
That which is executed or accomplished; effect; effective work; — usually with do.

I think the key thing to remember here is the term, SUCCESSFULLY. And while I don’t profess to be the end-all judge of “SUCCESSFULLY,” I can tell you that I’ve read enough specs and watched enough movies to know that when it comes to writing specs, concept and execution is everything. As I told the sender of said email, 99% of the scripts I read are shit. On top of that, less than 10% of those 1% specs I read are well executed with extreme emphasis on WELL. I should just be saying EXECUTED instead of WELL EXECUTED because if you know what you’re doing and your work is up to snuff, then you simply EXECUTE.

Sadly, we no longer live in a world where craftsmen EXECUTE. Is that because we really don’t have that many craftsmen left?

Yeah, I think so.

My neighbor just a built a new house and he had to go through several contractors to end up with a well executed house… LOL. No, he didn’t start out with the idea of having to go through three contractors… It just ended up that way because not ANY of the contractors could execute everything WELL i.e., they couldn’t execute. They ended up doing piece work i.e., one contractor had guys that could frame the house really well but when it came to applying the stucco, they obviously had no fucking clue as to what they were doing… i.e., they winged it. The second contractor came in and took all the bad stucco down and reapplied it and did a great job but screwed up the drywall and the door openings. The third contractor fixed the door openings and the drywall. Only time will tell when this contractor fucks something up and my neighbor will have to find yet another contractor to FIX something the previous contractor fucked up and on and on and on until the house is completed.

And so far, my neighbor is over $65K in the hole because of all the work these previous contractors keep fucking up. It’s been easier and faster for him to simply go find another contractor rather than bring suit or mechanic’s liens against any of these idiots.

Does this sound strangely similar and or familiar to many of the movies that eventually make it to the big screen?

You tell me. LOL.

I’m not gonna sit here and tell you NOT to write that spec script about strippers, prostitutes, and the mafia… Nope. Ain’t gonna do that. In fact, maybe YOU have to write about that to eventually or finally get to the great concepts that lie dormant deep within your cerebral cortex.

What I will tell you to do with that stripper/prostitute/mafia epic however, is to at least TRY to come up with something different. I just had another very long email today from someone attempting to justify their stripper/prostitute/mafia epic to me. They didn’t ask me to read it, thank God — they were just venting. But their venting rationalized the need and or necessity for just one more stripper/prostitute/mafia epic. LOL. Rantings like, “This is just as good as Goodfellas!” or the ever popular “I’ve seen at least a hundred movies like this but this one’s better!”

Oh really?

Something tells me IT AIN’T.

Maybe rather than going with something you’ve seen a hundred times, maybe you should keep searching for a concept that brings you as close to mental orgasm as possible. At least that’s a fuckin’ start. LOL. Yeah, rely on your senses. Does the concept make you sweat? Does it make your heart beat really fast? Does it take your breath away? Is something telling you this concept is so fucking great that you can’t even believe YOU came up with it? Does the hair on the back of your neck stand up? Goosebumps?

No?

Why not?

Does that idea kick your ass between your ears and make you walk around like you’ve got the best secret in the world that only YOU know about? Have you even tried to find an idea or concept that does anything like I’ve described to YOU? If not, maybe it’s time to give THOSE MUSCLES (whatever they are) a workout. Get them used to thinking differently. Find the trigger that makes you feel like you just found buried treasure.

Then once you find it, do it the justice it deserves. Take the extra time it really does take to EXECUTE it. Don’t execute without knowing WHY it kicked your ass between your ears and once you figure that out, chase each and every one of those motherfuckers down and stick them in your execution.

Perform your DUE DILIGENCE. We’re selling something, right? They say KNOWLEDGE is 90% of the sale and boy does that ever ring true with spec screenplays… How many times have I finished reading a spec where it was obvious the writer trying to sell me didn’t even have 50% covered. LOL. 50% does not a sale make unless you’ve already made a sale.

How many times have we entered conversations where the other person obviously doesn’t even know what the fuck they’re talking about? Do they persuade you? Do they manage to make you think like them? Probably not. Especially in this day and age of what seems to be the repeating of sound bites over and over… LOL. That’s fine for them but is it fine for YOU? It shouldn’t be if you want to be a screenwriter and we’ve got that unfortunate obligation to know all sides of the story… You do know ALL SIDES of the story, don’t you?

I hate reading screenplays that do not seem like the writer had that 90%. I feel like they’re cheating. I feel like they don’t want to do the work. I feel like they aren’t really that committed to what they’re doing and if they don’t seem that committed why should I commit?

If you’re going to go ahead and write a spec about something we’ve basically all seen before, you might as well stand the fuckin’ thing UPSIDE DOWN. Instead of giving us the direct to DVD version, go the extra mile and do something with it we’ve never seen before! Make YOUR VERSION the new version by which this genre will forever be measured! And, if you can’t pull that off — that’s okay — as long as that’s what you’ve been striving for.

I mean go ahead and pull that spec out right now. Got it? Good. Why is it DIFFERENT than the plethora of movies within the same genre? Is it differerent? Is it good different? Is it the same as everything we’ve seen before? Even if it’s well written, is it the same old tired thing we’ve seen a hundred times before?

If so, then what do you think YOU should do about it? Leave it? Go on to something new? Find a new concept that makes you hyperventilate?

I guarantee you this…

If you write a story that excites you in at least a couple of ways described above, you have a much better chance of getting someone else as excited. If you can manage that, you have a much better chance of breaking in and doing it again and again and again.

Unk

Sunday: 2 November 2008|1632|Under Screenwriting

Print This Post

71 Comments

Comments

71 Responses to “Concept and Execution”

Ryan on Sunday: 2 November 2008|1743

It’s all common sense. Every single thing you said is common sense. I still have to hear it to make it common sense… Make sense???

My spec doesn’t have strippers, Mafia, or anything Russian in it. I think I’m on the right path. There are a few Mexicans in it though…

Glad to see another post Unk!
Elver on Sunday: 2 November 2008|1748

It seems to me that when people start with a genre and concept that’s been done to death, they subconsciously feel more eager to experiment, resulting in one or two experiments that are actually pretty damn good, but surrounded by tired crap. So they’re kinda good to read, actually, in that “nobody’s ever gonna fund this, so I could probably be ‘inspired’ by some of the better bits in it” way.

What I really HATE about such things is the people who make their prostitutes/mafia scripts different by introducing insane character quirks.

So you get something like:

Sergei, a 22 year old member of the Russian Mafia (who just wants to be a pumpkin farmer like his father in Ukraine) falls in love with Cindy, an 18 year old HIV-positive prostitute (whose life ambition is to work in an Apple store selling iPods) but their relationship finds disapproval from Igor, Sergei’s middle-aged mentor in the Mafia (whose dialog is almost entirely made up of quotes from classic Hollywood films)

That’s probably the only kind of script I’m guaranteed to stop reading before getting to the 3rd page.
James on Sunday: 2 November 2008|1828

You hit so many different nails on the head.

1) “What I really HATE about such things is the people who make their prostitutes/mafia scripts different by introducing insane character quirks.”

This is DIRECTLY a result of writers who don’t know how to write character, reading screenwriting books about characters that must have a fatal flaw. Look, she’s flawed, she has a peg-leg!

2) Why is the argument always CONCEPT vs EXECUTION?

You need BOTH.

And yet, most screenwriters complain only about the being required to come up with a solid concept. They seem to think that their execution is flawless. It is just their taste in concept-less drivel that is their personal writer’s fatal flaw.

I have to say, if you can’t eek out even the most remote of concepts — wtf are you writing?

Stories are about SOMETHING. Not just character. Not just plot. But the journey.

Story is the answer to the question, “why am I watching this?”

Oddly enough, that’s also the answer to concept.

And if you have no idea why your characters are doing what they are doing — what their journey is supposed to be — what they hope to get out of it — what they actually get out of it — then how are you going to ever execute that?

That’s like being a contractor and simply wanting to build the coolest looking building you have ever seen without taking the steps to actually find out what “cool means,” nor learning how to erect a building in the first place.

Simply wishing it into existence isn’t going to happen.

And I, personally, feel that most screenwriters simply wish their screenplays were Goodfellas. Or other great movies they have seen. There’s a lot of hard labor in the crafting of a screenplay — despite how easy people may make it seem.

3) It is very easy to know whether a script has value or not within the first 3 pages. I can’t describe it in any other way than, as a reader, the writer has done NOTHING to instill my confidence that this story is actually going somewhere.

It’s the writer’s job to engage the reader. If you can’t even do that — wtf?

Seriously, read great script, novels, short stories. Don’t they engage you from page one? Can’t you tell the writer has plans for these characters? For these situations? that this is only the beginning of something much larger?

Your average screenplay (that 99% Unk talks about) does NOT do this.

Anyway — /rant off.
Luzid on Sunday: 2 November 2008|1856

“Is something telling you this concept is so fucking great that you can’t even believe YOU came up with it?” “No?”

Are you kidding? Virtually every writer thinks that of their own work – those who don’t, and keep pushing until they get close to that feeling, are the ones who can actually write.
racicot on Sunday: 2 November 2008|1928

Hey UNK,

I wonder if you could provide insight into what people (yes, THEM) think of Action specs?

I’m thinking big, DIE HARD-like Action…

Thanks for this and the other.
Susan P. on Sunday: 2 November 2008|2153

I find it’s moving through exhaustion that’s been an issue for me. I’ve not long finished a script. Is it like anything that’s been done here in Oz? No. It’s a very different idea although the atmosphere of it is, I think, fairly culturally typical. To me that is cool; that’s comfortable for my audience and comfortable for me. I know where the film ‘hits’.

But in terms of execution. I found myself, at times, thinking, frig it, I will leave that – and then I thought, nope, not good enough. I *could* have made a scene with a van abstract. But I took the time to do research and to find out a typical mechanical problem for a make of van and to include those specifics in dialogue.

I learned that the best punch is to have the key word at the end of dialogues. I then went back through the script and reversed 90% of my dialogue sections.

I made sure there was a point to each and every scene.

I have handed my script in to a comp and since then I know I could have tweaked something at the end. It’s not a big thing but it’s now bothering me. I will open the file and make the change.

What I observe – a lot – is people arguing that a) structure doesn’t matter, and b) that the SP will change so much to shooting script that what is the point of continual fuss.

Well, to ME, it’s not even about execution or concept, it’s that due diligence: doing all one can to get it as right as humanly possible. Have I absolutely cracked it despite my repeated drafts and efforts? I dare say not. I am quite sure an experienced producer is going to suggest reworking a section – or similar – BUT, when they look me in the eye I want to look back knowing I did everything that I could and never excused myself from giving that last push to the line.
Zane on Monday: 3 November 2008|0025

Perhaps it’s because I’m new to the game, but I find those “mental orgasms” a hard thing to acheive. When I get ‘em, I write. When I don’t get ‘em, I don’t even want to look at a blank page.

So here’s a newbie dilemma: I’ve got a concept that taps the orgasm center of my brain. Cool. But when I sit down and write 100 pages of a script, that concept doesn’t show through the pages.

So my execution is off … no mystery there really – I just go back to the drawing board: figure out my characters a little more, figure out the structure/makings of their arcs, then put pen to paper again.

Chasing orgasm once more … Cool. But still: I rarely find it. There are all these fears:

Maybe I don’t know my characters well enough yet. Maybe I don’t know my Structure well enough yet. Maybe I did too many drugs in high school and burnt out the orgasm center of my brain …

OR MAYBE I’M NOT CONFIDENT ENOUGH YET. Cool. I’ll go research some more; confidence is key.

Which is why I disagree when you say “Make YOUR VERSION the new version by which this genre will forever be measured! And, if you can’t pull that off — that’s okay — as long as that’s what you’ve been striving for.”

I say, “Pull it off NO MATTER WHAT.”

In terms of execution, it’s easy enough: there are books and blogs on screenwriting to help us newbies figure out how to execute our concept.

In terms of coming up with that concept … not so easy. We’re talking Dr. Frankenstein’s secret of creation here …

Any thoughts on how to mine those conceptual diamonds out of the brain?
Unk on Monday: 3 November 2008|0258

Ryan,

Agreed. How many people you know with common sense?

Elver,

Agreed. They often come up with one, maybe two decent twists within the story of the genre and then everything else is the same. This is great for Direct to DVD fare and there’s definitely a place for this stuff…

Just not in my DVD player.

James,

Agreed. You gotta have both hence, the title Concept and Execution.

Luzid,

Disagree. Virtually EVERY WRITER? Pardon me while I fuckin’ COUGH.

COUGH.

I understand what you’re saying however… Often, all someone needs is a swift kick in the ego to get them thinking correctly hence, the post.

racicot,

Nothing wrong with Action specs… Nothing even wrong with DIE HARD in the White house. Just gotta be SUFFICIENTLY DIFFERENT. Instead of a heist for money, how about transmitting a signal that kills honeybees? How about raising plague infested fleas and unleashing them? LOL. Hell, I don’t know… Just something different. Get as crazy as you can to come up with as many different ideas as you can. Even SHIT can trigger some great ideas.

Them people love action specs when it ain’t something they’ve seen before.

Susan,

Yeah, I read that all the time in specs. Stuff that was left — maybe to tweak later — maybe not.

That’s one of the reasons I say — no I PREACH — not to rush it. At least not with the FIRST professional level screenplay you write. Why not get IT right instead of moving on to something else? It’s just too easy to make a list of all the problems you think might be in your spec even if you like your spec. Don’t rush. Write the list down first. Take a day for each item on the list and let your conscious and subconscious work on it. Write down possible ways to tweak it be that an improvement, deletion, or something completely different.

What you’ve heard a lot of might be true of specs being purchased because of their CONCEPT. This happens ALL THE TIME. Somebody comes up with a great concept — POOR EXECUTION but somebody wants the concept so it’s easier to buy the script and then hire a bunch of somebodies to execute.

Having said that… Great concept and great execution of which, structure is part of, can easily keep your spec very much in its original state.

Zane,

Mental orgasms are hard to achieve which is why you need to keep working those muscles. Get them used to that kind of thinking. Expose yourself to as much STIMULUS as you can — news, movies, newspapers, articles, fiction, non-fiction, music, videos, etc. Hell, I hate going to the dentist but I love reading those magazines that are several years old and contain shit I’ve never ever heard of before.

I subscribe to so many email newsletters and eZines it would make your head spin and I do it only to put more information in my head because I know from personal experience it’s gonna find its way to a screenplay someday. Same with everything I can get my hands on to read. Every day is a new adventure because I’m on a treasure hunt and the difference is I know from personal experience that I’m definitely going to find that treasure as long as I keep looking for it.

You’re right… Execution can be difficult but that’s why we’re here, right? You’d be surprised at how well one’s execution can improve if they simply read ONE new screenplay a week.

But do they?

I have a post here somewhere on the site that talks about reading a DVD instead of just watching and listening. That’s right, stick that DVD into your player and turn down the sound. Make sure your desired language subtitles are on. Amazing. I recommend anyone wanting to learn more about dialogue perform this exercise a few times a month. Kind of like watching a foreign film but a great way to learn about subtext IF you go into it with subtext in mind. Or exposition for that matter.

Reread the screenwriting books and articles you’ve read in the past and actually learned something from. In fact, I always copy and paste those articles into my very own Open Office document and have been for years now… I literally have hundreds of articles all pasted into one document that I keep adding to. I pull this file out all the time when I’m bored or feel I need a little brush up.

Execution will come as long as you keep chasing it. Sometimes, there’s just no getting around repetition and experience. That’s why a lot of screenwriters say they hit gold somewhere between the 7th and 10th screenplay.

But do not underestimate TAKING YOUR TIME and doing it right instead of rushing through a script in 6 months. I would rather have ONE OUTSTANDING and AMAZING spec that took me a couple of years to write than 4 crappy specs any day of the week that nobody will be interested in. Eventually, the speed — like the execution — will come.

All those questions that come up are completely LEGIT but you just gotta GUT your way through them.

I think we are basically saying the same thing here… You’re saying to PULL IT OFF NO MATTER WHAT. I’m saying to convince yourself that you are writing your spec as the new model everyone will strive to emulate and even if you can’t pull that off, at least strive for it. Striving for something original OFTEN leads to something original.

In other words, keep going through the moves to do just that even if you’re not quite the person to KNOW whether or not you’ve actually achieved it. If you strive for it at least you’re thinking in that mode and thinking in THAT MODE is much better than NOT THINKING IN THAT MODE.

Good stuff everybody… Thanks!

Unk
Elver on Monday: 3 November 2008|0432

I feel like poking the hornet’s nest today… :P

Is there anyone else here who doesn’t think that GOODFELLAS is a great film? Yeah, I liked it and it was a fairly solid film, but it didn’t speak to me on any personal level. An 8/10 probably.

I also pretty much hated DEER HUNTER. And DONNIE BRASCO is horribly overrated.

And Michael Mann’s HEAT kept swinging between over-the-top and subtle-genius with way too much story crammed into way little time.

Let the flaming begin :P
Susan P. on Monday: 3 November 2008|0541

All true Unk. This said, I think another professional eye early in your career important. I found my learning curve greatly stalled for a while…then it took off. I can review scripts now with an eye and insight I didn’t have six months ago. BUT, I need strong professionals to pull me higher again because some things I will not detect.

I like the concept of master classes for that very reason.
Joshua James on Monday: 3 November 2008|0736

Unk,

Just curious, have you ever written anything dealing with OC, organized crime?

I’ve read some really great novels / thrillers that have . . .
Joshua James on Monday: 3 November 2008|0736

Oh, and I think THE YAKUZA is a great frigging film.
emily blake on Monday: 3 November 2008|1242

I wrote a Russian mofia pilot once. It was terrible. It was one of those learning scripts you write when you’re trying to figure out how everything works. I think cliche scripts are actually really good for that because they teach you basic structure without wasting your best ideas. Not that I realized that at the time.

The good news is I got a really cool scene out of it where this one dude cut off another dude’s thumb. It was pretty intense and I can use it elsewhere.
Clive on Monday: 3 November 2008|1434

BUT… and here’s the kicker, producers will only be sick to death of “mafia/gangster with stripper love interest” scripts until someone makes another stunning film with those elements.

The truth of the matter is, as usual, Unk nailed it. It is about both concept and execution.

It’s not that the female lead is a whore that creates the problems… or that the other characters are gangsters. It’s generally that the people writing the scripts have nothing interesting to say about either the subject… and no real knowledge of the people.

Now, as it happens, one of the best films on the European Film Festival circuit this year is “Love and Other Crimes”… which is the story of what a small time Serbian gangster’s girlfriend does on the day she plans to both rob and leave him.

The truth of the matter is, it’s a great film… a great concept, well executed.

And the reason it works is because it’s not based on other films… but on the director’s own experiences of small time gangsters on Belgrade housing estates.

I think my take on this is slightly different from Unks because as he rightly points out, he’s writing solely about what specs will sell in the US market. Whereas my take is this:

Write about the stuff that fascinates you, regardless of whether you believe you can sell it or not…

For me the motivation has to be to write the kind of film I’d like to make.

About four years ago I wrote a spec script that could easily have been my passport to Hollywood. But despite the fact that it had a great core cast of characters and I had (have) the skills to execute it well, it needed a massive amount of work on the core concept to get it up to scratch.

When push came to shove, I just didn’t care enough about the project to give it the work it needed. Something that isn’t true of my two current script projects… neither of which would get the time of day in the US.

The only thing people are tired of are bad scripts or in other words… piss poor concepts, badly executed.
Unk on Monday: 3 November 2008|2102

Elver,

I very much agree… There were some really good things about all those films of which, I think HEAT is definitely the best but yeah — too long.

Are all those films worth watching? Of course.

Are they on my top 10 list?

Nope.

Susan,

I agree with the idea of Master Classes…

Often, when I read someone’s script, I see flashes of brilliance in it but simply not maintained when I think with just a little more knowledge about the craft, they could execute.

Josh,

Have I ever written anything dealing with OC? Yeah, in fact, my very first script dealt with it but was not entirely about it. That very first script was optioned for quite a few years but the producer was never able to get up the money.

I read it now and it SUCKS. LOL.

Worth rewriting though.

THE YAKUZA was good. I have an idea about them I’ve had on the back burner for a few years now. Gotta wait until the pot boils over though.

emily,

Agreed. Sometimes you gotta write derivative and cliché stuff if for no other reason to learn what derivative and cliché IS. LOL. Again, which is why they say somewhere between the 7th and 10th script, you hit paydirt.

Clive,

Actually, I think you and I agree.

I too think someone should write what FASCINATES them… In fact, I wrote a post about it a couple of years ago.

What Fascinates You?
What Fascinates You? -continued…
What Fascinates You? -finale

We’ve also discussed this as well… I don’t have a problem with someone writing something that has been done to death in the spec world as long as they bring something really different to the table.

Especially in the BEGINNING.

Unk
Christian M. Howell on Tuesday: 4 November 2008|0438

Wow. I think I’ve reached a milestone. I actually have a short to the point theory regarding this very thing.

Good execution = Ordered elements

Do you show the “proposition” or the “hit” or do you show the scenes that led to it. GoodFellas was autobiographical in nature and succeeded on those terms. Maybe writers shouldn’t think about the person’s job and just think about the person.

I have scripts with hookers and Mafia figures. The movies aren’t about that aspect though.
Susan P. on Tuesday: 4 November 2008|0655

I was pondering about that ultimate moment of good execution. For me that is –

When your reader becomes part of the work and longs to share it with others.
Moviequill on Tuesday: 4 November 2008|0728

I knew there was a market for my alien stripper story where she goes undercover as a Mafioso’s goombah…
James on Tuesday: 4 November 2008|1622

Susan P — “When your reader becomes part of the work and longs to share it with others.”

:)
Clive on Wednesday: 5 November 2008|0619

Yeap, of course we agree Unk. We pretty much always do.

And, I absolutely stole the “fascinated” concept from you and wanted to give you a chance to flag it up! LOL

More and more I’ve come to the conclusion that bad scripts get written when the screenwriter isn’t actually a “writer”… by that I means someone fascinated by people and why they do things. Added to this needs to be a love of cinema… and most importantly a love and understanding of language.

What I see most are scripts by people who are “bewitched” by mainstream cinema, but who have no real interest in people, or writing as a craft or in cinema as an art form.

I’ve come to believe that 94.6% of scripts written are at some level “fan films”

There is nothing wrong with this, but it’s not what the industry either wants or needs.
Benjamin Ray on Friday: 7 November 2008|1650

Hi Unk and to all the folks responding to this great article by Unk.

Here’s my opinion and take on this topic.

I’m not a quitter. And I cannot fake what I like to write about. I will stick to my guns.

I believe that Carlito’s Way, Goodfellas, Casino, Scarface, Godfather (I + II), The Proposition and all the Sopranos belong in the category of noble cinematic masterpieces.

Generations after generations are falling in love with MAFIA/MOB/GANGSTER/STRIPPER/HOOKER… movies and TV shows. They are big in Europe and this is the future for Hollywood, I think.

Every big studio is looking for the next R-rated Mafia masterpiece with an imperfect character arc and with a dose of “true romance”.

I agree, it’s the job of a screenwriter who specializes in this “ complicated genre” to give something fresh. Something never seen. That’s what I’m tyring to do.

This is what I write about — the underground lifestyle/culture — crime, loan sharking, construction cons, gambling, prostitution, drugs/human trafficking, pornography, comic mayhem, mental illness, IRS, mistresses, corrupt cops, dysfunctional families, domestic violence, romance, district attorneys, FBI, femmes fatales and yes more violence and more urban angst…

I don’t copy anyone and my scripts are not full of clichés.

I think my scripts are original.

Here is a teasing synopsis, if you want a full page synopsis with all the details, please email me.

The script is called “Dance Desire Violence”,

New York, 1977.

Michael Wise,(19), a college dropout falls in love with the Crime Boss’ sexy schizophrenic wife, Serena Bianchi (30)…

Cheers,
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Joshua James on Friday: 7 November 2008|2249

Just some thoughts . . .

I think if you’re going to write about crime, it’s inevitable that the majority of the ideas will center on Organized Crime, since it casts such a large shadow not only over crime in America itself but pop culture America.

one needs antagonists, and mafia guys are a cool antagonist (and sometimes a cool protagonist) – in fact, mafia guys are the epitome of crime in America.

It’s hard to write about serial killers these days because they’re so swamped into pop media culture now (there’s three or four stories on episodic tv every week about different ones) but on the flip side, you can’t write about murder without eventually dealing with those.

Same goes for crime in America, eventually you run into some form of OC.

I’d also bet dollars to donuts that the above producer, if he came across a mafia script he loved but had no women character in it, would say, “can’t there be, like, a hooker our hero / mafia guy confides in and she secretly loves him in spite of the fact she’s a hooker . . . wait, maybe he’s torn between a hooker femme fetalle and a good girl back in the neighborhood who wants him to leave his life of crime . . . “
Elver on Saturday: 8 November 2008|0055

@Benjamin:

My first impressions upon hearing your pitch:

1. “Dance Desire Violence” doesn’t make any sense grammatically.

2. The 19 year old college dropout Mr. Wise is probably you. And I guess you like older, slightly insane women. (No offense meant. I like younger, slightly insane women.)

3. There’s a single “Crime Boss” in town. That’s kinda… strange. And why is he named “Crime Boss”?

In addition to film clichés (what you can see in a dark room with a popcorn-covered floor) there are screenwriting clichés like inserting yourself as the protagonist. With a couple of exceptions (Taxi Driver, most notably) these kinds of scripts don’t make it to the film stage. And these sorts of clichés are relatively hard to detect unless you’ve read quite a lot of unproduced and produced scripts.

A while ago I wrote a script called “Death to Popularity”. It’s got what I think is a great doubly-ironic ending. It’s been almost a year since I wrote it and while I still think that the ending is great, reading other scripts and watching films with my own script at the back of my mind has made me see that it has some screenwriting clichés and needs to be reworked.
Benjamin Ray on Saturday: 8 November 2008|0814

Hey Elver and Unk and all,

Thanks for your notes Elver.

“Dance Desire Violence” is 100% on the graphic novel style — lean, mean, violent, fun and not full of cliches.

Maybe if Unk is okay with this, I could post one or two page sample here.

I don’t mind good and/or harsh feedback. This is what I enjoy writing. I’m being honest.

Unk, let me know if I can post the samples in this blog.

Thanks,
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Clive on Saturday: 8 November 2008|1303

There’s a really good lesson to be learned about pitching here.

If at the end of your pitch the only feedback you get is negative, then either your pitch or your concept is wrong.

At that point offering pages is a mistake… because at best you’re going to get a “duty” read. When what you really want is people dying to read your pages.

In this business the pitch is everything… it’s the heart of every aspect of the business. And no matter whether you’re pitching to Hollywood or working as an extreme arthouse indie, eventually you’ll have to persuade an audience that your movie is worth their time.
Joshua James on Saturday: 8 November 2008|1504

“In this business the pitch is everything… it’s the heart of every aspect of the business. And no matter whether you’re pitching to Hollywood or working as an extreme arthouse indie, eventually you’ll have to persuade an audience that your movie is worth their time.”

Actually, I just have a small minor quibble with this . . . I’d say in SELLING, the pitch is everything, whether you’re selling stocks, scripts, or cat products, the pitch is key to opening the door to a relationship.

I don’t, however, think it’s everything.

But I’d say in Hollywood, performance is everything, it is the heart of the business.

You can pitch like a mad bastard, but if people love your pitch but hate your scripts, nothing will happen.

Same for movies, you can pitch a movie, it gets made and if no one ever goes to your movies, eventually it won’t matter how well you pitch. Because the performance matters more than the pitch.

This is why, I think, people are more interested in attachments than anything else . . . who’s attached to act, who’s attached to direct . . . and what’s their track record, how have they performed in the past . . .

Concept, pitch, important tools, sure . . . but not EVERYTHING. I think what matters more than anything else is performance (and for specs, execution, do the people who do read it, love it).

Just my opinion, of course.
Clive on Sunday: 9 November 2008|0341

Yours is a common misconception… the inability to tell the difference between “the pitch” and “pitching”
It’s the same problem you find in sales people who can’t tell the difference between “the product” and the “process of selling”
The pitch is the core concept of your movie, which either motivates people to see your movie or it doesn’t. You can have the best performances in the world, but they are irrelevant if nobody cares enough to watch your movie.
The truths of this industry is that a script with a great concept but a substandard script will sell faster than a well written script with a poor concept(because scripts can get fixed)… and a movie with a great concept but poor performances will do more business than a movie with great performances and a poor concept.
There is a direct link between the quality of the concept and the ability of the movie to do business.
Basically, the script won’t get read unless the concept is great… and the film won’t attach stars unless the concept is great… and the producers won’t put in production money unless they are excited by the concept… and the distributors won’t put it into cinemas unless the concept seems like an easy sell… and ultimately the audiences won’t go see the film unless they understand and are attracted to the concept.

It’s fine to have an opinion but not if it’s just plain wrong. In this case you are.
Joshua James on Sunday: 9 November 2008|0957

We’ll have to agree to disagree, Clive . . . unless you disagree to disagree, which is also fine – LOL!

Your last paragraph is actually disproved by reality . . . there are scripts that get read without great concepts to them . . . there are films that get stars attached without great concepts to them . . . movies to do get made and financed and distributed without a great concept . . . quite often they’re bad and you wonder what people were smoking (I mean, ANNA AND THE KING? A non-musical version of THE KING AND I? WTF?) but the thing is, bad movies get made, movies with no good concept behind them.

I mean, the reality is, a lot of bad scripts get read, attached and made.

And maybe some of ‘em ain’t even bad.

A lot of people didn’t know and understand the concept of NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (and still don’t) yet it didn’t stop people from seeing it, didn’t stop the Cohens from making it, didn’t stop stars from working on it and didn’t stop it from winning awards.

So I guess I don’t agree that I am just plain wrong . . . I disagree.

But rather than let this dissolve into another rabid argument about movies that prove my point and movies that prove yours, let me grant you this . . . as a spec writer, it is fucking important to have and know what the idea of your script is.

So you can sell it. No disagreement.

It could be the people buying it don’t care as long as there’s a monster and gunfights (a recent script I sold just got shot and all they cared about was the monster) or . . . all they care about is the nudity, etc. People make movies to make money, and many of them have different ideas, for them, what sells.

A lot of time their idea of what sells has nothing to do, really, with the idea of the story. Not all of the time, of course, but enough of the time.

That’s the real bitch of this profession.

For me, I believe the script, in terms of execution, is more important. The idea needs to be good, sure, but after a certain point I commit and try not to get too hung up on it. Because popularity of certain ideas is fluid.

I know full well what a “pitch” is . . . and it’s a fluid thing, what pitch is being sold today might not sell tomorrow . . . at one point, a boy seeing dead people was a great pitch, now, not so much.

today a pitch that some may view as dead in the water could possibly sell tomorrow.

That’s why Crichton wrote a film about an ER, put it in a drawer because no one was interested in medical movies and 12 years later, it sold as a series.

remember, at one point pirate movies were a big no-no.

But a pitch is just to get people to read the script, and there are plenty of great movies which have been made that don’t have great pitches or concepts in the past (Breakfast Club? Five kids in detention? On a Saturday? And we don’t even go outside?) that people loved.

Pitches are fluid things, more fluid for the people reading / buying them than those writing them. I agree with Unk, write about what fascinates you . . . if Westerns fascinate you, write about it. Even if they’re not popular.

I would also agree that great ideas never die, and the idea of a mafia boss going to a shrink (Godfather meets Ordinary People was how it was pitched, I believed) would have worked as a movie, had someone financed it like that. Instead it got made as a series, which was even better.

Just to restate, I am not saying that the pitch is NOT important, not at all. It is important, especially for specs. I simply said that, based on what I’ve observed and experienced, it’s not “everything” as stated previous.

The thing is with writing, people have to love it. It has to move them emotionally, if it doesn’t, it really won’t matter how good the idea is.

That’s the thing that matters most of all.

Again, this is just my opinion.

Nothing more or less.

I agree there’s always the possibility that I could be wrong, heh-heh. I ain’t Yoda. No one is.

But the more people I meet on my writing travels, the more it supports what I’ve stated above.
Benjamin Ray on Sunday: 9 November 2008|1145

Hey Unk, Clive and Joshua

Good points, but…..

If you did a survey and asked College and University students and single young Adults to make a list of the kinds of movies they want to see…

Since they buy most of the movie tickets, what would that list look like…

Here’s one small list I was able to sample via a Toronto Ryerson University party during the Toronto Film Festival this summer…

1. they want more movies by Guy Ritchie
2. more movies starring Robert Downey Junior
3. more movies like Borat…
4. more movies like Godfather and Scarface
5. more movies like Kill Bill
6. yes they loved Snatch, this movie keeps coming up
7. more comic book/graphic novel adaptations
8. Oldboy was great, love Asian films
9. Sopranos, TV?

So this Dec, during your small and big Christmas and New Year eve parties ask the key ticket buyers what kind of scripts/movies they want to see in future…

It helped me in my writing endeavors and to understand the business.

Cheers,
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Clive on Sunday: 9 November 2008|1407

Interesting list… three English writers and an Italian. (Ritchie, Baron-Cohen, Alan Moore and Mario Puzo)

Of course the survey is completely irrelevant… but I’ll let you work out why for yourself. It’ll mean more to you if you have to sit down and figure out for yourself why asking young adults what films they want to see is a complete waste of time.

I will give you one clue though… imagine you were doing the same survey in 1997.

By the way, I was at the Premiere of “Lock, Stock” in 1998 at the Edinburgh Film Festival. (That’s the other clue)
Christopher Rice on Sunday: 9 November 2008|1658

Awesome post!
Joshua James on Sunday: 9 November 2008|1808

BTW, OLDBOY is being remade as an American movie, with Will Smith, that’s what I heard.
Neil john brimelow on Sunday: 9 November 2008|2002

“Jessica Alba will be playing a prostitute who gets murdered in The Killer Inside Me, according to THR. Casey Affleck will play a West Texas sheriff who goes on a downward spiral from being a boring small-town cop into a ruthless, sociopathic murderer.

The film is based off the novel by author Jim Thompson and it has been made into a film before in 1976. The Mighty Heart director Michael Winterbottom will direct.”
Benjamin Ray on Monday: 10 November 2008|0813

Thanks Neil for that valuable info and motivation,

Sounds like these two movies will shake the foundation of Hollywood and might become iconic movies.

Happy to hear there is a decent market for movies like these.

But I’m still waiting for a movie/script that will better than Scarface or Godfather.

So far there are 4 big studio movies(greenlighted) on that level that will rock Hollywood.

Cheers,
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Clive on Wednesday: 12 November 2008|0927

Joshua, thanks for taking the time to write your rebutal… I do appreciate it.

But it strikes me that everything you’ve said supports my position.

Yes, every producer has an idea of what they need to sell a movie… whether that’s a high concept logline that will appeal to 18-25 year olds… or nudity and a monster.

I also agree that trying to write for trends is a fools game, because as you rightly pointed out, in this industry a trend becomes a trend the second someone makes good box office with it. Which is the point I was trying to make about Benjamin’s list… prior to 1998 no one in the core demographic knew that they wanted English multi-protagnist mockney gangster films…

However, where we disagree is in your narrow definition of what a pitch is for or even why it exists… something that I think comes from your experience as a writer as opposed to my experience as a writer/director and more recently a producer.

From my perspective as a producer the pitch is the thing that has to carry the movie all the way from the script to distribution.

Of course execution is important… but as a producer I have to have an idea that distributors can see a clear market for.

This is a lesson I learned the hard way as a writer/director by making a movie with a well written script, but with a concept that distributors couldn’t sell.

The Coen Brother’s movie doesn’t bring any useful information because they’ve established an audience for their movies, much in the way Woody Allen did… they constitute a brand and their pitch is “This is the new Coen Brothers movie”

What does shed light on this argument is the movie “Everything is Illuminated”

Basically it’s based on Liev Schriber’s very successful book of the same name and was Elijah Wood’s first major project coming off the back of “Lord of the Rings.”

Now, this movie has one of the best scripts to come out of the US in the last five years… it has great performances and is superbly directed.

However, Warner Independents buried it because they didn’t know how to sell the concept…

No matter which way you cut it, eventually your movie ends up in the hands of a guy in a shiny suit who has to sell it to another guy in a shiny suit… failure to understand that is what makes writers almost impossible for a producer to work with.

The concept is everything… full stop, end of story… great execution is a bonus
Racicot on Wednesday: 12 November 2008|1105

“Idea is King.”

-Jeffry Katzenberg
Joshua James on Wednesday: 12 November 2008|1126

“No matter which way you cut it, eventually your movie ends up in the hands of a guy in a shiny suit who has to sell it to another guy in a shiny suit… failure to understand that is what makes writers almost impossible for a producer to work with.”

Right. And it’s what I said:

“A lot of time their idea of what sells has nothing to do, really, with the idea of the story. Not all of the time, of course, but enough of the time.”

There’s the idea, then there’s the pitch, when it comes to writing. They can be two different things . . . as a writer, one needs to keep an eye on what their idea is and worry about the pitch after the hard work as been done.

I am not saying a pitch is not important, just that it’s not everything. The work is everything.

Because it could get bought and sold, or it might not even though it’s the best idea anyone has ever heard. It’s a fluid thing, what the market wants, and it’s best to focus on your work, because that’s the best pitch you have, your performance.

The COHENS have a brand because of their performance. Not their pitch, their performance.

I agree that it’s not a bad thing to brand and pitch and reverse-engineer backward to the product . .. my point is, it’s the product that is everything, at the end of the day. Not the pitch, the product.
Joshua James on Wednesday: 12 November 2008|1137

And respectfully Clive, I fail to see how my post proved your point when you said: “the script won’t get read unless the concept is great… and the film won’t attach stars unless the concept is great… and the producers won’t put in production money unless they are excited by the concept… and the distributors won’t put it into cinemas unless the concept seems like an easy sell… and ultimately the audiences won’t go see the film unless they understand and are attracted to the concept.”

And I pointed out that scripts with bad concepts get read, attached, and made quite often . . . often they’re made for reasons of brand . . . you’re correct in pointing out that folks went to see NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN because of the Cohen brand, not because they knew what the concept was . . . but doesn’t that in fact invalidate your argument that the pitch is everything?
Clive on Thursday: 13 November 2008|0302

The fact that bad films get made isn’t an argument for making bad films.
And, your argument is a typical screenwriter’s argument… it’s all about justifying why you shouldn’t have to change the way you work, rather than considering the needs of the business.
The reason that it’s almost impossible for producers to find screenwriters to work with is because 99.9% of screenwriters do exactly what you are doing… they will look for mealy mouthed excuses to justify their substandard work, rather than accept that they could do better.
“why should I nail high concept, easily pitchable concepts, when other people don’t have to?”
Well, because they’re easier to raise finance on, easier to attach stars to, easier to get distribution for. The fact that it’s possible to sell scripts without doing that doesn’t negate it as a truth… and if you want to test your theory in the real world get your ass over to Cannes next May and take your “unexplainable concept” into a meeting with the Weinsteins… see how far you get with it.
Susan P. on Thursday: 13 November 2008|0343

I think the point here is that there are exceptions to every rule – just don’t expect those exceptions to support your own work.
Joshua James on Thursday: 13 November 2008|0758

“The fact that bad films get made isn’t an argument for making bad films.”

Right. Which is why I wasn’t MAKING that argument, Clive.

I was pointing out that YOUR statement-

“the script won’t get read unless the concept is great… and the film won’t attach stars unless the concept is great… and the producers won’t put in production money unless they are excited by the concept… and the distributors won’t put it into cinemas unless the concept seems like an easy sell… and ultimately the audiences won’t go see the film unless they understand and are attracted to the concept.”

–is not correct, based on evidence before them. And the implications of what that means since it’s not a completely correct statement.

I was pointing out that the pitch is not everything.

As I’ve said, and keep saying, the PITCH IS IMPORTANT. Just that it’s not EVERYTHING.

The WORK, the product, is everything.

At no point did I ever state, write, or maintain the following: “why should I nail high concept, easily pitchable concepts, when other people don’t have to?”

I did not say that, nor would I ever say that.

In fact, I believe I’ve said time and again those things are important. Just that the work is even more important.

And I don’t think 99 percent of screenwriter’s are doing what I’m doing, nor do I know how you came to that conclusion . . . simply because you don’t know what I’m doing, and also, because I’m getting paid to write (at least for the past year and a half) and my understanding is that 99 percent screenwriters are not yet doing that.

I don’t know where you got the idea that I’m saying a writer shouldn’t change their work to fit the needs of business, since I haven’t said that, nor would I. Nor am I making mealy-mouthed excuses for substandard work – you don’t know my work, so perhaps you shouldn’t be making that type of judgment, don’t you think?

You’re jumping to a lot of conclusions about me, and respectfully, I don’t appreciate it – LOL!

I’m merely striving to be precise in this discussion. I was in no way justifying substandard work. I don’t think there’s anything I’ve written anywhere above that does so.

My intent was actually to point out the broader implications of the market and business, the things that go beyond the pitch and concept.

In fact, had you wrote, “Brand is everything” you wouldn’t have heard a damn peep out of me.

Concepts, pitches, they’re important but they’re not “everything”, simply because they’re not a zero-sum game. Like with Einstein, it’s all about relativity.

You could have the greatest concept and pitch in the world, yet if it’s a pirate movie and pirate movies are out of style, no one will buy it.

Market is relative.

If, however, your writing is great, that great script will open a door for you, and if you have other great scripts, it will go from there. Like the underlying math in physics, your writing is your foundation and your career.

Now I don’t mean that to state that the concept isn’t important, let me say that again just so it’s absolutely clear. I do not say that. You should write from solid ideas that make for an interesting story. You bet.

I love ideas, I think everything should flow from it, but in terms of market, it’s all relative to the brand. And as writers, our work is our brand.

Ergo, our “work”, our “product”, our “performance” is everything.

The performance (which includes concept, mind you, and pitch) should never be substandard.
Clive on Thursday: 13 November 2008|0813

No that isn’t the point.

Here’s the point.

“The pitch” is the core concept of a movie that carries it from conception to audience… it is the answer to the third of these questions:
Who are we talking to? (a subset of cinema goers)
What do we want them to do? (go to see our film)
Why should they do it? (to which the answer is “the pitch”)

In the case of “No country for old men”… the pitch is “this is the new Coen Brother’s movie, staring Tommy Lee Jones, that got great reviews at Sundance”

In the case of a nudie monster movie the pitch is “this movie has lots of perky tits, ass and a monster”

Let’s use, for example, “Garden State” … Zach Braff wrote it as a spec script when he was at college… had he attempted to sell it as a spec he would have been handed his own ass on a plate… however, he waited until he was famous so, his pitch was “this is a cool indie movie from the guy from Scrubs”
Without his fame as part of the pitch the film would never have been made… and had that film been made by an unknown cast it would never have seen distribution.
Now, unless a screenwriter understands how his movie answers the question “why should we go see it?”… then their film is going fall at one of the hurdles between it and and audience.
Most won’t make it into production, because they won’t get read… some will get read but not survive the coverage reports… some, will get options, but be unable to get finance… some, will get finance but run into problems attaching either a director or a lead actor… some of those will make it into production but fail to make it into distribution.
Now, at each of those stages the chances of you clearing those hurdles are increased exponentially by having a logline that excites people. Or in other words a film whose logline is strong enough to act as the movie main pitch regardless of who you attach.
The reason for that is that otherwise the pitch has to be built on other foundations… ie. who is attached.
The less able the story is to act as its own pitch the harder the producer has to work… and the greater the risks that the project will blow up in the producer’s face.
Joshua James on Thursday: 13 November 2008|1030

“Who are we talking to? (a subset of cinema goers)
What do we want them to do? (go to see our film)
Why should they do it? (to which the answer is “the pitch”)”

I don’t disagree, nor have I ever disagreed, that the above is not incredibly important. It is.

It just doesn’t sum up to “everything”.

More likely, when it comes to marketing, the pitch is the beginning.

If you do your pitch perfect, but the movie sucks and no one goes, there goes your career. A good pitch does not a great movie make (see MY SUPER EX-GIRLFRIEND) and could possibly become a career killer.

I have friends who work development, know some agents, etc … they were telling me about this writer who wrote a small movie that was very well received, directed by a fairly known director.

He / She got a big agent, went out and book some assignments. He / She pitches well, fun person.

Turned the assignments in. They were bad. According to what I heard, the writer couldn’t write very well (good at sketches, bad at everything else) and it’s hurting their career.

Because they don’t like the product. The writer, a comic, pitched like a bandit, but couldn’t follow through.

And now some folks believe that writer cannot write well. Not “it’s not for me, we’re making etc” but we hired them to write and they suck.

And now it could be that the writer may even lose his / her agent.

That’s all second-hand hearsay, of course. But it jibes with what I’ve seen when I worked in casting. Lot of actors come in, audition great, but can’t really act once you give them more than three lines.

They get a break, blow it. Blow another one. Suddenly, they’re not getting auditions anymore. Because the word is out. They do well in the room. Not so well beyond.

That’s not to say doing well in the room is not important. It is. It fucking is.

it’s just not everything. It’s only the beginning. The work is everything.

That’s been my point all along – I honestly don’t know why we’re arguing, it could be semantics or what have you, but that’s the only point I’m trying to make.

BTW, a friend of mine was in GARDEN STATE, it was originally titled LARGE’S ARK and I guess it was 160 pages long – the version they showed at Sundance was twenty minutes longer than the theatrical release and wasn’t terribly well received, so they cut it down and it made a huge difference in how folks reacted to it.

Again, though, I don’t know what the pitch of GARDEN STATE would be, if it has one, I thought the version I’ve seen was pretty good, well written, well acted and well produced.

It was probably a hard sell, no doubt, hard to pitch until Zach become a big enough name to push it through . . . but it again negates your argument that the pitch is everything . . . (the casting story goes that they sent the script out for a female lead described as a “Natalie Portman type” and she contacted them and said, “Why not just cast Natalie Portman?” They never thought they’d get her so they never tried, but she dug the script and agreed to do it)

I dunno man, maybe we’re going in circles and should just agree to stop before we drive each other crazy, right? LOL!
Clive on Thursday: 13 November 2008|1420

“The COHENS have a brand because of their performance. Not their pitch, their performance.”

OK, let’s gloss over the fact that it’s actually spelt COEN and look at the substance of that statement.

The Coen Brother’s first movie was Blood Simple, which was an ultra low budget genre movie… it got the following reaction from Pauline Kael

“Upon its release, Pauline Kael gave the film a negative review, criticizing the film’s style over content: “But the reason the camera whoop-de-do is so noticeable is that there’s nothing else going on. The movie doesn’t even seem meant to have any rhythmic flow; the Coens just want us to respond to a bunch of ‘touches’ on routine themes”.”

She wasn’t wrong Blood Simple isn’t and wasn’t a masterful performance… it wasn’t that well scripted and it didn’t establish their brand… it just proved they were a safe pair of hands to get a film to completion … and because it made some money, they were tagged as potential box office, if they came with the right project.

After that they made the high concept comedy “Raising Arizona” … which did great business based almost entirely on the concept. The vast majority of the audience for Raising Arizona hadn’t even seen Blood Simple and had no idea what a “Coen Brother” movie was… it was just a goofy comedy. It’s an OK film… but a masterpiece it isn’t.

It wasn’t until their third film “Miller’s Crossing” that the Coen’s as a brand started to develop and ironically “Miller’s Crossing” is one of the strongest conceptual films the Coen’s ahve ever made…
However the freedom to make what they wanted then almost bankrupted them, when they pushed the envelope too soon and made “Hudsucker Proxy”

So, they made a conceptual swing back to safe territory with Fargo and The Big Lebowski… both of which are concept pictures. Which are the films that actually established a mainstream “Coen Brother” audience.

After which they could do exactly what you described… sell on their brand and the quality of their performances.

However, it’s absurd to imply that they built their careers on performance alone. That’s a reputation they built over the span of six films… the best of which sold on concept.

Just so you understand this… I’ve studied the Coen’s Brother’s work for about twenty years. If you either them or Einstein (my other pet subject) as examples you are and I quote “opening up a world of pain”
Joshua James on Thursday: 13 November 2008|1452

I have a previous post that’s a response to previous that’s probably sitting in Unk’s spam . . . you’ll have to wait for that. But in the meantime:

“However, it’s absurd to imply that they built their careers on performance alone. That’s a reputation they built over the span of six films… the best of which sold on concept.”

Uh, the Coen’s (and you’re right, I mispelled their name”) have a BRAND, built up by their audience, which appreciates their work (even the work that fails), and again, what does this have to do with what started the argument, that you say “the pitch is everything” and I disagree by saying it’s important but not “everything?”

LOL!

And for sure I wouldn’t call RAISING ARIZONA just an ok film. But I agree that MILLER’S CROSSING is a masterpiece.

As I’m sure you know, they wrote BARTON FINK when they were blocked in the middle of writing MILLER’S CROSSING, it was their way to busting through.

Then again, you’re the expert, perhaps I read that story wrong, heh-heh.

I’m pretty well versed in the independent film movement (even paid to write a movie about it) but not everyone knows everything. I maintain I know more than the average bear, but on the other hand, when someone says this:

“Just so you understand this… I’ve studied the Coen’s Brother’s work for about twenty years. If you either them or Einstein (my other pet subject) as examples you are and I quote “opening up a world of pain”

I always just laugh. Just so you understand. That’s nice. But I don’t care. I seriously doubt there’s anything that could said in a blog discussion that can cause me real pain, from you or anyone – LOL!

Reminds me of when I was working in a video store, back in the nineties . . . That’s exactly what someone would say when french cinema would come up, or Corman classics . . . there were guys there who KNEW everything about movies, everything. This was before IMDB, and they knew who the best boy was, who did this, who did that.

I’m pretty knowlgeable about film stuff, but this guys were like Jeopardy masters. And ultimately, that’s all they were, most of them never moved on. If people were still renting videos, those guys would still be working there. Heh-heh.

And for me, while I love dishing about film trivia and whatnot, I’m not trying to win anything, really.

So if you want the crown of Guy Who Knows Coen Brothers Movies Better Than Anyone Else In The Whole Fucking World, you got it. I ain’t gonna compete with you. LOL!

I simply wanted to make the point that pitch is important but NOT EVERYTHING. If there was something you could say that would change my mind, I’m totally open to it. Many a fine person has enlightened me in discussions such as this.

But thus far, I haven’t heard anything. The Coen’s established a brand and that’s why they’re in business. They may have done it with a pitch, they may not have (I bet they don’t have to pitch now, heheh). I don’t know. I’m not gonna pretend to be the expert on the Coens.

Me, I’m a die-hard story wonk. I love talking about the nuance and complexity of story, and I’m also interested in the movie business as a whole and as a cultural movement . . . I love talking about that stuff, but I ain’t really interested in punishing anyone who knows less than I do, that’s the kinda game the clerks at the video store played that was fun then, now I’m interested in more than that.

So as I said in my previous, blocked post. We’re going in circles . . . you seem pretty adamant not to hear me out, I haven’t heard anything to tell me that the pitch is more important than the product, so as before, we’ll just have to agree to disagree, right?
Clive on Friday: 14 November 2008|0511

Until you can explain why outstanding, exceptional films fail to secure mainstream distribution your opinion that product is more important than concept in this industry is just plain wrong.

This actually happens to films and filmmakers every single day… even to well know ones.

I’m prepared to listen… but only when you can actually present a thesis supported by evidence that matches the industry as it exists and how it does business on a day to day basis.
Tom on Friday: 14 November 2008|0608

If you guys know so much about women, how come you’re here at like the Gas ‘n’ Sip on a Saturday night completely alone drinking beers with no women anywhere?
Joshua James on Friday: 14 November 2008|0756

Concept is part and parcel of the product, Clive, but as I mentioned before, it’s a fluid, mobile every changing relative integer in terms of value.

I don’t necessarily think pitch and concept are the same thing, btw. Linked, but not exactly the same . . . I mean, BEING JOHN MALKOVICH was Kaufmann’s fantasy about cheating on his wife, according to reports. I’m pretty sure that’s not how it was pitched, heheh.

Okay, why don’t some great concepts / pitches sell?

Let me speculate.

Again, this is just my opinion. Prepare for some massive metaphor.

Think of your product as X. Your math is strong, but . . . What does X equal? Especially for people, the buyers, who think they know algebra but in reality barely know basic math. What’s the value of X, in their opinion?

Depends on who, where and when. Who you are, where you’re pitching, when you’re pitching, etc. Who’s reading your script, what they’re looking for, etc.

Lots of unknowns there.

I pointed out time and time again, with examples, of how a great concept is relative to time and position (Pirate movies out, westerns in, a year from now it will be the opposite) and the value of X changes immediately when Will Smith gets attached.

That’s how great movies with great concepts often don’t get made, at least for awhile. Or sometimes never. There’s a black list released every year of scripts agents and producers love but don’t get made (I believe BEING JOHN MALKOVICH was one such script).

In the end, even if your script doesn’t get made, doesn’t sell, but enough people like and admire it (dig your math) it becomes your brand (your product) and will change what happens for your next one, more people will want your math, more people will accept that you’ve got strong kung fu.

Which in turn affects the value of X. Your brand changes the game, so that earlier products of little value have a higher value (as an example, Grisham’s A TIME TO KILL, which sold only five thousand copies (thousand of which he bought himself) for a small publisher . . . after he second book, THE FIRM, became a bestseller, and others followed, A TIME TO KILL was released and became a best seller as well . . . the X value changed.

Now this is all speculative, of course, but we are talking about a marketplace, which is by its very nature speculative. Which, like poker, is a game of incomplete information. So values are assigned to unknowns (like scripts) and those values change over time, depending on performance.

Joe Esterhaus, another great example. I don’t think he’s a terrible writer (TELLING LIES IN AMERICA is a pretty fine film) in fact, I think he’s pretty good, or was. He infamously sold a pitch for three million, one he wrote on a bar napkin.

Could he do that today? Doubtful. Why? Well, the value of his product went way down. Perhaps that’s his fault or not, but it did.

He doesn’t even have the position he used to, so perhaps, but not for the money he used to.

The market is fluid.

This is what I tell myself, anyway. Product is the most important, but I see product as more than one script (which is why I told you, had you said brand is everything, I wouldn’t have disagreed) and it is, essentially, how well you write, how well you handle the game.

Heh-heh. I just realized I switched metaphors from math to poker. Oh well, it’s early in nyc and my brain is still loopy.

The reason some great concepts don’t get made is dependent on other factors that go beyond the concept, most importantly position (do you have access to those who buy, etc) as any poker player would tell you, position is more important than the cards you hold . .. you could have pocket Aces, but if you’re in bad position, you’re still likely to lose thirty percent of the time.

Doesn’t mean you shouldn’t play them, of course. Just that they may not pay off.

Same with great concepts. They may not pay off, even though they should.

Doesn’t mean you don’t seek them out, don’t make that the centerpiece of your game. You should.

But the game goes beyond the cards you play. It’s a fluid thing, dependent on who you’re playing, what round it is, what position you’re in, a whole host of things that go beyond the cards in your hand.

Concept is the cards in your hand. You want strong cards in your hand. But your game is more than the cards in your hand. And sometimes you can win a hand strictly on reputation alone, if your brand is that strong (like Phil Gordon or Doyle Brunson).

So in a way, I see our discussion coming down to this . . . you’re saying pocket Aces is everything, I’m saying there’s more to winning the game than pocket aces.

Make sense? If not, I totally understand – LOL!

I do believe in quality of work (which includes concept, pitches and execution) and I get just as amazed when a bad film gets made as anyone, but then again, a script I wrote was made into an indie and I had no power over the many changes that were made . . . it’s quite likely it could also be bad.

So I do get hung up on the precision of words, I know, but a lot of this Socrates talk stuff is useful for me in a zen slap sort of way.

Listen dude, I’m simply speculating, of course. I’m not gonna sit here and pretend to be Yoda. I could be wrong, there are many unknowns floating out there . . . I love dialoguing about this stuff because it helps ME to understand the broader picture.

And hopefully I come out a better writer. I hope, anyway. I do.

Again, this is all just my opinion.
Benjamin Ray on Friday: 14 November 2008|1120

Hi Clive and Joshua, shake hand and peace out.

Enough is enough.

My question to Joshua and Clive –

After reading your statement — “over to Cannes next May and …into a meeting with the Weinsteins… “!

The experts are saying that this is impossible for any un-sold writer.

Do you agree? Well, I disagree and believe in my scripts.

How did the script — Lucky Number Slevin (2006) get to Weinsteins desk?

What kind of scripts (style of writing) and coverage report, the Weinsteins would find truly impressive?

Would a sold script like “The Low Dweller”(which had a perfect execution and concept) impress the Weinsteins?

I think the hardest job in this world is to be a Reader for the Weinsteins.

Cheers,
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Joshua James on Friday: 14 November 2008|1353

Benjamin,

I’m told there are many paths to nirvana . . .
Chris J. Scurria on Saturday: 15 November 2008|0035

I saw your sometimes true comment on what people want to see. Josh said that some may just want to see some skin (“nudity”). Unfortunately, that is somewhat true to much of the audience. People may not think so much on plot and some want to see some shot that people will want to see as a star shows something.
That is why we need to come up with more character-driven and well executed ideas. If someone is teased and people are cruel at school, than there is no reason to show anything. If a character wants to get away from his past, than there should be no part of the “story” where the no-plot scene has an inappropriate section.
Take care, Unk.
Remember God so loved the world, He sent His Son.

c. s.
Clive on Saturday: 15 November 2008|0451

There’s very little in your post I disagree with… it’s true there are a multitude of factors that determine what will and won’t get bought at any given moment.

So, for instance, Bruce Robinson’s script for “The Killing Fields” was passed over by one of Kubrick’s best and most experienced readers because it was “too wordy.” And yet, it then went on to win the Oscar for best screenplay… the quality of the product isn’t always apparent, even to the very best in business.

However, your model fails to answer two questions:

How an unknown screenwriter, like Benjamin, with zero brand value, gets a script read by someone who can take a view on its quality?

and…

Why well written, well performed films with name actors get buried by distributors and make that sad trek direct to DVD, without the cinema release they need to gather a mainstream audience?

Most people who wish to come into the industry or are fairly new to it can’t imagine that it’s possible to make a good product and still fail to make either any money or increase your brand value… but it happens more often than I’d care to mention.

In fact, it’s possible to make a great film and have your brand value go down… which is what happened to the Coen Brothers after “Hudsucker Proxy”

In order to understand this fully you have to actually sit in a distributor’s office and hear the following sentence “I personally love your film, it’s fantastic… but, I can’t see how we can sell it.”

Now you’d be forgiven for believing that if that happens it’s because there is a problem with the product… and yet Terry Gilliam had exactly this problem with the American distributors of “Brazil” … who refused to release probably one of the best movies ever made, until it had been butchered in post production and they also took out a court order to ban showings of the original European cut from ever being shown in the US. (There is a very good chance that if you’re American and have only seen the movie Brazil on US TV, that you’ve never actually seen the movie Terry Gilliam made!)

So, how does this impact on our conversation… well, it’s pretty simple… when a project gets buried it’s generally because the person who controls the money loses faith that they can sell the product for enough money to make a profit… or in other words a pitch failure has occurred. The distributor looks at your great film and just can’t figure out how to persuade someone to go watch it.
When the studio buried and butchered Brazil it wasn’t because it was a bad film… it was because they didn’t believe the concept of the film could be sold to an American audience… despite the fact it was breaking box office records in Europe.
(Actually, I’m aware that I’ve over simplified this story… because part of the recut was connected to bad audience polls of the European cut with US audiences… so there were quality issues as well – however, the primary problem was the head of the studio believed it was an arthouse film… or a niche film at best, a position US film critics violently disagreed with)

Regardless of your brand or the quality of your product it makes commercial sense to take to market products that distributors can get behind… if your pitch inspires belief in people, that inspiration will carry your film all the way to an audience… no matter how good you are or how easy it is to push pet projects into production, there is never any excuse for not nailing your product’s pitch… and many of the people whose brand is now essentially worthless learned this lesson the hard way when they decided that they were beyond the basic rules of business.

Finally… Benjamin, let me answer your question.

Basically, if you’re attending Cannes as a delegate it’s possible to pitch to the Weinstein’s and a whole load of other people… however, and here’s the catch… first you have to get accreditation for the festival, which you can only do if you’re an established industry professional. So you’re right it is impossible for a completely unknown screenwriter… however, for someone like Joshua who has sold a couple of scripts and for someone like me who has written and directed a couple of movies it’s possible.

However… even if you get access all you’ll get the opportunity to do is pitch. You’ll have to persuade them your concept is worth reading.
Which means you need to have that pitch nailed. There’s absolutely no point at all in bringing a project to Cannes unless the script is damn near perfect, which you’ve tested by getting positive coverage or a professional script editor’s report and which has a logline that makes people want to read your screenplay.

As I been saying all along… if your logline alone makes people want to see the film, you are long way towards creating a viable brand.
Benjamin Ray on Saturday: 15 November 2008|0854

Thanks Clive,

Your points and wisdom gave me motivation.

I have a pitch. But as you said, it has to be pitch perfect.

Yes, the bar has been raised. Thanks for raising it.

And thanks for that kick start.

Cheers.
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Joshua James on Saturday: 15 November 2008|0917

Well, Clive, we’ve never ever disagreed that the pitch wasn’t important. Just that it wasn’t everything.

Just as your example underlines your point, my many, many examples previous underline mine . . . that movies DO get read without great pitches, movies do get made, movies do get seen by audiences (I think one of my examples was Napoleon Dynamite).

Sometimes the movies are great, sometimes not. My point was never that if you can’t explain the concept you’ve got nothing to worry about. Sure, you do. However –

My point is that if people love the movie, whether they get it or not, that will be everything. They’ll find a way.

Or they won’t. Selling a film is important, I’d be the first to agree . . . one reason I think so many adaptations are done is that it’s believed there’s a built in audience . . . NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN combined three different brands together, Coens, Cormac and Tommy Lee JOnes . . . many of my friends are mystified as to what that film is about, what it all meant . . . they went to see it because of the three things above, not because they knew what the film was about.

Same for a Rob Schnieder movie. People go because of his brand, not because of a film’s great concept.

Answering your first question. How does Benjamin get his script read? He joins a group or a network (I referred him to Trigger Street), he mingles and asks questions, he does just what he’s doing, actually. People will read his scripts, eventually. If they like them, they’ll want to read more.

I think he needs to be a little more subtle, personally, LOL! (no offense, B) but that’s how it gets done . . . But he’s not gonna get Harvey W. to read his script yet, but who says that’s a bad thing? There are TWC readers all over New York he could run into. The pitch helps get folks to read it, sure. But they’ll keep reading past page 10 if they like the writing.

Your second question: Why do good movies get buried? Again, it may have nothing to do with the concept, and everything to do with other factors. The director didn’t make the cut the prodco wanted, so they retaliated by burying it (it happens) or the distributor just plain ran out of money (you follow the recent drama with THINK films, right?) and had no other choice.

Those are some reasons why it happens. And there are others . . . sometimes someone new comes in charge, and they just don’t “get” the concept. That happens to. Some people just don’t get it (Brazil, they didn’t get it.) Just like writers make bad decisions, sometimes the suits in charge make bad ones, too. Even if the concept is great, it can get mishandled, right?

So that’s how that happens, sometimes. That’s what I think.

Listen, I don’t disagree with you on the importance of concept. I’m just explaining the larger considerations and, I think, they’re just as important, if not more. It’s good to know them, right?

Just like a great hand in poker can’t necessarily win the whole game for you, a writer’s career is more than one script. It’s a lot of things.

Sigh. We should probably stop driving each other crazy with this, right? LOL!

And Benjamin, you can do what Clive said and you can also simply just call TWC up and ask them if they’ll read your script.

It could actually happen that way, too. Just make sure your script is ready. Because it if ain’t, you may not get a chance to submit again.

But my advice is to try and meet directors. Pester some film school kids, there are a lot of director students looking for short scripts. Make friends with them – you never know, one of them could grow up to be the next Spielberg.
Elver on Saturday: 15 November 2008|0957

Hey, don’t worry. If you have a really horrible and unfunny film, you might still get it made. And it might still make a lot of money. Or haven’t you guys seen PINEAPPLE EXPRESS yet? :P
Clive on Sunday: 16 November 2008|0912

Actually Elver, that’s a good example of how a sellable concept triumphs over quality of product… with the caveat that by failing to deliver a product to match the concept they’ve hurt the long term value of their brand.

Generally I’m anti-metaphor when it comes to describing business practices, because the metaphor always breaks down… however, I have actually found one that stacks up for this debate. In the 1960’s there was a cartoon strip called the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers and their motto was:

“Dope will get you through the times of no money, better than money will get you through the times of no dope”

If you rework it, it works for the film industry:

“A good quality pitch will get you through the times of no quality, better than quality will get you through the times of no workable pitch”
Elver on Sunday: 16 November 2008|0919

I think in the case of PINEAPPLE EXPRESS Seth Rogen wrote it in high school while stoned and the reason it got made was pretty much his fame.

It wasn’t really a pitch thing (because there isn’t a high concept behind it — no pun intended) and it wasn’t a quality thing (it’s a really horrible film) — it was just Seth Rogen’s fame.
Clive on Monday: 17 November 2008|0328

I’m done with debating this issue, but because I think it’s important people have access to the tools that people use to judge spec scripts here’s the link to Terry Rossio’s Script readers checklist…

Before he wrote “Pirates of the Caribbean” Terry started out as a reader, writing coverage… hope you find it useful… point one on the list is particularly enlightening

Script Reader’s Checklist
Clive on Monday: 17 November 2008|0328

Sorry the link doesn’t work… here’s the URL

http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp05.Death.to.Readers
Paul de Leonardo on Tuesday: 18 November 2008|1550

Here in Europe , many of us pas on most Hollywood movies at the video shop or at the cinema. We’re fed up of Americanatas.(movies with overdone concepts that give us the impression that americans think that America is the whole world)On the other hand when we European scribes submit to Hollywood our concepts are not very much excepted or understood.
The reason is probably our perspective of life and different cultures.
Maybe it’s high time that a mechanism is put in motion where scribes can start to collaborate across the two continents.
If any of yous are interested, please contact me. Paul. leonardshair@hotmail.com.
Elver on Wednesday: 19 November 2008|1545

Speaking as an European… I don’t quite agree. Yeah, there are a couple of legendary European films and the UK has created their own brand of absurdly good crime films, but overall… We make crap here.

I think before we can start saying “Hollywood sucks because they don’t understand our style” we should make sure that we can consistently produce stuff that our own audiences here in Europe love. Because right now that’s just not the case. And once we have that figured out… Do we really need Hollywood?
Paul de Leonardo on Thursday: 20 November 2008|1537

Hey Elver, perhaps I could have come more staight to the point. I maybe should have just suggested that we Europeans should try and team up our abilities with anyone else in the world to create new ideas and present the cinematic world with somthing fresh. But if you want me to send you somthing that would explain what I was trying to say; then just leave an e-mail address if you wish. Thanks for commenting anyway.
Elver on Thursday: 20 November 2008|1540

Always interested in the fresh stuff :)

elver.loho@gmail.com

If anyone else wants to have a chat, drop me a line.

P.S: Also, guys, don’t send me any Viagra ads. My mailbox is already full of them :P
Benjamin Ray on Sunday: 23 November 2008|1502

Hey Clive,

Good stuff.

Is there an email we can reach you at.

Cheers.
Benjamin Ray
brscreenwriter@gmail.com
http://www.hollywoodtoronto.com
Zed on Saturday: 29 November 2008|1257

Great article! It reminds me of the Bad Premise thing where a small mistake can ruin an entire story. Like Unbreakable where the main character works FULL TIME as a stadium security guard when actually those guys are almost always part time and very part time. Most sports security guys do it for the tickets to the game and a very small amount of money.
M. Night Shamalamadingdong got it wrong.

I’m a wanna be screenwriter who NEVER WRITES. LOL. Join the club, huh?
Zed on Saturday: 29 November 2008|1308

How about a screenplay about a Hollywood producer who is shown a constant stream of same-ole concepts… talking babies, talking animals, VAMPIRES, etc.
So fed up that he can’t find an original concept, he finally says, fuck it.. the next person through that door is going to get a movie deal.
And the next person turns out to be… ME. Or You… whomever. And bring your worst most Bowfinger script. Walla.. we have a movie. Nothing to it.

http://rottenapplepie.blogspot.com/
Elver on Sunday: 30 November 2008|1332

Speaking of which… I’m surprised how there are so very few films about filmmaking out there.

And very few of those are any good.

The documentary about Werner Herzog’s quest to make FITZCARRALDO was great. Hm. I can’t think of anything else right now.
Zed on Sunday: 30 November 2008|1805

I love films about Hollywood. My Tiny Universe is one of my favorites. Interesting concept too.. I wonder how he ever got it made?
Susan P. on Tuesday: 2 December 2008|0103

Bowfinger was a cool film in its own way but didn’t do that well at the BO. Scripts about the industry aren’t well received and screenwriting classes and consultants generally caution against using the theme.
Tom on Tuesday: 2 December 2008|0655

Another film-making doc is Hearts of Darkness about Apocalypse Now. It’s pretty great.
Maybe Charisma Shouldn’t Be a Stripper « The Writer’s Review on Monday: 8 December 2008|2036

[...] Charisma Shouldn’t Be a Stripper I read a blog post today on concept and execution that argued rather convincingly that strippers and mafia are cliches in film, and that having [...]

Leave a Reply

Find It
Recently Written
Categories
- Greatness
- Movies
- Screenwriting
  - Articles
  - Blogs
  - Books
  - Bullshit
  - Characters
  - Competition
  - Gurus
  - High Concept
  - Mistakes
  - Questions
  - Rants
  - Structure
  - Tips
  - Tricks
  - Videos
Screenwriting Stuff
Scribosphere
Most Popular Posts
Monthly Archives
Movies

Concept and Execution

Comments

Find It

Recently Written

Categories

Screenwriting Stuff

Scribosphere

Most Popular Posts

Monthly Archives

Movies