Message Board

Now don't get me wrong -- I'm not knocking the Nicholl at all: I think it is the best contest there is without question, and a sure-fire career starter -- but ONLY if you final or win. I was a semi-finalist this last year. I got calls from prodcos and a few management companies -- the same "cattle calls" everyone else got. Didn't amount to anything. I think it is a great feather in your cap, and a great thing you can add to a resume; but (and I believed otherwise myself!) a career-maker it is not. (And by "it" I mean quarter-finaling or semi-finaling; although the rush you get certainly can't be beat.)

I have never entered Chesterfield, because I have always been suspicious of them. This from my brother (anecdotal evidence alert!), who years ago was working in a prodco that shared office-space with them (and I believe, actually helped sponsor them at the time). He took a look in there one time -- again, remember, this was years ago -- saw the two guys handling the MOUNTAIN of scripts, and that just a short time before decision deadline, and, well... told me about that.

And so, I decided, never to enter the Chesterfield.

Yes, have hope, all you who didn't make it this year. I didn't (next 10%) with my semi from last year -- a script that won another competition this year. I know of a finalist from last year, whose script didn't even make quarts this year. The stories are endless like that. The process is about as subjective as can be (i.e., after a certain level of competence, of course) -- take it from someone experienced in this realm of reading scripts.

However... though a placement is a great thing to have, it's not THE career-maker you may think it might be -- unless you are one of those last coveted ten.

And even then... that just means the ball's in your court. Make your best shot.

Congrats to all who advanced -- very best of luck!

Craig

The problem is, that there are so few good scripts in general out there.

People want it both ways: they want to say: contests don't matter, it doesn't matter what the readers there think because I'm good enough, etc. Then, if they make it, they say: see? Cream rises to the top.

The "problem" is that there are so few avenues to Hollywood in general. Hollywood trusts the Nicholl to "let in" a few that will be allowed consideration. Otherwise, 5000+ scripts from the Nicholl alone would be falling across the desks of producers that simply can't handle them.

Here's how it is in Hollywood, here's the motto: No one need apply. They don't NEED you, and they sure as hell don't WANT you.

That given, the job is to cram your way in any way you can. And prove them wrong.

Most don't.

Let's see you try.

Dear Ashley,

If you REALLY believe that a reader is going to obsess over a WORD, and that that is going to sink a script -- girl, you've gotta be kidding! (Or I'm missing some point.)

I am/have been a reader. And I don't have the time to obsess over every word usage. One "ettle" will fly by my radar like it was never there. A bunch of words that are deliberately obscure, and a prejudice will build within me against the writer: I will wonder why this writer is deliberately using obscure language. Otherwise, it don't exist.

I'm sorry, but we simply do not have the time to take each and every script home and read it out loud to our mothers. In a perfect world, maybe. Not in Hollywood.

Here, it's: wham bam thank you ma'am. You better get the reader's attention in that short a span. And it better be for a good reason.

Because otherwise, you are gone sister, like yesterday's news.

Sorry. But them's the breaks.

Craig

It's hard to say anything without knowing your script, D.J. If it's just no good, then maybe what that reader said had some validity.

However, and mostly likely, you got the bad luck of the draw: you got a tired, poor, stupid reader; one who didn't have the time to delve into what was, perhaps, a very good script. Maybe your script "took chances," and that was beyond the reach of that reader. It could have been a million things.

Here is something to keep in mind about readers: I was a reader for a major major, but small, production company. The policy was: no script got read that wasn't agent repped. I was the reader who was making the determination whether a script moved on or not. I, however, could not get my OWN scripts read at this same company -- because I had no agent. Even though they were relying on MY expertise to figure out what scripts were good or not!

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT!?!

(Me, I didn't like it too much, lemmetellyou.)

Craig

I would like to add to Miriam's last paragraph my own observation:

I have read many, many scripts, both professional and "amateur." Most are lousy, some are good; a few, great.

But very, very few, cry out to be made. I can't define it, but you can have a great script, and yet never see it as a movie. A script has to have that certain something that instills PASSION in the reader (hopefully, a reader with power [eg., a producer]), the passion to see it through to the end, to see it made.

So many scripts, good as they are... the world misses them not, if they go by the wayside and end up nowhere.

Well -- write one that doesn't!

Craig

Okay, am I the only one here who sees "Look Who's Talking 2" specifically mentioned in the first post? Or am I finally, thankfully losing my mind from all this?

Come on guy: just because your script didn't make it to the top 300... hard as it is to swallow, did you ever think that as good as it was, there were like 300 BETTER scripts out there?

Now I *don't* believe that -- I'd be in the same camp you are! So I choose not to. But hey, using Occam's Razor now..........

Craig

Judy,

Two things: first, the first reader may have liked it minimally, maybe was sort of ambivalent about it. Believe me, there are ALL sorts of scripts out there, including those that aren't bad at all, but don't spark that... spark. You don't know how you feel about them, get a second opinion, and it's over. Or perhaps all sorts of office politics was in play. Some readers are not good readers, and are known as being not good readers within the company. It is impossible to guess without knowing the real situation.

However, secondly, and most importantly: as tempted as you are to send it to the studio, DON'T! I worked at a prestigious prodco, whose policy was essentially to refuse all submissions (and they ONLY accepted agented submissions!) The studios are rougher, and without an agent, you don't stand a chance of getting ahead there. But you WILL garner poor coverage, which may go on to haunt you later, in getting agents, reads at that studio, etc. Keep trolling for agents, that's your best bet, but avoid the temptation to send to the studios. You may rue the day you did that.......

My $.02,

Craig

Simple, Marc: Scriptapalooza is a lesser entity than Nicholl. So not making it to Scriptapalooza is harder to take, because the perception is that it's easier to "take." Not true.

You must all realize, and keep realizing, that these contests are crap-shoots, on many levels. Some have multiple reads, true: but that's *usually* for scripts that *make an initial read*.

If you think for a MINUTE that Nicholl scripts got more than one read, if that first read was scored poorly -- with over 5000 scripts! -- than you're fooling yourself. One, misguided, poor, silly, stupid, brainless, unsympathetic/empathetic, ignorant reader passes on your script... you're outta there!

Doesn't mean your script was bad at all! It just means that the luck of the draw (sometimes, mind, NOT always) was against you. Why multiple contest entries are really essential -- if you don't have ANY OTHER plan on entering Hollywood and getting your stuff out there.

It's hard. I've had to pass on a number of scripts that were oh so close... but made some fundamental errors. In the end, I think, every script needs work of one kind or another (the ones I've read). Even the best scripts (ones I do move on) -- they still often lack that "certain something" that makes a script CRY OUT to be made.

Craig

Hey, and while we're all waiting, to fill up the time -- I got some questions, 'cause I know little about Austin:

Are there quarter, semi, final rounds? How many usually make it to each? And how many finalists?

Craig

Just thought I'd share a story my brother told me: he said that, some time ago, the top head-honcho number one of a major production company gave a talk at a college, a general forum thing. During the talk, this head of the company said to the audience assembled (paraphrased), "Sure, we at [prodco] are always looking for good scripts. I encourage you to submit to us." Well, you can imagine the flood that poured in! Subsequently, most of those scripts were tossed right into the garbage.

But see, the reason why they were tossed into the garbage was because, being a top prodco, the policy was: only agented submissions. Of course, most of the scripts sent by this hopeful audience were not agented.

The problem here was that the head of the prodco was trying to be nice on a mass scale; and that this head really didn't know what went on at the company s/he headed! In trying to be nice and accommadating, this head gave out deliberately wrong and misleading information that only hurt all the hopeful people who heard the glorious news.

Sometimes, those at the top don't know, or don't care, what they are talking about.

However, after this same talk, so my brother tells me, a person in the audience approached this head in the parking-lot, and struck up a friendly conversation. That resulted in a favorable impression, that subsequently resulted in this person getting hired, and becoming a personal assistant to said head of prodco.

Tried and true methods are best: personal relationships, good scripts, hard work, the "rules" -- the ones *we* usually know, not the ones the bigshots sometimes don't.

Got my letter today -- I am out out out!

So it goes.

Craig

Ah, Hollywood! Land of dreams!

Where you entrust the script you sweated over for a year or more, in a life fully devoted to the craft of writing, to unpaid interns working part-time for college credit.

Or, you give it to flunkies working for $40-60 per script, which averages out to, take it from me, $10/hour or less.

Forget the reader mill. Take time to find receptive readers any way you can, and go there. Better to not have anything out there "being read," than something good out there being read by some of the readers I'VE seen.....

To all of us who DIDN'T make it only, allow me to help you deal with the pain:

Except for these recent tax checks, nothing good and REAL, ever comes in the mail. At least in this industry.

That is to say over:

If your phone ain't ringing, it ain't happening.

If your phone ain't ringing, it ain't real.

Yet.

Rule of thumb. It's true. Rest easy.

Craig

(and congrats to those of you who made it)

Well, persistence pays off.

I received my rejection from Chesterfield on Friday last.

And today... I received notice I advanced to Chesterfield's semi-finals!!!

Seriously, has anyone else experienced this? I don't get it. Yes, I submitted two scripts; but as far as I know, you are considered singly no matter how many scripts are entered.

I'm happy, but don't know what to think.

?

Craig

All's well everyone. I called, left a message. Got a message back.

Apparently, it was a mistake, and it happened to THREE people (they know of): people that got semi and reject letters both.

But... the semi letter was the right one! Yay! Same for everyone, I gather.

That's all that matters.

Now for other salient questions, I wonder if anyone has answers to: how many entries do they usually receive? How many make the semi cut? How many finalists? Fellows?

Anyone know?.....

Craig

I concur (concurr?) with everything Melvin said.

You have to look at the big contest entries, I've always said this, as just, something you do. Like paying car registration. You just do it, and forget it. You make DAMN sure you are writing good stuff, but you know what I mean. Because so much of it IS a crapshoot, you can't invest too much personal energy, etc., into it.

Judging the best contests? Definately, IMHO, Austin and Nicholl are the top two. Then probably Chesterfield, Disney, Slamdance, Sundance, and Telluride. They are not all equal in terms of entry odds or cash earnings, but they are in terms of prestige -- Slamdance a little less, but it's gaining momentum.

I have read so many scripts, and let me tell you the most common reason why so many don't make it farther in a contest -- they aren't that good. You might be scratching your head at my comment, but that's the truth: they aren't that good. All you have to do is write a good script. That's it. It means you have to painstakingly analyze EVERY part of your script. You may have to rewrite HUGE, MASSIVE portions of it. You have to learn to be ruthless, to not be so attached to anything you write -- to cut with impunity. To face the fact that MOST of the story ideas out there SUCK! Good writers, working with bad DNA.

Just write a good script. That's it. You can do it. Then watch yourself place in all these contests!!!

Craig

Susan,

Don't take not making it to the finals as any condition of your own writing. What you have could be very, very good. What someone else has could ALSO be very, very good. Sometimes -- sad to say! -- flips of the coin are what makes decisions. Next time, hopefully, yours comes up.

And I wish to correct something in my previous post: I meant to write "Scriptapalooza" twice, not Slamdance. Although, Slamdance, too, is moving up there as a contest with weight.

Craig

Melvin said:

>>>Religion, like everthing else in this world, is often subject to corruption.<<<

Amazingly enough, however, is that -- and my more knowledgeable fellows here can correct me if I am wrong -- a religion that's gone through centuries of change and "corruption," and yet always remained essentially peaceful, is: Buddhism. Taoism I believe also remained peaceful throughout the centuries, but I am not clear about how corrupted it ever got. I mean, that Buddhists did not go wielding the sword at any point in history to gain converts/kill infidels, unlike most every single other religion that's been around at one point or another.

I think the dividing line is simple: when the religion begins looking at others as UNconvertable "infidels" worthy only of death without recourse, warning, or mercy, then that *particular* religious belief has become a pestilence that itself must be rooted out to enable the rest of civilized (though differing) society to function normally.

It has become a case more of getting rid of rats in the basement, than revenge.

Craig

I do believe that many religions have been corrupted. The most corrupted? Christianity, Buddhism, and probably Hinduism. The least corrupted? Probably Judaism and Taoism. But see, by corrupted, I am using a non-perjorative sense; I mean, that the religion has fragmented significantly from its originally core values, beliefs, cosmology. Buddhism was pretty much atheistic to begin with and certianly didn't believe in an afterlife. That came later. Christianity: who knows what the core original beliefs were? They were certainly different from the scores of denominations we have now.

So again: when I say a religion has become "corrupted," I do not mean it has become "decadent." It's not "bad" now, was "good"; "impure" now, was "pure." I mean it's become "different."

(And notice how I can get away with all the generalizations here by using those cute little quote marks!)

Melvin says:

>>>Nobody can agree, and nobody is changing their minds based on the other's point of view. How many thousands of years do you think this will continue. Religion is a blight on mankind. Spirituality is its original intent and its only solution.<<<

With all due respect, Melvin, history proves you about as wrong as you can get. "Other points of view" were what spurred Muslims to topple Hinduism as the national religion of India, and what turned much of the barbaric world to Christianity, and there are countless other examples. These "points of view" are, in a word: religion.

I am not personally "religious" (I don't subscribe to any religious institution or doctrine). But I would never go so far as to say that "religion is a blight on mankind." Religion *can* be, but isn't necessarily so. I am sure that a Christian wife who just lost her husband in the Twin Towers this week, doesn't think of her religion as a blight upon humanity. I would venture to guess that at this time, more than her whole life, that religion might be providing her some very needed comfort and community.

Spirituality is expressed for many different people in many different ways. I have no problem with people even trying to "stuff religion down my throat." So what? Who cares? No, I have a problem with people trying to fly their religion into my building.

Craig

Can anyone substantiate the rumor I heard? That the finalists are being notified/have been notified already?

?

My "source" (feel like Bob Woodward here) stated that s/he had been contacted by Chesterfield, informing him/her that s/he was a finalist, and that to that effect, they wanted him/her to "fill out some forms." This "source" was very concerned lest I tell someone specific, but not necessarily tell people in general. I do not know this "source" personally; in fact, I just happened to "run into" this "source." But the message sounded extremely credible.

I HOPE I'm wrong. Believe me! I'm in this too, and I want to make it.....

Craig/Bob

>>>Your *source*: did s/he/it indicate how s/he/it was contacted? Phone? Mail? Email? Radio waves? Mental telepathy?<<<<

S/he/it was called. This was key to me accepting it as possible fact.

>>>Did s/he/it indicate what kind of forms?<<<

S/he/it IMPLIED, or perhaps I inferred, that they were forms for personal information. Another key bit of evidence.

>>>And what of one of the above posts that referenced your inquiry on the Nichollscribes board -- the one where your source* apparently referred to themselves as a semi-finalist, not a finalist?<<<

This is totally wrong. I had posted that I knew this (i.e., that Chesterfield was in the process of notifying their finalists) on Nichollscribes (a "site" only open to Nicholl placers); but because I was questioned there, and then subsequently questioning myself, I decided to post it as a question here. And elsewhere. There was no discussion of Nicholl with the "source."

>>>Lastly, did you try contacting Ed as was suggested above? That seems like the surest way to dispell or confirm any such rumors.<<<

No. I can, however, because I have all contact information.

Perhaps, like you... I am too scared to find out.......

Craig

My advice: never believe what anyone says in this town. Never. Do what you HAVE to do, minimum. You should have done the attorney thing *first*, then he could have hit the roof early and you wouldn't have had to do all those rewrites. Would have saved you both time and stress.

I had a director call me, say he was in cush with a company/fellow who wanted to get a series started, wanted me to help him on developing a series, yadda yadda yadda. I knew right away this was going nowhere. But I nodded politely, said sure; helped this guy devlop HIS idea, with an absolute minimum of effort and time and creative input. He still raved over my ideas, contributions, etc. I nodded politely. Never expected to hear from him again. And wasn't disappointed. When I finally contacted him, curious what had happened, I got that classic Hollywood line: We decided to go in a different direction.

Translation: [*Boot!*] Adios, chump!

Chalk it up to experience and move on. Sure won't be the first mentally-disturbed crazy-making individual you'll meet in this town.

Craig

Colleen,

I am chicken; but I hate NOT knowing something that I can simply move on from. So, I am going, RIGHT NOW (10/01 11:17am PST) to call them, and report back to everyone what if anything I find out.

Craig

Answering system. Left message. See if they call back today.

Craig

I do know they have at least a finalist notification, because someone I know made finalist in Disney a few years back. The same year, she made finalist in Nicholl, and didn't win there either.

But it was still enough to launch a very successful writing career!

Craig

To make finalist in the Nicholl is a real achievement. Not as much for Disney, but both in the same year?

Double placers (and I mean serious placements, not semi or quart) are usually virtually assured of career success. Max Addams: Austin and Nicholl Fellow same year (different scripts!) Marlowe: Nicholl (fellow) and Chesterfield (finalist) same year. Susannah Grant: Nicholl (fellow) and Disney (finalist) the same year. If you can pull off a double whammy, you are in good shape. If you pull off a finalist or fellow in one contest, your chances are great, don't get me wrong -- but not ASSURED.

Craig

The day has flown by, and I've received no return call.

Bad sign.....

Craig

Thank you Colleen, et.al., for the plucky chicken award, which I humbly accept. I neve did get a call back. I DID, however, get a mysterious hang-up, which I am in the process of investigating right now. I will keep you all posted.

Craig

Thank you Colleen, et.al., for the plucky chicken award, which I humbly accept. I never did get a call back. I DID, however, get a mysterious hang-up, which I am in the process of investigating right now. I will keep you all posted.

Craig

All,

Ed was gracious enough to call me back today, though he didn't have to, having posted the information here. He said, and I believe it from experience, that they are very busy over there, in the final process. It seems my rumors are nothing to be concerned about.

So we can all go on... whistling past the graveyard.....

Craig

Come on, this is boring. Melvin, attack Ashley again, call her a witch or something. Ashley, insult Melvin. I need some entertainment.

See, I'm not going to Austin. They chose to dink me, and will feel my wrath via my non-presence.

Oh will they tremble!

Craig

"Handwritten"?!?

So, let me get this straight: if I have messy handwriting, and you can't read it, and it comes back with a whole slew of wrong words and sentences, are you going to give me some kind of refund?.....

And is it $1 for the title page too?

So what kind of brads and washers are you using? (You ARE using washers, aren't you?)

Hey -- can I just send you a tape recording of me talking my script out? That would be even better!

And will you brainstorm for me too, if I back myself up against a wall?

Craig

Agents/producers don't like washers?!? Please!

First, any REAL agent won't be making his own copies.

Second, read a script with and without washers, and see which you prefer.

Of course, no washers, no brads, stapled, unbound, whatever -- it's still the content that counts.

That will be $2.25.

Craig

Randy,

I'll grant you staples. But if you think washers are seriously going to hamper your chances -- I'm sorry, I just simply flat-out don't agree!

For one, they are only a factor IF the prodco wants to copy what you've written! That means they have to like it first.

If they hate it, they could care less if there are washers. If they love it, they are not going to say, "Oh gee, washers?!? And it was the best script we've read all year! Oh well." [toss]

And if they don't know yet whether it's good or bad, they are most certainly NOT going to toss it into the round-bin because it has washers on it. It's just nuts to make a statement like that.

Everything else, okay... I should have been a little clearer. But I am still right: a script with good buzz could come in on toilet-paper and it will get read and it won't matter (the physical form won't matter as to the decision-making process, that is).

Craig

Randy,

Dude, I've read hundreds of screenplays for competitions and major production companies. No one has ever mentioned in a disparaging fashion the use of washers. They all prefer it. And they prefer brads with these washers, but a specific kind of brad, because a lot of scripts I've read have the WRONG kind of brad, and it pisses the reader off to no end.

Three-hole punch paper is very good: it enables the brads to go through it. I'm glad you're on the right track there at least.

But go ASK Skip Press, on that landscape-blasted Afghan-like public bulletin-board he frequents, what he thinks of brads and washers. I guarantee you he will say that washers are cool in the industry. Then come back here and supplicate to me profusely.

And to the original poster here -- babe, we know where you are, we'll contact you when we need you.

Craig

This conversation is so brainless and banal, I can't even believe it's taking place and I'm part of it. It's quite surreal.

Look, do what you want, avoid washers, go ahead. It will not affect your chances in Hollywood if you don't use them -- it won't make a damn bit of difference. Neither will it if you do. And if you think otherwise, you got real problems.

But I personally will continue to use washers. And if someday I find out I didn't "make it" because I had them on my scripts, then--

THE WORLD WAS ALREADY TOO F**KED UP AS IT WAS!!!!!

Craig

Daphne,

THANK you for putting some sense into this whole stupid conversation! (Which was actually over, but I'm revisiting it.)

Keep in mind the reasons for our prospective opinions, I and the... others:

Me: Use washers = ease of reading (and anyone who has read a script with washers vs. one without, knows what I mean)

Others: Don't use washers = (a) book tells me not to, or (b) producer's assistants may get deh wittow feengwers a boo-boo.

And before you shout and disagree, let me end the conversation on my point, so that I get the upper-hand on this unequivocally: by the time the script gets to the desk of said reader, producer, etc., it better have been a great idea, already pitched, executed flawlessly. Thereby, washers or no, they are swayed to your writing.

Ease or reading said script can ONLY help in this process.

Subject is now over. No further replies are necessary or allowed.

Craig

Probably a safe bet. Better to think that way. Acceptance, is the first best step to moving on.

Craig

Advertising once here is, well, to be expected occasionally.

But twice displays just a bit of bad taste.

And boy, I'd sure hate to be the suck-- the uh, fellow, that hired you when you were $1/page.

Craig

I believe it's common for finalists and winners (and semis and quarts too) in any contest to be chosen at the same time -- but for information to be disseminated OVER time.

Probably not done for the most philanthropic of reasons on the planet. But hey, it's better to know all at once, rather than now be left hanging, waiting for a bigger disappointment later.

This way, you can shoot right on past to the rest of the many disappointments that await you as you pursue this fun-loving industry!

Craig

I too have been unable to follow this little tiff, though it has been quite entertaining. Maybe you could give us all a recap since

HOLLYWOOD SURE ISN'T BITING RIGHT NOW!!!

(I am also wondering back to the Ashley and Melvin tussle... was he onto something there?...)

Craig

Hey, what a GREAT idea!!!

So here's mine:

Producers wanted for very good scripts. Contact Craig Schwartz, mevolve@excite.com.

Serious producers ONLY may apply.... Oh what the hell. Anyone with bucks can.

Craig

I can vouch for Babs' (do you like being called that?) script as being a phenomenal one, having read it myself. I do hope you've gotten somewhere with this, some notice, a lot of readings.

Care to share what success you've had so far?...

And hey, Babs is also great to meet in person!

(We had discussed going to Vegas, getting married, but... hmmm, whatever happened to that plan?) :-)

Craig

IMHO, it is impossible to evaluate an agent purely on the criteria of "no posted sales." Because many successful agents are busy getting their clients jobs that do not involve "posted sales" (such as rewrites, assignments, etc.)

The first place to evaluate an agent is by: their location. In L.A. or New York? One hurdle passed. Outside? Good-bye.

Second: by the agency. Hopefully one of the top ones.

Go from there.

Craig

The key is knowledge, which is difficult to get; and I mean knowledge of whether or not that first script you've written is FANTASTIC.

It's got to be fantastic -- every script does. And if you're lucky enough to have written a single fantastic script, don't worry too much about any other scripts (sorry those of you who disagree with me here). ALL you need to get started in this industry is one good script.

That's how it happens. I know of one lady, wrote a single script, no others -- in fact, never really wrote fiction before in her life! She rewrote it and rewrote it, got it down perfect. She was a finalist in two major competitions, and was subsequently signed to an agency, and is now a working screenwriter making a good income and on the road to success. And it all came from ONE script, with no others in the bag.

But like I said, you have to have a FANTASTIC script. But you should have one anyway. Make that your priority.

Craig

Allow me to respond, Jean, simply by making a distinction to new writers that is critical to understanding when entering the screenwriting game:

***It's NOT about selling your script***

The "selling your script" obsession, delusion even, is unnecessary. Many writers make very good livings in Hollywood -- and not only have they never sold a script, they've never had anything they've worked on produced!

It's all about "entre." Making your script perfect gets you entre. Yes, concentrate on writing, writing, writing. But understand that SELLING that script is not, and should not be, your goal -- or the measure of success.

Craig

I absolutely agree with Bryan. Make SURE that script is dead-on great! If it takes you a year to do that, take a year. And really be selective about who you send it to for coverage, etc.: some people just don't know what they are doing.

The very best is to find a writer you deeply trust, whose skill at reading is very high, and have that writer do a page by page, line by line, commentary. People like this in your life are just invaluable to your progress as a writer. They're difficult to find, but worth the effort.

Bottom-line: make sure that script is perfect! It *will* get notice if it is, or near it (and this coming from someone as jaded about the whole thing as I am: that's saying something!)

Craig

GREG BEAL!!! PUT HARRY STRAIGHT!!!

The Nicholl is not instant access to your wildest dreams, but winning the Nicholl -- hell, finaling in the Nicholl! -- is one of the surest ways to jump-starting a career.

Because it's not all about getting produced! There are so many working writers in this town who are not "produced." And you disparage getting an agent, when that IS the goal! (Should be at least, for newbies.)

Get your priorities straightened out. And don't dis the Nicholl, dude.

Craig

Amen, Colleen!

And Harry, you did a classic bait and switch. You brought up 1st, 2nd (?), and unknown placement (!) scripts in "various contests." WE WEREN'T TALKING ABOUT VARIOUS CONTESTS! You were talking about the BIG ones, first, and I turned it towards the Nicholl alone. But yes, other contests, various contests -- God knows what *they'll* put forward as winners! They don't have the weight to jump-start careers! I would never make such a crazy suggestion!

Other than that... you do make some good points, especially the idea that one should not rely on contests alone. Amen to that, too.

Craig

I have to stand and defend E.R. here.

We are talking: natural human response. Anyone who says their husband is a successful screenwriter and entertainment lawyer, and who has a top agent at ICM -- natural human response is to wonder, why is this person asking US this question?!? This was my FIRST THOUGHT! I didn't think Coleen was a liar (although I started two when I saw her highly irrational response): I just honestly couldn't grok why she was asking this question here. It made no sense to me. And I think it made no sense to E.R., who was just seeking some clarification.

Again, natural human response. Nothing wrong with natural human response. It didn't call for telling someone to fuck off and then flying the coup.

But then, maybe that's *your* natural human response.

Craig

Does "the whole package" mean what I think it means?....

Craig

Terry,

I don't get it. Why are you so totally obsequious to someone who SEEMS to have irrationally blown a fuse and decided to toss this entire website, and everyone on it, INCLUDING YOU, into the garbage -- based on one relatively-innocuous comment from one person that was perfectly natural?

In this business, here's some advice on what *I've* discovered -- just IMHO, and take it for what it's worth:

Courting *writers*, is never very satisfying. Especially fledgling writers trying to get a leg up in this biz themselves.

Okay, 'nuff said. Probably too much said.

Over and out.

Craig

Well I read Colleen's posts more carefully, as she aksed E.R. to do; and I read E.R.'s more carefully, as she should have done herself, taking her own advice. And I see no reason for telling E.R. to "fuck off" based on his post. That's pretty shitty, if you ask me. It's over-reactions like that, with no apology in sight as far as I can see -- just the servile slavering, bowing and boot-licking of various mendicants -- that make ME sick, to tell you the truth.

Over and out again,

Craig

Alright, I apologize for any things I said that may have been offensive to anyone. To offend is never my intention. Probably best not to post too late at night.

But I would hope that we could all treat others with respect, and not sink to the level of expletives and tantrums. And I hope we have the decency to call people on their use of expletives and tantrums in the future.

Craig

Miriam,

Of course. Building relationships is what life is all about.

Doesn't mean you have to cow-tow to tantrums and expletives, or that you have to care what someone who doesn't give two s**ts about you thinks as evidenced by their actions -- but yes, building relationships, in business and in life, is a very valuable thing.

Build the right ones and you'll be happy person overall.

Craig

Here's how I think the Woman's Poll would really run, if they polled it correctly:

The whole package! 2%

Thoughtfulness 1%

Sense of humor 1%

Charm 1%

Cute face 1%

Great bod 1%

Muscles 1%

Loaded 92%

Craig

Hey, what the hell -- I'll take your number too!

;-)

Craig

Aaaaahhh! How adorable you two are! Cute as two wittle pink buttons.

Craig

"Again"?

Craig

Not that you're far off, Ashley.

Of course, we all have things to make up for our short-comings. I just had the third person out of the blue tell me I look a lot like Hugh Grant.

(Physical quotients: up 25%

Whole package quotient, taking into account blatant, sickening, delusional vanity of statement above: down 35%

Net gain: -10%

Gee. I didn't need that.)

Craig

This particular "boardpest" would like to say: mashed potatoes are for chumps.

Other than that -- happy t-day all.

Craig

On the third day of Christmas my true love gave to me, Ashley -- and two latex gloves.

Craig

>>>So, Craig, what are you trying to say, dear?<<<

I don't remember. Did I post something?

Craig

David Martin II wrote:

>>> have some friends who are readers. It's another word for "unemployed actor." You make $75 for each script you read. Therefore, the faster you read, the more scripts you get through, the more money you make.

And there's no special training or qualifications (other than, of course, being able to read). And these guys are the true gatekeepers.<<<

Not quite. These guys are the "gatekeepers" only in that they sift through the garbage (in theory), separating the wheat from the chaff. Once the wheat is separated, the upward progress continues. The development execs, head readers -- these guys still have the real power.

Don't disparage readers so blindly. Your waiter is an actor in training -- bfd, what else is he going to be doing if not *acting*? And why wouldn't wannabe writers not read? Why would they not build contacts? Not find quality work to pass on, which only helps their image? Do you really think a qualified, highly-paid, produced screenwriter is going to waste his time sifting through studio garbage? Would you? How do you all propose to change this situation?

If they reject your script, their intern hacks. If they pass it on, they're insightful executives on the move. Gimme a friggin' break.

Craig

Whoops -- "*they're* intern hacks," meant to write. Don't want to be one myself.

Craig

Now that that's over with -- let's get back to discussing latex gloves in connection with various members on this board.

Craig

The twelve days of Christmas, far as I know, begin on Christmas day and end on January 5, which is the Feast of the Circumscio-- Circumcisci-- the Feast of the Cutting Off of the Thingy.

Craig

I agree with Ashley. And no, I am not making a joke.

Two women: one, an ex-girlfriend, came under the delusion that an idea I had for a script was her's, based on the fact that it dealt with her line of business. At one point, in a fit of something not unlike hysteria, she even demanded I not write the script. Did I mention she's an ex- yet?

Another person of the female persuasion, she was pitching to me her idea, and I came up with an idea that was TOTALLY unlike hers, but which was inspired by it. At first she went nuts, thinking I was stealing her concept; she later relented when the clear light of reason was allowed to shine into the hollow recesses of her mind.

So yes, if a woman is at all involved: give credit where credit is due, or go into hiding and pray she doesn't have her finger on any bunker-busters.

Craig

Have to say, I am totally on Richard's side on this one.

When I read the first question/response on the other thread, I was pretty shocked at how "offensive" they were, and was surprised that Ashley/all took then in stride. Don't get me wrong, *I* thought they were funny -- I just didn't know how others would take them.

Then I read this one, and it's, if anything, more mild. And suddenly, out of nowhere, Ashley -- who was trolling for such responses (attention?) -- takes offense.

For my $, this is a classic case of: crazy-making.

I think Ashley owes Richard an apology for leading him on and then turning on him. But Ashley should not be expected to give this apology. Why? Because then EVERY WOMAN ON EARTH would have to apologize to EVERY MAN!

;-)

Craig

1. How often do you go to the dentist? 2. When do you go to bed? 3. What’s your favorite movie? 4. What age would you like to retire? 5. Do you like rainbows too? 6. The amount of hugs in the world, to your liking? 7. Would you date Osama bin Laden? 8. Ideal number of children? 9. What’s just oh-so-cute on you, you little devil you? 10. Where on your body would you like a man (or woman) to be looking when s/he says s/he loves you? 11. What stuffed animal is propped up on your pillow right now? 12. What makes your heart swell? 13. When did you get your tonsils taken out? 14. What can wait in your life? 15. How often do you spread sunshiney smiles?

There. Feel better now, Ashley?.....

Craig

I don't get it. When you take out the TCP, you get: RESE. Is this code for something?

However, I would be more than happy to sock it to you. Just allow me a moment to slip on these latex gloves right here....[shwack!]

Craig

You mean to tell me that chick's bitching because her guy won't take out the *trash*?!? Why can't she do it her-GD-self? Maybe she'd get some R-E-S-P-E-C-T if some of the chores were spread out a little.

A man can't be expected to do EVERYTHING!

Yes, and that phone # you gave me, Ashley? I didn't write it down. It was 900- what again?

(Okay, just a limp little stupid joke, nothing personal or implied or otherwise. We're all buds here. [Except for that crazy chick who flew the coop -- ain't no tears shed here, lemme tell you.])

Craig

Sorry. My eyes glazed over after the phrase "query letter."

That's one rock this Sisyphus ain't rollin' no more....

Craig

Yes, I must agree about the Stephen King comments from others: I think he may be speaking in self-deprecating terms only. Stephen King is passionate about what he writes, and got into it for the love of his chosen field (horror fiction). Personally I think he has slipped over the years -- perhaps it's that "not hungry enough," that "I could s**t and they'd print it" attitude going to his head for so long -- but you shouldn't bag him for living a perceived "lowly existance."

Let's put it this way: if slaving over Murder She Wrote episodes is a terrible way to live -- what would you say about being an insurance paper-pusher? A gas-station attendant? A bank-industry drone? There's work, and then there's your life.

Stephen Pollan (I believe that's who it was: financial guru) said you should never seek *personal* satisfaction in your work -- what a radical thought! It took me a while to get it, but it does seem to be very true: work is money, your life outside work is where you can find fullfillment (sp?) Carries over perfectly to writing, because if you try to make a "success" out of it all right away, you are headed for heartache. Stick with the joy; soon, if you're lucky, the money/success will follow. And if it doesn't, it doesn't matter -- your priorities in the right order will ensure you stay "satisfied." Love what you are doing, put energy into maintaining that love and happiness, and screw everything else.

It takes work -- but then, it takes work to maintain a flat stomach. Or a relationship. Or a long life.

Thus spake Zarathustra.

Craig

Randy,

Isn't it "Sausalito"?

Craig

I'd first like to formally welcome myself to this board:

"Welcome, Craig, we are all honored to have you here."

Next, I would formally like to put one soul, slightly used, up for sale -- bidding to start at fleeting fame and/or fortune. Email me your bids at mevolve@excite.com. Thank you.

Craig

As to your first paragraph, so you don't get into a crying fit like others seem to have if not properly welcomed --

!!!!WeLcOmE BiLlY!!!!

As to your second paragraph -- get used to it.

Craig

I saw one episode, about a week ago.

My summation: Ben Affleck and Matt Damon are two pieces of s**t skimming the Hollywood toilet-bowl. IMHO, and this is just MHO, these two guys started Project Greenlight FOR NO OTHER REASON than to get a series like this going, where they can set up a "screenwriter" and lampoon him. It must be to answer all those nagging suspicions running around Hollywood about whether or not they wrote Good Will Hunting -- this answers those rumors one of two ways: "Hey, we all need help," or, "We didn't f*** it up *this* bad, so we must be pretty good." (And when are these two AWARD WINNING SCREENWRITERS going to write another script, HMMMMMMMMMM?) When Matt Damon makes comments like the whole thing is a "train wreck" or whatever it was to that effect, you can see that gleam in his eye, more like: "Hee hee hee, oh ha ha ha, BWAAAAA-HA ha ha ha ha, this thing is turning into a train wreck." Remember, they wanted to view video-tape of the finalists, and looks were a factor -- they obviously chose someone who, gee, wasn't better looking than THOSE two, right? And this is supposed to be the real Hollywood experience -- so, when can I expect to send in MY video tape along with my script? Hey, I have one here waiting, guys!

Now, I may have been proved wrong by later episodes I didn't see, but that's what *I* got from what I saw.

Craig

Youch!

This is why Ms. Moye must be handled with latex -- um, kid gloves.

Craig

Ashley,

I ain't exactly tripping the light fantastic on that idea either.

Craig

"If you think you know the "correct" one... well you don't. Only intellectual snobs and fudamentalists think they know the one right answer."

Bob -- are we to assume this is the correct answer?...

Craig

Why am I "that Craig guy" instead of just "Craig"?

And how could you possibly confuse ME with Ashley?!? I mean, with one you've got rugged, rough-hewn jawline; sinewy muscles; a rich robust voice, with a deep hearty laugh; and a full, firm package.

--And then you've got me.

Craig

:-)

Oh for f**k's sake-- alright, Sean, we'll talk screenwriting.

Use two brads in three hole punch, no double-sided. Write very well. Try hard, month after month, year after year, to get your big break. Never give up.

What else do you want to know?

Craig

Mitch,

?

"Unrequited love"? Yes, a bit too much of that lately....

Craig

Yes, Ashley and David. My mantra for the next year is "No apologies, no excuses, no fear." I am making serious (and painful) temporal changes in my life to facilitate maximum writing time, especially on a particular assignment during the next couple months (during which I probably won't be posting much here).

As to initial postings here setting the standard for what others think/take away of us, and how it affects us in the long run... mmm, I don't think so. We're just names here, no faces or personalities to go along with them. What's important is what you write -- bottom-line.

Craig

Actually, why don't you just advertise a fully shot, in-the-can movie? Then, when the bidding ends and you get your money, rush out and shoot it, because you will have a guaranteed sale! (What, are they going to ask for their money back after you go into production?) And hey, with a guaranteed sale, you are surely guaranteed agent recognition!

You should really put up body-parts for sale, you can make more money. If you offer to do a trade, you might be able to get back what you currently lack upstairs.

To quote an American classic, Return of the Living Dead: "More Brains!!!"

Craig

Whatever floats your boat, D.G.

Come on out here to L.A. next chance you get: there's a whole town just dying to beat the living crap outta your high-on-goofballs optimism, lemme tell ya.

And chock-full of chutzpah, how nice. You may want to take care of that, though -- we don't want you to spring a leak or nothing.

(I don't have a million of them, but I do have somewhere in the neighborhood of, mm, seventy-five thousand or so.)

C to the A to the muther-f*****g S

Unfortunately, Randy, I think Kevin was making a whole lot of sense, and you were particularly rude to him. (BTW: He can use as many "sorrys" as he feels like.)

There's nothing wrong with lofty goals; but Kevin was trying to rein in the "exuberant optimism" in a very articulate, level-headed, and thorough manner, and he succeeded. Kevin made complete sense. He wasn't raining on any parades: he was reorgazining them.

"Sales (options don't count)" led me, too, to believe that you were somewhat naive about the way the industry works. I have always believed that "going for the sale" is a sort of fool's game, because "going for the sale" is the least successful route to success in the industry. *Especially* if you are discounting options! In fact, such talk, even as goal-setting, strikes me as somewhat ludicrous.

It is all about one thing: getting an agent. I believe that, always have believed that, always will believe that. A good agent, a good agency.

Okay, a sale or an option, they don't necessarily guarantee success, and the nature of receiving "sale" or "option" do not immediately augur upward career-mobility. For example, "option": like Kevin explained, what was the amount? To who? What conditions? Aiming for "option" is to aim off the proper mark, just like aiming for "sale" is to aim off the proper mark. IMHO.

However, aiming for "garnering a good agent at good agency," augurs well all the time. Example: I have succeeded in snagging a good agent at a good agency. Particulars are, here, virtually unnecessary: the fact that you have a good agent at a good agency augurs very, very well for upward career-mobility. It also bears the earmarks of smart moves beforehand, and evident talent and ability, in getting that good agent.

Am I making sense? I hope so. I believe that we often aim at the wrong target, or aim low, as the case may be. Aim high, sure -- but aim smart.

Craig

"...comdemn you in order to build themselves up"?!?

I'll say this: if you're even half this creative in your scripts, Randy -- you will go far in this business!

Craig

No, D.Jay -- you're absolutely right! Couldn't be more right if it came out of my own mouth. :-)

Listen to Bob McKee -- a good script takes time to write: a LOT of time.

Anyone who believes he or she will be able to circumvent this process by creative visulization, one wing and one prayer -- put down the Deepak, the six-pack, and the Prozac; sit down, sweat hard for while, and write something someone's *really* going to give a s*** about.

("...about which someone's really going to give a s***," for those of you keeping track of my English.)

Craig

I have heard in the past that Chesterfield is not on the up and up. I am not saying this to cause controversy or to be mean-spirited or negative: I happened to know someone who told me, years ago, about what this person saw going on at the Chesterfield Fellowship. Again, years ago. But this is the number one contest I have never fully trusted. (Didn't stop me from entering, albeit.)

That being said, I happen to know of a writer who claimed s/he was contacted as one of the finalists last year -- so this person knew s/he was in the running at the end. This info was imparted to this person back in August (I have not been in contact with this person since).

So SOMEONE won. I'm sure. Though you may never find out who exactly....

Craig

There's no point in telling jokes: all of your situations are still hopeless. No matter what goals you set for quippy answers, the riddles will remain maddeningly empty, and unresolved.

Give it up, get realistic -- and don't quit your day jobs.

And how DARE anyone speak back to me, and what I believe and have to say (anticipating the responses). I repeat: how DAAAAAAARRRRRREEEEEEEEEE you.

Craig

"I found her honest, gracious and most likely a very talented writer. She knows she's been fortunate, however it also seems that Colleen has worked extremely hard to 'make her own luck.'..."

Those first three -- honest, gracious, and "most likely...talented" (?) -- don't make Colleen unique, nor ensured her success. Plenty of these types right now with good scripts around: many of them, most likely, here on this board.

"She knows she's been fortunate, *however*..." Which is it? Which is a rhetorical question, because of course, it's both.

One cannot deny that luck and fortune will be NECESSARY if you are going to get into this biz. One cannot deny that more often than not, that luck and that fortune must be worked towards. And that often, that luck and that fortune don't come to many. Them's the facts.

It's all what you choose to dwell upon. If you wish to belittle Colleen, saying she only made it sleeping with the producer, that would erase the fact that at some point she MUST be good, must be VERY good, at her writing; or she wouldn't have gotten anywhere. That's how it is.

If all you choose to dwell upon is the opposite case, you may ignore painful realities, at your own peril.

That's also how it is.

Craig

"Whap a tunc" righp batk ac you, Ashley.

(He joked.)

Craig

Come on, Ashley -- I'm SURE she didn't secretly write it, telling no one, and then solicited queries with a fake name.

And it's okay to conjecture. Accusations, those are something else; but conjecture, sure, fine.

That being said -- no, we don't know the exact circumstances. So we conjecture. So we can figure out what she did right.

And here's what I learned:

Any rich, powerful, single, female producers here on this board?

:-)

Craig

Not at all, Ashley. Me, I couldn't think less of you.

;-)

Craig

Phen bipch ip is, darlin'.

Craig

Are you trying to seduce me, Mrs. Moye?

Craig :-)

The highest pedastals I have to hand, alas, are all of them -- porcelain.

Craig

Ha ha ha! I bet you're a cutie, Ashley.

And you know, my ears *have* been burning lately... must cruise on over there to the other thread and check it out, apparently....

Craig

(ambiguity in title intended)

It seems I have come under attack for SOME reason. To wit, posted by Terry (who was attacking ISEE):

*****2. Are you Craig Schwartz? Note:

You and Craig both brag about being "in the know."

Craig has his oft-cited brother who fills him in on the insider tuff; you have your Junior Execs.

You both claim to be readers for contests and/or prodcos.

Neither of you has posted a profile.

Both of you seem to have it in for Colleen.

One difference -- you don't claim to be a writer, Craig does (and HE has representation).*******

Okay. First, I don't claim to be anything I'm not. I never did.

Yes, I AM a writer -- just like all you are writers. Or are you not writers?

NO, I don't have representation -- but then, I don't seek it.

YES, I have a brother who is "in the know," but you can define that many ways. I tell you how I define it: he and I are "in the know" about how the game works, not about specific facts and deals going on at any given time. We are "in the know" because we see what everyone else sees, and distill the information.

You can be "in the know" too.

More about me:

I feature in a major motion-picture -- Being John Malkovich. No, that is not a coincidence.

I've never pitched. Oh -- except for that one time, an original television series to the top brass at a major studio.

Yes, I have read, and read, for contests and major production companies. So fucking sue me. It's not like I enjoy doing it.

I don't have it in for Colleen. I just am mystified why so many want to lick boot -- but hey, what you do is your business.

I don't brag. If you told this to anyone who knew me, that person would laugh his/her ass off.

(Did I just brag?...)

Posting a profile simply didn't register on my radar.

I am grateful to ISEE for saying I am a "realist," because that I am. But a realist is not a pessimest, a cynic, or a "downer."

I am sure if any of you were to meet me, you would find me most pleasant and congenial and supportive and kind and encouraging. Every writer who has ever met me has thought this. So have some non-writers!

In fact, my problem, is *avoiding* people. But ain't this the constant problem of a writer?...

--But I brag.

I have learned a little as I journey. For example:

I still think queries are wastes of time. However -- that's as to the SPECIFIC purpose for which you are querying. The beneficial effect of querying is in the long-term, unanticipated effects you may produce. But it will take more than just that query even then. And it may very well take more than just that query ever.

But that's how I got the break I now have.

And as to "breaks" in writing: I, too, thought a "break" was selling, optioning -- *getting* something substantial. The break I am enjoying is substantial only in its potential:

A writing assignment I am luxuriating in.

Here's a little thing for you to chew on as well, something I am chewing on myself: this writing assignment I got purely through my personality. No, I do not brag, I state a fact. How do I know this?

Because the person who gave me the assignment didn't really think much of the sample script I gave him. But I was there at the right time; had good ideas; am very, very easy to work with; and we get along like friends.

THAT'S how it is most of the time. I know, it sucks.

Hey -- he LOVES what I'm writing now.

--Oh no, I brag again, don't I?

I *KNOW* there are those here who know far more than I do, are more inside than I am, have more contacts than I do, have done more than I have, are closer to "making it" than I am, have much better assignments than I do, can write better than I can--

Well, let's not go TOO far.

If anything, I am Socrates, and I only know that I know nothing -- which makes me the smartest one of all.

--Bragging again!

Because nobody knows anything in this business. Meaning: every rule you think you have down, goddamn it, it's been broken over and over and over and over. It'll drive you nuts if you try to nail a rule down.

It sure drives *me* nuts.

Oh, one last thing: I am not ISEE, ISEE is not me.

So there.

Craig

Oh please, Terry. Come on. Lighten up.

Can't you tell my post was written in a self-deprecatory, self-effacing manner? What else do I have to *say*?

One thing: I did NOT drive Colleen away. Go look at the log. You will see exactly what happened.

Yes, getting an agent IS what it is all about. No, I am not seeking representation right now. Maybe, there's a reason for that.

(Did I use the comma correctly in that last sentence?)

I have never read Ashley's profile. But now that you mention it, and put it on my radar screen, I think I will go right now and do that.

--But do you believe me?

Maybe the information I distill isn't the only information distillable -- is that a word? BFD.

And hey, I didn't think you were trying to character assassinate me. My tremendously inflated ego took any mention of my name as the highest form of flattery. You really want to assassinate me -- don't mention me at all.

Youch! I can't even imagine that!

Craig

Raquel Welch as my mom? I like!

But can we get the younger Raquel? That would just do WONDERS for my Oedipal Complex.

Craig

As to the bus: depends on whose riding inside. There are a few people I can think of who would have me opting for bumper or rack.

(No, no one on this board -- don't get your collective underwears collectively bunched up. [An interesting image.])

As to Being John Malkovich: Some know the story, some don't. I think I'll save it for my Charlie Rose tete-a-tete.

As to my assignment: Will be happy to share more, when more that is substantial comes about.

I really don't MEAN to be coy.

But hey, if you know everything about me -- what's left to keep you coming back?

...I mean, for my asinine posts?

Craig

No, Grover's right -- please don't phone me up!

You see what a failure I am at hiding character flaws on a public bulletin board. And boy, it takes REAL energy over the phone!

Craig

I'll vouchsafe you that.

Craig

There is another way to often get into locked-door agencies:

Figure out who you think would be good in the roles of your scripts. Then, contact those repping agents at those agencies (usually they are top agencies with closed-door policies anyway), and say, "Hey, I have a script that would be just great for Annette Bening here." (She's hot at any age -- not that that has anything to do with anything, mind you.)

Most agencies will gladly take in material that might be good for their clients, the same agencies that wouldn't want to read or touch your piece to represent the piece itself.

HOWEVER, keep in mind -- you are still going to be thrown into that shark-pool of a reader mill (to mix metaphors), and this can be a very unpleasant experience. You want to make ABSOLUTELY SURE your script is top-notch; because these readers are paid -- sorry, this is the truth! -- to say no, and they will at the slightest provocation.

So don't give them any provocation.

Or, better yet: be patient, and wait for the right moment to come along. You will know when it happens. If it feels forced, strained, unsure -- don't do it.

And keep in mind this other harrowing fact: we are in a Mercury retrograde until Feb. 8. It is not a time for action, but a time for patience: action-oriented activity -- communications, deals, ventures, mechanics (watch your cars!) -- all are working under a bad sign. Patient activities -- writing, reading, communing with yourself and nature -- these are what is recommended right now.

No, I am not quite a nut. But I am writing a LOT lately, and I gotta grasp at anything I can to keep me put!

Craig

I would say that recent posts re bigfoot and coffee and words-of-the-day have sunk this site to new depths. However, luckily, I have managed to become so tediously over-taxed by these same posts, that I do not check in very much, and then don't stay. Which means more writing time for moi.

So I don't know if that puts me in the 80% or the 20% category, DG. I think that more depends on which side *you're* on -- and I'd like to know that ahead of time please.

Craig

Ashley -- sincere wishes to your full recovery. You're missed here.

But before you get better... give D.G. a big wet kiss for me.

Craig

Well I've got the word for tomorrow all ready for you. It's

ENOUGH!

Craig

Well who wouldn't love you, Ashley?

The answer to all three of your questions is: yes.

And the fourth, um -- Melvin Udall?

Craig

"The games that the 'readers' play (didn't like the brads, didn't get 'perked', doesn't 'feel' the plot....etc) is all bullshit. If a GOOD director could/would read the script, the chances for the writer would greatly improve. The shredders have digested more good stories than ANY reader ever has. Mitch"

Readers, good readers, don't "play games." Readers read a script, always with the idea, Could this be a movie? And by "this," I do mean THIS solid tangible script in my hand, the words on the page. If I read a bad script with an interesting story, I might say: the kernal story is good, but this writer has dropped the ball, etc.

Think of it like this: Scripts are blueprints for movies, when they get to the readers' hands. Like plans for a new arts center. You don't look at one set of plans, and say, "Hmmm, this fellow's art center idea doesn't work well, but the fact that he put in four walls and a ceiling is pretty good. Since we need a building as it is, let's just buy this blueprint and get someone else to fix it up." No, readers want to see a finished, polished, working idea for a movie, a blueprint that can be shot. A great idea, great hook, will carry the poorer elements farther: but "great idea, great hook" -- it implies RARITY, and believe me, everything that comes out of your typewriter and mine ain't great.

There are great ideas by the truckload floating around Hollywood already. There are scads of scripts sitting on shelves right now that need good writers to rewrite so they can be shot -- and I mean scripts that have been optioned for a lot of dough, or have been written by big names, or are the pet projects of big industry people. The ideas are already out there.

Your idea is just one more to throw onto the heap (unless of course it's fanf***ingtastic; and I am telling you, those are **rare**). But if you have a good idea, and it's executed extremely well on the page -- if the script is (and everyone hates me for using this adjective, but I will) *perfect*... congratulations: you are moving up the food chain.

Craig

"I would bet that most scripts that get 'made' have been through more than a few readers...If you were a producer, wouldn't that brighten your day to find that a mega-hit movie was passed on by some FLUNKY, LOSER, STUPID, ILL-TRAINED, ILL-BRED, ILL-EDUCATED, ILL-MANNERED, WASTED piece of shit clerk?"

Hooooooo-boy. Mitchell, true, there are a few out there, I am sure. But for the most part, readers are concientious at what they do. When they see something they like, they are enthusiastic about it. And to Joan's point: if it's just not doing anything to build the enthusiasm, you will get passes. That's another thing, a well-written but passionless screenplay.

Not everyone who passes on you is what you describe above, Mitchell. Just like not everyone who "gets you" is necessarily a good reader either -- that reader could be the same description, in your universe (using simple logic).

Better to believe that it's just damn hard to write a good script! It is! If it were easy, everyone would be doing it (writing good ones, that is). I can tell you, from the scads and scads and scads of scripts I've read, so very few are any good. That's just the way it is.

Get the opinions of ten different places -- prodcos, agencies, etc. Just ten! If they all pass... look again at your script. (And I can already hear the howling responses to this right now, so go ahead and respond.)

You can blame the readers all you want -- but it's stupid, ill-trained, ill-mannered, and a waste of time.

Craig

Okay, Steven, let's start with this: there is the specific, and the general. When you read a script, you get the general feel, and the general feel governs, generally, the whole. If you *generally* don't like something, and then analyze it, you will find a host of problems there why it didn't work. When you read something that *generally* works, guess what: if you were to analyze it, you could very easily come up with things that don't work there, either.

There are always the specifics that are wrong with every script. EVERY script. But what you want to do, is to sway a reader, a company, on the general feel they get reading the whole.

Accumulation of small errors will sway the whole. But big glaring errors -- and I mean, with the core story, characters, etc., not a problem with a scene or a line or something -- will sway the whole as well.

You see, most stories, sadly, are just not worthy of passing along -- another element of what you've asked. Here's the thing: "Passing something along" is a big event -- it's got to be matched by a script good enough to pass along. I hate to say this, but it is rare.

A good buddy-cop script, say, may not get passed along *even though it does nothing wrong*; that is to say, it may get a review of roughly: "Good script working over old ground." This is why ideas are very important: some scripts have bad DNA. A script with bad DNA is dead in the water. Some scripts are "pass-on-able" at some times, not others, or in some forums, not others: Quentin Tarrantino's prodco is not interested in costume dramas; most prodcos are not interested in old-fashioned westerns. Thems the way it is, and you must realize this

*before you even write a word of your script.*

What this all goes to show, is that when you sit down, and write a script, make sure you do ALL your homework first.

Craig

Here's a great script I read about a year back, passed on to me (i.e., I did not cover this); it is PHONEBOOTH, to be released this year, I believe (?)

First, it was written extremely well: witty, clever, good descriptions, good characters -- all that was in place. Here was a problem in this arena, however: there were blatant directorial asides (things like, "The camera shows everyone at a distance, but we hear their voices like they are next to us.") How the writer circumvented this: he didn't even introduce these asides until the script was well-underway, and the reader hooked, to where it wouldn't matter worth a damn -- smart writer! Here's another thing about this: it wouldn't have mattered anyway because the story was so good.

The second point, the story: extremely clever, a great strong hook -- the entire movie takes place in a big-city phonebooth, where the main character is trapped by an anonymous, hidden phone-caller who says he will kill him if he hangs up and steps outside. Now there's the makings of a script that's going to keep me reading! First, I am invested in the character and situation. Second, I am wondering (as a reader should, told the hook): Now how the HELL is this writer going to pull this off? Wondering that made me want to read it, and read it straight through. It made most of Hollywood do the same, because it was a "hot" script going around that attracted a tremendous amount of attention, and a big bidding war.

The ending, IMHO, was lousy. But guess what: the whole was so good, it was *generally* so well-executed, that passing it on was the only option. If the whole is *generally* stronger, it will be passed on.

Goes against my insistence on perfection? No. Because that IS perfection, simply put. It is so rare in general, it achieves that high level. Hollywood has no time to fix up less than professional pieces (unless you are a player already). They don't have time to hold anyone's hand: there's too much going on, needing to be done, there already, for that. You need to go in with something that knocks their socks off, one way or another.

And any writer can do it, if he or she applies, takes the time, and really works at it. This I take on faith, because I'm trying myself.....

Craig

Sheila,

You probably did receive bad coverage. I don't doubt you.

Here's another thing: Whoever you are, whatever script you have, it will receive "unfair" coverage somewhere. It will happen, guaranteed, plan on it. Someone who doesn't care will read and miss everything there.

This is not to disparage readers, or all companies, as a whole. This is pure foolishness.

Hollywood doesn't employ this system, hasn't employed it for so long, for nothing. There's a funny scene about bad coverage in Sunset Boulevard, towards the beginning. Everyone's had it. Hate to break it to you, but they're not all wrong....

Craig

Well don't just leave us hanging -- you've gotta tell us this fever-induced dream!

(I'll bet it was about Melvin.....)

Craig

Now THAT'S a fever!

Craig

No, you wouldn't. It doesn't work that way.

You're best bet is to take the strongest script idea, finish it, move on to the next, finish that, and keep going.

Everyone is bombarded by ideas. And they're all great. Mine are all fantastic, too. So are everyone else's. The best thing to do is to get over the notions that (a) great ideas are anything on their own, (b) really that great as it is, or (c) that they will suffice. Great ideas are the siren-songs.

Craig

"Mr. Weaver and I had a small pissing contest re: novels. My synopses were not up his alley, whatever that means (he plainly says literary agent, 'all genres'...)I told him that I would write a screenscript and query him on that."

I are only hoping, Mitchell, that you don't mean you wrote a script FOR him, to get him interested? I must be mistaken, because I are not believing you would do that.

However -- just because an agent reps all genres, does not mean that agent WILL rep every script. It all boils down to the same thing: if he likes the concept, he will request a read. If he don't, he won't. Nothing personal, just how it is. How many movie ideas do you hear that warrant a "I'll wait for video" response?...

I are always saying that.

Craig

Luv you -- mean it!!!!!

Craig

D.G.:

If you haven't seen it yet, go rent: The King of Comedy.

I think you'll get a lot out of it.

Craig

Hmmm... I guess I should have stuck it out for more than two episodes. I'll rent it when it comes out on DVD.

Craig

I used to live in Redding. I often went to Whiskeytown Lake, a beautiful body of water. Or Lake Shasta. The Trinity Alps are breathtaking, and I love all the little towns up there: Lewiston; French Gulch; Weaverville -- home once to an herbal essence factory that would scent the air with sweet delight; childhood home too, once, to Kathleen Kennedy, one of the most powerful women in Hollywood.

I remember my years up in Northern California with great... maudlin, sometimes; joy, others. That was a much happier time. When I didn't want to be a screenwriter.

When I just was.

Craig

90 pages max for comedy, that's what to shoot for. It's hard -- but it's to shoot for.

I believe, you can get away with a lot of s*** if you keep it down to 90 pages. The critical eyes are much less forgiving at 120. This is not a set in stone rule, but it's what I experience.

And I have read enough !@#! scripts -- not as many as others, but enough -- to know what the perfect script is:

No pages and all white space.

Two brads, with washers. Still.

Craig :-)

It was my lame attempt at humor, indicating that no one in Hollywood really ENJOYS reading scripts as it is -- it's all work. So a script that has good "buzz" is treasured like gold.

And anything else is a chore getting into *anyway*, whether it's 90 or 120 pages, properly or improperly bound, all or little white space, comedy or drama, agented or unagented, whatever.

The perfect script, hence, doesn't exist -- or at least you don't have to read it.

What with what we're all trying to do, this passes here for gallows humor.

Craig

Can I post my worthless $.02?

The problem with issues like homosexuality -- and especially, abortion -- and the Christain faith, is that they are hopelessly horn-locked.

The Christain faith (and other faiths) teaches that abortion is a sin: nothing is going to change that. It teaches that -- not homosexuality, but homosexual-sexuality, is a sin: nothing is going to change that.

If you want to be a Christian, you can't deny the Word. But why should the other side deny anything? They shouldn't either.

These forces will continue to swirl and butt heads, until one side gains enough strength to overcome the other. Peace, understanding... I dunno: I see it as a playful myth, or game. both sides must exist in their own universes until the day of reckoning; and unless one side or the other is willing to compromise -- and neither should, or will -- you will have the same small skirmishes, until that future battle royale which will decide the war and the prevailing opinion.

Because, apparently, neither side can live in silent peace.

But where am I mistaken?

Craig

I have come to the conclusion that *I* must be pretty stupid, because I sincerely don't understand over half of what D.G. writes here.

Craig

Sounds like a good story. Hope it works out for you. I mean, I'd show up myself, but -- any hot chicks plan to be in attendance?

I used to read a lot of horror, too: my faves were Ramsey Campbell, Karl Edward Wagner, T.E.D. Klein, Dennis Etchison, Thomas Ligotti. Lovecraft and Poe of course. Early King. Wanted to write it for a while, too....

Yours reminds me of that old Monty Python skit about the joke so funny it kills you if you hear it, etc. There was also an old -- what was it, Outer Limits? Where some phrase or secret or something was being told, and if you heard it, you went mad? And through the whole episode, people were whispering it to each other; and you kept thinking -- I don't care if I go mad, I want to know what they're saying!

...All of this, of course, by way of MASSIVE tangent.

I think we were talking about chicks. :-)

Craig

I agree with D.Jay. Those who did not vote, ipso facto should not be voting. They have weeded themselves out of the mix.

I like the power I have. My vote, hence, counts for three people.

I've always wanted to be triune!

Craig

Take it from me: it gets old after you've seen 10,957 -- give or take.

Craig

A long time ago, I read Grendel, by the late John Gardner. It's the story of Beowulf told through Grendel's eyes. There's a scene in there that really moved me. It went something like this:

Grendel -- not the nasty you think he is, just a free spirit in the north -- is wandering along, when he hears singing. He goes to the window of a castle, and looks inside. There are the norsemen. And one Norse is singing the praises of the Gods, the fierce fighting power of the Norse, their bravery and goodness and fury, their hopes and promises and dreams, and how they will vanquish Grendel and create a new and greater world order so far much better than the one right now. Etc.

And Grendel was so moved by the passion, the poetry, the visions he heard -- it was SUCH a beautiful vision these enemies of his painted -- that he was sucked in; and was more than willing to be the monster of their myths, if it meant they could be true.

I feel like I've just wandered by and peeked into the castle myself with a few of these posts.

I'm staying out here in the cold.

Craig

Dear Yossarian DJ,

I like you too, man.

But it's called a BOOK. It's FICTION. The author was trying to MAKE A POINT.

You very well may have been joking, of course. It's just in case.

Sincerley,

Craig

It means that in the universe of responses that occur right away, his right-away responses are still quicker than others, if you were to actually measure them out.

My guess.

(Tangential Humorous Aside: There was a comic I saw once, where an employer is addressing his employees. "When we tell the customer we will get back to them 'right away,' what does that mean?" One says, "In a day," another, "A week," or "A month." "Wrong," the employer says. "The correct answer is: 'Nothing.'")

Craig

Yossarian DJ,

No, Grendel's not for real -- he is a fantastical creature, made up by Norsemen long ago, in a far away land. I am REAL sure on this point. Gardner knew he wasn't real either, why he felt safe writing the book. So don't worry your little head about it.

And yes, Catch-22 is a famous American novel by Joseph Heller, who also wrote Something Happened. The books are quite thick, and there are no pictures, so I wouldn't bother picking them up. They may confuse and frighten you. You just stay there in Belize where it's safe and cozy; maybe, if you're lucky, you can find a nice native (of either persuasion) to tuck you in at night.

Craig

I am on the side of whoever is winning -- but as a matter of principle, and pride, I only root for the side that is morally superior. This is how I protect my own ass, and yet feel good about things at the same time.

As to Grendel: I think D.G. may have spotted him once, or be in contact with him. Other than that, I don't think anyone really buys the myth.

...But what does all this have to do with screenwriting?

Craig

Mitchell, you certainly have a point there. It seems I admire your stance. [Yosi, skewer him] You seem articulate and thoughtful [Yosi, put him in his place] and I appear to have nothing but respect for your opinions.[Yosi, make mincemeat out of him]

Craig

Mitch, Yossarian -- I think I'm just going to have to off both of you. Mitch, it's obvious why. (You don't know? Don't ask.) Yosi, whatever they've dug up on you, it's probably implicating me in some way by default. The safest way out, is to dispose of both of you at once. And while I am at it, annex Belize and Guatemala. What the hell, Mexico too.

Oh, and this just in: dogs lick their balls, apparently, because they are tired of having Mitch do it for them. Interesting -- must follow up on that one.

Craig

Born and raised and living in so-Cal. But I am sure the denizens of all those other locales will be more than happy to know what you think of them, Mitch.

Masters in English? That probably accounts for my pedestrian tastes.

But I do disagree with you on one point: I *am* more successful than I already am.

Just ask me.

Craig

Here's how you do a synopsis:

You know how you have a three-act structure? Same goes for your one page synopsis.

Three paragraphs. First paragraph summarizes the first act, second the second, and third the third. Each should be of equal length.

Simple, easy to read, and shows you know how to write a script.

To paraphrase the poet:

"Brevity is beauty, beauty brevity -- that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know"

Craig

I'm out here. But I wish I wasn't after reading that.

Am I getting stupider? Or are some of you getting SO effing intelligent, you should be on another planet?

--And I'm talking, *immediately*.

Oh, and one more thing: proper grammer might help in the deciphering process.

...But then, I dunno, maybe you were gyrowing or something?

Craig

HA!

"Proper grammar," right?

OH-kay, everyone: just line right up and grab a stone and throw it right here at my fucking forehead, why don't you... and *please* throw as hard as you can....

Craig

Shelley, babe -- I'm with you!

Craig

Nice idea, Steven, but ditch the covers.

I am now of the opinion that covers are a waste of time: just make the title page the cover.

It's all about speed, and getting noticed. It's easier to not deal with covers. It's easy to read a script's title by just looking at it, instead of having to open it.

Use two brads, and washers, so it will hold together.

Let's never talk about this again.

Craig

I think I know why everyone obsesses over the look of the script -- binding, the number of brads, covers, all that.

And that is because nineteen out of twenty scripts are a s*** sandwich.

When you already know what's inside, only the bread is ever interesting anymore.

(evil, cynical) Craig

>>>But don't forget to take out 39% taxes, 15% manager fees, 10% agent fees and 5% attorney fees.<<<

Crap! That leaves you with a measley $234,000! (Initial payment.)

Hey, but you forgot -- you can deduct the cost of the copy of that script.

--Whew!

Craig

Steven:

Sorry... or maybe not... but indeed, most scripts are s***. I wish it weren't so, but I've read WAY TOO MANY of them to deny myself the truth.

I didn't say YOUR script was s***, or that any of our scripts here were s***. We should always be striving to write the best shit we can (do not confuse the best shit, with plain old s***). I try to!

And that's why it's not so bad: because it means less competition for us.

Craig

I spent three long grueling months banging out a project for a producer, that never came easy.

Then, I spent one HOUR putting a synposis together, and two weeks hammering out the script. And it ain't bad, if I do say so myself. (Hell, no one else around to!)

You never know how it will be....

Craig

My, has this thread degenerated.

You know, next it'll be a question about character arc, that will end in an orgy of golden showers and fecophilia.

Craig

What are you all wondering about? A big star is here -- it's ME!

Didn't any of you see Being John Malkovich?

Craig

Does anyone here edit their scripts -- re-read it and go over it and make corrections -- in hard copy format? Or only on computer?

I tell you, when I do it in hard copy, I am able to see things I just don't on the screen! It allows me to enjoy a sort of "objectivity" that is often out of reach the other way.

Not really important. Just wondering if this is done by anyone here.

Craig

Yossarian:

Fear not, you will be fine. I will hook you up with my agent down there. He will instruct you on how to document your reports to Interzone. Remember to use the proper typewriter for all reports.

For cover, I have arranged for you to take a job in exterminating. But beware the Centipedes -- their agents are everywhere.

Mugwort juice will help you deal with any gnawing sexual-identity crises along the way.

And should you choose to play William Tell -- take careful aim.

That will be all for now.

Craig Schwartz, you should know, was always an inside man. I mean the real "Craig Schwartz," who is yet to be revealed.

Craig

Did I say "Mugwort"? Meant to say, "Mugwump."

I may be rectified for that.

Craig

I would do your dishes. But I can't stand being around cigarette smoke.

Craig

(Who has been rewriting and rewriting his script for the big contest season we are now in.)

Do what I heard (on AMC) Raymond Chandler apparently did, when he was thoroughly blocked with The Blue Dahlia.

He vowed he would drink from morning till night, never spending a moment sober, until the drought broke.

And hell -- it worked for him!

Craig

Dear Ashley, et.al.,

"If you should try to jump across a ditch which all but passes your capacity, what is decisive is not that you believe you will succeed but that you should give it all you have. If you have faith but do not try as hard as possible, you will not succeed. If you should think that it is most unllikely that you will succeed, but nevertheless you try as hard as you can, you may succeed.

"What matters is not faith but effort; and that effort without faith that we shall succeed is either psychologically impossible or doomed to failure, while faith spells success, that is a myth which most Americans believe -- without sufficient evidence.

"They do not bother to distinguish between hope and faith and are impervious to the glory of the hero who lacks both."

--Walter Kaufmann, Critique of Religion & Philosophy (1958)

Craig

Ashley,

Winning contests remains the greatest single boost a fledgling writer can get to gain access to this industry. I wouldn't knock them. They are rough and merciless to many, and many aren't that good to enter; but the few that are, you simply must. I'm sure you'd stand a good chance of at *least* placing in at least a few; and that alone is a good solid mark on a writer's resume.

I entered Nicholl again this year, one little ol' script. Keeping my fingers crossed....

Craig

Something to add to about readers:

Sure, it's subjective, everything in life IS -- this ain't exactly spectacular revelation-time here. You want pure objectivity in reading your script, go program a robot to do it.

Readers are not all randomly drawn individuals -- they'd be selling fertilizer to farmers, if they weren't just so happening by chance to be reading scripts for contests.

No, some readers are rather skilled. I know a lot of you hate to hear this, but in fact, many are. You don't stay a reader for years in this town, if you don't got the goods in *some* way, shape or form.

Often, these skilled readers are reading your scripts, and their skill as a reader is telling them: your script stinks. Mine too.

Live with it. And live with this, the most important thing you can learn in writing (IMO):

Not everything that falls out of your head is worth writing down, let alone brilliant.

Gee -- imagine that!

Craig

Manfred,

I think your methods sound innovative, daring, and risky -- all the key ingredients to make it in Hollywood. One thing is true: you must be brazen, take chances -- or get lucky. ("Lucky" includes contest placements... lately, I am banking on "lucky"... because lately, I am not so innovative, daring, or risky... lately, in other words, I am not trying hard enough....)

Your plan seems good. But one thing about this approach, from what I've seen/experienced: though these "assistants" indeed can (might be able to?) open the doors, etc., they are -- for the reasons you describe -- notoriously fickle, and will turn a cold shoulder on a dime. (Mixed metaphor?) They will burn with desire as long as the project is fomenting... but the second one frown appears on one brow, they will back away from the thing like it's a rotting corpse.

The advantage of having managers/agents, is that they believe in you through the tough times when doors are getting slammed in your face. An "assistant" is there as long as the project is flying high (and, at THAT particular company), even if it's only in his/her mind: but the second that balloon dips, they're bailing out like a May Day emergency.

IMO, again, and from what I've seen.

Wow. Really don't know where all that wretched prose came from. My apologies.

Craig

Christ and Bigfoot have a lot in common.

But hey -- this wreader/writer could use a blessing or two.

Craig

"I wouldn't say where she was comin' from, but I just met a lady named Dynamo Hum...."

Miriam wrote:

>>>I know plenty of working screenwriters who do not live in L.A., and did not get their start by hanging out at parties.<<<

Really? The parties part, maybe. But who are these screenwriters? Did they maybe not get their start by hanging out at parties, but *did* get started by living in L.A.? Are they firmly established now, and therefore can live wherever they want?

I realize the constraints of posting/email is making this sound confrontational, which it is entirely not meant to be. It is merely probing. Because, all things being equal... it's certainly much easier to not only get things started, but to *get things going*, by living in/near L.A., than not.

But then it's not *necessarily* easier, however and IMHO, to get things started by living here. This is because that takes certain kinds of contacts, and a good solid product (i.e., a great script) -- and with those, one can get things started anywhere, really.

It's the getting things going part, that I wonder about....

Craig

D.G.:

The Long Goodbye is one of my all-time favorite movies; and if what you say is true, then what I've always suspected is correct -- Sterling Hayden was really LIKE that!

Craig

Okay, here's an argument I had with my dad once -- he a devout RC.

ME: So pops, if a person who lives in the middle of the jungle, and never knew Christ for one moment of his life -- how is this person saved after death?

DAD: Well, if he lived a good life and didn't know Christ through any fault of his own, he can still be saved.

ME: Okay. Let's say he deliberately killed someone else in cold blood. Then what would happen when he died?

DAD: Clearly he wouldn't be saved at that point, Craig!

ME: So, what you're telling me is, that even to God almighty there are some things more important -- than believing in Him?...

Craig

Just for the record Bryan: Bin Laden, et.al., these guys don't want to "push their ideas" on us -- maybe on their own people, but even that's debatable. They just want to murder and cause destruction and death and horror. This is good old fashioned nihilism. They get aroused and very excitable, by the very thought of razing anything they can around here.

If Bin and his buddies could push button A, and every American would have his limbs blown off, leaving bloody stumps to writhe and wriggle their last seconds to painful death; or they could push button B, and every American would fall into a blissful, instant permanent sleep with no pain and no suffering -- they'd push A. They'd probably hammer it like you hammer an elevator door to shut.

Most of these guys -- THESE guys -- are vermin. And you know what you do when vermin have infested your home? You exterminate them.

Craig

Clouds expected to roll in late Friday bearing the Son of Man, with scattered angels separating sheep from goats throughout the weekend. Expect a warming trend Monday, with some areas looking at a wailing and ganshing of teeth.

Craig

A writer is good, only if enough OTHER people -- of the RIGHT KIND of people -- think s/he's good.

Craig

Wrong, R. Sparks. In the tomato example, enough other people thought they were poisonous -- but clearly not the *right kind* of people. The people who thought that were !@#! stupid, all of them. It took whoever it was to come along and realize tomatoes were okay -- one, of the *right* kind of person.

Next!

Craig

Very touchy-feely, Lisa. You must be a Cancer.

It's all fine and dandy what you've written -- and I don't disagree. But in the final analysis (and this may come from formal schooling, where an established canon is in place from which you study), someone else has to give the work a "value" for it to be valuable. And it has to be the right kind of person/s -- your mother likes what you write, great, but that alone doesn't make you a great writer.

If what we're talking is what a good writer DOES, or what goes INTO making a good writer, or what a good writer often writes about, and so on... okay. I thought we were establishing what made a good writer good: good writing. And what is good writing? Writing given the "good" seal of approval, by whatever governing bodies make up that "good" seal of approval.

Craig

R. Sparks wrote:

"You're sorta right D.G. There are no bathtubs of fire. There is no Hell as people imagine it...."

How can you say this, R. Sparks? If you are saying there is not place of "fire and brimstone," doesn't this go against the very explicitness of the Bible? Isn't this, in fact -- heresey?

And if you can pick and choose these things... how can any of those who don't believe, take seriously the elements you *do* want us to accept? Why THIS, and not THAT? What's your criterion for truth and falsehood?

Why should I believe anything, at this point, you -- or by extension, any Christian -- says?

Craig

R.Sparks,

I hear you, and I value whatever experience you went through. If you can draw meaning and purpose and something truly tangible from such an experience, more power to you -- you're ahead of the game from most of us! I think it's wonderful that you have such a thing in your life.

To assume that because I don't accept a particular faith, is not to assume that I have none. But what your eyes showed you, you accept; something else has appeared to my eyes, and it's something else I accept.

I don't see why all paths can't lead to "God," however you define that term. I don't see why some, have a problem with this.

Personally, I believe that "Jesus" is a catch-all for the perfect ideal. Analyze most people's conception Jesus, and you will find wildly divergent forms -- and all these, wildly divergent from that form presented in the four Gospels (which are divergent from each other as well, and from the epistolaries). What most Christians accept as "Jesus" -- what could be better? An entity that's entire existance is FOR... us? Wow. Give me some of that for dessert.

But, one cannot resist the evidence of one's eyes for long. Though different evidence appears different, to different eyes. Granted.

Most people, in the words of the quiet Beatle, are "too busy fighting revolutions/that keep [them] back down in the lower world." This is the fundamental problem that religion, or any proper and good belief system, tries to redress.

Okay. Enough of depth. Let me get back to making snide, snippy, sarcastic wise-cracks about how trying to get into the industry is a hopeless venture.

:-)

Craig

I hear you Lisa. There is the "value" to self, and the "value" to society. I was addressing the second equation. We can't simply sit on the value to self for long: I think everyone here wants to believe in the first equation taking precedent. Otherwise, getting nowhere in this industry would be fine and dandy, as long as you were writing. Otherwise, hearing your neighbor decided on a whim to bang out a script over the weekend, then hearing he sold it to a studio for seven figures because he was friends with the studio-head, wouldn't bother you in the least. (Luckily, this has not happened yet -- and better !@#! not!)

R. Sparks: one person IS enough of the right kind of people. For long after his death, Melville languished in obscurity, a forgotten writer of the late nineteenth century; it took the attentions of D.H. Lawrence, reviving interest in him decades later, that eventually turned the world around to realizing he was one of America's greatest writers. Gerard Manley Hopkins and Emily Dickenson were great writers, despite the fact that no one knew that while they were alive. But we only know this because we can read them now -- and because a concensus of the "right kind of people" agree. It could be one person, or many. But they can't be the writers' mothers. You know what I mean.

Craig

But let me ammend my point slightly: sometimes, fashions change. And this is where things get complicated. One of the most influential novels of all time, is a work by Samuel Richardson, entitled: Sir Charles Grandison. The novel was read widely throughout England and Europe in the seventeenth through the eighteenth centuries, and influenced dozens of other writers and novels. But the book hasn't been in print for decades, and is virtually unreadable now for its singular lack of "drama"; whereas, many other "lesser" works (of the time), survive to the present, and are revered.

The world itself and its opinions are fluid. Someday, everything you write will be so much stardust, coalescing into one big black hole at the center of our galaxy.

How do you like THEM apples!

Craig

To the best of my knowledge, the Nicholl letters never arrive until about halfway through June. And this year, they have a number of thousands of scripts to contend with, so the wait may be a little longer.

Craig

Myth: Readers only read to page 10. I'm sorry, but everywhere I know, this simply doesn't happpen. They read the entire screenplay, every time.

HOWEVER, I do think, that, subconsciously, by page 10, a "verdict" has been rendered. Not a solid, cast-in-stone verdict, but a fluid one; one that determines how the rest of the script will be looked at.

If the writing is professional, solid, seamless; if it seems like the writer is going somewhere, then it doesn't matter if no plot points have "arisen" by page 10. Readers are not total effing idiots: they understand that some stories require different parameters. Readers are very forgiving, if the writing is solid.

You still gotta have "the goods," though. We all do: the pros, the amateurs, and everyone else. The story is the goods. If the goods ain't there, what are you going to do with the script? Good bad or indifferent, the script IS the goods.

Concentrate on getting the goods right. Concentrate on making sure the goods are *filmic* (worthy/appropriate to the big screen; I've read a number of good scripts that just weren't "filmic"; and then, I've read ones with problems, where I think: Okay, some issue here -- but the author understands what it takes to construct *filmic* scenes/situations/conflicts). This is the hard part, it might take a while. But as long as it takes, it's still time saved, compared to if you do it the other way.

Craig

It is? 666? Four times mentioned in the Old and New Testaments?

News to me. What are the other three? (I mean besides Revelations.)

Craig

HOLLYWOOD, JUNE 8, 2002: Jesus Christ, Son of God, is set to arrive on Earth Fall 2003/Winter 2004, for a reported mid- against high-six figures.

Christ, best known for his roles in the Gospels, is being repped by the William Morris Agency, and managed by Zide/Perry Entertainment. Peter Jackson is set to direct.

A similar deal to bring back Elijah is still in negotiations.

Craig

I am always playing with the idea to get the rights to existing materials -- books, life-stories, real events, etc. There are a number of things that excite me, that I would love to do.

Has anyone here done this? Is the only way simply to have $$$? Can anyone share personal stories?

Thanks,

Craig

R.Sparks:

Hmmm... if that last post was addressed to me and *my* last post, could we be perhaps stereotyping ourselves (meaning, *you* yourself stereotyping another?)

Could I perhaps have not been ridiculing Jesus, but instead Hollywood itself -- that boils down all things important into the weight of the "deal"? Could I perhaps be pointing out how Hollywood has supplanted religion for so many -- and so dangerously?

Could I perhaps be stating a deep feeling within myself, that Hollywood/its product is more destructive to this world and the life of the individual than maybe we would all care to really, significantly consider?

Or, perhaps, did you see the words "Jesus" and "Christ" mentioned in a satirical piece and simply assume that I was a "Christian-basher," just out there to ridicule another's religion?

R.Sparks -- is that a beam in your eye?

;-)

Craig

First of all -- it's "eschatology."

Secondly: most Christians I've ever heard or run into, if you are a "non-believer" -- i.e., you don't believe in Christ or subscribe to any form of religion -- they assume that you are lost, looking, confused, ignorant, or some form or other of heathen, or simply a "Christian basher."

I would like to tell you, that I take religion very seriously. I have studied deeply in the subject over a long period of time, and -- much as you may be shocked to discover this or not -- I have found the majority of Christian beliefs to be wonderful in some respects, but ultimately wanting. The more you REALLY delve into it -- the more you take SERIOUSLY a religious belief -- the less and less can you subscribe to a particular religious dogman, let alone the Christian one.

That is not to say that there is no value in Christianity or any other religion: there is immense value in studying them, in learning from them. But if one is honest, TRULY honest, to one's self... it is difficult to remain a Christian with any real integrity.

MHO only. Do not try this at home. :-)

And Mark? These discussions, when you think about them, are at the heart of writing -- what we believe or do not believe, what we subscribe to, who's or what's our mammon, our Ceaser, our golden calf, our messiah, our God. Our Hollywood.

Our drug.

Peace.

Craig

Bill,

You are very kind and generous with your words! I don't deserve them.

I really want everyone to succeed in this business. I know everyone can, if they do one thing: write a great script. But there is SO much that goes into that simple little sentence (phrase?) -- I myself have spent much of myself, to my great agony, to learn this; and am still learning.

As to adaptations: I have done two, one of an 18th Century novel -- hence, in the public domain; and the other was on assignment, a novel for which the producer owned the rights. I rather liked that one, but he didn't, so: assignment over, we parted ways. The first... well, it needs a rewrite. (Early work of mine.)

I have a number of ideas that I am burning to do -- one a runaway bestseller everyone's heard of, but Hollywood's never done (or even considered -- far as I know, Hollywood's never even made an offer on the rights!); another an obscure pulp series from the 60's (I contacted the late author's family once, but... well, long story, but I never really approached them with securing rights); another based on a true story of an event that happened in the late 60's in So Cal, circling around a real figure -- hence, it would border on a bio-pic (is this my best bet, Bill? making it a bio-pic, and therefore... therefore what?) There are a few others.

I have never done anything with these ideas: they simmer in my mind, and I let them simmer, till I figure out what/if I can do anything. I have long since learned not to waste my time spinning my wheels in the business.

But thanks for the advice Bill, I appreciate it. And again, your kind words -- again, undeserved. Drop me a line anytime, it would be a pleasure.

Craig

Bill,

Gosh -- I really don't know enough about Telluride or New Century to comment. Of course, the fact that they don't register on my or your radar, might be indication enough that they aren't the best? (I do know the Kennedy/Marshall Company used to be big supporters of Telluride, but... I'll have to check that out for you now.)

Here are the big ones: Austin, Nicholl, Chesterfield, Disney, and the Goldwyn one (but that last one is only reserved for UC students, so most of us are out). Next, Scriptapalooza and Final Draft have done good things for people. There's also Nickelodeon, which is a good way into a company (like Chesterfield and Disney). These are the biggies.

Many of the biggest people to come out of Nicholl? They were "double placers" -- they won/placed significantly in not only Nicholl, but another contest. For example, Maxx Adams (sp?) won Nicholl and Austin, the same year, with *different* scripts!

Winning any of these big ones isn't necessary to "win", IMO: just finaling is enough. And if you can double-place, the odds dictate that you are virtually guaranteed "serious entre" -- again, IMO. And one more IMO: as nice as semi-finalist status and quarter-finalist status is, they are not enough to give you "serious entre"; however, they do open doors that may not be opened otherwise.

Sort of like: "I just won Nicholl, can I come in to pitch?" Sure. "I just finaled in Nicholl, can I send over my script for you to read, Mr. Agent?" Sure. "I made quarts in Nicholl, can I send my script to you, Mr. Production Company?" Why not. These are all very rough and sketchy and not applicable to everyone... but you get the idea.

(IMO, slight tangential... you always want to hold out for the agent, even if it means not sending your stuff out at all -- I mean, except for contests.)

The very good thing about sending into smaller contests, and especially film festivals: If you're stuff is good (always the criterion), and you win, at least you can tell someone you won. And if it's a film festival -- you can say you won a whole film festival! Wowie. Winning is always something, you know.....

Pile up lots of little contests, or bag a few big ones. Never expect anything, don't be disappointed. Just my humble, probably inept and incorrect advice.

The longest best script I read was undoubtedly HOPEFUL MONSTERS, by Tom Stoppard (still unproduced, I believe), which comes in at 189 pages. But most scripts I've liked were no more than 130 pages, ever. If you can't tell it in 120 pages -- hell, if you can't tell it in 100! -- first, check the mirror to see if in fact you *are* Tom Stoppard. Barring that, go back and edit it down. Guarantee you, it can be edited down.

You may continue to flatter me online at this usual spot -- but please don't imply I am a professional of any kind, because I am not; I'm just a struggling wannabe-writer like everyone else here. However, you can all send me offline complimentary email at mevolve@excite.com, should the fancy sieze you.

Thanks for the kind words again,

Craig

"...struggling wannabe writer like everyone else here"?

Clearly, THAT wasn't what I meant! No one here is a "wannabe" in the perjorative sense. Or in any sense -- in fact, some here aren't struggling--

ACK! Let me get my foot out of my mouth. I'll try to shove it up my a** for you all, where it belongs.

Craig

It's not?!?

Now what the hell am I supposed to do with all these boxes of chocolate?

Craig

Allen,

How do you know that they didn't find out they were identical? Wouldn't they have looked pretty damn stupid advancing BOTH?

--And wouldn't you have felt pretty damn bad if both hadn't advanced?

Are you making fun of the contest? Of the readers -- saying unqualified ones OBVIOUSLY dinked it, how stupid were they? That knife cuts both ways.

For the record, I don't read for this contest, so there's nothing personal here. And... I do understand the idea behind sending in two scripts, you think it will beat the odds, etc. Okay.

But... didn't it occur to you too, that these contests usually input all the information into a database? Wouldn't be hard to scan for duplicates -- find the scripts -- and dump them.

Contests, IMHO: they're %75 spot on, and %25 luck. That is, luck will sink or advance you about a quarter of the time, due to reader prejudices, reader lack of skill, reader lack of care, etc.

But I'd say a majority of the time, people: cream floats to the top, and s***sinks to the bottom.

Sorry to have to put it that way.

Craig

Actually I am lost on this thread -- I don't know who is arguing what against whom anymore. Or if there even is an argument.

I boil it down to this. Everyone has their own corner on truth, in the Land of No-Facts-In-Evidence. If you don't like the truth one vendor is hawking, go try another one. Eventually, you'll settle on one that tastes just right for you.

And what's wrong with that?

Craig

There are no flawed opinions, now.

There are only -- wrong ones, and right ones.

I tend to be very -- well, often -- alright, all the time -- lucky in this regard. But my humility sees me through.

Craig

#159 checking in, working to reach our goal of 200.

Craig

HEY CHURLS & GOYS!!!

Don't worry -- when I come back, I'll forgive you all.

GET AWFUL HIGH CLOUD!!! C.S.

An utter cynic might say that Jesus was the most insightful human-being ever to walk the face of planet Earth.

Because, Jesus understood human nature. And He knew, that humans were just, as D.G. says, out for what they can get themselves, and as much as that. That He knew that human beings were thoroughly corrupt inside, and capable of terrible, wretched evils.

And that He also had to find a way to get human beings to resist this urge, or all humanity would be pretty much pond scum in no time at all.

And that He knew that there WAS no way to counteract that inner impulse. It was too strong, too gratifying, too rewarding, too satisfying. Whereas the opposite -- philanthropy, loving your fellow man -- was not only painful and tedious, but ultimately unrewarding.

And this same utter cynic might go on to say that therefore Jesus, the most insightful human being to walk the Earth, came up with the perfect formula: after every entreaty, promise GREATER "riches in heaven," "many mansions," wealth untold "stored up for you," and so on.

It's called: the carrot on the stick. And He knew it was that or nothing with these lame-brains.

This is what a total cynic might say.

Craig

Nietzsche "believed" (i.e., one can never quite be sure what he believed or not, despite what critics say) that we will live our lives over *exactly* the same as we do now: down to me typing this post in to moviebytes. His point was, if you can look at your life, and realize this -- and THEN be filled with joy and not horror? Then you're living a pretty good life. (The opposite viewpoint is given in Vonnegut's novel, Timequake.)

However, didn't Voltaire say something to the effect that he believed in an afterlife because -- Hell, if it happened once, it could happen again?

Here's a scary thought: Say there is no God, heaven, etc., just for the sake of argument. Say we die, and then there's nothingness afterwards.

Isn't it unlikely that after cyclopean cycles of time -- eons of eons of eons, time immesurable; unbelieveable stretches, a time so vast it could never be calculated -- isn't it unlikely, I say, that... we, some consciousness or other, WOULDN'T come back?

And of couse, being snuffed out of existance -- to us, it would all seem as "a single night." And, paraphrasing the bard even further: "What dreams *may* come?"

Chritstianity sounds a lot better faced with these dire prospects!

(darkly dire) Craig

Attacking the Bible for having great stories and not being "truthful" is missing the whole point, Marcel.

Is Shakespeare "truthful"? And what life-illuminating, life-enhancing beauty and "truths" emerge from it. Can you prove the Analects of Confucius to be "true," or the Tao Te Ching -- are they "proveable"? Nope. Chinatown and Casablanca, are they "true"? No, but then are they *just* great entertainment? Are they, then, no different from taking a ride on a rollercoaster? Or eating a Milky Way? Or watching an Adam Sandler movie? I don't think so -- clearly there's something more at work.

"Truths" there are aplenty in the Bible. And even "truth." But to disparage the Bible because it is not "true" -- waste of time.

To worship the Bible because it is "true" -- waste of time, as well.

I think *anything* can become a "golden calf." That goes for an established religion, the Bible itself, leaders -- and Jesus Christ.

Oh, must needs clarify that: your own, individual, highly-subjective, "cafeteria-buffet" conceptual image of Jesus Christ.

Unless one so *sure* of himself as to think *s/he* has cornered the "truth" on Him?...

So you don't need to read the hundreds and hundreds of writings, tracts, etc., that might portray a different "truth" of Him than you decided to form, reading/listening/absorbing your few chosen (lazy?) sources? Let alone *really* delving into what he *said* in just the four+ books of the Bible?

Well -- I'm sure He's very proud of you all for being so thorough.....

Craig

Remaining exactly at 200 is too close to perfection -- and perfection is a temptation for the gods to come in and wreak some havoc. Therefore, this post is placed to save us from any consequent and unnecessary strife in our lives.

You can all thank me later.

Craig

"...the rest of the books of the Bible"?

What books specifically? And how did you come across this bit of knowledge?

Do they happen to have the hundreds of lost Greek plays as well? Or the rest of Chaucer's Cook's tale? Or Kubla Khan? Or Edwin Drood? Or The Last Tycoon? Or the lost footage from Greed and The Magnificent Ambersons? Or maybe the musical version of that Nick Nolte movie with the little kid, what was it called?...

I just find it hard to believe that the Vatican is sitting on "lost" *anything*, really -- I'd like to see some proof to the contrary. Hey, it'd make me HAPPIER knowing there's a place where all this lost stuff goes!

Craig

Um...okay, you Biblical scholars are lurking out there somewhere. And you can answer far better than I.

Those apochryphal books: I'm pretty sure most of those are available to be read. They are not "hidden away at the Vatican." And, they are apochryphal for a reason: most are not authentic. Did you know about half the letters of Paul are in doubt, let alone the other books of the New Testament? The authenticity of these books are in question, as well as produced "late" (the Maccabbees I'm pretty sure are relatively late works).

Beyond THAT -- those aren't even the lost books of the Bible! I am blanking, but there are specific books mentioned in passing somewhere in the old Testament, of which we only have those titles and no extent works. But I am blanking where, and what those titles are, at the moment....

Craig

Faith with no proof, with no real hope based on proof. Faith, with most of the facts running against that same faith. Faith as a fervent prayer, in getting a response from the "Other Side," but never really receiving any (any real positive response, at least). Faith running high when there's nothing at all to base that faith upon -- in fact, most things are tearing it down. Sacrificing most of the good things of this life in maintaining that same faith.

Anyone else here trying to pursue screenwriting?.... :-)

Craig

Bill, et.al.,

I too am not a part of Zoetrope, and have hemmed and hawed (sp?) about joining for quite some time. The thought of doing those four scripts... I dunno, I read hundreds a year. And yet those four just feel like pulling teeth to me, and I can't make myself get through it. Perhaps it's the idea of reading a script on a computer screen, because I hate doing that, personally.

I know there have to be many talented writers on Zoetrope... I know there are many talented writers here as well... I dunno again, I should just join I guess... but something holds me back, and says not to... I certainly entertain no hopes of any "higher-ups" taking an interest in my script... I don't even know that I'd want to post a script....

Hey, I waste enough time online as it is (and I'm on VERY little comparatively) -- wasting more time, is that a good thing?... There are only so many hours in a day after all....

I guess I need something OVERWHELMING to convince me to go there and sign up.... haven't gotten that message from on high yet.....

Craig

[crickets CHIRPING for a good three minutes]

"...Is he really gone?"

Craig

There is one other possible answer -- it's just a *possibility*, but.....

It could be as simple as this: they didn't get enough entries. Therefore, they didn't have the prize money to put out. In other words, the "business venture" failed.

When contest extend deadlines, it means they worry about not getting enough entries. I don't if this contest did or not. But contests don't always get the entries they counted on.

Craig

"c'ya's"? -- "Cover Your Asses?"

Hey, I try to do that every day as it is!

Craig

Actually, for all we know, Christ may have come back as Bigfoot. He may have come back a few times as Bigfoot.

Until we get credible Bigfoot sightings, we'll never know, and should never care.

However, that Christ IS coming back is beyond question. He forgot his car keys.

Craig

(Just a little stupid joke everyone, no need to take offense.

Here's a question: does Christ have a sense of humor? Or we to take it He the Eternal Dullard?...)

???????

Steven -- when exactly did God lose his sense of humor?

I'll bet that at any period you name, we could look at world history, and see any number of horrible tragedies that would justify your sentiment. Which would lead me to wonder when you think God had a sense of humor, again.

...We get rather myopic, don't we, sometimes? Thinking the times *we* are living in, are the worst of all times......

Craig

Bill,

It's a pertinent question you ask, and it's the question I ultimately ask myself, and why I have decided to stay away, for the time being, from Zoetrope.

There is a time for everything, and I just feel the time isn't right for me right now at Zoetrope either.

I am going to say something that may offend everyone here; but understand what it is I mean when I say it, and I will try to make clear my thoughts, too:

Other writers like you -- other "wannabes" -- they're swimming upstream too, and they really can't help you. It's not the most productive thing on Earth mingling with too many of them.

I can see the hackles rising, but go beyond that: it's true, that writers at our level just can't help us. They are not OUT to help us, you and me -- they are out to help themselves first. Just like you and me, WE'RE out to help ourselves first. We are watching out for our own best interests; don't expect things of fellow writers. Fellow writers can be the most "unhelpful" bunch imaginable. Because ***wannabe writers like you and me are trying to get our own careers started, before we are trying to get the careers of others started.***

Meaning -- very important -- once you reach a level where you don't need constant criticism, feedback, notes, etc., on your writing -- once you feel fairly confident you are where you need to be, and maybe have a few close readers who read your work -- why -- WHY?!? really, why? -- go out and solicit ever MORE writers, read ever MORE of their scripts, give ever more notes, get even more back -- notes that you aren't even sure of, because you don't really know them? That's much more damaging.

Once you "make it," I believe you are obligated to go back, and help those out who aren't "in" yet -- it's a duty, a responsibility, common decency -- and a joy. But on the way... hey, you have to go where you're going to get somewhere... you gotta meet the right people... and we're all getting older, we all know what it's like: there are only so many hours in the day... we only have so much time to allot to this or that... to her or him... when it comes to career, of course... and family... loved-ones....

I shouldn't even be writing this!

So if I just stay away from Zoetrope... hey, I'm only trying to be nice.

Craig

If you're not "digging for gold," then what the hell are you doing out there with your pick and shovel? Looking pretty?

Helping everyone else dig for gold all the time only gets you poor -- if you don't first, foremost, dig for yourself.

How does that saying go? "God helps those who -- help everyone else first."

No, that's not it. I'll remember it eventually.....

(Nietzschean) Craig

Ah, to be young and energized again... so hopeful and bright... the world so open... everything possible... must be nice....

(Well, I am still fairly young)

(maudlin) Craig

To be Nietzschean IS to be misunderstood.

When I say "wannabe," I mean, quite simply, writers-in-training who "wannabe" in the industry.

When I seem to advocate "not helping others..." -- come on. Because I choose not to have children (right now, at least), does not make me anti-baby.

We all have a pool of energy, and we all must draw and distribute from it as we see fit. If you are alone in your home, and you DON'T want to go to Zoetrope... I don't think that counts against you at the Pearly Gates.

If a writer approaches you?... on their own?... I can't remember ever turning away anyone who approached me... not that I even have anything to give, except my opinion... such as it is worth... which is probably not very much....

Beware: opinions of our own writing can be (*can* be) notoriously innaccurate.

There is good writing, there is good writing -- and there is great writing. When you stumble across it, you are reminded again what it's all supposed to be. I read a script today -- wow. It really blew me away. It was a humbling experience.

Never assume you've crested every hill to be crested. But still, take joy in wherever you are....

Craig

The problem I have, is that this "manager" takes on far too many clients at once; He's never around when you want to get him on the phone; and all the pay is "back-ended," which doesn't do much for me right now. A lot of points are promised, but I have yet to hear *proof* of those clients actually seeing anything. And a lot of his clients -- not all, but a lot -- run around trying to blacken the name of other managers, or acting out-of-control, which doesn't say much for the company in general.

Somebody once said, "You don't need no steenken' agents," or managers. Being good at what you do is all that counts, and not hurting anyone else's career (helping others when you can is even better); and eventually you'll find success -- one way or another.

Craig

Andrea:

One thing I've found to be true in life -- both to my joy, and often, my displeasure -- is that: your first instincts are usually correct.

I think I'll go with my first instinct for now. Thanks for giving me reason not to doubt that.

ZOETROPE??? ZOE-NOPE!!! -- C.S.

(..."rub and tug"??)

I've heard this argument before, but it's not something about which to worry.

First, an idea has to be SOOOOOO good, so unique, so unbelievably, incredibly, awesomely magnificent, to be considered "stealable." Sorry to break it to all of you: those ideas are rare. *Stealable* ideas are rare. They are rare. Rare. Did I say they were rare?

HOWEVER--

I, personally, do not trust those sites where you list your scripts, and producers, etc., go and look at them. I never post on those sites... well, never again.

You see, there are shady characters, and resourceful (TOO resourceful; Machivellianly resourceful, if you catch my drift) companies, who can simply log on... drift through the many loglines there... come across ones that strike their interest... develop them on their own... package and sell them.

Some big management companies, for example, package and sell ideas, assign writers, etc. I am not going to -- give them a reason to be tempted. No, not gonna do it.

But aside from these sites, don't worry about your ideas being stolen. Everyone is too busy with their own s***, and their own stories... and everyone is so full of pride, btw, that their own stories are too perfect to take time out and write yours for you. Don't sweat it.

Craig

Yeah, how do you get to wordplayer.com?

I wonder where in the world wordplayer.com could possibly be. Say, *maybe*, it's on the world wide web?...

Nah.

Craig

"(no pun intended)"?... Was there a pun I was missing up there?

As for innocent? Let's just say... not guilty as charged.

Craig

Ever heard the phrase, "That's a problem I can handle"?

When I have an idea SO FANTASTIC, that I am worried about even telling anyone for fear they steal it instantly?

That's a problem I can handle.

(Not saying I DON'T, in case any of you agents are trolling around out there....)

Craig

Here's one I remember from my childhood:

You're standing on a corner And your nose begins to run You think that it's a booger But it'snot

Craig

(Well. Seriously, the poems above? Wonderful! I am a "poemophile," if there's such a think; and only wish there was a way to make a living at writing poetry.....)

(Hell, not that I'm making a living at writing scripts -- big HA! on that one)

(I really want to laugh -- LOL! -- at what Andrea wrote... but I can't figure out if she's making fun of me or not...)

(...gosh darn those mind-effing girls...)

:-)

Craig

Fascinating! Miriam, I never thought through my loglines like that before, maybe why mine are a bit weak. Thanks for that. (Can I ever send you some loglines for analysis?)

And the A/B thing, Andrea? Are you saying, two sentences? Or what?

Craig

Piggy-backing on that: I just saw I AM SAM last night. Regardless of what you thought of it -- think of the script for a moment. (SPOILER ALERT)

Think of those first few pages. We see a retarded individual meticuluously arranging sugar packets in a Starbucks (important establishing: this fellow will be able to "take care" of things, including a baby, later). He is late for an appointment -- at the hospital -- it's a girl giving birth to -- Holy Cow! It's his daughter!

A few moments later -- the girl abandons him on the sidewalk -- Yikes! Now he's left to take care of the baby himself! A retarded person must care for his baby in his apartment! Ohmigosh, what will happen next?!?

Probably takes up 3 pages of a script. You can see a reader dying to turn to page 4. You can see Sean Penn thinking, Wow! Now THIS is interesting! And turning to page 4 too.

....We should all stive to have scripts so compelling.

Craig

Yes... that is an interesting point you have there, Brandon. You think you could expand on it?

Craig

I'll try to address all of you and this severally (except you, Brandon: your words of wisdom speak for themselves).

First -- it's Greg Beal. He will go into an unholy rage if he finds out you misspelled his name. ;-)

You *can* will yourself to be a better writer. In fact, the first step to being a writer, is: wanting to write. I mean, *really* wanting.

Again, whatever you think of I AM SAM -- and I thought it was overly sentimental, contrived, and a bit too long, structurally -- and I am only using it as an example here -- again, whatever you think of it, *try* to look at it dispassionately: this *is* what Hollywood wants.

SPOILERS

You remember the first three parts I detailed above. It immediately goes into the trials of Sam trying to take care of his daughter. Then, as soon as things get good, the State takes him away, and he has an OVERRIDING task to accomplish: get his daughter back. It's an uphill struggle, he being mentally retarded; he has to convince Michelle Pfeiffer -- queen bitch top-notch lawyer -- to rep him. He has to go to court and overcome his own handicaps so he can testify, let alone the many examinations he faced earlier. Every step of the way he fails, he falls, he struggles back up. The stakes are high: his daughter, the love of his life -- his own life itself, which lacks any meaning without her--

Again, step back, LOOK at this dispassionately: this is the kind of emotional-wringing, constant drama, high stakes, and rising action that Hollywood wants.

And guess what: *SO* few of the scripts I read have any of this in them. I don't care if your script is 80 pages or 180; I don't care if it's sci-fi or Jane Austen period-piece; if it's on yellow legal or that crazy British over-sized paper they should just ban.

Is it intense? So few are that I read. Does it hook you right away, keep you going? So few are that I read. Is it professional -- even just in the way the script is put together *visually*? I can't believe how few are.

Maybe I'm just unlucky in the scripts I'm reading?...

"If it were easy, everyone would be doing it...." Might want to think about that a little bit.

Oh: with all due respect, immersing yourself in the best -- scripts, novels, poems, whatever -- doesn't mean you'll become (or even necessarily that you will have the advantage of becoming) the best producer of such, too. English Professors are unbelievably schooled in the greatest literature on Earth: but almost to a man, they simply are incapable of writing it themselves. Harold Bloom is a case in point, probably the greatest mind in literature of the last century; and his one, single novel, STANK. (However, the same doesn't always apply to poets: there were many fantastic poets who were also professors. I don't know why this is....)

And on that tangent-to-nowhere-fast,

Craig

A few things, Manfred:

I think there have been many serious attempts to analyze a "theory of writing" -- there are entire graduate schools devoted to the subject!

Hemingway is a great writer. However, true, even I wouldn't put him on the level of the god-like luminaries you went on to mention: there are only a handful of writers who can be in such company. But that does not make Hemingway a writer of no merit.

Hemingway is about as opposite in style as, say, James Joyce (the later Joyce) as you can get in this world. But you know what? They are about equally difficult to comprehend -- which is, very. Reading Hemingway is daunting. So is Joyce. So are the great readers you mentioned -- but not as daunting.

There are many great writers, and the scale of writing is vast and uncertain. But if we're going to take *Hemingway* off it... where can we hope to stand?....

Oh: and all script writers, IMHO, would do well to read and digest Hemingway's writing style....

Craig

Manfred,

IMHO: "In my humble opinion"

"Daunting" does not mean that Hemingway is as good as the authors you state are in the top tier: writers like Homer, Shakespeare, Cerventes, and Dostoevsky (and I would *certainly* add Nietzsche). But then, I never said Hemingway was on their level -- did you misread me?

Bill,

I don't want to say right now whom I am reading for, right now, but the writers are not repped, for the most part. They are just the "you's and me's" of the script-writing world. I have read almost none of the srcripts of BBers, here or elsewhere.

From what I read, there is a singular lack of intensity in scripts. You mostly get writers who, you can tell, are enamored of their own voice, and are in love with their own writing -- to the detriment of their script. Why? Because the scripts are bloated with unnecessary bulk. (The simplest thing a writer can do to improve his/her script: edit the HELL out of it. Meaning, hack away at the fat until you get it down to acceptable lengths.)

But even that won't substitute for story. I mean, a compelling story.

What's "compelling"? I'll give you an example: a freeway chase caught live. Do you turn the channel? Another example: The Osbournes: bite-sized dramatic encounters. What's not compelling? C-Span, usually. It's interesting, it's even important... but come on, you don't pull out the hot-buttered popcorn for it.

Turn on Lifetime at any given moment (that is, when they aren't running Golden Girls or Mad About You), and watch your average Lifetime movie or series. Pap? Yes. But COMPELLING pap. Note the simplicity of the scenes, the set-ups, the goals, the drama, the tension. The story. The driving action. The constant conflict.

Two characters blabbering about picking up chicks isn't compelling. Two characters speaking out their true inner feelings about what the Universe is really like isn't compelling. A character giving VO about how he grew up in a cheeky-smarmy way isn't compelling. A detailed description of character visuals, scene painting, isn't compelling. A character angsting his way from one scene to another, pining over this and that, isn't compelling. Characters TALKING ABOUT NOTHING FOR PAGES AND PAGES isn't compelling, for God's sake.

Next script!

Craig

Oh: I honestly never saw the "Greg Beal" typo before that post -- I must have missed it last time.

Greg "Madman" Beal will just have to break your knee-caps later.

:-)

Craig

(One more thing -- I actually read Finnegans Wake, word for word, cover to cover. Just don't ask me what it's about!

I think this may account for much of my mental trauma in life.....)

Craig

Manfred brings up many excellent points! And Manfred is very savvy about how the industry works, *much* more savvy than I have ever been (if I ever even was).

It is easy to get distracted from the "goal," we as writers have: to land a good agent. I believe this is the goal, simple and sure. It's hard enough! Jesus, is it ever. But it's not, or shouldn't be, to "sell that spec." Because that's rare, and even *harder*. However, it's possible to garner the interest of an agent, and get signed, ultimately. At which point, at least, you can be just-that-much-more PRO-active in your career: you can "make things happen," or at least act to -- whereas, when you're on the "outside," your whole job is ever "getting in," let alone "getting to play."

Good soft scripts, indeed, I imagine, are difficult to sell. Good soft scripts, they are in abundance too. What's funny is, getting to the contests: highly "saleable," pitchable, marketable scripts, often won't make it through: because, often, these stories are so "familiar," that readers will pass over them looking for something well-written. And well-written doesn't mean saleable.

(Of course, "well-written," all things in place, scripts -- they're rare as it is.)

Story conventions, I tend to believe for example, will kill a script in a contest, or even among the lower level readers. If a writer is doing a "slasher" flick, say, the conventions demand entry. But those conventions, when read, are not *compelling*, often, because they are overly-familiar. Though *without* them -- the movie would fail, utterly. And though a story like that is much more marketable than a coming-of-age period-piece, say, which might arrest that same reader's interest!

You can write outside the box: taking the slasher flick, Scream did (great hook, and then it lambasted the slasher flick internally), and so did Final Destination (a clever, endlessly-interesting twist on the slasher flick). That's your best bet, always. In anything.

It all goes back to story. Fabricate a fabulous story. Forget what everyone says about "Write from the heart." No, write from what will sell. Do you think that Hollywood produces movies only if they're "from the heart"? If that heart is green, yes. Otherwise....

When I was reading for a major prodco, it was an "upstairs, downstairs" mentality going on there: we in the "downstairs," were reading and covering and passing and moving. But the only things that ever REALLY got through, started and ended "upstairs." It's true: this company has ONLY produced, and developed, stories that ever started "upstairs." Again, this is why you must make pursuing an agent your main focus -- IMHO, or MOHO.

So Manfred, since you have your ear to the ground, clearly: What stories are hot right now?....

Craig

DEXTER GIMP, 60's, slouches out of his cave: the setting sun paints him redder than he is, but he's about as red as you can get, living your whole life rooting for nuts and berries naked in the noonday sun. A trail of yellow runs like a stripe, down the length of his beard to his belly button. He scratches his ass, and for a moment you'd swear they'd started logging again. He steps... and grimaces, looking down at the squelching.

DEXTER GIMP: F***ing Bigfoot again -- HEY! I DON'T SHIT WHERE YOU EAT, DON'T SHIT WHERE I LIVE!

Craig

No, I don't think that many.

?????

That's about all the writers I can manage to think!

Craig

Andrea, my friend: I hear you.

I want to throw in the towel every, oh -- what time is it now?

Make me a drink, will ya? As long as you're up. Vodka, OJ, ice. Then tell me -- what happened? Who was the agent, and what went down?

And why are you getting "cattle calls"? Sounds like you won/placed in a contest recently -- that's a good thing!

Craig

Taking the credit -- I think this is something I wrote a long time back, here, paraphrasing the original to appply to screenplay writing.

The original is from John Keats, Ode to a Grecian Urn (1820):

...When old age shall this generation waste,/Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe/Than ours, a friend of man, to whom thou say'st,/"Beauty is truth, truth beauty," -- that is all/Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

Craig

Bill,

I got one email a while back, through excite. It was sent in such a way as to render replying impossible. However, through some roundabout way I can't remember right now, I did write a long reply and send it back to you. I also told you to send email to my yahoo site. I never got the email I sent to you sent back to me, but I never got another response from you either. And this was all about, oh... three weeks ago?

Have you been sending me more emails?

Craig

?

I don't even understand the proposal. Could you clarify it, D.G.?

Curious -- and PLEASE don't take this the wrong way, either, D.G. I will first cop up to having done so myself, if that helps.

But I really do wonder, often... do you partake of "Mother Nature" upon occasion?

Craig

So you are proposing D.G. -- that we simply read and cover your script? And that we speak our minds? That if we critique it constructively, you will take that as helping it along "to get upstairs" (because, you would have the tools to rewrite), even if we are negative about it? That, in other words, JUST reading/reviewing it is enough to get a $1250 contract from you?

?

Craig

Well, this clarifies my question in the last post considerably.

BIG PROBLEM: the chances of D.G. making "1 million dollars" off a first sale are very low. I am not being pessimistic, it's just realistic, *given* the sale. It sounds suspiciously like back points dealing to me.... Now if it were $1250 at moment of sale... then I'd be a little more intrigued.

Like Bill said -- there are people willing to do this for free, D.G., for the asking.

You seem to be resorting to those "many mansions" ploys to get people to do something, like that other famous trickster...... (oops -- don't go there, Craig)

Craig

Hey "Schwvatzie"? I get a "gold star"? Hmmm... how to take this....

There is always the most blunt of questions to ask concerning your idea, D.G. That question is: Why YOU, and not [fill in the blank]?

And I would think that any way you answer that question -- it borders on "pride." Which I am sure is a maleficent force in the perfect world you wish to create through movies, and would want to see curbed as much as possible.

I remember what an old friend once told me, who was in a writing group, long long time ago. And he said there was one fellow in it, who unfortunately had HIV -- and he was deteriorating. And this fellow was writing stories about his disease, and they were stories meant to warn and inspire, that touched on the more meaningful things of life; and they were supposed to call the reader to awareness and move people to love and caring and forgiveness, and all that....

But -- my friend said, sad thing was: the guy couldn't write. And it was unfair that the universe touched this person in that way, and gave him that calling, and these wonderful intentions that probably most of that class didn't have regarding their own writing and life in general... but still that didn't erase the fact that: the guy just couldn't write.

The world you are in is called "screenwriting," and it's all about -- nope, not writing scripts: that's part of it. A good part of it, but not the whole part of it. The rest of it is "the game." And it's sad if you don't want the rules of the game applied to you, and get to "play the game" by by-passing them all this way or that. (Believe me, D.G. -- there's NO WAY you could bitch MORE about this fact than I do; and there are people here who could attest to that!)

But you gotta likes them apples. You simply GOTTA likes them apples -- or find another world.

Craig

How about peaked? As in, this thread as certainly peaked.

Craig

He's certainly peaked.

Craig

"Three acts" is deceptive: it's after-the-factizing.

What every story has is: a beginning, a middle, and an end. This is the three act structure.

Too easy? Too obvious? No. I just read a script that had a beginning... and finally, pages, later, I realized I was in the middle -- I thought you was in the middle at least... and then suddenly, without realizing it, it was over -- so I *guess* it must have ended.

So many people don't know how to START A STORY. They confuse "set-up" with "story" -- but I've talked about this before.

Most every single movie has that three-act structure. Bio-pics usually are allowed to violate the traditional three-act, because of the nature of the KIND of story it's telling: bio-pics *usually* have a relationship as the core of their *story* (i.e., the arc of the central question); and the development of that relationship will, thus, follow the three act structure. (For example, A BEAUTIFUL MIND: the structure of the film itself is odd and disjointed; but the relationship between John Nash and his wife, has a beginning, middle, and end -- a *development* if you will [note how it doesn't really have a "hook," or a "concept," etc.; relationships are essentially similar {not always}, and their differences lie *within* the individuals involved])--

Hell, now I am getting too complex and theoretical -- forget it.

Craig

Bill -- ?

You can critique a logline without reading a script. Writing a logline is an art all to itself. As is writing a synopsis, a treatment, etc.

Again -- ?

Craig

Of course, we could always walk away from our keyboards and go out and -- you know, actually TRY and help other people? Literally, I mean? Spend as much time doing what we possibly can to help those we see around us instead of sitting and fantasizing about fame and fortune and soap-boxes for our egos to blast forth more empty rhetoric---

[Tomoto from off-stage HITS Craig in the face]

Who threw that?!?

Craig

YES MIRIAM!!!

When you open that script, or press play on the beta VCR, or crank up that movie projector, you have just turned over an hourglass. You are timing it, waiting for ONE thing: the story to emerge. You can be distracted nicely by interesting characters, or events, but only for so long; actually not long at all.

The story is NOT set-up, either. A man drives off a road and into a small town, that's set-up. We will still be waiting impatiently for the "story" -- and the "story" is: the central question, the goal, the task, the what-have-you, of the protagonist.

Once that story gets started, we MUST stay with it, or again, our interest wanes. If we're watching people play video games and talking about nothing (Swingers anyone?), we tune out, you've lost us.

Anybody see Waking Life? Here is a movie that is decidedly not three-act, or traditional. It's all flat characters blabbering on and on. GOOD blabbering, but blabbering. But then, Richard Linklater understood this wasn't a traditional film, and he had to key his audience to the fact that they better not expect a traditional film, because they weren't going to GET a traditional film. So: he tipped them off by giving the whole thing a bizarre animation. We get the gist, and we relax -- and we enjoy.

Otherwise -- stick to the traditional three-acts.

Craig

"And the point is that it is possible to write an A-List screenplay that will have the audience glued to its colective seat without adhering to Hollywood's arbitrary and idiotic page and act breaks."

Bill:

Allow me to agree and disagree.

"Arbitrary"? No. Perhaps, overly-specific. But not arbitraray. If you are reading a script, and you reach page 15 and you're still in set-up -- first act -- you get impatient. As the pages progress, you get more impatient. If you get to page 45, impatience is very high (or, patience is very low). Chances are, if you are riveted and glued to your seat -- that first act was in place, because otherwise you'd be bored and restless and impatient. Ipso facto.

I can't name a movie that had a first act that dragged on and on and on: there might be some, but I can't name them off hand... can you?....

Because -- what else can you do? You can't have ALL second act, then a third act. You can't have a first act and a third act, that would be... decidedly odd. You can't have a first act and a second act, the end: what the hell kind of mess would that be?!? So I don't know what exactly you are talking about... specifically in the paragraph above....

They (act breaks) are not "arbitrary," they *should be* in a given location, by a certain point. They are not "idiotic," they are *necessary*. What else is there?....

Did I mis-state/misunderstand your point again?

Craig

I don't know why, honestly. It is simply a compulsion. It rarely makes me happy, this compulsion. I really don't know... I *really* don't know........

Craig

I have a few rotten tomatoes here for whomever wants them.

I also have another bottle of acohol for Ashley -- or was that a doobie you were smoking? As D.G might say -- them's some crazy mind-anderings!

Lastly, as to Jesus being a Communist? He did say, "Render unto Ceaser the things that are Ceaser's..." He had no intentions of social reform: he wanted men to look inward and heal themselves -- in his own weird and wacky way, but still.

Communism is purely celestial. While you're here, you gotta crawl in the dirt and eke out a living and work for the man.

Craig

I think I can solve the mystery:

I received a solicitation as well, for script X. Script X was never entered into a contest -- it's just not up to par. However, script X *was*, in a moment of foolishness a few years back, put on a scriptlist site, where its logline remains.

Last week I received, for the first time in over a year, a notice that my "script had been reviewed by a producer." Within a few days, this same script, was solicited by the same company above.

It's simple: the contest coordinator or someone is trolling the script list sites and sending out personal emails, because this personal approach increases the chance of a favorable response and an entry and an entry fee and because

IT'S ALL ABOUT $$$$$$$ IN THIS BUSINESS!!

Craig

I humbly and gratefully accept your full obsequious obesiance before my nigh-upon-diefic magnanism. I do dubitibly concur your maximizing hyperbolic ecominiums. You may stop groveling, it unseems you.

Craig ;-)

First, Bill, those percentages need to be revised: lately, I've been reading a lot of great scripts! The writers out there are getting decidedly better. This is bad news, because the competition is much stiffer: all the gurus, seminars, and universities are getting the gist of the situation, sucking up all the $ before anyone realizes that what they are doing is banking on inaccessible "dreams," and effectively cutting the chances of any individual writer from getting his/her shot; not because of a dearth of good material forcing Hollywood to shut its doors -- but because of a flood of really good material, which make it impossible to pick and choose except upon "extra-script" grounds: contacts, connections, etc. We are not there yet; but as more and more people become savvy writers, I am telling you -- this bodes ill for those of us who want in. It's simple math, do the numbers. It's also, survival of the fittest, I guess.

Anyway, Bill wrote:

"But what happens in a case where the writer feels he has executed perfectly to the thunderous applause of the audience to be, while being so absorbed in the creative process that he didn’t realize that this brilliant piece of screenwriting which danced across page 55 should actually have put in an appearance on page 45 or thereabouts?"

There is no "should." If all is as you say it is, then it came in at the right spot. That is because, going to your next point....

"And yet one more point. What if there is no way he can rewrite it to hit the note on page 45 without blunting, in some way, the emotional impact of what he originally wrote? Rather than get sidelined with posts pro and con as to the possibility of it all, let’s assume it to be so on a theoretical level and deal with it on that basis."

This is common, and it is called the "red herring plot" (to give it a name): it is fooling the reader with a given plot thread -- building first act, set-ups, goals, problems -- that are meant purely as a means to carry the reader/viewer along to the REAL story. When that story *must* come later, the author cannot just say, "Okay, I'll give 60 minutes of set-up": the author is obligated to draw the reader/viewer into a story, and entertain them, along the way.

Take A Beautiful Mind: Nash's dealing with his schizophrenia is the real story, which comes about 60 minutes in. So, we get: the story of his thesis at Princeton, and then the "spying for the government" storyline... until the REAL story emerges. Along the way we've been entertained. And, along the way, we've hit regular act breaks, inciting actions, goals and central questions, etc.

A script I just recently wrote, it "starts" on about page 35 or so: much too late. So, I had to start a "false" storyline much earlier, so the audience would last until page 35 or so (whether I succeeded or not, however, is purely debatable). I just read a script, pretty good one, where the author set-up an entirely different storyline -- it seemed to be a relationship piece -- until the "real" storyline appeared on about page 45 -- where it turned into a thriller. When you got to the thriller part, you realized the seeds had been planted for that all along, so it didn't come out of nowhere. But the author kept my interest, and kept me going in a story that started, and progressed, quite normally... until I realized the story I was following wasn't THE story, and the REAL story came forward -- but I didn't care, I had been culled along quite nicely.

Does any of this help?

Craig

"Jason Won't Wake Up"? "The Toast Leavers"?

Those titles alone are great!

Craig

And, to repeat myself from a previous site, Bill... if the numbers weren't enough to scare you... the competition out there is simply getting *worse.*

What I mean is: I am reading for a competition right now; and the scripts are decidedly better than I would have imagined! There are so many talented writers out there writing a lot of clever, workable, carefully constructed and executed scripts -- more than I would have previously thought could exist.

What will happen, as I've said, is that: a level competence will have been reached. And then, you will be left with a number of really great and wonderful scripts that are all on an even plane... where it will take factors wholly apart from the writing itself, that sees these scripts get made or not....

Like, who's your friend, and where're you lving, and what're you doing, and who're you f*****, and how're they taking it, and what do you have on them, and what can you get from them, and how long will they pay for you to keep it from the others, and what will the others counter with if they should find out what the first one knows, and....

Craig

"The best weapon against despair is faith."

?

Isn't this what is called a "tautology"?

What're you trying to do, taunt the guy???

>:-) <----gallows humor smile: hey -- you gotta laugh, or you'll cry!

Craig

R. Sparks,

You're making my point for me.

It's like saying, "The best weapon against alcoholism, is not to drink."

Well, if one wasn't to drink -- one wouldn't be an alcoholic!

Or, "The best weapon against sadness, is happiness."

That and $1.09 will get an unhappy person 16oz of coffee at your local 7-11.

What am I missing?....

Craig

I hope I am not contributing to making this a redux of the bigfoot thread.

I truly believe: you have to laugh or you'll cry.

Johnny's post I found very moving, and inspiring. Pursuing screenwriting -- *seriously* pursuing it, giving it your full, best effort -- is a thankless task: long hard work, "the void" (you never know where you are getting, and there are rarely answers from "out there" [i.e., the industry]), obsession and its attendant woes, nasty biting criticism, that sinking sense of inadequacy, of questioning yourself, all that. It can beat you up. And lemme tell you -- screenwriting is SO ABSTRACT... you see, engaging in too much abstraction kills... certain drives... know what I mean?...

Anyway: it's all a difficult, thankless, awful, misery of a trail of tears.

...That's it. No neat little bow on this package.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

If I don't do that.....

Craig

Unfortunately, Bill, Jay -- to some extent, in his last post -- is also engaging in tautologies.

Ask most professionals: getting in, takes phenomenal idea, and phenomenal writing.

Once in: takes phenomenal ideas, whatever writing.

Even that isn't set in stone: you get your ideas before the bigwigs, being in, and they get more attention than those who are not in, writing stellar stuff.

And then even that isn't really how it is either: you get in, you're rewriting other scripts, other projects.

Hollywood doesn't care about the writing IMHO. In the long run, it don't care.

ADAPTATION has phenomenal writing, and so did CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND, both by Charlier Kaufmann. CONFESSIONS languished for years, as did MALKOVICH. ADAPTATION isn't going to be as big as AUSTIN POWERS. Hollywood, if it had its way, would ONLY produce AUSTIN POWERS ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

If you, Bill, were to, say, sprout wings and fly, Hollywood would offer you big $$$ to buy the story of that, even if that story was a piece of dogs***. But if you were to not have sprouted wings and flown; but instead, you wrote the most moving piece of movie literature since CASABLANCA... well, fine and good. You'll have to get in line like the rest of us, and slog it out.

This is not to bitch and moan -- which I DO so love to do on occassion. This is to say

It's a business. It ain't art.

The most beautiful buggy whip imaginable, if it were made in the 1950's? I can only hope whoever made it, got a lot of satisfaction from doing that....

Craig

(If I start to ramble, just stop me before I post next time.)

And "Wild Things" was a remake of "Malice," I hear.

...Okay, it waren't Shakespeare or nohtin' else: this is just my obsessive/compulsive need to contribute here.

Craig

...And so they grumble, as they drag their rocks to build the pyramid the Pharoah intends to sleep in.

My recommendation is: find some way -- I don't know how to go about it, but there's got to be SOME way out there -- to get a hold of Satan. He's always looking to deal.

Barring that, your left nut may be the clincher... if that term doesn't feel to uncomfortable beside your left nut.

Hey, come to think of it... didn't Hitler have but one testicle?

So THAT explains World War II!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Remember -- you *have* to laugh, or you will cry.

Craig S.

I'm with you -- right up to that first "me."

After that, you're losing me.

;-P

Craig

...And every screenwriter that's wasted, God gets quite irate, right?

[Craig sidles up to chic Hollywood Producer at Studio X]

CRAIG: So I hear you got a few eggs over there waiting to be fertilized. Lemme tell you, have *I* got the sperm for you--

[SPLASH goes the drink in his face]

Craig

This film... I know this one, Andrea, but it's escaping me....

I think, together, these two are now closer to what it's like. What it feels like, at least.

One of my favorite quotes is from Rilke, I believe. Could be Lessing. Maybe Goethe. It's definately German. Anyway:

"Once we lived like the Gods. More is not necessary."

Stoic -- but sometimes you gotta be stoic about it all.

Craig

I see the person walking into a Starbucks, and approaching the counter, speaking very nicely, then taking the warm styrofoam cup over to a table and sipping--

Oh wait. That's chai tea.

Craig

Ashley wrote:

"Let me put it another way. Someone who pops a pill in their mouth to feel better, lacks the strength to confront themselves, and permanently resolve their issues. A weak coward = Loser. Here lies escapism in the extreme."

It is amazing, the rampant use of tautologies on this site lately!

If you lack the strength to confront yourself and resolve your issues... no wonder you would pop a pill. Am I allowed to say, "Duh"?

What I don't get, is why you would brand that person a "loser."

If they lack the strength, that person probably needs help FROM SOMEONE ELSE. Not, preferably, in the form of labels.

I think -- with all due respect, Ms. Moye -- you *yourself* are blinded by the pills, more than those that you attack: you are irrevocably prejudiced when you encounter them. (The pills, I mean.)

Someone's got a dangling engram....

;-)

Craig

"It's easier to give a sigh and be like all the rest/Who stand around and crucify you while you do your best

"It's easier to see the books upon the shelf/Than to see yourself....

"It's easier to say you won't than to feel you can/It's easier to drag your feet than it is to be a man

"It's easier to look at someone else's wealth/Than to see yourself....

"It's easier to criticize somebody else/Than to see yourself...."

--George Harrison

Craig

I seem to ask this question occassionally, because I think about it occassionally:

Anyone have experience optioning material previously published (books, articles, etc.), with the idea of packaging it for prodcos, studios, etc.?

I have one book/s in mind: they're old, they aren't popular. But I think they would make great movies.

I once approached the author's family (author now dead), and they were nice... but I never actually breached the subject. These are books that are languishing on their shelves as it is, long out of print.

Of course, not being Daddy Warbucks, I would like to do this as cheaply as possible. I would like to act purely in the capacity of producer: middle-man, essentially.

Anyone done this or know?.........

Craig

I already know who the copyright owner is: the author's widow. The daughter, she handles most of the business for her -- but these are not people who are making this late author a business of any kind: like I said, his stuff is out of print, and more or less totally forgotten. Though, in their day, they did win some prestigious awards, and have always been solidly recognized.

It just takes approaching them, and that's what I need: the approach.

Craig

It's bitter irony, that Mitchell's last post here was simply:

"Go to the Done Deal message boards."

I guess we're all headed for "done deal."

But if anyone else is planning on heading that way a little before schedule? Kindly let some people here know about it first: maybe they can head you off at the pass.

R.I.P., we can only hope.

Craig

The scene works well as you've written it. Not having read the whole script, I don't know what it is, but I am guessing it's a comedy?

Pretty good.

Craig

I am now of the opinion that entering early is the best way to go -- assuming, of course, and this should NOT be taken likely, that you have a "perfect script." (I get in trouble for using that phrase, I get lots of hate mail, but go with me here.)

Assuming you have that, this is why I think this: your script will probably get some higher marks. Because the reader will be patient and relaxed and in a better frame of mind. And then it will sit on the shelf, and be forgotten... with those high marks registered.

It will not be part of the wash, part of the time when the readers are swamped, reading tons of scripts at a time -- reading them sloppily -- reading them fast -- reading them to get done -- the finalist shelf piling higher, and the readers, etc., thinking in the back of their minds, "Gee, do we have enough finalists already?..." --

No, your script will be sitting there and resting peacefully, waiting to be thrown back in later on.

In reality, however, the difference in entering early and late is very slight. And, it all depends on the quality of your script.

IMHO all.

Craig

As a matter of fact, D. Jay wrote a script with the title of this thread -- a script I still remember a year later, as being particularly powerful, moving, and well-written.

I hope he had success in getting it seen since I had the pleasure.....?

Craig

Yes, Bill, this has provided some answers. "Answers" -- don't know if that's the right term, but it'll do.

It feels like I have been surrounded by suicides -- all violent -- this month of July. I have known of three that happened to people who were associates/friends of associates/friends of mine. The closest, and most tragic, was my roommate: his coworker hanged himself at work, and they discovered the body during work hours. The company was devastated. This suicide asked my roomamte, the day before, if he would go out for drinks the next night: my roommate said no, he was going to be picking up his brand new car. You can imagine how guilty he feels, and how it tainted what he thought would be a great joy.

There is bad mojo in the air, that's all I can say. More than normal. I don't understand it.

There's only two things you HAVE to do: Die. And until then, Live.

Hopefully, we do that second one well.

And I agree with the poster who said, we need to expand our lives beyond this pursuit of writing -- because it really is a (to use the only term appropriate) major bitch. You gotta have something else. I am only recently beginning to learn that myself......

"There'll come a time when all your hopes are fading When things that seemed so very plain Become an awful pain Searching for the truth among the lying And answered when you've learned the art of dying...." --George Harrison

Craig

There is a movie that actually shows multiple shots of s*** flying out the a*** of a person: if I'm not mistaken, it's Pasolini's CANTERBURY TALES. Watch that one to see how it's done properly.

Hey, Chaucer started it!

Craig

Just a note: this is post #64 here.

Craig

(Hoping it ends with non-sequitur idiocy, rather than sheer lunacy.)

I too am mystified.

Sometimes I think D.G. is trying to be Socrates -- except Socrates was humble and deferential.

Or maybe Jesus -- except Jesus was gentle and forgiving.

Perhaps a wry Nietzschean Zarathustra -- except Zarathustra was inspiring and truly deep.

Maybe the Fool from Lear -- he does dance in the middle of a storm, speaks in obscure riddles... and ultimately can't help Lear worth a good goddamn.

D.G. has admitted to playing the Fool.

Hmmm......

"He that has and a little tiny wit,--/With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,--/Must make content with his fortunes fit,/Though the rain it raineth every day."

Craig

..."Criticize you or your writings"?!? "Steal your ideas"?!?

Honey, I'll save you the trouble:

They're PERFECT, every last word of them.

No go get 'em!

And send us a postcard from the "inside" once you get there.

Not that I'll be hanging around my mailbox a whole lot, turning blue from a lack of breathing....

Craig

D.G., no, it ain't me.

And Craig Schwartz isn't my alter ego either.

And Tom: it ain't so special. I had a thread going a while back with my name in the title too.

Of course, *I* had to start it, but that's beside the point.....

Craig

Amen, Bryan.

My favorite line from Marcel's post: "You might get into some word confrontations by try to overlook them and move onto others."

OH COME ON, PEOPLE, IT'S FUNNY!!!

Welcome Linda, truthfully. We don't bite.

Each other.

Often.

Well... THAT often.

Craig

? -- Are we supposed to have?

Craig

You don't want a friendly, milk-toast agent. You want a bitch.

The only agent you really want -- is one that doesn't want you.

It's a zen thing you wouldn't understand.... :-)

Craig

Just because you don't recognize names, is no reason to pan a contest. I can tell you from experience, too: great scripts OFTEN do not get to place in contests, for whatever reason. I used to think this was just a platitude; but I have seen it with my own eyes. Just because your script didn't make the rounds, is not to pass judgement upon it.

And yes, I have said this before too: you think competition is bad now? It's getting *worse*, as more and more better scripts flood the market. Next year, there will be more. We are suffering from an "embarrassment of riches," I believe it's called?

Try to find satisfaction in something else in your life. That's the key.

Craig

"I know I'm going to regret this, but that isn't going to stop me."

Paula, I've never read a better description than this one sentence of the screenwriting pursuit.

Can I use this title for my autobiography?

...I'm just trying to tally how far past "going to" I am right now. :-)

Craig

I always go for whatever Titus Andronicus bakes up.

Craig

Andrea:

Go rent Titus Andronicus, and you'll encounter the most DELECTABLE pie imaginable. It makes you drool just to hear it being thickly-sliced up by Anthony Hopkins, and slobbered onto a plate for hungry Jessica Lange.

The only person who makes better pies is Sweeny Todd's friend, Miss Whatshername.

Craig

Since someone is doing "Pieology" here, why not let's share our astrological signs? Then we can look each other up and prejudge/psycho-illogically analyze every post that appears under that person's name.

Also: I have found the majority of writers *I've* encountered to be Geminis. I wonder if it'll pan out here.

--Yes, I am a Gemini.

This topic is surely no more brainless than others I've seen of late.... :-)

Craig

No more Geminis?

Well, I guess the field has been cleared for moi!

Craig

(Lisa: a CANCER? Oh my...)

I share a birthday with Judy Garland.

I also have a good friend I visit often in Hollywood, who lives in the building Judy Garland lived in when she was at her lowest.

There I met and dated a strange chick in the elevator (that is, I met her in the elevator). And guess what? She was a professional astrologer!

It's all coming full-circle.

Craig

Ashley:

I read your horoscope for today -- it said you were going to say that.

Craig

What is it about chewing gum for five minutes that makes a sniffer know you have Alzheimer's?

And what's he sniffing? Your teeth?

How would I go about getting into THAT line of work?

Craig

I kept reading that as "Orlando" too. It's probably the "o" at the end of "Szabo" which makes the mind immediately transpose.

Soooo you're a chick. Great -- ANOTHER one. Wanting to write screenplays....

:-)

Craig

Well, "optimas" is "aristocrat" in Latin.

So are you "First Aristocrat"?

Craig (Optimas Secundus)

"I'm not saying that contest people don't appreciate originality. But I think they, like the industry, prefer to go with "original" scripts that still play by the rules."

No, I don't think that's how it is. What readers look for are: good scripts. That simple.

Do good scripts always get picked? No. Sadly, no. It's not just a truism, it's the honest truth. Often, great scripts get passed over. Sadly enough, sometimes... lesser scripts advance....

But that's the nature of the beast. You know that playing the game. Or you better.

Craig

?

Craig

All I will say is this: I have often seen, with my own eyes -- scripts that deserve to advance don't; and scripts that don't deserve to advance, do.

I have read for a few contests, and yes, I've seen it. I've seen scripts removed from consideration for reasons entirely *apart* from the writing quality/value of the script, too. Believe it or not.

These contests are run by fallible human beings, with subjective views. *MY* view here is subjective. And fallible.

Don't take any one contest's word for it. Take a sampling of contest results, to determine whether your scripts is worthy or not, at any given moment.

Craig

I will echo Christine's words. And I will remind you all, again, that: I've seen what can go on in these contests. I am telling you: justice does NOT prevail. Poor scripts adavance, and great scripts get left behind. Blame it on: incompetence, mismanagement, ignorance, and sheer unmitigated good/bad luck.

This is not to say, you can slack off. You must make sure your script hits all the right marks -- that's your job.

Discouragement is the name of the game in this business. Good thing you don't just "get in" instantly, lickety-split, right off the bat: everyone would hate you.

Craig

Bryan,

I agree with your sentiments. But I would advise against the "It's probably bad this happened to him because...." syndrome: it only sets up more disappointment when it doesn't happen, it damages other's good fortune/your own karma, and it ignores simple reality.

Which is: life is inherently, absurdly, irrevocably, and totally unfair. That's just the way it is.

This is how you should probably comfort yourself: tell yourself that -- believe me -- there is a LOT more to whatever the story is about this sale, than we get. If you were to get the whole story, it wold make logical sense why s/he had this incredible stroke of "good luck." And learning that, you could replicate it -- or trump it.

Don't disparage from afar; accept that it's all not fair, and that the story is NEVER what it at first appears to be.

If you don't mind me telling you ANYTHING, that is. Which I guess, is rather rude, when I think about it... never stopped me before though.... :-)

Craig

The argument is all wrong:

A story about pot-bellied pigs is one thing.

A story about true-romance is another. Or a great comedy. Or a fascinating mystery.

It's all in how you interpret "trend."

Here's one thing you sure DON'T want to do: buck all trends. Don't go writing that sympathetic Osama piece -- you may not get anywhere with that one....

Craig

Methinks you might be anthropomorphizing, Ashley.

BTW: If your precious cat, say, was to expand in size about 20 times, it would have no compunction about consuming you. That is, after it playfully snapped every last one of your limbs tossing you around the joint, smashing your innards into a ripe jelly, and finally decapitating you with relish.

Craig

Put me on the spot, why don't you! :-)

My logline needs work: Circuit horse-trainer, stuck in a tiny forest town, befriends a young boy -- who may be his son.

It's about a womanizing, free-living/loving cowboy, who suddenly discovers he has a son; he then must come to terms with this fact as he becomes embroiled in the boy's, and the boy's grandfather's, lives. The grandfather is bitter against the absent, "faceless" father he believes killed his daughter (who drowned out on Whiskeytown Lake [the setting] years earlier), by driving her to despair. The cowboy, in my script, wrestles with what to tell the boy; what to tell the grandfather; and how these choices, and his own life, are subsequently going to play out.

As you can tell, it's a very, and *deliberately* so, quiet piece: close in spirit to You Can Count On Me, or Tender Mercies. The conflicts are interior and the drama subdued, compacted by language and setting and circumstances. I am happy that a few contests "got it" -- that I was not trying to write The Matrix or Seven or Lethal Weapon.

Thanks for the congrats! I appreciate it.

Craig

Yes, I agree.

He is eloquent and waxes poetic and is quite adept at public speaking, when he is free-speaking or on a tangent. But when he is relating "facts" or the "rules" or his notes, see how jarring his speech is, and count how many "um"s and "uh"s and "ah"s enter his vocabulary.

The VERY few times he touches upon the subject of "breaking into the industry" (which, by the way, he *LOATHES* TO DISCUSS): it's quick, it's dismissive. It's mumbled over. And it's accompanied by a sly grin, that seems to say, "These poor suckers -- thank God I'M gettting my coffers of greed crammed-full this week!"

I also don't like his choices of movies to discuss. At the Genre Weekend I attended, these were the flicks: for thriller, Seven. For comedy, A Fish Called Wanda. I get the impression he chooses films based on who he knows that was involved in the films, not on their individual merits.

All that being said... not a bad seminar. You can always learn something. He's funny and a good speaker, and knows how to entertain. His book is interesting, and the people running it are all great.

And he's going to be in the upcoming Adaptation -- well, Brain Cox will be.

Craig

Ashley,

Actually, I do see your points, and understand where you were coming from now. I can't really disagree!

I did qualify them with my "methinks," btw.

There is still the issue of the "cow" with no "spiritual interior," however. How do you know *you* can't see *its* inner "energy"?

Seriously. How do you know? What makes one person qualified to see to the spirit, and others not?

And if I don't see something behind the eyes of a cat -- does that mean I am spiritually dead inside? Or if I see it in a cow but not a cat, what then?

Do you see that spirituality in a fly? If you don't -- well, George Harrison, to take one individual, would have thought YOU were spiritually "imperceptive" and "unlearned."

Do you see where we're going with all this?....

Craig

Wow! All these suggestions are just incredible! I really appreciate it -- I don't know which one to take!

Where were you guys when I was writing this script? I could have used the help!

More anon,

Craig

Again, the response here is overwhelming! I am so used to commenting on other people/topics/writings/etc., I am rather unused to any attention showered on my own work.

Johnny: Thanks for that. I too hate CGI. I am always bitching about it, and it drives some people I know crazy.

Miriam: Yes the "forest" reference may not be necessary. I hope that small prodcos find it interesting: the thing could be done on virtually nothing -- the locale (if it sticks to the original) is colorful enough to stand in for special effects.

Tom: It never occurred to me to start describing John in the logline: I mean, his character, and not his profession. I like it! This dovetails with Johnny's rewriting of my logline, which indeed, makes it much more compactly energized: it evokes a story, instead of just a set-up.

Orlanda: MOW would be a good forum. It would be better if it had a very prominent female protagonist -- then I could try for Lifetime. Thanks for the kind words and encouragement!

Ashley: I do adore horses -- used to ride them, a few years back, with my ex-... but then, we broke up... and she took the horse... [sniff] no, can't go on.... :-)

Peter: Your logline is excellent. I only question "trots" really, since it might imply this is set in a time other than the present. But yours seems to most succintly set down the parameters of the whole neatly.

Didi: What the... Jesus, how long has this Tom Collins been in my hair?!?

Thanks all,

Craig

Orlanda: That might change the dynamics of the script too much. There are two strong female characters in the script, but they are not the leads (there are 3 male leads).

Joan: Yes, nice to see you and Mike again. I like this logline very much! I am going to jimmy it around a bit, but it's nicely compacted. I may utilize your talents on my latest script.

Ashley: We're talking about the horse thing? Or the gf thing?

Randy: Thanks! Yes my new project, after I finish my new script, is to *finally* actively network/market/push, instead of all the passive (aggressive?) machinations I have been pursuing so far in writing. I have been waiting a long time for "product" that I just KNOW is good. I am very close... very very close..... I must be, because the thought of cold-calling, calling in favors, reestablishing contacts, etc., all seems exciting to me, rather than daunting.

Craig

What the hell are you doing up until 5:30 am?!?

If it's writing, Orlanda, damn! You're putting us all to shame.

And if it's... well, you're still putting me to shame. :-)

Craig

It's actually

FADE OUT

No colon (:).

Because... there's nothing to follow it.

Except the pleas from the writer to buy the damned thing!

Craig

That sounds like fun! I'll try mine:

EATING MAGGOTS can be hard on your SQUISHY BRAINS, especially when ZOMBIES-IN-LAW come calling for your ROTTING INTESTINES & OTHER ASSORTED INNARDS, which I hear are tasty served with TOE JAM PIE.

(.......not really.) ;-p

Craig

Hackman rarely does a bad film? Well, he sure did if he was in ABSOLUTE POWER.

Or LOOSE CANNONS.

Craig

Look... I'm compelled to make this clear... those are NOT the titles of my scripts... I was just amusing myself with the worst possible script titles I could think of at the moment....

Although, DJ is right -- they are provocative enough to get me to want to read them and figure out what the f*** that writer's up to!

Craig

What I find curious, is how a rabid hatred (such as Ron manifests) can create such a serious disconnect from any verifiable reality, that such an individual can create whole-cloth fabrications -- blatant lies -- and then actually *accept* them as reality!

I mean, what kind of deeply disturbed mental state do you need to be in, to have this kind of thing running around in your head?

--But I'll bet Ron writes great scripts!

(Hey, if they're seriously ill and still making good movies, who cares?)

Stay off the meds, buddy! We need you deranged.

Craig

Yes, congrats, Barbara!

Craig

I hate your idea, Mary Kay!

In fact, I propose a vote right now -- what say we toss scary-Mary Kay off this little island of ours forthwith?

:-)

I like your idea very much, and welcome it.

Craig

41? Did you mean 411?

Honestly -- I mean, is this a catch-phrase of which I am ignorant?

unhelpful Craig

Hey, that second idea? I read that script! Years back -- it was passed to me I think, can't remember how I came across it. Was the guy that did Bull Durham involved in the rewrite? I may have read the version he did, but I can't remember now. Anyway, I remember enjoying it: tell your friend. (We're going back 5+ years, and 100s of scripts!)

That first idea sounds good too -- why didn't I think of that?!?

Craig

I weigh in, personally, on both sides.

I've seen/heard things go on in contests -- not Nicholl -- which, well.....

As well, I know what Greg means by rewrites not improving a script: It might hurt the writer to realize this, but often, your IDEA itself isn't working well. Or should I say, it's not a Nicholl-/any contest-winning idea. Stories run in hierarchies: some are executed quite well despite being lousy, and they will advance so far. But you must have an excellent story, crafted excellently, to actually advance to the winners circle.

However, going back to the writer's POV -- it is subjective, at some point, because you reach what I call the Level of Competency. Greg has stated in the past how, often, even Nicholl winners are rife with problems (my own words), and fall below the quality of "professional" scripts. I've heard individuals in the industry complain that lately there is a "disappointment" with the scripts coming out of Nicholl, as well. The scripts, you see, reach a given level of competency -- and then, it's individual choices which are picking them out, because further weeding is superfluous.

IMHO: It's NOT a crapshoot if your script is lousy -- it's the best rising, and the lesser ones falling aside, under the astute eyes of readers. If your script is quite good, then -- at some point, yes, it becomes a crap shoot. And may the best wo/man win.

Craig

Marcel,

You are all half the time unintelligible, but yet thanked.

:-)

Craig

...could you maybe not yell so much?

And who's Joe? And why are you thanking him?

Craig

Here's a logline for ya:

"Protagonist must succeed, or suffer failure. Thrills and chills (and a little bit of romance) guide you along. Success isb't guaranteed, although you're pretty sure he'll make it. Cliches are scarce, but conventions abound. Price is a mid-against-high whatever-it-is-you're-offering-me."

:-)

Craig

Me, personally? It makes me sick. Both what the author relates about the studio mentality -- but even more so, the author's attitude.

"...all my hard work...." Love that line. Script #1, based on existing material (i.e., not original), perfectly willing to bastardize the piece; and yet still, "...all my hard work...."

Yeah, ain't life hard. We're all crying here.

Craig

Hey, buddy? More power to you.

Many movies by Woody Allen walk the fine-line between traditional and ensemble flicks. The best that walk that line are HUSBANDS & WIVES, CRIMES & MISDEMEANORS, HANNAH & HER SISTERS, and a simply wonderful movie that got terrible reviews for no explicable reason, CELEBRITY.

Here's what you do: grab a gun and pull the TRIGGER repeatedly in the middle of Melrose STREET across from Paramount. Aim at the studio, but don't aim at anyone in particular (we don't want to actually hurt anyone). Spout some crazy shit about how you worship Osama or Astaroth or Jodi Foster or something, and get yourself arrested. Then, sell your story to the highest bidder when the agents come aknockin'.

Point is, you've got a better chance breaking into Hollywood over on *my* "Trigger Street," than you do Spacey's.

Craig

Right on, Larry. All you had to do was look at Matt Damon's smarmy face to know the whole thing was a total farce. A set-up for him and his buddy to advance themselves, and in the meantime, make a doofus look like a noodnick.

Tell me something: Why did they HAVE to do a Project Greenlight movie? Was that necessary? What was the reason for that?

Yeah, let's set up a scholarship for a struggling prospective law school student. Then, let's follow the student around with a video camera day and night and record the worst parts and make a movie out of it. Oh, and make sure the camera catches *our* best mugging angles (not his), and make sure we put that quote of ours, "This thing is turning into a train wreck," up on screen.

Pyramids consist of 99% base and 1% top.

No one's out to help you (i.e., no one's out to give you a hand free of charge). Knowing that makes it all the more easier -- and yourself all the more peaceful. You get in on your own.

But best of luck to all those advancing on TriggerStreet! More power to you.

Craig

Andrea,

I see your ( o ) ( o ) and.... and....

Hold on a minute, I'm still looking....

Craig :-)

It would certainly appear lately that Steven's got SOMETHING in his hands.......

Craig

"Marcel -- rhombitruncated-icosododechahedron."

"...rhombiwhothetruncawhattheicosodohuhthefuckareyoutalkingabout?!?"

"Sorry, that is incorrect."

Craig

Here's how it works:

Anything less than 100 is spelled out -- fifty-five, four, eighty-seven. (Use - too.)

Anything 100 or more is numerical -- 121, 154,345, etc.

Hope that helps,

Craig S.

Marcel--

Borderline psychotic is one thing. But if they're very angry to boot -- yikes!

Craig

Okay, I never do this... but I want to take a moment to recommend, to everyone here, a "script doctor" named Paul Cooper. He can be found at

http://www.HollywoodWorkingWriter.com/

Paul is a personal friend, and a very talented and LONG working screenwriter. I have read most of Paul's scripts, and honestly cannot praise them enough. Not only that, but Paul is a rarity in this industry: kind and open and generous, giving of his time and effort far beyond any call of duty.

Paul is also, as I've said, an active and award-winning screenwriter, who has enjoyed much success. For example, he just found out last week that his latest film, produced by Salma Hayek (originally for Showtime), is going to Sundance. He had another film showcase on television earlier this year alone.

I've learned so much from Paul -- Jesus, I can't even tell you! I hope any of you also interested in improving your own work, decide to check him out.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.........

Craig

A few quick things:

If they indeed take relish at your disppointments, that is awful. But it could merely be the case, that they care, and that they worry about your future and happiness.

If you find joy purely in the writing, and not the accompanying success, then you are lucky and stay that way. Because of you base your happiness on the success part -- you are asking for a world of hurt.

And, if you want the success, your script *must* be perfect, for all intents and purposes. Good, fine, okay -- there are hundreds and thousands of those, and you can't break free. It's hard enough to get the perfect ones to advance.

If you understand all this and are happy with that -- more power to you! And crucify the naysayers.

Craig

Marcel, all I can say is....

CHE-CHE-CHE-che-che...che....che...... AH-AH-AH-ah-ah...ah.....ah.....ah.......

Craig

I have spoken before about "perfect" scripts. A script has to be as near perfection as possible, or you got no "bitching rights." "I did my best job!" doesn't cut it.

The Universe don't hand out no awards for Second Place.

Here's another cold dose of... something: We are all, essentially, animals; we are motivated by the same things animals are, when you break it all down.

No animal on the planet, is capable of performing an activity, that has NO purpose. This is sheer torment for any animal; and so, animals (and humans) are incapable of it. You don't wake up and plan to tap your fingers for three hours.

So many people give up writing, because they get to that point: the writing becomes, consciously, an activity with no "purpose." This is why those who abandon writing really shouldn't be admonished: they did the only thing sensible. To keep going, would be torment.

It's difficult, but you have to maintain your love of writing, your joy, that bit of fulfillment, whatever small victories you can muster. Even to a microscopic degree.

Because if those go... and then, you really start to *believe* you're not getting anywhere... you feel like it's all for naught... the act itself is rather a drag, after all... and no one around you feels good about it, or supports you anyway... you see life outside your window passing by... what life inside, flitting away... you, alone, with nothing to show for it all.....

That is, if it *becomes to your consciousness* an activity containing no purpose -- brother, you're finished.

You gotta fight it. Or... not.

We, committed (foolhardy?) writers, are always on the lookout for that next rainbow to believe in -- one that can buy us some time.

Craig

...ugh....

Unless you're talking more squib at the movies... which I am ALL for... then please tell me you're kidding, Mary......

Craig

In Stephanie's defense:

She did say that she only wanted this person to "let her know she got it," NOT that that person should have read it in a week.

And so, it does seem rather rude of this nameless person not to at least let Stephanie know s/he got the script after a whole week! (Especially when she asked.)

...Are you *sure* you're all writers out there? Because some of you ain't reading things too closely.

Oh well -- maybe you won't complain yourself so much next time, that some reader "*clearly* wasn't paying attention" to your clearly fantastic screenplays.

Craig

(it's X-Mas -- give the girl some slack!)

I accept, with reservations, everyone's holiday wishes.

You may consider them justly and adequately reciprocated at your earliest convenience.

This is not a binding agreement.

Craig

:-P

Welcome Crystal.

And -- I do hope -- I mean, you have such a unique writing style in that very first post -- but I DO hope -- you don't craft your scripts like that. With all those $.25 words and complex sentence structures and such.

It'll sink you in Hollywood faster than a January release.

The Barthes and the Derridas and the Pynchons and the Joyces and the Foucaults would love you -- but not your typical brain-dead diet-only-of-pre-digested-pap Hollywood exec.

Just a thought.

Craig

I dunno... The Two Towers is like sex after a long, dry spell: it's indiscriminately fantastic. Until time goes by, and there's more to compare it to... at which point, I believe, it will be found to be wanting.

I am a huge fan of Tolkien, and I am saying this, mind. But I found Two Towers less "magical" than the first movie. I fear for the third.

When the glamour wears off, you may be left with an amazing spectacle -- that it *certainly* is -- but perhaps, little else.

Compare it to Excalibur, and this series pales (IMHO). Too bad Boorman (a vibrant, earlier Boorman) didn't have the greenlight to direct this epic.

But, still -- the only second imaginable, is Peter Jackson.

Perhaps I am complaining for wanting TOO much? It's entirely possible....

Craig

D.G.,

I took a print-out of your last post to 7-11 today. I asked the merchant there to read it, and if he would trade me what you wrote for a cup of coffee. He threw it back in my face.

I then took it to the gas-station, and asked the attendant if I could trade it for a gallon of gas. Again, my face was violated with your words.

Finally, I lit the message on fire, and used it to light up a cigarette. Now THAT worked nicely!

Craig

(just kidding -- I don't smoke)

And why are they "left-OVERS" and not "left-UNDERS"?

If fire-fighters fight fire, then do freedom-fighters fight freedom?

And if water comes out of a water-faucet, why doesn't fire come out of a fire-hydrant?

Craig

Me, I'm still around. Check in every now and again. Still writing. Since March, I wrote one whole script, and two half scripts -- makes two scripts you could say, in two months. Other stuff too. Always busy, nothing new. Life goes on.

Craig

Terri,

I feel your pain.

Read Milton's 19th Sonnet. Might help. Does me....

Craig