How to phrase stuff

I've been writing a lot of emails lately. I spend a lot of extra time on my emails -- I rewrite them a few times so I'm sure they communicate what they're supposed to, and hopefully so I persuade people without pissing them off.

My take on arguing by email is that it's just as convincing to say "I feel" or "It seems to me" or "My take on this is" as it is to say "it is this way"; however, "I feel" takes the sting out of my statement. Hey, that's how I feel. You may feel differently. That's beautiful, man.

Also, I ask a lot of questions. "Are you really sure this is how we should approach this?" is the polite cousin of "We shouldn't do this." But "We shouldn't do this" provokes an immediate resentment on the part of someone who disagrees; while "are you sure?" solicits his or her opinion, which is always flattering, and frames it in a way that he or she really has to look at his or her own thinking: am I sure? Am I really sure?

Asking gets the reader on your side; stating invites pushback.

Even when I'm talking about facts, I'll tend to say, "As far as I can tell," or "if I understand this correctly" rather than just writing "It's 98."

In a world where people break up by text, I get a lot of half-baked emails, mostly from younger folk. The writers don't put themselves in my shoes. Sometimes they piss me off without meaning to.

Take the extra minute to revise your emails. Then wait a half hour, and then revise again. Never send an email after 6 pm if you can send it in the morning; you may be able to trim a lot of anger and confusion in the morning.

Ask rather than stating. Make clear you know it's your opinion.

Often the most convincing way to present your argument is by avoiding making it an argument.

Four Out of Six

Neil Gaiman:  “You get work however you get work, but keep people keep working ... because their work is good, because they are easy to get along with and because they deliver the work on time. And you don’t even need all three! Two out of three is fine. People will tolerate how unpleasant you are if your work is good and you deliver it on time. People will forgive the lateness of your work if it is good and they like you. And you don’t have to be as good as everyone else if you’re on time and it’s always a pleasure to hear from you."

Or tweetable:  "Pleasant. On time. Talented. Success requires two out of three."

And then there's the Iron Triangle of Project Management:   "Fast - Cheap - Good. Pick Two." 

Words of wisdom.

TV, Oh Well

Diane Wild's TV, Eh? blog has gone down for the count. Too bad. It was a great resource for those who cared about Canadian TV. If only some Canadian networks had, y'know, clicked on that "Donate" link.

But one gets the strong impression that Canadian networks regard commissioning Canadian content as a tiresome chore; and government seems to be listening. The CRTC came around to Montreal for a "flash conference," where the question was raised, "Hey, Devil's advocate, but if we can't regulate Netflix, how is it fair to regulate the networks?"

Which the small band of creatives at the session suspected might imply, "We are testing the waters for deregulating the networks, but we want to make you feel as if we're listening to you."

To which some stalwart creatives said, "But you ought to regulate streaming video." And, "If we don't regulate the networks, there will be no Canadian programs at all." And, "If the Canadian networks don't make any Canadian content, why exactly should we protect them from competition from the American networks?"

Lisa said, "One day you're going to wake up and they're making Anne of Green Gables set in Connecticut. By then it will be too late."

The rest of the crowd at the hearing was Concordia students. Their overall reaction was, "What's TV, grandpa?"

Women in Film

New York Film Academy has an interesting infographic that shows jjjjust how few women there are in film. And yet, half the audience is women.

Plus ça change...

Don't Dream It, Beat It

At MIGS, I attended a superb talk by Ian Frazier (@tibermoon) of Bioware, on how next-gen consoles are going to affect game design. The core of the talk was how their capabilities (e.g. second screen, ability to share pictures and video) will magnify the 8 Drives to Play.

8 drives, you say? What are these eight drives? Ian crystallized them as follows:

1. Feel It (Escapist Immersion) –

Losing yourself in a fantasy world where everything is more compelling than it is here in your life. Contrast is all about escaping into a fantasy world:

AC4: Black Flag lets you be a pirate. Arrrr!

Another way to phrase this might be "Put Me In a Story." Games don't just tell (or show) a story. They put the player in a story which he lives through. So Far Cry 3 puts you in the story of an innocent California boy who becomes a badass. Spec Ops: The Line puts you in the story of Captain Walker's descent into madness. (I think I know why they call him Captain Walker. But I digress.)

 2. Learn It (System Mastery) –

Learning how the game's different rules interact with each other. Discovering the synergies. Figuring out how to build your character. Understanding what's important and what's not. You feel smart when you figure it all out.

Civilization is all about system mastery. Also, Starcraft. Also, chess.

3. Beat It (Skill Mastery) –

Win the game. Beat the boss. The harder the game is, the more powerful your triumph. Shadow of the Colossus.

4. See It All (Content) –

Exploring the environment. Climbing to the top of the mountain to get the view. Discovering the secret passages and the hidden rooms. Meeting every boss.

This is another drive that Contrast plays to. Also, Far Cry.

5. Help Your Friends (Cooperative Play) –

Playing as a team. An innate human drive since we were chasing mammoths around the mountains. Army of Two exists entirely because of this drive. Also, football, soccer, lacrosse, crew, etc.

6. Crush Your Enemies (Competitive Play) –

See them run before you. Hear the lamentation of their women.

Mortal Kombat. Also, boxing, tennis, ping-pong, poker, and fairground pie competitions.

7. Impress Everyone (Peacocking) –

I'm riding a feathered rhino! And you know how hard they are to get! Some WoW players live for this.

8. Build Something (Creation) –

This is the drive at the heart of Minecraft (though peacocking is there too, online). Also, Lego, Lincoln Logs and the Erector Set.

Hunter loves when an RPG gives him a house that he can decorate. He spends a lot of time putting stuff in his house and arranging them just so. Strange, because he has no interest in picking his clothes up off the floor in his actual room.


Different games play to these drives in different amounts. COD multiplayer is all about Coop Play and Crush Your Enemies, but not so much Build Something. Contrast is about Feel It and See It, but not about System Mastery -- its mechanics are quite simple.

I'm not sure exactly where the drive to feel like a hero lives in this list, though it's obviously key to many AAA games. ("Do you feel like a hero yet?" asks Spec Ops: The Line.) There is also the completionist drive -- gotta catch'em all -- that sends people across Renaissance Florence rooftops collecting feathers for the sake of, well, getting all the feathers.

Of course, there is also the drive to keep pressing the lever that gives you a hamster pellet -- the drive that keeps you playing a game long after it stops being fun, the drive that drives old ladies to sink their piggy banks into one-armed bandits in Vegas. Since Ian is a good guy, and not evil, he doesn't include it in his canonical list, though I'm sure he's aware of it. We all are. This article from Cracked is intended to be humorous, but it is dead on.

If you're designing a game, you should make sure you know which drives you're playing to. These are the goods you're delivering.

If you find this sort of thing interesting, you may also want to check out Jon Radoff's analysis of game player motivations, which builds on Bartle's division of players into explorers, killers, socializers and achievers.

Nice Review of Contrast Story

What can be said, however, about the story is that it is excellent in its ability to wrap so much punch into such a tiny package. The game is fairly short, so Compulsion Games didn’t leave themselves much room for error. Thankfully,Contrast does more to deliver an emotionally engaging story than most games even come close to in play-through times that are three times as long. Themes of abandonment and relationship dynamics are conveyed subtly and with a delicate touch. Control, sacrifice and power within relationships, be they personal or business, are also themes that are met head on. What’s excellent is that the messaging is reinforced not only by cut-scenes, but by gameplay as well, similar to past indie darling, Limbo. Many of the puzzles find Dawn and Didi fixing or restoring something, and in doing so, the player brings them one step closer to fixing and restoring Didi’s family. By the end, Contrast comes full circle and delivers an experience that is both touching and bittersweet. Truly outstanding work.

Thanks, GameRant!

Fanfic

Q. I wrote a screenplay based on [famous film franchise]. I plan to send a query letter to the star of the [famous film franchise] movies. Should I also send it to the director of the [famous film franchise] movies? If so, should I do it simultaneously, or should I wait to see if I hear back from [star] first?

This is not how it works. Studios, producers, directors and stars will not even read your script based on their franchise. They might have similar ideas for a sequel to you, and they don't want you claiming they stole your ideas. If they want a sequel, they already have writers working on it. They will not, barring the Rapture, option a spec sequel.

What you can do is take all the derivative material out of your spec sequel, and make it unique and fresh and new. You can't option a Bond spec, but you can write a spy movie, and if it's good enough, and fresh enough, someone may make it in spite of its similarities to the Bond franchise. 

(In extremely rare circumstances, someone might even decide that your spy movie would make a great Bond sequel. But the idea has to come from them.)

Your best bet is to be original. Hollywood is not going to turn to someone new for the same old ideas. They already have people they can count on for the same old ideas. You have to bring something new to the party.

Q. I'm writing a script that features a real rock star (playing himself) as a fairly significant character. I have 3 or 4 other rock stars making appearances as themselves too. I would assume it would be hugely obvious to anybody reading it that the rock star I picked is a placeholder, and if he isn't available/interested, then we could always cast Rock Star B, C D or E. Is this troublesome or limiting in any way? Would people not be able to figure out it's a placeholder and say ahhhhh forget it your idea hinges on getting this specific guy? Or should I ditch using a known name of a real rock star and make up a fake rock star character? In my mind that would water things down too much.

You shouldn't use the name of a real rock star unless you actually have that rock star on board. And, really, even then, you shouldn't, unless you're writing a documentary. It's your job as a writer to create a character. If you write a script for Lady Gaga to play herself, people are going to bring their own ideas of who she is. Better to invent a Lady Gaga-esque character that you have made distinct and fresh and clever and above all, interestingly flawed. That brings the character to life on the page, and gives Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta something to play on the screen. (Because, of course, almost all rock stars are already consciously playing a character who is a version of themselves. Who's Lady Gaga when she's at home?) The way you've phrased your question, it sounds like you just want "a" rock star in your movie. That is the very definition of "watered down." Always create characters, even if you're writing real people.

You Can't Copyright A Title, Unless

Q. I wrote a script called "LIVING NIGHTMARES" several years ago and had it registered with the WGAw. Found out recently that AMC ripped the title for one of there own films. Called the Writer's Guild to see what they could do and was told that it's perfectly legal for companies to rip the title of your work. Talk about some B.S.

Yep. Titles get recycled all the time. Especially titles like yours, which are based on extremely common phrases. "Living Nightmare" gets 714,000 Google Hits. (I assume that your LIVING NIGHTMARE was not a remake of the 1977 critical hit NAZI LOVE CAMP 27, which was also released as LIVING NIGHTMARE.) So if you can't protect the title to a produced movie, you definitely can't protect the title to an unproduced script.

My question is how Disney prevents people from releasing their own movies called SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS. I think that might have something to do with trademarks, or possibly just having a massive legal department. (UPDATE: See RJ Reimer's excellent explanation in the comments for how studios regulate the re-use of titles. Thank you, RJ!)

But there have been other SNOW WHITE movies. You can make one, too.

By the way, registering a script with the WGA gives it no legal protection whatsoever; it just provides evidence should there be a lawsuit. If you want legal protection, register your script with the Library of Congress, on any day the government is not shut down. 

Nitty Gritty

Q. If you wind up as a staff writer for a television show, how do you handle things like health insurance and taxes? I would guess the first one might be easier with the Affordable Health Care Act in play here in the US, and I know the WGA offers insurance after you earn a certain amount. But how do you actually live and get covered? Is it doable? For some of us with pre-existing conditions, that's a Real Thing To Worry About. 

The WGA has a very, very good, gold-plated health plan. So good that people continue to pay their WGA dues even when they haven't written anything in years, just so they can buy into it.

Q. Taxes. As a contractor, you're responsible for all of that stuff on your own. I assume there are oodles of accountants specializing in helping people in the entertainment industry, but can you give me a thumbnail sketch of what it's like? Do you get to deduct things like cable TV if you're a working TV writer? Is the tax burden better or worse than if you were a traditional employee?

Yes. There are oodles.

You can deduct quite a bit. Cable bills. Computers. Movies you go to. Lunches. Books. I am not an accountant, and this is not accounting advice, but there's a reason so many of us have loanout companies.

Option my Napkin?

Q. What if a producer just wants to option my film idea? I.e. I have the one pager and he loves it and has initial interest out there and he wants to keep shopping it around with me?

You don't get paid for an idea. Sure, Joe Eszterhas optioned a napkin for $4M in the 90's after BASIC INSTINCT, but then the napkin film did not do as well as BASIC INSTINCT, and it is no longer the glorious 90's, age of the ridiculous spec sale. Anyway, you don't. You give the producer an informal, or formal, right to shop the idea, with the understanding, or written agreement, that you are attached as the first writer, at a reasonable (e.g. Guild minimum) writing fee.

Generally speaking, your right to write the film stops at either a draft, or two drafts and a polish, depending on your clout. After that, the producer can take you off the project.

A typical deal for a pro writer might be a Right of First Refusal to write two drafts and a polish for scale (or scale plus X% if s/he's an overscale writer), plus a hunk of money if the film goes into production (say 2.5%-4% minus what he's been paid already), plus a ROFR to write sequels/prequels/spinoffs/TV and/or passive payments in case s/he isn't the writer of the sequels/prequels. Plus monkey points.

If you are a beginning writer, the producer may offer you only the production bonus, intending to give the idea to someone else to write. Don't accept that. The whole point of you shopping your ideas is to get to write them up. Vastly more films get developed than get made.

In the case of a one-pager, you're probably better off with, at a minimum, a written one-page deal letter clarifying that it is your idea and the producer is attached to it in the event he sets it up (finds development financing) within X time period. After that the producer is no longer attached, and any creative ideas the producer may have contributed are your property.

All of the above is technically redundant since you own the idea and a producer's doesn't own his notes once he gives them to you, but having it all on paper clarifies things for everyone, and if the producer has different ideas, you want to know them now, rather than later when he attempts to tie up your project without paying you. 

Why Buy the Cow?

Tim Kreider writes in today's Times about all the people who write him asking him to contribute writing to their website for free. (He probably got paid a little for the article.)

In the Middle Ages, writing was not something you did for a living. Writers were noblemen or clerics; someone was already feeding them. They wrote for fame, or to scratch an itch, or to praise God, or to argue that someone else was praising God the wrong way.

Then the printing press came along and you could actually sell books. (I have no idea if it's accurate that Gutenberg had a side business in pornography, but I hope so.) And copyright laws eventually made it possible to protect your content.

The internet has the lowest imaginable threshold for entry. So lots of people with paying jobs are also creating content (essays, short stories, YouTubes) in their spare time and throwing it up there for all to see. Twenty years ago it was difficult and expensive to make a short film, even a badly made one. Now it's easy to make something.

And many of the somethings go viral. And people make money off them. Get a million hits on YouTube, and they'll send you a check.

Suddenly professional writers and filmmakers are competing with myriads of amateur writers and filmmakers.

They're also competing with promoters. A lot of viral content has funding behind it. Lonelygirl15 turned out not to be a lonely girl in a room but a group of people who wanted to sell a series.

The paradigm has changed. You're now expected to give it away, in the hopes that this will vault you to a position where you can now sell your stuff for a whack of dough. Of course, for most people, the second part never triggers. There's no "path to Colonel," as they say in the Army.

To be sure, there never was a path to Colonel in content creation. Aspiring TV and feature writers always had to write spec scripts. And Stephen King wrote a lot of unpublished novels before Carrie got bought. J. K. Rowling wrote Harry Potter on the dole. Aspiring game writers are expected to program up something in Unity or Twine, so have a portfolio to show when Rockstar posts an opening.

But it does feel like what used to be a pyramid has shrunk its middle, so its base is impossibly wide, and the top quite pointy. The middle seems to be disappearing. There's room for star journalists, and free Huffington post contributors, but no room for journeymen. Right out of college, my Mom got a job at a local paper. "There were a lot of cars parked outside the Murphy's last night," the editor would tell her. "Find out what happened." That is no longer a job.

(I realize how ironic it is that I'm writing all of this on my blog, which I write for free. Though people keep offering to buy ads on it.)

The middle is disappearing in features, too. There are so many $100,000 features and $1M features out there that you can no longer sell a $3M feature, I am told. $2M to $8M is a no-go area.

Nobody makes a living making hundred thousand dollar features, or even million dollar ones. I have one friend who works as a P.A. to support her directing addiction, and another who works as a production manager. Of course they'd like to break out of the low budget ghetto. But the next few rungs on the ladder are missing. How do you jump from $100,000 to $10,000,000?

You win something at Sundance, of course. If you can become a star, you can vault. Until then, you have to keep giving it away.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing. The new paradigm has mobilized a lot of talent. Annoying Orange is way funnier than Two and a Half Men.

It had to be. It had to promote itself.

Knife!

(Though the lingering death of journalism does create public policy issues. Democracy becomes corrupt in the absence of muckrakers, and no one can afford to do a three month investigation on the if-come.)

This process has been going on for a long time. Before recorded music, if you were semi-good, you could become a traveling musician. You could make a living, of a sorts, playing to crowds of 40. Or, at least, you could eat.

That living hasn't existed for a long time. Instead you play to crowds of 40 to get exposure (and learn your chops) so you can play to crowds of 10,000 for money.

But it does feel like the change has accelerated. There are some pockets where you can still make a living without making a fortune. Games, for example. While the indie game world is full of opportunities to make a game for nothing in the hopes you'll have a hit on Steam, no one asks a writer to contribute barks to a AAA game for free. TV, too, is a process where professionalism is too important to give up. You can make a living as a TV writer because TV is a beast that eats scripts. A TV show doesn't depend on one viral episode. It depends on consistency, both creatively and in production.

But if you're thinking of getting into the rest of the content business, there's the old joke about the jazz musician whose doctor tells him he's only got a year to live. "That's cool, man," says the jazz musician, "but what do I live on till then?"

You need a plan for how you're going to live.

That can be a day job in the biz. For years as an aspiring writer my day job was development executive (another job that I think the industry has shed).

Bartender works, but there's the risk of waking up 50 and realizing you're a career bartender. (So then you write a blog about it, and it goes viral, so you get to adapt it into a bestselling book...)

"Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free" is good advice, but it becomes a problem if you are the cow.

The center cannot hold you. What you gonna do?

Morgans Erwachen

Mein Novel ist in German gepublished!

My novel's out in German!

So for all of you German speakers who are reading this blog in Google Translate, now's your chance!

I Need a Game Screenshot....

Hey, guys, maybe one of you who is a gamer can help.

For my MIGS talk, I need an image of an NPC follower in his underclothes. You know how, in some games (I think Dragon Age: Origins, but not II), you can remove your follower's garb to the point where they're wearing nothing but their Fruit of the Looms? I need a good quality JPG of that.

Can any of y'all help?

Transition?

Q. Does someone who traditionally writes in novella format have any place in television writing? I’ve learned a lot about the differences, and I’m eager to see if my own style of writing can be adapted to the far more fast-paced scripting I am learning. Since you’ve written both for television and your own books, what are the biggest speed bumps you encountered, transitioning from one format to another? 

There's no hard and fast answer. If you're a writer, you're a writer, and you can adapt your muse to different media. But certainly each medium has its strengths and weaknesses, and so do writers. If your gift is to delve into the deep thoughts of a character -- well, that's something TV is very poor at. Actors convey feelings well, but not thoughts. TV is very good at showing the dynamics of a family (whether kin or a family of choice) and characters making emotional choices.

TV has demands novella writing doesn't. You can polish and rework your spec pilot for a year, but spec episodes get out of date fast, and if you should be hired, you better be able to bang out a sixty page script in a week. A couple of times I've had to write a script in a day. That's not pretty, but you can't be precious. If the production meeting is Tuesday morning, the script better be there Tuesday morning.

Speed bumps? There's a learning curve to any medium, and in TV, there is a whole industry to break into. If you work hard and thoughtfully, and if you like writing what people like seeing on TV, and if people like you, you'll probably get in. The key, as in any new field, is listening -- to what's said, and to what's not said -- and carefully applying it to your work and your processes.

What's Up With Women In Games?

On the 22nd, I'm moderating one of the IGDA Montreal's roundtables, on "Women Characters in Games: Getting from Yorda to Ellie." Should be interesting. Here's the long version of the topic:

Some game critics say that women characters in games have too often been either helpless objects or ass-kicking men with boobs. 

Is this still true? Is there something about gameplay itself that gravitates toward masculine characters? Do gamers really not want to buy games with real female characters, or do marketing people only think so? Are we missing opportunities to tell compelling stories that will attract lots of players?

What could change — in our approach to game narrative, in marketing, in the structure of game teams, in hiring, in game culture, in the game media or elsewhere — for us to do better?

If you're coming, here are some interesting links...

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/29719/InDepth_No_Female_Heroes_At_Activision.php

http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them

http://www.themarysue.com/why-games-with-female-protagonists-dont-sell-and-what-it-says-about-the-industry/

Avalanche Sharks

How did I not think of this???

Writing Ruins You For TV

Writing ruins you for most TV.

So, Hunter is re-watching, and I'm watching, GAME OF THRONES together. And the rap about GoT is best summed up by this fake book cover:

I've heard a great deal about how many main characters die in GoT. And yet, 19 episodes in, I can't say that I've been shocked by anyone's death so far. Sure, some people have died, sometimes suddenly. Some important people have died, important in the sense that many fictional people would have considered them important to, say, the balance of power.

But no really great characters have died. No one has died who, in dying, would have left Westeros a less interesting place. No one with a really interesting character flaw, for example; no one you could get a lot more stories out of. 

This is a cable show. So likable and good characters are not immune from fatality, any more than a certain adorable teacher was immune in BUFFY. But really fun characters are, as far as I can tell, still immune. And "really fun characters," of course, in a cable show, often includes "really atrocious people." 

I called out my guesses for who I was sure would make it to at least episode 30, and Hunter did not contradict me.

Writing TV kind of ruins you for watching TV. We watched a SLEEPY HOLLOW episode, Lisa and I, and the moment we were told in Act 2 that the [entity] could only be killed by fire, we knew that it was going to be the convenient trunkful of [inflammable substance], shown in Act 3, that did for the [entity] in Act 5. And so it was.

That's one reason my writer friends watch so much BREAKING BAD. They're sometimes surprised. 

Ich möchte einen Agenten

Q. I am an emerging writer-director in Central Europe. I have an American-style script I would like to direct. How do I go about getting a US agent?

It's always going to be hard to get a US agent if you are not in the US. Theoretically it could all be done with a PDF of the script, a Vimeo of your director's reel, and Skype. But agents like to sit down with you and see how congenial you are as a person, which is an important part of being able to sell you.

I think to get an agent if you don't live in LA, your best bet is to try to hook up with agents at a festival at which you have a film playing. American agents come to some overseas festivals (Cannes, Milan). If you can get something into SXSW, or Tribeca, or Toronto, or Newport Beach, you can probably meet some agents there.

You're always going to be better off meeting an agent when you have a story:  your film is in competition, your film won an award, your film is in theatres. (I went to TIFF when BON COP / BAD COP was still in theatres. That was a good TIFF.) Because they need a story to sell you. 

AFM?

Q. Do you plan on attending the American Film Market in Santa Monica in November and do you recommend it to other young writers and filmmakers?

Film markets, as distinct from festivals, are generally not for writers or filmmakers. They are for producers to sell their product to distributors. Sometimes producers bring filmmakers along as decoration for a project they're trying to finance, but filmmakers have no real serious reason to be at a market.

The last time I went to the AFM, I was working for a producer, and we were selling our movies to distributors. There were no directors there who were not also producers.

$1 Options and Co-Directors, Oh My!

Q. I have a producer interested in my script. I want to direct. I've directed a few short films. 

The film could be made for $10-20M as it's a commercial style high budget film. The producer agrees. 

But he is a not a big fish either. He's got one film greenlit, but no producer credits. 

He has sent me an Option Purchase Agreement for $1. Purchase price is $50k + 5% of producer's share of proceeds and another $50k for the directing. Would you say that's reasonable for an unknown author + first time directing? 

He doesn't want to sign a directing agreement yet; he says that a simple paragraph in the option is enough. 

The thing he has mentioned though, is that he would bring an experienced co-director on board - what I'm worried about is that once he does that, he'll just kick me out.

There are a number of things wrong with this situation. One, nobody is going to fund a debut feature for $10M except in exceptional circumstances. E.g., you are an award-winning director of commercials with hundreds of well-known spots under your belt; or, your father is Francis Coppola; or, Tom Cruise is in love with you and is willing to appear in the picture. A $10M film requires bankable stars. The agents of these bankable stars will resist putting them in a movie with an unproven director. Distributors will also resist making financial commitments on a movie directed by an unproven director.

Normally a feature debut is more like a million-dollar budget, though it can vary from much less to a bit more.

Hence, the "experienced co-director." There are very few "co-directors" in the world, and they are usually brothers. The producer intends to tell everyone that the "experienced co-director" will do the real directing. At some point they'll make a deal with you to buy you out so they don't have to give you a directing credit, because an "experienced co-director" isn't going to want to share credit with you after he's done all the actual directing.

A producer who has one picture "greenlit" but no credits ... that's not very convincing. How do you know the film is actually greenlit? How do you know if the producer is the prime mover in the picture, or is just one of many producers?

A $1 option is not very good, obviously. It means the producer does not have any money to spare, and/or does not have that much faith in your project. He's willing to throw it out there and see if anyone's interested, but he's not willing to invest money in it. However, I wouldn't rule out a $1 option. A feature debut is always a difficult proposition for the producer. Assuming you really believe the producer has the clout and enthusiasm to get the picture made, a $1 option could conceivably be worth agreeing to. However, option renewals should not be free. If he hasn't advanced the project after 12 months, he should either have to pay some money (even $500) or return it to you.

$50K is a reasonable purchase price for a script by a non-union writer, and $50K is a decent salary for a first time director, but neither are par for a $10M movie. There should normally be some sort of escalator. For the script you should get 2%-4% of budget on the first day of principal photography, split with the other credited writers. (Plus the 5% of Producer's Net, assuming there is any.)

The producer is correct that you don't need a full directing contract, just a Right of First Refusal to direct in the option agreement. However, the ROFR can't be subject to this or that (e.g. "subject to approval by the investors"). It has to be an absolute ROFR, or it won't mean anything. (I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.)

You also want a ROFR to do at least the first paid rewrite, at union rates. Or whatever rate you're willing to rewrite for. The producer will ask you to rewrite endlessly for free, on the grounds that hey, it's a feature debut. You might decide that's worth doing, IF the producer is for real and your directing is for real, and you have faith in the producer's notes. But when a producer pays for a rewrite, he's really going to focus on giving you the best notes possible, whereas when he doesn't, he might try out half-baked ideas on you, because it doesn't cost him anything.

(I don't advocate rewriting for free when you're only the screenwriter, unless you're just starting out. Some feature screenwriters live off rewrites of their own optioned work.)

The key question:  have you shown this script around to other people If you've shown it around and no one else is interested, you might take this deal. If you haven't shown it around, you might shop it a bit more and see what the interest level is elsewhere.

It's tough when you get enthusiasm from someone but no money. Sometimes you have to take these crappy deals if they're the best on offer. But don't be in a hurry to lock up your project for a buck unless you really believe this guy is gung-ho on putting you in the director's chair -- which he's already told you he's not.

Also, consider putting this project aside for a third feature, and go write something that can be made for a million bucks. A million dollar budget script with a great hook and great execution, from a director with some short films people dig, is a very plausible proposition for producers and distribs.

That's my plan, anyway...

Non-Identifying

I watched most of SEX AND THE CITY, and I marveled how those girls screwed up one relationship after another, some of them with pretty decent men. (Aidan, for example.) I asked Lisa about it, and she said that, for a woman, part of the fantasy is that, if you had Aidan, you wouldn't push him away.

So I'm watching Season One of GAME OF THRONES, finally. The first time through I couldn't bear watching it because it was too obvious from episode 1 or 2 that poor Ned was an idiot who was going to pay the price for being honorable in the wrong situation. Weirdly, now that I have seen enough spoilers to know how Season One ends, I find it much easier to watch. But I'm enjoying it in the same was as one might watch S&TC:  boy, if I were Ned, I could manage things better.

I don't think we only watch because we identify with the hero. I think we watch because we separate ourselves from the hero. We think, "I may be a romantic idiot sometimes, but I would at least wait to see if Juliet is really for sure dead before stabbing myself." Or, "No, you old fool, keep your kingdom and let your daughters have it when you're dead." Or (my favorite): "Now that the witches have said you are destined to become king, avoid becoming king as long as possible: you cannot die until you do!"

You watch BREAKING BAD, as somebody said, to get to say, "Walter, no!" and "Jesse, think!"

When you write a script, don't just track the characters' emotions. Track also the audience's emotions. Make sure they get to have some fun ones. Fun emotions may be exciting negative ones or reassuring positive ones, or both in the same piece, but make sure they get to have'em.

Samples

Q. I'm applying to a TV fellowship. I specced a and just received a request for a spec pilot. 

I have a traditional sitcom in the same tone. Or I could spend the weekend writing up an edgy family drama idea I have, similar in tone to the ? Is the genre too different than what they might be expecting?

You really have two questions. One, should I go with the polished script, or the unpolished script I suspect will be better. The other is, should I go edgy or trad?

For a fellowship, edgy. They want to find a diamond in the rough, not a really nice polished piece of coal. Showing that you can take risks and execute on them is more important than showing you can nail down every last joke.

If you were applying for a job on a trad sitcom, they might be more concerned about whether you can nail down jokes.

For the "how do I spend my weekend?" question, it's easy:  spend the weekend writing up the new idea. Then see if it seems better than what you've got polished. Sometimes you can bang something out fast that's better than something you took more time on, just because it's a better idea. Of course, most of the time, it won't be.

Always send you your most impressive, freshest writing. Most people reading you have read a lot of polished stuff. Send something that can stand out -- but stand out for fulfilling its promise. A half-executed good idea is no better than a well-executed weak idea. 

7th Annual

Well, the 7th Annual Writer Mafia Party at TIFF was a success. I left around midnight, but my spies tell me there was still quite a crowd there at one in the morning.

Parties at TIFF are strange. Theoretically they are showbiz industry parties. But when I go, there are an awful lot of people I've never seen before -- and whom my friends have never seen before. I guess they are in the great Canadian marketing industry. Which is fair, since TIFF is a promotional event.

So, we instituted the Writer Mafia Party, where we don't buy your drinks or offer you free food, but you'll probably know a lot of people. I think it's one of the most fun events at the festival.

(I have tried over the years to take pictures of the WMP. It is really hard to take a picture of a party that looks like anything!)

Tonight I'm premiering a new short, WINTER GARDEN, at the Elgin. It's part of the Stage to Screen program, celebrating the Elgin's 100th anniversary -- it's the oldest continually functioning theatre from the vaudeville epoch in North America. There are six of us emerging directors, each with a film shot entirely at the Elgin & Winter Garden Theatres. Everything from a post-apocalyptic folktale to a silent film in black and white, to the death of John Dillinger to... my little supernatural tale.

My other 2013 short, ROLE PLAY, premieres at the Vancouver International Film Festival on October 2.

Come to the Elgin tonight, if you're around. Should be a good program.

John Badham On Directing

I loved John Badham’s I’LL BE IN MY TRAILER: THE CREATIVE WARS BETWEEN DIRECTORS AND ACTORS. It’s been one of the most useful books I’ve read about directing actors for the screen. Badham, of course, is the veteran director of SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER, BIRD ON A WIRE, WAR GAMES and yards of other films and TV. I had the pleasure of working with him on a project about Paul Watson, the rogue environmentalist/pirate. If anyone’s qualified to do a nuts and bolts book about directing, John Badham is your guy.

In his upcoming book ON DIRECTING (pub date September 1), Badham expands his survey beyond dealing with actors to the rest of directing, from why you don’t want to shoot a master shot of an action sequence (your editor will chop it up anyway), to how to use storyboards, to the need for a point of view in your camera placement.

No one can teach you everything about directing in a book. Actors need different things from their director. Directors have different cinematic styles. ON DIRECTING acknowledges that, but still gives you lots of useful tools and nuggets of information. How to deal with an actor who is creatively blocked. Why you need to slow fast action down, and how to do it convincingly. How to deal with actors who want to do their own stunts.

And it’s not all Badham’s knowledge. Badham has interviewed director and actor friends, and the book is filled with insightful quotations.

My only complaint, really, about this book, is that I wish it were a lot thicker. It’s 240 pages long, convenient for throwing into a backpack. I wish it were two or three times as long, because there’s so much to learn from it.

It's a Whole New Blacklist

Q. I would be interested in your thoughts on submitting to the WGA's Black List.

First of all, it's not the WGA's Blacklist. As the site says,

It began as a survey. In 2005, Franklin Leonard surveyed almost 100 film industry development executives about their favorite scripts from that year that had not been made as feature films. That first list - many of which have been made since - can be viewed here. Since then the voter pool has grown to about 500 film executives, 60% of whom typically respond.

Over 200 Black List screenplays have been made as feature films. Those films have earned over $16BN in worldwide box office, have been nominated for 148 Academy Awards, and have won 25, including Best Pictures SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE and THE KING'S SPEECH and five of the last ten screenwriting Oscars. A complete list of Black List films is below.

Now they seem to have added a moneymaking side to it, where you can submit scripts for money. 

In October 2012, we extended our mission further by allowing screenwriters from the world to, for a small fee, upload their scripts to our database, have them evaluated by professional script readers, and subject to that evaluation and our recommendation algorithm, sent to our - at present - over 1000 film industry professionals. You can begin the process of being discovered here.

This is not the same as the Blacklist. This seems to be a script reading and evaluating service, using the Blacklist brand. There's nothing wrong with using a script reading service, especially if you don't have friends in the biz who can give you honest feedback. But it probably won't get you on the Blacklist. You get on the Blacklist by having your agent send your superb script around, and having development execs love it and send it around to their development exec friends. You can't buy that service.

I would be careful of any script reading and evaluating service that says it can help you break in. I would use a service to get good feedback so you can make your script better. I think the way to break in is still to query agents. 

Which Draft Do I Register?

Q. I am considering script consultants to look over my screenplay, and I noticed your services. Should one register their script with the WGA before sending it to any paid script consultants?

I don't recommend registering with the WGA. If you're going to register, do it with the Library of Congress. 

Q. Or, is this done after you have gotten notes and completed any changes you might make as a result of the notes?

No need to wait. No matter what changes you make to the script, it will likely retain many of the same characters, plot twists, scene order, chunks of dialog, etc., so that if someone poached a later draft, they would be using copyrighted material from the copyrighted draft. 

Though, in general, very few people poach scripts. Really, very, very few.

Jazzy new trailer for CONTRAST!

I'm pretty thrilled with the game. We got a slew of "Best" awards at E3. People seem to dig the story and the key game mechanic, where you can become your own shadow and run along the shadows on the walls.

If you're at PAX or Gamescom, check it out. Coming soon to a PS4 or PC near you!

Are Networks Buying Bibles?

I note that in 2006 you said no one writes/uses series bibles anymore and also went on about show runners, etc. In this day of so many cable networks, Netflix, etc., all competing for original content would you say that maybe that has changed? I had read a while back that Netflix was actively soliciting for more new content. I am wondering if all these competing networks may have opened the gates a little to let in and review new writers. I also want to ask if there are accomplished and well known show runners who may be looking for new things and how would we find them. 

I have written a series bible and a pilot episode with a professional writer who has done a lot for other writers, but has no screen credits. I am satisfied we have everything properly formatted.  

I have a connection with an agency through the family and have been told they would look at our screenplay when ready even though they do not work with unproven writers. I am preparing for an alternate course if they can not do anything for us.

First of all, you have an agency to go to, so that's a good first step. If they think they can sell your stuff, they'll take it on.

Yes, there are more networks looking for material. However, they generally still want an experienced showrunner attached to the material. Otherwise, who's going to run the show? They don't want to buy an idea, they want to buy an idea along with someone to execute.

I still don't think anyone buys bibles as such. That's because a bible is just a bunch of promises. To see if the show works, there has to be a pilot script. In certain cases (e.g. Canadian TV, animation), an experienced writer can sell a pitch and then get paid to write a pilot.

You have a pilot script, so if you get an agent, she can go out with it. If you sell it -- a long shot even for an experienced writer! -- they'll still put a showrunner they trust over your head. But you get a pretty decent payday even if all you do is share a Created By credit, and get royalties for each episode, and demand to be on staff.

How do you find a showrunner? Your agent approaches showrunners who have production companies, and who are looking for material. It's her job to know who these are.

It's going to be hard to approach showrunners without an agent. But you can try. Look up the credits for a show you like. Find out who the Executive Producers are. See if there's a production company associated with one of them. (Often there's an animated logo for the production company at the end of each episode.) Google that production company. Find out their contact info, and contact them.

Game Informer Shows Us The Love

(I'm particularly thrilled that they called out our story.)

Contrast (PS4, PS3, Xbox 360, PC)

Release: Fall 2013

What It Is: Compulsion Games' platformer/puzzle hybrid, where shadows paint your surfaces in a 3D world inspired by the film noir of the 1940s and the 1920s vaudeville theater scene.

Why You Should Care: One look at Contrast's visuals is enough to garner interest. Still, Contrast isn't looking like a one-trick pony. Not only does the gameplay look varied with the main character's 2D shadow ability being used in different ways such as to transport her around the 3D world, but the story, which focuses on a girl named Didi and her imaginary friend, Dawn, is more mature than you'd expect. It centers on Didi's strained relationship with her parents. This promising title could be the next indie darling, and so far it's looking anything but conventional. 

For more information, check out our preview.

Game Informer, "Eight Upcoming Under-the Radar Titles That Deserve Your Attention"

John Henry, Space Alien

Vulture.com has a really terrific New York Magazine piece interviewing Damon Lindelof about writing blockbusters. Lindelof has some interesting things to say about his work on WORLD WAR Z, where he took an over-the-top third act and brought it back to something human. One of the interesting things he says is that, if he'd been the previous writer, he would almost certainly have written an over-the-top third act, and he explains why. "

"It’s hard not to do it, especially because a movie, if properly executed, feels like it’s escalating ... Once you spend more than $100 million on a movie, you have to save the world. And when you start there, and basically say, I have to construct a MacGuffin based on if they shut off this, or they close this portal, or they deactivate this bomb, or they come up with this cure, it will save the world—you are very limited in terms of how you execute that. And in many ways, you can become a slave to it and, again, I make no excuses, I’m just saying you kind of have to start there.

“It sounds sort of hacky and defensive to say, [but it’s] almost inescapable,” he continues. “It’s almost impossible to, for example, not have a final set piece where the fate of the free world is at stake. You basically work your way backward and say, ‘Well, the Avengers aren’t going to save Guam, they’ve got to save the world.’ Did Star Trek Into Darkness need to have a gigantic starship crashing into San ­Francisco? I’ll never know. But it sure felt like it did."

Where it gets really interesting is when the interviewer proposes he Hollywood up the legend of John Henry, Steel Drivin' Man. Of course John Henry has to be childhood friends with the inventor of the steam hammer. Of course they have to be in love with the same woman. But if it's a blockbuster, there have to be stakes. What is John Henry driving the steel for? Lindelof starts small, but by the end of it -- say he's channeling Writer C in the eventual arbitration -- well, read the article.

Andrew O writes:

What are your thoughts on crowd sourcing and crowd funding, especially with regard to TV? Is it good, bad, the future of the industry? Are crowd funded Web series a good launching pad for TV writing careers? 

I'm curious because I'm working with some friends on the Web's first full length, multi-camera, shot in front of a live audience sitcom. We taped the pilot last month at a theater in Hollywood and we're getting ready to launch our fundraising campaign soon. Are we blazing a trail or trying to push a boulder up a hill only to watch it roll all the way down at the end?

"It's hard making predictions, especially about the future," said Yogi Berra. Time will tell if he was right. It's impossible to say whether crowd funding will be a flash in the pan (probably not) or the Next Big Thing (probably not). It is becoming clear what works well in crowd funding, though. If the principals are famous people, more citizens are likely to chip in money for their projects. If the designer of a well-loved computer game puts out a call for his passion project, he'll probably get money. After all, people want to play his game and they know he can execute. I think Felicia Day would be able to crowd fund a Guild Wars-like project easily enough.

It's harder for someone to crowdfund something that's a stretch for them. Jane Espenson was able to raise $60,000 for HUSBANDS; I think she could have raised more for something more Whedonesque.

If you're not a known quantity, then I think crowd funding becomes a more official way for you to hit up your friends for money. If you have a lot of rich friends, that could work.

You can crowdfund for other reasons than funding your project, though. You can crowdfund to prove to a distributor that there are people who want your movie. You can crowdfund to develop a cadre of supporters for the project who will talk it up on social media once it's made.

Regardless, crowdfunding is a huge amount of work. Count on spending a month prepping your Kickstarter, and then figure the month of your Kickstarter you are doing nothing but pushing your project on Kickstarter by any means necessary. So you're hoping you can raise more money doing than than you could, say, doing your day job.

As for crowd sourcing TV, I'm not even sure what that would mean. Are you looking for 1000 people to help you do punch up? I'm not sure how many good jokes you'll get. Writing talent and skill are rarer than many people realize. But why not? Try it and see.

UPDATE:

Thanks. Most of us are gung-ho about going all out and raising the funds to do at least two more full length episodes. But, a few people think we should hold back, put the pilot on the Web and see if we can build a following before going to Kickstarter or Indi-gogo.

Absolutely put the pilot up first. If it's a hit -- ideally if it goes viral -- then you start your crowdfunding with a bunch of people already interested in your show. If it's a flop, you can then decide not to spend a couple of months crowdfunding more of it.

As with most financing, the more you have, if it's good, the easier it is to get the rest.

Ah, the Intricacies of Co-Writing

Q. If I wrote a script, then invited a friend to come cowrite and fix it up, he changed everything, can I go back to my original and take it back? They were all my characters and concepts. He will not talk to me at all now. Is the script dead in the water or can I take it back? I registered it WGA after I wrote it. Then reregistered the second version with both our names on it. I do have proof the first one though was MINE. Help.

This is why people sign collaboration agreements:  to make clear what you're agreeing to when you collaborate.

In the absence of a paper agreement, the question is, what did you agree to orally, or what agreement was implied, by your collaboration?

If you don't use any of his stuff, I think you're technically, legally free to use your old material. However if any of his stuff has crept into the old stuff, then you can't. (I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice.)

Generally I would not agree to co-write with a friend unless we agreed that I was permanently attached to the project. Otherwise I stand to lose all my work if my friend changes his or her mind about my creative contributions. So I completely understand why your friend is pissed off.

Is the project really more important than the friendship? I would rather lose a project than a friend.

I would distinguish between comments and writing. If I give you notes, you're free to use them or not, and I don't gain any sort of ownership over the project. It's only when you ask me to start writing things that I would expect to be part of the project as it goes forward.

In Which I Am Interviewed by the WGAe

Justin Samuels called to ask me a slew of questions. His interview with me is up on the WGAe blog.

Two Sentence Horror Stories

I begin tucking him into bed and he tells me, “Daddy, check for monsters under my bed.” I look underneath for his amusement and see him, another him, under the bed, staring back at me quivering and whispering, “Daddy, there’s somebody on my bed.” 

From io9. More at AskReddit.

Now, you try.

Why We Pitch

I spent yesterday morning at the Fantasia Frontiėres Co-production Market listening to movie pitches, and pitching my own feature, Souvenir. There was a distinguished Polish director who told us that he couldn't pitch his movie because, as Antonioni told him, if you pitch your movie, you won't make it. I'm in the opposite camp. I think pitching is one of the most valuable creative tools in your toolkit. You can learn more about your own movie in a few hours of preparing a pitch and delivering it than you might learn in weeks staring at the outline. Prepping a pitch really forces you to think about what you want to promise the audience to get them to invest their time and money in your story. What goods are you promising to deliver? Then when you pitch it, the people you're pitching to immediately let you know if they're buying the goods. Then, you go home and rewrite, based on your pitch. As I write a story, I tend to focus on the linear aspects of the story: the plot, the revelation of the characters, the twists and turns towards the ending. I have to go back and make sure I'm taking my time with the emotion and the spectacle. In our case, they dug it. They laughed and clapped in all the right places. We're promising fast cars, a seductive djinni, and people dying in inventive, horrific ways, so we're right at home in Fantasia. Whether your script is finished or not, there's a lot to be said for pitching the hell out of it. If it's not finished, you'll know better what you want to write. If it is "finished" (if any script is ever finished until you shoot it), then you'll know better what to make sure you've written.

Basic Instinct

We re-watched BASIC INSTINCT, partly because I'm pitching an erotic horror movie at the Fantasia festival this week, and I'm hoping to sell glamor and seduction. I had not noticed how much of a tribute to Hitchcock the film is. There's Sharon Stone dressed up like Grace Kelly, but with less underwear, her hair tight and blonde. There are murderous women who look sort of like each other. There's a shot down a staircase. There's a shot of a woman in a rocking chair turned away from us. And there's the whole Bernard Herrman-esque thriller score.

I remember reading the script a while back. My memory is that Verhoeven shot Esterhas's script almost word for word -- oh, there was a rewrite, but nobody liked it. It is a tight, clever script. 

Older Intern?

Q. In CRAFTY TV WRITING, you say that working for a literary agent is the best way to learn about the industry without going to school. I would love to try this, but need to figure out how to get into an agency. Do you have any advice on how to approach getting a volunteer position to work for a literary agent?

I would say, call up agencies and ask if they could use a volunteer!

One thing that may complicate the situation is that I am not just starting out in life...I am a college instructor and a professional in a different field. I know they offer volunteer positions and internships for college kids, but I would not qualify for that type of situation. I just moved to LA, so am new to the area. I also have a lot of experience with writing and reading, so I think I have applicable skills, but I am confused as to how to get in there.

The recent lawsuit by the BLACK SWANS interns has complicated things. Used to be, anyone could offer to be an intern. Technically, interning is against minimum wage laws, but no one much paid attention to that, because everyone benefited from the system. Companies got free, if unskilled, work. Interns got to learn how to do things they didn't know how to do, like read scripts, or call agencies about actors. The BLACK SWAN interns sued, and won, because they were abused, or so I gather. The company had them doing pure office work that had nothing to do with learning showbiz, such as filing pay stubs. I think companies may now be more reluctant to hire non-students. There are actual laws, I gather, making it legal to hire students for free if it's plausibly part of their education. So some companies will have put in place protocols for hiring interns that may block non-students. On the other hand, other companies may still be happily taking all comers. Generally, smaller companies may be more willing to take on someone with no experience to do stuff for free, because they have less money. Also, in smaller companies, you will get to do more different stuff. Bottom line: call people and ask if they could use a hand.

Noah Bradley sez: Don't Go to Art School

Noah Bradley posts why you should not go to art school. Short version: it costs almost $250K to go to RISD. He recommends you spend $10K and do it yourself.

This mirrors what I've been saying about film school.

I have no idea what film school costs these days; when I went to UCLA, it cost a fraction of what a private MFA would cost; but you had to finance your own student films, which could get pricey,  back in the days of shooting on film.

I continue to believe that the best time to go to film school is after you've worked in the industry for a while, know exactly what you want to make, and have the friends to help you make it. If you're just coming in, get a job at an agency and figure out the biz first. Meanwhile, make films on your own. SAG and ACTRA will cut you a lot of slack if you have no budget.

I can't speak to the value of game design school. Friends of mine in games seem to think a liberal arts education is more useful:

"Don’t go to art school": http://t.co/iwpoC5SQO0 (This applies just as much to game design school, if not more so)
— Nels Anderson (@Nelsormensch) June 26, 2013

On the other hand, depending on what you're trying to do in games, I would imagine it's going to be easier to learn programming or animation with the help of a professor.

It depends also on what kind of person you are. If you're a great self-motivator, you may not need the structure (and you certainly don't need the debt). If you need a little praise, understanding and/or kicks in the pants, then school will give you that, and the walls of your bedroom will not. 

Mixed

Last night we did the sound mix for my new short film Winter Garden. I'm really stoked about Darren Fung's ssssmokin' crime jazz score. That man can write anything.

Now all we're waiting for is the titles and online session, and we're off to the races.

Online Writing Courses

A friend of the blog wrote in to tell me that Online Courses has a handy compendium of online writing courses, including one on screenwriting from UBC.

There have to be more, though, don't there?

Have any of you taken an online writing course, and was it helpful? On one hand, you don't meet your fellow students, so you don't form a "posse" of people you "come up" with. On the other hand, if you're not in a town full of writers, an online writing course may be the most straightforward way to get feedback from a teacher. 

Failure is an Orphan, Success is an Orphan Black

We're re-watching all the ORPHAN BLACK season 1 episodes. They are even cleverer and funnier the second time around. It take a clone show to take bedroom farce to the final frontier.

Orphan Black was developed for a time at the Canadian Film Centre, when Graeme Manson was showrunner-in-residence there in 2009. That means that Graeme brought in the show he'd been developing for half a dozen years already (with his writing partner John Fawcett), and the kids in the Prime Time program developed the show as if they were a for-hire writing room.

A roomful of CFC kids is not a roomful of veterans, obviously, but they are full of talent and ideas, and there's room to take risks -- you get to develop a whole season without worrying that if draft three of episode 2 does not satisfy the exec, the network will pull the plug on development. The series shows the benefits of the system. Many SF shows miss opportunities right and left until they hit their stride; Orphan Black takes those opportunities, whether for drama or pathos or humor.

And then, of course, there's Tatiana Maslany, who is such a chameleon in the show that you have to keep reminding you that the three totally different characters in the frame are all the same actress. I hope she gets her Emmy.

Take a Deep Breathe ...

It's easy to get caught up in the rush of production. It's important to step back from time to time and remind yourself why exactly you are doing this particular shot, or effect, or moment. It was not until I got out of the sound studio and into the Mexican burrito joint that I realized the direction I should have given to get exactly the result I wanted. But I was trying to be a good boy and not waste anybody's time.

I sometimes think that the reasons people put up with directors throwing fits over things not being perfectly the way they want, is because the alternative can be worse:  a director who makes his day but doesn't get the amazing moment because "this is as good as I'm gonna get."

There is no excuse for being a jerk for the sake of your ego. But you also get no prize for being a nice guy at the expense of the picture.

So take a deep breathe, and ask yourself if you've really got exactly what you were looking for, and remind yourself why you wanted this particular moment, or shot, or effect, and make sure you're getting exactly what you wanted. And if you're not, pushing a little bit might be called for.

E3 Roundup...

So, Contrast got some awards and nominations!

Update 2:  And Game Critics nomination for Best Downloadable.

Update:  And IGN "Best Indie of E3"!

EGM awards "Best Indie of E3"

Jeuxvideo.fr awards "Best Platformer of E3"

GamerCast awards "Best Platformer of E3"

GameFront nomination for "Best of E3" (All Categories)

Worth Playing nomination for "Best of E3" (All Categories)
Game Informer ranks Contrast as "Outstanding"

And Tara Long on Revision3 picked us as best of show on Day 2.

Yay us!

The Democratization of Talent

The Times has a piece about fans who re-edit their favorite series. In the cases quoted, it seems to be mostly to put out-of-order series like LOST into chronological order. But the possibilities are intriguing. It reminds me of Mike J. Nichols's The Phantom Edit, a famous remix of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. That trimmed a lot of Jar Jar Binks and tried to make more sense of the story in general, prompting Salon to say "Materialized from out of nowhere was a good film that had been hidden inside the disappointing original one."

Nobody predicted "remix culture," not even John Brunner. No one knew that out in Santa Clarita there was an editor with an arguably better story sense than George Lucas. When Robert Rodriguez made El Mariachi for $9,000 in 1992, it was considered incredible that someone could make a good movie for nothing out in the middle of Texas. Now YouTube and free editing software have unleashed the creative potential of a hundred or a thousand times as many people as actually work in the biz. Used to be, if you wanted to tell stories, you would pretty much write a novel or a script and then show it to your bartender. Now you can make a film and get total strangers to see it.

I keep harping on this because I think we're just at the beginning. Right now there's elementary editing software that will stabilize your shots and give you an optical zoom and make the whole thing look like an Instagram. I think that's like the first word processors that allowed you to cut and paste. Later the software is going to help you build Gangnam Style on your Mac.

This could, in a little while, make it less necessary to go live in LA. Why suffer in LA when you can suffer at home? Come to LA when you've got 250,000 views on YouTube. Then they have to talk to you. Right?

My friend Jill Golick just got her web series Ruby Skye, P.I., picked up by the CBC. She's been making this series on the web for years, winning all sorts of writing awards and web awards. It is very easy for a network to pick up a web series. They don't have to guess what the writing will be like, or the tone, or the cast. They can just watch it and decide, "yes, please."

Because so many people will be out there making their own stuff without the benefit of going to film school, some of them will come up with storytelling styles that nobody in Hollywood is coming up with. I'm excited.

I'm excited.

Want to Know Your Opening Weekend?

How many people are searching for your trailer on Google?

A whitepaper released today by the search giant’s Think Insights group called “Quantifying Movie Magic with Google Search” reveals that trailer-related searches done four weeks before a film’s premier can be used to determine opening weekend revenue. According to the paper, coupling that “key leading indicator” with the current movie season and a film’s “franchise status” — a metric that evaluates whether a movie is part of a top-tier franchise like James Bond films, or a “midnight” blockbuster like a Twilight film — can predict the box office take with 94 percent accuracy.

 Oh, Google, is there anything you don't know?

101 Best Written Shows

The WGA has posted its list of the best written tv shows evar, starting with SOPRANOS and SEINFELD and running the gamut from I LOVE LUCY to 30 ROCK.

If you haven't seen the older ones, you might want to check'em out, in case they come up in a conversation.

Proof Crowdfunding Works

Apparently you can crowdfund an indie Canadian movie. Catch: it has to star the Mayor of Toronto.

Arrested Development: Made for DVR

Farhad Manjoo writes in Slate that ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT was ahead of its time in a specific way:  it was so jam-packed with jokes that flitted across the screen, and foreshadowings of bizarre events, that audiences can only appreciate it in its full glory on a DVR. But the show came out before many people had DVRs. Now 46% of the audience does.

Some of Arrested Development’s best jokes are on screen for just a few seconds—quick shots of yearbook quotes or Tobias’ blue handprints. (Arrested Development owes a huge debt to The Simpsons here, a show in which every bit of on-screen text is a joke that can to be decoded by freeze frame.) The show is also obsessed with continuity. “We wanted the rules of the world to be consistent,” Hurwitz said during a recent conference call with journalists. “If somebody smashed a hole in the wall, we wanted that hole there the next week. People who ended up seeing it back-to-back really got a distilled sense of that.”

... Once the show was issued on DVD, new audiences could finally see the show as a self-referential, endlessly rewatchable whole. And once they did so, people noticed something amazing—they could watch each episode a second, third, or fourth time and keep seeing new stuff. For example, it turns out the show was subtly foreshadowing Buster’s missing hand long before that tragic seal attack, and it was constantly dropping hints about Annyong’s planned revenge on the Bluths. Also, Tobias was probably an albino black man.

Canada Takes Care of Its Own

Just a shout out to Danielle Bélanger and Danny Lennon, who put together the terrific Not Short on Talent program at Cannes this year. You guys really opened the door for us. And no country outside Canada gave their emerging filmmakers a similar showcase at the market.

I had an interesting chat with Carole Brabant about Telefilm's evolving mandate. (Classic Cannes sentence:  back home, I don't tend to bump into Carole Brabant.) The agency seems to be moving out of development and aiming more to help market films that are already made. As a writer this is bad for me, but marketing has long been where the Canadian film industry drops dead. If fewer films get developed but more get adequately marketed, perhaps the anglophone side of the Canadian feature biz can break out of its ghetto.

A boy can dream, can't he?

A Pirate's Life For Me

Faithful Reader Shaula E sent me a link to a Ryerson School of Media "Report on Canadian Screenwriters" by professors Michael Coutanche and Charles Davis.

The report comes from a survey of WGC members, so it doesn't address non-Guild writers. These tend to be younger, less experienced writers. As you work in the biz, you tend to join the Guild and stay in the Guild; you don't hear of a lot of people quitting the Guild. However, it also doesn't include directors who also write, but count on the DGC to protect them. And it doesn't include a few cats I know who write mostly for overseas production companies, whose work the Guild wouldn't cover anyway.

Most of the conclusions seem about right.

1. Most WGC members have at least ten years of experience.
2. Only a little over half of professional WGC writers make all their living from writing

3. Writers make the most money in their forties. Income from screenwriting tends to drop in the 50's, and plunge in the 60's. I can confirm that I know very few working sixty-year-old writers. You would think that people become better writers the longer they write. Quite a number of older writers complain of age discrimination, but I'm not sure. They may become more subtle writers when the world is looking for a fart joke; it's hard to write a movie in which the hero slaughters dozens of "guards" after you've changed your first thousand diapers. Or they may not like the hours a TV writer works, and go into the relatively less lucrative field of feature writing. Or they want control over their work, and turn to novel writing. Or they get fed up with chasing after jobs, and become full time professors and part time writers. Or, hell, they become directors.
4. Not a lot of minority writers in Canada, and they are making not a lot of money.
5. Not that many woman writers, either, and they're not making as much as the boys.

Half of the biz is in Toronto. Considering that almost all the American biz is in LA, that figure is actually pretty low.

About half of older writers mentor.

Consider becoming a pirate, for greater longevity and job security.

Cannes, Day 5

The best films I've seen at Cannes have been Canadian shorts. I actually did get to see a bit of Joss Whedon's MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING. You know the story behind it, right? Joss has been having actor friends over to his house to read Shakespeare for some time. He had an empty month in his schedule after THE AVENGERS, and rather than going somewhere on vacation, he just decided to shoot a Shakespeare play, in black and white, in modern dress, at his house.

It's a very nice house. And it's fun to see Amy Acker (from DOLLHOUSE and ANGEL and CABIN IN THE WOODS) and Fran Kranz (ditto) and the other usual suspects performing Shakespeare. But Joss Whedon is not an outstanding film director. He's an outstanding storyteller and dialoguist. The problem is that here he's filming Shakespeare's story and dialogue. Though he keeps the visuals interesting and gives the actors interesting things to do amid all that dialog, he just doesn't bring enough to it to make it new.

Or so the buyers seemed to feel. The folks at the desk were holding back hordes of Joss fans with badges, hoping to save seats for actual buyers. By the time I got to the theater, maybe eight minute in, the place was almost empty; and it was not a big theater.

Possibly the most inventive film I've seen here is Chris Landreth's animated 3D film SUBCONSCIOUS PASSWORD, in which C'thulhu, James Joyce, Ayn Rand and Chris's childhood babysitter, among others, try to help Chris remember the name of the guy who seems to know him at the party.



 I was also terribly fond of Monica Sauer's whimsical silent THE PROVIDER, about a woman musher who needs a man to provide food for her huskies; and I dug Mark Slutsky's THE DECELERATORS, a parable about a group of kids who want to freeze time so they can stay in their favorite moments. Monia Chokri's QUELQU'UN D'EXTRAORDINAIRE (en français) tells the story of a not-so-young-anymore woman experiencing a surprising moment at the end of a day that starts badly and then goes to Hell in a handbasket. And Elise de Blois has a really clever and funny story called FOU, RIEN PIS PERSONNE.

I haven't seen all the Canuck shorts yet; I'll try to catch more tomorrow. It was interesting to see on the Cannes program that only Canada and Quebec are providing screenings in the market for their shorts. Cannes has a festival program of shorts, of course, and I know the American Pavilion is holding a screening of student work in their tent; but only Canada and Québec (separate pavilions, of course) are helping their filmmakers this way.

But what's really incredible is the wide variety of technique and style and story and theme in the shorts. A narrative feature has a lot of restrictions on it. A short isn't going to make money anyway, so you can do anything you want; and the audience will tolerate more elliptical story telling over the course of ten minutes than they will for ninety. So you're free to execute on your extraordinary vision. And these guys have.