Tuesday, May 05, 2009

New Issue Of Script Magazine - Star Trek, Terminator



Here's what's inside:

Interview: Bob Peterson and Pete Docter Elevate the Art of Story Telling With Up
It’s a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. No, not Russia -- Pixar! Writer Bob Peterson and director Pete Docter sit down to discuss the studio’s next feature, Up, and explain how the brand’s unique story process works.

Man Versus Machine Terminator Salvation
Skynet has become self-aware, Judgment Day has come, and Earth as we know it has been obliterated in a nuclear holocaust ... now what? Writers John Brancato and Michael Ferris pick up the story and switch gears in hopes that Salvation will uphold the Terminator franchise's legacy.

Writers on Writing: Land of the Lost
Sure, futuristic aliens stood alongside prehistoric dinosaurs, but that’s what made Land of the Lost a mid-70s’ Saturday morning staple. Scribes Chris Henchy and Dennis McNicholas recount how they updated the familiar weirdness in their big-screen adaptation.

Living Longer and Prospering: Crafting the new Star Trek
Dyed-in-the-wool Trekker Roberto Orci and passionate fan Alex Kurtzman were nonetheless surprised that the first adventures of the original Star Trek team had never been dramatized. Here, the writing and producing team talks about why and how they took on that challenge with a little help from two original cast members and one slightly warped timeline.

The Best is About to Get Better
As we approach the long-awaited release of Final Draft version 8, the Final Draft, Inc. Product Usability Team offers their impressions, assessments and expectations for the upgrade.

The Ultimate Writer's Workspace Giveaway
We’ve been stocking up on over $8,500 worth of essential screenwriting gear with the intent of handing it all over to you -- if you can prove that you deserve it. Take a look at all that’s included in our ultimate writer’s workspace and enter for your chance at the prize.

Reality Bites: Writers Get Clever
What can drama writers learn from reality television? Phil Gladwin examines the story of the late Jade Goody and ponders how reality serves writers in a world obsessed with voyeurism.

I *Heart* Unsympathetic Protags
Who says that every protagonist must be sympathetic? Just about everyone. Mystery Man, however, explores the possibilities of the unsympathetic protagonist and argues that audiences don’t need to feel for a character in order for the story to be successful.

ProdCo Spotlight: Radical Publishing
Barry Levine turned his cinematic approach to rock ‘n’ roll photography toward the animated world of graphic novels. In the midst of successful graphic novels turned box-office hits, he formed Radical Publishing -- a company focused on creating premium comic-book products that will eventually land on the big screen.

New Media: Anytime Creativity Strikes
When the writers strike left Bob Kushell and Russell Arch with an unfamiliar abundance of free time, they resorted to producing a five-minute Web talk show out of Arch‘s garage. The result, Anytime With Bob Kushell, proves that people like their talk any way they can get it.

Independents: Anatomy of An Action Scene, Part 1
What’s the point of action in a film? Should you even include it in your screenplay? Using Casino Royale and Hellboy II, William Martell explains how and why action scenes should do more for characters than beat them to a pulp.

Good Examples: Jonathan Nolan on The Dark Knight
By now the shattering performances by Christian Bale and the late Heath Ledger have become synonymous with the success of The Dark Knight. But the seriousness of purpose with which its screenwriters crafted the script was key to the film’s triumph. Writer Jonathan Nolan recalls what went into the landmark screenplay.

For more info: Script Magazine

To subscribe (though Amazon): Subscribe To Script!

Classes On CD On Sale!

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Writing For Toys and STAR TREK & STAR WARS.
Yesterday’s Dinner: Patty Melt.
Bicycle: Rode a little yesterday and a lot on Sunday... over 9 miles on Sunday! Not a record, but a record for Fat Bill.

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Pretty Scary Stuff!

I have been working my butt off to create some new material for my class on Horror and Thriller screenwriting on Sunday. Tuesday I wrote 10 single spaced pages on Contained Thrillers (5,327 words), and Wednesday I was a slacker and only wrote 2,234 words on Creative Kills for the horror half. Thursday I'll do more on the horror half and hopefully a piece on Paranoia Thrillers. I've also been watching a stack of horror films, both old and new.

The Sunday Class - Info!

Sometimes people ask why a guy with a bunch of produced thriller and action films is teaching a class on horror... and aside from having written a bunch of horror scripts that almost got made - including a horror movie for *Lifetime* - when I first moved to Los Angeles a couple of friends of mine and I produced a series called THE DEAD BEAT (hey, I came up with that title!) that was kind of the Entertainment Tonight of Horror Movies. My friends would drive down from the Bay Area and crash at my apartment and then we'd go out and shoot interviews all day for a few days, they'd go back and edit them and then when the Fangoria Horror Movie Convention came to town they'd be crashing at my apartment and we'd sell the tapes at the show. After spending three days at Fango a little over a week ago with one of the guys - Rod - and he e-mailed me a link to this Behind The Scenes of the Dead Beat Videozine from 1992! Shot by one of Rod's friends from the crew, which is why he's the star (beard and ponytail then, now... bald). I have horror stories about shooting these...



I was so much thinner then! Did you see Frank Darabont? My old apartment was in there, too (PSYCHO poster) - we'd sometimes shoot interviews there, and Jeff Combs (RE-ANIMATOR) almost died in my office chair when he leaned back in it and it snapped... and he slammed onto the floor! But we had some of that green reanimation fluid and injected him and....

- Bill

PS: I missed free chicken two days in a row! On Monday, I biked past a KFC and there was no one there, but when I biked back at dinner time - the line was halfway down Lankershim! Pretty much the same story with Pollo Loco on Tuesday, except when I went back at 8pm... they'd stopped giving away chicken. Pisser! I ate there anyway. Wednesday was 31 cent ice cream day at Baskin Robbins... and I got my ice cream!

Monday, April 27, 2009

Battle For Terra... in 3D!

My friend Keith has a movie opening Friday in 3D - an animated sci-fi action film. I was walking through the Arclight Hollywood... and there was the poster! Cool! Animated films are almost all from Disney or Dreamworks these days, Keith is an indie producer who put this film together outside the system and landed a big 3D release through LionsGate. Here's the trailer for the film...



If that looks interesting to you, catch it on opening weekend so that they can keep it in cinemas. The real battle is for *cinema screens* - if and indie film isn't filling seats they're just going to give that screen to 5FAST 5FURIOUS. Same with family entertainment and entertainment aimed at people over 25.

And this is in *Real 3D*, not that crummy kind like DR. TONGUE'S 3D HOUSE OF STEWARDESSES.

- Bill

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Movie Business Is Booming

From an AP story...

Studios head into summer on a box-office tear, with receipts running at a record pace. Revenues for the year are at $3.06 billion, up 17.4 percent over last year. Factoring in higher ticket prices, movie attendance is up 15.7 percent.

"We have never been in this strong a position heading into the summer season, ever," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of Media By Numbers.


And there was a fear that 2009 would be a bust due to the Writer's Strike and potential SAG strike creating a shortage of films... and then the economy going south. Instead, we are in a record year.

But movies aimed exclusively at an adult audience seem to be tanking - SOLOIST opened at #4 this weekend. There was an article in the Hollywood Reporter about this a week ago, and here's another with much of the same information but with an interesting solution to the problem...

Should Paul Walker be getting $20m a film and should Russell Crowe be paid $2m?

The 15-25 audience is driving the higher ticket sales and box office... or maybe it's just pure escapism. People are not seeing movies designed for "adults".

Screenwriters often complain that they don't make quality movies any more - but they *do* seem to be making quality movies... but very few people seem to want to see them. If you don't support quality movies, they will make fewer and fewer of them... until the only thing left with be 7FAST 7FURIOUS and OBSESSED 3.

- Bill


Classes On CD On Sale!

IMPORTANT UPDATE:


Yesterday’s Dinner: Teriyaki chicken.
Movies: I have seen a whole bunch of movies and am waaaay behind on my reportage of them... but I did see SOLOIST last night... and the new OSS 117 movie the night before.
DVDs: I've been watching a stack of horror movies for my class on Sunday, including...

SPLINTER (2008) - Really good low budget film, probably the only time I have ever been in suspense over a thermometer reading.

City couple are going on a camping trip. He's a complete nerd botanist, she's hot. For being a guy who knows *everything* about nature, he doesn't like being outside. As soon as he screws up pitching the tent, he begs his gf to go to a motel instead. While they are driving to the motel - she's driving, he doesn't know how to work a stick - they stop for a woman hitchhiker... who has an armed and wanted boyfriend. Now they're hostages in their own SUV... which hits something on the road. A porcupine or something, It punctures the tire. While wanted guy and our leading lady fix the tire, the slightly crazy bad girl and the nerd go to bury the porcupine... which is not a porcupine. And ain't quite dead. She shoots the thing, and they take off in the SUV in a panic.

The SUV overheats, and they pull into a gas station... which is deserted. Except for the dead guy in the bathroom who seems to be half service station attendant - half porcupine.... oh, and mangled up, so he's kind of like The Thing from the Carpenter movie. Once this thing attacks, the crazy bad girl seems to be dead, the other three are trapped in the gas station/mini mart. This thing - you can cut it up and it uses it's spikes to reconnect, not necessarily in the same way the human was. A parasite that just uses the host body to get around. Oh, and the hosts grow porcupine spikes. Go out and rescue the bad girl, see if she's okay?

The film milks being trapped really well, and the wanted guy is a double threat: a violent guy with a gun... and the first porcupine thing pricked his finger, so he's trying to keep his change a secret...

The effects are pretty good, there's an early crawling hand that is kind of silly and gross at the same time, which works because they don't take it as seriously as they should. A later arm is okay, but the really messed up thing-like creatures are the best. Arms and legs twisted around and heads hanging loose and just messed up looking and dribbling black-red blood. Builds some real suspense and manages to turn a gas station mini mart into a series of locations, from the counter to the beer cooler.

You see so many of these low budget movies that look like crap, or are just filler material for 60 minutes and then 20 minutes of chase/kills. This one at least keeps things happening all of the time - whether it's a criminal with a gun and a hostage situation or those things outside the gas station. And from the start it has good lighting and some nice dolly shots (moving camera).

Shot well, acted well, good creatures, good dramatic situations with a gun or two, good twists.... One of the better low budget things I've seen.

MURDER PARTY (2007) - Much less impressive. Technically okay, but kind of blandly shot. The story tries to rely on laughs to pad it out, but just isn't funny. On Halloween, New York parking enforcement guy finds invitation to a "Murder Party" on the street, so he makes a costume and goes... to an abandoned warehouse. Where a bunch of artists tie him to a chair and then talk for 60 minutes about the nature of art and other crap while they prepare to kill him. As an art project. The mildly amusing thing is that the artists die one-by-one in crazy accidents while waiting to kill our tied up victim. After an hour of talk, one artist goes crazy after his art has been insulted by the others and starts chasing and killing people for 20 minutes.

It was mildly amusing for those 60 minutes of talk - but often seemed kind of improvised: the things that were supposed to be funny were almost funny, like they needed a little more work or thought. But most of the first 60 is that guy in the silly costume chained to a chair while everyone gabs about art, and why their art is important enough for a grant. We had all of these weapons scattered around, and people get killed by allergic reactions! Kinda of amusing - but not laugh outloud funny and a boring way to die. Even the guy who gets drunk and accidentally sets himself of fire happens mostly off camera (probably couldn't afford the stunt). Then, at like 60 minutes, everybody else gets shot - bang, bang, bang... boring! But at least that sets the chase into motion, which was exciting.

The pacing thing kills a lot of low budget movies. I know a guy who has made two awful horror flicks, and when I read the scripts the first thing I told him is that you can't have 60-70 pages of people talking and then bunch up all of the action at the end. On both scripts, he ignored my notes... and it's hard to make it through the films. Hard to wait for 60 minutes for something to happen. You need that "regular heartbeat" of pacing. You need to keep things happening, not stall to kill time... before the killing time.

MURDER PARTY seemed like a hybrid horror and mumblecore film. Was trying to say something about art, but I didn't get it.

- Bill

Friday, April 24, 2009

Sex Lessons

When I was young and impressionable, I watched a movie called KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE made by three crazy guys. At the time, I was making parody films on super 8mm film - everything from movie parodies (NIGHT OF THE LIVING LIFE INSURANCE SALESMEN - You're In Evil Hands! to FISTFUL OF MOZZARELLA - FOR A FEW PIZZAS MORE) and these guys were doing the same kind of stuff with better focus and an actual crew on 35mm... and getting *paid* for it! I wanted to be them!

Here is their lesson on sex...


A good way to start the weekend.

- Bill

Classes On CD On Sale!


IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Bad Guy Leads & THE DRIVER.
Yesterday’s Dinner: Del Taco #6 combo.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Ocean's 11 Remake!

They are already remaking OCEANS 11... again! First time was with Sinatra and the Rat Pack, then Clooney and his pals, now they're aiming at a younger audience...



- Bill

OSS 117: CAIRO - NEST OF SPIES!

I saw this film last year, and reviewed it here, and now there is a sequel that takes place in Rio... and I'm seeing it tomorrow night!



Here's the sequel trailer... in French... No subtitles.



I hope it's as funny as the first one.

-Bill

Classes On CD On Sale!
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Adaptation and, you know, adapting books into screenplays.
Yesterday’s Dinner: Chicken Caesar salad.
Last night I was on... Screentalk Radio.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Two Scenes Of Gundown Execution

Most of my movies are best enjoyed after drinking at least a 6 pack of beer. No matter how hard I work to make the script clever and interesting and explore interesting characters involved in making critical decisions that will haunt them forever... they end up being turned into knuckle headed action films that often don’t make any sense. This is my favorite review from a movie that may have began with my screenplay and turned into... Well, this review from some fan site explains everything:

I watched this movie last night and it is really disappointing. First i didnot understand the fact that even Seagal played in high budget movies and in this one he is at position of screenplay director there are two scenes of gundown execution, really bad performed, where shooter is firing at least one meter right or left from victim, pointless. I mean everybody have or should have paintball and other technology for filming these scenes so its no need for this. Despite all brilliant acting and fighting of main actor this is a really cheap movie. The time is set in present but they used sr-71 Blackbird spy plane shots from 1st gulf war and you can see in background airports cars from those days. Then big mistake is when admiral orders attack from the air and 4 light blue (navy) f-15s bombers take off from aircraft carrier and few minutes later they appear like 4 f-16s in yellow colour. That is also very bad cause they are not even similar cause f-16s have 1 tail (backwing) and f-15s or f-14s two. In those scenes all planes are from archive footages and videos like in old Chuck Norris movies. But in that time that was new for audience. Anyway f-16s do not ever take off from carriers cause they are not navy planes and they are to heavy.

This whole movie is a remake of Black Thunder (1998) and in one scene when the plane that is all about is become invisible even from human eye it is like they are stole that scene from remake because it is not completely unseen its like a camouflage (like in Predator) almost unseen and its look like there is no shape of f-117, but more alike f-1 bmirage (French fighter jet). And also at the end battle the pilot of f-16 chasing Seagal in f117 is saying the exact word from original movie (I do not need to see you cause i know where you are) Next, in scene when f-16 is chasing a new project prototype there are several shots of several different planes in scene. In first there is a blue f-16, in second it has a green colour but only two sidewinder rockets on the ends of wings, and in the third scene there is a grey plane with much more projectiles and fuel tanks under the hull. And at last, the scene when three US commandos armed with small machineguns and i think that third one had two pistols shooting WITHOUT any grounds cover almost wiped-out 3 times more terrorists who are surrounding them from all directions with AKs with wall pillars covers, which is even in theory impossible. Even the terrorists were kids, they sholdnot have so many dead among them, no, not on that range. Also lesbian scene between US girl (Ciera Payton) (good acting in first time in movie, in face she looks like a pornstar, i am not kidding) and terrorist girl is GREAT with Seagal (John) in "like to watch" business.


There you go folks! Doesn’t that make you want to put it your NetFlix cue just to help you understand what the heck the guy was talking about?

Don’t.

- Bill

Thursday, April 16, 2009

This Will Make You Happy

Yesterday was tax day, and now it's the time on Sprockets when we dance...



- Bill

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Top Five Worst Movie Quotes To Utter During Sex

You could probably use a laugh today, because it's April 15th...

I subscribe to the Top 5 List, and get comedy in my e-mail box every day for a low, reasonable, price. Probably less than a penny per laugh. Here is a great sample of the funny stuff that meshes with our wonderful world of movies...

============================================
C L U B T O P 5
Now appearing with Celine Dion in Las Vegas!
============================================

From April 15, 2003

The Top 16 Worst Movie Quotes to Utter During Sex

16> "Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night!"

15> "All I wanna do is go the distance."

14> "I know what you're thinking. Did he fire six shots or only five? Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement, I've kinda lost track myself."

13> "It's not a tumor!"

12> "I feel the need... the need for speed."

11> "It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told."

10> "My sister! My daughter! My sister! My daughter!"

9> "Say 'hello' to my little friend."

8> "At that speed, will you be able to pull out in time?"

7> "We're gonna need some more FBI guys, I guess."

6> "I can't hold 'er anymore, Cap'n!"

5> "And I thought they smelled bad on the outside."

4> "I call him 'Mini-Me.'"

3> "We wants it, we needs it. Must have the precious."

2> "Look, man, I ain't fallin' for no banana in my tailpipe!"

and Topfive.com's Number 1 Worst Movies Quote to Utter During Sex...

1> "That'll do, pig."

To subscribe, go here:
The Top 5 List www.topfive.com

[ Copyright 2003 by Chris White ]

Chris White is a screenwriter, by the way. So, if you are a producer, after you sign up for Top 5, you should buy one of his comedy scripts.

- Bill

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Miley Cyrus - Is This The End Of The World?

The number one film over the weekend was Disney's new HANNAH MONTANA movie, but is this the beginning of the end? Here, experts discuss the real issues our world faces due to this Miley Cyrus movie... and the others that will come.



- Bill

Friday, April 10, 2009

Book 'Em Danno!

A couple of days ago I was poking around on the rewrite of the action book - I'm making progress, but it's slow. I have so many things going on that the book projects keep getting pushed aside. Yesterday's blog entry mentioned the story board panel I used as a cover illustration, and yesterday someone posted on my website messageboards that a copy had popped up on e-bay:

EBAY COPY:


And I thought, I should put up an image of my book on that blog entry so that you can *see* the storyboard panel I was talking about. But, not that ratty e-bay image. So I went to Amazon... where there are three people selling copies of my book for over $100!

Pisser is - I don't make a cent on any of these re-sales! It's like selling your 68 Mustang to somebody when it was just an old used car... and years later you discover the person you sold it to has now sold it to a collector for $50,000. Dang! Should have held onto it!

AMAZON COPIES:



Even that e-bay copy is selling for more than the cover price, and it's actually kind of a deal (even though it's in crappy condition) because the *words* are all still there. I own a whole bunch of used books, some have since fallen apart and are held together by rubber bands, but I can still read the words. Many of my Parker novels are screwed up - I bought them used, and instead of preserving them so that I could sell them to some collector, I read and reread them until the binding wore out and the glue keeping the pages in place failed. Rubber bands to the rescue!

I have books I bought in high school, in junior high... and probably some I bought in the 6th grade. What's the oldest book you own?

- Bill

PS: Check out this Great Screenwriting Job!

Thursday, April 09, 2009

Bill On The Radio Again

So I was on the Screenwriter's Utopia radio show Wednesday night, with special guest Max Adams. I talked a bit about introducing your lead character, then they introduced Max and spent the last half hour interviewing her. Max managed to win the Nicholl and the Austin screenwriting contest in the same year (like, weeks apart) with two different scripts. That's how you know you're a good writer - you have two different scripts each win one of the top contests!

Here's a link to the podcast...

Utopia Podcast.

Hmm, maybe I should get me one of them radio shows....

- Bill

Wednesday, April 08, 2009

The Tenant... Remake!

So I found out a while back that they are remaking one of my favorite films, THE TENANT. Michael Bay is producing. This seems like such an unlikely movie to remake because the first time around it didn’t burn up the box office - it’s kind of a cult film - and even though it’s based on a novel, it’s success is mostly due to its director, Roman Polanski. (Hey, didn’t Bill do a post on that guy a week ago, and that CHINATOWN film he directed?)

I am a fan of Polanski - not his criminal activities, but his film direction. This guy has a real style that can make the most normal scene into something creepy. It takes a while for the plot to kick in on ROSEMARY’S BABY, but you know from the start that something is very wrong because of the way Polanski shoots things. There’s a scene in ROSEMARY where the camera is looking through a door frame, and the subject is just off camera - you can see her legs, but her face only if she leans forward. And as a viewer you try to lean forward to get a better view. He loves to have the camera slightly tilted in scenes - not enough for you to notice, but enough for you to feel like something is wrong. And he does a strange thing in THE TENANT by building a room and furniture just a little bit larger than normal for a shot - so you don’t consciously notice the difference, but get the feeling that the protagonist is smaller than he was a minute ago. Not smaller in stature as much as smaller as a person. Polanski does all of this crazy stuff to make his films creepy and odd, and it’s usually not the *plot* that makes one of his films stand out as much as it’s the way he shoots and edits and the strange little moments. THE TENANT is an amazing collection of creepy moments shot in a creepy way, with a story that is also kind of creepy.

The story is kind of what would happen if Woody Allen wrote a haunted house movie. There is a serious housing shortage in Paris, and our hero Trelkovsky comes up with a great method for finding an apartment... he looks through the obituaries. When he reads a news story about a woman who tried to commit suicide by jumping out her apartment window and is not expected to live, he figures he’s found a place to live. He goes to the building, where he meets the manager (Shelly Winters) and the building owner who lives there (Melvin Douglas) and they give him the third degree. They are really picky about who they rent to. Of course, they can’t rent him the apartment until the last tenant dies. He goes to visit the last tenant, Simone Schull, at the hospital... to see how close to dying she is. He wants this apartment!

There he meets Simone’s hot friend Stella (Isabelle Adjani who was Warren Beatty’s girlfriend at the time), and he has to pretend he knew Simone. When he flirts with this girl, completely out of his league, she flirts back - they have poor Simone in common. At Simone’s bedside in the hospital - she is covered head to toe in bandages with only her eyes and mouth exposed - Simone takes one look at Trelkovsky, screams, and dies. He has his apartment!

But the apartment is, well, strange. First - all of Simone’s clothes and belongings are there. And everyone from the guy at the corner store to the local restaurant confuses him with Simon Schull - even though she was a woman and he is a man... and they don’t look a bit alike. Soon his life has gone to hell...

Here's the Trailer:


One of the cool things in the film is the use of the Luma Crane - first time it was used on a film. This device is an "arm" the camera goes on that can pan and tilt, allowing the camera to do all kinds of cool things. It's used in the opening title sequence, which has some similarities to Hitchcock's REAR WINDOW opening titles, in fact - the film is kind of like REAR WINDOW on acid...



What right does my head have to call itself me?



Filthy little brat!



Those wacky neighbors! This scene, near the end of the film, actually makes complete sense by this point in the film... The movie does a great job of making the crazy seem so normal, that we understand why he's wearing a dress and make up.



Now, can you imagine the mainstream version of this film aimed at the 15-25 year old demographic? If someone in that demo came to see this, thinking it was going to be a horror movie like FRIDAY THE 13th, what would they think?

The good news about the remake is that they have the amazing Scott Kosar scripting. He wrote THE MACHINIST, which has some similarities. Of all the screenwriters working in the biz today, he's the perfect match for this story... but who the hell will they get to direct it? And how will they sell something this weird to a mainstream audience?

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Great Character Introductions and those PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN.
Yesterday’s Dinner: Popeye's Chicken - more grease! But *great* biscuits!
Pages: One scene on the Country-Western script, and I'd hoped to do three. But progress is progress.

Tuesday, April 07, 2009

Remakes

Remake Fever Strikes Hollywood - Spec scripts are dead!

Last year there were only 88 spec script sales, this year?

- Bill

What's Going On?

(I love that Marvin Gaye song)

So, it’s been a while since I’ve posted about my remake project, and I have a good excuse.... I didn’t know what was going on. That’s frustrating.

The last news I got was at the FRIDAY THE 13th premiere when I ran into the producer and asked him how it was going and he said, “Fine.” The producer on the project isn’t the kind of guy to just call to see how you are doing. He’s a busy man, making deals and putting together film projects. People often mistake being busy with being rude - the producer is actually a really nice guy. A friendly guy. I like him. I like working with him. He just has a bunch of things going on at the same time and must focus on what is important *right now*. My writing is over, it is no longer important. Remember this when you don't get that instant return phone call on your project. I also bumped into the company’s head of production that night, and he gave me the details - the script had gone out to some places and everybody loved it. A director they like had read it and would be interested if there was a star attached, so the next step was to get it out to some talent.

But not the star we originally wanted. When I began writing the script, there was an actor that everybody loved - including me - who would have just been perfect for the role and would have brought attitude to the part. He had been playing sidekick type roles in movies, and stealing the show. One of those guys who wasn’t the star, but may have actually been the main reason why you went to see the movie - this guy was great. While writing the script, I tried to make sure it would work for this actor... though not be dependant on him. What if he was too busy playing sidekicks in other movies to star in ours and we had to get someone else? Always a bad idea to tailor a role to an actor you haven’t signed. I remember back on TREACHEROUS doing drafts for every star the script went out to... and we *did* land Mickey Rourke based on the boxing draft... but when Hemdale went bankrupt we lost Rourke and I was back to writing drafts for other actors... most of which we did not sign. That's a lot of rewriting for nothing!

But if this remake project’s lead character could sound *close* to the sidekick guy’s voice and yet still be a fully formed character that any other actor could play? That was the goal. Except, by the time I wrote FADE OUT, someone else had realized the value of this sidekick actor and gave him a lead... in a film that was successful enough that he was now a star and his agent had booked him in as many films as he could while the iron was hot. He was now unavailable for the near future.

So, someone else would play the lead.

Now, here is the problem with casting the star of a movie - all stars are equal in the eyes of a producer. That is, they are more concerned with the star power and less concerned with the actor fitting the role. Early in the project a bunch of star names were tossed around for he lead, and half of them were just plain wrong. Stars, yes. People who came even close to fitting the role, no. One actor was too young to have experienced the character’s backstory and still have time for the current story. So I had no idea who they were going to send the script out to, now.

When you don’t know what happens, it feeds into that writer’s paranoia. Are they not telling me for a reason? Have I been replaced by David Koepp? Or a trained chimp who will get all of the credit, then bite my face off at the premiere? Is Octo-Mom doing rewrites on the script? Why are they keeping me out of the loop?

Well, a couple of weeks ago I called to see how things were doing and talked to the producer who said, “Fine” again. I mentioned that if the director they liked was not available, I have a connection to a director who had done a film in the genre a couple of years ago that got all kinds of great reviews, even though the scheduling and release of the film had been screwed up and the film wasn’t a box office hit. Due to the great reviews, the director had landed a fairly big gig, he was in post on that now, and was probably wondering what his next directing job was going to be. He’s an undervalued director with a potential slot on his schedule - could I drop by the office and drop off a DVD of his first film? The onbe all of the critics loved? “Fine.”

This gets me through the gates and into the office. One of the reasons why it’s good for a screenwriter to live in Los Angeles is you can do things in person - which gets you on the lot and into the producer’s office where they will see you and remember you and you may end up with another job. Woody Allen says 80% of anything is just showing up. I probably landed a couple of assignments just by showing up in person to pick up a check or look at poster art or drop off some paperwork. If you show up at the office at the same time they are looking for a writer, you may end up with a gig. Even if they don’t have an assignment, this is a business of relationships - and showing up in person is a great way to keep that relationship with the company at the forefront of their minds. You tell a couple of jokes while you are there and shake some hands and high five some people and this reminds them of what a great guy you are to work with. Thought I don’t expect some other gig to result from me dropping off the DVD, maybe I’ll find out what’s going on... if Octo-Mom is there getting rewrite notes...

But instead of Octo-Mom, I talk to the head of production who fills me in, sort of. He tells me they have a new star who likes the script (right age, even though he doesn't look it), their director choice is still interested (but I get the feeling this guy is fielding offers and will pick the one he likes most), and everything is still moving forward... slowly.

It’s not that they are keeping me out of the loop on purpose, it’s just that at this point of the deal I am not even part of the loop. The writer has nothing to do with signing actors and directors and putting together the package that gets the producer the best possible studio deal (my deal does not change, even if he gets paid twice as much money). So they are off doing their thing and I am off doing mine. No news is not bad news...

But after a couple more weeks my paranoia is back, and I’m getting ready to call or e-mail the producer when I get an e-mail from him. From the actual producer. And it says more than "Fine". Octo-Mom *is* rewriting my script! That is why she hasn’t been taking care of her kids and Gloria Allred is fighting mad...

No. Just an update. Though I suspect there may actually be someone else doing some script tweaks (or that might just be my paranoia), the news is: it seems like they have a star interested, that director is still interested, and they are going after (and probably have by now) the sidekick actor - a TV star who has played *the lead* in at least one movie I have seen. What’s interesting to me about the casting of this sidekick role is that they have picked someone who resembles the actor who played the role in the original film... rather than someone who resembles the character in my script. The script was written to open up the possibilities for casting by giving more character to the character - making them more than just a sidekick. The actor they have is great, but one of the strange things about a remake is that everyone has a preconceived notion of what the characters should be and what the story should be and how each scene should play out... because they keep thinking of the original film. This limits the possibilities of the remake, instead of opening up the remake to something that isn’t just a carbon copy. Sometime in the future, when the statute of limitations on this project have expired, I’ll probably talk about the difficulties of writing a remake. Do you just remake the original or do you use the original as a jumping off point for something different?

But it seems like they are sticking with their initial director choice, no mention at all of the DVD I left them. This isn’t a big deal, their director is “hot” right now. But “hot” is one of those funny things in Hollywood. I am not “hot” - I’ve been around too long. To be “hot” in Hollywood, you must be mostly *potential*. Their hot director came from another occupation in the film biz where he was very successful, and has made one film which happens to be in this genre... which has not been released. The director I suggested has made a film in this genre which has been released and got excellent reviews but wasn’t a big hit. As strange as this sounds, their director’s unreleased film has the *potential* to be a massive hit! So the less actual experience you have, the more *potential* you have. More on *potential* when I post part 2 in a couple of days...

But here’s what’s going on with the remake project - star, sidekick and director are close to signing, then some other stuff happens, then they schedule it and then they make it and then Octo-Mom goes on Dr. Phil to talk about her new movie coming out...

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: The DVD Explosion Part One.
Yesterday’s Dinner: El Pollo Loco... I *must* eat more green stuff in the future. I used to eat salads regularly, but for some reason I am not near the places where they serve the green stuff. I do eat a lot of chicken, though.
Pages: After beating my head against the wall on my country-western bar script, I finally figured out the problem and think it's smooth sailing until the end. Of course, this may all change if I hit another roadblock tomorrow.

I am on the radio tomorrow: Screenwriter's Utopia Script Talk - with that smokin' hot Nicholl's Fellowship winner, Max Adams. My guess is that we'll be discussing contests, and breaking in by just being a damned excellent writer.

Monday, April 06, 2009

Hidden Meaning of THE WIZARD OF OZ

When we think of THE WIZARD OF OZ we think of a fun kid’s story about a farm girl named Dorothy and her little dog Toto who are whisked away by a tornado to a magical kingdom populated by fantasy characters and she must sing and dance and skip down the yellow brick road to see the Wizard so that he can use his special powers to send her back home... to Kansas.

What we don’t think of is an economic treatise on the importance of maintaining the gold standard even in the face of rapid deflation, and the bureaucratic issues of early 20th century politics. You probably wouldn’t see the Tin Man as symbolic of the industrial worker and the Scarecrow as symbolic of the small time farmer and the Cowardly Lion as politician William Jennings Bryant who was endorsing the Silver standard instead of gold.

Okay, all of that is about to change... because THE WIZARD OF OZ isn’t really some fun kid’s story, it has a hidden meaning...

The True Story Behind The Wizard Of Oz!

What's the hidden meaning in *your* script?

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Forward Momentum and superheroes... and DAREDEVIL.
Yesterday’s Dinner: A massive burrito.

Movies: Saw ADVENTURELAND Friday night (is that the sequel to SAW where the college kids wake up at a crappy theme park handcuffed to a game, and have to eat a bunch of bad corn dogs to escape?).

The film is a coming of age story, not an Apatow stoner comedy, even though it was directed by the guy who directed SUPERBAD. Though it’s not a crazy comedy, I think it has enough funny stuff to entertain someone who thought it would be SUPERBAD 2 - ELECTRIC BUGALOO. The hero’s crotch punching ex-best friend is always doing something funny and just plain wrong, and Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig manage to be funny and still remain real characters. There is enough comedy to keep that SUPERBAD audience watching... while the story and characters suck them in.

Story in a nut shell: James (Jesse Eisenberg) has to skip his summer Europe trip and get a job when his parents run into hard times. Before the hard times, his family was upper middle class, so James has never had a real job... his resume consists of editing his school literary magazine and mowing a neighbor’s lawn when he was a kid... So he ends up working at a crappy theme park where he learns about just about everything important in life. Oh, and it's a comedy so he's also trying to get laid.... since he is branded with "The Scarlet V".

James would like to work Rides, where the cool kids work... but ends up working Games with all of the other social misfits. There he meets uber-geek Joel (Martin Starr) and troubled Em (Kristen Stewart) ... and they become the three musketeers of the rigged games at the theme park. James and Em may not seem like they have much in common, but they seem to be at the same place in life at the same time... and a relationship begins to build. James may be able to lose that Scarlet V if he plays his cards right.

Ryan Reynolds plays studly rides repair guy Connell, who becomes Mentor and Friend and... antagonist... to James. Connell is rumored to have once jammed with Lou Reed. He’s married to a hot waitress at the local night club, and all of the gals think he’s dreamy. What’s interesting about this character is that he might have easily become just a good looking villain, but instead he becomes a tragic figure by the end. When you feel sorry for the antagonist, that’s a great movie!

The relationships in this movie were very realistic - messy and screwed up and yet, people love each other and care about each other. There were no clear cut villains, everyone is a shade of gray. And the film is deceptively well written - it seems like things happen naturally, just like in real life, and seems there is no larger plot... except every single scene in the film is there for a reason and every character and moment are actually leading somewhere. This script is so tightly written, so precise, that you can not see any of the plot points. They are there, and once we get to the end of the film, those little moments you thought were throw aways are revealed to be important parts of the overall plot.

MILD SPOILER EXAMPLE

The hottest girl working at the theme park is Lisa P (Margarita Levieva), every guy wants to sleep with her. She knows she's hot. She shoots down guys right and left.

There's a little throw away scene where James and Lisa P have a conversation at work. It seems like one of those small, natural, not plot oriented scenes.

Every guy in the park - both employees and customers - hits on Lisa P... but James asks about her parents. She tells him about her dad, who lost his job and is depressed. The conversation has this great built in suspense, because James is a major dork and will eventually blurt out something stupid. He's terrible with women. His awkwardness is funny. And even if James doesn't say something stupid, Lisa P *knows* she's hot and *knows* James is a dork, and she will probably just shoot him down for practice. As they keep talking about Lisa's dad, you keep waiting for James to say something stupid or Lisa to realize she's talking to a loser...

And that tension is entertaining.

What they are talking about is their parents, their relationships with their parents, and themselves. It's all about character. And the most amazing thing about this scene and a few others between the two characters is that Lisa P's dad is a very real character in this film - even though we never see him.

Now, this scene seems like a throw away, but it really is all about the plot - it secretly sets up romantic possibilities between the dork and the hot chick. And those romantic possibilities throw a major curveball into the story and the relationship between James and Em.... this little scene creates a *major* change in the story... but we won't know that until later.

This scene, and all of the dialogue in it, moves the story forward, is entertaining, and reveals character big time. The film is deceptive - you think it’s just a collection of scenes, but really it is tightly plotted and even the smallest moment is there for a reason.

END MILD SPOILER

One thing I really liked about the movie - something very difficult to do - are the characters who are *never seen* who you know and care about. Lisa P's dad and Em's mom are never seen on screen, but are parts of the story. These are real people off screen who are just as real to us as the people on screen.

Another thing I liked that very few will notice - one of the guys who interviewed James for a job in the first scenes of the film was a customer in the restaurant scene much later in the film. That made this whole world seem real to me. Kind of a SLACKERS moment - Hey, I know that guy!

And I really liked what wasn't said in the film - the scene with James and his father after James gets drunk and in big trouble... where the father says nothing, but he is the focus of the scene. The great scene with James and Joel in his backyard while the kid is mowing the lawn (some important things are not discussed, but are still in that scene). Even if you came for SUPERBAD, I think you'll still want James and Em to get together... and feel the heartbreak when things don't happen the way they usually do in a Hollywood movie. I liked this movie while I was watching it, and thinking back over it - like it even more. It’s one of those films that sticks with you. Funny and real and heartbreaking and you’ll remember that first really crappy job you had... and the first time you fell in love with someone who had many more problems than you have.

There’s some dried puke over there, could you clean it up?

- Bill

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

The SAW Game

I am a smart ass and a practical joker. If you’ve ever heard the long version of selling my first script to Hollywood, the version that includes the back and forth practical jokes my friends used to play on each other, and how I was *sure* this phone call was my buddy Van Tassell getting back at me for a prank I pulled on him after we both attended a party where alcohol was consumed, you already know this. One of my scripts that has been on the drawing boards forever - NIGHT STOCKERS - is about my years working at Safeway grocery and all of the pranks we used to pull on each other. On the midnight to 9am stocking crew, we often did crazy things like take all of the tennis shoes from that strange catch-all aisle of the supermarket and wrap them in the meat department with labels that said “Fillet of Sole” - then set them out for the morning butchers to deal with. The butcher would figure out some way to get back at us... often involving raw meat in our lockers.

On another message board, whenever one of the folks posts a thread called “Saw Watchmen” I will reply with...

“Is that the sequel to SAW where The Comedian and Night Owl wake up in an abandoned warehouse handcuffed to the wall with a rusty old saw on the floor between them and fight over who will saw off their own legs to escape first? But The Comedian just rips his own leg off and then shoots Night Owl for fun? Yeah, I heard about that... was it any good? Did Silk Spectre 2 get that booby trap off her boobies before it exploded? Did Dr. Manhattan make it through the maze of crotch high cactus okay?”

“Saw Duplicity”

“Is that the sequel to SAW where Julia Roberts and Clive Owen are ex-spies who wake up in the room surrounded by a pool of common face cream and rusty old experimental five blade disposable razors and they’ve got to walk through that stuff without slipping to get out... before a bomb goes off... and the key to stop the bomb was hidden in a martini olive that Roberts drank in the scene before, and now it’s in her stomach... and she’s not sure she can trust Owens to get it out, and he’s not sure he can trust her about anything, but they are in love with each other? Yeah, I heard about that, is it any good?”

Okay, folks, now it is your turn to play the SAW game on the comments section! Have fun!

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Sledge Hammer Of Subtlety and BLOOD DIAMOND.
Yesterday’s Dinner: KFC - I needed my yearly minimum requirements of grease... it's the word.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Lady In The Lake - All POV!

Philip Marlowe novels were all first person, so Robert Montgomery (Elizabeth's dad) decided to make a whole movie first person - everything in the film is from Marlowe's POV - so *we* get punched in the kisser and kissed by dames and end up in the middle of shoot outs and car chases. Cool for a while.



For those of you who wonder where the idea for last night's HOUSE episode came from.

You can also check out a great old Bogart movie based on a novel by the great David Goodis called DARK PASSAGE, where we get a POV escape from San Quentin, then the criminal gets plastic surgery (a scene lifted for MINORITY REPORT) and when they unwrap the bandages, it's Bogart looking in a mirror... and we break out of POV for the rest of the film as Bogart tracks down the real killer... entering his old life as somebody else and talking to all of the people he knew without them knowing that it is him. Great little film!


- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Be Indespensible! why you should be your best at all times.
Yesterday’s Dinner: Quiznos roast beef sandwich.

Movies: DUPLICITY - I would love screenwriters to conquer the world. I believe that screenwriters are both the brains and the heart of every movie. The reason why I tear apart bad movies to show where the scripts went south is not some sort of strange sour grapes - I know that what a screenwriter writes is not always what shows up on screen - I want all of is to learn from whatever mistakes were made in the way the film told the story... and maybe even act as an “I told you so” to any writers who fought hard against some idiot note that ruined their script and also ruined the movie. So I tend to worry about screenwriters who finally get their chance to screw the silly notes and make their film the way they want to... I don’t want them to screw up.

I am a fan of Tony Gilroy. The BOURNE movies, of course, but also gems like DOLORES CLAIBORNE - a film based on one of those non-monster Stephen King novels that has somehow been forgotten now. I wrote an article for Script Magazine on MICHAEL CLAYTON before it had even been released! I wanted people to see that film, so that screenwriters could rule the world. But when the film finally came out and I saw it, I thought it was okay. Not great, just okay. It was a character study sold as a political thriller when I was hoping for a character study that was also a political thriller - check out THE PARALLAX VIEW for a great example of that. What I want is for Tony Gilroy to have a hit that is as big as the BOURNE movies so that every studio in the world is fighting to hire him and let him make the film his way with no interference.

DUPLICITY isn’t going to be that hit film, either. The movie makes a bunch of rookie mistakes and ends up being just okay - much of that is due to Julia Roberts and Clive Owen having chemistry... and Tony Gilroy writing some really clever banter for them to fire at each other. The characters are great, the dialogue is great... but the movie needs some stronger plotting to keep it going.

Roberts and Owen are two ex-spies, one for the USA and one for England, who meet long ago, have a torrid night together... then Roberts drugs Owen and steals some classified papers. Later, Owens spots her, chases her, and extracts his revenge... which you know from the trailer is rug burns. This is a couple that belongs together - but can never trust each other. Occupational hazzard. But they hatch a scheme to quit the government and work as industrial spies - because that is where the money is... and we kind of figure the plan may be to steal some of that money somehow.

And here is the big mistake in the film... This is supposed to be a STING-like romp filled with cons and double crosses, but instead of bringing the audience in on the plot, so that when something goes wrong we *know* it has gone wrong and are worried, the decision was made to keep the audience at arms length. We don’t take either Roberts or Owen’s point of view in the story, we are completely neutral. And that means when something happens to them, it *does not* happen to us. We just watch as observers.

THE STING brought us in on the con, and gave us the story from Redford’s point of view. We were told what was supposed to happen to make the con work, so when things went wrong we could worry... and when the film cons *us* we get taken. The whole thing with a confidence trick is that the mark needs to feel like they are inside the trick rather than outside - they are part of a scheme to take someone else’s money... when it is really their money that is being taken. Those clever Nigerians have some money from a Prince they are trying to smuggle out of the country, and they want to put it in *your* bank account, and all they need is all of your banking information. They will give you 10% for helping them smuggle the Prince’s money out of the country. You are inside the scheme, making 10%, not outside the scheme being taken. The *audience* in a movie like this needs to be inside the scheme, so that they don’t realize they are being taken... but DUPLICITY leaves us outside in the cold.

Roberts and Owen end up working for rival big soap & cosmetics companies, each trying to steal the other’s face creams... which kind of makes this silly. The good thing about that is there are a whole lotta gags that can come from a fight to the death over face cream... the bad thing is that at the end of the day, something silly is the motivation for your whole film which makes the film less powerful. Though the film is light in tone, it can still have something serious driving the story - look at NORTH BY NORTHWEST. So the whole story seems trivial and unimportant, which isn’t the same as light and frothy.

The remake of THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR also has male and female characters who do not trust each other but may love each other, and one of the reasons why that film works is because we see the story from Rene Russo’s point of view. We see the story through her eyes so when Brosnan’s character pulls some sort of twist, she feels it and we also feel it. We know what she is thinking and feeling but not what he is thinking and feeling. He brings her into the story - there is the stolen painting, would you like it or shall I burn it? But she doesn’t know if this is real or part of his scheme. We are inside her head and inside the story.

When the double crosses come in DUPLICITY, because we are outsiders in the story, they have no impact. It’s something that happens to a character on the screen, *not* to someone we identify with and care about. And a strange thing happens when the double crosses start - because we are outside observers, we can easily see which double crosses are real and which are part of the scheme. If you discover the woman you love is sleeping with someone else, that hits you personally and you are too emotional to think clearly. But if one character up there on stage discovers that another character up there on stage is having an affair, you just process the information. You can think clearly about it, and realize that a fake affair would help the scheme and make more sense than a real affair that was so obvious their partner would catch them. So the audience is not conned, not shocked, and the twist dies.

The other problem with not bringing the audience inside the story, not giving us a POV character and allowing us to experience the twists and turns and cons through their eyes, is that the *dream fulfillment* of a con movie is being more clever than anyone else. We, the audience, participate in the con and outsmart people who are richer and supposedly smarter than we are. We’re smarter than them! And even if the story cons us as well, as in THE STING, we know that by the end of the film this will have been done for a reason that helps the con men get away with the scheme. The con men are smarter than we are, and anticipated a problem we did not. At the end of the day, the clever con men have still taken down the rich jerk and we were part of that...

Except in DUPLICITY we are not part of that. We are outsiders watching really clever attractive characters do things we don’t understand with wit and style and grace. So when they pull off their scheme, hey that’s nice... but we don’t get any of the joy. We also don’t get any of the fear that the scheme will go wrong. We just watch things happen as uninvolved observers. When we come to the end, we don’t feel much... when we should have felt at least a couple of things.

Another problem in the film - although I think it’s all the same problem - is a lack of “juice” - the bantering between Roberts and Owens is great, but the film has no suspense and not enough mind-f*ck twists in a genre that needs those elements to survive. I often wonder if the lack of “juice” in a film where the screenwriter has control is a rejection of genre - a rebellion against Hollywood. “You made me put in all of those entertaining genre scenes in BOURNE so I’m going to leave them out of this film.” - and we get very little suspense and not enough twists. There *is* a nice suspense scene near the end, but not much before that. When it comes to the heart beat of pacing, this film is on life support most of the time. There’s nothing wrong with making a film exciting and interesting. Those are good things.

The characters and dialogue are fun and enjoyable - Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkenson are great as rival heads of big companies who are locked in a personal war with each other. Plus, there is a great running gag about pizza that keeps popping up when you least expect it.

DUPLICITY is an okay film, but it’s not going to be that big hit that turns screenwriters into stars. If it didn’t have Roberts and Owens in the leads, it would be a nice little movie that would probably be dumped on DVD... and I suspect that is where most of its money will be made. My mom dad will rent it or see it on cable and think it was good. It is a good way to kill a couple of hours.

- Bill

Monday, March 30, 2009

Starbucks Turnover

It is the end of an era - the last member of the original crew at my local Starbucks has left.

I write in coffee shops. I usually hit 2-3 Starbucks in a day - writing for a little while in each one before moving on. I used to write at Priscilla’s in Toluca Lake and the Coffee Bean on San Fernando in Burbank - with a bike ride in between. But when you’re in a place where everybody knows your name... it’s time to move on. At Priscilla’s I would spend more time gabbing than writing, and if I just wanted to be alone and work - well, someone would come over and talk to me. There were a couple of people at Priscilla’s who would not leave me alone... so I stopped going there. I love Priscilla’s and when I drop in there now many of the same people work there. Of course, there’s always *some* turnover behind the counter.

When I stopped going to Priscilla’s, I started going to the new Starbucks a block away from my apartment - where the tennis club used to be. Hey, it was so close I didn’t have to ride my bike! Which is how I got fat. That’s one of the reasons why I usually ride to some other Starbucks now - the other reason is that the one near me is just too danged crowded, now. You have to practically reserve a table. For a while, that Starbucks had many of the same people behind the counter - they stayed there for a while before leaving. Usually years. You knew them, they knew you. I flirted with the girls, and they flirted back. In Los Angeles, you get a lot of actors and musicians behind the counter - so you’d go to Bobby’s gigs or see someone’s play or stand up set, And sometimes they’d catch a break and leave. I remember one of the girls landed a reality show - and I watched and rooted for her. Chet worked there a long time, as did Alan... and then Phil was the last one from the original 2001 crew. The perfect Barista is someone who actually has a personality (not some corporate drone) and is also fast and efficient. You want someone you can joke around with, who doesn’t take the job too seriously (they work behind a counter) but is also good at their job. For a long time that Starbucks on my corner had the same people working there - one of the gals (an actress, I went to see one of her shows) worked there every summer and then went off to school - but she always came back.

But these days there seems to be a revolving door at Starbucks - every month, a whole new crew. Even the managers don’t last long. And now Phil, the last of the original crew, has moved on. Phil got married, had a kid... and last week was his last at that Starbucks. He has moved on...

Part of the reason for the constant turnover at my home base Starbucks might be because it’s such a high volume store that they use it to train - a few employees ended up with their own stores or shipped out to other places. But part of the reason you *frequent* one place over another is the people behind the counter. Lately, the handful of Starbucks I work at have had new employees every month.

And that’s a problem for many reasons.

Hard to be friendly with a complete stranger - and even more difficult when the pattern shows you that person probably will not be there in a couple of months. I’m a shy person (yeah, I don’t seem that way) and it takes time for me to become comfortable with people - about the time I’m lowering my guard and joking with the new barista - they’re gone! Currently, there is a barista who seems to hate me in one of the Starbucks I frequent. Can’t figure out why. He’s been there for a couple of months, now, and still seems to go out of his way to be rude to me (but not the customers before or after me). My current plan is to overtip him, but I feel like I’m tipping him for bad service - and that’s just wrong.

But the main problem with all of this turnover in Starbucks is that there are always new employees working there - and new employees are, well, new. They are slow, because they haven’t developed that rhythm, yet. They can only do one thing at once - and they have to *think* about it. There are often these huge lines - two of them, one to order your drink, then one to pick it up. They screw up drinks, because they make mistakes. After waiting in two huge lines, you don’t get what you ordered.

The old timers always knew what I drink - it’s funny because I go to different Starbucks at different times of day and drink something different depending on what time it is. A few days ago I went into a Starbucks at “the wrong time” and they were confused by my order. But new people not only don’t know your drink, they don’t know what half the drinks are and write down the wrong code on the cup and you end up with Iced Coffee with 3 pumps of *Melon* flavoring. Yech! And you don’t want to go through this whole thing again to get the right drink. (It should have been 3 pumps of *Mocha* - in the mornings I drink a “no milk mocha” - iced coffee and chocolate syrup).

You know, new employees are new employees. It’s not their fault that they were just hired. But it’s *someone’s* fault that they were thrown behind the counter at a high volume store without being partnered with an experienced employee looking over their shoulder (but that would be two employees doing the work of one). I’m sure this is all to save money during the economy - just skip that training part and throw them into the deep end to see what happens... but today I had a brand new employee with no one around to help her who was just plain confused about how to do something... and I had to talk her through it. Crazy - I’m training new Starbucks employees!

Every company should take the time to train their employees - and give them a few days with the “training wheels” of an experienced employee next to them to help show them the ropes. That used to be the way things were done... but I guess it’s just not financially viable. At least not on paper. In real life, a week of training creates an employee who will probably know what they are doing for their whole career.

Of course, no one thinks in terms of a career anymore.

Everything and everyone are disposable these days.

And I’m drinking an iced coffee with melon syrup... Yech!

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Three Points To Non-Cliche Characters .
Yesterday’s Dinner: Sandwich.
Bicycle: Short bike ride to a Starbucks.

Friday, March 27, 2009

Bill's Little Movie Experiment (Part Four)

I thought this part was going to go up on Wednesday and today we’d return to Hitchcock... but the best laid plans.

Although I’m making my little film partially to recapture those silly days of my youth when I had a Super 8mm film camera, a bunch of film cartridges, and it only cost 99 cents for processing at K-Mart - this is also a series of experiments for a book on writing and making your own digital feature. That makes budget one of the most important parts of this experiment - I want to make this film for as little money as possible. What the average person might be able to put on a credit card.

John August’s REMNANTS series had a budget of $25k per episode, which is dirt cheap for something made by the rules in Hollywood. He paid people, had permits, did everything by the book. I will not be doing any of those things. I am going back to the days when all I had was that camera and a couple of lights and I had to convince friends to show up and be actors and/or crew. One of my early films - LAUNDRA-MATT - was me, a camera, my roommate Dave, my laundry and the coin laundry down the street from my apartment in Walnut Creek. He had to go to work, so we shot it in about half an hour. It got laughs when I showed it. NEAR HIT will be a little more structured and organized than that, but don’t look for a grip truck and cables.

COST TO MAKE


I know of a couple of producers who make movies *for a living* at budgets in the $6k range - paying key crew members and special effects houses. These are films you can find in Blockbuster (on the bottom shelf). One of these guys budgets his films for $10k, takes $4k off the top, and shoots the film for $6k... and the films look good enough to get into Blockbuster. They are not great - in fact, not even good - but are good enough. The problem with many of these low end things is that the people making them just don’t care - and there isn’t enough money for them to care. This guy makes a film every single month - it’s an assembly line - and he finds a script for almost nothing, actors who will work for meals and a credit and a copy of the DVD (Los Angeles is full of actors who want to break in, and think being in a film that is in Blockbuster is better than having zero credits... and they are probably right) and gets “step up” crew members - a camera operator who wants a Cinematographer credit, etc. The rest of the crew are unpaid interns... and even then it’s a skeleton crew. I know another guy (actually, I don’t know him, I know his camera guy) who makes films for $10k or less... and had a deal with Lionsgate Home Video that paid him $100k per film! He had once - long ago - directed a minor hit horror film, and his name on the DVD box sold a bunch of copies. He was smart enough to use famous true crimes as the basis for his movies - which provided the “mental real estate” that also helped sell his films. Some of you may know who I’m talking about. Anyway - making a film on the cheap and getting it into Blockbuster is possible.

In a past blog entry I mentioned a guy I know who figured out a way to buy his equipment with his first budget so that he could continue to make movies for tape and expandible costs forever. So if you want to make your own movie, cost isn’t as big of a factor as it used to be. I spent more money on Super 8mm film and processing the last time I tried to make a feature. Though I have yet to do an actual budget - I’m waiting until I finish the script - let’s just look at some basic costs to get a rough idea.

The day I began writing this blog entry (a while back) I got an e-mail from FIND (formerly IFP) in Los Angeles about why I should re-up my membership, and one of their main sales points was that you can get discounts on equipment rentals. Here in Los Angeles, everyone is making a movie and the laws of supply and demand makes cameras expensive sometimes. So FIND will rent me an HD camera for a weekend for $200. They will rent me sound equipment for $30 and a lighting package for $40. I haven’t checked the rates in the Bay Area, may be more, may be less - but I’m using this as a ballpark.

So, let’s do the math - 6 weekends at $200 for the HD camera is $1,200. Let’s add in the sound and the lights at $420. We also have to add in tape stock and those $5 pizzas, and some odds and ends. Regular reader Bill suggests we form an LLC to keep us from losing everything if something goes really wrong (my friend Max made a low budget horror movie, no insurance, and had a guy in full monster costume *fall of the roof of a house*! I wouldn’t have done something that dangerous in the first place.) - I will probably need some form of insurance to rent the equipment in the first place, so that will probably be in the budget along with the LLC. We’re looking at around a few thousand base cost. Now, there are other things that are going to cost money - but so far, this isn’t sending me to the poor house. I do plan on adding some known actors, but you don’t have to do that. I’m planning on spending around $10,000 total. Probably around $6k for the film itself and another $4k for the “deliverables” (I did an article last year for Script Magazine that went through all of the deliverables a distrib will require). (Deliverables include posters and various different versions on tape, as well as all of the legal requirements and E&O insurance, etc. - the things a company needs to deliver the film to distribs all over the world). I’m sure all kinds of crazy costs will come up, and that is part of the experiment - to find out those hidden costs and tell the readers about it so they will be prepared.

Part of my plan is to use the SAG Ultra Low contract - which I believe allows me to mix non-SAG and SAG actors in the same film... and pay the SAG actors a reduced scale. I haven’t looked into this, yet - so that may change. Most of these credit card films are made non-SAG, and use non-professional actors in all of the roles. I think the Ultra-Low budget allows me to cast almost every role with non-pros, and add one or two professional actors to help me sell the movie. I will use the “confined cameo” method - where an actor is in *one* location only, and those scenes are spread throughout the movie so that it appears they are in the whole film. My friend Paul Kyriazi made a post apocalyptic action film called OMEGA COP that had Adam (BATMAN) West as the last Chief Of Police in the known world coordinating the last surviving cop as he tried to bring order to a world in chaos... Adam West sat behind the radio at a police station set and talked to the last cop - was never in any other location. You could shoot him out in a day! And that’s my plan - find some actor I can shoot out in a day. Maybe two.

My friend who makes his little $2k movies mostly for fun has had an *iconic* TV star from the past in one of his films (the guy is no longer a star, and did it for fun) and had a female star from a couple of decades ago, who is still smokin’ hot... but no longer in her 20s. The shelf life for hot female stars is short - there’s a busload of new hot female stars arriving in Hollywood every day. So there are people out there who will do a movie for fun (no pay), which leads me to believe I can find someone who will work a day for very little pay.

The other way to go is to skip SAG contracts all together and use a Fi-Core actor. These are SAG actors who have fallen on hard times (or split with the union for political reasons) and can work for less than SAG minimum. Again, we are looking at people who may have once been famous, but now are out of work. I do not know who is and who is not Fi-Core, but I’ll bet Gary Colemen is... and everybody knows who he is. Other possibilities are music stars - a friend of mine made a horror movie with the lead singer from a very famous group in a small but pivotal role. And sports stars and comedians and anybody else who is not an professional actor... but everyone knows who they are. There are plenty of ways to get a face on the DVD box without breaking the bank. So my project will have at least *one* recognizable actor spread throughout the film (probably the hit target).

STUNTS


Someone asked about stunts after the last entry - and that’s a really good question. I am making an action movie... but won’t be able to afford a stunt team. This is where creativity comes into play. Back when I was making that ill-advised Super 8mm action feature, I also did not have a stunt team... but I had all kinds of action and even blew up a car (though not for real). Though I can probably round up some guys and gals with martial arts training - and probably most actors have some martial arts training - the main reason for doing those BOURNE style fights is budget.

My friend Paul Kyriazi made an *amazing* martial arts film called WEAPONS OF DEATH (not available on VHS or DVD) that starred real martial arts guys. Paul’s theory was to set up the camera and let the guys fight - and the end has an amazing fight scene between Eric Lee and Gerald Okamura. They practiced it a bunch of times, then Paul filmed it - and it’s amazing to watch these two guys fight *for real* (okay - it’s still a movie and they pulled their punches - but there are sword fighting scenes that is *real* sword fighting... just will dull-edged swords). Paul seldom cut to a different angle, his theory is that you get to see real guys doing a real fight with no camera tricks. That is a great theory... if you have Eric Lee and Gerald Okamura.

I will not have them... I will have some guys who took a martial arts class once and lied on their resume, saying they were a black belt. So I will be cutting a lot.

I know the stuntman who did the stair roll at the end of THE EXORCIST - great guy. Great stair roll. I also have seen THE EXORCIST 144 times (I was the projectionist) and can tell you there are *seven* shots in that stair roll. Which means Chuck only had to roll down a handful of stairs at a time. That’s still not easy... but the more you cut to a different angle, the more you can control the roll. Same thing with a fight scene. If you shoot like Paul did and just set up the camera and let them fight - that puts the scene on the skills of the fighters. If you shoot the same scene as a series of many shots - One character throws a punch, the other character gets hit and his head snaps back, etc. You have put the fight scene on the *editing*. When you are dealing with a ragged BOURNE-like scuffle, it doesn’t have to look graceful and elegant... in fact, it’s better if it looks messy. So that big fight scene is a bunch of little pieces... and that removes most of the stunts. We will probably build some balsa wood props and buy some candy-glass bottles and smash some things... but the fight scene will mostly be three shots: One guy throws a punch (or kick). The impact of the punch (or kick). The other guy goes flying from the impact.

That impact shot can be a soft tap. A touch. Edit it fast enough, and that creates impact. Add the sound effect, and that touch turns into a freakin’ hard hit!

String a bunch of those together and you have a fight scene through editing. There was probably a time where a bunch of really quick cuts in a fight scene might make the audience think you were faking it... but now we *expect* quick cuts in a fight scene! And, even though I hate the shaky-cam of the BOURNE films, I plan to use hand-held camera to cover up any time a fake punch misses by a mile. Again, that style is expected theses days, so no one will think I’m trying to hide anything.

Foot chases are just people running.

In those old Super 8mm films I used to come up with creative stunts that existed only in your mind... and I will do that in NEAR HIT as well. Want to have a guy dangling off the roof of a 20 story building? You find a really low one story roof, shoot up at the guy dangling. Cut to - shooting down at a pair of shoes nailed to a pair of 1x1 boards with a pair of pants on them hanging over the 20 story roof “kicking”. Put it together and the audience believes those fake legs belong to the real guy - and that the real guy is hanging over the 20 story ledge instead of that ledge up against the side of the hill that is only 8 feet from the ground.

REALLY COOL SHOTS


Which brings me to cool shots. One of the great things about 3 directors and only having to be responsible for one day of shooting a week is that we can challenge ourselves to come up with one *amazing* shot every week. I believe the reason why we know who the Coen Brothers are today is that shot in BLOOD SIMPLE where the camera is tracking over the top of the bar and cranes up and over the passed out drunk. And the other various cool *shots* in the film. So part of the plan is to come up with some “how did they do that” moments in the film.

In my stupid little movies, I always tried to come up with some amazing show off shot. From attaching a camera to a cable and *zipping* it across campus at Diablo Valley College where it would stop at a clamp on the cable four feet from where I had my actor standing... to a thing I did in my feature where I took an actor and a folding chair to the top floor of a San Fran hotel, set the chair up in front of the hallway window, and filmed all of the actor’s lines with this great background window overlooking the city, then shot the reverse through the window of a first floor office, over the shoulder of my hotel hallway actor, focusing on another actor on the other side of the desk. Cut the two together and people wonder how you got the camera on the crane outside that 40 story window... to the thing where you see speeding cars from a freeway overpass overhead as an actor is being chased across the overpass by bad guys. He looks down at the speeding traffic. Then, looking up at the actor on the overpass, he jumps! Of course, this is shot at the part of the overpass that is four feet off the ground, with the camera man laying in the dirt pointing the camera up. Then a shot of the actor landing in the bed of a pick up truck - close - all we see are the actors legs and the pick up bed. Then a shot from the overpass of the actor (secretly strapped into the pick up bed) as the pick up roars down the freeway. Cut that together and you have an amazing stunt.

Anyway, plan is for each of us to do one interesting shot a week. The rest can be masters & close ups, but one shot needs to be cool. That gives us 18 cool shots in the film... hopefully more than that, and hopefully we will all brings some interesting ideas to each day of shooting.

The first film of Paul Kyriazi’s I ever saw, THE TOURNAMENT, had a shot in it where our hero uses his super secret kung fu punch on the villain... and punches out a chunk of his stomach! The villain looks down, and he can see the sky through a hole in him! Then he falls to the ground, and the grass pops through the hole! Yikes! What Paul did is get the round mirror from a compact, put some gore around it, and stick it to the villain’s shirt. The mirror reflected the sky and field in front of the villain - which matched the sky and field behind him - and it seemed like he had a hole in him. When he fell down, they just stuck a bit of turf on his shirt and shot it from the right angle. All of these $1.98 special effect tricks go into my film, too.

SPECIAL EFFECTS


Speaking of $1.98 special effect tricks, in my Super 8mm I blew up my mom’s car... and then returned it without a scratch. Here’s what I did: this was back in the days of cameras with flash bulbs, so I bought a bunch of flashbulbs and some smoke bombs. I borrowed ever Super 8mm camera I could find. I strung flashbulbs on wires, put them all over the car. Put a little smoke on the car. Fired up the cameras and set off the flashbulbs. Cut! Another string of flashbulbs on the car. I opened all of the car doors, plus the hood and trunk, a quarter of the way, More smoke. Cameras rolling, set of the flashbulbs. Did this again and again, opening the doors a little more and adding more smoke each time until the doors and hood and truck were all of the way open. Then I took a bumper I had bought from the scrap yard, a door I had bought and painted the color of my mom’s car, and the spare tire... smoked the hell out of everything so you could barely see the car. Cameras rolling, last string of flashbulbs, and from behind the car, I threw the door, bumper and tire out of the smoke. Okay - in the editing room, I cut this together, and you have a bunch of different angles as the flash of the explosion blows the doors and hood and trunk right off the car! Tire rolling out of the smoke down the street! No actual explosion, though.

I also created plastic Toys R Us guns with flashbulbs in the barrel and a battery and contact in the trigger so that I could get some muzzle flash. All of this stuff is possible - but someone actually rents muzzle flash plastic guns, now - you don’t have to make them yourself and get that modeling glue all over your hands.

You have to be creative if you don't have any cash.

Wait, I said a building would explode, right?

Okay, there are several places on the web where you can get royalty free stock footage. You pay a flat rate, and own it outright... as does everybody else who bought the same footage. Here is the website - they have a sale on clips that includes a building implosion...

Free Stock Footage

And another place or two:

Footage Firm

Art Beats

And there are other places.

But a building implosion isn’t the same as an explosion - lots of dust, but no flames! So for that, we go to Detonation Films, which has all kinds of explosions and muzzle flashes and other cool stuff...

Detonation Films

Put all of the free and low cost stuff together and we have some big production value for an affordable price.

By the way, other tricks that I may use include everything from glass shots to hanging miniatures to foreground miniatures to the Schufftan process to anything else that they used in those early days of cinema before CGI. My friend Fred, who directed CYBERZONE, makes low budget flicks with more creativity than money - and he has done everything from a disaster movie for Sci Fi Channel using Corgi toy cars as foreground miniatures (with rubble and little telephone poles smashed over them) to aquarium castles as hanging miniatures in a fantasy film for cable. These things look *great* and cost very little. I watched an old film noir a couple of days ago, IMPACT, that had a car smashing into a gasoline tanker truck and explode... all models, but you really have to look hard to see that it isn’t real (actually, for me the giveaway was the angle - it was like a helicopter shot, but in a low budget movie from the 40s when they weren’t doing helicopter shots). Look up these things online if you aren’t familiar with them. John built a Schufftan rig a long time ago so that he could put real actors in a miniature set on video without any sort of post production special effects. The shots are married *before* the image gets to the camera.

LOCATION SHOOTING


Another bit of production value NEAR HIT will have is location shooting in Hong Kong. I’m still not sure how to get that into the story, but I know how it will happen in real life - I’m going to Hong Kong to teach a class after we shoot the film... and, since I’m teaching the class for the Hong Kong Film Academy where they have equipment, I will shoot a bunch of great stock footage type stuff, plus take character’s costumes with me and coerce someone from my class to wear the costume so that I can shoot over the shoulder shots and long shots and anything else - maybe even a foot chase between two stand ins, with close ups of the real actors running somewhere with the background completely out of focus. Hong Kong is a big city - just like San Francisco and Oakland - so I can do my real actor work as part of the normal shoot - doubling San Fran for Hong Kong. Some areas of Hong Kong are kind of Chinatown like... and San Fran has a Chinatown. So my little film gets to *globe trot* like a big budget movie!

I may also shoot some “plates” in Hong Kong so that I can green screen some of my actors into the backgrounds - not for lengthy shots, because I’m don’t want to give the audience time to realize it’s green screen, but a quick shot to “sell” that the actor is in Hong Kong would be great.

The people reading my book probably won’t be teaching a class in Hong Kong, nor will they also be teaching a class in London (for the sequel’s stock footage), but we live in a world where you can contact a film maker someplace else in the world and offer to swap stock footage. You shoot part of their movie using your stand ins in their costumes, and they do the same for you. It would be possible to have a film that seems to be shot all over the world, just by swapping footage with film makers from all over the world. Hey, and you’ll make friends while you’re at it, and be part of their films, too!

If the Hong Kong stuff works out, I may actually do some cool stuff there and then do some “reshoots” with the actors when I return. I would love to do a chase on the double decker tram cars that go from one end of Hong Kong to the other - when two trams come to a stop one behind the other, the windows of the second levels almost touch each other - and you could jump from one tram to another... and leap from train to train. Now, we wouldn’t do this in real life... but we could do the chase with stand ins, then come back and build a fake tram wall and window and do the tram-to-tram jump in the studio... and by studio, I mean John’s garage. Because even though this thing may look like a couple million bucks, it’s going to be made for next to nothing.

This is just an experiment... that should be a lot of fun to shoot!

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Opening With Character and THERE WILL BE BLOOD.
Yesterday’s Dinner: El Pollo Loco chicken & corn on the cob & black beans.
Bicycle: No bike today - too windy. Even with a busy day on Wednesday I managed to ride a little, returning DVDs.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

VHS Box Art+ Bill On The Radio Again

I am on the radio tonight: Screenwriter's Utopia Script Talk - the subject is Killer B Movies, and the other guest on the show is the writer of MUTANT ON THE BOUNTY.





Classic B Movie VHS box covers! Hundreds of them! How many of these films have you seen? Above are a couple of my sleazy contributions.

And I'm doing a one day class for the Screenwriting Expo on May 3rd: Edge Of Your Seat - Horror & Thriller Writing. Come on down, it'll be some pretty scary stuff!

- Bill

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Polanski On Chinatown

I have an original poster for CHINATOWN on my wall, it's one of my favorite movies. My ill-advised super 8mm feature film was kind of a CHINATOWN homage - a private eye movie that I shot without any permits in San Francisco. Car chases, shoot outs, fist fights... all on location without any permits. Or stuntmen. Or pyrotechs. I blew up my mom's car!

Anyway, here is an interview with the director of CHINATOWN about making the film...



And here is the original trailer for CHINATOWN:



And the CHINATOWN screenplay by Robert Towne. This is the shooting script. I have a copy of the first draft, which opens with Jake getting a flat tire on Cross Drive - named after Noah Cross. In real life, that's Mulholland Drive, named after William Mulholland - who really did own all of the water in Los Angeles at one time.

- Bill
IMPORTANT UPDATE:

TODAY'S SCRIPT TIP: Is Your Script Ready To Send Out?
Yesterday’s Dinner: Roast beef sandwich at Quiznos.
Bicycle: No bike yesterday - too much wind! Riding today (as you read this).
eXTReMe Tracker