You must watch..."Citizen Kane"

Today, an endorsement for the “greatest movie ever made” according to a bunch of critics, like the people who make the AFI 100 list, and such.

Rosebud...

What’s so great about Citizen Kane?  I watched it for the first time in film school and not knowing much about it, I went in expecting it to be boring.  Needless to say, I was surprised by how impressed and engaged I was with the film.  The way the film is photographed really grabbed me.  Many of the angles and camera movements felt very ahead of their time.  Other than Hitchcock, I can’t think of many other filmmakers doing that sort of work in the early 40s.

As far as the screenplay, I can’t say much.  It’s very good but also very epic.  I’m not sure there are many things  a baby writer can learn from it other than to create an extremely engaging main character.  Beyond that, the film does a lot of stuff I’m sure baby writers would LOVE to do (like tell a story completely in flashbacks) stuff that might not work for everyone. 

Funny enough, of all the Oscars Citizen Kane was nominated for (including Best Picture) Screenplay was the only one the film won.  But, that’s probably the best reason to watch Citizen Kane right now, post Oscars.  If you’re feeling like the wrong films, actors, sound editors, make up artists, or any of your favorites lost out last night (especially because of Hollywood politics) you can take solace in knowing the “greatest movie of all time” didn't even win Best Picture the year it was nominated.


EDIT: So I write this post, go off and watch the Oscars, and Steven Spielberg up and says basically the same thing before he introduces Best Picture.  Ha, love it!

The difference between an Oscar and a Razzie

Happy Friday!  Today is the day I usually talk about my own writing, but who cares, it’s OSCAR WEEKEND!  I’ve always enjoyed the Oscars though as I’ve gotten older, I’ve gotten more jaded about them and the fact that the nominations/wins often reward a person more for their career or their last project than their current project, but hey, whatever, it’s the OSCARS.

One good thing about being a little jaded now is that I’m pretty good with an Oscar ballot.  Not to toot my own horn too much, but in the past few years I’ve won several Oscar pools.  My secret?  Honestly, the thing that clinches it is usually the shorts, docs, and technical awards.  If you just look these up beforehand or go with who won the guild awards, you can usually pick correctly, otherwise pick the movie with the coolest name, that works too.

Anyway, I’m clearly excited to see the show.  Also, for the first time ever, I worked on a movie that was nominated for a couple things, so I've got people to root for (actually I’ve worked with people who were nominated in previous years because Hollywood is such a small world, but I feel closer this time).  On the downside, I will probably be less objective with my ballot picks, but on the upside, it’s a nice change to tell people you worked on an Oscar nominated movie instead of a Razzie nominated movie (yep, I worked on one of those, too).  The funny thing is, from my perspective, the people I work with are always working hard and doing excellent and professional jobs.  I’ve worked on a couple “bad” movies, and their sets and costumes totally blew me away.

Now, I’m not saying I couldn’t tell the difference between working on an Oscar movie and a Razzie movie...in hindsight there was definitely a difference.  But in what areas?  Well, I’d say the biggest differences were at the script level, followed by the higher ups level (Director, Producers, etc.).   Now, maybe that’s just me being biased as a writer, but it makes sense doesn’t it?  All other technical quality factors being fairly equal, a better script with a stronger vision/direction, equals a better movie.

And on that note, I'll leave you with this video that cracked my up and made me think of all us baby writers out there.  

While I wouldn't recommend copying Seinfeld word for word if you want to be a comedy writer like this little girl, I think watching shows you love or exposing yourself to anything written by a writer you like can only help you be a better writer (plus, you've gotta watch a bunch of shows anyway if you're planning to write a new TV spec this year).  Speaking of exposing yourself (ha) to good work, here is a link posted by ScriptShadow yesterday to all the 2011 Oscar nominated scripts.  Enjoy, and happy Oscar watching/happy writing (whether you're penning a future Oscar winner, or just your latest TV spec, like me).  

The Death Star problem in "I Am Number Four"

So, I just finished YA novel, I Am Number Four (a friend lent it to me, we have a sort of informal book club going right now).  Annnnd if you haven’t read it but want to, you probably shouldn’t read this post because it’s gonna be one big SPOILER (also spoilers for The Hunger Games, Harry Potter, and Star Wars).

Oh hey, there's a movie version too.

The book ends with a cliff hanger, or at least, a non-resolution.  WTF.  You can’t end the FIRST book in a series with a cliff hanger.  The first must stand alone!  Right?  You have to make Star Wars before you can make The Empire Strikes Back.  Or do you?  I recently read and loved Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games trilogy, and the first book also ends with a bit of a cliff hanger, and yet, that didn’t annoy me.  Why is that?  Am I just biased against James Frey?  Isn’t a cliff hanger a good idea?  I mean, I’ve stressed act breaks when writing TV to hook your audience to stay tuned…isn’t ending your book on a cliff hanger just another way to hook people?  And what about Star Wars, anyway?  Luke doesn’t defeat the Empire or even Darth Vader in A New Hope…so if you look at it that way it ALSO has a cliff hanger.

So...what was my problem again?

Ah yes, the problem with I Am Number Four is that there is NO SENSE of ANY resolution in the book because the book doesn’t set up anyone/thing to defeat outside of what will most certainly be the MAJOR EVIL of the entire series. In other words, the book doesn’t have a Death Star.  While the Rebels in Star Wars haven’t defeated the entire Empire by the end of that movie, the audience feels satisfied that the Death Star has at least been destroyed.  That’s because destroying the Death Star was the main goal in that movie, NOT destroying the entire MAJOR EVIL.  In the book, I Am Number Four, we meet number four/John Smith, and learn he’s on the run from this race of super evil alien guys who want to kill him.  Then, some stuff happens which ends with a big fight against some of those super evil bad guys…and…John doesn’t die…and then leaves town.  That's THE WHOLE book.

Now, I’m not totally knocking the writing in the book (I actually found it very entertaining as I was reading) but, come on!  I think if you want to write a series of books where the protagonist will eventually have to take down a MAJOR EVIL you have to have them take down some Death Stars first.  Otherwise, at the end, your readers feel taken for a ride where your characters pretty much accomplished nothing.  Sounds lame to me, but hey, what do I know?

Looking away from Star Wars, let’s compare this book to book 1 of The Hunger Games which unlike Star Wars, DEFINITELY has a "to be continued" ending.  In that book, the Death Star is the Hunger Games themselves.  Katniss must survive/defeat the games while she is in them before the story can move onto the bigger business of taking down the entire dystopian government.  And how about another popular series of YA books…Harry Potter?  Harry faces weakened/lesser versions of MAJOR EVIL aka Voldemort in each book before he gets to his final showdown.  

Oh, and that’s another thing...while the evil alien race gets a name there are NO individually named bad guys in I Am Number Four.  There is no Darth Vader, no Voldemort, just a mass of nameless evil aliens.

Anyway, just some things to think about if you're writing your own YA novel since YA is so hot...just ask James Frey.

Beyond that, I guess what annoys me most about the lack of resolution at the end of the book is that when I looked up info on the sequel to I Am Number Four, I discovered that book is going to focus on ANOTHER character not seen in the first book.  So…was the protagonist of the first book even the protagonist of the series?  And when will I get to find out what ultimately happens to the characters from the first book?  And more importantly, will I even care by then?  Considering that I have pretty much no interest in seeing the film version of I Am Number Four, I’m gonna guess no.

What show to spec? More suggestions...

To build on yesterday’s post, here is an article my friend just sent me from scriptmag.com by Heather Hale appropriately titled Which Show Should I Spec?  It contains (naturally) a list of good shows both comedy and drama to spec in this upcoming year.  The list recommendations were made by Jen Grisanti who has an impressive resume that includes working with the NBC Writers on the Verge program.  Look the list over to get an idea of exactly what shows are hot to spec in 2011…and get ready to watch some shows, babies!

Is Teletubbies on that list?

What show should you spec this year?

I'll probably post in more detail on this in the next few months as more baby writers plan their specs for the upcoming TV writing program/contest season, but for now, a (fairly) short post.  

As I mentioned before, while pilots are the hot thing to have, new specs are still important to baby writers (until all the contests change their rules to allow pilots).  So, what should you spec this year?  There are lots of opinions and "rules" out there for specs that sometimes conflict: 

• Spec something popular so readers will recognize it/DON'T spec something popular since you'll have too much competition.
• Spec a show that's well established/DON'T spec a show that's been around too long and is overdone.
• Spec a show in its first season if it's a big hit/NEVER spec a show in its first season.

Rules, rules, rules.  I think the most important thing to remember is that whatever you write it MUST BE GREAT.  I think people worry about "rules" a little too much sometimes.  Yes, it's smart to not pick the most overdone shows to spec because you'll have lots of competition, but if you have an AMAZING idea for a popular show, who cares?  Anyway, like I said, I'll offer more unsolicited advice later, but for now, a link to get your brain started...

Fall 2011 TV Scorecard

While all the "rules" out there aren't set in stone there is ONE RULE that is fairly stern, and that's that you can't submit a spec for a show that has been cancelled or has ended (well, I mean, I GUESS technically a lot of these competitions say you can submit a show that aired new episodes this year, but seriously, why would you spec a show that was canned?).  Note, this is just a list of network shows, there are many cable shows out there as well.  Also note, I actually think this list is a tad optimistic for some of the lower rated "looking good" shows...keep your eyes peeled for more news on new renewals...and pray hard if you wanted to spec "Chuck" this year.

You must watch..."Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"

In honor of Presidents’ Day, here’s a classic everyone should watch again.  It’s hard not to watch this film without feeling pretty patriotic, I mean, the film has an extended montage of DC landmarks, particularly the Lincoln Memorial.  But beyond that, what makes "Mr. Smith" so good?

Well, I think the protagonist, Jeff. Smith, is pretty great.  While a tad bumbling at first, he is probably one of the most eloquent, kind, and idealistic characters I have ever seen in a film, especially in contrast with all the jaded backroom DC types who surround him.  I found him very refreshing, I can’t remember the last time I saw a protagonist like Jeff Smith in a modern film…I’m sure a lot of writers think it’s “cheesy” to write a character like this, but in a sea of cynical and snarky characters, writing a Mr. Smith, might make you stand out…think about it.

Of course, Mr. Smith isn’t the only stand out character.  The wise cracking Saunders is also delightful to watch, especially when she goes back and forth with Jeff.  I loved all the snappy dialogue in her scenes and I think all the political banter in the film would be enjoyed by today’s lovers of Aaron Sorkin.

Probably my favorite thing about "Mr. Smith," though, is how passionately Jeff pursues his goal to create a National Boys Camp, which eventually becomes a crusade to clear his name and take down a corrupt media syndicate that is essentially controlling the politicians from his state.  I think showing a passionate protagonist is hard for a lot of baby writers, especially depending on the genre you’re writing.  I always thought it was so easy in action/adventure movies…your protagonist needs to get the special object, save the love interest, collect all the clues...so, they go on a quest!  But when your protagonist wants something more mundane, it can be dull to watch them pursue it.  

Take "Mr. Smith," how exciting can a guy standing in a room talking to a bunch of other guys be?  Well, “Mr. Smith” does it, and every moment is extremely compelling because the stakes are so high and the rules behind what he’s doing are so well defined.  Jeff's about to be kicked out of the Senate, disgraced forever, if he wants to be heard he has to filibuster, in other words, he has to stand on his feet and talk for as long as he can.  I can’t help thinking it’s like Speed and Jimmy Stewart’s driving the bus, unable to go less than 50 or he’ll explode…in other words, scenes of a guy talking his head off become just as exciting as any action/adventure film.

You've probably seen this famous scene already in some Oscar montage...it comes near the end of the movie (if you haven't seen the movie yet, watch the whole thing first and enjoy it in context) otherwise, watch it again here and relive the magic of "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington."

Almost finished...

I’m almost done with my pilot!!!  Sigh…that was supposed to read: I FINISHED MY PILOT!!!  But, I’ve got to write this post before tomorrow, and at this moment I’ve still got 2 key scenes I’ve outlined that I’ve yet to write.  When those are done, I will do a little happy dance, then put the script away for a week…and then I’ll pick it up again and rip it apart.  I’m good on page count now, I had some problems with length early on, but now I’m at 57 pages with only the 2 scenes left to flesh out, so I think when I'm done editing I’m going to be close to my goal of 60 pages/a little less than 60 pages.  My only problem is that I think my first act still feels too long while a couple of the other acts feel too short…but fixing that will come LATER.

I know I need to get faster with my writing (the turnaround when you’re writing on an actual show is FAST…shows gotta get made) but since this is my pilot/baby and will probably only ever be a writing sample, I’m willing to massage and nurture it for a nice long time.

Next week while I'm letting the pilot rest, I’ll probably start a new spec for this year’s round of TV writing program applications (depending on what I decide to spec).  I’m trying not to start too soon since the fate of certain shows I’m interested in isn’t so certain right now, and I don’t want to get a ton of work done on a show that gets cancelled...so we'll see.

Anyway, that's all for now...gotta get back to work...BUT, as a side note, I will leave you with my random thought of the day and that is...what is up with that Adrien Brody Stella Artois commercial?  

"STELLAAAAAAA!" (said in Marlon Brando voice)

I find it SO…I don’t know…it’s kind of sexy, kind of nuts, kind of hilarious since he’s serenading a beer…at least it’s memorable.  Hey, side note to my original side note, did you know that Stella is like Bud in Europe (they’re actually both owned by Anheuser-Busch)?  My friend who has traveled a bit says that Europeans make fun of American hipsters who go on and on about how much they LOVE Stella because it’s like going on and on about how much you love Bud Light.  Okay, side note over, back to work!

Music in scripts - "The Proposal"

Yesterday I mentioned a lazy and not so good way to include music in your script.  In general, I think dictating the moments where music isn’t in the world of the characters (they can’t hear it) can be dangerous because it’s a crutch for using the song to tell your story instead of actually WRITING it yourself.  Conversely, I think good uses of music are often ones where the music interacts directly with characters.

One example that comes to mind is from the hit rom com The Proposal where Betty White and Sandra Bullock's characters sing and dance to Lil’ Jon's "Get Low."

Betty White knows how to get low.

While attention is obviously paid to the song, the scene isn’t funny because the song itself is funny and the writer was counting on the song alone to make the audience laugh.  The scene is funny because the characters (a sweet Grandma and an uptight control freak) singing and dancing to a song with dirty lyrics is a funny contradiction.  One other good thing about this use of music is that if I read it in a script and I thought it was funny, I know the movie could use a similar song if they couldn't get the rights to this one. That's because the CHARACTERS are the star of this scene NOT the song itself.

Music in scripts - what NOT to do

Okay, so maybe I gave some mixed messages yesterday.  I said, “Go ahead, put music in your script, just remember there’s a big chance people will judge you poorly for it.”  Well then, allow me to point out good and not so good ways to use music in a script.  Today, the not so good…

I’d say the most cringe inducing use of music in a script (regardless of your personal taste in music) looks something like this:

MUSICAL MONTAGE - RICK SPRINGFIELD’S "JESSIE’S GIRL"

Bob watches longingly as Jessie and Jane fall in love.

I think the main problem is the song is working too hard while you are not.  By writing this, you’re saying: “I’m gonna take a break and let "Jessie’s Girl" tell you the story because I’m not a good enough writer to write a scene about a guy wanting another guy’s girl.”  Not that a "Jesse’s Girl" montage wouldn’t be great/funny/whatever, this choice just looks lazy. 

So, before you put a music choice in a script, ask yourself: Is this song doing the work my writing should be doing?  Am I relying on the song to tell my story or set a tone that wouldn’t exist otherwise?  If the answers to those questions are yes, I’d say scrap the song and focus on your WRITING instead.

Must...use..."Jessie's Girl"...can't...stop...myself.

Can you put music in your script?

So, you've seen movies or read scripts that use music and now you want to write something like:

MUSICAL MONTAGE - QUEEN'S "BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY"

OR

CREDITS ROLL OVER JAMES TAYLOR'S "FIRE AND RAIN"

But, you've probably heard that's a big no no….so what gives?  Can you put music in your script?  Thinking about yesterday's post on Love Actually (which is full of music) made me want to write this post and now I’m gonna be a little controversial and say the answer to that question is YES.

A Billy Mack hit is ALWAYS welcome in a script

The music question is really a stand in for a bigger question: Can I break the unwritten rules of screenwriting?  In other words, can I write a 140 page script?  Can I write an 80 page script?  Can I put in camera angles?  Can I say what characters are thinking?  Can I write my script in the 1^st person? And so on.  The writers asking these questions usually want to break these rules and others (duh) but they’ve heard people say: DON’T DO IT!!!

So, why do I say yes?  Well, you’re the writer, even if you are a baby.  Write what you want to write!  If you want to include music because that’s your creative vision, then do it.  Some great scripts I've read break the music rule and I’d hate to discourage someone from writing something good because they were told they MUST MUST MUST do things a certain way.

BUT, be prepared for the consequences of your actions.  Baby writers can't get away with nearly as much rule breaking as pro writers.  So, what is breaking the rules worth to you?  If you do something that people say you shouldn’t (like assigning music choices) don’t be shocked or pissed if a friend/reader/people in general hate your rule breaking choice (or your taste in music).  Hollywood wants to find the next big thing, the money maker, the new fabulous talent, and it’s tough…if it was easy, every movie would be a critical and financial success.  People doubt their own taste sometimes…you enjoy a script you read that when made into an actual movie, totally blows (I’m still mad, P.S. I Love You).  So, if you see a “mistake” from a baby writer like telling us what song plays, it’s easy to feel more confident saying “this writer is an amateur”…PASS.

You must watch..."Love Actually"

Happy Valentine’s Day!  Gotta show some love to one of my favorite films about love, Love Actually.  You should watch it again if you haven't recently, and if you haven't seen it yet, watch it first then read this because...SPOILERS!

I think Love Actually is the type of film that interests lots of baby writers because so many want to write movies with big intertwining casts of characters (easy to screw up).  I caught Valentine’s Day on TV the other day.  At first glance it’s very similar to Love Actually...a whole bunch of interwoven stories about a single (and similar) subject (even the posters look the same).

Faces of Famous Actors: The Movie

So, why do I love Love Actually but only felt lukewarm about Valentine’s Day?  Was I simply charmed by British accents?  Maybe...but I think it goes deeper than that.  One problem I had with Valentine's Day was that it often felt too on the nose.  Too many people just talk talk talking and saying just what they're feeling and blah blah blah…just blah.  Love Actually does a nice job burying potentially on the nose moments.  For example, the scene where Juliet discovers Mark loves her, the movies SHOWS instead of TELLS (Juliet sees the video Mark has taken of her wedding, and it's all of her).

Also, when people do tell someone exactly how they feel, Love Actually often buries the moment with humor or other obstacles.  For example, in the scene where Jamie proposes to Aurelia, he has to speak a foreign language to her riddled with funny subtitled errors.  So, instead of the audience groaning while he says all those sappy things, we’re laughing and completely charmed.  Next time you want to write a scene where someone has to do/say something on the nose (like confess their love) find a way to bury the moment.

Another good example of this is the ending of When Harry Met Sally.  First, the movie keeps Harry's on the nose dialogue short and sweet ("The thing is, I love you") then, when Harry has more in depth/sentimental things to say (all the things he loves about Sally) those words are buried by making Harry say them in anger.  In turn, Sally is pissed and crying when she responds.  The characters are basically acting the opposite of what they're feeling.  The result is a scene that could have been overly sappy or cringe worthy but is instead,  funny, romantic, and simply lovely.

Speech Control to catch typos

It’s Friday, which means it’s time to talk about the exciting things I’m writing this week…okay, I’m still working on my pilot, but since I'm nearing the point where I'll be passing it along for notes, I’ll take a moment to talk typos (I was also thinking about typos since Lifehacker just did an article asking for tricks to avoid typos).  Don’t you just hate when you proof and spell check and proof and spell check, only to later find you made mistakes that were hard to catch e.g. repeated words that spanned 2 lines, mistakes spell check won’t catch like then instead of than, an instead of and, or any of the your or its variations?

I’ve been proofing my new pilot a lot this week as my first draft finally takes shape (well, I’ll say it’s a first draft when I show it to people, but it will be more like a 5^th draft when I’m done fixing it).  It’s really important to me not to have distracting mistakes when I pass off my work.  For starters, I want anyone reading it to focus on content and not technical errors.  I will have someone who doesn’t prefer to make story comments (like my significant other) proof for punctuation and grammar, but there’s one trick I really like for proof reading.

I’m sure I’m not the only one who uses this, but if you haven’t tried it, I love the Assign Voices and Speech Control features under Tools in Final Draft.  I think the real purpose of these features is to have the computer robots act out your script for you, but I usually just set all the characters and descriptions to 1 monotone robot voice and have it read.  It’s amazing what mistakes a robot 3^rd party will catch that your eye just glossed over after hours of reading.  Also, the robot voice will help you catch run on sentences you’ve ignored, or even better, chunks of action description and dialogue that are probably too long.

Speech Control is my robot friend

Reasons NOT to skip college

So, this interview with James Altucher appeared on the front page of Yahoo a few days ago.   You should read/watch it…Altucher's basic argument is that achievement minded people shouldn’t go to college.  I thought I'd comment on this idea since I’ve talked about college before (specifically the merits and/or worthlessness of film school).  While starting a business, traveling the world, and becoming a standup comedian (when you're 18) all sound like fun (and maybe even lucrative) alternatives to college, I’ve gotta say, that I TOTALLY DISAGREE with Mr. Altucher (but hey, he’s the expert and I’m not).

To skip or not to skip college?

First, let me reiterate how hard it is to get an entry level entertainment industry job without a college degree.  Let’s say you just want to be an assistant to a development exec…just to answer phones for someone, do their grunt work, and read piles of scripts, you usually need at least a year of work experience at an agency where you will first deliver mail, then answer phones, network in expensive clothes you can’t afford on your low salary...and you can’t get THAT job without a college degree.

I do understand a few things Altucher is saying, college is expensive and doing something else might save you (and your parents) some tuition money.  But honestly, I think he’s missing the point that most families pay for college with student loans.  Not that going into debt for several years for an education is a good thing, but it’s not like most families have a big fat account that they draw from to pay for school or support their kid for a few years.  Students live off loan money a lot of the time, with the expectation that their degree will lead to a job that will pay off (and it definitely will depending on your field…I don’t think too many petroleum engineers are hurting right now).  

Also, college students have access to internships and while some industry internships are bogus (and possibly illegal) some are great and can lead to future work/connections and you can only get them if you are getting school credit (for example, I was recommended for a PA job on a film when I was still in college all because of an internship I'd done the semester before).

So yeah, I say, don’t skip college, BUT I think there are a few good things to be gleaned from all this talk about alternatives to the usual college --> career path.  I think having lots of different jobs and trying lots of different things can be a really good thing (especially for a baby writer).  While you don’t want to isolate yourself too much from the industry and friends/connections... traveling, doing crazy things, and taking time to write will give you time to finish more work as well as cool stories that will make you stand out.  Also, it’s true, college is expensive, and I think waaaay more people need to look into doing community college for a couple years then transferring.

Oversharing

John August had a great post earlier this week about waiting to share script ideas so you don’t get discouraged by less than enthusiastic responses.  I was happy to read this, I know Blake Snyder has a sort of different opinion (if I’m not mistaken, he basically suggests constantly pitching loglines and seeing what people respond to) but I’m with Mr. August on this one because I have first hand experience with sharing too early.  I told my friend who is a reader I respect about the spec I was going to write that eventually got me a finalist spot for a TV writing program.  He was very blah about my idea, but it ended up being the best spec I ever wrote, and thank goodness I didn’t scrap it right then.

I think the biggest problem with sharing work when it's still just an idea is that most baby writers aren’t very experienced pitchers so when we're in casual situations where we aren't ready to pitch we might give a bad pitch OR when people ask us what we're working on in these types of situations, they only take notice when our ideas are really out there.  I mean, if I told you I was writing a movie called Zombie Rainbow Butt Rockets that might get your attention, but if I said I was writing a psychological drama about a troubled ballet dancer you might think…ballet dancer?  BOOOORING!  But, I’m pretty sure Black Swan is a way better movie than Zombie Rainbow Butt Rockets.

On the flip side, I think you must share your work and get feedback when you have something to show (John August mentions around 20ish pages).  Being too secretive about projects will turn you into that person who thinks your work is too brilliant to have a logline or too complicated to explain, which is just bogus.  Think of it this way, how will Tom Hanks possibly intro a montage of your Best Picture nominated masterpiece at the Oscars if the plot of your movie can’t be condensed into about 20 seconds worth of description?

The simple joys of sharing.

Pilots or Specs?

Since I touched on this last Friday, I figured I’d do an actual post on it.  What should you write...pilots or specs?  I think the answer is…BOTH! but I get that’s kind of a cop out so I’ll elaborate by saying specs THEN pilots.

I guess specs are becoming kind of worthless to pro TV writers, but they still have a lot of value to baby TV writers.  For starters, writing specs is a great way to learn and get your feet wet.  More importantly, specs are still used for all the major TV writing fellowships and programs (i.e. many of the programs listed under the "CONTESTS AND STUFF" section on the right, that you should be entering).  So, if you want to be a TV writer I would suggest starting out with a spec, better yet 2 specs before you write a pilot…in fact don’t bother entering ANY of the major TV writing program/contests if you haven’t written AT LEAST 2 specs, because if you make it far enough, you WILL have to give a 2^nd sample (as I’ve mentioned a few times, I was once a finalist for one of these programs, and after I made the 1^st cut, I had to give a 2^nd sample).  Once you have at least 2 specs you’re really proud of, I think you can write a pilot, and your pilot will be better for waiting and learning.  

My only other piece of advice to fellow baby TV writers plugging away on specs would be to try to streamline yourself and think about who you are as a writer when you pick the shows you want to spec.  Pick shows you like and shows with a similar tone/genre to the pilot(s) you want to write and remember that most TV fellowships/programs are divided along the lines of 1/2 hour = comedy and 1 hour = drama…this isn’t the Golden Globes, a show like Glee is always considered a drama because it’s an hour long, so don’t write a Glee thinking it’s a great comedy sample…better yet, don’t write a Glee at all.  Moreover, while I think it’s fine to show range and variety with your samples, don’t go all over the place.  If you want to write drama, stick to 1 hour samples, if you want to write comedy, stick to 1/2 hour samples and don’t write a Mad Men then a Hellcats…or a The Walking Dead then a Gossip Girl…or a Fringe then a Desperate Housewives.  I know everyone has varied tastes and you might love all these shows, but that’s way too many niches and genres and I don’t think a reader for one of the programs would know what kind of writer you were if any of those combos were your 2 samples.

Finally, if you haven’t yet, you should read every single post about specs on Jane Espenson’s blog (link under the "YOU MUST READ" section on the right…seriously, don’t write a word until you’ve done that).

Learn the basics before composing your original masterpiece.

  by  jeanpierrelavoie 

You must watch..."Marty"

TCM has been playing tons of awesome movies in their countdown to the Oscars.  Seriously, my DVR is busting.  Anyway, last week I caught the lovely film, Marty.  I saw the movie for the first time several years ago, but I think my first introduction to it was that scene in Quiz Show where Marty is the right answer to the question “What movie won Best Picture 1955?” and the guy has to throw it and say On The Waterfront, which won in 1954…yeah…now I’ll never forget what year both of those films won Best Picture.

Marty was written by the much celebrated Paddy Chayefsky…perhaps most well known for writing this famous scene/line in the movie Network:

But back to Marty, I think lots of baby writers turn away from “classic” movies thinking they’re too old/stuffy/epic and the storylines don’t connect with the types of movies they want to write (often smaller, “indie” movies).  The funny thing is that I think Marty fits in that indie film aesthetic.  The movie is beautifully simple - just two days in the life of a single working class everyman who goes on a "date" with a plain woman who he connects with emotionally.  A guy goes on a date...that’s it.  Most of it is just people talking about life and hanging out around the city...sounds pretty "indie" to me.  So yeah, don’t let the age of the film deter you…just go see it, and try to not to get invested in the lives of these characters.

Speaking of which…I think there’s so much a writer can learn from Marty (basic structure, dialogue) but I think the biggest thing I took away from it was the characters…all of the characters.  Chayefsky not only writes a protagonist who I cared deeply about, but he gives each character their due, even the small ones.  I think lots of baby writers use or throw in smaller characters to help spread out exposition or to be small foils for their protagonist, but the small characters in Marty aren’t puppets and don’t get the shaft like that.  In a movie so dominated by one character and one actor (Marty) we still get several scenes where we see smaller characters (like Marty’s cousin, his cousin’s wife, his aunt) living their own lives and having their own problems and dramas and opinions…these are all three dimensional characters.  I think having richly written small characters makes for a richer world in your script, one that feels "real" which in turn makes your audience care what happens to all of these people...I mean characters (see, Chayefsky wrote them so well, I think of them as real people).

Keep warm, keep writing

I’m actually out of town today/the rest of the weekend and am writing this on Thursday – okay, I always write the day(s) before my posts go up, but this one feels like funny time travel since I'm away from my office.

Today, I’m someplace that should be warm but isn’t because of the residual effects of all the crazy weather our country has been having.  Seriously, I hear it’s like The Day After Tomorrow in all those “flyover” states where most of my family lives.   But hey, if you’re stuck inside, what better time to buckle down and get some writing done?

Speaking of writing, I’m feeling better about my pilot now on several levels.  Probably mostly importantly, I was talking to a TV writer friend who recently made the jump from baby writer to pro, and they stressed the importance of having lots of samples, in particular original samples (i.e. pilots over specs).  I guess this shift from pilots to specs has been happening for some time now, but it feels good to be on the right path.  I mean, my friend basically said that agents don’t even want to look at you if you don’t have a pilot…or alternatively that they know several pro writers who made their mark with one really excellent pilot.  So, pilots away, keep warm, keep writing, and have a lovely weekend everyone!

Comedy comes from pain

To conclude the whole unlikable protagonist/Groundhog Day kick I've been on this week, I thought I'd talk just a little about one big reason why I think Groundhog Day is so darn funny.

There's this saying that comedy comes from pain.  I googled to see who said it first, but it has been passed around so much it's hard to say (maybe Plato?).  I think the idea is clearest when you think about the old gag of the man and the banana peel.  Watching a guy fall on a banana peel = funny...i.e. comedy comes from pain.  But, it's even BETTER when you take it one step further.  What's funnier than a simple banana peel slip (or a kick in the balls)?  Why, a banana peel slip that happens to someone who will experience the MOST pain from it.  Think about it, what's funnier: a clumsy clown slipping on a banana peel or a well dressed and proper gentleman slipping on a banana peel?  What if that gentleman is also arrogant about how prim and proper he is?  I think that's kind of the idea at work in Groundhog Day.  A fairly nice guy being forced into a frustrating time loop might be funny, but it's WAY funnier when that guy is like Phil, a slightly arrogant and easily annoyed jerk.

I think Judd Apatow has done this well quite a few times.  Look at The 40 Year Old Virgin.  There's the pain: being single/trying to date...then make it WORSE by making your protagonist a virgin...and WORST because they happen to be 40 years old.  Knocked Up is the same.  There's the pain: dealing with an unexpected pregnancy...then make it WORSE by making the couple a one night stand...and WORST when the guy is an irresponsible schlub like Seth Rogan (and the woman is a control freak like Katherine Heigl).

So there you have it, a way to put your likable OR unlikable protagonist to use...imagine them getting into the situation that will cause them the absolute most pain/awkwardness/whatever, and you might just have the makings of a really funny comedy.

Groundhog Day!

Yay!  It's Groundhog Day today which means it's time to roll out one of my favorite movies of all time. Wanting to write this post actually gave me the idea for yesterday's post about unlikable protagonists (though I would call Phil a charming asshole way before I'd say he's "unlikable").  Still, while he changes some of his attitudes drastically in the movie I think he maintains a charming ass quality throughout.  I would say this is due to Bill Murray's performance in the role, which even when he's being sentimental (as he does in the scene below when he tells Rita goodbye) is always tinged with...I don't know...comedic self awareness (or just Bill Murray being Bill Murray).  

There are tons of hilarious dialogue scenes in the film, especially those where Phil adjusts what he's doing to try to win over Rita, but I always remember this great little car chase.  For one, it has the line, "Don't drive angry" addressed to the groundhog...and animals are funny.  Sometimes animals get stuck in movies where they don't belong (in a lame attempt at humor) but here, the groundhog is obviously essential to the car chase even happening.  Also, there is a nice that's good, that's bad moment near the end -- the car goes off the cliff (that's bad), but the way it lands, maybe Phil survived (that's good) until it explodes (that's bad).  And finally, how many movies can kill off the protagonist halfway through the movie and make me laugh at the same time?

If you haven't seen this amazing and hilarious movie, what the heck are you waiting for?

Does a protagonist need to be likable?

When the movie American Splendor came out it caused a stir among some of my film school friends.  While some enjoyed the biopic about comic book writer Harvey Pekar, others said they hated the film and couldn’t finish watching it because the protagonist was so unlikable -- if you haven’t seen video of the real Pekar (who passed away last year) you should check out one of his appearances on late night TV…he’s not exactly Jimmy Stewart.

This leads me to a question I often hear (usually due to the fact that baby writers get the comment to make their protagonists more “likable”): Does a protagonist need to be likable?  I say: NO…BUT.  Let me explain…

I think it's okay to write scripts about whoever you want, likable or unlikeable to the outside world (if your protagonist is SUPPOSED to likable but isn't, that's a different problem).  So yeah, write an unlikable character...BUT...and it's a BIG BUT, you’ve got to make me understand why that character is the way they are and understand that your unlikable protagonist probably DOESN'T think that they are actually unlikable. Think of your protagonist (and each character) as a real person and get in their head.  If your unlikable character has reasons or justifications for their actions, the audience can buy into them.  I think a good recent example is The Social Network (I guess biopics get less grief for unlikable protagonists because they’re showing you “real people”).  Mark Zuckerberg always has reasons for the "unlikable" things he does.  He fires his best friend because he thought he was hurting the company, he defends his actions towards the frat boy twins because he saw them as rich condescending jerks who couldn’t see the true potential of a good idea…and so on.

Now, this isn’t to say I won’t enjoy something with a likable protagonist more than an unlikable protagonist (let’s get real, do I want to spend 2-3 hours with someone I can’t stand?).  On the other hand, I think “likable” is subjective.  I know people who say Scarlett O’Hara is unlikable and while she goes through a lot of changes, I wouldn’t say her personality does a 180 even after 4 hours of Gone With The Wind.  It’s true, she is basically a spoiled brat who whines, complains, and often isn’t nice.  But, I happened to enjoy Gone With The Wind (the book AND the movie) and I think while Scarlett isn’t the sweetest, I get why she is the way she is (e.g. she's entitled because she was raised that way).  I also think those bad qualities are actually good because they contrast the circumstances she is thrown into and make for an interesting story (a spoiled Southern bell forced to come face to face with the realities of The Civil War).  I would MUCH rather watch THAT movie than a movie about Melanie, Scarlett's friend/rival who is unquestionably kind, nice, and “likable.”

So there you have it.  You can write a script with an “unlikable” protagonist, just think about why they are that way, why they do the things they do, and know that they probably don't think that they are unlikable.  When you do this, you might be surprised to find yourself liking your unlikable protagonist.