the bullhead giveaway

i have been fortunate enough to have worked on nine feature films that have made their way into cinemas across the globe and with another three being released this year and two more going into production, i am very happy with the way my career has been going. there has, however, been one thing missing – i have never had one of the films i have worked on be released theatrically in my homeland britain.

that changes tomorrow (friday feb 1) with the uk release of the belgian film ‘bullhead‘, oscar nominated last year for best foreign film. you can read more on my ‘bullhead’ adventures here and here.

to celebrate this, i am offering three writers who follow me on twitter a free, 2-hour, one-to-one consultation on a script of their choice. my speciality is features, but i will also be happy to look at tv pilots, tv episodes, shorts and webseries.

the selection process

to begin with, send a logline and a one-page synopsis to me – philATscriptguyphilDOTcom – and i will begin selecting those that interest me.

for the second phase, i will ask for the first ten pages of your script, and after reading those i will select the three successful scripts.

after reading the three scripts, i will then get in touch to arrange a mutually convenient time to chat.

note:- do NOT send complete scripts or the first ten pages unless i ask for them. if you do, they will be deleted without opening, although your logline and one-page will still be eligible.

there are some conditions, but i’ve tried to limit them as best i can.

i) the offer is only open to those who follow me on twitter

ii) scripts should be no more than 150 pages

iii) scripts should be properly formatted (if you’re unsure, check here for the basics), and as a pdf file

iv) scripts must NOT be in development at a production company or similar

v) as a writer, you will have had no more than one feature film been released theatrically (anywhere in the world)

vi) all genres are allowed – i like any genre as long as they are written well!

vii) the consultations will take place via skype

viii) scripts must be in either english or danish

ix) the scripts should be completed drafts – anywhere from the 1st draft to the 100th!

the deadline for the logline and one-page synopsis is sunday february 17th at 23.59 gmt

if you have any questions, feel free to contact me at philATscriptguyphilDOTcom or via twitter.

best of luck to you and i look forward to reading some great work

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

star wars first draft

believed to be one of the first drafts of ‘star wars’ by george lucas and dated may 1974, this is one for fans who can see where this iconic series of films began.

it is a first, rough draft and absolutely a work-in-progress. usually, out of respect for the writer, i would never post a draft of a screenplay at the stage this is at, but as it is nearly 40 years old, and considering lucas has passed everything on now, it seems reasonable to consider this as both a learning tool and something for fans of the series to enjoy.

The Star Wars

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

follow me on twitter and facebook

finding inspiration everywhere

this is the 2nd of 2 short summer posts looking at inspiration. this one looks at how inspiration can show up absolutely anywhere and how it is important to keep your eyes and ears open in the hunt for that gem of a story or even a scene or character.

a few weeks ago, the film safety not guaranteed opened in america, an indie ‘time-travel’ film that i am looking forward to seeing. the basic premise is “three magazine employees head out on an assignment to interview a guy who placed a classified ad seeking a companion for time travel” (imdb), but what was just as interesting to me was how this story began.

a man called john silveira was asked to write some jokes as filler for the thin classified pages in the sept/oct 1997 issue of backwoods home magazine by a friend who worked at the publication. the classified ad (pictured above) sent america’s media into a frenzy as they searched for this self-professed ‘time traveler’.

(as it happens, the text was the opening to an unpublished novel of silveira’s!)

that the ‘poster’ of this advert was anonymous only increased the curiosity of the media! eventually, writer derek connolly and director colin trevorrow took the idea of the search for this person and made their movie.

inspiration can come from anywhere!

there is a terrific scene in the player written by michael tolkin, where are a group of studio executives discuss how ideas can be found. (there are no character names here, just the dialogue.)

“I’m just saying there’s time and money to be saved…if we came up with these stories on our own.”
“Where are these stories coming from?”
“Anywhere. It doesn’t matter. The newspaper. Pick any story.”
“Immigrants protest budget cuts in literacy program.”
“Human spirit overcoming human adversity. Sounds like Horatio Alger in the barrio. Put Jimmy Smits in it and you’ve got a sexy Stand and Deliver. Next. Come on.”
“This isn’t my field.”
“It doesn’t matter. Give it a shot. You can’t lose here.”
“How about ‘Mud slide kills hundreds in slums of Chile’?”
“That’s good. Triumph over tragedy. Sounds like a John Boorman picture. Slap a happy ending on it, the script will write itself.”

the irony of this scene is that the executives are finding out ways of creating stories themselves in order to eliminate the writer from the process, but the idea that you could open a newspaper or visit a news website and adapt a story from any real life event is very clear. try it sometime – it is exercise for the creative mind if nothing else, and who knows what you might find!

happy writing and have a great summer

phil

scriptguyphil.com

you can also follow me and make comments on twitter and facebook

remembering what got you started

this is the 1st of 2 short summer posts looking at inspiration. this one looks at keeping a hold of the first seed of an idea that started you on the long road to getting your story onto the screen.

in an interview with f/x executive john landgraf on kcrw’s podcast the business, he discussed, amongst other things, the working methods of american stand-up and tv star louis ck.

one of the interesting points that came up was that when writing his tv show, louis ck only writes a first draft, preferring the raw instinct of his original thoughts to refining the writing to a more streamlined and (hopefully) perfect place.

louis ck made his start, and continues to perform, as a stand-up comedian, so it stands to reason that the idea of a live performance would creep into his writing style somehow.

now it takes a very special talent to be able to pull that off, and as a script consultant i tend to agree more with william goldman when he stated that “writing is re-writing” in his book adventures in the screen trade. but listening to the interview, it struck me that in the constant re-writing that goes on with most projects can often lead to too much diluting of the original idea, the original inspiration, and that the heart and soul of a story can disappear if you’re not careful.

one of the first questions i ask of a writer if the process has begun to get bogged down a little is “what was the single, original image that put you on the path to writing this story?”, and it usually is an image. the big ‘what if?’ question comes at an early stage, but i’m talking about that moment when inspiration struck. if you dig deep enough (although you probably won’t have to), it will come back to you and hopefully remind you where this story was born.

so if you get bogged down, try and remember that key moment – it might help you get back on track!

happy writing and have a great summer

phil

scriptguyphil.com

you can also follow me and make comments on twitter and facebook

you write because you love it, right?

charlton heston and edward g. robinson in soylent green

while relaxing on the set of soylent green (1973), which was to be his final film, cinema legend edward g. robinson overheard a young actor complaining about the length of time they had to wait between takes. edward g. robinson agreed that it was irritating then said,

“i figure that’s what they pay me for. the acting i do for free.”

now here is a guy who obviously loved what he did! a film career that spanned 57 years and 101 films including little caesar, double indemnity, key largo, the cincinnati kid and the aforementioned soylent green, is evidence of that.

there is something to be gained from robinson’s attitude to work. his approach to which elements of his job as an actor were most important to him can be adapted to any creative field. so let’s look at why it is important to condition yourself psychologically into working for ‘free’.

as i’m sure you’ve heard many times before, writing is not the best choice of occupation if you want to be rich. storytellers do it because they love it and are compelled to do it, and if they can crank out a living out of it then that is often enough. making a living, however, requires additional skills than simply being able to spin gold out of letters and words.

when you’re working on a project, there is more to do than writing a great script. if you’re working for a production company there will be (potentially annoying and soul destroying) notes sessions, treatments and outlines to write and possibly pitching to financiers and other creative talent. writers that enjoy all of these aspects are few and far between – if you are one of them, then my hat off to you – but for many writers, these are tasks that keep you from writing scripts.

in the same way, if you are writing on spec, there is a huge amount of legwork necessary in the attempt to get producers, agents, etc., interested in you and your work. researching which production companies or agencies to approach, and which employee at those companies are the right ones to contact first, is a time consuming process. and then there is the dreaded day job if you have one – the need to put food on the table and pay your rent can take a huge chunk of your day.

this is why i feel it is important to condition yourself psychologically into believing that when you sit down to write your scripts, you are doing it for love not money. sure, its a job, but it is one you have chosen because it is what you want to do!

it is your story and they are your characters that you have nurtured and grown to love. you enjoy spending time with them and you either wonder what they’re going to get up to or how they’re going to react to what you’re about to throw at them. even when you are hired to write on a project that isn’t yours, you should find yourself eager to get to know your new found friends and what makes them tick. you have to give yourself into it otherwise it will show in your work.

relatively few people have jobs that they absolutely love, so when it is time to write, free your mind of the pressures of the real world and any money that’s involved and simply enjoy the creativity – it is what you live for after all!

it worked for edward g. robinson – i hope it works for you too!

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

you can also follow me and make comments on twitter and facebook

to the power of three

regardless of what brought you to writing – a love of telling stories, the ‘lone wolf’ lifestyle or whether it is something you simply have to do – there is no way of getting away from the fact that the film industry is a collaborative industry. even if you are steven soderbergh or robert rodriguez who shoot and edit their own films, they still work with countless others, including writers, on their films.

a great many filmmakers work with the same writers and/or crew on a regular basis, but what i want to talk about here is a triangle of collaborators that form a solid foundation for a successful and extended career:–

writer – producer – director.

making the leap into the world of professional screenwriting on your own is a daunting task! one of the best ways to make this task a little easier is to form alliances as early as possible.

you could hook up with a producer that likes your work and will get to you to do some re-writing work and build things from there. you could go to festivals and meet other filmmakers who share your perspective and taste. you could answer advertisements and work for free on shorts being made in and around your area in the hope of making some good contacts that way. all of these are valid ways of making friends and new potential collaborators, particularly if you’re coming into the industry cold.

alternatively, you could look closer to home. many of you have been involved in the industry in one way or another already. and many of you will have been to, or are still going to, film school or another kind of film/media study programme. i’m sure even at an early stage that you will have made close friends who are also ready to break into the industry? are there potential collaborating partners in your close circle of friends?

when looking at the writer-producer-director triangle, there are three examples of how successful collaborations can be formed:–

the first one that sprang to mind was the triangle of john hodge, andrew macdonald and danny boyle.

hodge was (and still is, i believe!) a doctor by trade, but he met macdonald at the edinburgh film festival in 1991. this meeting obviously inspired hodge to write a screenplay – which became shallow grave (1994). once it was finished the hunt for a director was on. that hunt ended when they saw the tv drama mr. wroe’s virgins, directed by boyle. the triangle was complete! together they made shallow grave, the era-defining trainspotting (1996), a life less ordinary (1997), a short film alien love triangle (1999) and the beach (2000). they have also worked in pairs with macdonald producing the boyle-directed 28 days later (2002) and executive producing films written by hodge, the final curtain (2002) and the sweeney (2012). boyle has recently directed a film, trance, co-written by hodge, which is currently in post production.

the next threesome has created some of the funniest and most engaging comedies of the last decade – simon pegg, nira park and edgar wright.

this collaboration began when pegg and wright worked together on the tv comedy series asylum in 1996. pegg got together with another performer on the series, jessica hynes and they wrote the cult series spaced. having both worked with wright before, they brought him in to direct. the series was produced by channel 4, but a co-producer was big talk productions run by nira park. since spaced, they have worked together on shaun of the dead (2004), hot fuzz (2007) and are due to be making the world’s end (2014). park has also produced the wright-directed scott pilgrim vs. the world (2010), as well as paul (2011) co-written by and starring pegg.

the final triangle i want to mention is relatively new – antonio campos, sean durkin and josh mond.

this is an interesting triangle because they all want to write and direct their own films. what makes the difference here is that the writer-director of a project is backed up by the other two who act as producers. they met at new york university’s film school (although only one graduated), and soon after set up their production company borderline films. after producing 4 shorts together, their first feature was afterschool (2008) directed by campos. their follow-up was the excellent martha marcy may marlene (2011) directed by durkin. their next film, simon killer, also directed by campos, has been picked up for distribution but no release date has been set. to hear their story in their own words, check out the q & a with jeff goldsmith podcast on martha marcy may marlene – where you will also hear why josh mond is yet to step into the director’s chair!

there are important things to consider when forming collaborative partnerships. all parties need to have the same kind of drive and love for filmmaking, everyone needs to pull their weight in whatever role they have taken on and above all there needs to be trust – you need to know that your partners have your back and will go that extra mile for you! i wrote a blogpost about how to assess a working relationship, which you can read here.

making the leap into the industry will always be daunting no matter what, but if you are not making that jump alone and you are with people you trust, then it makes that leap just a little bit easier!

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

if you have any comments or other examples of writer-producer-director triangles, then feel free to post them here, or you can also find me on twitter and facebook!

culture clash

i recently came home from a fun and intensive three days at the berlin film festival, where i met with filmmakers from more than 20 different countries. i heard a great many stories from many different cultures, which highlighted one of my favourite parts of my job and this industry. i find cultural differences deeply fascinating, and an integral part of what makes the film industry such a terrific area to work in.

just by looking at what is on offer at my local arthouse cinema today proves the  diversity of global filmmaking – an american film set in the uk, a danish documentary set in russia, an american film, a german documentary, a danish film, a japanese animation based on a beloved english story, a french romantic comedy, a film by an italian director made in the u.s., an iranian drama and a classic british novel directed by an american.

on a personal level, i have worked on films made in denmark, belgium, romania and canada, and have helped develop projects in the u.s., the u.k., france, spain, germany, poland, sweden and australia – and i wouldn’t have it any other way!

cultural differences present to me, not only an extraordinary variety in the projects i get the chance to work on and the writers, producers and directors i get to work with, but also one of the greatest challenges in my work.

back when i worked on belgian film bullhead (rundskop), a situation arose where the production company had worked extremely hard to reduce the number of shooting days in compliance with their projected budget, and they were still a few days too many. as i had already worked on 6 drafts of the script, they asked me to take a few days to find potential ways of reducing shooting days by cutting, combining locations, etc. i was very knowledgeable of the story, but still enough of an outsider to not be too attached to the script in a way that might affect my judgment on whether certain elements of the script were absolutely necessary or whether the production team were simply too attached to them.

one of the things i chose to do was to cut two characters (the two french mechanics) who were part of a subplot that had a small influence on the main story. i found a way of incorporating the important information from their scenes concisely into other parts of the story.

however, by doing this i had unwittingly eliminated an important part of the tone of the film relating to cultural differences. when i had worked on drafts of the script they had been translated from flemish to english, so the elements regarding the differences between flemish-speaking and french-speaking belgians had been slightly lost in translation. these cultural differences mirrored somewhat the suspicions between the flemish farmers and the french-belgian mafia that runs throughout the story. having now seen the final film, i can see what the mechanics mean to the tone, and i can understand more clearly why they are there.

in the end, we got the shooting days down, the film got made and was recently nominated for an oscar as best foreign film. and i got to learn something about the cultural differences in belgium!

as an englishman, it was an eye-opener that two countries such as england and belgium would have such pronounced cultural differences. they are so close geographically, and are both part of western europe.

many filmmakers from all corners of the globe have tried to make films in hollywood, or at the very least in english or a language different from their native one with varying degrees of success. Right from the early days of silent and talkies, filmmakers from europe (curtiz, lang, wilder, etc) have moved to America and become influential filmmakers. many suggest that the combination of a european sensibility combined with american culture is what has made the films of these filmmakers so interesting – and i’m inclined to agree with that idea.

three prominent danish directors have tried, with varying degrees of success, to make films in english and/or the u.s.

lars von trier has been incredibly successful in critical circles for many years now – albeit with a certain amount of controversy and he often divides critics. he is certainly more highly regarded outside of denmark than he is at home, but he has also never truly cracked the american market, which possibly highlights a european/american divide.

thomas vinterberg, after the huge success of his breakout film festen also tried to make the leap into english like von trier. the two films he made, its all about love and dear wendy, (the latter interestingly enough written by von trier), were both highly ambitious, critically mixed, financial failures. vinterberg is now back on track making films in denmark, including the impressive submarino.

nicolas winding refn is the one director that seems to have the ability to adapt himself better to all markets. his story is an interesting one. he broke out with pusher  and bleeder, then went to america to make the underrated and underseen fear x. after financial troubles, he relaunched his career with pusher 2 and pusher 3, two highly successful films, then went to the u.k. to make bronson and valhalla rising. most recently he made drive in the u.s. all of these films have been well-received critically and, with the exception of fear x, have had financial success.

one of the most prominent filmmakers of the last 2 decades is ang lee. after success in taiwan, he was an unusual choice to say the least to direct an adaptation of the very british sense and sensibility. a film not in his own language or time period, you could be forgiven for thinking he might be out of his depth. however, emma thompson, the film’s writer, said that it was precisely because of this cultural difference that stopped the film being the usual british period drama, and gave it an additional dimension and took the film to a higher level. it was a financial and commercial success garnering 7 oscar nominations. he since made a number of successful films in locations, time periods and genres (brokeback mountain, the ice storm, lust, caution, etc) that wouldn’t at face value seem to be a good match for ang lee, but that he has adapted to and brought his own cultural sensibilities to the project that have added something to these films.

whether it is the project, the person or a combination of the two that makes the transition succeed or not is as difficult a question to answer as what makes a film successful.

with so many films receiving financing from multiple countries, it is important, now more than ever, to embrace cultural differences. we are working in a global industry now and i see that as a very positive development.

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

(and you can follow me here on twitter and facebook)

it ain’t what you do its the way that you do it!

back in 2002, i pitched an idea to a number of producers for a thriller involving a cycle courier. the basic idea was that the best (and most arrogant) cycle courier in copenhagen was requested to deliver three packages around the city in a short period of time. after he is successful he finds millions have been deposited in his bank account, and the three prominent businessmen he delivered the packages to have all been assassinated. he has been framed and must clear his name. cue masses of tension and some breakneck cycle/car chases around copenhagen’s very photogenic city streets!

generic action film? sure! but i thought it would have at least been an interesting angle for an action film. i did some preliminary research and interviewed some cycle couriers to get an idea of their day to day routine and the aspects of the job so the script would at least have an element of reality.

i then started to work on a few other projects as a script consultant and came to realise that consulting was what i wanted to do and what i was best at. the courier film got filed away in my subconscious – although i do admit to playing out the action scenes in my head from time to time!

fast forward to 2012 and a new film by david koepp, premium rush will be coming out in august. here is the logline – “In Manhattan, a bike messenger picks up an envelope that attracts the interest of a dirty cop, who pursues the cyclist throughout the city.”

generic action film? sure! but its an interesting angle for an action film!

before you start to worry, this is not going to be me griping about someone stealing my idea – they clearly didn’t – but it reinforces the theory that it isn’t originality that matters – it is execution.

the legend goes that the minute you have an idea for a new story, four other people around the world have had the same, or at least a very similar, idea. as ridiculous as that sounds, it makes sense sometimes when so many films being released today seem to be a re-hash or an amalgam of other films that have gone before.

i’ve also read different arguments suggesting that there are only 5, 7 or 13 ‘pure’ stories – take your pick – but it is how you apply elements of those stories to your writing.

however many ‘pure’ stories there are, and how many people around the world have the same idea as you, the execution of your idea is key. if you execute well enough there’s a chance you will rise to the top of the heap and get your script out there and onto the big screen.

i was one of, i’m sure, many people around the world who’s jaws dropped when they found out that david fincher was going to make a facebook movie. i really like fincher as a director, but he isn’t a director where i feel the need to be a completist. i suspected at that early stage that the social network would probably be a film i wouldn’t see, at least on the big screen. when details eventually emerged that it was about the personal conflicts surrounding the start up of facebook i became more interested and when i finally saw the film, i was riveted from start to finish – because it was executed so well.

this isn’t about being first to the post either. great execution of a story will also give a film the opportunity of becoming a classic later on down the line. for example, in 1990 three gangster movies were released in quick succession between september and december. goodfellas, miller’s crossing and the godfather part 3 came out in that order with varied success. they earned $47 million, $5 million and $67 million respectively (figures u.s. domestic box office – source box office mojo).

i love ‘goodfellas’, and although its not particularly good, i’ve never thought that ‘the godfather part 3’ is quite as bad as its reputation suggests, but of the three ‘miller’s crossing’ would be my favourite – and it made nothing on its original release. you could say that the coen brothers later success has helped keep the film in the public eye, but i say it is such a brilliantly executed film from the script on down that it stands the test of time better than the other two. ‘goodfellas’ may still be a more popular and lauded film, but for me, ‘miller’s crossing’ is more timeless.

so if you feel that the story you are really keen to write may not be the most original story ever, find the angle that hasn’t been done before and use your unique writer’s voice to execute the story in the best and most original way you can think of.

its hard to remember the last truly ‘original’ film that i saw, but i see well-executed ones all the time!

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

(and you can follow me here on twitter and facebook)

being a writer-producer

the legend goes that samuel goldwyn, one of the great hollywood movie moguls of old, once said, “writers have all the power in hollywood. we just have to make sure that they never find out.”

the amount of power writers actually have varies from production to production, but more often than not, once the writer’s work is done and production starts, the director and production team take over leaving the writer to a) start work on the next project and b) wonder whether the script they toiled so hard over is being treated well or not.

a small percentage of writers are lucky enough to be on set for re-writes and will have some creative input in the editing phase, but the majority will only have a minor influence once the script has been handed over.

it doesn’t seem fair that someone who has put so much creativity into a piece of work has to sit back as others bastardise and make changes to the work you have done – sometimes for the better, sometimes for worse. but they are still changing what you have done.

that’s fair enough to a certain extent as film is a collaborative process, which is one of the reasons i love working in this industry. (there is nothing better than sitting down with a writer, director and producer to discuss a script and find that everybody clicks and the project improves as a result). and hopefully you have been paid well for your work.

what i do find difficult to take is how the balance of influence seems to be misplaced. why is it that a writer has less overall influence than some others involved in the production of a feature film? that is a question that has been discussed for decades with no clear answer, but regardless of what the answer to that question is, it just doesn’t seem right that the person that started the ball rolling – in fact actually built the ball, often from scratch – is left twiddling their thumbs wondering how everything will turn out.

rightly or wrongly, film is a director’s medium – you only have to look at the ridiculous “a film by…” credit! – and seems that it will remain so for the time being, but that doesn’t mean a writer should lie down and take it!

some writers end up deciding to direct their own scripts, which gives them much more creative control. however, that is also very time consuming, and a lot of writers either don’t want to commit to that – because they want to write – or they find it hard to be given the opportunity because they don’t have the experience.

that is why more and more writers are becoming writer-producers.

here’s a list of names for you – all have served as writer-producers. some have also directed, but the titles listed here are writer-producer credits only.

steven zaillian – girl with the dragon tattoo (2011), american gangster

mark boal – the hurt locker

matthew vaughn – the debt

rick jaffa/amanda silver – rise of the planet of the apes

charlie kaufman – being john malkovich, human nature, adaptation, eternal sunshine of the spotless mind

and not forgetting luc besson who has been doing this for many years and has 22 credits as writer-producer on top of the films he wrote, produced and directed!

a separate list would include people like judd apatow or j.j. abrams who are ‘multi-hyphenates’, but are chiefly thought of in the industry as producers who write, and occasionally direct.

to show that you don’t have to be a big shot writer to be a writer-producer, here is another list of writer-producers on lower-budget, independently produced films that have also found relative success.

steven gaydos – road to nowhere

brandon freeman/heath freeman – skateland

deborah calla – a beautiful life

robert longstreet – septien

all of these films have been released in the last 6 months alone and account for less than half of the films released on the independent circuit with a writer-producer credited, so it is possible to become a writer-producer regardless of your experience or the size of the film as long as you do the work.

if you are a writer than wants to hold on to a certain amount of creative control then you should try and work your way to a producer’s role. there are three main producer credits of any weight for you to choose from –

‘producer’ – you could become the major producer of the film, controlling the hiring and firing, the financial and organizational aspects of the whole production. this, however, is even more time consuming than being a director. you would be on the project longer than anyone else, and would need to be available to everyone 24/7. unless you have the energy of the duracell bunny, chances are that it will be unlikely that you would be able to write your next masterpiece and produce a film at the same time.

‘executive producer’ – this is where you would aid the production financially in some way, either through your own private financing or by deferring some or all of your fee in return for more input down the line. an executive producer credit is also the one given to a writer who has been on a project at an earlier stage, but when the project takes a different direction and the writer leaves, they are given this credit as a thank you and/or a pay-off.

‘associate producer’ – this is by far the most appealing of the producer credits for a writer. the definition is often confused with the ‘executive’ credit, but whereas the ‘executive’ is predominantly a silent partner, the ‘associate’ is defined as a person who has done an extensive amount of creative work throughout the production – enough to warrant more than a straightforward writing credit. this would mean that you might have been doing extensive re-writes on set, probably outside what has been set out in your contract, or had some input during the editing phase, as well as perhaps having input with the actors and other creatives in rehearsals or pre-production. you would give up a certain amount of time performing this role, but you would be able to split your time between production and writing your next script. this, to me, makes it the optimal producing role for a writer who wants some creative control, but who also wants time to move on with other projects.

a fourth, lesser credit is that of ‘creative producer’. this is a more ephemeral title, and is used on smaller films as someone who has been highly involved on the creative side in the early stages, chiefly in development, but has little influence during production and post. on larger films the ‘creative producer’ is someone who has been involved in creating a specific world, storylines and characters designed for a potential franchise, where the work done at the beginning will be carried on through subsequent films.

it isn’t easy getting a producer credit as they are rarely given up lightly, and you will really have to put the work in for others to consider you worthy of the extra credit. bear in mind that it is the main producer that hands out these titles so it really depends on who you are working with and how willing they are to share the credit! you will need to gauge the relationship you have with the producer and the amount of additional work you have done before negotiating whether you are eligible for a production credit or not.

so are you a writer that wants to retain as much creative control as possible, or are you a writer that is willing to put your trust in others to do their jobs and to do them well? are you happier spinning your stories in the seclusion of your writing space, perhaps enjoying the process more than the end result, or are you the sort of writer that has the patience to follow a project through to the very end?

either route is commendable and both have their advantages and disadvantages. take things project by project and as long as you’re enjoying your work then that is what matters the most!

if you have any questions about becoming a writer-producer, then you can either leave a comment or send me an e-mail – phil@scriptguyphil.com

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

(and you can follow me here on twitter and facebook)

me and margaret thatcher…

 

…or how the hell are they going to get me to empathise with THIS hero!

on december 16th of this year, a film will open in the u.s., the premise of which chills me to the bone!

not a horror film, ghost story or an intense drama about the terrors of war. nope! this is a biopic about the second most influential woman of my young life – margaret thatcher, one of the most strong-minded women in modern history.

to help you understand where i’m coming from with this post, i just want to give you a very brief personal history.

when mrs. thatcher became prime minister of great britain in 1979, i was a mere boy of 10 years old. when she was finally ousted from power by her own party, i was 21, enjoying a theatre career in london and a socialist!

in addition to this, my favourite film director, ken loach, was practically blacklisted and only made 2 feature films during her time in office – one of which was made primarily in germany.

margaret thatcher will be played by meryl streep, one of the most revered actors in film history, and an actor i like very much. however, she has really got her work cut out to make me empathise with a person who stirs such feelings of anger and disdain in me. i suppose it could be argued that the negativity of these feelings has, in the end, created a positive effect in me, but that still doesn’t make me grateful to her or make me in any way forgiving.

so how will meryl streep win me over?

in my mind, there are a few options open to a writer when creating characters that, on the surface, will struggle to gain empathy from the audience.

the first possibility is to make your main character funny. i recently saw the terrific movie four lions. now, a suicide bomber isn’t necessarily the first type of person you think of as a hero of your story, but omar and his fellow jihadis won me over with their humour. this humour enabled the writers to show the human side of the members of the terrorist cell, so when combined with the dark subject matter, it gave the film a perfect balance and made me enjoy the journey that these characters take.

i can’t see that the makers of the iron lady will be taking the edgy comedy route (although there is a little humour in the trailer), so let’s look at the next option.

make your main character so compelling and fascinating that the audience won’t be able to take their eyes off the screen. when i sit down to watch a film or to read a script, i want to be drawn into the story, regardless of the subject matter. if the writer gets it right, then no matter who the character is – hero, villain, car park attendant #2 – then the audience will engage with that character. for example, der untergang (downfall), the story of adolf hitler’s last days captured the attention of the world. great writing and a superb performance by bruno ganz managed to humanise hitler without detracting from all the horror that he caused. it shows a once powerful man trapped in a desperate situation that he himself caused. however, it also shows us a man that has had his hopes and dreams shattered, and regardless of how wrong those hopes and dreams were, it made the character and the film not only palatable, but compelling.

i suspect that the story of margaret thatcher will focus on her hopes and dreams and the sacrifices she made in attempting to attain them, thereby humanising her as much as possible for people like me! and just for the record, i am not comparing margaret thatcher to hitler, nor to muslim terrorists!

a third option might be to make your main character the lesser of two evils. this idea has been utilised in countless films. there is the ‘hitman with a heart of gold’ (the killer), where the main character decides that the bad guys he is working for have no honour or morals and need to be punished, or for example in absolute power, where a burglar on a job witnesses the president of the united states beating a woman and her subsequent shooting by the president’s bodyguards. the lesser of two evils is a common choice for stories set in the world of crime, gangsters and even police corruption.

another example of how to create a ‘hero who does a bad thing’ is brilliantly described in stephen king’s must-read book on writing. in it he talks about his novel the dead zone, later filmed by david cronenberg. the hero, johnny, is a man who is in a car accident, a side effect of which enables him to see the future of anyone he touches. when he shakes hands with a presidential candidate, he sees that this man will start a nuclear war, so johnny decides to assassinate him. king’s main concern was how to get his audience on the side of the assassin. he does this by making johnny the nicest guy you have ever met – he even makes johnny refuse to have sex with his longtime girlfriend until they are married (something king himself admits to be pushing the boundaries of believability!). he also makes the politician a really nasty man, who is introduced in the book in a scene where he kicks a dog to death!

unless the film makers really demonise the members of the party that caused margaret thatcher’s own downfall, i don’t think that the lesser of two evils will be a truly viable option either.

so, will the makers of the iron lady be able to make the character of margaret thatcher compelling and fascinating enough for me to get me on her side and empathise with her? who knows, but i hereby vow to watch the film leaving my preconceptions at the door, so i guess we’ll have to wait and see if they succeed or not!

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

(and you can follow me here on twitter and facebook)