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(as it happens, the text was the opening to an unpublished novel of silveira’s!)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

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)

producer’s document series #2 – comparable films

This is the second in a series where I will be uploading documents that production companies use during the development phase.

These documents highlight the commerciality of a project and will give an insight into the development process from a producer’s perspective, particularly in regards to financing. Although I would always urge a writer to write the script they want to, it is definitely an advantage to have information like this in the back of your mind, not only regarding your story and its potential budget requirements, but it might also help you in your decision as to which companies/producers to approach.

This time I will be looking at how producer’s use previously released films similar to your script to help raise financing, but which also aids in marketing a finished film. (If you missed the first in the series on the Project Sheet, you can find it here).

When a producer approaches private investors to access funding for a feature film it is important to have a proof of concept. Investing in movies is a gamble – plain and simple – and that is where comparable films come in handy.

A solid, varied list of films comparable with the one that you are trying to finance will give a clear picture to the ‘money men’ as to what they can expect for their investment. A producer worth their salt will be able to draw up a list that is both realistic (an investor can smell an overly positive list a mile away!), but also one that will peak their interest that the project in question has the potential to make them a buck or two.

An interesting thing to be aware of is that box office gross, although important, isn’t the number one priority for an investor. They are more concerned with those three little words – Return on Investment (ROI). Naturally the more money a film makes the more they will get back, but these are people that work in percentages, and the higher the ROI percentage, the better, regardless of how many thousands or millions of dollars we are talking about.

That is why the key figure at the bottom of the comparable films table is the ROI percentage – not a dollar value!

I’ve attached a comparable films table below for a serial killer film we had in development at Zeitgeist Film so you see how our projections for the project compared with films of the same type. It is very important to choose films that are as close to your own project in genre, tone and budget. Working with films of a similar budget is key – your producer shouldn’t compare a low budget indie film with a hollywood studio film even if the stories and themes are the same as it will create an unbalanced outcome.

Download the comparable table here – comparable films – TOMB

I hope you find it helpful!

To be sure of picking up future document downloads, follow me on twitter or join me on facebook.

Good luck and happy writing

Phil

scriptguyphil.com

the writer’s 3-sided friend

its a well known fact in this industry that a producer will generally try to get as much work out of a writer as possible for as little money as possible – it is a business after all.

having been on both sides of the writer/producer negotiation, i know what a delicate dance it is when the subject of money comes up. i also know that it will usually be the producer that wins out.

hollywood mogul samuel goldwyn famously said, “in picture-making the writer is the most important cog in the wheel. it is our job to make sure they never find out.”

i think that sentiment has passed and many people in the industry know how important the writer is. however, it doesn’t mean they are being treated better or paid more!

unfortunately i can’t wave a magic wand and make everything right again, but the above diagram will hopefully help tip the balance a little bit more in the writer’s favour.

a producer will want a script to be good, cheap and quick. you can then tell them to pick two!

if they want the script good and cheap, its not going to be quick

if they want the script good and quick, its not going to be cheap

if they want the script cheap and quick, its not going to be good

i should add that this particular negotiation tactic works better the more experienced you are, but regardless of your standing in the industry, the ability to negotiate will earn you a certain amount of professional respect.

happy writing

phil

scriptguyphil.com

producer’s document series #1 – the project sheet

Over the coming weeks I aim to upload a series of documents that production companies use during the development phase.

These documents highlight the commerciality of a project and will give an insight into the development process from a producer’s perspective, particularly in regards to financing. Although I would always urge a writer to write the script they want to, it is definitely an advantage to have information like this in the back of your mind, not only regarding your story and its potential budget requirements, but it might also help you in your decision as to which companies/producers to approach.

First up is a project sheet.

Project sheets are a bit like treatments in the sense that there is no one set way of presenting a project sheet as each company puts emphasis on different things. The one I have uploaded here is based on the template I created during my time at Zeitgeist Film.

A project sheet is basically a one-stop shop that gives an overview of a project that a producer will use to keep track of all the vital elements during the development/financing process, and as a result it is constantly being updated. The project sheet will also be included in a project portfolio that gets sent out to prospective investors be they state/regional funding, private investment, etc.

Here’s a quick breakdown –-

• Company information – including attached crew
• Film specifics – budget, locations, etc.
• Pitch and synopsis
• Current financing details – confirmed and potential
• Comparable films
• Unique selling points – what makes this project special.
• Casting options
• Director and writer bios
• Conclusion

For a writer, I would suggest paying particular attention to the section “Unique Selling Points”. This is where a producer will make a case for why a project could be successful and deserves financing. As a writer, if you can come up with three strong USP’s it will certainly help your own case when submitting to producers.

The attached project sheet is for Ghosthunters, a project that Zeitgeist Film has recently helped develop, and will hopefully produce in the coming 18 months. I have also included the original excel template I created so that you can either have fun testing your own projects, or maybe even use as an additional document when submitting your scripts to potential producers.

ghosthunters project sheet example              template – project sheet

I hope you find them helpful!

To be sure of picking up future document downloads, follow me on twitter or join me on facebook.

Good luck and happy writing

Phil

scriptguyphil.com

reach for the stars

Stephen Dorff persuading Melanie Griffith to be in his movie from Cecil B. Demented

The story goes that in 1985, young up and coming director Anthony Waller met acting legend Alec Guinness by chance in Hamburg. Waller asked Guinness if he was interested in doing a one-scene part for his first feature film, Mute Witness. To Waller’s surprise, Guinness said he would, the only problem was that he was unavailable for 18 months. Waller suggested they shoot the scene the next morning before Alec Guinness had to catch his flight.

This all took place nine years before the rest of the film was made and used a scene from an early draft of the screenplay. When Waller later wanted to add a second scene with Guinness, he simply reversed the footage he’d already shot to make it look different.

Mute Witness is an entertaining, atmospheric film, but when it came out in ’94 all the talk was about Alec Guinness. STAR POWER!! If it hadn’t been for him the film might have been a straight to DVD release.

On all of the projects I’ve helped developed, the first question asked (after deciding that the script is good enough and could make a good feature), is invariably “who can we get to direct this?” or “who can we get to star in this?”

In a time where it is difficult to get films made, having a bona fide star or at least a recognisable face on your project is a distinct advantage. It helps with foreign pre-sales, which can be a large percentage of your budget, and it will also entice private investors who are becoming increasingly important in independent film production. The ‘glamour’ of the movies is one element that can be attractive to private investors, and a ‘name’ can be a big help with that.

So, how to get a ‘name’ actor attached to your project? As in all matters of writing, this is a two-part question – one-part artistic, one-part business.

To start with, look at the reasons why big names have done small movies.

If you look at it from a slightly cynical angle, the first word that might spring to mind is ‘Oscar’. Powerful roles in smaller, worthy movies can be a good route to one of those gold statuettes. For example –

Charlize Theron – Monster

Forest Whitaker – The Last King of Scotland

Kate Winslet – The Reader

Would any of those films have ever come up for Oscar consideration if these actors hadn’t been involved? Maybe, but that these fine and well regarded actors were on board meant that these movies got more attention than they would have otherwise.

Another reason, and one which I suspect is far more important to the vast majority of actors, is that a role is just too good to say ‘no’ to. This might well have been the case for the actors I mentioned above, and when you combine great actors in a smaller movie that you wouldn’t expect them to appear in (unless it’s a misguided passion project or they are appearing as a favour to a friend), this is when you can get performances that are often extraordinary.

Simply put, actors will kill for a great role regardless of how big or small a budget might be.

And this is the artistic answer on how to get a ‘name’ attached to your project – write a part that is so good and so challenging that an actor will be unable to say ‘no’ and will have the passionate drive to take a pay cut and persuade their (20% commission-earning) agent that it is the right thing to do.

That’s easier said than done, of course, and there is a great chapter on ‘stars’ in William Goldman’s book Adventures in the Screen Trade and how you must always give them the best lines!

Of course, if you do write the right role as well as a strong script, then it is possible to end up in a situation like Quentin Tarantino found himself in after the Sundance Lab in 1991. His script for Reservoir Dogs found its way to Harvey Keitel, who liked it so much that he attached himself as executive producer and later as one of the main characters. Keitel’s involvement lead to the bringing together of a great ensemble cast and eventually one of the most highly praised film debuts in recent memory.

In an interview I have just listened to with top international actor Stellan Skarsgard, he talked about making big Hollywood movies to be able to earn enough money so he can make the more interesting independent movies that he also appears in. He even said that he has put his own money into certain projects that he desperately wanted to be a part of – literally paying to be in someone’s film!

So artistically – Write a great role.

Moving on to the business side of attaching a name actor, the major problem is that of time constraints. These people tend to be extremely busy, but there is a way to counter this.

If when writing your script you feel that one of the roles, either lead or supporting, would be great for a name actor, then you have an opportunity to tailor that role in a practical sense.

By having the character appear in as few locations as possible and in scenes that are fairly simple to shoot, it will really cut down on the number of shooting days that your name actor would need to be around for. Can the four scenes involving a particular character in four different locations actually be shot in one location? Any professional actor, in particular one who has worked on large scale productions and all the hanging around that involves, will generally prefer one day of solid shooting than four days of some shooting, but more waiting around. Give your producer the chance of attaching a name by writing great roles that require as few shooting days as possible.

So regarding the business side – Condense your shooting schedule.

Which leaves us with a neat little equation –

A great role + short shooting schedule = more chance of attaching a name.

Needless to say that you should never do this to the detriment of the story!!

So take the group of actors that you really admire and would want in your movie, write your characters well enough that these actors would seriously consider them, attempt to condense the amount of shooting days for which they would be required and then get the script to their respective agents. Even if they say ‘no’, you will still have a script with great characters.

And then again, if they say ‘yes’……

Happy writing

Phil

scriptguyphil.com