Why Sucker Punch paid the price for starring kick-ass women

I discussed in an earlier post some of the storytelling shortcomings of Sucker Punch, but that wasn't the only thing missing. Like Sin City, it had sexy and scantily clad girls. What didn't it have? (Well, nudity, but that's not my point.) Tough, macho men.

I'm probably going to get attacked for this, but I'd guess that Sucker Punch held little appeal for a male audience because it was SO sold as a female-driven piece. I thought Warner Bros. sounded like fools a few years ago when they said they weren't going to make female-driven movies anymore, but stuff like Sucker Punch shows you the justification for their thinking.

Look at Sin City. Sure, it had Jessica Alba as a stripper, who's still one of the hottest screen strippers in history despite not actually appearing in the buff. It had Jamie King, Rosario Dawson, Carla Gugio and about a half-dozen other girls all in fairly skimpy outfits I'm sure every straight male in America could find some girl in the cast list that they'd love to see in various states of undress. But would they have turned out for a film that starred stripper Nancy and the gun-toting hookers of Old Town taking back the streets from slimy guys? I doubt it.

The other half of the equation: Mickey Roarke, Clive Owen and Bruce Willis. The male heroes of the Sin City segments. And interestingly, they're all a breed of character we don't see as often in films these days - men's men, macho types. In a release slate dominated by Paul Rudds and Jesse Eisenbergs (both of whom I enjoy, it should be said), those three actors really played to the "tough guy" that a lot of male viewers probably idolize on some level.

What guy doesn't want to calmly kick-ass like Bruce Willis, prove how tough he is in a fight, all to save the girl? Yeah, I'm sure that the actresses who got to wield swords and shoot guns in Sin City were all about the "empowerment" aspect of it, but I don't think that was a selling point.

Because take a look what happened the next time Robert Rodriguez was involved in an action film that had female empowerment as one of its main themes. Grindhouse had two segments: Planet Terror and Death Proof. Rodriguez's Planet Terror segment had Rose McGowan in the lead, though it was a fairly gender-balanced ensemble. Quentin Tarantino's Death Proof had nearly a dozen fetching young actresses, half of whom really got to kick ass by the end. The macho character - played by Kurt Russell - was the villain, and the film ends with his brutal beating at the hands of the women.

Grindhouse didn't do so well at the box office either. Part of that might have to do with the fact it was three-hours long, and that it was paying homage to a particular kind of film geek. Still was the male audience turned off by the fact they had no one to either identify with or aspire to?

The male action hero is in a sorry state these days, too. We live in a world where Seth Rogan was the action lead in Green Hornet. Seth Rogan! I could beat that guy in a footrace! Sure, guys go to the movies to see people the identify with, but they REALLY go to see guys who they wish they could be. There's neither in Sucker Punch. The three main guys are the mysterious mentor, the skeevy pimp/orderly, and the lobotomizing doctor.

I'm not necessarily saying the women had to be more overtly made into damsels in distress or that male characters needed to be added to those films specifically to overshadow them. I am saying that I think the lack of such a presence did reduce the appeal for a significant percentage of the audience.

I wanted to like Sucker Punch, and to be honest, I liked Death Proof (though the leaner Grindhouse cut was WAY better than the uncut solo version.) But then, I like most of pop culture's kickass women, from Sydney Bristow to Buffy Summers. It's probably safe to say that Tarantino, Rodriguez and Snyder are also fans of that archetype.

But clearly there aren't enough of them in the ticket-buying public.

Sucker Punch and the desensitization to dazzling visuals

My review of Sucker Punch

Story is king, and I think nothing proves that more than Sucker Punch's disappointing showing at the box office this weekend. For a film that was budgeted at over $80 million, was pushed by heavy marking that showcased the stunning visuals, and was from a "hot" director, an opening weekend of less than $20 million is not a good sign.

I'm reminded of an observation from James Cameron around the time Avatar came out, where he noted that audiences had become jaded by stunning visual effects. Images that ten years ago would have made an audience's jaw drop with amazement are now being met with a shrug. Yes for years now, digital technology has been touted as the future. There's nothing that filmmakers cannot create in the computers, no vista they can't take us to, no object they cannot manipulate.

And yet, why are films like Sucker Punch not only so boring, but also failing to even draw viewers in on their opening weekend?

Six years ago, Sin City opened to a $29 million opening weekend on a $40 million dollar budget. Like Sucker Punch, it also featured a lot of sets that were created in the computer, a lot of sexy, scantily-clad actresses, and a lot of violence. In fact, Sin City was so violent that it was rated R, so one presumes that it might have done even MORE business had it been PG-13 like Sucker Punch! Overall it did $75 million domestic and $158 million world wide - and it cost half of the reported budget for Sucker Punch.

Four years ago, Zack Snyder's own 300 had an opening weekend of $70 million, on a $65 million budget and it too was rated R. It made $210 million domestically - which is probably what Sucker Punch will be lucky to do worldwide. It too features a lot of CG environments.

I'm not going to add summer movies into this equation because I mainly want to point out the trends using these late-March, early-April releases, but it's worth noting that CG-driven blockbusters had been a big part of the summer movie culture both before and after the two films I've just discussed. They came in the middle of a trend, not at the start of it.

I'm sure that for a long time, many would have given the stunning visuals of Sin City and 300 a lot of credit for their commercial success. Give us a few money shots, some action and some hot babes and we're a happy audience - that's the conclusion the studios drew. And sure, those other films had an advantage in being based off of existing graphic novels, but they were hardly mainstream - and being based off of one of the best selling graphic novels of all time didn't help Snyder's own Watchmen get much above $100 million domestically in 2009.

So if these hits have so much in common, why didn't Sucker Punch duplicate their success?

Because it's about story.

At the end of the day, the ability to create anything in the computer is insignificant compared to the power of compelling characters, strong plots and engaging pacing. We're told as writers to think visually, and that's always going to be important, but there needs to be something behind the visuals.

When a filmmaker can make us see ANYTHING, we become impressed by nothing. In 1993, we were stunned to see dinosaurs reproduced so realistically in Jurassic Park, both through CGI and full scale reproductions. Today, would creating photo-real dinosaurs be enough to propel a movie to be an instant hit? Hell no!

The trailers for Sucker Punch did a terrible job of selling a story. Visually it looked cool, but there was nothing cool about the story it presented, which seemed to be some kind of Alice in Wonderland-riff with a girl in an asylum. It's a far cry from the story of a conflicted hero who has the fate of the world in his hands, one of the more standard action movie tropes.

Another example might be the failure of Drive Angry, which opened at number 9 in the box office a few weeks back, despite having the boost of the higher 3D ticket price. For a while, the conventional wisdom was that 3D was going to bring in greater audiences who came for the spectacle. Guess what? Despite a lot of ads, Drive Angry just didn't look like a story most people were interested in.

It's about the story, stupid.

A visual without anything interesting to say is nothing more than a pretty picture. People don't go to movies to see pretty pictures, anymore than they attend the theatre to see how well the stage sets are painted. Or in the case of Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark, how well the safety line holds.

Yes, there are musicals that have made production design their selling point, but let me tell you, all the production design in the world won't save your ass from falling asleep during the interminable first hour of Les Miserables. (Tip: If you go to this, bring a pillow and ask your date to wake you at "Master of the House.")

Now, the clear counterarguement to my assertion there is Transformers: Rise of the Machines. I can't explain that one either, though it was a pre-sold sequel coming in the middle of a very big summer. It had plenty of action and mayhem, but very little plot to speak of. I'm sure there'll always be anomalies like these, but I believe as desensitization to visual effects increases, so will audiences become more discriminating in the stories they shell out their hard-earned dollars for.

So make your screenplays airtight. Make sure there's something entertaining and compelling you're trying to say. Oh, and don't forget one other secret ingredient...

But we'll get to that tomorrow.

Tuesday Talkback - Budget

Just out of curiosity, how many of you keep budget in mind when you're writing? Do you just run hog wild or do you make an effort to stay within limits, so as to make the script more attractive on a financial level?

My review of Zack Snyder's "Sucker Punch"

Sucker Punch and the desensitization to dazzling visuals

I've enjoyed most of Zack Snyder's other films, but from the first teasers of Sucker Punch were released, I found myself not anticipating this film with the eagerness I expected. Still, even with some of the questionable buzz, I still had the impression that even if it was a failure, it'd be an interesting enough failure to merit viewing.

I saw the film yesterday with four friends at an afternoon showing that wasn't even a quarter-full. You could feel the restlessness in the audience and as my group left the theatre, the consensus was that the film largely missed the mark.

It's interesting that Snyder's next project is a Superman reboot produced by Christopher Nolan, because like Nolan's Inception, Sucker Punch has multiple levels of reality, dreams within dreams. Unlike Inception, the story isn't nearly as engaging, and the relationship between the different levels of reality isn't handled as elegantly.

The film opens in what I'll call "Level 1." A teenage girl is committed to an institution for the mentally insane by her evil stepfather. The reasons exactly why he has her committed are revealed in the film's best sequence, the opening, and so I'll be light with spoilers there. The bottom line is that he's put there illegally and he's paid off an orderly to not only commit her, but also have her lobotomized.

We see the girl taken in for the procedure and just as the spike is driven up her nose, the film shifts to what I'll call "Level 2." In this fantasy, the asylum has become a brothel, with the patients now recast as dancers. The girl is now addressed as "Baby Doll" and has been brought there to be a gift for a high roller who will arrive in a few days. Most of the other dancers react to Baby Doll's horror with disinterest, and a clear sense that they've accepted their own sad fates. Baby Doll hatches a plan to escape, saying they need to work together to get a map, a lighter, a knife and a key in order to make their plan possible.

See, Baby Doll apparently has a talent for burlesque dancing, and is in fact so enticing that when she dances, everyone is so mesmerized that it makes for a complete distraction while the other four girls complete their various tasks. I say "apparently" because not once do we actually see Baby Doll's performance....

Every time Baby Doll dances, we find ourselves in what I'll call Level 3. Here, the five girls are in a fantasy scenario that vaguely resembles World War I, albiet with the girls as soldiers wearing fetishized outfits; mechas; zombie soldiers; dragons; and high tech bombs. It's basically like they're dropped into a video game and were dressed by 14 year-old boys. Their "mission" is treated like a metaphor for their Level 2 object. If they complete the mission successfully, it means they got the object they need for escape. If they don't... well, you know.

And that's where the movie really falls apart for me. The War missions are basically a dream with in a dream. I don't know if it works to add another fantasy within Baby Doll's existing fantasy. We learn at the end of the film that in Level 1, Baby Doll attempted a breakout with much the same results as events when they play out in Level 2. Indeed, the events in the brothel play out as a more direct metaphor for whatever Baby Doll apparently did in the real world. With in the movie, we could interpret this as a fantasy version she concocted to make the horrors of the asylum more palpable, or perhaps the way her lobotomized brain chooses to recall those events.

The problem I have is that the war fantasies just feel gratuitous. If the brothel was the film's reality, then the war sequences might have worked better. Playing them as a metaphor within a metaphor makes that portion of the movie essentially a mixed metaphor. It's all gratiutious flash, and in a metatextual sense, perhaps it's appropriate that the girls are clad in exploitation garb during those sequences.

Why does Baby Doll's fantasy need a fantasy of its own? How does that add a new layer of meaning to the story? I don't think the film as presented offers a good answer to that question. The fact that Baby Doll's war fantasies draw on influences that seem to post-date the timeline where Baby Doll "really" lives is another oddity. (The film's opening is set in 1955.)

So the problem is that we have a film that seems to try very hard to tell us it has deep meaning, but there are major, fundamental elements that don't justify their own inclusion. There might be some attempt at thematic meaning, or using these dreams as a metaphor, but it doesn't hold together.

I also took issue with the way that the film tried very hard at times to tell their story visually, only to undermine that with musical choices where the lyrics were deeply on-the-nose. Powerful silent storytelling is ruined by ham-handed sound cues. Part of me wishes I could have seen the film with the sound off.

Then, a series of events at the end of the film muddle things even further. There's a point where Baby Doll and the sole survivor of her group manage to get outside the brothel, only to find that there are men just outside who block their escape. Baby Doll realizes she needs to sacrifice herself as a distraction so her companion can get away, but she does so with some odd dialogue that left me wondering if some connective tissue fell prey to the editor's knife. She mumbles something about realizing that "this" isn't "my story." As if some great truth is revealed to her, she accepts her fate and allows her friend the opportunity to escape.

The script might have gotten away with that, but then later we see that friend nearly caught at a bus stop by local police, only to be rescued by the kindness of a bus driver. This sequence felt a little vague as to which level of reality it takes place in. It could be the patient as she escaped in Level 1, or it could be Baby Doll's dream of her friend's escape in Level 2. Of course, if that's part of Baby Doll's fantasy, why are we seeing it?

This is made more confusing by the fact that the bus driver is the same "mentor" character whom Baby Doll and her friends have taken orders from in all of their Level 3 adventures. He exists only in the dream-within-a-dream of Level 3, yet here he is in Level 1 or 2, giving further cryptic dialogue that's on the order of the writer trying to hammer home the meaning of his script. I'm not one to pretend that if I don't get the meaning of a script that necessarily means it doesn't have it, but here I feel secure in saying that the mixed metaphors of the film render any conclusion impenetrable.

And to add insult to injury, the credit sequence is "enhanced" with an inexplicable burlesque number. The girls are not only outfitted in a way unlike any of their other brothel costumes, but the brothel's madam and the owner of the establishment also take part in this musical number. It's the very definition of "indulgent."

Perhaps a version of this film exists where the metaphors are more coherent and the relationships among the three levels of reality are more coherent. Unfortunately, that wasn't the version that opened wide this past weekend.

As we exited the theatre and walked back to our cars, my group attempted to figure out the thinking behind that dance number during the credit sequence. My friend Liz's theory was "I think it was... 'hmmm... how can we get these girls in even less clothing?'" Given the way the rest of the film struggled to remain coherent, I don't discount that as a key motivation.

Did any of you see Sucker Punch? What did you think?

Friday Free-For-All: Sasquatch Birth Journal 2

A friend of mine sent me this last week. The joke is kind of a slow burn so stick it out until the end.



It's one of those things that seems very lame at first, but funnier the more you think about it.

Interview with Scott Towler, writer's assistant to Michelle Nader (100 Questions, Kath & Kim) - Part II

We continue our talk with writer's assistant Scott Towler.

Part I

What led to Maria hooking you up with Bill Callahan, then on Scrubs?

Funny story actually, Bill was Maria's agent's assistant way back in the day. And Maria had wanted these tickets to a Broadway show or something, like day-of show. It was one of those requests you get as an assistant where you're like "shit, this is impossible!" Somehow, Bill made it happen, and as a thank you, Maria bought him a Directv and the NFL package. Maria didn't get me the interview though, it was just the presence of her name on my resume that did it. Bill saw it and wanted to pick my brain. And after we met and shared a few stories, I was offered the job to be his assistant as part of his term deal with Touchstone TV.

What was it like finally working on a long-running series? What sort of things did Bill ask of you and what did you learn from him?

I was welcomed with open arms, but that being said, I kind of felt like the party had already started and I was the latecomer, you know? A lot of the departments already had their teams and made their friends, so it was hard to get to know many of them outside of the writing team. Plus that hospital was so sprawling, the writers had their own little enclave, and unless you had business elsewhere, you didn't stray too far. Unless it was to the kitchen. We had the sickest kitchen on that show.

As far as my tasks went...here's where the great debate of being an in-room writers' assistant vs. being an executive assistant attached to a deal really comes into play. On the one hand, in-room writers' assistants are so close to the action, chances are good that if the show succeeds, they will too. They might even get a script out of it or be promoted to staff writer. Being an executive assistant is different. You manage that writer (or team of writers) lives. Their work, their homes, everything else they have no time for during TV season. And you hope that when they have down time, they give you the 1-on-1 training and guidance you need to really succeed and grow. Also, the hope is that you get to know the studio/network brass better so that when the time comes they'll read your stuff (like actually read it all the way through, not just say they did).

In this case, I did a lot of home management and things like that. I walked his dog every day. But I also finished a script and got some great feedback from Bill. He taught me that pilots have to be complete in every way. Mini-movies if you will. There can be no later-episode pay offs unless you have later episodes! This was a revelation for me. I would write all these things I planned on making work later and he helped me dial in my story a lot. Make it small and make it work.

Your dismissal from Bill's employ was rather unceremonious, as I understand it. During the writers strike, his deal was canceled. Was it hard not to get frustrated with the industry at that point?

Unceremonious to say the least. He lost his job too! We all did. The writers' strike was not a fun time employment-wise, especially considering it happened right before the holidays (boy, studios/networks sure know how to ruin the holidays). Luckily, I had some roots in reality tv as I mentioned, so I found my footing pretty quickly on The Two Coreys Season 2. And I was frustrated with the industry, but I also realized the writers were fighting for my livelihood as well. It wasn't selfishly motivated, it was what they were and are due. I'm sure there will be another one in the future. And I'm sure it will be equally if not more justified than that one was.

Plus the time off presented a unique opportunity for me to put my production experience to good work. I was hired as a producer on a micro-budget indie documentary and was able to use the time off to help plan the shoot, coordinate with our team and set up travel, rentals, etc. So it was almost a blessing in disguise cause it gave me a chance- no, it forced me to have the chance to do something I wouldn't have had time to do otherwise.

So what's it like to go from working on Scrubs to working on The Two Coreys? (Is there anything you can say about that job that isn't covered by non-disclosure agreements.)

Ha, I appreciate the footnote there. It's tough for me to speak too intimately about my experiences with Corey Haim, but I will say this: I did spend a great deal of time with him, and beyond being misunderstood in almost every way, he was also suffering a crippling addiction to virtually anything he could get his hands on. And it was almost like the show was encouraging it. They didn't go so far as to enable him, but they also didn't mind when he got messed up. It made for better TV. And it made me realize that Corey Haim might have been more of a victim than anything else. His death was really sad. I'm still pissed at the Academy for leaving him off the In Memoriam list at the Oscars this year. Just cause he had a bad stretch at the end of his career didn't make him any less of a part of the business. ... I think I've digressed a bit.

As far as cut and dry differences go, Scrubs was already running smoothly, Two Coreys had just moved from Vancouver to L.A. and revamped the entire concept. The first season of that show was really painstakingly bad. Not that my season was any better, but it was certainly closer to the American model of "reality tv" than it's predecessor.

Also, I was a PA on Two Coreys, and it was unlike any PA gig I've ever had. Not only did I manage a camera team, producer, and whomever else fit in our van, but I also had to drive the van! Nerve racking when you have 10 people who outrank you riding in the back seat. You feel like your every move is being scrutinized.

Ultimately, I did very well there. Had I stayed with them instead of going back to scripted, I would have gotten 3 months in NY and 3 months in Paris for their next show (whatever that was, I can't remember anymore). And I never would have had an opportunity like that at Scrubs. It's too expensive to move a scripted show all the time. That's why it's such a big deal when "Modern Family" goes to Hawaii. It's a sign that the show is doing very well. One Tree Hill was in Aruba this year too. Say what you will about the show, Bitter, but they're a bonafide success if they're getting approved for production travel.

Luck finally smiled upon you when Michelle Nader needed an assistant. How did you hear about that posting and how did you convince Michelle you were the man for the job?

She was one of the first writers to come out of the strike with a new term deal. And my old coworker and former Page Jen (Mark Binke and Todd Sharpe's assistant that I shadowed), called me and said she thought of me the instant she heard about the job. I took a long lunch one day from Two Coreys and met with her. It only took us about 10 minutes to realize that we were both no nonsense.

That being said, I was still pretty timid when it came to working with someone at her level. But I had at least realized by that point that TV writing was what I wanted to do for my career. And given her track record and prolific career, she seemed like a perfect fit. Plus she had worked with Bill Callahan on Spin City many years ago. He was quick to give a good recommendation on my behalf.

And before I even heard if I got the gig, I quit the 2 Coreys and crossed my fingers. I started work 2 weeks later.

Is working for Michelle similar or different from working for the previous writers you worked for? What sort of things have you been responsible for while working on her shows?

Working for Michelle has been the most career defining and unique job I have ever had. Because she has the best of everything in my mind: she's supportive and nuturing to almost everyone around her, but at the same time, she's as cut throat and "take no prisoners" as anyone I have ever met. It's a great balance, and one that has helped me learn how to be confident and assertive with my work.

My duties for her are pretty broad. When we're in development, I do a lot of her proofreading and editing (or at least I help!), and manage her personal life as best I can. When we're on a show (we've done two since I've been with her: Kath & Kim and 100 Questions), it's much much more. She let me co-write the webisodes for 100 Questions, and she gave me my first speaking role as an actor on Kath & Kim.

I tend to work as the liason between the writers and standards/legal as well. All the facades and fake names of products, companies, etc.-- I pitch as many as I can and hope the writing team (and ultimately Michelle) likes them. If they do, I go to legal and try and get one cleared, then I go to the art department and work on signage/logos/labeling. I also help with music from time to time, and even get to pitch some jokes for scripts when I really have something worth sharing. Occasionally I get to weigh in on casting as well. So I wear a lot of hats when we're in production. And that's partially because she can't do it all herself (no one can), but it's also because over time we have developed a great relationship and she trusts me when it comes to her "artistic vision."

Someone comes to you and says "Tell me what it takes to get your job." What do you say?

I'd say be willing to do any and everything you can to get noticed, but never seek attention. Good work always speaks for itself, and if you're good, the promotions and jobs will come with them naturally. Establish connections with any and everyone you can. Treat every single person you meet the same way: with respect. You have no idea how often I hear that I am "very pleasant to work with," or "am always positive despite whatever else is going on" for that exact reason. And I'm not bragging here, I'm just a nice guy. People remember that.

And you never know who will be the next JJ Abrams, so don't be an asshole like the rest of the lot. Be genuine, be good, be thankful, and it will happen. I'd go into some diatribe about karma, but I think I've said enough.

That same person then says, "Tell me what it takes to DO your job." How do you answer that?

It takes an indomitable spirit. Because 9 days out of 10 you won't be doing exactly what you love. But it's all with a means to an end. Its your job to be the backbone for your boss. Unchanged, immovable. Cause they have a heck of a lot on their plate. And if you can help relieve even just a little bit of that for them, it gets noticed in a major way. Also, you need a car and a smart phone cause the notion of "being in the office" does not exist (even when you have one collecting dust on the WB lot!)

Are you pursuing your own writing projects? Do you feel that you have a leg up on other aspirings due to your job and experience?

I am pursuing my own writing projects, yes. Aside from my blog, which is really just a hobby at this point, I try and match Michelle's pace as best I can. If she starts writing a pilot, I do too. And I can honestly say it has improved my craft immensely. When I look at my first spec and compare it to my work today, I am amazed at how far I've come. I'm also enthralled with how much I still have to learn.

And in answer to part two, this goes back to the in-room assistant vs. exec assistant debate. In my mind I feel like I do have a great leg up because I basically work for the CEO. And who better to lend you an ear than the boss, right? The real question becomes if my material will be good enough to market and sell. Because even if you have all the help in the world, if your work sucks, that's pretty much the end of the line. That's what makes creative endeavors so difficult yet so fulfilling all at once. Sure, I have great connections, but until I have a spec that is sold after one read and made into a headline on deadline, I'd say I've got just as good a chance as anyone else.

Thanks to Scott for all his time, and you can check out more of his writing at his blog, Great Scott!

Interview with Scott Towler, writer's assistant to Michelle Nader (100 Questions, Kath & Kim) - Part I

I've been friends with Scott Towler for a couple of years now, and I'd be hard-pressed to think of someone I know who's had more odd jobs in the industry in such a short time. Currently he's enjoying his third year of stability as the assistant to writer Michelle Nader (Kath & Kim, 100 Questions.) However, unlike Amy Baack, the showrunner's assistant I interviewed last month, Scott wasn't lucky enough to land that job until paying a lot of dues in this town.


So what drew you to Hollywood in the first place? When you were in college, what did you want to do with your life?

When I was 11 I told my parents I was going to move to Hollywood someday and be an actor. At the time I was scared shitless of being in front of people, but then I started playing music, and eventually got into theater (both musical and legitimate) and that fear went away. By the time I got to college my decision had already been made: performance acting major, music minor. And the nice part about Denison was that I was able to earn a B.F.A. instead of just a B.A., so I didn't have to take Econ. or any of that nonsense. Instead it was primarily all art or performance related classes: dance, film, music, theater, etc. It was great. So long winded as that was, I guess was drove me out here was the desire to act and leave a lasting imprint on our culture.

What was your first job in Hollywood and what were the most important things it taught you?

My very first job was as a P.A. on Access Hollywood. It taught me a lot, most importantly that I took my work a lot more seriously than most of the other P.A.'s I worked with. It got me noticed quickly. By the end of that summer, this was 2003 I believe, I was promoted to research assistant in the newsroom.

I also learned never to go backwards up a parking garage ramp. Why you ask? My first day on the job (and my 3rd day in LA ever), I was going to make a delivery. Thought I was lost, tried to back up, backed into a $100,000 Porsche. It was terrible. The guy chewed me out, I freaked out and thought my career was over, and to top all that- my delivery was late!

After that you were hired as an NBC Page. Can you explain a little bit about the Page program and what it's designed to do? What's your daily routine, and do you have any memorable incidents from your time there?

The NBC Page program, despite what Regis Philbin says, is a corporate training ground. They try and hire people they think will eventually be a good fit for NBC Universal as an executive someday. And that's exactly what they were grooming me to be. I wound up in television production working for Mark Binke and Todd Sharpe as an assistant (it was shortly thereafter I made the leap into freelance). But before they put you "on assignment" in a department, your job is basically as a tour guide of the NBC Burbank facility. And yes, we wore exactly what Kenneth on 30 Rock wears today (though they did update the uniforms a few years back, making all us old timers really bitter. After all, ours were polyester and most of us were really really poor at the time, so we never got them dry cleaned. And I can tell you, by August, after giving sometimes 6 tours a day, those things stunk to high hell).

The tours were terrible. Anyone who has ever seen that facility can tell you that virtually any other tour in Hollywood is better (including those terrible double decker bus tours). They gave us fake anecdotes about the studio to tell too. So not only was there nothing to see there, but half the stories we told were BS. Beyond that, we were also assigned to load in audiences for The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and The Ellen Degeneres show. That could also be fun. Whenever you were assigned to the Ellen show, that meant 2 things: 1, you had to dance that night. A lot. 2, you might get some free swag. It seems silly now, but that was a real perk back then. They also wouldn't let her audience go to the restroom on their own, so I would have to lead groups of 6 or 7 (mostly women) to a bathroom, stand there and wait for them to finish, and them walk them back. It was all very awkward.

As a Page, one of the jobs we had on Leno was called "CB" or "Client Booth." The job was to wait until each of Leno's guests arrived for the taping and then escort them to their dressing rooms, but there was one major catch: do not talk to talent, do not ask for autographs, just escort them and that's it.

Anyway, one day Jennifer Garner was supposed to be the guest and I was assigned CB. Having attended the same college as Jennifer Garner (and sitting in on a guest lecture she and Scott Foley gave the acting students at my school the year before), I was delighted to see her again when she stepped out of her limo. She recognized me instantly, and we started chatting like it was no big deal. Again, cause I knew her from before. We had a preexisting relationship (which, correct me if I'm wrong, would have been rude for me to ignore. Cause I'm not an asshole. We're all human beings here, regardless of job title), and so we were pleasant to one another.

But the Tonight Show Security guard, I think his name was Tony, but it just as easily could have been "meddling idiot," thought I was a little too friendly with Jennifer Garner, and tattled on me to my boss. What he didn't know was that I was supposed to be working the Golden Globes the following weekend, and because he spoke out against me, the Page department declared me a "loose cannon" and wouldn't let me work the event (my former page friends still won't let me live this down, the bastards).

Anyway, the next day, the band Wilco was on Leno, and I went right up to them and got their autograph. Cause at that point, it's like "fuck it," you know? If I obey the rules and still get in trouble, then clearly the rules are irrelevant. And if some guy wants to feel like a big man by attempting to ruin a kid's career, good for him. Besides, if they're going to openly let Snoop Dogg smoke weed at the studio, I think I can say hello to a former acquaintance.

How did you end up going from the Page program to working on Arrested Development? What sort of things did you do on AD and was there anything that surprised you while seeing the show's production from the inside?

As I mentioned earlier, I was working for 2 production execs at Universal. One offered me a job as his assistant, but I didn't want to do that. Will & Grace was hiring a PA, and so was Arrested Development, and working at the Studio allowed me a unique opportunity to interview before many many other candidates. And I did what I will always do after I was offered both jobs: I chose passion over paycheck. I never watched Will & Grace, but I was an AD die hard. The choice was easy.

So I started on Arrested as a PA, but then after 2 weeks they promoted their writers' PA to writers' assistant, and they offered me the writers' PA gig. I promptly took it. The job was the hardest I've ever had since I've lived here, and to be honest, it almost swallowed me whole. 7 day weeks, 16 hour days, no signs of that pattern ever changing. It was brutal. And it made me weak. I was only 23 at the time and I wondered if I had made the wrong choice. But I stuck with it and eventually we were canceled. So that took care of that one pretty quickly. Right before Christmas too! Thanks again, Fox!

Regarding the production though, the coolest part for me was seeing how detail oriented the writing room was. Every line, every reference, every single thing they put in there paid off. Even if it took an entire season to do so. And because we were distributing scripts for the first time on shooting days, the mood was very hectic yet relaxed all at once. After all, how stressed can you be when you are handed your lines 5 minutes before shooting? It was very loose, very casual. I even did a day as a Bluth Company Employee (311, titled "Family Ties"), and while on set Jason Bateman tried to throw me a line, but it was already promised to his stand in. But that's the kind of place it was- shit like that happened all the time. The whole experience was Hollywood in a nutshell for me: right place, right time, stars aligned.

After AD you ended up with a series of "odd jobs." Can you tell us what it was like doing this sort of "nomad work?" Did you have a larger plan you were working towards or at this point was it a matter of building up connections and trying to stay afloat?

It was tough. I was on unemployment for almost 8 months doing whatever work I could take. I didn't have much of a plan then, to be honest. I had felt like I lost my way a bit. I had moved here to act, and yes, I did some small parts here and there, but it wasn't my "job" at that point. It was just something else I did in addition to working. And since I didn't yet understand how to make acting a full time job, I took anything I could get.

I was a camera logger on a house flipping show. That was brutal. Show up at the crack of dawn, chase a camera around while listening to the feed so I can log the timecode of what was said and what room they were in-- all the while avoiding stepping on broken glass or boards or nails. Then they cut my days in half. So I walked. That kind of stuff happened a lot. I was hired, I would be recognized as helpful or efficient, and I would be taken advantage of. And the problem was that in my mind, I was just happy to work, so I let it happen. For too long.

Did doing so much different work give you a fuller insight into working in Hollywood?

Absolutely. I would say it gave me the industry "street smarts" that I possess today. It was also an integral part of understanding the production process. Cause I had only really done theater in HS/college. Film and TV were new for me. So there was a whole new vernacular to learn with it.

It also taught me to know my own self worth. As this period of my life was coming to a close, I was offered a writer PA gig on Family Guy and American Dad (they shared a writers' room at the time. They still might). The gig paid $400/week no mileage reimbursement. I turned it down as quickly as they offered it. They were like "plenty of people will work for this, you know." I said, "good, go hire them. I won't work for that little."

Bad decision? Who knows. More importantly: who cares. I did what was right for me, and I didn't sacrifice my own ethics or standards to do it. That's all we really have when it's all said and done.

Somewhere in all of this, you ended up as a writer's assistant with Arrested Development's Maria Semple. When did you decide you wanted to be a writer, and how did Maria end up taking you under her wing? What sort of things did you learn?

I've always been a joke maker, I just never had any desire to be a stand up. And I've been keeping a blog since 2004, so writing has always been a part of me. Heck, I even wrote a spec of "Friends" in HS before I even knew what a spec script was(we read it aloud in class and assigned parts. It was so perfectly lame). But as a 'talent,' I thought I was better if I could hide behind a character. Then I realized- screw the acting, I want to create the character from scratch. That way I held all the power in my hands, and was not just assigned a role that fit me best.

I had time to write while on Arrested Development, but I wasn't focused, I had no idea what I was doing, and I lacked the follow through I have today. To be honest, I wasn't even sure I wanted to be a writer then, but everyone else in my office was doing it, so I gave it a shot. Turns out I loved it. Maria recognized my drive, and she took me under her wing while I was unemployed.

Most of what I did was personal assisting work, but eventually she asked me about my writing and helped me work through a 30Rock spec I was working on at the time. Anyone who has worked with Maria will tell you that she is no-nonsense about story. If the story works, the jokes will follow. I had always viewed it the other way around. But she really clued me in to exactly what makes good TV work. And I grew from there. She hired me to be her writers' assistant on her first novel, and has always been an open ear for me, even to this day.

Tomorrow - More with Scott in Part II