I got a Twitter question from @JulianRamos_
Any books or novels you would recommend a high school senior / aspiring screenwriter to read?
Boy, did you come to the right place. Thanks to membership at several very well-stocked libraries, I pretty much read every screenwriting book published by the time I was in my early-to-mid twenties. After reading dozens of those books, I came away with the feeling that many of the books were saying exactly the same thing. That theory was somewhat proven by my friend J.J. Patrow in this blog post. He compares the storytelling philosophies of Aristotle, Joseph Campbell, Syd Field, Blake Snyder, Peter Dunne, Drew Yanno and then visually demonstrates the similarities via chart. So know that while there are probably hundreds of screenwriting books out there, a lot of them are going to tread on the same ground.
First, formatting is something you want to have drilled into you early on so you don't screw it up. For that reason, I'd make The Screenwriter's Bible: A Complete Guide to Writing, Formatting, and Selling Your Script by David Trottier one of your first reads.
From there, I'd say that it helps to get a sense of three-act structure and what that means in terms of breaking and developing your story. There are at least a hundred books that'll cover this in some form - I recommend Blake Snyder's Save the Cat. He's taken some flack for the way he somewhat rigidly adheres to a formula, but I think it helps to give beginners some structure. His 15-point beat sheet is a good way to get the hang of writing a film. It also can be of use in helping you dissect films that you like, making it a stepping stone to getting inside the story and understanding why some screenplays work and some don't.
After that, I'd suggest immersing yourself in some more personal memoirs from working writers. It's always good to balance the nuts and bolts education with straight talk about what it's really like not just to develop screenplays, but also work in the industry. There's more to being a screenwriter than just writing scripts, if you know what I mean. To that end, these are among what I'd consider required reading:
Adventures in the Screen Trade by William Goldman
Which Lie Did I Tell?: More Adventures in the Screen Trade by William Goldman
Billion-Dollar Kiss: The Kiss That Saved Dawson's Creek by Jeffrey Stepakoff
Tales from the Script: 50 Hollywood Screenwriters Share Their Stories
Go to your local library and find where those books are. I can almost guarantee that you'll probably find a dozen other worthwhile books in a similar vein right next to those on the shelves.
Also, for extra credit, read Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets by David Simon. It's not a screenwriting book. You'll find it in True Crime. Then, go watch the first season of Homicide: Life on the Street, the NBC series inspired by the book. There are a great many storylines and characters that are adapted quite closely from the book, but you'll also notice at least as many differences in character and plot. Some characters are merged, others are invented out of whole cloth. Make yourself aware of what changes have been made and ask yourself why those changes were necessary.
Hopefully, that'll give you some insight into how even the most interesting real-life stories often need to be restructured and re-conceived when adapted as drama. A lot of first-time writers try to adapt things from their lives without understanding that real life is boring and often without the construction that makes drama interesting.
That and Homicide's just an awesome show. David Simon wrote the book when he was a journalist for The Baltimore Sun, but when it became a series, he wrote a few episodes and this started his career as a TV writer/producer. He's since gone on to create The Wire and Treme.
That should be enough to get you started. Be warned that the more screenwriting books you find, the more tempting it is to say, "Well, I'll write my script after I read one or two more of these, just so I'm REALLY prepared." Don't allow reading these books to become an exercise in procrastination.
Does anyone else have what they'd consider essential reading?
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Tuesday Talkback - Should studios inform the original writers when they prep a remake?
Sunday, Deadline posted a story about how screenwriter James Toback was rather upset to find out secondhand that Paramount was planning a remake of The Gambler. Toback was the writer of the original version, which he considers one of his more personal films. Chief among Toback's complaints was the fact that the studio didn't even offer the courtesy of letting him know about the remake before announcing it to the world via Deadline.
Legally, Paramount was under no obligation to do so. They bought the script. They own the property. In a legal sense, Toback has no claim to the material any longer so there's no reason they would have had to tell him - but would it at least have been the moral thing to do.
This isn't the first such case of this happening. Wes Craven was rather blunt last year when discussing the fact that he wasn't consulted about the remake of what is arguably the film most associated with him - A Nightmare on Elm Street. He not only directed the original film, but he wrote the script and created the character of Freddy Krueger. Considering the studio had been looking to jump-start the franchise, you'd think they'd have at least courted him in an effort to secure his blessing, yet all indications from Craven are that they didn't. But again, they didn't have to.
And of course, the people who hold the rights to the original film version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer have been trying for a few years now to get their reboot off the ground - without the involvement of creator Joss Whedon. This again strikes me as a botched move, as not getting Whedon's blessing runs the risk of alienating his loyal fan base.
But what do you think? No laws are being broken here, so it's not as if the studios or producers owe the original creators anything in a legal sense. If you were in the studio's shoes, would you have given the original writers a courtesy call? If you were one of those original writers, would it bug you to find this stuff out from a third party, or do you think you'd accept that this is how the business works.
Legally, Paramount was under no obligation to do so. They bought the script. They own the property. In a legal sense, Toback has no claim to the material any longer so there's no reason they would have had to tell him - but would it at least have been the moral thing to do.
This isn't the first such case of this happening. Wes Craven was rather blunt last year when discussing the fact that he wasn't consulted about the remake of what is arguably the film most associated with him - A Nightmare on Elm Street. He not only directed the original film, but he wrote the script and created the character of Freddy Krueger. Considering the studio had been looking to jump-start the franchise, you'd think they'd have at least courted him in an effort to secure his blessing, yet all indications from Craven are that they didn't. But again, they didn't have to.
And of course, the people who hold the rights to the original film version of Buffy the Vampire Slayer have been trying for a few years now to get their reboot off the ground - without the involvement of creator Joss Whedon. This again strikes me as a botched move, as not getting Whedon's blessing runs the risk of alienating his loyal fan base.
But what do you think? No laws are being broken here, so it's not as if the studios or producers owe the original creators anything in a legal sense. If you were in the studio's shoes, would you have given the original writers a courtesy call? If you were one of those original writers, would it bug you to find this stuff out from a third party, or do you think you'd accept that this is how the business works.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Reader question - Positive and negative changes in scenes and knowing when to end a scene
Jeff asks:
I'm confused at where sequences begin and end and how they exactly fit into scenes. I'm doing a heavy outline right now, and am a bit stuck on this, because I want to do it the right way, the professional way, the best way. So I want to make sure that every scene counts. And according to the many books I've read, if a scene doesn't turn form a positive to a negative, or vice versa, the scene doesn't do anything and should be removed. So is that all there is to it? Should I just be paying attention to the positive negative fluctuations, and when I can identify them, is that how I know where my scene ends? I just get a little confused when locations change, say, from going inside a house to a car.
Honestly, I think this is what happens when a writer follows a guru too literally. Too many books out there try to reduce writing to a mathematical equation. True, there is a structure to screenwriting, and in some cases those elements are fairly rigid. Blake Snyder's checklist of how to break down a film is one of the more useful tools, but following that "Beat Sheet" isn't the only way to write a script.
The same goes for the mandate that every scene should go from a positive to a negative or vice-versa. I agree that every scene should advance the story in some form, but I have to believe there's more to that than keeping track of positive to negative fluctuations.
I'm a little puzzled by your last two statements. Your scenes should end when they reach their climax. Once you've achieved the point of that scene, your objective should be to get out of it as soon as possible. Look at the scene in Back to the Future where Marty gets the critical exposition he'll need once he's stuck in the past. He's with his girlfriend in the town square, talking about their plans for the weekend and his family. They start to kiss, only to be interrupted by the woman soliciting donations to preserve the Clock Tower. In the course of doing so, she reveals important exposition about how that building was struck by lightning 30 years ago.
The thing is, the writers need a way to make sure Marty would remember those details, and in his current mindset, his focus isn't really on what the woman is saying - so they have the woman force a flyer on him, one that has all the information about the Clock Tower. But there still needs to be a reason for him to hold onto it. That's easily accomplished by having the girlfriend say she'll be at her grandmother's. She writes the number on the flyer. Thus, Marty has a reason to hold onto it rather than discard it in the nearest trashcan.
And what happens after all that's accomplished? They kiss, she leaves and the scene ends. The scene had to lay out exposition and give Marty a reason to hold onto it. Once that was done, they got out of it. There's no scene of Marty talking to other people in the town square. He doesn't buy a newspaper, he doesn't have a lingering conversation with his girlfriend about their homework. The scene has done its work and it ends.
Once you've accomplished what you need to, you get out of that scene. If you don't know WHAT exactly you're trying to accomplish in that scene, then you've got bigger problems than not knowing when the scene should end.
I'm confused at where sequences begin and end and how they exactly fit into scenes. I'm doing a heavy outline right now, and am a bit stuck on this, because I want to do it the right way, the professional way, the best way. So I want to make sure that every scene counts. And according to the many books I've read, if a scene doesn't turn form a positive to a negative, or vice versa, the scene doesn't do anything and should be removed. So is that all there is to it? Should I just be paying attention to the positive negative fluctuations, and when I can identify them, is that how I know where my scene ends? I just get a little confused when locations change, say, from going inside a house to a car.
Honestly, I think this is what happens when a writer follows a guru too literally. Too many books out there try to reduce writing to a mathematical equation. True, there is a structure to screenwriting, and in some cases those elements are fairly rigid. Blake Snyder's checklist of how to break down a film is one of the more useful tools, but following that "Beat Sheet" isn't the only way to write a script.
The same goes for the mandate that every scene should go from a positive to a negative or vice-versa. I agree that every scene should advance the story in some form, but I have to believe there's more to that than keeping track of positive to negative fluctuations.
I'm a little puzzled by your last two statements. Your scenes should end when they reach their climax. Once you've achieved the point of that scene, your objective should be to get out of it as soon as possible. Look at the scene in Back to the Future where Marty gets the critical exposition he'll need once he's stuck in the past. He's with his girlfriend in the town square, talking about their plans for the weekend and his family. They start to kiss, only to be interrupted by the woman soliciting donations to preserve the Clock Tower. In the course of doing so, she reveals important exposition about how that building was struck by lightning 30 years ago.
The thing is, the writers need a way to make sure Marty would remember those details, and in his current mindset, his focus isn't really on what the woman is saying - so they have the woman force a flyer on him, one that has all the information about the Clock Tower. But there still needs to be a reason for him to hold onto it. That's easily accomplished by having the girlfriend say she'll be at her grandmother's. She writes the number on the flyer. Thus, Marty has a reason to hold onto it rather than discard it in the nearest trashcan.
And what happens after all that's accomplished? They kiss, she leaves and the scene ends. The scene had to lay out exposition and give Marty a reason to hold onto it. Once that was done, they got out of it. There's no scene of Marty talking to other people in the town square. He doesn't buy a newspaper, he doesn't have a lingering conversation with his girlfriend about their homework. The scene has done its work and it ends.
Once you've accomplished what you need to, you get out of that scene. If you don't know WHAT exactly you're trying to accomplish in that scene, then you've got bigger problems than not knowing when the scene should end.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Friday Free-For-All - A Salute to Wil Wheaton as he celebrates 10 years blogging!
This week was Wil Wheaton's 10 year Blog-Birthday. I really have to tip my hat to Wil because it was the fact that I got so much enjoyment out of his blog that made me really interested in starting my own. I found it around November of 2001 - and during that time, Wil was pretty much a struggling actor still trying to come to terms with what being a "teen idol" and one of the most hated Star Trek characters meant for his life.
For those of you who don't know, Wil played Wesley Crusher, a boy genius whose brilliance was so great he actually got to be an acting ensign on the Enterprise bridge at the age of 16. Unfortunately, this hardly endeared him to fans who felt that a child had no place on the bridge, and it didn't help that early episodes had the character be a bit of a snotty know-it-all. Worst of all, the kid practically saved the whole ship in the first episode. Fans resented him and Wesley never recovered from that. Wil, being a teenager at the time, also had trouble dealing with the hate mail the character would receive. I didn't come to TNG much later, so I didn't have as much trouble with the Wesley character.
So in Wil's early posts there's a lot of ambivalence towards his Trek history, compounded by the fact that he felt disrespected by some of the Powers That Be in Trek. It was a running theme in many of his posts, and it was fascinating to see Wil grow as writer. One of my favorite early posts are these two - featuring a dialogue between Wil and Wesley.
Mirror, Mirror
The Big Goodbye
Wil's blog has been a must-read for me since early on. It's a surprisingly personal blog at times, talking about the meaningful moments he has with his sons, his frustrations with the business, the joy of geekdom, and much more. Most of all, these past ten years have been about a journey that Wil has taken from a path that could have led to "embittered has-been actor" to "Geek Icon and All-around Cool guy."
Over the past ten years, Wil's readers have seen him go from struggling to get even an audition, to a successful career resurgence playing against type. The guy who had to struggle just to get into the room eventually had parts written for him on The Big Bang Theory and Eureka, among many other well-received gigs. The fans who remember the sad story of Wil canceling a family vacation to go on an audition where he got little respect probably take a lot of pride in seeing "Uncle Willie" get the acclaim he deserves. I've met Wil twice and he's been nothing but gracious both times. (And twice I've balked at bothering him at the comic book store we apparently both frequent.)
So I want to salute him this week, and I think of no better lesson to take from Mr. Wheaton than the journey he points out in his post:
"Ten years ago yesterday, I started my blog at WWdN. Ten years ago today, Metafilter declared that it was "lame," and most of the Internet was really shitty to me about the whole thing. I was so sad and hurt by how cruel people were to me back then, I almost gave up before I'd even started... but for some reason, I was stubborn and just kept going.
I'm glad I made it across what Ira Glass calls The Gap, because I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be going to PAX (or doing any of the wonderful things I get to do these days) if I hadn't. Thank you to everyone who has shared the journey with me; I hope to continue earning your time and support for the next ten years."
As a special treat, here's a live performance of one of my favorite Wheaton stories - the first time he met William Shatner. (A bit of mature language. Don't play this at work)
Or if you'd rather read it, it's available in two parts on Suicide Girls. (Also probably not safe for work). Personally, I think the live performance is hilarious and well worth the time it takes to watch.
Part I
Part II
I've very relieved to say that both times I met Wil, he was friendly, willing to pose for pictures, and didn't once make me feel like Mr. Shatner made him feel at that time. Wil, it's been a pleasure reading your blogs, Tweets and books, and enjoying your podcasts over the last ten years. You've evolved into a wonderful writer, and if you stick with this acting thing, who knows where it could lead?
In all seriousness, I think your recent success has been a direct result of all the good karma you put out there during those years when things might have been a little more lean. Seeing that paid back to you has been both rewarding and inspiring. Any actor and writer can identify with your struggles and yet also share in the hopes that if we put in the same work and positivity that you have, we may yet find the same success.
To ten years!
For those of you who don't know, Wil played Wesley Crusher, a boy genius whose brilliance was so great he actually got to be an acting ensign on the Enterprise bridge at the age of 16. Unfortunately, this hardly endeared him to fans who felt that a child had no place on the bridge, and it didn't help that early episodes had the character be a bit of a snotty know-it-all. Worst of all, the kid practically saved the whole ship in the first episode. Fans resented him and Wesley never recovered from that. Wil, being a teenager at the time, also had trouble dealing with the hate mail the character would receive. I didn't come to TNG much later, so I didn't have as much trouble with the Wesley character.
So in Wil's early posts there's a lot of ambivalence towards his Trek history, compounded by the fact that he felt disrespected by some of the Powers That Be in Trek. It was a running theme in many of his posts, and it was fascinating to see Wil grow as writer. One of my favorite early posts are these two - featuring a dialogue between Wil and Wesley.
Mirror, Mirror
The Big Goodbye
Wil's blog has been a must-read for me since early on. It's a surprisingly personal blog at times, talking about the meaningful moments he has with his sons, his frustrations with the business, the joy of geekdom, and much more. Most of all, these past ten years have been about a journey that Wil has taken from a path that could have led to "embittered has-been actor" to "Geek Icon and All-around Cool guy."
Over the past ten years, Wil's readers have seen him go from struggling to get even an audition, to a successful career resurgence playing against type. The guy who had to struggle just to get into the room eventually had parts written for him on The Big Bang Theory and Eureka, among many other well-received gigs. The fans who remember the sad story of Wil canceling a family vacation to go on an audition where he got little respect probably take a lot of pride in seeing "Uncle Willie" get the acclaim he deserves. I've met Wil twice and he's been nothing but gracious both times. (And twice I've balked at bothering him at the comic book store we apparently both frequent.)
So I want to salute him this week, and I think of no better lesson to take from Mr. Wheaton than the journey he points out in his post:
"Ten years ago yesterday, I started my blog at WWdN. Ten years ago today, Metafilter declared that it was "lame," and most of the Internet was really shitty to me about the whole thing. I was so sad and hurt by how cruel people were to me back then, I almost gave up before I'd even started... but for some reason, I was stubborn and just kept going.
I'm glad I made it across what Ira Glass calls The Gap, because I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be going to PAX (or doing any of the wonderful things I get to do these days) if I hadn't. Thank you to everyone who has shared the journey with me; I hope to continue earning your time and support for the next ten years."
As a special treat, here's a live performance of one of my favorite Wheaton stories - the first time he met William Shatner. (A bit of mature language. Don't play this at work)
Or if you'd rather read it, it's available in two parts on Suicide Girls. (Also probably not safe for work). Personally, I think the live performance is hilarious and well worth the time it takes to watch.
Part I
Part II
I've very relieved to say that both times I met Wil, he was friendly, willing to pose for pictures, and didn't once make me feel like Mr. Shatner made him feel at that time. Wil, it's been a pleasure reading your blogs, Tweets and books, and enjoying your podcasts over the last ten years. You've evolved into a wonderful writer, and if you stick with this acting thing, who knows where it could lead?
In all seriousness, I think your recent success has been a direct result of all the good karma you put out there during those years when things might have been a little more lean. Seeing that paid back to you has been both rewarding and inspiring. Any actor and writer can identify with your struggles and yet also share in the hopes that if we put in the same work and positivity that you have, we may yet find the same success.
To ten years!
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Thursday Throwback - Ways to Get Read
Note: This post first appeared on Thursday, March 26, 2009
Last week I got a question from a reader named Ian:
Simply put, how does a script come into your, or any other reader's, hand? What is the route it takes? I feel it would be valuable for aspiring writers such as myself to know how to get to the gatekeeper in the first place. :)
Generally, it varies with the job. When I work for a production company, the vast majority of the material I read comes in through agents. At agencies and management companies, most of the time, those scripts are coming in through agents as well.
So how does one get a script to a reader when they don't have an agent? Probably the most common way would be through a personal connection. If you're in L.A., network; make friends with other writers, with agent and producer assistants. Once you're on good terms with them, ask if they'd read your script and give you their reaction. If they think it's good, maybe they'll pass it up the ladder to people they work for. I tend to favor asking the contact for notes first rather than just saying, "Hey can you show this to your boss?" In that case, you're basically asking them flat-out to cash in one of their favors, and few people in that situation would be inclined to do that without vetting the material first to make sure it's not a waste of their boss's time. Plus, your friend might have good notes, or maybe he'll like it enough off the bat to ask, "Hey, you mind if I show this to a few people at work?"
Contests can also be a way up to the Gatekeepers. Several of my previous employers have requested the top ten finalists from many competitions like the Nichols Fellowship. Strangely, despite the reputation those contests and many others have, rarely are those submissions as strong as the professionally-submitted ones. If you've got confidence in your writing, it might not hurt to pick a contest or two and see how you do. Just make sure it's one with a good reputation. It can cost $50 or more to enter some of these competitions, which is why I don't suggest going crazy with those submissions.
I hasten to point out that even winning a competition doesn't necessarily mean much. The odds of a contest-winning script getting sold and produced are still pretty low. I come at it from the view that doing well in a contest at least gives you something to put in a query letter to an agent or manager. At the very least, it shows that someone with some experience in script reading has vetted the script and found good things in the material. It's a foot in the door - but be aware, query letters don't always have a very high success rate. If you get one response from every ten or fifteen you send out, that's pretty good.
Depressing, ain't it? Does anyone out there have any suggestions for other ways to get read?
Last week I got a question from a reader named Ian:
Simply put, how does a script come into your, or any other reader's, hand? What is the route it takes? I feel it would be valuable for aspiring writers such as myself to know how to get to the gatekeeper in the first place. :)
Generally, it varies with the job. When I work for a production company, the vast majority of the material I read comes in through agents. At agencies and management companies, most of the time, those scripts are coming in through agents as well.
So how does one get a script to a reader when they don't have an agent? Probably the most common way would be through a personal connection. If you're in L.A., network; make friends with other writers, with agent and producer assistants. Once you're on good terms with them, ask if they'd read your script and give you their reaction. If they think it's good, maybe they'll pass it up the ladder to people they work for. I tend to favor asking the contact for notes first rather than just saying, "Hey can you show this to your boss?" In that case, you're basically asking them flat-out to cash in one of their favors, and few people in that situation would be inclined to do that without vetting the material first to make sure it's not a waste of their boss's time. Plus, your friend might have good notes, or maybe he'll like it enough off the bat to ask, "Hey, you mind if I show this to a few people at work?"
Contests can also be a way up to the Gatekeepers. Several of my previous employers have requested the top ten finalists from many competitions like the Nichols Fellowship. Strangely, despite the reputation those contests and many others have, rarely are those submissions as strong as the professionally-submitted ones. If you've got confidence in your writing, it might not hurt to pick a contest or two and see how you do. Just make sure it's one with a good reputation. It can cost $50 or more to enter some of these competitions, which is why I don't suggest going crazy with those submissions.
I hasten to point out that even winning a competition doesn't necessarily mean much. The odds of a contest-winning script getting sold and produced are still pretty low. I come at it from the view that doing well in a contest at least gives you something to put in a query letter to an agent or manager. At the very least, it shows that someone with some experience in script reading has vetted the script and found good things in the material. It's a foot in the door - but be aware, query letters don't always have a very high success rate. If you get one response from every ten or fifteen you send out, that's pretty good.
Depressing, ain't it? Does anyone out there have any suggestions for other ways to get read?
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Agency Promotion Hazing represents everything wrong with this town
I saw an "EXCLUSIVE" on Deadline the other day that really turned my stomach. This is the story of how one agency told an assistant they were promoting him to full agent. They called him over to one of the partners homes on a Saturday to build a swing set. Then when he showed up, several of the partners performed a "career intervention," (where he was no doubt made to feel incompetent and unappreciated) before ushering him out into the backyard for a "surprise" celebration with his friends and family.
Bullshit like this is precisely what's wrong with this industry. I don't see what's funny about hazing a hard-working assistant like that. And I'm sure the douchebags who concocted this master scheme thought they were so clever that they'd push this guy to the limits of his temper before saying "Surprise! You're one of us now!" but honestly, it's still incredibly mean-spirited. The promoted assistant is still the butt of the joke.
But that's not what elevates the brilliant minds over at this company to the title of "Bitter Script Reader's Asshats of the Week." If you want to conduct promotion ceremonies with all the dignity of Rush Week at Beta House, be my guest. If you get your jollies by pushing someone around just to see if he'll snap, or cry, or whatever, fine... doesn't make you any different from half the assholes in this town. No, what elevates this agency to the most classless operation in town is that someone said, "Hey, wouldn't it be great if we called up Nikki Finke and gave her this story exclusively?"
The Greek system at my college was loaded with assholes - it's why I pledged GDI - but there was at least one element of honor to the hazing: What happened in the house, stayed in the house. I'm sure pledges were made to endure many humiliating things, but no one called up the school newspaper and plastered it on the front page. Sad that this agency lacks the professionalism and maturity that even a 19 year-old pledge armed with ruffies can grasp.
Going public like this pretty much ensures that this whole ritual had nothing to do with the assistant at all. It was ALL about the perpetrators of this "genius" prank. Unsatisfied with merely getting their target embarrassed in front of his friends and family, they had to crow about it to the entire town!
Even so, the prank itself is still pretty tasteless. It's never funny when a boss "jokes" that one of his employees is about to be fired, or deliberately makes him feel like his job is in jeopardy just for kicks. It wasn't funny when Michael Scott did it to Pam in the first episode of The Office and it's not funny in real life.
I almost guarantee that the people at the top in that company are among the discourteous who insist "Thick Skin Required" when putting out job postings for their company. This is a sort of fine print that many in the industry use to absolve themselves of treating those in their employ like human beings. I've known plenty of CEOs and Company Presidents who've been able to get the job done and motivate their employees without resorting to dehumanizing them. What makes some Ari Gold wannabe so special that he can ignore basic human courtesy?
The worst part is that this sort of assy behavior is self-replicating. The abused become the abusers. The victims of pranks like this will turn around and do it to the next guy in five years, reasoning that it's okay because it was done to them. It's the same with salaries. "You're going to work 15 hours a day and take work home every night for the wage of a mere $9/hr. Why? 'Cause 'Fuck you,' that's why! I had to endure this years ago - what makes you so special that you're too good for this?"
Hey guys, how about you quit playing the part of "Poor Man's Ari Gold" in "The Me Story starring Me" and just focus on doing your jobs and appreciating your employees without publicly humiliating them? Maybe you're not all assholes over there, but everything in that article (including the fact it was made public) is exactly what an asshole would do.
I tell you this, though. I'm not going to be querying any of these agents. And I certainly wouldn't waste my time filling their inboxes with increasing worse pitches and made-up queries certain to annoy even the most hardened agent. Not even taking into account I know their email structure is readily available through IMDBPro.
Bullshit like this is precisely what's wrong with this industry. I don't see what's funny about hazing a hard-working assistant like that. And I'm sure the douchebags who concocted this master scheme thought they were so clever that they'd push this guy to the limits of his temper before saying "Surprise! You're one of us now!" but honestly, it's still incredibly mean-spirited. The promoted assistant is still the butt of the joke.
But that's not what elevates the brilliant minds over at this company to the title of "Bitter Script Reader's Asshats of the Week." If you want to conduct promotion ceremonies with all the dignity of Rush Week at Beta House, be my guest. If you get your jollies by pushing someone around just to see if he'll snap, or cry, or whatever, fine... doesn't make you any different from half the assholes in this town. No, what elevates this agency to the most classless operation in town is that someone said, "Hey, wouldn't it be great if we called up Nikki Finke and gave her this story exclusively?"
The Greek system at my college was loaded with assholes - it's why I pledged GDI - but there was at least one element of honor to the hazing: What happened in the house, stayed in the house. I'm sure pledges were made to endure many humiliating things, but no one called up the school newspaper and plastered it on the front page. Sad that this agency lacks the professionalism and maturity that even a 19 year-old pledge armed with ruffies can grasp.
Going public like this pretty much ensures that this whole ritual had nothing to do with the assistant at all. It was ALL about the perpetrators of this "genius" prank. Unsatisfied with merely getting their target embarrassed in front of his friends and family, they had to crow about it to the entire town!
Even so, the prank itself is still pretty tasteless. It's never funny when a boss "jokes" that one of his employees is about to be fired, or deliberately makes him feel like his job is in jeopardy just for kicks. It wasn't funny when Michael Scott did it to Pam in the first episode of The Office and it's not funny in real life.
I almost guarantee that the people at the top in that company are among the discourteous who insist "Thick Skin Required" when putting out job postings for their company. This is a sort of fine print that many in the industry use to absolve themselves of treating those in their employ like human beings. I've known plenty of CEOs and Company Presidents who've been able to get the job done and motivate their employees without resorting to dehumanizing them. What makes some Ari Gold wannabe so special that he can ignore basic human courtesy?
The worst part is that this sort of assy behavior is self-replicating. The abused become the abusers. The victims of pranks like this will turn around and do it to the next guy in five years, reasoning that it's okay because it was done to them. It's the same with salaries. "You're going to work 15 hours a day and take work home every night for the wage of a mere $9/hr. Why? 'Cause 'Fuck you,' that's why! I had to endure this years ago - what makes you so special that you're too good for this?"
Hey guys, how about you quit playing the part of "Poor Man's Ari Gold" in "The Me Story starring Me" and just focus on doing your jobs and appreciating your employees without publicly humiliating them? Maybe you're not all assholes over there, but everything in that article (including the fact it was made public) is exactly what an asshole would do.
I tell you this, though. I'm not going to be querying any of these agents. And I certainly wouldn't waste my time filling their inboxes with increasing worse pitches and made-up queries certain to annoy even the most hardened agent. Not even taking into account I know their email structure is readily available through IMDBPro.
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Tuesday Talkback - Kill your least favorite character cliches
I sounded off yesterday about how I hate Garden State-esque Quirky Girls in screenplays. Today, it's your turn. If you could permanently erase ONE character trope from cinema what would it be?
The plucky sidekick?
The fat friend who's there to make crude jokes?
The sex-crazed best friend who is basically Kim Cattrall's Sex & The City character with the serial numbers filed off?
The ugly girl with a chip on her shoulder?
The cocky douchebag who - against all common sense - is somehow the hero of the script?
The wise minority sage?
The stripper with the heart of gold?
The flamboyant homosexual who's basically the gay equivalent of Stepin Fetchit?
The plucky sidekick?
The fat friend who's there to make crude jokes?
The sex-crazed best friend who is basically Kim Cattrall's Sex & The City character with the serial numbers filed off?
The ugly girl with a chip on her shoulder?
The cocky douchebag who - against all common sense - is somehow the hero of the script?
The wise minority sage?
The stripper with the heart of gold?
The flamboyant homosexual who's basically the gay equivalent of Stepin Fetchit?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
