Screenwriting On The Blog

21...

2012-01-19T23:15:00.002Z

... is not how old I am now, even though I'm writing this in the final few minutes of my birthday. It's how many movies I watched on a recent two week vacation in New York. A combination of planes, cinema trips and dvds accounts for what is probably a personal best.

I also read 5 scripts and one book. It was wonderful.

That's what I do. That's how I like to spend my leisure time. That's why I got into this business in the first place.

I think sometimes that gets forgotten. Maybe not for everyone. Not even for me most of the time. But nevertheless it was just a little reminder.

I think if you don't love it, go and do something else. There are easier ways just to earn money, even in a recession. Because you're gonna need that love when no one returns your calls or replies to your emails, when they pass on what you thought was your best work yet, and generally don't give you the time of day.

I didn't do a yearly round up thing over the holiday period and even now, on my birthday, I'm not really big on looking back over the past year or ahead to the new one. But I just wanted to wish those kind enough to read my blog and everyone who has let me read their scripts this past year a belated Happy New Year.

I hope we all go from strength to strength, personally and professionally, in 2012.

Screenwriting, Networking and Pitching Workshop

2012-01-14T22:55:00.004Z

Philip Shelley & Phil Gladwin are once again running their intensive two day screenwriting course in London on Feb 4th & 5th, and in Belfast on March 24th & 25th. They are also running a one day 'Pitching' masterclass in London on Saturday March 10th.

You can find all the information about the courses and how to book here:

http://www.screenwritinggoldmine.com/screenwriting-workshops

http://www.screenwritinggoldmine.com/how-to-pitch

Special guests lined up for London include Ben Stoll, Head of Development at C4, and Matt Bouch, Producer of Being Human and The Sarah Jane Adventures.

Special guests lined up for Belfast include Vanessa Haynes, Development Producer at Kudos NI, and Terry Cafolla, lead writer on Law & Order UK.

Script Club 2012

2012-01-10T01:22:00.004Z

I don't know Stuart Hazeldine. I've met him twice at LSWF and he seems like a nice guy. As is customary at these things when on a panel, you are always asked how did you get started in screenwriting. So I've heard Stuart tell the story a couple of times that he knew he wanted to be a screenwriter, had never seen a script, was at some sci fi convention and found a copy of the Blade Runner shooting script on sale. He bought it, used it as a template, and he was off and running. That was it. From seeing how that one script worked, he launched a career. What if it had not been on sale that day? No idea. I'm sure he would've found another opportunity to find something similar.

From when Stuart was starting out until now, getting hold of scripts has become staggeringly easy. Sometimes you can even read them before the movie has come out. Reading scripts is the surest and cheapest way for screenwriters to improve their writing. Better than any guru lecture or how to book.

So it amazes me that I still meet and work with writers who have never read one. Never. Not even one. I'm not having a go at anyone, I promise. I always make the case to producers about new writers that there was a time that every single screenwriter had never written anything or didn't have a single credit. Everyone started from that point. Even Aaron Sorkin. Similarly, there was a time when none of us had ever seen a screenplay.

That's fine. But that's got to change quickly if you want your career to progress.

It's with that in mind that Dave Melkevik's Script Club is back. Go over to his blog to find out more information and get involved. One script a week. That's maybe 1-2 hours of your time. And it will be a damn sight more useful to you than watching much of the TV that is on at the moment.

LSF 6: Your script and the 20 common pitfalls

2012-01-02T20:06:00.003Z

The title of this session, the last I attended, was a bit of a misnomer. So much so that in the Q & A that followed one cheeky beggar asked, "so what are the 20 most common pitfalls?" It was pretty funny actually. But in reality what the session did provide was an overview of how your script, and indeed your actions and etiquette, are perceived by people inside the industry, and from that point of view it was invaluable. Moderated by Industrial Scripts supremo, Evan Leighton-Davis, the panel included Danny Stack, Steven Russell, Daniel Martin Eckhart, and Paul Andrew Williams.

What common mistakes did you make sending scripts out early on?

PAW: Sending them out for one, because they weren't very good. Early scripts were written in pen on A4 paper. Probably best not to do that. Didn't read any book on scriptwriting and still hasn't. Had no real idea of what he was doing, but clung onto the idea of 'what happens next,' to just keep driving the story forward. Then he started to get feedback etc and gradually his work improved.

DME: Wrote 7 or 8 specs before getting anything produced. It was a learning experience and even when looking back at them now still quite likes them. Also had no formal training, but just loved movies ever since being a kid and had an instinct for how scripts should feel and look like. One of the big problems he had was with script length - they were always too long.

DS: Every screenwriter that's ever lived makes the same mistakes when starting out. He was writing specs when working as a reader and you see scripts and the mistakes they make and realise omg I do the same thing. You always think your scripts are better and fresher than what's out there but when you read a lot of scripts Danny realised he needed to work harder to be better, more original, more imaginative, etc. If you download scripts online and just read a few a week, that's some of the best education you're ever going to get. Because you'll see mistakes and think okay I'm not going to do that. But equally, you'll see things like stylistic techniques and think that's a great way to do that, and so on. Readers get maligned for supposedly wanting to find things that they can be critical about - but equally we want to find things we love and our passionate about and can push as much as we can.

Any script pet hates?

SR: Intensely dislike camera direction in a script. It's not the writers job. 'Angle on' and the phrase "we see..." pops up a lot and it's a dry way of doing things when what you want is for the script to be emotive. It's a bit lazy and you need to work harder than that.

ELD: All the execs he knows just hate exposition. Telling the story through dialogue or quite transparently telling the story that way. It's the laziest form of screenwriting. That's a very common mistake for new writers.

DME: When you're an experienced writer and have had a few scripts produced, you can take liberties and get away with a lot more. But when you're a newbie starting out you want to do everything you can to avoid everything there is that will stop someone reading your script. Some script you download are from very experienced writers and they will have camera directions and lots of other stuff we're told not to do, all over them. And what's more, it might all work wonderfully. But when you're new - just don't do them.

ELD: Every single reader, the first thing they do is turn to the back page to see how long the script is. And you can make their day a little bit by keeping it as short as possible. Put yourself in their position, they've got a pile of scripts sitting there and they are going to be more disposed to reading the shorter ones first. And script lengths generally are creeping down a little bit. People are aware of that.

DS: Between 90-105 pages is becoming the standard now. It does depend a little bit on genre because horror might be on the shorter side for example. But scripts much longer than this and people will start raising eyebrows. And from a reader point of view, they'll be thinking oh I'm not going to read that one tonight. People talk a lot about the importance of the first 10 pages (or less, like 3 pages, these days) and that's all true. But what can then happen is after that point things start to go off the rails. So much effort has gone into the first 10 pages but then the structure falls away or the characterisation gets a bit wonky. And it should go without saying that as much time, effort and hard work needs to go into the rest of the script as it does with the first ten pages, but sometimes what's on the page doesn't look like it has.

As far as etiquette goes, how important are all the things that go on off page as it were, like making a good impression and getting on with people, etc?

SR: It's hugely important. We spend hours and hours working with writers and the relationship is really important. So if people are being difficult you're going to wonder whether it's worth it. This one writer had sent a script in and then just kept emailing 'have you read my script yet,' over and over again. Until it reached the point where they would just send an email with a question mark. Yeah, don't do that.

PAW: It's always a struggle to get your script read. But when you do pick your battles. Pick what you really care about and choose carefully what you're going to fight for. Is it a deal breaker? But at the same time keep your ego in check.

What are your thoughts on self promotion?

DS: You've got to be yourself but there's no harm in promoting yourself in a positive way that isn't a load of rubbish. Humility and humour go a long way, especially in email. In fact it's surprising how common it is for people who call themselves writers can't actually write a good email or letter. Or you might get what is obviously a generic email, and they've forgotten to put your name on this one so it just reads Dear,. The other thing is constantly asking if you've read the script yet, and then saying if you haven't here's another draft, can you read that one instead. And so begins another cycle of torment.

DME: Producers are human beings too. They want to work with people they get along with. Working on anything from TV to features, it's a long process. You're not talking a couple of months, you're talking a year or two. If you come across as difficult and someone who can't be challenged/argued with (in a constructive way) the producer will think I'll find the next best guy. Maybe it will be someone who is not quite as good a writer as you. But he can get along with him and grab a beer and have a laugh. Don't be a precious artist and think what you've written is just genius and you're doing them a favour even letting them read it. That's really important especially at the beginning. You need to start playing the game.

We're in the social networking age. How important is an online presence and what are the cautionary tales?

DS: The great thing about the internet is that it's ours and we make the content. So you can make yourself out to look really good, but by the same token you can end up looking like a complete idiot. And unfortunately it's very easy to do the latter and not so easy to do the former. So if you're going to have a website maintain it well. If you're going to have a blog have something to say. If you're going to twitter don't slag off people. Facebook is the same. Unless you protect your content it's a public forum. Execs will check out your blog before or after your meeting, so be careful what you say. If you think starting a blog will help you jump the queue in terms of getting work it won't. You can sometimes get work through relationships that have begun through your blog, but it will probably take years. There is still an attitude at the moment that writers don't need any online presence, which is a valid opinion. But that might change. We leave digital footsteps everywhere and the internet is such a part of our lives, that if an exec google you, like we all do, and don't find anything, it can look a bit weird.

DME: Today you can get away with nothing. But in five years time you might not. People need to be able to find you.

LSF 5: In Conversation with Ashley Pharoah

2011-12-26T21:43:00.002Z

The penultimate session I attended at LSWF was an in depth conversation with Ashley Pharoah, one of the most experienced writers working in British television today. (As ever these are my paraphrased notes.)

How did you get started?

Ashley always wanted to be a writer. He knew nothing about scriptwriting. He listened to Radio 4 plays and wrote a 30 minute play, sent it off to BBC and about 6 months later they got in touch and said they’d like it. He got paid £300 and that changed his life. This was something he enjoyed doing so much and you could get paid to do it. Ashley went to the NFTS, didn’t eat for about 5 years, and then properly started on Eastenders.

How did you get on Eastenders?

A director he was at NFTS was working on the show and said the scripts were awful. But the weird thing was whilst at college the thought of writing for TV, an even more so a soap, was appalling to Ashley. So even though he was on the dole and completely skint, a part of him still thought was it worth the shame? (which he blushes about now.) But he sent in a spec film script which was a good writing sample, and it was good enough to get him an episode, and he ended up being there for 3 years. Film school turned out to be the theory, whereas working on Eastenders was the practical. Hearing actors say your lines – and psychologically, seeing your name on telly, he felt like a real writer.

When you’re creating characters and series bibles etc, what sort of things do you think about?

Ashley doesn’t really do series bibles. They are really hard to write and really hard to read. He’d much rather write – and read for that matter – a script. All the bibles he’s been involved with have been retrospective ones put together by script editors for the purposes of series continuity. He might have done more work on characters etc when starting out, but nowadays he’s likes to discover the characters when writing the screenplay. Does it matter where they went to school or what they had for breakfast? What matters is action. Character is action.

Can you talk us through how the commissioning process might go?

Different ways. You've got to get that first meeting with a commissioner. Ashley met so many people on Eastenders like other writers, producers, script editors, that went onto work on other shows. John Yorke was his junior script editor on Eastenders. Often young writers will show Ashley ideas for a series and it’s not really. It might make a good movie, or three parter, or serial, but it’s not a series. There has to be something in the kernel of the idea that will generate conflict for a long time, so if a commissioner turns round and says okay what might happen in series 7 episode 3, you have some idea of where you can take the series. Something in the one page pitch that tells you there is potential for endless conflict. For example Wild At Heart. A show about an English family in Africa. Company Pictures asked him to come up with a Sunday 8pm ITV show. And he’d done so many he said no. But this was going to be set in Africa. So it was a traditional dysfunctional family, but the environment was new and could exert so much pressure on the characters. And if the original family left, you could bring in a new family into that environment. And they’re just doing series 7 now.

What can writers do to improve their chances of getting a series green lit?

It’s complicated and the worst thing you can do is to try and double guess what they want – which we’ve all done. You obviously need to get your script in front of someone who can green light a series. Ashley's in the fortunate position now of getting those meetings – although even then it doesn’t mean getting the series. With his new show, Eternal Law, about angels being lawyers on earth and learning about humanity etc, it was a bit high concept and he didn’t want to give people the chance to turn it down just from the pitch. So he wrote the pilot on spec and took that to ITV because he wanted to retain control of the content. That’s what got him the meeting and although the pilot script changed a bit, the kernel of the idea was in place.

How specific should you be about talking about things like channels and time slots?

If it’s your own stuff, probably not as much, but certainly have an awareness of the different styles of broadcasters and, really crucially, the difference between 8pm and 9pm slots.

You've done quite a lot of supernatural and high concept stuff, when are we going to see a return to more naturalistic stuff like Our Friends in the North?

Ashley's actually done a fair bit of both. Ever since Cathy Come Home people think television is about social message and political change. And of course it can be. But it's always bothered him that television is seen as social realist and cinema more poetic. It began to change with Dennis Potter. With Life on Mars they tried to have a high concept show that had emotional truth, and hopefully said something, even ironically, about the political situation. Things like Our Friends in the North dominated for around 50 years. So a few high concept shows doesn't hurt.

How does the collaboration with Matthew work?

They're very different people and very different writers. When they were in America pitching to people, Matthew described them that if they were doing an episode of ER, Matthew would do the helicopter crashing on the roof and Ashley would do the old man dying. Matthew is more of a movie writer in that sense and Ashley is more interested in the emotional core. In series television it works really well to bring different strengths to a project. Ashley doesn't think, coming from the more socialist realist background, that he could have done shows like Mars and Ashes without Matthew. But he likes to think they would have been weaker shows without him trying to keep them real in terms of emotional truth. Ashley and Matthew write episodes separately, and they are not joined at the hip. They did try to co-write in the same room once on a project for Aardman but it was a disaster because they are such different writers they kept just trying to rewrite each other. But what it means is that they can go off and do their own thing.

Why do you write on series TV as opposed to feature films?

Because he has a mortgage. Like he said at film school he never would've dreamed of working in TV. But attitudes have changed and a lot of the snobbery has gone, mainly because of US shows. And in any given week 90% of the best writing on screen is on TV. Going to the cinema now, unless you've got your kids with you and you have to put those glasses on, there's nothing to watch. It's become a theme park. You strap yourself in and have an amazing special effects ride, which is okay. But we don't see our life on there. Compare that to going to the movies a lot in his twenties, and something like Chinatown, which was a mainstream Hollywood movie, would that happen now? Having said all that, Ashley does write movies but they never get made. Whereas his TV stuff does and he gets paid and you have a lot more influence, from casting, seeing the edit, the rushes, the music, etc. When working in that environment Ashley sees himself as a writer that's a filmmaker. But in the movie world, he feels like a cleaner again. He's sat in meetings with a production company, the director and him, and the conversation has been about what's going to happen in the next draft, and no one actually looked at him. It baffles him that they are not interested in using his knowledge and experience, and it's his script. And it baffles them that he would want to be involved in the stuff he's involved with in TV, like the edit, casting, rushes etc. In film writers just deliver the script – and maybe they'll get fired and another writer will do the next one. And so on.

How much do the actors contribute to creating the characters?

Obviously they do contribute. And if you're very lucky something magical happens between them getting the script and what they do on screen. When it works well it's really exciting and dynamic. But when it doesn't, it can be quite painful to be a screenwriter.

For long running series is there room for others thing apart from crime, life and death, family, etc?

Well that's not a bad start. The soaps do cover that and the obvious reason is that it gives you natural intensity and conflict. Of course there is room for other areas of story telling. But funnily enough when really powerful writers reach the stage where they can write anything they want, and stray away from genre, it can often not work. Because no one is editing and reigning that in. When Ashley's stepped out of genre in his career he's come a cropper a couple of times. He thinks genre is a help. The example he gives is the sonnet, one of the most rigid forms of writing – but it's produced some of the greatest ever. He likes being told this show is going to be on ITV, 8pm, you've got 44 mins, 3 act breaks. It's a challenge.

But series television is a really hard place to be learning on the job and Ashely has seen writers come unstuck. For example the first series of Life On Mars had gone out and Kudos knew of a playwright they really rated. This writer had never written a TV episode of anything and they wanted them to do one in the second series. Ashley and Matthew hope they are generous people, but realised what massive pressure this person was now under. If someone said to Ashley can you write a play by next month he'd say no, he's never done it, he would need to learn the craft. And it chewed this poor person up and it was unfair.

But on series TV writers are really well paid. Ashley now exec produces most of his shows and sees the budgets, so knows he sees what directors, producers and DP's get and it's not as much as writers. It's really annoying when writers on series television do sloppy work and at some stage you do see it. And he just thinks you lazy bugger. Because it's not just about talent. And the danger is falling into a comfort zone where you make a good living and as long as you don't stick your head above the parapet you're okay. And the other thing is that the quality of directors coming into the TV industry is getting worse. When Ashley started out the director was the most important person but it was generally a good democratic thing. Now writers are the most powerful. They get shows greenlit, actors do to, but directors don't. So the talented ones go and work in movies where they get the reverse of what Ashley gets in that environment. A few years ago the Directors Guild tried to get more power in TV and Ashley could understand why. But in cinema they insisted on retaining the horrible 'A Film By' credit, which is the most disrespectful credit in the history of cinema. And until they say they don't want to do that, why should they have a piece of the TV cake?

LSF 4: Hollywood Pitching

2011-12-15T23:11:00.003Z

Festival Sunday. I was tired. Already. Even with not being there on the Saturday and with getting an extra hour in bed because of the clocks moving. So I missed the first session of the day. It was a shame, but I actually felt the physical benefits as the day wore on compared to last year. So the first session I attended, and wasn't going to miss, was this one. Moderated by Jonathan Newman and attended by David Reynolds and Stuart Hazeldine, it was a great session and insight into the life of a jobbing writer who has to pitch a lot, especially relevant to working in LA, but still applicable here too. (As ever, these are my paraphrased notes and apologies to those involved if there are any mistakes.)

How did you first get into the industry?

DR – Got a staff job on Late Night with Conan O’Brien. Wrote some sketches and got hired. Went back to LA, tried to get on a sitcom, and his agent said do you wanna go over to Disney for a couple of weeks and do some punching up on scripts. And he fell into a career and six years and fifteen movies later with Disney and Pixar, here he is.

SH – Sold his first spec script, basically Die Hard on the London Underground, around the mid nineties. Got an agent, did some BBC work but realised he’d always be writing TV if he didn’t get a Hollywood agent and that’s not what he wanted to do. So went over there and got an agent in late nineties and has been pitching and doing assignment jobs since.

What makes a good pitch?

DR – Have a good idea. These days the pitch is 20 mins or less. And people will leave the room or pick up the phone after 20 mins. You need enthusiasm, get your point across. A lot of execs want to know the end first. They'll say just tell me how it ends. It’s counter intuitive to writers because we like to tell stories, and build up to the end which will hopefully be surprising and satisfying etc – and they just want to cut to it. It’s then hard to do an enthusiastic pitch to go back to the beginning of the story and pitch it knowing they know the end. But be flexible.

SH – Try to hold as much back though as you can. So maybe don’t say the guy dies, just say it’s a tragedy, or it ends badly, something a bit more vague. And just to show you nobody knows anything the pitches he’s sold have all run longer than 20 mins and he tends to pitch in more detail than most. Stores up a lot of energy and gives it his all so he’s exhausted by the end of it. And it works for him. If that’s your personality then go with it. But still have a strong antennae for when their attention is waning. Be prepared for anything and any level of rudeness. The exec might leave and you’re just left pitching to their assistant.

What should and shouldn’t be included in the pitch?

DR – A lot of the time they know what you’re going to come in and pitch because it’s an assignment or you know they are looking for something specific. Sense the pitch moment to moment to get a feel for how they are responding. But pace it out. Don’t be 20 mins in and you’re still on Act One. Practice it. With friends etc. Good tip, if you’re doing action, set up one sequence in some detail, and then when you get to the next key one just say it will be like that but better and bigger! You don’t have to get it all out there.

JN – Rehearsing the pitch is brilliant and crucial. Went to LA with a project he’s working on with a producer and beforehand they were in London and the producer said okay pitch it to me. And they did this like ten times. So all the mistakes were made in a little café in London and not in the room in LA.

SH – Don’t mention the location of the script unless it’s vital to the story. And don’t pitch with dialogue, unless it’s something like ‘I see dead people.’ Make sure whatever you’re pitching is really germane to the understanding of the story. He always practices, writing it out, then doing it without having that in front of him, and so on. You go in, have a few moments of pleasantries, and then you’re off. Need to frame it in some way, be it with genre or hook them in with something, be it an intriguing character or action set piece, whatever. Try to pace it out around 5 mins for each act. And state it “and then in Act Two…” and, “and then around the middle” so they know where you are in the movie. At the end they’ll have questions – and of course answer every single one no matter how long it takes. Then frame things at the end more directed towards marketing. Now they know what the story is you can say this is why the movie should be made now and there’s a really strong audience for this, etc. You’re telling them how to sell it to their boss.

How do you know if the person in the room doesn’t like your pitch and what do you do if that’s the case?

DR – Sunglasses on, taking calls, scrolling a blackberry. You know if they’re not into this. It’s like trying to pick up someone in a bar and you know if they are into it or not. If it’s going badly you start to bail. You don’t go just forget it and walk out. Finish it, but get it done as quickly as possible. Wrap it up.

SH – Just to play devil’s advocate, sometimes the guy who seems the most bored ends up buying it. Conversely sometimes the guy who seems the most enthusiastic is just going through the motions. So read the signs but don’t be too effected by it. And when they buy something don’t delude yourself that you know what they are buying. You pitched it so you assume they are buying what they heard and they love what you love about the story, and it might not be true. When they offer to buy something call them up again and ask what they like about the story. Not to be combative. But let’s say you were pitching a whole story because of one character and they buy it and you get to the 2nd draft and they say we like it but do we need this character. And you think if they take that character out you won’t be able to continue writing it. That character was the main thing that interested you but they see it as superfluous. So try and establish that early rather than going through 12-24 months of hell.

Speed/elevator pitching – have you done it, what do you do?

DR – It’s tricky because every now and then you’re be working on a spec, let’s say with Will Ferrell in mind, and you might meet him and he’s like hey what’s going on and you’re like working on a story, you know, about a guy and you’re resisting the temptation to say you, you, you. It’s really tough. Some people can do it and say I’m working on this thing right in your ballpark and we should get together some time to talk about it. Or you do it like this. I’m working on something and it would be great for Steve Carell, and all of sudden Ferrell will be like, really, what it is, send it up this way. You have to know who you are talking to but you can do it. But you’ve got to be careful.

Who are you most likely to be pitching to?

DR – It’s case by case. If you are pitching to a studio and you are new, you’re going to be pitching to the person on the lowest rung of the ladder. Who’s usually 12. And that’s just the way it is. And hopefully when you get more successful you’ll move up the ranks. If you’re pitching to a producer, you might pitch to his number one guy. And you’ve got to sell it to him. And these people will sit in the room and just write. You might only see the top of their heads. Because what they have to do is go back to their boss and tell them the pitch. It’s really unnerving and tough.

What do you think about using other material alongside the pitch, like visual aids?

DR – Has been on pitches that have visual aids. If you’re pitching a specific location you can have pictures, especially on ipads or whatever. Or maybe some small story board type things. But be sensible with it of course. Leave the easel and fog machines at home. If you can have something you can readily unfold and bring out of a briefcase it might help. If it’s something that helps sell the story it can be very strong.

Creative England launches new fund for regional filmmaking talent

2011-12-07T21:56:00.002Z

Creative England opened for business on 1 October 2011, with the core purpose of supporting the sustainable growth of independent creative businesses, and the talent that feeds them, in every part of England outside London.

This new organisation builds on the work of the Regional Screen Agencies that, for the past ten years, have assisted the development of the film, TV, interactive, games and digital media industries, and the growth of film culture in England.

The Development Fund is open to individual writers, writer/directors and/or producers based in the English regions for the development of all types of feature films, including animation and documentary. Applications are also invited from writer/director/producer teams. Funding is available for the costs of developing a screenplay (or the equivalent for documentaries) such as research costs, writer’s fees, script editor/developer support and script readings.

Funding is also available for screenplays that are ready to be presented to potential financiers, to help with budgeting, scheduling, casting, producing teaser trailers/pilots, and other expenses associated with raising finance and generating sales and distribution interest.

The Development Fund totals £250,000 in its current round and applications are welcomed on a rolling basis. Awards will range from £2,500 to £25,000.

Click here to download guidelines and application form.

LSF 3: In Conversation with Joe Cornish

2011-11-29T22:28:00.005Z

After the Edgar Wright session there was a half hour break until the next one - In Conversation with Joe Cornish. So I'm hanging out with the very lively Adele Kirby who has been given permission by the festival organisers to get some short podcast interviews from speakers for use on another website. Cool.

Adele wasn't at the festival last year but I was. And more importantly, I knew where the Green Room was - the room the speakers get to hang out in for a bit of peace and quiet. So being the helpful fellow that I am, (and sniffing out a chance to get backstage passes) we trotted off to see who we could find to talk to. And we enter the building the Green Room is in, and who is sitting in a little Starbucks, all on their own, but Chris Jones, Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish.

I'm not a shy person. Especially when I'm in this sort of environment. So we went straight in there, told Chris who Adele was, and was ready for a private chat with Edgar and Joe. Nor, it should be said, do I get particularly tongue tied when networking. However I wasn't expecting Adele to get her recording device out, wave it in front of Edgar, and go "so Jez, what questions do you have for Edgar Wright."

Cue gormless stare and birds tweeting. I really don't remember what I said. Some stupid babble about admiring his work, how old he was when he broke into the industry, how old he was now and what he has already achieved. Honestly it was awful. It was particularly ironic considering Edgar had spoken in his session about what it was like meeting and working with Spielberg - and how he didn't just blab about how much he loved Raiders but tried to connect with him on a shared love of film, David Lean movies, etc. And no disrespect to Edgar - but he's not Steven Spielberg. I mean I loved Shaun of the Dead, and liked Hot Fuzz. But I mean honestly, I just stood there like an idiot.

So here's a tip from me. You know you're going to the festival. You know by and large who is going to be there. If you have trouble sleeping like I do, spend some time lying in bed at night in the few days before the festival thinking about what insightful cool stuff you would said if you happen to bump into, see, stand next to in the toilet (use with caution that one) Speaker X, so you don't end up looking like a moron.

However I did get to apologise in advance to Joe Cornish, that if he saw me leave half way through his upcoming session, it wasn't because he'd bored me into an early exit, it was because it was Friday afternoon and I had to get home in time for the Sabbath. He was very magnanimous about it.

So hear are my notes from half of being In Conversation with Joe Cornish:

Joe was mugged in 2001 and had the idea for Attack the Block in his head for about 4 or 5 years. He got money from the Film Council and Film4 to develop what at that stage was just a 5 page outline and a 'mood book.' Joe loves to sketch and grew up in the eighties surrounded by that style of marketing. He'd created a book that tried to capture the feel and look of the movie and pitched with that alongside the outline. When we go to the movies sometimes all we see is the movie poster, the tagline and the premise. Joe began from there and fleshed it out from that starting point.

Attack the Block is a pretty straight forward chase movie so once he had figured out the inciting incident, why the aliens were chasing the kids, how to trap them in the block, and how to get the trajectory of going upwards, the rest was filling in the detail that was greatly informed by research.

Joe knew he had to go out and research that world. He grew up around those areas but would be lying if he said he came from there. He went to loads of youth clubs and sat down with a group of young people, switched on his tape recorder and talked them through the story. "You're coming home from football practice and you see this..." and Joe had visuals of the aliens sketched out by a friend of his in urban environments. And the kids just responded. Joe let them talk it out and asked questions; what would you do, where would you go, how would you defend yourselves, who would you want to defend, who would you be less interested in defending, if you went home to get something to defend yourself what would it be, who would be at home at that time of day, etc.

And once he'd done that they identified the pairs of friends who were sparking off each other in those larger groups and went back to talk to them again in smaller groups, often just asking about their lives, their interests, what was in their pockets, what they like on TV.

Because in part, Joe was terrified of actually sitting down and writing the damn thing. But also because Graham Linehan had once told him not to worry about not writing and to wait until your brain bucket is so full of stuff that you can't not write. And you never know what might be relevant to the story when you start working your way through it.

He filled up two A4 files of verbatim transcripts of what those young people had said to him and he typed it up himself, as if learning a foreign language, to get the slang and the rhythm right. He talked to people who had been mugged, talked to residents in the tower blocks. So when he was writing, if he got stuck he could pull something out of reality to help him out, and not have to make it up. But it was when they cast they were also testing the dialogue as the real acid test.

Obviously the movie is heightened reality and slightly simplified so it travelled abroad. Joe was aware that fantastic movies like Trainspotting and stuff from Shane Meadows has struggled in this respect (often using subtitles even in the US!)

There are two types of alien movies - there's withhold the monster type, which Joe loved in the eighties but there was a point in the late eighties where it started to get stupid because the creature was built up so much when it was finally revealed, it couldn't possibly live up to expectations. So the other sort is to reveal the monster early but play on the multitude. Similar to Gremlins, and perhaps the difference between Alien and Aliens. Joe wanted to start with a withhold the monster type thing, but show enough - and then play on the multitude later on. And that's kind of how Zombie movies work too. So they had to come up with something they could show, but not too much, and that's where the shadowy type thing came in. Joe knew they couldn't afford CGI creatures so in part it was a budget thing, but also as a film goer he was bored of movie aliens. He likes the real stuff, like Yoda in Empire Strikes Back, or in Gremlins. And as a kid it wasn't like he didn't believe in those things. In fact maybe even more so because they were actual physical things that were there. So in Attack the Block they had a guy in a suit, and then used low fi CGI to actually remove detail, rather than add it. But it was a big sticking point in development. People often asked how are you going to do this and all these creatures. So they had to kind of prove it could be done.

There were still things they couldn't afford to do. There was a sequence of them fighting the aliens up the side of the block in a kind of Errol Flynn balcony type thing and they had scouted locations and story boarded it and about a month before the shoot realised they couldn't afford it. And it was tough then for Joe to maintain the momentum and geography of the story. But he was reading a book at the time about the making of Star Wars and an anecdote that George Lucas wanted a planet for Darth Vader and a separate spaceship - but they couldn't afford both. So he combined the two. And Joe reckoned okay, if the Death Star can come out of a budgetary restraint, then he could figure out his thing. But it was really like a maths problem and he hates maths. Was always better at creative writing.

Joe took a Robert McKee course when he was 24 and read all those books - but they actually gave him writers block because it made him feel like everything he wrote was wrong somehow. And every time he wrote something he would compare it to some sophisticated template and it wouldn't fit - and that actually held him back for years and years. He felt somehow he wasn't good enough etc. But working with Edgar on Ad Man really taught him to forget all that. He reiterated Edgar's advice - don't let it be a chore. If it becomes a chore then you are doing something wrong. Why not enjoy it? Or, maybe a better question, why are you not enjoying it?

And unfortunately, that's round about where I had to leave.

I was back at the festival on Sunday and the first session I went to then was Hollywood Pitching, with Jonathan Newman, Stuart Hazeldine and David Reynolds.

LSF 2: In Conversation with Edgar Wright

2011-11-24T23:20:00.007Z

Edgar Wright was the second session I went to. I kinda felt bad for the other speakers in this slot because Edgar was a late addition to the festival line up and judging by the fire risk size of the audience, a lot of people had clearly also made a late switch.

Edgar Wright made his first film, A Fistful of Fingers, when he was around – staggeringly – the age of 20. But by his candid admission, the film was powered along by its own naivety and if anyone had stopped to think about it, it probably wouldn’t have happened. It’s not the greatest film of all time and didn’t turn out the way he planned or it was in his head. He doesn’t like to badmouth it, because a lot of good people that he still knows and works with worked on that film. But he realised he was trying to run before he could walk and was more obsessed by the idea of making a film before he was 20, then getting the film right.

It’s 78 mins long and they had to actually pad it out to make it that long. Which was another thing that he learned. Make sure the script is right first. The edit room is the final draft, but you can save yourself a whole lot of trouble by getting it on the page and the script right first. The film actually got a small release and came out the same weekend as Golden Eye. That’s what you are competing against. It doesn’t matter how much less it cost to make. It’s now in the cinema and that’s the competition. And that’s worth keeping in mind.

Edgar got his first break through meeting Matt Lucas and David Walliams, which led to a TV directing job. And that was more like going to college. It was a second chance to learn his craft. He was only directing at this stage, having had his confidence knocked and taken a back seat from writing. Some early advice he got had come back to haunt him – don’t make a spoof as your first film. And you’re too young to be a comedy writer. Go out and live your life a bit first. By the time Shaun of the Dead came along, he and Simon Pegg thought they had. Zombies aside, it’s essentially kind of autobiographical, about wasters living in North London.

Edgar didn’t hesitate to say that professional relationships have been key to his success. Meeting someone like Simon, even before they did Spaced together, Edgar knew he wanted to do a film with Simon in the lead.

His writing process changes from project to project. Watching movies and documentaries can be useful – but sometimes it’s procrastination. However one of the great things about Hot Fuzz was the research with the police. Ride alongs, tours of regional stations, etc. There’s always something brilliant you’ll get out of research. Even for a comedy. There are bits in that movie that are so silly or little lines here and there, but they are the result of something someone said. With Shaun of the Dead there wasn’t much research to do because they were living those lives. But they’d never been police officers so thought they should.

When Edgar moved onto Scott Pilgrim, the tone attracted him and reminded him of Spaced. They never did a third series of that but he still felt he had an itch to scratch and liked that world of magical realism.

Edgar and Joe Cornish actually wrote on Tintin in 2008 – which shows how long animation takes. It was a different experience because he was just being paid as a writer. Not only were you working for Spielberg and Peter Jackson, but you have the books to live up to and be faithful to. Spielberg is like an icon – but he creates a great environment, which makes you feel free to suggest things, even certain shots, etc.

Then came the questions:

How many drafts does Edgar usually do?

For Fistful – clearly not enough. For Shaun, it was quite a long process probably through something like 10 drafts. It was with Film4 and then that collapsed and they had to go round to everyone, getting no after no, until Working Title. But it was a scary time because he’d been devoted to that and it’s like putting everything on black and if it doesn’t land, you’re broke and wasted three years. He turned down a really good proposal to direct a TV series because he was concentrating on getting that movie off the ground and when the producer heard this, she said if I had a pound for every time a director said that… And it was like wow, that’s how it is. That’s how hard it is.

What is it you think that Working Title responded to that the others didn’t?

Maybe they’d seen Spaced. But it’s difficult to get the tone across in comedy on the page. A lot of people who read the Shaun script, which is pretty much exactly what you see on screen, if you didn’t know what the style was going to be like, and thought it might be quite broad, Carry On style, they just didn’t get it. Some actors passed on it who they were really banking on because they just didn’t get it. On the other hand. Bill Nighy, who hadn’t seen any of their stuff, got it straight away and he was in.

What kind of development process do you go through when you start writing a script?

Different with Tintin and Scott Pilgrim, and even (the upcoming) Ad Man because comics exist. But him and Simon map out beat sheet in 3 act structure, flip chart, page per scene, keep writing on a flip chart until nothing left to write and you have to start on the script page one. Some of it never makes it into the film, just a chart about a character, what do they like, back story things, etc. It’s just good to get it all out there. Write it all out in a room together. But Edgar does go back to those screenwriting books, especially if he’s blocked. There’s a point where you’ve got to put those books away and just write. Read them once and put them away. This past summer he wrote something on his own for the first time in ages and that was tough because there was no one to bounce off. So he would find a couple of people who were sounding boards.

Before Shaun, he and Simon watched films they liked and tried to match them up to traditional structure and books – and it was interesting. Because some do and you can learn from that, but then again a lot don’t. But it’s an interesting exercise to take your favourite films and break them down.

You Exec Produced Attack the Block, how much involvement did you have with that?

Edgar met Joe ten years ago and similar to when he met Simon, wanted to do something together. Joe had never written a screenplay but they worked on stuff together and then he went off to write Attack.

What value do you think it would have to go into the world and say I’m a writer-producer, (not writer-director) and seek talent to put the big picture together?

Edgar has never been in that position but it could help. It might give you more control and power. The easiest way to get your script to the screen the way you see it, is to direct it yourself. That’s not to say it can’t work the other way around. But if you’re just a writer on your own, especially in Hollywood, you can get screwed over. That could be by a director, or an actor, who just decides to improvise around the dialogue. And you’d be surprised how often that happens. So the more power you have, it’s going to help. But if you’re really precious about something, do it yourself. That’s what Tarantino did. He was always very protective over his scripts and there were ones he was happy with and ones he wasn’t as happy with. And now he’s not ever written or is ever likely to write for anyone else.

What mistakes have you made?

Edgar said he didn’t really think Fistful through. He was really passionate about making a film but wasn’t serious enough about it. Everyone worked really hard but when he got a second chance with Shaun, he was determined not to mess it up and to make sure he got on screen what he had in his head.

What advice would you offer to screenwriters starting out today, or have writers block and just not getting where they need to get?

Edgar has had writers block and then you’ve got to treat the writing as something you love and not a chore. Go out and watch a movie and don’t feel guilty about it. Read other stuff, try and get inspired, even if it’s got nothing to do with what you’re working on. Do research and find something that sparks something off. Get feedback, which could do the same thing. In terms of starting out, probably two ways to do it. Either have a very strong, personal voice, or really zero in on what you want to sell. In LA it’s completely different. A lot of people over there it’s about writing the script but then also selling the script. You almost have to be a great salesman. So sometimes it’s a question of what kind of writer you want to be. Do you want to be recognised through your voice and be distinct that way, or do you want to be known as a writer who can turn their hand at lots of different things and genres. (Like Billy Wilder – so not a bad thing – it’s not being a sell out.)

And perseverance. A lot of people seem to be waiting for a hand out to get something made – but it never comes. You’ve got to go out and make it happen.

A cool session. And appropriately enough, next up, we're in conversation with Joe Cornish.

LSF 1: Another 50 ways to break into the business

2011-11-16T22:01:00.005Z

Apologies for the lateness of my LSF write ups - but the story begins... with a sequel. The follow up to last years 50 ways into the Industry. That session was extremely well attended, a great all round chat about the business, but only covered about, erm, 9 ways in. This year, chairman Danny Stack had other ideas. He had a list. A list dammit. Of all 50. And he was determined to guide Martin Gooch, Vadim Jean, Chris Hill and Bernie Corbett through it.

#1 Get a job as a runner or as an assistant to a producer or agent, etc

MG started off as a runner. He had no connections to the film industry but that's all he wanted to do. He went to America, couldn't get any work, came back here, did a degree, still couldn't get any work, so went to Soho, became a runner, and it all started from there. "I could've saved 4 years of my life." As soon as he did that he started to meet people. And he still works today with people he met then, 17 or so years ago.

VJ first job on a movie was as a runner - or actually a driver, going up and down the motorway ferrying people or equipment around. Most useful skill as a runner - reading an A-Z. (Although to be fair to Vadim runner technology, i.e. satnav, has come along way since his day.) You have to work for free to start with. Most of the people who come and work for him are rubbish because they have no common sense. But if you can make yourself invaluable, be the best runner ever, most of those have gone on to get paid work from him.

MG noted a lot of people in the audience looked a bit, erm, old, perhaps for a runner position. So forget about it, just go out and make a film!

#2 Join a writers group

CH - writing is a solitary endeavour and when you're starting out you might not have any contacts in the industry. And it's a way to meet other people etc.

#3 & 4 Online media, social networks, blogs, etc

DS You have to be careful how you present yourself, because it's a public forum and you don't want to end up looking like an idiot.

# 5 Write a script

VJ Because if you haven't actually got a screenplay to show, you're not a writer, you're a fantasist. Just write. If it's rubbish then throw it away. But you've got to do it.

MG Get into the habit of writing regularly, even if you don't feel like it. Write another script and another one and another one. Just one isn't going to be enough. And you have to rewrite and refine all the time.

DS Online distractions are just that. It's not working. Writing is working.

MG Turn the internet off. Martin isn't a morning person (and neither am I) His shoots start at 8am whereas most start at 7:30am (which still seems pretty early to me!) But when he's writing he starts at 9pm and goes onto 2am.

#6 Do as much as you can.

MG The only way you can get on in the film or TV industry and learn the skills you need is to do stuff. Be proactive.

#7 Join the Writers Guild

#8 Network. Things like the festival, obviously, but also Q&A screenings.

#9 Most networking things are rubbish. (Apart from LSWF obviously!)

It was suggested most of the time the people in the room are not the people you want to talk to. But I'm not sure I agree with this one. And to be fair the conversation then went onto a tangent that everyone can help everyone. Danny has got jobs through other writers he knows and Martin, if he isn't available for a job, will pass it onto other directors he knows.

#10 Read lots of scripts

#11 Get feedback on your own scripts

Not from friends and family. Everyone needs feedback but be careful who you get it from. Feedback from someone who doesn't know what they are talking about can be really damaging.

#12 Have a portfolio of scripts

Doesn't have to be features. Shorts too. MG's best short is 3 pages long. A really, really good short film is worth more then a bad feature.

#13 Screenwriting degrees and MA's

Access to filmmaking equipment is more available these days but in terms of meeting peers, learning the craft of writing, etc, these courses can be really useful. My own opinion is that there are some wonderful courses out there, that teach you a great deal, you'll meet really good people, and they also get you access to the industry. But there are also a lot of rip off courses out there too that are both a waste of time and money - so be careful and do your research.

#14 Don't give up the day job - or just yet anyway.

BC Save up and maybe take 6 months off to write. He knows a lot of people who have left their jobs to devote their time to writing and hoping a career will follow. But real life isn't always as straightforward as that.

MG Spent most of my life being skint. Whilst as a runner, a camera loader, a DP, whatever. And most of the time he'd be doing other jobs alongside that. (And he wouldn't tell anyone what they were!)

VJ runs a company that's a full time job. Producing and directing is his day job. But he writes, the passion projects, on trains and planes.

CH has a maths degree! He did some work as a tutor so figured he might as well use it. He saves up and then lives on bake beans for a couple of months.

DS It's tough but you can't use the fatigue from the day job, only to come home and put the kids to bed etc, to not write. It's really, really hard but that's what we've got to do.

MG A lot of people don't schedule in thinking time. Writing notes, going to see stuff, research. It's almost as important as the actual writing.

#15 Read the industry papers like Screendaily and Broadcast.

DS You can get a few people together and get a joint subscription and then read the content online.

#16 Get a job in a Distribution or Sales Agency to see the cutthroat decisions on which films get made and why.

CH It's generally not about the script, more about casting. But it's interesting to see which scripts cut the mustard and informs, to some extent, what he writes now.

VJ is 50/50 on this. On the one hand it's great to know this stuff and you have to write for the market. But so often the best stuff he reads does not come from this mindset.

#17 Get your autobiography out of the way.

BC When people are starting off in writing they often draw on their own experiences, which isn't necessarily a bad thing to do. But you need to get it out of your system. As a writer you're going to work on lots of projects. And that one may not be as interesting to others and you think it might be.

VJ Having said that, he's seen scripts based on someones life where it does have an emotional truth and does happen to be universal and it was the best thing that particularly writer had ever done. A lot of scripts he sees don't ring true because the writer isn't bringing any of their own life experience to the story.

MG Research is fun. He's spent a day on a London ambulance and in the London sewers.

DS Write what you know is an incomplete sentence - it should be write what you know about the human condition.

#18 Just ask and just do it

MG Because we're all obsessed with emails, the letter is coming back. He's had much more success with a letter. A poorly written email or letter is a very bad sign. As is getting an email with the body of the text in one font and the name in another - so obviously cut and pasted!

#19 Write and make a short film.

MG It's easier than ever. People approach him all the time to make their film and he just thinks well why don't you do it.

VJ The first time he took a script and shot it was a massive revelation. In the cutting room there was that horrible 'but that script was brilliant on the page' moment. And he got rid of it all except one line. Write a two page script, get a camera and shoot it. Because you'll learn so much and it will improve your writing more than anyone else. Unfortunately, not enough film execs have had experience actually making a film.

#20 Learn about contracts, copyright and industry practice.

BC Gets a lot of calls from people who have people interested in their script, but they have no understanding at all of the nuts and bolts of how contracts work and what rights they have, etc. There are books you can read. It's not particularly simple or interesting but it will repay itself. And if you are going to be a professional, you need to know this stuff. People seem to be overly worried about plagiarism, which is very rare, as opposed to Producers coming along with rip off contracts, buying up rights for no money, etc.

DS Producers will exploit you basically if you don't know what you're doing and you don't have an agent.

VJ - doesn't do that.

#21 Make the first 3 pages of your script amazing.

VJ It used to be ten. He doesn't use readers because he wants to read it himself. And the slate is big and the spec pile is massive. It comes down to a very basic do I want to know what happens next? Robert McKee and all that is useful to know the basic rules and especially when you get stuck. But what it basically comes down to is do you want to know what happens next and that has to be captured within the first 3 pages.

MG There isn't enough time to read everything. He picks up a script and flips to the back to see how long it is. If it's over 90 pages it's bloody hell. (And by the way ALL people reading scripts do this.) And if it's in the wrong font and spelling is awful, then forget about it.

CH Used to be a script reader and could tell within the first page whether it was going to be good or not.

VJ You're competing against everyone else, people who have far more of a track record than you and with scripts and a writer that he knows he can take to a broadcaster and get a commission. So you have to force him to read the whole of your script by having a brilliant opening 3 pages. This is even more the case in TV. In film it's easier to make a feature from a new writer. But the principle about the script remains true.

#22 Have a story

Following on from that, it should really go without saying that a brilliant opening will only get you so far. It may well convince the reader to read the whole script. But if that doesn't stack up, it's going to count for nothing.

VJ A lot of screenplays have no story. They don't have that basic fairytale element, a beginning, middle and an end, something that takes you on a journey. Are people actually going to want to see this thing you've written? Have a story. He writes most of his stuff with other people and he's working more and more with writing teams. Because it's great for bouncing off ideas etc. And it can also be more fun.

#23 Get an agent.

VJ They are a gatekeeper of sorts. And it protects both parties. You might think your idea is really unique but very often it's not. For some bizarre reason every broadcaster at the moment seems to be working on something with a nanny. And it's not that they've stolen it from anyone. But fashions come in cycles.

BC Famous catch 22. Can't get any work until you've got an agent, can't get an agent until you've got work. There's a lot of truth in that. On balance they are helpful to writers. It's a relationship and a good one won't just be about reading your contracts. They'll read your work, talk about what you are working on, what you are working on next, give you feedback, etc. Don't rush into the first agent. Try and establish yourself a bit first so you can control that.

DS You don't need one, until you get one. You should be too busy and too proactive with your own writing. (I'm actually about to sign with an agency so I will speak more about this in a separate blog post soon-ish.)

#24 Go to Cannes

MG has been 11 times, and next year will be his 12th. He sold a screenplay this year at Cannes so it can happen. He sets a budget for £500, finds somewhere cheap to stay and eats everyone else's food.

BC You can't just turn up though. You have to get accreditation. The Writers Guild can do this but only to bona fide candidates.

#25 Maintain contact with your network

DS Every few months keep in contact. Not just hi how are you just checking in. But ask about what they're doing, if there is anything you could work on etc. Obviously be cool and polite about it.

#26 No money, no work, no £1 options, no deferred fees.

BC Very dogmatic about it, don't do any work unless you're getting paid. There are some grey areas especially when you're starting out. But we are talking about a multi million pound industry where people get paid for what they do. And that's the whole basis for a professional career. £1 shows no serious commitment to the project. They'll be taking taxis to meet financiers and buying dinners so why can't they pay you? If your script is under option you can't do anything else with it. Very occasionally, he has known producers to take an option on a film to stop it getting made, because they have something similar in development (This was, perhaps in my own naivete, completely shocking to me!) A lot of producers around live a fantasy life, hoovering up projects, when they don't have the skills, contacts, experience to do anything with it.

CH £500 shows a certain level of commitment. He's been in both positions, and the £1 option is often there at the beginning and can be tempting to get the ball rolling.

MG Works for free for himself and his mates - anyone else has got to pay. If you came in and did the plumbing, you get paid. Or at least get them to buy you are really nice lunch. People are exploiting our love of film.

BC A lot of small budget projects will work on deferments and that means later on, not non existent. Get something in writing what will come back to you if there is a profit. Partnerships are more common. If you trust the producer then fine - but get something on paper. It will save a lot of lawyers fees later on.

DS Producers come to him with no money, but with a one page agreement that if there is to be any development money or other money, you get a slice of it. So there is a bit of a carrot there - they're not just taking advantage.

(This is quite an interesting and far reaching topic and I will try and do a longer blog post on it soon-ish.)

#27 Never give up

BC In any given year there are around ten thousand film scripts floating around the industry - and one hundred get made. Those are your chances. So you have to absolutely love it.

MG The magic, the love and the passion is the most important thing. If you don't have it, stop now. Because it's really, really hard. But when you do see your name on the screen credit it's the best thing ever.

That was the end of the first session I attended. And yes, we only got just over half way. But it was a fine effort and these are my paraphrased notes. So apologies to any of the panel involved if I have misquoted anyone.

Coming next... In Conversation with Edgar Wright, Wright, Wright

And all your RPP questions answered

2011-11-15T00:52:00.002Z

Courtesy of Danny Stack - here we go...

1. What is a single play?
A single play is a one-off story. For the purposes of the competition, this would be a one-off 60-minute TV script (typically 50 pages min - 80 pages max). In general, pilot scripts are more popular and common for submissions to the competition but feel free to submit a single play if you don’t have an idea for a pilot script.

2. What is a pilot script?
A pilot script is the first episode of a potential new TV series.

3. Will you accept 30-minute scripts or feature length (90-minute+) scripts?
No. 60-minute original TV scripts, please.

4. Is there any particular genre you’re interested in?
We’re interested in great writing, and don’t mind what genre it comes in.

5. Can I submit an adaptation I’ve written of a book/game/other source?
No. Original scripts only please, even if you’ve adapted from your own book/game/other source.

6. What’s a logline?
A logline is a brief description of your story idea. For example, ‘A British cop gets sent to the Caribbean to solve murders.’ A logline shouldn’t be mistaken for a tagline e.g ‘In space, no-one can hear you scream’ (from Alien).

7. Should the 100-word synopsis summarise the script, or the series as a whole?
Whatever you think best represents the idea, story or script.

8. For the first round of submission, why just the first ten pages of a script?
It’s a truth universally acknowledged in the industry that the first ten pages of a script indicate a great deal about a writer’s talent as well as how the script is shaping up.

9. If my first ten pages end in the middle of a scene, should I submit additional pages?
Please submit the first ten pages only, regardless of where the scene ends. Similarly, please do not send the full script at the first round stage. These will be immediately disqualified.

10. Can I enter more than once?
Writers can enter once as themselves, and once as part of a co-writing team. Multiple entries from an individual will result in disqualification.

11. Can I get feedback on my first ten pages, or on my script?
Unfortunately, due to the large number of submissions received, feedback cannot be given for scripts that are unsuccessful.

12. Should my script end on a cliffhanger?
That’s up to you, and the story!

13. I’ve rewritten my script that got rejected last year. Would it be a bad idea to resubmit it for this year’s competition?
Not necessarily. If the script represents your best writing, then feel free to resubmit.

14. When is the deadline?
16th January, 2012.

15. Should I wait to write the rest of the script?
We strongly advise that you write the entire script, as there will be little turnaround once we request the full script to read.

16. Can I submit a script that has been optioned by another producer or production company?
We want original scripts that have not yet been optioned or produced. If your script gets optioned (or an offer) whilst in consideration for the competition, please get in touch to let us know.

17. What happens if my first ten pages get through to the second round?
We will request the full script. Once all of the full scripts have been read and assessed, we will make a longlist of the scripts/writers we wish to put forward for the competition’s final stages.

18. What are the competition’s final stages?
A shortlist will be compiled. Tony Jordan and the other judges will choose a winner. We expect this to be around Spring 2012.

Red Planet Prize

2011-11-07T14:20:00.001Z

It's back :)

The Deadline is 16th January 2012.

Mark it in the diary folks.

Good luck!

Festivale!

2011-10-29T20:02:00.002+01:00

On Sunday I'll be at London Screenwriters' Festival.

If you're not there - why not? *

If you are, come and say hi.

It's gonna be awesome. Full write ups of every session I attend as soon as possible.

* I mean that seriously. Genuine question. If you didn't go, tell me why. Comment here or send me an email, and I will try and pass it on to the organisers to see if it can be addressed for next year. Put simply we need everyone who can go to do so, and support the festival. Otherwise it will fold. That's just basic economics and times are tough. The festival is financially touch and go every year.

Does this make me official?

2011-10-19T12:52:00.002+01:00

Yesterday I discovered this

Smallest profile ever.

But hey, it's a start. And in the words of David Brent - coolio

:)

Pitch Your Script To The Industry With Advance Films

2011-10-08T21:49:00.006+01:00

You may have already heard about this as I'm sure a few of us got the same press release. But just in case... and don't forget to do your own checking:

Get ready to pitch your script to the most influential people in film with David Pope, the director of advance films, whose directing credits include the award winning feature film, MILES FROM NOWHERE. Advance films have teamed up with online writing platform, Circalit, to host a screenwriting competition to find great ideas for film scripts. As the former head of the New Producers Alliance, David knows the who’s who of the industry, and he will get your pitch up to speed so that you’re ready to be introduced to a network of contacts tailored to your project. David will help you position your screenplay for the industry and recommend to you the producers and executives who are just right for you.

Advance films is a London based production company that also provides training, support and consultancy services. Advance consults on projects at all stages from development to finance to distribution and David’s clients and collaborators have included everyone from the BBC, BFI and the UK Film Council to the Cannes Cinefondation, The Rotterdam Lab and Edinburgh International Film Festival; so make the most of his experience to get your script pitch perfect.

All entries will receive a professional feedback report on their script. The deadline for submissions is Dec 1st 2011. Please visit www.circalit.com/projects/competitions/davidpope for more information.

£15 Entry Fee

Film London - Borough Short Film Funds

2011-10-06T21:27:00.004+01:00

The London Borough Film Funds are currently open for entries for short film ideas from filmmakers (either the writer / director or producer) who live, work or study in the boroughs listed on the website:

http://filmlondon.org.uk/borough_film_funds

Various deadlines apply towards the end of the month.

Portal Entertainment Create £6k Writing Competition for Multiplatform Storytelling‏

2011-10-02T13:11:00.002+01:00

PORTAL ENTERTAINMENT AND CIRCALIT ON THE SEARCH FOR THE WRITERS OF TOMORROW
£6K GLOBAL WRITING COMPETITION TO CREATE A STORYWORLD

Portal Entertainment today announced that it has launched a £6k global writing competition to create a storyworld: a story told using different types of media across multiple platforms. The winner of the competition will receive £6k to develop their storyworld with Portal Entertainment. The Top 5 entries will be given professional feedback from BBC Multiplatform Executive Producer Sarah Clay (Becoming Human, Waterloo Reunited, E20).

The competition was launched at the Immersive Writing Lab - a global creative event to help writers learn the tools to tell multiplatform stories. To find out more about the launch event and the to watch videos from the event go to www.immersivewritinglab.com.

‘Coming up with a storyworld is not easy and we know that,’ said Julian McCrea, Founder of Portal Entertainment. ‘We have designed the competition, to help develop the writer's storyworld over three months, across five different stages: world, characters, story, audience, and medium. We will be giving feedback at each stage of the competition.’

The competition is hosted at Circalit, a platform that enables writers to showcase their work to industry professionals online. To enter the competition or for more information please visit www.circalit.com/projects/competitions/immersive.

Raoul Tawadey, CEO and Founder of Circalit commented, 'It's clear after attending the Immersive Writing conference that digital convergence hasn't simply affected the business end of media, it's affected our notion of narrative storytelling itself. We're extremely happy to be hosting a competition to explore what the stories of the future will look, feel and sound like, and on what devices we will experience them.'

The Immersive Writing Lab event is being supported by Stellar Network, Circalit, Imaginox and Varytale.

New Year

2011-09-28T18:22:00.002+01:00

Tonight sees the onset of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. So I just wanted to wish everyone a happy and healthy new year, and thank you all for reading my blog over the past 12 months.

Also, at this time of year we ask people we may have upset or offended over the last year to accept our sincere apologies and forgive us for any hurt caused.

I'm aware that a large part of what I do is give feedback on scripts that are very personal to the writer - and although I try to be as careful and delicate as I can be with my words, if I have said anything that has caused any hurt please accept my apology.

But this is a screenwriting blog so let's not get too heavy. Let's end the year with a screenwriting resolution - courtesy of Danny Stack - and make next year the year to end all script formatting problems!

Pitching & Bitching

2011-09-24T22:23:00.002+01:00

Last Wednesday a group of Red Planet Prize finalists met up at Kudos HQ, together with Tony Jordan, Alison Jackson, Simon Winstone, Vicki Delow and Camilla Davies from those two companies. We were taking part in a pitching workshop, a chance to hone our pitching skills, something screenwriters absolutely need to do, but don't often get the chance. I've often said that practicing pitching, for example with friends or even at college, is a lot like taking penalties in training. No pressure - no problem. But in front of a packed stadium - well, did you see Rooney hilariously fall on his butt last week? However this was somewhat different - as the practice session was taking place in front quite a panel of industry experts.

We weren't there to pitch our own projects, it wasn't about that on this occasion. So the brief we got was to pitch Hustle, as if it was our own idea and a completely brand new show, and yes... to the man who actually created it. And then that same man would give us feedback. No wonder pretty much everyone asked for a drink before we got started. But we all did a really good job and it was both great fun and really educational. After we were done, Tony gave us a few tips based on his years of experience. And I'm sure he won't mind me sharing some of them with you guys. (NB: These are my interpretations of his words and the notes we were given - and should not be directly attributed to Tony Jordan or anyone at Red Planet or Kudos.)

Think about who you are sitting in front of. Some like the more conversational, relaxed approach, whereas others will still want a back and forth conversation, but might be a little more focused and business like (for want of a better word.) A lot of this comes from experience, but try and do as much research on the person you are about to meet beforehand and obviously pay attention to their body language during the meeting.

Be a Writer. Be the creative guy. Just because you’re going into a corporate office to meet a business person it doesn’t mean you have to turn up in a suit with a briefcase. They want to meet you because you are a writer. Keep it informal, relaxed and be yourself. My own rather more limited experience suggests that this is truer of TV than it is for film, (especially in LA, as you may have seen in my write up of the Alan Denman lecture.) In film they still expect you to dress like Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network, but possibly expect a more business like approach.

One of the questions I hate the most is Why Now? How is the idea relevant to the times we are living in now? This can be really tricky, but it's important and sometimes easier than others. Ironically enough, just as it's coming to an end, Hustle is more timely than ever. But whatever the idea is, work very hard to have an answer to this question prepared before you go into the meeting.

Don’t overkill the idea. A pitch should be able to convey the heart and soul of a series within the first 30 seconds. You want to make the listener ask questions to find out more. Keep it clear and brief. There’s no need to go into details about episodes, the twists and turns of the series - or even the characters - unless you have a concise, clever, universal way of doing it. (For example a couple of people at the workshop likened the characters of Hustle to modern day Robin Hoods - Mickey is Robin, Danny is Will Scarlet, Stacey is Marion etc, which is archetypal and everyone will 'get it' immediately.)

Own the idea - it’s yours. Don’t read anything out. Keep it fresh and spontaneous. Exude confidence and passion for your idea. Frames of reference provide instant clarity. It’s often better to give singles references to convey the tone (for example Tony mentioned a few times that Hustle was basically Ocean's Eleven on TV,) instead of merging two or three together, eg. ‘Sex in the City’ meets ‘Spooks.’ That can look like quite calculated and unimaginative. (Again this is quite a British thing - I'm led to believe that they love all that this is this meets this thing in the States.)

Bear in mind Broadcasters are looking for ideas that will meet the specific channel requirements at that specific time. You love the idea, and you’ll try to get them excited about it too, but if it’s not for them it's neither the end of the world, nor is it necessarily any reflection of the project itself. It's more important to just enjoy the experience and keep the door open for the future. So whatever you do, do not try to persuade them this project IS for them when they have said it isn't. That's like saying they haven't been smart enough to get it, or they are being an idiot. That's not very clever - and in any event, no way are they going to change their mind (even if it's just on principle!) Just accept they are not interested. Be gracious because it's a small industry where everyone knows everyone and talks. So it’s worth building and maintaining a good reputation.

If it looks like the broadcaster is bored and is thinking oh my goodness this is rubbish, don’t be afraid to stop halfway through and acknowledge this. In fact, maybe the idea has only been in your head until now and saying it loud has made you realise oh my goodness this is rubbish. Fess up. Be open and light hearted. They will thank you for it and want to see you again. As opposed to if you keep going on and on. Next time your name comes up in their diary don't be surprised if you end up seeing an assistant. (The caveat to this is to be absolutely sure about what they are thinking. That can be tough but what you don't want is to end the pitch or say oh that's rubbish isn't it - and actually they were quite into it.) But if they have lost interest and don’t want to know any more, use the few spare minutes to have a chat and build a relationship. This particular idea may not be for them but you want to leave the door open, so use the small talk wisely.

And during that small talk try to glean useful information. What are they are looking for? At what stage do they like to get involved in an idea? Do they like loglines? Fully formed treatments? How do they like to receive pitches, post or email? (So down the line you can send an email or a letter and reference ‘you know you said you liked X, well here’s my new idea... etc.)

Channel 4 Screenwriting Course 2012

2011-09-19T22:48:00.003+01:00

You may well have already heard this elsewhere, but just in case, applications are now open for the Channel 4 screenwriting course 2012. CLOSING DATE FOR SUBMISSIONS: Tuesday November 1st 2012.

Full details can be found at:

http://4talent.channel4.com/extra/4SC

or at:

www.script-consultant.co.uk

And remember Janice Okoh made it onto the course last year so don't forget to check out her blog.

Breaking Into Hollywood

2011-09-15T23:21:00.003+01:00

Last night I attended the Breaking into Hollywood presentation by Alan Denman. It was two and half hours long - and overran. Comprehensive doesn't even begin to cover it. Alan has been in LA for around nine years and the purpose of this course is to distill that experience into a one evening lecture and give the rest of us the shortcut and benefit of this experience.

I can't possibly go into too much detail in one blog post - simply because there was so much detail. But the evening covered things like the layout of LA, where best to stay, the need for a car and the pros and cons of renting against just buying one, parking regulation, how to eat well but economically, important visa information and of course, where and how to network. Things like The Table and Britbreakfast that I'd never heard of. Free screenings that go on all the time, where, if you're watching Social Network for example, Justin Timberlake and Aaron Sorkin might turn up to watch it with you (true story.) Info about agents, managers, entertainment lawyers, the list goes on and on.

Do your research and prep before you even get on the plane. Figure out who you want to meet and how to get to them. It's much, much easier in LA than it is in London. Take plenty of quality business cards with you. Have a US mobile phone because you'll need to be contactable at all times. Be polite and respectful when networking and everyone is really friendly and helpful. But if you have a cynical, pushy or arrogant attitude, no one is going to give a damn. You're just not that important.

One thing that really stood out for me was that writers in LA are far more industry savvy than here. You're expected to know about things like budget, finance, actors, sales, territories, target audience etc - i.e. the practical nuts and bolts of filmmaking. That's in addition to having a verbal logline on tap that will get people excited, before you even get to the polished script you've got on your laptop. If your pitching a project you should probably have a short 1-4 page business plan to go with it that covers this sort of thing. Everything in LA is geared towards commercial movie making. That doesn't necessarily mean high concept, but it does mean it's treated like a business and movies need to make money (even if most still don't.) The indie scene is far more prevalent in New York. But even then, it's probably best to leave your gritty, kitchen sink drama in England.

This is a practical course. It's geared towards people who are genuinely interested in going to LA - not necessarily to live - it might be for 2 weeks, 2 months or multiple trips every few months. But before you do I would seriously urge you to get in touch with Alan. He also offers residentials, either scheduled like the upcoming American Film Market or any time throughout the year tailored to what you are looking for. You'll probably even be invited to dinner. You need to be brave out there. Introverted is going to be a waste of time and money. But so is just turning up, script in hand, and having absolutely no idea what do to or where to go in this huge city. Get in touch with Alan. You won't regret it.

The Tools of Screenwriting by David Howard & Edward Mabley

2011-09-13T23:06:00.005+01:00

On September 22nd, during BAFTA's Screenwriter's Lectures series, Souvenir Press are re-publishing an updated version of The Tools of Screenwriting: A Writer's Guide to the Craft and Elements of a Screenplay - by David Howard & Edward Mabley. And they asked me to review a copy for this blog. My first thought was ooh, me? How kind. (So lesson to all, beware the vanity and flattery of the poor screenwriter.) My second thought was, ooh, free book. (See first lesson.) So I immediately agreed... And then immediately regretted it. What if I hated it? I'm not going to say nice things about it if I don't believe them to be true. Oh goodness, am I going to read it, hate it, and then have to politely (or not so politely) send it back and apologise? So it was with some considerable relief that not long after beginning to read it, I thought my word, this is actually quite good. By the time I got to the end, I'd forgotten about the review and was just enjoying reading it.

I should explain. I believe there should come a point in a screenwriters life where you basically don't read screenwriter how to books any more. You should read scripts, and just write, write and write some more. And then get loads of quality feedback. Because they can become a distraction. A couple of years ago I sold all my screenwriting books except Vogler's Hero's Journey and Mernit's Rom Com masterpiece. I now have Tools to complete a trilogy. Because there should also be a point in a screenwriters life where you read everything. Gobble it up. For me it was at college, helped by the fact that the library meant I didn't have to pay for Seger, Aaronson, Field, Goldman etc, etc.

The Tools of Screenwriting doesn't have cool, funny industry inside stories that both amuse and shock. There are no anecdotes about what the munchkins got up to on the set of the Wizard of Oz or why there are no bras in outer space for Princess Leah to wear. Tools is exactly that. It gives you a clear run down of the tools you'll need to generate a good screenplay. Reading it won't make you a great writer. In the same way reading a great cook book will not make you Masterchef. But it will give you a description of the ingredients you will need, tips about how to use those ingredients - and then it's up to you. The chapters are short. There is no padding or fluff to this book. It's just a workers guide. It breaks down into four sections and I'm going to list the chapter headings to give you an idea of how the book approaches its task.

The first section is titled About Screenwriting and contains the chapters The Screenwriter's Task, Stage Versus Screen, Adaptation, The Auteur of a Film, The Screenwriter's Relationships and A Cautionary Note. This is the background info. This is about where, as screenwriters, you might find yourself within the industry and what your job might entail.

It then moves on to Basic Storytelling. Chapters include What makes a "good story well told," The Division into Three Acts, The World of the Story, Protagonists Antagonists and Conflict, Externalizing the Internal, Objective and Subjective Drama, Time and the Storyteller and The Power of Uncertainty. This section really gives you the fundamentals of how to construct a screen story. What methods and techniques are at your disposal.

The third section digs a little deeper. Screenwriting Tools. The chapters are Protagonist and Objective, Conflict, Obstacles, Premise and Opening, Main Tension, Culmination and Resolution, Theme, Unity, Exposition, Characterisation, Development of the Story, Dramatic Irony, Preparation and Aftermath, Planting and Payoff, Elements of the Future and Advertising, The Outline and the Step Outline, Plausibility, Activity and Action, Dialogue, Visuals, The Dramatic Scene and Rewriting. This is where you start to earn your bread a little bit more. Writing a basic, linear screenplay that works is a good start. But are there things you can set up on page 20 and pay off 50 pages later? Twists are great when they come off but is dramatic irony, letting the audience in on something the characters don't know, more engaging? Does the story world make sense and is there narrative logic behind even the craziest of ideas? Like I said, the chapters aren't long. It's more like the book is a bite size accumulation of the tools of the screenwriting trade.

The final section is an analysis of several feature films, including ET, Some Like it Hot, North by NorthWest, Citizen Kane, Witness, A Streetcar Named Desire, The Godfather, Chinatown, Annie Hall, and more. If I had one complaint about the book it was probably this. An update to include films of the last ten years would've been good. Instead of Annie Hall how about 500 Days of Summer? Instead of Streetcar maybe Crash? What about Little Miss Sunshine or frankly anything by Pixar? But it's a small complaint and to be fair the films chosen are absolute classics. If you haven't seen most of them and want to be a screenwriter, it's probably time to sign up to Lovefilm or something.

I realise all I've mainly done is list chapter headings and this is probably the weirdest book review of all time. Souvenir Press may well be regretting the day they sent me the book. But in closing, all I can say is, if I ever start teaching on a screenwriting course, I would definitely use this as my core text.

EOM.

Another quality course

2011-09-10T22:12:00.004+01:00

The Authoritative Guide to Writing – And Selling! – a Great Screenplay

Sat-Sun 24^th and 25^th September, 10am - 5.30pm Central London

The seminar comprises two intensive, interactive days, designed to focus your creativity, your screenwriting skills and improve your networking.

It's run by two very experienced practitioners: Producer/Script Editor Philip Shelley (Waking The Dead, BBC; Inspector Morse, ITV), who also runs the Channel 4 Writers Course and the script-consultant.co.uk website, and Screenwriter Philip Gladwin (Trial & Retribution, The Bill (both ITV ), who also owns and runs the Screenwriting Goldmine website.

If you’re a screenwriter who is looking for new inspiration after the summer slowdown, and if you want to learn some very specific and highly effective techniques for writing – and selling – a great screenplay, then this two day workshop is for you.

If you are interested in finding out more, and seeing some of the excellent feedback we got from our inaugural course in July – please follow this link for more information:

http://www.screenwritinggoldmine.com/seminars.htm

London Screenwriters Festival: Group Discount!

2011-09-07T00:39:00.004+01:00

If you're planning on going to the London Screenwriters' Festival (and why wouldn't you be,) but haven't bought your ticket yet, sign up to become part of a group booking and you can get £66 off. *

Organised by Janice Day, the Group Sales Ticket Co-ordinator, if you email groupsales@londonswf.com with JEZ FREEDMAN in the title, she will send you back the discount code.

I've booked my ticket and like last year, I hope to attend on the Friday until early afternoon and all day Sunday. Look forward to seeing you there.

* I'm not taking any commission for this discount. Just helping Janice spread the love in these tough times.

Back to work people - short courses to look out for in September

2011-09-04T01:14:00.004+01:00

I'm back - safe and sound - it's September, and as ever, things are ready to kick back into gear. On that note, there are three courses coming up that I want to tell you about. Generally speaking, I'm not a big fan of short courses. I think they promise more than they deliver and are usually quite expensive.

But I met Alan Denman about eight years ago at the old London Screenwriters Workshop when I attended a course he gave about the Hero's Journey. It was an early step on the road to becoming a screenwriter. Alan splits his time between London and LA, doing what most of us are still working towards. And he's here in London giving three courses over the next month.

September 10-11: FROM PAGE TO PRODUCTION. For writers and producers - learn how to produce your own screenplay.

September 14: BREAKING INTO HOLLYWOOD. An evening seminar for those wanting to kickstart a career in LA.

September 17-18: GET IT SOLD, GET IT MADE. How to write scripts that will attract producers and financiers.

Click on the links for more info about Alan and the courses - and go to You Tube for a series by Alan called the Screenwriters Salon for an idea of what you'll get at the courses.

I should be at Breaking into Hollywood so if you decide to join me, come say hi.

Storm in a tea cup

2011-08-30T20:33:00.001+01:00

I'm in hurricane swept New York - with no phone, no internet and no TV (argh!)

Currently sitting on the floor in Barnes & Noble using their complimentary wi fi (bless them)

I will hopefully return next week when normal-ish service will be resumed.

Hope all you guys are well! Summer's nearly over - how did those August screenplays work out for you?

Collabor8te Short Film Fund for Writers in the UK & Ireland‏

2011-08-07T23:59:00.009+01:00

Check out this great opportunity to get your short script developed and made.

Rankin Film have joined forces with The Bureau to launch this new scheme to find and nurture new writing talent. Here are the details:

WHAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR
The initiative will produce up to 8 short films during 2012: from scripts of any genre, up to 15 pages, with budgets up to £10,000.
While Collabor8te is keen to develop narrative films, with strong stories and characters, we actively encourage a broad array of styles, mediums and genres. We will not consider ideas for documentaries.

Scriptwriters do not need to have any previous film credits nor does it have to be their first short. We are interested in working with both new and established talent.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF YOU ARE SELECTED FOR DEVELOPMENT
10 successful candidates will be contacted via email on Monday 28th November 2011. Each candidate will be expected to attend one, day-long development workshop at Rankin Film, London, w/c 12th December. This will be followed by a series of remote one to one meetings in January/February 2012. After this development period up to 8 scripts will be selected for production.

PRODUCTION TEAMS
We will aim to shoot and complete all 8 short films in 2012. Each film will have a carefully selected production team that will include a mixture of new and established talent, recommended by Rankin Film, The Bureau and DazedTV. The scriptwriter will work closely with the director, communally elected by the Collabor8te team and the scriptwriter. Writer-director’s will be considered where they can display an ability to direct the project. In these instances a directing show reel will be required.

We are currently looking for scripts and will only discuss other attached elements (ie. cast, directors, producers, crew) if the script is short-listed.

TIMELINE
Submissions Deadline: 3rd October 2011

10 Selected Scripts Announced: Monday 28th November 2011

Workshop Day: w/c 12th December 2011

Production: February - November 2012

All films will be submitted to international film festivals throughout 2012 - 2013, after which point they will be uploaded for exhibition on DazedTV.

Please complete the online submission form

Due to the high volume of submissions we will not be able to reply to those entries who have not been selected.

If you have any further questions please contact info@collabor8te.com

I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way

2011-08-01T01:49:00.002+01:00

I'm particularly fond of protagonists that aren't immediately likeable. I like seeing stories about characters learning, changing, etc. Obviously I'm not the only one. But the problem is, it's a lot harder to pull off than having a character immediately likeable, with a clear, noble goal, making it very easy to engage with and root for them. I like those movies too. But there is something particularly appealing about taking a selfish bad boy and watching them turn into a selfless good one. The further a character is in one direction, the further they have to travel - and the more satisfying the journey. And clearly I'm not the only one as I see a fair few scripts across my desk that have protagonists that are not very nice to begin with. The danger however is that the audience just won't like them enough to care about them, what they do, or what they want to achieve. And if you can't make the audience care, you're pretty much sunk. So it's a massive balancing act of retaining the character flaws, whilst getting the audience on side.

I've heard of various ways to try and do this - but it's summed up very well here. So a big thank you to Jody Moller, who I'd never heard of but came across after a bit of googling on this topic.

1. The Redemption Factor

This applies to characters that start out unlikeable but over the course of the novel/movie grow, begin to really see themselves for the first time, recognise that they were unlikeable and change for the better. Think about Bill Murray’s character in Groundhog Day. At the beginning of the film weatherman Phil is painful. He is arrogant, rude and let’s face it sleazy. When he first starts reliving the same day over-and-over it brings out his worst characteristics as he tried to take advantage of every situation. But eventually – redemption and suddenly we the audience feel bad for him.

2. The Use of Humour

When we see a character behaving inappropriately but their behaviour is considered humorous then somehow we ignore the moral ambiguity and laugh – suddenly they are likeable, regardless of the way they act. Think of Melvin Udall in As Good As It Gets (portrayed brilliantly by Jack Nicholson). He is the definition of ‘unlikeable’ but he is funny and we love him.

3. The Badder Baddie

If you are going to have a protag that is inherently evil then the Antagonist needs to be bigger and badder – thus making your protag likeable purely by comparison.Think of Dirty Harry (or any movie or book with a morally ambiguous cop for that matter) the cop might be dirty but I can almost guarantee that the people they are chasing are far worse.

4. Morality Is All About Context

Give your Protag morals, they can be skewed morals, but morals nonetheless. Then make the Antag go in exact opposition to those morals – suddenly your protag is ‘likeable’. Often the ‘morals’ given to unlikeable characters revolve around protecting family, revenge etc… Think The Godfather.

Note that most of the examples given above fit into more than one category.

Like I say, whilst I've heard these ideas before, I've totally stolen the above from Jody's blog. She goes on to talk about Lisbeth Salander from the Millennium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson. So check out the full post here.

Checking in with some opportunities news

2011-07-27T14:18:00.005+01:00

Things have been busy. Like, really busy. And I apologise for not blogging a bit more regularly. Normal service will hopefully be resumed soon. But in the meantime here some new competitions and opportunities I recently heard about:

Courtesy of Hayley McKenzie, check out a new short script fund for UK Screenwriters.

Not new but courtesy of Screendaily, more information about Industrial Scripts and their Talent Connector programme.

Courtesy of Bang2Write, Bafta Rocliffe Forum has been asked if we know of writers with a short film script that would suit Arabic sensibilities for a Dubai director - got something? Email us scripts@rocliffe.com

And, a director has contacted Rocliffe looking for a short script led by a strong, female character. Email outline to scripts@rocliffe.com

Finally, courtesy of Phill Barron, another Circalit short script competition. The deadline for entries is 10th September 2011. Scripts should be no more than 5 pages in length.

That's all for now folks.

Sixty Second Stories

2011-07-10T22:37:00.001+01:00

Sixty Second Stories is a global survey of cinematic storytelling from a new generation of filmmakers. Emerging filmmakers from all over the world are being asked to produce Sixty Second Stories - the best ninety stories will become a feature film. The feature will premiere at the 2012 Berlinale, before playing festivals around the world.

Deadline: 3rd October 2011

To find out more, download an entry form and preview some of the other films submitted so far, visit the Sixty Second Stories website.

Graduate Trainee Scheme for Junior Script Editor

2011-07-04T21:45:00.003+01:00

These sorts of jobs very rarely get advertised so it sounds a bit awesome for a new graduate:

Leading UK drama indie Mammoth Screen (www.mammothscreen.com) is introducing a Graduate Trainee Scheme for Junior Script Editors. The successful applicant must have graduated in 2010 or 2011, and will be offered a year’s contract (from September) at Mammoth’s London office, working on a wide variety of projects in development and production. We are looking for a hard working team player with an incisive mind, good imagination and a genuine passion for storytelling. Please write a 1500-word critique of a British terrestrial TV drama which has transmitted in the last month, telling us what you liked and didn’t like about it, and giving constructive suggestions as to how the script could have been improved. Please send your applications to enquiries@mammothscreen.com - Deadline 18th July.

Apply with CV here

Coming Up 2012 - Deadline Extended!

2011-06-16T14:24:00.003+01:00

Just in case you thought you missed it - the deadline is now Tuesday 28th June

Full details can be found here

Sir Peter Ustinov Television Scriptwriting Award 2011

2011-06-06T23:16:00.005+01:00

It's that time of year again Part II:

Each year The International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences awards the Sir Peter Ustinov Television Scriptwriting Award.

The competition is designed to motivate non-American novice writers under the age of 30, and to offer them the recognition and encouragement that might lead to a successful career in television scriptwriting. Entrants are asked to create a completed half-hour to one-hour English-language television drama script for a family audience. The deadline for submissions is July 1st.

The winner will be flown to New York City to be presented with an award and a US$2,500 prize at the International Emmy® World Television Festival on November 19, 2011. The winning script will be read by actors in front of an audience at the Festival, and the winner will be invited to take part in the red carpet festivities at the 39th International Emmy® Awards on November 21, 2011.

Application forms can be downloaded here

I've blogged about the award and my experiences with it numerous times. Click on the labels below and that should take you to everything you need to know.

As in previous years, if anyone wants to read my script The Storyteller they are welcome to. Just email me at the usual address, jezfreedman"at"hotmail.co.uk and keep to the one and only rule - it's for your personal use only.

Shameless plug as ever - if anyone wants feedback on their entry before they send it off (not much use after is it - boom) then details of my service can be found here. Don't leave it to the last minute though. For one thing, it makes my head hurt. For another, hoping that my feedback is useful, you'll want time to redraft before you send it.

Best of luck everyone

Pitch For FREE Online With Talent Circle

2011-06-01T19:16:00.001+01:00

I've been a bit slow on the uptake on this but it's a great initiative spearheaded by Lucy together with Talent Circle. Pitching, writing loglines and a synopsis is a skill in itself that almost bears no relation to writing a script. But like most things they share this in common - the more you practice the better you get. Here are the details:

Want to pitch for FREE, online?

First you need to register with Talent Circle (this is free).

To place a pitch on the bulletin, there are a few things you need to know first. First off, we've introduced some guidelines for pitches. We ask that all pitches follow this format:

1) Title

2) Genre

3) Format (ie. short, feature, web series, treatment, etc)

4) Logline (25-30 words max)

5) Short Synopsis (60-100 words maximum)

6) Writer Bio (2 short sentences max – ie. Credits? Projects? Screenwriting MA? Blog URL? Etc)

In order to pitch, you need to post to the NOTICEBOARD. Here's how you do it:

1) Log in and create a "submit a posting"

2) Select "Notice (or just about everything else)"

3) Choose your email response.

3) Fill in the details (remembering the guidelines above please!)

4) Under "classification" choose "Script Pitch" - Submit and you're done!

FYI - We ask that writers only submit two pitches a day and to check their pitches have gone up BEFORE submitting duplicate postings. If for any reason your pitch is declined in the first instance, we will give a reason why and a second opportunity to submit.

LAST OF ALL:

Writers pitching on the bulletin are expected to be looking to connect with other writers, producers, directors, etc and to welcome communication from colleagues. However, if YOU are offering constructive criticism to writers on their pitches, please be aware of the TONE and CONTENT of your messages! Excessive negativity/confrontational attitudes to pitches placed on the site are NOT WELCOME and will be not be tolerated by Talent Circle.

GOOD LUCK!

Please pass this great FREE opportunity on to all your writing friends.

Coming Up 2012

2011-05-18T22:03:00.002+01:00

It's that time of year again:

Coming Up 2012

COMING UP is currently the only talent scheme in the UK where emerging filmmakers have the opportunity to make an authored drama with a guaranteed network broadcast. Now in its tenth year, Channel 4 and Touchpaper Television continue their commitment to innovation, experimentation and new voices.

Commissioned by Channel 4 and produced by Touchpaper Television, part of the Zodiak Media Group, the aim of the series is to create eye-catching, innovative, challenging films.

APPLICATIONS ARE NOW OPEN FOR COMING UP 2012

We will make 7 films for a half-hour Channel 4 slot.

What do we look for?

Bold, original and surprising ideas with strong voices – unafraid of ambition, wit, urgency and fearless entertainment. Films that can be shot in four days on a limited budget.

Who can apply?

We are looking for the best fresh and talented filmmakers out there.

Writers who have not had an original single, series or serial broadcast on UK television. Writers who have contributed episodes or series and serials (eg a long-running soap) are now eligible to apply.
Directors without a primetime TV drama credit.
Writer/Directors: We will accept submissions from writer/directors who meet the criteria for writers and directors as per above, but excellence in both disciplines must be shown to be considered in this category.

Submissions from multi-cultural and regionally-based filmmakers are encouraged.

How to apply:
Application forms are available here.

Submissions accepted by POST ONLY to:
COMING UP 2012
Touchpaper Television
3-6 Kenrick Place
London W1U 6HD

Deadline for Applications: 1pm on Thursday 9th June 2011

The International Student Film Organization: Short Film Competition

2011-05-11T15:48:00.000+01:00

I've happily accepted another offer from the ISFO to be on the jury for their short film script competition. The competition is being run through Circalit and here are the details:

The competition aims to encourage students interested in screenwriting to publish their work on an international platform and present their skill through a short film script. One of the targets of the ISFO is the connection of the student- and professional film sector and the competition is going to give students the chance to have their work judged by experienced screenwriters and industry professionals.

This competition is hosted by The International Student Film Organization Ltd

How the winner will be selected?

All screenplays will be pre-judged by film students from all over the world on www.circalit.com. The 20 best scripts will be forwarded to a jury of industry professionals, who will give their verdict between the 27th June and 17th July.

The jury includes distinguished judges such as Catherine Shoard (The Guardian film journalist), Phillip Barron (Screenwriter), Taghi Amirani (Documentary Film Maker), Jenna Bors (Academy Award winning student film maker), Andy Baker (head of MOFILM), Jez Freedman (Screenwriter), Evan Leighton-Davis (Industrial Scripts), John Dalton (Screenwriter), Hazel Hayes (YouTube Representative) and Wendy Mitchell (Head of News of of Screen International).

PLEASE NOTE: As only the 20 top rated scripts are going to be passed on to the judges, it's going to be up to you, the author, to ask your friends to come to the Circalit website and vote for you. Scripts which have not received any votes will not have a chance of being passed on. We have decided to organise the competition this way because we feel that it is not just writing skill that makes a good screenwriter, but also the talent to promote him/herself.

Prize

The winner will receive a free copy of the Mariner Writers' Suite 7. As a runner up prize, Pauline Kiernan has kindly sponsored her book 'Screenwriting they can't resist'. The best three scripts will also be premiered on the ISFO website with the permission of the students. The 20 most popular scripts will receive comments from our distinguished jury.

Rules

-You must be a student to enter (university confirmation might be required as proof from the winners)

- You must be a member of the ISFO (eg have signed up for our free newsletter)

- All screenplays must be between three and five pages long

- The story should be freestanding

- The screenplay can be of any genre

- All work must be original

- The deadline is the 12th June 2011

- By entering this competition, you register on the ISFO mailing list.

- By entering this competition, you grant the ISFO permission to access your name, email address and city of residence for the purposes of identifying entrants.

Writing what you know

2011-05-02T19:21:00.003+01:00

Along with 'nobody knows anything,' 'write what you know' is one of the most overused (and often misused) expression in screenwriting.

I recently read Starting Over by Tony Parsons. At the end of the novel there was an interview with him and he made what I thought was a very accurate and interesting observation. He said that writers have three things to work with; life as you have lived it, life as others have lived it, life as you can imagine it.

It breaks down as experience, research and imagination. What you have gone through, what others have gone through and what you can make up.

It really does boil down to that. Writing what you know is writing about what you've done, what you can find out about and what you can dream up. New writers often fall into the trap of writing stories based on their own lives - and to be fair, most of us have done bugger all by our mid twenties. That's why the slush pile is full of a night in the life of a bunch of clubbing twenty somethings. Like all 'rules,' there are exceptions. It didn't do Human Traffic, Swingers or Go any harm. But most exceptions prove the rule.

And different scripts require different combinations of all three. Here's how it's worked for me in four of my screenplays.

A Lonely War - drama inspired by real life exploits of the 43 Group. Set in post war London, this took a massive amount of research; books, documentaries and best of all, speaking to a couple of former group members. Nevertheless the story I wrote was fiction - it came from my imagination. As far as my own experience - probably very little to be fair.

The Storyteller - drama about a disabled, aspiring novelist struggling with chronic pain. A dash of research, but most of this came from my own experience and imagination. The story was based on a what if? The protagonist isn't based on me, but an alternate version of me.

Can He Flick It - comedy about a guy trying to win the subbuteo world cup to save his family toy shop. Not much research or experience in this one. I did grow up playing subbuteo with mostly my brother every Saturday afternoon, and I did do some research into this weird subculture that surrounds the game now. But most of it I just made up, based on my love of films like Dodgeball and Happy Gilmore.

Dough - Again, not much in terms of experience, although the story is set in the Jewish community I am familiar with. However there was plenty of research into the character of Ayyash, the lives of Darfur refugees in this country, and I spent a day in my local kosher bakery watching everything and learning loads. But once again, the bulk of the story came from our imaginations.

So as far as writing what you know goes - the only time experience played the majority part was in The Storyteller - and even then it was mixed with a fair degree of making stuff up. For the most part, my screenplays come from research and imagination. This is true in the next two scripts I'm co-working on, one an animation feature about birds (so zero experience, a little research and plenty of imagination) and rom com about warring matchmakers (also pretty much zero experience, a bit more research and most of it made up.)

So the next time you hear someone talking about writing what you know, or even telling you to do exactly that, smile politely, nod your thanks, and think about what it really means.

2 minute screenplay competition - deadline Monday

2011-04-29T00:11:00.002+01:00

Virgin Media Shorts is just around the corner and Trev Walsh at White Tiger Films is running a competition to find an entry.

Details can be found here.

I've done a fair bit of reading work for Trevor and he's a committed filmmaking learning his trade. This is a great chance for an up and coming screenwriter to work with someone as dedicated to making something that will stand out from the crowd, and using that as a springboard for bigger and better things.

It's not like anyone's going to work Friday. Something about a wedding. So plenty of time to get scribbling.

Good luck.

It's funny, because it's true

2011-04-21T00:01:00.004+01:00

No I'd rather stand, thank you. Sorry it's late but I wanted to get the girls settled down for the night.

Yes they're sharing Emma's bedroom. Still awake of course, I could hear them chattering away as I slipped out.

Yes I know they shouldn't be left alone in the house that's why I want to get this business settled quickly.

I've brought over the film script you unwisely rejected. The one about the producer whose daughter is kidnapped by a psychopathic screenwriter.

All you do is get it made. You own the company, you're head of production. Just do it. Naomi is a lovely kid. Hear what I'm sayin'? Don't worry, I'll see myself out. Goodnight.

(Roger McGough)

Juliano Mer-Khamis ‎1958 – 2011

2011-04-13T14:52:00.003+01:00

I keep politics off this blog. It's not what it's about and therefore I don't think it belongs here. The only exception is when it impacts on writing and the arts. Unfortunately, this is one of those occasions. Last week Juliano Mer-Khamis was assassinated when he was gunned down in his car, sitting next to his 4 year old son, outside the Freedom Theatre he ran in the town of Jenin. By all accounts this professional hit was carried out by gunmen who were supporters of Hamas.

I didn't know Juliano. I never met him. I have read a couple of interviews with him and some of the statements he made. And therefore it's entirely possible that had I met him we would have strongly disagreed on pretty much everything. One declaration that his mother wasn't treated in an Israeli hospital when she was in labour and nearly bled to death because she was married to an Arab I can only assume to be an outright lie. Being somewhat accident prone I have been in Israeli hospitals many times. And not only are Jews who are married to anyone at all treated, Arabs themselves are treated in exactly the same way.

Nevertheless, Juliano ran a theatre dedicated to giving Arab youth something else to do, and presumably keep them away from being indoctrinated by the extremists around them. It caused controversy because it staged 'Western' plays and allowed women and girls not only to attend, but to participate too.

And so he was murdered. In cold blood. By his brethren. This despite the fact the he was vehemently anti-zionist, fully supportive of the Arab cause, uprising, worryingly so quite frankly for someone like me looking on. But this wasn't enough for some of his brothers in arms. He ran a theatre that was based on the arts, and liberal values and culture. And so apparently he deserved to die.

He was killed by fellow Arabs because he ran a theatre. And Israel are supposed to make peace with these people, who hide behind women and children in Gaza, firing their rockets, and killing even their own people when they disagree with them.

But apart from letting the horror of that sink in, one other strange thing struck me. Where is the outcry? Where are the open eds and letters and boycotts from the Ken Loach's, Mike Leigh's and Caryl Churchill's of the world - who are never slow to display hopping mad outrage when Israel inadvertently kills civilians when trying to defend its citizens from Hamas terror attacks - and thereby also displaying their complete ignorance and/or deliberate bias.

But this is one of their own. A director, actor, writer. Slain in cold blood for his artistic beliefs. It certainly wasn't for his political beliefs. And yet the silence is deafening.

I am at a loss to explain this. Is it because it doesn't fit into these people's mantra and agenda? Is it because it would highlight just what sort of people we are talking about here? Is it because it would make attending rallies with people holding placards saying we are all Hamas or Hezbollah now just that bit more repugnant than it already is? Dammit, why did it have to be Arab terrorists who killed him. It would have been so much more convenient had it been some Jews.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I've gone online, searched around, and missed all the open letters and statements of dismay from the artistic elite in this country. Maybe it's a Google conspiracy.

Maybe.

I'll just leave you to decide.

Let the cluster**** to Elstree begin

2011-04-07T15:39:00.003+01:00

Applications for the 2011 BBC Drama Writers Academy will be open on 7th April until 5th May 2011. Please see the BBC Jobs website for an online application form. Now in its seventh year, the Writers Academy is a major initiative aimed at discovering and training the next generation of writers for BBC One’s flagship shows: EastEnders, Casualty, Holby City, and Doctors. The scheme works as an apprenticeship for writers.

The first part involves a three-month course taught by John Yorke, Controller of Drama. Writers then complete a broadcast episode of Doctors, and if this is accepted they then complete commissions on Casualty, Holby and EastEnders. Eight writers are selected out of hundreds of applicants to undergo the intensive 15-month programme designed to equip them with all the skills necessary to write successfully for BBC Drama. The course entails classroom training, lectures from the country's best writers, instruction in all aspects of television production, and direct writing experience on the four Continuing Drama shows.

What the Academy enables us to do is to attract writers with interesting and original voices to television. Many of the Academy writers come to us from Radio or Theatre backgrounds. Previous graduates have gone on to become core writers for Casualty, Holby City, or EastEnders, and also to write for other shows for the BBC and elsewhere. Over 80% of course graduates are still in constant work with us.

Entry requirements

You are eligible to apply if you have been paid to write for television, film, radio, or theatre. Along with your online application form, you will need to send in an original sample of your writing plus proof of a professional commission. The online application forms can be completed through the BBC Jobs website - after 11th April 2011.

The course breaks down as follows:

An introduction to writing for continuing drama series 13 weeks training made up of: Classroom lectures accompanied by intensive writing exercises, analysis, and individual tutorials, led by John Yorke. Guest lectures from leading British TV and film writers including Richard Curtis, Tony Jordan, Jimmy McGovern, Peter Bowker, Tony McHale, Sarah Phelps, and Barbara Machin. Workshops in all aspects of television production including directing, scheduling, production management, casting, and more. During this period each writer will also write an episode of Doctors.

Writing for broadcast

At the end of the 13 weeks, if their individual Doctors episode is greenlit for broadcast, each writer will rotate across EastEnders, Casualty, and Holby City, writing a broadcast episode on each show.

At the end of the 15 months, each writer will have written for each of the four shows. The BBC also has an option at this time to guarantee further commissions on the shows.

London Comedy Writers' Festival: Meet the Producer of 5 of the Biggest British films of all time‏

2011-03-25T14:59:00.005Z

The London Comedy Writers' Festival is thrilled to announce an exclusive, one night only, in depth Q&A with Barnaby Thompson, Head of Ealing Studios, the home of British Film Comedy and the oldest continuously working film studio in the world.

As Head of Ealing and co-founder of Fragile Films, Barnaby is one of a handful of British Producers who single headedly have the power and influence to greenlight a project with the shake of a hand. He is the Producer of the fourth highest grossing British Film of all time - 'St. Trinian's' - and has produced 5 of the top 20 British independent movies of all time.

From 'Wayne's World' to 'Spiceworld', everything that Barnaby Thompson touches turns to (Fritton's) gold! So join us for this exclusive session with one of the UK's most prolific and successful producers and ask the man directly how to get your script to the top of his pile.

Tickets: £10 (buy here) or free to Comedy Writers Festival Delegates (buy festival pass here)
Date: March 30th
Time: 7.00 - 9.30pm
Venue: Ealing Studios, Ealing Green, London W5 5EP

Sign up to the Comedy Writers Festival here
http://www.londoncomedywritersfestival.com/buy-tickets

Remember you can get a £25 discount by using the discount code janiceday

London Screenwriting Agents Use Crowd-Sourcing Platform Circalit to Find Thriller Screenplays

2011-03-10T21:39:00.002Z

London screenwriting agents, Dench Arnold, have teamed up with Circalit to source screenplays online. The crowd-sourcing phenomenon has already proved successful in industries such as music and charity, and is now being replicated in the screenwriting sector. Screenwriters post up their thriller screenplays online at Circalit (www.circalit.com) where the online community read and rate the entrants, giving writers feedback on their work. The most popular scripts are then considered for representation by Dench Arnold.

Elizabeth Dench commented, “We’re very happy to be using Circalit to source talented new writers. We hope this competition demonstrates the power of crowd-sourcing to access a global pool of talent.”

Any member of the public can upload their screenplay to the competition for free at www.circalit.com. One entry per person only. All submissions are open to public voting, but writers may choose how much of their script they wish to share with the public. The deadline for entries is 1st May 2011.

About Circalit
Circalit is a platform which connects writers with industry professionals. Launched in mid 2010, Circalit enables writers to post up their work in a copyright secure environment, receive feedback, build a network, and enter free writing competitions. Film producers, publishers, agents and other industry professionals are able to use the Circalit community to crowd source new literary talent and tap into the talent pool of rising stars. Circalit’s aim is to unearth new literary talent.

Guding Lights: Deadline next Friday

2011-03-03T21:20:00.002Z

This kinda snuck up on me but the deadline for the Guiding Lights mentoring scheme is Friday 11th March.

You can find all the details by clicking on the link above. It's not an entry level thing. You need a small track record to be eligible. But if you do, it's well worth applying for. The mentors they get are top quality and some prestigious championing your work is - in my opinion - one of the best ways to get ahead in the industry.

Good luck

Comedy Festival Ticket - Apologies

2011-03-02T12:47:00.003Z

As equality sweeps through the Middle East (well, ahem, that's the idea) it's only right it should prevail
here too.

Unfortunately Janice's big heart and my unquenchable desire to be liked has this time exceeded our reach.

The £30 discount we offered yesterday is unfair to the other people working hard to sell tickets at the standard £25 discount.

So apologies for any inconvenience caused. Please still click here to buy tickets for the exciting festival and use the janiceday discount to get £25 off!

Still a bargain. Still an event not to be missed.

London Comedy Writers Festival: BIGGEST discount in Town

2011-03-01T20:21:00.002Z

A lot of (very nice) people are running around offering you good people a £25 discount off the upcoming London Comedy Writers Festival - 9th & 10th of April.

But I just really like to be liked - so, once again courtesy of Janice Day, I'm offering you the biggest discount around.

I won't be there myself because the main festival is on a Saturday - but its got a great line up. Check out the list of speakers already on board.

So if you want to buy a ticket with £30 OFF - go here - and enter the discount code janiceday

Enjoy

Dough-tastic

2011-02-16T13:44:00.005Z

Some DOUGH news, at last. Have been bursting to share this but had to wait until it was official and on the Viva Films website.

Jonathan Pryce is attached to play Jewish baker Nat Dayan.

And Merveille Lukeba is attached to play Muslim cannabis dealer Ayyash Habimana.

And if that wasn't weird enough - Mark Knopfler OBE, former Dire Straits lead guitarist, vocalist, songwriter and all round music legend - is attached for the film score.

It's all getting a bit exciting now. I'm over the moon with the casting. There are not that many actors around that can play Nat and Jonathan Pryce is an excellent choice. I'm delighted he likes the script enough to want to do it. He's a British institution and eerily, even looks a bit like how I thought Nat should.

Once we'd nailed the character of Ayyash, Merv was always our first choice. The script was basically written for him and my rather gushing review of his performance in SKINS is now a bit embarrassing having met him. I'm pretty sure he has better things to do though than read my blog so I think I'm safe.

And the involvement of Knopfler. Well that was just something Producer/Director John Goldschmidt pulled out of the hat and it feels rather odd that someone who is a legend in their field wants to invest his time, experience and talent working on something I wrote.

As William Thacker might say, nice... surreal, but nice.

Suckling at the nipple of Tony Jordan's wisdom

2011-02-13T22:01:00.004Z

Which, according to the man himself, is exactly what we weren't there for on Friday as around forty Red Planet finalists met at the Century Club in Shaftesbury Avenue.Tony was joined by colleagues from Red Planet and friends from Kudos Productions.

This had a very different feeling to the workshop I went to in 2007. For one thing it was easier getting to Central London than Flitwick in Bedfordshire where Red Planet HQ is located. But the involvement of Kudos in particular signaled the intention that this was going to be bigger. Anyone who was at the London Screenwriters Festival (if you missed it scroll down the blog for my review), or has heard Tony speak elsewhere, will be familiar with his comments about the Red Planet family, the eight old farts, and finding the next generation of writers. Friday's workshop was about putting some of that into practice and the participants will now continue to build their relationship with both companies to ultimately see whether there is anything to work on together.

But although the main reason for Friday was a getting to know each other networking session, Tony can't help himself and deliver some wisdom anyway. A couple of things really stood out that are hopefully worth sharing here.

Firstly, Tony spoke about the two sides of the industry from a writing perspective - the corporate and the creative. Keep in mind we're still talking about writing now. We're not talking about producing, marketing, the money, etc, etc. Only the writing. And yet there is still, as he sees it, a creative side and a corporate side. And he doesn't care too much for the corporate side. What he means by this is that writers working on projects that they think are second guessing the industry are not as interesting to him as - in his words - writers writing something because they've just been told they have three months to live and this is the project they simply have to write before it's too late. Those are the ones he wants to see. Don't worry about what it is. He's turned off by people coming to him and saying this is a 6X60 series for Channel Four at 9pm on Thursday. Sometimes that's the first thing they say and he's like but what is it about?? That's thinking corporate when writers should be thinking creative. He'd rather hear ideas, and likes being involved with things from inception, and it might turn out to be a series, and two parter, three parter, whatever - but think idea, think characters, don't think formats and corporate.

Alongside this is chasing fads. The last one was - naturally - vampires. So vampires are hot, everyone wants vampire stories, the commissioners tell that to every single company, every single company asks their writers have you got any vampire stuff - and then the same commissioners get three hundred vampire scripts. Until they are absolutely sick to the teeth of them. And what happens is that one writer says I don't want to write about vampires, I want to write about fairies. And after reading three hundred vampire scripts and having three hundred more on their desk, and then the next script that comes in is about fairies - which is the one you think they are going to read first? You don't want to join any fad - you want to start something not end it - start a fairy revolution instead of being just another vampire junkie.

The other thing was Tony's tip to save all the rest of us from shelling out cash to see this guru or that guru. Because whatever you use - 22 steps, 3 acts, some sort of triangle thing I don't quite understand - stories all boil down to the same thing. You have a character at Point A - and at the end of the line you have what they want at Point B. And the writers job is to put complications in the way of the character getting from Point A to Point B. But the key to making this brilliant lies in how much you make the audience care about the character in the first place. Tony was pretty clear in that he loved ideas, concepts, stories, etc. But it is character that is the most vital component. Don't scrimp on the character work you do. (A tip I've heard from him before so many of you may have too, is to apply for jobs in character. Application forms ask great questions and he got both Micky Briggs and Gene Hunt job interviews!)

Friday was great fun. I had to leave early but even then it was a worthwhile couple of hours. But I have a feeling that it's what might happen next that will define whether or not my achievement of reaching the final this time will eclipse that of 2007.

From Script to Screen: The Book of Eli

2011-02-07T00:23:00.004Z

I try and read a script every week. That's in addition to the script reading work I do. This is just for leisure. Jews aren't allowed to work from sundown Friday to nightfall Saturday - so I like to relax and read a script purely for pleasure (although inevitably learn something too.) During Script Club season I'll mostly follow that - and when that's not running I'll just read whatever I feel like from Simply Scripts or My PDF Scripts etc. And it adds up. That's approximately fifty scripts a year (how many have you read, ever, let alone just last year?) which means that my script collection outweighs my DVD one. And there are no prizes for guessing which one is more beneficial for screenwriters. And as Dave Herman points out, I began to actually enjoying reading scripts of movies I haven't seen - and then catching the film. Certainly from an educational point of view, I'd far rather read a script not knowing what happens next and not seeing any other pictures in my mind except the ones that the words on the page are creating for me, than be influenced by anything pre-watched.

I read The Book of Eli script towards the end of last year and then saw the movie over the holiday season. The script was fantastic. I loved it, and couldn't understand why the movie had not made more of a splash. It seemed to just come and go to mixed reviews, even though it did put up a fight against the mighty Avatar to do some decent business. But then I saw the movie and was shocked to discover that a few small, but very crucial details, had been changed. And it just brought home to me how important seemingly minor tweaks can be and what effect they can have on the overall movie.

Spoilers for The Book of Eli coming up.

You can read about the movie for yourself if you want to, on wiki or IMDB. But here's what you won't read about.

In the script, the blind characters have no pupils. They are therefore very clearly blind. If I remember correctly Eli has dark sunglasses on most of the script, except on rare occasions where he is on his own and the script makes it clear he is shrouded in darkness or asleep. However the character does things - fights, shoots, whatever - in the story that a blind person cannot do. So when Eli takes his dark glasses off at the end of the script to reveal that he is blind, it is the best jaw dropping moment I have ever read in a script. However, in the movie, the blind characters do have pupils and we see Eli without his glasses virtually the whole time. (The movie posters by the way always have him with the glasses on.) So when you have the double reveal at the end that the Bible he is carrying is braille, and the villain therefore won't be able to read it - but that Eli has been able to read it and has the book memorised so he can dictate it, the whole twist is potentially lost. For one thing I imagine there are sighted people in the world that can read braille, so that alone proved nothing. And I even stumbled across an internet forum which was discussing whether or not Eli was blind. It made me scream. From the script there is no way it was intended to be an ambiguous ending and the writer must be pulling his hair out that it was left so unclear. I realise there are possibly filmic issues with shooting an entire movie where your protagonist has his eyes shaded. But it's so crucial here that for me you either do it, or don't bother making the film.

Secondly, the antagonist, Carnegie, was altered - slightly - but it made a big difference. In the script he is demonstrated to be a brilliant orator and his power is derived from that. It has a religious fervour to it and men, much stronger than him, are prepared to follow him because of it. We therefore understand that if he was to get his hands on the one remaining Bible in the world, and be able to harness it and use its language for his own ends, it would make him even more powerful and unstoppable. The stakes are clear and very high. On the other hand, he does not go with the gang when they chase Eli - therefore not getting injured in the process, like he does in the movie. At some point, I am going to guess that someone said we can't have the antagonist just sitting there, we need to make him more active. But in doing so, and seemingly in favour of the critical speech he gives, they totally undermine the threat of the character. He just becomes one of the gang and frankly there is no longer any apparent reason why the head henchman doesn't just shoot him in the face and become the boss himself. And having got injured, the movie makes it clear that he is dying from his infected leg wound. This leads to the third change.

Solara is a young girl who was under the control of Carnegie but escapes to travel with Eli. When they reach their destination Eli dictates the Bible and dies. (And by the way the script makes it transparent that she is shocked when Eli removes his glasses and she discovers he is blind - whereas in the movie she barely batters an eyelid.) Solara buries him (with a rather nice epitaph on his grave stone which is in the script and I loved, but is cut from the movie,) and then she dons Eli's 'uniform,' complete with weapons. Despite being offered a safe haven in the world's last library located on Alcatraz, she declines and says she has some business to finish back home. In the script, with Carnegie unharmed, still ruling over this town, with the Bible that albeit he can't read (but could theoretically find someone who can at some point) the ending is fantastic because Solara picks up the mantle and it adds another layer to Eli's journey. However in the movie, with Carnegie dying and his control over the town already starting to unravel, it completely undermines the final shot of Solara tooled up and ready to go home to defeat her nemesis once and for all. It's a small change but in terms of something delivering an emotionally satisfying ending, it had a big effect.

To be fair, the writer, Gary Whitta, seemed pretty chuffed with how it all turned out. And fair enough. It's still a cool movie and I enjoyed it. But for my money Gary, your script was subtly, but so much the better. It reminded me that the little things can add up and do matter. And whilst I'm not suggesting a writer fights tooth and nail over every line of the script (that would be a very, very bad idea,) be aware that when you're writing stuff and making changes, and then when the thing hopefully gets picked up and you have to make more changes, think about the big picture and the impact those seemingly small differences make to the overall story.

ps. I've left a comment on Gary's blog so I'm hoping he'll come back and comment here. For all I know the changes were his idea and I've just made an arse of myself!

pps. I read the first draft of Toy Story 2 this weekend and man, did that script improve a lot by the time it hit our screens!

David & Judy’s Script Club 2.0

2011-01-19T14:30:00.006Z

A million dollars isn't cool. You know what's cool?

David & Judy's Script Club.

And so was born the totally original, completely non plagiarised, gobsmackingly brilliant tag line for the relaunch of Dave Melkevik's script club.

You can pay the mostly exorbitant fees for all the one day courses that claim they will teach you how to write screenplays that you want. But the best and most economically viable way to improve your writing is to read scripts.

Dave doesn't care cos he's smart enough to just be doing this for himself. But I was disappointed there weren't more comments during last years club. The first script this time is The Social Network.

We all know it's gonna win Best Adapted Screenplay. So the real question is, can you afford not to read it?

And it's my birthday - so I can yell if I want to

Massive Action Day

2011-01-11T20:28:00.004Z

I've been back a week tomorrow, after a lovely trip. Being on a plane or on holiday is without a doubt the best time to catch up on some movies. 14 or so days saw Despicable Me, Made in Dagenham, The Other Guys, True Grit, The King's Speech, The Expendables, The Fighter, The Book of Eli, The Social Network, The Switch and The Season of the Witch.

Nice.

Will probably look at some of those a bit closer soon.

However, and I don't know if it's new year's resolutions kicking in, but I have been greeted by a deluge of reading work. So much so that I haven't added to the first act of a new script I started whilst away. So this is just a post to check back in, wish everyone well, and let you all know about Massive Action Day.

Check it out. Jurgen Wolff has come up with an idea to get your new year off to a writerly start. If you're around this Saturday it looks like there's nothing to lose. And it could be fun too. I don't work on Saturday's but if you do join in, let us know how it goes.

Thanks to Janice Day for letting me know about this.

Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow

2010-12-27T01:52:00.004Z

I'm in New York on our annual vacation to spend time with my wife's family. And it's snowing. Hard. We're talking big boy snow here. None of that namby pamby stuff that shut down England and nearly caused us to miss our flight.

Anyway, I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank everyone who takes the time to read this blog. I hope it's been entertaining and informative, and I will try my best to maintain it during the coming year.

Thanks also to those who have allowed me to read their work and have asked me to give feedback in order to take their projects forward. I've done my best to both call things as I've seen them, tell it like it is, not shirk on asking the tough questions, but hopefully all in a manner that has only helped and not offended. The service, and the prices, will stay the same for as long as it can.

Finally, let me wish everyone a happy and healthy new year, and success both personally and professionally in 2011.

Always the bridesmaid

2010-12-18T20:21:00.002Z

Here's how the conversation went.
Me - "Mum, I didn't win but I got shortlisted for the Red Planet Prize."
Mum - "Again?"
Me - "Yeah I get to go to the workshop and stuff."
Mum - "You did that last time."
Me - "Yeah, but... There were like over 1500 entries and I got into the top 20 or so."
Mum - "Very nice."

Although I've made my mum out to sound like a typical Jewish mother who'd rather I'd been a doctor, it's a very large injustice. To be fair she was actually made up for me but she is so desperate for her baby boy to do well there was a certain de ja vu about this news. I can't deny I was equally desperate to go one better this time. But in the cold light of day, I'm really proud of getting this close again. I hope it demonstrates a consistency in my writing and I'm looking forward to another trip to Flitwick in the New Year.

Who's with me??

LSF: My roundup

2010-12-14T20:58:00.003Z

It seems strange still talking about the London Screenwriters' Festival when the event feels like it was a million years ago already. But having written (what I think is) the most comprehensive review of the festival found anywhere on the net, I thought one final post summing up my thoughts might be useful with one eye on next year.

In Hollywood, or throughout the film industry for that matter, everyone wants to copy the last big thing. Whatever smash hit there has been, the studios will be looking for their own version of it to do next. It's rare however for anyone to attempt to redo something that hasn't worked. However great the Cheltenham Screenwriters' Festival was, ultimately it was forced to close. That's not a criticism of anyone involved with it. As I think I've said before on this blog, in large part it was due to circumstances that weren't under their control, like lack of sponsorship and government funding cuts. Nevertheless there is no small degree of lunacy in thinking okay so that's gone, but we all loved it and we need it, so let's do another one. But that's essentially what David Chamberlain, Chris Jones, Lucy and everyone else involved, did. So all credit to them for having the guts to do it, and then the skill to do it so well.

Why go to the festival? For me I'd always wanted to go to Cheltenham but knew I couldn't. So this was a chance I didn't want to miss. The list of speakers was excellent and so many people I knew; other writers, bloggers, reading clients etc, were going that I wanted to be part of it. A strong aspect of being a screenwriter is being 'known.' Without a doubt the primary way to do this is through writing screenplays and sending them out. But in addition to that you have to get out and network. You have to get your face known. Ultimately, that doesn't matter if you haven't got quality scripts to back it up. But by the same token, as I've said before, if you write brilliantly and have no one to send the work to, what's the point? On more than one occasion when I introduced myself to someone at the festival they said they'd heard of me. I know, I just read that sentence back. So I know I sound like a prat. But that's not what this is about. It's not an ego thing. It's a marketing thing. A screenwriter is a product. And it's easier to get someone interested in a product if they've already heard of it (hopefully good things!) So the networking side is very important. And it goes hand in hand with the sessions I chose to go to.

I picked the ones I would attend based on two criteria - education and networking. The Editing session was a purely educational exercise as it was an area of the filmmaking process that I didn't know much about and it was very interesting. So to the Sustaining one. Cos basically we're all broke when we start out and it was a good question to try and answer. On the other hand, I didn't really expect to hear anything new at the Gatekeeper session. That's not being disrespectful. It's just that I'm a reader too and have been around in the industry for a few years now and I think it was a (very useful) session for newer writers. But I attended because I wanted to see Lucy and Danny again, and meet the others on the panel for the first time. Similarly with the Tony Jordan and Nicola Shindler seminar. As interesting as it was, I attended more to make sure I got the chance to speak with them (having met them both previously) than the actual content of the session. Some were a bit of both. So for example, I was intrigued educationally what the 50 ways in would be, but also thought there were one or two people on the panel that I really wanted to meet.

So next year when thinking about what to pick and what you'll miss out on, maybe break it down into two questions; what do I hope to learn, and who do I want to meet? I reinforced current contacts and made more new ones in one and half days than I've done the rest of the year.

One final thought. Get to sessions early and get to the front. I also used to shrink into the back rows. That's a waste. Because the people who are most likely to be there early are the speakers. And they will probably be hanging around, getting miked up, waiting for the session to start. If it's appropriate go talk to them then. Afterwards you might not get a chance because everyone will want to. But you stand a better chance if you're in the front row.

The London Screenwriters' Festival returns in 2011. And they've already got a special offer on the ticket price all ready for Christmas. Click here to pay £24 a month for 10 months (total of £240)

LSF 7: In Conversation with Tony Jordan & Nicola Shindler

2010-12-05T17:37:00.005Z

If Editing and the Script was the most educationally beneficial session for me personally, then this was probably the most entertaining. It featured Tony Jordan and Nicola Shindler, two people who put writers at the heart of what they do. With Tony it's less surprising, because at heart he himself is still a writer, who just happens to run a company. With Nicola though, it's a philosophy that she readily admits has contributed an enormous amount to the success of her company. A lot of people in the industry pay lip service to the writer being at the centre of the creative vision, far fewer actually do it.

Nicola started out as a script editor, a job she never knew existed - you just don't do you if you're not in the industry? - because basically she just wanted to work with writers. And she set up her company for much the same reason.
What inspired Tony was the same then as it is now - the audience. If you can imagine you're at Wembley, and something exciting happens, and you get an oooh or a roar from the 80,000 strong crowd - well imagine that when 26 million people are watching Eastenders laughing or crying at the same, that's a massive turn on.

Whilst Tony and Nicola are at the top of their game, both agreed that it never feels like that. All you have is what you are working on at the moment. There are never any guarantees that the next thing will get commissioned or you'll be working next month or next year. Tony said he had his last three ideas turned down.

Q: How does the landscape look to you at the moment?

NS: It's difficult because budgets are getting lower all the time and it's hard to make things for less and less money. And there are less and less hours to make things for. But actually Nicola felt things are better now than they were five years ago because television seems to be opening up again in terms of taste and what people want. There was a period where things were getting quite restricted - so very high concept material was being looked for, or things that copied previous successes. But it feels now that people are more open again to writers coming in and not immediately knowing that this is a twelve part series for this type of audience - but they've just got this script that's great and we'll then find a home for it. And because there's less money and less slots, that's not always a bad thing in terms of making smaller ideas work.

TJ: The way the industry works, and new writers get pissed off about it and rightly so, is everybody is terrified to put their head above the parapet. So if a broadcaster makes one of Tony's scripts and it bombs, their job's still safe because they can turn round and say it was a Tony Jordan script, how was I to know? But if they commission a script from a new writer and it bombs, they took a punt and therefore they pay with their job. That's why they like writers with a track record. But he agreed with Nicola. Three or four years ago briefs were quite restrictive and your pitch had to be a different kind of pitch - that this is this, it will attract this kind of audience, for this slot, this is the what the first episode's about, here are the character arcs, and it will all be defined right from the outset. But now there's more freedom to go into a meeting and say this is the idea, we're not quite sure what it is yet, but run with it from there. For example Tony had a conversation with a broadcaster for what he thought was a series, and came out the meeting with it being a two-parter (although he wasn't sure if that was good business or not!)

NS: You have to put in the work. Like Tony who worked for years on soaps, generating ideas all the time. You have to learn your craft. In any job you work your way up. You can't just be expected to be given a BBC 1 series at 9pm.

TJ: As a writer you spend your life staring at a computer screen. You write a script, send it out get it rejected, put it away, start another one, send it out, get it rejected, and so on. The beauty of long running series is there's an instant reaction to your writing. Your script is on screen in two months. That gag on page 11 that you thought was hilarious, and it dies on its arse, if your stuff isn't made you never know. So Tony did 200 episodes of Eastenders and it was kind of like handing in his homework. Because when he watched it he could see that didn't work, or he thought those scenes would cut together in a certain way and maybe it didn't come across, or whatever. It's feedback in a way that new writers don't get. All they get is rejection letters that don't help.

Both Red Planet and Red do try to give some feedback on scripts they reject, but Nicola noted that sometimes people get very cross... when you're trying to help them. I found this staggering but not too surprising bearing in mind I'm a script reader too. It's just not cool. It means these people will probably never want to work with you, ever. So even if you vehemently disagree with the feedback you get, don't be an arse about it.

Q: What are the new opportunities for new writers at the moment?

NS: There are still the soaps, although it's hard to get into them. The Writers' Academy, Hollyoaks, Emmerdale and Coronation Street, although they are quite tough.

TJ: The Writers' Academy has made things tougher. In Tony's day they ran Shadow Schemes and he didn't think this was the case any more. I should point out though that Tony's actually mistaken and I know for sure Eastenders still does run one, although the format may have changed a little from when Tony was there. But the Writers' Academy, as brilliant as it is, only takes 8 writers that are guaranteed episodes of Eastenders, Doctors, Holby and Casualty. So those shows know they are getting at least 8 new writers every year. And if a number of them do well, they'll stay. So it's tough to get on. Even getting on the Academy is very tough and the ones that do can often have written for TV before. So that initial gig is very, very tough to get. It's always been hard but from working with new writers there is the sense that it's harder than ever now - there's just nowhere to go.

Q: So can there ever be too many writers?

NS: Well there can be too many people calling themselves writers, which is a different thing. You know that saying about everyone's got a book in them or everyone's got a story to tell - is absolute bollocks really. You're born a writer. It's a specific hard skill and there's a madness to every writer she's worked with that's specific to writing. There's a way of thinking, of working out stories in your head, a solitude, which is such a specific way of living, that it's not for everyone who wants to get into it. And again it's about putting the work in. You get people who say I've got a great idea but I'm not showing it to you because you might steal it. Or I'll give you a treatment but not a script - but you've got to write and write and write and put your heart and soul into it.

TJ: Red Planet takes unsolicited scripts and talks to new writers, because Tony still remembers what it's like starting out and it's horrible. But he does get people who come to see him with a 3 page treatment or an outline for a major new series - and they want him to invest in it. To commission a script, to go to a broadcaster, to use his contacts to sell it, to do all that. And they've written 3 pages. So Tony will ask for a script and they will turn round and say well I'm not writing for nothing. That doesn't go down too well. A writer writes. It's in the title. What they'll also say is I've talked to a lot of other companies and there's a lot of interest. Please don't do that. What you need to do is write the script, and then rewrite it. Tony doesn't want to see it until it's like your tenth draft, and you've done all you can and you're really proud of it. Then he wants to read it and if he share's that belief, he will use every contact he has and never let it rest and try and get it on screen. That's the way it works.

NS: But you have to invest your time in it first of all. The thing with ideas is that they could go either way. If you're very experienced and Nicola knows your work and your take on things, then she'll get how the idea will evolve. But if she doesn't know you or your work, then you have to give. To give of yourself.

Q: You're two of the few remaining companies that take unsolicited material, at the expense of a great deal of time and money. Why do you do this and what are the benefits to you?

TS: The reality of it is most of the television in this country is written by a little network of old farts. There's about 8 of them, including Tony. (His words, not mine!) And he never understood that until he started producing, when he used to go to broadcasters to put a show together and find the writers, they'd say can we give you a list. And it's the same 8 names on it every time. And these writers always have stuff in development, they're always working on about 8 different things at once. And they do that because they are on the list. And because Tony understands that, he said that the future of his company rests on him finding the new generation of writers. And to find them first. If he can find them, and before anyone else does, and make them feel part of the Red Planet family, and mentor them and help them with the scars and bruises he's picked up himself along the way, then that list that goes round will all be writers that came through Red Planet, and they'll bring him their stuff first. It's kind of a long term plan which makes perfect sense to him. Because the other problem with the 8 old farts is that they are usually hard to get because they are so busy. And if you do get them you don't get their full time because you are one of 8 things they are working on. Whereas if you can get a new writer, who is passionate and dedicated, you get 100%. And it's worth noting that Red Planet are making an 8 part series next year from a writer who came through the Red Planet Prize - and it will be the first thing they've had on TV. So it can happen!

NS: Her first job at the BBC she was led down this staircase. And the BBC as part of the license deal has to read everything that comes in. But no one had done it for a few years and that was her job. She became obsessed with getting rid of that pile. The truth is of those scripts only about 2 went anywhere. But you might find work from a writer with an interesting voice, who can be mentored and worked with etc.

TS: As he said earlier, broadcasters, rightly or wrongly, want a safe pair of hands. And he is perceived as a safe pair of hands. So the beauty of Red Planet Pictures is he can go to a broadcaster with work from a new writer and he can act as the insurance. He can say if it all goes pair shaped he will step in.

Q: How easy is it for new writers to hold onto their original voice?

TS: You have to. It's vital. And it's not about arguing over every single line of your script because then you just become a pain in the arse that nobody wants to work with. Tony's technique was to ask himself a question about every note he got; does it fundamentally change what he was trying to do with the script? If the answer is no, just agree to it. And you'll be a joy to work with for the first 17 pages. But when you come across a note on page 20 that really matters, that changes the heart and soul of the character and story, you can say I just can't do that. If you do that on everything by the time the crucial one comes along you're just being awkward. But if you just do it then you see them go whoa. And they'll say okay then let's leave that. And the reason they do that is because nobody knows anything. So if you pretend you know something it really freaks them out. They'll be like whoa, he knows something!

NS: I should point out at this juncture that Nicola thought Tony may just have damaged so many careers of people sitting in the room! Her basic point was that they are not all that stupid and they only gives notes if they genuinely think it will improve the script. She has found that the best writers she's worked with suck up notes. It's the ones who are neither here nor there that are a bit defensive about notes. Obviously as a reader as well as a writer, who works with other writers giving plenty of notes, and receives them too from my writers group etc, I agree with Nicola. But there's unquestionably bad readers and script editors out there to (just like there are bad writers, directors, producers, plumbers, whatever.) And it these guys you have to be wary of and probably deploy Tony's tricks of the trade. (And to be fair to Tony he did clarify the point that there are good and bad ones, and you just have to be careful.)

There were then some questions from the audience but not much new ground was covered. One I should point out from Janice Day was about whether there is a certain ageism with writers. Whilst Nicola conceded that stories about characters of a certain age could be harder to get away, both she and Tony were adamant that if the script is great, it really doesn't matter who wrote it, let alone how old they are.

Sadly that brings to the end my write ups from the festival. I've now covered all 7 sessions that I managed to get to over the one and a half days I was there. Just imagine what people who were there for all three crammed in. I hope you've enjoyed them and found them useful, and there will probably be one more post on the subject bringing together my thoughts on the festival as a whole and a writers approach to it thinking ahead to next year.

LSF 6 : Meet the Gatekeepers

2010-11-28T17:46:00.004Z

Meet the Gatekeepers was a chance for most of the writers in the room to put a face to and get an insight from the people most likely to read their scripts. Chaired by Evan Leighton Davis, the panel included Jamie Wolpert, Sarah Olley, Alex Mandell and probably more familiar to you all, Danny Stack and Lucy V Hay.

So what is a gatekeeper? It's not people to keep writers out. Honestly. It's most likely to be the initial filter facing your script. There's too much material floating around for the execs and producers to read, so they will use readers. Readers will write a synopsis, a report, and typically deliver a verdict like Pass, Low Consider, Consider and Recommend.

So what are they looking for and how do writers get through this initial pass?

JW: His job has been mainly to find writing talent as opposed to projects. Most people he has worked for have more than enough projects already on their slate. But what there's a deficit of is really talented writers they can bring to them. So an original, strong voice, a real depth and authenticity to the writing. His big thing with scripts is that the vast majority of the ones he reads have series of scenes that are either a story scene, a character scene or a twist scene - and if you watch really good TV, all of those are happening in the same scene. And a writer who can do that, even if the overall script is a mess, is someone he would want to meet.

DS: The companies he has read for want to know two things - is the writing any good and therefore is the writer of interest? And is this project something that they would possibly be interested in making? They look at the front sheet of the report first, and maybe last. Does it say Pass or Consider etc - and then the premise Danny has written of your script (note not yours. His. That's how clear it has to be cos someone else will be interpreting it.) And most execs just read that and if it doesn't do anything for them they won't read any more. Some might read the synopsis (again the reader has written it, not the writer. So the plot better be clear,) and actually think this is interesting after all and decide to read the first 10 pages or whatever, to see for themselves. But that's pretty rare. The main things Danny's looking for is originality, style of writing, is it commercial, is it a genre film? And the more you read the more you realise that so little is out and out original. What hasn't been done before? So much is derivative that it's hard to come up with something truly original. But that said, you can still stand out by doing whatever it is you are doing, really well.

ELD: What the execs he's worked with really want to know is; if I pass on this project am I potentially passing on something that will be a really good bit of business? If I pass on this will I lose my job if it goes elsewhere and does really well? If I pass on this project and don't meet this writer, am I passing on what could be a really considerable piece of talent? People work with the same people over and over again - and relationships tend to be long term. As Tim Bevan said, he managed to get Richard Curtis and that relationship drove much of Working Title's business in the early years.

SO: The commercial potential is really important. Has it got a new hook that will raise it above the other stuff that's out there? Can I imagine the poster campaign on the tube? Horror was a really important genre but it's saturated the market now - so there has to be something fresh to make it stand out. The biggest thing for her is structure. Because if a writer can't structure a story properly there will be too much work to get something off the ground.

LVH: The biggest problem she sees is with structure. Secondly, character. A lot of writers seem pretty good at evoking a mood and dialogue. But dialogue is probably the least important thing. Structure and plot are probably the most important thing because there are so many ways in which it can go wrong. If characters aren't following an arc of some kind it's very easy to get bored. Structure is not a miracle cure despite it being a script buzz word not that long ago. And whilst we don't want tick the box screenwriting, everything should have a beginning, middle and end, no matter if you call it three acts, 21 steps, whatever, whatever. Otherwise it can kind of all unravel - especially after the initial set up.

SO: If a writer sends a script in and the structure is a mess, but they have brilliant characters and a strong voice etc, it might be that she still wants to meet them and get to know them. It's just that they probably aren't ready to come in on something being worked on now.

JW: Obviously structure is vital. But the 'what' isn't as important as the 'why' and the 'how'. He'd much rather find an interesting voice in a jumble of a script, because you can sort out structure. It's harder to sort out lack of character or story. If it's not there it's not there. But if a writer has great characters, dialogue, setting etc, structure can be worked out together. That's what he does as a script editor.

AM: There are two schools of thought. The US and the European. US is more focused on the structure and European more on character. If you have a story, and character building from that, that's half the battle. Dialogue comes last because it can be changed easily. The first 20 pages are crucial. If you've got a mesmerising opening then you've got someone hooked. Of course you then have to keep the interest, the pace etc, but if you've got them hooked they will finish the script. If you don't deliver in the first 10-20 pages they probably won't read any more. From a studio point of view high concept is also really important. That one sentence log line that makes you go I want to read that.

JW: In TV high concept has probably had its day. Even in film, in this country, your high concept idea will still probably feel like a diet version of something else. The big thing for him was the distinction between Plot and Story. Story is what happens and why. It's the meaning of the thing. Plot is the order those things happen. So the example he heard from Paul Abbott is that the Plot is the King and Queen die - the Story is that the King dies and then the Queen dies of a broken heart. If you have an interesting story with interesting characters, you can mess around with the plot until you find the best way of telling that story. But that's not to imply that structure isn't important. If it's near impossible to follow what is going on then people who don't have to read the whole script may well not bother. Readers have to because that's their job. But a producer doesn't and might not.

ELD: What are the shortest cuts to antagonise readers; what makes your heart sink quickly?

JW: "I'm in my twenties and a drink a lot and club a lot and here's a story about me and my mates drinking a lot and clubbing a lot." And it's relevant to anyone else how? You might be great and the dialogue might be great, and in fact he read one recently which was, but he didn't care if the character got the girl or not because the writer didn't care if he got the girl or not because he was with a different one every night. Autobiographical is great but it's got to have a meaning. Your life is not necessarily interesting to someone else just because you've written it down. There's got to be more to it.

SO: Don't try and tell someone the whole story in one massive email. Keep your approach brief. If a writer has a lack of market awareness and you don't know what your audience and genre is, that shows you're not really aware. Also not knowing your central conflict, what's it about - and a vagueness; so is this a rom com, a thriller, TV show, film? That's pretty annoying.

LVH: A sense of audience is really important. So many scripts seem really conflicted. She sees a lot of stuff that appears to be for children and yet there is loads of swearing in it. It's really important you know who you are writing for and what the restrictions are. And the other thing that really bothers her in scripts is rape being just a beat in a story. Not against stories about rape like The Accused or The General's Daughter, which are important films. But rape that happens to both female and male characters as just something that happens and isn't it shocking but now lets move on to the real story. And it's not great.

JW: Second to drug addiction that's absolutely true as the most overused plot device. The number of times he's seen a script where a female character's motivation was because twenty years ago she was raped - and the glibness of it is really offensive. If you are going to use something that emotive and difficult, you have to really use it and honour it. Changing the subject. When sending in a script you also need a sense of perspective. Readers might have over a hundred scripts sitting on their desks so don't send an email two days letter asking if they've read it yet and what their notes are. He once had a writer send in an 180 page script in iambic pentameter and when he hadn't read it a week later, was asked to send it back with an apology.

DS: First thing a reader does when picking up a script is flip to the last page and see how long it is. So if it's a feature and it's over 120 pages that's a bad sign. If it's a TV hour and it's over 70 pages, that's a bad sign. And then scripts with basic formatting issues are a bad sign. Everyone seems to have Final Draft these days which is great but scripts still come in with green font, and dialogue centred, and scene description centred. And notes to the reader; "dear reader please consider... or please press play on track 2 on the accompanying CD in scene 2.... or did you enjoy the chocolates that came with the script..." All true apparently. Chunky paragraphs of descriptions, even in the most pacy written scripts, are also just visually still a turn off. Keep it lean.

ELD: Exposition would be top of the list. It's incredibly lazy screenwriting. Characters telling each other or asking each other things they blatantly already know just because the writer wants to convey the information to the reader. It's a massive turn off. Another pet hate is too many characters introduced in a rapid period of time early on in the script. It might be late at night, a reader has read umpteen scripts that day, and the last thing they want to do is double back on pages thinking who is that again?

AM: Loads of characters with the same or similar sounding names. Because you just lose track of who you are referring to the whole time.

ELD: Audience again. So important. Knowing who the audience is. And not kidding yourself either into thinking (and stating) that this is for absolutely everyone. Everyone in the whole world will want to see this movie.

Just a few final points that arose in the session:

The majority of the stuff you read as a freelance reader you wouldn't take to anyone else. But all the panel, and I would echo this, were clear in that readers want more than anyone to find great scripts and writing talent. And if they do they will hook them up as best they can. Because as well as it being quid pro quo, you also want to be connected to the next big thing, to say yes I know them or we helped get that off the ground. Because it does you no harm and you might want to work with them in the future somehow.

Don't send out stuff too early. What you send out should in your opinion be the final draft. (It won't be, but you have to see it like that at that stage.) If you know there is stuff still to work on, there's no point. Obviously this particularly applies to companies and producers, but even if you are sending something to a script consultant. If you know some areas need work, you are wasting your money. Send stuff to them when you've done all you can, and you can no longer see the wood from the trees, and you really need help now and a fresh pair of eyes to take the project to the next level.

Readers will have favourite genres just like everyone else does. And writers often feel that they might get unlucky or a bad report if their script happens to be in a genre the reader doesn't like. But as Lucy pointed out, she hates vampires cos they have been done to death, (my bad pun, not hers) but counters that with the fact that one of her all time fave specs had vampires in it. She's not a fan of Sci-Fi but has read some brilliant sci-fi scripts. With good writing it doesn't matter. And in some ways it's better to impress the non fans of that genre as opposed to those who love it and may want to make apologies for it. I totally agree. I hate horror and would never pay to go and see one. (I did once cos my mate was booking the tickets and for some reason booked Stigmata rather than American Beauty.) But that said, one of the best specs I've ever read was a horror script that was bloody scary even to just read it on the page.

For new writers this session was probably the best and most informative one I went to. So many scripts fail for silly, basic reasons and the more writers who cut that out, the more the overall quality of the slush pile rises, the better for everyone. But what's interesting is look at what the guys say is the priority of what they are looking for. Some emphasise character, some structure, some a strong authorial voice. But you don't get to choose your reader. How are you going to know which one you are going to get? How do you know that if your structure is really tight but your characters could do with work, that you'll get the reader who will empathise with that. Or what if you have something really interesting to say but haven't done so with clarity at the moment. Will you risk the reader being more interested in one than the other? The answer of course has to be no. And so - as obvious as it may seem - the overall answer to what are people looking for in a script, is that it is good. In. Every. Single. Area.

That's really, really hard. But that's what it takes. And if it was easy, we probably wouldn't need or want seminars like this one.

LSF 5: How do I sustain myself

2010-11-24T22:35:00.005Z

This was the shortest session I went to, still just over an hour though, and a tricky topic to cover. It was chaired by Ceri Meyrick and featured Deva Palmier, Phil O'Shea and Martin Gooch - and the panel decided that sustainability in this industry could mean creatively, financially and psychologically - and they would try to cover a little of each.

Deva decided not to chase the cash. Through the Guiding Lights scheme, Gurinda Chadha mentored her for a year, and she was faced with the cash question very strongly. She had meetings for the directors lab at the BBC and made it down to the last nine. They picked eight, and you guessed it, she was the one to miss out. It made her think about what she wanted to do and when she asked why she was the one to miss out, the answer was that although she had clearly done her homework, they knew she didn't really watch and love Eastenders. And she didn't. It wasn't for her and it saved her time. She could've done with the cash, but she went back to Gurinda and had a long chat with her about what she should be doing and how she should be spending her time. She'd been doing teaching but that was taking up a lot of her time. So her solution was to get an extension on her mortgage, upgraded her flat, and got in a flatmate who pays for everything. She does a little cash job at the ICA lab, answers the phone a bit, but most of the time writes, and it's understood that she is allowed to do that.

I liked Deva a lot. There is a passion and integrity about her. But when I later asked the panel if anyone had ever taken a job for the money, they all said of they had. Even Deva. She admitted that had she got onto the BBC programme to direct Eastenders, she definitely would've done it. And she has made some stuff where her heart wasn't in it. But now, right at this moment in time, she's not doing that. Now she's only doing what she passionately wants to do. It's right for her, now. Martin added that when he directs commercials of course he does not think they are works of art. But when you can get ten grand for the gig, which then pays for you to attend the whole Edinburgh fringe festival, then it's worth it.

Interestingly, Ceri picked up on this point. The biggest problem she comes against is writers who feel they should work on continuing drama but don't really love it or want to. They feel, and are often pushed by their agents, that they need a Doctors credit because then you'll get to do Eastenders and then you'll get to do Holby and then you're off and running. But if you don't love those shows it's a complete waste of time for the writer and Ceri. The power of 'no' is really important and you keep control of your creative career - and it gives you a creative boost if that's not what you want to do they you shouldn't be doing it.

This was, unsurprisingly, immediately pounced on by someone in the audience because as well as meaning this is turning down potentially a career sustaining amount of money, we all know that by and large, it's also the only way in. Ceri insisted it wasn't the only way in - which of course it isn't, not 100% - but it to most new writers it doesn't feel like that. Certainly not the writer in the audience who was invited into the BBC on the strength of her spec, that was tonally similar to an existing show at the time which she loved, and that this person at the BBC mentioned maybe putting her up for - but only after she's done a bit of Doctors, a bit of Eastenders, a bit of Holby etc, etc. Suddenly it would be about six years later before she would get a chance on the show that was the reason she was in the meeting in the first place. No system is perfect and of course giving new writers shots at existing high profile shows is never really going to happen. But I think it would be nice if - certain - development people recognised the enormous frustration this causes. That said, there are exceptions. Writers who have not wanted to write continuing drama and stuck to their guns, writing original stuff and have eventually made the breakthrough. Deva knew of one at the ICA lab and I can think of a few off the top of my head too. Not many though.

The flip side is that working on continuing drama gives you a massive learning curve, and the important flying hours (basically actual productions of your work on TV) to hone your writing. And to get a show of your own or higher profile shows, you need this. So again we have this tension of writers being told both that going for continuing drama if you don't love it is a waste of time, but actually it's the best learning experience you'll ever have. And as Ceri admitted, statistically it is the best way in - it's just not the only way.

Phil gave the sound advice to those starting out, who are passionate about being screenwriters, is that you make a list about what is really essential. So a roof over your head, food to eat, and if you have family they are looked after too. And after that you just keep writing. There is no point sleeping on the street because you've taken six months off to write a script you then haven't sold. You might hear those stories but they are so rare - and I would add, completely insane.

Phil plays safe. Experiences peers and colleagues of Phil's have had is that someone gets interested in your project, say off the back of a treatment. But they haven't got any money to buy it or develop it. So you decided to borrow money from the bank to give you the time to write the script, which you do. But when you take it back to them they say sorry, it's not quite what we expected or we're not interested now, or something similar in the meantime has come out. And now you have a massive overdraft to pay off. So be careful. Plenty of writers have day jobs. It's not the end of the world if you spend forty hours a week working somewhere. You've got the rest of the week to write. What Phil didn't specify - but it's there in the subtext - is that hang on, that just leaves evenings and weekends. Yep. That's the trade off. You can pretty much forget about a social life. And that's hard. I can tell you from experience that it's very hard. I see my wife because I live with her. But since I took a part time job just over a year ago, I rarely see my friends any more. I don't feel good about that and it's tough. So this thing of ours is not something to get into lightly. (Fortunately Jews have Shabbat, one of God's best creations - a day when we're not allowed to work and get to spend time with our family and friends. I seriously recommend it for everyone. Just pick a day, Saturday or Sunday are the obvious ones, when you don't even turn on your laptop. And no sneaky email checks on your phone. I'm sure you'll find it extrememly refreshing.)

If you do break in, that's great. But as Phil noted there are plenty of writers and directors who for whatever reason just had that one opportunity. Just check out IMDB for example. So don't rush to give up your day job. Get a few episodes under you belt first. Writers can go for a year without getting a paid gig - same as directors and actors etc. The difference and perhaps slight advantage we have is that we can and must still be writing our own projects in that time. But of course you also have to make sure your house doesn't get repossessed. Creatively, Phil always has a least ten projects on the go, all at different stages. So a couple of scripts doing the rounds, some treatments, working on new stuff etc. You have to send a lot of stuff out because producers don't come to your door.

Martin has wanted to be a filmmaker since he was five. He later set himself the target of writing a feature film script each year, which he has kept up and is now at thirteen. Some are good, some are bad, but he did accidentally manage to sell one to a guy he met in a pub that flew him out to Hollywood and bought his script. He actually loves the making of films and became a writer almost by accident - because no one was writing the short films he wanted to make. But he found that he loved it, and was amazed that so many writers, even on his MA hated it like it was tearing their soul apart. He thinks you've got to love it and look forward to it. He sets aside whole days when he writes and loves it. Above all, Martin thinks that working in this industry isn't really a job, it's a lifestyle. You wake up and you're thinking about your film. You go to dinner and you're thinking about your film. And so on. I agree with Martin, to an extent. But I think it's also really important to think about other stuff, important stuff, too. I'm not sure workaholicism is ever healthy, regardless of the profession. And just on the other point, there have of course been many tortured soul writers - so don't feel too bad if you're one of them!

Martin loves walking onto a set and just making stuff. He makes everything, commercials, music videos, any old crap, for money, and it's not all great but it's an incredible experience. Sustainability as a writer can mean having another discipline. He knows writers who are camera men, loaders, runners, and extras. Just being on set you learn tons - as he did watching Spielberg as an extra on Band of Brothers. And you are also making contacts, which is incredibly important.

Finally a couple of what not to do's. Firstly from Phil. Writers will see in the trades and on the web that the BBC or this company or so and so is looking for this. And they'll think great I'll write that. But realistically, by the time your script is going to be ready, that ship would've sailed. Don't worry about stuff like that. What he's always done is write what he wants to write and at some point or other you will find somewhere to place it. That may be from someone looking for something or competitions, like Phil did when he won one of the Film Council's 25 words or less pitch things a while ago. I would echo that. Any success I've had in comps has been with scripts that I've written quite some time beforehand. They were just scripts I wanted to write and then bunged into a competition.

And the last word to Martin - which basically breaks down like this: you only get one bite of the cherry. Don't send stuff out too early. It will only get read once and if they don't like it they won't read it again - no matter how brilliant the rewrite has made it. The script is now tarnished and you might have blown a really good opportunity with a great contact by just not being ready yet. And how do you know if it's ready yet? Get feedback. Lots of it. Deva once had a meeting with a key person at Film Four but Gurinda told her to cancel it - because her script simply wasn't ready. That can be hard to do. You might think it's ok, you'll pull it off in the meeting. Better to take it now and get my foot in the door whilst I have the chance. But you'll only end up then getting it slammed in your face if the script is not up to scratch.

Did the session cover how does one sustain themselves? I'm not sure. But as a topic that was probably the hardest one on offer. It was also the last session of the festival, so everyone was knackered. But I think it's a credit to the panel and the audience participation that meant there was still a great deal of interest and useful advice.

LSF 4: Writing Comedy

2010-11-21T18:19:00.005Z

This session was chaired by Paul Bassett Davies, and featured Dean Craig together with writing team, Andy Riley & Kevin Cecil and they took on the ambitious task of tackling this broad topic and trying to find some sort of universality to it.

It was felt that comedy has to come from a place of truth. There has to be an element of the familiar that people can recognise - but then a twist or a surprise, something the audience hasn't thought of. Because if they can see it coming, it probably won't be funny.

One possible secret of comedy success is re-incorporation, which came from Patrick Marber. This is where the real craft lies. You seed something early on and it pays off later in an unexpected way. Quite a good tip if you are stuck at your ending is to go back to the first twenty pages and see what else you have set up that you can then pay off. If you have an A plot, B plot and C plot - the C plot is often a running joke about an object. So look at your script and see what physical objects have been used, and think about how you can bring them back in a comedic way.

Dean, probably the most laid back person at the entire festival, wasn't convinced about rules and such. He mostly follows instinct. If it makes him laugh etc, etc... But he did agree that if things had an element of truth they are much more likely to be funny.

You have to believe in what you are writing. A crucial point is that comedy is often very character specific. For example when things happen to characters in a drama, thriller or even horror, the initial reactions at least will be very similar no matter what the character. At the beginning of Panic Room Jodie Foster could be anyone. But with comedy, something that happens to one character may not be that funny if it happens to another character. Think about what that particular character is going through and what is it about that character that makes this situation funny? This doesn't necessarily apply to sketch comedy, which is generally purely ideas led. But anything longer than that and it's well worth considering.

When Kevin and Andy work they brainstorm ideas, don't limit themselves, throw anything in etc. There will come a time when you have to censor, and reject things and rewrite. But it's always easier to rewrite than it is to come up with the initial ideas. Because in the first instance you have to get the work out. John Vorhaus noted in his book, The Comedy Toolbox, that writers should expect to see the 10% rule. In other words, when thinking of and pitching ideas, if you want to come up with ten good ones, you will probably need to have a hundred. And even then you'll find that when they have all been rejected you'll suddenly come up with something in the room that is the one they go for. This is staggering when you think about it. The amount of material, ideas, concepts that have to be generated. But this is what makes comedy so tough. Concept wise, drama for example can be okay. Some might find something interesting, others won't. But with comedy the reaction is immediate. You either laugh or you don't. And part of doing comedy is about putting yourself out there, going for something, and it may not catch everybody. The same scene in a movie for example may be people's favourite, or their worst.

When writing sitcoms, it's always a problem in every episode one in the first five minutes to establish the characters and get the story going. You see a lot of scripts where the characters come on and almost literally say to the view hello I am so and so, and tell a joke to illustrate their character. But five minutes in and nothing has actually happened in story terms.

It's also always handy to have a social structure. If you think about who your main character is, it's useful to have people above them and people below them in the pecking order. So you have people they can give orders to and people who hassle them. Even if it's a family scenario. Put your main character in the middle, who is often the most normal one and the one the audience can relate to (30th Rock, Seinfeld) and then surround them with more eccentric characters.

The session was then thrown open to questions from the audience and the first one was about swearing in scripts. This was particularly interesting because most script readers are put off by it, yet it is still very common to see a lot of it. The reason being it's just not done well enough. It's thrown around for impact, but of course the more you do something the less impact it has. And I've found, probably unsurprisingly, that the younger the writer, the more swearing there'll be. That's possibly cos younger people generally swear a lot more than older ones. You just have to ride the bus round where I live to notice that. And there is probably the influence of things like Skins and The Inbetweeners too. The consensus in the panel was that there is probably too much of it, but when it's done well it can make the dialogue pop. But it has to come from character and should probably be inventive. The obvious example is The Thick of It. However when you get the sense that the writer is just sticking in swear words instead of actually telling a joke, it just becomes bad and lazy screenwriting.

The next question was about structure, and whether comedy structure differed from say, drama? It specifically referred to feature films and the overriding opinion was that it essentially didn't. But something interesting did crop up in that there is often a danger that comedy films are less funny in their final act. In a three act structure, when you say what's that film about, it's normally about what happens in act one. So take The Hangover for example. It's a film about a stag party in Vegas with a few guys and they wake up with no recollection of what happened the night before and have lost the groom. And now they have to find him. So the end of act one is often a very funny moment and quite often the very first idea of the film. Once you get to the end of act two, and it's a crisis point for all the characters, it's very easy to slip into drama. And then in act three you're dramatically paying off the emotional threads you've set up at the start - and there tends to be less laughs. And what you have to make sure is that there isn't no laughs at all in act three. You need the heartfelt moments. But make sure the laughs are in there too.

Something that had been picked up from Robert Mckee was that comedy is possibly the only genre where you can get away with having a scene, or scenes, that don't further the plot - if they are funny enough. Richard Curtis often goes back over a script he's written and looks for the funniest scene and then just extends it. A great example of this is the press junket in Notting Hill. It doesn't advance the plot in any way shape or form but that sequence is one of the funniest in the movie. But a cautionary word too. This has to be used sparingly. By and large you absolutely have to keep the story moving forward. You can't string a bunch of funny scenes together that don't do this, and then defend them because they are funny. One or two maybe, but probably no more than that. And it can happen that you have a scene that you love, think is really funny, but doesn't help the story at that juncture. You've got two choices then. Cut it - or cheat a bit and find a way to make it integral and work for the film and story as a whole.

But one final comment. Try not to take the so-called rules too seriously. For example comedy does tend to be more dialogue heavy and that can work. Sometimes things work and no one knows why. And vice versa. Two great examples in a couple of the biggest films in the last year or so. The Hangover has no central character. Up is a film about an old guy with a house with loads of balloons, talking dogs, a kid and oh yeah, the first ten minutes are really sad. Can you imagine trying to pitch those to a studio?

In conclusion, I once heard Gary Lineker talking about the difference between strikers and midfielders. A midfielder can be brought into a club, plays okay, a few nice touches here, and couple of good passes there, etc, and the fans will think he's alright and give him a chance. But with a striker, even if his all round performance is good and better than the midfielder, he will be judged purely on his goal tally. I think so to with drama and comedy. A drama can have nice moments. It can do a bit of everything, make you laugh, cry, whatever. And like I said above, some people will like it and find it interesting, and others won't. Comedy will be judged and defined but how many people you make laugh and how often. How many comedic goals do you score? It's probably the hardest thing to do. Both on the football pitch and in a script. It's tough and it's risky. But very often, with high risk comes high reward.

LSF 3: Editing and the Script

2010-11-17T23:39:00.002Z

Not long before the festival I was speaking to last years Ustinov winner, Clare Tonkin, who works for an Australian broadcaster. She mentioned how access to the production side of things, especially being able to observe the editing suite, was a real insight that she could learn from and bring back to her own writing. So this session, given by Eddie Hamilton and Chris Jones, was an absolute must for me. And I think from an educational point of view, it was the one I got the most out of.

I know lots of writers, a few directors, and a fair few producers. But no editors. And Eddie was clearly a very smart and enthusiastic one. He began by talking about how he broke into the industry. He made student films but got turned down for three film schools. He ended up doing a job he hated and decided he had to give it up and really go for what he loved doing. And he discovered at a young age, messing around with videos etc, that the combination of the technology, the storytelling, and being able to spend hours working at it on your own, meant he really fell in love with editing film. So he got a job as a runner in Soho, asked the editors hundreds of questions, and taught himself to use Avid etc.

Eddie had read Chris's filmmaking book, discovered via his website that he was making a film, and asked whether they were looking for an editor. He lacked experience but had a great attitude and enthusiasm, and it was ultimately this that got him the job. After that he hustled for work, met Matthew Vaughan, which led to work on Mean Machines, Kick Ass and now the latest X-Men movie. Eddie admitted to working on films that haven't always been great (see Swept Away) but nevertheless was always able to learn something from the experience. And if you do good work, stay professional, and don't fall out with anyone, you can get recommendations and a leg up for the next job. And basically that is how the industry works.

Eddie has read tons of scripts. If it's for a job, and he knows the director well, he might read it quite early in the process. But he'll also read scripts from friends etc and approaches screenplays differently to writers or even directors. The first questions are who is the target audience? Who will pay money to see this? Because at the end of the day it's a business. And if you make films that no one wants to see and lose money, it's going to be harder to get the next project off the ground. Eddie trusts his instincts when it comes to script, how it's working, and how developed a project is. And you ask questions like how dense is it? How sharp is the dialogue? Is it clear who the main character is? And these are the same questions writers, readers and script editors should be asking.

But film is created in three stages - written, shot and edited. It's three steps where the film is re-invented and made. However one common question is why does a finished film often look so different from the finished script? And Eddie's answer was quite revealing. By the time the film reaches the edit suite, the script no longer matters in a way. Because all you've got to work with is what's been shot. And if for some reason things went differently on the shoot than expected (and that can be anything from the weather forcing an interior shoot rather than an exterior one, or an actor having a bad day, or co-stars lacking chemistry,) that's still all you've got to work with. What may have been on the page is gone. So you have to try and craft the best film possible from the material.

It's not the technology available that matters. For Eddie, all that matters is story and character. When he's looking at the material that's all he's thinking about. And if for example something hasn't quite worked in the shoot, an actor didn't deliver or whatever, then you may have to find a way to minimise the focus on that character. It can happen that whole characters get cut out of the finished movie. Sometimes a relationship isn't there in the material. Can you help this in the edit? If the answer is no, you may have to re-shoot scenes or shoot additional material.

By the same token, it's only fair to say that good actors and good performances sometimes means dialogue gets cut. For example working with Toni Collette, she's such a good actress, and there's so much going on with her, that she can convey something in one line instead of the half a dozen that were in the script. But writers shouldn't necessarily feel bad about that. The dialogue sometimes has to be written out like that for the reader, and then ultimately the actor, to understand the intention. But if this intention can then be conveyed in less dialogue, so much the better. (I would add a caveat to that, as a script reader, that writers shouldn't fall back on this as an excuse for writing reams and reams of long winded dialogue. It should still be as sharp as you can possibly make it. But just be aware that good actors can bring something extra to the table.)

Interestingly, and perhaps sadly, Eddie repeated what Tim Bevan said, that producers will often greenlight a movie too early because they need the production fee to survive. And I'll repeat what I said then. That I believe this is the single biggest reason movies fail in this country. I have no idea what, but we must do something to try and change this.

Eddie sees his job as holding the hand of the audience from the very first shot. What is the tone, character and story? Tone is so important because audiences want to know very quickly what story they are settling in to watch. How can I best elicit the emotional responses you want from the audience by choosing what shot you want and how you cut them together. (Music is also really important in this respect.) This also felt similar to what Bevan had said and keeping the audience and what you want them to feel at the forefront of your thinking is a lesson many writers still need to learn. And a lot of films don't work because the tone is not right or unclear.

There are many tales of films being completely re-conceived in the edit - most famously Annie Hall. But if the writer, director and editor are working well and functioning as a team, all anyone wants is to make the right choices to make the film as good as possible.

A couple of final comments from Chris to close. In the creative process everybody filters through their own life experience. When you ask for opinions some might say no way would anyone say or do that, whereas others will say that's exactly what I'd say or I know someone who has done that. I think writers have to trust their own voice and be true to their vision, as long as it's not at the expense of narrative logic and plausibility.

By the same token, when thinking visually, it's important to remember that human beings are meaning making machines. And when we see something on screen we can make it mean a huge amount in a second. But it's really hard to do that in a script. Because all you have available to do that are words. It's not exactly new but I don't think I've heard a better description of film as a visual medium than this. That is what, ultimately, it is all about. And it's the writers who are best at using their words, as economically as possible, to create the visual images in the director's mind, so that they find their way into the shoot, that means that when the material reaches the edit suite, what you want to achieve is still there.

BAFTA Screenwriters' Series

2010-11-13T20:20:00.002Z

This dropped into my inbox yesterday - and the fantastic lineup certainly looks worth checking out.

We asked six of the film industry’s leading screenwriters with credits including Atonement, The Devil wears Prada, Frost/Nixon, Slumdog Millionaire, and The Reader to give their opinion on the craft, the films they have written and their career so far.

The result is a series of exclusive videos, clips and profiles providing a fascinating insight into the discipline and culture of screenwriting. We are really pleased with the series and have been getting great feedback.

Hope you get a chance to take a look and that you find the series insightful!

LSF 2: 50 Ways Into The Industry

2010-11-11T13:42:00.004Z

The title of this session was a bit of a misnomer. Because although the panel gamely came up without 35 ideas on index cards, the session became more of a general discussion and we only actually went through a few of them. That didn't make it any less interesting though.

It began with the panel introducing themselves and talking a bit about how they broke into the industry, although it soon became clear that there is never usually one big break. More likely there are a couple of breaks at different stages, and that staying in the industry once you have got in is as much of a challenge, which is something I think resonates with a lot of people.

Moderator and Writer-Director Jonathan Newman took quite a common route. He made short films. Less common though is the fact that he has now turned not one, but two, into feature films soon to be released.

Consultant and talent scout Shirani Le Mercier took a different route, but one more common to those working in development or on the production side of things. She sent CVs, lots of CVs. About 150 she reckons to be anything, assistant, tea maker, whatever. And funnily enough she got 3 job offers - after 5 months of rejections. But once in she worked her way up from there, doing much the same thing to get to the jobs and positions she wanted to be in.

Back to the writing side of things and Stuart Hazeldine made shorts, wrote a spec (kind of like Die Hard on the London Underground,) worked as an extra and hustled as much as he could. And the hustling never stops. Even once you're in. Because it's like you're starting from scratch each time. (I think the entire panel concurred on this.) Even if you are at the top of your game, like Aaron Sorkin for example, he's still got to chase the next great project and battle it out with, I don't know, Steve Zaillian lets say. They don't rest of their laurels because people rarely come to you. They or their agents are busy hustling.

Screenwriter Marc Pye wrote and wrote and wrote. Whatever he wanted to. Short stories, TV specs, novels, features, shorts. And then guess what - he hustled. He barraged (politely, that's important,) a script editor on a soap until he eventually got a shot. And then he did the same thing to try and get on The Bill, pitching idea after idea, getting rejection and rejection, until he finally got a break. He stressed the importance of building up a body of work. You've got to have more than one script because you need to be able to answer the inevitable question - what else you got?

Also on the panel was Paul Trijbits. He spoke more about what screenwriters should be doing rather than his own career (but did mention how being invited to run the Film Council's Premier Fund was a fantastic opportunity and experience.) There was a bit of a debate about what the emphasis of the screenwriter should be. Most of the panel had talked about the importance of networking but Paul disagreed slightly. He affirmed that at the end of the day a good script (and to be fair it probably has to be better than just good) is your best tool. Networking, hustling, etc, shouldn't be at the expense of sitting at your computer and writing scripts. That was what producers and agents are for. But I think by and large at the end everyone had agreed. That for writers the priority has to be the writing. But in a working day you can spare an hour to make phone calls, send emails, etc. For my money I think there has to be some networking and contact making. Otherwise you can be the most prolific writer on the planet. It won't make a difference if you don't know anyone to send them too.

And when you do meet people it's important to have a good logline ready. A broad idea of what the film is about and the tone. You need to be able to distill it like this because if you can't no one else will be able to. Shirani suggested a good pitch contains genre, target audience and a 'this meets this' to put them in the right frame of mind. The consensus was that this could be quite dangerous though. You tend to get people just crossing the two most fashionable films of the moment but there is usually a uniqueness to them that you can't and probably don't want to mimic. My own opinion is that describing your project to be in the vain of something else is normally okay. It's a very economical way of getting the feel of your project over to someone. But use it with caution.

A couple of other points worth mentioning. It's so important not to send stuff out in haste. We've all done it. We make a new contact, we've got a script, and we just want to get it to them. But if it's not ready, they will notice. And you only get one shot. Jonathan told the story of how one of the Farrelly brothers (Peter I think) saw his short, called him up and was interested in turning it into a feature. Jonathan flew to LA and was sent in to pitch with Fox and Dreamworks. But in truth he had no idea at that stage how to turn it into a feature. They had no story. And the opportunity was lost. It was a chance with two massive studios that never came again (at least with that project.)

By the same token don't submit something and say in the covering letter that so and so thinks it's really good. Because it begs the obvious question - if this person or company like it so much, why didn't they pick it up?

As the session came to a close there was a bit of last 10 minute scramble to talk about some of the ways in the panel had come up with. These included soap Shadow Schemes (don't be precious about this. Even with Marc's soap track record nothing is guaranteed,) internships at a production company, working as a PA (this might be better for someone interested in producing or development, rather than writing,) and Stuart Hazeldine's idea of writing a spec sequel to an existing movie.

I have to be honest I'd heard people say this before, but never actually met anyone who had done it. Stuart wrote a sequel to Blade Runner, and wasn't worried about being sued - because he had no money anyway! It got him a lot of meetings and people still ask him whatever happened to it today. Even more significantly, having demonstrated he could write in that universe, he got a job adapting another Philip K Dick short story. (I notice on Stuart's wikipedia page that he wrote a sequel to Aliens 3 too - so it's obviously a tactic that appeals and works.)

I would say to also use this one with caution. It can be cool but it's limiting. This can be your passion project, or your comfort project. A bit of go to writing when you're burned out and can't write anything else. But it shouldn't take the place of coming up with your own, original scripts.

So for writers 50 Ways in at the end of the day boiled down to about two. Write the best screenplays you can - and then find the right people to get them too.

Good luck!

LSF 1: In Conversation with Tim Bevan and Michael Gubbins

2010-11-08T20:56:00.003Z

The London Screenwriters' Festival opened, appropriately, with Tim Bevan, the head of the most successful production company in the country.

The conversation took the form of a history of Working Title Films, which was very interesting, particularly for those looking to establish their own company in the industry in this country. But for the purposes of this blog entry, I've picked out the bits most relevant to screenwriting.

Bevan admitted that in the beginning, script development was quite incidental. They just had to get the next film made and were never allowing the development process to take as long as it needs to. An Indie is in the terrible position of having all their money in development, but your income is dependent on getting a film made, because that is where you get your fees from. And because getting the thing on becomes the be all and end all, you forget a little bit about the quality of the thing. (I actually believe this is the single biggest reason why movies in this country fail - which I think I got from Phil Parker, but can't recall for sure.)

Bevan came to the conclusion that you need capital. Because you have to spend money on developing a script and at the end of that process, be able to take a long hard look at it, and if it's not good enough, to chuck it in the bin. And an Indie doesn't have the luxury (and my guess is that 98% of the producers and companies in this country don't either.)

Bevan felt that there was a lack of ambition in British movies - partly because of money - but he realised that audiences wanted to be entertained. At Working Title they think about the audience from Day One. What's the genre? They made mistakes early on with films that fell in between. Now a marketing person sits in on development meetings. Ultimately they have to sell this. It shouldn't be based purely on that. Bevan doesn't believe that a marketing person should run a studio, but they should be in the room.

But the question in the first development meeting isn't a sales or commercial one, it's is there a good story here? The only thing Bevan expects to see in the first draft is - is there a decent story in here? What you want to see is a narrative running all the way through the script. And in the first draft the narrative is normally very up front. Script development is about getting the characters to carry that narrative. And so throughout the process the characters evolve and become more and more important.

Notting Hill is set up as an overtly commercial movie - but Billy Elliot isn't. But there is something in the middle of that movie about aspiration and emotion, and father and son relationship, that affects people all around the world. And Bevan believes this is the key. That what one is looking for is the emotional core, whatever the movie is; funny, serious, a Richard Curtis movie or United 93. It's the emotional core that appeals to audiences.

So the three questions Working Title asks is; are there characters, is there a story, is there emotion?

Bevan stated that he didn't think people went to the cinema to have their own lives reflected back at them. They go because they want to escape for a couple of hours. Maybe it's a serious movie. But all great cinema is slightly heightened. So if Notting Hill is two feet off the ground, most films are at least two or three inches off the ground.

When you go to the movies you either want to laugh or cry, be frightened or spectacularly wowed - and these are all emotional responses. (Which interestingly, also, in a loose way, correspond to comedy, drama, horror and thriller.) And if you don't get that emotional response it's a disappointment. If you don't have an emotional connection with something it seems to be a little bit pointless.

I've never understood the criticism Working Title gets. There was some talk about the Working Title 'formula' (which Bevan said if that means making 200 million dollars on a movie then it was a formula he was all for.) But there is a tendency to associate the company purely with sugary rom coms. It's true they had a run of films like Four Weddings, Notting Hill, Love Actually, About a Boy and Bridget Jones - all very successful movies that I can watch over and over again, especially when I feel unwell or it's bloody freezing out. What's wrong with that? But the company also provides a home for the eclectic cinema of the Coen brothers, as well as movies like Elizabeth, Frost/Nixon, The Interpreter and Atonement.

Of course not everything they make is great. But that's not what this is about. The sniping about a perceived philosophy of filmmaking I think comes more from a place of jealousy. But not listening to one of the most successful producers of all time surely comes from a place of stupidity.

Free Networking The 21st Century Screenplay: An Evening with Linda Aronson An Evening with Linda Aronson

2010-11-05T15:02:00.004Z

If you weren't able to make it to the London Screenwriters' Festival, or did but are having withdrawal symptoms, you might wanna check this out.

Thursday 11 November 2010 - 7.00 for 7.30pm

If you want to read about the things the other screenwriting books don't tell you, you couldn't do better than Linda Aronson, award-winning screenwriter, novelist and story editor, whose book Screenwriting Updated stormed into the best film schools and universities around the world.

Her latest book The 21st Century Screenplay brings even more insights.

Linda was one of the stars of last weeks London Screenwriting Festival so we're delighted that we've been able to get her for a very special Euroscript networking evening while she's on one of her rare visits to this country.

Linda Aronson is expert in the fundamentals and also highly advanced techniques, from the basic story sentence and character development to how to handle flashbacks and non-linear storytelling.

Her session at the LSF was one of the most popular and she teaches regularly around the world at top schools such as NYU and Berkeley.

If you didn't see her at the festival, now is your chance, and if you did, then now is your chance to hear even more.

She has also promised to have copies of her brand new book The 21st Century Screenplay which updates Screenwriting Updated and adds a great deal more.

Linda will be in conversation with award-winning writer-director Charles Harris.

Come and learn, and ask questions, drink, chat and mingle.

Booking essential. Our events are often highly popular - please arrive in good time to ensure you get in.

To book your free place click here now - you will need to give separate email addresses for any friends you'd like to bring along.

The Green Man
383 Euston Road
London NW1 3AU

Opposite Great Portland Street Station

Channel 4 Screenwriting Course 2011

2010-11-03T13:39:00.005Z

Still recovering from the London Screenwriters' Festival and chasing my tale a bit with following up on things from that and other commitments too. I write too slowly so I'm rubbish at taking notes (I was one of those kids who got extra time in exams - suckers) so I recorded all the sessions I went to instead on my handy little mp3 player. As I listen to them again over the coming days, on the train, bus, car, whatever, I'll jot down the juicy bits and report back.

In the meantime, in case you've not heard about this already, check out what looks like a really cool competition from Channel 4.

All the details can be found here.

Deadline is Friday week, the 12th, so don't hang about!

Going logo

2010-10-31T22:50:00.004Z

Coming 2011 (hopefully)

Biggest Screenwriters' Festival discount in town!

2010-10-28T11:51:00.005+01:00

It's hard to believe there are now less than 24 hours to go until The London Screenwriters' Festival. Unsurprisingly, according to Charles Harris in a Euroscript email sent out yesterday, tickets are almost sold out.

So if you are still undecided, I just wanted to remind you of the biggest ticket discount I know of going. Most are offering around £30-£40 off. But the glorious Janice Day can get you a whopping £75 off! Just go to buy tickets and enter janiceday as the discount code, and voila, a full three day pass for £224.

I honestly think under £75 per day for this festival is an unbelievable bargain. So unbelievable that if I was you I'd book fast before the organisers find out what Janice has done and put her in the naughty corner.

And if you do take advantage of this discount - please don't forget to find Janice and thank her. An obvious place to do this would be at her Networking session at 6pm on Friday in Room B

Whilst I think it's incredibly important for writers to support the festival, this isn't exactly a charitable venture. When we talk about supporting something, it often implies an altruistic decision. But this is business. Pure and simple. If you're a screenwriter, at whatever level, and you want to be taken seriously, you need to be part of the industry. This is one weekend out of 52 where you can choose to be at the heart of it. What you'll get back is far more than what you put in.

It's not cheap. There's no getting away from that. And these are tough times. But we have to choose how we spend our money. I don't think a ticket should take the place of rent/mortgage money or food on the table. Nor do I think it should replace money you have earmarked for charity giving. But other than that, what else is more important to you? Is that big weekend out boozing going to further your screenwriting career? Should you go to that restaurant or can you save that money by eating at home and putting it towards the cost of a ticket? You might want to look good at the festival, but is that new outfit a priority right now or can the money be used elsewhere? Holidays are important, but can it wait for future savings, and use the money now instead for the festival?

Are you just talking the talk or are you prepared to commit, and walk the walk down to Regents Park and meet everyone you will ever need to meet for a screenwriting career in one weekend?

I always hated the Cheltenham Festival. Why? Because I was jealous. I knew I'd never be able to go. For various reasons, (and it wasn't the money) as much as I wanted to, I would never be able to be a part of it.

So I for one was delighted by this new festival being in London. I know that makes it harder and more expensive for non-Londoners. But sorry. Film industry wise London is the LA of England. It just has to be here. And so for the first time I will be too! So come and say hi. I imagine I'll be the only one there wearing a yarmulke! And because of the Jewish Sabbath I will only be there Friday up until about 4pm ish and all day Sunday. But hey, it's something. It's being part of something. And that's better than nothing.

Which one do you want to be?

National Student Film Association Free Screenwriting Competition

2010-10-26T12:54:00.001+01:00

This dropped into my inbox today. As ever, one should always do their own checking.

National Student Film Association Announces Free Screenwriting Competition

Today the National Student Film Association (NSFA) invites all student film-makers to submit their short film scripts to the National Student Screenwriting Competition. The competition is run in partnership with the BFI and boasts a host of professional judges including BAFTA winner Asitha Ameresekere, the organisers of the London Screenwriters' Festival, and board members of Euroscript and Women in Film and Television.

The competition is aimed at UK students of all kinds who are looking for a career in film but have not yet had the chance to present their work to industry professionals. Not only does the competition offer fantastic prizes such as a mentoring meeting at BAFTA as well as BFI and IMAX vouchers, but students will also have the opportunity to get their scripts read by two members of the high calibre jury.

Competition judge Asitha Ameresekere commented, "This is a fantastic opportunity for students to expose their work to members of the industry and gain invaluable experience in the competitive screenwriting business. I am very excited to be part of the NSFA competition and look forward to supporting outstanding new talent."

The competition is hosted online at Circalit, an online platform for aspiring writers, where all the entries will be visible to the public, and talent scouts will be paying close attention to the winning writers.
Raoul Tawadey, CEO of Circalit, commented, "The NSFA are doing student film makers a great service by connecting young artists with industry professionals. Starting a career in film can be a difficult process and the gap between writing your first screenplay and seeing your work produced can be very daunting. I hope this competition and the work that the NSFA are doing will give students the opportunity to kick start a career in the film industry.”

Contact

Screenplay submissions can be up to five pages long and of any genre. The deadline is the 7th November 2010. For more information please visit, www.studentfilm.org.uk

Franzi Florack

franzi.florack@studentfilm.org.uk

www.studentfilm.org.uk
www.facebook.com/#!/NSFAUK
www.twitter.com/NSFAUK

About the NSFA

The National Student Film Association (NSFA) is the UK’s largest student organisation to promote student film across the country. Founded in the summer of 2009, the NSFA is a non-profit, democratically elected organisation which aims to aid the production and distribution of student films. The NSFA actively seeks to help student film makers in producing new films by promoting cooperation and collaboration at a national level and by working with student film events to improve the quality of talks and workshops they are able to offer. Once a year, the NSFA helps to organise Screentest, The National Student Film Festival, and gives out the National Student Film Awards.

Who wrote this stuff anyway?

2010-10-17T18:55:00.002+01:00

Read this article on Thorne, the new cop show on Sky One featuring David Morrissey that started last week.

Did you read it? Finished? Okay, did you notice anything strange?

No? Well, can you tell me the name of the writer or writers of this glossy new show?

Probably not if you just read the article. Because they are not mentioned anywhere. I had to go on IMDB to find out that Dudi Appleton and Jim Keeble have penned the scripts.

From the article one can discover that Morrissey optioned the novels from author Mark Billingham having read one whilst away on a shoot and finding out via the internet that Billingham wanted Morrissey to play his detective leading man. Then, director Stephen Hopkins got involved. Morrissey says "it was when Stephen came on board that I started to get really excited. It’s his vision. I tried to give him as much freedom as I could.”

Well that's great. Did Hopkins, no doubt a talented director, imagine what he was going to shoot out of thin air? Did Morrissey and his co-stars make up the plot and dialogue as they went along? At what point was the, you know, screenwriters hired and erm, what are those things called, screenplays maybe, written?

Let be unequivocally clear. I'm not having a go at Morrissey. I'm not having a go at Billingham. I'm not having a go at Hopkins. I'm not even having a go at Ed Cumming, the journalist who wrote the article. They are just operating within the pervading culture that we have allowed to develop. But it's a culture that is extremely disrespectful to the writer. We continually hear the script is everything. So why are the people who write them so often forgotten?

This is not a bang the drum blog post about how great screenwriters are or that writers are superior to other professionals in the industry. On the contrary, I always thought, and was always told, that film and TV were collaborative mediums. I like working with producers and have enjoyed spending time and learning from the few actors I have met so far. I don't know too many directors but I'm sure there is nothing more exciting as a screenwriter than working with a director to bring your words alive on screen. But between the producer and the director there is a little thing called the script, and somebody called the writer. And the fact remains that without a really good one of each, no one else is going to have a job. So let's not cut out the middle man, yeah?

It's hard to believe the London Screenwriters' Festival is now just a couple of weeks away. They have brought together an unbelievable list of speakers - a real who's who of the industry. And for those going I'm sure it will be a fantastic weekend. But if there's one thing I would like to hear emerging from the festival in the days and weeks following it, it's that there were real discussions about how to end the marginalisation of the writer (do movies really have to be described as A Film By.... enter director's name. It's not enough to say Directed By...??) and how to place the screenplay, the person who writes it, and most importantly of all, the joint, collaborative nature of getting a project from script to screen, at the forefront of the industry and how it presents itself to the outside world.

PS. I'm also not having a go at Thorne, the show, or anyone who worked on it. I've not seen it because I don't own Sky. I personally hope it's excellent because it's a British show after all!

London Screenwriters' Festival discount

2010-10-11T19:11:00.005+01:00

The London Screenwriters' Festival is shaping up to be an incredible event and of course I wholeheartedly recommend attending if you are able to do so.

Granted, it's not cheap. But these things never are. However these are tough times and with that in mind, festival affiliate, friend, author, screenwriter and all round nice lady, Janice Day is offering a special discount of £75 off the full price of £299.

Just click on Buy Tickets and enter janiceday as the discount code, and hey presto.

Do it. Do it now.

Brit Film #3: Slumdog Millionaire

2010-10-07T13:14:00.005+01:00

Hindsight's a wonderful thing. Especially in the movie business. And the inclusion of Slumdog Millionaire in this series looking at successful British films over the last couple of years is probably the most straightforward there will ever be. Made for $15 million, taking over $377 million at the box office and winning a whopping eight Oscars, including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay, makes it one of the most successful British films of all times. And despite being set in India, it most certainly is a British film. A British director, a British writer, a British leading man, and two British production companies ensure that. But when looked at objectively, this is also probably one of the most unlikeliest successes in British film industry history. In fact, the lack of confidence in the movie led to Warner Bros, the film's distributor, suggesting it go straight to DVD. It was only after Fox Searchlight bought 50% of Warner's interest and handled the US distribution that a cinema release was guaranteed. And goodness knows how much that cost Warner Bros. But in theory, you can understand their concerns.

The film has no discernible stars (although has now of course made Dev Patel one,) it's set in India, it has a non linear narrative, and - drum beat please - it has subtitles!! These are not readily identifiable ingredients for a box office smash. On the surface, it's this sort of thing that lends enormous weight to Goldman's famous "no one knows anything." But can we take a closer look at the marketing and the story to see how and why it resonated with such a large audience, and across so many countries.

Firstly, people who market movies are generally pretty smart. Sometimes even smarter than those who make them! And they took advantage of everything they could. They had a massively recognisable game show tie in with Who Wants to be a Millionaire to hook people. They created a big, happy, smiley poster, with "from the director of Trainspotting and the writer of The Full Monty" in big, bold letters. So immediately Slumdog has pedigree. Fans of those hugely successful films might give this a go. And the key buzz word all over the posters and TV ads was "feel good." It made no mention on whether the movie was a comedy, a drama, a thriller, a horror - all the usual genre choices used to sell a film - but instead the focus was clearly on the fact that this was a feel good movie. And in a time of recession and global economic meltdown, who doesn't want to see a movie about a poor kid trying to become a millionaire that is guaranteed to make you feel good? But many felt afterwards that this had been a bit misleading. That the dark content of sections of the story meant that it couldn't, and shouldn't, have been described as feel good. However whatever your feelings (and mine is that feel good is defined by the ending, and how you feel when coming out of the cinema, which was surely good) what is beyond dispute is that this description helped sell the film and put bums on seats.

However that trick, as it were, can only work to a certain extent. If the movie ultimately sucks, then the reviews and word of mouth will kill it anyway. But the movie delivered and it did so using another kind of trick. If I described a movie to you as boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back, what would you think it is? Surely, a romantic comedy - the genre with possibly the best longevity and most consistent success rate. And is that not the story of Slumdog Millionaire? Overlaying the seemingly complex flashback structure is a far more simple story of Jamal meets Latika, loses her, and finds her again - repeated three times reflecting the growing ages of the actors involved. The active question of any romantic comedy is will the boy and girl end up together, and how will they do so? So to with Slumdog. The active question of the story is not whether Jamal will become a millionaire or not. It's will he be able to be together with Latika and how will he overcome the odds to achieve this. The game show is just the method he uses to achieve this. He even says himself that he went on it because he knew she watched the show. He has no interest in money and I would suggest the film would've worked equally as well had he fluffed the final question, but still met her at the train station.

But no one knew they were watching a romantic comedy. But it's not a comedy I hear you say! This is true. It's tone is dramatic. Everything gained comes at a cost. It's win-lose the whole way through. This is exemplified by the win ending, which is only made possible by Jamal's brother's loss and sacrifice. But the structure is definitely that of a romantic comedy. And I think Slumdog Millionaire is a brilliant example of how superficially unattractive film projects can work, both commercially and critically, and that British filmmakers need not necessarily stick to these shores when looking for stories to tell.

Film competition from Duracell‏

2010-10-05T13:39:00.005+01:00

This dropped into my inbox today. As ever, one should always do their own checking.

Hi Jez,

I noticed recently in your blog you wrote about Film competitions and it was really interesting!

I thought I would let you know some information about our film competition going on here at Hill & Knowlton for our client Duracell and thought it might be of interest to you and your readers.

To celebrate the launch of new Duracell myGrid, the much anticipated pad offering wireless charging, myGrid is hosting a short film competition for would-be movie makers and film fanatics. Enter (for free!!) the mySequel competition and be in win a chance of winning prizes worth more than £15,000!

The challenge is to create the next instalment to ‘Entangled’
(www.youtube.com/user/officialduracelluk ). The short film, produced by Ridley Scott’s production company RSA Films ltd, is shot in the iconic b-movie style, parodies a world full of wires and features you as the lead character.

Entrants have four weeks to submit their own sequel ideas via a script which will be uploaded onto the microsite where submissions will be evaluated by a panel of judges. The competition will close at midnight on October 31st. The winner will see their mySequel idea go from script to screen with a £15,000 production day, courtesy of Duracell myGrid.

The website to direct students to is: www.mygridproductions.co.uk where it outlines all the essential information regarding entering the competition and timings, etc.

We do hope this will be of interest to you and do feel free to pop this on your website if you so wish! In the meantime if you require any additional information please do not hesitate to contact the team on mygridproductions@hillandknowlton.com / 0207 413 3208.

Many thanks,
Emma Gannon

Brit Film #2: An Education

2010-09-26T17:35:00.005+01:00

Once upon a time I was given a little known book called Fever Pitch. Unlike any football books at that time, it was not about the game or the players - it was about what it was like to be a fan. And not just any fan, but an Arsenal fan. Nick Horby's book, and subsequent movie, were for all of us, and as a result I have always had a special affinity for the author. His first two novels High Fidelity and About A Boy, were outstanding, and made impressive movie adaptations. Back in 2002 I did some work experience at Working Title Films and was allowed a sneak peak at a script co-written by him and Emma Thompson. But a screenwriting career has never taken off for one reason or another. So it was with great interest that I came upon An Education, which didn't immediately suggest it was obvious movie material. (Nick Hornby himself writes about the trials and tribulations of getting not just this film off the ground, but the film industry in general. It makes fascinating, if a little scary, readin g.)

I read the An Education script before I saw the movie, and thought it was beautifully crafted. Dave's script review (and my comments) can be read here. But what's interesting is that what works and what you can do on paper, is not necessarily the same on screen. For example, in the script, as I said in my comments, what really works is that David comes across as genuine and charming. You're a bit uncomfortable, but you get carried away with it just as Jenny does. On screen though, the image of David you have in your head is replaced by the very real 31 year old Peter Sarsgaard - and suddenly things are very uncomfortable indeed. It's harder to believe, despite the charisma and charm, how on earth Jenny's parents can let her swan around with this much older man. The fact that is based on Lynn Barber's memoirs (what on earth were her parents thinking!) is irrelevant. But in any event that shouldn't take anything away from the brilliant script and superb performances.

It's a fantastic character study. Jenny is by far and away the smartest person in the movie - but when the denouement comes and she realises she doesn't really know anything she needs to know to get by in this world, it's an incredible moment. By the same token, Alfred Molina as her father, Jack, is for the most part characterised in one way - ignorant, simple, a man who is very much what you see is what you get. And yet there is one scene which turns this on its head. Towards the end, he stands outside his broken hearted daughter's room and confesses he knows nothing about the world and has lived his life in fear. All her wanted for her was to not be like him. He wanted her to have an education - regardless of whether it came from Oxford or a man of the world like David. It's screenwriting of the highest order.

But why have a picked it for this series of analysing successful British films. Well it's pretty obvious isn't it. As with In the Loop it got an Oscar nomination. And not just one. But one for Best Picture, Best Actress and Best Screenplay. It's a classy movie and all those involved have had their reputations enhanced. And they also achieved the seemingly impossible. Despite being a drama (no one wants dramas... apparently) and a period piece (goodness me are they mad) according to internet figures it made over three times its budget. Not a hit, for sure. But actually more profitable than In the Loop. And hopefully, all this will make getting the next project off the ground for all those involved, that little bit easier.

And speaking of competitions...

2010-09-20T17:13:00.002+01:00

... this looks like a pretty juicy one - and from extremely respectable and established companies too.

Competition Caution

2010-09-19T13:06:00.006+01:00

There was an interesting blog on the Writers' Guild website the other day, generally speaking about script competitions, and more specifically about the ones run by Kaos Films.

What was particularly interesting is that it came after a reader of this blog had emailed me, during the period where the Kaos website was down and their emails were on the blink, to ask whether I'd heard anything about what was going on. I hadn't at that stage but we both did a little digging and then Kaos was suddenly up and running again with an apology and explanation as to what had happened.

In the comments section the subject of the somewhat AWOL Rise Summer Challenge was raised, as well some other interesting points that are worth checking out.

I should say clearly that as far as I'm aware, and as far as the general consensus seems to be, Kaos have always been true to their word, and although I don't know any of them personally, I don't have a bad word to say about them.

But the question of Script Competitions is certainly worth giving some thought. For example I know there are some that are dead against any of them. The theory being that if your script is good enough to win a competition, it's good enough to be picked up by a producer where you'll get a better deal anyway and not be locked into the competition company and rules.

The trouble is, it's increasingly hard to find people willing to read unsolicited scripts if you haven't got an agent, and when you're starting out, you're not going to have one. So competitions can provide both motivation, and an outlet for your work.

Is there a difference between competitions that charge an entry fee and those that don't? The fact is script competitions are a lot of work to run, never mind about what the prize on offer might be. So I don't think an entry fee is unreasonable. Three of the most established and respected, The Nicoll Fellowships, Blue Cat and Scriptapalooza, all require an entry fee. Then again, the biggest ones in this country, The BBC Writers' Academy and The Red Planet Prize, don't. The Sir Peter Ustinov Award also doesn't. There may be other stipulations, but that is a different issue. Kaos did require an entry fee, Rise didn't. But Kaos keep delivering films from their winning scripts, and Rise has disappeared without a trace.

So I think the most important thing for me is credibility. My own philosophy is that if I'm going to enter a competition with an entry fee, I decide first whether I can afford it! And then what is the track record? If it doesn't have one, if I haven't heard of any of the people involved, I will probably think twice. If it's free, then I might just bung it anyway cos what's to lose?

Unsurprisingly, my experiences with The International Emmys and Red Planet mean I am mostly in favour of script competitions. But it's definitely worth being cautious, especially with those who charge a fee.

Bit of promotion, and why not

2010-09-14T15:59:00.008+01:00

Dear Jez,

I hope you're well. I thought readers of your blog might be interested in hearing about a free feature screenplay competition at Circalit (http://www.circalit.com/) in partnership with the London Screenwriters’ Festival where the winner gets a £100 cash prize, a meeting with a top literary agent, and free tickets to the festival. I hope you will help us spread the word about this fantastic opportunity by posting about it on your blog. I’ve included a press release about the competition and the London Screenwriters’ Festival itself (see below) in case you are interested in writing about it.

Kind regards,

Hannah

UK Film Industry Bounces Back at the London Screenwriters’ Festival

This year London is set to host the biggest screenwriting event in Europe as The London Screenwriters Festival makes its debut in October. The festival boasts a host of world famous speakers including Tim Bevan, Co-Chairman of Working Title, and the BBC’s Head Drama Commissioner, Ben Stephenson, and will draw in hundreds of screenwriters from across the globe.

The festival comes at a time when the UK film industry has suffered a series of losses. The demise of the UK Film Council has overshadowed the collapse of the New Producers Alliance and the end of the Cheltenham Screenwriters’ Festival as it goes into receivership.

Tim Bevan, Chairman of the UKFC, commented, “Scriptwriters and producers (and those who work with them) need a festival like this to share experiences and make sure that British scripts and films can compete in the global market.”Dean Craig, screenwriter and director of DEATH AT A FUNERAL added, “I'm really excited to be a part of the London Screenwriters' Festival. It's vital that this resource exists for writers at any stage of their careers to develop their skills and contacts.... It's going to be like Cannes for writers, but without the sun and yachts.”These comments come amid concerns that changes in industry funding and the effects of the recession will make it harder for screenwriters to get spec scripts produced.

Creative director of the festival and Oscar shortlisted film director, Chris Jones, commented, ‘With the emergence of new film technologies and the growing importance of online distribution, the number of film makers embarking on new projects has risen sharply over the last few years. Film making is increasingly being democratized. At the same time, the institutions that once supported the creative industries are collapsing around us. That is why we decided to create the London Screenwriting Festival to provide the invaluable support that writers need to turn their project into a reality.

The London Screenwriters Festival is a vibrant, illuminating and forward thinking gathering of creative professionals.’The three day event is taking place at Regents College in Regents Park, October 29th-31st 2010 and offers writer a series of seminars, workshops and events on film related subjects, including the chance for writers to pitch their screenplays directly to agents and producers.

Literary agent Julian Friedman commented, ‘Screenwriting is very often an isolated profession and the one thing holding many writers back , particularly in the UK, is a lack of industry contacts. The London Screenwriters Festival is a chance for writers to fully immerse themselves in the industry alongside many peers, whether you are an A-list writer or relative beginner. In a deep recession we all need to work hard to build relationships and stay abreast of industry developments so that we can find leads and niches which are relevant to our individual talents. The London Screenwriters’ Festival is designed to do this in spades.’US born festival manager David Chamberlain adds, ‘We have been amazed at the support and help offered to writers by people at the top of the industry. With over 60 speakers in attendance, every single aspect of the screenwriting industry will be in discussion. From writing masterclasses to seminars on self-producing or pitching your screenplay, it’s truly fantastic to see so much advice and so many opportunities being offered to emerging writers.”

Tickets cost £299, with discounts available.

For more information or to request an interview contact:

Judy Goldberg

London Screenwriters Festival

PR@londonSWF.com

+44 (0)7850 122 370

http://www.londonscreenwritersfestival.com

Get an Agent with Circalit and the London Screenwriters’ Festival!

The London Screenwriters’ Festival have teamed up with Circalit to offer screenwriters a chance to get representation. Screenwriters are encouraged to enter the free competition at http://www.circalit.com/. The winning writer will meet with a top London agent, get £100 and free tickets to the London Screenwriters’ Festival! The competition will be judged by the executive team at the London Screenwriters’ Festival and is free to enter. The deadline for submissions is October 15th. Creative director of the festival and Oscar shortlisted film director Chris Jones commented, “We’re very excited about this competition with Circalit. Circalit’s unique style of competitions don’t just give writers the chance to win prizes, but also to share their work, gain valuable feedback and make industry connections. Circalit are doing the screenwriting community a great service with their free online social network and we’re very pleased to be able to do a competition with them.”

Hannah Oddie

Marketing Manager

Comedy, and a bit with a dog

2010-09-08T18:07:00.005+01:00

I went to see Tamara Drewe last night and a couple of interesting things happened (possible spoilers coming)

Firstly, the film is a comedy. Most of the people in the cinema were laughing consistently all the way through. But towards the end the film either veers into black comedy, or turns away from comedy all together and becomes a drama to deliver an emotional pay off - I'm not quite sure which. But during this sequence a man gets trampled to death by a stampeding herd of cows - and there was a fair bit of laughter scattered across the cinema, including from the lady sitting next to me. A few minutes later and a dog got shot - and the same lady was literally covering her eyes she could barely begin to look. How very British.

Second thing - I was in the loo afterwards and overheard a couple of gents talking.
Gent 1: So what did you think?
Gent 2: Was alright. Quite funny in parts
Gent 1: Yeah
Gent 2: Gave up caring half way through though
Gent 1: I know what you mean

Whether I agree or disagree is not the point. What occurred to me was that (A) had I been the writer and overheard that I probably would've thrown up in the toilet there and then - and (B) everyone is going to have an opinion about the work you produce. And you are never, ever going to please all of the people all of the time.

So commiserations to those who got a pass from Red Planet yesterday - it really doesn't neccessarily mean your work is no good. And of course congrats to those who made it through.

Tonight sees the onset of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. It was almost a year ago that I started work on Dough and I realise I haven't updated you in a while. Well the script is basically finished (as much as any script can be whilst it's not actually been shot and edited.) It took virtually the whole year to go from outline, to treatment to many drafts (not telling how many) to get to the final one. And now starts the fun and games of trying to package it, as they say, and actually make it.

But for me, whilst I'm still working closely with Viva Films during that process, it's time to properly start a new project. Because juggling Dough, my part time job, my reading work, and life, has meant that I haven't really written anything else for a year. (aside from some pitch documents, one pagers etc.) I know what I'm going to work on. And I'll will keep in mind the lessons learned from last night.

Keep the audience laughing, keep them caring - and whatever you do, don't shoot a dog.

Brit Film #1: In the Loop

2010-08-31T21:18:00.004+01:00

Whoa, was it really 3 months ago that I wrote this post, introducing a new strand analysing the recent upsurge in successful British films? That didn't quite take off did it. But better late than never, here is the first of what will (hopefully) be a series of blogs. Just to recap - the idea will be to look at the British films over the last 18 months or so that have been successful and of course to examine why they worked. Success in this industry is defined in so many ways. So for the purposes of this blog, it's my call really. But I will hopefully explain why I think it is so.

Admittedly, I'm starting rather gently with probably the easiest film to look at on this yet to be fully compiled list. In the Loop was probably the easiest film to make too. By that I don't mean the actual making of it per se; writing the script, raising the money, shooting it, etc - all of which are a continued nightmare of twists and turns seemingly no matter what the project. But because In the Loop is a movie spin off of an extremely successful TV show, The Thick of It, conceptually, everyone pretty much knew what they were getting. That's massively important and it's a leg up that cannot be underestimated. It's why book adaptations are so popular. It's why comic book adaptations are so popular. Not to mention video games and of course sequels of all of the above. Everyone lives in a state of fear of what will and won't work - in other words, what will and won't make money - so if it's 'worked' in one medium, it's that little safety net that helps studio bosses sleep at night.

So I doubt selling In the Loop was that hard. The problem would be, how do we make this British TV show travel? Because for a British film to be properly successful, domestic box office takings is never going to be enough. And of course here came the very savvy decision to not make a quaint British film about a leadership election or something like that - but to comment satirically on the single biggest defining thing of this century - the global war on terror. With America's invasion of Iraq extremely unpopular with both the young, i.e. the biggest cinema going audience, and the predominantly liberal left that makes up the majority of the film industry, this was a project that would hit the right notes here and abroad.

The film itself is kind of like the Malcolm Tucker show. He dominates the movie in a way he never did in the early TV series. Now, I don't know much about acting, but I did hear that shouting, whilst you'd think that would be hard, is actually a lot easier than a quiet, nuanced performance. Not to denigrate Peter Capaldi's tour de force in any way whatsoever, but on that basis the real star of the show is Tom Hollander's Simon Foster. We watch as character after character crumbles in the face of having to take a moral stand against something they don't believe in - and yet only Foster seems to feel bad about it. The movie is almost entirely dialogue driven (you can find a review of the script here) and most of us don't have the luxury of a brilliant TV series to act as a kind of prequel/pilot/something or other. So I'm not sure I recommend trying to mimic the style. But it's the content that helped this find an audience and resonated with people who saw it. On the one hand it's quintessentially British - and on the other hand it's zeitgeist enough for everyone around the world to get it. So whilst I realise it's a really general point, when thinking of the screenplays we write, there is definite value in making them reflective of the culture we know best - British. But at the same time, what is it, what's the one thing (or more than one thing) that will make it accessible to people abroad; for example a universal topic, theme, or character emotions?

So what makes this a success? It's pretty obvious isn't it. It got nominated for an Oscar. Best Adapted Screenplay to be precise - which is an interesting choice bearing in mind the 'adaptation' came from a TV series and much of the script is improvised. But nevertheless that nomination is a valuable industry stamp of success - and anyone who says otherwise may be being a little disingenuous - that opens many doors for those involved. According to Christine Langan, Head of BBC Films, In the Loop was made for £4 million. Internet figures suggest it only took around $7 million at the world wide box office. So by no means a commercial success. But tellingly, Armando Iannucci's next film has a budget of $20 million. A bigger budget is of course by no means a guarantor of success. Sometimes the studio interference you get because of it means it's quite the opposite. But one thing is for sure. You don't tend to get given more money if your previous movie has been deemed a failure.

A Meme: It All Started When... How I Got Into Screenwriting

2010-08-16T11:07:00.006+01:00

So I'm not quite sure how these meme things work, but Michelle tagged me to write a post on how I got into screenwriting. There wasn't really one moment as such, but this is how it came about:

I've always enjoyed writing stories. Always. Even at school, whilst lagging behind in those horrible maths workbooks etc, writing stories would regularly get me good marks. And although I didn't realise it then, I was probably writing fledgling screenplays. Because long, flowery prose never appealed to me. My stories had short, quick descriptions and lots of dialogue!

When I went to Uni I studied English Literature, and it was there that I started to think seriously about Story; how stories work, how they are constructed, etc. At this point I was still hedging my bets between journalism and screenwriting - so I did a Post Grad Diploma at Birkbeck College where I could take modules in both. I quickly discovered journalism wasn't for me. When told that if a couple have just lost their child in a road accident and you have to be able to knock on their door and get the story, I knew I was in the wrong classroom. I also realised I didn't want to tell other people's stories, which is basically what journalism is (kind of.) I wanted to tell my own. Moreover, I absolutely loved the screenwriting modules. What I was writing was absolute garbage - but the form seemed to come naturally. I can't remember when exactly but at some point I bought Final Draft and still use that same one today.

So it was more gradual evolution than moment of inspiration. Like I've mentioned previously I went on to do an MA Screenwriting and had a brilliant time. I was sure I'd made the right choice and there was nothing else I wanted to do. And there still isn't.

I think most of the bloggers I know have already done this - except one... Yes that's right, David Melkevik I am tagging you! And I have no idea how. Oh and whilst I'm throwing this tagging lark around, lets throw Lisa into the mix too.