SWF09 In Brief(ish)

I went to some really interesting sessions at the SWF, outlined for you below. Here are my immediate thoughts on the whole thing:

Women in film MUST be included next year. I was surprised and pleased to see loads more women than I expected and there was a consensus this needs attention next year. This made most obvious at the Son of The Pitch special when the fact there was only 1 woman out of 10 pitching was noted. Unfortunately none of the speakers from the floor complaining about it put the case particularly well I thought and I was unsure that was really the time for it. We need a proper panel, with various female filmmakers, writers and script editors, all dedicated to the idea of representation of women in film.

Speakers disappear in a puff of smoke. Despite the SWF selling itself to the writing public as an "easy access" to producers, agents and various other companies, these people's disappearances to the green room in-between sessions was obvious. One has to ask why there is a green room: is it because the producers et al fear getting mobbed? If so, I think they're imagining the average screenwriter is more "in your face" than I do - when I've seen speakers after sessions, both here and at other places, I've always been amazed by how much of a wide berth writers give them.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I heard more than once complaints about people "putting it about", especially one of the speakers that DID make himself available to writers constantly for the whole four days (WTF?!! That's great, surely??) - and I heard complaints not enough people were networking either. This is quite patently ridiculous. You're a writer, you have to hustle. End of. I've heard stories from more experienced writers saying they "tag team" and requesting cards politely as soon as they see people - if that's "annoying" or "obnoxious", then we as screenwriters have to ask ourselves where we fit in if we are deemed to be a nuisance just by trying to make contact with people and companies. On the other point then, as I've always said: it's not just about the actual script, it's about you too. That script's not gonna sell itself!

Now, the sessions...

------------------------------------------------------------
THE CALL TO ADVENTURE - Chris Jones

An inspiring talk from filmmaker Chris Jones, whose short film Gone Fishing was *nearly* Oscar nominated this year. He made the very good point there's no excuse as "no money"; there's money EVERYWHERE. You want to make a film? Get out there and do it, the money will come. These are brave new times, we have the technology to make a cinematic-quality feature, it's all about WANTING IT. In these times then, it's all about DISTRIBUTION - and "it's never been easier to get out there and produce something we can exhibit on a global platform".

HOLLYWOOD OR BUST - Doug Chamberlin

A very illuminating insight into Hollywood and its many myths, including "No one knows anything" (apparently not true in Hollywood, instead "reality is perception": it's like a giant high school - who are the popular kids?); "everyone hires their friends" (apparently majority know no one when they start out and *anyone* can break in, it's all about GUERRILLA MARKETING and getting someone to champion your work) and "everyone is crazy" (semi-true, it's "real world logic" vs. ""Hollywood logic"). Simplest and most important rule: DON'T QUIT. If you quit, you'll never break in. End of. Go for what you want.

MAKING A LIVING AS A WRITER - Janice Day

What is standing in the way of you being a writer? More to writing than talent - it's all about DESIRE. If you want to be successful, you WILL be. Are you afraid of failure - or afraid of SUCCESS? Are you sabotaging yourself? Positive thinking is key. Set your goals - make them concrete. What are the steps to achieving those goals? You have to be like the Duracell Bunny, facing down those rejections and getting on with it: Janice's book was rejected by over forty publishers. Plan your time well: Janice spends 60% of her time on her most lucrative projects; 25% of the next lucrative and 15% of her time on her "dream". Manage your financial situation properly - to do this you have to know what it IS. Don't stick your head in the sand.

THE SCREENWRITER AS DIPLOMAT - Simon Beaufoy (In conversation with Peter Bloore)

A really interesting look at one of Britain's high profile screenwriters: Beaufoy had the worst time of his life after The Full Monty for example, being sued left, right and centre by male strippers! After that there were two feature disasters, Blow Dry and The Waterhorse, which apparently taught him to approach his career differently. He says to remember producers and directors are powerful people with powerful opinions - they're not necessarily STUPID people, even if we are outraged at the notes we get and the changes we get asked to make. He used to be bitter about the development process; now he realises it's just a queue. Never say a straight "no" to suggestions you get - ask for more time to think about it. The CORE of the story is what needs protecting - "everything else is up for grabs". He had some interesting insights on DIY Filmmaking too: "budget constraints focus the mind". apparently he made a super low budget film where he was the cook as well as writer! DIY filmmaking EMPOWERS the screenwriter (I heartily agree). If you want your idea on film, JUST DO IT.

MORE OF 4 - Tessa Ross with Kevin Loader

I unfortunately arrived late, but some great behind-the-scene insights from Tessa Ross. Remember the networks are NOT a bank but part of the creative team. Slumdog Millionaire gave C4 a very good reputation - without it, they might be in a very different position. Whilst they want more success like this, they don't want Slumdog copies: C4 is about talent, risk, writing. She made the very good point the British public don't like paying for drama at the cinema because we get so much quality drama on television. C4, BBC et al also have to compete with other English Language channels like those in America. What C4 looks for: scripts that are resonant, contemporary, driven by the writer.

SCRIPT ASSESSMENT FOR PRODUCERS - Esther Wouda

A look at how people might read scripts and/or what they might expect of them. An inexact science - so much depends on emotional response - Esther nevertheless does her best to pin down some common elements, including the mnemonic "M.O.U.V.E" - "meaning, originality, universality, verisimilitude (zeitgeist/feeling of time), emotion."

WRITE IT, SELL IT, MAKE IT - Panel Discussion

Another look at "getting out there" DIY Filmmaking-wise, which certainly appears to be the "thing of the moment". Some really interesting thoughts, including Slingshot's Arvind Ethan David's thoughts on Sugarhouse: "If we HADN'T had a theatrical release, we might have made some money on this film." Also under the microscope: no budget Zombie flick Colin, Gone Fishing, the SW Screen iFeatures initiative and The Exam. Food for thought: "what is my strategic commercial objective?" And "Does my budget make sense?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BTW, I went to more sessions than this - but the things I learnt will form the basis of some other posts with my own thoughts on the matter too in the coming weeks.

SLASH Shoot

Whoa. Think I may have died somewhere in the last 36 hours and no one has bothered to inform my body as I type this, Zombie-like. Had hoped for a 2am or 3am end to the shoot this morning - we actually left the site at 7am. Basically, the Halloween SPIRITS FROM SATAN cobbled us, again and again: I've never known such a plethora of bad luck in such a short space of time:

1) A broken generator culminating in a mad dash back to my house on the off-chance one of our neighbours had one - WHICH HE DID. (God Bless ya, Tony)

2) A forgotten kettle

3) A single wrong turn that made us go approximately twenty miles out of our way

4) A torrential downpour

5) FIREWORKS!!! Yes that's right - November the 5th is fireworks night EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE (or at least the UK), but not in The New Forest apparently

But hey ho, these things are sent to try us and we're not dead yet (allegedly). It certainly means I learnt about two years' worth of producer stuff in just a few hours 'cos NO WAY I am ever gonna let that sorta thing happen ever again (though having said that, I'll prevent all that and something else will EXPLODE UP instead, like a rat out a drainpipe -- did *anyone* tell me filmmaking was like this?? Oh they did?! DAMMIT).

Many thanks to an awesome team who took it all in their stride: our two actors Lucy Laing and David Black; DoP David Beaumont; stunt coordinator Elaine Ford; runners Eve and David (seen above stepping in as the serial killer); sound guy Udit (You were brought on to the project so last minute I never found out your second name!); makeup artist Jessica Stonechild and of course the director Schuman. Hats off to ya.

Want to view photos of the location and the shoot? Here you go.

Screenwriters' Festival 2009

"Is Jared coming? Where is he?"

These words have so far been frequently uttered, up to 100 times a day in the last three days... Factoid. But then I guess I should have known taking a fella with me who is allergic to ever turning up on time would be an issue. Luckily for me and the lovely Elinor, we have no qualms about leaving the bugger to fend for himself (rather in the same way we've both abandoned our children to fortune this week). Jared then turns up, out of the crowd, eyes wild with panic and booze-fuelled paranoia: "Where the hell did you go?? Didn't you know I'd be in the bar???" He's had a hangover every single morning we've been here! It's been rather fun in a perversely sadistic way, watching him over breakfast: he's been more and more grey in colour each day, shuffling food about on his plate before going off in search of the hair of the dog. FOR SHAME.

Observations so far: Cheltenham Ladies College looks like Hogwarts. Everyone started off saying things like "Walk with me" and "let's do lunch" and even, "But how do we monetize that?" as a joke and now everyone appears to be saying it for real. The SWF volunteers are awesome and know where everything is, even before you know you want to go there. Jason Arnopp appears to float on air in a Zen-like way, fluttering amongst everyone like a bird. Piers Beckley doesn't look like his blog picture and Phill Barron does. Julian Friedmann appears omnipresent, a bit like Jesus or Cate Blanchett. Oh and absolutely everybody appears to have an opinion on my sparkly eye shadow: 99% thumbs up, though one lady in the toilets asked me if I was a bit old for glitter. Nice!

I have been unable to rein in my uncool on two occasions - I GUSHED at one of my fave Corrie writers Damon Rochefort and randomly grabbed the awesome Olivia Hetreed as she walking past and told her even more randomly I'd read one of her scripts before running off again. *Le sigh*. Still I'm normally *ice cold super cool*(!), so childish enthusiasm has to surface every now and again >ahem<.

Got some fantastic notes for you all from some very good sessions and some more obvious tidbits too which never hurts to remind ourselves of. Not writing them now, 'cos we're off to the Rocliffe Forum reading, followed by yet more networking in The Queens Hotel. Tomorrow I have some producer speed dating, which just between you and me I'm DEAD nervous about, especially as all my friends with me have done it already. Apparently it's fine. I know that of course, but blarg -- scary. You know how it goes.

Oh is that the time?? Gotta dash... Speak soon my lovelies, wish you were here, let's do lunch. MWAH.

I iz not here...

Hi, I'm not here. Or rather, I am here but I won't be blogging for the next week 'cos I'm at The Screenwriters' Festival and then, next saturday I will be filming Slash. Who the hell decided THAT was a good idea? Slave driving producer, that's who... Oh, right: me. Well, come on: it's a horror film and it's HALLOWEEN next saturday. How awesome is that? Well it seemed awesome six weeks ago when I decided, now I'm wondering how the hell I'm gonna shove everything into the next week. Hey ho. Whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger, etc etc. I hope.

So it's gonna be radio silence from me for at least a week, but despair not: if you need your daily dose of rambling from yours truly, I can guarantee I will turn up on Twitter or Facebook during this time. Links below.

If you're at the Screenwriters' Fest too - come and say hello!!! Follow the sound of swearing and general interrogation of everyone and you're bound to find me. Alternatively, look for a brunette who's usually in purple or pink, a loooong black cardi and flared jeans who looks as if she's stepped out of a time warp circa 1977: that's me.

See you all soon!!!

Me on Twitter

Me on Facebook

Let This Be A Lesson To You, Children ; )

I hear all the time from writers wails of confusion and irritation about how certain writers do well when they're yet to be discovered. "But they're so mediocre!" Said aspiring writers will say on message boards, forums and social networking sites. "If someone just took a chance on me, I'd do it so much better!!!"

Here's what I say: yeah right.

Check out John and Edward from the X Factor. Those guys SUCK at singing, but they're very entertaining. Both weeks the competition has run so far, much more talented singers have been voted off, yet those Irish twins are still there - despite repeated booing from the X Factor audience. I doubt they'll win, but I'm certainly not ruling it out altogether.

These guys have become the poster boys for what this competition is really about, what it's named for: X FACTOR. Not the Singing Factor. Not Dance Factor. Not Looking Really Cool Factor. End of the day, if you are rightly packaged - double trouble! How handy, not to mention memorable - it can work for you. You don't actually need that much talent. You just need to be in the right place at the right time.

And this can work for screenwriters too. Think about it: everyone goes on about talent, but what this means is so different to each person you talk to. It's unquantifiable. I've been called talented and I've been called a loser. We all have; we all will be again.

But PACKAGING - there's something that IS quantifiable. Being professional, knowing what you're talking about, pitching well, being polite, pleasant, someone to remember - we can ALL do that. But most of us don't. Most of us let self doubt crucify us - or believe erroneously the story we've dreamt up will do all the talking. IT WON'T. Preparation is key; remembering how you APPEAR is key. Sure you'll cock some stuff up and come across as a weirdo; learn from it, move on to the next one.

Basically it all comes down to this:

You are everything you have. So use it wisely.

Character Role Functions # 2: Movie Heroines - Who Gets Your Vote?

SPOILERS GALORE I often post here, there and everywhere about the veritable lack of decent female characters in movies and specs generally. So when my delightful stalker Jazz Juice emailed me this week and demanded to know who gets my vote as the "near perfect" movie heroine, I had no hesitation.... And you'd be surprised. It's not Ripley or any of her many imitators. It's not anyone played by Judy Dench, Maggie Smith or Meryl Streep, either. In fact, she's an oft-overlooked genre movie heroine...

... It's Julianne Moore as Sarah in Jurassic Park: The Lost World. Whilst far from a perfect film (how the hell DID that T-Rex kill everyone onboard the boat FFS??), I do actually think she's as close to a "real woman" we're gonna get out of Hollywood, especially in a genre film.

*I know, I know* -- WTF??? So let's consider the evidence:

She doesn't need a man - yet is all woman. Sarah goes to the island alone ahead of the rest of the party, so she clearly has balls of steel: there are BIG MONSTERS there, but she doesn't let that put her off. Refreshingly then, she doesn't act like a man as well. Despite putting up with no crap from the men, she has a maternal side, noted most when interacting with Kelly (Ian Malcolm's stowaway daughter) and is also a good girlfriend: whilst she chastises Malcolm for his belief she can't look after herself, she is also understanding based on his previous experience - and female enough to turn it ALL back on him: "If you wanted to rescue me, why didn't you rescue me from that charity dinner three weeks ago when you said you would? Or that dinner with your parents you didn't show up for?"

She draws on her predecessor, but doesn't mirror her. Ellie is Jurassic Park was not a bad heroine, but wasn't really involved enough in the main body of the action: IMHO, Laura Dern did what she could in a limited role, having only one real set piece to herself - the velociraptor in the electricity station - which was over very quickly and rather conveniently. In comparison, whilst Sarah shares some of Ellie's characteristics (her independence the most obvious), all manner of HELL is thrown at her: this enables us to look deeper INTO her character than Ellie's, since what Sarah DOES about it reveals what she is *really like*, a classic example of the screenwriting adage "characters are not what they say, but what they do".

She doesn't go to the island because she's stupid. Sarah takes a calculated risk, not a stupid one. She's experienced in her field and knows full well the island is dangerous, which is why she is so careful not to disturb anything - and it's worth remembering that UNTIL the men get there, she gets by completely undetected by the dinosaurs. In fact, had the mercenaries not landed there at all, she may well have made her target of "five or six days" to document the animals. In fact, the only stupid risk she takes is photographing the baby dinosaur up close -- which only goes wrong because she borrowed a camera from one of the men who didn't tell her it was almost out of film. As she says to Ian, "I've been working around predators since I was twenty years old: lions, hyenas... You."

She doesn't lose her head, even in mortal danger. There are a number of occasions in which Sarah's life is threatened throughout the movie - quite possibly more than anyone else, in fact. Yet despite this continual run of extreme bad luck, she never bewails her misfortune or does something *plain dumb* that marks her out as deserving to die like so many movie heroines (falling over and/or screaming a classic example). So whether she's being sniffed by a tyrannosaur (and having to protect a child at the same time), being chased by it or landing on a sheet of glass above a terrifying drop, or a velociraptor jumping on her back, she never once freaks out. This is in comparison to many of the men: Ian Malcolm stands by and watches, horrified, as the T-Rex goes in the tent and again when said velociraptor jumps on Sarah; another man FALLS OVER and is squished by the giant foot and of course most of the male hunting party run into the long grass and get picked off too.

She doesn't scream. I am so bored of movie heroines screaming in genre movies: there's a big monster, would you really waste time and breath screaming about it? Or would you simply leg it? Gotta be the latter. The only time Sarah even utters anything vaguely *like* a scream is when the velociraptor JUMPS on her back and I would categorise it more as a "yell of surprise", which is often involuntary. Again, much of the hunting party scream (even before they're eaten), despite being big butch men.

She uses her wits to get herself out of trouble. Women are not as strong as men: fact. That's why I get so pissed off seeing all these hotties kicking ass, there's no truth there for me - all we're doing is assigning traditionally "male" characteristics to women and whilst some women *are* as strong or stronger than *some* men, I think hottie-ass-kicking does little to further understanding of women as a whole. In comparison then, Sarah only faces danger down WHEN SHE ABSOLUTELY HAS TO, as anyone sensible (not just women) WOULD do. So rather than take on a T-Rex with the equivalent of Ripley's robot body armour in Aliens, Sarah mostly runs for her life - and Kelly's too, often hand in hand. I can get behind that; it's exactly what I would do, especially with a child in tow. She also relies on her own animal instincts, so it's a nice contrast in the barn when she and Kelly start digging for safety - as the velociraptors attempt to dig their way IN.

And perhaps most importantly:

She rescues herself, but accepts help when it is offered. I get really annoyed when I hear men say to women: "You're so independent, which is why I didn't help" and also when women say they DON'T want help EVER because they think to accept help from a man shows weakness. Just because a woman is independent does not mean she will not appreciate your help; she will always flock to your side when you need her (or should do!). Similarly, accepting help girls DOES NOT make you weak. This is shown up under the microscope here, because if Sarah can rescue herself - like in the barn - she will; if she can't (like in the truck over the edge of the cliff), she will accept a man's help gladly. Similarly, she will gladly take a distraction, like when Ian lures the velociraptors to the car, when she and Kelly escape into the barn. Why? Because she WOULD do the same for him.

So... What Movie Heroine does it for you - and why?

A Tale of Two Readers

The delightful David Chamberlain has allowed me to indulge my John August fantasy by asking, "Do you think there is any value in sending a script to TWO readers at once? Or… Using a reader, re-write, then use a different reader?"

As with anything in this scriptwriting malarkey, I think it's principally down to the writer. I frequently use many readers at the same time on the same draft, because I'm a big fan of the Power of Three method. The way I see it, one reader might freak you out with a suggestion or observation (particularly story or structure-wise) two or even three others might NOT make - so what was a concern suddenly pales into insignificance.

A great example of this concerned a thriller spec I was polishing recently: I sent to four readers, all at the same time. One got back to me immediately with a damning report: he thought the story didn't work, he thought the characters weren't empathetic enough, the works - and he justified his reasoning well. But THREE other readers gave the story and characters the thumbs up. Suddenly I don't need to freak anymore: maybe he just DIDN'T LIKE the story or characters. Readers have their own opinions too (and rightly so). We all forget readers might not *like* a script, just like they might not *like* a movie, no matter how good it is and/or whether other people like it.

But there's also the point it can depend on the draft and where it is on the "rewrite scale". Personally, I don't tend to send very early drafts to multiple readers. I tend to send to one, trusted reader who can help me iron out the obvious stuff first - the lost opportunities in the plot, contradictory characterisation, dodgy dialogue, etc. We know, deep down, what our early drafts' problems are - but we're too close to the work, so we need someone to gently shove us in the right direction; I'm lucky in that I have several friends who I can rely on to help with this though. After this stage, I then start paying readers (and I DO get paid-for reads) for the more polished drafts, which I then compare and contrast with others' viewpoints on Po3.

So really: I'm afraid it just depends on your POV. I have Bang2writers who like to send work to me from the very first draft; others like to get Po3 and other peer feedback before paying someone like me to give the draft a going over. Similarly I know others who do the same as I do.

What do you do?