The Scream trilogy turned the slasher/horror genre on its ear by being a slasher movie that was aware of how stupid everyone sounded in slasher films. Aside from reciting the rules, etc. it had a line that really stuck out to me, said by the killer to Randy (Jamie Kennedy), "Never say "who's there?" Don't you watch scary movies? It's a death wish. You might as well come out to investigate a strange noise or something."
In the Pre-Scream days the slasher genre had pretty formulaic dialogue. Before the killing started everyone would have typical vapid teenager dialogue that really didn't reveal anything about their characters or go anywhere, then, once the killing started it would degrade into a series of "No!" "Ahhh!" "Please don't!" and "Die you son of a bitch!" or very close facsimile. Nobody was allowed to know what was really happening until it was too late, they never ran away correctly and frankly, you were kind of glad to see them go. The Post-Scream environment brings about an entirely different type of slasher film. Of course pickings have been slim since then but it added the idea that characters could fight back and defend themselves for the whole movie (not just the end), can run away and stay away, can get the police involved early and can be fully aware of what has happened, what is happening, and what needs to be done. There are even adults involved!
Scream had characters with back stories, complex interpersonal relationships, changing relationships, moods, intelligence, ingenuity and semi-rational behavior. No longer was a character subject to summary execution, they had a fighting chance! Of course most of the cast got killed off anyway simply because it's cheaper to higher different people in the sequel, but hey, they had a fighting chance. Scream also introduced a vulnerable killer but of course that's been addressed already.
The slasher movie today, in my opinion, needs a healthy mix of the pre and post Scream dialogue conventions. Characters shouldn't be blissfully unaware that something is wrong while they hump things but they also shouldn't ban together with Uzis to take out the killer. There has to be a happy medium in there between the two. One has to be aware that each slasher franchise does what it does and does it right, it's up to the writer of a new film (such as myself) to find the true voice of the characters, to give them their personality.
Dimensionality has been discussed previously so we can focus primarily on what the characters are talking about. Normally in a horror film it's sex, sex related things, bad jokes, juvenile pranks... basically anything that goes in one ear and out the other. There are no profound discussions in horror films simply because you can't kill a character that an audience perceives as intelligent as them (or god forbid more intelligent) because in that situation, they would know EXACTLY what to do. So it becomes almost commonplace that any character that has a well developed personality can't die. Scream of course, once again, threw this out the window with the death of Randy and the rest of the crew (in the first film anyway), but I'm speaking in general terms.
So, it has become my own personal mission to avoid the pitfalls of generic horror movie dialogue. I'm not going to have characters investigate anything, they aren't going to be pretty faces with empty heads nor are they going to go look for anyone else. Of course now that I've gotten rid of every conventional thing for them to talk about they are going to have actual conversations. They're not going to discuss existentialism in Bolshevik Russia or anything, but they can't simply talk about screwing either. Some sort of happy medium... which is going to be the hard part of the story. My treatment is finished and the story is perfectly worked out, now I have to start the actual writing and for the first time consider what these characters are going to say.
That's what first drafts are for though, and there's always the mainstay of reading a line out loud to see if it sounds like something a person would say. I also have to watch out for all the characters sounding the same. They're all an extension of myself in some way, it's just a matter or having them draw from different things to make them truly unique. Then again I'm going to be killing them off after a half hour... and does anyone REALLY care what happens to them? I want them to, as I've mentioned in the past. All of my blog entries regarding this topic have been building up to this as I am now starting the first draft of the screenplay.
Of course now that I've covered all the aspects of the slasher film (well, most of them. Some. I think) I'll have to think of something new to talk about next week. I'm sure I can come up with something Slasher related though. See you all then.
Showing posts with label creativity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label creativity. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Ending the Madness: Chair Jumper or Warm and Fuzzy?
I've finished my outline and as I've been plodding along through the treatment I've been giving some thought to the ending. The slasher movie and of course the horror genre as a whole has surprisingly little variation to the endings. In this case though, that's okay, it's how you get TO the ending that really matters, but of course you don't want to leave people feeling cheated at the end. Here are the most popular ones:
1. "The Chair Jumper"
The chair jumper is the granddaddy of all horror/slasher endings. Just when you think everything is going to be okay... it's not! It's one last over the top scare, which is either followed by a very short concluding scene or the credits. This is the ending that usually leaves the audience talking the most about the movie, mainly because the chair jumper is so completely unexpected that it really gets you.
My personal favorite chair jumper is the ending to Friday the 13th. I know I talk about that series a lot, but come on, it's completely derivative, formulaic and there are ten of them to work with. I'm talking about the original though. Poor Alice Hardy (Adrienne King) has just woken up from the night from hell and the police are pulling up to the lake. One of the policemen spots her and waves when suddenly... Jason jumps out of the lake and pulls her down! Holy crap! Traditionally when the cops come it's over, you're safe. The police give off an air of security so this chair jumper was completely out of the blue and was fantastic.
A few other chair jumpers worth mentioning... the end of The Evil Dead, Phantasm, Friday the 13th Part uh... the one where Mrs. Vorhees jumps out of the lake... and uh... that's about it. That I can think of anyway, here's your chance to leave me some comments.
2. "It's Not Over!"
The 'it's not over' ending implies one thing: sequel. This is a fairly popular ending for the slasher/horror genre simply because horror movies are fairly cheap to produce so they're almost guaranteed to turn a nice profit... which means they need more. Lots more. The endings are intentionally ambiguous, or in some cases, clearly left wide open. I'm talking "if there isn't a sequel I'm going to be pissed" open. Endings such as these are the easiest to do, just remove the last scene and cut to the credits and just like that, you're ready for a sequel. Throw the "alternate ending" on a special edition DVD that comes out six months after the regular one and you've truly gone Hollywood.
My favorite example of this is the ending to Halloween. Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasance) comes to the rescue of Laurie Strode (you know who plays her), shoots Michael Myers three thousand times, knocking him out a window... only to have him disappear. Oh no! Is he going to come after Laurie? How did he survive that? What's going to happen now? Was Dr. Loomis shooting blanks? So many credits and only two lines before the credits roll. Thankfully the sequel picked up eight seconds after the original left off. Okay, make that two favorite examples. The end of A Nightmare on Elm Street. Somehow all of Nancy's (Heather Langenkamp) friends have mysteriously returned to life, her mother is fine and it's off to another day of school... when Freddy locks the car and pulls Nancy's mother through the little window on the door. Not so much as a chair jumper as a "it's not over" simply because it seemed a bit fishy from the start of the scene. Very fun though, very fun.
A few more examples of the "It's not over!" are: Evil Dead II, The Ring, Hellraiser, Jason X... uh... geez. I'm off my game today. There are a lot more, I know it, I just need a nap.
3. "How Ironic!"
This is not irony in the literal sense so much as just silly. They're usually ambiguous and are coupled with the "It's not over!" ending because of the situation the lead character ends up in right before the credits roll.
The best example of this is the ending of Evil Dead II. Ash just went through so much crap that it's not even worth going into and then he somehow gets sucked into the portal that was supposed to save him. Briefly mentioned earlier was a passage from the lost pages of the Necrinomicon stating that someone came from the future and was supposed to have contained the evil then... and he's even wearing a blue shirt, just like Ash! Needless to say he ends up back there and goes from being almost killed to being a savior only because of his shotgun. The camera pans back and it's the page from the book! Poor Ash.
I think the only other movies with endings such as these skirt out of the horror genre and go for a little dramatic irony as well. This ending could also be considered the "surprise!" ending as well, but people will find it "ironic." Anything done by M. Night Shaymalan does that. It's the "Hey, you just sat for two hours for the film school 101 ending." It is though, in the first year one of the first assignments is to do a five minute "surprise" ending. Mr. Shaymalan simply expanding all his ideas to two hours. Well, I don't mean to go off on a tangent but... stop doing that.
4. "Whew, we're okay..."
Sometimes the prerequisite of the "Chair jumper" as well as the "How ironic" this ending has the survivors happy that they survived whatever it was trying to kill them. If this is the actual ending it usually has them walking off into the distance with their arms around each other or the cops showing up... or both. Kind of sappy, kind of relieving, but watch out for the bait and switch. Sometimes you think it's okay... but it's not.
A good example of this is every movie where you don't have another type of ending. Friday the 13th II, III, V, VI, VII, VIII, A Nightmare on Elm Street III, IV, V, VI, Child's Play I, II, III, Hellraiser II... mostly sequels. Sequels do this simply because they're not sure if the profit margin will be big enough to do another one so they don't want to leave fans disappointed if they can't muster the cash to make another.
I'm glad the characters are okay and all, but this ending is kind of boring. It's how most movies in general end. Why not have a character say, "Whew, I'm glad that's over with" and have them fall and break their neck. Now that's an ending.
So which do I prefer?
I'm a chair-jumper/it's not over fan myself. One last good scare coupled with the idea that no matter how hard they tried the survivors couldn't stop whatever was trying to kill them. They're a lot of fun and I think they leave the audience with the best impression of the movie due to the fact that when they finally start to relax you play with their emotions one last time. If done right, it's awesome. If cheap and stupid (Scary Movie, though that was intentional) it'll just make you laugh, but you'll remember it. Now back to the treatment and time to work on that ending.
Wait, there's more!
Oh, as an aside I've finally found a new title for "Vengeance" ... it will now be called "perfect ending" (Thanks to help of my perpetual editor SE) The title is worlds apart from Vengeance, which now that I think about it sounds more like an American Gladiator that a movie. The title also has a lot more meaning to the story itself and if you want to know more, send me an e-mail and I'll send the script over.
I've also finally gotten a little extra cash and am going to submit to the Hollywood Lit Sales development service. According to their FAQ, only 5% move on so I've already braced myself for a "pass" rating but it's the constructive criticism that I'm after (though I think it should garner at least a "consider" rating, but I may be biased. I like it. A few other bloggers that have read it liked it.... my mom liked it...). So in four or five weeks I'll talk about how that went. In the meantime, I'll be focusing on my horror movie. See you all next week.
1. "The Chair Jumper"
The chair jumper is the granddaddy of all horror/slasher endings. Just when you think everything is going to be okay... it's not! It's one last over the top scare, which is either followed by a very short concluding scene or the credits. This is the ending that usually leaves the audience talking the most about the movie, mainly because the chair jumper is so completely unexpected that it really gets you.
My personal favorite chair jumper is the ending to Friday the 13th. I know I talk about that series a lot, but come on, it's completely derivative, formulaic and there are ten of them to work with. I'm talking about the original though. Poor Alice Hardy (Adrienne King) has just woken up from the night from hell and the police are pulling up to the lake. One of the policemen spots her and waves when suddenly... Jason jumps out of the lake and pulls her down! Holy crap! Traditionally when the cops come it's over, you're safe. The police give off an air of security so this chair jumper was completely out of the blue and was fantastic.
A few other chair jumpers worth mentioning... the end of The Evil Dead, Phantasm, Friday the 13th Part uh... the one where Mrs. Vorhees jumps out of the lake... and uh... that's about it. That I can think of anyway, here's your chance to leave me some comments.
2. "It's Not Over!"
The 'it's not over' ending implies one thing: sequel. This is a fairly popular ending for the slasher/horror genre simply because horror movies are fairly cheap to produce so they're almost guaranteed to turn a nice profit... which means they need more. Lots more. The endings are intentionally ambiguous, or in some cases, clearly left wide open. I'm talking "if there isn't a sequel I'm going to be pissed" open. Endings such as these are the easiest to do, just remove the last scene and cut to the credits and just like that, you're ready for a sequel. Throw the "alternate ending" on a special edition DVD that comes out six months after the regular one and you've truly gone Hollywood.
My favorite example of this is the ending to Halloween. Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasance) comes to the rescue of Laurie Strode (you know who plays her), shoots Michael Myers three thousand times, knocking him out a window... only to have him disappear. Oh no! Is he going to come after Laurie? How did he survive that? What's going to happen now? Was Dr. Loomis shooting blanks? So many credits and only two lines before the credits roll. Thankfully the sequel picked up eight seconds after the original left off. Okay, make that two favorite examples. The end of A Nightmare on Elm Street. Somehow all of Nancy's (Heather Langenkamp) friends have mysteriously returned to life, her mother is fine and it's off to another day of school... when Freddy locks the car and pulls Nancy's mother through the little window on the door. Not so much as a chair jumper as a "it's not over" simply because it seemed a bit fishy from the start of the scene. Very fun though, very fun.
A few more examples of the "It's not over!" are: Evil Dead II, The Ring, Hellraiser, Jason X... uh... geez. I'm off my game today. There are a lot more, I know it, I just need a nap.
3. "How Ironic!"
This is not irony in the literal sense so much as just silly. They're usually ambiguous and are coupled with the "It's not over!" ending because of the situation the lead character ends up in right before the credits roll.
The best example of this is the ending of Evil Dead II. Ash just went through so much crap that it's not even worth going into and then he somehow gets sucked into the portal that was supposed to save him. Briefly mentioned earlier was a passage from the lost pages of the Necrinomicon stating that someone came from the future and was supposed to have contained the evil then... and he's even wearing a blue shirt, just like Ash! Needless to say he ends up back there and goes from being almost killed to being a savior only because of his shotgun. The camera pans back and it's the page from the book! Poor Ash.
I think the only other movies with endings such as these skirt out of the horror genre and go for a little dramatic irony as well. This ending could also be considered the "surprise!" ending as well, but people will find it "ironic." Anything done by M. Night Shaymalan does that. It's the "Hey, you just sat for two hours for the film school 101 ending." It is though, in the first year one of the first assignments is to do a five minute "surprise" ending. Mr. Shaymalan simply expanding all his ideas to two hours. Well, I don't mean to go off on a tangent but... stop doing that.
4. "Whew, we're okay..."
Sometimes the prerequisite of the "Chair jumper" as well as the "How ironic" this ending has the survivors happy that they survived whatever it was trying to kill them. If this is the actual ending it usually has them walking off into the distance with their arms around each other or the cops showing up... or both. Kind of sappy, kind of relieving, but watch out for the bait and switch. Sometimes you think it's okay... but it's not.
A good example of this is every movie where you don't have another type of ending. Friday the 13th II, III, V, VI, VII, VIII, A Nightmare on Elm Street III, IV, V, VI, Child's Play I, II, III, Hellraiser II... mostly sequels. Sequels do this simply because they're not sure if the profit margin will be big enough to do another one so they don't want to leave fans disappointed if they can't muster the cash to make another.
I'm glad the characters are okay and all, but this ending is kind of boring. It's how most movies in general end. Why not have a character say, "Whew, I'm glad that's over with" and have them fall and break their neck. Now that's an ending.
So which do I prefer?
I'm a chair-jumper/it's not over fan myself. One last good scare coupled with the idea that no matter how hard they tried the survivors couldn't stop whatever was trying to kill them. They're a lot of fun and I think they leave the audience with the best impression of the movie due to the fact that when they finally start to relax you play with their emotions one last time. If done right, it's awesome. If cheap and stupid (Scary Movie, though that was intentional) it'll just make you laugh, but you'll remember it. Now back to the treatment and time to work on that ending.
Wait, there's more!
Oh, as an aside I've finally found a new title for "Vengeance" ... it will now be called "perfect ending" (Thanks to help of my perpetual editor SE) The title is worlds apart from Vengeance, which now that I think about it sounds more like an American Gladiator that a movie. The title also has a lot more meaning to the story itself and if you want to know more, send me an e-mail and I'll send the script over.
I've also finally gotten a little extra cash and am going to submit to the Hollywood Lit Sales development service. According to their FAQ, only 5% move on so I've already braced myself for a "pass" rating but it's the constructive criticism that I'm after (though I think it should garner at least a "consider" rating, but I may be biased. I like it. A few other bloggers that have read it liked it.... my mom liked it...). So in four or five weeks I'll talk about how that went. In the meantime, I'll be focusing on my horror movie. See you all next week.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Get to the Killing Already!
As I work on my outline I've had one question in particular that has been really bothering me: How long before the killing starts?
How long can I develop my characters before I start to bore my audience? In order to create a bond between the average moviegoer and the characters in the story I have to have a certain amount of development. There has to be something to latch onto and in order to do that I need a little bit of time. If I wanted one-dimensional throwaway characters there would be no problem, in fact I could have a group of thirty people, kill one every three minutes and there is a feature length film... but that's not what I want.
The flaw in the majority of horror films is that the characters are entirely one-dimensional. They are a means to an end, which in the case of a horror movie is to up the body count. They have one small purpose to their character, with no reason why, no back story, no change, no conflict and their lives end with little to no emotional impact on the audience. For a good example of what I mean let's look at Annie and Lynda (Nancy Kyes and P.J. Soles), Laurie Strode's friends from the movie Halloween. They're typical teenage girls, saying typical teenage things and they expressly want to get laid that night. Next thing you know, they're dead.
That's it. Who cares? I know they're Laurie's friends and all but honestly, all they wanted to do was get laid and now they're dead. These things happen. Laurie on the other hand loves her parents, works hard in school, is a babysitter, is a comforting figure, has a crush on a boy... so on and so forth. I feel like I know Laurie Strode, I feel like I care about her and when her friends get killed it's not them I feel emotion for but Laurie... I worry that something might happen to poor Laurie. She's got a lot going on and so much to live for, she can't get killed now!
The trick to having a good, well developed character that people care about is giving them a back story, internal as well as external conflicts, goals and, more or less, a life outside of the scope of the film. They have to be real people that we're watching for the course of the story... what they did before we're aware of but not explicitly told and what they're doing after is dependent on their transformation through the story. Laurie Strode, unfortunately, did not change as a character... she didn't have a chance to, the movie just kind of ended as it is with horror movies. Halloween II picked up immediately where Halloween left off and introduced a whole new batch of forgettable characters, such as the nurse, who could have been walking around saying, "I'm a nurse... I'm a nurse... I'm a nurse" and had roughly the same impact. Laurie Strode did change eventually though, she went from victim to killer in Halloween: H20. It may have taken twenty years but she finally confronted her demons and made a real character change after which she could really move on and continue changing her life.
Larry Zerner e-mailed me last week, amazingly enough, and said something regarding horror movie characters that struck me as both funny and true, "In Friday the 13th Part 3, all the characters were three-dimensional (if you wore the glasses)." Replace "Friday the 13th Part 3" with just about any horror movie and it applies, there just isn't any character development. Laurie Strode was one of the few examples of a three-dimensional character but she lacked that final crisis decision to solidify change and instead let Dr. Loomis pull the trigger (she could have grabbed the gun or something, work with me here).
I've digressed a bit into the last topic but it applies to the question at hand. Can a three dimensional character be fully developed in the time before all the killing starts? The Halloween example proves that yes, it is possible and if the movie is constructed right it should play out completely by the end. How much time then should be devoted to this? Also, what about all the other characters? Should they just be killed fodder and have no real purpose except to be there?
The answer, in my opinion, is no. The problem then arises of how long until the killing starts? I've informally polled twenty people at work and got their thoughts on how long they're willing to wait before someone gets it. The median answer was a half hour. A few other answers were, "horror movies are retarded," "the opening credits," "all at once," and "who are you?" So, a half hour or so is as long as the majority of people will watch character development before someone has to die. I suppose I agree with this, but if done right, the time before the killing should be interesting and engaging.
If the characters develop well, have their own interesting plot lines and intriguing interpersonal relationships, the viewer may not even notice the time devoted... then again they did buy their ticket and sit down to see some hapless folks get killed. So it remains a double edged sword, try to develop the characters and have the audience connect, but don't drag it out so long that they get bored and want them to die anyway.
One movie in particular I know of that I was really getting antsy for the killing was Hostel. The first hour or so was porno, the rest was gross-out horror. Needless to say I was bored out of my mind for the first hour mainly because I didn't care about the characters. They weren't very deep and I was kind of disappointed that Paxton (Jay Hernandez) survived. Good luck playing the piano, chump!
Regardless, careful planning must be done to ensure I get these characters right and that my audience doesn't start to lose interest. Engaging characters, interesting subplots, complex relationships, the whole gamut, must be explored in thirty minutes because right around then this goes from character piece to "Hey, where's Barry?"
Still, I think I'm on the right track. I have one outline written but while writing this entry a few ideas came to me (I guess writing this actually DOES help) so a new outline must be written. I'm on the right path!
Next time... "Killing Your Characters: Gorefest, Quick and Easy or The Cutaway"
How long can I develop my characters before I start to bore my audience? In order to create a bond between the average moviegoer and the characters in the story I have to have a certain amount of development. There has to be something to latch onto and in order to do that I need a little bit of time. If I wanted one-dimensional throwaway characters there would be no problem, in fact I could have a group of thirty people, kill one every three minutes and there is a feature length film... but that's not what I want.
The flaw in the majority of horror films is that the characters are entirely one-dimensional. They are a means to an end, which in the case of a horror movie is to up the body count. They have one small purpose to their character, with no reason why, no back story, no change, no conflict and their lives end with little to no emotional impact on the audience. For a good example of what I mean let's look at Annie and Lynda (Nancy Kyes and P.J. Soles), Laurie Strode's friends from the movie Halloween. They're typical teenage girls, saying typical teenage things and they expressly want to get laid that night. Next thing you know, they're dead.
That's it. Who cares? I know they're Laurie's friends and all but honestly, all they wanted to do was get laid and now they're dead. These things happen. Laurie on the other hand loves her parents, works hard in school, is a babysitter, is a comforting figure, has a crush on a boy... so on and so forth. I feel like I know Laurie Strode, I feel like I care about her and when her friends get killed it's not them I feel emotion for but Laurie... I worry that something might happen to poor Laurie. She's got a lot going on and so much to live for, she can't get killed now!
The trick to having a good, well developed character that people care about is giving them a back story, internal as well as external conflicts, goals and, more or less, a life outside of the scope of the film. They have to be real people that we're watching for the course of the story... what they did before we're aware of but not explicitly told and what they're doing after is dependent on their transformation through the story. Laurie Strode, unfortunately, did not change as a character... she didn't have a chance to, the movie just kind of ended as it is with horror movies. Halloween II picked up immediately where Halloween left off and introduced a whole new batch of forgettable characters, such as the nurse, who could have been walking around saying, "I'm a nurse... I'm a nurse... I'm a nurse" and had roughly the same impact. Laurie Strode did change eventually though, she went from victim to killer in Halloween: H20. It may have taken twenty years but she finally confronted her demons and made a real character change after which she could really move on and continue changing her life.
Larry Zerner e-mailed me last week, amazingly enough, and said something regarding horror movie characters that struck me as both funny and true, "In Friday the 13th Part 3, all the characters were three-dimensional (if you wore the glasses)." Replace "Friday the 13th Part 3" with just about any horror movie and it applies, there just isn't any character development. Laurie Strode was one of the few examples of a three-dimensional character but she lacked that final crisis decision to solidify change and instead let Dr. Loomis pull the trigger (she could have grabbed the gun or something, work with me here).
I've digressed a bit into the last topic but it applies to the question at hand. Can a three dimensional character be fully developed in the time before all the killing starts? The Halloween example proves that yes, it is possible and if the movie is constructed right it should play out completely by the end. How much time then should be devoted to this? Also, what about all the other characters? Should they just be killed fodder and have no real purpose except to be there?
The answer, in my opinion, is no. The problem then arises of how long until the killing starts? I've informally polled twenty people at work and got their thoughts on how long they're willing to wait before someone gets it. The median answer was a half hour. A few other answers were, "horror movies are retarded," "the opening credits," "all at once," and "who are you?" So, a half hour or so is as long as the majority of people will watch character development before someone has to die. I suppose I agree with this, but if done right, the time before the killing should be interesting and engaging.
If the characters develop well, have their own interesting plot lines and intriguing interpersonal relationships, the viewer may not even notice the time devoted... then again they did buy their ticket and sit down to see some hapless folks get killed. So it remains a double edged sword, try to develop the characters and have the audience connect, but don't drag it out so long that they get bored and want them to die anyway.
One movie in particular I know of that I was really getting antsy for the killing was Hostel. The first hour or so was porno, the rest was gross-out horror. Needless to say I was bored out of my mind for the first hour mainly because I didn't care about the characters. They weren't very deep and I was kind of disappointed that Paxton (Jay Hernandez) survived. Good luck playing the piano, chump!
Regardless, careful planning must be done to ensure I get these characters right and that my audience doesn't start to lose interest. Engaging characters, interesting subplots, complex relationships, the whole gamut, must be explored in thirty minutes because right around then this goes from character piece to "Hey, where's Barry?"
Still, I think I'm on the right track. I have one outline written but while writing this entry a few ideas came to me (I guess writing this actually DOES help) so a new outline must be written. I'm on the right path!
Next time... "Killing Your Characters: Gorefest, Quick and Easy or The Cutaway"
Monday, August 6, 2007
Scriptapalooza
According to an e-mail I received the other day, I've made it to the Quarterfinalist round of the Scriptapalooza competition. This being the second quarterfinal round I've made out of this past round of contests I'm not too sure I'll make it past this, but hey, it's nice to make it somewhere.
I'm still on schedule for sending my script to the development service as mentioned in a past post and I'm trying my best to keep up with my two hours every other night campaign. I know I may not sound particularly confident in regards to this contest, but I am up against scripts that blow mine away, just from the title alone. These are going straight to the top, those with such compelling titles as:
Whale Farts by Brian Price and Samuel W. Gailey
Now, call me crazy here, but what could this possible be about?* There are two roads this can go on and I shall explore them both, just for the benefit of... myself.
Whale Farts is a compelling look at the future of our nation. In a time when our fossil fuel reserves are at an all time low, and the instability in the middle east has lead to broader conflicts across the region and a halt to all exports. Global Warming fears have taken a frightening new twist as increased carbon emissions in the atmosphere have actually thickened the ozone layer, making it almost impossible for solar panels to function while still increasing temperatures to unbearable conditions, causing hurricanes to batter coastal cities year round. In the midst of this crisis, Dr. Gregory Handcrotch bucks the trend, and on a small fishing trawler with a surly crew of New England natives sets out to test his new invention, one that would surely change the course of human history... that which can harness the awesome power of a whale's fart.
Alright, interesting. The Sum of All Fears meets A Perfect Storm meets The Day After Tomorrow. I like it. Get Beck to do the soundtrack and we're there. Okay, let's try this again, only without any thought (yet I'm sure more money):
Whale Farts is the latest comedy creation from the director/producer/key grip that brought you Wedding Crashers and some other recent comedy comes the story of Petie, played by that chubby guy from Knocked Up, a marine biologist fresh out of grad school starting his first real job at Sea Fun Adventure Village. His first assignment? Training Patches, the baby humpback whale. With his friends Joel, that fat guy from Superbad and Larry, the older looking friend of the main guy from Boy Meets World he must try to get Patches ready for his opening performance in two weeks. There's only one problem though: Whale Farts. Nobody will come see a performance that smells like week old krill, so it's up to Petie to fix the problem, reaffirm his friendships through adversity, and win the heart of the pretty dolphin trainer Julie, played by one of the chicks from That 70's Show, possibly the older sister of Topher Grace's character.
There. Whale Farts.
If you're a producer and you'd like me to turn Whale Farts into a feature length screenplay, feel free to drop me a line. Of course this would be selling out my artistic integrity, but hey, I promise I'll do an indie flick for my second one, I promise.
*As an aside, though, I'm not trying to knock anyone else's work, I know people are sensitive out there, I'm just having some fun with a title.
I'm still on schedule for sending my script to the development service as mentioned in a past post and I'm trying my best to keep up with my two hours every other night campaign. I know I may not sound particularly confident in regards to this contest, but I am up against scripts that blow mine away, just from the title alone. These are going straight to the top, those with such compelling titles as:
Whale Farts by Brian Price and Samuel W. Gailey
Now, call me crazy here, but what could this possible be about?* There are two roads this can go on and I shall explore them both, just for the benefit of... myself.
Whale Farts is a compelling look at the future of our nation. In a time when our fossil fuel reserves are at an all time low, and the instability in the middle east has lead to broader conflicts across the region and a halt to all exports. Global Warming fears have taken a frightening new twist as increased carbon emissions in the atmosphere have actually thickened the ozone layer, making it almost impossible for solar panels to function while still increasing temperatures to unbearable conditions, causing hurricanes to batter coastal cities year round. In the midst of this crisis, Dr. Gregory Handcrotch bucks the trend, and on a small fishing trawler with a surly crew of New England natives sets out to test his new invention, one that would surely change the course of human history... that which can harness the awesome power of a whale's fart.
Alright, interesting. The Sum of All Fears meets A Perfect Storm meets The Day After Tomorrow. I like it. Get Beck to do the soundtrack and we're there. Okay, let's try this again, only without any thought (yet I'm sure more money):
Whale Farts is the latest comedy creation from the director/producer/key grip that brought you Wedding Crashers and some other recent comedy comes the story of Petie, played by that chubby guy from Knocked Up, a marine biologist fresh out of grad school starting his first real job at Sea Fun Adventure Village. His first assignment? Training Patches, the baby humpback whale. With his friends Joel, that fat guy from Superbad and Larry, the older looking friend of the main guy from Boy Meets World he must try to get Patches ready for his opening performance in two weeks. There's only one problem though: Whale Farts. Nobody will come see a performance that smells like week old krill, so it's up to Petie to fix the problem, reaffirm his friendships through adversity, and win the heart of the pretty dolphin trainer Julie, played by one of the chicks from That 70's Show, possibly the older sister of Topher Grace's character.
There. Whale Farts.
If you're a producer and you'd like me to turn Whale Farts into a feature length screenplay, feel free to drop me a line. Of course this would be selling out my artistic integrity, but hey, I promise I'll do an indie flick for my second one, I promise.
*As an aside, though, I'm not trying to knock anyone else's work, I know people are sensitive out there, I'm just having some fun with a title.
Monday, July 30, 2007
A Clear Head
As dreaded an activity as mowing the lawn can be, it does provide me a chance to be alone with my thoughts. As I mulled things over, walking back and forth, back and forth, back and... and so on, it came to me that I needed to have some sort of routine. A way to keep expanding my knowledge of screen writing as well as honing my skills. This sort of stability would help me to not only expand my mind on the topic but also help me to feel a sense of accomplishment. I need to know that my fate is not in the hands of a faceless contest judge but in my own, and the only way to do that is through focus and dedication.
I'm not saying I'm not dedicated now, but as far as dedication is concerned I could use a little improvement. Waiting for a contest for months on end is no way to start a career and hindsight being 20/20 as it is I have come up with the following stipulations for myself:
Every other evening (starting tomorrow) from 9pm-11pm (minimum) will be, hmm, let's call it "Form and Function"
The form aspect being that in that time I could choose to read up on the how behind formatting, story, selling and that ilk and the function falling into actually writing. Working on my outlines, treatments, loglines, synopsis and of course actual screenplays.
I think that this re-dedication to what I want to do with my life is a much needed kick in the pants. It will allow me to focus and of course will not pigeonhole me into a particular exercise, you can't really force creativity, it has to come. I don't want to write, I need to write, and I think this funk I've been in lately could be attributed to not letting myself do so. Standing on a precipice wherein salvation is in one direction (winning a contest) and chasm of despair the other (losing) is no way to bring about my dream. That thinking has put me in a state of flux, keeping me aloof in a lot of aspects and really making me kind of flake out. With this new routine I will regain my focus and moreover, my composure.
Things are looking up already!
Reminder: 8/15 submit to the Hollywood Lit Sales development service
Whilst I work on my craft I should also learn how to improve it through more means than my own interpretation of books and lectures. To the future!
I'm not saying I'm not dedicated now, but as far as dedication is concerned I could use a little improvement. Waiting for a contest for months on end is no way to start a career and hindsight being 20/20 as it is I have come up with the following stipulations for myself:
Every other evening (starting tomorrow) from 9pm-11pm (minimum) will be, hmm, let's call it "Form and Function"
The form aspect being that in that time I could choose to read up on the how behind formatting, story, selling and that ilk and the function falling into actually writing. Working on my outlines, treatments, loglines, synopsis and of course actual screenplays.
I think that this re-dedication to what I want to do with my life is a much needed kick in the pants. It will allow me to focus and of course will not pigeonhole me into a particular exercise, you can't really force creativity, it has to come. I don't want to write, I need to write, and I think this funk I've been in lately could be attributed to not letting myself do so. Standing on a precipice wherein salvation is in one direction (winning a contest) and chasm of despair the other (losing) is no way to bring about my dream. That thinking has put me in a state of flux, keeping me aloof in a lot of aspects and really making me kind of flake out. With this new routine I will regain my focus and moreover, my composure.
Things are looking up already!
Reminder: 8/15 submit to the Hollywood Lit Sales development service
Whilst I work on my craft I should also learn how to improve it through more means than my own interpretation of books and lectures. To the future!
Nicholl Fellowship in Screenwriting... Denied
At least this time I received a hand signed rejection letter, I must be moving up in the world. With two contest failures in as many days it seems yours truly has just solidified his case to go to a development service to figure out exactly what is wrong with "Vengeance."
I suppose it's always hardest to critique your own work, but I have had a lot of people read it and they all seemed to enjoy it. Seemed being the operative, maybe they're all humoring me, but who knows. If any of you would like to read it, please let me know, contact info is over on the right. It seems that this blog is turning into the emo pity party that I so wanted to avoid, but, with rejection comes that little but of sting that your best just isn't good enough.
The letter I received was well written, but the last paragraph kind of struck me as odd, it read "In January of next year, we'll send you a 2008 application form, which will include a list of the recipients of the 2007 Fellowships."
Now that's just kind of rubbing it in the losers faces, they might as well preface the application, "Boy, don't you wish you were these people?" Oh well, out of 5050 entries 254 made it onto the next round, and unfortunately mine wasn't one of them.
All that's left is Scriptapalooza, which I'm investing any stock into, so perhaps on the 15th of August (my next paycheck) I'll send my script off to the $75 development session to figure out exactly what needs to be improved. In the meantime, I think it's time to really put some time into rewriting One Night in Jersey... a broad comedy might be the route to take. We shall see!
I suppose it's always hardest to critique your own work, but I have had a lot of people read it and they all seemed to enjoy it. Seemed being the operative, maybe they're all humoring me, but who knows. If any of you would like to read it, please let me know, contact info is over on the right. It seems that this blog is turning into the emo pity party that I so wanted to avoid, but, with rejection comes that little but of sting that your best just isn't good enough.
The letter I received was well written, but the last paragraph kind of struck me as odd, it read "In January of next year, we'll send you a 2008 application form, which will include a list of the recipients of the 2007 Fellowships."
Now that's just kind of rubbing it in the losers faces, they might as well preface the application, "Boy, don't you wish you were these people?" Oh well, out of 5050 entries 254 made it onto the next round, and unfortunately mine wasn't one of them.
All that's left is Scriptapalooza, which I'm investing any stock into, so perhaps on the 15th of August (my next paycheck) I'll send my script off to the $75 development session to figure out exactly what needs to be improved. In the meantime, I think it's time to really put some time into rewriting One Night in Jersey... a broad comedy might be the route to take. We shall see!
Saturday, July 28, 2007
BlueCat Results
Well unfortunately I haven't made it to the finals, but hey, it was nice to be a quarter-finalist in something. Looks like I only have two more contests to hear back from, but judging from what's happened so far, it's not looking promising. Even so, I have to keep a positive outlook, not all judges are the same, and referencing an earlier post, it's all subjective.
Even so, I think I may finally have to submit to one of those professional services; the ones that give you notes on how to fix your screenplay, and hopefully make it more marketable.
I found two that seem like the could be useful:
Script P.I.M.P. Development Services
Running at about $250 it's not exactly a bargain, but if you receive a "recommended" rating you then have the ability to submit a query letter to some of the bigger studios. Of course who knows if that's going to get you anywhere, but at least it's a step in the right direction... although they claim they will help you in sending your screenplay to producers, studios and managers. So that DOES sound pretty good.
Hollywood Lit Sales Coverage Special
The places claims to do the same thing as Script P.I.M.P but for only $75. That's a heck of a price difference for what appears to be essentially the same service. What does that mean? I have no idea. Is one better than the other? I also don't know.
I think what I may do is submit it to the Hollywood Lit Sales people and see what they have to say, see how it goes, follow their recommendations... and if that works out I'll then send it over to Script P.I.M.P. By that logic, someone is bound to want to see the script provided it gets a recommended rating from both places.
Since the contest route does not seem to be working out for me, I'll have to look down another avenue, and this may be it. In the meantime I think I will start to work on one of my unedited scripts, just so I don't get too out of practice sitting on my hands. Who knows, maybe a comedy will fare better than a psychological thriller. We shall see! I'll keep you guys abreast of what happens, as well as what happens with the other contests.
Even so, I think I may finally have to submit to one of those professional services; the ones that give you notes on how to fix your screenplay, and hopefully make it more marketable.
I found two that seem like the could be useful:
Script P.I.M.P. Development Services
Running at about $250 it's not exactly a bargain, but if you receive a "recommended" rating you then have the ability to submit a query letter to some of the bigger studios. Of course who knows if that's going to get you anywhere, but at least it's a step in the right direction... although they claim they will help you in sending your screenplay to producers, studios and managers. So that DOES sound pretty good.
Hollywood Lit Sales Coverage Special
The places claims to do the same thing as Script P.I.M.P but for only $75. That's a heck of a price difference for what appears to be essentially the same service. What does that mean? I have no idea. Is one better than the other? I also don't know.
I think what I may do is submit it to the Hollywood Lit Sales people and see what they have to say, see how it goes, follow their recommendations... and if that works out I'll then send it over to Script P.I.M.P. By that logic, someone is bound to want to see the script provided it gets a recommended rating from both places.
Since the contest route does not seem to be working out for me, I'll have to look down another avenue, and this may be it. In the meantime I think I will start to work on one of my unedited scripts, just so I don't get too out of practice sitting on my hands. Who knows, maybe a comedy will fare better than a psychological thriller. We shall see! I'll keep you guys abreast of what happens, as well as what happens with the other contests.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Bluecat
Bluecat
The top 10% of entries have been posted to the Bluecat results page and yours truly has made it into the top 10%. Judging by the amount of scritps in this percentage, they must have had a lot of entires. So that's good, I made it this far which makes me feel kind of good.
Even so, as usual I decided to take a look at some of the entries to see what I'm up against. We have Mother of Frankenstein by Ian Simpson and...Mother of Frankenstein by Robert Ian Simpson. The odds of that happening are simply astronomical. That or this person submitted their script twice, under two different names, and they BOTH made it! He must be thrilled.
Some of my other competitors have submitted things such as "A Guy, a Girl, a Chimp, and a Lake," "Crazy Thunder," "Every time I go to Staten Island Something Bad Happens," (I kind of agree with that one) "Hannibal," "Life Without a Face," "Sizzlean," "The Maltese Falcon."
And my comments, in no particular order, Two guys, a girl and a pizza place. I still agree. Do you mean the killer or the guy from Carthage? Man without a face. Sane thunder. I don't know if that's a word. Been done.
Hey, I haven't read them and I'm competing against them for my life's dream, I'm allowed to belittle them without actually having read their scripts. Even so, the "Life Without A Face" really also reminds me of This comic.
Oh well, I'll post again when I get more results!
The top 10% of entries have been posted to the Bluecat results page and yours truly has made it into the top 10%. Judging by the amount of scritps in this percentage, they must have had a lot of entires. So that's good, I made it this far which makes me feel kind of good.
Even so, as usual I decided to take a look at some of the entries to see what I'm up against. We have Mother of Frankenstein by Ian Simpson and...Mother of Frankenstein by Robert Ian Simpson. The odds of that happening are simply astronomical. That or this person submitted their script twice, under two different names, and they BOTH made it! He must be thrilled.
Some of my other competitors have submitted things such as "A Guy, a Girl, a Chimp, and a Lake," "Crazy Thunder," "Every time I go to Staten Island Something Bad Happens," (I kind of agree with that one) "Hannibal," "Life Without a Face," "Sizzlean," "The Maltese Falcon."
And my comments, in no particular order, Two guys, a girl and a pizza place. I still agree. Do you mean the killer or the guy from Carthage? Man without a face. Sane thunder. I don't know if that's a word. Been done.
Hey, I haven't read them and I'm competing against them for my life's dream, I'm allowed to belittle them without actually having read their scripts. Even so, the "Life Without A Face" really also reminds me of This comic.
Oh well, I'll post again when I get more results!
Monday, June 25, 2007
Script P.I.M.P.
Script P.I.M.P.
Well, according to the latest newsletter I didn't make the cut into the final round of the competition, here's a list of those who did.
I always look over the titles of finalist scripts to see if they jump out at me as something particularly interesting. In most cases, they don't, in fact some of the titles are downright silly, such as "Birdman McGee" ... who knows what that can be about.
One though, in particular, drew special attention to me. In an earlier post I mentioned the logline for my script "Vengeance" and a brief logline. The mystery/thriller is essentially about a series of murders that happen in a number of hotels... in California... so the script titled "The California Hotel Murders" really kind of grabbed my attention.
Isn't that, in essence, what my movie is about as well? I mean, who knows about the details and how it's written, but come on. Maybe I should have titled my movie something a little more obvious as well. Maybe I could call it "The detective that solves the murders" ... you know, something with pizazz! That title's got legs!
Ah sorry, it's just a little frustrating. I'll post more results once I get them.
Well, according to the latest newsletter I didn't make the cut into the final round of the competition, here's a list of those who did.
I always look over the titles of finalist scripts to see if they jump out at me as something particularly interesting. In most cases, they don't, in fact some of the titles are downright silly, such as "Birdman McGee" ... who knows what that can be about.
One though, in particular, drew special attention to me. In an earlier post I mentioned the logline for my script "Vengeance" and a brief logline. The mystery/thriller is essentially about a series of murders that happen in a number of hotels... in California... so the script titled "The California Hotel Murders" really kind of grabbed my attention.
Isn't that, in essence, what my movie is about as well? I mean, who knows about the details and how it's written, but come on. Maybe I should have titled my movie something a little more obvious as well. Maybe I could call it "The detective that solves the murders" ... you know, something with pizazz! That title's got legs!
Ah sorry, it's just a little frustrating. I'll post more results once I get them.
Saturday, June 2, 2007
Still Waiting
Still Waiting
While I'm still waiting to hear something my creative drive has kind of stalled out. I've had a few good ideas but I haven't really sat down and put a few hours into something in quite awhile. I think it may have a lot to do with waiting to hear back from the contests.
My own assumption is that I'm looking for some sort of validation... someone to say "hey, you're a pretty good writer" so that I can then move forward and put more time and energy into things. Even so, deep down inside I know that this is the wrong mindset to have; I should keep plugging away just to create.
I'm expressing my own duality. I have a strong desire to write, it kind of makes me antsy when I don't write for awhile, but I also wnat someone to tell me that I'm a good writer, that I have a lot of potential, that I should keep it up. A validation for continuing. I have ideas I want to flesh out and plot outlines I want to bring to life but I keep making little excuses and finding other things to occupy my time, and when I do finally sit down to write, "oops, it's bedtime!"
Does anyone know how to get around this? I know I should be writing, I should be practicing and improving, but it's just frustrating in creative limbo.
I suppose I'll flip through my little notebook and look for a blurb or two I can flesh out a little more, just something to keep the creative juices flowing.
While I'm still waiting to hear something my creative drive has kind of stalled out. I've had a few good ideas but I haven't really sat down and put a few hours into something in quite awhile. I think it may have a lot to do with waiting to hear back from the contests.
My own assumption is that I'm looking for some sort of validation... someone to say "hey, you're a pretty good writer" so that I can then move forward and put more time and energy into things. Even so, deep down inside I know that this is the wrong mindset to have; I should keep plugging away just to create.
I'm expressing my own duality. I have a strong desire to write, it kind of makes me antsy when I don't write for awhile, but I also wnat someone to tell me that I'm a good writer, that I have a lot of potential, that I should keep it up. A validation for continuing. I have ideas I want to flesh out and plot outlines I want to bring to life but I keep making little excuses and finding other things to occupy my time, and when I do finally sit down to write, "oops, it's bedtime!"
Does anyone know how to get around this? I know I should be writing, I should be practicing and improving, but it's just frustrating in creative limbo.
I suppose I'll flip through my little notebook and look for a blurb or two I can flesh out a little more, just something to keep the creative juices flowing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
