STORMBLOG

Friday, May 04, 2012

SHORTIES -- News Blips for Writers

WRITERS ON THE STORM 2012 POSTPONED. Say it ain't so! Oh, but it is, Virginia. Why did we do this? Well, to be honest, because putting on a contest the scale of WOTS is a huge amount of work, and we need to be concentrating on other things in the short term. But fear not: Writers on the Storm will return 9/24 and run through the end of the year. And we are putting together some pretty damn good prizes this year as well, such as: coffee with Lynn Hendee, producer of Ender's Game, which stars Harrison Ford and is shooting now, and a consultation/meeting with 2011 Nicholl Fellows (that means they won, guys) Tianna Langham and Chris Bessounian (and we'll have an interview with them next month as well.) So use this time to polish, polish, polish and polish again. Remember: winning a contest is not like entering the lottery. It's not random. It's about the quality of the script. If your script is a pass when you send it in for coverage, it ain't gonna win a contest. It's that simple. So invest in yourself and do the heavy lifting required to really deliver on those screenplays.

Miller

WOTS 2011 UPDATE. The new start date for Writers on the Storm 2012 is 9/24, and it ends 12/31. That gives all of y'all time to go back and rewrite act 2! Come on, you know you need to :) Now if you are wondering what's up with last year's winners, we only finally started sending them out a few weeks ago and are still waiting to hear back from many companies. Most excitingly, top management company The Arlook Group responded positively to our runner-up script A SHIP THROUGH FIRE by John Winn Miller. They're reading a follow-up script from Mr. Miller now. We also have some very exciting possibilities on our winning script WRIGHT OR WRONG, by Glenn Sanders and Brooks Elms, that we can't talk about yet, but if it happens will be pretty amazing. More news as it develops! -- Portia Jefferson, Writers on the Storm Contest Coordinator

REJECTED PITCHES = BRILLIANCE. Take five and treat yourself to some of the funniest shorts on YouTube, courtesy of the razor-sharp comic wits at Teen Wheels TV. To date they have posted four episodes of their "Rejected Pitches" series, which feature top directors being shot down by a trio of moronic executives. So far they've taken on E.T., Back to the Future, Look Who's Talking, and best of all, The Shining. So the next time you have a meeting with a producer who is a pure dope, you'll think back on these videos and smile! Check out their YouTube page right here.

BELOW ZERO ICES THE FESTIVAL CIRCUIT. Kudos to writer/producers Bob Schultz and Signe Olynyk. Their indie horror film Below Zero (directed by Justin Thomas Ostenson) has been owning the festival circuit. Just pay a quick visit to the film's website and check out all those laurels, including Best Horror Movie from American International Film Festival. Edward Furlong (T2) stars as a screenwriter who locks himself in a slaughterhouse freezer to overcome his writer's block! When horror vet Michael Berryman (The Hills Have Eyes) enters the picture, you can pretty much figure out what happens next... Next up, they're shooting Bob's zombie movie I-15, which was one of the best scripts Coverage Ink read last year. Exciting times for this young, hot team! And by the way, if their names sound familiar, you've probably met Bob and Signe at their annual Great American Pitchfest. Speaking of which, the Pitchfest will be back June 1-3 at the Burbank Marriott, so get your tickets now! Stop by and visit us at the Coverage Ink booth while you're there.

SPEC MARKET FURY! It is smokin' hot out there right now for pitches. An astonishing 13 were set up last month, almost double last year's number. That's indicative of the overall health and confidence of the biz -- when people get worried, the first thing they stop buying are pitches. So this is great news indeed (note: don't think you can hop on that bandwagon. Selling pitches is reserved only for name screenwriters with juice.) On the spec side, a nice little $3 million sale always injects a jolt of life into the marketplace. James Vanderbilt's White House Down shook down Sony for the big bucks, no doubt because he wrote this summer's Spidey reboot which is getting positive buzz, despite the fact that the Spidey suit looks like it was cut from a Spalding basketball. Overall, the spec market is slightly more voracious than last year (17 specs were sold in March,) but WAY better than the horrifically awful 2009 and 2010. In short: the market is hotter than it has been in a long time. It's a freakin' great time to be a writer! Now go get your piece.

THE SAD, SAD STATE OF THE TV MOVIE. Have you ever wondered why there are, like, no MOWs and TV movies at all anymore, versus ten years ago? We sure as hell did, so we put that question to TV movie producer Steve Kennedy (Saving Jessica Lynch) from Daniel Paulson Prods. According to Steve, several factors have conspired to more or less crush the venerable Movie of the Week. The first is, the networks decided that it's more profitable to have a smaller audience that returns week after week for a show, than it is to have a big audience that only turns out once. Never mind that original television movies can be resold as DVDs and so forth; they're just not that interested. Secondly, TV movies cost way more money to produce than, say, a 3-hour The Bachelorette pile of vapidity. Even cable, once a bastion of original movies, has greatly reduced their output. Showtime used to make 30 movies a year. But then they realized they could create successful original series like Dexter instead. Nowadays your chances of getting HBO or Showtime to greenlight your original movie are pretty much nil. That leaves Disney Channel, Nickelodeon, Lifetime and Hallmark, who are doing quite well, thank you very much, making flicks for their niche audiences. But the days of the MOW as we know it... gone.

SCRIPT PIPELINE EXTENDED DEADLINE 5/4! Our pals at Script Pipeline put on one hell of a contest. In fact, it's one of only five that we at Coverage Ink recommend as well worth the entry fee. Their winners have had some amazing success in the past. And now, the 10th Annual Script Pipeline Screenwriting and TV Writing Competition 2012 is ending imminently (like, Friday May 4th!) If you haven't entered yet, what are you waiting for? These guys are the only contest to our knowledge, other than the Nicholl Fellowship, who have had a previous winner (2008's Evan Dougherty) go A-list. Dougherty's 2008 script Snow White and the Huntsman was huge major studio spec sale ($3 million!) and is now a major motion picture starring Chris Hemsworth, Kristin Stewart and Charlize Theron. Will you be next? Cruise on down the Pipeline and enter that script now. Hurry, time is almost up!

THE SAD, SAD SAGA OF MEL GIBSON. This one is almost painful to write. If you're a subscriber to TheWrap.com, you no doubt have heard/read the transcription of actor/director Mel Gibson's latest rant. (If you do not subscribe to TheWrap, you may have no idea, since Variety ignored it, not wanting to acknowledge they'd been scooped -- even after the story had been picked up by the US corporate media.) The short version is, Gibson went on a tear at his Costa Rica home, railing out guest Joe Eszterhas (Showgirls) and screaming like a freakin' maniac about anything and everything, including losing his looks, in front of all his guests and their families (including Braveheart screenwriter Randall Wallace.) Gibson made some particularly vitriolic comments about his ex and generally just frickin' lost it. Now we've all been watching Gibson self-destruct publicly for years, of course, so this is no surprise. What is amazing however is that through it all, he continues to do great work. He was sublime in The Beaver, about a dad with mental issues who can only communicate through a puppet; his new movie Get the Gringo was passed over for US release despite universal superlative reviews. Ezsterhas said that he released the recordings his son made of Gibson's rant so that hopefully Mel would get the professional help he needs. Amen to that.

NOT TO "B" OUTDONE: TRACKING B CONTEST BEGINS 6/1. You didn't think we'd mention the five contests Coverage Ink recommends as worth the entry fee without telling you the others, did ya? Here they are, in no particular order: The Nicholl Fellowship, Scriptapalooza, Script Pipeline, Writers on the Storm, and... Tracking B. Who, what? Amazingly, after years of unparalleled success stories, many screenwriters still have no idea who these guys are. The Tracking B contest is an "insider" contest run by, well, The Insider, the mysterious industry figure behind TrackingB.com, the real-life industry tracking board subscribed to by every major producer, agent and manager. To tell you about all the writers who have been signed, sold and gotten work after winning or placing in Tracking B would take the entire length of this column (you can just buzz over to their site and check it out for yourself.) Their annual feature screenwriting contest opens 6/1, so calendar it now and enter early before the prices rise. Trust us on this, this is a must-enter contest! Not to mention every writer who enters two scripts gets a free subscription to TrackingB.com, which is an invaluable source of critical intelligence for writers. Head on over to TrackingB.com and discover for yourself just what you're missing!

Back to Newsletter

MAN ON A MISSION - InkTip's Gato Scatena

Gato Scatena is passionate about what he does. He has a vision for a future where InkTip.com and the InkTip Pitch Summit become the industry's #1 talent farm. And from the looks of things, he may just pull it off. The 30-year-old from Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, has put his UC Santa Cruz film and digital media degree to good use as Vice President of InkTip and President of InkTip Summit Events. In 2010, he and InkTip President Jerrol LeBaron set out to rethink the screenplay pitch festival. The result: the InkTip Pitch Summit, which raises the bar by greatly increasing the number of executives attending and maximizing the number of pitches writers can make (now averaging over 40.) We caught up with Gato, knee-deep in planning Pitch Summit IV (September 21 and 22, 2012 – discount tickets are on sale now) to find out exactly how InkTip connects so many writers and executives.

by Jim Cirile

Jim Cirile (JC): Hi, Gato! Appreciate your time. What was the genesis of the InkTip Pitch Summit?

Gato Scatena

Gato Scatena (GS): Thanks, Jim. Jerrol (LeBaron, InkTip founder) had been wanting to do some kind of an event that was primarily focused on the executives that we cater to, because there are a good number of executives out there who are still pretty old-school, and they prefer face-to-face meetings. A large percentage of those types of people tend to be in the upper echelon of producing anyway, more studio-level guys. Second to that, we were approached by a couple of other pitching events, trying to get us to sponsor them. I started attending events and sending my staff. If we sponsor something, we’ve got to be able to vouch for it. Jerrol and I came to the same conclusion, that there was a big gap between claims and actual performance. So we set out to find a way to do an event that would actually yield results. We weren’t going to execute anything unless we knew that we could exceed expectations of our target audience.

JC: You guys changed the paradigm pretty effectively, with the key innovation being pitching to three execs at a time, not just one.

GS: Thanks, yeah, I thought that was my idea, but Jerrol swears it was his (laughs.) Statistically, we had to bring roughly three times as many executives to our Summit compared to the next most populated pitching event, which brings about 100, in order to get movies produced. There are several advantages to this.

JC: Obviously, the first is simple math: the more people you can pitch your script to, the more potential connections you can make.

GS: Right. And there are other advantages as well. If you sit down and you’ve got three executives there, you can have two of them who are bored -- maybe they’ve been having a rough day, they’re not in the mood -- but all it takes is one guy who might be interested (in the pitch) and asks just the right question from a producer’s point of view. All of a sudden, it starts this conversation where one or two of the other executives want to get involved. It’s an obvious social dynamic that we all know can occur, but to put it into this format was a new thing. The other important reason behind it was statistics. We simply had to fit more producers in order to ensure that we were going to have movies produced off the very first Summit, which we did. As far as I know, to this date we are the only pitching event with confirmed movies produced. A nice little cherry on top was that at all these other events, it’s really easy for executives to get fatigued as the day goes on. We found that by adding extra executives to the table, they’re keeping one another awake by talking to each other throughout the day.

JC: So what’s the trick to getting over 300 executives to show up?

GS: The primary trick -- and I love it -- is that we’re InkTip.com. We work with these executives 365 days a year. They subscribe to the executive newsletters; we’re in constant contact with them. We have an entire department over here, the entertainment pro department, and all they do is make sure that the producers are finding exactly what they’re looking for, whether it’s scripts or writers. We have a really good rapport with all these executives. So we have sort of an advantage there. The scariest change that we made vis-à-vis other pitching events was that we weren’t going to offer any sort of stipend or payment for executives to attend. We felt that by offering money to attend, number one, it’s going to send the wrong message.

Scatena with InkTip founder Jerrol LeBaron.

Number two, I know a lot of them offer $100 stipends. $100 just isn’t enough to attract an executive that you actually want there. So then you’re just kind of putting fans in the stands. And three, there was this precedent set by all the other events. If you’re an executive, you know you can find material through us. We’ve got over 150 (produced features.) If you’re looking, we want you to come and help you find good stuff. If you’re not looking, we’re not going to incentivize you to fake it. That said, every executive that attends does cost us $150 to $200-plus for food, beverage, parking and so forth.

JC: At the Pitch Summit I attended, I saw all the execs hobnobbing before the event started. That’s got to be a huge perk for them as well.

GS: One result that we didn’t plan for is that executives love coming to the Summit now because of their networking opportunities. That has led to more options, sales and movies produced. These guys start talking to each other, and they find ways to make certain deals work.

JC: Pitch Summit III went buttery smooth last month. You guys obviously put a lot of effort into listening to the feedback from attendees of previous Summits.

GS: This last one just ran insanely smooth. But the thing that makes Jerrol and I the most proud is that we were advertising that every writer was going to be able to pitch 35, and for us to breach 40 pitches per writer on average was great. This was the first time where we didn’t really have any complaints. From here on out, it’s smaller things. For example, after meeting so many executives -- at other events you’re meeting about 12 people face to face. At Summit III, I believe the average number of companies pitched was 42. It gets a little hairy trying to keep track of everybody that you’ve met. So one note we got was, “If you guys could find a way to make it easier to follow up with them, that’d be awesome.” So we’re wrestling with either using different nameplates or having cards available at every table for the writers to just grab.

JC: And how about results?

GS: The majority of our writers were getting requests from over 50% of the companies they were pitching. All in all, we’re just doing a great job on one, attracting serious writers, and two, we’re getting into a really sweet spot in terms of attracting the right executives. A lot of material is getting optioned through us at this point. Movies are getting produced. That’s what we’re here to do. We’ve got another eight options and writers repped that have been confirmed from this last Summit last month. We actually had for or five options that happened on the spot, at the event. We’re trying to knock it out of the park on the next one and continue to up our success rate.

JC: Thanks so much for the peek behind the curtain, Gato!

+++

InkTip Pitch Summit IV is September 21st and 22nd at the Burbank Marriott. Tickets are available now Hurry! Super Saver deadline is Friday, May 18th. Register now and save up to $95 on your passes.

Back to Newsletter

Thursday, April 19, 2012

InkTip Pitch Summit III Review

2010's first Pitch Summit, brought to us by our friends at InkTip.com, was tremendous mix of both opportunity and discombobulation. Now in their second year, have they ironed out all the bugs?

By Tanya Klein

I recently checked out InkTip’s Pitch Summit III. Having attended the very first one -- which was riddled with logistical missteps and probably caused a few serious cases of sciatica in some of the unfortunate writers who stood in endless lines -- I felt more than a bit trepidatious. Luckily, I was pleasantly surprised. The organizational upheaval from their first outing was completely ironed out. They had plenty of people working to keep everything running smoothly. The lines were mercifully short, arranged by genre, and they were kept moving with adequate speed. Efforts were made to keep all of the attendees in the loop through continual announcements. So, first of all, kudos to the InkTip team for oiling this particular machine.

Any review of an InkTip Pitch Summit really comes down to how one feels about pitching to three or four executives from different companies simultaneously, versus focusing on only one. Because, you see, that's how they do it. You don't just pitch one-on-one to an exec: you pitch to a table of three execs, all from different companies. Let’s start with the pros: The three-to-a-table scheme makes it possible for a writer to cover more ground – a lot more ground. It’s the difference between pitching to 15 people or to 50. That’s an undeniable plus. But does it outweigh the cons?

In the morning I stood in line for one three-executive table, two of whom I really wanted to see and the third one – let’s call ‘em 'Gravy' – I hadn’t heard of. When I got to the table, only Gravy was there. I’m guessing the other two were still enjoying their morning coffee or were simply a no-show. First con of having more than one executive at a table: You can’t hold the line if someone is stuck in traffic; and sometimes a writer will miss the opportunity to pitch to an executive, because said executive is searching for the restroom.

The InkTip Pitch Summit in progress.

Later in the day, I noticed that I was pitching to an executive – let’s call ‘em 'Homeless' – whom I had pitched to before at a different table. Homeless complained that they kept moving him around. Second con: It’s difficult to accommodate last-minute executive changes, since they can’t simply put up another table, but have to find the proverbial birds of a feather (they endeavor to clump the execs together by genre.) If more than one executive occupies a table, the occupants have to agree at least somewhat on the type of material they’re looking for, which probably leads to either some unhappy executives or likely a few table switches (which in turn leads to some unhappy writers.)

In the afternoon, I tackled some of the longer lines, gleefully inching my way forward, until we were informed that the table had collectively decided that they wanted to hear comedy now – let’s just call ‘em 'Confused.' Down the drain went my pitches – and about 15 minutes of my life. (Hey, I’m German. I don’t do comedy.) Third con: Listening to only one genre all day makes for some tired executives – and abrupt changes. Fact is, quite a few of these folks are looking for several genres, and the three-to-a-table table mechanic doesn't handle that very efficiently.

In general, having more than one executive at a table makes it hard to keep track of exactly who you’re pitching to at any given time – especially when the executives switch tables or take long breaks or a company didn’t show up and was quickly replaced with another company. Let’s face it, the moment you sit down, you pitch. You don’t pull out pen and paper and start copying down everyone’s name tag.

One last thing worth noting: unlike Great American Pitchfest, InkTip provides no real background information on whom you're meeting with, nor any contact info. All they give you are the contact's name, company, and a couple of credits. This makes following up with people whom you do not get a chance to meet with difficult. Great American Pitchfest, on the other hand, is worth the cost of admission just for the detailed booklet they provide, which becomes a valuable reference you'll refer back to time and again throughout the year and may yield plenty more opportunities long after the pitching is over.

Was there opportunity? You bet! I got in about 15 pitches, altogether about 38 companies in total. That's pretty amazing. Still, my personal preference is one executive at a time. You have a slightly better chance at establishing a personal connection when it's one on one. I’m also comforted in knowing who exactly I’m pitching to; and I prefer being able to tailor my pitches to the person at hand, as opposed to keeping it general. But that might just be my inner Teutonic control freak. When all is said and done, InkTip showed they have learned from their mistakes of the past and they delivered an event chock full of potential for writers.

+++

Tanya Klein is a CI story analyst, teacher and screenwriter. For almost a decade she ran a theater company in NYC, and she was the second unit cameraperson on Coverage Ink Films' LIBERATOR. She is currently working on the script for CI's first feature "TWISTED," which begins shooting in late fall.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Jeff Fisher's Butt-Kickin' Rewrite Process

by Jim Cirile

Here's what's supposed to happen: you send your script in for coverage; the notes come back, and finally after much groaning, agonizing and denial, you rewrite the script, solving all the problems that deep down you suspected all along.

Except, it NEVER happens that way. The way it actually goes down is: you do a rewrite based on the notes, and while some problems may get solved, new issues are created -- those knee-jerk solutions may not be all that well thought through. One step forward, two back. So after yet another rewrite, one sends it for coverage again. But now when the notes come back, it seems you're even further from the bull's-eye than you were on the first draft! Pretty frustrating, right? It always takes way more drafts than we would have hoped, and it's seldom that linear progression forward from "pass" to "consider" we all hope for.

Jeff Fisher

Unless you're Jeff Fisher, that is.

A few months back, Jeff sent his script "Cloud Nine" in to Coverage Ink for analysis. According to the notes, it had a lot of good elements, but also needed a lot of TLC -- rather like many of the scripts that come our way. But the most amazing thing happened when Jeff sent along the rewrite about 4 weeks later: the reader (AK, who had also read the first draft) was blown away. "I've never seen anything like this," he said. "This guy nailed all the notes." In less than a month, Jeff Fisher went from pass/consider with reservations to consider/strong consider. He skipped right over the 16 drafts it usually takes the rest of us to achieve that! So with great admiration (and just a smidgen of jealousy,) we figured we'd ask Jeff just how the hell he pulled this off.

Jim C: Hi, Jeff! Can you tell us a bit about your background?

Jeff F: My first "industry" job (unless you count movie theater usher) was a Craft Service PA on a Paramount feature called ARRIVE ALIVE, a romantic comedy starring Willem Dafoe and Joan Cusack that shut down production after nine shooting days. : ) From there, I was lucky enough to PA on some awesome features ("Cape Fear" was a biggie for me) back East where I'm from. I moved to LA and worked as an assistant at ICM and then Columbia/Tri-Star, always shooting little spec music videos and stuff to build a reel on the weekends. I shot my first short film "Garage Sale" over a week's vacation from ICM. Off my short films (and thanks to my awesome friend Toni Gallagher), I was able get a gig on a few early reality shows ("Bug Juice" was my first) and worked my way up to Director on shows like "The Real World/Road Rules Challenge" and "The Simple Life." I wrote and directed my first feature ("Killer Movie") which premiered at Tribeca in 2008 and stars Paul Wesley, Kaley Cuoco, Leighton Meester, Nestor Carbonell and a gaggle of other actors I loved working with. It was about a reality film crew that gets into all kinds of trouble -- something I knew a thing or two about. There's lots of mayhem going on, but it's all very "Scooby-Doo."

JC: Nice. Give us a quick heads-up on what CLOUD NINE is all about and what you hope to do with it. You're planning to shoot this puppy?

JF: CLOUD NINE is the grown up version of a little musical short I did called "ANGELS, BABY!" back in 1999. (Watch it right here.) I always loved the idea of having an angels around looking out for our best interests. I actually got the idea for the short watching Steven Spielberg do a press interview for the movie "ALWAYS." I'm paraphrasing, but when he was asked about the angel in that movie, he said he loved the idea that when he was trying to figure out where to put the camera and got a great idea, maybe it was the spirit of some great director from years gone by whispering in his ear. That was the impetus -- along with a musical number I once saw the actress Jessica Tuck perform (that's another story though.) It has just been growing into a feature in the back of head since. I've had some great notes and help from friends along the way too.

And the plan is to make it this summer!

JC: What was your reaction to the first round of coverage on it?

JF: "YIKES!" But -- and I think you say this in your video -- it resonated. I knew the notes were valid and I was determined to make this as strong a script as possible. I let it marinate for a week. I asked for some advice from writer friends I respect -- and dug in on the next draft.

JC: Smart move. I always let stuff simmer for a while.

JF: I had to sit with the notes for a beat. Digging right in that day was too aggressive. I actually wrote out all the notes I received and started writing possible solutions in the column next to them. By the way, some AWFUL solutions! I'd call a friend and ask -- and they'd talk it through and often give me a good idea or get me thinking of something emotionally honest. I found a lot of my initial solutions were way too "on the nose."

JC: Exactly. We're often in such a rush to get the rewrite process over with that we often choose the easiest fixes, which may not be the best ones for the script. The first things we think of might be inelegant or contrived or cause plot holes down the line. You did an amazing job on the polish. What sort of advice would you give to other writers who might be in a similar position -- ten pages of notes, now what the hell do you do?

JF: That is so cool of you to say. Thank you! Honestly, I'd say don't sweat it. Just read them through (hopefully with a strong drink close by) and put them aside for a beat. You'll know when it's time to check them out again. You don't have to solve every problem all at once. Just pitch one solution to yourself or a friend. The next one won't be far behind.

JC: Thanks a bunch, Jeff! Looking forward to hearing more about CLOUD NINE as it heads into production.

Monday, April 09, 2012

Writers on the Storm 2012 Contest Posponed

Hi folks, we are postponing the start of Writers on the Storm 2012 until fall. We had been scheduled to launch May 21.

There are several reasons for this, but the main one is time. We are overloaded with projects at the moment, and it takes a lot of time to put together a contest on the scale of WOTS. Coverage Ink, which is the parent company of Writers on the Storm, is also in preproduction on our first feature film called TWISTED.

We will announce the new launch date of the contest within a few weeks. In the meantime, we are sending out the top ten from last year's contest, so, everyone, let's all pull for our winners! We're getting lost of positive feedback on out winning script, Wright or Wrong. No less than Jake Wagner from FilmEngine called it "very clever." So let's cross fingers!

We appreciate everyone's patience. If you're going to be at Great American Pitchfest (June 1-3), please stop by our booth and say hi. And now, all of you, what are you wasting time reading blogs for? Get back to writing! (Oops, me, too.)

Jim C.

Wednesday, April 04, 2012

THE HUNGER GAMES -- Greatest Movie Ever?

Jennifer Lawrence went brown, not black. If you're going to dye, why not dye it to the correct color?

Okay, okay. Let me clarify right away: I don't actually think The Hunger Games, Lionsgate's hugely successful, more or less faithful adaptation of Suzanne Collins' young adult sci-fi bestseller, is the greatest movie ever made. That honor, of course, goes to Monty Python's Life of Brian. But the strangest thing happened as I sat there watching this film: for a brief time, I did actually think Hunger Games was the shizzbombdiggityest film ever. Seriously.

Warning: spoilers ahead!

Going into the movie, I wasn't expecting much. My daughter is a big fan of the book series, and I'd read a few chapters of the first one. I found the writing pretty good, but was not really compelled to keep reading. I'm old enough to realize that The Hunger Games is just a young adult ("YA") version of The Running Man and The Most Dangerous Game. And so, feeling this material was about as fresh as the mini Baby Ruth in the Easter egg I planted under the sofa last year but only just found yesterday morning, I put the book aside. Turns out, however, that those unfamiliar with where the story was lifted from found the material bracing, the heroine, Katniss Everdeen, inspiring, and the post-apocalyptic world of Panem dark, exciting and new.

And so as I watched the movie on opening day with three 12-year-old girls--target audience, yup--I was expecting to enjoy the film perhaps slightly more than a colonoscopy. Sure enough, as The Hunger Games went through its paces, I was not especially interested. The whole premise just seemed, well, stupid. In case you're unfamiliar, in the story, the 12 districts (which are all supposed to be suffering from severe hunger, although there is nary an emaciated person to be found in the entire movie) choose tributes--children from 12-18--to participate in a gruesome, televised fight to the death --bread and circuses, without the bread. Problem here is, there is a BIG difference between a 12 year old and an 18 year old. 12 year olds are kids; 18 year olds are grown-ups. Having them compete on the same battlefield makes zero sense. Nor does the hyper-gory nature of the competition. WHY kids? Well, to appeal to the YA audience, of course. But in reality, does it make any sense? Of course not. And this is underlined by exactly what happens in the movie--when a young girl who touched the audience (Rue, played by Amandla Stenberg) dies in the competition, riots begin. Yeah, you know, in the 70-some-odd years they've been doing these games, I'm sure this has NEVER happened before. No one ever got upset over the killing of one of the contestants and went ballistic. No parents ever organized or tried to stop the madness. It's idiotic. What fascist state would ever persecute the ones most likely to engage the public's emotions, to potentially ignite rebellion? Far more likely: adults would be chosen for these games, not kids, and most likely they'd be prisoners or outcasts or enemies of the state... oh, wait, that's Running Man again.

Katniss and Rue

But wait, I said Greatest Movie Ever! I haven't said much positive yet. Here's the thing: the filmmakers did one thing very, very right. Midway into the movie, they focused on the battlefield relationship between Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Rue. This accomplished several things: firstly, it made Katniss super-empathetic. Rue became her charge, Katniss the mother/protector. This, coupled with Katniss never killing the other competitors offensively--only defensively--made her someone to root for, a good person worth our emotional investment. It's like Ripley once she took Newt under her wing in Aliens. We all liked the character to begin with, but having to protect a young one brings out that maternal instinct that we can all relate to (yes, even dads who begrudgingly take their daughters to YA movies.)

Secondly, these scenes break up the more or less uninspired woods stalking/fight scenes. Let's face it, how interesting is it to hunt people in the woods for two-thirds of a major release? It all feels pretty stale, and the few token attempts to enliven the action by showing that the woods are actually like the Enterprise-D holodeck, and the gameskeepers can create new weather and creatures at any time, are pretty much a fail. But because Katniss bonds with Rue, we lock in and we care, too, and we don't stop to think that much about the lack of creativity in envisioning these sequences and indeed the very premise.

Lastly... they killed Rue. (I said spoilers!) This can't help but move us, and it injects the movie with some much-needed heart at just the right time. To ice the cake, Director Gary Ross wisely cut to scenes of Rue's grieving dad igniting the protests, and then the riots spreading (which according to my daughter did not happen in the book,) all of which tap into our own visceral, "Yeah! Get those bastards!" feelings. And thus, for a fleeting time there watching the movie, I actually thought: Wow. This is the greatest movie ever.

Anyway, that went away pretty quick. The ending in particular was a real fizzle. We're hoping that Katniss steps up and becomes the voice, the embodiment, of the new resistance. We're hoping that she uses her status as the winner to make a speech, to motivate and unify people to effect change. We want her to step to the maniacs who instituted this system in the first place, to use her archery and her passion and her chutzpah to do something. Yeah... nope. See, apparently that all happens in book two, so the movie ends on one hell of an anticlimax.

I walked out of the theater thinking this was a good movie -- flawed, but good. Within two hours of thinking about some of these issues and others -- such as why Heymitch (Woody Harrelson) is a drunk in his first scene but then inexplicably stops drinking (motivation?,) where's the hunger (apart from the title,) why--if the battlefield is indeed a hologram--woods at all? Why not a messed-up futuristic Wipeout-style obstacle course, complete with vehicles, armor, explosives, etc.? And of course, the inevitable, why do all the older teens all look to be in their mid twenties? Sigh.

All of that said, kudos should be given to the filmmakers and writers for hewing the adaptation closely to the source material (although my daughter and her friends certainly had quibbles) and more importantly, for a savvy marketing campaign. If you see the film, you'll likely enjoy it. Just try not to think about it too much afterwards. Or during.

--Jim C.

Friday, March 09, 2012

Save the Cat! 3.0 Story Structure software review

Is the latest version of the story structure software based on Blake Snyder's best-selling book series the hook and ladder company your screenplay needs? Coverage Ink's roving correspondent Ebony Jones dons her veterinary garb to give this Cat! a thorough check-up.

+++

I admit I’m a little biased. I had been eagerly awaiting the opportunity to try out the new Save the Cat! 3.0. According to the late great Blake Snyder, this is “the only story structure software you'll ever need!” And he’s not lying. I’ve mentioned in other reviews that I’m big planner. Before I delved into my first script, I read Snyder’s book Save the Cat! I ran to Target and bought the corkboard with the color-coded index cards and the thumbtacks. I felt like Luke Skywalker with my light saber ready for screenwriting war. I was determined to battle the Dark Side of no real plot or no theme or no motivated hero. All I needed was a character and place and I had this! But then I came to realize that I’m more of a visual person. I need to be hands-on to actually see and do this process step by step.

I was lucky to attend a 2-day workshop where I learned and utilized the principles from “Save the Cat! Strikes Back” which is a third book in the series that expands on the Blake Snyder beat sheet template (BS2) and helps to give your script even more depth. After I left that workshop, I wanted something more. I wanted a one-stop planning software where I could implement the BS2 concept and easily maneuver between genres and lengths. Save the Cat! 3.0 software does all of that.

I won’t get into too many specifics about the formula itself because I really want to encourage you to read all of Blake Snyder’s books before even touching the software. Reading the books will give you a better grasp so you can fully utilize all of the bells and whistles that this software has to offer. Thankfully, the software has a thorough video tutorial as well as an excerpt from Chapter 3 of Save the Cat! Strikes Back so you’re not thrown to the wolves. While the BS2 concept is simple, it is a unique writing experience. You'll get the hang of it quickly, and once you do, you'll find it indispensable. There's a reason why so many prodcos in town use Save the Cat! as their bible.

Let me highlight the parts of the software that I find to be the most beneficial to my writing personality. Some people like to just fire up Final Draft and crank out a script. That’s fine and nothing wrong with that at all. Keep in mind that Save the Cat! software is not a screenwriting software. There is a tab on the notes cards labeled “script” where you can write out the script as it applies to the corresponding index card if you must get it down on paper. But the script writing function is nothing extensive. Conveniently, if you do use the script function, you can export that script from the BS2 software into Final Draft 8. If you have an already written script and want to see how well it conforms to the Blake Snyder beat sheet, you can import it from Final Draft into the BS2 software and it will create the scene cards based on your scene headings. Slick.

The concept of the BS2 beat sheet (which you can download for free right here) is to get through the whole planning process from beginning to end without any glaring omissions or plot holes. If there are holes in your BS2 then you don’t have a strong enough script. The first thing you start out with is the title and logline. You can either do a short logline, a long logline, or both. Again, don’t cheat the software by just putting anything to move onto the next round. Treat it like a game of Super Mario Bros. Play hard to get to the next level. I love that you’re forced to get this right from the start. I spent a day trying to come up with a good logline. It’s painful but you’ll pat yourself on the back later. You’ll also need to pick your genre. Don’t worry. Everything can be changed, so nothing is written in stone. And then the software walks you through the process of figuring out the key 15 plot beats (hence, the 'beat sheet') that constitute the structural underpinnings of your screenplay. Once you've got that down, it's on to the corkboard, where you'll structure the details between those 15 beats -- the 40 scenes that make up your movie. Don't worry, it's easier than it sounds. The software holds your hand, but it does force you to think (trust me, fellow writers, this may seem frightening, but is a good thing.)

Each note card allows you soo many pieces of information to pile on including your characters, setup, pay-offs, attachments, notes, and locations. Each card is a scene so you can put all of those elements of that scene on that card. But the key is, you have to fill out your 15 beats before you’ll be allowed to move on to The Board. This is the way they prevent you from rolling into a screenplay with half an idea but no idea where you're going. When you move on to The Board, it prompts you as to whether you wish to just fill out the 15 cards or the 40 cards. If you’re starting a script from scratch, I would recommend doing the 40 cards because it’s a thorough writing journey in terms of filling in your characterization and plot. And the 40 cards also help denote where there are emotional and conflict changes in your scenes. If there’s no change to a scene, then there’s no reason to have the scene. This marvelous feature literally forces you to properly structure your screenplay and think everything through in advance.

STC! 3.0's interface. Hey, it even looks like a real corkboard!

The feature that I love that isn’t illustrated in any of the books is what beats should fall on what pages if your script length isn’t the standard 110 pages. What if you’re writing a TV show where the script is maybe 55 pages? This is where the software is a godsend. You can change how many pages you have allotted for your script. The BS2 and “litter box” will change according to that number. So your script will always be proportionate to the three-act structure no matter the length. Conversely, got novel? STC! does, and this same feature will break down your manuscript of up to 1,000 pages, placing all the beats in the correct places.

Other features include adding notes and color-coordinating the card according to the story type. So if you have a B story or even a B + C story, you can track all of these stories and/or character arcs along with your A story to ensure that all of the stories are aligned and will fall on the correct beats. Version 3.0 includes a redesigned interface where you can see all the elements at the same time in the same window, an all-new multimedia corkboard that allows you to "tack up" videos, sticky notes, links, pix, you name it, 10 pre-made genre templates, over 100 tips and tricks, and my favorite, a 50-point "greenlight checklist" which I found invaluable. They even have a Save the Cat! Cloud for file storage and portability.

There is much more to explore so I hope you take the opportunity to try Save the Cat! software on your next script or even to improve a script already written. The main thing to keep in mind is that if like many of us, you often launch into a script without having "broken" the story or worked out all the main story beats, you may well find yourself adrift in Act 2 with no clue how to continue. The brilliance of this method is it forces you to Get It Right, like it or not. But trust me, by the end of the process, you will like it. Save the Cat! 3.0 can't help but improve your screenplay structure, and if you ask me, that is one neat cat trick.

Save the Cat 3.0 software is available for PC and Mac.

+++

Ebony Jones is a 2001 graduate of Cornell University's School of Hospitality with a degree in business communications. She has completed her first unpublished novel Sierra Phillips: Swimming in Blue Liqueur as well as a short story, When Ariel Lost Her Voice. She has finally tackled restructuring the dramatic screenplay she's been working on that has now gone from When Momma Dies to untitled since the mother no longer dies.

Saturday, March 03, 2012

"Maggie" Bravely Scores an Option

Suzanne Kelman

We always love it when clients tell us their success stories, especially when it's with material that's a little outside the box. Writer Suzanne Kelman tells us that her spec script MAGGIE THE BRAVE was optioned by MovieHatch. "They partner with Broken Road, Red Wagon and Tribeca," says Kelman. "The movie is in development right now." The script also won Best Feature Comedy Screenplay at the 2011 Los Angeles United Film Festival.

Set in 1978, MAGGIE is a quirky British comedy about an aging, single, self-absorbed hypochondriac who is about to be thrown out of her government housing and relocated to an awful retirement community--unless she can find a husband within three weeks.

"(They are) in the process of attaching the talent and the director," says Kelman. "One thing I am realizing about screenwriting is it take a looooog time from script to screen. I should have started writing when I was twelve just to get something made in my lifetime."

Kelman, whose book Big, Purple Undies (cowritten with her sister Louise) sold over 50,000 copies, is currently working on a new script called VIOLET SKYE with her writing partner Rose Woods. Well done, Suzanne! We'll be keeping an eye out for the likes of MAGGIE.

Thursday, March 01, 2012

Why There Will Never Be a Ghostbusters III

Moviefone's Mike Ryan hits it out of the park with this great assessment of Bill Murray's career, as well as the economics and other factors that drive sequelitis. Did you know that Murray only agreed to be in Ghostbusters as part of a trade deal with the studio to release his passion project Razor's Edge? These types of "one for you, one for me" arrangements are commonplace in Hollywood, and its how folks like Clint Eastwood and George Clooney have gotten some of their best films made. Unfortunately for Murray, Razor's Edge tanked, but his shrewd method of damage control (creating a semi-reclusive bon vivant/iconoclast-type persona) helped ensure that his icon status remained intact and that he didn't become Chevy Chase.

Most interestingly, we learn why despite Dan Aykroyd's best efforts (and a halfway decent 2009 videogame that reunited the cast for voice work,) there will be no Ghostbusters III... at least, not until the inevitable reboot. " It's so hard to get everybody together. And we're so much older," said Murray. "There's a lot more hair dye being used this time. When it's face-lift time, we'll have to quit." Ryan then points out that this quote is 23 years old. Fascinating stuff. Check out the article right here.

Friday, February 17, 2012

Coverage Ink/Writers on the Storm Newsletter February 2012

1) On the Button
2) Shorties
3) My Bandwagon Seems To Have a Flat (The Descendants review)
4) Steve Kaire: More Test Your Screenwriting IQ
5) Ten Things Your Agent Will Never Tell You

+++

1) ON THE BUTTON

by Jim Cirile

Here's something that's crucially important in screenwriting that hardly anyone ever talks about: the BUTTON. No, not the thing on your pants that is getting harder and harder to fasten (okay, maybe that's just me.) I mean the punchline, if we're talking comedy, or the line with punch if we're talking anything else. In short, it's the unexpected comeuppance, the fiery bon mot, the sublime retort, the fist to the face you want to end your scene on -- punchy and memorable and exquisite.

Why are buttons so important? Well, lots of "duh" reasons, like, always end on a high note, as well as wanting the reader to be so excited about what they've just read that they launch vigorously into the next scene. A solid button makes you want to keep reading; a lame one makes you go, Hmm, I wonder what's on HSN? And of course you want something that makes you shine as a writer, something that punctuates or encapsulates the point of the scene and puts a dainty little bow on it.

Good reasons all, of course. But the main reason why buttons rock, to me, are because they embody and define great movies. When we think of the movies we love, we often think of the buttons--the best lines said at the best possible times. Buttons are part of the reason why we become screenwriters in the first place. We want to create those iconic moments. And thus it is odd to me that so many screenplays have flaccid scene ends, or don't have buttons at all. Button up, folks!

Here are just a few fricking amazing, classic buttons:

Take your stinking paws off me, you damn dirty ape! (Planet of the Apes)
I don't like to lose. (Star Trek II)
Snap out of it! (Cher to a smitten Nic Cage, Moonstruck)
We're gonna need a bigger boat. (Jaws)
No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die. (Goldfinger)
I know. (Han to Leia, Empire Strikes Back, after she tells him she loves him)

And perhaps the greatest movie button ever written:

I'll have what she's having. (If you don't know where that's from, there's no hope for you.)

So if you're unfamiliar with buttons, here's how to implement them. When you get to the end of a scene you've been working on, read back over the scene and edit it mercilessly. One thing many of us do is "overshoot the button," which means we keep blathering on even after the point of the scene has been made and the logical place to end the scene has passed. So scan your scene for a natural end point. This might be a crushing piece of news or a great comeback or just a crazy-smart piece of dialogue you're proud of. And then simply end your scene there. All that other stuff after it? You probably don't need it.

Then do the exact same thing with the other 50 or so scenes in your screenplay.

If you're a comedy writer, the button is where you prove your mettle. Every one of those darn scenes is going to need that rock 'em sock 'em line to go out on. This can be a real hair-puller, let me tell you. Monty Python often ended their sketches early, rather than have a proper punchline; thus the crazy animated links became their own nonsequitor buttons in a way. One useful trick is to make your button a new development or something no one saw coming. It's been said that jaded movie execs want a surprise on every page. So the surest way to keep people turning pages is to end on something that teases them forward -- a trick every novelist worth his or her salt employs.

And now a confession: I'm trying to think of a great button for this little piece, and I'm coming up with diddley squat! Something no one sees coming... hmm... okay, how about this?

+++

So what's going on? Jeez, everything! How about Coverage Ink Films' LIBERATOR trailer debuting on USAToday.com? How about Writers on the Storm returning? How about a new book coming from yours truly? How about Coverage Ink Films announcing preproduction on our first feature? And a wee little SALE to light a fire under everyone's butts as we roll into contest season? Plus watch as we demolish the script for the overrated "The Descendants." All this and more in SHORTIES below. And don't miss my "Ten Things Your Agent Will Never Tell You" article!

Onward and downward,

Jim Cirile

Founder, Coverage Ink, Writers on the Storm

Like us on Facebook!

SHORTIES

WRITERS ON THE STORM VI returns May 15, 2012. Six years of this! Crazy. When will we ever learn? One would have to draw the conclusion that we like being inundated with scripts. (sigh) Still too early to have anything to report from last year's winners yet. In fact, we haven't even taken the list out yet. Charles Mitri, John Winn Miller and our winners Brooks Elms and Glenn Sanders have all finished new drafts based on our notes, and if all goes well we should be going out in early March. We'll have more to report when we have more to report!

SICK AND "TWISTED." We are pleased to announce preproduction on our first feature film "TWISTED." As of January 2012, Coverage Ink Films is a real, live production company. Our goal is to make one feature a year. Twisted is a time warp horror/thriller written by CI analyst Tanya Klein and Jim Cirile and will be directed by Liberator director Aaron Pope. If all goes well, Twisted will begin principal photography at the end of summer in Los Angeles.

LIBERATION BEGINS NOW. Coverage Ink's new 20-minute short film/presentation pilot LIBERATOR isn't even done yet but is already getting an insane amount of buzz. USA Today picked up the world premiere of the 2-minute trailer and dozens of media outlets and fan sites have also run with it. It helps that LIBERATOR star Lou Ferrigno is having one hell of a comeback, mirroring his character in the film. Ferrigno is on NBC's Celebrity Apprentice this season (Sunday Nights at 9PM) and is reprising his role as The Hulk -- at least, in voice -- in the upcoming Marvel summer blockbuster The Avengers. The publicity firestorm has Lou doing interviews around the clock, all of which is just huge for us and Liberator. Click HERE to visit the Liberator website and see the trailer, behind the scenes video and more! And don't forget to watch Lou -- as well as the star of a previous Coverage Ink production, George "Mr. Sulu" Takei -- on Celebrity Apprentice.

AGENT'S HOT SHEET: THE BOOK. As most of you know by now, sadly, both Creative Screenwriting and Script magazines are no more. This is just ridiculous. We went from having two great magzaines to none in the space of a few seconds. Surely someone out there will perceive an opening and start up a new print screenwriting magazine. There's definitely a market for it! At any rate, I wrote the Agent's Hot Sheet column for ten amazing years before CS foundered. That's an awful lot of important and still-relevant advice from the top reps in the biz that shouldn't disappear. So I am now editing and updating those columns and will be offering them as an e-book : Agent's Hot Sheet-- Ten Years of Screenwriting Wisdom from Hollywood's Top Reps sometime in March. You will also be able to order it as a PDF from Coverage Ink, just like our legendary CI Spec Format + Style Guide (which, BTW, is NOT available as an e-book due to formatting issues--only as a PDF download from CI.) We'll have news on where to get your copy in next month's newsletter.

Bessounian, Langham and C3PO

THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE NICHOLL. Huge, huge congratulations to our pals writer/directors Chris Bessounian and Tianna Langham, who along with five other writers were named Nicholl Fellows in November. Their script “Guns and Saris” grabbed the top honors, and the news hit Bessounian so hard it actually put him in the hospital, believing he was having a heart attack! We hope their careers are heating up in a big way. Bessounian and Langham are also the founders of Squirrel, a crazy-useful site that allows the filmmaking community to feedback on festivals so that we don't waste money on the many that are just not worth the dough. If you've been to any recently, sign up and leave your e-pinions (free of course.) Way to go, you two!

YET MORE CATS TO SAVE. Blake Snyder may be gone, but the Save the Cat! team soldiers on, their mission: to continue sharing the STC! method with the world. I recently had breakfast with BJ and Rich from Save The Cat! and came away super impressed. These are two smart, very cool guys and their hearts are in the right places. I think Blake would be very proud that they are continuing on with his teachings. And if you don't have a clue what I'm talking about and haven't yet discovered the wonder that is the Save the Cat! books and software, then stop right now and click this link. The next Save the Cat! beat sheet weekend is March 24/25 in Los Angeles, and you should check it out. Those two days could be the single best thing you ever do for your writing career. Read Ebony Jones' review of an STC! Beat Sheet weekend right here. Then sign up at http://www.blakensyder.com. By the way, Ebony will have a review of the new Save the Cat! 3.0 software right here next month.

MOVIE OUTLINE 3.1.2. If you missed our review of the terrific all-in-one screenwriting software Movie Outline 3.1.2, click here to see what Ebony Jones has to say about it.

GET "DEAD" FOR FREE. Magrie Kaptanoglu, writer of the must-see short film DEAD IN THE ROOM, tells us that you can now watch it for free on YouTube! The film has completed its festival run, so they have released it for the world to enjoy. Read our article about the film right here and then pop open a cold one and relax for five minutes and get "Dead": http://www.youtube.com/deadintheroom

SALE! Spring is rolling in fast, and that means... contest season. Are your scripts ready? I mean, really ready? Well, folks, we will help you make sure those scripts are in fighting shape. Just submit your screenplay for analysis to Coverage Ink and use this code: CISPRING20 on your order form, and you will receive $20 off any CI coverage service (feature screenplays only.) May not be combined with any other discounts; offer expires March 6th, 2012. So shine 'em up and send 'em in!

Noooooo!

GOD HELP US, MICHAEL BAY TO DIRECT "TRANSFORMERS" -- AGAIN. Seriously, what more do we need to say here? It's a sequel but they're calling it a reboot, but seriously, who cares? Be afraid. Be very afraid!

Back to newsletter

My Bandwagon Seems to Have a Flat

A somewhat contrarian review of “The Descendants”

WARNING: SPOILERS!

by Tanya Klein

George Clooney and Shailene Woodley in "The Descendants"

I finally got a chance to check out “The Descendants” last week. I’ve been looking forward to seeing this much-lauded movie for quite some time, but life kept intervening. Maybe it should have intervened a bit longer so I could have saved my money and waited for the DVD.

Yes, I’m talking about the same movie that got rave reviews in pretty much every single paper. Yes, that movie written and directed by media-proclaimed genius Alexander Payne and starring everyone’s favorite ex-E.R. physician, George Clooney.

Despite my snarky attitude, let’s start with the good stuff: the acting throughout is believable and on-the-money, with all of the actors making the most of what they were given. Some of the shots show flashes of brilliance. The oft-mentioned scene of George Clooney’s Matt King racing down the street in his omnipresent flip-flops, wobbly and panicky, is indeed as good as everyone claims it is. It tells us in one very funny shot everything we need to know about what’s going on with the character at this point in time. Some of the scenes, like George Clooney confronting his now comatose spouse about her infidelity or the jilted wife character (Judy Greer) bringing her flowers, are very effective.

And now, let the griping begin.

My major complaints are mostly script-related. All of the characters essentially remain enigmas. Matt King describes himself (in one of his endless voiceovers) as the “backup parent,” who doesn’t seem to know his kids very well. Why he chose to de-prioritize his family to the extent that he seems to be completely baffled by his younger daughter Scottie’s (Shayla Eve) tantrums, we don’t know. Also, whatever running away from family responsibility he did prior to the movie has clearly stopped by the time the movie starts. In other words, whatever development the character might have gone through happened before we got to see it.

The subplot of the Hawaiian land sale serves as the vehicle for Matt’s supposed epiphany, his new sense of responsibility towards his heirs and ancestors. Yet, we don’t know which particular straw broke the camel's back or if, in fact, there even was one. There is never a moment where Matt journeys amongst the people and experiences what the real consequences of his actions might be. Sure, he gets lectured to from a native Hawaiian woman early on in the script, but we never see how injurious the land sale would really be (a topic covered much better in the film "Princess Kaiulani.") It doesn’t help that a lot of Matt’s supposed character flaws – his father-in-law calls him stingy and accuses him of not treating his wife, Elizabeth, like he should -- are talked about as opposed to shown. These are all "Show, Don't Tell" screenwriting violations, of course. Since we don’t know this character or his motivation or his Achilles’ heel or really anything else about him very well, we have a hard time feeling for him and going along for the journey. Matt never arcs. He comes to a moment of decision where he does do the right thing, but the only thing motivating it is a minute of staring at photos on his wall (his ancestors) rather than any personal journey.

Speaking of which, the journey lost me before it got rightly started. The inciting incident – the older daughter, Alex (Shailene Woodley), telling her father about his wife’s infidelity – didn’t strike me as believable. Completely apart from the setup – she just happened to see her mother walk into a house with a guy in a completely different part of town where she happened to pass by (hey, okay, you‘re allowed one coincidence per movie) – what didn’t ring true was the situation in which she told her father. A 17-year-old semi-rebellious teenager might throw that into her father’s face in any number of situations: a fight, a visit to the hospital, him trying to assert parental authority or any number of other scenarios would all work fine; unfortunately, sitting in the living room and having a conversation after Matt tells his daughter that her mother won’t come out of the coma isn’t one of them.

The character of Alex also, regrettably, has no arc or transformation at all and remains quite enigmatic throughout the movie. I originally expected her slacker friend Sid, who unaccountably is always at hand, to serve as her vehicle for change. But that didn’t happen. In fact, Sid seems to be one of those characters that fit squarely into the "use him or lose him" category. Just who IS this guy? Is he sweet on Alex? Why does she keep him around? How does she know him? And if he's such a good friend, why wouldn't Matt know who he was? Throughout the movie, we keep waiting for the character of Alex to grow and mature out of being rebellious and difficult and self-centered, traits she seemingly adopted as a defense mechanism to dealing with her mother's infidelity and her father's disconnection; and we expect Sid to be the person who facilitates this. None of this ever happens, and in fact Alex simply stops exhibiting those behavior patterns for no reason that I can tell. As charming as the actress is, this role is an epic fail as far as the writing is concerned.

And as for Scottie, well, there's no "there" there either. That's 0 for 3. She never arcs or comes to begrudgingly accept her father; they never have that tear-drenched heart-to-heart where they at last connect; nothin'. Towards the end of the movie, on their way home from confronting Elizabeth’s lover, Matt and Alex talk about the fact that they haven’t broken the news of her mother’s diagnosis to Scottie yet. A few realizations hit me at this point -- one, that I had all but forgotten about Scottie, because the character was so underdeveloped and her issues never addressed -- two, that I hadn’t even realized that they hadn’t told her yet (and it really didn't make a difference) and three, that I really didn’t care.

A few days later, I saw another film, this time on DVD, that’s been on my list for a very long time, “The Beaver” – yes, my list is a bit backed-up – starring Mel Gibson and directed by Jodie Foster -- and it made me think about the vagaries of this business. Even though these two films cover very different ground, both deal with families in turmoil and transition and specifically, fathers who have difficulty connecting with a difficult high schooler who has written him off. But "The Beaver" does all that in a much more original and creative way. The writing, directing, and acting is as good as it gets; the script by Kyle Killen, a Black List fave, paints every single character in three luscious dimensions. Yet, when it came out – thanks to Mr. Gibson's minus numbers on the likability scale – it didn’t get any kudos. "The Beaver" is a superior film to "The Descendants" in every way. In this business of bandwagons and public perception, have we gone so far astray that most emperors are nude while anybody wearing clothes is relegated to the DVD bin? Yes, George Clooney is charming and still handsome, while Mel Gibson hasn't aged well and his off-screen antics are appalling. But this is the man who directed "Braveheart," and you know, he can still act up a storm. Gibson's performance is arresting; he rips open a vein in "The Beaver". Clooney sheds a single tear and kinda coasts a bit in "The Descendants". The performances are not even in the same league.

But of course, we like Clooney, and we don't like Gibson. So there you go. As for "The Descendants," one kind of hopes to exit the theater after seeing a critically lauded film feeling more than, "Eh, it was okay, I guess."

+++

Tanya Klein is a CI story analyst, teacher and screenwriter. For almost a decade she ran a theater company in NYC, and she was the second unit cameraperson on Coverage Ink Films' LIBERATOR. She is currently working on the script for CI's first feature "TWISTED."

Back to Newsletter