Being Specific About Career Goals

Having a "goal" is not enough. We must be specific in identifying our long term and short term career goals. The key word here is SPECIFIC.

"I would like to write movies" is not a valid career goal because it's not specific enough. What kind of movies and what are the steps we need to take to get there?

For example, five years from now I'd like to be an extremely well paid feature film writer. So am I going to achieve that goal by writing character driven indie dramas? Because if I write and sell two of those (hell, even one), that's what type of writer the industry will see me as, and those are the types of offers I'll be fielding. Luckily, my sensibilities lean toward high-concept, big budget ideas, which are exactly the kind of ideas studios pay well for. So taking into account my goals and my sensibilities, I should be writing high-concept, big budget specs, and that's exactly what I'm doing. If the story idea I have doesn't serve that 5 year goal, I write it down, takes notes when ideas strike me, and file it for later. But I don't lose sight of the goal and the genre expectations I need to meet.

Hopefully, after 3 or 4 big budget successes, I'll have the resources (read money and connections) and experience to fulfill my long term goal of writing and directing my own modestly budgeted films through my own production company housed underneath the hollowed out volcano of my private island/kung fu training compound. A much easier goal to attain once everyone in Hollywood knows my name, I have demonstrated I can generate profit for them and proven with decisive force that my giant space based laser will in fact work.

So my short term career goal is to become one of the go-to writers for high-concept, summer blockbuster level ideas. THAT is specific. I now have a much clearer idea as to what I need to accomplish in order to achieve that goal. Have you given enough thought to your specific goals, as well as formulated a plan to achieve them?

Dangerous Review: The Gloriously Inglorious Basterds

How Do I Love Thee, Basterds? Let me count the ways...

1. Writing: every scene is vintage Tarantino in that they all include drama, comedy, tension, set-ups, pay-offs and climaxes, wonderful and insightful transitions and yes, sudden violence. EVERY SCENE contains the aforementioned. Hopefully, one day I will be able to say that about my own writing. In any case, it's a great goal to aspire to.

2. Cinematography: Tarantino always impresses with his ability to call the shots - his camera holds the frame when it needs to, boldly and with supreme confidence. This is exemplified beautifully in the opening scene, which, by the way, is just masterful fucking storytelling through and through on the part of the entire cast and crew. His composition within the frame is on par with any great painter. In lighting, again, I am reminded of the great paintings of the masters. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the opening shots in the French countryside weren't inspired by a Cezanne or Monet landscape. The camera is always placed exactly where it needs to be - if you're paying attention you can see precisely WHY he's chosen the angles and camera moves he has. Also, his camera moves only when necessary, and is always balletic when it does so. There are no extraneous moves.

3. Dialogue: Dare I say no living filmmaker can write dialogue as funny, smart, tense and full of subtext as QT? I dare.

4. Casting: The entire casting is inspired - not what or who you'd normally pick to fill those rolls, yet no one else could fill them. Every single actor is pitch perfect in their parts (let's not even START on the ghastly brilliance of Christoph Waltz's performance). Tarantino didn't sit in some dreary L.A. casting office to fill his needs, he actually went to France to find the French actors, Germany to find the Germans, etc. This is a director who will do whatever it takes to get his exact vision on screen.

5. Score: never dull, never over the top (except when it needs to be), always perfect. Memorable, yet not overpowering.

6. Directing: Tarantino treats all these elements with the studied grace of a symphony conductor, every instrument coaxed to play their parts to perfection and only when necessary. There are moments of drama, melodrama, comedy, ridiculousness, hope, inspiration, romance, mayhem and outright terror (again, often all occurring within the same scene), what more would you ask of a film?

Is Inglorious Basterds perfect? No. But damn near and certainly worth a watch. In a multiplex, on demand, interwebs of a world, it's worthy of viewing if only by virtue of being unique AND well done, a combination that hasn't exactly been clicking in entertainment of late. Yes, Tarantino "borrows" from everything he's every seen - who among us don't, to some degree? But QT does exactly what an artist should do when they "borrow": he takes it, puts his unique spin on it and spits it back out at us. In short, he makes it his own.

If you aspire to make, act in, shoot, light or write films for a living, I'd say Tarantino is required viewing, listening AND reading.

A Dangerous Review: Avatar

Just saw Avatar & generally loved it, even though I thought it was a bit uneven. Okay, dangerously uneven. On the technical side, it was brilliant. The 3D & other special effects were so meticulous they drew me in to the world of the film in a way I've never experienced before. Everything felt real, every detail of the planet as well as the Na'vi themselves - they felt as solid and realistic as any human that's ever graced the screen (except Klaus Kinski, THAT guy was REAL : ). And the planet Pandora itself is as gorgeous as anything ever committed to film.

Jim Cameron has always been a gifted technician and writer, and though I liked the story, I did feel the execution was definitely NOT up to his usual standards. There were characters that are Cameron staples - the tough warrior chick, the closed-minded General, the corporate lapdog, the brash but brilliant scientist, etc. - but whereas in previous Cameron films those characters had depth, dimension and solid motivations, I felt the characters inhabiting Avatar were mere caricatures of those in his previous films.

Steven Lang and Giovanni Ribisi gave great performances with what they were given, but what they were given were the same villains we've seen hundreds of times. Unfortunately, they were one-note and very predictable in their actions and reactions. They were so run of the mill I kept waiting for them both to don black hats and start twirling mustaches. Sigourney Weaver attacked her role with her usual gusto, which was great, but again I felt her character was singing a single, predictable note. Michelle Rodriguez almost isn't worth a mention, since she played the same character type she always plays, which is basically her tough saucy self. Zoe Saldina did a terrific job, and I suspect the reason I loved her performance and character so much was she was a Na'vi from beginning to end (unlike the Jake Sully character, who did dual duty as human and Na'vi). She was a "good guy" through and through, totally innocent, which means not much dimension, but I bought it, mainly because that's how her Na'vi upbringing would have influenced her. Sam Worthington was good as Jake Sully, and I felt he had a strong enough character arc to carry the picture.

So the actors were fair to great, but again, I had big problems with the general shallow and uninspired characterizations on paper. Surface characterizations such as these serve to make a film predictable, which means no surprises for the audience. Terrible, from a writing standpoint.

Another example of sub-par writing - one which really bothers me, for some reason - was a scene between Weaver & Ribisi about why the humans are on Pandora in the first place. There is simply no reason for the scene besides delivering exposition. The clunky, stumbly, awkward, b-movie dialogue coupled with the shallow characters made this scene close to laughable. There are a few expository scenes like this, but this particular one stuck out as especially irritating.

Would it have been so difficult for Cameron to simply have a scene showing an "unobtainium" or whatever-they-call-it shipment being delivered and Sully asking "what the hell is that"? It would have given a valid reason for the exposition, and would have caused more real (instead of manufactured) tension in the scene since Sully is so clueless he doesn't even know what the hell all this is about.

Nitpicks aside, I still highly recommend everyone see Avatar, if anything for the experience of truly feeling as you've been transported to another world. On a technical level, the film was flawless. However, I can't wait for Cameron to write some more and recapture his talent for writing unique - instead of trite - characters.

WWDSD: The Credible Hulk

It is my pre-pro opinion that the reason Hulk films fail is because their scopes have been ridiculously large. Think Transformers. The reason the live action Hulk TV show worked is because we cared about the characters, and we cared about them because they were rooted in reality. If the only thing that can stop an 18 foot tall Hulk are genetically engineered Hulk-dogs, soundwave cannons or another Hulk (which was all Abomination was), we can't relate to the danger - or lack of. But if the Green Guy was a tad smaller, say, eight, nine feet? And now he can get hurt by something we can comprehend - like bullets or an ax, even a nuclear blast - we now fear for his safety.

If I was writing it, a new Hulk film would be downsized and dark. This is an epic struggle between two opposing parts of the same man, warring sides of a fractured Id, it's Jeckle and Hyde, Frankenstein and his monster. The reality of Banner's situation is dramatic and personal. Use it, for Hulk's sake... and ours.


Incredible Hulk TV Opening Theme -

Ready, Steady... Wait a Minute.

This is about jumping the gun again. In preparing to market my first screenplay, I came across some very helpful advice in the books "Breakfast With Sharks" by Michael Lent, and "The Screenwriter's Bible" by David Trottier (I highly recommend these books to every aspiring screenwriter). These guys have very practical, step by step advice to follow before I or you tell ANYONE about your script.

Because once you start talking, other people start asking questions, and you'd better be ready to answer in a way that exudes confidence and originality. In other words, you'd better know what you're talking about! The only way to do that is to be prepared. As every business person must know how to promote themselves, so any aspiring screenwriter has to have MARKET themselves.

What am I trying to say? Who am I trying to reach? What will that individual respond to? What's the ultimate distillation - the logline - of my story? Does it roll off my tongue when I say it out loud, or does it trip me up? I have to sound excited about my story, not confused by it. Who SPECIFICALLY am I going to send my screenplay to? Why?

The answer to these basic questions (and many others) must be known before I start talking to anyone. It's a waste of time, money and opportunity to send my romantic period drama to Silver Films. Do YOU have a marketing plan that considers all these issues? A coherent and interesting logline you can say simply; a "phone script" to guide you during calls when you may be flustered for whatever reason; a story synopsis; not one, but several query letters coming from different angles; lists of possible representation, producers, prodcos and talent to query; lists of resources to use in tracking down said information (IMDBpro, Done Deal Pro, screenwriting contests, etc.); lists of other applicable resources like screenwriting communities, fellowships etc. that will help build you network & get your work seen?

If you're serious about a career, all these factors must be considered and are just as important as your writing -- who cares what you're writing if no one will ever see it? All those resources serve that sole purpose: getting your work seen. All of these subjects are covered to varying degrees in the aforementioned books. It is our job as aspiring writers know the marketplace and our place in it. Whether you check out the books or not, pay attention to how prepared you are to sell your story to others, because in most cases we're only going to get ONE shot to impress someone.

WWDSD (What Would the Dangerous Screenwriter Do)?

Yes, a writer should never talk about their ideas - they should talk about their screenplays, stuff they've actually written. But every week I see films which could have been good, and instead were butchered like Chinese chicken. My wife's head is going to explode if I tell her one more time about the shit movie I saw which would have been so much better and more profitable if they just would have done it my way, or so and so's doing this and this film and it's going to suck unless they do this or that, and since Warner Brothers, Lucas, Spielberg, DC and Marvel all seem to have misplaced my CV, since no one will hire me to write one of these big budget busts - yet - well, goddamnit I'm gonna write about 'em on my blog. That's right, we gettin' crazy up in hey-ah.

So allow me to introduce a new column to the Dangerous Screenwriter Blog, smartly titled "WWDSD?" or, What Would the Dangerous Screenwriter Do? These sporadic posts will each be about what I would do with certain projects that are in the works, or have already crashed and burned. I know, I know, it's just what you've always wanted. You're welcome.

Might as well get the biggest albatross off my neck first: Super fucking Man...

WWDSD? What The Next Superman Trilogy SHOULD Be

Since no one since Richard Donner will ever bother to make a great Superman film and rebooting the franchise again just seems stupid, I might as well spew my Super-wad of an idea for a Supes trilogy that would grow from Superman Returns AND take care of that pesky kid problem, all right here on my own blog.
And if this ever gets to the eyes of anyone connected with Warners, DC or the Siegel estate, please feel free to steal my ideas. The world will love you for it and as long as you hire me for something else I won't be mad, I promise.

PART I: SUPERMAN VS SOMETHING THAT REALLY TESTS HIS FUCKING ABILITIES AND GIVES HIM A CHANCE TO FLY AROUND ALOT AND BEAT STUFF UP (Working Title)
A typical day in Metropolis, marked by Super Clark trying to deal with his Super kid being raised by Lois and her swell husband. Sticky relationship stuff. Until a small armada of alien spaceships arrive on Earth.

First Contact, biggest story of the millennia, from a struggling newspaper's point of view. The world is by turns shocked, afraid, curious and ecstatic. We try to communicate but the aliens have no interest -- they go all Roland Emmerich on us, bombing the shit out of our planet, destroying cultural monuments, upending ecosystems, not using turn signals while changing lanes, just generally being a nuisance.

Clark puts his "regular" life on hold and goes into Superman mode, but these aliens are tough bastards with many tricks up many sleeves, giving ol' Supes a real challenge.

Superman eventually beats the aliens down, destroying almost the entire armada. Almost. The last ship takes off and Superman thinks he's won. But the ship ends up at Lois's home, abducts the kid and take off.
Lois and the hubby tell him what happened and Superman takes off into space to find their missing son.
THE END

PART II: SUPERMAN AND THE WHOLE GANG TOGETHER AGAIN, PLUS ONE.
Two years after the alien assault the world is still rebuilding and Superman is again our savior, but he, Lois and her husband have spent their time in search of their son. Superman has enlisted the help of a world renowned female astronomer. A hot one.

The astronomer and Superman start cozying up, making Lois all territorial and jealous. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor has been futzing with alien DNA, injects himself with it and gains alien powers and strength. He is now a physical threat to Superman, and they go mano y mano. Lex is more than a match for Superman and gives him a proper smackdown. Superman crawls back to the astronomer, who tells him she's found the alien planet. His son may or may not be there, but the aliens definitely are. Superman is so happy he and the astronomer share a little kissy kissy. He then takes off and does some soul searching -- he and the astronomer, he and Lois, wanting to go after the aliens that took his son but can't leave earth in the grip of SuperLex.

A contact of Lois's figures out Lex's game and reverse engineers a vaccine. They give it to Superman, and he and Lex battle again. Lex has Superman on the ropes, but Superman injects him with the vaccine and Lex reverts back to fully human. Lex is jailed, but not before telling Superman not only does he know where the aliens are, he knows their whole back story: Lex reveals they came from the same general vicinity of where Krypton used to be. Coincidence? Lex thought not. The aliens were at war with Krypton just before it blew up. Since then they have found and eliminated every stray Kryptonian, Superman and his son now being truly the last of their kind. Lex points out the aliens never would have found earth if Superman didn't revisit the remnants of Krypton (set up in Superman Returns), therefore if it wasn't for Supe and his son, the devastation the aliens wrought upon earth would not have happened. The astronomer tells Superman a dude's gotta do what a dude's gotta do and with Lois and her husband's blessings as well, Superman takes off into space, heading for the alien planet.
THE END

PART III: SUPERMAN AND LEX, BFF
Superman flies to the alien planet, which turns out to be Bizarro World (look it up, it's part of the comics). Superman has to navigate this backwards, contrarian planet, running into twisted copies of Lois, Jimmy, Perry, everyone the aliens came in contact with back on earth (and other planets), including an Bizarro Lex Luthor, who in turn becomes Superman's greatest ally.

Together Superman and Bizarro Lex either find the boy, or they don't. Either he's intact, or has been turned into some weird Bizarro experiment which Superman will either have to save or destroy, depending on whether we want the kid back on earth with Superman or not. In any case, Bizarro Lex plays a big part in Superman's success.

After his great adventure, Superman returns to earth, his spirit now as strong as his physical form.
THE END, AND THE SAGA CONTINUES...

Thoughts on Subplots

If I set out to write a particular screenplay, the implication is one story, 3 acts. The main action of the story is simply known as the plot - what happens and to whom. I like to think there's another story that runs just underneath the main story, which is my theme - every great story is really about WHY it happened, that's they key to what makes them "work" as well they do. So what happens, to whom and why it happens = plot, theme and character, the basic building blocks of story, and suddenly I find myself writing not one but two stories which must overlay each other perfectly.

But the plot thickens (sorry) because now I have to add the subplots. Why not just write a straight story about one thing and be done with it? Because if I want it to be good - even if I only care if it's good enough to get sold - every well told feature script has subplots, at least 2. Pesky subplots. Sure, I could write a story with no subplots, but I guarantee it won't be a GREAT story or one that will sell or further my career in any appreciable way. Every great film explores one main/core theme from a variety of viewpoints, thereby giving them the qualities of depth, range and scope. Thematically, they've covered every applicable angle of their story. In order to compete at the professional level, I need to do that with my stories.

Subplots do most of the heavy lifting in this exploration of theme. To accomplish this, those 2 subplots have to be as structurally sound as the main plot, so they each must have the applicable 3 acts - beginning, middle, end (though some of these acts don't necessarily need to happen on screen). Further, if they are to be a unified part of the story, all subplots must relate to and inform the main plot's theme. If they don't reflect the theme in some meaningful way, they will seem disjointed, out of place or wholly unnecessary. So if I aspire to write great scripts - again, even if I only aspire to write so/so scripts that simply sell - subplots are necessary. If anyone's keeping count, I now have to write 5 stories, not just one. I don't even want to THINK about re-writes at this point!

So to maximize my story's potential I start with theme in creating my main plot, or vice versa - letting the plot dictate the theme. Whichever comes first is irrelevant, they're now in synch, they inform each other. The next step is to figure out exactly what else I want to say about the theme or, cheesy as it may sound, what else my story "tells" me to say about the theme. Now I have my subplots. Now I separately plot out the 3 acts of each subplot, as well as any necessary plot points. Once that's done I now have my 5 separate stories, all tangents off the same theme, interconnected, informing each other and strengthening the main story as a whole.

The nice thing about breaking my plot and subplots down like this is that I get a good view of them separately and can now interweave them at will in a way that makes logical, progressive story sense. And once I've started writing the actual screenplay I know I won't get "lost" in a maze of half-baked ideas and dead ends. It makes me very clear in what I'm writing, and it makes my stories multidimensional instead of shallow and one note. Hell, one day I may even write a truly GREAT screenplay - or at least one that sells.

Is Your Spec Ready to Show? Probably Not

"Contacts" are delicate things, especially when you're first getting started. Typically you don't have many, so you have to take care of the ones you do have (remember, Contacts breed Contacts). Once a Contact is broken, the chain of people they're connected too is broken as well. So if you have a "solid industry Contact" you're planning on hitting up once you've finished your genius screenplay, never, ever, under any circumstance, tap that contact too early. To wit:

A Friend of mine works at a big agency. We're good friends, have known each other a while outside of the industry, etc. After I finished my first readable draft of my current action/comedy spec, I tapped my Friend and asked if they would read it. My Friend was happy to try to help, but since they work at a large agency, said Friend is naturally very busy. So my Friend gave the script to their partner to read, a Writer a few rungs above me.

The Writer did me a true solid: they read my spec and gently explained to me that though there are some strong elements, the script as a whole was far from ready for market. The implication was not only was a major rewrite needed, but I had a lot of work to do as a developing writer. It wasn't just the script - I wasn't ready for market.

That writer did me a very big favor. I took the advice to heart and spent months not only rewriting the script, but boning up on my screenwriting craft. Reading everything I could, screenplays, books about films, books about writing, books about the industry. Rereading screenwriting books I'd already read. I read the trades daily. I search out podcasts, blogs, interviews of successful/up and coming writers, etc., anything that would enhance my knowledge of the craft and push my writing and myself to the next level. By the way, these are things we should all be doing on a daily basis anyway.

After months of study and months of rewriting, I finally had a new draft of my spec I was very proud of. It was good and I knew it. I contacted my Friend for another read. This time my busy agency Friend gave it to an agency Reader. The Reader read my spec, wrote coverage and my Friend was generous enough to send me a copy.

I am happy to say, aside from one or two issues here and there, the coverage was very positive. I told my Friend to give my script a read, since their agency's coverage was so positive. My hope was if my Friend read and not only liked but saw the commercial potential for my spec, they might be inclined to get it to someone who deals in such commercial projects. However, though they have been immensely helpful, said friend has yet to personally read my spec. Why? Because first impressions stick, and in my Friend's head is their first impression of what they've heard about my writing: I'm still at amateur level, and no one is excited to read the work of an amateur.

Me and my work have to get people excited. In order to do that, the work has to be exceptional, better than good. If it isn't I risk alienating a Contact, and at this stage of the game, I can't afford to do that. Can you?

Inspire Change in Your Characters and Your Audience Without Preaching

Theme and change are big parts of my own writing. I want to entertain people, but I also want to make them think, see things in a new way, maybe even change their lives, as pompous as that may sound. Lots of writers have this goal, but so many of us make the mistake of coming off as preachy and heavy handed instead of subtle yet forceful. To that end, I'm reading Dr. Linda Seger's book "Advanced Screenwriting" and came across some insightful advice regarding character arc and inspiring your audience. The following advice is a quote from author Thom Hartmann:

"People change not by taking something away from them, but by giving them an additional tool. Since the Self is a collection of all that we are, people resist if [they feel] something is being taken away. For instance, if someone fights at every opportunity, for them giving up fighting means giving up part of themselves. But if the person is told that fighting, in some circumstances, can be a good thing, they might be more receptive to picking up the skills of negotiation."

Dr. Seger goes on to say that audiences identify with a character subjectively and objectively. Subjectively, we live with the characters in the moment, experiencing what they experience, through their eyes while we watch the film. After the film, once we reflect on what we have seen, we are now looking at the film and character's actions/journey through an objective lens, "remembering scenes, reflecting on character actions and seeing their arc as being similar to our personal arcs.
They see the choices and the consequences of those choices, thereby giving your audience new tools through which they may affect their own inner transformations".

If you're just being preachy, i.e. not giving the characters and consequently the audience choices to change, you're not giving them the new tools to affect change. "You model new behavior through your characters, and the audience members can, through them, acquire the know how to make change, if they so desire."

Be Rough as You'd Like, It's My First Time

So, in the interest of putting my money (which I really have none) where my mouth is (which I possibly have too much of), following is the first page of a spec screenplay I'm getting ready to market.

By "getting ready" I mean the spec is complete and polished and I'm currently researching and targeting buyers (managers, talent, prodcos, agents, in that order).
Once I finish the spec I'm currently in the middle of writing, I'll start approaching those buyers, entering contests, etc with both.

Sorry @ the terrible formatting, I haven't been able to figure out how to properly format screenplay excerpts for this blog yet. If anyone knows how, please enlighten.

Any feedback - even the snarky kind - will be received with great appreciation. But I'd really like to know if you think the following accomplishes what a first page should: set tone, time and place, establish character, hook you into wanting - HAVING - to turn the page, read as its own "mini-story", etc. So without further adieu...


Dark Rum Chronicles: The Adventures of Nick Drama
by
Alain Dominic


FADE IN:

INT. PRIVATE AIRPLANE HANGER - DAY

A FIST connects with NICK DRAMA’S jaw, sending him reeling the opposite direction into -- another fist.

Late 30’s. Scruffy. Hawaiian shirt. Cargo shorts. Nick resembles a ranch hand turned surfer, like he should be on vacation sipping a drink with a pink umbrella. Yet --

ANOTHER FIST. Looks like that drink’ll have to wait.

See, Nick’s a little preoccupied with the FOUR BLACK-CLAD MERCENARIES gleefully tenderizing him.

Another vicious blow and Nick’s legs give out.

NICK in mid-fall, semiconscious.

NICK (V.O.)
Drama. I don’t like it. Unfortunately, its my last name.

NICK’S HEAD smacks the concrete floor with a dull thud, bouncing slightly.

NICK (V.O.)
That’s me. Nick Drama. The handsome feller getting his eggs scrambled right there.

A swiftly moving combat boot swallows Nick’s vision. Another kick flips him on his back.

NICK (V.O.)
And if you’re wondering how an average Joe like me gets himself into a jam like this, well brother you ain’t flying solo,‘cause right about now old Nick finds himself pondering that very same question.

A HAND roots a dusty beer bottle from the floor. Smashes the end off. Angles the jagged edge toward Nick.
A TATTOO OF A WATER SNAKE winding its way across the knuckles distinguishes this hand from the other Mercenaries. This bastard’s clearly their LEADER.

End pg. 1.
Ok, let me have it!

Screenwriting is Easy!

It's just a constant process of figuring out how to precisely say what you need to say without really saying it.

The Importance of Diversification

So, career-wise, I have a Grand Plan. Part of that plan entails writing specs and assignments for feature films. I'm not that interested at the moment in t.v., indies, webisodes, etc. I'm talking big budget, studio films. The most difficult market to breach. So how will I do it?

I do have choices, one of which is to follow everyone else pursuing the traditional methods (queries, pitchfests, contests etc.) to secure representation. Then both of us knocking on doors and pounding pavement until someone bites.

Or I could think out of the box.

I'm choosing to do both.

Though I've written a few, I now have ONE solid feature spec in my arsenal (by solid I mean a well written, marketable concept, polished and ready to shop). But so frakkin' what? I'm gonna need a lot more ammo than that to win this war. So I am currently working on another I have just as much confidence in, and won't pursue representation until it's completed.
Once it is ready to show, I'll still waiting to approach reps, because I have a slate of future projects that I'm building pitches for, so when someone says "Good work, but what else do you have?", I have projects that I can properly pitch. And I want to be well underway on my 3rd spec. Once all that is in place (as well as some contest wins/placements, hopefully), I'll start looking for reps. So that's my plan on the traditional front.
If anyone has any ideas on how I can enhance/maximize this plan, please, share.

Now for my "out of the box" approach:

Studios are now owned by corporate conglomerates. They don't make "passion projects". They don't take risks on new writers or out of the box projects. They are, in fact, in the risk aversion business. If they do do something risky, hiring an unproven writer or taking on a quirky story, you can bet it's because those writers/projects have already proven themselves marketable commodities in other forms (comics, old t.v. shows, video games, BOARD games now!).
That's the only way you're going to get some of the crazier movies out there now (if/when there are any). It's called "pre-awareness", and even if it only extends to 5000 comics sold or 10,000 hits on your website, it's a heluvalot better than zero. In an exec's eyes, no matter how unfounded, it proves there's an audience out there for it, and that can only enhance your project's appeal in their eyes.

So while writing and pursuing traditional methods of breaking in, I'm trying to adapt as many of my screenplays/future screenplays as I can to other forms of media - comic books, webisodes, independent shorts and features, etc. Wait a minute - didn't I just say I'm not too interested in those things? Yes. But in today's marketplace, if I want to succeed, I need to be.
And here's a trick - I need to be passionate about these platforms. If I'm not, I can't add anything original or write sincerely. And if you don't write from a place of sincerity - especially in the comic book world - you'll be easily sniffed out by the audience as a fake, and they don't buy your stuff, literally and figurative. But if you do write with originality and passion, I believe you will be noticed by your audience.

If I liked romance novels (don't, FYI), I'd adapt some of my stories to romance novels. If I was a tech freak and liked short films, I'd consider shooting my own shorts and distributing them on the net, to festivals, etc. Point being, I'm going after the other mediums I AM interested in, knowing it's all in service of the larger goal of being a pro studio writer.

Aside from comics, because I also want to direct (surprised?) I'm also planning on shooting a few indie shorts, and eventually my own indie feature.

Each of these markets are unique, and each involves a lot of research in order to maximize my investment of time. Sometimes I feel like I'm wasting huge chunks of time researching these when I should be writing. But I need as much knowledge as I can to make informed choices and business decisions. There's no way around that, so the time spent is necessary, and I'm betting the knowledge gained will serve me well in the future.

In any case, the goal of writing films is a lofty one - I'd say one of the most difficult to achieve of any profession (if I wanted to become a neuro-physicist at least I'd know how long it would take, and the specific hurdles I'd have to jump through. By comparison building a career in screenwriting is like trying to catch a unicorn before God blinks). So you have to maximize your odds.

Therefore, if you're an upstart writer like me in today's climate and you truly want to succeed, I think we have no choice but to DIVERSIFY. Do whatever it takes to get our work out there. There are more opportunities out there now more than ever before to get our work shot, published, drawn or performed, and SEEN. We'd be stacking the deck even further against ourselves if we didn't take advantage of these opportunities. How smart or competitive would that be? If people like me (your competition) are taking advantage of these strategies, can you really afford not to?

If Hollywood ain't buyin' right now keep selling, but don't shrift yourself - and your stories - of the opportunity to find a different audience. DIVERSIFICATION. Sooner or later, Hollywood will be filling your voice mail with messages asking why you didn't contact them sooner.

Beating Writer's Block

3 methods of overcoming "writer's block" that work for me:

1. Take time off - sometimes you're just written out, or uninspired. You need to recharge, and that means reconnecting with the outside world. Re-focus on whatever hobby you're in to. Start a new hobby. Read a book totally unrelated to what you're writing, work out, watch a few movies, play Xbox, whatever.
The important attributes of the activities you choose, though, should be 1. something that only takes a few hours at a time, and 2., an activity that can be repeated as many times as necessary to get you going, whether that be a few hours respite, or a couple weeks of comic book geekdom. Just be sure not to go past 2/3 weeks. If you feel you've been away too long, maybe quit this method and try one of the others?
A great side-effect to this approach is you usually end up learning something new while you were away. You're now recharged and have more ammo in your writing arsenal to draw from.

2. Jump to another writing project - knowing you'll get back to the one that stumped you after a short amount of time. Sometimes just switching creative tracks for a while can be refreshing and give me a new perspective on my existing project.
Just be careful you set a time limit for working with the different project, or you run the risk of getting sidetracked. You must get back to the original project, or no matter how much work you accomplish, you'll never finish anything.
The obvious benefit to this approach is I'm filling in the details of future projects while working on my current one. When the time comes to write those other stories I won't be starting from scratch. I'll already have material to work from, and have already consciously and subconsciously been swimming in those waters.

3. Write shit - as stated in a previous post, simply acknowledge the fact that you're going to re-write the damn thing anywhere from five to a hundred more times, and just be willing to write poorly. No one but you is ever going to see it, and you're going to change it all anyway, so don't sweat it.
When you look over your crappy, ill-conceived scenes, you'll eventually have an idea on how to make something better. How can you not? One good idea leads to another and so on.
The nice thing about this approach is it keeps me writing and focused on the project at hand (instead of jumping ship for a while). And as a bonus, I'll usually find a gem of an idea in all that crap I had to fix that helps either with the section I'm currently working on, sheds light or fixes a problem in another section.

If anyone else has any tips, let me know. I'm always looking.

A Swiftly Tilting Industry - or, What Will OUR Paychecks Look Like?

The following was a response I posted to a very interesting article concerning the current climate and future of writers in Hollywood. You can find the article posted on The Artful Writer website at http://artfulwriter.com/?p=870
(There are 2 ways of looking at this: 1., things look pretty bleak, especially for someone like me just trying to break in to the studio system. Or 2., there are more opportunities than ever before out there for upstarts like myself to take their careers into their own hands, get their works produced and seen, and make money. These opportunities can be seen as stepping stones to studio work.)

At this point I'm a relative neophyte when it comes to understanding the rules and functions of the WGA, so this post may be moot. But I do understand the WGA ostensibly exists to protect writers and make sure we get fair deals. Regardless of where the fault lies, they don't seem to be doing this very effectively.

The business is changing fundamentally, we all know that. But buyers seem to be trying to deal with the change, in fact dictate the change, while the WGA sticks its head in the proverbial sand.
Sure, we just struck for better deals concerning new platforms, etc., but the WGA seems by and large to be fighting by the current rule book, while buyers are busy drafting an entirely new manifesto. So -- why don't we take initiative and create that new paradigm/business model before they do?

Instead of bargaining from our historic position of weakness, what's to stop US from leading the current paradigm change and start bargaining from a position of strength? After all, it is OUR content that fuels the industry, until we sell it to someone else and let THEM craft/dictate the terms of the deal.

As stated, I'm not well educated on the specific boundaries imposed on our dealmaking options by the WGA, but here's a "what if" question that I think could change the story in our favor (though I know it's a HUGE "what if"), or at least inspire some out-of-the-box dialogue in that direction:

In the spirit of writers negotiating from a position of strength, what if independent prodcos and talent reps pre-packaged projects with writers, directors and talent, then approached studios from the angle of "This is the package, these are everyone's quotes, TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT" (don't stop reading, hear me out). The quote would be as sweet as we want it to be, we'd ask for what we think is "fair".
Oh yeah, part of the contract would be "the original writer stays on the pic unless the DIRECTOR or producer says otherwise - the studio has no say. They paid for a package designed a certain way, and our part of the bargain is we deliver exactly that".
So drastic script changes, studio notes and general outside meddling will be greatly minimized.

I'm well aware this sounds audacious and impracticable. Of course when given a simple "take it or leave it" option, they're going to leave it. But as we all know, great change is never easy and always comes at a steep price. So initially the price we pay will be lots of execs laughing us off the lot, not working and going (further) into debt while other projects are picked up and developed instead of ours. But so what - isn't that pretty much where things stand right now?

But what if ALL the key element top earners - writers, directors, stars, etc. - were to adopt this policy (being attached to a project at an unwavering price)?
Studios may refuse us for a while, but it seems to me that eventually, from not hiring top-tier talent in possession of top-tier material, b.o. receipts would inevitably start to drop.
B team talent just won't be up to the task of pulling off the spectacular successes A talents are capable of achieving, and once B listers ARE capable of it, they'll BE "A talent" and will want the same deals A talent is holding out for.

Basically, we will have effectively boxed the studios in to a certain way of doing business: spending much more $$ in production costs and everything taking even longer and being more complicated because they're now relegated to working with B talent or less, or they pay the quotes and abide by the rules set by top tier talent.

Though there'll be strong resistance at first, this type of business model can actually be a money SAVING proposition for studios, because instead of wasting all that pre-production time/money/resources, very little change will occur to the project because the creatives have already agreed upon and set the project parameters, which means minimal unforseen expenditures, and shorter production time as a whole.

While all the A talent is working outside of the studio system, some indie prodcos are bound to have great financial successes with A talent working in smaller films (talent would have to understand that until our "embargo" is pushed through, they'll simply have to work for less, which again, they're already being forced to do).

These b.o. successes will eventually force some studio somewhere to break the embargo for sheer economic reasons (once they've seen the stellar receipts from projects THEY passed on because of not wanting to accept our new dealmaking standard) and accept a package deal based on the terms we've set.

Again, because this is A list talent, they're more likely to deliver a commercial hit. Once a studio makes money off such a hit they will of course want to continue to do so. We've effectively started the ball rolling, and sooner or later the new business model WE'VE created could be the new standard way of doing business and packaging projects. We the creatives now dictate the terms of the deal, and if the studios want access to OUR content, they must come over to OUR house and play in OUR sandbox. AND pay for the privilege.

Again, I may just be uneducated on how this all works and it's a pie-in-the-sky idea. But it seems to me to be a far-fetched but workable strategy, dependent only on if A list talent would/could show some serious solidarity for a while. After all, solidarity will ultimately benefit us all, economically and creatively. Isn't that enough of a carrot?

Whether or not this is a feasible plan, I think we need to stop wondering what's going to happen and start deciding for ourselves how our new world is going to look, rather than have a bunch of ad execs and media congloms decide our future for us. What kind of a deal do you think we'll end up with if we let THEM decide how OUR deals are structured?

Regardless of what happens this paradigm shift is happening right now, and this seems to me to be the ideal moment for creatives as a whole to start dealing from a position of power, rather than weakness.

A Major Difference Between Professionals and Amateurs

After recently reading a very good book on pitching, and having written and re-written 30-50 loglines in order to craft the perfect one or two that distill the essence of a story I spent a year writing, it occurred to me that I'm gaining a huge leg up on most of the writers I know, not to mention those I don't. Why? Simply because I'm taking the time to do these things.

I've spent hours - days, maybe, if I add it all up - scouring the internet, researching contests, production companies, producers, managers and agents to whom it may be appropriate to submit my material (when I'm ready, which is not yet). And from what I hear, not many writers do this. It's much easier to haphazardly blast your queries to everyone in town you can find an address for.

Searching for all this stuff can seem like a waste of time, when that time could be spent actually writing. That may seem like a good, responsible excuse, but it's not. If we want to get anywhere, people must read our material. And they won't if we haven't done our homework. Rather, they'll consider us and our query a waste of time and move on to someone who took the time to check out if they should submit their genre spec based on easily obtainable evidence of the buyer's history and tastes.

When you're starting out you don't have a manager or agent, so you have to be both, in addition to your duties as a writer/editor. At their core, every manager or agent is just a salesman, so you must be too. It's nice to look at successful screenwriters and imagine they woke up one morning with inspiration shining through the window, lasering directly into their cerebrum, wrote a brilliant script in a matter of weeks, sent it out to a bunch of random reps/buyers and was immediately welcomed with open arms because of their brilliance.

But the truth is - and this should give us all some consolation - that from William Goldman, J.J. Abrams and the Rossio/Elliot team to John Grisham, J.K. Rowling and Dan Brown, every COMMERCIALLY SUCCESSFUL writer has had to endure the process of "taking off the writer's cap and putting on the business attire". Writing the queries, withstanding the rejections, re-write after re-write, building connections and relationships, etc. They all did it and still do it today, and we must too. Unless you have an aversion to commercial success, in which case maybe we'll catch you at next year's Renaissance Fair (but I bet even Shakespeare had to do his homework on who to approach to get, say, Titus playing at the Old Vic).

Especially if you're a writer today, there's just no excuse - it is easier now than it has ever before been to find the necessary info to target our submissions to someone who has the power to move our careers forward. There are many ways to research buyers and representation, literally thousands of websites, hundreds of books and gagillions of interviews with these people spanning all forms of media. Part of the job of an aspiring writer - 50% of it in my opinion - is to seek out such information, take notes, and use said info when time comes to get an agent/manager/query prodcos, etc. If you don't target your submissions carefully, you're wasting their time, and they're going to remember that.

I think that's a big reason why MOST aspiring writers fail, drop out, or keep banging their head against what seems like an impenetrable wall for years without making a dent. Because they don't do their marketing and business research. They don't practice their pitches out loud until it becomes ingrained in their subconscious. They don't write logline after logline trying to find the most compelling sentence that showcases their stories' strengths. They don't seek out background and information that can help them build rapport with prospective buyers/reps. The movies or personal passions we may have in common with them, the places we grew up, the kinds of stories we want to tell, all this info can be found in countless interviews with professional writers, script consultants, buyers & reps, an used to engage them with US the writer, on an emotional and personal level. It seems most writers don't even take the time to analyze what their stories' strengths and weaknesses are, much less do any of the above. They think that's the job of someone else, and again, it's not.

If I can't be bothered to spend the time carefully crafting my own marketing plan to give my "baby" the best shot possible, then why should anyone else? It's our job first, and those of us lucky/smart enough to recognize that will always be miles ahead of most of the pack, and I don't mind bragging - that feels good.

R.I.P.

Damn, what a horrible couple days it's been for screenwriters and the industry at large -- we've lost not one or two but THREE huge talents in the past 48 measly hours.

Bud Schulberg, writer of "On the Waterfront" died last night.

I just heard Blake Snyder, screenwriting consultant & author of industry standard "Save the Cat" died on Tuesday.

I just checked out some filmmaking blogs, and after signing out was immediately informed that John Hughes (does anyone reading this NOT know who John f'ing Hughes is??) died today.

Wherever they are now, a big THANK YOU to all these folks for enriching my life, as well as millions of others.

"I'm not European. I don't plan on being European. So who gives a crap if they're socialists? They could be fascist anarchists for all I care, it still doesn't change the fact that I don't own a car."

Tales From the Script

Last night I went to a screening that should be required viewing for all aspiring screenwriters.

The film is "Tales From the Script", a fascinating documentary put together by two other aspiring screenwriters, Peter Hanson and Paul Robert Herman (take note, Paul and Peter are writers who haven't yet found traction, so took the initiative to shoot their own film. Through that decision these guys now have access to some of the best, most experienced minds in H'wood film writing, and a wonderful doc with THEIR names on it that is now showing in selected theaters!).

The doc features interviews with some of H'wood's top screenwriters -- Shane Black, William Goldman, Zak Penn, Frank Darabont, Jose Rivera, David Hayter, Billy Ray, John August, David Ward, Larry Cohen, just to name a few. The purpose was to get a picture from seasoned screenwriters about the lifestyle and challenges all screenwriters face, and how to navigate those challenges. Most of the film was horror stories about writers being treated badly, but the cumulative effect was actually quite inspiring -- against all odds, these guys did it (just like your protagonist)!!

There was a post-screening Q&A panel as well, hosted by Peter (the Director), who asked some very insightful questions. Jose Rivera, Zak Penn, Adam Rifkin and David S. Ward were among the panelists, and all shared intimate, fascinating, insightful and inspiring points of view. Truly an invaluable gift for aspiring writers like myself, so thanks, Gents.

Among the writers who made a huge impression on me was Billy Ray (writer of State of Play, Breach, Flightplan, etc.). Billy has great passion and enthusiasm for storytelling, despite all the travails he's had to endure throughout his impressive career. Billy sticks to his intent as a screenwriter against all odds, and consistently produces thoughtful, socially significant films.

For me, the most inspirational speaker was Larry Cohen. Larry's been in the business since the late 50's (!) and has been working the entire time. Aside from the impressiveness of a 40 + year career, the true inspiration Larry passed to me was when during the Q&A portion of the screening, a writer asked WHY writers don't have much power.
Larry's answer was "Bullshit"! Writers are low on the totem pole simply because they set themselves up for it! Writers tend to characterize themselves as beaten down, trod upon, disrespected and powerless, so of course, that's how we're treated. But if you stand up for yourself, stand up for your point of view, people are bound to listen -- after all, who's the story expert in the room? YOU ARE! So have some self confidence and speak up! This doesn't mean to be combative, what it does mean is simply to stand up for your ideas.

And although most insights were about the difficulties of writing for H'wood, Larry made a great argument for how wonderful the life can be, if you chose to focus on the positives instead of the negatives: you get paid large sums of money for films that more often than not don't get made, films that directors, actors etc. didn't get paid for, but YOU did; a director works maybe 2 years on a movie, shooting in the cold, on mountaintops, away from their families for months at a time, dealing with actors, producers, studios, financiers, marketers, etc, while you're sitting poolside contemplating your next story; directors can't direct whatever they want, and actors can't have whatever roles they want, but you can write whatever you want, whenever you choose; the list goes on.

There's too much to write about what a great impact hearing all these stories and points of view had on me, but I highly recommend you seek out "Tales From the Script" and watch it, repeatedly. Harper Collins is also releasing a "Tales..." book in January which features all the above interviewees, plus a bevy of others who weren't in the film but still wanted to participate.
After experiencing the film and the invaluable advice these guys are imparting to us for the low, low price of cost of admission, for me, the upcoming book is a must-have.

I have great respect for all the ladies and gentlemen who participated in the "Tales..." project in book and/or film. To take time out of their busy careers to impart their hard won wisdom to those aspiring to do what they are doing is a priceless and generous gift that can ignite careers and change lives. These folks - and certainly the filmmakers - are truly paying it forward (backward?), so a big thank you to any of them who may be reading this, and an especially large thank you to Peter and Paul for putting this all together.
If you'd like more info, just go to www.talesfromthescript.org
Happy Writing

VOICE: What the Hell is It??

A nagging question for most writers: What do people mean when they refer to a writer's "voice"?
The far too general answer we mostly get is "You know it when you hear it".
Simple. Efficient. True. But as a writer, doesn't help us much, does it? So let's dig a little deeper.

First let's define "voice" in its most basic terms. What are the attributes of a "voice"? Voices can be loud, soft, brash, clever, nonsensical, unassuming, powerful, direct, elliptical, poetic, etc., etc. To boil it down, essentially voice is something that defines itself above others -- awash in a sea of noise, a unique "voice" cries out. So maybe we can say at essence, voice is simply a unique or distinctive way of looking at the world.

If we're now looking at the world in a unique or distinctive way then it turns out "voice" is in fact a point of view. Now we're getting somewhere -- "voice" is a unique point of view. Serves well enough as a definition to me.

But all voices come from someone, so the next question appears to be: whose? Whose voice do we write with?
If a comedy is supposed to read like a comedy, a horror to read like a horror, a thriller to read thrilling etc., with whose voice/from whose point of view would be most appropriate to write? Your own? The protagonist's? The genre's? What if you're a angry person writing a comedy? Do you write with an angry voice because that's "your" voice, or do you try to fake funny? Do you write with the protagonist's voice? Maybe. What about what the story or genre dictates? Could that lead to cliche? Does anybody else think about this shit?

My last screenplay was a sunny action/comedy, my current is a dark fantasy. I can't use the same "voice" for both -- one is bound to sound inappropriate and false. So what's the solution? How do I stay true to myself and the dictates of my story and genre? There may be a possible key in the concept of "tone".
Every story strikes a particular "tone". I suspect the "tone" of a script/story can be defined as the result of the aggregate effect of a consistent "voice" from page to page. So again, whose voice do I use when working in disparate genres? And what the hell does my own personal writer's "voice" "sound like", anyway?

My fumbling-in-the-dark opinion is if voice emanates from the writer and is informed by the writer's thoughts and experiences, the "voice" one "hears" on the page must ultimately belong to the writer, BUT filtered through the essence of the main concept and genre in which we're working.

My personal history, my personal thoughts give me an unique or distinctive point of view, a particular way in which I see/imagine everything imaginable which no one else can duplicate. Therefore, when it comes to storytelling I have my own particular point of view and expectations of each genre. We all expect to see certain attributes in a horror film, but how I envision those attributes interacting and playing out is my own unique vision within the parameters of the genre (meaning if I'm writing horror, through scene setting, character action and word choice I describe the horror in the most cinematic way I can, if I'm writing suspense, my sentence structure and word choice should elicit suspense from the reader, etc.).

The buddy cop story, the troubled teen story, the serial killer story, they've all been done before. But HOW YOU do it must be in a way that only YOU can. Although we've seen all these stories a gadrillion times over, I have a unique ideal expectation of the attributes each scene in a particular story I'm trying to tell within a specific genre should possess. For example, maybe you think the Devil should be creepy. Maybe your parole officer thinks the Devil should be scary, while I think the Devil should be seductive. No one's right or wrong, everyone just has their own unique visions and expectations based on their personal points of view.

So within the descriptive blocks of my screenplays, I should strive to express MY unique point of view WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE GENRE. If I do this consistently paragraph to paragraph, scene to scene, page to page, I will have created a unique voice which is my own, yet strikes the tone of the genre in which I'm working. The writing has achieved a unique point of view, and I, the writer, have expressed an original and distinctive voice.

If you want great examples of "voice" on the written page, check out any of the writings of Mark Twain, John Steinbeck, Chuck Palahniuk. Read some scripts from the Cohen brothers, Quentin Tarantino, Stephen J. Cannell, J.P. Shanley, Shane Black or the Wachowski brothers (I was also impressed -- from a "voice" point of view -- with the original screenplay for "Hancock", titled "Tonight He Comes", track it down if you can).
Don't just watch the movies, READ THEIR SCREENPLAYS!!! (If you're not constantly reading anyway, screenplays and otherwise, you have no business trying to write for a career) Care for them or not, all of the above have literary voices that practically jump up and smack you to the next page. There are many other writers with exceptional use of "voice", seek them out, study them, learn from them.

This stuff is by no means definitive, or even correct -- just my musings on "voice". If you have a better handle on it, let me know, I'm always looking.

Common Writer's Mistake #1: Not Writing

First, my sincere apologies to those who look forward to new posts for disappearing for a few months. I'm back and will be posting regularly again. So... what happened to the Dangerous Screenwriter?

As aspiring writers with lives, families and day jobs, it's always a struggle to find the time to actually write. But if you really aspire to be a professional, no matter how simplistic this may sound you must never lose sight -- as I recently did -- that WRITERS WRITE. Every day, no matter what.

To be a professional we must first think of ourselves as professionals, and you can't get to that level if you just write every now and then or just when mood or inspiration strike. You must learn to write even when you don't feel like it. You may write poorly, but you can always go back and fix it. The important thing is to keep working that writing muscle every day so when you look back over a few months, instead of having nothing tangible to show your body of work will have grown.

I had some very serious issues occur in my "regular" life a few months ago. On a personal level things were not good, they were about to change in a very big way and I had to focus on Life. I simply didn't have the time, brain power or emotional capacity to focus on writing. Or so I thought/felt. Then, on a writing level, things got worse.

I had a golden opportunity to write a teleplay and hand it off to a friend of mine who happens to have some serious connections and could quite possibly use my teleplay to get me work -- a REAL writing job on staff with a network show. However, I was forced to focus on life issues and missed our agreed upon submission deadline. I was in the middle of writing what I think is a terrific spec episode of "Dexter" and should have been done by the beginning of April. It is now the end of May and that episode is still incomplete. I've missed my deadline by over 2 months and counting. Golden opportunity blown.

Not only did I miss the chance to shop my spec, but I aptly showed my inability to meet a deadline. Unacceptable for a new writer trying to show his professionalism. The consequence of this is that I've probably burned that particular bridge to a career. To that contact I've now proven myself undependable and painted myself as an amateur who's not really serious. I have no excuse to smooth my shortcoming. Hollywood doesn't care why you missed your deadline or couldn't complete your assignment. They just know that time is money and I've just demonstrated working with me could lose them both.

Another unfortunate consequence of missing my deadline was when I did, it was a real shot to my self confidence as a writer. I had blown my Golden Opportunity. Of course if I keep at it, other opportunities will arise. But who wants to wait? Haven't we all waited long enough? Opportunities are scarce, especially in today's market, and we need to take advantage of every one. So I missed my deadline, lost confidence and as another consequence couldn't face the blank screen. I was afraid I wasn't good enough. I kept putting writing off, and had no shortage of reasons -- personal problems, health issues, family issues, etc. Even doing good things for myself like working out seemed like a valid drain on my writing time. With low self confidence, you can find a billion reasons not to write.

So what does a writer with low self confidence do to regain their confidence and get writing again? You write. More specifically, you write shit. You know you're no good anyway, so just write shit. Write knowing that it'll be bad. So what? No one's ever going to see it. The important thing is that you're WRITING. The second thing you do is KEEP writing shit, every moment you have. From my experience, what happens is at some point you will go back over your work and see your shortcomings. That's when the magic starts, because you will try to fix them. You may not be too successful at first. You may feel like you're covering shit with more shit. You probably are. But at some magic moment, you will have a good idea how to fix a particular problem, or you will be inspired by a bad scene to write a good one, even a killer one. The magic of this moment is that your confidence immediately goes up a notch. "Hey, that was a pretty good idea", you say to yourself. That inspires you to keep working to make the material better and the snowball effect begins -- one good idea raises another question which leads to another good idea and suddenly your pile of shit isn't smelling quite so bad anymore. Goddamn, there're even some roses in there somewhere! How it worked for me is every problem I solved, every piece of dialogue or scene direction I fixed raised my self confidence until -- in a relatively short amount of time -- I felt like a WRITER, again, one in control of himself, his muse, his craft, and eventually even my time and my life.

A crucial aspect of why self confidence is so important to the writing process is -- and I'm sure you've heard this before -- if you want to be a professional, you need to act like one. You need to see yourself as a professional and conduct yourself in that way, so when other people meet you they see a professional, not an amateur or worse, a dreamer. So you must have the confidence to see yourself that way first. And the only way to get that confidence -- real confidence, not a pose -- is to know deep down inside that you're a real writer, and the only way to know that is to be like other real writers, and REAL writers keep writing, no matter what.

So my apologies again for my temporary lapse, and I look forward to being Dangerous again.

FREE Professional Screenwriting Software

A quick note to all those out there who need properly formatted scripts but don't have/can't afford pro software like Final Draft, Script Thing, etc.

GET CELTX!! Before I got final draft I wrote using Celtx version 1, a wonderful writing program that's easy to use, professionally standardized, has different templates for stage plays, teleplays and feature screenplays, and above all, it's FREE! After I switched to Final Draft I found myself missing some Celtx extras, like being able to store your projects online, the Celtx community boards, etc.
Celtx just rolled out their version 2, which is new, improved, and still FREE! For those of you who don't have and can't afford proper writing software, Celtx is a can't miss and will make your life much easier! To check out or download the new version of Celtx just go to http://celtx.com/download.html

PS - I am in no way connected to or affiliated with Celtx, this is just a genuine endorsement from someone who used (and may go back!) and was impressed by their software.

Page Count: How Much is too Much?

Is 90 too short? Is 110 too long? Is 120 okay, or the mark of an amateur? If you do your research you will soon find many credible sources all giving different estimates regarding your page count. Ultimately I think it's just a decision you have to make yourself based on available knowledge and the needs of your particular story.

My view on page count is you have to look at it in the context of a new writer trying to break in: you can be sure that any agent, exec or producer who does read your spec are overworked already and read so much crap they're not necessarily excited about reading more crap, so one of the first things they do is flip to the back and check the page count. This accomplishes two things for them:

1. Keeps their workload bearable: No agent, producer or exec will read your spec until a reader covers it first (even then, they may never actually read it). But that reader/assistant has 10 scripts to read and cover, maybe their boss's cat to neuter, etc. So when they flip to the back to check the page count, are they going to choose to read the 95 page spec first, or the 125 pager? We're talking about a 30 page difference here - that's like a whole extra act! My opinion is that a 110-125 pager screams "amateur" or "bloated", so they'll put off reading it as long as possible, until they have no choice but to tackle it.
By that point it's probably already late in the day/night/week, they're tired, have read lots of other crappy specs and are now not looking forward to reading yours, and they haven't even breached page two yet (Format Tip: your first/title page is never numbered, so your first actual page should read 2).
This attitude also sets you up for another pitfall: since they now dread reading your spec, the first unprofessional mistake you make or hiccup your spec has, they're apt to judge your entire spec based on it because you've now given them another excuse aside from page count - you don't know what you're doing - to skim through and not give your story the attention it deserves.

2. Relates to the above: Amateurism. A lot of people believe that a screen story can/should be told in @ 90-100 pages (just think of all the 90 min. films out there; when you see an 2hr, 3hr extravaganza, I bet 99 times out of a hundred that screenplay is coming from a seasoned pro whom people will indulge on their page count because they've already proven their storytelling/box office skills). So when readers see a page count of 110 to 125 from an unknown, the immediate impression of the author is "I'm dealing with an amateur - someone who takes 110 pages to tell a story that I'm sure could be told in @ 90". And booya - you've been pigeonholed as an amateur.

So essentially, I'm very nervous of the impression a page count in the 110-125 range makes on readers when you're trying to be seen as a professional, not just another hopeful trying to break in.

Regarding the advice that anything less that 110 gives the impression the script needs to be "fleshed out more", this may be the case if you have an 89 pager, but I don't think any reader/exec is going to check a 95 page count & arrive at either of the preceding two conclusions, or just automatically assume because the page count is 95 the story is going to necessitate more fleshing out.
If anything, I think they'll be grateful an "amateur" has a page count under 100, it might speak well of your ability to be concise, which is what screen storytelling is really all about (unlike this post). On top of that everyone knows the script is going to go through major changes in development anyway, and things will always be added/taken out.

I guess we'd also have to consider genre when talking @ page count. If I saw a 125 page action spec, horror, or romantic comdey I'd automatically assume it was as bloated as this post - that there's surely things the writer could have cut but didn't. On the other hand, if we're talking about a character based drama or thriller, the same could be true, or the plot may simply have a lot of necessary twists & turns (either way I don't think it would get the benefit of doubt).

So for a specific answer, I think a good page count for an aspiring writer is anywhere from 95 to 109. I could be wrong, but that just seems like a comfortable "safety zone" my opinion. I fear anything over 109 risks being seen as amateurish or bloated, and no one I've heard of ever got flak for turning in a 95- 100 page spec.

Good Critics Are Hard to Find

Soon after I started this blog I let a few friends know about it. A few of them checked it out, gave me kudos. That was nice. Then a particular friend - let's just call him "Tim the Tool Man" to protect his identity - pointed out a couple tiny errors in one of my posts. One was an error in grammar, a misuse of quotation marks. The other was the context in which I referenced Steven Soderbergh's Ocean's 11 (I was writing about attributes of successful original screenplays and mentioned Ocean's as possessing those attributes. Though Ocean's did illustrate the point I was making, technically it was an adaptation of existing material, not an "original" screenplay by Ted Griffin).

Small transgressions. But I am a writer, and everything I write represents me to others, including people who can hire me. Small mistakes here and there add up, suddenly I come  off as sloppy and unprofessional, and real pros don't work with people like that. Christian Bale knows where I'm coming from.

So in everything you write, it is crucially important that you remember EVERYTHING MATTERS - spelling, punctuation, proper grammar, syntax, tenses, etc.  If you don't know or are unsure of a particular rule of grammar - look it up, learn it and then learn more. You're a writer, fer Christssake!

You never know who could be looking at any random message or post you may put online or anywhere else. Could be the person who could give you that first "big break" you've been hoping and dreaming for. If that person isn't impressed because they're a stickler for proper grammar, syntax and punctuation and you're all over the place... there goes your "big break".

Small mistakes are too easy for most friends and family to overlook and forgive (they're just happy you managed to accomplish anything at all). But a good friend and critic - someone like Tim the Tool Man - will be detail oriented, blunt and honest. They will test your theories and pick your story apart like Perry Mason cross examining O.J. Simpson, and as a writer, you need that. That person is not being "picky", they are being helpful. They are holding you to the standards professionals will. In short, put your best foot forward, always. Then seek out honest, detailed feedback and be grateful for it, because people like Tim the Tool Man are indeed rare.

Oscar Thought for Writers

Concerning the nominees for Best Original and Adapted screenplays and Best Picture, I was trying to look for some pattern in these categories that may be of some help to us aspiring screenwriters. My question was, regardless of their individual merits or shortcomings, what was it specifically about these individual and vastly differing projects that got them to the pinnacle of the Hollywood game? What do they all have in common that directly contributed to their success?

The answer is a two-parter:

1. Excellent Writing - writing that got readers (agents, producers, studio execs, directors, stars, etc.) excited.

2. A Champion - someone like a producer or director who were so excited by the material that they fought for it and protected it the whole way through, from gestation to finished product.

Put those two together and my conclusion is for any writer - beginner or otherwise - to get their screenplay not just bought (if a sale is your end-game, you'll be playing one very short game) but actually seen in a real, live movie theater, the writing must be so engaging as to gain not one or two, but a literal army of Champions - all the people a film requires who will do the hard work of transferring your blueprint sketch into a complete, living, breathing work of art (or at least, cinema).

So when you're considering your next writing project, and during the actual writing, always remember that many very smart, powerful and talented individuals MUST respond to your material in such a way that they dedicate 2 or 3 years of their very lives, perhaps even more, to seeing it through to fruition in as accurate an interpretation as possible (a real Champion is one who not  just gets behind, but also protects the material).

Everyone's different though, so what key ingredients will make all these different people with different agendas come together to champion your screenplay?

I believe the answer is a combination of superlative, unique storytelling coupled with a clear, distinctive marketing concept. There, the "M" word, I said it.

Now, you may not think of films like Doubt, Frozen River or Slumdog Millionaire as obviously marketable. But if you examine their loglines or overall concepts, I think they are all clearly distinctive from other films out there, and also share universal stories. "Distinctive" is a good place to be in any market, and in marketing terms "universality" translates to wide audience appeal. 

Why am I focusing on marketability? Because in the end, you need to sell your work, and agents, creative execs and producers are basically all just salespeople. They need product, plain and simple, and in order to sell the most product that product must be familiar to the buyer yet also stand out as unique in the marketplace, an attribute I'm calling "original familiarity". Think about it, these players want to take risks, but not if it means losing their jobs or industry clout. So they like different. But they need familiar. And that's the trick in crafting your screenplay.

The classic actioner Lethal Weapon has ridiculously familiar plot - two cops team up to bring down a ruthless drug cartel. How many times have we seen that before, right? But it was the writer's specific take on the details of the story - mainly the interaction and relationships of the main characters - that gave Lethal Weapon its uniqueness. It was the telling of the story that made it seem like an original. Try the original/familiar approach when looking at the concepts & premises behind 99.9% of "successful" films, I bet they're all originally familiar.

Too Funny...

Not the greatest video, but funny, and most importantly for our purposes, instructional. A few days ago no one knew who these assistants were, they were nameless and faceless to the rest of the industry. But by creating this video, they have created "buzz" around themselves. I'm sure by week's end they'll at least have an agent, if not a production deal! All because they thought out of the box and created their own project instead of waiting around for someone to hand them one. A good lesson for writers - why not shoot what you write? Make a web video, webisodes, a short film, whatever. Lesson  being, don't wait for anyone to give you permission - go out and make your own breaks. I have a tendency to write big and expensively, but I'm trying to focus on smaller fare too, the kind I can shoot on the cheap. Also looking into graphic novels, so if your best bud happens to be an aspiring comic artist searching for unsucky material, let me know.

Also, on a mechanics of writing level, think how much better this video would be if it were about 2 minutes shorter - less is always more! Think of this when you're editing your scenes - the shorter they are, the more powerful they will be. Always leave them wanting more...
Hollywood ASST from Back of the Class on Vimeo.

Anatomy of a Logline

Loglines have two main purposes: 

1. To communicate your story clearly and concisely

2. To "hook" your reader/listener into wanting to know more.

I read a very good article somewhere (sorry, can't remember or I'd lead you to it) that basically said the anatomy of a logline should always include:

1. The Protagonist

2. The Antagonist

3. A Goal

4. An Obstacle

5. An Action.

Not easy to do in one sentence, which is why I think so many loglines fail to serve their purpose. If you go on imdb, TV guide or even look at the back of your DVD boxes, you'll find most good loglines have all 5 attributes (of course, this is not the only way to design a logline - you can simplify this template, phrase your logline as a "what if" question, etc.).

Loglines look easy - which is why I think so many writers don't spend enough time developing theirs - but in truth they are deceptively difficult. I literally wrote 20/30 different variations of my logline for my current screenplay, trying to distill the entire story to its essence, and I still have about 4 different takes I fluctuate with. I was developing my logline throughout the writing process, and even into the marketing phase. I took a lot of time and thought, trial and error to come up with a simple sentence that describes my story, is easy to say and understand, and that hooks the listener/reader into wanting to know more.

It may take you some time, but distilling your story down to a one sentence logline that can be said easily and clearly understood will be well worth it once you have a one-liner that rolls off your tongue when people ask you what your story is about!

Connections vs Friends

It's not what you know, it's who you know, right? So everyone runs around Hollywood trying to build CONNECTIONS. I think we need a little more than "connections". I don't like the word and am trying to get it out of my head. For me the connotation is of trying to build a relationship with a person in order to use them. I don't like using people, or being used, and neither should you.

You probably don't, and I think this is a big reason why writers don't like to talk. They feel the pressure of the subtext of the conversation with any industry professional - you have something I want/need, please, please like me so you'll give it to me!! This kind of mindset smacks of desperation and manipulation. It's a relationship built under a false pretext, and no one wants to be seen as desperate, manipulative and false. So how do you build "connections" and stay true to yourself (and others)?

Easy - forget "connections". Make FRIENDS. No, I'm not saying run out and buddy up to anyone and everyone in the biz. I'm not saying invite them home to meet the family, crash their birthday party or offer to pick their kids up from school (you'll soon turn into a "friend with restraining order").

What I am saying is, if you meet someone and can hit it off on a personal level - WITHOUT careers being in the conversation, chances are, you'll be looking at that person as someone who's company you enjoy. Someone you can connect with on a personal level, a level of honesty, not just a business opportunity.

If you genuinely don't like or respect someone but you think they can help you with your career, stay away. This is not a friend. It is a connection, and connections come and go depending on if you have something they want, or not. They're not dependable, and sooner or later you'll be let down. Is that the best use of your time and energy?

But friends stick around. Friends are willing to help when they think they can or are inspired to do so. They contact you just to say "hi", wish you well, happy birthday, go out for drinks, whatever. But if they're someone you genuinely like and the feelings are reciprocated, you'll soon find yourself surrounded by steady, dependable relationships based on more than just opportunism and business. That's personally fulfilling, isn't it? Life enriching. And career enhancing. And it takes all the fear and intimidation out of those quasi social/business relationships. So stop cultivating connections. Start making friends.

PS - look at the personal/business relationships of all the filmmakers you admire - you'll soon see a pattern: people work with the same people over and over again. Why? Because not only do these professionals enjoy relationships with others who are proficient in their fields, but they also happen to be people they genuinely like being around and share similar mindsets. 

 

Writing Resources

As beginning writers, we're always looking for advice. Where do you go to get it? Some very good resources:

Podcasts - there are many film comment podcasts that review and analyze recent and past films. Listening to film criticism will enhance your understanding of film and the things you notice within them - techniques, structures, casting choices, why something works or doesn't, the list is endless. There are also a handful of podcasts out there that interview professional, working writers at various stages in their careers. There's no one better to learn from than them, especially if you don't live in Los Angeles and don't regularly bump into Oscar winning screenwriters at your local Starbuck's. Simply go to itunes and look up tv/film podcasts, you will find a host of podcasts to peruse, some will be helpful, some, not so much. But podcasts are a terrific FREE resource for studying and understanding all aspects of filmmaking. Some of my favorite & most trusted weekly podcasts:
Creative Screenwriting Magazine
On The Page
Script Magazine
The Hollywood Saloon
/Film
KCRW's The Business
KCRW's The Treatment w/Elvis Mitchell

Now on to Professional Writer's Websites - do you frequent any? You should be! There are hundreds (maybe thousands?) of screenwriters out there who have their own websites and blogs, and you'd be wiser for surveying them. Many of these guys & girls are just a rung or three above you on the career ladder, and have valuable insights on navigating the business of writing. Among my favorites:

Wordplayer.com - read every article on this vast site at least twice!

Aspiringtvwriter.blogspot.com

Complicationsensue.blogspot.com

Kfmonkey.blogspot.com

Sex-in-a-sub.blogspot.com
Gointothestory.com
Johnaugust.com
Mysteryman.org
Unknownscreenwriter.com

And a hundred others I have bookmarked! The real value for me in these sites is not only do you receive street-tested knowledge from other writers, but you have an opportunity to converse with these writers (at least online), get some one-on-one advice and build relationships. Again, if you don't live in Los Angeles, a very useful way to learn the art, the business, and cultivate those all important "connections". 

A word of caution though - show some professional courtesy when contacting these people! Use tact, be polite, concise and to the point. Don't ramble on and don't EXPECT anything in return - you're already getting great advice for free, don't wear out your welcome by being too pushy, asking too many questions, "depending" on anyone to solve your story problems or give you the golden keys to the kingdom. These people are much too busy to entertain endless correspondence from an army of unemployed writers!

Just read what they have to offer, glean what you can, correspond when necessary, and thank them for their valuable time and insights. Remember, no one is forced to start a website, they do this in hopes that beginning screenwriters will learn something and maybe not be so green or make the same mistakes they did. Don't let them - or yourself - down!

There are many other film/TV related websites and publications you should always be checking - Variety.com, boxofficemojo.com, Done Deal Pro, Hollywood Reporter, etc. should all be a daily stop for you. The value in these sites is to know what's going on in the business TODAY - who's doing what, who's selling what, who's buying what, etc. And funny as it may sound, TAKE NOTES! Are any of the people/companies mentioned in the articles working with new writers? Are the kinds of projects they produce/want to produce up your alley? This research and your notes will come in handy once it's time to market your own screenplay - you'll already have a rough list of production companies, producers, agents, managers etc. to query!

Another very important aspect of your web toolkit are screenplay contests and writing communities. If you're a writer with no credits yet, placing in a recognized contest can be used to beef up your queries, build connections, or give some form of credibility/vetting to entice those who are too busy to read your screenplay.

And join a writing community - somewhere online or off - gives you a safe environment in which you can discuss your work with other writers, get feedback, put your script on its feet, etc. And let's not forget - connections. Maybe your comedy writing buddy has a relationship with a producer that doesn't do comedy, but may be very interested in your summer action script!

All this to say, in today's world there are more resources available to aspiring writers than ever before to learn your craft and learn the business. Take advantage of these opportunities, or others will, and you will be left in the proverbial dust. Good hunting!

PS - let me know of any sites you find exceptionally informative!

Good Storytelling

No matter what you do, all your work should have a definable beginning, middle, and end.

The Bionic Man opener brings back great childhood memories for me, so excuse the indulgence, but it also illustrates how to tell a complete story in a very short amount of time - a minute and a half, in this case.

Every scene you write should read like its own short story, with a definable beginning, middle and end. Every sequence should have a beginning, middle and end. Every act? A beginning, middle and end. Stories within stories.

Do your scenes/sequences/acts/stories have solid beginnings, middles and endings? If not, you're not really telling a story!

Writing and Parenting

Being a full time parent while trying to write is certainly tough. But even when you're not writing, you can still be writing. A few ways I've found to take care of my little one while staying creative:

Every kid has their movies they want to watch over & over again, which can be terribly annoying on many levels, especially when you're trying to work while the background shrill of the same songs & dialogue echo through the house day after day. I suggest a change in perspective. Remember that these big budget animated movies are put together to appeal to not only to kids, but to a mass audience. These films are huge investments and it's very important these companies make their money back. Therefore the storytelling structure they use are usually very traditional and very tight. They usually follow the Hero's Journey format very closely, all characters serve specific functions and purposes (usually all archetypal), character arcs are well defined and specific, and there's very little fat in the way of dialogue and purpose. So if you're watching Beauty and the Beast for the 101st time, try watching it with your writer's eyes and ears: what's the subtext of every scene/what are they REALLY saying in storytelling terminology? Notice the scene transitions, the "buttons" on the end of every scene; What does each character want and how do they go about getting it? What are the archetypes behind every main character? What is the anatomy of an individual scene? What are its beats? Can you identify basic structural elements such as the inciting incident, the call/refusal to action, the first and second turning points, the midpoint where everything should shift - how does it shift? There are a million more questions you could ask yourself, all of which will enhance or inform your own writing in some way. The point is if you have the right frame of mind, instead of trying to block out these films as an unwanted annoyance, you can instead watch them over and over again with your little one and be just as fascinated, engaged and interested as they are on repeated viewings.

Bedtime I find is another good opportunity to be a good parent and also flex your creative muscles. Instead of reading a book, take some of your little one's favorite characters and make up a story on the spot - akin to freewriting. You'll immediately find you're inadvertently painting yourself into creative corners, and in order to keep the story going you'll have to improvise, and quickly. The real value of this instead of mulling a story point over and over in your head before committing to it, as we tend too often to do, you'll have to silence your inner critic in order to forge ahead. You may find you have an innate knack for 3 act structure. You may discover you have a gift for thinking out of the box, for connecting seemingly unrelated story elements, for dialogue, relationships, character or you may discover you need serious help in one or many of these areas. Again, the real value in this exercise is it exposes your strengths, your weaknesses, and most importantly, get that inner critic out of the way of your storytelling process.

More often than not as soon as your little one has drifted into dreamland, you'll leap to your computer inspired and on fire. Or maybe you'll just sit on the couch and watch T.V. In either case, you have stretched and worked that storytelling muscle while taking care of your "real world" responsibilities. And if you're a parent you know well enough the importance of multitasking!

Never Give Your Script to Anyone Hot Off the Press!

As writers work endless hours in solitude, the deeper we delve, the more we tend lose objectivity on the quality and coherence of our projects. Once we feel we're "done", by any stretch of the word, we're always anxious to get immediate feedback on whether we've achieved our goals or fallen short. So we take our creation hot off the press, and put it in a reader's hands.

Then, moments later, we make an adjustment. Or realize something isn't quite right. We fix here, tinker there, rewrite a little, then, making the same mistake a second time, immediately send our revised copy to our trusted reader who has already begun - if not finished - the original draft. Usually this is accompanied with an apologetic email sounding something like "really sorry if you've started my first draft already, I made some revisions, and now the structure is better, I've eliminated/combined some characters, and put a whole new twist on the ending! The new draft is absolute genius, so trash that first one and check this baby out!".

In varying degrees I have committed this sin, as have friends of mine, as I'm sure have you.

It may seem a small sin, but I don't think there's any such thing as a small sin in the Business - they're all large, egregious sins, because they can affect your career not in just one, but in many different ways.

For example, we all know the importance of connections and the value of a true, "trusted reader", a friend or acquaintance who will give you honest and specific feedback, no smoke, no bull. But any trusted reader is going to get tired of re-starting your towering work of staggering genius every time you feel another adjustment needs to be made. People have better things to do. It also gives the impression you are unorganized, amateurish and flaky. There is so much competition in this business, and so many flakes and wannabe's that most professionals will zero in on the tiniest, most insignificant piece of information about a potential writer and characterize said writer based entirely on their mistake. If that seems unfair or illogical, consider the sheer volume of material out there producers, agents, readers, execs and directors have to slog through each day just to find the two or three unproven writers or new projects they may say "yes" to this year. Fifty thousand original scripts registered with the WGA each year, of which less than 50 will even get optioned (remember, I said "original" works. Most projects bought now days are almost exclusively based on pre-existing works). Think of a prospector who has to sift through an entire mountain to find a half-ounce of gold flecks. You think he's going to closely examine every stone comprising the mountain for their individual merits? To say these people are busy is a gross understatement, that's why the Business is a lifestyle, not just another occupation out can clock out from on Friday.

So by jumping the gun before your material is ready, not only have you distanced a valuable resource, you've also painted in their minds a picture of someone who's "not ready yet". That's not where you want to be. Also, I doubt your trusted reader will be waiting on pins and needles to read your next project when they know they'll have to read at least 3 drafts of basically the same story. No one is going to have the same passion or tolerance for your project as you do, don't test what little they do have. If, however, you turn in your projects with i's dotted, t's crossed and such, your reader will look upon you as someone they don't mind spending their time on, because you appear serious about your work. There are other side effects too, which are self evident if you consider the topic a moment, but since I passed brevity about three paragraphs ago, I'll stop detailing the problem and consequences here.

Now it's time to talk about solutions, which should also be pretty obvious: once you're "done" with your project, SHOW IT TO NO ONE. Throw it in a drawer. Close the drawer. Nail it shut Wyle E. Coyote style and don't go near that drawer for at least two or three weeks -- at least (I recommend a month). What you need right now is to get your mind off your project -- literally to forget about it. Start another screenplay, read some books, ply your hobby, whatever, just forget about what's sitting in that drawer for a while.

Then, one day when you don't feel like it, pull the nails out, open the drawer, go to a quiet place for at least 2 hours with a pen, a highlighter, a pencil and your script. Then read. Take notes. Make changes. Do what you need to do. You'll be surprised -- shocked, actually -- at the many errors that litter your script. Don't worry, that's expected, you've been staring at this document for hours on end for months, of course you're not going to see things that will scream out to other, more objective readers. Then go to your computer and plug in those changes and guess what? Entomb it in another drawer for another week or two. Rinse, repeat.

Then, after two touch up/rewrites, maybe, just maybe, your work of staggering genius will be ready to be seen by foreign eyes.