Writer/Directors and Co-Ops
This weekend brought two stories of interest to screenwriters, particularly those of the Hollywood bent.
The first was Rachel Abramowitz’s article in the LA Times about the recent batch of screenwriters-turned-directors, which included bits about Scott Frank, Mike White, and Charlie Kaufman, among others. I spoke to her about The Nines:
“Most of what I do never makes it to the screen,” he says, voicing a common lament. “I feel all this responsibility to those characters and these stories. They’re half alive. They’re trapped in 12-point Courier.”
“The Nines,” he says, deals with “the responsibility of a creator to his creations. You can look at it from a religious point of view. If you create this whole universe, are you responsible for making sure it sticks around?”
The second story comes from today’s Variety, in which Michael Fleming breaks the news of a new “Writer’s Co-Op” formed by writer/producer John Wells and others.
I’ve read the article three times, and many of the details aren’t clear. But here’s the basics: Nineteen established screenwriters are agreeing to cut their up-front fees in exchange for first-dollar gross on the projects that get made. In addition, the screenwriters would have additional controls over their material. The deal is set up at Warners; it’s unclear whether any other studios would match the terms.
Will it work? I hope so. While the Writers Guild plays a crucial role in enforcing minimum standards for payments and practices, I’ve long felt there was room for improvement at the top end of the feature screenwriting continuum. By banding together, big-name scribes can get more leverage.
Which leads to the awkward issue of which names are on that list of 19. Mine isn’t; I wasn’t asked.1 Readers might remember a similar-sounding agreement at Sony/Columbia several years back. I was part of that, and despite making several movies for the studio during the time, found that it never amounted to much.2 Many of the writers who were part of the Sony deal are participants in this new venture, so it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
- Insert whichever “wouldn’t join a club that would have me” rationalization you’d like. Did I feel a little slighted? Sure. Did the realization that other big names weren’t on the list comfort me? Yes. Is it awkward admitting this? Certainly. ↩
- Word around the virtual water-cooler is that David Koepp likely made some money through the Sony deal, because his original Spider-Man grossed so much that the deal’s profit definition must have kicked in. For whatever reason, he’s not part of the Writers Co-Op deal. ↩
Articles
March 19th, 2007 at 9:07 am
John August loves saying “12-point Courier”! He Loves it!
Jonson
March 19th, 2007 at 9:49 am
“I’ve long felt there was room for improvement at the top end of the feature screenwriting continuum.”
ha. sorry but that statement is a little difficult to contextualize. ironically i’ve long had an idea about creating a filmmaking co-op, but the impetus was thinking that there was a lot of room for improvement at the low end.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:17 am
John,
Your down-to-earth response is really stabilizing, especially in an industry where hyperbole seems to be the norm.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:55 am
Christopher (#2):
Context: The biggest-name feature screenwriters are paid well, but nowhere nearly as well as the biggest-name directors or producers (or even lesser-name actors). Even when the screenwriter has initiated the project — that is, it’s not based on any pre-existing material — the odds of him or her getting meaningful gross are essentially zero.
The studios don’t want to give it, because it forms a precedent. But if a group of writers gets it as part of a special deal, there’s incentive for the studios (or at least, one studio) to experiment.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:56 am
This could be a great deal for the writers whose screenplays actually get made, but it could be a tough deal for the writers whose screenplays don’t. The article alludes to the writers giveing up 90% of the upfront money.
Let’s say that the co-op produces 18 scripts that would have sold for 1 million bucks a pop. Now the upfront compensation is 100K. Now let’s say that 5 of those SPs get made and the writers get 5% of the gross. Finally let’s say each of the 5 produced films grosses 100MM (big assumption). Well then each of those SP’s writers will get 5 million bucks (500% premium). But the 13 other SP’s writers will get their 100K plus whatever other fees they still make. Total compensation is 26.8 million (up 8.8 million) but the writers on the low-end are getting hosed. The bottom line is that as a higher percentage of the movies from the co-op get made the better a deal this becomes for writers.
(NOTE: Obviously my assumptions are broad estimates)
March 19th, 2007 at 11:15 am
It could also be a sly way to get cheap scripts from great writers… I read nothing in the article that prevents the producers from putting the project on ice once the script is in.
Now, on the other hand I’m assuming they want great scripts to make decent movies, so there’s a mutual objective to get the script produced.
Still, A list directors and actors get Pay-Or-Play, meaning they can put zero effort into a project and still rake in the cash, whilst writers need to bleed on the page just to get a fair shot at a backend deal. A good start, but a long way to go…
March 19th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
thanks for the additional context - although that’s not what i meant, it does help a bit. i was more referring to this:
“Unlike many screenwriters, the brand-name writers do not appear to be an aggrieved lot. They’ve largely felt Hollywood’s warm glow — and its financial embrace. Top studio screenwriters generally earn $2 million to $3 million for a script and $250,000 to $300,000 a week for polishing other people’s films.”
despite the lack of parity for them with directors and actors, thoughts about improving the lot of that group are far above my musings.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
I heard to join the Writers Co-Op you either have to be the son of a member or save the life of a member.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Top Screenwriters get $2 to $3 million a pop for screenplays? Seriously? And a quarter-million a week for polishing scripts?
Is that true? It’s very, very difficult to find information about how much writers actually get paid in LA LA LAnd, but I never thought it was that much money. Unless of course when they say “top studio screenwriters”, they mean a group of about 25 people or less.
Then again, you pretty much have to make $1 million-plus per year just to own a home in LA, so I suppose it’s all relative.
March 19th, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Johnny, I’m not sure that pay-or-play kind of situations would ever occur for writers the way they do for directors. A director attached to one project essentially cannot work on another, she has to sit on her butt until the ball gets rolling. A top shelf director may be in a position to do preproduction on other projects, and rattle them off one by one, but the working guys making midbudget romantic comedies and anything else in the sub $15 million range especially have to be working it all the time, trying to pull in new jobs. And if some studio has a star and a script and they want to roll now, they’re not going to wait 6 months to see if your other job pans out.
Writers, especially writers working on spec on original work, have to put a shitload of upfront effort with no pay, but if there is a lull in their other work, why they can be doing a second draft, or a treatment, or writing a whole new script. Directors who are non-hyphenates get to watch television.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:21 pm
I can’t remember if I read it here or not, but are you teaming up with William Goldman (The Princess Bride) to write the ‘Shazam’ movie?
March 20th, 2007 at 6:30 am
I believe I remember reading here (from a user, not John) that Goldman did an earlier draft of the script, but John hasn’t responded to the question of whether or not Goldman’s draft will be incorporated into his own.
March 20th, 2007 at 7:33 am
So if the movie doesn’t get made, no payment? I hope these gents are including a reversion clause.
March 20th, 2007 at 7:56 am
Erik, not sure about your point. My point was to say that top directors (and actors) still get better deals than top writers. Of course Pay-or-Play does not pertain to screenwriters. Writers need to create or, well, they’re not doing their job. Ultimately, a top writer should be paid top dollar for his or her work AND get points. That’s all.
March 20th, 2007 at 11:49 am
There are a few writers who get six figures a week on polishing work - but you’re talking about a very small number of people (maybe half a dozen) and only on projects which are already greenlit.
Furthermore, when you hear stories about a script selling for $2 or $3 million dollars, bear in mind that number is NOT all guaranteed. Generally a big chunk of it is paid upfront, but an even bigger chunk is “production bonuses” - eg, paid to the writer in the event that the movie gets made and they receive solo credit. It’ll be cut in half if they share credit.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
Various answers to various questions raised:
March 20th, 2007 at 11:40 pm
Could you kill a member? I’d give fifty bucks to somebody to off Bruce Joel Rubin and see if he comes back rubbing clay on Demi Moore. I’ll give you another fifty bucks if he does.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:14 am
OK, my english is not too good so I’m probably not getting this. From what I understand, with this deal, writers are encouraged to write commercial, succesful movies, so that said movies can gross more money at the box office, and the writers earn more money. So, in my opinion, this works great for movies like “300″, “spider-man”, the pirates of the caribbean series, “The Departed”, etc. These movies -at least for me- have great stories and it’s a fact that they were box-office hits. But my question comes here, what happens with movies like “Little Miss Sunshine”, “Running Scared” or “Harsh Times”. These movies (again, in my humble opinion) also come from excellent scripts, but their box-office gross wasn’t spectacular. Wouldn’t the writers end up losing with these kinds of movies?
March 22nd, 2007 at 4:33 am
I think this is a very well thougt-out deal, advantageous to both parties.
The writers do take a huge risk because it’s unlikely that more than one film, say, gets made under this deal (I’m basing this assumption on the fact that scripts tend not to go into production, generally speaking). But in the unlikely event a script does go into production it would be hugely rewarding for the writer. Perhaps not financially, but in terms of artistic control.
But what makes this really worth while, for the writers, is the fact that there is a reversal clause that takes immediate effect (says Craig Mazin), the writers are free to take their scripts elsewhere should WB not be interested. I’d say that this tips the scales in the writers’ favour.
March 22nd, 2007 at 7:54 am
In theory it sounds great, and indeed it might be a good step, but it does kind of worry me. Others have brought up the danger it might present when scripts don’t get made. But I have a different concern as well.
I understand that the idea is if a screenwriter has more power in the making of the film, then they’ll be more tied to how it does at the box office (that is, presuming the not really true premise that good movies make more money). They’ll be rewarded in the end. And relinquishing up-front money for “more power” seems somewhat dubious. Power in filmmaking is not exactly clean cut. You don’t automatically have it just because you have a certain position of supposed power. I worry that screenwriters could be giving up cash for the promise of more power, but that in production that “power” might not materialize. How specific and binding are the clauses of the agreement?
March 22nd, 2007 at 9:19 am
Rachel: The writers are relinguising certain up-front money but if a film gets made the writer will be paid for the script in full. And perhaps for some rewriting as well, though I don’t know about that. In addition he’ll get a position of some power and the chance to be actively involved in the making of the film from a to z.
But I was actually going to ask a question that has nothing to do with this co-op.
Because I just noticed that this site is powered by WordPress.
I know one is supposed to be able to publish videos (QT, Flash, movie, whatever) on a WordPress blog but apparantly some kind of plug-in is required. I’m basically very disinclined to work my way through technical problems, but it looks like I need to, so I have two questions: 1) Which plug-in do I need? 2) Is this complicated or a simple matter?
Thanks in advance.
March 22nd, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Someone just told me about this:
http://www.solostream.com/2006/09/20/set-up-a-videoblog-part-deux-or-how-to-easily-add-quicktime-video-to-your-wordpress-site/
I guess it will answer all of my questions.