How ScriptShadow hurts screenwriters
[There is an update to this post here.]
Earlier this year, a blogger going by the name Carson Reeves began reviewing screenplays on a site called ScriptShadow. These aren’t scripts for existing movies, but rather screenplays to upcoming films — ones in production, ones in development, ones in limbo.
A recent Wired magazine article by Scott Brown discusses his intentions:
[Reeves] says he wanted to celebrate the writer, promote talented unknowns (aren’t most screenwriters pretty much unknowns?), and acquaint newbie scribes with the art of the craft. “I’ve had so many emails from writers all over the world thanking me for making Hollywood feel closer and less intimidating,” he says. “It’s particularly appealing to amateur screenwriters who want to know what’s selling. You have to realize that this is information they’ve wanted for years but just didn’t have access to.”
That’s not really the case. Aspiring screenwriters have always had access to this material the same way Reeves apparently got access to it: by working and interning in the industry.
In between answering phones and trying to get their bosses on flights out of Kennedy, bright underpaid aspirants have the opportunity to read almost every script in town. Impromptu networks of assistants pass around their favorite screenplays, in the process picking the next generation of hot writers.
Studios turn a blind eye to this because it helps the industry. You want the smartest people with the best opinions working for you, and you want them to have a good sense of what’s in development all over town. A boss at Disney isn’t going to lose sleep if an intern at CAA reads a draft of that Miley Cyrus comedy. It’s expected. It’s good.
So ScriptShadow should be a good thing, right? More is better.
It’s not. And the reasons become clear pretty quickly.
There’s a big difference between reading a script and reviewing it online for the world to see. Not only are you spoiling plot details, but you’re establishing a baseline judgment for a project that’s often still in its fetal phase.
Brown’s article is alarmingly upbeat on this point:
Scriptshadow is the logical next step in our increasingly impatient attitude toward the delivery of entertainment. We’ve seen the sun set on the medieval Age of Professional Reviews, the rise of the populist recap, and the boom of real-time in-theater Twitter. The precap, however, trumps them all. It’s the kind of access Tinsel-trolls like me have been jonesing for since the ’90s, when Ain’t It Cool News hooked us with preemptive trashings of preview screenings.1
And here’s the rub: just like the AICN reviews of screenings made studios much more reluctant to test their films, sites like ScriptShadow are making them clamp down much harder on the heretofore common practice of passing scripts around.
This isn’t theoretical. It’s happening now.
Ruining it for writers
Earlier this year, I worked on a rewrite of a potential tent-pole movie in development at Fox. A week into my writing, ScriptShadow posted a review (since removed) of an earlier draft of the same project. It was largely laudatory, but the studio went ballistic. I don’t know what pressure they put on ScriptShadow to get the review taken down, but I was suddenly given extraordinary restrictions on exactly who could read the script. I couldn’t send it to the director, the producers or anyone other than one executive at the studio. These were by far the most restrictive terms of any film I’ve written at any studio.
Keep in mind, this wasn’t X-Men or Avatar. It was one of two dozen movies that could maybe someday get greenlit. Fox legal was willing to go to war over a movie it might not even make.
The more often sites like ScriptShadow poke that hornet’s nest, the bigger the reaction is going to be. The revised terms — I couldn’t even send the draft to my agent — may become the norm. Assistants will get fired for sharing scripts. In the long run, it will be crippling for the industry, and screenwriters will suffer most:
Screenwriters get hired based on the last few things we wrote, and if those are sealed in vaults, we’re screwed. I got my second writing assignment (A Wrinkle in Time) based on the script to my first assignment, a project that was still in active development. If that script had been locked down, I might not have gotten another job.
If I can’t get feedback from trusted readers about the script I’m writing, it won’t be as good. Period.
Pretty soon, blame for one of these “leaks” is going to be aimed back at the actual writer, and how would she defend herself? If I leave my iPhone or laptop unattended for sixty seconds, it would be nothing for someone to send himself one the drafts I’ve emailed to myself as backup.
I don’t want to have to write in a Fox office, on a Fox computer. But that could very easily be the future.
A better tomorrow
Several screenwriter friends have emailed Reeves, asking him to take down reviews of their scripts. Every time, he has. So I believe Reeves when he says he wants to help writers. Here are two ways he can do it:
Review scripts of movies once they’ve come out. Most of the scripts aiming for awards this season have freely-available .pdfs, and Reeves’ own contacts should enable him to get ahold of the ones that aren’t. Shining a spotlight on the scripts and their screenwriters would genuinely help readers see how the words on the page were translated to the screen.
Ask writers before posting a review. No doubt some screenwriters benefit from getting their spec scripts mentioned, just as the Black List has helped draw attention to worthy writers. As long as Reeves checks in with the writer first — making sure that a review wouldn’t derail a deal in the works — everyone benefits.
Other sites publish script reviews. The reason I’m singling out ScriptShadow is that its owner genuinely seems to have some sense of responsibility to its readers and the screenwriting community. Hell, it uses Scrippets, so it can’t be all evil.
I’m hoping that by setting the bar higher, ScriptShadow can stop hurting the screenwriters it claims to celebrate.
- More than impatience, I think it speaks to a culture of entitlement: “It’s not fair I have to wait until a movie is out to know what happens.” Or, “It’s not fair that only Hollywood people get to read these scripts.” Guess what? It is fair. Fair doesn’t mean you get whatever you want. ↩
Filed under: Film Industry, Projects, Rights and Copyright
Articles
December 8th, 2009 at 6:16 am
I couldn’t agree more. Very well said.
December 8th, 2009 at 6:35 am
Very well balanced criticism, good suggestions for Reeves and others offering similar services. I am impressed by your fair judgement.
December 8th, 2009 at 6:53 am
I can imagine a future where Execs are put in their positions based on their ability to incorporate such sites as SCRIPTSHADOW* into their development cycle… and, you know, possibly address and/or combat actual online piracy.
Why is it Scriptshadow’s fault? Why isn’t it the skittish Exec’s?
*If Scriptshadow goes down, someone less smart will take his place. And H’Wood (fo sho) doesn’t want that. Surely. Not that?
December 8th, 2009 at 6:59 am
It is TOTALLY unfair that only Hollywood gets to read these scripts. What’s not fair is that a lot of very talented writers with more creative ability in their little fingers then the vast majority of bean-counters running production companies in Hollywood, labor in silence and get treated like dogshit because nobody is allowed to read and recognize their work. God help us, if the movie industry were faced with having to respect and answer to the fans of a SCRIPT or it’s author. Or acknowledge that a script had intrinsic worth and appeal to the general public and wasn’t just something to randomly revise into oblivion. Or accept responsibility for developing material that is offensively stupid lowest-common denominator garbage.
People have been rowing in these galleys for so long they’ve forgotten freedom. You don’t want to write at a Fox-owned computer in a Fox office with a handcuff on your wrist attached to the hard drive or something? THEN DON’T. They tell you at some point that you gotta do that, turn around and say, “FUCK YOU, NO. I am gonna write where I want, how I want, in an environment that is comfortable and inspiring to me and fuck your selfishness and paranoia.”
Screenwriters are writers, remember? Not glorified corporate stenographers. They are creative artists. They should have ownership over their work anyway. They should have the legal right to show it whoever the fuck they want. I mean, this makes the comic-book industries’ work for hire practices during the Great Depression look fair.
And if you say, “Well, this is how the industry works and we just have to accept if we want to work in it”, then maybe it’s about time people stood up and did something about it. Y’know? Maybe we should take a hint from the aforementioned comic book industry and start looking into something called creator’s rights. And anybody like Scriptshadow who lets a little light and fresh air into the stifling atmosphere of modern Hollywood is doing all right by me.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:05 am
And I want to add that John, with this website, and all the help and aid and kindness you’ve shown to aspiring screenwriters, you’ve let an enormous amount of light in, and please don’t take my above tirade as an attack on you or your opinions on this matter in any way. I have some strong feelings about this, but even stronger assurances that there’s nobody who’s given more of himself, without expecting any payment or reperation, through the medium of the web, to help other screenwriters then John August.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:05 am
What you say about your own experience is very worrying, but from the perspective of people outside the industry scriptshadow is a god-send. The assertion that anyone who wants access to screenplays can go and get an intern job in Hollywood applies only to US citizens, there are plenty of us around the world who can learn from exposure to scripts that sell and will miss the site dearly if it’s closed. And I dare say there are people who come to writing later in life rather than straight out of college that would disagree, too.
The one problem with only reviewing scripts for films on release is that the pool of scripts that make it through to production and release is far, far smaller. I don’t know what the solution is.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:16 am
Hey John,
I’m glad you wrote this article. It’s important for Carson and everyone else to see one unintended effect of his activities.
But your prediction of detriment to established writers is only one possible outcome and it may not even be a permanent one.
Another possible outcome is that the screenplay itself will continue to gain momentum as an independent artform. And that, you must admit, is of great benefit to the writer.
I have to tell you, reading an unproduced script that’s good gets me really excited to see the movie. It’s the best advertising possible for someone seeking out well-written movies to watch.
Do studios pull books from bookshelves when an adaptation is coming out? There’s an expectation that each medium will be different. Studios needs to give readers some credit here.
It’s fair to say “Scriptshadow may hurt professional screenwriters – if studios overreact.” Given time, I think you’ll hear some testimonials from pro screenwriters saying how Scriptshadow helped them.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:24 am
Very well put, and I think your suggestions are great.
Is there some pool of “dead” scripts that he could review too, to terraling’s point? I could see that being helpful to writers too — seeing the ones that didn’t make it and figuring out why (although I know the “why” may have nothing to do with the writing).
But if scripts could come back to life at any moment, I guess that’s not as viable…
December 8th, 2009 at 7:27 am
“Aspiring screenwriters have always had access to this material the same way Reeves apparently got access to it: by working and interning in the industry.”
John, I think it’s important to remember that some of us wannabes aren’t in LA. Hell, some of us aren’t even in the same country, and not everyone can afford to drop their lives and fly to LA on the off-chance they can score a low paying internship.
I understand that LA is the hub of things, and that sooner or later we’re gonna have to be there to get something done, but in the meantime, Scriptshadow has been an amazing resource for us long-distance dreamers. Being able to read spec scripts has been invaluable because it gives us an idea of what specs are selling, as well as highlighting stylistic trends in the spec market. Something like The Weinstein’s Co.’s cleaned-up pdf of Inglorious Basterds, though it’s useful for learning about the craft, won’t do that.
But I take your points about the problems it presents to you professionals, (and if there’s a way to solve it to everyone’s satisfaction, great). We can’t have professional writers being locked in wi-fi blackspot bunkers in order to turn in a draft.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:34 am
I don’t think it’s that big of a deal. Additionally, I think the less assistants pushing the work of friends and/or scratch-me-back acquaintances, the better. The whole system in Hollywood is broken in so many ways, and this whole “reviewing a script too soon” bit is just a small part of it, and not even the worst by any means. I completely understand your perspective, because it happened to you and stifled you in what I bet was a very frustrating way, but I think you’re going to a bit of an extreme. No one besides aspiring writers and a industry types even reads these sorts of blogs anyway so I really think there’s little risk of spoilery plot points or negative perceptions spreading to the mainstream media or general public.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:37 am
This is a tough one for me, John. Your site has been in my life for years and has always proven helpful. Carson’s site is a bloody godsend and gives the filthy, unproduced, unsold masses like myself a remarkable educational tool.
Ultimately I have to say that if the “threat” the execs feel by a wily fellow like Carson and his site leads them to accidentally raise up the quality of their output, then go get ‘em Carson.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:01 am
“Why is it Scriptshadow’s fault? Why isn’t it the skittish Exec’s?”
Because ScriptShadow takes a time-honored (and ultimately beneficial) practice of sharing copyrighted screenplays among a small group of Hollywood insiders (and like it or not, even the interns mentioned qualify over anybody reading ScriptShadow outside of LA, which would include me) and twists it into a situation that cannot be tolerated by legal departments and movie execs of any major studio. We need to remember that people are breaking the law here.
Anybody who thinks that ScriptShadow helps the development of a fledgling project by “keeping everybody honest and raising the bar of the movie through feedback” has probably never been through such a development process. The readership of a page like ScriptShadow is completely different from the small group of people that used to see the scripts, and if I go by experience in related fields, designing/writing a movie through internet feedback might be one of the worst mistakes a writer or exec can make.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:07 am
It’s about respect though, isn’t it? It’s about taking a huge risk with a writer’s career where it’s very possible to ruin it before its even begun. Read the early drafts to a classic like Groundhog Day for instance and consider how a script like that may never have made it to production if it had been read, reviewed negatively and spoiled on ScriptShadow. Why would a studio plow money into resurrecting a soiled property such as that? Sites like ScriptShadow create a very real risk of preventing writers from developing drafts or even careers. I appreciate the care and affection that goes into ScriptShadow and I don’t believe there is any intention to hurt writer’s, but the site has been very damning of some writer’s without giving those writer’s a chance to defend themselves. They take whatever they can get and they give their skewered view, publishing it for a world wide audience. Public coverage?! I mean, come on! Screenplays in development are not for public consumption and it’s not fair to play god with a writer’s work like that.
I mean what’s next?
December 8th, 2009 at 8:09 am
I hate to do this, but I have to apologize for those damn plural apostrophes in my previous comment. Damn you, Internet — you learn me such bad grammar!
December 8th, 2009 at 8:10 am
Ouch…I have to respectfully disagree,Scriptshadow, has been my one go to source for screenplays, hell, if it wasnt for Scriptshadow, I would have never been so hyped to see a few of the movies that are now being released.
I agree with Racicot , if scriptshadow goes down, ten more will pop up,with a lot less love and respect than carson gives to material.
read script..then read review…to all you script leeches:)
December 8th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Thanks for your well-balanced discussion. I’ve wondered about this myself, and figured that if ScriptShadow begins obviously hitting the mainstream for audience preview use, it’s dead. But as a professional living and working in Nova Scotia, Canada, it’s such a great resource – I really hope that doesn’t happen.
I use it telling myself that it’s okay because my motives are purely educational, and 9 out of 10 writers I know would share material for those purposes. But I do feel dirty about it – it looks like ScriptShadow is asking writers’ permission only after the script is out, and strictly speaking, just because Carson and his fans have good intentions doesn’t mean we aren’t violating copyright.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:12 am
Why are we calling him Carson Reeves? His name is [redacted]. And he’s hurting writers in the way Mr. August pointed out.
Note from John: At Carson’s request, I’m taking out the name listed here. I hope to have an answer from Carson about the issues I’ve raised.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:31 am
Hello John.
There’s another side to this that you haven’t covered.
Carson has reached out to the Done Deal community and has gotten representation for several screenwriters, through a contest.
He has another contest upcoming, which promises industry eyeballs.
So you can amend your post to, Scriptshadow hurts WEALTHY* WORKING SCREENWRITERS, but helps N00b screenwriters.
Because you are in the former category, you are bothered.
If you were in the latter category, you’d be thrilled.
December 8th, 2009 at 9:04 am
John, you make a reasoned, well-balanced argument. Alternatively, studios could also start to listen to feedback at this earliest stage in the development of a movie to gauge when it gets off-track. Or, once the movie is past the point of no return, a script review sheds light on the mainstream filmmaking collaborative process and how good intentions can create a shitty movie.
In the 14 years that I’ve been running a movie scoop/news website, I think the biggest reason that studios don’t like script reviews isn’t because of the spoiler info they can divulge, it’s because they often give a little too much raw story for people to look at behind the curtain, and that can be embarrassing for some of them.
I also think that an equally-as-valid argument can be made for strengthening the position and importance of the writer by getting scripts out there and into the wild and educating the public about how many great ideas will never see the light of day.
December 8th, 2009 at 9:08 am
“reviewing scripts online for the world to see”? Maybe for script buffs to see, maybe even some film buffs too, but the general public couldn’t care less about screenwriting. Before Episode III of Star Wars came out I got the script and offered it around to some of my friends and acquaintances… Nobody would read it! Not even to know how it ends. Anyway, I didn’t know this website, so I’m glad John has written this entry. It seems very interesting. I’m going to get something to eat and read some of the reviews. I think the writer of the blog acknowledges the different points of view about the content he offers: beside every link to a screenplay, it reads “(This script is meant for educational purposes only. If you are the writer or copyright holder of this script and would like it taken down, please e-mail me at Carsonreeves1@gmail.com and I will do so immediately)”; also, he links to this very blog entry in a blog list. As somebody who may never set a foot in Hollywood, let alone land a job assisting someone in the business, I totally support a site like Scriptshadow.
December 8th, 2009 at 9:31 am
I don’t think Carson has ever intended his site to be used for anyone but aspiring and unrepped screenwriters. He’s a champion of the unheard, and I think that’s who he genuinely hopes to serve (take a look at his Logline Contest for further evidence of this). He wants to get folks to read scripts, to discover what is being sold out there on the spec market. He’s not a spoiler whore, bent on tweaking development of a feature based on his review. If anything, his reviews serve only as a “should I read this or not?” sort of filter. At least for me, anyway. Carson means no harm by it. He takes down scripts as soon as he’s told to, and he’ll continue to do so. His isn’t a forum of spoilers and “Hey guys, look what big script I just landed. Here, one for each of you!”, but rather a quiet place where screenwriters can learn by reading other screenwriters work, work that someone has indeed purchased (except when he reviewed New Moon). All in all, from my lowly position, people like Carson should be applauded. I’ve read more screenplays than I would have ever read and I’ve grown more as a screenwriter because of it.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:03 am
It bothers me, John, that much of your argument is premised on the fact that the studios don’t like ScriptShadow and are apt to lash out against it. The studios are highly irrational entities, as anyone who’s worked with them (or even read about people who have worked with them) know very well. Telling someone like Carson that what he’s doing is wrong because the studios don’t like it sounds rather similar to, “It’s your fault that he hit you; you didn’t have dinner ready when he got home.” What if the studio heads wake up tomorrow morning and decide that they like Carson’s site but have a problem with yours? Would Carson be justified in telling you to shut it down?
Both you and Carson have sites that are immensely helpful to aspiring screenwriters. I visit both johnaugust.com and ScriptShadow at least once a day, and I’m thankful for the existence of both. To see you attack his site — at least in part on behalf of the studios — is disappointing. This guy is devoting thousands of unpaid hours to tracking the most popular scripts in town and helping people who aren’t in the loop get a feel for what’s selling. Right now, as you yourself have pointed out, studios are buying fewer scripts and jobs for new writers are dwindling as a result. Thus, a site like ScriptShadow is more important and useful than ever for people who want to break in. Recently he started a contest designed to showcase the top loglines and scripts among unproduced writers — sort of an outsider’s version of the Black List.
I’m a huge fan of your site and have been for years. More than anything I’d like to see you and Carson work things out — in private — between the two of you so that you can both continue providing the valuable resources that we aspiring writers have grown to appreciate.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Some of the arguments in defense of ScriptShadow are appallingly naive.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:21 am
Jeff: “Another possible outcome is that the screenplay itself will continue to gain momentum as an independent artform.”
Thank you sir, and I could not agree more, or have said it any better, myself.
Both John and Carson are contributing greatly to screenwriting through their respective websites, and I would rather see them working together then against each other. As another great screenwriter, Paul Schrader, wrote in BLUE COLLAR: “Everything they do, how they turn us against each other, the lifers against the new guys, the old against the young…is for keeping us down, and in our place.”
December 8th, 2009 at 10:23 am
This whole thing is stupid… there’s so many variables to take into account before one can conclude whether ScriptShadow is good or evil. He’s just one guy with an opinion, and being singled out because of it.
I think studios should get off their rags, and go back to whining about piracy: cams, test screeners, R5 rips, dvdrips, etc.
I say Carson should just get some Chinese servers, then studios can’t do a thing. And then he would never have to remove the links…
But, Carson is a fair and honest guy. He takes down links if asked, his reviews are thorough, and they generate exposure and discussion.
This is just another example of people wanting to silence a voice with an opinion.
Censorship. We’re already on our way to a totalitarian future (Britain even closer).
I guess negative reviews on a film that hasn’t come out yet are evil too yea? All those critics must be devils…
The simple answer is DON’T MAKE CRAP FILMS!
December 8th, 2009 at 10:25 am
More often than not, John’s posts reflect the point of view of someone who is part of the establishment and has little interest in accepting the challenge of the new talents. “If you want to work, you got to live in LA, you got to network, you got to start as assistant, you got to this, you got to that, forget about specs,…”. Remeber Eszterhas? Didn’t live in LA, didn’t network, wrote mostly specs, didn’t assist anybody, and landed really profitable deals. John is not only patronizing, but also preaches resignation. I bet the studio execs love him. Is all about the next job, isn’t it? Long live Scriptshadow and long live every writer with balls! I’m not making coffee, I got great stuff to write.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Bravo, John.
While it may be interesting to amateurs to read scripts in development, it does more harm to working writers.
And the idea that seeing early drafts of these scripts somehow gives amateurs a sense of “what’s selling” is indeed naive and misguided.
Your suggestions for ScriptShadow would protect the interests of writers while still giving amateurs access to scripts for learning the craft.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:38 am
I like this blog a lot, but I like ScriptShadow even more, and I find these denunciations rather silly. John’s argument seems to be:
What he seems to be saying is, “if unimportant people are able to read hot screenplays, then it won’t be cool anymore and important people will stop reading them.” But there’s another possibility: maybe the unimportant people will become important people. Horrors!
December 8th, 2009 at 10:40 am
As long as the scales don’t tip into a cesspool of negativity (I know, it could happen at any moment), this ACTUALLY is a rather healthy debate on the current state of screenwriting both in and out of Hollywood, probably one long overdue.
I’m sure someone is gonna’ toss a dirty bomb in here eventually (my bets are on the one who calls themselves “READER”… seems to find us unwashed serfs who write specs to be “appallingly naive…good show) but until they do, good points on both sides of the aisle.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:40 am
This basically boils down to the same exact thing that someone above said: as long as the studios don’t wrongfully overreact to sites like Scriptshadow, there won’t be a problem.
Can we trust them to not overreact? Probably not.
But if they can turn a blind eye to assistants passing shit around on tracking boards, they can and should turn a blind eye to one guy with one opinion on one website. A look at the comments section on any of his posts should drive this home – there are plenty of people making up their own minds about the material, whether Carson likes it or not, and I’d bet dimes to donuts that those Commenters would be more likely to see a film based on a script they’ve read than not.
And, again, as many others have pointed out…the number of people patronizing this site is relatively small when compared to the filmgoing public at large. This is not going to make a dent. Once a small wave of overreaction has passed – from studios and from some writers – this’ll all blow over and just become a standard part of the culture. Why? Because it’s more of the same, only it’s digital now.
This is a terrific blog, John. Sucks to hear about your experience, but that’s going to be the exception, not the rule. And it seems like you’re taking this one a little too seriously.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:42 am
Hard Times
This is not an isolated case. Internet and the information-cycle is in a critical battle right now. Everybody is taking information and posting it for free these days. I think it
s funny studios are coming to skandinavia to test theyre cases. Pirate bay. I have a very biased view on this, and everybody else should aswell. This is why: On one hand, the industry has been very lucky selling very priced products, and made many people very rich. On the other, its just an industry. +Who knows who is to blame for hard times. And movies are being made rapid. Its funnt how John mentions Miley Cyrus. The Disney experiments are showing many interesting findings about they`re stars and the journeys the go tru.When And Why
People coming to these sites are also information junkies. If these sites where not so open, some of them would never even get into film. But also, the information comes when the product is out there. When i see a film, i learn alot about why it`s here and so on. So the help in the sites are also an illusion of getting gold for a personal progress.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:50 am
John August, Thank you so much for your site, and the wonderful information and insights you share. Your site is an extraordinary resource, and I have learned so much (including in every reread; today one of my goals to reread your first scribble draft post).
Couple of small points, made already, worth mentioning again. Vast majority of scripts don’t get produced, and I’m grateful I can read more than just the small handful that make it to the screen. And, as genuinely appealing as working in the industry to learn the ropes is for me (I have a huge appreciation for craft and understanding the medium you’re working in intimately), that’s not an option for me.
And one big point, and hope I’m doing this huge topic justice. Industries (practices, behaviors, technologies) are constantly changing and evolving. I’ve been in the design industry for 15 years, and every bit of it, the practice, the business, has changed (what doesn’t change? great work is always great work). And I’m not sure where it’s all going, but I think from a large perspective, an influx of fresh storytelling voices into the movie industry will be for the good, and the more savvy those voices are re the craft of it all, the better.
I am a huge fan of Scriptshadow and of your site, and I will be visiting both your sites as long as they are available, and may they be available for a long time to come.
December 8th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Aspiring screenwriters adore ScriptShadow. Execs hate it. And as much as I will weep for fired assistants/interns who will leak scripts we have to realize that ultimately this is a Pandora’s box situation, assistants and interns are recreating the real-word networks they enjoy online — just like everyone else — and there is no going back. To pretend that the old way things work is the only way things should work is silly.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:01 am
@Jeff
Me, throw a dirty bomb? Have you not read what people have being writing to John? I’m sorry if you don’t agree with me. “Carson Reeves” and ScriptShadow are a great site for people to learn about screenwriting… BUT they’re are also dangerous to new and working writers, the ones it proclaims to champion. No one is talking about taking down ScriptShadow, but it’s incredibly naive to think it’s fatcats and studio buffons who find the site troubling. I am a working writer. I am not wealthy. I am not a Hollywood schill. John proposes a fair compromise and I find it shocking that some of here feel it’s OK to say, “nah fuck you I want me those private, stolen works in progress.” Sorry, I don’t agree.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Studio screenplays are valuable copyrighted intellectual property that have a lot of time and effort invested in them. Leaking them to the internet to be reviewed — while they are in the process of still being written — does not serve the interests of the studio, execs, or writers. Most creative people do not want their work publicly reviewed while it is still in process. What’s next, reviewing their initial notions? Additionally, the making of a studio film is a corporate enterprise that usually has tens of millions of dollars or more invested in it. Believe it or not the development of a script to one of these films is often considered a trade secret. People sign non-disclosure agreements. That’s pretty standard for any big corporation, and the reason for it is that they don’t want the competing corporations to get wind of certain projects. They don’t want to be plagiarized before they can get their own product to market. That’s reality. And, yes, while it might be nice for aspiring screenwriters to be able to get a look at recently written but not yet produced scripts, it really isn’t as valuable as people are making out here. There are plenty of scripts — of produced films — available in bookstores, libraries, or even on the internet. Studying how a screenplay translated from script to screen, or from book to script to screen, is far more valuable than trying to track what just sold. Try and write a spec to match what just sold and you can be pretty sure that the marketplace will pass you buy. Because what they bought today, they will not be buying three months from now. Write what you are passionate about. It’ll make a better sample for an assignment than trying to anticipate the next ‘trend.’
December 8th, 2009 at 11:15 am
If you’re a professional, then fair or not, the Hollywood studio system has been around far longer than most of us. So, if that’s such a huge problem for you, you’re in for a hell of a lot of pain (I mean, in addition to the normal pain a writer experiences!) To me, it’s all about becoming the best writer I can become; not changing the system. I mean, isn’t focusing on your writing enough? To me, if you’re so worried about changing the system, then your writing will suffer greatly and maybe you shouldn’t even be a writer. OR, go ahead and get your buddies and produce that Indie film! Nothing wrong with that, but don’t destroy a system that others are willing to work within. Is it perfect? Well, that’s really not the point. It’s what it is. Learn to become the best writer you can be and live your life with some joy. The rest is just spinning your wheels. Thanks for the great article, John!
December 8th, 2009 at 11:28 am
I’m dying to be nice about this, to those who see this kind of soul stealing and theft as a God Send, so let me start by saying:
Here are the two sites where you can garner thousands of complete, produced, and award winning screenplays and learn quite literally, everything you need to know through observation to uphold your craft, free of charge…
http://www.script-o-rama.com/
http://www.scriptpimp.com/show_me/free_screenplays/
…and that you ABSOLUTELY, do not, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, have the right to publicly review my cork-board full of 3×5 cards or my intellectual property as a work in progress, LEAST OF ALL with my name attached to it while displaying it as my final work.
Nabisco does not owe you the recipe to the next cookie they’re building in development. (Even if you ARE an aspiring bake chef. And it would be terribly educational for you.)
And since its self evident that this is NOT about gaining access to screenplays (as has been so implied) since the good ones are also available on Amazon . com, so if you can write a blog comment, you can read Thank You For Smoking for 2.99. – And its not about conveniently “being” in Hollywood (as nobody implied), since the guy who’s blog you’re reading made a conscionable choice, involving sacrifice to go BE in Hollywood and circulate those scripts to boot, I’m pretty sure that arguments out as well.
And since a massively invested film production is in fact NOT a democracy run by the fans, regardless how much you may feel you deserve or want it to be, (EG: No, even if you’re the biggest fan, you surprisingly DON’T get a vote) …so the artists who have earned their way onboard and/or OWN the property are not in any way subordinate to your opinion, as there is no evidence that you will better create their art or perform their jobs.
That said…
Can anybody then tell me even just one single benefit to the public “review” and judgement of an artists industry-private work in progress?
Or is it all just as I suspect, a smokescreen disguising a conveyor belt to bring candy for fans?
December 8th, 2009 at 11:33 am
That was
@Terraling, SC, & DarthPaul
December 8th, 2009 at 11:43 am
@IndyVox
That argument would be much more compelling if studios weren’t already illegally reading each other’s copyrighted screenplays on an hourly basis. Like John says, they turn a blind eye to this practice because they need it to aid their development decisions. It’s not any more or less legal than what Carson’s doing; they just happen to get some use out of it, whereas they’re not getting any benefit from ScriptShadow (or just haven’t figured out how to do so yet).
December 8th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Agreed with Terraling. Those industry jobs are particularly hard to come by these days (and are fast disappearing, as I’m sure you’re aware), so if Carson is spreading the word about scripts and who is buying, then all the power to him.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:53 am
@Nick,
There’s nothing “illegal” about it. – A studio has EVERY right to choose who it turns a blind eye to. – They own it. – Its their copyright. – They can say No when they deem something damaging. – Every property holder has that right.
@ Jonathan Peters
So is an Olympic gold medal. – That doesn’t mean you get to steal one. – You get one if you do the work. – If you have the skill. – If you commit your life.
The information on “who’s buying” is published free daily. – That’s not what this is about. – Not by a mile.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Jonathan,
Except Carson is doing much more than “spreading the word about scripts and who is buying”. He’s publishing works in progress, early drafts that weren’t meant for reading or review by anyone other than the writer’s reps and execs.
So, I’d have to say, less power to him.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Websites like ScriptShadow are inevitable. As soon as someone shuts down Carson’s site, another will pop up to take its place.
The film industry is afraid of ventures into the unknown (a big reason why they prefer remakes, sequels, and franchise pictures over specs), and it tends to overreact to anything that runs counter to their ideas of normalcy.
I’m not saying ScriptShadow is perfect. Downloading a script (intellectual property) is akin to downloading an album off Limewire. But, unlike music, 90% of the scripts Carson reviews are not accessible to anyone outside of Hollywood. He is catering to a fervent, but small, audience. The fact is, most people don’t care about the script. I don’t see a problem in making them available to the 1% who do, which, by the way, are also the people who love movies and pay to see more of them than any other demographic.
Perhaps the true threat Carson’s site poses to the current Hollywood system is more subtle. A few people have mentioned it on this thread already.
The screenplay has always been undervalued, and the industry is largely run by people who have no background in writing – I’ve worked at three development companies, and what I see are Ivy League alumni who’ve read “Story” and think that entitles them to judge anything passed across their desk. To acknowledge that ScriptShadow is a problem is to acknowledge that screenplays have stand-alone artistic value. Whether he intended to or not, Carson is championing the screenplay as an art form in and of itself, one that deserves the type of attention (and criticism) we have traditionally paid to similar forms of writing, like stage plays.
I’ve always thought we make an arbitrary distinction in the importance we place on the stage play relative to the screenplay. Why is one published, and the writer given authorial credit, and the other throw into a box and locked up in a closet?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
As a working writer in Hollywood, I can verify everything John has said. I had my first big sale in 2009 and my reps have not been allowed to show the material to ANY prospective producers or execs for assignments specifically because of the Reeves site. The script is on studio lockdown for 18 months until the option expires. I’m not some greedy A-list Hollywood player. I live in a small studio apartment and drive a 15 year old car. In a very real way, my career is on hold because of the script-review blogosphere.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
@Nick
While all the studios read many of the same specs circulated for sale, they are not all reading scripts that are undergoing in-house development. Those scripts are trade secrets and are watermarked and kept confidential. Some are kept under much tighter wraps than others. (And have still leaked to the web.) Now, while some assistants trade scripts, they are putting their jobs at peril to do so. If they are caught, they will be fired for violating their non-disclosure agreements. But leak them they do. Once the scripts hit the agencies — for casting — they seem to get all over town. And it’s counterproductive.
Some of the responses here display no respect for intellectual property or copyright. Ironic coming from people who purport to be aspiring writers.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
John, I have to admit that I’m an avid reader of Carson’s site, but you’ve given me a lot to think about here. I think Carson has only the best of intentions – to educate and to help aspiring screenwriters develop their craft. He’s also run several contests aimed at helping non-repped writers get representation. So in that sense, I separate him from some of the guys at AICN who write articles with insider “scoops” just so they can bring themselves more publicity.
BUT I have to confess that I never thought about the unintended consequences that you describe here, and it isn’t all that far-fetched that if studios are worried about their product being released, they’re going to be that much more punitive when going after the sort of “intern and assistant script-trading” you describe. That’s inconvenient enough for the people on the bottom, but if it’s actively making things difficult for working writers, then perhaps some restraint is necessary
I have to wonder if the problem is not what Carson does, but the fact that his blog is so visible. Scripts have been traded through the internet for a long time now, so why is it only a problem when Carson does it? Is it because he’s reviewing five scripts a week? Because his community of readers is so large?
John, just out of curiousity, did the review of your work appear before or after the BLACK SWAN review that really put Carson’s site on a lot more people’s radars? (And for that, he can thank the Natalie Portman/Mila Kunis sex scene.)
For what it’s worth, I think Synthian gives one of the more intelligent repsonses I’ve seen so far. I think the “Fuck you, rich boy!” and “We have a right to everything on the internet” attitudes are deplorable. Why should John’s right to privacy on his private intellecutal property expire simply because he’s famous and successful?
John, I have to admit that I was going to write a review this week of the first draft of GREEN LANTERN, and use it to point out some lessons that could benefit screenwriters. The draft is almos two years out of date, so I assumed it wouldn’t contain too many spoilers. In light of your post, I might rethink that plan, though.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
If it was just passing around scripts, that would be one thing (in my opinion). But the reviews of scripts that are in development can be detrimental to the process, especially when the reviews are of out-of-date drafts or written to a specific context or requirement that is unknown to the reviewer.
And while it shouldn’t matter if a specific draft of a script “barely kept [his] interest”, a script in development can be a fragile thing.
Even without the links to the scripts, the site can be problematic.
In my opinion.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
I don’t see how anyone can even defend the reposting and distribution of copyrighted material on the web.
It’s blatant copyright infringement.
Studios pay a premium to writers for this material. Not only reposting and distributing, but putting a VALUE judgment on it in the form of a review by WhotheHellCares severely devalues the product.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Synthian,
Thank you. The Nabisco analogy is especially apt. I’m always a bit confused when people confuse what they want with what they are entitled to. A screenplay is intellectual property that someone owns and has a legal right to control.
There’s also a common sense angle. Just as a novelist wouldn’t publish drafts of his or her novel before the finished novel is published, neither would a screenwriter want his work in progress published and certainly not REVIEWED, which has ramifications in the real world for all involved. These ramifications are why companies like Nabisco protect their trade secrets (that cookie recipe) and why Hollywood might feel compelled to do the same, at some cost to all involved.
To imagine that an aspiring writer’s desire to read early drafts of someone else’s script trumps the author (by which I mean both the actual author and the legal “author”, who under copyright law is whomever owns the intellectual property) is naive to the extreme. Of course, it might also reflect a shift that’s underway in our culture that we may just have to deal with. It’s just a shame that people with such good intentions are now able, through the internet, to take misguided steps that have the exact opposite result from what they intend. But I guess we’ll have to get used to that and find new ways to do things.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
@ Dan
“Downloading a script (intellectual property) is akin to downloading an album off Limewire. But, unlike music, 90% of the scripts Carson reviews are not accessible to anyone outside of Hollywood.”
Which is a completely moot point because… They’re NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ACCESSIBLE!
Thats exactly the Sense Of Entitlement we’re talking about here.
How on Earth, did you come to the conclusion, that these artists owe you the premature exposure of their work?
At least album thefts have the dignity to let the artist finish.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Working Writer,
I don’t think the problem is with Carson’s site so much as it is with the studio’s (over)reaction to it.
Let’s say your script gets reviewed on the site. Positive or negative, it will be read by a few thousand people randomly scattered across the world. You don’t know these people. They don’t know you. These people don’t run the studios. They have no influence. They don’t make the decisions. So why do the studios care? Why should they care?
Do studio execs really think that your script’s box office potential hinges on Carson’s review? Come on. I feel bad for your problem, but I think you are misdirecting the blame.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Some of the comments (thinking in particular about #12 Mattias, #16 MaryP and #35 IndyVox) rest on some assumptions about copyright law that either aren’t correct or at the very least are not as certain as the writers believe. Yes, all the screenplays are copyrighted (from the minute they are written in fact, even before they are sent off to the copyright office or WGA) but the minute someone starts talking about they start talking about fair use with absolutism I can tell he/she has no actual legal background. It’s a fuzzy area and there are good arguments for and against whether it is fair use (I’m going to preemptively add: don’t respond by saying “but with books, dvd’s etc…” because it will again just show a lack of legal knowledge). The discussion of whether posting these is appropriate, harmful, etc, is an interesting one but don’t couch your arguments on the authority of something you don’t understand (it’s copyrighted!). If I write a couple of sentences on a napkin, technically that’s copyrighted.
@Reader: You said: “Some of the arguments in defense of ScriptShadow are appallingly naive.” I agree. But the same is just as true as some of the arguments against it. There will always be “appalling naive” arguments on either side. Pointing that fact out doesn’t do a whole lot more than pointing out the obvious.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
I say this as a novelist, and someone that’s dealt with Hollywood and the thought challenged people than run it. I love Script Shadow. What’s most amazing is how dreadful most of the screenplays that are reviewed on the site; even those deemed the best in Hollywood. Of course the mouth breathers that live behind the studio gates are upset. Anything to shine a light on them and how ridiculous they are and their “taste” is a great thing! And good if writers have to go work on the studio lot. They are working for the studio….most employees do have to work at the place that employees them. Duh. Too funny!
December 8th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Just to add another dimension to the discussion.
I think ScriptShadow helps get movies get made. Now, this is pretty much pure speculation since I am no Hollywood insider. However, if an exec is nervous about producing a movie, seeing said movie at the top of a reader list of the top unproduced screenplays, with other respected scripts on the same list, can only help the exec cover their ass and go make the movie.
I would think it helps indie producers get financing as well.
And in turn, does that not help the writer?
Finally, I’ve seen ScriptShadow take down reviews, within hours, when he is told that the draft he reviewed is no longer representative of the project. But yes, I see the issue: he had to be contacted about the draft. Writers/Producers who do not see the site right away might be hurt by this. But if everyone is going crazy over this site anyway, they are probably keeping an eye on it, right? ;)
Last note, promise. Source Code was the first script I read on ScriptShadow, and one of the first scripts ever. I cannot wait to see it. I, despite wanting to be in the movie business, do not watch that many movies. I usually watch more TV, cuz of the initial lower time commitment, and cost :D. But I will be there the first weekend Source Code opens. And I will drag my friends with me.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
@bn
Actually, it’s you who have no understanding of intellectual property or copyright law. It’s not a fuzzy area, at all. The copyright holder controls the distribution of the property. Simple enough for you? Distribution of a trade secret is not ‘fair use.’
December 8th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
I think the Nabisco cookie recipe is apt; aspiring writers do not have some kind of RIGHT to scripts in development. Some of you may see the studios as the big bad guys, but it’s their money. It’s their property.
Barring any international visa issues, if you’re serious about becoming a screenwriter, move to LA. Period. And if you think that being an intern or assistant is below you, you’re going to have a tough time in this town. So many of us are willing to do it – what makes you better than us?
I also think Working Writer’s comment is very important. “Carson” may claim to be helping writers, but that’s a clear situation in which he’s hurting an up-and-coming writer.
Does anyone wonder why Carson does this? If he wants to support and champion aspiring writers, why doesn’t he become a manager or agent?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Scriptshadow actually saved me a good month or two of work by reviewing Supermax. I’d been developing a very similar concept and I would have hated to spend all that time only to discover at the end “Oh, this script is already out there.”
December 8th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
@ Synthian
I’m not saying that Carson’s method is correct. I think it is wrong to dole out scripts for free, and I think it is wrong to review early/unpolished drafts of scripts. I’d be in favor of an Amazon-style $2.99 fee for each download. I’d gladly pay that, if the majority of the fee went to the writer.
But these sort of underground tactics are the inevitable result of the convergence of internet populism and studio autocracy. It’s like prohibition. You can’t stop people from drinking, but you can make it illegal and force the people who drink to become criminals.
The fact is, people will find a way to read un-produced scripts. The industry operates under the assumption that a script has almost zero-value until it gets greenlit. This movement is saying, “No. We think screenplays themselves have inherent value and we want to read them and talk about them.”
I don’t see how this hurts the writers. I think it helps promote their art form.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
This is a tough one. I’m a working writer and director, and yet I use ScriptShadow all the time. Yes, I could call my agents and try to track down scripts, but before ScriptShadow, I didn’t even KNOW much of what I should be reading — and I’m repped by one of the biggest agencies in town! Yes, assistants are extraordinarily well connected and well versed in what is hot. When I was an assistant, I regularly passed scripts around. Now that I’ve moved on, I’m focused on actually writing, instead of gabbing with 22-year-olds about what struck their fancy over the weekend. And so sites like ScriptShadow breaks those levels of remove.
But the truth here is complicated. Script Shadow provides a great resource for writers, both aspiring and professional. It is also a clear violation of copyright, and it’s use and proliferation could lead to the screws being turned in much the way John describes (though it seems to me that the idea of writing a Fox screenplay on a Fox computer is pretty far-fetched).
The more alarming thing here is actually the most banal: studios will probably be influenced in some way, with some projects, by premature reactions on the internet. The cart will continue to be hitched before the horse.
Those of us who have worked in Hollywood know that there is actually a method to all the madness. Yes, studio execs can be vile, manipulative, and devoid of ideas. They can also be generous, helpful and wonderfully creative. Defending ScriptShadow by saying it’s a way of busting the walls of the studio, of speaking truth to power, is sadly naive.
I have to also say that one recurring theme in above comments (from SC and others) is odd: that sites like ScriptShadow highlight the art of the screenplay. Screenplays are blueprints. They are guides. They are not ends in themselves. Nobody but aspiring screenwriters ever reads a screenplay for pleasure. If you’re interested in writing a piece of art, look to the novel.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
@ Paula / Amanda
Thanks. – Agreed. — Common sense should have a foothold.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Where is anybody saying that they’re “entitled” to read these scripts?
Speaking personally, I don’t think I’m entitled to ScriptShadow any more than I’m entitled to johnaugust.com. I’m glad that they both exist and I’d be disappointed to see either one disappear.
What bugs me, though, is that the studios are doing things to screw over writers (both working and aspiring) all the time. Every day, every hour. Anything they can do to make more money by paying writers less (and hiring fewer of them), they will. These trends are reported by this and other blogs not as developments that need to be fought against, but merely as “the reality.”
But one guy starts a popular blog that he (and many others) feel is in the collective interest of unproduced, unrepresented writers… and suddenly that’s the guy who needs to be shut down. Why? Because the studios have decided they don’t like it. Carson has helped writers get representation and visibility, and he’s done all this pro bono. He wants to help people like me get a shot. The studio system, on the other hand, couldn’t care less. Is it any wonder that I’m inclined to side with Carson?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Some people here talk like if Carson went into some screenwriter’s room to steal his very first draft. If those screenplays made it to readers, agents, production companies, whatever, they may be far from what ends up on the screen, but they aren’t “unfinished creative works” either. At least the screenwriter judged it finished enought to start moving it around.
If the studios can’t live with a few thosand people reading some of their scripts, something that no matter how some of you paint it can’t really do any harm, then all they have to do is increase their security measures as well as sue the website. No need to convince the guy he is doing something wrong if you have the law on your side, right? Just sue him. Unless the law is not so clear about it. For instance, in some countries it is NOT ILLEGAL to download films and music from the internet to watch, as long as you don’t distribute them. Fair or not, that’s the LAW.
Many speak about the fans sense of entitlement. Why should any of you tell the guy how to run his blog? What gives you the right? If what he does is illegal, then sue him. Don’t try to convince us that he is wrong and harming many aspiring screenwriters. Just sue him.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
I haven’t read all posts- how could I possibly -but let us simply say a) it’s copyrighted material, folks. b) There’s enough sites- been there for years -with a load of scripts, various drafts included, for ‘educational purposes’. c) I’m all for publicizing the Black List and/or projects long-buried in development, if they’ll remain so (an iffy question, and I could’ve waited a couple of years to read the Moneyball drafts). This town lives for sharing swag or its equivalents, but daily feeding of scripts- we couldn’t possibly read them all, so what’s the purpose? It makes us all into tabloid consumers, there only for the curio effect. Now, I understand the impulse for doing this, and there is a modicum of responsibility. But yeah, wake-up call, it’s about helping the writing, not satisfying the curiosity of the world.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
@Dan “The industry operates under the assumption that a script has almost zero-value until it gets greenlit.”
This is not true at all – and it’s exactly what Working Writer is talking about. All scripts, whether they’re drafts of studio projects or specs that never sold, are used as samples to get writers meetings and rewrite assigments. Ask executives about their favorite scripts, and many of them have never been green-lit (hence the Black List).
If writers cannot use their projets as samples, they will have a much harder time getting work.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
@ Amanda
Why doesn’t Carson become a manager or agent???
Probably because he’s a human being, not a bottom feeding spore unfit to latch on to the undercarriage of your average public restroom toilet bowl?
Just a thought….
December 8th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
(Carson Reeves) is breaking the law. The studios own the copyright on the scripts he’s linking to — they are not for public to see until the studios want them to. The fact that [he] is only linking to them is his legal defense I’m sure, but he knows what he’s doing isn’t right.
I also remember a couple instances where [he] trashed scripts that were much buzzed about but hadn’t sold yet. I’m sure those writers were thrilled.
Note from John: At Carson’s request, I’m taking out the name listed here. I hope to have an answer about the issues I’ve raised.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I’m amazed at all the writers who are attacking John. I sometimes have drafts that I’ll show to one or two people that I wouldn’t want to go wide.
Sometimes it’s a rough draft I want notes on. More often, I’ll get a note I might not agree with, but try it for the director/actor/studio/producer. I recently showed a 131 page draft to a producer – we were trying something that obviously wasn’t working, and I did a major rewrite after that to get it in shape. If the rough draft had leaked out, it would have been embarrassing and harmful.
Again, writers – imagine that someone steals an early draft of yours and leaks it out. Don’t you want to control how your writing is represented? Don’t you have that right?
And please, don’t say that he pulls down the draft if someone asks. The second that draft goes up, a dozen people download it; within an hour, it’s on public mediafire accounts, and by the end of the day, hundreds of people have it.
John’s plea is a reasonable one – ask the writer. If they don’t mind, great. Wouldn’t you want that courtesy with your scripts?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
I also have to disagree with you John, I think ScriptShadow is helping and here’s why:
The script is not the final product, and people realize that. If there are spoilers and a reader CHOOSES to read anyway, and they enjoy the material, they are STILL going to see the movie. Heck, maybe even if they DON’T like the material they’ll still watch the movie. Executives will eventually understand this.
It may not help YOU, but it’s helping a lot of other people learn what is a GOOD script and what is a BAD script. It’s keeping everyone on their toes here. Sure, there need to be some restrictions. But the site as it is, is only helping the industry by creating excitement around new material.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
@ Amanda “This is not true at all – and it’s exactly what Working Writer is talking about. All scripts, whether they’re drafts of studio projects or specs that never sold, are used as samples to get writers meetings and rewrite assigments.”
True. But, how much are those writers getting paid for that unproduced spec? Since you seem to be familiar with the industry, then you know that it is commonplace for a writer to spend months re-writing for a company, and then never see a dime for their work when the company backs out. The unpaid re-write is a sad reality.
Is the writer supposed to be okay with the fact that they’re getting screwed by this process just because of the promise that “It might lead to more things”?
Let’s keep in mind. I’m NOT a supporter of giving scripts out for free like Carson does. I haven’t supported that method in any of my posts.
I’m saying, it would be possible for a ScriptShadow-style site to exist where people could actually pay to read these specs, and that money could go to the writer. God forbid, the writer be the one who profits from his work, rather than the studio execs.
Please, tell me would be wrong with a site where people could pay a small fee to read unproduced spec scripts, and that money would go to the writer? And how would this hurt screenwriters?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
I wonder how many interns right now are copying and pasting the reviews from ScriptShadow onto their coverage.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
@ Dan,
“I think it is wrong to dole out scripts for free, and I think it is wrong to review early/unpolished drafts of scripts.”
Ok, we’re on the same page then… with one change. – Price is irrelevant. – If you’re not the writer or owner… and the work is unpublished… I think its wrong to dole out scripts. <– Period.
Sure, piracy is inevitable… but there’s an innate value to the barrier that keeps the whole world from devaluing these works in ignorance, and keeps the flood gates restricted to the trickle of those few willing to do what’s necessary to get aboard in the first place. – And that value of Commitment vs Free, usually comes at a premium, called respect.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
@NIck (22&60) – Hear hear.
@John August – I remain eternally grateful for your awesome site and the generosity it represents, but don’t find myself in cut and dry agreement with you on this one.
@ Working Writer (44) – congrats on your sale, and I sympathize with your predicament: you’re unable to leverage one of the main benefits of having completed a great script, namely, using it as a script sample. But if the option holders have the script in lockdown for fear of bad reviews from ScriptShadow, how will they react when others entities, unconnected to the site but involved in your script’s development and production, give bad reviews along the path to the screen? It seems they’re plugging their finger in one small hole of many in a large damn wall. I’m not being a smart-ass, and again I applaud you, but just wonder about that scenario.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Great discussion. But I think that copyright remains the fundamental issue. Whether you don’t like the rich guy you’re stealing from, or whether you’re using the script for good instead of evil – these things don’t change the fact that it’s someone’s property. It may in many cases be harmless stealing, some writers may be okay with it, some of us may appreciate the free educational tools – it’s still stealing.
The Internet makes it easy to steal creative property – it doesn’t make it right. The simple and obvious thing in this case is that for all of us with good intentions (I believe Carson’s included there), the Internet also makes it easy to get permission before publishing. I could Tweet Jason Reitman right now and ask his permission to read Up In The Air, or write to Mindy Kaling and ask for a peek at her just-sold rom-com. Carson could do the same before he posted script links. Maybe he does in some cases, who knows?
The problem is that we’ll all likely get the inconvenient answer more often than we want: “you’ll have to ask the studio.” Writers who’ve sold their scripts probably don’t even have the right to distribute their work on the scale that Carson’s doing it. What does that tell us?
I’m going to have to re-think my use of ScriptShadow after this discussion. The fact is that I’d like to think I’d happily share my scripts with Carson and his niche audience – but I’d absolutely want the choice – before the script is published, not after. And maybe BN can enlighten me differently, but I do believe that choice is my right.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
John, I say the following as someone who has read your “Professionalism” speech twice and basically treats it as the gospel of the blog I run:
Your entire argument can be summed up as “there are some upsides to ScriptShadow, but the studio is overreacting and it is therefore hurtful.”
You bring up AICN, which is actually a great example. At first, studios freaked out about it. But I haven’t noticed much of a slowdown in advance screenings anymore. I haven’t noticed AICN getting stonewalled by the studios (quite the opposite). As soon as the novelty wore off, it was business as usual.
I don’t claim to be “entitled” to any of the scripts posted. They don’t belong to me. But as you said, scripts have been passed around for ages. Trying to intellectually argue against their inevitable appearance online is at best fruitless and at worst elitist.
Script Shadow is run by a reasonable guy and it doesn’t spoil the endings. If it gets shut down, chances are something worse will replace it. That won’t win the moral argument, but it’s the reality.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
@ Nelson:
“Some people here talk like if Carson went into some screenwriter’s room to steal his very first draft. If those screenplays made it to readers, agents, production companies, whatever, they may be far from what ends up on the screen, but they aren’t “unfinished creative works” either. At least the screenwriter judged it finished enought to start moving it around.”
If it was meant to be released, it would have been. Do attorneys publish their inter-office memos and first drafts of their closing arguments before a case gets to court? Does John Grisham post his first draft of his latest novel online “just so readers can see the process?” Do painters release the early sketches of their work before applying pigment to the canvas?
The Nabasco cookie analogy is still the best one, though. Just because you can learn from someone else’s spec script doesn’t mean you have a right to complain when they say, “Hey! Get out of my desk drawer!”
I’m with Amanda, Working Writer, and Synthian. I don’t think Carson’s a bad guy by any means, nor do I think he intended any of this fallout from what he does. But the fact is, that’s the situation, so how can we all make the best of it?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Great points from all. I see the negative and the positive here. But Carson’s claim as to why he started the site I think reveals the internets entitlement that is an ADD staple of our culture:
“Scriptshadow is the logical next step in our increasingly impatient attitude toward the delivery of entertainment. We’ve seen the sun set on the medieval Age of Professional Reviews, the rise of the populist recap, and the boom of real-time in-theater Twitter. The precap, however, trumps them all. It’s the kind of access Tinsel-trolls like me have been jonesing for since the ’90s, when Ain’t It Cool News hooked us with preemptive trashings of preview screenings.”
That sounds less like a need to promote good writers than just the ol’ need to know NOW. It’s speed for its own sake, not a lofty goal.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Any time you label something with a less than stellar review and it’s out there and it’s public, you are no long championing anything. You are creating a negative buzz and studios don’t want that. No one wants that about something they are still working on.
There’s a world of difference between a friend saying “hey would you like a peek at this?” (especially if both of you are within the industry) and sites like ScriptShadow and the script reviews on Latino Review and other sites. And there’s a much larger difference between something like The Black List (which only presents its works in a positive manner) and review sites.
In many ways, the moment you’ve passed judgment on something in a negative light it becomes that much harder for it to succeed. You’ve tainted the public assessment and to do that during a fragile state like development can poison everything.
And that does nothing to claim that very little of the reviews of scripts on the web period really review the structure and craft of the script and instead collapse into a detailed step by step spoiler guide.
I think the two solutions presented in the main post would be a great middle ground solution.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
@ The Bitter One :)
Thanks for that. – (So I didn’t have to.)
@ Nelson,
You’re on a blog called “How ScriptShadow hurts screenwriters”
Which is a place where we came, to discuss: How ScriptShadow hurts screenwriters.
So asking why all the arguments to show that he’s doing wrong is sorta point-blank missing the boat.
As for your other question: If the law’s on your side, why convince him? Why not just sue?
Really? – We should have to sue to express to the guy rather than talk? – We shouldn’t discuss it? – We should just stop writing and go sue as though that weren’t already an unnecessary and counterproductive expense, and as though all principle damage could be undone through fiscal gains and site removal?? – Really?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:32 pm
After skimming through all these comments, the following conclusion seems fair: working writers (and people who have a similar frame of reference) agree with John’s post because they all understand the many unmentioned problems that the ScriptShadow example exposes. Everybody not working in the industry and maybe trying to break in defends the ScriptShadow practices as “not being a big deal”.
This might be a rift that even a well written post like this one cannot bridge. From my perspective I agree with what an earlier poster said: some of these comments read incredibly naive.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
@ James –> THANK YOU!!!
Bashing hurts! – Period. – ESPECIALLY IN DEVELOPMENT. – Inviting others to bash while in development hurts. – So why judge someone else’s shot!?
I’m still waiting for an example of a single benefit other than amusement.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I too have to hand it to Synthian for taking the time to “fight the sea” whereas I had given up earlier. Fantastic discussion. I’m glad John brought this out into the open.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
just like music and print, industries have to change. you might not want to admit that you need to challenge yourself or work harder at this point in your career, but you do. a look at any of what hollywood is shilling in theaters this year proves that. carson’s site might not be the bolt of lightning that revitalizes the industry, but it’s a good start. stop whining, keep writing. don’t give us any tears “from the inside”, get better at your job or start working at the mall.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
The copyright issue is an interesting one, like how the studio get copyright of a script. As a novelist I would be horrified if one of my books became Random House property once it was bought. That said, for the studios to be talking about fairness in intellectual property is a silly joke. Also, I’m going to start a blog about the false American usage of naïve, pretentious, and passé. The usage of naïve on here is laughably pretentious and passé. Those tricky French based English works. Almost as crazy as their creme brulee!!!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
A script is a blueprint for a movie, nothing more.
Studios buy these plans to make a movie.
Unless the screenplay is for a sequel, or a franchised property (Twilight, LOTR, etc.) then going to extraordinary lengths to protect the screenplay is unnecessary. Nobody cares about the screenplay except the lawyers.
Does anyone think that anyone in the general public would want to read a screenplay?
Sites like AICN will always be able to get the scripts to most of the hot and upcoming genre films and post a review. AICN has always avoided posting the actual screenplays for legal reasons, but I’d rather be able to read the script for myself than trust the opinions of the contributors to fanboy sites.
The only situation I can think of where guarding a screenplay zealously, would be if two (or more) studios had concurrent development on identical ideas (Volcano/Dante’s Peak). Even then, it would serve both studios to share their ideas, just to make sure that their movies were not going to be too similar, and thus cancel each other out.
I have no problem with reviewers on the internet posting “early” drafts of scripts for review, especially if it would hurt the chances of really crappy movies getting made, or stalled in production.
“Carson” posted a review for the upcoming movie “Burst.” Burst is most likely the worst sold script I have ever read. It literally is 90 min of people blowing up. That’s it. No real plot, and no real ending. Perhaps they’ve changed the script since they went into production, who knows. But if they did, they most likely had to do a page one rewrite. It would have been better if the sold script would have gotten negative reviews via feedback on the internet before someone decided to put in into production.
The main complaint I have heard about Scriptshadow is the posting of “scripts in progress,” whatever that means. Writers in Hollywood have become too lazy and are obviously turning in scripts that are far from being ready. Then writers like John are hired to do a rewrite. Lord only knows how many times this happens every day in Hollywood.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Isn’t scriptshadow another online version of a writer’s group?
But besides that point, I agree with you, John. Though the other question I have is, is there not a confidnetiality clause in the contract? If so, then script shadow would be in violation.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
@ Synthian: well, I don’t know you, but the blog I’m in is called johnaugust.com. I think you are in a different place. The internet is wide, you see? But if you come here, you’ll see that not all arguments are against Scriptshadow. And don’t get it wrong: you are not expressing to the guy -if you want to express to the guy, you may start posting your concerns in his blog-. What you are doing here is buddying to raise your voice, maybe thinking that the lowder you are, the more convincing you sound. But I think it is you who “point-blank misses the boat”: I don’t care if it’s legal or not, and you can’t convince me or others who think alike using that argument. I just think it isn’t unfair, so as long as the site is up and running I think I will check it from time to time. I’m reading a screenplay right now, Source Code. The first few pages aren’t that appeling, but since the review says it’s such a great story, “genre-defining” and what not, I think I’ll give it a chance.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Because…because…they TWITTER!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
John, I respect you immensely, but I disagree with the assertion that a site like Scriptshadow hurts working writers more than it helps them. I’m also genuinely surprised to hear that assertion coming from you — someone who hosts a library on this very site containing much of your own work. You even preface the screenplays with a sentence that could very well be taken verbatim from the Scriptshadow site: “The best way to learn screenwriting is read a bunch of scripts, so these are intended for educational purposes only.”
The fact is, it’s irrelevant that you are technically violating copyright by posting your fourth, unproduced draft of HOW TO EAT FRIED WORMS in the very same way that Carson Reeves technically violates copyright by posting the PDFs of unproduced scripts he reviews, in the very same way that your assistant, for instance, technically violates copyright when he makes a photocopy of a script I’ve written, for instance, so that you can read it as a writing sample. We can all agree that these are all technical violations of copyright (although in none of the above instances is any party profiting off the copyrighted IP, which is an important point to make).
What is relevant is that there is an appetite for unproduced screenplays outside of traditional Hollywood circles, and now in this current digital age there is also a means of access to those unproduced screenplays outside of Hollywood circles.
So it’s pointless to scold the people who provide that access — particularly when it’s someone as ethically responsible as Carson Reeves appears to be. Instead we need to focus on how to adapt the way we do business to the natural evolution of our business.
With all due respect (and I really do respect you greatly) the “drawbacks” to a site like Scriptshadow are really nothing more than minor inconveniences to a writer like yourself. Yes there will be instances where scripts will have to be kept under lock and key, but that is nothing new. Fox has had conniptions about content leaks many many times before ScriptShadow existed, and they will continue to have conniptions about other content leaks that have nothing to do with ScriptShadow. High profile scripts have been stamped and watermarked for years — soon we’ll be living in a world where every digital copy of a screenplay is watermarked so any leak will be easily trackable to the original recipient. It’s all part of the natural evolution of the business.
The earlier poster who drew the AICN test screening analogy is right on the money. Studios test market movies as frequently as ever. That’s because it’s a necessary part of the creative process, and the benefits that come from those test screenings still outweigh the drawbacks. The same thing will happen now that screenplays have gone digital. You and I are always going to use prior work as writing samples because that’s just the way the business works. The technology will catch up because it has to.
So instead of complaining about evolution (and for our purposes, evolution means breadth of access), what we really need to be focusing on is educating the public that any screenplay that exists out there in the ether is a work in progress and not necessarily indicative of the quality of the final product, and it should be read and processed as such. And furthermore, as writers we need to understand and acknowledge that when we turn in a draft to the studio or send it out to other producers as a writing sample, what we are essentially doing is “publishing” that work and allowing it to be read, consumed, and reviewed, just like we always have. Before the reviews were kept private as “coverage”. Now they are made public as “blogs”. We’re still being judged by the quality of our work, just as we’ve always been.
Personally I am thrilled that there are people interesting in judging my work on the screenplays I write, not just on the movies that result from them. And we should embrace the fact that sites like Scriptshadow provide that opportunity, because the fact is it’s going to happen whether we like it or not.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:01 pm
His response to this on Twitter has been ‘Controversy = Readers’ Totally ignoring any of your positive suggestions. I think you were much too nice to him. He clearly could care less about writers.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
@IndyVox
I get a kick out of responses that start, “Actually…”
Where on earth do I even begin with your response? First, a screenplay is not a trade secret. That’s silly to even suggest that it is and shows a lack of understanding as to how a trade secret is defined. Even if that is what you didn’t mean that is still just a sloppy use of legal terms.
Since you brought up trade secrets… your statement that “[d]istribution of a trade secret is not ‘fair use’” is wrong on some many levels. Trade secrets and copyrights are two different things. Distribution is a copyright issue, not a trade secret issue (as the word is legally used). If a trade secret is “distributed” it’s not protected by anything — it is no longer a trade secret. Trade secrets are not protected by copyright law — they are protected by secrecy: non-competes, non-disclosures, etc. Fair use is a copyright doctrine, not a trade secret doctrine.
Back to copyright: You say, “The copyright holder controls the distribution of the property. Simple enough for you?” If we are going for a Forrest Gump level of understanding of the law, then yes, that is simple enough for me. My earlier comments, though, were intended to address the real world. A copyright holder who owns the rights to distribution (often times there are multiple copyright holders dividing the various rights) has the right to distribution. I agree. But that doesn’t even begin to address the fair use doctrine, which is an exception to absolute control over distribution, copying, etc. If there was no fair use doctrine then any parodies or satires of copyrighted work would be infringement (for example the SNL skit parodying the trailer for New Moon).
I’ll admit, my earlier comments about knowing how fair use will be applied in every given situation is fuzzy isn’t any sort of brilliant legal analysis on my part. It’s me regurgitating what they teach you in the first few weeks of an introductory intellectual property class in law school. That’s why it is so amusing that you are trying to call me out on it.
I’m not trying to turn this into a debate about the merits of copyright law or even how fair use should or shouldn’t be applied. Just pointing out that it is a problem trying to shore up arguments by relying on an inaccurate or incomplete understanding of the law, as you have illustrated.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
@ Nelson: “I don’t care if it’s legal or not, and you can’t convince me or others who think alike using that argument.” – You don’t really mean that, do you?!
That would be a very worrying attitude in anyone, but espcially in a writer.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
@ bn: amen brother! (or sister)
December 8th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
I wonder how Carson would feel if I got together with his friends and family and started posting online their photos of him on holiday, of his graduation, of 2-year-old Carson taking a potty-whizz…
Ignoring all of the other (relevant) issues, it’s just common courtesy to ask someone’s permission before putting their stuff on the internet.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
John could delete his post and instead, just copy and paste Working Writer’s comment (44) into the body.
That’s all anyone really needs to know.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
@ Nelson: “I don’t care if it’s legal or not” – you don’t really mean that, do you?!
Not respecting intellectual property is a worrying attitude in anyone, but in a writer it strikes me as paradoxical, to put it mildly.
I think opportunities to read screenplays and analyses online are great. But they must respect the original writer. John’s suggestion for a compromise makes total sense.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Sorry, hit the wrong button and it became an unfinished response no. 91.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
guys, first, let’s not get snippy about it. we all understand passion and don’t mind a witty comeback or putdown but let us keep it at a higher level. Matthias is right, in essence it is a big divide because of where you are or where you pretend to be or want/not want to be. the problem isn’t legal or semantic per se – nobody is being draconian, I think, except the free-for-alls. it’s whether the restrictions imposed by piracy hurt the working writer. facts of life, perhaps. and legally, the writer of a studio copyrighted material has no rights whatever to grant or not to someone like scriptshadow. sure. and what a bummer that a scriptwriter doesn’t own his material. indeed. we’re talking about live and let live. that’s all. when a site posts scripts every day or every other day you’re flooding, not educating. i think the safest bet for the disseminators is to think about the highest level of responsibility they can muster in this regard and up that a notch or two more. it’s a courtesy they deserve to the business -where they enjoy working or are hoping to join.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
@bn
A screenplay in development to a $100 million film can most assuredly be defined as a trade secret. That’s not debatable. It’s a statement of legal fact. (Your saying it isn’t so does not change that fact.) Employers require employees to sign non-disclosure agreements… to protect trade secrets.
To distribute a copyrighted work one does not own the copyright to is a violation of copyright. If one has signed a non-disclosure agreement before distributing said work, then that is a violation of the non-disclosure agreement as well.
You agree that the copyright holder has the right to distribution? Bravo.
As for fair use, no one is talking about parodies or satires. Releasing entire scripts to the net can’t even by considered educational fair use. (Really, look it up.) It also hurts the market for the copyright holder who might want to publish the script.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
@ Vera: it was just a blunt way to put it. But I do consider this particular case as one of fair usage, so I don’t think he needs permission by the writers and I don’t think I’m doing anythin ilegal reading those screenplays. It’s educational use. One could argue in favor or against this, but none of us has any say as to what is ultimately legal or not. So, unless someone sues him and wins, this is all chatter.
And I do put what’s fair before what’s legal. The contrary attitude is worrying in anyone, writer or not.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Before anyone decides whether or not Scriptshadow is good for writers, I invite you to do the following: Bust your ass as a struggling screenwriter for ten years before finally selling a spec to a major studio, only to wake up one morning a few weeks later to discover that some anonymous guy with a website has shared with the world both your first draft script and his review of it, the negative aspects of which surely have nothing to do with the fact that the reviewer once had a similar script idea that he never got around to writing before you sold yours.
That was my personal experience with Scriptshadow, and I’m hard-pressed to figure out how this was supposed to be beneficial to me, or the project, or to screenwriters in general. Before we had a chance to develop the script with the studio — before I’d even been paid for it — “Carson Reeves” used my script to draw traffic to his site without the permission of me, my reps or the studio that now owns the script.
To be fair, I asked “Carson” to kill the link to my script, and he did. But the toothpaste is out of the tube. I can’t force everyone who downloaded it to delete it and I can’t stop them from hosting it elsewhere online.
I get that there is a market for this sort of thing. And I’m not naive enough to think that there’s any percentage in trying to shut down sites like Scriptshadow. And “Carson” certainly has every right to voice his opinion. But before we lionize him, let’s be really honest about what he’s doing.
He’s standing atop the labors of writers who have no say in the matter. He’s taking the private act of developing a screenplay and he’s shoving it into the public light, without the slightest care as to how that might affect the project or the writers involved. And he’s doing this from behind the safety of a pseudonym.
If that’s celebrating the writer, I’d like to opt out of “Carson’s” free service from here on out, thank you very much.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
A strange argument from a writer who encouraged people to illegally download his movie The Nines when it served him to suggest that (i.e. not many people went to see it).
I suspect this is more of the same. This probably doesn’t help people like August much, but overall will help writers and the industry in the long run. Let’s face it: Hollywood doesn’t have a surplus of good writing and ideas. John is using a cheap argument – fear – to keep the market from trying something new. Fear: scripts will be worse! Writers will have their hands tied their backs! Scripts will locked in vaults!
Maybe. But doubtful. We might also get better movies in the long run. We might get a new generation of scriptwriters that learn from these sites and gain confidence when they see that earlier versions of scripts are not the polished gems we see at the end of production.
John, you always make solid arguments – in fact I’m sure you could convincingly argue the direct opposite of this and have the same kind of support in the comments. What does that say? It says you make really good arguments. But I think ultimately most of your arguments are self-serving.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
@ Jamie Linden,
ScriptShadow publishes scripts in development. (Other writer’s scripts).
John publishes unproduced scripts. (His own scripts).
The difference between unproduced scripts & in development scripts is night and day, and we can’t really confuse the two because one has a writer hanging on at the other end of it for dear life… and the other has run its course, and in this case by clear decree of its already successful owner, does not.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
I love how those who consider themselves professional writers or at least have, in their minds, some sort of validity regarding a career, are quick to point out that the Scriptshadow defenders are nothing more than a naive gaggle of simpletons.
Sad, really. Once you “make it,” real or imagined, those who have not just don’t understand your “professional agony.” Worse, a champion of the form, someone who truly regards screenwriting as a viable art and uses his platform to celebrate and educate, is deemed an enormous threat to your professional existence.
These are fascinating times we live in.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
Wow! Carson’s site is just scratching the surface of what really needs to happen during the development phase. Here’s a SMART quote from a follower of John August’s blog– “Alternatively, studios could also start to listen to feedback at this earliest stage in the development of a movie to gauge when it gets off-track. Or, once the movie is past the point of no return, a script review sheds light on the mainstream filmmaking collaborative process and how good intentions can create a shitty movie.”
This is the STRONGEST statement I’ve read from someone that’s thinking ahead. So far, only 29% of all studio movies released this year measured up at the box office. Yes, that means 71% FAILED to connect with their target audience. Scripts should be “test screened” before getting the greenlight. Not by the internet or general public but a combination of execs, readers, and moviegoers (their target audience). Most execs are afraid to take this leap though. But guess what? If I am a shareholder of any of the parent companies and I find out or know that 71% of the films the studios put are underperforming, I’d divest because eventually this is going to negatively affect my share value. Look at Universal this year with an 18% performance rating at the box office. Miramax: 0%, Fox Searchlight: 0% — yes, zero percent. Check the data at Box Office Mojo, Imdbpro, or FilmSource. Something must be done to curb the losses. And it starts with the “types” of scripts studios choose to greenlight. And where do they get most of these scripts from? The agencies! Obviously there’s a disconnect between what the studio likes, the agent wants to sell them and what moviegoers really like.
Forget owing favors and kissing ass. It’s about telling and sharing a GREAT STORY. Moviegoers deserve nothing less. If the mediocre fare we’ve seen hit theaters in record numbers over the years doesn’t change, skittish execs have no one else to blame. So, winding down, it’s fare to say that moviegoers are getting a mediocre product. Not saying many of the screenwriters can’t write. Some of the directors chosen for a project aren’t right for it e.g. CONSTANTINE, SPEED RACER; Casting might be off e.g. GHOST RIDER, BROTHERS; or the marketing department missed the mark for a wider audience e.g. 500 DAYS OF SUMMER, OLD DOGS; the film’s release date may be wrong e.g. PRINCE CASPIAN, THE SOLOIST. But it starts with the type of script you ultimately want to share with audiences. Can we trust a small pool of execs at each studio to make the right decision for the end product? Maybe if we had more Thalbergs, Zanucks, Camerons, Spielbergs, Hitchcocks, and the like. We need to find and nurture more visionaries. The remaining visionaries are getting older. Just because one makes Variety’s top 10 execs to watch under 30 doesn’t make he or she a visionary.
Something radically different must happen going forward. So, John August, a pre-reading of studio scripts by a larger pool of invaluable readers is absolutely necessary. I’d want to know if a script you sold truly deserves a chance to get produced? Not just because one or several execs said yes. The use of instinct or guts is good but we can see by the numbers that poor judgment in this area is the norm, and not the exception. Let’s go backwards and gather data for the movies that have been released and whose scripts were reviewed by Carson and TESTED poorly. Did these movies perform well at the box office?
A hundred Carsons sprinkled with execs and (select) moviegoers could provide a stronger prognosis though. Better stories and subsequently better films is what the world needs. I am all for ScriptShadow being a site for aspiring writers and industry execs. Carson, should consider having people sign up as “MEMBERS.” This way part of his site is kept from people with bad intentions.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
This sounds like an affluent golf club reacting to one of the caddy’s finding their way into the clubhouse. It’s ridiculous.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
@Jeff
The notable exception is Jamie Linden, a professional and produced screenwriter who has written in to indicate his appreciation for ScriptShadow’s review of one of his scripts. Perhaps we’ll hear from more like him.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Carson Reeves…(if he really wants to make his stance he should be willing to not hide behind his pseudonym) cares about one thing above everything else, his ego. The guy is loving the feeling of power that he’s been able to arrive at. He knows enough eyeballs that watch the bottom line read him that he has the power to scare them of investing in projects that don’t fit HIS taste if his reviews are scathing enough.
People say he champions new writers…whatever. They’re usually from scripts that have already been sold, just not yet produced (a key factor). Get back to me when he starts reviewing never produced, un-repped writers and championing them and helping them land deals, THEN I buy that line of crap.
The fact is, he reviews things that are hot in the spec market OR projects that have enough of a profile to drive his hits (and further wax his ego).
He clearly has zero experience in the actual development process because he is unable to accurately put early drafts into the proper context when writing his reviews. That is what makes him potentially dangerous. If it seemed like he had any credibility whatsoever it would be slightly less troubling, but still not right.
[He] only cares about [himself]. He runs his little contests occasionally to maintain the illusion of educational purpose/helping the little guy. It’s all a sham. He’s an egomaniac and loves wielding his power against the people that won’t give him the time of day for his non-existant writing career.
Note from John: At Carson’s request, I’m taking out the name listed here. I hope to have an answer from Carson about the issues I’ve raised.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
John, I’m a big fan of yours both as a screenwriter and a blogger on the topic, but I think you’re off base on this issue.
Although its reach is broad geographically, ScriptShadow’s audience is quite limited. Regular people don’t care about reading unproduced screenplays. SS’s audience is made up of screenwriters and filmmakers in various stages of their careers who do not otherwise have access to the Hollywood assistant-net. As such, it’s not substantially different than the private tracking boards where development people discuss scripts floating around the business.
ScriptShadow has a slightly broader audience, sure, and the scripts are available for public download. But no one outside that population is actually downloading them. And the site has proven that it will take down scripts upon a valid request–not an option available on a tracking board.
So, yes, it’s a copyright violation to post these scripts, and I can’t support that. However, the standard protocol for dealing with copyright violation is to inform the infringer and demand a takedown–which seems to happen in this case. I don’t see how the site is either profiting from the violation or reducing the actual value of the screenplay.[*] All in all, (and while conceding this point) I think the copyright side of the argument is of little relevance to the question of whether ScriptShadow is hurting screenwriters.
The situation, instead, seems to be that studios are freaking out about their scripts being reviewed early in the process. It seems like more of a response to the Internet in general than ScriptShadow in particular. The genie was let out of the bottle long ago and this is just a natural extension that will continue to grow. That fact that there aren’t more sites like ScriptShadow is really more of a testament to the small audience than anything else.
Frankly, perhaps the studios are right to have been worried all along. Certainly some scripts could benefit from absolute secrecy. Haven’t some always been kept under lockdown? However, far more scripts–even studio scripts–could benefit from the exposure. Ultimately, I expect that the studios will come to view ScriptShadow or some similar site(s) as just one more step on the film promotion machine.
-
[* While I mentioned that SS's audience is probably quite small, I believe it is likely fairly influential with local audiences. These aspiring writers and filmmakers in communities across the country and world are likely those people who their friends turn to for early news about films coming out.]
December 8th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
@Nick
Wait, I didn’t write in to indicate my appreciation of Scriptshadow’s review of one of my scripts. I wrote in to point out that there is a (relatively small) audience interested in reading screenplays in development, and if that audience’s desire is strong enough then in today’s digital age they are going to be able to track down those screenplays. As a result, it’s pointless for us to slap their wrists and tell them they’re wrong to do so because it’s a violation of copyright, specifically because that copyright is violated on a daily basis in our industry anyway.
It’s our responsibility to adapt (or choose not to adapt) to the demand of that audience, it’s not their responsibility to respect our “rules” when we violate them every day ourselves. I think that’s what people are objecting to here– the insinuation that “it’s okay for those of us in the industry to violate copyright and pass scripts around because we’ve tacitly agreed its in our best interest, but when you in the general public do it is no longer in our best interest, so you need to stop.”
December 8th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
@Slappy
“Get back to me when he starts reviewing never produced, un-repped writers and championing them and helping them land deals, THEN I buy that line of crap.”
That’s exactly what he’s doing right now with his logline contest. Google “logline contest” and it’s one of the first results that comes up. Check it out and then get back to us.
Interesting that you excoriate Carson for hiding behind a pseudonym. I assume “Slappy” is in the phonebook of whatever city you live in?
December 8th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
…and of course while I was writing DouglasHorn posted many of my same points, only better and with more words.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
104 What you’re arguing is akin to a sports radio talk show host saying his listeners should dictate the local team’s personnel moves and coaching decisions by vote. There are about a million reasons why that’s a foolish idea.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I’m a writer who had his script reviewed on ScriptShadow, and the script itself was published on the site for anyone to download. Beyond the obvious copyright implications, it was distressing and unhelpful to have my unfinished work – it was a very early draft – exposed and discussed in public while the creative process was still ongoing. The script draft reviewed was not a fair representation of the final work, and indeed many of the criticisms highlighted in the review were things that had already been fixed in subsequent drafts. It felt like a violation, no more different than if someone had hacked into my hard drive and posted one of my in-progress works online.
These early drafts are confidential work product and just because members of the public might find them interesting to read does not give them the right to do so. It’s not just studios that have an interest in keeping this stuff private but the writers too. I was just moments away from emailing ScriptShadow with a request to please remove the review and the script (even though it was a largely positive review) when I found out that the studio had already had it taken down.
There are many many valid and useful ways for enthusiastic amateur writers to learn about the screenwriting craft and about what’s currently selling in Hollywood (not that this is something they should do anyway as trying to chase trends will get you nowhere – remember, skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it is right now) but ScriptShadow’s site is not one of them; it’s not particularly helpful to those amateurs and all it does is cause annoyance and grief to the professional writers who find their in-progress work being picked apart in public before it’s ready for prime-time.
A lot of the posts defending SS in this talkback seem to betray a basic lack of understanding of the confidentiality and trust necessary to collaboratively develop a screenplay in the Hollywood system, and are also indicative of the increasingly pervasive entitlement culture that the internet has given rise to – people want it all and they want it now and for free and throw a tantrum when they don’t get it.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
@Jamie
Parallel development!
December 8th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
@Jamie Linden
I apologize; that was a poor characterization of what you wrote. Mostly, I wanted to make it clear that you are a professional writer who doesn’t want to see ScriptShadow killed, and I’m glad you dropped by to share that perspective.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
I just keep thinking in my head, so if 100,000 people read the script, there are still 380 million people just in the U.S. that haven’t and have the potential to watch the movie. I don’t think SS plays to the majority of America as it does just to the small world of screenwriting.
It’s not like every American out there is on SS reading up on the latest specs. Most people could care less about scripts, they just want to see movies.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
This is such an obvious violation of copyright law it shocks me to see so many people crying about their “rights”. Once a script is purchased by a studio/prod-co they own the copyright and therefore the right to exploit that material, not the writer and certainly not a 3rd party. These scripts represent sizable investments by publicly traded companies. Do you think Toyota wants people voicing their opinions on their designs for the next hybrid? Trust me, if they did, they’d ask.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
I think it might be beneficial to remove the copyright element from the debate (let’s move over to BoingBoing) and focus on other issues here. Legal or not, is it beneficial, to whom, and at what cost?
Looking at it from the writer’s point of view: you’ve written a script that has sold. The studio (or whoever is shelling out the money) has one question: will we lose money? This is true of a Sundance movie or a blockbuster. They need to be able to make money to keep the lights on. Will positive buzz help a script get green-lit for production, or rather, will it help more than it hurts? There is that one thing that gets a script green-lit for production (ability to make money), and a million things that will keep a script from getting green-lit. Since these scripts are all relatively early in the development process, those making the decisions must look far ahead for anything that might hurt the movie down the road. Press, even on a blog, is one of those reasons against green-lighting and rarely used as a reason in favor of green-lighting. Why take a risk on a script getting negative reviews this early on when there are literally tens of thousands of other scripts that might not have any problems? This, of course, doesn’t take into account at all the writing process and how scripts can change dramatically from draft to draft with a little time and effort. On the flip side, positive reviews do little to ease their worries. There are thousands of fervent DOLLHOUSE fans online, but that has never resulted in substantial ratings.
Is the chance substantial that Scriptshadow will affect you? Define substantial. Let’s be generous and say that Scriptshadow could process a 100 scripts, and out of those one script will have a negative Scriptshadow experience used against them in the production process or in their search for more work (I am a working screenwriter, but I have never had a script of my own on the site, so maybe others can speak more towards that percentage).
But, perhaps Scriptshadow will benefit these writers, by giving them constructive criticism on their scripts. Talk to any working screenwriter, and they will tell you that one of the main reasons a script dies is because of excessive notes given by unqualified individuals. So your solution to that problem would be to solicit a forum to get even more unqualified opinions? That’s like the Titanic hitting an iceberg and asking everyone to pitch in and kick holes in the hull. Writers, particularly new writers, are often forced into taking notes that will not work. A good writer will do their best to make the note work, and a good executive will recognize when their note didn’t work. And then onto the next draft. But when a site like this reviews a script or offers it for download out of context to where it is in the process and who has been giving these notes, it gives an unfair sense of the writer’s ability. And it will be the writer that is hurt, not the dozens of producers, agents, executives, etc. that have been asking the writer to do drafts attempting these changes.
Now let’s look at the benefits to you, the aspiring writer. You get to read a script and learn from it. What do you learn? How a script is formatted? That you can pick up from books, classes, or a quick Google search. Will it make you a better writer? Maybe, in that reading scripts helps you learn the language. But reading scripts alone can’t make you a good or successful writer (ask the army of studio readers struggling to sell their own scripts). Is there any reason that reading an unproduced screenplay, of either negative or positive quality, will help you in your writing more than reading a produced screenplay? Let’s be generous again and say yes, it will. How much will it help you? Will it be the tipping point between getting that script made or remaining non-pro? This slight percentage of helpfulness also has to be factored into the already daunting percentages against you selling a script, period.
So, I think it just boils down to costs versus benefits. The risks to the writer may be slight, but I still feel like they are substantially higher than the benefits to the amateur writers reading the site or to the writers themselves. A little foresight might be called for on the part of the amateur writer hoping to turn pro, as the shoe will hopefully be on your foot soon.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
To people whining about the lack of availablity of scripts, outside the entertainment industry, outside of New York and L.A..
Thousands of scripts are available for free for anyone to read, in any public university library, the arts/film/theater school — some published as books, others donated to the film/media/communications programs. (I went to school in Indiana, I live in rural Michigan)
Not accessible 24/7, not available online or checkout. And not copyright violations, stolen from some agent’s office.
If you want to complain about not being able to read the latest script sale, in full, tough.
You can read complete scripts of movies, bad and good, old and new – often with handwritten notations and revisions. You have to get your ass to the library and read them. If the library sucks complain about it or do something about it.
Why mess with an unfinished movie and everyone who’s in the middle of it?
December 8th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
I don’t agree.
I think Script Shadow’s idea was rather brilliant. Admittedly I don’t follow his blog very closely; I’ve only read one of the unproduced script he published and I´ve never written a review (if that’s what people do). Nevertheless, I’ve always thought his blog was a great resource. Something I really could get into if I only had the time.
I think Script Shadow only published ordinary spec scripts (not scripts that are in production or development, or only rarely).
So the scripts he published are in a class of their own. Good enough to make the rounds in Hollywood but for the most part not good enough to get picked up. Because they aren’t professional enough or they don’t attract talent or the timing is off, whatever.
Reading unproduced scripts that perhaps are, or were, contenders is a great deal more interesting and illuminating than reading scripts of movies that have come out. Those scripts are readily available and you can read them in the privacy in your own home. Script Shadow offered something that’s not on offer anywhere else on the web.
Like I say, a great idea. But Script Shadow seriously mismanaged things. I think it was clear from the very beginning that it was only a matter of time before he’d be forced to shut down.
For one thing, he should have asked the writers in question for permission (and he should definitely have stayed clear off scripts that have been picked up and are in production or development — he should have stayed clear off production companies, period).
As it was, it was almost as if he was hell bent on preying on the defenseless — first by publishing writer’s scripts without their consent and then by writing lenghtly reviews and grading the scripts and more often than not he gave them a poor grade. Like “Barely held my interest” or worse. Tone is important and he set a very bad tone.
There are more ways than one to write a review.
Script Shadow’s way of doing things was very poorly thought out. To make the whole venture more uplifting and more educational he should have catered more to the writers on whose works he depended and he should have catered more to his readers who no doubt are mostly wannabe screenwriters.
I could go on and on about what I think Script Shadow should have done to protect and hone his idea, but this post is already overly long.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Wow, this is weird. I remember scriptshadow before he was scriptshadow and posted on Done Deal. I understand reading screenplays that have a buzz going for them, but I wouldn’t want any of my early drafts reviewed.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:39 pm
I completely agree that what’s happening over on Script Shadow is copyright infringement, although as long as Carson doesn’t sell anything, good luck taking him to court.
I also think it’s incredibly helpful to aspiring writers who may not be able to get out to LA this instant learn something about scriptwriting and what’s happening in LA (although I agree, at some point, you have to move there for a career in the entertainment industry).
However, the big question in my mind is, can this be stopped? Realistically, right or wrong, can it be stopped any more than bit torrents or the piracy that pretty much killed the DVD markets in parts of Asia?
Honestly, if you get Carson Reeves to shut his site down, another one is going to spring up in its place.
It sounds like the issue here is the studios’ over-reaction to a negative review. Like at least one commenter said above, most of the general public has NO interest in reading a script (which is why this site is nowhere near as damaging as piracy). I really don’t think the general public is being swayed by Script Shadow, so the studios need to relax.
Again, I’m not saying it’s right, it shouldn’t happen, but a lot of things shouldn’t happen. Unfortunately, they still happen. So I think the studios need to re-think how much they let this site’s reviews influence their development and let this be a resource to aspiring screenwriters.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
So much whining about “rights”.
So little understanding of what it takes to be a working writer.
Many here complaining so loudly about the possible loss of their beloved stolen intellectual property clearing house would be better served by reading “The Day of the Locust.” (Hint – it’s a really big mirror.)
The “business” doesn’t owe anybody a break. Steve Martin (I think) said “Talent plus perseverance equals luck.” Notice the luck doesn’t come first. And stealing ain’t the perseverance part.
The white elephant in the blog is that it takes HARD WORK to become a professional screenwriter. More hard work to sustain even a semblance of a career for any length of time. That’s what many newbies, amateurs, wannabes, dabblers just don’t want to face. Professionalism in ANY discipline requires loads of dedication, practice, suffering, solitude, heartbreak, dreams deferred, fear, self-reliance… rinse, repeat, ad infinitum.
If you’re looking for a short cut life, I suggest full time cigarette smoking.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
@Kristy at MSP, @Jamie Linden, @DouglasHorn
To everyone justifying stealing and public judgement by saying, “But its not mainstream thievery! – Its only a LITTLE bit!”
So?
Its not up to you to decide what amount of my work is OK to publicly display or what quantity of audience is acceptable to give it to. – At all. – Ever. – Even a little.
Its not.
“But its only a little rape.” is not a viable justification for exposing someone else’s anything. Whether it be their body, or their body of work. – Its not even reasonable to use your perspective to decide whether the violated party is overreacting or not. – They’re in different circumstances. – They’re there. Where they are. – You’re not. – So your declaration that the stealing isn’t hurting them is nothing more than conjecture and masturbation. – You simply and inarguably don’t know. – And here you are, with one of the largest Writing Partners signed screenwriters in the world, telling you that it damages them… and yet still wondering.
Its not in question. – If he wanted to be respectful, he would have just asked each writer. Starting on day one. That’s not a compromise. That’s just respecting your writers 101. – (OF COURSE it occurred to him.) – But he didn’t do it. – Because he knows… that as a writer, you protect yourself from tabloid and conjecture people until your production process is done.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:52 pm
@Synthian
As much as I like your overall point, no one’s ever won any good will talking about copyright infringement in the same breath as rape.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Content creators don’t like reviewers, which is understandable. Actually, they love reviewers when they write positive reviews, and then they hate them when they write negative reviews. I would imagine that John loved the critics when “Charlie’s Angels” came out, then hated them when “Charlie’s Angels 2″ came out.
But the fact is that reviews make for better movies. And screenplay reviews will make for better screenplays.
Studios have long tried to use copyright claims to try to squelch bad reviews. They’ll deny a reviewer access if they feel they’ve been treated unfairly. “You don’t have any right to see this movie early– buy a ticket!” They’ll let “friendly” broadcast reviewers run clips of the movie, then tell unfriendly reviewers that do so would violate copyright. It’s silly and short-sighted.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
John’s geographical category for aspiring screenwriters is a little narrow: that they all live and intern in LA. Obviously, this is way off the mark. As others have mentioned (darthpaul for one), many of us live elsewhere and don’t have the “opportunity to read almost every script in town”. But despite our geopgraphical shortcomings, a few of us will one day break into the biz, and it’s nice to ocassionally get a look at the latest spec.
Also, isn’t the Scriptshadow site fundamentally a personal-advancement project. It’s just this guy Carson’s attempt at getting his foot in the door. That is, if he isn’t shooting himself in said foot by running such a controversial site.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
@ A.Nerd,
There’s still no debate. – We know what the Cons are. And we know that its illegal. – But we’re still waiting on just one solid benefit for anyone to put on the Pros side at all. – (Other than, “it amuses me”.) – We need any one legitimate benefit to distributing and reviewing someone’s work-in-progress without permission, that ISN’T already taken care of by the legitimate supply of 2,000+ fully produced screenplays above. – And you’re the closest anyone’s come. – How bout it?
December 8th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Let’s not underestimate the importance of “commercial in confidence”. Screenplays are blueprints. Imagine a Script Shadow website that reviewed the blueprints to, say, consumer electronic devices…. and it reviewed “draft” blueprints. Would anyone defend the right for “aspiring engineers” to read the blueprints? Would we be surprised if Apple or Sony jumped down the throats of the website? Would we consider it morally or ethically defensible?
How is this different?
December 8th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
@ A.Nerd,
I wasn’t trying to – What I meant was what I said. – If you took my current 3rd draft screenplay, and posted it for the world to see, it would cost me everything. Immediately. – I’m not looking for any connections or exposure I don’t already have. And as such… with or without my permission, it would be the most severe and costly act ever committed against me.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
@ Matt Bird Interesting thought. How will script reviews make for better scripts? Better for studios, professionals, amateurs…? Can you see any negatives that outweigh these benefits?
I think the main difference is what exactly are they analyzing? Charlie’s Angel was put out as a largely completed project. That is substantially different than a script that is still being rewritten and changed. You see a lot of reviews for albums about to be released, live concert shows, etc. You rarely (if ever?) see a review of unmixed studio demos, other than those released by the bands and usually only for comparison. I think it would be unfair and largely unhelpful to analyze the in process music and lyrics for an upcoming Arcade Fire album without having the actual music and performance to compare it to. I think that’s a fairer example than comparing Scriptshadow to legitimate film review and news sites.
@ Synthian I struggled with it, and I frankly can’t see any benefit to Scriptshadow that outweighs the costs, but I am (like each of us) biased in my own favor. I am all for any site that helps new writers, but I think in the long run this will hurt all writers. There are enough sites out there that offer scripts for review, contests, entertainment news, etc. without the (even minor) damaging effects that posting and reviewing these scripts will have to us all. But, in the long run, it’s also great that we can talk about it and debate what a script really is.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
I’d rather read scripts that have worked, rather than something that ‘might’ work, or is in development to work. If any education is to be had from scripts, access to earlier drafts of a completed film, and subsequent drafts to the final polished product is of more use to me than access to Synthians ‘corkboard’ of cards. I want to create my own petrie dish of ideas, some of which will never get to the final script, but some ideas get binned to be incorporated in other projects at a later date. So as a tool for script writing, it fails, as a tabloid insider warm and fuzzy peekaboo, where some sort of VIP emotion can consume the viewer, it works, and that’s a feeling that over rides respect and personal space. It’s essentially a script paparazzi exhibition…do we want that in the industry? Scriptorazzi? I don’t want the industry shot before I even get a chance to get into it…
December 8th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
Well, it’s not rape, but it’s certainly a violation of rights, both those of the writer and the studio that paid for the copyright.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
It’s worth considering that “fair” is becoming a somewhat meaningless term in this age of anarchial knowledge distribution, fueled by the democratization of both information AND production technology.
Every creative trade is feeling the pinch – the livelihood of the middle-class photographer is in grave danger, CGI art tools are available to all, the quality of HD video cameras and availability of DIY production tutorials and high quality free software puts film-making in the hands of everyone.
But it still requires a unique perspective, an instinct and an eye for polish, and dedication to professional level completion to actually make something “good” and/or saleable. We can argue until we are blue in the face about whether most stuff that gets funded and distributed is good, but it will always adhere to a certain level of professional finish if it is to be widely distributed, whether in theaters or on youtube. (Excepting, of course, random viral clips – we are talking more about planned, intentional works.)
I am not suggesting that we throw in the towel and say that we as trendmakers or thought leaders have NO control, just that this dilemma is in no way unique to screen-writing or even film making in general.
my .02
cheers
jake
December 8th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
@ A.Nerd,
Great! – So the benefits are all covered by the thousands of other scripts, contests, blogs, videos, programs, and post-production reviews at our fingertips?! – Great!
Then I don’t need to worry about it!
Fuck ScriptShadow!
:P
December 8th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
We just went through public copyright consultation here in Canada to prep for new laws, and I was amazed at how many people believe creative product is fair game. I suppose they would have the same “intellectual” response if I walked up to their house and started taking their stuff? And if I said to them, “Dude, I just don’t think it was that hard for you to earn the money to buy this crappy car, so I’m gonna borrow it for a while or give it to my buddy or whatever,” they’d probably thank me for the constructive criticism and get out of bed the next morning excited to work harder and do better to impress me.
Snort.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Seacrest out!
December 8th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
I can see where working screenwriters wouldn’t see much benefit to having a draft of their script reviewed (unless it got an exec’s attention).
I can see where people who are considering being screenwriters would find reading the scripts (and reviews) educational.
All that is besides the point, unfortunately.
Just like music and movie piracy can’t be completely stopped, neither can this. Shut down ScriptShadow and another site is going to spring up in its place.
It may suck, but I don’t think that makes it any less true. I’m happy to commiserate with you, but that won’t make it any less true, either.
I still don’t get why studio execs are allowing the opinion of an anonymous script reader and some aspiring writers influence their own expert opinions so much.
That’s what needs to stop.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
This is a valuable discussion with some eloquent arguments on both sides and a laudable lack of napalm. But an outcome that will satisfy all parties doesn’t exist because ScriptShadow exposes the gulf between screenwriters who aspire to make it and those who’ve managed to fool the gatekeeper and sneek through the door – we’ve all been one but only some will get to be the other. The two groups have divergent priorities and different value judgements to make – and, in the case of professional writers, crucial relationships to preserve.
From what’s been written here, I suspect that at least some of those in Carson’s corner are waving their flags and hoping that if they sing loudly enough, they might drown out the small voice in their ear that questions whether supporting copyright theft is appropriate for a writer. I suspect also that if they (oh happy day) actually landed a deal and then found their less than stellar first draft exposed and slammed on ScriptShadow, they might be forced to review their positions.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Readers need to realize that not every draft of a screenplay is for public consumption. As Lowell points out, often screenwriters attempt things in drafts knowing they are going to polish it, clarify it, rearrange it, or blow it up in a subsequent draft. Often, the studios are okay with that… they want to see how an idea works and are willing to give it a shot in a draft, with the caveat that it will be reworked for the shooting draft. Reviewing drafts of scripts without the permission of the screenwriter or the studio is a disservice to writers, whether you are produced, unproduced, or just trying to break in.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
Synthian, with all due respect, you’re being extremely dramatic.
How exactly do you think someone posting the 3rd draft of your screenplay for the world to see would cost you “everything?”
With perhaps some exceptions (and I’m not defending those exceptions, if they exist) the scripts that Carson is reviewing are all readily available to the Hollywood community at large. So all I’m saying is that if you are willing to expose your script to that Hollywood community at large, then in today’s age you have to also be prepared for the possibility that your script will be exposed beyond that Hollywood community at large. And because of that, the onus is on us as writers to take responsibility for the work that we send out to be consumed.
When we turn in drafts to studios, we are putting our work out there to be judged, plain and simple. Jeff Lowell’s example of work-in-progress drafts is irrelevant, then — hopefully we can trust our collaborators enough to assume they will not leak unfinished drafts, and if they do then the blame for that leak is on us and on them, not on the Carson Reeves’s of the world.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
@Caroline
You’re exactly right. This is as much an issue of conflicting interests as it is an argument about right vs. wrong. And that makes it a much more complicated debate. But it’s absolutely one worth having.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
@Kristy at MSP
The majority of America being disinterested in reading unproduced screenplays is beside the point. You can’t justify providing a service that is illegal or unethical or inconsiderate on the basis of it only appealing to people who find it appealing. There are plenty of other points to consider here, but I’d hate to think that your primary rationalization for running MSP (a Scriptshadow knock-off, for those who don’t know) is “thinking in your head” that non-screenwriters won’t notice or care.
December 8th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Closing this thread of comments, moving to the update:
http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/how-scriptshadow-hurts-screenwriters-contd