Like banging a chainsaw against a tree
As a guy who runs a blog about the nuts and bolts of screenwriting, I sometimes get frustrated by aspirants who only want to dip their toes in, or believe they should be able to have a thriving film career in Duluth. The don’t want to commit fully to the form or the craft.
A comment (#6) on an article about Objective-C programming had a good simile for this situation:
It is like I showed a chain saw to a early American colonist, and he said, “Can I cut down the tree without starting the engine? I don’t like the noise. Maybe I can just bang it against the tree?”
UPDATE: More discussion here.
Articles
January 16th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
(((TypeOf(colonist.imagineCuttingDownTree) == TypeOf(enum_Success)) == False)
0
January 16th, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Our culture has this heinous meme called “follow your dream”, that suggests a person can accomplish anything by simply believing in themselves, a code-phrase for entitlement.
I’ve heard horror stories of top corporate recruits fresh out of college who whine about lack of promotions and raises… a few weeks in.
This is not how to succeed at life, or in screenwriting. Instant gratification is a good motivator for buying products, but it is useless for accomplishing anything else.
January 16th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
Hi John, The phrase ‘dip their toes in’ has aroused my curiousity. Are you referring to people that only want to write a small portion of a film? -Jonathan
January 16th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
@implementation JAWriter
-(int)cutsDownTreeWith:(JAAction *)action { return ([action isa] == JABanging) ? kFailure : kSuccess; }
@end
January 16th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
LOL! This post is symbollic of why I love this blog.
January 16th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
January 16th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
I think the stark reality of the difficulties of financial success in screenwriting allow many of us to become “casual screenwriters,” which is not a screenwriter at all.
I live in a Chicago suburb, have a job in finance which keeps me busy 40+ hours/week, and have written exactly one screenplay with plans for several more. In no way would I consider myself a screenwriter but rather a guy with a full time job whose hobby is writing. If by some dumb luck I stumbled upon an important “Hollywood” connection who wanted to pay me for my writing, I would expect the headline to read “Finance Guy Lands Big Paycheck With Script,” not “Aspiring Screenwriter Lands First Gig.”
Maybe I am more rooted in reality, but I have to believe that the guy working part time in Duluth and banging out the occasional script on the side doesn’t really consider himself a screenwriter. Does he? I consider him a guy who writes screenplays. When you get paid, then you are a screenwriter. The same goes for the screenwriter pumping out episodes of Battlestar Gallactica who likes to follow the stock market and tell people what stocks to buy. He’s not a financial consultant, but with some dumb luck (or inherent wisdom) he could end up making more money than Jim Cramer.
As for those who HAVE quit their day jobs and begun writing day in and day out but remain holed up in their midwest suburban condos, refusing to follow the action, well… you’re just handicapping yourselves.
My guess is that a majority of non-California writers still keep a paying job and write on the side. The argument, I suppose, is whether those people consider themselves to be aspiring screenwriters or writing hobbyists. It may just be semantics, but I’d be interested in some responses.
January 16th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
It amazes me the range of your internet accessing. I had read that quote awhile ago since I’m both involved in that world (iPhone programming) and the screenwriting world (not to mention my day job in the movie world). And it’s true in both that there are a lot of people unwilling or unable to make that commitment.
Both iPhone programming and screenwriting are looked at as a gold mine where all you need is a good idea. Details and the craft are a distant second to these people. They want their cake now! When I suggested to someone struggling on a section of code that they may want to review some books, their answer was they would buy a book from the money they made after they got their app on the store that week.
January 16th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
@MJ Marcinkus:
I also work 40 hours a week at an unrelated job, but I absolutely consider myself a screenwriter. Here are a few reasons why:
Screenwriting is always in my brain. It’s what my mind WANTS to think about, even when I’m not trying to. On the other hand, at work, I have to force my mind to think about the tasks I’m doing (and even then, my thoughts often drift back to writing).
When I’m in a room full of other screenwriters, I feel like I’m in my element. When I’m in a room full of other people who do my job, I don’t quite feel like I belong there.
Under the right circumstances, I would absolutely be willing to write screenplays for no money. On the other hand, there is no chance I’d be willing to do my day job pro bono.
Yes, technically I’m paid to do my day job and not (yet) paid to write screenplays. But my identity is that of a screenwriter, and I firmly believe that I have a shot at being paid to write in the future — and it won’t be because of dumb luck; it will be because of hard work and dedication. Sounds downright Pollyanna-ish, I know, but that’s the attitude that keeps me going.
January 16th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
It seems to me that if you really, really (really) want to write, then you will. Whether you do it as a full-time gig is up to the individual.
I think people get fooled that writing is easy, when the phrase should be “Writing well is bloody hard”. It’s not very lucrative either.
But if you love writing so much, why would you do anything else?
January 16th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
I guess I need to cancel my plans to move to Duluth.
I am reminded of a bit in the Muppet Movie when Kermit and Fozzie come across Gonzo who is hitchhiking to Bombay (Mumbai), India. He explains he’s going to India to break into show business. Kermit and Fozzie mention that you don’t go to India to break into the movie business, you go to Hollywood.
Gonzo replies “Sure, if you want to do it the easy way.”
January 16th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
@Nick: I never thought of it that way. I too, imagine just about every mundane office scene playing out in much more comedic or dramatic fashion on the page. I suppose because I see some movies and get inspired because of the great writing, that I don’t feel worthy to consider myself a screenwriter. More correctly, then, I suppose I am a bad screenwriter, or perhaps just a half-assed lazy one.
@Scott: As a true outsider, I never viewed screenwriting as a gold mine. Quite the opposite, I always ask myself why I spend so much time writing when the monetary payoff is likely nil. The answer is always “because you LIKE it, dumb dumb – that, and people don’t listen to you when you speak.” What has always confused me is how so many good ideas never make it to fruition while so many more obviously horrible ideas get wide releases. I’m not talking about the horrible chick-flick written in 2 weeks starring Meg Ryan that will still rake in a nice profit but rather something like the 1996 movie “Ed” starring Matt LeBlanc and a monkey and a minor league baseball team. Then again, it’s movies like “Ed” that keep us half-assers’ dreams alive.
January 16th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
MJ Marcinkus:
The way I see it, getting paid is irrelevant. You’re a screenwriter if you write scripts. If you get paid much or zero is only a measure of your financial success as a screenwriter.
As for John: I’d offer a word of caution in dismissing anyone’s screenwriting possibilities on account of geography alone. Granted, the accepted paradigm of “consider living in Hollywood if you want to work in Hollywood” exists for a reason, but it is also the kind of thing that might very well be on it’s way out. I used to do that too, but lately I find myself relaxing when it comes to that. Sometimes we get so caught up on how “we” made it that we forget that our way of skinning a cat, while admittedly successful, is not the only one that exists.
January 16th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
First: @john you now beat Neil Patrick Harris as coolest man in Hollywood.
I write in my free time. I don’t worry about the “business” side because I know I am not good enough. So by day, I’m lead engineer at a top 30 website. The secret of my realistic self-assessment is knowing too many wannabe writers, and overseeing too many job interviews.
Just like screenwriting, 90% of developer applicants are embarrassingly bad. They view development as some 9 to 5 thing. You could ask about some recent trend, like “Have you tried Ruby?” and they’ll respond “What’s that?”
Great developers spend free time contributing to open source projects just because it’s fun. These guys are, without exaggeration, 10 times more productive than mediocre developers. These adopt new skills long before it’s profitable to have on your resume, just because it’s fun.
I see the same 9 to 5 mentality in my writer friends going nowhere. They think they’re making progress by putting a few hours a week into it (alongside their acting, directing, music, and dance). I could ask, “Isn’t your screenplay a lot like ‘Trading Places’?” and they’ll respond, “What’s that?”
I think there’s no coincidence that a successful writer spends his free time learning programming, one of the most analytically challenging skills around. In another life he’d be John Romero.
January 17th, 2009 at 12:30 am
I don’t understand the replies written in the programming code at all, but I still think they are hilarious. I know they are funny but I can’t prove it. I think that’s cool.
January 17th, 2009 at 5:38 am
I work as a film editor, and I’ve found similar issues with the actual making of movies as well. Ever since DV cameras became affordable, a lot of aspiring wannabe filmmakers have a “just point and shoot” attitude towards filmmaking, with a result of a lot of first-time movies looking half-assed. It’s a problem on two levels, both technical and aesthetic. These filmmakers don’t know (and some don’t care) about the finer aspects of filmmaking, like proper lighting, composition, good sound recording and mic placement, proper coverage of a scene, etc. They think that if they just have an image on the screen of people saying the dialogue they wrote, that they have a movie.
It’s funny, when John mentioned Duluth in his post, my first thought was of Austin, Texas. This is a town that constantly promises to be a new “film center” in the US, but it never really quite happens. There are a lot of local filmmakers in Austin, and some do achieve a small level of local fame, though I don’t know if any of them have a career simply as a filmmaker full-time. But none of them have really gotten any fame outside of Austin. (A few, like the Duplass brothers and Alex Holdridge, have become known once they left Austin.) And I think a lot of that has to do with what I said above: many of these filmmakers just take their DV or consumer HD cameras, run out, grab some footage, slap it together on their laptop, and call it a movie. (The stereotype of the “Austin slacker” as shown in Richard Linklater’s SLACKER is very much alive and well.)
I could go on, but I’m pretty off-topic already. :-) I just wanted to show that the problem isn’t just with screenwriting, it’s with the making of movies as well.
January 17th, 2009 at 9:23 am
As one of those guys from Duluth (actually, thank god it’s not Duluth) I will say I understand your frustration with the naivete, lack of commitment and general silliness that abounds out here in the provinces. I’ve met any number of out-of-town writers who act like grizzled, jaded vets in the coffee shop. They all have their LA stories and drop names as well as anyone in Santa Monica. Hell, I even do it. Many of us are clueless. And a lot of us probably suck, so it’s best that we’re not down there clogging LA’s lousy transit system.
But there are talented, busy, successful, committed out-of-town writers, even out-of-country writers. I can think of a dozen off the top of my head. It happens, but it’s rare. True, most of these individuals have paid their dues in the LA haze at one point in their careers. But they make it happen. Jim Harrison comes to mind. He did it for 25 years while living on a farm in the Michigan north woods. Like Jim, I’d have a hard time surviving somewhere I can’t get to old growth timber in five minutes.
In my own case, I’m getting older and only learned I had a knack for this screenwriting thing a couple years ago when I wrote a script on a lark and suddenly people started asking to read it. I honestly don’t really know how it happened. I didn’t plan for it. I had no Hollywood delusions. And I still don’t, even though I’m obsessed with the process and I get up every morning at 4:30 to crank on it, continuing after I put the kid to bed. And along he way, I’ve met a few people and have had a good time with it. I’ve burnt up money (theirs and mine) and carbon traveling down to LA, I’ve dropped names in restaurants, had fascinating creative meetings and met some people I greatly admire. I’ve heard several times that my out-of-town perspective was an asset, a refreshing change.
But I’ve got a mortgage and a kid and there’s meds and chronic illnesses and the fact that the economy ate my retirement. I’m not going anywhere until I’ve got at least nine months of mortgage payments in the bank and health benefits. But before I even get to that point, my goal is just to get something produced. If it happens, maybe we’ll pack up the truckster and head down. If it doesn’t, oh well, I guess I’m just dipping my toe in. I’m a working class stiff from a long line of working class stiffs. I’ve got no problem punching a clock, though I’m certainly open to alternatives.
Maybe that means I’m not committed. But I’m still up every day at 4:30 writing (while occasionally reading blog posts from the pros) and I’ll probably continue to do so, even long after people in the business stop asking to read my stuff.
January 17th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I completely agree with John. If I would’ve stayed in Minnesota, I wouldn’t know the very important things I now know about the industry. And I would be more delusional than I still sort of am. At the very least, I’m aware of how improbable it all is. But isn’t that great fuel for trying?
January 17th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Come on, John. It’s fine to give aspiring writers the advice to move to where the action is… but ranting about those who choose not to (without even knowing their many reasons)… that sounds a bit elitist to me. Why should it bother you if I choose to bang my chainsaw against a tree in Duluth? At least we have real trees here.
I understand the obstacles of not living there, but you’d have to pay me a significant sum to move to L.A. (and I’d leave as soon as that contract was up). I just plain don’t like the place. But I love films and I love to write, so that’s what I do. Sorry that I frustrate you with my “lack of full commitment to the form or the craft” but I’m gonna keep banging on this tree up here in Duluth whether you like it or not.
January 17th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Ever wonder why there are so many films about film-making (or where the lead character is an actor, an agent, a director, or a writer)? It’s because the people writing the films and the people green-lighting the films all live in L.A. and think that film-making is a normal and/or exciting topic.
Ever wonder why films about film-making tend to tank at the box office? It’s because the people PAYING to watch films DON’T live in L.A. and DON’T get the joke.
Maybe it’s time for writing (& green-lighting) to come from the same place the audience comes from… everywhere else!
January 17th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
You can stay in Duluth and write screenplays. No one will stop you.
But you can’t stay in Duluth and complain about how unfair it is to that no one takes a Duluth screenwriter seriously.
January 18th, 2009 at 2:55 am
I think this is essentially a good point, for just about everyone, but I also think there are exceptions to every rule. Peter Jackson has managed to bring Hollywood to his house on the other side of the earth. Now, of course, he’s Peter Jackson. But I grew up in New Zealand, and I remember when Peter Jackson was just a quirky human interest story about a low budget gorehound who made a weird movie about drug addicted puppets.
Of course, it’s unlikely that Mr Duluth has the talent, drive and savvy that Peter Jackson had.
January 18th, 2009 at 5:06 am
@Jonathan
I think he means the people who feel that they can just get 50 ideas from 50 people or the people who don’t read books on film theory. I know I hate the thought that people don’t “break in” to any other professional career. Screenwriters have to be the most creative people in Hollywood. They have to work 25 hours a day and study things that other people pay no attention to.
If you want to make it as a screenwriter, you have to be a film aesthete. A person who pays attention to scene transitions, relevance of objects in frame, etc. Part of me hopes no one knows if I sell since then people will gravitate towards my blog.
I feel for you John.
January 18th, 2009 at 8:45 am
Hold on a sec, John. Re your post 22.
Why can’t he complain if no one takes a screenwriter in Duluth seriously? If he wrote a dawn good screenplay that someone (producer, agent) read and wanted to get involved, why would it matter? ‘Oh he lives in Duluth. Bin it.’…? No. It’d be a phone call and a plane flight away if his or her writing we’re good enough.
The film world does not revolve around Hollywood or L.A. anymore and less so in the future. I think you’re a great Hollywood writer John and I love your blog, but some of your practical advice is somewhat conflicting and unreal at times. It’s just as hard to get a film off in Hollywood/L.A. as it is anywhere else on this spinning globe of ours.
I sometimes think you need to step out of that Hollywood/L.A. thing and realise what the rest of the world is doing. Films do get made out here too you know and the US is no longer the biggest film territory.
Things are changing. Step out and smell the coffee :)
January 18th, 2009 at 9:31 am
Totally agree with you, John. This is not an industry that one can just dip ones toes into. This is an industry where one must take chances and commit in order to succeed. It seems that so many of us think that if we sit around writing long enough opportunities will eventually find us. That couldn’t be further from the truth. In order to succeed, in order to find opportunity one must dedicate oneself, one must believe in ones work and one must go out and push said work. We all have to work for our opportunities, we have to take chances and be bold. I’ve never heard of anyone being “bold” while living in Duluth. I’ve never heard of anybody truly succeeding without diving head first in.
January 18th, 2009 at 10:39 am
FYI, that quote is from Aaron Hillegass’s book ‘Cocoa Programming for Mac OS X’.
January 18th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
You can live in Duluth and just commute for this sweet job:
http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/tfr/997269206.html
January 18th, 2009 at 8:02 pm
Being part of the younger generation; I can see, in others and myself, some of what is being referred to. It’s an impatience with the real work it takes to succeed in any industry. I view it as a positive and a negative. It can be a fueling force to evolve and get better at what you do, or it can paralyze young workers as they complain for more respect without the skills to show for it. If you’re naturally talented, you can probably write anywhere in the world, and eventually it will get noticed. But most people need time and effort, and I think John is saying moving to LA is a direct connection/sign to that committment.
That being said, while I do believe the game is changing, and the focus will spread farther than Southern California, if your goal is produced credits and not a hobby, hard work is always the answer.
January 18th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Awesome, you understand programming. I can no longer stand programming, not java, not C# not even SQL, but that’s beside the point…
Actually I’m in toronto and today I went to a screenwriters’ meetup at the National Film Board downtown. We had tv writer, Russ Cochrane, speaking to us on the ins and outs of writing for tv. I must honestly say I wasn’t impressed and have absolutely no desire to write for tv. It sounded like a paint by numbers deal. Instead I like the idea of writing films but I have a feeling that I can’t expect to do that living in toronto(the land of low film grants). So in one aspect, I see what you’re saying but in another, I don’t simply want to exist as “the working writer”. To me that sounds like a job and truth be told, that’s what I’m running from after being a programmer for more than 6 years…
January 18th, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Without looking at Nick’s blog profile and even if MJ Marcinkus hadn’t said that he lives in a Chicago suburb, I would’ve been 98% confident in pegging Nick as an L.A. boy and MJ as a midwesterner.
There’s a clear distinction between the L.A. and midwestern mindsets toward labeling oneself. In the midwest, you’re not allowed to put “screenwriter” on your business card unless you earn your living by screenwriting. It’s as simple as that. L.A. has thousand of actresses who wait tables. In Ohio, those would be called waitress.
January 19th, 2009 at 8:27 am
There is no commentary so exacting as that of an eloquent programmer.
January 19th, 2009 at 9:23 am
@ Gideon, I don’t think he’s dismissing people because of geography, though I’m sure John will correct me if I’m wrong. The point is that you have to be in L.A. to take the meetings that lead to work. The spec sale is a) rare and b) not a career. Most writers write on assignment a good deal of the time, including all those who make a living at it, and many who sell specs never work again. What John is really talking about is the career of screenwriting. If you want to work on Wall Street (not a smart move at the moment), you’d go to New York. You wouldn’t try to do it from Duluth. Well if you want to be a screenwriter, the industry is in L.A. and the same principle applies. Of course there are exceptions (they prove the rule), and of course it makes sense for a person to be ready before they make that move. For example, someone who’s serious about building a screenwriting career might stay in Duluth until they have written enough material to plausibly launch a career — e.g. they might write TV specs and an original pilot or a one-act or some other short, original sample, and they might write, say, 2 or 3 screenplays that they know are really strong. Then when they take that leap, it’s a calculated risk. I moved to L.A. from New York after I got my first agent who immediately urged me to come to L.A. Within a year I was a working writer, whereupon I figured out why it’s advantageous to be here.
@ Dave — “I’m not going anywhere until I’ve got at least nine months of mortgage payments in the bank and health benefits. But before I even get to that point, my goal is just to get something produced. If it happens, maybe we’ll pack up the truckster and head down. If it doesn’t, oh well, I guess I’m just dipping my toe in. I’m a working class stiff from a long line of working class stiffs. I’ve got no problem punching a clock, though I’m certainly open to alternatives.” — Just wanted to point out that, initially, becoming a working writer might be a better goal than getting a movie made. So many variables beyond your control determine whether a movie actually gets made, and most movies that are developed in Hollywood (for which writers are paid) do not. It’s not uncommon for a writer to make a living, and a good one, along the way to the goal of getting those movies made. Also, for someone like you with what sounds like a solid skillset, TV is another option. It pays quite well and will enable you to support your family. Of course, it’s not always steady work, but the pay is such that it doesn’t matter for those who are generally doing well (i.e. one show might get cancelled but you get a job on another show either right away or after a bit of a gap). Also, it sounds like you might also be able to fill in any gaps with whatever it is you do now. My point is that you might actually be in a very good position to strategize making this your real career and you sound like a good candidate for that.
January 19th, 2009 at 10:18 am
@Tennyson E. Stead, Maybe you weren’t speaking in my regard but I’m not sure if that was a compliment or sarcasm…
January 19th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Mike #22:
I don’t know what drew you to this conclusion. Exactly what is the basis for it?
An article?
Another blog?
The fact is, the film industry absolutely does revolve around Los Angeles. Los Angeles is the primary hub for film and television much like New York City is the primary hub for theatre.
And I think you’re misunderstanding the whole Duluth thing. With the exception of those great (and mostly fake) PR articles about some dude who worked in a factory in Maine, wrote a screenplay, mailed it to Alan Horn, and then got a movie deal, screenplays are not sold in that way. Most screenwriters spend years meeting with different agents, agent’s assistants, development executives, VP’s (there are so many fucking VP’s), writer’s assistants, writers, film directors, television directors, music video directors who will eventually become film directors, internet stars (ignore them, they’re useless), until they finally get in a place where the right person will read their screenplay and hopefully, if they’re really, really lucky get some helpful notes, which will undoubtedly lead to a pass. Rinse and repeat. Rinse and repeat.
And guess where all those people live? Los Angeles. So unless you can somehow afford to fly in every week, stay for a couple of days, and then fly back to Duluth (and if you can, why the hell do you want to be a lowly screenwriter?!) you should definitely move to Los Angeles.
There are exceptions, of course. But I’m talking about the best possible route.
January 20th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Around 1994 I bought a used NeXT computer because I was a developer and I had read that it had a great software development system. All of my friends thought I was an idiot, to waste time learning “Objective-C” or whatever because it was a weird language only supported by a dead piece of hardware.
Out of almost nowhere, 14 years later, Objective-C suddenly becomes one of the most valuable skillsets in the software development world.
Why did I stick to it, in light of all the practical reasons to quit? It felt to me to be the highest Quality thing to do at the time.
The moral of the story is this; if you like what you are doing and where you are doing it, because you have an internal sense that it is a “Quality” endeavor, don’t let contemporary criticism change your path. Look at it this way: if you are wrong, you’ll learn from the experience but if you are right, and you change course anyway, the how will you feel?
January 20th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Dear John,
You said: “But you can’t stay in Duluth and complain about how unfair it is to that no one takes a Duluth screenwriter seriously.” So you really take those a-holes who sit in starbucks sipping on their mocha-cappa-frappe-crappie typing a screenplay seriously? It seems to me that quite a bit of the really interesting ideas that get turned into films come from outside LA (as in the rest of the world), while all the well worn, heavily remade, formulaic films come from LA. This is a major problem with the “industry” right now and it amounts to what can best be described as creative incest.
The world that exists in LA exists only in LA; it DOES NOT represent the rest of the world (even if it thinks it does). As purveyors of an art form (I believe it is important to continue to think of film as art otherwise you cease being relevant), is it not, in part, our duty to hold a critical lens to the things that make up the world we live in? When one looks at fine art does it not express some kind of deeper understanding of humanity or the world at large and ask questions about that which we take for granted or might not notice? How can you do that when living in the plastic bubble of LA?
from duluth
January 21st, 2009 at 8:05 am
As a follower of your blog for several years, I thought myself to be quite acquainted with your ideas and beliefs. This post has completely blindsided me.
I had always believed that your first concern was with making art; now I see that your primary preoccupation has been with careerism.
Initially, I wanted to rant and rail against you and shake you from your ignorance. But then, you are completely right. If one wants to make a living as a screenwriter then a move to LA is of a huge advantage.
I’m sure you would agree that it was by living in LA that you secured the job of adapting Roald Dahl’s “Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory”?
Funnily enough though, Dahl -also a sometime screenwriter- found he did his best writing in a garden shed. In Wales. An entire ocean of solitude away from sushi-lunches and free diet cokes. You were later paid handsomely to rearranged his ideas, and probably far more than any advance paid to Dahl for his novel.
You have argued successfully for the benefits to a move to LA for your own career, and I agree that you and Mr. Deluth are on far from an even playing field as a result of his refusal to move.
But I feel you have never addressed the artistic cost to you of living in LA. Do you feel obliged to spend time on projects of little artistic merit but which benefit your career? I remember your post where you put forward the script of The Nines for consideration during awards season, so you clearly care about artistic recognition.
I feel you must acknowledge the debt of Hollywood to its source material -be they novels, life-stories, or historical volumes- that originate from around the globe. I would further argue that subsequently non-LA screenwriters, whilst having “weak” Hollywood careers, have recently created better screenplays than those in the industry. The work of Martin McDonagh, Peter Morgan, and Enda Walsh are just some random examples.
Whilst none of these three are on any likely shortlist to rewrite Ironman 2, I am sure that they are consoled by their academy award, baftas, plaudits from Sundance and Cannes, and, in the case of McDonagh, being the the most in-demand London playwright since Shakespeare.
January 21st, 2009 at 8:14 am
I was having a similar discussion this weekend, albeit about someone thinking that they could just jump in and write a book. And my point in the “I want to/I’m going to write a book/screenplay!” discussion is always the same.
I think any reasonably intelligent person can do it. Just like I think any reasonably intelligent person is capable of building a house.
But if you or I set ourselves to the task of house construction, we would recognize that there are a whole host of skills that we would need to acquire. We would read books on the subject. We would ask questions. We would budget time and money. We would be realistic about the quality of our first house. And we would be very humble.
But when it comes to building a work in words, people don’t seem to look at it that way. Maybe that’s because the only visible tools are keyboards and pads and paper. Or maybe people are just seduced by the idea that greatness in anything can be achieved without effort.
January 21st, 2009 at 9:03 am
From Duluth:
I think you’re confusing the act of writing a screenplay and having a career as a screenwriter.
I believe John was talking about the latter (at least I am).
And I have to take umbrage with a couple of your comments. Here’s the first one:
One of the greatest things about writers is that we can write anywhere. There are plenty of places in LA where really well known writers, or at least working writers, go to write; and of course socialize. I even bumped into Lawrence Kasdan typing away at the ole Coffee Bean on Sunset and Fairfax (now, he could’ve just been replying to his emails but there he was, on his laptop).
Quick aside: When I say that I “bumped” into him, it was really me saying, “Hey, you’re Lawrence Kasdan! I love your work” and him with a kind of terrified look on his face.
But what’s most interesting is that you think a screenwriter in Los Angeles can only write about Los Angeles. As if the most thought provoking movies of all time were all written outside of Los Angeles. I don’t even understand the thought process behind the theorem that interesting ideas are in fact, regional.
It seems to me that quite a bit of the really interesting ideas that get turned into films come from outside LA (as in the rest of the world), while all the well worn, heavily remade, formulaic films come from LA. This is a major problem with the “industry” right now and it amounts to what can best be described as creative incest.
This one really bugs me. Not because you’re point of view isn’t shared by others; in fact that sentence is being repeated right now by 85% of all film students. What truly bugs me is how untrue it is.
Let’s just take the two biggest film industries in the world. Hollywood and Bollywood. Of all the films that come out during the year, I’d argue that most of the movies coming out of Hollyood were bad.
I’d also argue that most of the movies coming out of Bollywood were bad.
And I’d further argue that most of the independent movies were bad.
Fact is, most movies, much like most screenplays, are bad. But you’re holding the studio system (which is really what you’re talking about) up to a higher standard because that system of filmmaking produces the most films that are readily available to the public. But as a former agent and a producer, I can undoubtedly tell you that most creative endeavors churn out less than stellar results.
And that’s a good thing.
When we get a truly great film like The Wrestler we can appreciate the amazing chain of events and luck that had to happen for an excellent movie to be made. But it’s not the system, it’s just the way it is. Because for every Darren Aronofsky’s The Wrestler, there’s a Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain. Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire? Take some time out to watch the shit that was Danny Boyle’s The Beach.
Great ideas and great movies can come from anywhere. Shit ideas and shit movies can also come from anywhere. But when you’re talking about the career of a screenwriter, Los Angeles is the best place to go to make that happen.
January 21st, 2009 at 12:01 pm
@from Duluth:
You’re trying to make your point by overgeneralizing — acting like every screenwriter in L.A. is a delusional doofus who sits in Starbucks all day, while the serious creative folks are nested away throughout America’s heartland.
That just isn’t the case. I’m not going to argue that there aren’t good writers outside of L.A., but I will argue (correctly) that there are plenty of jackasses from Oregon to South Carolina who think that they can write a totally awesome screenplay just because they saw The Matrix 40 times. (Pay a visit to the TriggerStreet site if you don’t believe me.)
You’re also conveniently ignoring another important fact when you trash the artistic landscape of Los Angeles. The reason it continues to be the world capital of film is that creative people from all over the world choose to come here to write, direct, act, design sets, and so forth. They don’t just sprout up fully formed in front of the Hollywood sign. They’re bringing their individual perspectives to L.A. because its where they believe they’ll have the best opportunity to express themselves. Most of the time, the output of that expression is deeply flawed. But, as Kevin points out, it’s no different anywhere else in the world. You’re just judging the L.A. film industry more harshly because you’re more familiar with the spectrum of films it produces.
January 21st, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Dear ‘The Other Side’:
You just attempted to fashion a post in defense of “Non-L.A. Screenwriters” and in example you listed…
-1 Novelist (Dahl) -3 Playwrights (Morgan, McDonagh, Walsh)
You did not craft a great argument there. You dig?
January 22nd, 2009 at 9:50 am
Dear Other Other Side,
Well apart from all of my examples being successful non-L.A. screenwriters, Morgan and McDonagh have just got Best Screenplay nods from their Academy peers, as has Mike Leigh.
You are right about them not being great examples; they are now terrific ones for the purpose of my arguement.
January 22nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
The Other Side:
I’ll put it this way.
Judging someone’s creative talent based on where they are living is patently absurd.
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:38 am
Dear Kevin,
English is not my first language and my post expressed many ideas, so it’s best if I quickly recast my arguement:
John proposes that screenwriters who refuse to live in L.A. are never going to make successful careers for themselves.
Of the ten Oscar nominated screenplays this year, half are from non-L.A. residents (as far as I can discern). These range from first time screenwriters to veterans.
I feel that this shows that the situation for non-L.A. screenwriters is quite healthier than the gloomy picture that has been put forward.
This blog has an audience far beyond California, and acts as a source of inspiration to many. But the majority of readers will likely never live in L.A., due to family, work, or citizenship reasons. Rather than wreak their aspirations upon the rocks, I pointed out some successful examples within the company they keep.
It was never my intention to disparage the creative work of L.A. writers, but to highlight and stress that several of the non-L.A. nominees feel their work has benefited from extensive travel and living where ever they please.
And so I’m sure that, in some cases at least, those American colonists who banged the chainsaw against the tree enjoyed the ripe fruit that fell from the branches.
January 24th, 2009 at 6:54 am
The Other Side:
You know what, I like you a whole lot now because you expressed yourself and a difference of opinion without being insulting or rude.
I see what you’re saying and I see your point but I think that sometimes when we (as people) are in an adverse position we tend to use the exceptions as the rule. And I get it. If you can’t make the move to Los Angeles you would at least like to keep the hope alive that you can still be a working or successful screenwriter. I don’t think John or myself wanted to discourage that hope but of course, generally speaking, you have a better chance of being a working, American screenwriter if you move to Los Angeles. Much like the way you have a better chance of getting bit by a shark if you are swimming in the ocean.
And that American colonist that banged a chainsaw against a tree and enjoyed the ripe fruit? He ended up freezing to death because he tried to build a house out of rotten apple cores.
January 27th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
My point being…
THEY BECAME SUCCESSFUL AS PLAYWRIGHTS.
You are going to have a lot easier time selling a screenplay once you have six plays running in London, for example.
John is talking about making it as SCREENWRITER. Not a playwright. He himself didn’t start as a playwright (to my knowledge), so why the hell would he be giving that advice to people.
Let’s see…To become a successful screenwriter, you first must become an award-winning playwright? That seems like an absurd path to aspire towards, but go ahead. If you’re looking for advice on becoming a great playwright, look for a different blog and stop tearing down John for giving appropriate advice.
So no, you’re argument is not terrific. Terrible, maybe. Terrific, no.
January 28th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Kevin,
I’m glad you enjoyed the debate. As I read once long ago, invective is no substitute for argument. I will, however, object to the horrible fate you bestowed upon my American colonists.
As for the “other other other side”… There is no such hope for you and I. I feel compelled to stop now; long before your name spawns into a Rubix cube.