• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Archives for 2009

What’s wrong with the business

October 15, 2009 Film Industry, Los Angeles, Television, WGA

Writers in film and TV are making less money. For 2009, TV writers brought in three percent less, while screenwriters’ [earnings dropped](http://www.wga.org/content/subpage_whoweare.aspx?id=230) 31%.

In a rough economy, it’s no surprise to find workers in all industries making less, but in the case of the writers, it feels a lot different on the ground. It’s not simply the economy.

Fundamental relationships and business practices are changing. More writers are competing for fewer jobs. Established quotes are being ignored. Mid-tier writers are passed over in favor of the very cheap or very expensive, and even they have a hard time actually getting paid.

Get a group of working — or _should be_ working — screenwriters together for more than ten minutes, and you’re likely to discuss all these issues.

Last week, David A. Goodman (Family Guy), Kayla Alpert (Confessions of a Shopaholic) and I did a panel on KCRW’s The Business, discussing these topics. The show is now online, and [worth a listen](http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/tb/tb091012writers_face_the_new).

Some important points to emphasize:

* __All writers in the industry are essentially freelance.__ Even being staffed on a TV show is seasonal. Writers aren’t “laid off;” they’re simply unhired. That’s true for many jobs in film and TV, from actors to gaffers to costume designers. Writers are pretty much the only craft that can generate their own work, however.

* __Writing is the R&D of the entertainment industry.__ Try as they might, studios don’t know which projects — or even which genres — are going to be hits. That’s why they develop a range of properties, knowing that only a few of them will go into production. A studio that doesn’t develop material won’t have movies or shows for upcoming seasons.

* __Studios are small parts of big corporations.__ While studios have often been owned by larger corporations, from Gulf+Western to Coca-Cola, the current consolidation and integration of the major studios is unprecedented. Film and TV used to be largely insulated for a downturn in the economy — people still wanted their movies and shows. But now that studios are so tightly entwined with their parent companies, corporate cutbacks hit Hollywood much more directly.

* __Quotes are both real and imaginary.__ A writer’s quote is generally whatever she has recently been paid for a roughly equivalent job. ((Quotes work the same for actors and directors.)) If Sasha Dramaturg received $200K for a draft, set and polish ((“Draft, set and polish” is common shorthand for a writer’s first draft, a rewrite of that draft, and smaller polish on that draft.)) on a movie at Fox, her quote would be $200K. If Fox wanted to hire her to write a movie, her agents would be looking for at least that much money. Recently, however, quotes are sometimes being ignored. Fox might tell her agents that they’re paying $100K, take it or leave it. If Sasha takes it, her quote is now $100K. ((Deals can also be “no-quote,” meaning they’re not supposed to be disclosed. For the animated movies I’ve written, I’ve made significantly less than my quote.))

* __Writers aren’t unique.__ While this panel was about writers, every facet of film and television is in upheaval. You can take any profession or craft, from development executive to stunt coordinator, and find uncertainty and anxiety about where this is all headed.

Host Kim Masters did a smart job stoking the conversation, and producer Darby Maloney cut an hour’s worth of material down with remarkable finesse.

One thing that didn’t make the cut was a list that a friend had sent me in anticipation of the panel. It’s more bloggy than radio anyway:

What’s Wrong With The Film Business
—-

1. The conflict and turnover caused by the buying and selling of companies causes confusion, uncertainty, and weakens morale in the production area.

2. The “suits” who control the studios interfere too much with creative decisions; the studios should be run by creative people rather than businessmen, lawyers, etc.

3. The constant turnover of the production head of the studio is disastrous.

4. Overhead is indefensibly high.

5. Authority is not clearly defined.

6. Producers are given exorbitant contracts, and there is no relationship between what a producer receives and the box-office success of his or her films.

7. Screenplay costs are excessive and and the write-off on stories and contracts is enormous.

While this seems like a very current assessment, the list actually comes from a 1936 report by Joseph P. Kennedy, who was hired by Paramount’s board of directors to determine what was ailing the studio. ((This list comes courtesy Howard Suber, who makes reference of it in his book The Power of Film. It originally appeared in Leo Rosten’s 1941 book Hollywood: The Movie Colony/The Movie Makers (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, Inc., 1941), Pp. 253-254.
Rosten’s book is out of print, unfortunately.))

I find it strangely comforting to realize that the industry was just as broken 70 years ago.

To me, it suggests there’s a cycle to the industry. While we’re in a painful contraction phase now, there is still reason for optimism. Hollywood loves money, and money loves Hollywood. As the economy improves, I suspect we’ll see increased investment in the industry, either through new technology (as happened with home video) or new piles of money (such as foreign investment funds).

It’s a strange time for a writer to be starting in the industry. Not only will you be competing with every other aspiring writer, you’ll also find yourself up against established writers who’ve been forced to cut their quotes. With uncertainty comes caution, and studios will be less likely to take a chance on an unknown writer.

But crisis is also an opportunity. When I meet with recent film school graduates, I remind them that whatever happens next in the industry won’t be something my generation does. It will happen among the 20-somethings, the narrative entrepreneurs who figure out how to make the next great thing. Rather than seeking permission to work in the existing industry, they’ll make their own.

To become one of those inventors of industry, you need to surround yourself with similarly ambitious people. Film school is a good choice, but so is living and working in the right neighborhood in Silverlake or Brooklyn or Austin — or more likely, a place I wouldn’t even realize is a hotbed.

In the KCRW panel, Kayla Alpert made a final point worth repeating: writers can write. As frustrating a time as this is, screenwriters at every level have the unique opportunity to make something new by themselves. That’s a luxury worth more than dollars.

Pitching Prince of Persia

October 13, 2009 Pitches, Prince of Persia, Projects

[Jordan Mechner](http://jordanmechner.com/blog/2009/10/prince-of-persia-movie-pitch-trailer/) has posted the game-footage trailer we used when we pitched the feature film version of Prince of Persia to the studios six years ago.

Most movie pitches don’t involve video, but with PoP, most of the studio executives weren’t familiar with the game at all, so it became an important way to introduce them to both the franchise and the world. As Jordan notes in his post, this trailer doesn’t really tell the story of the movie, but it does give a sense of the characters and style: the dashing prince’s acrobatics, the devoted priestess/princess, the dagger with its time-reversing slickness.

Jordan and I pitched seven studios over two days. Each time, the presentation was pretty much identical.

1. Introductions. Apologies for keeping us waiting. (1 minute)
2. John hyping Jordan’s prestigious videogame background. (1:00)
3. Play the video. (2:10)
4. Jordan describes the world of the Persian empire, using artwork. (:30)
5. John pitches Prince Dastan, using artwork of him. (:30)
6. John and Jordan alternate pitching story, introducing character/prop artwork as new things come up. (6:00)
7. Questions about story, tone and scale. “Somewhere between Pirates and Raiders. It’s not Lawrence of Arabia.”(3:00)
8. Promises that they’ll follow up. (1:00)

Altogether, we could get through the pitch in less than 20 minutes. Disney liked it, and sent us to Jerry Bruckheimer’s company, who bought it from Jordan. The film comes out next May.

Here’s the trailer we used for the pitch. The actual trailer for the movie is ridiculously good, and should be out before too long.

Prince of Persia movie pitch trailer (2003) from jordan mechner on Vimeo.

Kindle, international edition

October 7, 2009 Geek Alert, The Variant

kindleWhen I published [The Variant](http://johnaugust.com/variant) on Kindle, I knew I’d be leaving out most of the world, since the Kindle was U.S. only. No longer.

Amazon announced today the international version of the Kindle, which lets users in 100+ countries buy content through its Kindle store. It ships October 19th.

Why do the machines need humans?

October 6, 2009 Geek Alert, Rant

Wired’s Matt Blum asks [geeky questions](http://www.wired.com/geekdad/2009/10/top-10-unanswered-questions-in-geeky-movies-ii-the-sequel/) about popular sci-fi movies, including one that’s [always bugged me](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2006/why-the-matrix-trilogy-ultimately-blows):

> 8. The Matrix: Why do the machines need humans?

> The intelligent machines have all humans hooked up to elaborate devices to harvest their body heat and chemicals, right? But they also have sophisticated fusion reactors. The energy production of fusion reactors compared to that of humans (with all the maintenance required, including The Matrix itself) is so much more efficient it’s just ridiculous -— and we’re supposed to believe that intelligent machines, which would presumably operate logically, would keep the humans around anyway? It’s obviously necessary for the plot, but it just makes no sense.

But what would make sense is if humans were used not as batteries, but rather as organic CPUs.

For all its processing power, perhaps the Matrix can’t do something that human brains can. So they use the connected humans as a fleshy cloud computer to keep the Matrix running.

As a viewer, I’d be willing to accept an incredibly simple answer here. On page 50, instead of…

MORPHEUS

The human body generates more bio-electricity than a 120-volt battery and over 25,00 B.T.U.’s of body heat.

…how about…

MORPHEUS

The human brain is slow and imperfect, but it can do things silicon can’t. It can imagine, create. It can stitch together ideas to form something new. That’s why they need us -- so they can evolve.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (73)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (489)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (237)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.