John August

Archives for 2011

New dates for Anatomy of a Script

Big Fish, Follow Up, News

Because of a travel situation, I had to swap dates for my [Anatomy of a Script](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2011/anatomy-of-a-script-series) session on Big Fish. I’ll be coming two weeks later.

__March 16:__ Will now be Mike Werb & Michael Colleary on Face/Off (screening at 4:45 pm)

__March 30:__ Will now be me talking about Big Fish (screening at 5:00 pm)

Winnie Holzman (Wicked, My So-Called Life) and Robin Schiff (Romy & Michelle’s High School Reunion) are hosting on behalf of the Writers Guild Foundation.

[Tickets](https://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/155452) should still be available.

If you purchased tickets for the original date, and now can’t make it, call 323-782-4692. Sorry to reschedule. I promise it’s a really good reason.

Revenge of the snarky script-reader

Film Industry, QandA

questionmarkFor the last few years I have been using a coverage guy (along with my trusted readers) to give me perspective on my screenplays before I send them to my manager. I found this particular reader’s notes to be lucid and constructive, close to what an average reader would say about the project. Worth the price.

Recently I became Facebook friends with him. I looked on his Facebook page and found it filled with snarky comments about scripts he has read or is in the process of reading for coverage. Some of the more mild comments were about ironic spelling mistakes. But some of his comments were on very thematic elements and specific in nature. He described entire scenes and visuals from scripts, along with the titles.

I emailed him and told him I had a real problem with him commenting on scripts that he does coverage for. He replied that he has never commented on my projects and that I sent him, that only comments on things that are “totally ridiculous.”

I said it’s not about me personally, I just don’t think you should be making these comments when someone pays you for a confidential opinion on a script. He then posted on his Facebook page something to the effect of SORRY I HAVE TO TONE DOWN THE COMMENTS AS A WRITER IS GETTING PISSY ABOUT THEM. Never one to back down away from a debate, I fired back my point of view: he shouldn’t post specific things from the scripts he is paid to cover.

He deleted all of my comments then deleted me as a friend, thus eliminating the entire debate from public view. He has since, in a private email, told me he never comments on a script that is sent by a writer directly to him. I told him that that didn’t matter if it was Joe from Idaho’s first script or Steven Spielberg looking for perspective on a project, that you were entering into a contract with that writer/submitter to keep things confidential.

Do you think this coverage guy was out of line? What level of privacy do you expect from people who cover your scripts?

— TJ
Los Angeles

answer iconHe’s unprofessional. It will bite him in the ass eventually. No further action is required on your part.

But I am a little sympathetic. I wrote a lot of coverage during my first few years in Los Angeles. Sometimes, the only way I could get through 120 terrible pages was imagining what I’d get to write about it.

This was all basically pre-internet, so my snark was limited to the comments section of coverage. Had Facebook existed, I hope I would have been smart enough to keep it off there. But I’m keenly aware that I’m not a 20-something, and my expectations of privacy and professionalism don’t line up with the current generation’s. I’m not even sure [who I should be](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2011/all-yourselves-belong-to-us) on Facebook.

A famous friend of mine now keeps a stack of non-disclosure agreements on the table in his foyer. When a plumber comes to fix a leak, he has to sign the NDA.

Yes, it seems ridiculous. But I think it’s indicative of how a culture of oversharing has undervalued trust and discretion.

Married showrunners

Television

Running a TV show is inconceivably exhausting. But is it better or worse to do it with the person you love? Mary McNamara has an article in the LA Times about [married TV showrunners](http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/06/entertainment/la-ca-showrunners-20110306):

> Imagine a world in which you and your spouse together write, pitch, sell, cast, staff and then make a television show — 12 episodes for cable, 22 for network. Writing is the easy part, the fun part, the part that you now barely have time to do because you now are managing writers’ rooms, actors and budgets, discussing with your spouse every living little detail, before and after the notes from network executives inform you what you’re doing wrong.

McNamara interviews the married showrunners of Blue Bloods, The Good Wife, Big Love, Hung and In Treatment. But I can think of several more teams in the same situation, both in features and television.

The perk, of course, is that you actually get to see and spend time with the person you love. The downside is that work never really ends.

> “You will disagree on what[ever] you are invested in,” says Dmitry Lipkin, who with his wife, Colette Burson, created and produces “Hung” for HBO. “It’s not something I would recommend if your marriage is in trouble,” adds Burson.

Young vs. new

First Person, Follow Up

A reader follows up about [yesterday’s post](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2011/looking-for-more-first-people):

> Just wondering if you meant “young women directors,” or “NEWCOMER women directors.” Because of course women have been so underrepresented, many of the new ones aren’t young in years anymore. And there’s nothing ageist in any of the other categories.

I meant young. I’m curious about the experience of women who make films in their late teens and early 20s. We hear a lot about the equivalent male directors, enough that the occasional distaff exception (e.g. Lena Dunham) is genuinely newsworthy.

But the point is well-taken: “young” is often used in Hollywood when “new,” “green” or “inexpensive” would be better choices.

This actually happened, I swear, at lunch in 2001:

FAMOUS PRODUCER

Let’s see, what else. Oh! We just got the rights to (interesting project).

ME

I saw that in the trades. Congrats.

FAMOUS PRODUCER

Studio’s really excited. They see it as a franchise. Starting to look for a writer.

ME

It’s a tough one. It’s out there. I think I’ve seen every episode.

FAMOUS PRODUCER

(realizing)

Oh, you’d be great. Obviously. But I think we’re going for a younger writer.

A beat.

ME (V.O.)

I’m thirty.

The producer meant “less expensive.” Mostly.

Since a screenwriter’s price tends to rise with his credits, and it takes years to build those credits, young writers tend to be cheaper. They’re paid less because they have less of a track record.

In a moment of unusual candor, the producer could have said, “We’re looking for an inexperienced writer — or better yet, a team — with maybe one produced credit who will work tirelessly and bend to the studio’s will, without complaint, all for right around scale.”

But she didn’t say that. She said, “young.”