Film Industry

Will the digital mediums replace emulsion photography, even if only partially?

–N

If you’re going to allow me the “if only partially” escape clause, then certainly. Well-regarded films such as TADPOLE and PIECES OF APRIL are already being shot on digital video, as are the SPY KIDS movies and the STAR WARS prequels. On the distribution side, most new theaters are being built to allow for digital projectors (which will be installed whenever someone figures out who should pay for them).

Speaking in vast generalizations, digital is usually cheaper and faster than film. Videotape costs less than film stock, particularly when factoring in development and printing costs. Editing is already an almost-entirely digital process, so shooting digitally saves you a step. And studios dream of being able to digitally transmit their movies directly to the multiplex, saving the cost of striking and shipping 2,500+ film prints.

What’s more, the recent generations of digital projectors are quite good. You could switch over every movie theater in America and most people wouldn’t notice any change.

For all the progress that’s been made in digital cinematography — and it’s considerable — film still has some significant advantages that will keep it viable for decades to come. First, there’s a lot of entrenched experience. Cinematographers know film and love it. Second, film technology itself has improved dramatically. Today’s film stocks allow you to shoot in lighting conditions that would have been impossible a decade ago, and techniques like silver retention and skip-bleach processing allow for a lot of creative freedom. Third, the resolution of digital cameras still can’t match film — and when they do, there will be other creative reasons (such as film grain, focus and contrast) why you might still not be satisfied. Finally, on an $80 million movie, the film costs aren’t prohibitive, so there’s no reason for many movies to switch to digital video. (There is, however, a lot of pressure for one-hour TV shows to switch to digital cameras. Many are making the change.)

On the other end of the spectrum, digital video is a godsend for the $80,000 movie, where film and processing could eat the entire budget. Since it is these smaller movies where tomorrow’s filmmakers get their start, I can envision this new wave rising up through ranks with digital cameras in hand, and never trading them in for the “old” film cameras.

If you sell a script to a studio, what are your rights regarding the first re-write? Do you have to be a member of the WGA to demand this?

–Anonymous

Simply on the basis of morality, ethics and artistic vision, the original writer should always have the first crack at rewriting his script. Unfortunately, morality, ethics and artistic vision are sometimes in short supply when it comes to making movies. That’s why it’s good the Writers Guild of America (WGA) has its “creative rights” provisions, which cover situations like this. You can find a full list of them here.

If you’re not a WGA member and you sell a script to a studio, are you still covered? Almost certainly yes. The major studios have agreements with the WGA which basically state that any writer they employ has to be a WGA member — so if you’re not a member when you sell the script, you have to join right away. And it’s certainly worth it. Not only does the WGA offer screenwriters these up-front protections, but it also offers health insurance and collects residuals for writers’ work.

So are you, Paul, absolutely guaranteed the first rewrite on your spec script? No. There are at least two scenarios where this wouldn’t happen. First, you might sell your script to a company that is not a WGA-signatory. Even relatively big studios (like Miramax/Dimension) have divisions that aren’t WGA. In that case, you wouldn’t be guaranteed the WGA creative rights. A second scenario might have you waiving your right to the first rewrite as a condition of the script sale. I’ve never heard of this happening — it feels morally, ethically and artistically wrong — but it’s conceivable, so I’m sure it has happened to some writer at some point.

Finally, I like that you use the word “demand” in your question. No studio will be inclined to give you anything just because you ask politely. If having the opportunity to rewrite your script is a priority for you — and it should be — don’t accept a deal that would shut you out.

(While you’re at the WGA site, you should also check out the “Independent Film Program,” which can offer some helpful protection even for non-WGA members.)

I have written a script for a producer who says he will produce the film this
year. How exciting for me until I found out he has brought on another writer,
whose re-write is terrible. This would be my first credit, and wondered if
my chances at having a career are better with a produced script I don’t like,
or should I change my name for this one?

–B.U.

What a horrible situation. I’m sorry to hear you’re going through this. If
it’s any consolation, even more experienced writers with multiple credits find
themselves rewritten badly at times.

[Ahem.]

First and foremost, I don’t think you should take your name off the movie
until you see how it turns out. I speak from experience when I say that many
movies which seem doomed to suckdom somehow turn out better than expected.
A writing credit on a decent movie is better than no credit at all.

Also, a quick search through IMDb will reveal that many of today’s most respected
filmmakers have less-than-respectable credits. Ron Howard directed GRAND THEFT
AUTO. James Cameron directed PIRANHA II. They won Oscars,
eventually.

Since I don’t know all the details, I’m going to make some assumptions about
your situation. I’m guessing you’re not a member of the Writers Guild, and
that the producer is not a WGA signatory. (A signatory means that the producer
has signed an agreement with the WGA promising to abide by certain rules of
conduct.)

There are two reasons the WGA could be important here. First, the WGA guarantees
its members the right to use a pseudonym. Theoretically, this producer could
decide to use your name even if you didn’t want him to. Second, the WGA determines
final writing credits for movies under its jurisdiction. Since you were rewritten,
the issue of who deserves credit could come up. If the WGA is not involved
in the movie, the producer often determines credit by himself.

For now, assuming your relationship with the producer is decent, I’d hold
tight and see how the movie turns out.

If your screenplay is good enough will that guarantee it recognition or is
it more in the selling of the idea?

–Brett

A screenplay that is "good
enough" won’t get any recognition at all.
Unless it has an ingeniously compelling (and marketable) idea, a script has
to be ungodly well-written to attract much attention. Of course, the best scripts
have both a brilliant idea and brilliant execution, but that’s not your question.

Let’s say you decide to write a family drama. Unless it’s about a family of
killer robots, the "idea" of the story is not what will make it sell.
So you better have some fantastic writing in there to make it compelling.

On the other hand, the family-of-killer-robots script could conceivably sell
even with some sub-par writing, if it does a good job presenting the idea and
studios happen to be in the market for killer robots with a twist. Here’s the
big difference between the two kinds of scripts: if you write a extremely well-written
script that no one buys, you’ve still written a great script. On the other
hand, if you write a crappy script (even with a great idea) and no one buys
it, all you have to show for it is a crappy script.