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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: outline

Scriptnotes, Ep 333: The End of the Beginning — Transcript

January 16, 2018 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2018/the-end-of-the-beginning).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 333 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast we’re going to be taking a listener question about getting through the first act to look at the bigger issues of how we get our scripts on the right track to begin with. Then we’ll be looking at the role of writing and writers in creating VR, AR, and other immersive experiences.

Craig, you are in Seattle. How is that as an immersive experience?

**Craig:** Seattle is a great city. I really like it up here. It is verdant, as we like to say. It’s got that kind of – well, I’d guess you’d say a big city vibe but little city kind of vibe at the same time. It reminds me a little bit in that way of Boston or San Francisco. You kind of have the best of both worlds. Super educated. Very progressive town. Honestly, it just feels like a lot of LA to me, except colder, wetter. The time is the same. You know, you don’t have the time change problem.

So, it’s nice. We’re up here just for a few days. My son is taking a look at some potential colleges and things like that. And, you know, just chilling.

**John:** Cool. We are trying to figure out a date for us to come up to see Seattle and talk to screenwriters up there. Maybe this summer? It’s all really depending on really kind of Craig, because Craig’s schedule is crazy, because he’s making a giant TV show for HBO.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** But we’d love to come up there. So if we have dates, we will share them as soon as we know.

**Craig:** As soon as we know.

**John:** Last week you were absolutely correct. You diagnosed me over the air with a sinus infection. That is in fact correct.

**Craig:** Nailed it.

**John:** I’m on my heavy antibiotics. I feel much better. I don’t really sound better, but people will suffer through my nasally voice for one more week hopefully and then I’ll be better.

**Craig:** And what did they lob at you?

**John:** It is not a Z-Pack because it had been going on long enough that they put me on a different antibiotic. I also have some Mucinex, I have two different kinds of Mucinex to take.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** My saline nasal spray. I have other stuff for kind of emergencies. But I really do feel quite a bit better. I was able to fly yesterday without my ears exploding, so I was very happy with the progress so far.

**Craig:** It’s amazing how quickly the antibiotics will turn around an infection like that. And let’s just all pray that we don’t ultimately succumb to bacteria that don’t care about our antibiotics. It’s a real thing. Because, you know, the problem with sinus infections, there are very few blood vessels running through there, so you have to actually bomb your system with a pretty sizable amount of antibiotics just to reach those little nooks and crannies up there. It’s atrocious.

And, also, the clearest evidence we have, I believe, that there is no intelligent design of human beings, the sinuses are absurd. They’re so dumb.

**John:** Yeah. Hopefully they’ll be restored to full functionality soon enough and we’ll be good. My question is would our voices be the same? Our voices would not be the same without our sinuses. So we have to credit some of our wonderful resonant human voices to the bizarre structure of our sinuses.

**Craig:** I don’t know. I guess a little bit. But, I mean, you’ve got a big hole that runs from your nose down to the back of your throat. That’s why we can breathe through our nose. But the sinuses that are in our cheeks and our foreheads, I don’t know if they’re doing that much for resonance. But, yeah, I’ll give you this. Maybe we wouldn’t have – maybe we wouldn’t have Barbra without the sinuses.

**John:** Yep. All right, let’s do some follow-up. Man, this is going back so, so far. Why don’t you try Richard’s question here.

**Craig:** OK. This is from Richard. “I’m writing as a long-time listener with an update to a question I asked all the way back in Episode 3. That’s right, not a typo, Episode 3 from 2011. How simple life seemed back then, right?” An aside, yes. Right. It did.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** It did. Oh, 2011, how we miss you. Richard goes on, “Back then I asked as a prospective parent what it’s like raising a child while trying to break in as a screenwriter. You both gave some great perspective about how it’s tough but doable. Well, I wanted to let you know that last year, 2017, I was admitted into the WGA having written two freelance episodes of TV, but better yet my daughter turned five.” Awesome.

“Somehow, through perseverance, discipline, luck, moxie, and a very, very patient wife I was able to become a writer and a parent in these past six years. I’m now preparing to go out for staffing season this year and transition to a fulltime TV writer. I find you both inspirations as writers and people. Your podcast has given me an education and a sense of hope.”

Holy cajole, thank you, Richard.

**John:** That’s very nice. What a lovely way to start 2018 with a follow-up from six years ago. So, congratulations on being a parent. Congratulations on being a paid writer, a working writer who is now a member of the WGA.

Some clarification for people who don’t know, freelance episodes of TV series are – a lot of US TV shows are written by staff. And so the staff is assembled and they put together the whole season of television. There are also freelance episodes. And there are requirements that change and it’s all complicated, but some episodes of network TV shows are intended to be farmed out to somebody who is not a member of the staff, or for other reasons they’ll bring on an outside person to write an episode of a TV series. That sounds like what happened to Richard and that’s fantastic for Richard.

So something else he wrote attracted the attention of the showrunner, or other decision maker there, and said like, “You know what, let’s give that guy a script.” And Richard apparently did well enough to do it twice last season and now he is a paid writer writing under a WGA contract, which is fantastic.

**Craig:** That is. It used to be, I think, a lot of these freelance jobs existed. As I recall friends telling me, they sort of disappeared, but not completely. And so it’s good to see that Richard got that. And really cool to see that, Richard, our podcast is older than your child. I like that.

**John:** Yeah. It’s nice to see.

**Craig:** You know, your kid will always be younger than our show. Thanks for listening for all this time and we’re glad we have helped.

John, we’ve got some more follow-up from Laurie.

**John:** Laurie from Episode 331 writes, “Why are you so adamantly against work-for-hire? Are you saying that non-WGA screenwriters should turn down paid ghostwriting gigs? If the price is right, and the client insists on such terms, that is the alternative is no work and no money, what’s the downside for the writer?”

Craig, what is the downside?

**Craig:** Well, I don’t think, Laurie, that we’re adamantly against work-for-hire in the essence of it, because John and I both work in that capacity all day long, work-for-hire for studios.

What we’re concerned about, and yes, we are saying non-WGA screenwriters should turn down paid ghostwriting gigs. What we’re concerned about and what the downside is is not the downside for you individually in the moment, although there is one, but rather the collective downside for all of us. Because you’re essentially pushing down the nature of the work around us. Anytime somebody shows up and works for less than minimum wage, for instance, they are harming all minimum wage workers. I think we can all agree on that.

Well, in our business of professional television and movie writing, we have minimum wages. We also have some other protections that are minimum protections like our credit protections. When other people show up and work for less and under conditions where they don’t get credit, or paid properly for their work, or residuals, they essentially put pressure on the rest of the world. Not only do they make their lives worse in that moment, but they make other people’s lives worse.

Yes, in that moment you will get paid as opposed to not being paid, possibly, although I would argue you could take a stand. But what are you essentially doing is mortgaging your future to make a little bit of money right now. And you’re also harming everybody else’s.

So, the downside is not so much for the writer. The downside is for writers. I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch, Laurie, to say that writers who are hired with money to write things should be able to write, if they so choose, under their own name. They should receive credit for the work they do and they should be compensated fairly. To me, that is not being adamantly against something, it is being reasonably for something.

**John:** Absolutely. So work-for-hire is common across all industries. So it’s not just writers, there’s artists, there’s other folks who work-for-hire. And we are really working-for-hire when studios employ us to work on screenplays. But they’re hiring us under very specific circumstances and conditions because of the union that we have. And if you talk to people in other industries, or writers who are doing the kinds of things that aren’t covered by the WGA contract, they would love to have some of the protections and some of the guarantees that we have. And so I don’t want to dismiss the possibility that there are writers who are working on movie stuff that is not covered and for other reasons maybe can’t be covered because of the weird esoteric conditions, but the aspiration should be to get that work covered and get that work paid fairly and those writers treated fairly. Do screenwriting on feature projects or television projects that could be covered under a contract because you are not just hurting yourself, you’re hurting everybody else who could be doing that work.

**Craig:** Hallelujah.

**John:** All right. Let’s move on to our marquee topic of the day. This is a question that came in from Dr. Cakey, and he sent audio, so we’re going to listen to Dr. Cakey’s question.

**Craig:** All right.

**Dr. Cakey:** To give some context for my unfortunately long question, I write almost constantly, either actually writing pages or more in the notes phase. But despite that, I almost always fizzle out very early on to the point that I finish less than one, even the messiest rough draft, per year. If you have a magical solution to that, I’m certainly open. But otherwise I think a place, or the place that stymies me, the place where I lose my way is what’s in the three-act structure term’s the second half of the first act. That is the incident has incited, the ball has been kicked, but its flight hasn’t yet stabilized.

The transitional period between what the story is going to be about, you know, crystallizing, and the protagonist actually doing that story. The period between Luke Skywalker seeing Leia’s message and him in the Millennium Falcon shooting TIE Fighters, and getting between those two points.

Because this is a period in the story rather than a point in it, I feel like that’s why it’s difficult to talk about, or why I haven’t seen people talking about it. And it’s also why it’s something I can’t find when I outline. So if you have advice about this space between inciting the story and beginning it, I’d appreciate it.

**John:** So an interesting topic and one we’ve never specifically dug into in these first 332 episodes. So, let’s talk a little bit about what we mean by the first act, because anyone who has picked up a book on screenwriting has probably heard the descriptions of what a first act, a second act, and a third act is. But just so we’re all talking about the same things. First act is the beginning of your movie. It’s usually the first quarter to a third of your movie. You’re meeting the characters. You’re setting up the world. You’re setting up the situation.

In the very classic sort of screenwriting book, the end of the first act is this big pivotal turn where everything is different. It’s the Dorothy, we’re not in Kansas anymore. Then you go into the second act which is sort of your biggest act. It can sort of be twice the size of your first and your third acts. That’s where the meat of your story is happening. The end of your second act is the moment of final crisis, the big worst-of-the-worst kind of twist. And then you get to your third act and the movie wraps itself up.

So, what he is describing, Dr. Cakey, is that moment after you’ve sort of first set things up, that inciting incident has happened, the fuse has been kind of lit, but before the character has really fully undertaken this journey. And that seems to be where he’s struggling.

**Craig:** Yeah. Well, I tend to think about these things entirely in terms of character. And in terms of the psychology of the character. Because you and I, when we’re doing this, we are in full control. The character isn’t. The character is as close to a real person as we can fashion. But we, as the writers, well we’re in perfect control. So everything we’re doing is intentional.

When I think about the character in the beginning of the story, this is a person who has achieved some ability to survive in the world a certain way. And then you, the writer, have upended things. People call this the inciting incident, and so on and so forth. And that’s, I think, what Dr. Cakey – which I really want to believe is his real name and that he’s a real doctor – Dr. Cakey is describing as the first half of the first act, right.

So, here’s the person. He’s living his life, she’s living her life, and then boom, a thing happens. Everything is rattled up. So, then he knows, Dr. Cakey does, that when we are in our second act some journey of a kind, whether it’s metaphoric or literal, is going to be undertaken. But what happens in between the point of the big shakeup and the going on that journey, the crossing of a threshold?

And to me a lot of times what that section is about, Doctor, is a character resisting and a character contemplating and considering, a character planning, trying to get out of, and then making some sort of bargain with the universe or fate. Characters are I think always on page 15 trying to get back to page 1. And between page 15 and whatever you want to call it, page 30, and please don’t hold me to those page numbers. You know how we are about these sort of things. The character is attempting to wriggle around it. They are meeting people and they are learning things that make it harder for them to wriggle around it, but in short they’re bargaining a bit.

I mean, Luke essentially is, I mean, in Star Wars he’s going to go return the droid and then this guy says, “Kid, come with me and fight the,” and he says, “Nah, that’s not for me. I’ve got to wriggle out of it. You know what? Let me just do one more harvest and then maybe.” He’s bargaining.

And then he goes back and he sees that his aunt and uncle have been murdered. There’s nothing more for him now and so our second act begins. But the second part of the first act for a lot of characters, whether it’s an animated character like Shrek, or a person like Luke Skywalker, or even in romantic comedies, you’re talking about–

**John:** So the decision that the Bill Pullman character is just fine. Like, you know, I don’t need to go off on the better one, I can stay with Pullman.

**Craig:** There you go. Exactly. And so really what – I think what I find helpful, because I think it’s real. It’s not like any of these things were written down by a monk in the 1500s and we just have to follow them blindly. These conventions occur because they mimic in some satisfying way what we know to be true. In your life, Dr. Cakey, if a big boulder comes rolling through and changes things, you are not immediately going to leap into a journey or an action. You are going to spend a little bit of time trying to undo what just happened, trying to make sense of what just happened, trying to excuse it, get out of it, return to where you where, and then once that becomes impossible then you start to think, OK, maybe I can do this, or this if I talk to this person and this person. To me, that’s kind of what it’s about.

**John:** So, what you’re describing is very true and very emotionally accurate to what it would be like to be in those circumstances. It’s also a very classic mythic structure, though. You’re talking about the denial of the call to adventure, which is a very classic sort of moment that heroes go on a classic hero’s journey/quest.

They won’t always have the denial. Like sometimes it won’t be a bad situation that’s forced them into that thing. They actually finally are able to voice that thing that they’ve wanted.

So, you’re talking about something outside coming in and disrupting their life. Sometimes it’s the character’s own want that finally gets expressed. Like this is the thing I want more than anything else, but they’re afraid to sort of fully grapple with it. So that’s another moment you’re going to see in these sort of we’ll say 15 pages, but really after you’ve sort of introduced the character, before they’ve really fully taken on their journey.

But as important as it is to understand this from the character’s perspective, you also have to understand it from the audience’s perspective. The first act is really how you’re teaching the audience how to watch you’re movie. And so in that initial set piece, the initial opening, you’re talking about the world, you’re talking about the characters, the tone, the voice. You’re giving them a sense of what’s important and what’s not important. But it’s after that section, it’s this period that we’re talking about, where you’re really kind of describing the path ahead for that character. What the kinds of things the movie will be doing over the next 90 minutes. And so you’re kind of cordoning off the sections that the character won’t go down, that the story won’t go down, so the audience sitting there in the theater watching it has some sense of what they’re in for.

You’re basically laying out the contract with the audience, like if you give me your attention I will make it worth your while. These are the kinds of things you can expect to see happen. And these are the questions I’m going to set up that I promise I will answer for you over the course of this next 90 minutes if you give me your full attention.

When movies don’t work, when TV shows don’t work, it’s often because that contract wasn’t well written, or was broken essentially by the end of the movie.

**Craig:** Well that’s exactly right. You are not only offering the audience a chance to crawl into your little world and thus give them an orientation tour of it, but you are also establishing a connection with them in terms of your responsibility to them. This portion of the movie is where you get to assure the audience that you’re going to be taking care of them by letting them inside your hero’s mind or thought process in some small way.

Even if the character is thrilled by the boulder that has rolled in, I’m going to go out on a limb and say generally speaking she may want to immediately get in the car and go on that exciting road trip because of what just happened on page 15, but A, she’s not going to want to go on that road trip for the right reason. Something is going to ultimately change with her, so I want to know, I want to get in her mind. I want you to show me her mind so I understand that she has something to learn. That she is not a complete character at this point. And then I want her to, I don’t know, say goodbye to some people. I want her to quit her job. I want her to pack, purchase clothing. I want to see a preparation.

Really, this area is to get ready. All of us, we get to get ready.

**John:** You’re assembling the team. You are figuring out what the path is ahead for you.

Going back to Star Wars, you know, it’s crucial that Luke not only deny the call to adventure, but he goes back and the family is dead. So, we call this burning down the house. You’re essentially making it impossible for them to get back to the life they had on page one through circumstances. Ideally, it’s circumstances that the character themselves have done and not some external force, but it also works if it’s an external force.

But something has changed and you basically said of all the stories this character could go on, the story the character is going to go on for this movie, for this two-hours of time is this story. This is the road ahead for this character. And that’s a crucial thing you’re doing in this period at the end of the first act.

**Craig:** Yeah. I actually don’t necessarily mind if a movie burns the house down, or does something like that in order to force a character to do something as long as I have seen that character refuse to do it prior. Because that does set up a certain tension which is to say, oh OK, now you’re doing it but you didn’t want to. You had to. And eventually you’re going to need to want to. You’re going to need to make this right choice when you can go back to a house.

And that’s a good expectation, but this is all stuff that you are setting up in motion here. You know, you think about the first half of your first act, Dr. Cakey, as who is this person and what is their problem. You can look at the second half of the first act as a little bit of an indication of what the ending of the movie is going to be. Because the motions that they’re going through here should be both in denial of that ending, but also in a sense predicting it.

**John:** So let’s talk about if you’re having problems in this period, what are some things to be looking for? I would start with do you really know what your character wants? And when I say wants, I mean both macro level like what is the overall hope, dream, ambition of the character, but what does the character want moment by moment? It goes back to what Craig was saying about trying to find a way to get back to page one. They probably want to retreat to a place of safety. How do you juggle the very immediate wants, the sort of scene by scene wants, with this bigger sort of emotional want?

Can you hear what the character’s song would be if this was a musical, because this is classically the moment where you’ve already had the “welcome to the world” song. This is the “I Want” song. Well, what is that character’s song? And if they could sing it, what would they be singing? Because that would probably tell you where they’re emotionally at as they’re trying to head into the second act.

Second I’d say have you picked a story that’s interesting to you, or just a character or situation that’s interesting to you? Because maybe it’s a fundamental thing about the nature of the story you’ve chosen, because if you’re not actually that intrigued by the journey, by where they start and where they’re going to, but you really love this character, or you really love this world, or this situation, that may be your problem and that may be why you’re struggling to get through this part of the first act and really only finishing a script in a year is you’re trying to force yourself to be interested in something that’s not fundamentally that interesting to you.

**Craig:** I think also, Doc, if I may, sorry, I think I’m coming down with John’s whatever sinus infection, I think you need to take a step back and start watching some movies that you love that you think you know. And watch them specifically for this. Write down everything that happens in every scene until the first act is over, and then think about what connected you to the second part of that, what you call the first act. Think about it. Really think about what grabbed you and what meant something to you and then ask how that might apply, not the details, but the spirit, how that might apply to what you’re doing.

**John:** The thing I want to stress is we’re talking about first act and second act that like it’s a really natural clear distinction between the two.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** And a lot of times in the movies that I’ve worked on, I would disagree on sort of where the first act is and where the second act. I think it can be kind of arbitrary and honestly invisible. When a movie is working really well you sort of cross over that boundary and you don’t really notice that you’ve crossed over it.

Like, you might check in with a character later on and realize like, oh yeah, they’re in a very different place than they were 20 pages ago, but it wasn’t right on a certain page break where like, oh, suddenly now the curtain closed and now we’re open to act two. It doesn’t often feel that way. So, looking through some of my movies, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory has a very, very obvious act break where we’re outside the factory, then we’re inside the factory. It’s a very different movie and things happen completely differently inside and outside.

But Go really doesn’t have that same kind of break, even though there’s three sections to it they’re all following different stories. Basically each one of those little stories has its three-act structure, its beginning, its middle, and its end.

Big Fish kind of has a first act and a second act, but I would have a hard time pointing at one specific scene that says like, oh, that’s the start of the second act. You know, it’s two characters on two different journeys and you’re following them. And if I’m doing my job correctly, scene by scene, you’re intrigued enough that you’re not really noticing that the landscape underneath your feet has changed.

**Craig:** Sometimes I find myself in a room where a producer and executive are discussing the first act or the second act, and one of them say, “And the first act, you know, I think ends here.” And then the other one will say, “No, I think the first act ends here.” And they’ll start arguing about it. And I will tolerate it, briefly, but eventually I will say you all understand there’s no – the curtain stays open the whole movie. No one cares. Why are we talking about this? Just talk about the movie. Talk about the story.

A proper movie has one act. Beginning, middle, end. That’s it. I don’t get all hung up on this act stuff. I really don’t. And, by the way, I think partly because there are other kinds of entertainment I’ve come to enjoy very much, like say musicals, that are two acts. But, you know, you could also take any two-act musical, ignore the fact that there’s a break in the middle so people can pee basically, and then re-divide that into three if you’d like. Or five. Or seven. You know.

**John:** So both stage musicals and classic broadcast television, they have act breaks because they literally have breaks where they stop the action and go to the next thing. And because they have that mechanical divide, you write them in a very specific way so that you have an intriguing question at the end of an act and then you come into the next act to sort of answer that question.

So, with Big Fish I had to figure out how to both resolve the action and have a big moment, but leave an open question so that the audience has something to talk about over the break and is eager to see that question resolved. In TV, we look at what Aline does with Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, they have to really plan for what those act breaks are. And once you get used to that form of writing for television, with act breaks, it becomes an incredibly useful structuring tool to figure out how you – those become the moments in which you story sort of hangs. You figure out those act breaks first a lot of times and then write to those act breaks. And it’s powerful when you can do it.

When we had our live show and we had Julie Plec talking about the one thing she wishes she could kill, or the lump of coal, it was the six-act structure which is imposed on some broadcast shows now where the acts become so short that like you’re just scrambling to get any meaningful piece of entertainment in between those last commercial breaks.

**Craig:** Yeah, you know, in the writing of Chernobyl I’ve never thought about acts, but not even once. Each episode is an episode. That’s what it is. It’s an episode. Inside of the 60 pages I couldn’t even begin to tell you where there’s acts. It’s just not relevant.

**John:** Yeah. And as we were talking about Game of Thrones and sort of the challenges of that first pilot episode and making it work right, they really weren’t act problems that you were describing. It was audience understanding of what characters were going for. It was audience’s understanding of the world and, yes, those are first act issues because you’re trying to establish things, but they’re really the whole piece issues.

**Craig:** Oh yeah. They had problems at the end of the show when people were showing up and I would say, “Well who’s that?” And I watch Game of Thrones religiously. I couldn’t tell you where an act occurs in any given Game of Thrones episode. Nor could I tell you where an act occurs in any given episode of Breaking Bad or any TV – any episodic TV show, like a 60-minute show. There’s no first, second, third to me. It’s really more about just breaks. It’s different.

In movies, there is this sense of dramatic motion, like “And now the second act is over and the third act begins. Well, the third act seems to be starting a little late.” And I always just giggle. I’m like, is the movie the right length? Then let’s just call to five pages earlier the third – who cares? What are you talking about?

If the movie is the right length and it’s paced properly, I don’t know what any of this jargon means. So hopefully we’ve helped Dr. Cakey without over hammering on the orthodoxy of this act stuff.

**John:** Yeah. So I want to try to square this circle here by saying I think it’s fine to talk about acts while acknowledging that they don’t really exist. What’s useful about talking about acts is we recognize that in most feature films with a central protagonist there’s a journey that happens because these stories happen to a character just once. Like there’s a once in a lifetime thing that is happening to this character that you’re going to kind of naturally flow along a certain path. And one of those paths is going to be leaving this comfortable place and going on a journey.

And not necessarily a literal journey, but some sort of change is going to happen to this character. And in that process of change there are turning points. I think it’s fine to talk about all those things without getting too hung up on “It’s this act, it’s that act, we’re on this page, or that page.” And where I feel the danger is is that somebody at some point read a bunch of scripts and watched a bunch of movies and realized like, oh, it’s happening at this page counts and at this minutes. And that must be how movies work. And they mistook the measurement of the thing for the thing itself.

**Craig:** Yeah. People watch movies and then they confuse symptoms for causes. And they will advise people. You see it all the time. “Well, in the middle of your movie this thing must happen.” OK. Why? “Because it does all the time.” Well, yes, but why? “Just do it. All movies have it.” OK. Well how am I supposed to do it if I don’t know why it’s there? And why did all the people who did it before me who didn’t have you telling them to do it, why did they do it?

And so these are the things that interest me. I’m never concerned about the act effect, which is why I actually like this question because he’s really asking why. Why do these things happen? Yeah.

**John:** So, back in Episode 100 someone asked in the audience, basically I have these two ideas, which one should I write. And I said write the one with the best ending because that’s the one you’re going to finish. I think my advice for Dr. Cakey is as you’re auditioning ideas to write, for you specifically I would say write the one that has the most interesting section of what we’re talking about. Pick the one next to write that has a really fascinating change from the normal world into the – we’ll call it second act – into that journey of like where things are going. Write the one that has a really intriguing moment of that character having to decide to go on that journey, because that’s the one that’s going to probably work best in that section. And it may work best overall for what you’re struggling with.

**Craig:** I’m down with that.

**John:** Let’s go to Nicole in Rome. She writes in with an audio question as well.

**Craig:** Let’s listen.

**Nicole:** Hi John. Hi Craig. My name is Nicole Mosely. I’m listening to your podcast from Rome in Italy. And I’m enjoying it very much. Thank you.

I have a question regarding new formats of storytelling that became possible in the last years. I’m talking about virtual reality, 360 film, and augmented reality. I’d like to know what you guys think about it. Is this the future of filmmaking? Or is it just to hype something that is already dead before it hits the mainstream?

And the thing that would interest me even more is how does it affect storytelling? For example, how do you actually get the viewer to look at what is important and convey story and meaning when it’s no longer you, the screenwriter, but actually the viewer who decides what he’s going to look at? What does all of this mean for dramaturgy like the three-act structure? Does it still apply as it does in non-linear movies, or does it work in a completely different way?

And is that still storytelling? Or would it serve for journalism, education, gaming, and other experiences? Also, the moment we talk about full immersion and the viewer being inside the story, what role does he take on? Is he the protagonist? Or is he a fly on the wall?

I know those are so many questions, but I’d really like to know what your take on all of this is. Thank you.

**John:** It was one of those epic questions that sort of keeps on going. But they’re all related and I think they’re all fair questions to ask.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** From my perspective, I don’t think AR/VR/Immersive storytelling/360 movies, I don’t think they’re the future of cinema. I don’t think they’re the future of moviemaking. But I think they are in our future. I think they are important art forms that need to be talked about in their own way and to try to just say that all movies are going to become them I think is really naïve.

I think they have as much to do with video gaming as they do with traditional movies. I think you have to sort of look at what is the best way to tell a story in those new mediums and not necessarily try to apply everything we’ve learned from TV or from film. Just let them be their own thing.

**Craig:** Yeah. I agree. Well, first of all, Nicole, these are really, really good questions. And I don’t blame you for being a combination of skeptical and also possibly hopeful. I mean, it’s always exciting when these things come along. And then, of course, scary as well. What is it going to mean for all of us?

I think the first thing to understand, at least from my point of view, is that virtual reality/360 film, and augmented reality is – well, let’s leave augmented reality aside. Let’s just talk about VR/360. That already exists. They’re called videogames. The only difference that we’re seeing now is the delivery method which now straps to your head, so you’ve eliminated the space between yourself and the television. So, visually the experience is different. But storytelling-wise it’s the same. You control your point of view in a 360 up and down way the way you do in say Skyrim.

The storytelling that occurs in that format, well, there’s lots of ways of doing it. One way is the kind of it’s open and you discover things as you go. One way is sort of a combination of that, but you are also kind of on rails, so when you attach yourself to a certain story point you follow that little quest and you’re kind of on rails with it. Or you have choices between things to follow. That exists. And I think that when John says games, I think he’s right that this feels more about games to me than movies.

Movies and books and television shows are entirely passive experiences for the audience. They have always been so, with rare exception, and I don’t see any reason why that’s going to go away. That experience is actually the fundamental narrative experience. To read a book. To watch a play. To see a movie. To listen to a song. And we will always come up with other ways to have that experience, but the fundamental experience will always be there. No new technology has gotten rid of the technologies before it. None.

I don’t think there are any story type of technologies that have just simply been eliminated. We just accrue more of them, which I find fascinating.

There are some examples of things that are happening. One of the people that we want to talk to is Ed Solomon who has put together this crazy thing with I think Soderbergh, right?

**John:** Yeah, exactly. Mosaic.

**Craig:** Yeah, Mosaic, which is very much a kind of, OK, choose your own adventure style parallel storyline. Everything all adds up. Lots of different points. And it will end differently depending on what you’re doing. But, of course, no matter how complex you make these things, and we will talk to Ed about it, it comes down to, well, it’s written right? It’s written.

So, yes, these things are kinds of storytelling. They are all sorts of storytelling. And just as there are simple children’s books you can read and then these very complicated children’s books that aren’t really for children but more like for adults that involve moving back and around and turning things upside down.

Did you ever read – there’s just all these multimedia things and ways to do storytelling. And so I guess I’m going to say, Nicole, all of it is going to happen. None of it is going to eliminate anything else. That’s my crazy point of view. It will accumulate, but it will not eliminate.

**John:** Absolutely. I think the question that’s sort of underlying what Nicole is asking is how do you write it. How will we figure out how to write it? And we’re still grappling with that. I think we’re still grappling with how to write certain kinds of videogames. Like videogame writing has improved dramatically, but it’s a very different kind of writing than what we’re used to. Because usually when we’re talking about a book, we’re talking about a play, we’re talking about a movie, it’s one shot straight through. And we know exactly what we’re going to be looking at. We can direct the viewer’s attention completely.

But in a videogame you may not have that option because the character could do a thousand different things. It’s a forking branching paths, and so you have to plan your writing for all the different scenarios they could come across.

A similar thing happens with immersive theater. So, Sleep No More, New York, or I went to Safe House 77 here in Los Angeles, and those are situations where parts of it are clearly written and controlled and there’s a whole plan for this is going to happen at this moment. There’s a timeline in which things happen. But you can’t know for sure that a certain person in that audience was looking where you wanted them to look, or was interacting the way you wanted them to interact. You can direct your actors to do certain things, but the audience can change that as well. They have to be able to sometimes improvise based on what’s happening in the space. So every time is different.

So that’s still playwriting to some degree, but it’s also a different thing. And I think to try to force it to become the future of something, or to be like something else, is limiting its potential.

I would say when you’re grappling with AR/VR/360/some new storytelling mechanism/an alternative reality game, always great to take lessons from what other things have done before it, but you really are walking into uncharted lands. And enjoy that uncharted landness. I think it’s important to be able to not limit yourself because the movie version of it would have done this. Well, you’re not making a movie. You’re making something else. What is going to be the cool experience? What is going to be the thing that people will take with them?

And one of Nicole’s great questions is are you a spectator or a participant as a viewer? Are you changing the story? Are you making the story move around? Or are you a fly on the wall? Both can work, but that’s a fundamental choice you’re going to have to make early on in any of these projects is to what degree are you participating in the story versus watching.

Jordan Mechner who did Prince of Persia, he really describes his games as being like you are the hero of the game. You have to think about every action being you are the protagonist doing it. So, if you’re watching people have a scene around you that is a failure. You have to be driving the scenes that you’re in.

**Craig:** Yeah. A lot of it reminds me of magic in the sense that you are implying a certain amount of choice to the audience that they don’t have. Pick a card, any card. I know what card you’re picking. Or it doesn’t matter what card you’re picking. You’re going to think that it’s this card. This is what craft is all about, right? So, when we do these things, I think videogames do it all the time, they make you think that you’re making a million choices. They make you think that you are somehow going to change the ending of something. But sooner or later the debt comes to be owed.

And the debt is to story. It’s to narrative. Mass Effect had a little bit of a problem when they arrived at the end of their trilogy of a billion user choices only to realize, “Uh, we have to give an ending. And the ending has to cover at least an enormous amount of these possible choices. So, let’s go with three of them,” and everybody went bananas.

And I understood why they went bananas, because the game had promised a certain kind of something it could not deliver. I played it. I played them. They made you feel like the choices you made mattered and you had many, many multiple choices. But in the end really they were kind of squishing you towards two poles, which were manageable narratively. And then some other things that occurred, which were managed narratively, but you know, it comes down to decision tree. No game, no piece of art can offer you a decision tree that is as complex as just walking down the street to the 7-11 is in real life. Because there is an end, right? The show ends, therefore work backwards from that.

So, I think, Nicole, no matter what happens it’s our brains that will always be the sticking point. That’s sort of the log jam. We have to deal with our brains. And people’s brains do require a certain kind of firm narrative to cling to one way or the other.

**John:** Circling back to Dr. Cakey’s question, I feel like this is also a case of the contract you’re making with the viewer, the participant, whatever you want to call the person who is experiencing the art that you’re making. It’s quite early on, the first few minutes, you are going to be establishing these are the kinds of things that can happen. These are going to be your responsibilities. These are going to be my responsibilities. Together we’re going to make this all work. And in a film or television show, it’s one kind of contract. In an immersive theater piece or in AR/VR, something that’s 360, it’s a different kind of contract. But it has to be there and you have to recognize that whether you’re explicitly stating it or just sort of implying it, people are going to have expectations about where you’re going. And so as long as you’re going in a place that meets their expectations and hopefully surpasses their expectations you’ll have a good experience.

Where it’s just confusing, or I just don’t even know what I’m supposed to be looking at, that’s where these projects tend to fall apart.

**Craig:** Yep. 100%.

**John:** Cool. Do you want to take Melissa’s question?

**Craig:** Yeah, Melissa in Eugene, Oregon, not too far from where I am now, asks, “I’m writing because last year I made it to the semifinal round of the Nicholl Fellowship,” congrats Melissa, “and ended up getting some inquiries from managers and producers based on that. The majority of people that reached out asked for the whole script, but two people asked for a writing sample.

“Is there an industry standard as to what a writing sample should consist of? The first ten pages? Any ten pages? The first act? Or is this generally up to the individual writer? Any advice you can give would be appreciated.”

John, what do you make of this?

**John:** Great. I don’t really know what to make of it because I’ve never been asked to send in a writing sample that wasn’t the whole thing. Because honestly I feel like you can send the whole script and if they just didn’t finish the script that’s up to them. We talk to a lot of people who read scripts for a living, who are staffing, and they stop whenever they stop, or they skim through stuff. We had these agents on for the last Three Page Challenge and they said like, “Yeah, we’ll start reading and then when we get bored we’ll skim.”

If they’re asking for a sample, it makes it sound clear that they don’t want the whole script, I would send them ten pages. And ten pages doesn’t feel like a lot and I think if you’re sending ten pages, I’d send them the first ten pages I should stress. And that’s not a lot. If they like the ten pages they can always ask for more. Craig, what’s your instinct?

**Craig:** I wouldn’t do that. Because here’s the thing. You have gotten inquiries, Melissa, from managers and producers based on making it to the semifinal round. The majority of people will ask for the whole script. That implies to me they haven’t read it. Two people asked for a writing sample, I wonder if that means we’ve read your script that was in the semifinal round. Can you please send more?

No matter what, I would never send anything less than a complete script. Because like John said, especially now in the age of PDFs where we’re not creating extra weight on their desk, they can read as much as they want. The script is a writing sample, top to bottom. If you send ten pages and they love it, the problem is they may go, “Great. I’ll ask her for the rest of those later,” but then a couple days go by and something happens and they’ve forgotten. But a script is a script. So, I would just send the whole script every time. If they ask for a writing sample and you’re not sure if they’ve read your Nicholl script, send the Nicholl script and something else.

If you don’t have another script, just resend the Nicholl script and say this is what I have so far.

**John:** Yeah. I think you are right and I’m going to sort of retract my previous advice. I guess I really can’t make a strong case for the ten pages. I think I may have been thinking about writing packet submissions, which are for a very specific kind of thing, and the WGA has been addressing abuses in that world.

The other thing I’ll say is it’s not even that we’re shipping big chunks of paper around, or even attaching PDFS. If you stick a link on there saying here are some things I’ve written that you may enjoy, then you’re sending two of those things and they’re basically just Dropbox links they’re going to open or not open.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Great. You’re really creating very little burden for them to do it. Just make sure you’re steering them to the thing you think is your best work, the thing that is going to best showcase what you’re able to bring.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. You know what? Every now and then, John, I feel like we actually answer a question.

**John:** Oh, that’s so nice.

**Craig:** A lot of times, you know, listen, I’m not dissuading people from writing in. We do our best. Some of these questions you people ask are not answerable. You realize that. We do our best. But every now and then I feel like we nail it. And we’re definitely going to nail this next one. Definitely.

**John:** All right. Let’s bring in our next and our last one. It’s the last one in our list here. It’s from Will in Toronto. He writes, “How feasible is adapting a novel into a screenplay? Does the red tape of IP and rights make an adaptation virtually unreasonable to focus on or even impossible? I came across a novel in the past few months that would serve as a brilliant screenplay, but should I give it my undivided time and effort if it’s going to be ultimately denied?”

So, this is a very fundamental question but also a naïve question and I think a question that we can frame out for Will here in this discussion. Yes, a lot of books are adapted into movies. And sometimes those books are optioned by studios or producers who say like, “Hey, let us borrow the rights to your book and we may make a movie out of it. We’ll pay you a small amount of money. We’ll pay you more money if we make it. We’re going to hire a writer to work on this.”

That happens. That’s a lot of what I do is adapting books into movies. Individual writers can also option books. So, you, Will, in Toronto, if there’s a book that you love that you thought could be a movie and you felt like you could convince that author to sign over the rights, to option those rights to you, you could option those rights from that author and do it.

I’m sure on previous episodes we’ve talked about optioning stuff, about adapting other work. But I think you are fundamentally asking is this a thing you should be thinking about doing. I don’t think it’s the first script you should write is an adaptation. I think you need to learn how to write screenplays first. And I think you need to write one or two screenplays that are just yours, that are just entirely your things that you own every piece of.

And then if you want to circle back around to that book to adapt, go for it. Craig, what do you think?

**Craig:** I think you did it. I think you nailed it, John. I predicted that this question would get answered firmly and completely and you did it. I have nothing to add except this tiny piece of information. When John says, “Hey Will, maybe you could find this author and option the rights yourself.” That is absolutely true. And it may cost you a dollar. It may cost you nothing. Right?

It depends on who the author and the book is. If no one is asking them about their book, it’s an obscure book, or there wasn’t any interest. You’re the only person interested. What does it cost them to say, “All right, well you know what, give me ten bucks and you have a year to set this up somewhere, at which point somebody will have to purchase the rights to this book, but you have the exclusive right to go ahead and create a screenplay based on it and go and try and sell it.”

**John:** Yeah. Back in the day, when I was a young screenwriter, there was a book that I really wanted to option. And the only way to figure out how to get to the author was to call the sub-rights department of the publisher. So let’s say it was Macmillan, you would find the number for Macmillan in New York. You’d call the operator at the Macmillan switchboard and ask for sub-rights. And you get to someone in sub-rights and say I’m looking for the film rights for this book. And they would look up in some sort of catalog and then they would tell you who the person was. Or later on you’d email or you’d fax something through and they’d fax you back information.

Now with the Internet, you find the author, you find the author’s Twitter thing, and you ask them. You find an email address for them and you email them directly. The few times that I’ve optioned the rights to books myself, I just figured out who the author was and how to reach them and started the process myself.

**Craig:** That sounds exactly like the way to go. Will, we’ve done it. We’ve answered your question. I feel really good about it.

**John:** I feel great about it.

All right, it’s time for One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is Bathe in my Milk. Craig, have you clicked this link yet?

**Craig:** No.

**John:** Click the link. Clink the link, Craig.

**Craig:** Batheinmymilk.com. OK.

**John:** Now, please describe what you see.

**Craig:** OK. So I see a photo. Oh, all right. So, it’s a photo of a bathroom. It’s a bad bathroom. Peeling wallpaper. An elderly white woman is standing in a shabby white nightgown, cleaning products at her feet. There is a torn tassel rope and then a standalone tube. There is an African American man also about her age I would say sitting in the tub and the tub has apparently got milk in it. But maybe just soapy water.

And then her head is casting a shadow against the window. It’s not good. Should I keep scrolling?

**John:** Keep scrolling.

**Craig:** Oh god. OK. So now she has repositioned herself on the other side of the room and now there is a younger Asian man in the same tub. Nothing else has changed except a plunger has appeared in the cleaning – oh god. What is the story here? What is happening? Every single photo is the same except that there is a different man in her tub of weird, creepy, milky water.

Oh, there’s a big boy at the end. He’s big.

**John:** Yeah. He barely fits into the tub.

**Craig:** Yes he does. Oof. Yikes.

**John:** All right. So, Craig, tell me your theory. What the hell is going on here?

**Craig:** OK. Well, theory number one, this is a very, very low rent spa. This is a spa that costs $0.14.

Now, I think this is some kind of art project. I can’t imagine it’s anything else. The bathroom doesn’t – it’s – what could possibly be happening here? Oh my god, there’s one picture where she’s outside looking in through the window. Did you see that one?

**John:** [laughs] I saw that one, too.

**Craig:** That’s horrifying. So in one of the pictures she’s not even in the room. She’s outside of the room looking. Yeah, this is just a weird art project.

**John:** All right. So now you can click through to the New York Post thing which shows the actual flyer this all comes from. So it’s a flyer that’s mounted onto a telephone post. It says Bathe in my Milk. It has one of the photos there. It says Bathe in my Milk. Offer open to men only. Soy, almond, or traditional. Use my sponge. I will watch you. And then it has a link to the batheinmymilk.com.

**Craig:** So what the hell is it? It is a prank. Should we tell people?

**John:** It’s a prank, yet it is a meme. It is a creation, this guy Alan Wagner, and his friend Sydney Marquez helped him build it. He’s a guy who just does these things. They’re kind of art projects. They’re just like sort of little bits of cultural stuff that go out there. And this is an especially effective one, I thought. I just thought it was delightful.

**Craig:** Yeah, this is great. I like this line. He says, “Nobody seems to be enjoying it, and yet they are partaking in it.” That’s a great description of what these people are like. Yeah.

**John:** So I’m going to put up a link to the New York Post article which goes into sort of the backstory of it. So, Alan Wagner is a USC film school grad. I suspect he might be a listener, so Alan if you’re listening, hello.

**Craig:** Well done.

**John:** And basically he built that bathroom set in his garage. He just did it for the giggles. It looks like all those actors are from Craigslist. I just thought it was a nice example of just making something for the hell of making it. And a wonderfully creepy sort of disturbing thing to float out there in the world.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s got a bit of the Saw bathroom kind of going on in this. It’s creepy.

**John:** It does. Yeah.

**Craig:** Very creepy.

**John:** It also reminded me a little bit of escape rooms. You can sort of imagine that there’s some escape room that’s kind of like this bathroom. That is just so disturbing.

**Craig:** Yeah. There will be a Bathe in my Milk Escape Room. Well, god —

**John:** Top that.

**Craig:** I won’t. I will go right underneath that with the most mundane One Cool Thing ever, but you know I’ve got this Apple Pencil. I don’t use it. It’s just there. I have it. I don’t know what to do with it. And finally I just thought, you know, I had to go somewhere and just jot down some notes and I didn’t want to bring my laptop. So I brought my iPad. I just said, screw it, I’m just going to do the pencil, the Apple Pencil note thing. I’m just going to plunge in. I’m not going to read instructions about anything. I looked to see there’s two apps that people use. There’s Notability and then there’s another one. I can’t remember what it’s called.

And I just flipped a coin, went for Notability. And you know what? It’s actually not bad. I don’t know if this is a One Cool Thing as much as a one begrudgingly, yeah, it actually works pretty well. I guess the nicest part of it, the part that made me happiest was I’m writing these notes down and it just automatically puts an image of the notes that I’ve taken on my computer when I’m at home via the magic of Dropbox of iCloud or whatever. But, you know, yeah, it’s OK. I mean, it’s not Bathe in my Milk, but it does the trick.

I’m not like fully into it. I’m OK with it.

**John:** Yeah. I don’t use my pencil for very much, but when I do need to go through a script and do some markup on it, I find it’s actually really good. So, even doing Three Page Challenges, I will find I usually use my Apple Pencil for that. So I’m looking at the PDF. I use a PDF Expert for that. And then I use the little pen function on that and circle things, highlight things, mark things. And it’s quite good for that.

And I agree that the iCloud aspect of it is incredibly important because then when I’m on my computer and we’re recording an episode I can pull up that same PDF with all of my markup in it and sort of see what I wanted to talk about.

So, I do use my pencil some. I think the pencil is remarkable. I just don’t have as much use for it as I’d hoped I would.

**Craig:** I’m there with you. Look, this is a better method for me than what I normally do, and what I normally have done, which is to just write notes on a regular piece of paper and then take a picture of that with my phone so in case I lose the note I have an image of it. But that’s sort of dopey.

The one thing I wish they could do differently is I don’t like that the Apple Pencil makes a little click when it contacts the glass of your iPad. I wish that there was no click. Because there’s something about graphite on paper, you know don’t get a click. You know what I mean?

**John:** I don’t hear that click. Are you sure you have the nib screwed all the way in?

**Craig:** No, it’s not a click-click. It’s more just – it feels hard. There’s no give, basically, right? There’s a little bit of give to paper and a little bit of give to graphite, because the graphite is wearing away as you’re drawing, right? And the paper is wearing away as you’re writing and drawing. But there’s nothing – it’s a fully inelastic collision between the nib of the Apple Pencil and the service of the iPad. And I wish it was slightly – I wish there was just a touch of give.

**John:** I get it. I get it. My wish for the Apple Pencil 2.0 or whatever is some stylists in the past have had a thing where you flip it over, and it’s like an eraser on the other side.

**Craig:** Ooh.

**John:** I keep trying to do that and to try to erase and instead you have to click the little erase thing and that’s just frustrating. There are also great apps out there that are doing innovative things where you’re touching with your finger while you’re using the thing. And you watch people do it and it’s amazing and it’s magic. I just don’t have a need for those things right now.

**Craig:** Also, I don’t have any talent with anything that involves dexterity and some sort of fine art instrument like a pencil, a crayon, a marker. I’m a disaster.

**John:** Yeah. I’m good at craft. I’m good at wrapping up things and that stuff.

**Craig:** You are.

**John:** But I’m not good with the little fine motor skill stuff whatsoever.

**Craig:** I’m also bad at craft.

**John:** I remember during the strike you were so impressed with my duct-taping abilities as we were duct-taping signs.

**Craig:** I still think about it. Yeah, we had this job of like, so, you know, these picket signs are made of two posters that are stapled together over a stick. Not even a stick. Like a slat.

**John:** It’s like a yard stick.

**Craig:** Yeah, like a yard stick. It’s a piece of crap piece of wood. And if you were to just walk around holding it your hands would be shredded with these terrible splinters from these things. So you have to duct tape them so that people can walk around and hold them without shredding their skin. And so John and I spent an hour at the Writers Guild one morning in 2007, I guess it was.

**John:** I guess.

**Craig:** Duct-taping these things. And my method, you know, just because again I don’t understand craft. I just figured, you know, I’m just going to start winding duct tape around this thing. And eventually I’ll stop. And then John’s method, everything was at a perfect slant. Each layer overlapped the other layer perfectly, so it just looked professional.

**John:** I’m a professional picket sign maker.

**Craig:** Yeah, it was really good. So I tried to do it like you were doing it, but I wasn’t as good.

**John:** Yeah. No, I really love that. I love that kind of stuff. I love wrapping presents. There’s something really calming about that. Like me and Martha Stewart, we love to wrap presents. Love it. Love it.

**Craig:** I still can’t do it. I’m almost a 47-year-old man, and when I have to wrap a gift I go to Melissa and I just say can you please wrap this for me. Because I don’t know how to do it. [laughs]

**John:** I kind of feel bad for my daughter because I will still wrap gifts that she’s giving out for presents for people and like I’m denying her the ability to actually learn how to do it, but I just love it so much that I always want to do it.

**Craig:** You know what I do? My one crafty thing is tiling out large D&D maps and then taping them back together.

**John:** That’s quite a skill. I’m not good at that. So nicely done.

**Craig:** That I rock. I knew that somehow this would come around in my favor. I just didn’t know how it would happen. So exciting. This is why VR struggles because you could never predict that.

**John:** No. They would never know that like Craig’s ability to tile things is crucial.

**Craig:** It’s going to be the ending. Like who could have seen that that was the ending? Our show is produced by… [laughs]

**John:** This Sunday, Craig, we get to play the next installment of Storm Kings Thunder. I could not be more excited.

**Craig:** Oh I know. I mean, it’s all I want to do every day.

**John:** Our adventuring party is headed into some place along the spine of the world and we have a giant who is a friend, so it’s going to be great.

**Craig:** It’s going to be great. And there will be blood.

**John:** There will be blood.

**Craig:** There will be blood.

**John:** Our show is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Rajesh Naroth.

If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you send questions like the ones we answered. We love it when you record your audio with your question because it just makes it easier, because that way we don’t have to read your question. And also we get to hear the voices of our people. We get to hear your accents. The way you pronounce words in Canadian and/or Italian accents is fascinating for us.

But short questions on Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust.

We are on Facebook. Search for Scriptnotes Podcast. You can find us on Apple Podcasts. Just search for Scriptnotes or really any place you get podcasts. Leave us a review. That’s always so lovely. It helps people find us.

The show notes for this episode and all episodes are at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you find the transcripts. They go up within a week of the episode airing. And for all the back episodes you need to go to Scriptnotes.net. It is $2 a month for all the back episodes and the special episodes. We are crucially close to having 3,000 paid subscribers, which is remarkable.

**Craig:** Whoa.

**John:** So if you are the person who pushes us over, I will be eternally thankful, because that would just be kind of cool.

**Craig:** I won’t care because it means nothing for me. [laughs]

**John:** It means nothing for Craig.

**Craig:** Nothing.

**John:** Other than something else for him to complain about.

**Craig:** Ooh. Yay.

**John:** That’s a gift that keeps giving.

**Craig:** Come on people. Help me out here. One away.

**John:** We also have some of the Scriptnotes USB drives in the store. So that’s store.johnaugust.com. That has the first 300 episodes of the show in one handy little package.

Craig, thank you for a fun show.

**Craig:** Thank you, John. I’ll see you next week.

**John:** Bye.

Links:

* [Bathe in my Milk](http://batheinmymilk.com) and the [NY Post article](https://nypost.com/2017/12/22/the-story-behind-creepy-as-hell-milk-bath-flyers/) about it.
* The [Apple Pencil](https://www.apple.com/apple-pencil/) works pretty well! You can use it with [Notability](http://gingerlabs.com/).
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Rajesh Naroth ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_333.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 331: We Had the Same Idea — Transcript

January 2, 2018 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2017/we-had-the-same-idea).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** Ho-ho-ho, my name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 331 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the final episode of 2017 we look at what happens when two writers seem to have written something very similar. What are the legal and ethical responsibilities for those writers, but also for everyone talking about those writers? We’ll also be answering listener questions about slug lines, conservatives, and what impact the new tax law will have on writers.

**Craig:** Hmm, exciting. Everyone get ready in your cars and at home because we’re going to talk about taxes.

**John:** Taxes! At least as much as we know about taxes so far. We won’t have all the answers but at least point you in the right direction.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think it’s safe to say that this episode will not have any explicit language.

**John:** No. It’s going to be a very safe episode. So listen to it with your kids, with your older parents, your grandparents. Do it. Taxes.

We don’t know everything, and one of the things we did not know – this is the follow-up segment – we talked a couple episodes about How Would This Be a Movie, these female inmates who were firefighters, we thought this is absolutely a slam-dunk for a movie, how is this not already a movie? And, of course, it already was a movie.

**Craig:** Yeah. Obviously. You know, I know probably people think that we would be somehow embarrassed or ashamed by this. Quite the contrary.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** Listen, nobody can know everything that’s been made. And I think it’s actually very encouraging and very confirming that we picked something to be a movie and we were right. It’s just we were late.

**John:** We were late. So, in 2012 there’s a movie called Firelight. It stars Cuba Gooding Jr. It was made for television I think for ABC, or ABC Family. Ligiah Villalobos wrote it, who is actually a former WGA board member. She won the Humanitas Prize for writing this script. So, it’s a movie that’s out there that you can see. The log line on IMDb says, “A group of young inmates are given the opportunity to turn their lives around by becoming volunteer firefighters.”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** But I would say, Craig, my prior belief holds, I don’t think this precludes someone from making another female inmate firefighter movie.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** This was made for television. And I’m sure it’s great, but I think there’s a big feature version here you could totally do.

**Craig:** 100%. Look, you can tell the same story multiple times. We certainly know that. We tend to see it with classic works of literature. I mean, we’re on our 4,000-version of A Christmas Carol. But even for these things, these events, they can be told and retold in different ways because sometimes the major difference is money.

If you’re making a feature film, you get more money to spend, make it look a certain way. Just you’re able to tell the story in a slightly different way. And now with all of our different formats, you can also tell stories just using different segments of time. So instead of a TV movie, which I think you said ABC or ABC Family, traditionally broken up by commercials. You can do a version that doesn’t have those kinds of breaks, which definitely impact narrative. You can do a version that’s spread over four episodes. You could do whatever you want these days. So, yeah!

**John:** You could do the R-rated version of this. The other thing which has changed is basically your perspective. Like who are you telling the story through? Ligiah made very distinct choices about how she was going to tell her story, but you may make different choices.

You look at the difference between All the President’s Men and the new movie The Post, they’re both telling the same section of history but from very different perspectives. So, I say go for it. If you want to write that movie, write that movie.

**Craig:** Oh, of course. Yeah, there was a BBC docu – no, not a docu. I don’t know if you call it a docudrama. It was about Chernobyl. So BBC, this was a few years ago, did a movie about the Chernobyl incident and I watched it, of course. And they did a fine job. But it was – it was what it was and it was compressed into a certain amount of time and it wasn’t at all the way I wanted to do my version of the story. And at no point did I ever think, oh well, someone has told a part of this story, sort of, therefore I can’t. That’s crazy.

**John:** I say make that female firefighter. Make Chernobyl. Maybe don’t make a five-hour Chernobyl drama right now, because Craig is just about to start doing that.

**Craig:** Yeah, that would be stupid.

**John:** But other than that, everything is open and clear.

**Craig:** 100%. Go for it.

**John:** Other follow-up. Sam wrote in to ask, “I have a question about Episode 235.” This person is listening to the back episodes which we applaud. “Craig mentioned on that live show that he was privy to the original Game of Thrones pilot which according to him was deeply flawed. So what was that ‘massive problem’ the creators had and what did they do to fix it? I’m curious what the pitfall was and how to avoid it as I write my own pilot.”

**Craig:** You know, I’m happy to talk about what I perceived. I’m going to do it carefully because that pilot has been seen by about three people – I think just myself, Scott Frank, and Ted Griffin. And no one else outside of the production or HBO. So I don’t want to get into specific things, because then there will be a hundred click-baity articles about it.

And, Dan and Dave are my friends. And what’s the point? That just seems silly. But I’ll talk about it at least in terms of the spirit of your question which is, OK, what screenwriting problem could there have been and what can I avoid.

The massive problem that I was talking about was I remember saying to them, “You guys have constructed this enormous, tall, beautiful building, but you forgot to put in a lobby with doors. There’s no way in.” The way they had done it, I think because of their closeness to the material, and also their tremendous knowledge of the material, there wasn’t much of a point of entry. You were immediately confused by everything. You were confused by who was talking. You were confused by the relationships between the characters. You were certainly confused by the allegiances and the conflicts.

And so when it was over the overwhelming sense that I think all of us had in the room was there was a lot of quality there but I don’t know what any of it means. And as we talked through things I could see them realizing, “Oh, go d, you didn’t know this? Oh, you didn’t understand that? Oh boy.” And so my general feeling about it was that there was writing to do. It wasn’t just about reshooting or recasting, but it was about writing.

And they did. They rewrote. And they rewrote brilliantly. It’s a great story, by the way, of not just of how brilliant, creative people sometimes need a take two, but also a brilliant story of a company supporting artists, at great risk. And obviously with great reward.

So that was the massive problem that particular day. So if you’re writing a pilot and there’s a lot going on, unless you are OK with people being confused because it’s sort of the chaos of war or something like that, just remember they know so much less than you. In fact, when the show begins they know nothing.

**John:** Absolutely. The general phenomenon you’re describing is what we often call the curse of knowledge. Is that you as the writer know why everything is there. You know how it is all going to fit together. But it’s that process of forgetting everything you know so if you just started on page one and had no priors, what would you think is going to happen. Or, sort of assume different priors, where a person is going to have assumptions about this kind of a genre but might not know what you’re going to do with it. You have to just be able to wipe all that clean. And working on something for two years probably by that point they’re showing this to you, they had a hard time wiping that all away. And so showing it to trusted people you think are going to be smart about what you have and what you’re aiming for was exactly the right choice.

**Craig:** Yeah. There’s this dilemma that I’m constantly rolling around in my head and I bet you are, too. And it’s a little game. And the game is too much or not enough. I don’t – nobody wants to pander. Nobody wants to overfeed the audience. Certainly nobody wants to hit the nail on the head or be obvious.

So, we tend to try and craft things in such a way that the audience can play along and they get invested and they can tease things apart and they can draw their own conclusions. But you want them to draw the conclusions you want them to draw. So, then you start to think have I taken too much away? Are they unmoored? Do they not have enough? It’s a little bit like I guess designing one of these escape rooms that I’m so fond of doing. You have to build it in such a way that it can be escaped. Or else it’s just not much fun for the audience.

And I think sometimes we overcorrect one way or the other and I think for writers we probably have a tendency to overcorrect in the direction of supplying not enough because we are constantly getting notes from studios and networks whose default position is “tell everyone everything five different times.”

**John:** Yeah, the challenge of the notes you get from the studios and from networks is make things explicitly clear but also make everything shorter and simpler. Those contrasting notes of like they’ve read 14 drafts so they sort of know what’s going to happen. And so they keep going, “Could we cut this out? Could we cut this out?” So, that’s why I think so often it’s important to show it to people like you, people who are want you to succeed but are not invested in all of the politics of that particular project.

**Craig:** Yeah. And that’s why I think those showings are the most terrifying. Because you don’t have to worry about them burying you on purpose. You don’t have to worry about them overpraising you or going easy on you. You know you’re going to actually get the truth, which is hard. It’s hard for everybody, you know?

I don’t like giving it any more than I like getting it.

**John:** Yeah. All right. Final bit of follow-up questioning comes from Kinsey, which is a great name. “In the recent episode on pitching you guys made a pretty clear cut distinction between pitching features and pitching TV. But considering that platforms like HBO, Netflix, and Amazon Prime are beginning to blur the lines between the two, would you say that studios or producers are now generally more open to the miniseries format? And what distinctions would you make between pitching a classic open-ended TV series versus pitching a miniseries like Craig is doing?”

**Craig:** Well, I don’t know if either one of us can safely say that producers and studios are more open to miniseries formats than they were two or three years ago. It seems that way, just based on how many are hitting the airwaves.

**John:** Yeah. I think the evidence is just in how many you see. And they don’t even call them miniseries anymore. Like Scott Frank’s show I sort of assumed was a series, but then it’s like as we talked to him it’s like, oh no, it’s just this is what it is. These are episodes. And I’ve heard that of people going to Netflix is like they’re like, “Oh, it could be ten episodes. It could be four episodes. It’s sort of whatever makes sense for the thing.”

So, yes, there are places who like to have a series so they can come back and do more things down the road, but I think you’re going to see more and more projects like that. The services want people to keep subscribing. So, it doesn’t necessarily mean they have to keep subscribing for that one specific show. They want you to subscribe so that you can see the next thing that they’re going to be able to make.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think the phrase limited series is probably as descriptive as any. The idea being the purpose of the series is to end. As opposed to a regular series as he’s describing it, which the purpose of the series is not to end. And I would even extend that to something where, OK, technically speaking the purpose of Game of Thrones was to end after seven or eight seasons. That counts as an ongoing series.

I think that they want both kinds. I think if they had their choice they would love someone to come in with an open-ended series that would keep people coming back week after week. That’s kind of the golden goose, right?

**John:** Yeah. There was a project over at Sony that I was considering doing that was meant to be – I pitched it as a limited series and they said, “OK, yes, maybe, but could we also think about doing it as a dot-dot-dot,” so it wouldn’t necessarily have to finish up and end there, or we could do more anthology-like where it could come back as another season as a different thing. So, I think there’s some openness there.

You know, something that is made strictly for Netflix, they don’t necessarily need to have that ongoing basis because they’re not trying to sell foreign rights off to somebody else. Everything for Netflix just sort of stays inside Netflix.

**Craig:** Exactly. But you can see that Amazon in their massive purchase of the Tolkien properties, minus I think the properties that people really like, well sorry, now Tolkien fans are going to go crazy. I like The Silmarillion, too. I’m just saying generally.

Anyway, Amazon purchased all of that because they do want an open-ended series. They do want something that is must-see-TV that people talk about and obsess over and tweet over and turn into endless reaction gifs just like they do with Game of Thrones. I mean, it’s a naked attempt to replicate Game of Thrones. And we know this because it’s obvious on its face and it follows the head of Amazon Television saying I really want my own Game of Thrones. So, no mystery there.

**John:** Nope. All right, let’s get to our main topic. This is something you proposed because it came based on a series on tweets and just set us up.

**Craig:** Sure. And I pulled this because it happens a lot. It happens a lot, and I want to talk a little bit about why I think it happens and what you at home should be doing if you find yourself in one or the other pair of shoes. So, this started with a journalist whose name is Sarah Sahim. And she tweeted, “I’m never going to pitch anything ever again.” And along with that she included two screenshots. One was a title of an article she was pitching to write to the New York Times and the title was Bertrand Cantat and the toxic masculinity of the “tortured male artist.”

Then she includes a screenshot of the title and sub-header of an actual article by Amanda Hess which I guess appeared in the New York Times. How the myth of the artistic genius excuses the abuse of women. To some assessing an artist’s work in light of his biography is blasphemous, but it’s time to do away with the idea that they’re separate.

Well, she clearly and strongly felt that Ms. Hess’s article was a direct rip-off of her pitch. She went on to tweet, “My heart is f-ing pounding with anger. I lost money because my ideas were handed to a white woman.” And then she asks people to put money in her tip jar. And I don’t mean to demean her whatsoever, because I actually understand how she feels. I think anybody who has ever written anything understands how that feels.

But, here’s another thing I understand because I’m a writer and it’s Amanda Hess’s response. “Hey Sarah, I have hesitated to say anything about this publicly and I’m sorry for the delay. But since people keep tweeting and emailing me, falsely calling me a plagiarist, I felt that I should. I have never met the editor that you pitched. Before I saw your tweet I had never even heard of him. Thousands of people work here. I’ve since learned that the editor works for the Opinion section. I work for the Times’ newsroom. We operate totally independently of one another. My editor in the newsroom, Mary Suh, assigned me this story after she noticed a tweet I wrote in October responding to revelations about actors and directors accused of sexual harassment and worse. She asked me to expand on it and I did.”

And she goes on making the general case that, hey, these aren’t really the same thing at all and I don’t talk about Bertrand Cantat or musicians and I’m talking about film and TV and so on and so forth.

So, here’s the thing. I get how it feels when you think you might be ripped off. John, I think it’s safe to say you and I encounter people complaining about this a lot.

**John:** Yeah. A couple times a month.

**Craig:** Couple times a month. Yeah.

**John:** And we find it in sort of the feature realm, or sometimes the TV realm, but it’s a similar kind of situation. So, Sarah Sahim is a freelancer so she’s a person who is going in to pitch stories to big publications very much like how we’re pitching ideas for a movie. This is a story I want to write for you. Would you pay me to write this? That’s kind of like a feature pitch. You’re going and saying like, “Hey, I have this idea. Do you want me to write up the story for you?” That’s how she makes her living.

And so when she sees this article coming out that feels like, to her, the thing that she was pitching, she’s furious because a job that she didn’t get that she sees someone else wrote that story.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I get that because we have a natural bias toward our own writing. It’s not necessarily just a bias of favorability. It’s a bias of – I guess I would call it a bias of completion. When we have an idea in our minds, when we write something it is fully fleshed and formed and it is alive and vibrant. And when we read somebody else’s it’s words. And it is easy, I think, to see, OK, I pitched something to someone at the New York Times and then someone else at the New York Times did something that is similar and obviously took from me because how else could they have done it.

Therein is the mistake.

**John:** Yeah. You’re drawing a causal relationship between a correlation which is that you pitched something and something else existed, but the actual cause behind both of those things was the cultural moment that was the genesis for both your idea and the idea for the story.

**Craig:** Exactly. So, I wanted to talk about this mostly because I want to – I actually feel for Sarah, and we’re all Sarah. We’ve all been Sarah. And I want to figure out how to kind of come up with a general code to avoid ending up like Sarah did in this situation, which wasn’t great, because people basically saw what Amanda Hess said and then kind of went and turned on Sarah. As is the case on Twitter, relatively little happens with moderation.

**John:** Yeah. Well, there was a pile-on on Amanda originally, and then Amanda responded and there was a pile-on on Sarah. And we would like there to be no pile-ons. And so how do we get to a no pile-on place in these situations?

**Craig:** Yeah. And it was particularly rough because they’re both talking about articles about toxic masculinity and now two women are beating each other up in a public forum about who is responsible for it and it all just felt bad. I felt bad for everyone. So how can we avoid this?

So, I came up with a little checklist, John.

**John:** Let’s do it.

**Craig:** So, you’ve opened up the paper, you’ve turned on Twitter, you’ve seen something and you go, “Oh no. I believe, I have the feeling, that I have been violated. Someone has broken into my house and stolen something of mine.” Of course, when it comes to writing some houses are a lot alike and maybe they didn’t break into your house at all. So, let’s just stop for a second and ask some important questions on our checklist, even as we’re feeling violated, even as we’re angry. And the most important and first question is “Did this person theoretically take an idea from me or a unique expression?”

**John:** Let’s unpack those. An idea being the sense of there’s a cultural moment happening there with auteurs and how we’re treating male auteurs is part of the problem. Maybe that’s the general idea in Sarah Sahim’s situation?

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, you have a topic. You have a take. You have an issue. These are ideas. These are subject matters. They are not in and of themselves unique expressions. They are not intellectual property. Two different newspapers can write about the same topic and they do every day. So, even if you believe someone has actually read your pitch and went, “Ooh, great idea, but I don’t want to have her do it. I want to do it,” the truth is no crime has been committed other than an ethical one. But in this sense if you believe that that is the nature of what’s happened, you kind of also have to just shrug and say I didn’t own the thing that I’m claiming got stolen. It’s not mine any more than it is hers. I can still write my article. Nothing will stop that.

So if you get to this part in your checklist and you say, OK, they haven’t taken my unique expression. That is they haven’t lifted paragraphs, sentence structure, et cetera, and people have been caught doing that, especially in journalism, then stop. You’re done. But let’s move on.

Next. Is it about specifically a title and words in a title or execution, which is a little sub-chapter, because I think sometimes you see a title, and in this case Sarah looks at a title, right. She had one. Bertrand Cantat and the toxic masculinity of the tortured male artist. Toxic masculinity. Tortured male artist. And then in Amanda’s headline we see artist, and I think maybe OK, is that enough? [laughs] Right?

And sometimes you key in on certain words and you feel like this is meaningful. It is evidence of a violation. It’s not. It happens all the time.

**John:** Absolutely. This is also the place where I jump in and remind everyone that the feature writers often do not write their headlines, or they may write a bunch of headlines, but it’s ultimately not their choice what the headline is. So, Amanda Hess may have had nothing to do with the headline that was actually assigned to that.

On features and in television, you know, you might have a great title like Asteroid. And this is my movie Asteroid. And someone else sells a script that’s about an asteroid about to hit the planet. Just because it says asteroid does not mean it has anything to do with the movie you wrote called Asteroid. And I can understand the emotional frustration of like, “Oh, but I had this perfect title and now someone else is using this perfect title.” But sorry, that doesn’t mean that they stole your title.

**Craig:** Exactly. I mean, let’s say for instance you and I independently had an idea. We both wanted to do a movie about the Easter Bunny versus Santa Claus.

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** And I’m sitting there going and, you know, it’s arch, it’s ironic, it’s funny. I’m going to call it Bunny vs. Claus. There is a fairly decent chance that you’re going to do the same. It’s not particularly clever or brilliant. It sort of is what’s there, right? People can have the same idea. People can have the same title. But, if I sell my script after you ran into me at a party and you go, “This is what I’m working on.” And I sip my drink and inside my head go, “Oh, dammit, I better sell mine before this dude sells his.”

And then I sell mine. Yeah, you might be like, what? You stole my….but, no.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** So, title is just not enough.

**John:** I guarantee you there are at least 15 thrillers out there on the market called Escape Room.

**Craig:** Oh yeah, for sure.

**John:** Because the idea of an escape room that turns out to be like a, no, you really will die if you don’t get out of it, that’s a fine idea. A bunch of people will write that movie. And that movie can be original in the sense that you’re not basing it off of anything else. But the sense that no one else will ever have that idea of writing a movie about an escape room is crazy. And my frustration when it gets to actual lawsuits, which we will talk about later on down the road, is writers tend to think that they are the only people who could ever have that idea. Like oh my god, I wrote a thriller that’s set in an escape room. That’s not a great idea, but it’s certainly a good idea done properly. But it’s not – you’re not the only person who could have had that idea.

**Craig:** And you aren’t.

**John:** You are not.

**Craig:** Exactly. And that brings us nicely to our next item on the checklist. Is this my original creation or is it something that I’m putting together as a result of a public record or observation of real life? And in this case, it is both, when we talk about the escape room idea. It’s both my original creation, but it is also based on an observation of the real world around me. And similarly when you look at what Sarah was proposing to write and what Amanda did write, they were writing clearly about the world around them and about matters of public record.

At that point you’re done. Stop. Don’t go forward. Do not pass go. You’re not ripped off.

**John:** 100% agree. So, if you’re basing something on actual events, if you are going back to write a great female inmate firefighter movie, yes, absolutely a valid idea. You can write a great version of that, but you can’t claim that you’re the only person who ever thought about writing about female firefighters because Ligiah wrote it and wrote it great. And we talked about it on the show. So, it’s not an original idea there. All that can be protected is your original expression of that idea.

And so in this case is the characters, is the way the story actually proceeds.

**Craig:** Exactly. And that is why you can have two articles written by two different journalists at two different periodicals about the exact same topic. And the only way you can show that one author, one journalist, infringed upon the copyright of the other is if they are duplicating unique form – sentences and sentence structure and word choice and word arrangement. Right?

OK, and then lastly, and this is the one that really blows my mind because people fail to check on this time and time again. It happened recently with somebody who was like, huh, I wrote something that’s a lot like Scott Frank’s Godless. Interesting. Well, turns out after Scott Frank wrote Godless. Timing counts. Chronological primacy counts. More often than not, when people make an allegation that someone has ripped them off, more often than not what I see happening is somebody like for instance Amanda coming back and saying, “Uh, guess what? I’ve been working on this since before your evidence that I ripped you off. So technically if there’s any evidence at all of being ripped off, it’s evidence that you’ve ripped off me,” which obviously Sarah didn’t do.

But the point is chronological primacy is crucial. If you don’t have a sense of it, hit pause and figure it out. Find out. And remember this, too, especially when we’re dealing with topic matters. I’ve seen this a lot in the comedy world. A comedian will do a joke. Another comedian will accuse them of ripping – you ripped off my joke. And then somebody else eight times out of ten will show up and go, ah, you both ripped off this guy who was from 30 years ago.

And so there was a joke I think Louis C.K. accused Dane Cook of ripping off, but then Steve Martin had done the same joke about 20 years earlier on The Tonight Show. So, the problem is even if you are chronologically ahead of the person you’re accusing, you may be behind somebody else you don’t even know about. At which point you just got to really think carefully.

**John:** Yep. Especially something with jokes. It’s like we’re all living in the same culture, so the odds that we’re going to come across similar kinds of things, like we’re going to have online dating frustrations, is pretty much 100%. So, yes, you need to write original jokes, but you also need to be aware that other people are going to be writing original jokes about the same universe that you’re living in.

**Craig:** 100%. So, let’s talk now about those rare circumstances, because they do exist, where somebody’s rights have been infringed. You go through our little checklist here and you’re like, um, I’m covered. They did in fact lift my unique expression. I was the first person to make this expression. It’s not about idea, or title, or subject. Nor is it about a matter of public record. It’s about my unique expression in fixed form.

So, OK, congrats, you’ve passed the checklist. So what do you do? Should you now publicly accuse that person on social media, John?

**John:** You should never accuse that person on social media. That is not going to win you anything.

**Craig:** Ever. Ever. Ever. Ever. It is the weak person’s move. It is a person-who-has-no-leg-to-stand-on’s move. If you believe and can prove and have substance to an allegation that someone has ripped you off, you call a lawyer. And you sue them. And, ideally, you win. But going after people on social media backfires almost always with this stuff. Because in the end what you look like – and you’re not – but what you look like is nuts, or ignorant, or petty, or jealous, or stupid, or amateurish. And these words get thrown around willy-nilly on Twitter because people love it. And that’s not who you are. Who you are is somebody who got upset in an understandable way.

So, what you don’t want to do is turn your initial honest and completely understandable emotional reaction into a target that people are pasting on your forehead because you decided to behave in a way that was ultimately self-destructive.

**John:** I completely agree. So, if you are in this situation, you’ve past through Craig Mazin’s checklist of was I ripped off and you can tick affirmatively on all those things, yes get a lawyer. Yes, I think it’s fine to discuss privately with friends what you’re doing and maybe they can help talk you through some of what’s going on, but going out to the broad wide world of social media saying this thing that happened to me is not going to serve you well.

Now, if you see that there’s a pattern of this kind of thing happening particularly with a certain person or a certain kind of employer, I can see the reason why you might want to speak up for that. The same way you don’t want to stay quiet about harassment and other things, it’s important to not feel like you have to keep everything to yourself, but to go after the individual in something like this, writer versus writer, I don’t see being good for you or for any writer around you.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think even in situations where perhaps speaking out publicly in advance of some kind of legal action would be called for, I would still want to do so on the advice of legal counsel. So, I’d seek out the help of an attorney and the attorney says to me, “You know, this is something where I think we need to apply pressure from two different avenues. I’m going to file a lawsuit and I want you to go and say to people what’s happened here, because you have stuff to say.” And in that case what you don’t have is somebody tweeting and equating feeling violated with being violated, which are two different things. Particularly when we talk about intellectual property and copyright infringement, it’s a matter of law. It’s not a matter of feeling whatsoever. And there are a lot of people with hurt feelings who have sued and lost or been sued and lost who still walk around with hurt feelings feeling violated. But unfortunately the law was the law and that’s how it worked.

So, if you have legal advice, and I do, I strongly suggest getting it in a case where you honestly believe you’ve been violated and they say that it’s a good idea to go public, then go public. But otherwise I just don’t see the upside.

**John:** I agree with you. So let’s talk about situations where you’re not filing a lawsuit, you feel frustrated, you don’t feel like maybe you could tick two out of the four checkboxes. What do you do? You’ve got to move past it. And that’s I think a crucial thing is that if you fixate on this one moment where you feel like your idea was stolen but you don’t think there’s a lawsuit, you don’t think there’s any sort of way to rectify the situation, you got to keep moving. Because with this one New York Times story, or with a pitch that you went in with that they end up doing a different movie, you got to keep moving. Because I see writers who get fixated on this one big score, like this one thing would have changed everything for them, and they don’t move forward. They just stagnate on feeling bitter about this one thing.

And that does nobody any good. So, you’re there to write. So, write something else and that’s the power that you have.

**Craig:** And also take charge of your circumstances. You know, if you believe that your fate is completely determined externally from you, then this is going to hurt even more. But I think if it were me, and it has been, and I see that somebody is doing something that I wanted to do or was doing, my instinct is not to say, “Oh my god, you ripped me off.” My instinct is to say, “OK, A, good news, I’m on the right track. I’m thinking of things that these people are paying other people to write. So, A, good. B, maybe I should reach out to the woman who is writing this article and say, ‘Hey, great minds think alike. Ha-ha-ha. Awesome job. Love your article. Was wondering if I could grab a coffee with you and you could give me some advice, or you can get on the phone and give me some advice, because I’m like you and I’m thinking the same things like you. And I want to write about the same things like you. So, hey, let’s…’” Can we turn this into a positive? And not turn it into an accusatory thing, which ultimately gets you nowhere.

Even in success, what do you get? Nothing?

**John:** You get nothing. So, I want to talk about the third party involved here. So we talked about the two writers in a situation, but I want to talk about everybody else. Everyone who is seeing this thing on happen on Twitter, or someone comes to you with a story, if you came with just Sarah’s initial story, that instinct to be outraged. Like I can’t believe they’re stealing this thing. My general advice, which I’ve given before, is just be generous. Be generous in your assumptions. Be generous in your assumptions with the original writer. Be generous in assumptions with the writer who claims to be ripped off. That everyone may be acting in good faith, they’re just feeling very different things. And they’re acting out of a place of emotion rather than sort of what the real reality of the situation should be.

So, in talking about both the writers in this situation, but all writers who feel like their work has been stolen from them, be generous in how you’re taking in the situation that they’re presenting. And try to look at people in their best light and not make assumptions that they’ve done something horrible just because one person says so.

**Craig:** Well there you go. I think that what used to be a worry about jumping to conclusions is now a worry about jumping to alliance or jumping to condemnation. We are presented with a narrative in which a great injustice has been done by a bad person to a good person, which is a very seductive narrative. There’s an entire religion based on it. And we naturally start like rats who have been fed cocaine hit the bar again for more cocaine. And our hearts leap out for the person who has been hurt because we’re empathetic or we’re sympathetic.

And we get in there and I think in our zeal to be good, and to be comforting, we forget that we have completely accepted the notion that another human being is bad. And now that person is easy to kick around because boo them. And then we turn around and now I see people accusing the first person of somehow betraying them.

Whoa, everyone, let’s always as best we can try and get some facts. And if at all possible, at all possible, can we get some information from a third party. You know, it is one thing for someone to say, “This person did this to me.” It’s another thing for a third party, disinterested party, like a journalist to say, “This is what I have learned about what this person has done to this person.” That is just generally more credible. So, let’s just slow down.

**John:** Yeah. Slow down. Don’t hit that retweet button so quickly. I thought back to a moment that happened earlier this last year. This was a tough, horrible year on just so many fronts, but I remember there was a tweet that came through my timeline where someone said that the Trump White House had replaced the word person with citizen in their explanation of the Bill of Rights. And that’s an outrage. Basically they’re trying to divide us into real Americans versus fake Americans. And so this person on Twitter was outraged about it.

And I was like that’s horrible. And I was about to retweet it. And then I was like, but is that really true? And so I went and I pulled up the page and like it’s true. It said Citizen rather than Person. So then I went to Internet archive and I pulled up that same page from previous years. And it turns out it said Person the whole time through. So it wasn’t a change that had been made. It was just like that’s how it actually said it on that White House page. So it wasn’t Trump who did that.

And so rather than retweet it I tweeted back to the original guy saying like here is what’s wrong about that, and here’s the actual link to it. I think I helped stop that little meme from spreading for about an hour. And I think if we all did that and just took a step back and looked at the actual reality of the situation, do a little research yourself, you might find that the world is not so – the world is outrageous and awful in many ways, but not everything is bad. And not everything is the way it is being presented on Twitter, certainly.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So take a step back.

**Craig:** This way you get to earn your outrage.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** If you have an impulse to outrage, then train yourself to recognize it, stop, make sure you have earned it, because the thing that you have been presented needs to be tested. OK. Let me check. Let me make sure. Verify. Snopes. Et cetera. Good. Outrage.

**John:** Outrage. Full outrage.

**Craig:** Correct. Outrage free-wheeling, unfettered outrage.

**John:** Sounds good. All right, let’s get to some more questions. Eric in NYC writes, “I read in the New York Times that ‘a deduction that is disappearing is one for fees paid to agents, other outside managers, or headhunters who take a commission on a salary directly from an individual.’ This sounds quite a bit like the deduction that affects working writers, so I wonder why we haven’t heard more about this as the tax bill has been debated. Or perhaps we have and I haven’t been listening close enough. To the best of your knowledge, how does the tax bill affect writers who pay a commission to agents?”

**Craig:** I have no idea. I mean, the thing to remember about a lot of working writers in Hollywood is that once they hit a certain level of steady employment, and I think this would cover most of your steadily working professional writers, they create pass-through corporations, S-Corps usually, sometimes C-Corps, in order to better take advantage of the byzantine tax laws.

And one of the things that that means is things like agent fees and manager fees become business expenses from your business and they are not a personal expense. So I don’t know exactly if this is true. I don’t know what it means, per se, and I don’t know how it is going to affect a lot of writers.

The truth is, I don’t know what the hell is going on. And you know what? Neither who the ding-a-lings who voted yes on it. Because they didn’t even read it.

**John:** Yeah. That’s what’s so frustrating. I mean, everything is so frustrating. But I want to be able to provide a good answer saying like if you’re an S-Corp it’s going to affect you this way. If you’re a C-Corp it’s going to affect you this way. If you don’t have a corporation it will affect you this way. So therefore you should arrange certain things certain ways. I would love to be able to provide you those answers. And so once stuff shakes out a little bit more, hopefully the WGA will be able to provide guidance on how this will affect writers moving forward.

But right now we just don’t know. I’ve read conflicting reports about what changes for S-Corps versus C-Corps. It’s all just kind of confusing and murky. Certainly writers tend to have a lot of student loan debt. That gets affected differently. So, it’s a challenging time.

Sorry. [laughs] Yeah, so I would say that the best guidance would be to do things the way things have been going for a while and then listen for changes as stuff comes through. Because it may make sense to make an S-Corp earlier, because the threshold used to be if you were making reliably over $200,000 a year than an S-Corp made sense. Maybe that will drop down lower. I just don’t know.

**Craig:** I don’t know either. I think this is one where you just have to talk to your tax people. I mean, I’ve been speaking to my tax guy and running various rumors I’ve heard past him and he’s like, “Ah, I wouldn’t do anything right now. We’re still all figuring this out.” So whatever happens, some strategy will be employed, but it also may just be that what is is what is.

I mean, the truth is if in fact the government said nobody can deduct agent expenses anymore, whether it’s a corporation doing it or a person, well, we can talk about that, but generally the conclusion is there is no action item. That’s the law.

**John:** Exactly.

**Craig:** Sucks for us.

**John:** Yeah. It could be more people going without a manager, or making some other choices based on that, but I doubt that would really change that much.

**Craig:** Who the hell knows? All right, let’s go to Mark in Encino. He says, “I’m curious about your thoughts on the polarization of our country and how it affects writer’s rooms. Many of your showrunner guests have indicated that they’re looking for talented writers that see the world differently than they do. But I can’t help think that most of these showrunners would balk at hiring a new writer who didn’t have a progressive/liberal stance on most issues. I’ve been in too many rooms that are openly hostile toward conservative or libertarian viewpoints and I know some closet conservatives in town who don’t dare speak about their party affiliation for fear of losing opportunities.

“What would you say to a talented, hard-working, intelligent writer in this town who happened to hold conservative views? Bit your tongue and go along with the room? Considering that roughly half the country holds conservative views, wouldn’t it make sense to populate writer’s rooms with a few more conservative voices? I don’t mean to belittle the hard-earned gains of people who have endured discrimination because of their race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, et cetera, by placing political affiliation within the same sphere of diversity. That said, it still feels like Hollywood is working to keep certain people out, even though the criteria for what makes those people different has changed. Thoughts?”

**John:** Well, neither of us are staffing TV rooms, but it’s true we’ve had a lot of guests on the show and the thing we hear consistently is they’re looking for writers who are not like them. They want some different voices in there, so that’s why diversity in rooms becomes so important so they’re not an echo chamber of their own thoughts and they can see things outside beyond their little bubble.

So, in general I want to agree with some of Mark’s concerns and this instinct to make sure that you’re not excluding a huge chunk of the population by your choices, but I guess we just have to decide what we mean by conservative, or sort of what those views are. Because your views are like a fiscally conservative take on how we should be doing tax policy, I don’t think that’s necessarily going to hurt you much in your ability to staff in a room.

If your conservative values are going to church every Sunday, I think that’s awesome. And that’s the kind of thing which actually could be an asset in a room because you might have experience about sort of what a very religious life is like. Those are things that I think could be assets for you as you’re going into a writer’s room.

Where I think you’d have a harder time in some of those rooms is if you felt like I don’t think those people should have rights, or I don’t think those people should have healthcare. There’s certain beliefs you could have that would come out naturally in the conversation which could be challenging in a room.

Craig, what are you thinking?

**Craig:** I’m pretty much right there with you. I mean, look, if the point is that diversity in a room and the principle of different kinds of voices is helpful for writing, then – and you want to take advantage of that, which I think is fair by saying, “Look, I am also different in a way from all of you, so I would have a different viewpoint,” that is absolutely fine and I do think would be welcomed, unless your different viewpoint is intolerant. Because then unfortunately what you’re saying is you need to tolerate my intolerance. And it just doesn’t work that way.

In general, these rooms need to function on tolerance. And so everything up to intolerance I think is fair play. Like you said, libertarianism, a way of viewing taxation, the notion that private interests may be better at doing things than the government, foreign policy, you know, how aggressive should we be? Should we be supporting this or supporting that? That’s all I think fair game. I don’t imagine people getting emotional about those sorts of things.

What they get emotional about is intolerance. And I don’t think that you would find any welcome room in our business if you are harshly intolerant or even mildly intolerant of the things that generally speaking we are tolerant of. We are a community of artists, and artists have always been, I think, more tolerant than most people of these things. And also we have a great tradition, and we have a lot of friends and a lot of coworkers, and a lot of heroes who are not white, who are not straight, who are not gender binary, and all of that stuff.

So, if you can sort of be tolerant than I don’t see any reason why you should be – I think sometimes some people get a little dramatic. Don’t forget, when you say like, “I know some closet conservatives in town who don’t dare speak out about their party affiliation for fear of losing opportunities,” you know, there are always people who are going to come up with some excuse for why they’ve lost an opportunity. Anything other than, oh yeah, it’s super freaking hard to get these jobs. It’s super freaking hard for everybody. And so, yeah, you can go home and say that wasn’t my fault. It was the fact that I’m a Republican. Or you can go home and say these are very, very difficult jobs to get. The odds are against me. I must prevail. I must work harder and go on harder. Isn’t that the whole conservative thing anyway? Right? Not to be a snowflake.

**John:** Yep.

**Craig:** There you go. Don’t be a snowflake. [laughs]

**John:** No snowflakes. All right, Ann writes, “A couple weeks ago my feature script was trending on the Black List site. It’s still trending now. I’ve had an interested production company contact me and I’m meeting with another production house this week. It’s all been very exciting, but I’m grappling with how to handle these meetings. After an hour-long call with one of the LA companies, they said they’d love to develop a project with me one day and asked for any treatments, outlines, or ideas I have. They also sent me a ‘top secret’ script they’re developing and asked for my feedback. I sent my notes. And they said they were very impressive.

“On a second call, the exec said he liked one of my treatments, but felt it needed more plot. And to keep sending him material. I don’t have a manager or an agent and basically I’m wondering about the dos and don’ts of these kind of meetings and relationships.”

**Craig:** Well, I think Ann it sounds like you’re doing it just fine. It’s always a scary thing when you, after a period of time I presume, where you’re not getting any attention but you’re really struggling to get some, finally get some, then I get it. You sort of tense up and go oh god. I kept asking for people to look at me and now they’re looking at me. What do I do?

Well, it seems like you’re doing it right. I mean, you’re meeting with them. You’re talking to them. You’re kind of being a participant in their lives. You’re sending notes back. These are the sorts of things that don’t really qualify as working for free. It’s more like being a kind of collegial friend of the court. And I think they’ve said basically we’re not up to the point yet where we want to pay you for what you’ve written, but send us more.

And I think maybe at this point other than what you’re doing I would suggest the following. One, express to them your willingness, if it’s there, to work on other things as well. In other words, the thing that you sent notes on, if you can be an active participant and actually be paid to work on that, that would be lovely.

And, two, say hey, you know, if you guys are aware of a terrific manager or agent that you think would be a nice match for me, I’d love for you to make an introduction.

**John:** Absolutely. So, if these are bona fide producers and they are really working in the town, they’ll have contacts with other agents and managers and stuff like that. And they may be able to bridge those gaps.

I also agree that what you’re doing so far is not spec work. You’re reading something, you’re giving some notes, it’s basically just kind of feeling each other out. That’s fine. Don’t do a ton of it. But it’s sort of like you’re kind of an intern, sort of wandering around through there. And that’s fine. That’s totally normal. Don’t do it for six months.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Just sort of build out a relationship. That’s great. Take more meetings. Don’t feel exclusive to these people or to anybody. And just keep trucking.

**Craig:** Yeah. All right. We’ve got something from Daniel in Sydney who writes, “My writing partner and I are working on an original pilot that starts with our hero coming into some notoriety. We currently have outlined two interview scenes with well-known celebrity hosts who run their own shows. It is a bad idea to have celebrity ‘characters’ included in the script? Even if we’re not wedded to the specific celebrities we’ve chosen, and wouldn’t necessitate them being cast if the show were to be made, we found them useful for telegraphing the tone of the interview. And since a Seth Meyers interview is generally understood to be very different in kind to a Joe Rogan interview, et cetera. Or, are we better served coming up with obvious stand-ins for these celebrities, say having our hero interviewed on Later Tonight with Marty Klein? Are we just being lazy?”

What do you think, John?

**John:** I think it’s fine to use Seth Meyers if it’s just like a one-off scene. Where like Seth Meyers is just interviewing the character and there’s not big, long, elaborate scenes with Seth Meyers. That’s fine. You will see that in scripts where it’s just like they talk to Katie Couric or whoever and it’s just clear that it’s a placeholder person, that you’re not relying exclusively on getting that one person in there. It’s not like it’s William Shatner and he’s in the whole movie playing himself. That’s fine.

It’s also fine to do the second suggestion, which is basically just give us a type. And then if that character does have to recur again then you actually sort of own that character and you can do specific things with that character. So, I wouldn’t get pulled too much by a real person showing up as long as it is clear how we’re using them.

**Craig:** Yeah. I have to be honest, I do find it a little jarring when I see it in scripts. It does feel – it doesn’t feel lazy. It feels a touch gimmicky. What it does is it disrupts the world that you’ve created. I want to believe that I’m in a world that is my world, but it’s also not my world. And so it’s a special world I’ve gotten to go in to watch this movie. And obviously some topics require this kind of thing. But others don’t. Comedies tend to lean on these things quite heavily and sometimes it can be a little, I don’t know, cheesy.

I do think if you’re going to write somebody to replace somebody, so you don’t want Seth Meyers, but you want a Seth Meyers-like person, change the name plenty. And maybe even change the venue. And maybe even change the time of day. In other words, make it your own thing. It will feel fresher and more connected to that world than either something that’s from our world, like Seth Meyers, or something that feels almost like a parody or knock-off of something from our world, like Later Tonight with Marty Klein.

**John:** Yeah. I agree with that. And I think it comes back to tone, also. Like there’s a tone of movie and certainly a tone of comedy where you do have those real callouts, where you see real people. And that makes sense, especially if it’s part of a montage of things, like they’re being interviewed a bunch of different places. Just saying like Seth Meyers, blah-blah-blah, that is fine. But in a drama or something else than you’re going to a real person, that always feels weird to me.

And I think I may have complained about this on a previous episode, but I would like to call out for CNN and sort of all the news networks, like stop letting your anchors be in our movies. I think it does a real disservice to your anchors, to your Anderson Coopers, to have them be in our fictionalized stories to provide verisimilitude when the asteroid is about to hit us. Maybe just stop that. I think that could be a good thing for 2018 is if we stopped having CNN in our movies.

**Craig:** I agree with you. I think it cheapens them. And look, the old school news folks would never do it. And I think a lot of the – I think a lot of people today wouldn’t do it just on principle. It’s one thing I suppose if you want to do, you know, a send up of yourself, or appear in a late night sketch. That’s fine. Everybody understands you’re doing a goof.

But, yeah, when you essentially trade on your own authenticity and authority for cash, it just cheapens the whole thing doesn’t it?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I’m with you.

**John:** Just stop. All right. One simple question here. Mackenzie from Michigan writes, “I know about the ‘one-page/one-minute’ rule, but my script doesn’t have any dialogue. Is there a separate rule for scripts with no dialogue? Or is it a guessing game on how long it will turn out to be?”

**Craig:** [laughs] It’s a guessing game. You don’t know.

**John:** You don’t know.

**Craig:** It’s the god’s honest truth. The person that will figure it out is a First AD. And they will do so by relying on their experience. So you’ve written this happened, and then this happened. Well, that should take about this much time to shoot. That should take about this much time to shoot. And then this should be this much time on screen.

**John:** Yeah, the script supervisor will do a report like that, too. So he or she will sit down with a stop watch and literally read through the script and usually in consultation with the director figure out how long would this scene be and just basically add it all up.

So, this is a thing you could do yourself, Mackenzie. You could just go through your script and just really kind of read through it and figure out how long do I really see this playing. Just play the whole movie in your mind, add it up, and you’ll get some sense of what that would actually feel like.

**Craig:** Correct. That sounds great. We have time for one more?

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** All right. Well let’s go with – this one is a good one. This one will get me all angry. Jesse writes, “I’ve been approached by a director to co-write a script with him and he’s asked what I would charge as a work-for-hire. I’ve heard 2% to 3% of the production budget, but do you know of any resources to find a good starting point? Or have you any suggestions on how to decide on a figure? That would be greatly appreciated.”

John, do you see the big red flag?

**John:** Ah, yeah, work-for-hire is the problem here. So, work-for-hire is a term – and so all I know Jessie may have just put that in there because it sounds like a big official term, but work-for-hire is a way of working for somebody where they own everything. They’ll own the copyright. You’re basically just writing for them and you have no claim to it whatsoever.

You really don’t want to be doing this right now. If you want to write something with him, great. Write something with that director. That person could be paying you or not be paying you, but don’t sign over everything to that director at this point. That doesn’t feel like a great choice.

**Craig:** No, it’s a terrible choice. I mean, look, so John and I, when we write we write work-for-hire, but we’re writing work-for-hire for movie studios. And then we have an arrangement with the movie studios via the Writers Guild that says the Writers Guild will figure out the credits. So we have the ability to credit on the movies that we write, even though we don’t retain the copyright. The legal author of everything John and I have ever written for screen is a studio.

What this director is saying to you, if he is saying work-for-hire, the real question I have is why. Why work-for-hire? What does he get out of it? Well, what he gets out of it is you never existed. Your name doesn’t have to go on the movie at all. The author of the movie is him. Because he’s the commissioning author. And then you worked-for-hire. Work-for-hire goes all the way back to the revolutionary period when silversmiths used to hire people to make silver out of the molds that they created and so it was a work-for-hire. You’re not really the author, I am, because it’s my shop.

So this is what ends up happening. So you’re concentrating on how much money you get paid. I’m concentrating on the fact that this guy is potentially getting set to shaft you.

Now, I don’t want to get ahead of my skis here. If this director is saying, “OK, no, it’s a work-for-hire for someone else. We’re both going to be writing work-for-hire for somebody else,” that’s different. As long as you have parity with the director here in terms of credit, and copyright standing, then I’m OK. Then we can move on to the money point.

And on the money point, you know, I don’t really know how to advise here. Because I don’t know what the budget is. Yeah, there are some people out there who say things like 2% to 3%. Some people say 10%. I mean, I don’t know. I don’t know. I think that you need some help and really what I think you should say to the director is, “You know how much I should be paid? Half of what you’re getting paid. How about that? Like whatever you want to get paid, I also get paid that. We have perfect parity. That’s what it means to co-write a script.”

**John:** Yeah. Perfect parity in the sense of the amount being paid to that person as the writer versus the director. I know it can get confusing because if that is the writer-director and he or she has made other movies, they may have previous credits, there may be some reasonable case for why you’re getting less money than that person is. But, a work-for-hire is not the real situation you’re talking about there. You want some sort of contractual agreement where if this movie happens, we are a writing team with an ampersand and this is how it’s all going to work out.

**Craig:** Yep.

**John:** I will say I talked to a writer this last year while I was living in Paris who does a lot of basically what Jesse is describing where he goes in and helps writer-directors with their scripts and basically gets no credit and just gets paid by this writer-director to basically rewrite their scripts. That’s not uncommon in Europe. It’s not a situation I would want to emulate here in the US.

I believe in Writers Guilds and writers getting credit for the things they do. And residuals.

**Craig:** Yeah. And it’s really weird in Europe because they don’t have work-for-hire in Europe, so really what’s happening there is that’s just straight up ghostwriting. That’s somebody essentially taking money to not exist.

**John:** Yep. That’s what happens.

**Craig:** I don’t like that.

**John:** All right. We answered a bunch of questions. We still have more questions. But if you have a question for us, write in to ask@johnaugust.com and we will try to get to them on a future show. But now it’s time for our One Cool Things.

Craig, I’m so excited to see yours, so talk us through yours first.

**Craig:** So, mine is the Nokia Thermo. John, I hate thermometers. I freaking hate them. There’s so many different kinds – here’s the problem with thermometers. There’s the dinky digital kinds, and then you stick them under your tongue, or you lose them and they go, meep-meep, and you have to hold them in your mouth. And you’re never sure if you’re getting them right under your tongue. And especially if you have a kid, are they holding it under their tongue?

And then you can put it under the armpit, but that’s a different reading because the body temperature is different than the blah-blah-blah. And it goes on, and on, and on, and on, and on. I hate them.

And then, you know, when you and I were kids they had the glass thermometers with the mercury that inevitably somebody would drop and then there was deadly mercury on the floor. So there’s that problem.

So, the Nokia Thermo, I love this thing. It is an electronic thermometer. On their website they’re charging $100 for it, but on Amazon I think it’s $80. And, yes, there’s an app. And it syncs with the app. And you can record, oh, Craig’s temperature, and Melissa’s temperature, and Jack’s temperature, and Jessie’s. Yeah, whatever. Whoop-tee-do. That’s not the point.

Here’s what’s fascinating about it. It uses essentially a scan of your temporal artery and your temporal artery is sort of located in an arch across your forehead and then up under your hair. And so what you do is you glide this thing, you sort of place it in the center of the forehead, and it’s got this very – you know that super soft kind of silicon? Yeah, so it’s like being caressed with a whisper. You place that right in the center of the forehead and you just slide it like you’re swiping. You swipe right. You slide it to the right, towards the hairline, and just like that, boop, it’s done and it gives you an instant reading. And it is really accurate because I tested it against a bunch of thermometers and it was just spot on.

And I loved it. And it was fast. So, I’m a big fan of the Nokia Thermo.

**John:** So, I’m looking at the picture here and I’ve seen this exact thermometer before. So I don’t remember who originally had this, but obviously Nokia makes it now. And I was curious about it. So I’m so glad that you liked it and now that I know you like it we will buy one immediately.

**Craig:** You’re going to love it.

**John:** I’m going to love it.

**Craig:** So much fun!

**John:** My One Cool Thing is a very good blog post by Justin O’Beirne about Google’s Moat, he calls it. Basically it seems to be obsessed with Google Maps and Apple Maps and sort of how they compare and how they grow over time.

So, his blog seems to be just entirely about digital maps. But this article I thought was especially great because he takes a look at the same areas and how Google Maps maps it and how Apple Maps maps it. And the differences but also some of the new technologies and sort of speculation about why Google Maps is ahead and how they are going to continue to be ahead.

So, it’s really fascinating. A thing I had started to notice but I hadn’t realized that it was just on Google Maps is as you zoom in closer and closer they now show the outlines of buildings. So they always had like the satellite view, but now they very carefully trace the outlines of buildings and they use those traces of outlines to sort of show the larger density within cities.

It’s a very smart bit of both computers crunching things hard, but also designers really thinking about what is the right level of detail to show you at different levels of zoom in. It’s impressive. And he speculates on why they’re doing this and sort of where it’s going next.

**Craig:** Where is it going next?

**John:** Well, one of the things that’s so fascinating is if you go into Google Maps and you zoom in really close it shows the outline of the buildings. And it shows where the bay windows are on buildings. So like it’s really detailed. And his theory is that Google is doing this all because down the road when they have cars going around they want to be able to take things to a specific door. Or really know buildings in such detail they can see like someone is going to come out of that door versus that door.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And so they want to know where all the doors are. And so they have the satellite imagery, they have existing maps, they have their street views. And they seem to be doing a very good job of combining all that data to really know exactly what businesses are where. Basically where everything should be so that if they down the road want to send an autonomous vehicle someplace they’ll know exactly where to send it within like feet.

**Craig:** That’s fascinating. It’s scary, but it’s fascinating.

**John:** Yeah. It’s good. Just today I’m in Boulder visiting my mom and we looked out the window and we couldn’t figure out what this one thing was. And it was some sort of like giant enclosure, sort of like how you know practice fields have those big tent enclosures over them. But we couldn’t remember what was there. And so we pulled up Google Maps and like, oh, those are tennis courts because we can see the tennis court.

**Craig:** Amazing.

**John:** Everything is at your fingertips at all points these days.

**Craig:** Everything.

**John:** Everything. That is our last show for 2017.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** Craig, there was some good stuff that happened this year, but on the whole I’m just ready to sort of put 2017 aside and be excited about 2018.

**Craig:** Let me just remind you, let me just be Jewish for a second, John, that’s what we all said about 2016. [laughs]

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** I just want to caution you that we may be fondly remembering 2017.

**John:** There is that possibility. I think 2016 ended really badly, but 2017 was really bad the whole time through.

**Craig:** Well, you know, the fun part of this all now is that people can hear us. As the world changes they can go back and listen to what we said before and after these things. And it’s very touching actually and people are like, oh John and Craig seemed so happy right up until the election. [laughs] They were so happy.

**John:** There was that little extra episode we put out which was like–

**Craig:** Shell-shocked. Yeah.

**John:** Everything will be OK.

**Craig:** Yeah. Well. Yeah. Look, this may get worse before it gets better.

**John:** That’s absolutely true. Or it may not get better. But we’ll hope it gets better.

Our show is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Matthew and the Children’s Bell Choir of Akita.

If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send these longer questions like the ones we answered today.

On Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust.

We’re on Facebook. Just search for Scriptnotes Podcast. Look for us on Apple Podcasts or wherever else you get your podcasts.

Show notes are at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find the transcripts. They go up within the week. And you can find all the back episodes at Scriptnotes.net, or on the USB drive which is at store.johnaugust.com.

Craig, have a great New Years. And I’ll talk to you in 2018.

**Craig:** Merry Christmas. Happy New Year. See you next year.

**John:** Bye.

Links:

* [Firelight](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2281241/), the How Could This Be A Movie that is, indeed, a movie
* Amazon’s [deal](http://deadline.com/2017/11/amazon-the-lord-of-the-rings-tv-series-multi-season-commitment-1202207065/) for The Lord of the Rings TV rights
* Amanda Hess’ Twitter [response](https://twitter.com/amandahess/status/943318750094417920) to Sarah Sahim’s accusation of plagiarism
* [Nokia Thermo](https://health.nokia.com/us/en/thermo)
* [Google Maps’s Moat](https://www.justinobeirne.com/google-maps-moat) by Justin O’Beirne
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew Chilleli and the Children’s Bell Choir of Akita ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_331.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 329: Five-Star Podnerships — Transcript

December 18, 2017 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2017/five-star-podnerships).

**John August:** Hey, this is John. So today’s episode contains some explicit language. You might want to listen on headphones. Thanks.

Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** Craig, you have reindeer ears. This is our live holiday Scriptnotes show. Thank you guys all so much for coming. It’s the end of 2017. Thank you for braving fires for being here. You’re awesome. Craig, what a year. It’s been just a huge year. So much has happened.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Something that on Twitter this producer pointed out that the movie Kong Skull Island, that came out in March. That movie is from this year. This has been the most endless year of all years.

**Craig:** I want this stop. Perfect miserable discordant.

**John:** Absolutely. But that’s actually sort of the meme of this moment because as you guys all know as we’re recording this it looks like Disney and Fox, well, Disney is going to buy Fox. That’s a huge change. So we talked about that on the–

**Craig:** Dox.

**John:** Yes. They will call it Dox. Bart Simpson and Mickey Mouse together.

**Craig:** Ooh. Wow.

**John:** Something there.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, I don’t think that’s ever going to happen. It is fascinating to see how they are – I mean, it’s not done-done, but they are doing this very careful carving up of Fox. So they’re taking Fox Television. That’s the part that produces the TV shows, but they’re leaving the network because you can’t own two networks, because Disney owns ABC. And they’re taking the movies. They’re taking the movie library. They’re taking the television library.

Nobody knows what they’re going to do with the animation studio. Blue Sky?

**John:** Blue Sky, yeah.

**Craig:** Fox News, not taking Fox News with them. Crafty Disney. Very crafty. And also they’re leaving the sports behind because they have ESPN. So it’s very strange. And I don’t know what’s going to happen to the lot. Do you know what’s going to happen to the lot?

**John:** I have no idea. So you have these two giant powerhouse companies. You have Disney and 21st Century Fox combining and something you said on the last podcast is like, you know, other companies are going to need to figure out what their plan is to do because you don’t want to be the last person without a partner.

**Craig:** Correct. Otherwise you’re in a competitive disadvantage.

**John:** So, Craig, what I want to talk about tonight is we need to be thinking about the future of our media empire and what we’re going to do because consolidation is sort of inevitable, so we need to figure out–

**Craig:** I don’t want to lose the money I’m not getting.

**John:** Yeah, so it’s crucial. We need to find ourselves–

**Craig:** We have to protect.

**John:** We need a podnership is what we need. And so I want to talk through some options. I put together a little small deck to talk through some of the options. If we need to merge up with somebody else–

**Craig:** Is that a small deck?

**John:** This is a small deck.

**Craig:** Got it.

**John:** So it’s only about eight slides that can talk you through my vision for what can happen down the road.

**Craig:** I’m super ready.

**John:** So we can survive.

**Craig:** Thank you, by the way, for consulting me.

**John:** Yeah. You’re welcome. First let’s talk through goals. What are the goals of this merger?

**Craig:** Money.

**John:** And what do we want to get out of this?

**Craig:** Money.

**John:** Well, yeah, we want to maximize shareholder value.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** That’s crucial. So–

**Craig:** Do I have shares?

**John:** Well, you have a lot of emotional investment in this show, right? You have fans. You have people. People like Craig. You can’t buy love, Craig.

**Craig:** But you can’t eat applause either, right?

**John:** You also – we want to make sure we can exploit our library of valuable characters. And that’s where you kind of come in. Because you think about – a lot of the characters on this podcast, they’re Craig characters.

**Craig:** All of them.

**John:** A lot of them are.

**Craig:** There’s Robot, that’s you. You’ve got that.

**John:** I’ve got Robot, yeah.

**Craig:** But I got Sexy Craig.

**John:** Yeah, Sexy Craig problematic in this era. I just want to point that out.

**Craig:** Sexy Craig, actually there may be an article dropping. I don’t want to freak anybody out, but there may be an article dropping.

**John:** But there’s Whole Foods Craig.

**Craig:** Whole Foods Craig.

**John:** A lot of good synergies with Whole Foods Craig.

**Craig:** And Umbrage Craig.

**John:** But that’s just Craig.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Finally, I want to position us to be able to compete with Netflix, because that’s really the goal, because it’s clear that Netflix is going to become giant. And so we need to make sure that we’re ready when they do become giant.

**Craig:** What do we do?

**John:** Well, we need to look for another podcast we could merge with and sort of synergize with.

**Craig:** Oh, mega podcast.

**John:** And so maybe even sell ourselves out to somebody bigger so we can actually survive.

**Craig:** I just have to think of another podcast.

**John:** How about Pod Save America. So, Craig was actually a guest on Pod Save America and you were fantastic, Craig.

**Craig:** Oh, thank you. Thank you. I wasn’t really quite sure what it was until after I did it, which infuriated John by the way. Made him crazy. I love that part of it. That was a fun show. I actually did Lovett or Leave it which is the–

**John:** It’s part of the whole empire.

**Craig:** It’s part of the Pod Save America empire.

**John:** So maybe we can join their empire.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And I think what would be good about it is you share a hatred of Ted Cruz. So that’s good.

**Craig:** I think that everyone qualifies on–

**John:** That’s true. They have really fun live shows.

**Craig:** True.

**John:** We have live shows, they have live shows. They do it every week. But we could do more live shows.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, we’ll step it up.

**John:** All right. Down sides.

**Craig:** Apparently they don’t want to be here every week.

**John:** There are too many Johns. So their show has Jon Favreau, Jon Lovett, there’s me. So something has to go.

**Craig:** I’m honestly OK with it.

**John:** Finally, America may be done. So, that may be – the brand may be – I don’t know what the value is – what is the future of Pod Save America after America–?

**Craig:** You’re talking about the brand? You’re not talking about, like, just because Armageddon in general should be a negative for all of these.

**John:** Yeah. I don’t know that America has enough future to support a podcast called Pod Save America.

**Craig:** Right. The runway is starting to get a little short for us, isn’t it?

**John:** Shorter.

**Craig:** Yeah, shorter and shorter.

**John:** So we might need to go to like a narrative podcast.

**Craig:** Oh, great idea. Is it Stone?

**John:** No, it’s S Town, or Shit Town is the other thing you can call it.

**Craig:** Well, that’s just outrageous.

**John:** So Craig does not listen to podcasts. This is a thing. By applause, who has listened to S Town?

**Craig:** Liars.

**John:** So, S Town follows this reporter who goes to visit this guy. It’s a real thing. You would love this show because here’s some things you would love about this show. It talks about a grumpy loner with opinions on everything.

**Craig:** Oh, I remember hearing about this. And making a decision to not listen to it. Yep. Yep.

**John:** And he’s really fascinating. And there would be so many opportunities for How Would This Be a Movie. Because like pretty much everything he touches. He has a maze on his property.

**Craig:** Do you think that How Would This Be a Movie deserves its own acronym, really?

**John:** Totally does.

**Craig:** It’s not like Return of the Jedi.

**John:** In the outlines it’s actually called How Would This Be a Movie. Yeah, if you read the outlines?

**Craig:** But it gets a HWTBAM?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** HWTBAM.

**Craig:** HWTBAM. Okay.

**John:** Some downsides. Can you think of any downsides for this?

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t listen to this show.

**John:** Yeah. And also it’s too acclaimed. Craig, that might scare you aware.

**Craig:** I don’t like the tinsel. I don’t truck in awards.

**John:** And the show is also about whether this main character John was hiding gold on his property and that’s a little familiar for us.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** Yeah. There’s gold hidden here.

**Craig:** He’s so rich because of this.

**John:** Dirty John. Who listened to Dirty John? So not as popular. It’s a coproduction with LA Times. Really fascinating. You know about this?

**Craig:** I read it.

**John:** So you know the history of this. So tell us a little bit about Dirty John.

**Craig:** I watched the podcast with my eyes.

**John:** So tell us about what it’s like to read a podcast.

**Craig:** It’s amazing. It’s just like you remember reading things, and that.

**John:** Nice.

**Craig:** Dirty John, great long story of a horrendous, sociopathic, manipulative man and a woman that he cons. One of many women that he had conned in his life. And it’s about her and her family learning the truth of him and trying to get free of him. And it ends in the most spectacularly violent way. It’s remarkable.

**John:** Yeah. It was a really enjoyable listen or read. So I feel like this is a natural brand extension.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Easy. Dirty John & Craig. Just you add an ampersand. We add you to the mix.

**Craig:** Dirty John & Craig. That’s like a great ‘70s band.

**John:** Absolutely. So, the main character, the main bad guy in the show, what was his profession? Do you remember?

**Craig:** Well, he claimed to be a nurse, right?

**John:** He claimed to be a medical professional, sort of like you.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So like he had a medical background, so that fits in really well with you. So those are good synergies.

**Craig:** Great point. I do know a lot.

**John:** You know a lot.

**Craig:** I know a lot.

**John:** Yeah. Some downsides of this? What do you think?

**Craig:** Somebody give me something.

**John:** I would say it’s in Orange County. We got to go to Orange County.

**Craig:** I forgot that it was in Orange County.

**John:** And if you listened to the podcast you’d hear the Orange County accents. It would drive you crazy.

**Craig:** What is the Orange County accent?

**John:** Listen to it and you’ll just claw your ears out.

**Craig:** Is anyone here from?

**John:** You agree with me guys, right?

**Craig:** Oh, there we go. Man.

**John:** That was tough.

**Craig:** You’re not going to do it?

**Audience Member:** What do you want me to say?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** That was it?

**John:** That was it, yeah. Sort of curious but indignant.

**Craig:** Actually sounded like she was from London. What do you want me to say?

**John:** The last thing I’ll say is you don’t listen to podcasts but there’s these Hunt a Killer subscription boxes that were so creepy and I don’t want to go back to that. I don’t want subscription boxes on our show.

**Craig:** That one just didn’t work for me.

**John:** Because you didn’t see the show.

**Craig:** Oh, no, no, the Hunt a Killer thing. I got the box.

**John:** Oh, you got the box. Great. Did you find the killer?

**Craig:** I didn’t go past the first month.

**John:** I’m sorry. Yeah. Sorry.

**Craig:** Didn’t work.

**John:** Didn’t work for you. So you’d be a bad advertiser for that because you didn’t enjoy hunting the killer.

**Craig:** Yeah, we probably should stay ad-free just because of my–

**John:** Yeah. So finally Missing Richard Simmons. Did you listen to Missing Richard Simmons?

**Craig:** No.

**John:** No. It was a very popular podcast. Who listened to Missing Richard Simmons?

**Craig:** Why?

**John:** Because they like podcasts. They like our podcast.

**Craig:** I also don’t understand that.

**John:** So here’s what possibly could work about Missing Richard Simmons. Screenwriters as a whole are not necessarily the fittest bunch.

**Craig:** True.

**John:** So there’s opportunity for fitness.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Screenwriters not so healthy. He gets them–

**Craig:** He cries with us. We cry with him.

**John:** So here’s the other thing I need to tell you about this. Aline Brosh McKenna is obsessed with this show. She loved this show. So that’s a plus.

**Craig:** That’s a downside as far as I’m concerned.

**John:** It’s also a downside, too. A plus and a minus.

**Craig:** Nailed it.

**John:** And Richard Simmons, he also just wants to be left alone. That’s ultimately what you come out of the show learning.

**Craig:** Is that literally the big secret of Missing Richard Simmons is that he just wants people to F off?

**John:** Kind of yeah.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** That’s really Craig’s secret. He basically just wants to be left alone.

**Craig:** That’s not a secret.

**John:** So let’s take a look at the numbers so we can run through and figure out what we’re worth. We have about 50,000 listeners, a solid 50,000 a week.

**Craig:** That’s pretty good.

**John:** That’s pretty good. We’ll take that. People here in the room. We make money selling t-shirts and so t-shirts we sold $1,429 is how much we made on t-shirts off of this last thing. So thank you everyone who bought a t-shirt. Thank you very much for that. Yeah, absolutely. We’re rolling in cash.

**Craig:** My share of that is?

**John:** Is what you’ve always gotten.

**Craig:** Gotten. Gotten. God.

**John:** And we have monetized through advertising, which was zero dollars in advertising. Now, the Disney/Fox deal is about $60 billion is what I heard with the Disney/Fox deal, so I’m thinking maybe – keep it a little simple – maybe $59 billion.

**Craig:** To be fair, we bought about–

**John:** We will take Apple Pay, so.

**Craig:** We bought about 100,000 bitcoin about 12 years ago.

**John:** Yes. So we’re doing this for kicks and giggles.

**Craig:** That’s really what we’re selling. We’re just selling the bitcoin.

**John:** So if anybody wants to make a bid for $59 billion for us, Megan is here. She has her Square c ash reader, too. So anyway you want to pay, Megan is here in front. But let’s get on with the show.

**Craig:** Yeah!

**John:** We have three amazing guests for you tonight. Our first guest is Julie Plec. Julie Plec is the co-creator and showrunner of Vampire Diaries, its spinoff The Originals. Also Containment. She developed Tomorrow People. And has written for Kyle XY. Julie Plec, welcome.

**Julie Plec:** Oh hi.

**John:** And so we need to tell everybody that Julie Plec is actually taking a red eye after this show. That’s how much she is devoted to the–

**Craig:** She showed up with luggage.

**Julie:** I did. I walked in with my suitcase. My parka.

**John:** Nice. Next we have Michael Green. He is the co-creator and showrunner of American Gods and Kings. He’s also the screenwriter of every movie you saw this year. Murder on the Orient Express, Blade Runner 2049, and Logan. Michael Green, welcome.

**Michael Green:** Hello. Good to be here.

**Julie:** Amazing.

**John:** Justin Marks who wrote the live action Jungle Book and its sequel. His TV series Counterpart debuts January 21 on Starz. Welcome the three of you. Thank you guys very much for coming here.

**Craig:** What a bunch of losers!

**John:** Oh, they’re fantastic. We know very little about TV, even though Craig is about to do a TV show, so I thought we’d—

**Michael:** Oh, why?

**Craig:** Well, it’s a miniseries. So I think of it as just a long movie.

**Michael:** Same.

**Craig:** No, because it ends. Isn’t that the problem with TV is that it keeps going and going and going? Justin, isn’t that the problem?

**Justin Marks:** Yes.

**Craig:** It just won’t stop.

**Justin:** Yes. That is definitely the problem with TV. It just will never leave your life.

**Michael:** In success you run till you die.

**Craig:** Till you die.

**John:** Julie Plec, your shows have run for a very long time. You’ve been on incredibly successful shows that run a long time. Originals is just about to end. I think that’s actually where you’re headed is to go to the wrap party for this. What is it like coming back season after season on a show? Is it great? Is it bad? Should Craig run away from it? Should he run towards it? What do is it like having a —

**Julie:** It’s sort of like to each their own, right? I’ve worked with writers who get two years in and they’re like, “Get me out. I can’t.” Their brain, their mind, just atrophies and they feel like nothing they do is fresh and nothing that they do has any value, et cetera, et cetera. Basic self-loathing stuff.

For me I get so much personal and emotional value out of building the community. When you make a movie you’re, you know, a few months in, six months, whatever. In and out. And you might never see any of those people again. And in television you can – year after year after year you’re working in success with the same people and you’re watching them grow from the bottom of their position all the way up the ladder till you’re partners. And there’s just something so emotionally fulfilling about that that above and beyond the storytelling it’s really – it’s a very full life. So even when it’s hard you still feel really satisfied by it.

**John:** Julie, you’re doing a traditional show where you are writing and shooting the show and editing the show all at the same time, but you guys had a more – the new wave experience where you guys – on both American Gods and on Counterpart didn’t you write everything before you started shooting? Is that correct? Justin, why don’t you start?

**Justin:** Yeah. We wrote the entire first season before we started the first season. And it has its advantages and it definitely has its disadvantages, too. But the hard thing is that you can’t, you know, you write these roles and it’s great – in TV you’re supposed to be able to see the actors and how they gel with it and how it works. And then you have these things and there are just a number of opportunities where you look at a role that you’ve written for ten episodes and then you see someone there and you’re like, oh my god, this person is in the show for the next nine episodes. And the other way around, too, sometimes people come on for two episodes and you’re like, oh my god, this person is great and you’re stuck with it. I mean, you’ve shot – everything is planned out and everything is done. So that ten-hour movie thing has, you know, some strengths. Some strengths.

**Craig:** Ten-hours is a lot.

**John:** Michael, so American Gods–

**Michael:** We were somewhere between the two for the first season of American Gods. And I should point out, so I’m the recently disgraced showrunner of American Gods.

**Craig:** What happened?

**Michael:** My partner and I on the show were let go last week. It’s in Deadline.

**Craig:** Why are we bringing this up in this show?

**Michael:** But I loved the experience. I’m very proud of it and happy to talk about it.

**Julie:** Shame!

**Michael:** Shame!

**John:** Shame!

**Michael:** I’ll answer the now boring question. We wrote about two-thirds of the season and made sure to leave the ending so that we could course correct and rewrote the hell out of the middle of it. Because it’s the best of both worlds. We were able to put in a bunch and know where we wanted to go but also say, you know what, we see the actor who we want to lean in to and can craft towards them and do the things that television does really well.

**John:** One of the things that TV did a lot of in 2017 was not just sort of like do shows that were like previous shows, but they literally just did the same show again. So we had Will and Grace come back. We have Roseanne coming back. Dynasty is back. As you guys, and Julie especially you’re writing for network, is there a pressure to just like come into them with a thing that is like exactly either – is literally the same thing they’ve done before? Do you get approached about like why don’t you reboot this series that already existed?

**Julie:** No. You know, weirdly I’ve managed to avoid the “just take that thing and make it different and preferably better” pitfalls. I think it’s because ultimately I’ve been locked in my own franchise for the last eight years, so I just keep making those again and again.

I was talking to somebody the other day and they said something like 80% of the stuff in development at the network is IP, whether it’s remake or whatever.

**Craig:** Welcome to movies. And so the golden age of television died.

**John:** Well, but there’s also just so much more TV being made. So you’re saying 80% at network, but it feels like where you guys are doing it, so on Starz or on Netflix—

**Michael:** Well, I worked on something that was IP. It was based on a book. But you had an original.

**Justin:** Yeah, it was original.

**Julie:** Hey, how was that?

**John:** That’s true. American Gods is based on a book. That’s right. I forget.

**Craig:** But it was based on a book, but there is a sense that in television now they’re starting to do this thing that they’ve been doing in movies forever where they take something that honestly really should have just been left alone, like—

**Michael:** Slinky the show.

**Craig:** Or Battleship, the movie. And Battleship. Still the best story ever told. And where is Earth? And they make a movie out of it and now they’re going and digging up these shows. Like for instance, a few years ago – you guys probably all got this call to write a Dynasty movie. I think it was at Fox. And now they’re like, ah, you know what, that’s a dumb idea. We’re not doing that anymore. For a while we were doing that. Now let’s just make the Dynasty show again.

**Julie:** But the thing that I don’t get is that like, I mean, I’m 45 and I watched Dynasty in high school. It was one of my favorite shows. But I’m not tuning in to watch younger Dynasty necessarily. Like I just–

**Craig:** You want those Dynasty people.

**Michael:** I would watch Dynasty reruns. I mean, I’m older than you. I loved – watched the shit out of it. And the more ridiculous it was, the more we loved it. Someone needs to have that experience.

**Craig:** Yeah, but like Melrose Place. I don’t need to see Melrose Place again. Like a new Melrose Place.

**Justin:** I really have to say as the resident person here, I have no idea what Dynasty is.

**Julie:** What?! Young child.

**Justin:** And I don’t know if that goes to your argument.

**Michael:** So there’s Alexis Morell Carrington Colby Dexter Colby. Look it up.

**Craig:** Dynasty was the show that came about because Dallas was popular. Have you ever heard of Dallas? Who shot JR and all of that?

**Justin:** Yeah. I know it’s in Texas.

**Craig:** Yes. Correct. So then Dynasty was like the Pepsi to Dallas’s Coke. It was not great.

**Julie:** Yeah, I mean, my point is like if you’re marketing – and by the way, all my Vampire Diaries crew ended up going to work on Dynasty. So yay Dynasty. And I hope it survives forever. But you’re building off of a franchise name or a brand or whatever, but it’s like so old that the people that remember it as being a popular viable brand are so far out of your demo that like what are you doing. That’s my question.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** I will say, this is a very mild defense, but as a father of a 12-year-old daughter, there’s things – she won’t watch things that were shot before a certain time. Like she won’t watch things that are shot square, in like 4-3 format. She can just tell like, oh, this is old school, old style. And so like I tried to get her to watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which is brilliant, and she won’t because it looks old to her. It looks old-fashioned to her.

**Michael:** It’s like we wouldn’t watch the black and white Gilligan’s Island?

**John:** Yeah.

**Michael:** Those are the old episodes.

**Craig:** I would watch those. I was that kind of guy.

**John:** Justin, a question for you though, because Jungle Book is an example of taking an existing property and making it in a whole new way because you have new technology to do it.

**Justin:** But that’s what I don’t understand. I mean, not to pick, I don’t understand the – you know, parents who grew up on a movie like Jungle Book or something like that, it’s bring your kids. Is anyone really saying like, “I watched Dynasty, I’m going to tune in with my kids?”

**Craig:** Not a person.

**Justin:** Anyway, I interrupted the–

**John:** No, but I wanted to go back to sort of your sense of when you were doing Jungle Book, the degree to which how much are you trying to reinvent the story of Jungle Book or how much are you trying to do it with the same story with a new technology? Because I faced that with Aladdin, which was the pressure of are we trying to reinvent the whole thing and rethink everything, or are we trying to Beauty and Beast it and literally just do the cartoon? And you must have faced that same pressure?

**Justin:** I think it’s harder the better the original movie gets in that sense and the more complete the story is. In the case of Jungle Book, you know, it’s from a certain era and there’s a sort of episodic nature to it. And we just had a list of here are the things that you remember without being aided, you know, from the original movie. And you just sort of live with that. And then everything else in between you evaluate and you interrogate and you say is this as good as it could be, or can we make this better? Can we make this richer and more, you know, a little deeper, motivate the villain a little better? Anything like that.

But, you know, there was definitely a list of like half a dozen moments/images/ideas that absolutely had to be in the movie because I feel like no matter what you feel about the original you would want to see it again. That’s how you associate it.

**Craig:** And are you – this is a question for both of you guys, because you both move between movies and television. How is the balance? I mean, how do you work that out? Is it something that you are kind of edging one way or the other, or are you perfectly divided up here?

**Justin:** I think I’d like to know from the person who wrote four movies this year.

**Julie:** Four movies. Four credited movies. God knows what else you did.

**John:** It was really the year before was a lot of that, but still.

**Michael:** I can’t say there’s any balance at all. It’s like any project or when you’re balancing two or more things. It’s whatever bullet is coming at you, dodge that. Look for the next bullet. Dodge that. You know, and just get through it. I mean, look, four movies in a year is the product of five years of development, just all sort of like “fuck you it’s happening.”

**Craig:** Yeah, I think sometimes people think that you just went, like here’s a mountain of coke, and whaaa….

Yeah.

**Michael:** But there was definitely the weird summer last year when I was hopping between three sets. And I don’t recommend it. It’s not the way to do your best work. You know, if you have a family and you like them, or even better love them, you know, that’s not a good thing to do.

But it was mostly about, if I made any conscious decision it was television is getting so strange and volatile and new and unrecognizable, and features the same. So, I thought why don’t I just try to do two careers at once and maybe one will win out or be dominant at that point. And that means there are some times where you’re not doing shit in either. And then there are time when both suddenly the tinder lights.

**Craig:** And there’s neither one medium nor the other holds a greater personal or creative satisfaction for you?

**Michael:** No, I think like everything else whatever I’m doing I wish it was the other.

**Craig:** Ah. That is a Jewish Christmas.

**John:** Michael, I want to get back to the question that Justin tackled which was there’s an existing piece of thing out there that people are familiar with and then you’re going back and you’re tweaking it, you’re redoing it. So Murder on the Orient Express, there’s a book, everyone has read the book. Everyone – lots of people have seen the movie. Lots of people come into it knowing the twist. So how do you approach – like what were your first conversations about this property as you sat down to tackle it? What was your way in?

**Michael:** It was a bizarrely wonderful experience, because I went in to the studio. I had already worked with the producers on it. And it was the, “Hey, do you want to do this?” And the answer was yeah. And they said, “Well what would you do?” And I said, well, let’s do the book. Like let’s not fuck with what’s great. I don’t want to out Agatha Christie Agatha Christie. Yes, there’s an ending. I’m pretty sure Americans don’t remember it. If they do, then it’s like Bare Necessities in your – you know, these are the things we want to get to. And then they’ll look for how did you present it, can you make it emotionally resonant, can you add to it so that you do, “Yes, and?” But also like I’m just not going to try to beat out that, nor am I going to blow up the train. Nor am I going to set it in space.

But if you’re OK with that, let’s write the movie. And it was with Fox. And they were like, “That sounds great. That sounds like what we want to do.” And gave them a script and it was one of those things where everyone wanted to do the same thing. The planets aligned, so the gravitational pull was to the same direction, down to when you’re lucky enough to get Ken Branagh to direct it, and say he wants to star in it. Ok, now we know that it’s going to feel like the kind of movie we’ve been talking about.

So, it was the lucky thing of never having a moment where someone was trying to turn it into something weird or other. But that said, it’s IP. It is familiar. It’s British civil religion. They certainly remember the ending there, but they don’t mind that. They want the security of the Americans aren’t going to fuck it up. And we told them we wouldn’t by hiring–

**John:** Kenneth Branagh.

**Michael:** Their best guy.

**John:** Hire the Shakespeare guy to do it.

**Michael:** The most British man there is.

**John:** Basically they’re giant British fans for the original Agatha Christie, so they will know all that stuff.

**Michael:** Yeah, they’re rabid. That’s their baseball as I understand it.

**John:** Now, Julie, you have rabid fans from what I understand.

**Julie:** I do. Yes.

**John:** So, Nima who works for us is a rabid fan. He’s seen every episode of Vampire Diaries. And so he wrote a question which I’m going to now paraphrase for you. And you don’t even have to answer the question, but I want to sort of answer the meta question of this kind of question.

**Julie:** OK. OK.

**John:** So his question is on Vampire Diaries vampires have the ability to compel humans to obey their will. Could a vampire compel a human to not obey another vampire’s compulsion, or compelling?

**Julie:** Whoa.

**John:** See, yeah. Nima is excited that you said whoa on that.

**Julie:** Yeah. Maybe. Shoot, eight years, we never went down that road.

**Craig:** Probably because it’s the nerdiest road ever.

**Julie:** Should have gone nine.

**Craig:** Just saying.

**John:** So, my meta question is about that kind of question, because you must get that stuff all the time which is like someone who is a huge, huge fan of what you’re doing but wants to needle or poke or just ask things that either you don’t have an answer for or, you know, it just kind of doesn’t matter. How do you deal with that?

**Julie:** Most of my fan engagement and interaction has been on Twitter. And for the first four or five years I was very, very heavily involved in and invested in Twitter. And I would read all my mentions. And I would spend hours and hours. And that particular group of fans that I was engaging with heavily weren’t concerned with that kind of shit. Like literally they were like very worried about who Elena was going to end up in bed with. And it was very important. And when it didn’t go their way they were very mean.

Like if somebody had tweeted me that I would have been like, “Let’s talk man. This is great. I’m so excited.”

**Craig:** Finally something to discuss dispassionately.

**John:** Nima is here. He’s very excited to meet you. There’s Nima.

**Julie:** Oh hi!

**Craig:** But there is a certain kind of interaction now between television producers, particularly shows like yours which do have a very visceral connection for an audience. And I think a lot of the shows that I see, generally speaking sci-fi shows, horror shows, superhero shows, there’s a certain kind of fandom that gets really intense. And I watch it from the side and I will sometimes see these reactions happening on Twitter and I will get frightened just standing near it for the people that are making the show.

**Julie:** Yeah, well, you know, it got ugly. And it got sad and ugly because then I had to stop reading my mentions and I had to not engage on Twitter in that way. And for the last couple years I mean at best scroll through every now and then, just wanting to find that one person who is like asking, “Hey, how did you get into writing,” so at least to reward the good behavior, you know?

I mean, we could have a symposium on this. And I’m only really focusing right now on the negative side of it because obviously there’s a tremendous amount of positives. But the negative side of it is just this entitlement that is so toxic. Like just you are ruining the thing that I love, therefore you are terrible. And yet I’m like, but I wrote the thing that you love. You know, and it’s like, I mean, you love that. It just becomes so personal and it becomes not just about, “Oh, I’m not happy with the way this storyline is going,” it becomes about, “You’re fat. And you’re ugly. And no one is ever going to marry you. Thank god you don’t have children because they’d be ugly.”

I mean, like it’s all that stuff.

**Craig:** I should not have said any of that. I just—

**Julie:** And it’s just extraordinary. And it’s a high level, in a weird way because I noticed it all happening over the first couple years and I thought, hmm, like the world is going to a dark place and I’m seeing it happen through the sort of Twitter fandom. And then the world went to a dark place and now everybody talks to each other like that. And I saw it first.

**Craig:** It is frightening. I just wanted to say that I think that a lot of the people – I think anybody that falls in love with any television show or any movie, when we say we like it or we love it, what we’re really describing is a relationship that we have with it. That’s why people change their minds about things, right? We have changing relationships. As we grow older our attitudes towards things change. We revisit. I think people sometimes can have a very bad relationship with a show. It means something to them you did not intend. It is providing a function or serving a function for them. And then when you don’t do what they want or you kill the wrong person, because as we know sometimes that person is just wah-wah-wah, and so they’ve got to go. Right?

**Julie:** Yeah. [laughs]

**Craig:** These people lose their minds because you are disrupting this thing that they have an unhealthy relationship with.

**Julie:** Yeah, and I remember in early seasons them saying like, “You don’t understand this relationship.” Two and half seasons I have painstakingly laid in every little nuance and detail of the time their hands just sort of brushed, and the way that she looks at his lips before she looks in his eyes when they’re staring at each other. I like gave you that relationship that you love detail by detail. And now you’re, you know, you’re coming at me in such an aggressive way.

**Craig:** Geez Louise.

**Michael:** I liked when you touched my hand.

**Julie:** That was nice.

**Michael:** By the way, wait, to go back to your first question because Julie, who has had a brilliant career that I admire and tell everyone about because she’s one of the heroes, has gotten to work on her shows for long enough for people to have that relationship.

**Julie:** Yeah.

**Michael:** That is not a miniseries relationship.

**Craig:** Right.

**Julie:** That’s true.

**Michael:** And so the exchange rate for having – to be able to steep, to be able to play that long game, to be able to have your own emotional investment be reflected back in your audience’s emotional investment, the exchange for that is your life and health in like 15 years.

**Julie:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Well, you know, Dan and Dave, we had Dan and Dave on our show – Dan Weiss and David Benioff who do Game of Thrones – and those guys don’t look at anything. They have never looked at anything. And it has been fascinating, because every now and then I’ll be like, “Hey, how you are guys – oh, yeah, you don’t even know. Never mind. You don’t know about the firestorm that just occurred because of the episode in which blah-blah-blah happened.” Nor do they know when people are like, “Oh my god…” They are just completely isolated.

And, now it works for them because they are – well, they’re weird.

**Michael:** But do you read reviews?

**Craig:** I stopped. I have stopped.

**John:** So I, generally I stopped–

**Craig:** I have good reason to stop.

**John:** But this last time with Big Fish opening in London I was not going to read reviews, and so I was putting my phone away and someone tweeted at me, “Shame about the London reviews.”

**Craig:** Oh that, ugh.

**John:** Why are you doing this? And so I had an early flight, so I had already taken a Xanax so I could fall asleep. So like, you know what? Fuck it. I’m going to read all the reviews. And so I was already pre-medicated and I read all of them. And in a weird way it was good. I’m glad I did it because there were like two-star and five-star reviews, so it was a real range. And it was actually really good to actually know what it was, because there are times where I haven’t read reviews and I’m just kind of wandering around in a fog like I don’t know what’s out there. And so for me it was good to know–

**Craig:** I suppose in the limited circumstance where I can pill myself up and be on a plane, I’ll go ahead and read a few reviews.

**John:** Justin Marks, will you read reviews of your show when it comes out, Counterpart?

**Justin:** You know, it’s really hard because with the show especially you’re much more accountable to those reviews than you are on a movie where it’s done. I mean, there’s nothing else, what can I do? Can I go back and change the movie? No. So I’m curious for the people who do television, because I’ve never been through this process before. I think I kind of have to. I think I kind of have to know what’s working and what’s not working if there’s a collective consensus about something.

**Michael:** You don’t have to. You work for Starz, so here’s what’s going to happen. You’re going to get an email every day with the headline of whatever review came in and a parenthetical that says, “Positive, negative, mixed.”

**Justin:** And so you just look through it like that?

**Michael:** That was more than I needed.

**Julie:** I will say like I’m personally one of the writers who in television believes that there’s a social contract between a storyteller and the viewer. And I could introduce you to 50 writers who completely disagree with that and say I’m telling my story the way I want to tell the story and the viewer either likes it or they don’t. I like the fluidity of understanding what people are connecting to. And then trying to absorb why, you know.

And conversely, you know, I learned a lot about even just racial representation on my show through social media. Things that I had never considered, ever considered being a problem, and then sort of confronted with that. And that was so illuminating. I mean, I was mortified. And learned a lot in a way that nobody would have stopped me on the street and been like, “Do you realize that that person of color had two lines?” You know, that kind of stuff.

And so I wouldn’t ever want to like tune out from that relationship because it is a sort of focus group feedback that I think is really valuable.

**Michael:** There was one – we did an interview with this podcast Fan Bros and it’s a black audience for genre stuff. And they were great. And they kind of took us to task and said, “Well, we really love the show, but your black lead you’re doing a terrible job.” And we’re like tell us about that. And it was very helpful and our response was we hired them. We put them on staff. Because had we not heard that – they weren’t allowed to write reviews about the show anymore.

**Craig:** That’s how you get a job is you start a podcast—

**Michael:** Tell the showrunner it stinks.

**Craig:** Tell white people they’re fucking up.

**John:** Yep.

**Craig:** I could do that.

**John:** All right, so while we’re talking about reviews I thought we might play a little game. So, let’s move on. We’ve had some good reviews, some bad reviews, but this is Christmas, or the holidays, let’s have only five-star reviews. So underneath your seat you have some five-star reviews.

**Julie:** Oh my gosh.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** So we are properly set up here.

**Craig:** So excited.

**John:** So these all come from iTunes. And so we went on iTunes and we found reviews of different projects we worked on. And we’re going to read them now and we’re going to have to figure out – titles of these things are not on here so we’re going to have to figure out among us what they are talking about in these five-star reviews.

**Craig:** And the ones that we have in our hands, could these be any of our movies?

**John:** Any of our movies.

**Craig:** OK.

**John:** All right, so I’m going to start us off. So this comes from Skip Hunt.

**Craig:** That’s not real. That’s like Mike Hunt.

**John:** So, “Not sure how I found this podcast. I think I was searching for info about the fountain.io markup stuff.” A nerd. “Anyway, I’m hooked and I’ve added this podcast to my regular playlist. I have not interfaced with Mark Mazin, but John August has been very generous and helpful with his time. Thanks for putting this podcast out. I’ve found most of it very helpful. Smiley Face.”

**Craig:** Now we’re supposed to guess what that’s for?

**John:** Yeah, I think we can figure that one out. That’s a pretty easy one.

**Craig:** Fucking Mark Mazin. I’ll tell you. That guy–

**John:** So that was Scriptnotes. Craig, read us another five-star review.

**Craig:** All right. This one is titled “Impressed,” by MJ Gingsham. “Very nice directing and editing. Actors are very decent and acceptable. The music is very cool aswell. 5 stars!” Huh? Music is very cool, as well.

**John:** As well. As well. This is punctuated exactly the way it was there.

**Craig:** Hmm, what do you guys think?

**John:** What do you think? What could that be?

**Craig:** I’m kind of leaning towards—

**Julie:** Are these all movies?

**Craig:** No, it could be a TV show, right?

**John:** It could be a movie or a TV show.

**Julie:** Oh, oh, oh.

**Craig:** Is it the Vamp? Is it Vamp Di?

**Julie:** I feel like if it’s just generally across the board a mediocre five-star review, that’s probably mine.

**John:** Julie Plec, you’re correct. Julie Plec, read us a review.

**Julie:** OK, from I Am Romanov 2, “This movie was much better than the Passion of Christ.”

**Craig:** The Passion of Christ. Oof.

**Julie:** Yes.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** It feels like Jungle Book to me.

**John:** It could be Jungle Book. Lots of choices here.

**Craig:** Well, has anybody dabbled in a Christ movie other than Passion? No? No. No. Well, maybe Corpse Bride.

**John:** Could be Corpse Bride.

**Craig:** Because Christ.

**John:** Christ. Death. Resurrection. Yeah.

**Michael:** Frankenweenie. Same thing.

**Craig:** Frankenweenie.

**John:** Sure.

**Julie:** Who did Frankenweenie? Nice.

**John:** The answer is Michael Green for Green Lantern.

**Craig:** Why would you compare Green Lantern to Passion of Christ?

**Michael:** I don’t know. They were both hard to get through. They both hurt my soul for different reasons.

**Craig:** And the heroes did have super powers, so.

**Michael:** Also the CG suits.

**Craig:** CG suits. CG suits.

**John:** Yep. Nudity. Michael Green, read us a five-star review.

**Craig:** I would have never thought of that one. Your turn. You can read it right there.

**Michael:** OK, “Best movie of the year — This film did better than do the original justice. It’s a masterpiece!Ryan Reynolds stole the show and all the other actors did well too. Not to mention Hans Zimmers score completely fit and mixed in with this awesome epic of a film“

**Julie:** Is this the same movie?

**Craig:** That feels like Green Lantern again.

**Justin:** But Ryan Reynolds was great in–

**Michael:** Hans Zimmer did not do the score. So I’m thinking this is a Ryan flub.

**Julie:** Yeah.

**John:** So, what are you predicting?

**Michael:** Blade Runner.

**John:** Blade Runner 2049.

**Michael:** And you’re not fat.

**Craig:** Fooled me.

**John:** Justin Marks?

**Justin:** “I love this one by Ishiro Honda would be proud.”

**Craig:** How is that a name?

**Justin:** “This is the best movie I’ve seen so far this year and I’ve only seen 2 good movies this year. Amazing special effects, great characters and I felt like a kid again watching this movie. See it if you haven’t already.”

**Craig:** Jungle Book, right? It feels like Jungle Book.

**Michael:** Jungle Book.

**John:** It’s Jungle Book. All right. Next up, Miss Shorty Rocks says, “loved it — if u ppl have nothing good to say than don’t say nothing at all cause this move was good i liked it was really good i would watch it again again why dnt u all do me a fav n put the shut to up that means shut up.”

**Craig:** That has to be one of my fans. I mean, for a bunch of reasons not the least of which is she’s clearly arguing with the majority of people who are upset. So I got to – that’s got to be one of my people.

**John:** You’d be wrong.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** That is for Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun Li. Justin Marks.

**Justin:** Yeah, my mom does write under that Miss Shorty Rocks.

**Craig:** Wasn’t Ishiro Honda in Street Fighter? Wasn’t he one of the characters?

**Justin:** Was that a character? Don’t ask the writer of Street Fighter.

**John:** Craig Mazin?

**Craig:** Oh, I’ve got one here. “Wow,” by Edward Elrick Fan. “I wish I was bloating like the girl.i always wanted to bloat like that girl in the movie I wish I was her SERIOUSLY!”

OK, this has to be Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

**John:** It’s a movie about bloating. I love that he’s a bloat fetishist who is like you know what, I’ve got some time, I’ll leave five stars for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

**Michael:** Violet, you’re carrying water, Violet.

**Julie:** That’s amazing.

**Craig:** I was most just concerned with the lack of the subjective mood here.

**John:** Yes, that really is the biggest cue of that.

**Craig:** Edward, you wish you were bloating like her.

**John:** Seriously.

**Craig:** Were Edward.

**John:** Julie Plec.

**Julie:** Sponge Bob Girl 101 says, “You have your options in what movies you like. People say it was horrible and some people say it was good just give it a chance if ur not interested in cussing and comedy i recommend that u do not watch this movie. I enjoyed this movie a lot it was so funny. And i didn’t watch the trailer thats probably why i didn’t hate it”

**Craig:** Again, that feels like one of my people.

**John:** Yeah. Which movie though?

**Craig:** Notice fighting off others. Any one of them, honestly.

**Julie:** Cussing.

**Craig:** Not Winter’s War.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** I’ll go with Identity Thief.

**John:** Identity Thief it is. And Michael Green, I think you have the last one.

**Michael:** Mine is not a five-star review.

**Craig:** It’s a two.

**Julie:** Ouch. That’s mine.

**John:** Go for it.

**Michael:** OK. I think things are going to get mean. “Box of Bisquick,” by Woody Wood 123. Because there were 122 other Woody Woods. “Am I the only one who deleted this podcast after three episodes because, while the information was useful,” at least you’re using that well, “I just couldn’t get past John August’s manner of speaking like he just swallowed a box of Bisquick.”

**John:** Just swallowed Bisquick. I love that.

**Michael:** “Sometimes he’s barely intelligible. Good this he’s a writer.” Good this he’s a writer should be like. Oh. “A shame. I would have liked to be a follower.”

**Craig:** I would have liked to have be a follower. We would have liked for him to have be a fan. Just, this person was hearing the best of you, by the way. I just want to point out.

**John:** Absolutely. That’s after Matthew’s edited me carefully. So.

**Craig:** I don’t think it’s Bisquick.

**John:** What would you say I have in my mouth?

**Craig:** Quikrete.

**John:** Oh yeah. Something quick that fixes.

**Craig:** Some sort of marble and cement product.

**John:** Yes. I want to ask a practical question of our TV folks here in the room which is you guys are all not just writers but you are hiring writers to work on your TV programs. If someone is – as you’re reading through scripts and trying to put together a staff, what are you looking for in writers that you’re trying to hire onto your shows?

**Julie:** For me, just a voice. You know, like a distinct voice. Somebody that can write a funny line. Something that makes me laugh, even if it’s in a drama. Has a personality. Has some kind of cool twang to it. Because I don’t have time as I’m reading material to really dissect like, oh, structurally that was really excellent and I would have slid act two later. Like I’m reading it for my own enjoyment and if it grabs me, the voice grabs me if it’s got sparkle, I tend to read the whole thing. And if there’s no sparkle, even if it’s a great script, I just put it aside.

**John:** So how many pages will you read before you detect if there’s a sparkle.

**Julie:** About ten.

**John:** Ten. OK. Michael Green, what are you looking for as you read scripts?

**Michael:** Very similar. I’m looking for someone who I see something that will make my show better and different. I remember a showrunner I worked for back in the “22 episodes a year I don’t know how we did it days,” and I don’t know how you do it. But he said when he was hiring, and this stuck with me as a bad idea, he was looking for ten little hims. And I thought that’s terrible because you can already write like you. You know, and I can write like me all the time. I can’t stop. It’s awful. So I want people who can do what I can’t do. And then I suddenly realize reading that voice that if that voice was in my show, my show would be better. So that please.

Specificity in ten pages. Sadly, that does bear out. Showrunners read about ten pages because if it isn’t excellent in ten pages it’s never better by 20. It just doesn’t. And so polish the shit out of the first ten, please.

**John:** Justin Marks. What are you looking for?

**Justin:** I really try to look for writers who make me jealous. I think that’s really the thing that I feel like if there’s something – because I completely agree. That idea, and we’ve talked about this in the room a lot, like I can do me. I can do me pretty well. Like I feel like I know me and I can write for me and understand that. But if I am reading someone who really writes from a place, a voice that I’ve never really been able to bring out of myself then that’s exactly what I want to do.

And I will also say, I mean, yes, the question is about reading. So it’s leading in that sense. But I do think from a place, for me at least, the meeting is everything. We’re not having the meeting unless that spark has happened on the script. But I find that the best collaboration with writers in the room are people who – it also brings the best part of me out when we’re having this conversation and we’re talking about our favorite movies, or our favorite TV show, or our favorite book. You know, that’s the dynamic in the writer’s room every single day.

You know, you can bring a lot of diverse voices together, but if you don’t like the same stuff and want to do the same stuff I feel like that’s where you run afoul. So, yeah, I think it’s a combination of the two. And in some ways, depending on I guess the way everyone writes their show, I think it’s that meeting. What do we bring out of each other? That’s a hugely important thing.

**Craig:** Did you ever have any problems with control issues having come from a place of, look, I write by myself. I write. This is mine. And now I have to let you do it?

**Justin:** So badly for me. I mean, like so badly. I was so bad at it at the beginning. And fortunately the writers are really good when it comes to knowing that I was a first-time showrunner. But my thing was really like I just kept using this phrase, “I have to wrap my head around this.” And the only way I can wrap my head around it is to sort of just run through it and see it and keep doing it and keep doing it. And I realized I was making so much more work for myself. Like so much more work for myself to such diminishing returns as you’re doing it. Because it’s really like maybe it seems big to you as you’re sort of going through each page and each scene and each line of dialogue, but like you’ve hired brilliant people who can write this stuff. And, I mean, you’ve all worked it through together in the room and unless something has really just run sideways on the page, like there’s no reason to do it.

So, I had a hard time with that at the very beginning. And really like the first season was a tough journey to realizing like there are people around you. Ask them for help. That was a really tough thing. I wish I had learned that. I wish I had worked on a show. They should only, only let people run shows who have worked on shows. They should not have hired me.

**Michael:** The best day on your first season show isn’t when you get picked up for the second season. It’s when one of your writers gives you a draft that you don’t have to touch. Because it means you can now have a weekend, or now you just tell that person, “I’m sorry, you’re fucked. You’re going to write a lot.” Because otherwise you’re going to have to do every page and that’s not – there’d be dragons.

**John:** We’re going to have time for about four questions. I want to ask you guys about, you’re not just reading, and you’re not meeting with folks, but you’re also managing folks. And it feels like the management of a writing staff has become a – Harvey Weinstein was two months ago. It feels like it was six months ago, but it’s only two months ago. Has anything changed in the sense of how you guys are approaching life in the room? How you guys are approaching your shows in the wake of the sexual harassment stuff that’s come up?

**Julie:** I was just talking about this today. We had our little holiday lunch and I said – I said what is it going to be like for us moving forward in a writer’s room? And I was at a table full of women, so it was a very easy conversation to have. But I said, you know, we have to be as respectful of everybody’s space as we’re asking men to be of ours. And we can’t sit around and talk about like bras and periods all day long either, you know.

**Craig:** Aw.

**Julie:** I know. I know. There has to be a sense of mutual respect for everybody in the room. But on the other hand, I mean, when you go back to what they teach you at Warner Bros. in the sexual harassment training that I’m sure will be wholly revamped before next year is about the Friends lawsuit. And the Friends lawsuit back in the day was a woman who was in the writer’s room as a writer’s assistant, I think, who basically was just like the things discussed in the room, the words used in the room, the ideas discussed in the room were unacceptable to me and made me uncomfortable. And the defense, which turned out to be a winning defense, was but we’re in a creative space in which we are supposed to be allowed to be free to express ourselves without filter and without judgment.

And I really do believe that. And I think it’s just a difference between if someone is expressing themselves freely without filter but are also an asshole, then there are lines that have to be drawn. And a woman that I was talking to said, “If we could just get more comfortable saying, ‘Oh, that’s too far for me, or that’s too much.’” Or even better, if we don’t have to say it at all, she said, “I would love nothing more than to never be the woman in the room that says, ‘You know, hold on.’ But if some guy would tap his buddy and be like, dude.” And just move on. Say that’s a little too much. Hey bro, back off. And let it go. And don’t make a woman or a man or whoever is feeling objectified, or persecuted, or just offended have to be the one to sort of raise the Debbie Downer flag and be like, come on guys.

Although we did have a bell in my last room where like a writer brought in a bell and every time somebody swore inappropriately she’d be like, “Ding.” And then we’d laugh and we’d move on.

**Craig:** That’s not a bad idea. I mean, systems that are based on the male observational power generally are doomed. But if you have a situation where someone, like OK, you know that there’s a guy. Like let’s say I’m in your room and you can look at me and be like, and I’m like, OK, got it. Dude. Right? And then we just have a thing and then I know because I do need to be told. I think a lot of men need to be told. Because we’re just a little duh.

**John:** Let’s go to a question. Sir, your question.

**Male Audience Member:** So this is a bit of a champagne problem, but I hope there’s some general advice in here. So, it’s taken me ten years to get to this moment. And I have a spec script that’s going around town. And I got an agent. We had to move very quickly with that. And I’m at this lovely moment where every manager in town wants to meet with me, take me to lovely lunches. And I don’t quite know what’s the right way to pick a person to work with, hopefully for the long term. Like what is the trait to optimize. There are bigger places. There are smaller places. There are people that function like agents. There are people that develop.

You guys have experience. I will never have the opportunity to ask people like you this again. So I’m curious–

**Craig:** Correct. We all disappear after this.

**Julie:** What do you need in your creative process? Like if you had a perfect creative relationship with someone else that was on your team, would it be sit in a room with me for eight hours and help me break this story? Would it be I need really great comprehensive notes on my material? Or would it be like I wrote this, shut up and sell it? Where in that is what you would wish for?

Male Audience Member: I think frankly my agent team can take the shut up and sell it side of stuff. I’d like someone that I could kind of work with almost like a producer. I can call, I can game plan. I can be a little bit closer with. I don’t necessarily need day-to-day notes. I don’t need – I’m a grownup. I don’t need hand-holding. I don’t want to be told what to write. But I’d love someone to read stuff and give some feedback.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** Some general advice I give to anybody who is looking for new representation is pick somebody who you won’t dread getting a phone call from. Because sometimes people will be like, “Oh, he’s a shark but he’s great. He’s on my side.” But if you don’t want to answer the phone, if you don’t want to talk to him, that’s not the person for you.

Julie’s question is very smart about just in terms of like knowing what you’re actually looking for. So are you looking for a bad cop? Are you looking for a good guy? Figure out what it is you’re going after. And Justin Marks, you and I have had a lot of discussions about managers because I was down on managers for a long time and you were like, “No, no, John, you don’t understand what’s actually going on.” Talk to us about managers.

**Justin:** Yeah. I think – and it’s interesting because I’ve been thinking about that a lot lately as you get on a show and you’re just doing one job this whole time. And so my manager’s role in my life has changed significantly from the beginning. But in the beginning when I was just starting out I really think, and it’s only because I can count on less than one hand the number times a month I’ll speak to agents now. And my manager is the person who I’m always in the trenches with. He knows what I’m writing on a given day. He knows, you know, are you moving on to this? Are you getting this done? They’re calling about this. You have to get that finished. Whatever it may be, he’s the person who is really like a partner.

And I’ve had my manager since I was in college from the very beginning. We’ve been together and I have a very comfortable rapport. He’s the only person in my life who can tell me when something is truly terrible. He’s the person who calls to deliver bad news. And can do it fairly and without spin which is really important to me.

So, I feel like in this – and this is where our discussion was originally is I don’t think agents do anymore what they used to do.

**John:** I think everyone agrees with you there.

**Justin:** And maybe it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy because managers have come about. But I think it’s a very important thing especially because this is not true of all agents but I’ll just say it, I think the attention spans are very short. And if you have a good manager that’s not what it’s about. They have a very long attention span.

But you only get one shot of giving a piece of material to even your agent in that sense. You don’t want to damage that relationship. So to have a manager who you can really vet your material with and to do multiple iterations on it with I think is a really important thing.

Now my relationship with my manager is very different. I mean, he’s like my therapist more than anything. Or he’ll come to set and just sit around for a little while, and then we’ll go for walks where we just go for walks like in movies where someone is really down and going for a walk. That’s what we do.

So I guess it’s worth 10%. Right?

**Julie:** Well, I mean, I’ve always been down on managers, too, because working in television I always tell people don’t get a fucking manager, for god’s sake. That’s 10% of your income. You want to buy a house. You want to raise a child. You want to put him in college. You want to keep your money. Like for the love of god, don’t get a manager who is just going to put you on a show and then cash a paycheck for nine months out of the year.

But, what you get for that 10% is a fulfilling relationship if that’s what you need. You know? Whether it’s breaking every story with you beat for beat, or just walking around the block with you. If that’s how you want to spend your money to have that relationship, then just make sure it’s someone who is going to give it to you. Because there are way too many managers in this town who just operate like agents who will stay on the phone with you longer. And I think it’s total bullshit.

**Craig:** I agree with her 100%. And I will say you don’t have to sweat this decision. Pick one of them. And if you don’t like him or you don’t like her, fire their ass and pick another one. Because there’s a thousand of them.

**Julie:** Yeah.

**John:** Yeah. Great. And just in case you are a Michael Green in a couple of years and you have four movies in a year, what’s your name?

**Male Audience Member:** Jeremy Cohen.

**Julie:** Good luck, Jeremy.

**John:** Jeremy Cohen. There’s probably a few other Jeremy Cohen’s on IMDb, I think, but–

**Craig:** You can only have one Michael Green or one Jeremy Cohen. You can’t have Michael Green and Jeremy Cohen. We’ll have to figure this out.

**John:** All right, on this side. A question.

**Female Audience Member:** So Craig is always talking about how he doesn’t make any money from the podcast. So what is going on there?

**Craig:** Thank you! Oh my god! Like all this time I’ve been waiting for somebody to ask the obvious question. What is going on?

**John:** So, I can actually honestly answer you. So that number about the t-shirts, that is true.

**Craig:** Oh god. This is going to be bad.

**John:** So, a bunch of you are premium subscribers. Yes, some people in the audience here. So people who get all those back episodes, that’s $2 a month. We get a dollar of that back from Libsyn. So that ends up being – we have almost 3,000 of those, so that’s $3,000 a month that’s coming in. So that’s good.

That helps pay for Megan’s salary. It pays for Matthew. And our transcripts. And so that’s kind of what it covers. There are podcasts that make good money, like those Pod Save America podcasts, they’re making bank. And it’s a whole different world. But we just decided we didn’t want to sell Casper Mattresses.

I mean.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**Julie:** They do it so well. I mean, that’s part of the novelty of Pod Save America is they–

**John:** They do a great job of that.

**Julie:** The way they do their advertising is so funny and enjoyable.

**Craig:** I’m sorry. We would crush it.

**Julie:** You guys would crush it. It would be amazing.

**Craig:** We’re professional writers.

**Julie:** I want to hear you talk about–

**Craig:** By the way, you know who we should advertise?

**John:** Who?

**Craig:** Bisquick.

**John:** Bisquick. Yeah. Bisquick would be a fantastic thing. And so I can tell you guys here tonight, I think for the first time, that I am going to be doing another podcast in the New Year and that one will have ads in it. And so that will be a very different world for me. And it’s been an incredibly different experience learning how all of that works, because it’s not just two guys talking–

**Craig:** That’s not going to last a long time though is it?

**John:** No. It’s a miniseries just like yours.

**Craig:** Oh, OK.

**John:** Yeah, it’s fine.

**Craig:** No, you go and you have your thing.

**John:** Yeah. It’s fine. We can each do our own little thing.

**Craig:** Yeah. You love someone, set them free.

**John:** Thank you.

**Craig:** The truth is I do love talking about it because it’s hysterical to me, but John really does all of the work. That’s the other thing I often repeat. And between Megan and Matthew who edits and then the hosting costs and all of the other stuff, it is – we break even.

**John:** Yeah. I should say Craig used to have to write me a check every month for the hosting and stuff. Craig used to write money out of his pocket. So that doesn’t happen anymore.

**Craig:** So like that’s how I get paid now is by not having to pay money. But if we did advertise, how much money do you think we could make?

**John:** We could make good money. We’ve gotten approached a couple times. Because you guys are obviously incredibly upwardly mobile people and–

**Craig:** That one guy is.

**John:** Yeah, that guy.

**Julie:** Jeremy Cohen.

**John:** We could advertise only to Jeremy Cohen.

**Michael:** You could advertise him.

**John:** Yeah. Absolutely. Be that guy.

**Craig:** Stuff that Jeremy likes.

**John:** Cool. Great, thanks. Another question.

**Male Audience Member:** As you guys have sort of underscored throughout the evening, it’s been quite a year. And I’m wondering how the sort of world climate/political climate, the darkness of the moment has influenced the creative decisions you’re making, both on a day to day level in terms of scene work, character work on the page, but also the projects you’re taking or the stories you’re interested in telling.

**Craig:** That’s a great question. Great question.

**John:** Yeah, it’s hard whenever you have a villain to sort of not go into a place where it’s like, oh, is it this kind of villain or is it this kind of darkness. It’s hard to write dystopian story now that doesn’t feel like, oh, you see outside your window.

So I’ve definitely been mindful of that stuff. But I would say that I was in France during a lot of this and then I was also writing my book for 10 to 12 year olds. So that was great to sort of have that escape hatch and not be sort of in the thick of it all the time creatively. How about you guys?

You wrote Chernobyl.

**Craig:** Well, yeah. Actually great timing. Here’s a story about Russian lies. And what’s been happening over the last year has been actually very influential.

I started working on Chernobyl about four years ago. And just a week ago I rewrote the very first lines of the show. There was a time when the show was at its foundation about a thing. I mean, obviously it’s about Chernobyl but what human point is there to all of this. And as I started writing through the episodes by the time I got to the end I realized it had become something else and it’s something that is far more relevant to what is happening now in the world around me.

I think in general as a writer I have become vastly more concerned about representation of characters. It is on the forefront of my mind. I am constantly asking myself questions like just checking the pitfalls. The pitfall of default white. The pitfall of this character doesn’t deserve a name. You know, all of these things. And just constantly running that tape in my head. Whereas before, honestly, nobody ever asked you to do that. Nobody expected you to do it. And if you did, they would ask you why.

Like I remember years and years ago, my gosh, it was for the Weinsteins. There was a script and there was a discussion that a character had with a guy who was just like at a reception desk for a hospital. And the guy at the reception desk I just happened to make Southeast Asian. And they were befuddled. Why did you do that? And I’m like because there are a lot of them. And they’re people in the world. Now it’s the opposite. And that’s wonderful.

I think actually in a great way the response to the fucked-up-ness has been really good for me as a writer. I think it’s been great for our business in general, not just in terms of weeding out terrible people, but also just in the day to day business of how we approach storytelling and how we approach each other as human beings. There is a strange optimism. It’s just every time I start to feel good then some other asshole comes along. So anyway.

**Julie:** Yeah. I’ve had a two-pronged experience which has been sort of fascinating and concerning, but also really great. So the fascinating/concerning part was I write, you know, Vampire Diaries was – it’s gothic romance. And all of the origins of that kind of like the bad boy, the murderous bad boy, and the love triangle, and vampires in general, vampires throughout literature are very sexual beings. And so I use a lot of bodice-ripper kind of influence and all the Harlequin romance novels that I read growing up, and soap operas.

And I remember hitting like Season Seven and I’m pitching, “OK, and then this happens, and she doesn’t want to go. And she’s refusing to go, and so he breaks her neck, throws her in the back of the car, and she wakes up and she’s in a hotel room against her will.” And the whole room went, “You can’t do that.” And I was like, “Why? You know, she’s a vampire. She would do it to him.” And they were like, “Because that’s rapey. It’s like rape culture shit.” And I was like, oh, god, you guys. And I’m being very glib right now to make my point. But I said “This is the show. Like the gothic romance. I’m a feminist. I’m a strong woman. I’m not advocating abuse here. I’m just – there is a quality of sort of titillating fun to this that has built the empire of the show. And now if I can’t dip into that well then what the hell are we going to do, you know?”

And I was filled with despair and it actually launched into this great conversation in which we agreed to disagree and ultimately modified the beat so she had more agency, which I outlawed that word for a year in my writer’s room. I’m like the buzz words.

**Craig:** The buzz words. Because executives have stolen them.

**Julie:** But, you know, and then you realize, OK, but there are now limits to what you really should feel comfortable representing. And so that was my sort of growing experience. And the sort of wonderful experience was after the election and our despair and coming back to the writer’s room of The Originals this year we were like, OK, what stories are we going to tell? And someone was like, “Well what if there’s this faction of vampires who think that only a certain kind of vampires are cool. And like they want to get rid of all the other kind of vampires. And they certainly hate werewolves. And they really hate witches. And they were like kind of vampire purists.”

And so just basically made our whole season about like–

**Craig:** Alt-Right Vampires.

**Julie:** Trump supporters, you know. And it has been the most liberating, wonderful, it’s just amazing. And it’s so on the nose you guys, and I’m going to apologize in advance. I was watching a playback today and I’m like, ooh, that’s really on the nose. But it felt so good all year. And we loved it. Loved it.

**Michael:** Sometimes you got to punch right on the nose.

**Julie:** Exactly.

**John:** Michael Green, how has it changed your process?

**Michael:** Largely a lot of angry writing. A lot of just channeling that. Actually I should say it’s a pendulum swing between escapist bullshit and really, really angry writing. So, Season Two of American Gods, like Season One we wrote in a progressive administration, assuming we were going into a progressive administration, before America decided to shit the bed. And it’s not funny, but we had written a lot of things about immigration, very culturally diverse. But it was kind of accidental that we were doing it. We were just writing what we thought would be positive and suddenly it became a sparkplug. Up until last week we were leaning into that with a lot more ferocity. And part of the reason we parted ways was we wanted to defend that stuff when circumstances would have prevailed that we might have had to not do it.

On the other hand, escapist bullshit. Like I was on the set of Murder on the Orient Express, or I went the next day after the election. And I was never so glad, like I walked across fake snow to a fake train. And I’m like 1930s! And all of a sudden I realized that 1930s Europe suddenly felt idealistic.

**John:** Justin, how has it changed you?

**Justin:** I will say, I’m sure it’s the same for all rooms, but so much of our time is taken up talking about this stuff now, just every single day of how bad everything has gotten. But what’s really interesting, we have a show about identity. That’s sort of the idea. It’s two worlds and it becomes a show about who would you be under a different set of circumstances and all these things. And so very often in the first season we’re exploring ideas of gender identity, of sexual identity. And then we come to this season and the conversation feels very different now.

And we have a very diverse room. It’s a very important part of what makes this show what it is. But at no point had we really had the conversation about racial identity and what that means. And it was suddenly like we’re having this conversation. It was a really interesting day when we started to talk about it because, you know, we take place in sort of Berlin and then an alternate Berlin in another world. And there’s all these kind of throwback themes to espionage in it. You know, this conversation started like, well, do we always have to have this conversation as it relates to it? And someone said, and it was the best thing, and it was just like a glass of cold water to the face for the whole room of, “We’re already having this conversation whether we want to be or not. It’s time we actually start engaging with it.”

And that changed everything for us. It suddenly became this, and you know, we tried to create I think a better way of also just talking to each other. It may be a sexual remark, but it may also be a racial remark or something like that. To sort of get a form of discourse where people are comfortable, not just criticizing but also being criticized, and not taking it personally. You know, especially I think the white male point of view immediately goes to a place of, well, hold on, but I voted for Obama. It’s like one of the good guys thing.

And it’s like, no, you really have to take a step back and listen to yourself and hear yourself in that way and feel – and ask aloud to a diverse room around you, “Is this OK? I mean, how does this make everyone feel if I say this. It’s different if I say this than if you say this, right? Is that what it is? Or, no, what is it?”

And it becomes a really interesting thing. And I’ve got to say, I can’t believe that it has taken this long for these kinds of conversations to happen so comfortably and so much in the open. So in that sense it is – I do share that feeling of optimism. I do share that feeling of – I mean, what else do we have? It’s like the stories, you read that Sebastian Younger book about a tribe where no one was happier than when they were in London during the blitz being bombed every day because at least they had a community. Like that’s kind of how I feel now with it is like—

**Julie:** Well, yeah, it goes to what we were saying about making something comfortable in the room. So, I am a very energetic room personality. And when we’re in a flow and we’re talking story and when I get onto an idea and I’m pitching a thread, I’m like oh and this, and boom, and that. And nothing – nothing ruins that more for me than someone is like, “Well, you can’t do that because that’s not – I’m going to blanket it not PC. But it’s basically that’s racist, or that’s this.” And I’m like, come on, you know. And you get so frustrated because the air is cut out of your momentum. And you’re like that’s not sexist. Or that’s not rapey. Or that’s not whatever.

But, somebody in the room thinks it is. And somebody in the room had the balls to say that to you. And especially somebody like me who is then going to have a sort of hilarious, never angry, but a hilarious meltdown of like, “Oh, the energy just got sucked out of my soul.” We have to create these environments where people, especially young staff writers, et cetera, can feel free to be like, “Um, hello, you can’t do that and here’s why.” And where I will then come off of my sort of downward spiral and say, “OK, no really, tell me.” And then I can still decide you know what I disagree or I hear you or whatever. But to make sure the conversation happens.

**John:** Cool. Thank you very much. We usually end with One Cool Things. We’re going to do something special this time. This is our new little thing called, let’s see if the slide will change, Secret Santa or Lump of Coal. So there’s no emoji for lump of coal, so we used a smiley pile of poop.

So this is something great from the last year that we want to make sure people are aware of, and something from the last year which we could do without. So, My Secret Santa would be this was the final season for both Please Like Me, which is a series I loved, and Girls, which I loved to death. And we can forget that these great things happened in this year. So, my Secret Santa are those two shows. Go check them out if you’ve not checked them out. Their last seasons were both great.

My lump of coal goes to post-credit scenes on superhero movies. Just stop. I mean, like I kind of dug it at first. It’s like, oh, it’s an Easter egg. It’s a little bonus thing for the fans. But now a movie will end and like, ugh, I’m pulling up Wikipedia, like is there a tag scene? Ugh. And by the time it actually gets to it, like ten minutes later, I’m like it was not worth it to stay. So, let’s just stop. We could all stop. We can all agree to be done. Or do it within one minute, but then it be done and say, OK, no, there’s no more. Done.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m with you. My Secret Santa, is that what the good one is? Secret Santa? Is something I talked about on the show before, but it’s become an integral part of my life. 1Password. You don’t have to use 1Password. There’s other things like 1Password. But here’s why I’m actually evangelizing this.

So, for those of you who don’t know it’s a password management thing on your computer. You put all of your passwords in it. It generates good passwords for you, really strong ones so that not everything is Baloney1. And it’s great.

But, here’s the best part about One Password. So now it’s like a subscription-based thing the way all software is going, which is annoying, but my wife and I now share a subscription and so we have all of it now as a family. So the point is if I croak, she has everything there. And we have to start coming to terms with this that when we die now we leave behind this minefield of digital shit behind us. And we also have these accounts and things and banks. So now your partner has access to it all.

So, be a good digital citizen and get yourself something like that.

Lump of coal. You don’t like those post-credit sequences on movies, what I cannot have any more are these stupid mini-trailers in front of the trailer. Show me the trailer. What is that fucking thing at the beginning of the – I’m already watching the trailer. You know I’m watching it. If I’m going to see your thing, that means I’m watching the trailer. The thing lasts like four seconds. It’s a mini-trailer in front of the trailer.

Go on YouTube, go to a trailer, and watch what happens. Oh, I’m going to watch this trailer. First there’s a mini-trailer. It’s four seconds long. It’s insane.

And then you watch the regular trailer. What is that? Make it stop!

**John:** Done.

**Julie:** Amazing. Amazing. OK, so my Secret Santa, we already covered Pod Save America, which has just been my absolute salvation this year. And I would like to be on it if anybody knows anybody. Honestly, Reed Morano and Susanne Bier I want to say is the last name, Byer, but it’s two female directors in television, Handmaid’s Tale and The Night Manager. And what these two women did visually was so spectacular. Just the art direction, the cinematography, the actual – the visual point of view. That’s where you really can understand a director at least kind of knows their shit a little bit. They’re not just telling a story. They’re presenting a world, a beautiful world to you. And female directors in television, the good ones are few and far between and growing by the day.

But I was so wildly impressed by their work and I think that they, along with Patty Jenkins, and of course Ava DuVernay, on the movie side have really just planted their flag this year and made us all look good.

And then my lump of coal is the six-act structure in broadcast television. It is the death of good storytelling. It is the quagmire of where formerly good writers go to die. It is – when you think about it, it’s really seven-act structure because your title card comes in there and then you’ve got to – every 3.5 minutes you have to turn something and twist something. And it’s horrible.

And somebody today said that finally networks are starting to say, good networks like cable networks, are starting to say, “Oh, we don’t care about the act out. We’ll like act out in the middle of a word if we want. Don’t worry about building to that.” And that is interesting at least to explore because it’s the worst.

**Craig:** Is this for commercial interruptions?

**Julie:** Yeah. The worst.

**Craig:** That’s bad.

**John:** Michael Green?

**Michael:** Secret Santa, The Leftovers.

**Julie:** Ah!

**Michael:** If you haven’t seen it, you do. If you’ve seen it, watch it again. Damon Lindelof, Mimi Leder, speaking of female directors, she’s an authorial voice in there that demands mention and notice. If you haven’t seen it, there was probably a reason. It felt like, oh, that’s too hard. Or maybe there’s some homework. And you know what? First couple episodes, yes. Yes. And there are 450 shows on the air. Anything that takes a couple episodes to get going, I get it. You don’t want to. Like why should I acquire a taste? It’s gross.

No. Just to get to the pleasure of seeing what real writing and what real television – I mean, what it can get to in the third season. It would be worth running a marathon and I will never run a marathon. It is gorgeous. It is liturgy. It’s beautiful. I admire it.

**Julie:** It’s a masterpiece.

**Michael:** It really is. It’s a masterpiece. And just to see how you can end a show by choice, word felt. I watched it and went, “I want to try harder, do better.” And it made me want to.

Lump of shit. This is probably not the room to say this in, but there’s this hashtag I see a lot, #amwriting.

**Craig:** Thank you. I know.

**Michael:** Like if you did that, you’re not. Secondly, writing is like, you know, if you’re a writer that’s hygiene. Like #ambrushingmyteeth. Or worse, it’s like people who declare they’re in love publicly. Then you’re not. #inlove. Like blast fuck you.

Just write and turn your wireless off and shut the fuck up.

**Craig:** That is a man after my own heart. No romance. None.

**Michael:** The romance about writing, just–

**Craig:** Oh, it’s the worst.

**Michael:** Just do your shit.

**John:** Justin Marks, bring us home.

**Justin:** My Secret Santa, and I can’t believe that I even have to say this in 2017, but I would say the thing I’m most grateful for this year is a free press. More specifically, and I want to see it around next year, and I think that especially the kind of press that values good investigative journalism and checking sources. And I think we’ve seen it both on a very high level and then in the last couple months here in this industry how much it can change things. And I really hope that we keep – in the age of the Internet when we’re just sort of pushing free journalism left and right, I hope we all have a newspaper subscription. I really, really do. Or at least the one that gives you the online version of it. That’s my earnest one.

The pile of poop, this is a thing, and I have it here. The fact that cell phones these days, they’re just getting bigger. I have the iPhone SE and this is too big still. I want a smaller phone than this. And I don’t understand why there’s not a choice. Michael has a new phone that I don’t know how it can fit in your pocket. And that’s what the thing is. We live in this age where technology is everything you can fit in a pocket, and yet it can no longer fit in your pocket.

And I just don’t understand why I cannot have a phone the size that I want it to be.

**Julie:** Right. But you’re not 40 yet are you?

**Justin:** No.

**Julie:** Because the vision starts to go and then you can’t see. And I’m like I need a bigger goddamn phone because I can’t read anything.

**Craig:** You ageist.

**John:** So for young bucks like Justin Marks, we want small phones.

**Justin:** Small things. Like really small, like the Zoolander phone. I don’t know why we don’t have that in smartphone technology.

**John:** Yeah, movies promised you the Zoolander phone and it never came.

All right. That is our show for this week. Guys, thank you so much. We have so many people to thank, so let us thank them.

We’ll start off with Chris from the Writers Guild Foundation for putting us on. Writers Guild Foundation, you’re the best. Thank you.

**Craig:** Thank you, Chris.

**John:** We need to thank The Los Angeles Film School for hosting us, especially Daniel who did our AV. Daniel, thank you very much.

**Craig:** Thank you, Daniel.

**John:** We need to thank Dustin Bocks and Nima Yousefi for putting together all of these slides and stuff you saw.

As always, our show is produced by Megan McDonnell. Megan! It is edited by Matthew Chilelli who is in Japan, so cheer loudly for Matthew.

Our intro this week which truly was great, and so you’ll hear it on the real podcast, is Jon Spurney.

**Craig:** Brought to you by the devil.

**John:** Our outro is by Andy Roninson. If you have questions for us, write into ask@johnaugust.com, or find us on Twitter. I’m @johnaugust. Craig is…?

**Craig:** @clmazin.

**John:** What are you guys on Twitter?

**Julie:** @julieplec.

**Michael:** @andmichaelgreen.

**Justin:** I’m really annoying. It’s @justin_marks_ because there’s a NASCAR driver named Justin Marks and it’s really bizarre.

**John:** That’s fine.

**Justin:** Don’t tweet him.

**John:** You can find the show notes for this and all episodes at johnaugust.com, or all of the back episodes at Scriptnotes.net. You guys are the best. Thank you very much and have a happy rest of your 2017.

**Craig:** Merry Christmas.

Links:

* [Show slides](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/Scriptnotes-Dec7-Live-Show.zip), in case you want to follow along at home.
* [Pod Save America](https://crooked.com/podcast-series/pod-save-america/)
* [S Town](https://stownpodcast.org)
* Dirty John to [listen to](http://wondery.com/wondery/shows/dirtyjohn/) or [read](http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-me-dirty-john/)
* [Missing Richard Simmons](https://www.missingrichardsimmons.com)
* Julie Plec on [IMDb](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0687096/)
* Michael Green on [IMDb](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0338169/)
* Justin Marks on [IMDb](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1098479/) and check out his new show [Counterpart](https://www.starz.com/series/counterpart/featured)
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [Julie Plec](https://twitter.com/julieplec), [Michael Green](https://twitter.com/andmichaelgreen) and [Justin Marks](https://twitter.com/Justin_Marks_) on Twitter
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Intro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Jon Spurney and [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Andy Roninson ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_329.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 328: Pitching Television, or Being a Passionate Widget — Transcript

December 13, 2017 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2017/pitching-television-or-being-a-passionate-widget).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 328 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the program we’ll be looking at how you pitch a television show. We’ll also wade back into the turbulent waters of sexual harassment to discuss what the responsibilities are of men, women, and labor unions to remedy it.

**Craig:** That’s not at all a minefield.

**John:** Not a bit of one. But a reminder, we have a live show coming up. That’s next week. Actually this week as you’re hearing this. This Thursday, December 7, in Hollywood we will be welcoming guests Julie Plec, Justin Marks, and Michael Green to talk about wonderful things, including television programs, so you should come. If there’s still tickets you should come.

**Craig:** That’s quite a group there. I mean, got some big movies in there and some big time writers and producers. And as always it benefits the Writers Guild Foundation, which is our favorite charity.

**John:** It is a fantastic charity. If you would like tickets go to wgfoundation.org/events and you will see us there and you can grab yourself a ticket. So, we still haven’t planned everything that’s happening, but I will have some surprises for you, Craig. Things you do not even see coming.

**Craig:** The good news is I don’t ever see anything coming. Everything is an endless surprise to me. I’m like a child.

**John:** Yeah. It’s lovely. You know, persistence of memory, you know, you cover something over with a napkin, oh my god it’s a surprise to you.

**Craig:** Right. You can play peekaboo with me and it still works.

**John:** That’s fantastic. It’s good stuff.

**Craig:** It is good stuff. Great stuff. That’s how I stay young.

**John:** It is. So, let’s get into sexual harassment because this is essentially follow up because in a previous episode we were talking about sexual harassment. Craig, you had some suggestions and guidelines you wanted to propose. And you got some feedback from that, so why don’t you take it from here.

**Craig:** Sure. I got a really interesting email from somebody that I know and I wanted to share it. And I spoke with her and so we’re going to leave her name out of it. We just agreed on the guidelines of things. And I’m editing down the email a little bit, but I think I’m hitting the important points. So I’m just going to go ahead and read this from an anonymous friend.

“Craig, you know that you’re one of my favorite humans.” You know, I wish I could I just stop there, John, honestly, because that’s amazing, right?

**John:** Like on a little thank you card, just write that. Just send it.

**Craig:** Just send it. Because I really appreciate that. Well, it goes on.

“Craig, you know that you’re one of my favorite humans but I feel compelled to disagree with some of what you guys said on the latest episode. I’ve been incredibly lucky to have had a minimal amount of weird and inappropriate interactions in my work life. I happened to have worked for mostly gay men and women. I’m cautious by nature and tend to remove myself when I feel uncomfortable. I’ve worked mostly in progressive areas in well-respected organizations and none of that has stopped me from having awful moments and interactions I would like to forget.

“You said that no one will be offended if you say you’re uncomfortable and I simply cannot stress how untrue that is. Offended may look different on different people. It may come off as anger, acting dismissive, annoyed, patronizing, etc. But it will be there every single time.

“I have been told I have offended people for far less than standing up for myself after a moment of questionable behavior by a colleague. The result of offended, no matter what it looks like, is the same. You will be someone that no one wants to work with.

“You also said to remove yourself when something feels rapey. Two things. I can’t ever remember worrying that a colleague would rape me. It’s almost never that cut and dry. If someone has a rapist t-shirt then, yeah, you should leave. Short of that, it will often just feel like you’re dealing with a guy who is maybe a little too interested but not crossing any big red lines.

“Second thing. If I remove myself from every workplace where there were someone that I had a bad gut feeling about, I wouldn’t ever work again. The conversation I would much rather have is around how do we talk to men about this situation. For women, this is almost mundane. It is such a part of our lives. Rather than us twisting ourselves in knots to figure out workarounds, can we talk about how men treat women?

“Let me tell you why this matters to me. The situations I had didn’t physically scar me or even traumatize me. Again, I’ve been very lucky. What they did do is slowly chip away at my sense of self-worth. They subtly tell you that the only reason you’re in the room is because you’re young and female and that your voice or opinions are irrelevant. You don’t get attention when you succeed or when you fail, which are net positive things. You get attention when you look nice and no other time.”

So, I read this and I thought this is a very fair criticism. I mean, first of all there’s a lot of great insights in there that I think you and I probably wouldn’t be able to have access to because we’re not in the same situation that women are in, so I really appreciated that point. And I also think that the larger point that she’s making which is it’s not easy to just say I’m offended and I’m walking away is true. And they’re right about that. They meaning anyone who agrees with that.

And I also think that it is true that even though we are trying to do a service by telling people how to manage difficult situations that are imposed upon them, it is true that we – I think you and I have a responsibility if we’re going to talk about that part of it to talk about the other part which is, “OK boys, how are you supposed to behave.”

**John:** Yeah. Fair. I think what I got so much out of her letter is that how do you deal with these difficult situations without being labeled difficult. And that she wants to be in that room. She wants to be doing her work and she feels like if she calls anybody on their behavior she’s immediately sort of ostracized as that person who is like, “Oh, she can’t play. She can’t hang. She’s not one of us.”

And that is a terrible situation. And so I think you’re right. We need to look at what are the responsibilities of men, women, and everybody else in that room and in those working situations to not let that happen. Because I think your advice was well-intentioned. You said that if you feel that you’re at an unsafe place, get yourself out of that place. And that is one end of this horrible spectrum of behaviors we’re seeing where there are literal attacks and assaults happening.

But in attempting to get yourself out of those possible bad situations, she’s saying you are opening yourself up for the other kind of bad thing that we see happening on the other end of the spectrum which is just like opportunities being taken away because you’re not longer seen as cool.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I think we heard a bit of this too from Dara Resnik and from Daley Haggar when they were on. And it’s a sense of damned if you do, damned if you don’t. If you don’t say anything and you just stay there, you become a victim. If say something, protest, or try and get out, you become a complainer. And so what I think we’re hearing here, and it makes total sense, is that there are certain situations where there are no behaviors that women can engage in that end in a kind of victory. That really it’s just a competition between negative outcomes and you’re trying to look for the least worst situation, which isn’t ideal, so maybe we should be coming at this from the other side which is what can we say to the people perpetrating this stuff so that women aren’t in this situation of having to pick the lesser of evils.

**John:** Yeah. So I mean a couple thoughts. First is to listen to letters like this that make it clear that these situations happen. Because I feel like a lot of times I think men aren’t aware that they’re creating these impossible situations for the women they’re working with.

**Craig:** I agree. I think that that is very much part of what happens. I also think that there are a lot of guys who know exactly what they’re doing and just don’t care. And maybe, perhaps I’m naïve, but maybe if we just codify certain things it will be a little harder for them to get away with it.

**John:** Well let’s talk about codifying things, because I had a great conversation with a writer who is on a TV show this last week and he said that they’re looking in their room as they’re sort of figuring out for next season. They want to come in with a list of like “These are going to be the house rules. This is what we’re going to be doing. This is how it’s all going to work.” And the writing staff is going to vote anonymously on those things. And any one of those rules that gets like two people voting for it is part of the rules for that room. It’s part of the rules for how that show is going to work with the writers.

Will that solve everything? No, it won’t. But at least there’s a thing you can point to saying like, “Hey, this is how we’re going to do it.” And so if someone is breaking one of those rules, everybody sees that he is breaking one of those rules. And I think that helps not only the woman who is being harassed or bullied. It helps everyone else in that room be able to point out like, “Hey, this is not right. We agreed this was not right. You’re breaking the norms of what’s happening here.”

I think with rules you can help set norms. And norms are what’s not being followed here.

**Craig:** I totally agree. I think that’s actually really important that we distinguish between norms, social mores, and laws. It is illegal to sexually assault someone. But it is not illegal to make a joke that makes someone uncomfortable. And what it is is just a violation of a social norm and a social more. And I think a lot of times what happens is people throw up their hands and say, “Well you can’t legislate behavior.”

No, you absolutely can. Here’s an example. Let’s say I work in a writer’s room. And it’s lunch time. And we all eat lunch around the table. When lunch comes, I have the soup. And I decide to eat it with my hands. I just lift up handfuls of soup and just rub them into my face. That’s not illegal. There’s no law against that. It’s weird. It’s creepy. It’s wrong. It is a violation of a social norm.

Similarly, I can’t take my socks and shoes off and put my bare feet up on the table. It’s gross. We all know this. But somehow when it comes to creating a sense of social mores around the way we respect each other and particularly the way men respect women in a room, we get – we become uber libertarians who can’t imagine the notion of any kind of restraint.

Well, I have a bunch of restraints I’d like to suggest.

**John:** Well, Craig, I will say though both your soup example and your taking off your shoes and socks and putting your feet on the table, I have not worked on a lot of TV staffs, but I will guarantee you that someone could write in saying like that exact thing happened on our TV show. And the more powerful the person is who is taking off the socks or eating soup with his hands, the harder it is for other people in the room to call him out on that behavior. And so that’s I think part of the reason why you want to have some written out thing of like these are the things we – like if it says on the wall “Don’t take off your shoes and socks and put your feel on the table,” then we know not to do that.

And that is I think what I’m asking for people to try to do is to have a little bit more codifying of what it is that’s going to be OK and what is not OK.

**Craig:** I completely agree. I mean, I only really raise that point to say as a response to people who can’t imagine that it’s even possible to create rules.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** So I have some rules.

**John:** Go for it. I want to hear them.

**Craig:** I have ideas of rules. Here’s an easy one. Keep your hands to yourself.

**John:** Yep.

**Craig:** I mean, this is a nursery school rule. This is kindergarten stuff. Apparently it’s difficult for some people. So, let’s just make it a rule. Keep your hands to yourself. I don’t need to touch anybody to do my job. We’re not massage therapists.

**John:** Josh Friedman had an interesting tweet back as all this stuff was starting to break that when he is in a work situation, like when someone is a writer on one of the shows that he’s working on, like even if that woman is a friend they’re not hugging. They’re not hugging in the room because it’s just this weird moment. And so let’s just maybe not touch each other.

**Craig:** Keep your hands to yourself. And then when it comes to things like jokes, which seems to be an area where a lot of things go wrong, here’s a general guideline and I think these are all incredibly followable. I try to follow them myself. Until you have a sense that a certain area of comedy is safe with another person, just presume that their mom or dad is there with you. Then you’re not going to say that certain kind of thing. You got to find out if someone is OK with some sort of comedy before you get there. And we all know what we’re talking about. We all understand that some humor pushes the envelope. Some humor is edgy. Some isn’t.

You know what? Hold off on the super edgy stuff until you get a sense of whether or not it’s OK with the other person. And if you think it is, and it turns out you were wrong, and the person is upset, stop. Just stop. Apologize. You misread it. That’s it. Say you’re sorry and don’t do it again. That’s that.

**John:** So when Dara and Daley were on the show they talked about you have to have a freedom in the writer’s room to sort of pitch out stuff and not censor yourself from bad ideas, bad jokes, and sort of going into dangerous territory. I get that. And also people are going to point out the Friends’ decision which I will quickly summarize by saying there was a lawsuit against the Friends TV show by someone who was working in that writer’s room and she lost. And essentially you could read it to say all is fair game in the writer’s room. That’s too broad a reading of that. That was a very specific situation.

What I would point you to is like there’s still the possibility of sexual harassment in a writer’s room if things go too far, if you create a situation where people feel unsafe.

Here’s a good tip for a joke. Pitch a joke about a character. Don’t pitch a joke about somebody in the room. Don’t aim stuff at people who are in the room in general. Just let it be about the characters and the show, not about the folks who are sitting around you.

**Craig:** I agree. And look when I talk about a sense of humor, a show has a sense of humor. If you go to work on a show that is dark, then the room will be dark, because people are trying to pitch for the dark show. If you go into The Simpsons, then you know what that sense of humor is. You should be pitching within it. This is less to me about what you’re pitching in a room to try and get comedy going. It’s more about what you’re doing when you bump into somebody by the coffee machine, or in the hallway. That’s what I’m talking about.

I think that’s where it gets particularly pernicious when you’re just invading somebody with a sense of humor that they don’t like. What is the point of a sense of humor if the other person isn’t laughing? Just stop.

**John:** Yep. Agreed.

**Craig:** Physical guidelines like — there’s certain rules that people generally follow, I’m talking to boys. You meet somebody, a woman, in professional situation. You don’t know her, or you vaguely know her. Maybe you met once a long time ago. It’s a handshake.

When you are working with women and you know each other very frequently, it is just very common in our business that people will hug. There’s nothing wrong with it. I call it the business hug. Nothing wrong with a business hug. But make it a business hug. There’s apparently a problem where people don’t understand how hugging works. It’s about a second long. And the purpose of the hug is to finish the hug as fast as you can. That’s the way I look at it. There’s no squeezing. There’s no holding on. It’s not a real hug. I mean, how did people miss this? It’s not a real hug. It’s not the way you hug your child or your spouse. It’s a quick business hug. It is a formal act.

Same with the cheek kiss. I don’t really like the cheek kiss.

**John:** I don’t like the cheek kiss either. Let’s rule out the cheek kiss. This isn’t France.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** It was lovely while I was living in Paris. We don’t need it here. Here’s what I’ll say about the hug is it should be the same kind of hug if you’re hugging a guy or you’re hugging a woman. And guys hug here. It’s fine. It’s natural. But it’s quick. It’s really quick. So don’t linger. It doesn’t need to linger.

**Craig:** Yeah. No, that’s a great guideline. Basically you’re hugging this person because they’re a professional and this is what we do to greet each other as professionals and that’s it. So the hug is the same for a man. It’s the same for a woman. That’s that. Real simple.

And I would also say — another guideline I would give to boys is – I like saying boys, by the way. We don’t say boys enough.

**John:** Boys.

**Craig:** Women refer to each other as girls all the time. It’s affectionate.

**John:** Craig, I would say though does boys infantilize or take away some of the sting of it. So essentially you know like, “Oh, they’re just being boys.” That’s my only worry about the “boys” term.

**Craig:** All right. They’re men. They’re people with XY chromosomes who are moving through the world and they’re adults. Men.

**John:** Men.

**Craig:** Don’t be a physical reviewer in the workspace. It’s fine every now and then if somebody changes their hair to say, “Whoa, cool. Nice haircut.” And it’s perfectly fine if somebody walks in with some awesome new shirt or some amazing new kicks to go, “Oh, I like that. I like the shirt. I like the sneakers.” But otherwise just shut up about it. Nobody cares. Nobody wants to hear your opinions about how people look about their hair, their makeup, their clothes, their body type, their shoes, whether or not they smile, whether or not they don’t smile, their funny eyes, their beautiful eyes, their stupid eyes. Whatever. Just shut up. Nobody cares. That’s not why people are there.

So when our friend writes in and says you get attention when you look nice and no other time, that is such a disaster. And if you are in a workplace and you are sharing your workplace with women, as I imagine you are and should be, then you just have to get it through their head that they’re there because of their minds.

I mean, we are creative people. We’re not doing physical labor. They’re there because of their minds. Comment on the quality of their minds. That’s it.

**John:** So, here’s an opportunity. If you are about to make a comment about someone’s physical appearance, you might stop and think if there’s something else you could say. I mean, you’re basically just trying to start a conversation or just like to fill an awkward silence or just do the normal social interactions of things, think of something else you can say rather than commenting on how the person looks.

**Craig:** I think that you and I have a decent starting list here, but this is by no means all-encompassing and I’m sure that different places have different call for different rules and different guidelines.

I think the important thing though is that men in this business have to start talking to each other about generally speaking how we’re supposed to be. And I do believe that if you are in a situation where you are saying things that you know would be hurtful to somebody but they’re not there and they’re never going to be there. Look, humor does as humor does. And there’s different levels of intention.

I know that people are flawed and imperfect. This isn’t about perfection. This is about when you are with people and it’s about not making life miserable for these other human beings. And I cannot promise you that you’re doing it because it’s going to make your life easier. I’m just telling you you should do it because it makes you a better person. It makes you a more honorable person. It’s just basic human decency. And I think we’re all better off for it.

**John:** Yeah. So I would say that if people have additional suggestions for things that should be on that list of like how not to be a jerk as a man, tweet at us. Send us an email. And we can certainly add to this list and maybe post this for things that people can think over as they’re moving out into the world.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** We have an email from Carlton who writes, “I wonder if you could see any role for the WGA in preventing sexual harassment in your industry. Could you imagine the WGA or other unions calling for a mini-strike at a company where there are allegations of sexual harassment or assault, which are safety issues if nothing else? One thing that victims have been saying in all these stories is that there was no point going to HR or even no HR department at all these companies. I know if I had a problem at my workplace I could always go to my union.”

So, Carlton has a fair question. You know, unions are set up to help the workers of an industry. Basically we are there to provide workplace protection. And this is a situation where some of our workers are either physically not safe or they are being treated poorly on the job.

So, yes, that is that is a union concern. It is a concern for the WGA, for the DGA, for SAG, for everyone below the line. Yes, every union needs to be thinking about sexual harassment and how they can make sure that their members who are working at these places are being treated OK.

So, there’s a lot kind of going on behind the scenes. And so I would say that you’re going to see a lot of stuff in the New Year about what happens next in terms of how the unions can address this individually but also impressively together to have systems that help protect workers in these situations.

**Craig:** well that’s good to hear. I don’t think that we can pull strikes per se legally against an entire company. Like I don’t think if somebody experiences sexual harassment at CBS that the Writers Guild could strike all of CBS. I don’t think we could do that legally. But certainly the union should be involved in these things. All those unions you mentioned should be.

Interestingly and trick-ily, who are the people that are doing the sexual harassment? Sometimes it is management. Sometimes it is our own members. I mean, when we talk about some of the showrunners, we’re talking about Writers Guild members. When we’re talking about a director with an actor, we’re talking about DGA members. So it’s not quite as clear cut as it might be say for somebody who is working in food services at a plant and so you’ve got your shop steward saying, OK, management is doing something to one of the workers. It’s complicated.

**John:** It’s also complicated because sometimes if it is management or if it’s a producer or if it’s somebody else, a manager, that is a person who is not under any sort of union control. So how do you – and that same person could be harassing writers and harassing PAs and harassing actors. And so how do you keep track of all that? Well, I think there has to be an industry-wide response to these situations.

Carlton’s also question about going to HR, well in order to file some of these lawsuits to get some of these actions to take effect you do need to go to HR. But what I’d urge anyone listening to this to know is that you also need to go to your union. And so the same time you go to file an HR complaint, you go to the union and the union can come with you. I know it’s true for the WGA. I’m sure it’s true for SAG and for DGA.

So there’s people there who have your back. And so it’s important to sort of like – the union has a role to play here and so does every member of a union.

**Craig:** Do we have a specific person at the Writers Guild that people should be contacting?

**John:** Yes. And so I’ll put a link in the show notes to that. So, yes, there’s a whole plan. And you’re going to see more stuff coming out from the Guild about exactly what steps to take if you’re encountering these situations.

**Craig:** Great. That’s very useful. Good.

**John:** Cool. A follow up question from Ben in Colorado. “On a recent episode you were both talking about how the screenwriters should not end dialogue with a parenthetical under it, except in animation. Can you talk about this exception and some of the other differences between writing for live action versus animation?”

All right, I can take this. So, in animation you do sometimes leave parentheticals underneath actor’s dialogue for sound effects or for like gasps. For things like that that would just be assumed in live action, but because you’re recording audio separately you actually mark all those gasps in there or like sneezes and other little things. You put them all in dialogue to make sure they actually get recorded when they go in to do the sound recording.

**Craig:** Efforts.

**John:** Efforts. Yes. The grunts. The groans. All that stuff. You put that in the dialogue track whereas you might drop that into action in a live action feature. Otherwise, animation scripts look almost exactly the same. The numbering happens a little bit differently because they do things by kind of these sequences, these reels situations. But other than that there’s not huge differences between the script that we as screenwriters are doing and for animation and what we would be doing in live action.

There’s, of course, a second step. So it goes from the screenplay into storyboards. And storyboards are these picture versions of our scripts. And things do change in that process. And so a lot of times the screenwriter will have to come back in and tweak dialogue based on the order of shots and sort of how the scene is shaping out when they actually board it. But script-wise it doesn’t look that different.

**Craig:** Yeah. I wouldn’t get hung up on it.

**John:** Last bit of follow up, the switch from documentary to narrative film. We had several people writing in to offer examples of adapted documentaries. On a previous thing you had said like, “Oh, it’s not a common thing to do to go from a documentary to a feature.”

**Craig:** [laughs] Apparently it happens literally every day. Sometimes I’m so wrong it’s like shocking.

**John:** Yeah. So do you want to read through some of these?

**Craig:** Well sure. So some examples that people sent in. Hands on a Hard Body was a documentary that follows a competition to win a new truck which Doug Wright and Trey Anastasio turned into a Broadway musical. A Broadway musical I saw.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** Hunter Foster, brother of Sutton Foster, was starring in that one.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** Man on Wire becoming Robert Zemeckis’ The Walk. And Loving based in part on the documentary the Loving Story. So, those were three. But it was like a cascade of them. And someone even said like, you know, I used to work in acquisitions where all we did was try and find documentaries and turn them into movies. So, I’m an idiot basically is the point.

And it’s important to say to people, you know, you can’t just trust people because they have a stupid podcast. That doesn’t mean a damn thing. Just don’t trust me.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Not a word.

**John:** I’d also say that it’s important when you are wrong to admit that you’re wrong and to say it on subsequent episodes.

**Craig:** Oh god, yeah. Sometimes I’m not just wrong. Sometimes I’m gloriously wrong. I actually feel like that’s really the goal. It’s not very interesting to be slightly wrong. You know? Like you stumble and people don’t really notice. But if you can really trip and land with your hands to your side, so you’re catching the ground with your face, that’s fun.

**John:** That’s the way you do it.

**Craig:** That’s how you do it.

**John:** All right. Let’s see if we can be gloriously wrong in our next segment which is about pitching television.

**Craig:** Oh, no, I’m going to nail this. This one I’ve got. Yeah.

**John:** Previously on Scriptnotes we’ve done episodes about producers and pitching. That was Episode 55. And pitching an open writing assignment. That was Episode 248.

But we got an email about how do I go out and pitch a TV show. And some of our other writer friends have been chatting about that recently, too, so I thought we’d just dig into what it’s like to pitch a TV show. Because I’ve done this three times. Craig, you did it for your Chernobyl show, but have you pitched other TV shows? Or was that the only one?

**Craig:** That’s the only one.

**John:** Great. So I can go through my experiences and we can hear what Craig’s experience was with Chernobyl. But it’s a lot like a feature pitch but you’re pitching some different parameters and they’re looking for very different things as you go into that room. So, let’s talk through pitches in a very general sense because this is what happens in every pitch meeting. You go into a room. There’s five minutes of chitchat. And eventually you transition into, OK, now we’re going to start talking about the thing that you’re here for.

What’s different about television versus feature pitches is in television they’ve invited you in for a specific reason. So, either you’re going into the studio or you’re going into the network. They know in a general sense what the story area is. They want you to be in that room. They’re in theory happy to hear your pitch.

In features, previously we talked about the elevator pitches, that really tight version of a pitch which you don’t use that much. We’ll have pitches where we’ll go into pitch on an assignment that started there, so it’s like an open writing assignment or it’s based on a property.

With these TV pitches it’s this weird kind of middle form where you’re going in and they know the general area that you’re pitching but you have to really walk them through the whole idea. And so a pitch might be 15 minutes. It might be 30 minutes. But it has to be a really complete package, not just for what the pilot is going to be, but for what this series is going to be and why they need to bid right now to get this series so they can make it for their season.

**Craig:** Yes. I find it to be a very different kind of pitch than a feature pitch only because of the nature of the medium itself. I feel like it’s actually much easier to pitch television because what you’re trying to do is create a sense of ongoing interest. And in features you’re trying to create something that is whole and finished. It’s really hard to pitch something to somebody and then tell them how it evolves and then tell them how it ends. It’s hard.

And in television you’re just – I think your job is to get them as excited about the potential as you are. In features, it’s not about potential. It’s about you’ve done it.

**John:** Well, it goes back to the very nature of what is a feature versus what is a series is that a feature is about a story that can only be told once. A television show is a story that can repeat itself, or can grow and change and become a different thing. And so for a feature you’re pitching this is exactly what I’m going to give you, versus a TV show. This is the area in which this thing would go. Like you’re pointing towards a trajectory rather than one destination.

**Craig:** Right. See, in television I always feel like you’re pitching – I always feel like. I pitched one thing for television, but in my mind if I go and pitch another thing this is what I believe. You’re pitching an experience. And in features you’re pitching a product.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And it’s natural, I think, for feature purchasers to want you to give them more of a sense of completion and more of a sense of the details having been worked out because you have one thing that you’re pitching, a beginning, middle, and end. In television, I think there’s a general relief valve. No one is expecting you to be able to pitch the beginning, middle, and end of ten episodes or 22 episodes. Not at all.

So, you can talk more about what the nature of the experience will be. I find that to be much more engaging for me. And I can only assume it’s more engaging for them.

**John:** So a writer colleague passed along this list by Peter Micelli who is an agent at CAA. I assume this is the list that he sends to his clients to send out. But it was a very good general sense of this is the flow of what a lot of TV pitches are like. You start by talking about the inspiration. Really like what the idea means to you. What you’re trying to convey is that this is, you know, something that is deeply emotionally connected to you, because remember you’re pitching not just this idea, but that you are the person to bring this idea to life. And that you are the person who is going to work 23 hours a day to get this show exactly right and perfect. That you’re passionate about it. So they want to hear that kind of from the start.

Then you’re pitching the general themes and sort of the concepts of it. This is what areas this touches on. This can also be the answer to the question why now. Why would we do this TV show in 2018 versus 2005? What is it about today’s world that makes this show especially compelling and really demands to have this kind of show be on the air? Why does it fit?

And only then are you sort of getting into kind of the show itself. You’re giving them the sense of the kinds of things that happen in the show. You’re starting to introduce the characters. But really at first you’re pitching a vision – a personal vision and then sort of a global vision. And only then are you getting into the meat of like so here are the characters, here’s how we’re seeing the characters do their thing. This is what happens in the pilot, but these are the intriguing things that are happening. These are open threads that are going to carry us through to future episodes, and ideally in the fantasy world into season two.

Was that at all your experience going into Chernobyl? Did you start with your personal connection, Craig?

**Craig:** Yeah. I had not seen this, but this is essentially what I did. And this is a guess, because I never sit in a room, nor have I ever sat in a room to hear a writer pitch me something to get me to give them money for it. But I have to imagine that the thing that person fears the most is somebody coming in there in order to get money from them. There are people, I mean, writing is a tough gig, and sometimes people need work. And sometimes people are desperate and sometimes people are trying. Sometimes people are trying to manipulate the system or game the system or get some employment. Whatever it is. And they come in and they just start going through the mechanics. And on the other side of the table they’re like, “But where is the heart? Where is the soul here? Why? I feel like you just want to get a job.”

And bizarrely that’s the worst way to get a job. It would never occur to me to walk into a pitch for a television show that I wanted to do and not begin with, “I want to do a crazy thing. It is going to take me a long time. It is going to be really, really hard, and I really want to do it. And here’s why.” Simple as that.

**John:** Simple as that. When we had Benioff and Weiss on to talk about Game of Thrones, their backstory on Game of Thrones was that they were just obsessed with the book. And I remember an anecdote where one of the HBO guys was at the gym and he saw – I think it was D.B. Weiss – just like going – like D.B Weiss was on the treadmill but still going through the book and marking stuff. And that’s when he saw like, oh, the passion. These guys are obsessed with making this TV show. That’s what networks and studios want is obsessed people who will work to death to try to make these shows happen.

So you have to start with that sense of like this is something I must do. I am the perfect person for this because of XYZ and this is the perfect time to do this kind of show.

**Craig:** Yeah. You become a force of nature then. See, like when I came into pitch my miniseries, I think they must have noticed that I was kind of on fire about it. And I had been thinking about it and researching it for a long time. A long, long time. And I was able to answer a lot of questions. And I was able to talk about specific moments. And really instead of trying to convince them of anything, all I was doing was sharing what had convinced me. So, that’s kind of the deal.

Nobody wants you to manipulate them into a decision. What they want from a good pitch, and I think this is true for features, too, is they want to be able to see, and feel, and experience what you saw and felt and experienced when you fell in love. And then, listen, sometimes they say, “You know what? You look at that and you see beauty, I look at it and I don’t. So, it won’t work out here.” But a lot of times they say, “Oh my god, yes, I’m seeing this through your eyes now and I’m excited.”

That’s the most important thing.

**John:** I’ve sold three TV shows as pilots. And in each case I genuinely loved it. I was genuinely obsessed with the idea and I could completely see what the vision was for the show. And I’d say – so I pitched to studios, and then I had to pitch to networks. And in every one of those meetings I was just as passionate about it. And some of them were like, “Yes, yes, we absolutely want this show.” And some of them were like, “Nah, not for us.”

And a lot of times I could feel as I left the room it was like, oh, that did not go well. That is not going to work for them. But in each time I was conveying the same excitement and the same enthusiasm because I really genuinely did want to do this. I wanted to put aside feature stuff to try to do this TV show. And they respond to that. They see that.

And even the places that didn’t pick it, they didn’t pick it because they didn’t believe in me. It just wasn’t a good fit for them. That’s still going to happen. You’re still going to have situations where they say no. But you’re going to have a much better likelihood of saying yes if they see that you are the right obsessed person for it.

**Craig:** That’s a really good distinction to make. I think for a lot of people that work regularly as screenwriters, television writers, we are being asked to come and help on things. And at that point what they’re saying is we want you. We want you for you. And there may be writers who hear, “OK, there’s an open writing assignment. A rewrite on blah-blah-blah. And so you’re going to go in and pitch on it.” And five other people are pitching on it. And what you’re pitching is you and your suitability for their needs. And when they reject you or pass on you, it is about you. And that can hurt.

When you’re pitching your own material it’s not about you at all. It’s about the material. They may love you, they just don’t want to make a movie about this. They may love you, but they have a television show already in development that’s kind of close to the one you have, or they once made a show that was a little bit like yours and it was a disaster for them so they just don’t want to deal with it. So it’s not about you. And that actually psychologically I think is a nice benefit if you are aware of it.

**John:** Absolutely. So, I would say it is about you in terms of like they want to see your passion and your excitement, but they can still see that and pass. And if they’re passing, then it’s not about you. It really is truly about sort of how it fits in their plan for what they’re going to try to make.

So when you were pitching Chernobyl, did you talk about the characters by their names? Did you talk about actor names? How were you describing the principal people who were going to be in your show?

**Craig:** Well, I narrowed it down to the three that I felt were the most important. And then a fourth that was important just so we understood what was happening with the other three. There are something like 100 speaking parts on this show. You can easily drown somebody in details. But ultimately I was able to say this is why I wanted to do this because of this person. And what this meant. Not only what they did, but what their whole connection to this whole process was. What it did to them. What it signified. And what it signifies for all of us. And their key relationships with these two other people.

And you sort of use that as a touchstone, because I do believe whether it’s features or television you should never talk about something that happens in a show or a movie without pointing out why it matters to a relationship, hopefully a relationship, but at a minimum to a character.

**John:** Absolutely. So when you are talking about these three characters, you used their – they’re based on real people – do you use their character names or do you refer to them as a Stellan Skarsgard?

**Craig:** No, I use their names. And because I don’t want to seem, I don’t know, too desperate or showy. I also feel like when you start mentioning actors you’re giving too much rope to the other side of the table with which to hang you. Because they may not like those actors for some reason. They may have worked with those actors and hated them. They may decide that your interest in those actors implies a certain poor taste.

You never know. So, what I like to do is only discuss that at the end if there seems like real interest. And then they say, “Well who do you see?” And then I’ll say, well, these are the kinds of people that I’ve been thinking about. And I never just put one down. But I have the one that I want.

And at that point I’m really kind of now – now I feel like I have them and now I’m actually kind of checking on them to see if they’re on board with me.

**John:** Absolutely. That can be a very useful thing. In a pitch I did last year, I needed to convey that it was a certain type of person. And so I ended up falling on it’s a Chris. It’s a Chris Evans, it’s a Chris Pratt. It’s a Chris Pine. It’s one of the Chris’s. Which was a useful sort of joke in terms of like there are a bunch of people who are sort of in that space who could do one of those things.

If you were in a TV show situation you could say, “Sort of like a TV Chris Pine.” That is a thing we can sort of understand. And so it provides a context for like the kind of person you should picture in your head for this role. And it was just helpful just for the pitch. It doesn’t mean that you’re going to cast a Chris Pine-type in that part, but just to get them through this 15 minutes of story it’s helpful if they have some image in their head of who this person is.

Some writers will bring in little boards with pictures on them to show different characters. I’ve done that. Sometimes it’s really helpful.

What can be helpful about having a physical thing is then when they’re going back through the pitch or they’re asking you questions they can point to the board that you were talking about then and it helps to remind them like, OK yeah, there was that moment. Tell me more about this guy again. And so having something physical they can point to can be useful.

Did you bring in anything in for Chernobyl?

**Craig:** Not a thing. And, you know, listening to you talk about the image board it strikes me that one of the mistakes that so-called gurus make, other than advertising themselves as gurus and taking people’s money, which they shouldn’t, is that they prescribe solutions as if this is the way to do things.

It seems to me that we are all very, very different. And the most important thing you can take with you into a pitch is your best move. The move that makes you most comfortable and the move that advertises your strength. And it’s not necessarily your strength as a writer you’re advertising, but your strength as an employee. So, you go in there and you show them this board and these images, because you’re comfortable – that’s your safe place. That’s a good place for you. You’re organized. You’ve thought it through. You’re planned. You have this thing here.

And for me, I find that more of an ad-libbed conversation, a back and forth, like a sense of mutual discovery of the show together is kind of – that’s how I’m happy. And while I’m doing it of course I’m leading the conversation. But I like a conversation. And whatever it is that works for you, do that. I mean, for god’s sake never let anybody tell you that you can’t do something like bring in an image board or just show up and talk if that’s what you’re best at.

**John:** Definitely. I had the opportunity to be on the other side of the table once for a project. We were going to do Tower of Terror over at Disney. And it all fell apart because it no longer exists as a ride.

**Craig:** That’s a good reason.

**John:** That’s a good reason. It no longer exists. I got the opportunity to sit across from three writers, or three writing teams, who had come in to pitch their version of it. And they were all fantastic. And I would have loved to have hired all three of them. We hired none of them because it never existed as a project.

But it was fascinating to see the different ways they were approaching the same material and the different ways they were approaching the process of pitching. And some of them were – they were all writing teams, so in some cases one person just did all the pitching and then the other person would come in for the questions and stuff.

Other times you could see it was a much rehearsed, like they’d worked through the whole thing. It was all a bit. It was funny along the way. Other times it’s just like one guy reads a paragraph, the other guy reads a paragraph. They can all work. The last one was probably the hardest to get through.

**Craig:** That’s a little rough.

**John:** But I will say that the ones that stuck with me most was not a person reading off a piece of paper. Because I can read. I don’t need you to read something to me. I need to see you describe it to me. And I need to see what your vision for this really is. And that’s especially important in television where they are making a long-term contract with you to be creating this show, running this show, to be there when everything goes horrible. So they need to see in your eyes that you really do have a vision for how this is going to work.

**Craig:** Such a great point. Because in features, in the back of their minds they’re always thinking, “Well, it’s a great idea. Let’s just—“

**John:** “Who could I have write that?”

**Craig:** Yeah. “You know what? Let’s pay this dude whatever we got to pay him, and then let’s bring her in because she’s great and we’ll pay her a lot. And she’s really going to write it.”

You can’t do that in television. I mean it’s theoretically possible. Occasionally it happens. But by and large they’re trying to avoid that.

So you’re absolutely right. For television they really are looking for long-term partners. I can only imagine they respond much more readily to confidence than to sweatiness. When you sound desperate, feel desperate, seem desperate, you are just immediately less attractive. There’s just no way around it. As an employee. There’s just no way around it. I’m not even sure that’s fair, because I think that a lot of people are not confident in that situation. But then would be remarkably confident in the room. And hopefully you have somebody on the other side of the table who can price that in. But generally speaking if you can be confident and most importantly if you can seem alive and interested.

**John:** Yep.

**Craig:** Then I think there’s something to hold onto. You want to be near people who have that positive passion.

**John:** Definitely. So a thing I think we should stress is that if you’re being invited in to pitch to the network, to pitch to the studio, you’re probably not a brand new writer. You’re probably a writer who has some credit under your belt. Either you were staffed on a TV show or there’s some other reason why you’re interesting or notable.

But that reason could be something really small or recent. So like when I came in to do my first TV show, D.C., my first feature Go had shot but hadn’t come out yet. I was newly hot. And so they were excited to meet with me because they liked my writing, they thought I was going to be a pretty big deal. And so I was able to convince them and convey that I’m the person who could do this show. But I was also coming in with an established producer who they had as a fallback. So they could look at my eyes and see the passion. They could look in his eyes and see that he can at least get a show on the air. And that was the combo.

So, it may seem like we’re pitching this pitching topic to the folks who are already staff writers on something or who are moving up the food chain, or the feature writers who are switching over to TV. But I really do think it’s not that far in the future for really anybody as a writer.

**Craig:** I agree. I mean, sooner or later, right?

**John:** Sooner or later.

**Craig:** I think everybody is going to be in a situation where they’re pitching something and they have nothing going for them. It may not be in TV, it may be in features, but I mean you and I both had those experiences. Every writer has that experience at least once.

**John:** Yep. The Duffer Brothers were just brothers at one point.

**Craig:** They were just brothers. [laughs]

**John:** The Duffer Brothers.

**Craig:** That’s right. And I remember those days and I remember understanding, OK, so I’m being brought in as a widget. They don’t know who I am. Their expectations are incredibly low. Every other widget is a certain kind of widget. I’m going to surprise them. I’m going to be memorable. I’m going to be smart and I’m going to be passionate. I’m going to get myself out of widget category. Sometimes you can. Sometimes – I remember very early on in my career I was pitching something — I won’t say who the executive is. I don’t think he’s in the business anymore.

And he just looked so bored. And so I just stopped and I said, “You know what? I’m boring you. I don’t want to bore you. Let’s just wrap it up. Let’s wrap it up.”

And he’s like, “I’m sorry. I’m sorry. You weren’t boring me. You weren’t boring me.”

I’m like, “It’s OK. It’s OK.”

And he goes, “Oh, you know, I’m tired.” And he had some excuses, but I got out of there. Because–

**John:** I’ve gotten out of that room, too. And I wasn’t so forthright to say like, “Oh, I’m boring you. This is done.” But you’ve ripped cords in your pitch. And we’re going to jump through and now we’re done. Clearly it’s just not going to connect.

**Craig:** Let’s just get to the end here as fast as we can.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** For those of you who are yet to do this, to have this experience, there are some bad pitches in your future. And nobody – nobody – manages to avoid them. At some point they will happen. Generally speaking part of the problem is, aside from the fact that you are new, because you’re new you’re pitching to people who are also either new or even worse not new but just slowly sliding down the ladder of Hollywood.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** It’s the worst. Just the worst. And those are just awful because now everyone seems desperate. It’s like, “Oh my god, Willy Loman has come in to pitch Willy Loman.” Ugh.

**John:** [laughs] Yeah, both of you are just thinking let’s make this work. We could rub some nickels together.

**Craig:** Right. Everyone is just pathetic. It’s just like Jack Lemmon from Glengarry Glen Ross and Willy Loman. It’s the worst. And everyone is sweaty and sad and you didn’t even know what’s going on, or why. They’re coming. You can’t avoid them.

**John:** Yep. It’s gonna happen. All right, let’s do our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is super simple. It is a hair brush that was recommended on Kevin Kelly’s Cool Tools, which is another thing you should check out because it’s a really good blog. I’ll put a link to that.

But my daughter has long straight hair and it is just a disaster to try to get a hairbrush through it some mornings. And so I’m usually the person who has to do that and I get sort of elbowed for hurting her.

**Craig:** Ah yes.

**John:** This hairbrush is really good. It’s called the Tangle Teezer. It sort of looks more like something you’d use to brush a horse. It has these really thin plastic things and you think, well, this wouldn’t work. But it works remarkably well. So you just go zip-zip-zip and it’s just a great piece of technology in plastic form. So I would recommend if you have long hair or hair that is difficult to brush with normal brushes, I’d say check this out because I was skeptical and incredibly impressed.

**Craig:** Yeah, the stuff that you and I know about hair. Oh boy.

**John:** Oh my gosh. Yes.

**Craig:** I’m lucky my daughter has always liked having her hair short. She has very thick hair and very straight hair, but she likes it short and purple. I think it’s currently purple.

**John:** Nice.

**Craig:** So I don’t have to worry about that. I do recall when she was younger and she had longer hair I remember hearing Melissa and her just having that classic argument. The ow…stop…you’re hurting…you have to…ugh.

See, oh man, your daughter is lucky she has you because if I were her dad she would just go to school with crazy hair. Real simple. Real simple.

I have a One Cool Thing this week that I just started with but I’m so far – so far so good. So far I’m impressed. It’s an app for iPhone and iPad called Sleep Cycle Alarm Clock, which is a bizarrely generic name for what it does.

So, it uses the microphone on your iOS device and it essentially analyzes your sleep and your snoring. And what it’s doing is it’s listening to you and it’s gauging how frequently you’re moving around. So we’ll put the snoring aside, just the moving around. Generally speaking, the deeper our sleep the less we move. The lighter our sleep, the more we kind of turn over or toss or wiggle.

And by listening to it and doing this analysis over a few days it starts to show you, OK, here’s how your sleep cycle is working. And it also will record you if you start to snore. So you can see how frequently you might have snored during the night and how loud it was. And you can play it back.

It’s also pretty smart. It knows to ignore your partner on the other side of the bed. It also knows to ignore kind of steady noise like a white noise machine or a fan. So it’s really looking for changes closer to it. It’s very smart. So far so good. I’m kind of digging it.

Oh, and the other thing it does is after it kind of gets you down, then you say, OK, look, I want to wake up – like I need to wake up tomorrow at 7:30. So you’ll say, OK, I need to wake up around 7:30. And it will say, “OK, we’re going to wake you up between 7:15 and 7:35. And we’re basically going to try and catch you on the upswing towards lighter sleep.” Pretty smart.

**John:** That’s nice. That’s very smart. So, I’ll check back in in two weeks and see whether you’re still using it.

**Craig:** Or find that just like, “Oh my god, I’m so tired. This thing is wrong.”

**John:** It would also be great if it was transmitting all your snoring data to be analyzed by machines or like if you’re talking in your sleep they’re building up evidence against you.

**Craig:** Yeah, that’s probably what’s happening.

**John:** That’s probably what’s happening.

**Craig:** Now that you’ve said it that actually does make the most sense.

**John:** Yeah. Maybe we could have a podcast that’s just Craig snoring.

**Craig:** I still wouldn’t listen to it. [laughs]

**John:** All right. That is our show for this week. It is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Phil Baker.

**Craig:** Oh, he’s new.

**John:** If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust.

We are on Facebook. Search for Scriptnotes Podcast. You can find us on Apple Podcasts at Scriptnotes. Just search for Scriptnotes. While you’re there, leave us a review. That helps people find us. Also, if you’re listening on some other platform, there are other platforms, yeah, leave us a review there. That’s always great.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. I’ll also put up the outlines I have for the three TV shows I sold. So, basically I have kind of the pitch document that I went into the room with. It’s not exactly sort of what happens in the room, but it’s a good representation of the things I was talking about.

**Craig:** That’s good. You know, after Chernobyl airs, so we’re about–

**John:** [laughs] Three years away.

**Craig:** Well, a year and a half. About a year and a half away. But once it airs I will put all of that – I’ll put the scripts, the pitch documents, the bible. Everything. I’ll put it all up on your site.

**John:** Fantastic. You can find the transcripts for this episode and back episodes at johnaugust.com as well. Come join us on Thursday so we can talk to you and Julie Plec and Michael Green and Justin Marks about television and features and other great things. We’ll see you there at the live holiday show. Go to wgafoundation.org to get your tickets.

And if you want any of the back episodes, go to Scriptnotes.net. That is your best source. We also have a few of the USB drives left. They are $30 I want to say. They’re at store.johnaugust.com. They have the first 300 episodes of the program.

**Craig:** Doesn’t matter to me how much they cost because I don’t get any of the money.

**John:** You get none of the money Craig.

**Craig:** Go ahead. Charge $1,000. I don’t care.

**John:** Absolutely. The more we charge for them, the more we have to pay Megan and Matthew.

**Craig:** And to steal from me.

**John:** Yes. That’s the goal. Have a great week.

**Craig:** You too, John. See you soon.

**John:** See you, bye.

Links:

* Holiday Live Show [tickets](https://www.wgfoundation.org/screenwriting-events/scriptnotes-holiday-live-show-john-august-craig-mazin/) are available.
* A sexual harrassment [resource guide](https://www.wgaeast.org/resources/sexual-harassment-resource-guide/) from the WGA.
* The [Tangle Teezer](http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001S261Q6/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) hair brush as recommended on Kevin Kelly’s [Cool Tools](http://kk.org/cooltools/)
* [Sleep Cycle Alarm Clock](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sleep-cycle-alarm-clock/id320606217?mt=8)
* Initial write ups/pitch documents for [DC](http://johnaugust.com/downloads_ripley/dc-what-it-is.pdf), [The Circle (a.k.a. Alaska)](http://johnaugust.com/downloads_ripley/alaska_writeup.pdf), and [Ops](http://johnaugust.com/downloads_ripley/ops_writeup.pdf).
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Phil Baker ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_328.mp3).

« 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.