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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Scriptnotes Transcript

Scriptnotes Ep 422: Assistants Aren’t Paid Nearly Enough, Transcript

December 19, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here.](https://johnaugust.com/2019/assistants-arent-paid-nearly-enough)

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

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig, Craig, fo-feg, fonana-fana fo-bleg – I don’t even know how that works – Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 422 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. And Hollywood assistants.

Last we asked for listeners to tell us how much assistants in this town are getting paid and the impact of those wages. And oh boy.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** Oh yeah. It’s the most mail we’ve ever received on a topic. More than 50 of you wrote in. So we’re going to assess where we’re at with assistant pay. And the challenges ahead. So buckle up.

**Craig:** Let me tell you. There is umbrage coming the likes of which few have ever seen. Few have ever seen. You are about to take a raft ride down umbrage river my friends.

**John:** We’ll also be looking at videogame writing.

**Craig:** More umbrage.

**John:** Spec features. And thesauri. Craig, are you ready?

**Craig:** Nah, I love thesauri. I can’t be mad at you, thesaurus.

**John:** Let’s start with some follow up though. Craig, will you help us out with Heidi who wrote in about things to watch out for?

**Craig:** Sure. Heidi wrote, “It’s not as horrifying as sexual abuse, but I think and hope we will talk about the long hours that writers, especially comedy writers, are required to be in TV writer’s rooms. It’s commonly known that on certain shows writers have sleeping bags in their offices. They’re in the room till early morning, get a couple of hours of sleep, then buy new clothes to change into at the studio store. Even without technically sleeping over, comedy writers are sometimes expected to work until after midnight for days at a time.” Yikes. I have heard these stories.

**John:** Yes. And it was a thing I associate more with previous generations but I think it still happens now. I think it’s very much show by show. And one of the first questions you ask when you talk to a TV writer is what is the room like. And is it a room that is crazy or is it a room that actually has reasonable hours? And you kind of don’t know until you’ve talked to people who have been in that room.

**Craig:** Yeah. Like you, I had heard this mostly as a story of in the past when you were in a world of 14 sitcoms, each of which were churning out 22 episodes that people would go through these processes. I think if it’s happening now it’s because the show is poorly run. I don’t know what else to say. There is no intrinsic value in running a show like that. If you’ve fallen that far behind it’s because the show is being poorly run.

Now, there are certain times I know when showrunners – I did a panel at the WGA with Rob McElhenney who is the showrunner and star of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia. And he says sometimes you’re hoping that a staff writer’s draft is going to get you in the ballpark. And every now and then it just doesn’t. And you’re behind. But to have an entire room of people there all night until early morning routinely is madness. And also frankly if you’ve got your staff there overnight why are you sending them to buy new clothing at the studio store? Shouldn’t you be as the showrunner be, I don’t know, supplying them with amenities? Find a hotel room somewhere for them to shower? It just seems crazy. I don’t understand this.

**John:** Yeah. The other big challenge with this, in addition to being unhealthy, it makes it impossible for some writers to work on a show like that. So people with kids. It makes it impossible to have a sustainable life when you’re doing those things.

Now, we’re talking about writers here, but of course there’s an industry-wide problem with long hours. And so we’ll put links in the show notes to other articles that talked about the long hours worked on set and how dangerous that can be for cast and crew. So KJ Apa obviously of Riverdale was an example of that.

Industry-wide we need to look at the unsustainably long hours and look for what the solutions are. One example is French hours that sort of make it so you’re only working a certain number of hours per day. You might work through lunch but you’re actually getting home at a reasonable time. We need to be thinking smarter and more sustainably about how we’re making our film and television.

**Craig:** Well, here’s a shocking bit of information for people. They’re always surprised when I say this. There is no, as far as I know, there is no real hard limit that anyone recognizes for working. So when you’re in production I’ve worked 21-hour days. And no one should be allowed to work 21-hour days. It doesn’t matter whether they’re paying people or not. It shouldn’t be allowed. It’s dangerous. It’s just dangerous. We need to have some kind of legislation that caps the amount of days.

Now, what is the cost to doing that? Money. Money. So, this is the theme for today. And now let me begin my anger at our oh-so-progressive business, which is populated almost entirely by Democrats, you know, people that vote the Democratic Party. People who believe in progressive policies and social policies and people who profess to be as woke as woked can be. And yet when it comes to this stuff, hypocrisy. Hypocrisy. So this is going to come up over and over and over. And easy calls to just say it doesn’t matter if working people to the bone for 21 hours straight puts more money in your pocket. Don’t do it. It’s wrong, with a capital W.

**John:** I also think there’s an overlap between Hollywood hours and startup culture hours. Because every film and television project kind of starts as a startup. It’s this new idea you’re struggling to work hard to make this thing come to life. And there’s the excitement and the joy, but recognizing how unhealthy that is in the long term is something we all have to keep in mind as we work on these projects that we hopefully love. So, yes.

And that could be the mantle that we’re taking up. It could be the charge that we’re leading, but apparently it’s not the charge that we’re going to be leading this year on Scriptnotes.

**Craig:** No, no. We have more important fish to fry. We have one more important fish to fry.

**John:** But, Craig, I want you to stretch before you get into full umbrage. So this I think is a good warm up umbrage here.

**Craig:** OK, cool.

**John:** Martin from Detroit writes, “My question is more of a concern. It’s regarding your segment How Would This Be a Movie. Have you ever—“

**Craig:** Hold on. I just want to interrupt. So this is already bad. Because do you know what a concerned troll is, John?

**John:** I know what a concerned troll is. This is actually definitional concerned troll which is why I left it in the outline.

**Craig:** Wonderful. Go on my friend from Detroit.

**John:** “Have you guys ever thought about all the screenwriters out there who may be affected by this segment. I mean, I know you guys don’t personally care about ideas being ‘discovered or stolen’ as I’m sure you get offered high profile assignments from existing IP all the time. But so many of us don’t. We have to search and find our own IP and it tears us apart after we spend so much time in research and development of the idea to only realize that a ‘bigger fish’ is also making the same project.

“It’s happened to almost all of us and it sucks every time. I think with all the great stuff that you guys do for screenwriters this segment of how could this be a movie is a detriment to working screenwriters. Sure, it helps all the studios and bigwigs to go out and grab one of your proposed ideas, but it does nothing for us. Each time you do one of these segments I feel like Obi-Wan when Alderaan was destroyed. I grow faint and need to sit down as I feel other screenwriters’ pain across the world.”

**Craig:** OK.

**John:** “All the while praying that you don’t mention any of my ideas that I have spent months, even years, researching and prepping. I thought this was a podcast for screenwriters, not for bank-rolled producers. I know you guys love the segment and think it’s fun, but well, just think about it. Signed, Concerned Screenwriter.”

**Craig:** Hmm. Let me think about it. Let me think about it. Well, I guess Martin what I would say is that you use a lot of words incorrectly. There’s so many fundamental flaws with what you’re saying here. For starters, I don’t know what you’re calling IP. I have no idea what you mean by that. Do you mean a book, a novel? Do you mean something that actually is intellectual property, because that’s what I and P stand for? If that’s what you mean then I don’t know what you’re talking about because we can all talk about it all day long. I can tell you all about the new Joe Hill book. Doesn’t matter. I don’t have the rights to it. Do you have the rights to it, Martin? If you do, it doesn’t matter what John and I do, because you have the rights.

But I don’t think that’s what you mean. When you say IP, I think what you just mean is topic. I think that’s what you’re saying. And Martin I have terrible, terrible news for you. When John and I do that segment we’re reading about topics that are in the newspaper. And they’re on the Internets, which means everybody already knows. It’s out there.

Now here’s another thing you need to know, Martin. You can’t own any of that. And you’re a fool to think that if John and I merely refrain from talking about it on our one podcast that no one else in Hollywood has noticed. Let me explain how it works, Martin. Every single thing we’ve ever seen has also been dumped into a hopper in front of an assistant – and we’ll get to them shortly – who have to go through all of this. These are all compiled and submitted every day, minute by minute, second by second. You have found nothing – you hear me? – that they don’t know about.

The only thing you can do if you’re talking about stuff that isn’t actually IP but just topic is to find something that they know about but don’t care about because they don’t see in it what you see in it. Which, by the way, would define say me and Chernobyl. It’s not like people didn’t know about Chernobyl. They just didn’t, I don’t know, they just didn’t care that much. I did. There you go. That’s how it works, Martin.

We don’t do this show for bank-rolled producers. I have no idea what you’re talking about. Nor do I think anyone is growing faint and screaming out in pain as we blow up Alderaan on a week-by-week basis. I don’t know what to tell you, Martin. I disagree with everything you’ve said here completely. But maybe nothing more than the way you’ve phrased this all as a concern.

Thank you for your concern.

**John:** I think the most crucial word that Martin is missing is How. And the idea of the topic is How Would This Be a Movie. So it’s not saying like there’s an idea out here and we’re going to make this into a movie. It’s really talking through what are the opportunities and challenges of this idea in turning it into a movie. And what are the many different avenues you could take?

Because you and I often don’t agree on sort of what the way into a story is. And that is the job of a screenwriter is to figure out given this idea, given this notion, how are you going to approach it. Who are the characters? How do you think about this idea as a screenwriter? That’s really the purpose. So, while we might brag about how many of the things we picked ended up becoming movies, it’s just because those are ideas that could become movies. We really are focused on the how. Like what are the actual mechanics, the characters, the storyline, the tone. What is it suited for? That is the purpose of the exercise. And that is what screenwriters do every single day.

**Craig:** Yeah. Martin, why don’t you just write something that other people can’t write?

**John:** Do that.

**Craig:** There’s a thought. Just do that.

**John:** Good. All right. Craig, are you properly stretched?

**Craig:** Dude, I woke up stretched for this. I don’t need stretching for this.

**John:** We’ve got another question. Matt writes about narrative games. “I’m a writer/narrative designer in the videogame industry who has worked at many well-known story-driven studios throughout the years. I heard a rumor about the WGA awards dropping the videogame writing category for 2020. My question is simply what gives?”

Craig, what gives?

**Craig:** Well, the guild has done it again. Well done Writers Guild. So here’s how this goes. The Writers Guild in the mid-2000s decided in its wisdom that one of the ways it could maybe help organize videogame writing would be to include videogame writing as a category in its awards. So they were going to use awards as sort of bait. And the way you could qualify for those awards ultimately became signing onto a kind of a Writers Guild – it’s not even like a real – it’s like a side agreement. It’s not like a full agreement. And so they did this for a while. And what happened was – big shock – big videogame companies did not – they did not unionize. Their members did not vote to join the Writers Guild. But we still hand out the awards.

And so then the Writers Guild said, oh, we have a great idea. Let’s just stop giving the awards. Because I can only presume the Writers Guild trophy costs thousands of dollars to forge in the fires of Mt. Doom. And we have to save that money. So now they’ve just given a huge middle finger to the videogame writing industry.

And here’s my problem. We have the worst of both worlds now. The writers that appreciated recognition for their writing are angry because all they see from their side is, oh, I guess we’re not writers in the eyes of the Writers Guild anymore. And on the Writers Guild side they’ve gotten nothing from this, except bad press. And again whatever they saved from the forging of the trophies in the fires of Mt. Doom.

I personally believe that videogame writing is essential. I think that a lot of videogames are vastly bigger than the movies and television shows that we write. I would love to see certain videogame shops unionize for the Writers Guild. We haven’t actually done the work to do it. All we’ve done is offer awards. Waited for something to flop out of the skies in our laps. It didn’t happen and now we’re taking our ball and going home.

It was a bad strategy. I don’t understand it. I don’t know why they did it this way. This was something that I was urging Patric Verrone to do, oh god, all the way back in 2006, starting with Bethesda. I thought that was a good place to start. But I can think of a number of companies where switching them to a proper Writers Guild agreement and getting them into the fold would be amazing for us. And we just haven’t done it. We don’t have the right inroads to that business. We’re not talking to the right people. It’s not a priority.

We have other priorities right now apparently, which I also don’t agree with. So, this is angering to me. And on behalf of all of my brethren and sister-en in the videogame business, all I can say is yeah this is a screw job. I hate it.

**John:** All right. Counter point. First let me validate the things you said that I think are absolutely true. Which is that videogame writing is truly writing and it is writing that is analogous to what screenwriters do. If you look through some of these narrative games they’re literally written in screenplay format, especially for cut scenes. It is very much the same kind of writing. And so the same way that I wish we had the foresight back in the ‘30s to cover animation writing, we should be looking at how we cover videogame writing. So you were right back then when you talked to Patric Verrone about wanting to make sure that videogame writing got covered. You’re still right now to say that videogame should be covered.

Craig, how often do you go to the Writers Guild Awards?

**Craig:** Well, John, as you know until recently I was not a heavily nominated writer. But I have gone to the Writers Guild Awards most recently to support our mutual friend John Gatins who was nominated for an award for his fine screenplay for Flight.

**John:** Very good. At those awards you took careful note of all the awards given out and at no point did you say, huh, that is funny that they are giving out an award to an area of business that they do not even represent writers in that field?

**Craig:** I’ve got to be honest with you. I didn’t pay heavy attention to that. I was having a good time. I was drinking a little. You know, sometimes you have a – and for me you know what that means. It means I had a full two glasses of wine.

**John:** Yes. Because 1.5 we have stipulated is enough for a podcast, but two is too much.

**Craig:** Right. Two is a party. But, no, it didn’t bother me.

**John:** All right. So I was not part of this decision to remove this category from the awards this year. There have been other awards that we decided to over the years award or not award based on sort of what seems to make sense. And giving out awards is a continuously flexible thing. I would not be surprised if the videogame award comes back in the future.

The challenge is that often the number of eligible entries for something will be like two. And so when you’re giving an award and there are only two possible things you can give it to it becomes a little less meaningful of an award. And so I think that all factored into the decision not to award the videogame category this year.

I do hear your frustration that this was not messaged properly and that you saw this as a rebuke of videogame writing, which I think you and I both agree is cinematic writing.

**Craig:** I’m just waiting for when the Writers Guild does message something properly. It’s been a while. It’s been a while. Just sort of set your watch to this. I don’t understand why they do these things.

**John:** So Craig here’s my frustration. Here’s my genuine frustration with your approach here is that I honestly could have flipped a coin and it could have – if they had awarded this award I could have imagined or some other screenwriting-ish kind of award but for an area that we don’t cover, I could imagine you saying, “What a stupid choice for the WGA to be offering an award for a category of writing that they don’t even cover.”

So, something like Best Writing for Reality Competition Shows. And that’s my frustration. I do think that you perceive anything the Writers Guild does as a stupid bad choice when sometimes it’s just a choice.

**Craig:** Well, I don’t think that’s true. The Writers Guild does make some stupid, bad choices from time to time. No question about that. If the Writers Guild had made a awarding reality shows awards, like Writers Guild Awards while they were trying to pull them into the fold, which they did for a while. I mean, they were trying to organize reality writing for a while. I think that would have made sense. I would have understood that.

The problem with giving people awards is once you start giving them to stop giving them is a bit of a slap in the face. I don’t think I would have had a problem with that. I don’t have a problem with everything the Writers Guild does. I have a problem with almost every kind of way the Writers Guild handles messaging about touchy things. Particularly in the last six months where it just seems to be one blunder after another. I don’t know who is in charge of that. It’s not the individual writers on the board. They don’t write press releases. But somebody is bungling this over and over and over. And, so no, I don’t think it’s fair to say that I just decide a la Republican Senators and anything that comes out of a Democrat’s mouth is bad.

No, I’m thinking critically about this. I assure you. I feel like they just – I can’t remember the last time they said something and I went, “Well done.” I really can’t. I’m an annoyed member of my union. What can I say?

**John:** All right. Let’s move on to a topic where I think we will find much more agreement. This is the issue of assistant pay. So to remind everybody, in a previous episode we asked – this was in relation to the #MeToo movement – what issue do you think we’re not paying enough attention to now that in a few years we’ll look back and say, oh my god, how did we not focus on this thing as being a huge problem? And someone wrote in to say I think you should be paying much closer attention to how little assistants in Hollywood are being paid and how that is a huge barrier to increasing representation, diversity, and just sustainability within this business.

So we in the last episode asked, hey, if you are somebody who has experience as an assistant in Hollywood tell us about your experience. Tell us what you’re making if you feel like telling us that. And what needs to change. By far it was the most email we ever got in on a topic. And the person who had to read all those emails is our producer, Megana Rao. So Megana Rao, welcome to the podcast.

**Megana Rao:** Hi guys.

**Craig:** Hi Megana.

**Megana:** Hi Craig.

**John:** So, we got a zillion emails that came in. So if we’re going to quote anybody from these emails we should stipulate that all the names have been changed. We’ve removed anything that can individually identify a person. And I should also say that some people were concerned that even by saying that “some assistants are getting paid as low as X dollar figure” that we could actually force wages down. And we’ll get to why that can be a problem is that even people who were able to unionize it sometimes had a negative effect on how much they were actually bringing home each week.

So this is complicated. And so this is not going to be the episode where we fix all these problems. This is going to be an episode where we describe the nature of these problems and invite discussion on how to improve things for everybody.

But I thought we might start with some context because a lot of the assistants who wrote in were writing in about television. And Craig has made a television show. He won an Emmy for it. But it was not a traditional television show. And so I wanted a better sense of what traditional TV assistants were like. So I emailed Aline. She wrote:

“On a show there’s typically a writer’s production assistant who gets lunch and runs errands.” So a writer’s production assistant. “Then there’s the EP assistant who works for the showrunner,” so who works for Aline. “Then a writer’s assistant who is in the room and works with all the writers, but especially the showrunner. There’s also a script coordinator who handles the mechanics of getting a script properly distributed.” So she’s describing four people.

And she says that some shows combine these roles in various ways but that’s how Crazy Ex-Girlfriend did it. So, we’re looking a showrunner’s assistant, a writers’ room assistant, a writers’ room PA, and a script coordinator. And the script coordinator is the one that classically has been a union job. Megana, can you tell us about Lance?

**Megana:** Lance says, “I’m a script coordinator on a network show. The IATSE union minimum for a script coordinator is $16.63 per hour. That means that even with overtime and a 60-hour week guarantee I make about $44,000 a year after taxes. And that’s if I work all 52 weeks out of the year, which as anyone who works in TV can tell you basically never happens. $44,000 a year is pathetic for any full-time worker trying to pay their rent is Los Angeles. But it’s downright laughable considering what a script coordinator is responsible for.

“We manage and distribute the scripts, act as the liaison between the writers’ room and the other departments of the show and process the guild union paperwork to ensure that writers are properly credited and paid.”

**John:** So Craig, working full-time 60 hours a week bringing home $44,000 a year.

**Craig:** Yes. That’s bullshit. That’s just absolute bullshit. And we haven’t even gotten to – and we will – get to what we’ll call the assistant-assistants, right, like the classic assistants. Now we’re talking about somebody that’s actually doing a job that has even more responsibility or authority than a number of assistants.

What’s happening here essentially is theft. OK? It’s theft. Because any normal business – any normal industry that was relying on somebody to do the things that Lance is describing here would have to pay them more than that. More importantly, the way they’re doing this, and this is a theme that’s going to come up over and over, is essentially relying on the fact that they can get rid of Lance. And somebody else will be there. They’ll shove them in. They’ll train them and make them do it. And then they’ll get rid of them.

It comes down to just a callous disregard for people. They don’t care. They don’t care about Lance when he’s not there, or she’s not there. They don’t care what’s going on in the morning and what’s going on in the evening. They don’t care if they’re trying to start a family. They don’t care if they have bills or medical problems. They don’t care at all. They just want what they want. And if you can’t give them what they want then they get rid of you. And I will say it again. In our business it is disgusting to think that this is how companies treat our lowest paid people.

Think of this. Lance, Script Coordinator, is sitting there on a network show where I presume at some point or another there was a storyline about how hard it was to work in today’s economy, or get laid off, or be underpaid or overworked. And Lance is there with his 60-hour work week getting paid $16.63 an hour. Working for a company where no doubt the CEO has tens, 20s, 30s, and 40s of millions of dollars or more. It’s sick. It’s a sick business. This is honestly a sickness.

And you and I, John, we’re going to change this. I swear to god. As god is my witness. The god that I do not believe in. We are going to change this. I swear. I swear it.

**John:** All right. Let’s set the table a little bit more. So we talked about assistants in television. So there’s four different kinds of roles you might look for there. We also heard from agency assistants. We heard some real horror stories from agency assistants.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** Evelyn wrote that she currently makes $16 an hour working at a talent agency which she is told among the higher numbers. Man, we got some horror stories there.

We heard from studio assistants. We also heard from temps, which I found was fascinating. Megana, can you tell us about Miguel?

**Megana:** Yeah, so Miguel says, “To preface I’m currently working as a temp going between HBO Max, Skydance, and Disney+. And temping pays more than any assistant job I’ve seen or had. I’m currently covering for another temp that has been on the same desk for eight months and we both make $20 an hour. When you factor in the temp company my employers end up paying $30 an hour and $45 an hour when it hits overtime. I’m constantly asking how companies can pay $30 an hour for a temp for eight months, yet I’ve never made more than $17 an hour as a full-time assistant for four years. I’m pretty sure I get paid more than the person I’m covering for, even without the premium the temp company takes which is 33%.

“Short term, it’s actually better for me to stay a temp right now than to work full-time.”

**Craig:** Oh yeah. Oh yeah.

**John:** That illustrates the hypocrisy that’s happening here. Because if a company can pay $30 or $45 an hour for a person in that job they can pay the actual person that money. They’re paying for the convenience of having a temp that they can just not think about or worry about. But it’s crazy.

**Craig:** See, OK, so what they’re doing is they’re saying if we hire somebody permanently we take on certain burdens. We have all this payroll tax we have to pay. We have to pay for some fringes like healthcare, which we don’t want to pay for. But even worse, we’re stuck with them. Because it’s hard to fire people unfairly. And I know the laws are so awful. You can’t just fire people willy-nilly because you don’t like their face. Or maybe, oh my god, what if a woman gets pregnant. Dun-dun. What do we do then?

You know what the best thing to do would be? Let’s not hire anybody ever. Let’s just use temps. Let’s just rent human beings. And maybe it comes out to be a little bit more, but that’s OK because we have the convenience of just getting rid of them whenever we want. And that is essentially the Uber-ification of the assistant business.

If you go back to Evelyn, our agency assistant who wrote in, what she is saying is essentially she comes home with roughly $480 a week. That’s about $1,900 a month. That’s including overtime. OK. That’s the difference, right? So, they’re “stuck” with Evelyn because they’re employing her in a traditional normal way that it’s supposed to work in America. And they’re giving her what amounts to about $22,000 a year.

When I moved here in 1992 my first job paid me $20,000 a year. OK, she’s talking about take home. Fine. It’s roughly then, you know what, it’s the equivalent. $20,000 a year, it was barely survivable. It’s even less survivable now. And it’s unconscionable. And more to the point, and this is what blows my mind, these people – Miguel, Evelyn, everyone writing in – these people are at the heart of this enormous pillar of our economy, of our American economy. Our entertainment industry is enormous and it is one of the few exporting industries we have. And all of these people know everyone’s phone number, address, credit card number, Social Security number, the gate code to the house, the alarm code to the alarm. They know everything. They see financial statements. They handle scripts that are confidential. There are a thousand Evelyns out there who are being terribly underpaid and all of them can destroy every secret we have in Hollywood.

So is this how we’re going to run our business? To save those dollars because we can while CEOs. And even forget CEOs. Even just like the senior vice president of something is making so much money. No. You can’t do it. I’m not saying that you have to pay Evelyn $300,000. But I think $20 an hour is a pretty reasonable place to start, don’t you?

**John:** I do. So, Evelyn actually wrote more about this, so let’s go on to – she talked about the expenses of living in Los Angeles and how she’s being paid the same amount as she would have in 1993.

**Megana:** So Evelyn says, “I’ve had this conversation with our head of HR,” and Evelyn also works at one of the big four agencies. She says, “I’ve specifically asked how companies can justify paying assistants this low. And the response was not the greatest. I mentioned that agency assistants made the same amount of money in 1993 that we make now in 2019. The response was that our working conditions have improved since then. And they were salaried and abused working 16-hour days. We are hourly now.”

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**Megana:** “The amount of money however still comes out to the same and in addition the response was the value of the dollar is much different. In 1993 everything was cheaper. Cars. Gas. Apartments. Bills. Food.”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**Megana:** “My apartment would have been a third of the price 25 years ago.”

**Craig:** Yeah. Did they say it’s better now because they’re not abused? Is that what they said?

**Megana:** I think that was the point. But this was the real kicker. This HR person responded to her, “Low wages should push people to work harder, to get more experience in order to make the next step and make more money.”

**Craig:** OK. Now we get to the heart of the stupidity and the greed. Which is this ugly puritanism. You’re being paid less, they say, because it’s good for you. Let me tell you dear friends at home that nobody succeeds simply because they were being underpaid. There is not one person that is powerful and rich today that is powerful and rich because they were super freaking angry at their low pay when they started. Nobody works at McDonald’s says, “Oh my god, this sucks so much. I have to be the CEO of a company.”

People who are going to be successful are successful because they want to be successful. They have a drive and ambition and a talent and a work ethic. And sometimes they just have dumb luck. But one thing I know for sure is getting underpaid doesn’t make you want to be successful more. What it does is sap your energy, demotivate you, make you believe you’re working in an unfair system, because you are, and it makes you resentful. It is bad for your health. It’s bad for your family. It’s bad for your relationships.

And that person who said that is just wrong. I want to believe that they weren’t actually saying something they believed but rather they were lying. Because I feel better about them. I’d rather that they be an evil greedy liar than someone so stupid as the think that paying people less than what they deserve is good for them.

**John:** The other challenge here is that if you were making that same money working at In-and-Out you walk away from In-and-Out and you have no other expenses or needs related to that In-and-Out career. But the career that Evelyn wants is very different. So she goes through her budget and sort of like how she breaks out her expenses. She says she has $208 left at the end of the month. “But as an assistant I should also be going to comedy show, script reading, networking events that may cost money, so there’s another $20 gone each time.” So the networking expenses. The clothes expenses. Or a car.

Christian writes in about how important it is to have a car as a writer’s production assistant.

**Megana:** Yes. Christian says, “I want to point out the fact that it’s nearly impossible to do a writer’s production assistant job, keep in mind it’s supposed to be entry level, or any other assistant job with elements of personal duties without a car. And that the wages we make god knows none of us can afford car payments. So that’s just another way our wages, combined with the requirements of the jobs, ‘Must have car,’ has been listed on so many job descriptions I’ve seen. It keeps those who come from underprivileged backgrounds from breaking in.”

**Craig:** I’m going to lose my mind. So these folks like Christian are writer’s production assistants. That means they’re working for a show. Right?

**John:** Yep.

**Craig:** Give them a car. It’s a TV show. It has a budget in the millions. In the millions. Go out, buy an $8,000 used piece of crap and there. Now you have a show car. It’s disgusting. I just don’t understand. Like come on. Why would you do this to them? Why would you do this? Some people, if you’re not going to pay them a proper salary then you can’t also penalize them for other things that you need from them. It’s all backwards. And it’s disgusting. The only way – I really believe this – the only way we’re going to fix this is by continuing to talk about this and shaming somebody interesting doing the right thing and going, “You know what? I don’t know what we were thinking here. Duh. Let’s just get a car so the writer’s production assistant has a car that they can use during the day that we pay the insurance for and we put gas in and we wash.”

Oh my god. I’m going to lose my crap.

**John:** So a car is obviously a huge expense, but rent is a huge expense, too. And so we had people who wrote in sort of what rent is like. But, Megana you recently moved to Los Angeles. Los Angeles is not an inexpensive city to live in. So, what was your experience like trying to find a place to live? And how do you find a place to live in Los Angeles as an assistant?

**Megana:** Woof. OK. So I joined a few Facebook groups and reached out to a bunch of friends. I ended up finding my current apartment through Craig’s assistant, Bo. But every time I was looking for an apartment and I would find something sort of reasonable maybe around the $1,000 range it was always a shared—

**John:** So $1,000 that you’re sharing?

**Megana:** Yes. $1,000 and it was like $1,000 would be my monthly rent. It was always a shared bedroom or like a hostel sort of situation where I would be like in a bunk bed. Or just probably an hour commute to get to the office. So, it was rough.

**John:** Well, also, you’re single. You’re in your 20s. I think there’s an expectation that you can get by with a little bit less for that now.

**Megana:** Definitely.

**John:** But like if you had a kid. If you had other expenses it makes it impossible to be an assistant if your rent is going to be that high for you. It rules out a huge number of people who could be working in that job because they simply couldn’t afford to work in that job.

**Megana:** Totally. Or finding roommates who would be OK with me coming in with a family or a partner just adds a totally extra layer of difficulty.

**Craig:** I mean, not to mention a lot of people in this position have student debt that they have to pay off. It just blows my mind. The reality is such that where we’re going is the only people who can do these jobs in Hollywood are people that have independent sources of money. They come from money. That’s who we’re going to get. We’re going to get people with money already. Well I don’t want those people. There’s nothing wrong with them, but I wasn’t one of them. And I think it’s best if we open the door wide for all sorts of people. That’s kind of the point. And, again, liberal progressive Hollywood, these cities are attractive places to live and to work. So the rents are going to go up and up and up.

And if you as a boss don’t understand what these numbers are and you still think it’s OK to pay your assistant $15 an hour and not help them out in any other way and force them to work ridiculous hours, you’re a dick. You’re a dick.

And you’re company is a dick. And I’ll say UTA, ICM, CAA, WME, if this is what you’re doing you’re dicks. And Universal and Sony and Disney and Warner Bros and Lions Gate and Fox, dicks. There. I’ll light my whole career on fire. I don’t care. It’s wrong. They have to stop this. It’s just wrong.

**John:** To that point let’s hear from Kyle. So Kyle is working at a management company.

**Megana:** So Kyle says, “While working for a miniature golf course in 2015 I was making $14 an hour. That is in 2015 dollars. So I assume the pay rate there is even higher today. I now make $15 an hour at my current job as an assistant to a talent manager. That is after renegotiating it up after a year of working here. I had asked for more money when it came time to evaluate my performance, but my boss found that he could not afford to pay the extra $5 a day I had asked for.”

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**Megana:** “This is while I have to listen to him making deals for his clients for hundreds of thousands of dollars from their jobs. Jobs that I submit them for. Jobs that I work 45 hours a week on making sure that they are happy and satisfied with. I currently have to share a bedroom in a house with six people because I do not make enough money to have my own room.”

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** There’s going to be a war.

**John:** A revolution of some kind.

**Craig:** You can’t keep this going. This is disgusting. It has to stop. And what we’re doing is creating an entire generation in this business that is disgusted by this business. And who looks at their own bosses as gross hypocrites, which they are. Which they are. Not that, you know, when you and I started John I’m sure we both looked around and saw a lot of disgusting crap, too. This has been going on for a long time. But I feel like the economic portion of this has gotten ridiculously bad. There is no excuse for it. None. It’s not like we’re in lean times economically in Hollywood. We are not. The compensation packages are outrageous.

How do these people look these 25 year olds in the eye and say, “I need you to take my Tesla to the car wash, take my Armani to the dry cleaners, take my $5,000 designer dog to the vet. I need you to then drop my kid off at her $50,000 preschool. And then I need you to come back and do all the work I demand that you do and here’s $15 an hour. Enjoy the taxes on top of that. And, no, I can’t afford to give you an extra $5 a day.”

**John:** No, Craig, you and I think back to when we had those entry level jobs. Because you were saying you started – you were working for nearly nothing. It was a marketing company. I was a reader, not getting paid very much at all. And I think the reason why I was OK doing it is because obviously I always had my parents I could fall back on, but I also had a sense that this was only going to be for a year or two. That there was clearly a path up. There was a way to sort of move forward. And as I would talk to folks who worked as like a PA, like a writers’ room PA, there was a path. There was a ladder to move forward and to move up.

And one of the things we heard consistently in these emails is that I think a lot of times employers believe that ladder is still there, that there’s still a clear trajectory, and that trajectory doesn’t exist anymore. And one of the reasons it doesn’t exist is the systemic changes in the business, specifically short seasons and small rooms.

If we can jump down, take a look at what Barry writes about how short seasons and long breaks affect how he can move up in the business.

**Megana:** So Barry says, “I currently work on a successful TV show. I worked for five months on the first season. Then we took nine months off. Then I worked for five months on the second season. Then we took an entire year off before the third season started. It should be pretty clear why the folks who make the least amount of money and have the fewest contacts and don’t have agents or managers repping them for other jobs are going to be hit the hardest in this scenario where the new world order is that the majority of jobs only last a couple of months.

“This is a huge difference even from when I started in the industry, where getting a job on a hit show would at least mean that you had a few years of steady work before you had to start looking again.”

**John:** So what he’s describing is traditionally if Barry had been employed on an old fashioned TV show that had 22 episodes a season he would have been employed basically the whole year. And he would have had a whole year to prove how good he is at his job and attract the attention of the showrunner and might get a script in the second year. There would be a way to sort of move forward and move up.

But if it’s just, OK, we’re going to write a bunch of scripts and then we’re going to go off eventually and shoot the show and then we’re going to take these giant times off, Barry is hopping from show to show to show to show. And can never get to prove his worth to the people who are supposed to be there noticing how good he is and sort of give him that next step. And so this system that we set up makes it so hard to do what was pretty easy for me and Craig and other folks who came into the industry 20 years ago.

And I think so many employers still think we’re in that system of 20 years ago.

**Craig:** Well yeah. I mean, look. What a great deal for them. They can run these shows this way and then they can hire people for a ridiculously small amount of money. They don’t even have to pay for their cars or pay for their gas or any of that stuff. They can work them to the bone when they need them. Kick them out the door when they don’t. And when they finally show up and say I’m sorry I can’t afford to live this way they go, “Fine, bye. We’ll just get the next person that is excited to do this and they’ll do it.”

There is this feeling see that if they pay you more, like what you’re worth, that you will be demotivated. I really believe that like a lot of these people believe this stupid notion. You know, when I started and I was paid my $20,000 a year my share of rent was $700. And that $700 was for my own – I had own little bedroom that I could close the door to. And it wasn’t in a great neighborhood, but it wasn’t, you know, in a bombed-out zone or anything.

And $20,000 with $700 a month rent was doable. It wasn’t great but it was doable. I could handle my expenses.

Now, that place, which was not exactly Fox or Warner Bros or anything, still had an opportunity for me to prove myself and soon enough I was making $28,000 a year. In other words, there was a sense that there was growth. I think a lot of these places go, “Why would we offer you growth? We don’t care about you. We just want you to do this job. If you don’t want to do it, go away. We’re a McDonald’s now. There’s no growth at McDonald’s. Just come here. Do the job. If you don’t like it, F-off. We’ll get another sucker. There’s like people knocking on our door.”

Just because a lot of people want these jobs doesn’t mean you can get away with paying people little for them. There’s going to be a riot. And again I will just say to them, I will say to all of you that are underpaying these people, you are playing with fire. They have your emails. They have your information. Wizen up. If you don’t want to do the right thing because you’re a good person, do the right thing because you’re a prudent person.

**John:** Yeah. We heard many stories about folks feeling that supply and demand made it impossible to negotiate on their own behalf. And one writer wrote in and she said that – she was working on a show and the studio was trying to basically pay her less than she’d been paid on her previous job. And it wasn’t until friend of the show Aline Brosh McKenna stepped in and said, “No, you have to pay her this amount.” She was able to keep her very low hourly salary.

The other thing which I was not as aware of until we got all of these emails is the idea of 60-hour work weeks. And so we were just talking about how people work too long. But for many of the assistants who were writing in they are working under the assumption – they’re hoping to get a 60-hour week. Because they’re paid at a certain rate and they go into overtime after 40 hours. And without that guaranteed overtime there’s no way for their life to be sustainable.

But sometimes that can backfire. We had situations where time sheets were doctored to hide overtime or basically there were blanket statements that you cannot possibly do overtime. So weekend reading, well that does not count as part of your work.

**Craig:** Yeah. So this is an area where they can screw around all they want, right? And there’s not much you can do to prevent people from wriggling around rules. But what you can do is prevent them from just generally not paying you enough, right? We know – this is a little bit like with screenwriters and producers and free passes. It’s hard to stop bad people from getting what they want if they want to wriggle around rules and spin on technicalities. But what you can’t do is fudge an overall number.

So, in reality no matter how these companies are managing these hours with their employees, they know what they’re paying them. They know. They know exactly what the average salary is for every single person in that position. In every single position. They have the data. Easy enough to run. That includes how they actually effectively spend for overtime or for not overtime. Take that number and make it bigger. It’s as simple as that. Because what they’re doing is wrong. We have a moral requirement as far as I’m concerned as people who are well-off in this business – you and me – to speak out on behalf of those who are not. Because we’re not seeing – I don’t think – anything remotely close to fair treatment. And it makes me feel gross. And I and you can’t solve this problem. Not with our own pocketbooks. But every single company can.

So the real question is how much would it cost. How much would it cost a company like say WME to guarantee that every single one of their assistants is making $20 an hour and that’s across the same amount of hours they were working before. The same amount of paid hours. I don’t know what it would cost them. Maybe it would cost them like, I don’t know, $20 million. They have it. That’s not a problem. I know exactly what they have. I saw their stupid IPO. I saw the stupid amount of money that the guys in charge make.

And I also know that they’re also happy to host big fundraisers when Elizabeth Warren comes to town. Well, I guess not her. She doesn’t take their money. Pete Buttigieg? I don’t know. But when people come to town to talk about the death of the American dream and income inequality these mega millionaires show up and applaud. And I’m telling you that they know where to go because their assistant reminded them. And the assistant handled the RSVP. And they’re not paying the assistant enough. So, why don’t you take a good long look in the mirror if you’re paying your assistant less than that amount?

Right now take a good long look in the mirror, dickhead, and then pay them more.

**John:** So, I don’t want to stop at the assumption that $20 an hour would actually solve anything. I don’t want to anchor that as the set point, because I think it’s really dangerous when we put a number out there and say, oh, as long as we hit that then all the problems are solved.

**Craig:** I mean, it’s a place to start.

**John:** Yeah. So let’s talk about solutions overall and the range of things that are going to need to happen for this problem to be improved. So increasing pay to some number would be a start. Just the way there’s a movement towards a national minimum wage. Some sort of realistic minimum for Los Angeles that factors in how expensive it is to live in Los Angeles. And the requirements for putting on these people in terms of how they have to dress, especially if you’re at an agency. You know, that you’re supposed to have a car if that’s a requirement. If those things, even if it’s just like kit rentals or something that sort of really reflects the true cost of trying to do this job.

**Craig:** Kit rentals? So if people don’t know what kit rental is, if you’re working as like the key grip on a movie you may charge them a kit rental which is there’s equipment that needs to be used on the movie that you own and you rent to the production. It’s one of the ways that a lot of people make money. Sometimes they’ll call it as a box rental for computers. If you need somebody to use their own computer you pay them a box rental. You’re renting their computer from them while they work for you.

I think it’s a brilliant idea, John, to say that there should be kit rental for clothing. If you require a certain kind of clothing level at your company you should put in an amount that is essentially compensation for the clothing that that person has to purchase. Of course.

**John:** Yeah. Unions. So classically when workers are not able to demand the things individually unions are a way to gather up all those workers and demand more things. And so some of the people who wrote in are members of IATSE. So IATSE is International Alliance of – oh, god, I’m going to mess up what it actually stands up for.

**Craig:** Television and Stage Employees.

**John:** Employees? Great. IATSE is a giant umbrella union that covers lots of different things. So some of the folks who wrote in are members of IATSE, which originally represented script coordinators and also represents some writer’s assistants on certain projects. It doesn’t sound like it’s been a blanket wonderful solution. Some people talked about how it actually forced their wages down because the overtime things that kicked in.

IATSE is not a great union. It’s kind of not. But the idea of union representation is not the wrong one in the sense that it hopefully can raise the floor for everybody. It’s just it’s not going to sort of solve the problem I think by itself.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m not sure that the union is going to be the answer here. The union meaning it would – because it’s not going to be the Writers Guild. It’s not going to be the Directors Guild. It’s not going to be SAG. It’s not going to be a creative guild. It would be some kind of service union kind of thing. And it would be a long and expensive war. And it could make things possibly worse. But it could make things amazing. I mean, in its best incarnation it would solve the problem completely. But you will get there faster, I think, if you use shame and start calling out places.

But I guess also my favorite is reverse shame. What I would love as a result of this, honestly, is for a major company – meaning a big agency, a major agency, like one of the big four agencies, or one of the major studios, or one of the major networks – to stand up and say, “We’re actually going to do this. We are going to improve across the board all assistant pay. And we’re not going to do it with games to take it away on the other side. We’re legitimately going to put more money in the pockets of our assistants.” Because once one place starts it will spread. That’s what it will take. It will take one brave company to look their stupid shareholders in the eye and say stop being greedy for five seconds and realize this is good for us. We can’t push everything in a race to the bottom. That is not the answer.

**John:** Agreed. So in addition to the companies actually stepping up and taking more responsibility for this, I’ve really been heartened to see how many assistants have gathered together and started to share their own information about how much they’re making. So, in the process of putting this episode together we got a look at a lot of this secret spreadsheets that have been passed around where assistants are talking about how much they’re actually earning which gives people a sense of what the ranges are or sort of you can actually get this much at a certain place and can help these assistants make better choices about where they’re working and sort of what is reasonable to ask for and how hard to push.

One of the things that was really helpful to see from the emails that we got in was some guidance for showrunners. And Boris I thought actually had a really great point which I’d never considered. So Megana can you tell us what Boris wrote about assistant’s scripts?

**Megana:** So Boris says, “Read your assistant’s scripts before you hire them so that you know what kind of writer they are. And if there’s something about them or their writing that will make it impossible for them to advance on your show I think a lot of showrunners in this industry don’t want to be the bad guy. So they avoid these kind of tough conversations with their assistants. But they are so necessary to have. Most assistants want to move up. And if we’re working sometimes up to 90 hours per week on your show everyone has to be on the same page about what the payoff for that work could be. Because I can tell you from experience it is really hard to hear from a boss who you have spent years working for that they never had any intention to promote you, or do much of anything to help you professionally. And their assumption was that you just figure out your career on your own somewhere else.”

**John:** Yeah. So that relationship between showrunners and assistants is crucial. I mean, that showrunner is trusting that assistant with so much information about not just their lives but their vision for the show. And what Boris is asking for is to just be a little bit more honest at the front about what you potentially actually see in this person.

And I think there’s actually potential for showrunners to make a big difference here. I can imagine some showrunners really stepping up and saying, “Hey, look, let’s go through all of our budgets and really take a look at how much our assistants are getting paid. And how we can prioritize paying them a true living wage so that person can make a living doing this job.” They can still have the same aspirations of moving up through, but it’s not going to be survival until they can actually get a staff writing job or a script on a show.

**Craig:** And you know where that money can come from, right?

**John:** It’s going to come from the massive overall deals they’ve signed with streamers?

**Craig:** Voila. And even if you’re not at a massive overall deal that you signed with a streamer, even if you just have your one show on basic cable and you’re the showrunner, you got enough. Take care of your people. They’re your people. They work for you. OK? And if you want to go fight the fight with the studio and say, “Hey, you guys got to give me more money to pay my assistants,” and you want to argue with them that they shouldn’t take that money out of your salary, do it. I don’t care. Have that argument. Or, just give them money. Either way, don’t stop until your people are taken care of. If your people under you are not making a reasonable amount of money and you need to ask them if they are. You really do.

Have the conversation. And find out how they’re doing. I guarantee you that if you’re a halfway decent person and you have that discussion with them and you hear about what their deal is you’re going to hear something that makes you go, “I think I might need to vomit now. I think I screwed up. And I think I need to take care of you better.” And then do it. Figure out how to do it and then do it. It’s how it starts. It’s got to start somewhere, right?

**John:** Be the change you’re seeking in the world.

**Craig:** Well, also seek the change. Because, look, a lot of people, they’re busy and they have their lives. And the assistant comes along as somebody to say, “I’m here to help you.” And that’s incredibly wonderful. And if you haven’t had an assistant and suddenly you do and they’re taking care of things for you, you feel like wow. And it’s easy to take that person for granted. Do not. Listen to them.

Because a lot of times they’re terrified of you, whether you know it or not. The way I was terrified of every boss I ever had when I was 22.

**John:** So let’s talk about the way forward for assistants and also for our discussion of this topic on the podcast. So we read aloud some bits from this, but truly there is a book of stuff that people wrote in. So we’re going to look for some way to form a document that can actually be downloaded or looked at on the site to get more of these anecdotes in there, because we really just scratched the surface of what people wrote in.

Keep writing in as more stuff comes up. As you get ideas listening to this. Or reading other stuff about how to fix this and sort of the parts of this conversation that we’re probably missing. Because there is a lot to talk about here clearly. Off-mic Craig and I will be doing work talking with folks as well about how to fix this situation. So, I just want to thank everyone who did write in.

**Craig:** Thank you guys.

**John:** Even if we didn’t read any of your stuff, it helped inform all this discussion and will help us moving forward.

**Craig:** I want to be your Che Guevara. [laughs] Seriously. I do. I’m so angry. I’m so angry about this. It’s just not fair.

**John:** And Megana thank you for all the hard reading you did this week.

**Megana:** Of course. And thank you to everyone who wrote in. I read all of them and it was tough.

**Craig:** I bet. I bet.

**John:** All right. Let’s get to some simpler questions. Craig, Rob asks, “My agent tells me that no one is spending on feature development. So the only solution is to spec. I have concepts in light treatment form about five pages, but it seems crazy to invest months of work taking them further without clear interest. To me if there’s enough interest for me to write it there should be enough interest for someone to pay to develop it. I get why companies want things to be a certain way, but surely this can’t be the only way?”

Craig, what’s your feeling in terms of writing out that spec versus essentially I think Rob is talking about pitching the thing for someone to develop?

**Craig:** Sure. Well, Rob, first of all you have to understand that what your agent is saying is that no one that talks to him is spending on feature development. Meaning no one that’s willing to take his call or her call. OK? So, your agent sucks. Because of course they have feature development money. They have entire funds that are there for nothing but feature development. They do take pitches. They do develop things.

Now, if you are new and you don’t have much of a track record, taking a pitch from you is a high risk endeavor for them because they just don’t know what they’re going to get. If you have original concepts in light treatment form then putting aside your agent’s utter failure, it probably is in your economic interest to write it if you can. It doesn’t matter what the interest is. You make interest with the writing. No one is going to say, “We can’t wait to see your script about blankety-blank.” If they are, well, it costs them that much breath to say it but little else. It doesn’t mean anything.

**John:** Yeah. So some context on this question which I realized as I pasted it in. Rob is British, so he has a British agent, which is why he still has an agent at this moment. I agree that there is feature development that is happening off of pitches. Pitches do sell. Katie Silberman was on the show talking about the pitch that she sold recently.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** And she did another one after that. So, it does still happen. It happens with people that they’re excited to work with. And so if you happen to be a person they’re excited to work with that can happen for you.

I think the crucial thing to be thinking about is in this period of time where you have these five pages of ideas, you’ve got to be writing. You have to always be writing. And so you need to pick one of those ideas Rob. The one that you’re most excited to see as a movie. And write that script. Because if you stop writing scripts because you’re not sure that they’re going to sell that’s not being a writer. That’s not moving your career forward. You always need to be writing something. And if they’re not paying you to write it, then you’re going to need to write it yourself.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, when you say, “To me if there’s enough interest for me to write it that should be enough interest to pay to develop it.” It will be once they know that you can write to their satisfaction. It will be. I guarantee you. But until that point it’s not. And therefore you should write it and, I mean, hopefully you know this, Rob. The amount of money they’ll pay you to develop something is vastly less than the amount of money they’ll pay for the actual script of that thing, if they don’t own it. So, if they love what you write they will pay a lot for it. If they love what you might be able to write they’ll pay a little for it.

So the question for you is do you know what that is. How much effort would it take to write it? And then bet on yourself. There is a certain entrepreneurial aspect to this job. There’s no way around it.

**John:** The other thing I want to challenge is no one spends on feature development. Well, Rob, why does it need to be feature development? Because you know where they do spend money in development? Is in television. All television is is development. And so it’s coming in with an idea, a writer they’re excited about, and then paying that writer to write the script and decide if they want to shoot a pilot. It’s the way television has always worked. It’s the way it works in streamers right now.

So, take a look at some of those ideas and ask yourself does this have to be a feature idea, or could this be a television idea? Could this be an idea for a streamer? Because that may be the way that you get paid to write that thing you really want to write.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Jack asks, “Just wanted to ask if you could recommend a good thesaurus website. I get stuck on emotional descriptions sometimes and find myself frequenting the Internet for synonyms and the like.” Craig, do you have a favorite synonym site?

**Craig:** You know, I bounce around all sorts of them. Merriam-Webster, m-w.com – maybe just mw.com now – is quite good. But I bop around all over the place. It’s not like there’s one great one or anything. The nice thing is they’re all freely available to you. So, no need to rank them. Just type in a word and then type synonym and then see what pops up.

**John:** That’s always a good way to do it. When I’m in the middle of a sentence in Highland and I just need to find an alternate word because I’m repeating a word, I’ll right click on a work and pop up the thesaurus that’s there. So that’s Apple’s built-in thesaurus, which is pretty good. So for finding that matching word that can swap in.

For more in depth searches it’s probably been a One Cool Thing before. But Rhyme Zone is a really amazing website that I mostly go to when I’m doing song lyrics and need to find what could possibly rhyme with this word. It’s great for that. But its thesaurus ability is also really smart.

It was developed in a really strange way in that rather than sort of relying on experts to find synonyms, it’s just going through and figuring out with all the text in the Internet trying to figure out what words match up to each other. And so it’s really a weird way to get to thesaurus, but I find it works really, really well. It finds words that sort of cluster in meaning that aren’t necessarily direct synonyms which could sometimes be more useful. So, Rhyme Zone is the place to go.

**Craig:** That’s a good one. And another one, if you ever find yourself suffering from tip of the tongue syndrome, where you are trying to remember what a word is. Like weirdly yesterday I just needed the word digression. And it was one of those weird mental blocks where I’m like what is the word again? You know, the word that’s like D-something and it means wandering off from your conversational topic. I’m just having one of those gear locks.

So there’s a terrific website that a lot of puzzle solvers will use called onelook.com. And it’s got all sorts of wonderful uses, but one of my favorites is it can search for words based on criteria you enter including wild cards and question marks. An asterisk means any number of letters could go here. A question mark means any letter could go here.

And so you can say for instance, D and then asterisk. That means it’s going to return every single word that’s D and then some amount of letters after, which obviously that would be too many. But if you hit colon, then you can type in a word that you’re saying limits this search by definition. So I can say D-asterisk-colon “conversation.” And then it will just find all the D-words that are vaguely related to the concept of conversation. And, voila, there’s digression.

So, very, very useful website for me.

**John:** And I just looked it up. One Look is by the same people who make Rhyme Zone.

**Craig:** There you go.

**John:** So it’s all fitting together here nicely.

**Craig:** Gorgeous.

**John:** It is time for our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is Untitled Goose Game.

**Craig:** This is everywhere.

**John:** From Panic. Oh, it’s so good. I’m just so delighted. So, now I think I’ve talked about it on the show before, is like I refuse to install games on my computer because then I’ll be playing games on my computer rather than doing work on my computer. And so this game is available for Mac, PC, or Switch. So I bought myself a Nintendo Switch just so I could play Untitled Goose Game. And it was worth the purchase. So I’m greatly enjoying it.

In this game you play a goose who is trying to do things and just annoy people. And you just feel like a small child who is an annoying brat and it’s just a delightfully fun little game.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s basically the story of my life, man. It’s how I move through the world. It’s Untitled Craig Game. It’s me. I’m just wandering around honking at people.

**John:** You are that goose. You are honking at the world.

**Craig:** Honking at the world. Certainly honked at them in this episode.

My One Cool Thing is a repeat but it’s the second year, so it’s all new. This is Queer Qrosswords. So this is a pack of 32 crosswords. They are all LGBTQ+ themed. They are all by LGBTQ+ constructors. They did it last year. They’ve done it again. It’s out today as of this recording. We are recording on National Coming Out Day, October 11.

**John:** Happy National Coming Out Day, Craig.

**Craig:** Happy National Coming Out Day to you, John. And last year they raised nearly $25,000 for LGBTQ+ charities. So here’s how this works. They don’t take money from you. Rather, you prove that you have donated at least $10 or more to one of eight suggested charities, all the ones you might imagine are on there. You send in your proof of your fresh new charitable contribution, and they send you a packet of 32 crosswords. And the constructors are terrific. A lot of the constructors are people whose names if you are a crossword puzzle solver like myself you have seen time and time again in the New York Times. There’s also my most preferred escape room cohorts Trip Payne. And then most importantly, most importantly, my – you know I’m absolutely obsessed with the puzzles of Mark Halpin. I talk about them all the time. He, I think, is the best cryptic crossword puzzle constructor in the universe. And he had an amazing one last year. And he has, of course, another one in this packet. His crossword alone is worth a $10 or more contribution to an LGBTQ+ charity.

So, Queer Qrosswords. We’ll put a link in the show notes. But that’s Queer and then Qrosswords. They cutely spell Qrosswords.

**John:** Very nice. And that’s our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. Thank you, Megana. It was edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Naomi Randall. 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 like the ones we answered today. But for short questions on Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I’m @johnaugust.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you find the transcripts.

You can find all the back episodes of the show at Scriptnotes.net, or you can download 50-episode seasons at store.johnaugust.com.

Craig, thank you for all the umbrage.

**Craig:** Thank you, John. And Viva la revolución.

**John:** All right. See you.

Links:

* [Hollywood’s Grueling Hours & Drowsy-Driving Problem: Crew Members Speak Out Despite Threat To Careers](https://deadline.com/2018/02/hollywood-safety-drowsy-driving-long-work-hours-crew-1202275319/)
* [WGA Will No Longer Award Video Game Writing](https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/03/wga-will-no-longer-award-video-game-writing)
* [John’s Post on Assistant Pay](https://johnaugust.com/2019/hollywood-assistants-have-always-been-underpaid-but-this-is-different)
* [Untitled Goose Game](https://goose.game)
* [Queer Qrosswords](http://queerqrosswords.com)
* [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)
* Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Naomi Randall ([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_422_assistant_pay.mp3)

Scriptnotes, Ep 421: The Follow Upisode, Transcript

December 19, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for the episode can be found [here.]( https://johnaugust.com/2019/follow-upisode)

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 421 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast we’re following up on things that we’ve discussed in our first 420 episodes.

**Craig:** Oh god.

**John:** So, you should probably listen to those first.

**Craig:** Yeah. Do us a favor. Hit pause. Just give a quick 420-hour listen. And then come right back.

**John:** Yeah. The character voice you’re using there is the voice of Flune who is a terrific character that you played in our last D&D session.

**Craig:** Frune.

**John:** Oh, Frune, sorry.

**Craig:** Frune. You don’t get his name wrong.

**John:** Sorry, yes, Frune. And Frune was a great character that I hope others get to experience in some way, because it was a great character voice choice there Craig.

**Craig:** Thank you. They won’t experience it the way I do it. I’m special.

**John:** There’s so much to get through because after 421 episodes a lot of things have happened. Let’s go all the way back to Episode 5 where we talked about copyright and work-for-hire. And there’s a development just this past week which I thought was really interesting. So, Craig, talk us through what’s happening with Terminator.

**Craig:** Yeah. So Terminator, like a number of movies, right now is subject to the original writer’s effort to terminate the copyright grant. And in this case the copyright grant was made 35 years ago. So, when you’re looking at these cases, right now if you were to write something original and then you sell it to a studio you are granting them the copyright – you’re transferring them copyright.

One of the things that we know from US Copyright Law is that it permits authors, or in the case of death the estate, essentially surviving spouses or children and so on and so forth, to terminate grants of copyright assignments and licenses that were made on or after January 1, 1978 when certain conditions have been met. And one of those conditions is you can’t do this any earlier than 25 years after the execution of the grant. Or in some cases 30.

And so there’s a window that you kind of arrive at. And it’s all tied to a date. The important thing to know here is that we’re hitting that window. And for a number of interesting projects. And this depending on how this shakes out could have very serious impacts on how Hollywood does stuff. Because some of the things that these writers are looking to terminate grant on are huge properties. Huge.

**John:** Huge.

**Craig:** Like Predator and Nightmare on Elm Street. And you’ve got not small authors but huge authors like Stephen King and David Mamet who are going to war to kind of get back their right to their work.

**John:** Yeah. So one thing that complicates all of this is that sense of copyright as it applies to screenplays is complicated because as we’ve talked about on the episode we’re referring to, but other episodes, one of the useful fictions that we engage in in the United States is that I can write a script and sell it somebody and we sort of pretend that they wrote the script. So that copyright is with the person who bought the thing rather than the person who wrote the thing. It’s a useful thing that lets us have a Writers Guild. And these are complicated questions.

The Friday the 13th which happened this past year was pulling apart some of that fiction. And it’s going to be interesting to see how it all sorts out. So the Friday the 13th original writer was able to sue and win to get back some of the rights to the Friday the 13th franchise. So, this is going to be really fascinating.

Now, the article we’ll link to, it seems like in the case of Terminator what’s probably ultimately going to happen is they will make a deal with Gale Anne Hurd who I should stipulate I do know and is a friend. They’ll basically pay her some money so they can keep making Terminator movies. But in the case of some of these other properties it could become really complicated, especially the things that are books that were then adapted into things. Well, if that author is able to take that book back then someone else could make a completely different property based on that book.

**Craig:** Yeah. And you’re also dealing with companies that maybe weren’t paying attention to this. So, Skydance for instance acquired the rights to The Terminator franchise from his sister – David Ellison runs Skydance. His sister Megan Ellison runs Annapurna. And so it was an interesting inter-sibling business exchange where David Ellison bought the rights to Terminator from Megan for $20 million. So that’s $20 million just for the rights. That hasn’t paid for a script, or actors, or production, or anything. Just $20 million for the right to make these.

And then suddenly someone comes along and says, “Oh by the way that’s not an absolute right. You paid $20 million for something that I could theoretically revoke.” So what happens is you’re right – you enter a situation where basically people are trying to figure out, well, I have something that is worth a lot unless you say it’s worth nothing. And you have something that is worth something to you, but without me not as much. So, how do we work together?

It’s fascinating. But I could also see circumstances where an individual writer just says, “Yeah, I don’t actually care about money. I don’t want you to make more movies of this. I’m killing it.” And that’s interesting. Generally speaking our business, once they identify a problem like this will go into overdrive to figure out how to prevent it from biting anyone else in the butt in the future. So that’s what I’m actually kind of curious to see happen.

**John:** Yeah. I’ll be curious whether there’s legislation or other things that sort of work to sort of protect the folks who believe that they are copyright holders because they’ve made properties based on it.

Now, we should stipulate that for most of our listeners who are writing their own things, don’t think about this, don’t worry about this. This is 30, 35 years down the road from whatever spec script you sell. So, while we wish you all to have 35-year careers, that’s not a thing you need to be thinking about.

But as we approach projects that we’re being brought in to work on that may be a question we should start asking. Wow, do I want to spend three years working on this property not sure that it’s actually a movie that can be made because of weird chain of title problems.

**Craig:** Yeah. Honestly I’m just excited for people to live 35 years. Period.

**John:** Yeah. That would great if they did.

**Craig:** That would be great.

**John:** Back in Episode 2 we talked about how to get an agent and/or manager. So you and I tackled the big fundamental question that people always asked us. They were asking us on our blogs for a long time. And we tried to answer it. This past week I was talking with a writer who was asking me, like, “Oh, is it OK for me to be trying to get an agent?” This is a non-WGA writer. “To try to be getting an agent during this time?”

And I told him yes. I think actually it’s an OK time to try to get an agent. And in a weird way I feel like there’s going to be a lot of lower level agents, literary agents, who are really not doing a lot at the moment. So I said like, yes, it is legitimate and OK for him to do this. And it’s also legitimate and OK for a person at this point to try and get a manager.

I think managers are probably busier than they’ve been traditionally, but it is legitimate to do this. So if you’re wondering like, oh, is this a time that I could be looking for an agent, I’m not a WGA writer, yeah you could.

**Craig:** I mean, I think the only difference between now and then is that it’s going to be much, much harder I think for somebody to get an agent now just because the amount of agents has been reduced down. The supply is very small. So, you have a lot of Writers Guild members that – I mean, look, I can’t tell if anyone – I mean, I know you did. There’s like two or three people that I’ve seen. But like generally speaking I’m not sure if it made really any changes.

**John:** Oh, I think we’re talking about two different things. So, yes, there have been quite a few people who – working WGA writers who moved to agencies that have signed the deal. What I was telling this writer is like is it OK for me to talk to one of the big agencies that has not signed a deal. Yes. It is actually OK if you’re not a WGA writer. You can do that.

**Craig:** Oh, you mean as a non-WGA writer.

**John:** Exactly. As a non-WGA writer.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah, well, I mean, sure. You’re not bound by anything.

**John:** Yeah. In a weird way this moment is a better moment for that non-WGA writer to be read at these agencies than when a deal is signed because suddenly there’s going to be a lot of movement and a lot of frantic reading at all those agencies. So, this is not the worst time to do it.

**Craig:** Well, the only thing to be aware of is if you sign – let’s say you’re not a WGA writer and you sign up with UTA for instance. The second you sell something–

**John:** You’re going to have to drop the agency.

**Craig:** You’re going to have to drop the agency. So I don’t really recommend it. I don’t quite get the point of it. And I’m not sure why they would take anyone on with that. Oh my god, we have to solve this thing. I can’t believe this is still going on. You’re not on the board anymore so I can be more frustrated about this, I think. I’m just so frustrated, John. So frustrated.

**John:** Craig, I hear your frustration.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**John:** Episode 389 we talked about the future of the industry. We talked Endeavor Content, the parent company of mega-agency WME, and its plan to become a public company through an IPO. That IPO was scheduled for last week. And it did not happen. It was pulled at the very last moment. So we’ll link to an article Kim Masters wrote for the Hollywood Reporter which was good how Ari Emanuel’s outsized IPO dreams were dashed. There’s an article we can link to by Lawrence Meyers saying why Endeavor’s IPO U-turn was a surprisingly brilliant move.

What I’ll say sort of in framing on this, I was opposed to the idea of Endeavor Content and thus WME becoming public companies. I said this several times. I feel like a company whose responsibility is to shareholders really can’t have its responsibility also be to its clients. And that’s why you also don’t see law firms as public companies. It’s just not a thing that tends to work out well. And I didn’t see this working out well.

I was surprised honestly the IPO didn’t happen. It looks like it was really more sort of the state of the market made it not a great time for them to be launching other–

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** WeWork most famously, and we’ll link to an article about WeWork which was great, and Peloton did launch and went down a lot. So, you know, I can say that it was probably the best choice for them not to launch because it didn’t seem like it was going to go very well.

What I did tweet on the day that it happened is that I want to be really clear that I’m not rooting against the production arm of Endeavor Content. It’s great to have more buyers. I’m not rooting against the agency of WME or William Morris, whatever you want to call that thing. I don’t think they should be the same company and I really don’t think they should be a public company. But I don’t have some desire to destroy them. I want them to find a way to get through this. Partly because I want those agents who are working there – and especially the younger agents working there – to be able to have jobs and be able to do this as a living. And I think agents are a really helpful and important thing in our industry. So I don’t want to see them go away.

**Craig:** Like you I despise the entire idea of the sort of publicly traded agency responsible to shareholders, although to be honest with you it’s already too late to the extent that all of the big agencies, and a number of the mid-sized ones, or even god knows smaller ones, are already essentially in the pocket of private investors, institutional/private, you know, venture capital. So that’s already kind of happened, but I didn’t like the idea of the IPO either.

I mean, some people – god bless them – really do think that the WGA killed this. I just want to hug those people and say, ah you. No, we didn’t. This was the market for sure. And I was thrilled. Thrilled honestly that the market ruined it because I hate the idea of it. And unlike you I don’t like the idea of the Endeavor production company. I do wish that that would be destroyed. I would love to see all of those destroyed. I’m way more militant about those things than you.

**John:** Let’s tease this apart. So I like the idea of independent production companies. And so I’m envisioning a scenario in which Endeavor Content who makes film and television shows is not affiliated with the agency. So I would love the production entity there sort of like an Annapurna, like an A24, to exist, like another buyer is a good thing. I would just like a buyer that doesn’t have its own agency.

**Craig:** But that’s what it will always be. I mean, so they’ll say, “Look, we are what you just said. We’re two different corporations.” Blah-blah-blah. And everybody will go, “Oh, shut up.” You know, we know. Yeah, you are, but the whole reason that you’re interesting as opposed to some other place is because you can say we have all these clients that we can funnel towards this. I think those things should die.

And, look, we’ve got a lot of buyers right now. The one thing I don’t think we’re short on is buyers.

**John:** I would say a change that’s happened over the time that we’ve been doing this podcast is while I was really saddened to lose Fox and that consolidation sucked, it is weird that we have a tremendous number of buyers right now. And I think that’s why we’re seeing more writers employed than ever.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly. So sure, I would love a big studio. Another big studio would be amazing for movies. But just in general for buying there are a ton of options. And I would love to see all the agencies getting out of that business entirely because I think it’s a distraction. I think there’s a danger that they just care about that. I think in the case of WME it’s not even a danger. It’s just a fact. That’s what they care about. They said as much. Yeah, an interesting thing. I sort of giggled at it because I was happy because I don’t like the idea of that and it’s not anything we did. If we want to comfort ourselves with that we can. But I completely agree with you that we need to get these agents back to work and working for us. So, again, let’s fix that.

**John:** Let’s fix that.

**Craig:** As quickly as we can.

**John:** A term I’ve been thinking about this past week is sustainability. And how do you find a sustainable business model? Because I wonder and I worry whether this idea of growing bigger and bigger through venture capital is just simply not sustainable. And I would sort of urge us all to be thinking about some of these decisions through that lens for the next couple months in terms of how do you get to a place where you’re setting up systems that can keep going on that don’t have to rely on constant growth.

**Craig:** Yeah. For sure. And the best check I believe on these agencies are the clients. Not necessarily a union. If an agency begins to cease to be valuable to its own clients they’re going to leave. And that is the ultimate check on this marketplace.

Now, there are certain things that these agencies can do that are kind of anti-competitive. We know that. But there’s at least enough of them where we’re not in the situation where there’s a monopoly. So the real question is can we find an agency that is large sized and competitive that isn’t also kind of ignoring certain activities that they need to pursue on behalf of their clients. I think we’re not in a dangerous place yet there. But, it is worrisome. I mean, one of the reasons why I was so supportive of the Writers Guild action in the first place is because I think these agencies needed a wakeup call. And the easiest wakeup call to deliver was the one on affiliated production. The packaging thing is just never going to change.

I mean, you can change, but it’s never going to go away. At least that’s my opinion. So I’m hopeful that we can get there. I do think that there has been a good adjustment.

What we haven’t seen is what was predicted to happen within two or three weeks of our vote which is either one of these large agencies collapsing or signing our agreement or high-powered agents splintering off to form a new agency. Actually agency business has shown itself to be incredibly resilient and incredibly stable and incredibly resistant to large change.

So, where this goes from here, do not know. But we know where it’s not going. It is not going towards an Endeavor IPO any time soon.

**John:** I will say that – you say that the agency business has been shown to be remarkably stable. I would say that there’s not been visible signs of that cracking and fissuring. But I don’t think we know the internal workings of those agencies.

**Craig:** No. I’m sure that there are things that they’re doing internally. I mean, they have to respond to the world around them. But they have managed to weather this crisis by any definition of the term weathering. And they’ve weathered it well. I’ve been surprised to some extent, but also to some extent not. And it does call into question just how much money they’re making without us. Seems like maybe quite a bit.

So, you know.

**John:** Yeah. Let’s do some quick answers here. Jason Reed asks, “I’m curious what happened to Scriptnotes producer Godwin. He had a short stint and disappeared. I assume he got hired in TV or similar, but I don’t remember it being mentioned.”

Godwin Jabangwe is writing for Netflix. He got a Netflix deal. He went through a program at Imagine for writing and he’s been writing a thing for Netflix. I spoke to him a couple weeks ago and, you know, I think he’s doing well.

**Craig:** And it’s not on the air yet though?

**John:** It’s not on the air.

**Craig:** One day we may see the Godwin show?

**John:** One day we’ll see the Godwin Jabangwe name showing up I suspect.

**Craig:** The Jabangwe Jump will occur.

**John:** It will.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** Adam LaMarkin asks, “What celeb most impressed Craig with the congrats on Chernobyl?”

**Craig:** Well, this is kind of cool. The night before the Emmys I was at dinner with our Chernobyl family. And I was sitting next to our director Johan and suddenly there was just somebody behind us. And I turned. And that person said, “Are you Craig?” And I said, “Yeah. Are you Sean Penn?” And he said, “Yeah.” And then we had a whole discussion with Sean Penn.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** Big Chernobyl fan. And, you know, I’ll tell you man, six months ago Sean Penn doesn’t stop to put a fire out if I’m on fire. You know? And I think that was pretty cool. He really liked the show a lot.

I would love for Chernobyl to be able run theatrically, like just for one crazy weekend. The Cinerama Dome or something like that. I don’t know if we have the materials that would make it work mix wise. I don’t know if we ever mixed it for that many channels. But, he said, “All right, if you do that I’ll present it.” I said OK.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** All right Sean Penn. That’s pretty awesome. That was pretty cool.

**John:** Follow up question from Adam LaMarkin. “Has Craig seen cocaine now that he’s won an Emmy?”

**Craig:** So if you crack the Emmy open it’s full of cocaine. That’s what weights it down.

**John:** Fantastic.

**Craig:** Yeah, no.

**John:** Greg Titto asks, “What good D&D moment earned John an Emmy inspiration token?”

**Craig:** John, I cannot remember. Why did I give you inspiration?

**John:** So I won inspiration because I was helping to make peace in a fight between Michael Gilvary and Kevin Walsh.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** So they were arguing over a familial death vengeance thing and I being the peacemaker argued that in the afterlife they’d be able to solve these questions.

**Craig:** That’s right. You came up with a way to shut them both up. And if that doesn’t get you inspiration after a 30-minute argument about why they should both kill each other what does earn you inspiration at that point? It was great. And also it was very true to your character. Your character believes that he is at the center of a cult that is worth joining. So you speak with confidence. Pure confidence.

**John:** My character is essentially sexual Jesus. So it was nice.

Jim Bond asks, “Will there be an Austin Three Page Challenge Craig?” Because you’re running Scriptnotes by yourself at Austin this year. So is there going to be a Three Page Challenge?

**Craig:** There’s not. I believe the issue is that I’ve got two other things I have to do. I haven’t confirmed this yet but I believe I’m going to be moderating the Dan Weiss and David Benioff panel, which is going to be a big one. And I have my own panel on Chernobyl. And we’re doing the live show. And I judge the pitch contest final.

**John:** Yeah, so you’re being busy.

**Craig:** I’m pretty busy. And, you know, I don’t like doing Three Page Challenges without you. That just seems weird. Oh, and I saw by the way on the schedule some other guy is doing the first three pages. Yeah.

**John:** Um. OK.

**Craig:** He’s doing a thing called The First Three Pages. And I’m like, huh. Well, you know, it’s not patent-pending or nothing.

**John:** No, it really isn’t.

**Craig:** Yeah. Good luck.

**John:** You could do the first four pages. I don’t know. You could change something.

**Craig:** Just change one thing. [laughs]

**John:** Just one thing.

**Craig:** Just one thing.

**John:** Scott Turner says, “Please remind me that I will survive this page 68 funk that I’m in.” He’s referring to Scriptnotes 152, The Rocky Shoals. Craig, how will Scott survive?

**Craig:** He’s not going to. Unfortunately it’s over, Scott. You’re never going to make it. No, of course you’re going to survive it. Scott I also recommend maybe listening to the episode I did recently called How to Make a Movie, because I do believe that one of the more useful aspects of that little talk is how to approach that section of the movie so that it’s not something you fear or get lost in, but rather it’s your favorite part of the movie. Because the truth is it’s my favorite part. That second half of the second act is actually my favorite part of any movie I’m writing.

So take a listen to that. But, yeah, of course you’ll survive it. You’ll survive everything until you don’t.

**John:** You don’t. Several listeners wrote in to ask about t-shirts. So over the course of making Scriptnotes we’ve had all sorts of t-shirts. Probably 12 different designs. We’re going to be putting all of them up on Cotton Bureau for print on demand. So if you would like one of the old Scriptnotes t-shirts, including like the Scriptnotes tour shirt, or Camp Scriptnotes, we’ll try to get all of them up there that we can. So maybe in lieu of a new shirt this year we’ll have all of the old shirts up. So if you’ve worn out your favorite Scriptnotes shirt you can replace it.

**Craig:** You could make a Joseph-like Technicolor t-shirt coat.

**John:** Oh wow. Just stitch together all you old ones. Make a coat of many colors.

**Craig:** That’s right. A coat of many colors.

**John:** A Dolly Parton reference. In Episode 42 Verbs are what’s happening, your One Cool Thing Craig was about which e-cigarette brand you preferred. And pointed to the Joytech 510 with the [low carbonizer] and E-Juice from Johnson. Craig, how are you feeling about e-cigarettes at this moment?

**Craig:** Well, I don’t use any vaping anymore, because you know unfortunately it’s just too easy to get hooked on the nicotine. So I quit it just because I didn’t want to deal with nicotine craving, although I do love nicotine. This technology that I cited here, it is like Model T Ford stuff. So, almost everybody now that vapes is going to be using something like a Sub ohm mod box with the cool, you know, like the whole other thing with double coils and blah-blah-blah. Johnson weirdly their juice started to really be awful because they had to make some flavor changes.

But there’s a billion places to get all this stuff. There has been a controversy in the news recently because a few people were suffering from what appeared to be some sort of mysterious lung disease. And the mystery has been solved. They were vaping kind of off-brand/back store cannabis products which have been mixed with some weird oil. And the oil was essentially coating their lungs and making them sick and possibly threatening them with death. But that’s been about, I don’t know, like 14 people.

People who are using regular vaping products from reputable sources are not going to have that problem. I think that the hysteria around vaping is a shame. Cigarette smoking is so much worse for you.

Now, it is a problem that kids are vaping at enormous rates. And the problem there is not that they are going to die from strange vaping disease. The problem is that they’re going to be hooked on nicotine which is going to screw up their moods. And I don’t know if you’ve noticed John but teenagers are a little moody to begin with.

**John:** They can be moody.

**Craig:** Yeah. So it’s a huge problem. And the Juul Company has essentially been at the forefront of the problem. They are the company because of the design of their product. If I could wave a magic wand and do some regulatory work I would think that all vaping products would need to be able to make some sort of noise when used. It wouldn’t have to be a very loud noise but something that would be enough to alert a teacher. Because kids are literally just vaping into the sleeves in class. And that’s not correct. That sort of has to go.

All that said, this train may have left the station permanently. I’m not sure there’s a way to put the toothpaste back in the tube or pick your analogy.

**John:** So I was at a dinner with some doctor-y friends and one of them is a researcher who is studying literally flavored vapes and figuring out what is the chemistry happening inside of favored vapes. Her point, which is – so I’m not reporting final research, I’m just reporting what she’s observing so far – is that the compounds that these things are creating are not things that have been well studied. We certainly haven’t studied what they do in lungs. So, while I would like to, like you, believe that it is significantly safer than smoking, I don’t think we actually have science to back that up. So, I wonder if in a future follow upisode four or five years down the road we may look back at this and say like, oh no, oh no, no, vaping was really bad. And that is a concern.

Because I actually had sort of misunderstandings of it even based on your initial description. Because I literally knew nothing about vaping before you mentioned it on the podcast episode. I assumed that you were breathing out water vapor. You are not. You’re breathing out glycol. And that’s not a thing that you necessarily want in your lungs a lot.

**Craig:** Well, I’ll push back on that.

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** Propylene glycol is considered one of the safest substances you can breathe in. In fact, every time you’ve been at a concert or a show that had a fog machine you were breathing in and breathing out propylene glycol. That’s what that is.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** It is inert. There’s also a substance called vegetable glycerin which is just as safe and inert. And that’s the other thing. So generally speaking you’ll see a mixture of those two things. But you can also just say, look, I just want vegetable glycerin. I don’t want propylene glycol. For some people it irritates their throat or something.

I do think you’re right. We could come down later and say, “Oh my god.” I think there are certain flavors that they are already starting to pull out because they’re concerned that when you heat them they can change chemically and cause a potential problem. But to compare them to the 400 compounds in cigarettes that we know are carcinogenic, it’s a bit like saying, “Well, we haven’t tested this bicycle yet so we don’t know if it is as dangerous as this wood chipper.” Logic tells us that it can’t be more dangerous.

So the question is for people who are trying to quit I would have no problem saying to them every single time please if the only way you can quit is to switch over to nicotine through vaping, do it. Because it can’t be worse. It literally cannot be worse.

But, if you are just looking to have some fun for the first time, maybe just don’t do anything like that.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** But keeping people from starting smoking would be wonderful if we could. But, you know, look, underlying all of this stuff regarding drugs and humans using drugs recreationally is the innate organic desire to do so. Even animals will seek out hallucinogenic vegetables and eat them because we like it. Just living people like messing with their brain chemistry. And so the trick is trying to figure out how to do it in a way that doesn’t ruin your life or your body. Vaping I still think – I just think that there’s a certain hysteria around it and a moral judgment around it that I’m uncomfortable with. It reminds me of the way people used to talk about marijuana to us. And now all of a sudden marijuana is wonderful and everyone should have it in all of their facial creams. And I just feel like we need to take the moral component out. There’s a judgy-ness going on that I think is unhelpful.

**John:** Absolutely. You want clear observations without moral judgment on it.

**Craig:** Yeah. Yeah.

**John:** Let’s talk about Episode 419, catching up to the present.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** Professionalism was an episode we did. I listed some characteristics that I thought demonstrated professionalism and things you should look for when you talk about professionalism. Phil Hay, our friend, tweeted to humbly offer these additions. “Commitment to dignity, yours and others. Good boundaries. And doing what you say you’re going to do.” Those feel like good general purpose things to add, just like you added humility to it. So dignity/humility I think could maybe be put together. I think those are two ideas that sort of fit well together.

But, yes, I think those are all good additions to a code of professionalism.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, commitment to your own dignity and to others’ dignity, and good boundaries, I think is directly answering the way our business has changed over the last couple of years. And he is exactly right to say it. It used to go unsaid. Well of course it’s unprofessional to harass someone or to make somebody feel uncomfortable in a sexual way or to grab someone. But it turns out you actually need to say it. You have to actually say it out loud, “That is unprofessional.” So I think it’s really good to establish that. And I loved when he said, “Do what you say you’re going to do.” Because I’ve always said every time I walk into a room with the producer or a studio executive I’m bringing with me the ghosts of every writer that screwed them over. And, you know, they do.

I mean, when I hear these stories I’m just shocked. Shocked at what writers do. I mean, then I’m like why am I the guy that actually panics about making sure that I deliver something on time or whatever, much less deliver it. Right? I mean, there are writers that have taken money and then just never done anything.

**John:** Ghosted.

**Craig:** Yeah. Ghosted. How the hell? It just seems like you would go to prison. Theft. [laughs]

**John:** Kieran from Ventura writes in about professionalism, “Amateur comes from the Latin word for love, Amo Amas, Amat. And it’s easy to see the connection and meaning there. A professional was originally someone who would profess an oath to start their occupational journey, such as a doctor, a lawyer, or a priest. So the solemnity of this oath-taking seems to point to the seriousness that is required when trying to conduct oneself in a professional manner.”

So I like that idea. I like that idea of professional being the sense of like professing or commitment to the thing that you are doing beyond just the love of the thing. Useful Latin-ing there.

**Craig:** I agree. I think that sometimes “professionals” believe that they’re only professional because they’re being paid, and yet they act like amateurs. And that’s a problem because they can say things like, “Well I fell out of love with this.” And I’m like, OK, but you took money and therefore there’s like an oath, right, that you’re going to fulfill your obligations because this is serious business. And, yeah, I think that’s a really useful way of thinking about it. I mean, ideally you want to stay in love with your work but also behave in a way that is consistent with the promises you made to the people around you.

**John:** Yeah. Eric writes in, “Be sure to include social media decorum as an evolution of what blogs and forums used to be,” because my original post was very much about blogs and forums. He writes, “No one owes you their attention. Don’t spam people. If they choose to interact be cool with it and don’t expect anything else. Don’t be a dick goes a long way.”

**Craig:** Yeah. Well, I mean, I feel like we’ve talked about how to Twitter-er before right? I mean, haven’t we talked a little bit about that?

**John:** We have. I think it is constantly evolving. Even as we started the show Twitter was a very different medium. Like we live in a kind of different universe, which is a good segue to an extra episode we did called This Feeling Will End. That was in November 2016. Do you remember the topic of that episode? It was a bonus episode that we recorded after the presidential election.

**Craig:** That was the election, yeah. Has the feeling ended? [laughs]

**John:** Has the feeling ended? This is a fascinating week for it to come up. Because I remember the just despair and wonder and confusion I felt in that moment. And I feel a different thing this week. But it’s related. That sense of like, wow, have all the systems in place just completely broken down? What kind of form of government are we living in? I do feel some of that.

So, I don’t know that this feeling did end. It certainly changed. How are you doing?

**Craig:** Yeah. I would agree with you. I think there was probably a little too much optimism built into that. A sense that the structures around one person would continue to behave as those structures behave. They did not.

**John:** Nope.

**Craig:** It’s not the failure of one man. It’s the failure of an entire institution. And, yeah, I think that the feeling has changed but it hasn’t gone away. And the new feeling I have, the new question is, “Is there any way back? Or is there simply a better but different place that we can get to?” I mean, eventually this ends. But how and when and what does it mean, I don’t know.

**John:** Looking back to the actual title of the episode, The Feeling Will End, for me I was living in France during that year and the feeling ended, or at least that initial feeling ended with the Women’s March. Because the Women’s March was like, oh wow, I’m not alone. Everyone else acknowledges this is a crazy thing that’s happening. And so participating in the Women’s March and sort of that mass demonstration was helpful and meaningful.

And so since that time I’ve been in a lot more sort of protests and marches and really come to appreciate that as a political forum and political act. So, I do wonder in this moment that we’re in right now if something like that will be what is required for us to sort of shock the system and actually get to that place where we make everyone who has to do things recognize that they actually have to do a thing. That we’re not willing to settle for rolling along with this slow motion car crash.

**Craig:** Well, at the very least we can say that we don’t quite know, or at least we cannot predict from the current situation what the final outlook will be. When this began with Nixon, first of all he had the single largest landslide in presidential election history, or if not the single largest really close. He had won nearly every state. And then when this started there was just a lot of people saying this is ridiculous and it’s nonsense and it will go away. And it just didn’t. And slowly but surely people came around. Not everybody, but enough to say, “Yeah, no, that’s enough with you. You’re done.”

**John:** So we’ve recommended on the podcast before, but if you have not listened to the Slow Burn season about Watergate it’s a terrific short podcast season that really talks through what it felt like to live in Watergate. And so useful in this moment.

Episode 335, Introducing Launch, that was the episode in which I introduced Launch which was the podcast series I did about the launch of my book series Arlo Finch. A part of that Launch series was about the film and television rights and how I decided not to sell the film and television rights. So the follow up is I’m now in the process of shopping those rights. And it’s been really fascinating talking with people about Arlo Finch as a movie or a TV show. And those conversations are really cool.

It’s nice to sort of see the thing that I’ve made with a different lens and sort of with a different placement in the entertainment universe than even when I started to write these books. I think so much has changed so quickly. I was looking at it as like, oh, is this going to be a three-movie series. And now it’s like, oh, is this going to be a streaming series? That change happened so quickly that it’s sort of nice to go back and think about what I believed the [unintelligible] rights were for Arlo Finch as I was writing it and what they are now.

**Craig:** That is a great point. And if I had to guess – I’m not trying to handicap anything – but if I had to guess I’d say, yeah, streaming service. I see the way my daughter watches things. Like, man, she just devoured Umbrella Academy. You know? So I think, yeah, streaming service is my guess.

**John:** We’ll see where it ends up. I will report it here when it happens. Also back in Episode 419 we talked about the premium feed. So this is people who are paying us money to listen to all the back episodes, the back catalog. And the suggestion that we might end up moving from the Libsyn service that provides the Scriptnotes app to something like Patreon. An update here is I’ve been talking with the other folks in places who do this thing and I think we may have a good alternative here. So I suspect we probably will move on from our current set up. But I also want to thank all the people who wrote in on Twitter and we got 10 or 15 people who sent in feedback on what they were looking for. Some highlights of what you guys most want is access to the whole back catalog. So the episodes that we’re talking about today. Some bonus content certainly. And the ability to get to those things easily. So not just through a web interface, but getting to them on your own player rather than through a dedicated player seems to be the call. So that is what we’re looking at doing.

**Craig:** Yeah. That sounds, I mean, I’m along for the ride obviously. But you know me, I love a change. Let’s mix it up.

**John:** Yes. Craig, do you want to take us through another topic from 419?

**Craig:** Yeah, sure. So in 419 we spoke about #MeToo and asked what other issues are we not paying enough attention to now that will seem head-smackingly obvious in a few years. And Kelly wrote in with something really interesting. She said, “While it’s not quite the same as the Harvey Weinstein scandals, I think there will be a big come to Jesus moment in the next few years about how low assistant pay is still a massive gatekeeper to the industry and prevents meaningful movement for diversity. I’ve been an industry assistant for almost eight years now and I’ve worked in an agency, on a show, and for a few different production companies so I’m pretty ingrained in assistant Hollywood.

“When I moved to LA to try and become a writer I worked as an unpaid intern for months before getting my first job that paid me $375 a week. This was in 2011. You would be shocked at how many assistants have a similar story. For assistant Hollywood the intersection of low pay and lack of diversity is so obvious. And while I’ve seen some high level showrunners tweet about assistants being paid more, very little has been done to create any sort of meaningful change. For the most part it seems like an issue that higher level writers, studio, and agency heads etc. choose to be willfully naïve about as they then turn around and lament the lack of diversity in Hollywood and how few experienced people with diverse backgrounds are available for employment.”

John, what do you think about Kelly’s point that this is a big thing we’re just all of us not paying enough attention to?

**John:** I think Kelly is right. And she’s right on a couple different levels. I think what she’s pointing to is a longstanding assumption about who assistants should be. That assistants should be folks just out of college. They’re seeing this job only as a stepping stone and don’t actually need to be able to live on this job. Because they have family money, they have some other way of earning. And in a weird way it’s almost like a hazing to we’re going to pay you so little now but it’ll be worth it in the end.

And I think that is a destructive and bad tradition that we’ve sort of ignored a little too long. I don’t know how you’re feeling about it, Craig, but I’d be happy to spend some time over this next year on this show, but sort of in the real world looking at what assistant pay is, how it is a barrier, and how it is keeping people from really entering the industry and what we can do about it.

**Craig:** I am so in on this. Kelly is 100% right.

So, one of the things that makes me vomit about Hollywood, and there’s a number, but one of them is that as she points out there’s a kind of lovely progressive narrative that everybody shares, but when it comes time for a group of them running a corporation to determine how much their least paid people get paid, they just will not give them what I would consider to be a living wage. They just don’t do it. So, they are doing incredibly hard jobs. And by the way, they’re being entrusted, all of these assistants, with all of our confidential information. They are essentially the machine oil that makes this machine run. And they are being woefully underpaid at studios and at agencies. And these are studios and agencies that have the money to pay more. And they are studios and agencies where the people at the top are being compensated with tens of millions of dollars. Sometimes those people are bad.

And so we see Les Moonves and how much money he makes. And I think of whoever the assistant is making $15 an hour. And you may say, OK, hold on, I’m out here in Little Rock and $15 an hour is pretty good. In Los Angeles $15 an hour is not going to get it done. Especially when you need to show up at work wearing a certain kind of amount of clothes. You need to have a certain amount of access with your phone. You have to watch everything on every streaming channel. And then they expect you to go out and network with people which means go to dinner and have drinks and all this stuff. It’s ridiculous. Assistants in Hollywood are not paid enough. And you and I think can actually make a difference here. I really do.

**John:** So let’s try.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think we should. I don’t know who to talk to. We need a Che Guevara. But basically I just want to start shaming places. And I would love actually if assistants who are having a great experience could write in and say, “Look, here’s the part that’s good. I’m being paid this. This seems livable and fair. Here’s the part that’s rough. The healthcare that we get is wonky because of blankety-blank-blank-blank.” Let’s start collecting some interesting data so that we can start shaming places that don’t live up to that standard, because we have to take care of our assistants. We have to. It’s just cruel. I’m so glad that Kelly – I’m not sure if Kelly is male or female – but I’m so glad they wrote in to turn our heads towards this.

**John:** Absolutely. And what I would say is that any solution, both the information about sort of what’s really going on on the ground and sort of like what steps need to be taken to rectify it sort of should come from the people who are in it right now. And I think too often we try to fix problems from just the top down without understanding what the actual situation is and the people who are doing it right now. So that’s why we need input from people who are at that rung right now, which I think is probably a lot of our listeners.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So write in and tell us what you know.

**Craig:** Perfect.

**John:** All right, let’s jump down to Episode 403, How to Write a Movie. Alexander Angle wrote in and actually attached audio, so let’s take a listen to what his question is.

Alexander Angle: Hey there. Question for Craig. So, I’m re-listening to Episode 403, AKA the Craig Episode, and in it you talk about theme and anti-theme with anti-theme being what the character pursues at the beginning of the story. My question is simple. Is pursuit of the anti-theme the same thing as the character’s tragic flaw? Are they just interchangeable terms? Or is tragic flaw something totally separate? That’s it. Thanks a bunch.

**Craig:** What a good question.

**John:** So in your schema of things anti-theme and tragic flaw, they’re clearly related. Are they the same thing?

**Craig:** They’re not the same thing. So, one thing I would say, first of all Alexander, is I don’t think a character is necessarily pursuing the anti-theme at the beginning of the story. They are living the anti-theme. They are living in accordance with the anti-theme. So it’s not anything aspirational. It’s just part of who they are. Why they choose to believe that anti-theme, the reason they live in accordance with it, that is connected to a tragic flaw.

So tragic flaw as we commonly understand is a character aspect that is an imperfection in the way somebody perceives or thinks about the world. They are terrified of losing someone that they love. They think the only way to love somebody is to possess them. That is a tragic flaw. Jealousy is a tragic flaw. Hubris is the classic tragic flaw.

But those things aren’t necessarily organizing principles around what you live your life. Nor are they particularly useful for the construction of a plot. So there is some specific kind of philosophy that the character already believes in quite firmly that is a symptom of their flaw in some ways.

**John:** So I’m going to try to restate this and see if this makes sense. A theme and therefore and anti-theme tend to be either a question or a statement, a set of beliefs. And that is challenged over the course of the movie. Whereas the flaw that you’re describing there is more – it’s probably a single word. It’s probably a single concept. So you’re saying hubris or jealousy. That is a flaw that could be informing why they’re doing what they’re doing, but it’s not the overall sort of story question the way that a theme or an anti-theme is.

**Craig:** I agree. And I think that we get a little too caught up on the tragic flaw because of the way we’re taught. We’re taught – well just classic pedagogy we’re taught Shakespeare, we’re taught the Greeks, we’re taught tragic flaw. And again very useful for analyzing work. Not incredibly useful for creating work. It is easy to extract a tragic flaw after the creation of a story. I don’t think it’s a particularly good way to go about building one in the first place.

**John:** Cool. Episode 420. That was last week. This was the one with Seth Rogen. I brought up Dana Fox’s observation that audiences will laugh when they see male nudity, but they won’t laugh when they see female nudity. We had two listeners write in about that. Anna from London wrote, “The point Seth made about the actress and her post-coital breasts was only considering 50% of the film’s viewership. If as you say male viewers would have found it too distracting to see her breasts, I can assure you that most of the female viewers would have spent the whole scene distractingly asking why the hell does she still have her bra on? As the actress in question pointed out, women, especially those who have any kind of sexual contact with men, know that having her bra on would be highly unrealistic given that men love breasts so much they find it impossible to digest comedic dialogue at the same time as looking at them.”

**Craig:** Well, I haven’t seen this scene. And I could be wrong. My sense of it was that the choice wasn’t bra or no bra, the choice was visible breasts or not visible breasts.

**John:** Yeah. So sheet up or sheet down.

**Craig:** Correct. Sheet up or sheet down. Exactly. And, yes, just to overshare, it’s like when my wife and I are done having sex she then immediately covers her chest with a sheet. That’s not how it works in our house at all. Of course not. But it is – the question then is where do you lose the most? So in terms of I’m judging as somebody writing like, OK, I need this to be funny. If the sheet is down then I think men are going to be – the boobs will upstage the jokes. And I think for women they might say, oh that’s interesting, they’re doing it the way we do it in our house. But also I think some women would say, oh, this movie is just gratuitously showing boobs for boys.

There’s a lot of ways where you can lose. So there is a safe choice there which is just to have the sheet up. Is it accurate? No. As you and I have talked about a million times neither is the fact that cars don’t have rearview mirrors in movies. It’s like a thousand things we do that are inaccurate in movies because as much as we want to be true to life sometimes it just doesn’t work as well.

I would agree with you Anna completely that when I see women in bed with their bras on I’m like what is this. Like I don’t understand what’s happening. Just put the sheet over. Because, yeah, the bra is the first thing that comes off. That’s bizarre.

**John:** Abby writes, “I’ve been around plenty of women who find their bodies and other women’s bodies consentingly hilarious. They’ll definitely laugh at boobs, booties, and other bits quicker than they’ll laugh at another dong flopped in their face.”

And that’s absolutely fair and true. I want to sort of step back from that sense that male bodies are innately funny and female bodies are innately not funny. Because I think context is really important here. And if you create a context in a movie where women consentingly laugh at bodies, that’s great.

What I do find though in most of the movies I see, or most of the American movies I see is that when a man is portrayed naked it’s a powerlessness, there’s a shame and humiliation thing that’s happening there. And so that makes it OK to laugh or with that character. When you see a woman in that situation so often there’s not that sense – it doesn’t feel OK to laugh her or at the situation because it feels like, ugh, there’s a crazy power imbalance here that makes me really uncomfortable.

I think context is key here. And I can totally imagine the scene that Abby is describing where it is funny that this woman is nude in the scene and that is OK because the scene in the movie has made it OK.

**Craig:** Yeah. There’s a certain aspect of the whole punch up/punch down thing. You know? When we live in a society that is patriarchal, where men have more power than women. Exposing men and laughing at their nudity is a punch up kind of thing. And laughing at a woman’s naked body feels like a punch down kind of thing. And this is where modern discourse fascinates me. Because I feel like there are circumstances where – probably only circumstances where you will dissatisfy somebody. Because if you do show women’s bodies in a way that is consentingly hilarious as Abby is describing, and therefore do so within the mode of as she says writing from the female gaze, some women will laugh and some men will laugh, and then some women and some men will be outraged that you are, you know, mocking a woman’s appearance. You’re body-shaming. You’re punching down. You are exploiting for the male gaze. I mean, the male gaze isn’t going anywhere, so we know it’s always there.

Some of these are just kind of really hard things to thread because it’s not enough – your intentions aren’t enough. Because on the one hand I’m saying, look, my intention is this. And on the other hand your intention disappears once the action hits the airwaves and it’s going to strike people in different ways.

You are not capable of hitting it correctly with 100% of people. Some people are going to say you have done something offensive to me. I’m not one of those people who is like everyone is offensive. Not at all. But the reality is you can see how sometimes you get caught because you may be trying to be respectful in this manner and then someone says well you actually were weirdly disrespectful in this manner. It’s an interesting time.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** For all of us.

**John:** What I will say is I think it’s an interesting time to make the movie that does what Abby and Anna are describing which is to be realistic about those moments and actually figure out what’s funny in those moments. And I think you’re going to find the people who can write and direct those moments are going to be women. And I think we have more female filmmakers happening now than ever. So I think we’re likely to see great examples of those moments coming in the years to come because we have more women working than ever.

**Craig:** That’s the key. Right, so because I think a lot of guys will say, “It’s not fair. If I do this then they get mad at me. And if I do that then they get made at me.” And I understand that that doesn’t seem fair. But also part of the problem is that it’s the what this is. And there are certain areas where we just know, look, if you’re going to make certain interesting insights and comments about race and some of those comments are self-deprecating or touch a nerve, I would rather have the underpowered party doing that. I don’t want the white guy doing that. I’d rather see a black woman doing that because then I understand that there is a certain purity of intention there.

I don’t have to wonder if somebody was punching down or punching up or ignoring or this or that. So the key is different people coming in to tell these stories. It is one thing to say to a guy, “You should show women’s bodies as funny,” but I would argue it’s probably going to be much more effective – meaning funny – and interesting to an audience if a woman is doing that. Because I think they just have a better insight on it. So different voices, more different voices, is going to help unravel a lot of this. And expand what we consider to be fun and funny.

These are good arguments to have.

**John:** Yeah, I like them.

**Craig:** Some of us are afraid to have them because we know that inevitably we’re going to get yelled at. And we’ll get yelled at for some of this. But I’m OK to get yelled at by some people. I think it’s important that we talk about these things without feeling like everything has to be, “Ugh, PC, blah.” You know, there’s a way to talk about it where we can be a little risky but also, you know, kind of acknowledge that there’s certain difficulties we’re dealing with as we navigate a changing cultural landscape.

**John:** Agreed.

**Craig:** OK, John, we’re running a little bit long. We were going to be talking about the fact that the WGA has canceled the WGA awards for videogame writing. And I have a lot to say about that. All of which is in favor of my videogame sisterin’ and brotherin’. But we don’t have time for this one, so let’s push it off to next week. But if you’re listening and you are wondering what we think, it’s coming. Don’t worry.

**John:** Cool. All right. It’s time for our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is a website for the City of Los Angeles. If you notice a traffic light is out, if you notice a walk signal is out, like a walk button is out, your temptation is probably to say like, oh, there’s no way to really do that or fix that. You can try to call 311 but it’s a whole phone tree to get to stuff.

It turns out there’s actually a pretty good website with like a map you pull up and you just report like at this corner, at this intersection, this walk button is not working right. And so you might think like, oh, if I report it is it actually going to get fixed. But I would say, yes, it actually does get fixed. Because as I was walking my dog these past few months I’ve noticed two things that were out. I reported them and within days they were fixed and corrected.

So if you notice that a traffic signal is out or even a walk button is not working properly, report it. Because the system actually does work. It’s one of those rare cases where I can report a good governmental thing happening in my life.

**Craig:** God, you’re going to be that guy when you’re old that writes letters to the local paper.

**John:** I’m not going to be that guy. I’m never that guy.

**Craig:** You’re going to be that. I feel like you’re going to be that guy.

**John:** I’m never going to be that guy. Nope. But I will report things that are out on this website. Absolutely.

**Craig:** I love that. My One Cool Thing this week is an app-maker. As you know I love escape rooms. That’s my thing. And there are all these interesting small apps that are basically escape rooms for your iPad or your iPhone. And a lot of them are terrible. The vast majority of them, these little kind of mini ones, are coming from Asia, usually from China but sometimes from Japan. And some of them are great. Some of them are just annoying because they’re poorly done and really are there just to pipe ads at you.

But there is one developer that has come up with a bunch of them. They’re quick to play. They’re very clever. They’re beautifully designed. They’re kind of gorgeous looking. And you can disable ads on them I believe which is always nice.

So the developer’s name is Goro Sato. Goro Sato. I believe if you just search for that in the app store some of his escape rooms will come up. So go under G Sato soft. But he or she – I think Goro is a he – I think it’s a masculine name. Regardless, Goro has done a lovely job. These are not expensive games. I think they’re free and then maybe you spend $0.99 to make the ads go away or something like that.

**John:** Cool. It sounds great. I love escape rooms. Megana our producer was asking about corn mazes. And our friend Nima proposed that maybe corn mazes were the original escape rooms.

**Craig:** No. [laughs]

**John:** You don’t think so?

**Craig:** No, they’re garbage. They’re garbage.

**John:** You think corn mazes are garbage? Wow.

**Craig:** They’re garbage. Yeah.

**John:** So I think we’re going to try to do a corn maze here these next two weeks.

**Craig:** Where is the skill in that? Oh my god, dead end. Go the other way. Corn maze. Corn maze.

**John:** We’ll see what happens. But that is our show for this week. Our show is produced by Megana Rao, edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by James Launch and features our own Aline Brosh McKenna with samples of her from episodes 152 and 182.

**Craig:** Nice.

**John:** It’s a really good one. It’s a dance party.

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 like the ones we answered today. But for short questions on Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find the transcripts.

You can find all the back episodes at Scriptnotes.net. Stuff may change in the future, but Scriptnotes.net will not change so you’ll always be able to go there to find the back catalog. Right now we still have the app for Android for iOS that lets you listen to the back episodes. If something changes there will still be a way to listen to those back episodes. I promise.

Craig, 420 episodes. Not a mistake among them. All flawless. We were right the first time.

**Craig:** Yeah. But the good news is that we’re getting canceled for this one. So, it’s finally over. Thank god.

**John:** [laughs] Ah, the end.

**Craig:** Ah, freedom.

**John:** Cool. See you next week.

**Craig:** See you next week.

Links:

* [Scriptnotes, Ep 5, Copyright and Work for Hire](https://johnaugust.com/2011/wga-copyright-and-musicals)
* [Real-Life ‘Terminator’: Major Studios Face Sweeping Loss of Iconic ‘80s Film Franchise Rights](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/real-life-terminator-major-studios-face-sweeping-loss-iconic-80s-film-franchise-rights-1244737?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark) by Eriq Gardner
* [Copyright Section 203](https://www.copyright.gov/docs/203.html)
* [Friday 13th Screenwriter Wins Rights Battle](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/friday-13th-screenwriter-wins-rights-battle-producer-1147991) by Eriq Gardner
* [Scriptnotes, Ep 2, How to get an agent and/or manager](https://johnaugust.com/2011/scriptnotes-episode-2)
* [Scriptnotes, Ep 389, The Future of the Industry](https://johnaugust.com/2019/the-future-of-the-industry)
* [How Ari Emanuel’s Outsize IPO Dreams Were Dashed](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/how-ari-emanuel-s-outsized-ipo-dreams-were-dashed-1244772) by Kim Masters
* [Why Endeavor’s IPO U-Turn Was a Surprisingly Brilliant Move](https://www.ccn.com/why-endeavors-ipo-u-turn-was-a-surprisingly-brilliant-move/) by Lawrence Meyers
* [WeWork: At What Point Does Malfeasance Become Fraud](http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/marketing-expert-scott-galloway-on-wework-and-adam-neumann.html) by Scott Galloway
* [Scriptnotes, Ep 42, Verbs are what’s happening](https://johnaugust.com/2012/verbs-are-whats-happening)
* [Extra, This Feeling Will End](https://johnaugust.com/2016/this-feeling-will-end)
* [Ep 335, Introducing Launch](https://johnaugust.com/2018/introducing-launch)
* [Launch Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/launch/id1319436103)
* [Scriptnotes Ep 419, Professionalism](https://johnaugust.com/2019/professionalism)
* [Scriptnotes Ep 403, How to Write A Movie](https://johnaugust.com/2019/how-to-write-a-movie)
* [Scriptnotes Ep 420, The One with Seth Rogen](https://johnaugust.com/2019/the-one-with-seth-rogen)
* [LA Report Broken Lights and Crosswalk Buttons](http://myladot.lacity.org/sr/ladothtml5viewer/)
* [Escape Room Apps by Goro Sato](https://apps.apple.com/us/developer/goro-sato/id412448991)
* [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)
* Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Jim Bond ([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_421_follow_upisode.mp3)

Scriptnotes, Episode 428: Assistant Writers, Transcript

December 6, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

You can find the original post for this episode [here](https://johnaugust.com/2019/assistant-writers).

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

**Craig Mazin:** Well, my name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 428 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast we’re going to be talking about best practices for assistants who write and also the state of WGA negotiations on both the studio and agency front. Plus in a bonus segment we will make our final ruling on cats.

**Craig:** Which is what everyone has been waiting for for 420 some odd hours.

**John:** Yeah. Craig has opinions on cats and so I cannot wait to get into what those opinions might be.

**Craig:** Mmm. They’re hard. Hard opinions.

**John:** They are fixed opinions on cats.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** All right. Some follow up. We have a live show coming up. It’s December 12. We have amazing guests. Craig, remind us who the guests are.

**Craig:** We have Kevin Feige, who is the mastermind of all things Marvel. He is in many ways probably one of the top five most powerful people in our entire business. Lorene Scafaria, who is our longtime friend, writer-director of Hustlers, and charter member of the Fempire. We have Shoshannah Stern and Josh Feldman who are the co-creators, co-writers, and co-stars of This Close on the Sundance Channel I believe. They are fantastic. And it’s a live show. A little bit of a twist. Both of them are deaf, so we’re going to have something we’ve never done before at a live show. We’re going to have multiple interpreters so that they can essentially be signed what we’re saying and what the audience is saying and reactions. And then someone else can interpret their signs for those of us who hear.

So that’s going to be interesting. We don’t have anything else I think for that show, but how much more do we need? I will say it is selling out rapidly. We’re already pretty close to sold out, which is not surprising.

**John:** No, not a bit surprising. Also at this live show we will be providing details on the new premium feed which Craig just minutes ago tested out. So, that will be exciting to share. We’ll share what happens.

**Craig:** It works. It definitely works. No, you guys want to totally come to this. I mean, come on. Come on!

**John:** Come on!

**Craig:** Come on!

**John:** So we are recording this on a Friday. On Sunday, so after we recorded this but before you hear this episode we will have the town hall on assistants. So this is a thing that I’m going to be participating in where we gather together a bunch of assistants and we talk through issues that assistants are dealing with. Obviously we’ve talked a lot about this on the show. But that will be a chance to get a bunch of people in a room to talk through those things. So I hope it went great. There was theoretically a livestream. We’ll see how that goes.

There was theoretically audio recorded, so if it’s useful we’ll put that in this feed. If it’s not then we won’t. But I’m looking forward to that conversation/I enjoyed that conversation.

**Craig:** Well, I’m sorry I can’t be there. But I’m sort of now rooting for some kind of riot just because I think it would be amazing to watch. I can say – I can’t really get into specifics – but I have been talking to some people. And things are happening. There are legitimate discussions happening, both from a – how would I put it – a kind of perspective we are going to change the way we are doing things point of view. And there are also interesting things happening where what I’m hearing from individual people is that when it’s time to hire assistants HR and business affairs, their attitudes have changed literally within the last month. Word is getting out.

**John:** Word is definitely getting out. I’ve had a lot of those same kinds of conversations that you’ve had with employers and other folks involved with these decisions. So hopefully as we roll into 2020 some progress will be made. But I believe some of that progress will happen at the top, a lot more of that progress will happen at the bottom. A thing I’m always reminding myself is that the assistants who are sort of leading this conversation right now will grow up to be the people who are running this town.

So, if nothing else were to change, the fact that they are focused on now means that as they become ensconced in these positions of power they will have a perspective on sort of what is appropriate for assistants.

**Craig:** Or, they will abandon their principles.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** And turn evil.

**John:** Yeah. Let’s hope not.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, of course. We don’t want that. But if there’s one thing literature has taught us is that people can go bad.

**John:** People can go bad. While we’re talking about assistants, we have had a lot of discussions on different areas in assistant-dom and we really are trying to scope this out to not just be about assistants working in the TV writing space, but assistants overall in the entertainment industry. So anyone who is on a desk, working on a job in order to get that next job, that’s who we’re sort of looking at for these assistant discussions.

But there are some emails that have come in that are very specific to the writer assistant life. And so I wanted to focus on those today. I asked Megana to find some emails that really spoke to this and as always she is going to be our voice to the assistants. So let’s start with an email that Megana is reading.

**Megana Rao:** Peter writes, “Here’s one aspect that I haven’t heard you guys discuss yet. Assistants taking on writing duties. I just wrote my second outline for the show I’m an assistant on. Two other assistants have also written outlines. I get the impression that some feel as though this is the sort of thing that assistants do to prove themselves as ideal candidates for a promotion to the writing staff. And it’s one of those things that some people would say, ‘I’d kill for the chance to do that.’ I understand that. And I understand that I’m fortunate to be in the position that I’m in.

“But the point of view changes when day in and day out you’re the first one in and the last one to leave. You make minimum wage. And if you’re lucky you somehow negotiated a 60-hour guarantee. So once you’re done doing the full day of the non-creative, behind the scenes, keep the machine running duties, and you’re then asked to go home with the notes and write the outline that night, you can’t help but feel shortchanged just a little bit.

“One way to make it better? Maybe through us a story credit or something. I’d be happier being known for the creative contribution, to be able to say I contributed to the process. I’m here because I want to be a writer.”

**John:** Craig, what’s your first reaction to Peter’s email?

**Craig:** Oh Peter, OK, so look. This is not me saying that you’re being treated well, nor is it me saying that you’re not being treated unfairly. However, we have to be really clear about what writing is and what writing isn’t. And we’re going to see in another letter or some input from another person that there are cases where writers are really being ripped off here when it comes to credit. I’m not sure this is one of them.

When you are given notes or you’re told to take notes and then put them into an outline order, I don’t know if that really is a story-creditable thing. Story credit is for the creation of a story. It is not for the organization of other people’s notes or thoughts into a format. There are times when it can be contribute-able. If you’re given a bunch of notes and you’re told make this into a story outline, even though there isn’t enough here for a story outline, and you have to create elements within, yes, then you are creating and you’re writing.

If you’re given the outline and you’re told to put it in prose format out of notes and bullet point into prose, I’m not sure that is something that is creditable as story credit. Our writing credits must be protected very, very carefully. If we dilute them we dilute them for all of us forever.

So, yes, I understand that you feel shortchanged by this. And really what I suspect, Peter, and I could be wrong, is that if you were paid reasonably well, that is to say not minimum wage, and you do have a 60-hour guarantee instead of what you’re getting which is 40 hours to work 60 hours, and if you’re not working all day long and all night long for people who don’t seem to appreciate you then this would be OK. The solution is not to water down the meaning of a story credit. The solution is to pay you fairly and to treat you well.

**John:** Absolutely. A thing that is so challenging about – especially this writer assistant who is in the room who part of their job is to take what’s on the whiteboard and put it on paper, to take the notes that are spoken in the room and put it on paper, that is a very challenging job. It’s not quite writing. And that’s what we’re trying to distinguish, like writing from what that sort of transcribing job is.

What I do want to make sure we don’t overlook in Peter’s email here is that he’s basically doing all this work during the day and then they say, “OK, and when you go home write this up as a thing.” That is beyond your 60 hours. Now when you go home, this is your homework.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And that’s not cool at all. That’s not legit. So, if this is part of your job, it needs to happen during your job time, or you need to be getting overtime for that at home work they’re putting on you. Because if they sent the writer home to do that, well, that’s kind of part of the job. But this is not part of your job, so therefore you shouldn’t have to be doing this work at home.

**Craig:** Totally. Now, we have an interesting version of the same issue but different enough that I think my response is different. I’m kind of curious about yours. It’s from Paul.

**Megana:** Paul wrote, “One my previous show at one of the big streamers the episodic scripts were ‘group written.’ That meant scenes were split up amongst all writers and then compiled into a sort of Franken-draft. Though I had broached the idea of perhaps getting a half a script on this show that ask was rebuffed, which wasn’t a big deal because I had expected that response.

“However, when one of the episodes rolled around I was assigned roughly half of the scenes. This meant I wrote about 30 pages of the script’s first draft, which was about 56 pages in total. No credit was offered and by this point I knew better than to ask. This showrunner had made a point of telling the support staff that the way we needed to show that we cared and were invested was by asking and looking for extra work to take on for free. Writing scenes seemed to fall under that umbrella. And I’ve heard he’s continued to run his room this way.”

**John:** Great. So here he is writing scenes. Writing scenes is writing-writing. And so that is – we’ve crossed this boundary between like these are notes, kind of a vague outline, to OK if you’re actually writing scenes then you are writing scenes in a show.

Now, I’ve talked to friends who are on shows that are kind of group written, where everyone just picks a scene, they paste it all together into a Frankenstein script, and they kind of rotate among the writers on staff who gets credit for it, because basically everyone has been writing on everything.

Here’s the challenge. The role of the union, like the Writers Guild, is to define who does certain jobs. And if you are doing that job of actually writing-writing and you’re not a member of that union that is a problem. There’s a reason why the WGA exists is to protect that job so that not everyone does that job. That said, I am fully mindful of the fact that you are probably aspiring to do that job. And so I want to have a discussion about what are the best ways to let you get some experience actually doing the job you’re trying to do while not getting abused by this system. Craig, your thoughts?

**Craig:** I completely. I don’t quite understand, Paul, what your, well, I think I do understand what your showrunner is doing here. You say, “Hey, how about throwing me half a script? I can draft up half a script, maybe I’ll do it with another assistant, or maybe one of the writers could mentor me and we can co-write a script together and in this way I can actually be hired as a writer and get paid a minimum thing to write a script.”

Now, the showrunner says, “No. No, no.” Which is fine. They’re allowed to say that. I mean, they have a fixed budget for writing. They have other writers to handle who may not want to share credit with you. They may want to get their own piece of credit. Paying you may not be something as easily done as waving a wand because it has to go through a whole thing. And then you’ve got to join the union. And by the way they’re going to charge you your dues. And there goes that money.

Regardless, what happens is they do it anyway. And this is where I get angry on your behalf. Because as you say one of the episodes rolled around. You were assigned roughly half of the scenes. OK. That’s it. You’re hired as a writer. Now, they can’t hire you as a writer without hiring you as a writer. That’s just wrong. And they can say, “Hey, look, we are giving him a shot that nobody else would give him and this is how we find out if he can write or not.” Absolutely not.

No. You know how you can find out if he writes or not? The same way you found out everybody else can write. Ask to read one of his original scripts. There. Now you know. He can write or he can’t. No, that’s just, eh, let’s just get this guy to do free work for us on our show and give him no credit for it because we don’t want to hire him as a writer. We don’t want to go through business affairs. We don’t want to pay him his P&A and all the rest of it. Well, you know, I just think that’s wrong. And I think that for my fellow writers who are in positions to hire other writers, hire them or don’t. And if you feel like being generous and giving somebody an opportunity, do it the right way. If they fail they fail. But at least you weren’t exploiting them.

**John:** I do feel like there’s an opportunity to support that writer without giving him or her full scenes, or like this is all yours to do. And that probably does involve pairing them up with someone who is actually on the writing staff to figure out how they’re going to approach this thing. And if I were an aspiring TV writer I would love that opportunity to prove myself and to sort of go in there and do that work.

But at the point where you are assigned material responsibility for writing scenes that are supposed to be in the actual script itself that does feel like you’ve crossed a line there. And that just doesn’t good or cool or right.

So essentially if you are shadowing the person who is assigned those scenes, that I’m OK with. I don’t know if the union is OK with it, but that feels like the kind of thing which is what you want this writer assistant to have the ability to learn how to do. Beyond that, like you I’m concerned.

**Craig:** Yeah. No question.

**John:** Now, these conversations have been about TV writing which is where I expected most of this to happen, but we got an email that was about feature writing. Let’s take a listen to that.

**Megana:** Leslie reached out with an example from working on a feature. “I worked as a writer’s assistant for a studio feature film. I was kept on even after the writer’s room wrapped and ended up working on set throughout production and post in a writing and creative producing capacity. I was frequently asked to write scenes or ‘turn our notes into scenes.’ Often I was the only person who actually possessed the Final Draft file of the script so I was responsible for all of the writing changes anyways. Sometimes the writing was very tightly based on notes, and other times they’d leave a lot of room for me to actually write the scene.

“Because of all of this I asked if I could be credited in some way. I was told I could have a consulting credit, or essentially some type of staff writing credit. However, about a year later as they were actually finalizing credits I was informed they could not give me this credit officially, but that I was welcome to use it on my resume.”

**John:** Craig, talk to us about Leslie and the situation she finds herself in.

**Craig:** Well, this nightmare is the result of these feature rooms, which I hate. I just won’t do them. And they come up every now and again and I always very politely, because it is polite, I’m not angry about their existence. I just personally cannot reconcile the job of writing a feature, which I feel is an individual authorial act, with being in a room with a whole bunch of people, which feels like something that is more about episodic television where you’re not being authorial to a specific closed-end narrative but rather churning an ongoing hopefully endless narrative. So here we have one of these films that have these rooms. So it’s not being written by a writer. It’s being run like a big old TV show.

And it seems like here once again Leslie is in the same spot Peter is in. It’s not here’s a bunch of notes, please put them in outline format, meaning organize them and turn the bullet points into prose. This is turn the notes into scenes. She’s being asked to write scenes. At this point I have to say not only is she being abused and exploited and treated unfairly, but the writers who are asking her to write scenes are literally ripping off the studio. Because the studio didn’t hire Leslie to write those scenes for that movie. They hired those writers to write the scenes for this movie.

And this is where they make us all look bad. They really, really do. I find this behavior reprehensible. I do. You don’t want to feel like you’re always angry at your own people, but you know when your people screw up you feel it more. You just do, because you’re embarrassed. This is embarrassing to read. And then even worse, when Leslie says, “Hey, can I be credited in some way,” they tell her you can have a consulting credit, which doesn’t exist. The Writers Guild will not allow those for the reason that people would hand them out like candy. Or essentially some type of staff writing credit, which does not exist in feature films.

**John:** There’s no such feature credit.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** So they either were lying to her, or literally just didn’t know what the hell they were talking about. Either way, either way, this is just wrong. Really just disappointed to hear this.

**John:** Now, I’ve not been involved in one of these feature room situations. But reading Leslie’s letter got me thinking back to some movies I’ve been on that have had so many writers back to back, where like a writer is on for a week, a writer is on for a week, a writer is on for a week, that essentially there was always an assistant who was kind of the keeper of the script, who was the person who was like making it all make sense. And I’m thinking of one specific example where she ended up becoming a really great writer herself and god bless her.

So there are situations where there is a person who is responsible for sort of keeping the script kind of intact and ends up doing – I mean, I’m trying to distinguish the clerical work of getting those scenes in there and actually making Final Draft make sense and sort of the weird production stuff from the writing-writing. And I do feel sometimes a person in that position ends up kind of doing the writing because they’re making the editorial choices about what’s actually going to make it in and what’s not going to make it in. Or situations where like you’ve described being on a set where you run through the scene, this is not working. You and the director and maybe an actor figure out what’s going to happen. And then you, Craig Mazin, talk about your kit and how you sort of get those pages up and right.

We all know of movies where the person who ends up actually typing up that scene is not really a writer-writer, but is basically the person who is putting down on paper what the actor and director and whoever else figured out what was going to be the scene that we’re going to shoot in an hour.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And that’s not really writing, but it’s frustratingly all confusing.

**Craig:** There is script coordination. And somebody who is figuring out how to fit everything into one master document and making sure the revision levels are accurate and the scene numbers stay correct. That is a job. It’s not writing. But it is a job. Somebody who is taking dictation and typing things down into script format, it’s not writing, but it is a job.

Now, I tend to – not tend to – insist really on being the sole person who does that. I like being my own script coordinator. I maintain the files. I handle the revisions levels. I do all that stuff because, well, I trust myself to do it. And I don’t like handing my baby over to anybody else.

The thought of somebody making editorial decisions in a coordinator position is terrifying to me. I mean, that’s our job. And whoever is in charge of that movie, theoretically the producer, if the producer has lost that kind of level of supervision over the creation of this stuff then I don’t even know what to say. This is just shocking to me.

So, yeah. You know, I think that when it comes to features we should be in charge of doing our jobs for god’s sakes. Look how every other union is.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** I mean, go ahead and try to move a C-stand on a set.

**John:** Ha-ha.

**Craig:** But apparently we like it. Apparently there are some writers who enjoy other people just sort of casually writing and not receiving credit or payment or acknowledgment. It just makes no sense.

**John:** Now, if some of these examples had murky aspects to them, I think this one is the least murky of them all. Let’s take a listen to our fourth and final letter that we’ll look at today.

**Megana:** Derek writes, “My first big break was as a writer’s assistant for a dramedy. It was a mini-room with only four writers, two creators, and one sort of showrunner. There were also two non-writing producers who would sit in on the room sometimes and consult. Since the room was so small they were really open to my pitches, which was great. I offered a lot of story and dialogue ideas and I felt like my contributions where welcome.

“When it came time to write the final episode of the season the two creators offered me the opportunity to do the first draft. This was partly because they liked and trusted me, but also because they were focused on revising other episodes and time was running out. I was thrilled to have the opportunity and didn’t want to mess it up by negotiating the details. There was also the very real issue of time pressure.

“I was offered the script in the morning and literally had to start writing that night after the room broke. There also wasn’t a formal outline for the episode, so I was working off of basically a paragraph of ideas. I wrote the entire episode in two evenings after working as a writer’s assistant in the room during the days. I delivered the script to the room and the other writers really liked it. They put their own polish on some of the dialogue and then we passed it onto the studio and network where it was received positively.

“After the whirlwind died down I decided to focus on how to get credit for my work. I talked to the show-runner who was very supportive of me, but didn’t think it likely that the creators would willingly share credit. She also didn’t feel like she had the social capital to throw her weight behind me.

“The episode aired a month ago with large chunks of my original draft intact. I had crafted entire scenes that made it all the way to my television screen, but no one would ever know.”

**Craig:** OK, John, well how are you going to handle this thorny, well-balanced moral conundrum?

**John:** Yeah. I want to go through here with a highlighter and sort of mark like problematic, problematic, problematic. Let’s start from the beginning. A writer’s assistant for a dramedy. It’s a mini-room with only four writers, two creators, and one sort of show-runner. And two non-writing producers who would sit in the room sometimes and consult. So, from this we have this tiny, tiny staff of which Derek is really kind of a staff member because he’s being asked to pitch on things. He’s being included in stuff. And I’m sure this is exciting for Derek because this is an opportunity.

But ultimately it becomes clear that he’s being treated as the staff writer, not as the writer’s assistant. And so when he’s assigned a script you are assigned a script. You should be hired as a writer. That is just – that’s absurd. And so the minute you were assigned a script you were assigned a script and that is completely WGA covered work.

Now, if we go back through the Scriptnotes transcripts and back episodes you will see that some of the people who had those first breaks, really important steps in their career, they kind of got that script and that became the thing. I don’t want to sort of diminish what a great opportunity that is. But it’s also this is your chance to be recognized as a writer on a show. And the fact that Derek was not recognized as a writer meant that he wrote this script that became the script in the actual series and he’s not credited as the writer and has no ability to arbitrate for credit on this thing that the wrote.

**Craig:** Yeah, this is just a shame. I mean, to be clear if you’re in a situation where you aren’t a writer, you’re an assistant, and you volunteer ideas, you volunteer pitches, thoughts, ideas, well that’s on you. In other words, just because you say them doesn’t mean anyone is obligated to pay you or employ you. And they may even use one of them. But, you know, again, you volunteered that. So, that’s OK, something to think about. If you notice that the things you’re volunteering are getting in there you can say, “Hey, if you like the free samples I’ve been giving you would you enjoy paying for a subscription?”

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** And then find out if they’re interested. Then you find out exactly how much they like your work. Because if they say, “Actually no. What we really like is the way you get lunch correct and how you’re here in the morning and here in the evening and you type well,” well then you know that OK I guess maybe I had an inflated understanding of the value of my pitches, because they basically seem to be saying we don’t need those actually.

But if they love them, then that’s an opportunity for them to step up and hire you as they should. The two creators offered me the opportunity to do the first draft. Now, for those of you in Derek’s position listen carefully because here’s what has to happen. You may think as a new person in Hollywood or somebody that’s kind of on a lower rung on the endless ladder of success that when the two show creators or the somebody producer or the somebody executive comes to you and says I’m going to offer you an opportunity, you may rightly think that the person in charge has offered you an opportunity. It is also true, however, that of the 14,000 people that act like they’re in charge in Hollywood about 12 of them are. And the rest are full of crap.

So these two – I picked out this detail. There are two creators and one sort of showrunner and two non-writing producers. I’m already suspicious that these creators may not actually be in charge. So the question is who is really in charge. Did they know I’m being offered a script? Or not? Because if you end up going to the person who is in charge and they say, “Whoa, no, no, no. Did not authorize,” then there’s a real problem.

So if somebody offers you a script then what you have to do is go to one of the producers that you know is involved in business-y stuff and say I’ve just been asked to write a script. I assume there’s some sort of paperwork I need to sign for a writing employment deal. And if they say, no, we’re not employing you as a writer then you’re not writing the script.

**John:** That’s what it is. So, I think what Derek needs to say is Yes And. So basically say yes. Say enthusiastically yes, you’re so excited to do this, and what do I need to sign so that you don’t get in trouble later on. Nothing gets weird and murky. So not you, Derek, but you as creators. You as the show get in trouble later on. Because you are so excited to do this and what do I need to make this legit so that everything goes smoothly?

**Craig:** I mean, Derek, just so you’re aware, you could hire a lawyer and sue the production company that put that out there because they don’t own the material you wrote. So when we’re hired as writers we’re hired as employees. And we are work-for-hire employees, meaning the copyright of what we do is not ours but rather the company that employs us. That’s why they can put it on the air. They own it.

But they don’t own what you wrote.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** You can just say, oh, by the way, you guys infringed my copyright. It’s not that you could have used that material anywhere else because it’s a derivative property of their copyright, but they don’t own your unique fixed expression. This happens. And this is the only way to wake people up. I’m not saying you should do that necessarily, because you may think well there are reprisals associated with that and there probably would be. But on an ongoing basis I hope everybody listening understands if somebody asks you to write a script find an adult, not them, but an adult that works on the show, who works in the money adult section. Let them know you’ve been hired and ask them to go ahead and generate an MBA writing agreement, a WGA-covered writing agreement that you could then submit to a lawyer, have them review it, and then you sign. And now voila you’re a proper writer.

**John:** And they would pay you scale. They would pay you the absolute minimum they could pay you, but guess what? For an assistant that’s great money. And more importantly, it’s credit.

**Craig:** Credit.

**John:** It’s credit and it’s also you’re getting paid to do the job that you want to be doing.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Hurrah.

**Craig:** Hurrah.

**John:** Hurrah. So, let’s try to figure out any takeaways from these four emails we listened to–

**Craig:** Burn it all down! [laughs]

**John:** So a thing that’s very clear to notice here is that this is writers treating assistants poorly and asking them to do writing that they should not be asking them to do in some cases. And we see this sort of continuum of like you know what taking those notes and putting them into outline form, it was probably not story and it’s probably actually the job you were being hired to do. Once you start writing scenes, once you start writing scripts, then you are doing WGA-covered work. You are really being a paid – a professional Hollywood writer. You need to be paid as a professional Hollywood writer. And it needs to be done under a WGA contract.

**Craig:** 100%. And to our listeners who are writers and I assume there’s many of you, just don’t do this. Don’t do this to other human beings.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Why, by the way? You know, it doesn’t take much, honestly, to do the right thing. And I know enough people who do the right thing and who don’t suffer from it and who probably sleep a little bit better than you. Why don’t you join their ranks?

**John:** If you’re one of these people who actually does run a show and you want to slip a note to me or to Craig to tell us your side of all this, that would be great. Because Craig and I are not in the business of employing a lot of other writers, so you may actually be able to come to us with some best practices that we’re not even considering about sort of how you both protect the role of the professional writer and provide opportunities for these writers who desperately want to be doing this job in the room. So help us out here.

If you are listening to this saying like oh Craig and John got it wrong, tell us how we got it wrong

**Craig:** Tell John. I don’t care.

**John:** And we’ll have Craig read that aloud and he’ll read it in a funny voice.

**Craig:** [laughs] As always. I’m so reliable.

**John:** You are. All right, let’s get onto our next topic. Negotiations. So we talked a lot about agency negotiations, but a new phase of negotiations is also coming in. Every three years the Writers Guild renegotiates its contract with the AMPTP. These are the people who produce movies and television shows, so basically the big studios and other production entities. Over the history of this podcast we’ve talked about this a zillion times. We’re always talking about the run up to the negotiation and this and that. And a strike authorization vote and all these things. In fact, Craig and I really first got to know each other on the picket line back in 2007/2008 when we were going through that whole labor drama.

**Craig:** That was really the primary benefit of that strike.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** You and I met each other.

**John:** We did. So let’s sort of set the table before we get into things to talk through kind of the timeline of like how this all goes because sometimes it gets confusing where we’re at in things. So, generally what happens is a year before the contract is about to expire the WGA begins meeting in small groups with screenwriters, showrunners, other folks to hear sort of what the issues are. So, the contract is up in May. So, a year before they start talking with certain people and that has happened.

And then they put together a negotiating committee, and so this negotiating committee is the people who are in the room talking with the people from the studio side about the issues. And I have been on the negotiating committee. Craig, you have been on the negotiating committee, too, in the past, right?

**Craig:** I have.

**John:** And it is not often thrilling. It takes place in the Valley.

**Craig:** It’s punishing.

**John:** It’s long days.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s long days and people talk at length. You listen at length. And then you don’t go into the room where things actually happen. It’s really one of the most punishing forms of guild service there is.

**John:** It is. And so I’m going to be doing it again this time.

**Craig:** Lucky you.

**John:** They announced the negotiating committee. I’m on there. A bunch of familiar names are on there. Michele Mulroney, Shawn Ryan, and Betsy Thomas are heading up the negotiating committee. Looking through the list there’s five members who are predominately screenwriters, so me, Michele, Dante Harper, Eric Heisserer are there. There’s a lot of wide representation of TV writers as well. So that part of the process has started, so the negotiating committee begins meeting and talking through strategy and other issues.

Part of what they are basing that strategy on and what the issues are is based on a member survey. So that survey is still active as we’re recording this. As I guess it closes on Wednesday. So if you’re listening to this episode on Tuesday and you got an email saying take the survey that survey is there waiting for you to look at.

And I thought Craig we might talk through this survey is pretty short but basically asks you to rank your top four issues that you want to focus on out of a list of 14 items. So I thought we might talk through in a very broad sense what are 14 things that the guild was asking about interesting he survey.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** Pension and health is always there. That’s a given. Pension and health is always a thing that is part of this negotiation. First off, addressing TV mini-rooms like we just discussed in the emails today. So TV mini-rooms are where you get together a bunch of writers to break a series, break a season, sometimes write a bunch of episodes, and then everyone goes away. Then they come back when things are actually produced. A challenge with TV mini-rooms is that often it pushes people’s pay down very, very low because they are getting paid minimums for the time that they are in the room writing, and then they’re dragged out as producers for a very long time after that. So it’s an issue that is affecting a lot of folks working in TV these days.

**Craig:** People seem to both not like them and also that’s all that everyone is doing. It’s weird. I mean, it seems like some of these things we’re kind of weirdly complicit in. I mean, I always just – it’s worth saying, we’re the ones in charge. We’re in charge of TV. The people that are running these mini-rooms, that’s us.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Then we have establishing a foreign box office residual for feature films, which would be great. So right now if you’re credited as a feature film writer you receive residuals for the reuse of your work here, but you don’t get it for the release of a feature film in foreign theatrical markets. I think that means like theatrical release.

**John:** Theatrical release. Yeah.

**Craig:** So I do and you do receive monies if for instance they’re rerunning one of our things on a channel in France. But television episodes receive additional residual compensation in foreign markets I assume for the first airings of things. We do not. That would be cool. I mean, I don’t know how we’re going to get that. [laughs] It’s just sort of like, hey, can we have a lot more money? No. Oh, OK.

**John:** Yeah, it’s a weird parity thing. I think it’s, you know, I think foreign theatrical didn’t use to be a big revenue stream or as big a revenue stream as other things were. But now as Asia gets built out with movie theaters, as China gets built out with movie theaters, it’s worth more now.

**Craig:** I guess. It seemingly has been worth – people have been talking about how much the foreign market has been worth for features since I got into this business. I mean, I just–

**John:** But as theatrical?

**Craig:** Yeah, yeah, yeah. I remember there was like a freak out in like 1995 when people were like, oh my god, there are movies that are making more overseas than they do here. Yeah, no, it’s always been an enormous thing for us. I mean, yes, the China thing is different. Right? I mean, that’s a kind of thing where one market can actually be more than the domestic market. But, no, I mean, generally speaking what was the rule of thumb? 60/40. Some movies were 50/50. Even if it was 70/30, the point being that’s a huge amount of money. As a feature film writer who feels very much like our segment of the union has gotten short shrift over many years, this is a lovely pie in the sky thing to ask for. But it’s not really – I would much rather see some more practical things occur. My personal point of view.

**John:** All right. Point three. Establishing minimums for comedy variety series on streaming services. Right now there are no minimums for comedy variety series made for streaming services. That feels like it needs to be fixed.

**Craig:** Yeah, no. I mean, there should be minimums for everything I would think. Makes sense. We have improving the 2017 MBA span provision for writer-producers. So this was something new that we got in 2017 in our last negotiation which protects writers that are paid on a per-episode basis who are then their episodes are spread out over a long amount of time, right. So if you’re paid for an episode, a per-episode basis, and you’re supposed to write three episodes over the course of a normal amount of time, well that’s how much money you get for this amount of time.

But if they spread those episodes out over the course of a year suddenly your annual income has gone down to nothing and the fact that you’re held exclusive to that company means that you can’t go work somewhere else. It’s a real mess. So what happened was we got additional compensation for the extra weeks that writers and writer-producers were spending on these things. So I guess we’re trying to improve that.

**John:** Next, improving compensation for staff writers by adding script fees and/or eliminating the “new writer discount.”

**Craig:** Huh.

**John:** So this is a situation where if you are a staff writer on a television show, the money you’re getting paid for your weekly gets counted against the script that you’re actually writing, so you tend to not get actually paid for the script you’re writing as a separate fee. Just the money you’ve gotten along the way sort of buys them a free script out of you. That doesn’t feel great.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** There’s also this first 14 weeks thing, this new writer discount. So addressing that.

**Craig:** I mean, that should just be like number one. Just editorializing. I believe when we talk about like hey somebody who has a huge movie that made $400 million in China, can we get them more money? I go, uh, OK. Or, this nonsense where the companies are punishing our most vulnerable and newest members who are making the least. That should be like job number one of the union is getting rid of crap like that.

So, hopefully we can.

**John:** When you took your survey did you park that as number one?

**Craig:** I don’t recall how I ranked anything. But it was definitely something that I checked off. I mean, to be honest with you I was probably shading towards features because we get screwed over so much.

**John:** I get that.

**Craig:** Yeah. Improving diversity and inclusion in hiring. Well, this is an evergreen. Again, I have to point out we’re the ones doing the hiring.

**John:** Often we are the ones doing the hiring. Next, improving feature roundtable minimums.

**Craig:** Ooh. This sounds familiar.

**John:** Yeah. This sounds familiar. Craig is – I would say it’s not a hobby horse. Sounds like the wrong thing. This is an issue that you focus on a lot and you focus on a disagreement on how things are interpreted. If there were good strong language on this that raised the minimums on that I think I’m guessing Craig Mazin would be happier.

**Craig:** Yeah, I mean, right now there is I think the studios are abusing an inapplicable part of our agreement that says that they don’t have to pay a whole week, which should be the minimum unit of payment to us, but rather they can actually pay one-fifth of that, a day rate, for these roundtables that happen on all sorts of movies. Because what happens in those roundtables are people are actually doing real work. They’re contributing things that are creative. That’s why we’re hired for them. We should all be paid the weekly minimum, which frankly is not that much more than some of them pay anyway. But again this is something where it starts to put money in people’s pockets.

It may help – if it helps one person hit the health minimum for the year so that they can provide health insurance for their family it would warm my heart. There is no reason that we shouldn’t be able to get this. This feels incredibly doable. And I have no reason to believe we’ll get it anyway. [laughs]

**John:** Well, speaking of getting more money into people’s pockets, this is a thing that’s been a long time frustration of mine. So improving minimum compensation and terms for writing teams in TV and features.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So as far as like I know I think we are the only union in which two people have to share minimum on something, which is nuts. And so if you’re a writing team you get paid a minimum as if you are one person even though you’re two people. That is why you’re so attractive sometimes for TV rooms because they get two brains for one salary. Something has to be improved there because it’s not fair and it makes it harder for those people to qualify for insurance. It makes it harder to make a living. So, we need to make improvements on how treat teams.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s going to be a bigger issue in features than in TV because the minimums are so much larger.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So that’s something to take a look at. But it does hurt us. And I think maybe there is, well, there’s a fairly obvious compromise, right? I mean, they have never paid two people on a team the price of two individuals. But perhaps they could pay two people who are working as a team 1.5 times the individual rate. I mean, there’s an answer. So hopefully we get there.

**John:** I think there’s an answer as well. Improving options and exclusivity protections. So this is something that first occurred in 2014. I think I was on the committee at the time we got this in. It limits the ability for companies to basically hold people away from employment while they’re figuring out whether there’s another season of the show. And this was a thing that really was generated by writers saying like this is crazy. I’m being held out of work because they can’t make a decision about whether they’re picking up the next season of the show.

**Craig:** Yeah. And so this is a great thing for us to have. It applies in a nice way to those of us who are making less. Right? This is a good example of the union protecting the people who need protection the most. And obviously the way you improve this is by raising the ceiling and defining upwards how many people something like this covers.

**John:** Agreed. Next, improving residuals for original TV and feature programming on streaming services. Residuals on streaming services is complicated, because residuals are by definition when you when you take something that has had one life and you put it on to a new platform, and so the residual value being captured is a different thing when it’s only existing in one ecosystem. And yet these things clearly do still have residual value. That is why these companies are making these things because people still watch these things. So how we figure this out is complicated.

**Craig:** It is complicated. However this is one of the terms that is not writer-exclusive. This is something that would be industry-exclusive. In all likelihood meaning 100 million percent chance the DGA is going to be negotiating ahead of us. This is the kind of term that will likely be set by them.

**John:** Mm-hmm. Improving TV weekly minimums. So it’s how much writers and writer-producers get on shows that they’re writing on weeklies.

**Craig:** Yeah, I don’t see improving feature minimums. It’s weird. Funny that.

**John:** Funny that.

**Craig:** Guess we forgot again. [laughs]

**John:** Paid parenting leave.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** This feels on trend for the world. And so right now what we have in our agreement, and this is fairly new, is eight weeks of unpaid leave. So really all that says is if you give birth to a child, and this is a – I don’t know, is this for both genders or just–?

**John:** Both genders.

**Craig:** That’s nice. So if you have a child, a new baby, you get eight weeks to be with them without being fired. But they’re not paying you, right? There are obvious ways to improve that. I’m not sure length is the answer. I suspect it’s some reasonable financial agreement there, too. And we should not – in most developed civilized nations there is some kind of paid parental leave.

**John:** Next up, requiring at least a two-step deal in theatrical contracts.

**Craig:** Yes. God, yes. Yes.

**John:** Yeah. I would say even more so than raising minimums this is what puts more money in the pockets of feature writers who are working near – especially who are working near the minimum.

**Craig:** This is my real hobby horse. This is something that’s I’ve been banging on them about for years. And the way it should work is similar some of the other television provisions that apply to people who are earning under blankety-blank amount of money. I don’t need a guarantee of two steps, and neither do you. But if somebody is earning near scale or even twice scale, frankly, they need to get two drafts because with only one draft in place they are not only losing money, they are being exploited and having to write two drafts anyway. And it is exacerbating practically every problem we have within that system. And if I were in the room the argument I would be making to our friends across the table is that this is a way for them to rest creative control back from some of their producers who simply develop stuff into terrible places.

**John:** I agree with you. Finally, script fee parity across platforms. So, trying to make sure that you get the same rate whether you’re writing a one-hour for premium cable, basic cable, SVOD, you know, whatever service. It’s the same script and trying to get parity no matter which platform you’re writing it on. This has always been a goal. I believe even to this moment like CW pays less than other places do. It’s madness. This is, again, an evergreen goal, but I think it’s heightened by this time that we’re in where there are so many platforms. And you’re like who am I even writing this for? And it’s not been clear what venue this thing is going to go on.

**Craig:** This one is an uphill battle, again, because the DGA has a – I doubt that they’re going to be getting directing fee parity across platforms. So this is a tough one. But, sure, why not? As long as we don’t get parity downwards which is, you know, there’s a certain Monkey’s Paw aspect to these negotiations. Sometimes–

**John:** Be careful what you wish for.

**Craig:** You get something and then you go, oh no. I mean, very famously the guild struck over definition of foreign cable pay something or another in early 1980s. And the directors did not and took the other definition. And we won. We won. We got the definition we wanted and then later realized that the one the directors had was actually better. So then we went back and said actually, no, we don’t want this thing anymore that we struck over. We want theirs. And to that day and to this day the companies have grinned and said, no, no, no, no, remember, you guys struck for that. That’s yours now.

So, you know, fun.

**John:** Fun. So these 14 points everyone is surveyed on. That information feeds into the committee. The committee meets to discuss, prioritize, set things. Ultimately they will come up with a sort of pattern of demands. Basically they’ll list these are the things that are most important. There’s generally a membership meeting where they talk through those things. They talk through what’s going to be happening. Generally it’s a vote on the pattern of demands, saying these are the things we’re going into these negotiations with. And ultimately a negotiation starts happening.

That’s still a ways down the road. But I wanted to sort of lay out the overall timeline of how this stuff goes because I would say over the last couple weeks – maybe over the last month – I’ve been hearing this slowly banging gongs, like oh there is going to be a strike happening. And none of what I’ve just laid out here to me indicates that reality.

So, I just want to put a bucket of cold water on a little of that talk right now because what’s actually happening is what’s actually happening which is that right now we’re voting on which of these things are most important to us.

**Craig:** But, you know, to be fair regardless of what is true or real, everyone apparently that employs us is convinced there’s going to be a strike. And they are acting accordingly. So, if we want them to stop acting like that I suppose we could do something. We haven’t done any of the things that would make them stop thinking that. And so they’re going to continue to think that. And they’re going to continue to behave in accordance with that, which means almost certainly that they will do predictably what they do when they think there’s going to be a strike. They’re going to hire a lot of people, rush, rush, rush, set dates for delivery before the termination of the agreement. And then if there is a strike then there is. And if there isn’t, then they’ll just whatever, deal with that backlog like they did when we almost struck in 2014.

**John:** Talk me through what you think the WGA would do if they wanted to make people not be saying those things.

**Craig:** Yes. I can think of a number of ways. I probably shouldn’t just blab them here on a podcast. Happy to have that conversation with you off mic, because you don’t want to just walk out there and say, “We’re never going to strike.”

**John:** Yeah, that’s not helpful.

**Craig:** But on the other hand clearly as a result of the rhetoric surrounding the agency campaign and the general tenor of membership meetings the companies have decided reasonably or not that we’re hell bent for leather. And that this is all part of a larger plan that all of this is wrapped up in one big total war against everyone. And that’s how they’re going about it. And we can giggle all we want but in the end if they are convinced, they’re convinced.

And one of the great dangers of them being convinced that we’re going on strike is that they will precipitate the strike.

**John:** Yeah. That’s the danger.

**Craig:** That’s the problem. That they’ll say, look, they’re going to strike no matter what. What we can’t do is come in there, offer them something reasonable and have them spit on it and go on strike, because then they’ll never take that and we’ll have to come up with something better. Therefore let’s just go in there, offer them a bucket of crap so that they’ll do the strike that they were going to do anyway, and then we’ll negotiate a real deal, which is kind of what happened in 2007.

**John:** So if you are summarizing this for Deadline, or basically just transcribing this for Deadline–

**Craig:** Ha-ha.

**John:** I think Craig says like Craig advises studios, “Don’t offer a bucket of crap.”

**Craig:** Yeah. Please don’t offer a bucket of crap. I would say to the studios don’t presume we all are going on strike. Because I actually don’t think the union does want – I mean, union leadership. I don’t really see it. I don’t see this like we’re striking no matter what. Of course we’re going to drive a hard bargain. That’s what we do. And of course we want things and of course there are things that are always strike-worthy. I mean, if they come in with rollbacks and stuff like that, you know, I’ll be out there waving the red banner. That’s fine.

But this current belief, this inherent belief that we’re going on strike, while I understand it from a certain point of view I often feel like I have to translate this strange political machinery of our own union to other people. I actually don’t think we are hell bent for leather and going on strike and I think we would much rather prefer, as per usual, to get a deal that follows the pattern of the DGA but addresses certain writer-specific things that we need to have addressed. Most primarily I will add the area of features which have been neglected completely for well over a decade.

**John:** I would say that’s probably a Craig priority.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** In this negotiation.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** So you brought up earlier the agency stuff, so let’s talk a little bit about the agency stuff which we haven’t talked about for a bit. So, some stuff that has happened in the meantime, Abrams Agency, Rothman Brecher both signed the new franchise agreement. It’s similar to the existing franchise agreement. Packaging fees got sunsetted through January 22, 2021. There are new modifications that allow an agency to have up to a 5% ownership interest in an entity engaged in production or distribution. So that is 5%, basically you can own 5% of a production entity is a new thing in this latest round of stuff.

Craig, I know I’ve been holding you back from talking about this so let’s get some Craig Corner time here. Tell me what you want to tell me.

**Craig:** I don’t know. What’s there to even say? I mean, if it takes us seven months to sign Rothman Brecher, uh, then by my calculations to sign UTA, CAA, William Morris, and ICM it will take us 14,980 months. So I don’t know what’s – I just think in general whatever our strategy was, if we had said to the membership in the beginning FYI if we all do this then we think in seven months we will at least have the Abrams Agency and Rothman Brecher. I think you would not have gotten a 95% vote.

This has not gone the way we would have hoped. And at this point I don’t see any reason why it would. I think the large agencies have essentially said, “Yeah, no, no, we’ve moved on. We’re going to figure out a way to live without you.” And they are.

And our unilateral disarmament is going to have grave costs for us. But there’s nothing I can do about it. And it’s going to continue this way. And I think the general feeling among a number of members I’ve spoken to is just a kind of, oh well, that’s that.

**John:** All right. So frequent listeners of the podcast know that one of the frustrating patterns we always get into is like Craig says something and I say like oh I would want to respond more fully to you but I can’t because I know things, because I’m on the negotiating committee, because I was on the board and such. And it puts us in this weird place. And so a thought I had is that because I know things that you don’t know there’s a frustrating mismatch of stuff. And I can’t tell you the things that I know, but an opportunity might be for me to type up like four facts that I know that let me perceive the situation very differently than you perceive it. Because I think we’re both very rational people.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Fundamentally.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** And so I think it probably is frustrating for you recognizing that John seems to be a rational person yet he’s responded to these things very differently. So I thought maybe I could type up these four facts, put them in a document, and encrypt the hell out of it with a long password.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** And then so I’m going to send you this document after we record this.

**Craig:** And I have to guess the password. [laughs]

**John:** And when this is resolved, when this is resolved–

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** In which we obviously have different timelines of when we think this is going to be resolved, then I will send you the password–

**Craig:** 14,000.

**John:** So it’s somewhere between tomorrow and 14,000 years from now.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** I will send you the password. And you will open up the document and you’ll say, huh. And I’ll be curious then sort of what perspective would be on this conversation we had just now. Because I think I feel the frustration of the audience sometimes in the sense of like how are they seeing these things so very differently.

**Craig:** Hmm.

**John:** And it might be a way to sort of bridge a little of that gap, honestly only for my sanity.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Not for yours.

**Craig:** No, I understand. That makes sense. Because you don’t want people to think you’re irrational. I mean, here’s the thing. I fully acknowledge that I do not know the things that you know. What I do know is that for a long time you and others have said that you know things that we don’t know. But actually nothing has happened. Nothing that I would call significant and let me just define it as always as CAA, UTA, ICM. I’ve given up on William Morris Endeavor.

And so because we have heard a lot of versions of we’re real close, things are happening. In the election one of the things that people kept throwing out there was that the people who were daring to fulfill their constitutional obligation to the union and volunteer to serve by running for office were undermining the union because there was a major agency that was moments away from signing a deal and because of this challenged election they were not doing it.

I have to assume one of those was the Abrams Agency or Rothman Brecher. I don’t know what else to say. Well, that was the big prize. Eh, you know. So we’re just sort of stuck here not knowing. All I do know is it’s been the longest – I don’t know, I’d call it a labor action – by this union that I’ve ever been in. It’s approaching the longest it’s ever done. I think eight months is the limit.

**John:** So, winding back through time, there was a moment at which you were running for the board. You hadn’t decided to run for vice president. And I was so excited that you were running for board because I knew you would get elected and I knew you’d be on the board and actually have the information. And I was thinking, oh, Craig will now actually know what I know. And it will be great. And so that didn’t come to pass and many things happened in the meantime.

There’s a scenario in which you had stayed running for the board and you could have known these things and I would be fascinated to have these conversations with you.

**Craig:** No question. And I know this must be frustrating for you, too. But I do wish that the leadership of our union would recognize that there is a serious cost to not informing us of anything. We know nothing ever. I mean, this is different than an AMPTP negotiation. We know when we’re negotiating with them. It’s a thing. And there’s only one of them. It’s a thing, right?

This stuff where we’re just sitting here going oh good, I’m so glad they took weeks to refine their agreement with Rothman Brecher. That’s really just about the fact that whatever 90% of us were represented by four companies. And those four companies are still – we’ve heard zero. And I can certainly what they say is that there’s absolutely nothing happening. And that could be a lie. But it would be nice if it were a lie for our side to prove it. But we don’t hear anything. All we get are these overly rosy announcements that we have made a major breakthrough with some company that just doesn’t rise to that test of being a major breakthrough. I don’t know what else to say.

**John:** I hear what you’re saying. And I look forward to being able to send you this document. Here’s something I would propose we do. We got a question in about moving to Los Angeles. I’ll read the question. And I think weirdly you and I are not the right people to answer it, but I think some of our listeners are the right people to answer it.

**Craig:** Oh good.

**John:** So let’s read the question and then invite people to write in, for a change not about assistants. Mark from New York asks, “This podcast has taught me nearly everything I know about screenwriting. More recently you’ve even inspired me to make the move from New York City to Los Angeles and pursue a career in writing for TV. I fly out at the end of January and I want to hit the ground running. What advice would you give to someone who is about to make the move to Los Angeles? Other than securing an apartment and transportation, what should I prioritize once I arrive? Is there anything I could be doing in the months leading up to the move to increase my chances of finding work? Finally, if each of you could do your first years in Los Angeles differently, what would you change?”

**Craig:** Great questions.

**John:** So these are great questions. And for me and Craig it’s more than 20 years ago and I just feel like so much is different. But I think for a lot of our listeners that is a very recent thing. And so if you are a person who could help answer Mark’s question I’d love to hear it. So if you have moved to Los Angeles in the last, you know, five, ten years and could talk to him about what you did and what you would do differently, I think that would be a great help to Mark.

**Craig:** Do you remember, I bet it was this way when you got here, too, because we were about the same. When it was time to rent an apartment there was a fax number that you could call and you would get faxed a sheet of available apartments and rents and phone numbers.

**John:** I remember going to West Side Rentals where you’d actually on Tuesdays and Fridays I believe you could pick up the Xerox packet and it would be there exactly at noon and it was a race to get those apartments.

**Craig:** Yes. [laughs] Yes. Yes. I mean, you’re absolutely right. We are not. We are old. I mean, we’re – I mean, I don’t even know if the temp agency I applied to even exists anymore.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** Well, it probably does.

**John:** I’m sure it’s an app now.

**Craig:** It’s an app. Everything is an app. It’s a robot. Everything is a robot.

**John:** All right. Let’s do our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is something that other people have used as a One Cool Thing, but it is genuinely really amazing. So, this is a solar mirror breakthrough. So solar power can happen in various ways. You can have the things where they’re shining on the photo voltaic cells. This is more the classic kind of thing where you have a bunch of mirrors pointed at one area and you’re making it super-hot. And it goes all the way back to the idea of Archimedes’ mirror where people had to polish shields and they were burning a ship. It’s that idea but done with computers that can precisely manufacture these mirrors and precisely aim them.

And the breakthrough that happened this last week was they were able to hit a thousand degrees Celsius.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** And when you get something that hot you can actually unlock a bunch of industrial processes that are really helpful, like making concrete, or splitting water up to make hydrogen and oxygen. So it’s potentially a really great breakthrough. I’m sure there’s lots of other things you can apply that kind of energy generation to. So, anyway, it was just a good example and actually clear to follow things. Because so often when you look at sort of technology and energy it’s just really complicated. And here you can see like, oh, I get it. The mirrors are pointing at that thing and it’s making it really hot.

**Craig:** Make stuff hot.

**John:** Make stuff hot.

**Craig:** Make stuff hot is how we generate energy. I mean, if you can make stuff that hot using mirrors then you should be able to heat up a whole big bunch of water into steam to turn a turbine and make power.

**John:** Chernobyl was heat to generate steam.

**Craig:** Yeah. They all are. Every power plant we have, whether it’s a dam, or coal, or nuclear, or gas, it doesn’t matter, that’s all of them. That’s what they all do.

**John:** Well, that’s actually not true at all.

**Craig:** What? Which one does something else?

**John:** I mean, a dam is just using gravity to generate electricity.

**Craig:** No, but it’s spinning.

**John:** It’s spinning but it’s not heating anything up.

**Craig:** Well, that’s true. You’re right. You’re right. My point is it’s spinning a turbine.

**John:** Yes. Exactly. Turbines.

**Craig:** Turbines.

**John:** For sure.

**Craig:** I mean, it’s photo voltaic. Goes directly to electricity, but if you’ve got these mirrors all pointed at something to heat it up it feels like it could be pretty cool. I could be wrong. A bunch of physicists are going to write in and tell me. You know what? I don’t care.

**John:** Not a bit.

**Craig:** I don’t care.

**John:** Well, one thing I love, when you fly out of Los Angeles sometimes and you look out the window you can see the big solar array sometimes. And those are so cool.

**Craig:** Yes, they are. And the wind farms.

**John:** Oh, I love me some wind farms.

**Craig:** Yeah. You know Trump thinks they cause cancer.

**John:** I think the worst things that happens with windmills is they do kill some birds, but you know what?

**Craig:** They do. They kill birds. I mean, I eat birds.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Chicken is good.

**John:** Chicken is good. Craig, do you have a One Cool Thing?

**Craig:** I do. So it’s not necessarily something you’re going to want to go out and buy immediately, but the promise for the next year I think is quite good. So like you I purchased the new MacBook Pro. 16-inch screen. I believe you feel it is too large for you, which makes total sense.

**John:** It’s too large. I returned it.

**Craig:** Makes total sense. And I like you had been working with a 13-inch MacBook Pro. It is quite a bit bigger. That’s, you know, I’m getting used to that part. But the part I’m really happy about is the keyboard. So Mac sort of infamously changed their keyboard a few years ago for their portables to this, what do you call it, Butterfly switch thing? Is that what it was called?

**John:** Yeah. From scissor to butterfly.

**Craig:** From scissor to butterfly. So the key had much less travel. It was kind of a more hard feeling. I got used to it, like everybody else. The problem was that they were not very reliable. And I like many people had to bring my laptop in to get the entire keyboard replaced because some tiny little thing broke somewhere. I mean, they paid for it, but at this point now they’re replacing tons of keyboards. It was a huge problem. And, honestly just didn’t feel great to type on that.

I thought it did at first, and then it got annoying. So, this one they’ve gone back. And it’s joyous. I can only presume that for a company that so rarely admits it made a mistake and really would prefer that the rest of the world catch up to them, in this instance they have essentially admitted they made a mistake. And therefore in the following months and days the smaller MacBooks, the smaller laptops, the ones that aren’t quite as expensive as the MacBook Pro, they will all start getting this new keyboard. So, new keyboard coming, it’s inevitable. We should be all fine in just a few years.

**John:** Yeah. So I am still using my old 13-inch MacBook Pro. I don’t even know what year it’s from. It still has like the large USB ports and such. I love it. But I’m ready for a new computer. So once the 13-inch version of this comes with this keyboard I’ll be in heaven.

**Craig:** Yes, you will be.

**John:** All right. Stick around after the credits because we are going to be talking about cats. But for now that’s our show. As always it’s produced by Megana Rao. It’s edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Michael Carmen. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send your assistant stories or your advice about moving to Los Angeles.

For short questions, on Twitter I’m @johnaugust. Craig is @clmazin. We love to answer your short questions there.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you find transcripts. We try to get them up about four days after the episode airs.

Come to our live show. There’s still some tickets left as we’re recording this. You should come join us there for the live show. So in addition to those guests there’s always some sort of game stuff.

**Craig:** Yes. Yes.

**John:** And you get to see me and Craig in our natural habitat.

**Craig:** I might wear some reindeer ears or something this year. I might be festive.

**John:** You haven’t sung a song for a while, either. So maybe some singing would be in order.

**Craig:** Yeah. You know what? Maybe we’ll do a song.

**John:** Maybe we’ll do a song. I’d love to do a song.

**Craig:** I wonder like I’ll do a song with maybe Kevin Feige and I can do some sort of duet.

**John:** Perfect. Do it. Thanks Craig.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

**BONUS**

**John:** Craig, cats. I’m happy to talk about either the musical Cats which could include the film Cats, or talk about the actual furry beings called cats.

**Craig:** You know, I’m not – I was never a huge fan of the musical Cats. I’ll just say it. I love Broadway. I love Broadway shows. And I’m not one of these people that’s a snob against Andrew Lloyd Webber. I think Evita is amazing. And, you know, Jesus Christ Superstar is amazing. And I really love Joseph and the Technicolor Dream Coat. I just never loved Cats because I think it suffers from the structure that it came from which was just a bunch of episodic poems about individual cats. And so it just sort of, you know, you meet a cat, you meet a cat, you meet a cat. It was just never my thing.

That said, Memory is in the what, top five Broadway songs of all time?

**John:** Yeah. A remarkable song.

**Craig:** It’s incredible.

**John:** I have never seen Cats. And so I know kind of what happens in it. I know it’s largely plotless. It’s a bunch of people just auditioning to die in a way. So, never having seen Cats, but I’m always curious to see things, so I’m going to see the Cats movie and I’m going to go into it with my heart open and ready to be impressed. So we’ll see about that.

Having discussed Cats the musical, now let us discuss the actual beings called cats. They’re small furry creatures who sometimes live with us. Craig, what is your opinion of cats as a species?

**Craig:** I mean, how did this happen? How did this happen? I understand dogs and their value. They show affection and they have utility. And they protect you. And they watch over you. And if you are sight impaired they guide you. They’re remarkable. They’re remarkable creatures. And I don’t understand how cats even became a thing. They just seem to me to have no more value than, I don’t know, rabbits. What do they do? What do they do?

**John:** So to stipulate, you and I are both dog owners. We are both dog lovers. You have an amazing dog named Cookie, I have a great dog named Lambert. Dogs are wonderful. But I don’t want this to be a cats versus dogs discussion. Let’s just talk about cats on their own merits.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** So as a person who loves dogs I also love cats, but I love cats at a distance because I’m very allergic to cats. So I’ve never been able to invite one into my home. My daughter has been advocating very hard for us getting a cat. It won’t happen, because Mike is just never going to allow a cat into our house.

**Craig:** God bless him.

**John:** But I enjoy other people’s cats. And I actually like other people talking about their cats and here’s what I think I find so fascinating about it. Whereas dogs are wolves who sort of came very close to us and ultimately we changed them into being a thing that is useful to us, that’s why we have such a codependent relationship with our dogs, cats never really quite there. They’re domesticated in the sense that they are comfortable living around us, but they are still small lions. They are still wild creatures who just happen to be in our homes. And I think that’s what people find so fascinating about them is that they are not just even mercurial. If we were to die they would eat us.

**Craig:** Oh, within seconds. I mean, my feeling is that if you fall down and you are dying, a dog is going to in a moment of clarity attempt to dial 911. Like it will have its finest moment. A cat will start eating you before your last breath. I don’t understand them. I don’t.

**John:** But in some ways maybe you don’t understand them the same way you don’t understand people who do things that risk their lives to do. People who are climbing without ropes. Like free-soloing.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** That to me is sort of like the emotional aspect of having a cat. You know it’s not actually – it doesn’t care about you, at least not in the same way that a dog or a person would care about you.

**Craig:** How many people have we just lost? I mean, of the amount of people that listen to our show?

**John:** Most of our listenership, yeah.

**Craig:** 40, 50, 70%. Gone. Permanently. People are very emotional about their cats. So I want to acknowledge that I’m really joking. I mean, it’s not that cats are evil or bad. And nor do I doubt the depth of affection people do have for their cats, and people do. And I have all sorts of – Lindsay Doran who is one of my most dearest of friends, who I love very, very much, is obsessed with her cats. She loves them. And, you know what? And I love her. So, I accept that. I don’t understand it, but I don’t have to.

That said, you and I are right. [laughs]

**John:** So, I’ve had two cats in my life. One was this tiny little kitten. Tiny little black kitten showed up on our driveway. It was a Friday afternoon. There was no parent around. So, we took the cat in. I started feeding it. And we ultimately found it a home. But the cat lived with us for about a week. And so I called the cat Friday. And I will try to post a photo of Friday the cat because this was ten years ago. I was reminded as I was looking through photos. And Friday was a great little cat but ultimately could not live with us.

The best cat I’ve had the chance to meet though is a neighbor’s cat named Raleigh. And so it’s an actor who lives two doors up, and her cat will just kind of wander into our yard sometimes. And this cat is the most – not dog-like cat – but the most sociable cat. Will hop up and just sort of hey you eating lunch, that looks good, let’s take a look.

That is a cat that made me appreciate sort of what it’s like to have a cat who is in your life a lot and where you could see what the cat was thinking. It was sort of an alien thought process. It wasn’t sort of – I couldn’t quite put together what its thoughts were. And it did suddenly scratch me. But it was intriguing. So I can definitely see the value of a cat like that.

**Craig:** Expressionless faces with their dead eyes. The closest I ever was with a cat was Melissa had a cat named Tiggy. And so when I first started dating her and I went home to where she lived I met Tiggy and Tiggy was apparently vaguely brain damaged or something. It had never weened and it had been hit by a car. I don’t know what the excuse was. All I know was that Tiggy would jump on you and then sort of I guess cats have this instinctive behavior of kind of kneading with their paws if they are nursing.

So it would just knead you with its paws, and its claws, which hurt. And drool. So it would just sit on you, and hurt you, and drool on you. That was it. That’s actually the most affection and, yeah, interaction, physical interaction I’ve ever had with a cat. Usually they just stare at you like you’re something on the bottom of a shoe.

**John:** Yeah. That’s cats. Last point I will make is why cats haven’t had the tremendous influence on human civilization the way that dogs have, we would not be humans if we hadn’t sort of domesticated dogs the way we did. Cats did and probably do still perform an important function of like getting rid of mice and vermin, other things which would be unpleasant around us. So they have a utility certainly and in rural places especially.

**Craig:** Yes, for sure. And don’t forget that they do steal babies’ breath. So they help thin the population.

**John:** Absolutely. Like babies you don’t want. Only the evil babies.

**Craig:** Jerk babies. That’s how you find out your baby was going to be an idiot. A cat just, you know. None of that is true. Old wives’ tales.

You know what cats do do? They actually do create huge health problems for pregnant women because of toxoplasmosis, which is–

**John:** That is not good.

**Craig:** The nasty little thing that they poop out in their weird litter box.

**John:** Yeah. Litter box, again, a thing which cat people are willing to deal with. Litter boxes.

**Craig:** I mean, what?

**John:** And they’re saying, “You’re picking up your dog’s poop. Is it any different?”

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Yes. It is. Because it’s not inside my house. How about that? It’s not sitting in a bunch of weird gravel.

**John:** All right, Craig. I’ll be back with you next week with whatever listeners we have left.

**Craig:** None.

Links:

* Buy tickets for our [Live Show](https://www.wgfoundation.org/events/all/2019/12/12/the-scriptnotes-holiday-live-show) Thursday, December 12th with Kevin Feige, Lorene Scafaria, Shoshannah Stern, and Josh Feldman!
* [Professionalism in the Age of the Influencer](https://johnaugust.com/2019/professionalism-in-the-age-of-the-influencer), read the full text of John’s speech
* Watch the [Assistant Townhall](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5x_jDCftkg&feature=youtu.be)
* Learn more about [Agency Affiliates](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaXQ84Hn6_Y)
* [Solar Mirror Breakthrough](https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/green-tech/a29847655/heliogen-solar-heat-mirrors/)
* [Archimedes’ Mirror](http://www.unmuseum.org/burning_mirror.htm)
* [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)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew Chilelli ([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_428_assistant_writers.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 426: Chance Favors the Prepared with Lulu Wang, Transcript

December 6, 2019 News, Scriptnotes Transcript

You can find the original post for this episode, [here](https://johnaugust.com/2019/chance-favors-the-prepared-with-lulu-wang).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 426 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast we’re going to be talking about not explaining things, autobiographical writing, and putting together indie features. To do so we’re excited to welcome Lulu Wang, a writer-director whose movie The Farewell is simply one of the best films of the year. Welcome Lulu.

Lulu Wang: Thank you.

**Craig:** Hey Lulu.

**Lulu:** Hey Craig.

**John:** Lulu, your film is a 99% on Rotten Tomatoes.

**Craig:** Oh, that’s not good. That’s not good.

**John:** That 1% – are you going to hunt down that person and shake them and ask what do you have against Nai Nai?

**Lulu:** [laughs] No, it was actually a relief when we got to 99. It was just sort of like, you know, it’s like when you get the brand new shirt and you’re like, well, OK, or the brand new car, and now that you’ve got the scratch on it it’s almost like you can breathe better. I don’t know.

**Craig:** I think that 99% is sort of – it’s better than 100% because it’s the beauty mark. It’s that tiny little flaw that makes you realize it’s real. Because if it’s 100% then you think, well, maybe they bribed people or something.

**Lulu:** Yeah. And everyone is holding their breath, too. That’s the thing. Everyone is like when is it going to – and I was just tired of holding my breath.

**Craig:** Well it’s usually, what’s his name, Armond – who is the guy?

**John:** Armond White?

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s usually Armond White that ends up coming in out of nowhere and ruining things.

**Lulu:** That’s what I’ve heard.

**Craig:** So I think 99 is better.

**John:** 99 is great. And what’s even better is when people actually enjoy your movie. And so I saw your movie opening weekend and a good thing about Twitter is I just said on Twitter like I really loved The Farewell and Lulu Wang you made a great movie, not knowing you at all, and you could write back and we can talk on Twitter, and now you’re here on the show.

Lulu Wang: I love Twitter for that reason. Sometimes I want to get off of it, but then when things like that happen. Because you know the show also – I mean, the movie kind of got set up because of Twitter.

**John:** Tell me.

**Lulu:** Chris Weitz messaged me.

**Craig:** Oh.

**Lulu:** I was at the gym the day that the story aired on This American Life and when I got out of the gym I had a DM from Chris Weitz. And actually not a DM. I think he publicly tweeted at me and was like, “I’m trying to reach you, but in case you don’t get the email from my agent, the email from me, or the DM that I just sent you, I’m publicly doing it here.”

**John:** That’s great. That’s amazing. So that is a good thing that Twitter has made in the world is The Farewell. So, it has brought down many good institutions, but it has made one good movie.

**Craig:** We’re all so conflicted about Twitter aren’t we? Because I have made some really good friends through Twitter. Some interesting things have happened. And then there are those days where you just realize that it’s slowly gnawing away at the foundations of everything that is good and decent.

**John:** Yeah. And then there’s Facebook which is just a joy and delight. [laughs]

**Craig:** I’m off of Facebook. I don’t live there anymore.

**John:** All right. We are going to talk about all of these things, but before we do that we have some follow up. We’ve been talking a ton about assistants obviously on the show. And Lulu my impression, for some reason I thought you were a New Yorker, so I was going to ask all these questions about like well what is it like to be an assistant in New York, because we’ve been so LA focused. But you’re actually an LA person. How long have you been in Los Angeles?

**Lulu:** Since 2007 I would say.

**John:** Great. And did you have any classic assistant experience? Were you answering phones for anybody? Did you do any of that work?

**Lulu:** I was an onset assistant for two different production and those were my first jobs in Hollywood in LA. I didn’t know anybody and I got my first job because I called the production office from the back of the Hollywood Reporter back then when they were like the listings for productions were in the Hollywood Reporter. And I just blind called and said, “Hey, I speak Chinese. You don’t happen,” it was Rush Hour 3, “you don’t happen to need someone who speaks Mandarin?” They were like oh my god we do, where did you come from, this is amazing. And I started two weeks later working for this actress.

**Craig:** You know what I like is that they’re making a movie with somebody that spoke Chinese and it never occurred to them to go find somebody that spoke Chinese.

**Lulu:** Well I think they were trying. They were like this actress is coming. She’s going to need an assistant who speaks Chinese. And they just didn’t even know where to go to find that person.

**Craig:** Fascinating.

**Lulu:** So I just called out of the blue.

**John:** What I love about this story is it just shows such pluck and sort of like I’m going to flip open the back of this thing, I’m going to start calling numbers, and recognize what I have to offer that they may need. So very smart.

So you’re assisting on that and then another production, too. And was your goal always to become a filmmaker? Coming out of undergrad what was your vision for your life in Los Angeles?

**Lulu:** Yeah. I wanted to make films. I didn’t go to film school but I took like the Film 101 class and decided I wanted to be a director, but that I wanted to write scripts. And just moved to LA by myself to the dismay of my parents. And said how am I going to do this. And so that’s how I got that first job. And then I went on another production to work for a producer. And was trying to I guess learn how to do this in Hollywood by working on Hollywood sets and kind of being in the vicinity of people who were doing it. And what was exciting about the second film that I was an assistant on was that David Gordon Green was the director and I knew his films. This was a big studio film, but he had come from indie. And so I was excited to just learn from somebody who was self-made and started out by making these micro-budget films.

**John:** So your experience as an assistant, did you actually pick up those things you needed to pick up?

**Lulu:** Absolutely not. No. And that’s what I quickly realized is that you spend so many hours on set. You know, and I’m not very good at hierarchy because I don’t know anything about sets. I don’t know that video village is for these kinds of people, and those kinds of people shouldn’t go near them. Like I didn’t know all those rules. I don’t really know how to make coffee. I was hired as like a business assistant on Pineapple Express and then ended up doing a lot of dog-sitting and making sandwiches and trying not to burn the toast, until I eventually got fired. [laughs]

**Craig:** Was it the toast that did that?

**Lulu:** No. It was a combination of things. You know, it was, yeah, it was my probably bad assisting skills. But my eagerness to learn and it’s very difficult to both respect hierarchy and try to be eager to learn. But my understanding was the reason I’m doing this kind of really poorly paid, no insurance kind of job is to learn. But then you get there it’s like you’re the assistant. We hired you to just be – to assist us.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, this is kind of one of the trickier things to navigate for assistants because the whole point as you say, we’re talking about a lot of people who are very well educated. They’re really smart. In other industries they would be already middle management, but in Hollywood there’s this system where you have to be an assistant in order to learn. On the other hand the people who are employing assistants actually need assistants. They need people to help them and handle things and so there is this push and pull where you – even as an employer I feel it where I feel, OK, I have a responsibility to help this person. But also I need them to help me.

**Lulu:** Right.

**Craig:** And it can be tricky sometimes to navigate.

**Lulu:** Well and I’ll just say like I was trying to figure out – because there was a lot of time in which I had nothing to do. And I would say – I would try to make myself useful. And I would say, “You’re out of town. I can’t even assist you because you’re out of town. I’m going to go to the post-production facilities and talk to the editors and try to see if I can be helpful there.” But it was almost like, no, just stay in your lane. If you have nothing to do then just stand there. And I have a really hard time just standing there.

**Craig:** Not ideal.

**John:** But I suspect your frustration at just standing there is probably the reason why you were able to make two features including The Farewell. So that’s honestly—

**Lulu:** It’s true.

**John:** So if you didn’t learn on the assistant track, how did you learn what you needed to learn in order to become the writer-director that you are? Where did you get that experience and how did you get started?

**Lulu:** I’ve always been a learn as you do kind of person. So honestly I learned through my first feature film. And I didn’t expect that my first feature was going to be as big as it ended up being. My partner, you know, in making Posthumous was the producer. She’d never made a movie. I’d never made a movie. And she ended up financing it as well. And we just were very naïve. We were like we want to make a movie. How do we start? Well, we need a script. All right, great. Why don’t you write it? OK, I will. You know, and it started out I think where a lot of filmmakers do that, but then we ended up getting this amazing cast. And the way we got the cast was also like, well, you’re supposed to have a casting director. We can’t afford one. A friend said that he knew one. And so we said to Dan Hubbard in the UK, you know, our friend Darren says you would help us. We’ll give you $5,000 just to make the phone calls we need to be made. And like we’ll come up with the list of people and just send you these lists. And that’s how we ended up getting Jack Huston and Brit Marling.

**Craig:** Great.

**Lulu:** And like CAA I son the phone and we were like, I said to Bernadette, I was like, “Wait, I thought this was a $500,000 film? Are we still going to be able to do this if Brit says yes?” And she was like, well, we’ll figure it out. We’ll figure something out. We’re not going to say no to the cast, because also the cast helps you to get more money is what we had learned. So, yeah, that was a process. Every step of the way just kind of throwing ourselves into it. And then learning as we go. And even on set I think I really just learned, oh, this is how you work with the DP. Oh, this is what the production designer does. And figured it out.

**John:** So it was film school by just doing it? You’re like this is the thing we have to do today, so I need to learn how to do this thing.

**Lulu:** Yeah. And I feel very fortunate that I had that opportunity. Because not everyone does. And I’m incredibly grateful to Bernadette Burgi who was my partner on that film that we did this together because without having gone through that experience I wouldn’t have had the confidence to do The Farewell.

**John:** Now, the experience you described very much sounds like a startup. It sounds like a business startup. We’re going to make this product and were going to figure out how to do it and we will add people on as we go along. And it is, especially that first feature, is so just entrepreneurial. You’re grabbing stuff and putting it together and sort of seeing what works. And it’s great that you actually had a movie that you could show at the end of it. Sometimes they do fall apart.

But a thing I find a lot coming out of the Sundance Labs is there’s a whole program now called Your Second Feature because it’s so hard for people to move from that first feature which was just all pluck and scramble to then get that second feature happening. And there was a gap between those two for you. So how did you move from the first one to the second one?

**Lulu:** Well, I feel like the second one was almost like my first one. Because even when I did the deal to make my second feature, which was Chris Weitz, his company, and then Big Beach who financed it. I don’t know that they even saw my first feature before they said yes to my second. And it was a pluck and scramble situation as well because I went and I pitched it and said, well, I’ve made a movie now. It should be easier to pitch and get a film set up. It was not. Especially when your second film is even more “indie” than the first. Meaning it’s not a genre film. It’s American. It’s 80% in Mandarin. Like all the things that we know about The Farewell now that I was trying to pitch at the time, and even my agent at the time was like, “This is crazy. You shouldn’t be trying to make this film. You should make a bigger film after you’ve already done one feature.”

And so what I did is I went back to Film Independence Project involved and I made a short film for $9,000 as a way to learn how to do that. And then when The Farewell wasn’t getting picked up. I set it aside, was working on other things. But it was always in the back of my head. And as I was on the festival tour with my short film that’s when I met a producer for This American Life. And, you know, he said what other stories do you have, and I pulled The Farewell out and set it up as a story. And then it went from This American Life to then being set up as a film.

So in many ways I feel like that’s like a first film experience in a way. You’re just trying to get your story out there and trying to find partners.

**John:** It’s kind of an every movie experience—

**Lulu:** True.

**John:** Where you have an idea. Like this is a thing that wants to exist. And you’re just not sure what is the right venue, who is the right person who is going to recognize what’s great about this. So you already had a script, but it wasn’t until you did the This American Life piece that Chris Weitz could hear and then bug you on Twitter about that it became a real thing.

**Lulu:** Right.

**John:** And what was great is you already had the script. You could show him saying this is what the plan is for the movie when he was sending you that first tweet.

**Lulu:** Yeah, I didn’t show him the old scripts though because the thing that I realized happened with the earlier scripts was that I had many written so many drafts to try to accommodate different notes that people were giving me of like, oh, if you just made it more like this then maybe I would finance it, or maybe that would be right for our company. So I had tried all of these different things that in the end it sort of felt like it wasn’t my voice anymore. And I had to kind of start clean so that I could remember what it is that inspired me to tell the story. And I feel like This American Life helped me to do that because you can’t make things up for that show you do go back to the essence of what you felt and what things, you know, felt like and what happened in real life.

**Craig:** I’m kind of curious. Do you think that one of the reasons that you were finally able to get it made in accordance with your own voice is because the world around us has been changing and there’s more of an interest in stories that aren’t what we would call traditional American stories. And it’s not just about sort of chasing international money or anything like that. But just rather more of a sense that even American audiences are interested in stories that aren’t traditionally straight down the middle white people American stories?

**Lulu:** Maybe on a subconscious level. You know, as far as – because our film came out, or we started making it before Crazy Rich Asians came out and so I’m not necessarily sure because I had so many people tell me, oh, this is a great idea. It will be My Big Fat Chinese Wedding. So, they weren’t necessarily responding because they thought, wow, this is interesting and we can explore this new culture and ideas. It was just how do we do fit it into the right box.

**Craig:** Did the right thing for the wrong reason kind of deal, right?

**Lulu:** Like how do we do the ethnic box office hit? And then when I kept saying, no, this is actually an American film that’s very indie and it’s going to be darker than that. People were like very confused by it. And like my producers both at Big Beach and Depth of Field, it’s just because they heard the story on This American Life and like couldn’t get out of the car because they were crying so much. And so on some level it was almost like, well, we’re so moved by this human story. The language and the cast stuff, well, in a way that might be a challenge, but we’ll just do it for the right budget so that it makes sense.

**John:** Yeah. So looking at your movies, you have the Billi character played by Awkwafina who is going to a wedding and so therefore your assumptions about genre should be like, oh, it should be a romantic comedy. It should be about family and romantic comedy and all of that stuff. But that’s not the heart of your movie. The heart of the movie is Billi and Nai Nai and sort of the lie that’s being told to the family. Was that always the central idea and conflict in your vision for what this was going to be? That was always the heart of it?

**Lulu:** Yes. And, you know, it took a while before I realized that. And it took me writing different versions of the script because that was always the feedback. Well, if it’s a wedding movie where they go back to China why wouldn’t your main character be the bride? Like doesn’t that just up the stakes? Not in an anti-feminist thing, but just like if your main character is the person who is engaged in the fake wedding and has to keep up the sham, like isn’t that where the stakes are? But then every time I tried to write that version it’s like but then it becomes about her relationship and not about her relationship with her grandmother. Because, you know, so much of what you’re trying to set up on the page then becomes like her and her fiancé fighting or not fighting and trying to, you know.

And I’m like I’m not interested in that stuff. And what’s interesting to me emotionally is the fact that for me at the time that I’m 30 and I’m single. And I’m going back and my grandmother is like, “When are you going to get married because I want to see your wedding?” That was the heart. And me knowing that she’s going to die and she not knowing that. And in her mind anticipating being at my wedding. And having to live with that, right? That was the heartbreak. And you don’t get that if you have people kind of in a farcical comedy trying to like pull off a wedding even though they hate each other.

**Craig:** See, I wish that I could get this lesson across to all of the people that are paid to “help us.” Let’s say that you’re a producer or a studio executive and you look at material and you think, “There is this other way of telling a story that I think would be wonderful.” And you might even be right. Maybe there is a great way to tell that story. Maybe that alternate reality movie makes $900 million. Who knows?

But if the person writing it doesn’t feel it, it’s just not going to work, so why say it? I mean, really I wish I could just hug everybody close to me and say your job is to figure out what the writer really wants to do and help them do that, because that’s going to be good. And whatever you make them do is not.

**John:** Yeah. It feels like a dozen other writers could write that movie that you’re describing. The sort of romantic comedy or going back with the fiancé and all of that stuff. But you are the only person who could write that story of Billi and Nai Nai and what that feels like because it’s your actual real story.

So let’s talk about autobiography and sort of how that fits into this kind of storytelling. Because a lot of the details are true to what you experienced, but you also did change things. So how did you make the decisions about how much is this character really Lulu Wang and how much is this character someone else who is going through this story?

**Lulu:** Yeah, well, like I said in the beginning when I started writing drafts of the script I was changing a lot. And if I had not just made a romantic comedy I think that I would have been much more willing to compromise, or easily compromise without even realizing it just out of desperation to make a film. But then after doing – especially after doing This American Life and having that experience, the purity of storytelling, and then having people resonate with that I really leaned into keeping the factual experience as accurate as possible. Because to me it was more interesting to ask myself how to explore the drama. Because I felt a lot of drama. You know, and it feels weird to say instead of like trying to figure out how to put that on screen let’s make some stuff up that looks more dramatic from the outside but actually doesn’t resonate with me.

So, yeah, we changed – and we kept having this conversation during development which is like well a movie is not real life. We’re not making a documentary. Do what’s best for the movie. And so then it was like but I’m not trying to stick to facts because I’m married to factual accuracy. I’m trying to do it because I just don’t see the need to make something up. Like let’s figure out how to film it or how to write it in a way that this moment is actually more dramatic.

But then there were other times where I’m like am I just – is this my blind spot? Where I am married to factual accuracy and I just don’t realize it? So that was just difficult to decipher psychologically. But for the most part I kept the plot similar to real life just because I didn’t want the movie to be about the plot. But I took creative license a little bit with the timelines and obviously you have to streamline who the characters are. Like I can’t represent every aspect of every character. Like my father was a diplomat and it was always like are you going to put that in? That’s such a cool thing. He was a diplomat in Russia. He speaks Russian. And then every time I put it in it would be like where is this coming from.

**John:** It feels like Chekhov’s gun. Like literally if he speaks Russian then there has to be a reason why he speaks Russian. There has to be a payoff to it.

**Lulu:** Yeah.

**John:** In the movie Parasite that she was an Olympic shotput gold medalist or silver medalist that is a detail but kind of becomes important later on in the film.

**Lulu:** Right. And so then ultimately I had to streamline it to be – because it’s a story at the heart of it about this family and their relationship to the matriarch and losing her, I could really only explore facts about these characters that related to that grief. You know, understanding when they left China. Understanding why they left. All of that.

**John:** Well you figured out that Nai Nai was the central character. I mean, Billi is the one we’re following, but like everything had to be about Nai Nai and this moment. And so every detail that really couldn’t tie back into that just couldn’t make it into the movie. And in some ways it wouldn’t have made it into your final cut. Like you could have shot those scenes and they wouldn’t have made it back through and into it.

But in terms of stuff you did decide to change, like the reason I assumed you are a New York is because Awkwafina’s character in the movie is a New Yorker. So I just assumed that must be your real life experience. That kind of change. When did you decide to do that?

**Lulu:** From the beginning. I wanted Billi to be a New Yorker because I needed in a very short amount of time to establish her as the quintessential American. And I think around the world American means Manhattan, New York City, you know, the typical New Yorker. If you have her in LA and she’s in a car and she’s driving, you could be like where is she? She’s on the 405, she might as well be – she could be in another country for all you know, right? So there was something just having that iconic setting was important.

**John:** There’s a moment early on, we don’t see a lot of her in New York, but there’s a moment quite early on where she goes I guess downstairs to the laundromat which I guess they own the building?

**Lulu:** Yes.

**John:** And she has to talk to the kid who is translating for the parent, which is such a great specific moment. There’s no giant payoff to it, but it felt so authentic and so real and so precise to that moment. It made me sort of understand who Billi was and sort of the situation she found herself in so economically. And what I loved about that scene which is indicative of what I loved about the movie overall is you didn’t chose to explain a lot. There was no outside person who was new to all this who everything was being explained to in a way that a Hollywood movie classically would try to explain everything that was happening. Or that the laundromat owner didn’t speak English. You just showed the things and trusted that the audience would figure it out. Did that make you nervous at any point? Did you have the instinct to sort of explain more?

**Lulu:** Oh yeah. I’m so glad that scene works for you because it was the biggest headache because I had written it as a bodega and then, you know, location scouting we had this laundromat. But there was always this question of are audiences going to be confused that she’s paying her rent? You know, she’s going into a laundromat and maybe other cities like why would she be paying her rent? That’s a very New York thing. But that might not make sense. And so then I added a line in there where the laundromat owner’s daughter says, “We could double the rent right now if you just moved out,” as at least a way to like cement it. But we kept going back and forth of is it enough. Do we need to ADR? And also we shot it as a oner so we couldn’t cut. We just didn’t have any coverage.

And even in the script, I was looking at the script recently and I had written like laundromat, laundromat owner, but then in parenthesis it said, “Also the landlord of the building.” And you’re never supposed to write something in a script that you can’t actually show. And so I was really worried about that and I was like why did I do that? Because in my head I knew I would somehow make it obvious. But it was definitely nerve-wracking. Because then of course the producers are like how are people going to realize that she’s the landlord. And I’m like, well anyone who lives in New York. And they’re like but you might have audiences who didn’t live in New York.

**John:** What I liked about the movie is you weren’t always worried whether those people were getting a little bit confused. And a thing Craig and I talk a lot about is confusion versus mystery and where you find that balance. But in real life you don’t always understand everything that’s happening around you. You just sort of get the gist of it and that’s important. Especially as you get to the wedding in China and the days and routine of sort of how it all goes. And the wedding seems to go on forever, which is great, and I’m just sort of following it, which is the joy of it.

Craig, on Chernobyl there were many times where you did have to explain things, but there were also times where you were just showing stuff and we could figure out like, oh, it looks like they are cleaning something and that’s all you need to do. You don’t have to explain every little bit.

**Craig:** No, I mean, you have to play this weird game in your mind, and I guess I’m kind of curious Lulu how often you played this game yourself. And the game is what will a normal person pull from this? And it’s a strange thing because you know you can’t get everybody. It’s a bell curve. There are going to be people who look at something and go, oh, I totally missed that blah-blah, or oh no, I thought that that was his kid. That’s not his kid? People will make very strange things, but what you’re going for is that thick middle of the audience and you’re thinking what will they reasonably pull from this? And then the game is how much do I need to show them and how much can I get away with not showing them? Or if do need to explain something, how much?

And so you’re always engaging in audience by proxy games in your mind. And it’s guessing. You’re guessing, right? I mean, sometimes I think if there’s a weird hidden talent that is required in addition to understanding how to structure drama or where to put the camera, it’s this weird ESP of what will people think when I show them this.

**Lulu:** I completely agree. And the greater challenge on The Farewell is because it would be like, but Americans, because I’m working with American, non-Chinese American collaborators, so there were things that they didn’t get and that was so obvious to me that I took for granted. And then I might get a note and then it would be like, wait, but is this a note about my writing where it’s actually something is broken in the script? Or is it just about perspective and who is being centered? But if I’m the one being centered no one in my family would need this explained to them.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Lulu:** And that would be weird for a Chinese audience. And, you know, we were doing it as a coproduction and wanting to release in China. And I was like but that’s when you start – when Chinese people roll their eyes at movies that get released in China. They call it “they’re just soy saucing it up.” You know, because they’re trying to entice the Chinese people but it doesn’t connect to them because they’re like we would never need that thing explained.

**John:** Absolutely. I mean, whenever you have characters in a scene saying like, “As we all know,” and they keep talking. But there must have been pressure at some point, or at least the idea at some point to like, well, couldn’t Billi bring an American friend or couldn’t there be some white westerner who shows up there who has to be explained things. Did you ever get pressure or the nudge to do that?

**Lulu:** Not with Big Beach or Depth of Field, because the very first conversation I was like here are the conversations I’ve already had and here are the conversations that I don’t want to repeat. So, that was not a thing. And, in fact, at some point Billi had an ex-boyfriend and there was like a phone call in there as a way to kind of feel her tie back to America. And then the producers were like, “She doesn’t need a boyfriend. This is 2019. Let’s just let her be single and not address it.”

So it was great. But yeah, early on it was sort of like the most obvious way to address a fish out of water if she’s Chinese-American, which Chinese people don’t really even see it that way. They’re just like she’s Chinese. They’re not like, oh, she’s an outsider because she’s actually grown up in America. They’re like she’s Chinese. So if you’re going to have a foreigner in a China story it’s got to be the boyfriend. And like didn’t see that she would be the foreigner, you know. So, I actually got that from a Chinese investor.

**John:** To go back and clarify, so a Chinese audience sees Billi’s character as an American or as Chinese?

**Lulu:** As Chinese. Yeah. And so to them it’s like a fish out of water story for a Chinese person in China, and that’s also the frustration of a real Chinese person’s experience or Chinese-American, or any Chinese who lives and has grown up in the west, is when you go back they assume that you should just blend in and you should fit in. And when you don’t they’re like, “Are you Korean?”

**John:** Well that can segue to the question I wanted most, or the sequel that I want you to make most desperately. So the premise of the movie is that this wedding occurs on a very accelerated timeline so that Nai Nai can be there and so everyone can gather together to celebrate Nai Nai, even though she doesn’t know that she’s dying. And the bride in this case is Japanese, right? And I want another story in your mind of the bride and the groom and sort of like what they think is actually happening and if they are ready to be married. Because they do not seem like the happiest couple as we see them in the course of the story.

So as you’re thinking through this and even as you’re talking with the actors, what are you telling them about their relationship? Because that whole rushed marriage, I don’t have high hopes for it. But tell us what you’re thinking?

**Lulu:** No, I actually directed to them to be fine. They’re young and they’re naïve, but I directed it to them to actually be in love. But I think like what a western idea of what two people in love looks like is different maybe than in eastern. And so it’s a quieter, less showy kind of desire for companionship or whatever. But, yeah, but I did want to play with like do they look like deer in headlights because of the marriage that they’re about to go into, or is it just because they’re basically pushed into the center of the family for this wedding, but they know it’s not about them. It’s actually about Nai Nai.

So it’s like she has no leverage to demand what she wants for her own wedding, because it’s not about her.

**John:** Yeah. It’s fascinating. Which is also a message that you have in the movie overall. That it’s not about what Billi wants. It’s about what the family wants.

**Lulu:** Yeah. And there were versions where we dug a little bit more into the bride and groom and gave them voice and perspective. And there were even scenes that we shot where there was a conversation. But it just ultimately felt untrue. Because the reality is I never had those conversations with my cousin. We don’t speak the same language. And it’s very awkward and difficult to have those conversations. Of course, I can call now and try to do it with a translator and try to get the feelings out, but I feel like even if I did that it would just be not the response I’m looking for. It would not be very dramatic. So it felt funnier to keep them silent, because that was my experience.

**John:** Cool. We have a question that came in that I think is actually a great one to bring up with you. Jordan wrote in to ask about reactive protagonists. So in Episode 423, “John advises that we should examine if the action of the story happens because of the things that protagonists do, or that the story happens to them.” And that they should be “driving the action to some meaningful degree. You can say that Billi is – I mean, is she driving the story to some degree? So talk to us about like is she reacting to the situation or is she driving the situation? Tell me what you think about that.

**Lulu:** I think she’s reacting. And I’m curious what you guys think because I’ve always heard, you know, and this was one of the challenges in the script was that your main character has to have agency and has to be driving the story and has to be doing things. And every time I tried to write that version, the things she was doing felt very not true to my experience. And also the thing that she is supposed to be doing is to not do and to not talk. But then how do you represent that on screen? And then does that get monotonous just watching somebody not do anything? [laughs]

**Craig:** You know, sometimes we think one person is the protagonist and they’re not. They’re the main character but they’re not the protagonist. I mean, how do you define her change for you as the filmmaker through the story?

**Lulu:** Her change is acceptance and a sense of grace and respect, and yeah, acceptance of her family and respecting their choices. Not a very dramatic journey.

**Craig:** But, no, that is. And it’s also there is a kind of action you can take that is not as obvious as other actions, right? So she doesn’t have to old boy her way through a hallway of people with a hammer, right? OK, so that’s not what she’s doing. But when you design a – I mean, dramas are torture chambers and you designed a torture chamber for her of a kind. And her reaction to things is active actually. I mean, we don’t say like well the hero is reacting because someone has put a bomb in the building and they have to stop the bomb. That is a reaction, right? But the question is what are they going to do? How does she move forward as people put these obstacles in her way? And what does she do differently as she goes through?

It’s subtle. But I think it’s there.

**Lulu:** Yeah. And then the thing that I thought about in the – especially in the second half of the movie once we realize, OK, this isn’t about her actually spilling the beans – is the action for her is figuring out how to say goodbye. And so that’s what drove me. Yeah, and I know, again, it’s not like a hammering your way through the hallway kind of thing, but there is a driving force of trying to figure out like her trying to decide well do I stay, do I actually go, can I help? And that powerlessness is tied with her trying to figure out how to say goodbye.

**Craig:** It’s a choice. Her action ultimately is a choice.

**John:** Yeah. And I do want to circle back to this idea of reactive protagonists because she is. I mean, by any standards of western movies she is not sort of driving scenes or driving the central story to the degree that we’re sort of used to. And I think that’s good. I think it’s one of the reasons why I loved the movie so much is it’s much more difficult to keep us engaged in a story where that hero is not actually driving the action. And you succeeded brilliantly in doing that. And so I want to sort of point out that it – my blanket advice of sort of like the protagonist needs to be driving the action is because that’s generally how good stories work and how the good experience of watching things on screen happens. But when you can find another way to sort of create a really gripping, beautiful movie without doing it, awesome. It’s a harder thing you chose to do and more authentic to your experience.

**Craig:** But there is a kind of a movie where – how would I describe it? It’s sort of – let’s call it a kind of survival sort of film. So in this case when Jordan is asking his question he specifically refers to Jurassic Park. And he says that most people would consider Sam Neil’s character to be the protagonist of this film, and yet Jordan says, “It seems to me that the story is mostly happening to him, especially for the first half of the movie.” And I would agree.

But it’s a movie about survival. And survival movies don’t necessarily have to be movies where zombies come or dinosaurs come. Sometimes survival is I’m stuck with my family in another country and what am I going to do. And in those movies the point is how do we respond to something that is beyond our ability to control. So zombie movies are always reactive in that regard. They’re always responsive because the movies are coming. Now what do you do? How do you react? The dinosaurs are coming. Grandma is dying. There is a flood. It could be a lot of different things.

But the purpose of the stories is how is a normal person supposed to react? How can they make it through this? And I think that that is active disguised as reactive is how I would put it.

**Lulu:** It’s so interesting that you say survival movie and talk about all these genre films, because I actually approached The Farewell as a genre film. And I was talking to a friend of mine who is a director and does horror because she really helped me. And we had this conversation during my development process where, you know, people want to know my comps and I was trying to reference other family dramas and I felt limited by the toolbox of the family drama genre, or family comedy, because I was actually trying to – and I couldn’t phrase it this way. I didn’t say this is a survival story, but I kept say like, well, you know, it’s all about the tension of this lie. It’s not about something happening. It’s about the fact that everyone knows it’s there but they can’t talk about it.

And so she was like, oh yeah, like monster movies. And I was like oh my gosh that’s so great because that’s the thing. In genre movies the monster can always be there. Once you set up that the monster is there you almost don’t have to show the monster for the majority of the movie, right? So much of it is about anticipation and dread. And so then when I was working with my DP it was the same thing where it was like how do we shoot this film where what we see externally the family is eating and laughing, but how do we use the camera and music and all of that to make it feel like there is this monster in the room, which is the lie.

**Craig:** There you go. Survival.

**Lulu:** Yeah. Exactly.

**Craig:** Dinosaurs.

**Lulu:** We intentionally did that in every scene of saying like what are we doing here so that we feel the presence of the monster.

**John:** That’s awesome. I would not have guessed that Jurassic Park and The Farewell would be so closely related, and yet thanks to a listener question we get the truth out here.

**Craig:** Got to see it through the Matrix, man. You got to see through this.

**John:** It’s all related. Chris McQuarrie, a frequent guest on the show, had a Twitter thread this last week where he was talking though his advice basically on getting started. And Jake wrote in to say, “The primary thesis of his thread was that simply submitting scripts to studios is as effective as making money as playing the lottery. Instead McQuarrie says we should do things like make small films. Do work we normally wouldn’t in order to network. And generally make our own luck. I dig this idea but wonder what the borders are.”

So, Lulu, you are an example of someone who felt like you kind of were making your own luck quite a lot here. And so to what degree do you agree with Chris that making short films or doing other stuff is the way to sort of get noticed and to get stuff out there? Because it seems like you ended up making this short film as a sort of proof of your abilities, but it was the This American Life that really sort of got this project started. So how do you react to this Chris McQuarrie idea?

**Lulu:** I think, you know, it’s hard because so often it is luck. Like when you look back you’re like oh my gosh thank god the right person, the right place, and all of that. But the other thing that like after my first film because I got so lucky to find a partner who financed the whole film and I felt incredibly privileged, it was also a place of insecurity. Of like, oh, well I only made my first feature because I got lucky. And doesn’t mean that it’s going to happen again. And it didn’t go very wide and so no one is throwing opportunities at me.

And so I felt really insecure. And then after The Farewell I was like, wait, it wasn’t just luck. It‘s because I created these opportunities. It’s always to some degree luck, but it’s what they say. It’s opportunity meets – wait, what’s the saying? You know the saying.

**Craig:** Preparation. I believe.

**Lulu:** Preparation. Yes.

**Craig:** It’s serendipity favors the prepared. I mean, the fact is that luck may be responsible in part for somebody starting, but it is not sufficient to keep them going. And similarly bad luck is not sufficient enough to keep somebody brilliantly talented down. I think you could say it’s lucky that Chris Weitz heard you on This American Life, but how did you get on that show to begin with? Not everyone gets on This American Life. That’s a pretty high bar to clear.

So it’s not all as much luck as we think. I tend to agree with Chris – and I hate the lottery metaphor. So Chris McQuarrie is one of my best friends and we have to fight constantly. So first of all I have to point out that when he does this stuff on Twitter he calls it McQ &A, which I think is the dumbest thing in the world. So, McQuarrie, please stop doing that. It’s so stupid.

But anyway, I mean honestly, McQ &A? Ugh. But, he is one of the smartest people I know, which I hate. And I think he’s right to an extent here. It’s not so much that it’s a lottery, it’s really more like – so you are a musician, correct, Lulu? You are a pianist?

**Lulu:** Yes.

**Craig:** So when you think about how many people get to rise to the level of a world renowned classical pianist, it’s really, really small. And it’s not because it’s a lottery, it’s because there’s an almost professional sports/athletic kind of narrowing of the field to the best of the best of the best of the best. And so it’s not random. I mean, the lottery implies randomness. It’s not random. If you write a brilliant script and you send it to a studio it’s going to get noticed. It will. One way or another. It’s impossible for some genius script to not get noticed. The problem is that it’s hard for people to notice genius. And sometimes scripts don’t appear to be as brilliant as the movies that would come from them will be, especially for somebody like you who is also a filmmaker.

Where I agree with him is prove it. If you can prove it by making a short, or even shooting one scene, or something that is real that people can look at, then your odds of shortening the time for your brilliance to be noticed and your worthiness to be acknowledged, your odds go up.

**Lulu:** Yeah. And I also think there’s something to be said, not about like external, you know, validation or giving you opportunities, but for me I feel most empowered as a storyteller when I’m actually storytelling. When I’m actually creating. And so after I made my first film, Posthumous, because it was a feature a lot of people felt like I shouldn’t go back to this program and make a tiny budget short film. But all I knew is it was an opportunity for me to make something. And I haven’t made that many things. And so any opportunity to just make something is great because I’ll learn from that.

And so that was one of the best decisions because I actually got advice to not do it but like that film being at this film festival in New York at the SVA theater was how Neil Drumming found me because he is a filmmaker and he had made Big Words. And he just happened on a Wednesday night to get dragged by his friend who is an actor to this tiny random short film festival. And was about to start a job in January for This American Life. Now, is it lucky that Neil happened to be there that particular day? But also if I didn’t chose to make the short film and was like, “I’m too good for this, I’ve already done a feature, I’m just going to focus on doing another feature,” like none of that would have happened.

**Craig:** Chance favors the prepared. One day someone is going to knock on your door and say, “I would like to buy something.” And if you have it, you sell it. And if you don’t, you don’t.

**Lulu:** Right.

**Craig:** I think the metric we should be thinking about is how much time is going to happen between the thing that I’ve made that is worthy and people recognizing that it is worthy. And if there’s anything really great about Chris’s advice here it’s that turning it into something that is more than just words on a page will shorten that time.

**Lulu:** Yeah, absolutely. And it’s like even I think back on finding my first job on Rush Hour it was because looking at what was available and then thinking about what are my assets and how do those things intersect.

**Craig:** Right. And this has been another chapter of McQ & A. I mean, come on. What would be the John August version of that? I don’t know.

**John:** Yeah, I don’t know. I need to work on my branding there. Allie asks a question which is probably a simpler question but also a fundamental question. “How do you find friends in Los Angeles?”

**Craig:** Oh, I need to know this.

**John:** “I’ve been working as a screenwriter and producer in Europe and the third season of the show I’ve written is currently airing and opened the door for some great meetings in LA. That means traveling a bit back and forth. But I really hate it in LA. I don’t hate LA overall. I just have no friends. People I meet are producers, executives, and Uber drivers. I never get invited to social events while I’m in LA, so kind of get why. How do I start to find friends?”

Now, Lulu, you moved out here probably straight after college, so you had a much more classical situation here. What advice can we offer to Ally about ways to find friends now that she’s spending more time in Los Angeles?

**Lulu:** I’m kind of a terrible person to ask that, because I had no friends for a very long time. And also like I lived on the west side, which was a terrible decision, because most people live on the east side. So, you know, honestly I actually didn’t have a lot of friends for a long time. Not like close friends. And I felt very isolated and I hated LA too for that reason. And it drove me to just write more. It’s terrible.

**Craig:** There you go. Friends just get in the way of work. Here’s the problem, Ally, you don’t live here. So you’re not going to have friends here because friends are people that hang out with each other. Do you know what I mean? You seem to be asking for like rental friends when you show up, but that’s not how friendship works. So if you live here I guarantee you you will find friends because you will be working with people. Most people will know people and you’ll meet them and somebody will click. And then once you have one or two then they have friends and so on and so forth. But the point is you’re around and you are available for reciprocal friendship.

If you are just coming here to have meetings then I don’t see where the opportunity is for, you know, you have to be able to offer something in return. So, maybe stay here a little bit longer? But also if you’re not then keep your friends in Europe and just know that when you’re out here in Los Angeles it’s all business.

**Lulu:** Yeah. And I think it’s all about expectations because it has to happen organically, too. It’s like dating. You might meet somebody but you create the circumstances in which you might meet people and have interesting conversations. And then you become friends. It’s sort of like if you go out being like I need friends now and I need five of them, like that’s very difficult.

So I think for me during that time I just didn’t put too much weight on it. And I would go out to places that I would enjoy being at by myself. Like the bar of a restaurant. Or an outdoor concert. Or whatever. Like a wine tasting somewhere. And then just talk to strangers. But I’m somebody who loves to talk to strangers. And it’s not lifelong friendship, but I find that to be very interesting, too.

**John:** Yeah. What you’re bringing up is that you need to find people who are sort of similarly placed to you. So that you’re going to have a similar experience. So, I moved to Paris for a year, and so while I was living in Paris for a year my fantasy was like, oh, we’re going to make all these great French friends. And then I realized like, oh, everybody who actually lives in Paris, they don’t want to make friends with me if I’m only going to be there for a year. Everyone knows I’m just there for a year and then I’m going to go away. And so I needed to – the people we made friends with were other parents at my daughter’s school because they were also just there temporarily and we were all sort of in the same boat.

And so we became friends because it was handy. Because we needed to hang out with other folks who were sort of in our same situation. We had something in common which was that we’re here for a short time and we have kids about the same age. And Ally your situation is if you’re just dropping in occasionally maybe pick the place where you’re going to stay in Los Angeles so it has more of those transitory people that you can cross paths with again. The same way that you bumped up with Mari Heller at the film festival in Berlin.

**Lulu:** It was not even a film festival.

**John:** Just Berlin in general.

**Lulu:** Just randomly. Yeah.

**John:** Make the kind of friends who you can just bump into at places because it sounds like you’re going to be traveling a lot. And don’t get so worried about like oh I have to have this big cadre of LA friends because that’s not realistic given how little you’re going to be here.

**Craig:** Yeah. Also what’s wrong with just being alone? It’s wonderful. It’s amazing. Ally, get yourself a PlayStation. Pop in a game. And just watch the hours go by. It’s amazing.

**John:** It’s so good. All right, it’s time for our One Cool Things.

**Craig:** Uh-oh.

**John:** My One Cool Thing is an article by Jennifer Keishin Armstrong for BuzzFeed. She’s writing about a lot of old sitcoms don’t hold up, but the Mary Tyler Moore Show does. And it’s a really great look back at the Mary Tyler Moore Show and how surprisingly contemporary it is. So I remember growing up with that show in reruns and loving it, but the things that Mary is dealing with in terms of it being both a home comedy and a workplace comedy and sort of what she’s trying to do, you could air that show now and it would still make a lot of sense.

And so it would tackle social issues, but it was also incredibly funny. So, the Mary Tyler Moore Show, especially if you haven’t seen the Mary Tyler Moore Show, I think it’s worth dipping back in and seeing that, because it was so foundational to sort of like how our comedies work these days, but also just really, really good. So, check out this article and check out the Mary Tyler Moore Show.

**Craig:** Fantastic. Well I have an article also. Do you guys – so this article has got the best title ever. It’s in Esquire. And the headline is God Warrior Remains a Beloved Meme, but Marguerite Perrin Isn’t Afraid of Dark-Sided Stuff Anymore. So do you guys remember way, way back, 14 years ago in November of 2005 a woman named Marguerite Perrin later to be known as God Warrior was on the show Trading Spouses? Does this ring a bell to either of you?

**John:** I have no idea what this is.

**Craig:** OK. So, I don’t watch Trading Spouses. I don’t know anything about it other than that it was a reality show where people would swap, like I’ll give you my husband, you give me your husband, and then they’re going to learn how life is different. You know, so they would do stuff–

**John:** But it was a fairly wholesome reality show? So it’s like an ABC kind of show, right?

**Craig:** It was – I don’t know what channel it was on.

**John:** It wasn’t like a sexy-sexy show?

**Craig:** No, no, no. It was more like, oh, you’re a truck driver and you’re a doctor. Let’s switch places and see how the other half lives. That kind of thing. No, no sex involved. And in this particular case this woman, Marguerite Perrin, who was a devout Christian from rural Louisiana, was swapped with a Boston hypnotherapist married to an astrologer. So they sent her up to Boston and when Marguerite came home she lost her ever-loving S. And freaked out in this kind of incredible hyper-Christian way. And said, “They’re tampering with the dark side.” And she pronounced Dark Dork. And said this is tainted. “I am a God Warrior. And I don’t want anyone tainted doing anything…” She lost her mind.

It’s a great clip. It will live forever on YouTube of course. And here’s why I love this article. So we had a sense of who this woman was and now 14 years later who is she? She’s still her, but also not her. She has become kind of an icon in the gay community. She was recently spotted at the New York City Pride. And when – her daughter died in a car accident. Weirdly I guess the LGBT community kind of adopted her weirdly because of the meme status and because they just kind of loved her. And when her daughter died she got all these lovely notes and flowers and things from people in the gay community and sort of reciprocated and kind of grew up.

And became cool. But also still, look, she’s still like religious and everything, but it’s like watching a study and somebody going from the kind of most narrow-minded point of view to somebody that’s actually kind of opened up in this brilliant way. And I thought, huh, it took a while, but Trading Spouses actually worked. So check out this article. It’s kind of heart-warming in its own way. God Warrior Remains a Beloved Meme, but Marguerite Perrin Isn’t Afraid of Dark-Sided Stuff Anymore by Justin Kirkland at Esquire.

**John:** Fantastic. Lulu, do you have a One Cool Thing for us?

**Lulu:** Well I’m reading this book called Three Women, Lisa Taddeo. And I really love it. It’s based on research over the course of I think a decade on three women and it’s all about female desire. And it’s like why I went into film was – actually very little known fact is the movie Secretary and Piano are two movies that I saw in feminist film theory class and was always just interested in the exploration of female desire. And the expectations that society has versus the reality of it. And so this book is a really great deep dive into that.

**John:** Fantastic. Lulu, you are busy doing a bunch of publicity for The Farewell, but you’re also working on other stuff. Some of which I know you can’t talk about. But in general we talk about how challenging it is to make your second feature, what is it like making your third big project? How has that experience been?

**Lulu:** You know, I have not really started yet, but it’s been intimidating to start because I like to be challenged and I want to do something that I haven’t done before, but then that’s also scary to do something I haven’t done before. And to do something that’s not based on my life and isn’t autobiographical. And making it feel as real to me as possible. So, I think that’s been the biggest thing. And I get submitted scripts all the time that are Chinese family dramas and I’m like but I just did that. The interesting thing is once you’re known for something people want you to kind of do that thing over and over. And it’s sort of like what’s at the heart of it, but the heart of my storytelling isn’t like just Chinese family drama. It’s something else. And for me it’s figuring out what is that something else and how do I translate it into my other work. And what are the things that are important to me?

**Craig:** Jewish family drama. That’s my advice to you.

**Lulu:** I mean, same things. Really, the same things.

**Craig:** It kind of is. It kind of is.

**John:** Whatever you end up doing next will you please come back on Scriptnotes and talk to us more?

**Lulu:** I would love that.

**John:** Oh, Lulu, you’re a delight. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Outro this week is by James Launch and Jim Bond and features Chris McQuarrie.

**Craig:** McQ &A. [laughs]

**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. Lulu Wang, you are?

**Lulu:** @thumbelulu.

**John:** That’s a great Twitter handle. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts. We try to get them up about four days after the episode airs. We have super exciting news coming very soon about the premium feed and what’s happening with that. But for now you find all the back episodes at store.johnaugust.com.

**Craig:** You know, I got to say it’s not super exciting. But what is exciting, I mean, I don’t think it is. But we actually do have really super exciting news about an upcoming live show. I’m not saying what it is.

**John:** Oh, that’s right. There is a live show news coming up.

**Craig:** Oh, it’s big.

**John:** So traditionally we do a holiday show in December. We are not breaking with tradition. And I think you’re going to want to get tickets for that one when it becomes available. But they are not available quite yet.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** Nope. Lulu Wang, thank you very much for being on Scriptnotes.

**Lulu:** Thank you so much for having me.

**John:** Great. Thanks.

**Craig:** Thanks Lulu.

**John:** Thanks. Bye.

Links:

* [The Farewell](https://a24films.com/films/the-farewell)
* Chris McQuarrie [Twitter Thread](https://nofilmschool.com/christopher-mcquarrie-twitter-writing-advice)
* [A Lot Of Old Sitcoms Don’t Hold Up. “The Mary Tyler Moore Show” Does.](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jenniferkeishinarmstrong/mary-tyler-moore-show-streaming-friends-sitcoms) by Jennifer Keishin Armstrong
* [God Warrior Remains a Beloved Meme, But Marguerite Perrin Isn’t Afraid of Dark-Sided Stuff Anymore](https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a29669768/where-is-god-warrior-dark-sided-meme-marguerite-perrin-today-interview/) by Justin Klein
* [Three Women](https://www.amazon.com/Three-Women-Lisa-Taddeo/dp/1451642296) by Lisa Taddeo
* [Lulu Wang](https://twitter.com/thumbelulu) 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)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by James Llonch & Jim Bond ([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_426_lulu.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 (490)
  • Formatting (130)
  • 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

© 2025 John August — All Rights Reserved.