Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2018/writing-animated-movies).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August and this is Episode 356 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

This week Craig and I have switched places. He is in Europe while I am back in Los Angeles. Luckily I am not alone. Across from me I have Linda Woolverton, a screenwriter whose credits include The Lion King, Homeward Bound, Alice in Wonderland, Maleficent, and of course 1991’s Beauty and the Beast. She also wrote the book for the stage musical Beauty and the Beast for which she received a Tony nomination. Linda Woolverton, welcome to Scriptnotes.

**Linda Woolverton:** Well thank you.

**John:** I could have gone on for about another five minutes with your credits because they are so vast. And like these are just some of your feature credits, but you also had TV credits from before then and after then. You’ve done a lot of stuff.

**Linda:** Well, I’ve been writing professionally since over 20 years.

**John:** Yeah. Well, I’ve been writing for more than 20 years, but I don’t have anywhere near the credits that you do. It’s just remarkable.

**Linda:** Well, thank you. You know, it’s hard work.

**John:** I sort of want to start with that last credit because Beauty and the Beast, the 1991 movie, I looked it up on Box Office Mojo and I looked up the adjusted gross, all-time adjusted gross income for it. It ranks number 133 of all films adjusted gross income. And that is higher than Iron Man. It’s higher than Toy Story. It’s higher than five of the eight Harry Potters. And then, of course, that also spawned the live action movie from 2017 which made $1.2 billion. So I guess this may be an insensitive question, but Linda Woolverton you must have gotten so much money off of Beauty and the Beast. Can you just give a sense of how much money you’re really talking?

**Linda:** That is a really appropriate question given where we are right now in terms of the business and feature animation and feature animated films being made into live action films.

**John:** Of course.

**Linda:** So, the important thing to note here, we’re going to talk about financial gain, is that feature animation is not covered by the Writers Guild of America. Which means that there are no residuals. There’s only up front. And I was paid I’m going to guess $35,000 to write the script. Took me four years, as animation does. There was nothing else. Oh, there was a bonus when the movie was made that Jeffery Katzenberg gave us checks. Howard Ashman was there. Alan Menken was there. And the directors, Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise. He handed us a check for $100,000 each. I was blown away. I had never seen that in a check before.

So, I was like, “No!”

**John:** So many zeroes.

**Linda:** Really. Howard Ashman tore it up and threw it him.

**John:** Because that was a pittance. Even back then.

**Linda:** For him.

**John:** Yeah. At that time to be paid $100,000 as a bonus. So I want to make sure everyone’s clear. You were paid $35,000 up front for these four years of work on Beauty and the Beast. And your backend was zero. Well, $100,000, it was that $100,000 check.

**Linda:** Gift.

**John:** Gift. That was what you’ve received from writing one of the biggest movies of all time.

**Linda:** Yes, now, luckily I wrote the theatrical version of Beauty and the Beast, which is a whole different ballgame.

**John:** Having done a musical adaptation, it’s a very different thing.

**Linda:** Completely different thing.

**John:** You control copyright in these stage play versions of what you’ve done. And that is probably a much more lucrative thing. I can guess you’ve made more than $35,000 off of that.

**Linda:** A little. Because the show ran 13 years on Broadway. Traveled around the world twice. And it just opened in China. So that’s very lucrative. Just a little note here, when we did the deal for the theatrical version, Disney – it was really interesting – they had ownership of the movie. Right? Because they owned the movie. So I had to proportion out my royalty as per all the new stuff I wrote. So my royalty, which if it had been a full royalty it would have been a wonderful thing. But it’s only partial royalty.

**John:** I am in the same situation with Big Fish. So I wrote the stage play version of Big Fish, having written the screenplay of Big Fish, but Columbia is considered the author of that. And so they could have brought somebody else in to have written the stage version of Big Fish and I would have had no participation in it whatsoever.

**Linda:** Right. Exactly.

**John:** It’s not a great situation. But, in your case and in my case we got to stay on those projects and that’s fantastic. But I think what’s so interesting is not only did you not get residuals on the animated version of Beauty and the Beast that you wrote, but while your name is listed in the credits for the live action Beauty and the Beast you don’t have a piece of that either because that is – animation is not covered by separated rights. Had the original movie been live action and covered by the WGA, you would have gotten a piece of the live action remake as well.

**Linda:** Probably. Because if there had been an arbitration, because I did not work on the live action. If there had been an arbitration I’m 99% sure I would have gotten at least shared credit, which means I would have had a participation. So, it’s unfair with a capital U. But it is what it is.

**John:** So let’s get into that. Why animation is not covered. Because Craig and I have talked about this before, back in Episode 317 a listener wrote in with a question basically saying “How could animation not be covered by the Writers Guild of America?” And the long answer is long, but the short answer is that back in the days when animation was new the WGA didn’t think it was necessary to cover that. And so the Animation Guild began covering the writing of animated features. The Animation Guild is part of a larger guild, IATSE. They represent animation writing at the major studios. And the WGA can’t just go in and take it back because it’s another union thing. So, US labor law is preventing us from trying to go in and get that.

So it is a real frustration. And I think also a real cautionary tale for people writing in other genres that don’t seem like important things at the moment, but will become very important things.

**Linda:** Right.

**John:** I look to videogame writing. And I look to people doing things that don’t yet feel like they are on the level of film and TV writing but could be one day.

**Linda:** Yes. Yes. It is definitely a cautionary tale. And I didn’t know. Someone from the guild Board of Directors asked me, you know, well you signed the paper. True. I signed the paper. But I didn’t even know that there was a WGA at the time. I was this Saturday morning writer. I wasn’t in a guild at that point. And I went over and wrote a feature film.

So, you don’t know what you don’t know.

**John:** So let’s go back into some of that history because you were a Saturday morning writer, but what were your first writing credits? What got you started? And what made the leap into being able to write a feature animation?

**Linda:** It all began when I wrote two young adult novels. I had just left my job at CBS. I was on a desk and I wanted to be a writer. So I wrote a spec Muppet Babies.

**John:** I remember Muppet Babies. It was a great show.

**Linda:** I wrote a spec. And I didn’t sell the spec but I got work off of it. I started writing Berenstain Bears for Saturday morning. And then my career just never stopped. I was writing Saturday morning for like four years.

**John:** That was here in Los Angeles?

**Linda:** Yes. Here. Really fun. Really fun. Great group of people. You know, it’s just a little group.

**John:** So, in that era of TV animation were you writing as a room or were you just going and pitching a show and being sent to write it? What was the process of writing a half-hour like a Berenstain Bears, or they aren’t even half-hours. You’re writing little smaller segments.

**Linda:** They’re like 15 minutes.

**John:** So Muppet Babies. Was that written as a room or was that written – each individual writer just went off and wrote it himself.

**Linda:** I have never written in a room. Ever. Don’t know how to do it. No, you know, Berenstain Bears, it was very funny. It was my first job, so they gave me an outline. And they said here’s the outline. We want you to write the script. If it’s no good we won’t pay you. And there you go.

**John:** That’s a non-WGA sort of situation.

**Linda:** Exactly.

**John:** Here, work on this for spec, and then if we like it we’ll choose to pay you.

**Linda:** Yes, we’ll choose to pay you.

**John:** But if not it’s a useless thing that you’ve spent weeks writing.

**Linda:** Yes, exactly. So, that worked out. And the process was here’s an idea. Pitch the idea. Just like anything else. Here’s the idea, pitch the idea, pitch a take, and then they hire you and you go write it and then you get paid. So, that went on for – I had a really fun time. And then I just couldn’t think of anything more for silly creatures to do. And I had just seen a Disney animated feature that I didn’t think was very good.

**John:** Are you going to say the name? This pre-Little Mermaid. Little Mermaid is the moment where–

**Linda:** Little Mermaid is the revolution, whatever it is, of animation.

**John:** It was a ground-breaker. And that’s a whole special episode of Scriptnotes. We had a whole episode just talking about The Little Mermaid as a breakout moment.

**Linda:** Oh really?

**John:** Yeah. So, it was a pre-Little Mermaid feature you saw which wasn’t especially good, and that inspired you to say, “I can do better than that.”

**Linda:** Yes. So I went to my agent. I did have an agent. And I said I would like to go try to work at Disney. And she said, “No. They don’t read animation Saturday morning writers, because it’s not real writing in an interview.”

**John:** That whole thing about it’s not real writing is an ongoing thing in animation, isn’t it?

**Linda:** Yeah. It’s an ongoing thing. Yeah. What real writing is? Real writing? So I said, but I have these books, you know, I am a real writer. Here’s a hard cover book published by Houghton Mifflin with my name on it. Does that prove anything? So I drove my book over to the lot and it there was no dwarf building. This is way–

**John:** Pre-dwarf era.

**Linda:** Pre-dwarf. And there was no guard. So I just walked in and put it on the desk and said maybe somebody here wants to read this. And I left.

**John:** Wow. I can’t believe that worked. But it worked apparently.

**Linda:** It worked. My phone rang on Sunday and it was Charlie Fink had picked it up. He was probably hanging out with the receptionist. Picked it up. Read it over the weekend and called me and said you have to come work for us.

**John:** Well that’s great. So they say come work for us. Was it a specific project already at that point, or was it just a general come in and pitch things? What was the idea?

**Linda:** I did have an idea. Several ideas and pitched them. I came up with an idea that they didn’t do. But they offered me a live action Winnie the Pooh.

**John:** Sure.

**Linda:** I mean an animated Winnie the Pooh feature.

**John:** Feature.

**Linda:** I wrote that. They didn’t make it. But it opened the door to Beauty and the Beast.

**John:** I think a lot of writers we talk with, they get hired to do something that doesn’t actually go, but they can demonstrate that they are a good writer who can work with people and that’s what gets them the next job. And one of those things becomes the assignment that actually happens.

**Linda:** Right. Exactly. So that’s OK. You know, you’re getting paid. You’re honing your skills. You’re proving what you can do. And you’re bringing what you bring, which is really important I think.

**John:** So at the time that you’re writing the animated Winnie the Pooh, or eventually you’re brought in to write Beauty and the Beast, are they bringing you in as a special like they’re assigning you this project and you’re writing this, or are you working on a weekly basis? What was the nature of your relationship with Disney at that time?

**Linda:** It wasn’t weekly. It was a contract.

**John:** So just like writing any other feature.

**Linda:** Any other feature. Yeah. Only I didn’t know how animation worked.

**John:** Let’s talk about how animation works, because this is so different. I’ve done three animated movies. And so much of the process of writing an animated film, like the script looks almost exactly the same, but the actual process of making it is so different from live action, not just in terms of the development of it, but then with the live action feature you are writing it, and then you’re shooting it, and then you’re editing it. And those stages are pretty distinct. In animation you’re sort of doing all those processes at the same time. You’re writing a script and you’re hopefully going off and you’re able to get at least one chance to write a script when it’s just a script. But from that point forward it goes through this process of being broken down into shots and storyboards and then into animatics. And it becomes this living thing.

And your script, while still important, isn’t as central as this animated thing that’s in this sort of raw form in front of them. And you have the ability to keep changing story things quite a lot later in the process than you do in live action. It’s a very different situation. It’s not like the editing room. It’s like the clay is still moldable a lot longer.

**Linda:** It’s moldable for years and years.

**John:** Yes.

**Linda:** And what’s interesting about the process, you know, it’s sort of a given that the project will take on a different form from the written word to a different medium, which is usual. Then it will go from that to the next step. But it’s sort of a given that at some point in time the whole thing will get thrown out and you start again.

**John:** Yeah.

**Linda:** If you’re lucky. So, that’s just how that process works. And there’s a lot of, you know, I would say it’s difficult to be a writer in feature animation because they really – you sort of like aren’t on the same par as people who are artists. It’s an artists’ medium. It is not a word medium, even though it’s a story medium.

**John:** It is very much a story medium. But that story is being translated through artists’ hands who are doing some of the functions where in live action the actor would be doing it. The artists are the actors who are making this thing come to life.

**Linda:** Exactly.

**John:** And stuff changes through that process.

**Linda:** It does. It absolutely does. But, again, story is the most significant thing. And the story as a writer as the story-maker, you know, I still believe that we are as significant in feature animation as in a live action feature film.

**John:** Absolutely. And especially the movies that have done well have had their writers as an integral part of the process the entire time through because those are the people who just the keepers of story. The people who can see past that beautiful artistic moment that you created to this is the journey the character is on and this is how we have to get through this.

**Linda:** Because it’s so fragmented. And one person is in charge of this sequence and one person is in charge of this sequence. Which was so confusing to me when I first did Beauty. It’s like well how do you have a singular voice? How do you keep that singular voice? Because every sequence had a different tone as per the person who was boarding it.

So, you know, I fought. I had to fight. I had to fight for Belle. Because Belle was losing her way. She was going backwards, back to being the victim princess, and I had to kick and scream to make her not.

**John:** Also she’s in many situations the only human character on the frame. And everyone else is big and broad and special. And so that’s a thing that happens, especially in animation, but also in live action where the hero becomes the least interesting character on the screen because everybody else can be wild and crazy and be driven by their Id. And the hero has to be this sort of moral compass moving board. And I can totally imagine how Belle could be reduced to just princess of the castle.

**Linda:** Yes. So we couldn’t let that happen.

**John:** No. And you didn’t. Am I correct that Beauty and the Beast was the first animated film nominated for an Academy Award for Best Picture?

**Linda:** Yes.

**John:** And that was a crucial ceiling to break through, because to be able to think of these movies as not just like a good movie for children, but an actual good movie for adults and for everybody else.

**Linda:** That was a huge breakthrough. It was like on a par with all the other live action movies that year. Silence of the Lambs won.

**John:** Yeah. But Silence of the Lambs is a great movie.

**Linda:** It is.

**John:** Nothing to take away from that. But I think just to be on the same list as Silence of the Lambs–

**Linda:** Yes.

**John:** Or these other sort of movies for adults is a crucial thing. And I don’t know if we’ve gotten to a place where Pixar movies could be Pixar movies if we hadn’t gotten an Academy Award nomination for Beauty and the Beast. I do think it was a ground change of sort of how seriously we’re going to take animated films.

**Linda:** Well that’s about the money, isn’t it? Isn’t it about the box office?

**John:** Well, yes. So, I think the box office is a crucial thing to be talking about though because we’re recording this as the Incredibles 2 has just opened and sort of set all sorts of records. Like everybody wants to be that movie. It’s a well-liked movie that is making a tremendous amount of money, so everyone wants to be able to do those things. And very few people can do those things. Disney can do it. Pixar can do it. They’re the same company now. Every once and a while Fox Animation or Warners will have something else that breaks through. But it’s really tough. And it takes a tremendous amount of investment and years of commitment to make an animated movie. Much more so than to make a live action movie.

**Linda:** Yes.

**John:** Anybody could just write a check for $100 million and make a big live action movie. You can’t just write a big check and make an animated movie. Essentially the research and development on making it is just so much greater.

**Linda:** It is. It’s much greater. Yeah. And I’m writing one right now for a company called Skydance.

**John:** So Skydance’s logo used to be often in front of like Paramount Features. They’re a big pool of money that invests in movies and they’re starting animation now.

**Linda:** Yes. They’re starting a live animated feature division, but I guess they produce television now as well. And big budget live action features under the Paramount umbrella I guess. So, there’s three in the pipeline at this moment in time. My one was first, but we got put back because it’s a hard subject. Again, it was one of those like let’s throw it all out and start again. So, you just sort of like I had forgotten all this.

**John:** Well, you choose to forget that. It’s like having a newborn.

**Linda:** Oh, yeah right.

**John:** You forget the darkness of those first months. And then it’s like, “Oh no, but they were so cute. You look at the photos, like oh it was delightful.” And then you’re like, “Oh that’s right, this is what it’s like.”

**Linda:** That’s right. This is what it’s like. I forgot.

**John:** Here’s one of the differences is that making a normal live action movie you’ll go through those places where everything falls apart, but it will fall apart in sort of script land and then you’ll start shooting and then you’ll have troubles during shooting and there will be challenges and there will be a terrible first cut and you’ll get through it. But at no point will you be sort of like a ways into it and then just like, “OK, we don’t know what this is. We’re going to change who the lead character is of the story.” And that happens almost every time in animation. It’s just so regular to know that you’re going to have the complete upset.

**Linda:** Yeah.

**John:** And it’s still surprising. I will say the stop motion movies I’ve made with Tim Burton have been somewhat of an alternative to that because you can’t go back and rejigger things very easily. Because once you’ve shot a frame it’s just sort of shot. And so the most that could happen to us with is we could reboard and reschedule some things for sequences we’re not quite sure of yet, so like if there’s things where like we’re not quite sure how it’s going to work out we’ll put those towards the end of the schedule and so we can sort of see what we’ve got and then write towards those sequences which were not set on, but we can’t do that thing which they can do on Frozen and other movies and just like let’s change that entire sequence and let’s make Elsa a very different thing.

We can’t do that in stop motion the way that you can in traditional or sort of CG animation.

**Linda:** I had the best time of my life working with Tim Burton.

**John:** So tell me about your experience. What was good about that for you?

**Linda:** Working with Tim?

**John:** Yeah. I have my memories of Tim, but I’m curious what it was like from your side.

**Linda:** From my side it was, first of all I was intimidated by him. But he agreed to direct Alice in Wonderland. And I went to London to meet with him and I was intimidated. You know, it’s Tim Burton. But when we started talking, you know, he doesn’t make complete sentences because he finishes it in his head.

**John:** Absolutely true.

**Linda:** So he’ll say something and he won’t finish it, and then he’ll say, “But you know what I mean?” And I realized first of all I did know what he meant and I knew who he was.

**John:** Yeah.

**Linda:** Because he came from here. And it came from animation. So, I got it. And then I was able to kind of connect. And I found him to be so open and many directors I’ve found they want to put their stamp on it immediately. They want to just stomp on what was there and sort of show it around and make it theirs. And I didn’t find that with Tim at all. I found suggestions and he’d say, “Well try this,” and they were great suggestions. And he was very, very supportive. And, you know, we had to throw a bunch of stuff out for budget-wise, and I would say how about we throw this out. “No, no, no, we’ve got to keep that.” So I found him to be fantastic.

**John:** Yeah. What I love about Tim is that he treats a writer like a department head. You are the department head in charge of the script and the story. And he treats you with the respect that he would treat a costume designer, you know, a Colleen Atwood, or a great DP, or a production designer, and like lets them run with this thing. And will give them guidance, but like he sort of trusts that you know what you’re doing. And so often directors don’t trust that you know what you’re doing. And that makes a huge difference.

**Linda:** Huge difference.

**John:** Do you know the backstory? I had the competing Alice in Wonderland project. You know that there was a whole thing here right?

**Linda:** I don’t really know the whole thing.

**John:** Well, let’s go through it. So here’s what happened is at the same time that Disney approached Tim about your Alice in Wonderland, because you had written it first for Disney, right?

**Linda:** Yes.

**John:** I was approached to do an Alice in Wonderland project for Sam Mendes. And Dick Zanuck was the producer of both movies.

**Linda:** Right.

**John:** Which is just an impossible situation for Dick to be in, but being the uber-producer he was and the wonderful gentleman he was he was making it work as best he could. But it became this crazy situation where like I was trying to write this movie for Sam and Sam was going off and doing another movie. Tim was going to do his movie. Mine was for Warners. Yours was for Disney. And it became a place where it’s just like “Well this is just silly. This is just not going to happen.” And so ours went away and yours went into production. And so the choice was made for Dick. He didn’t have to sort of choose between which of his directors he was going to work for. But it was nuts that there were going to be two live action Alice in Wonderland movies in the same space.

**Linda:** I find that when that happens, when you hear that there’s two competing versions of a project, one of them ultimately goes away.

**John:** But sometimes they don’t and it’s always crazy. So Deep Impact and Armageddon is an example of where both things happened. There is the other Jungle Book movie which is coming out. That’s crazy. Mowgli.

**Linda:** That’s right.

**John:** So it does sometimes happen that both movies exist, but you don’t want to be the second movie most times.

**Linda:** No. No you don’t.

**John:** And we were going to be the second movie. So I wrote a movie called Monster Apocalypse for Tim. And we were getting close. And Pacific Rim went into production and we looked – someone read both scripts and is like that’s too close. We’re going to be the second giant robot movie and we don’t want to be the second giant robot movie.

**Linda:** Right. So whoever gets there first.

**John:** Yep. First to cross the starting line is the thing. It’s tough. But, anyway, I’m glad your movie exists and you got it made and you got to make a sequel and that’s fun. I visited Tim on the set while he was doing your movie and it was in Burbank and they had – actually, no, it was down in Culver City. And they had this giant green screen stage and I’d never been in a space that was that much green. It was really painful to be in that set. And Tim had these special weird tinted glasses so he wouldn’t get headaches from it. But it was just so strange being in a space where I just had no idea what anything was.

**Linda:** What was up, what was down.

**John:** Yeah. I mean, the costumes were beautiful, but there was no set.

**Linda:** He kept having to leave and just get his perspective and reality in the blue sky and all that during that whole process. So, yeah.

**John:** But let’s talk about – that movie was a live action movie and there was a tremendous amount of CG and animation. But there’s other kinds of movies like Justin Marks and his Jungle Book that Jon Favreau directed which are essentially animated movies with like one live action element. And now you wrote the original Lion King, but now they’re going to do The Lion King as an all CG thing with real actors voicing those parts. We’re at a place right now where it’s really difficult to say whether that movie is an animated movie or a live action movie.

My understanding is its being shot as a live action movie technically under WGA, but we’re going to run into situations where is that animation or is that live action and we have to fight to keep them.

**Linda:** Who is going to make that determination though? Studios aren’t because it doesn’t behoove them to because they will have to give up something. So, who’s going to decide? What percentage of real people are in it? So, if it’s all CG, does that make it animation?

**John:** That’s the question. I mean, the original Lego Movie is a WGA movie because there’s a live action element to it. The second movie does not have that and it is not a WGA movie. And the difference for what a writer gets off of writing One versus Two is tremendous. And so my hunch is that there will be some movie that will come up, it will be a big enough fight to say this should actually count as a live action movie that WGA and SAG and DGA will all step in to say like this really needs to count as a live action movie. And whether that becomes a lawsuit or there’s some way that you intervene to say like “You have to be acknowledging this as that kind of movie.”

Zemeckis with his stop motion things, those have been WGA movies to date. And so hopefully that’s a good precedent.

**Linda:** That would be wonderful. So that’s it? So the last Jungle Book was WGA.

**John:** Yes.

**Linda:** The Jungle Book. Is there a definitive–?

**John:** No, there’s not. It’ll be figured out at some point. Well, most people go by if there’s one live action person in it, if there’s a real identifiable human being in there that is filmed then it’s not an animated movie. But there’s going to be weird test cases where you’re just not quite sure what it is.

And what happens if the original Lego Movie, if they’d taken out the live action element would it still be a WGA movie? If something starts as a WGA project can it go into animation and come back out? These are difficult situations and you and I both know writers who are in those situations.

**Linda:** Yes.

**John:** Folks who are being hired on to write projects where it’s not quite clear whether it’s going to be animated or live action or a combination of it. And they’re getting hired generally by the worst possible terms.

**Linda:** You know when you’re being hired to write a story, to me it’s like the furthest thing on my mind in the beginning anyway, when I was young and naïve, is how much I’m going to get paid, or how, or what it’s going to land as. I’m concerned about telling the tale. And I’m thrilled to be able to tell the tale. And much less for a big company like Disney that it’s going to be seen around the world. That’s huge.

**John:** Yes.

**Linda:** So the last thing on my mind is like, “Well, do I get residuals for this?” Didn’t cross my mind. So, I think it’s really important for writers who are making a leap from live action to animation to be very conscious, especially the new marketplaces.

**John:** Absolutely. So we were talking about, so Skydance is a new marketplace. But there’s Netflix. There’s Apple. There’s Amazon. There’s new people who are making movies. And if those people make movies under a WGA contract that is so much better for writers like you and me who are trying to make a good movie and actually get paid for it.

**Linda:** Right.

**John:** Than if they were to do it under an Animation Guild contract or no contract like Pixar is done under.

**Linda:** Right. So, when I went to Skydance, you know, I understood intimately the unfairness of it. So, I said, “Well, if you want me to do this then you have to give me a contract that’s as if it’s a WGA deal.” And I actually foolishly didn’t sort of press them to join the WGA, because I actually didn’t know that I could do that, or had that sort of clout in any way. But they agreed. So my contract is as if a WGA contract.

**John:** Which is better. And so I think what we’re going to be looking for in the next ten years for feature animation writers is places where we can get an actual WGA deal, best case scenario. That’s fantastic. That’s great. But in places where we can’t, how do we get coverage there on individual projects, for individual writers, that give them some of the benefits of a WGA contract. That gives them some protection, some backend, hopefully some credit protection.

I looked at some of your credits and you’re listed as additional material by, which is not a WGA credit.

**Linda:** No.

**John:** It’s madness that you could have worked on a movie and clearly would have gotten credit under WGA, but wouldn’t get credit because the studio decides.

**Linda:** The studio decides. Yes. So even in the Skydance project, it won’t be WGA arbitrated. If there are other writers, they’ll decide.

**John:** So ideally you want to get some coverage for that. The other situation which many writers find themselves in is that maybe you’re going back and forth, you’re writing some animation, you’re writing some live action, and getting your pension and health covered between those two things can be really difficult. And so a writer you and I both know said like “Well thank goodness I’m on my wife’s health insurance because otherwise I wouldn’t have health insurance because I don’t work enough in WGA projects. I don’t work enough in Animation Guild projects to get it covered.” And that’s foolish.

**Linda:** And that’s a really scary thing. Like I don’t get WGA coverage on this project and I’ve been on it for two years already. So, thank god I have points, the points system is still working for me.

**John:** So, we’ll explain to listeners that when you work on WGA projects you accumulate points which sort of count against times where you’re not working. So, because Linda and I could be on a project for two years without sort of new income coming in there to sort of pay your things, you have points that sort of carry you over those stretches where you’re not on a new project.

**Linda:** It’s like credits.

**John:** It’s like credits essentially.

**Linda:** Yeah. Then you use them up.

**John:** You use them up. Yeah. And so then you’re looking for the next WGA job because otherwise you’re going to be out of health coverage.

**Linda:** Right. Exactly.

**John:** Scary things. Well, let’s talk about other changes that are out there because just this last week it was announced that Jennifer Lee is taking over as Chief Creative Officer at Walt Disney Animation. Jennifer Lee was on here to talk about Frozen. She is fantastic. She’s a real writer, so it’s great that she’s taking that over.

Pete Docter is taking over that slot at Pixar. Again, a real screenwriter. I would hope that’s somewhat good news for writers overall. They’re both places that really value story. So, maybe there could be some progress made at those two places, at least in terms of we can’t get WGA deals, but at least we can get some better consideration of what it’s like to be a screenwriter working on these projects. A little bit more parity with what we’re getting for writing live action and what we’re getting for animation. I would hope.

**Linda:** Right. I would hope, too. I don’t know if he’s going to change the nature of Pixar, because they’re a non-union joint. So, who knows?

**John:** Who knows?

**Linda:** I hope though that can change a little. And I don’t know Jennifer Lee.

**John:** She’s great.

**Linda:** Well, that’s fantastic. It would not be anything I’d want to take on because, you know, being a screenwriter is one thing and being in charge of all the everything of animation is a whole different ballgame. So, I wish her luck.

**John:** I mean, yeah, it’s more like producing. Or, it’s running a studio really.

**Linda:** Yeah, it’s running a studio.

**John:** It’s all the management aspects of that, but also the creative choices. And so I have a hunch she’ll do a fantastic job of it, but it’s tough.

Like you, she’s also – she went through and adapted her own thing for the Broadway stage, so she’s got that experience too. So, we’ll see.

Do you have any regrets not having gone back and tried to sort of run the show? You haven’t directed any features. You haven’t produced other things. If you were to do it again would you have made different choices in terms of the kinds of things you – the kinds of other roles you would want to take on?

**Linda:** I produced. I guess I have a credit producing a few. You know, people ask me a lot if I want to direct. And I have a skillset. I have big imagination. I have a skillset. I’m a storyteller. I’m a world-builder. And just because I can do that doesn’t necessarily mean I can do something else.

**John:** Yeah.

**Linda:** And maybe I don’t have a director’s eye. Maybe I don’t know where to put the camera. And that’s OK. You know, I create the world, I put the people in it, and when I write I write really specifically, very specifically on the thing. I overwrite, which annoys directors. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that I’m going to be a good director. So I have never taken that on. Because I think I know myself. I also know, I mean, here’s what the really horrible truth is: I get bored.

**John:** Yeah.

**Linda:** Right?

**John:** Totally. And to be stuck on something for three years on the same thing is so tough. At least as a writer you can dip in and dip out. A director, you’re there every day.

**Linda:** Yeah. I can dip in. I like to dip out. [laughs] And do something else, you know. So, if I were to go back and do it again I’d probably just write novels like you have.

**John:** Yeah, writing novels is – that sense of control you have writing a novel is great. So, after your YA novels you haven’t gone back to do prose?

**Linda:** I never have.

**John:** It’s so many words. Man, just so many words.

**Linda:** It’s a lot of words.

**John:** It’s a lot of words.

**Linda:** You have to fill up the white on the page. Right?

**John:** Yeah, you can’t just sort of sketch it in there.

**Linda:** No.

**John:** That is a tough thing. But I’ve enjoyed it. But it’s much more work than I sort of anticipated going into it.

**Linda:** Really. Yeah. I might still try my hand at it.

**John:** You should. It’s fun. I had two listener questions that I thought would be great for you. So I’m going to start with Ben in LA who writes, “I was just wondering if there is such a thing as a bad character want. A character should always want something, but is there an example of something a character shouldn’t want?”

And I’ll sort of put parenthesis around this to say that we talk about want a lot on the show in terms of that driving force behind that character, and really I think animated musicals are a great example of character wants because so often that second song in a Disney movie is the I Want song. It’s basically them singing their wants.

As you’re working on one of these movies how early in the process are you articulating what that character wants? Is it from the very first pitch you’re describing that want?

**Linda:** The I Want issue holds true in musicals, but again I think that if you lean on one thing too heavily it becomes formulaic. And I live in fear of that happening. You know, so my protagonist wants something. And to make them proactive as opposed to reactive they have to proceed through the world with a desire. And however that’s not how everybody lives. So every single protagonist isn’t going to be like the person with I Want who has like I’m never going to stop until I get this thing. That’s not every character in the world.

You know, some characters – isn’t it interesting to have like a normal person who has something remarkable happen to them and then their want becomes to get it back to the way it was.

**John:** Absolutely. Return to normalcy. Yeah.

**Linda:** Return to normalcy, or to find happiness in another way. So, I fear the I Want and it’s also kind of like so getable and kind of easy. Land this I Want on this person and then like whatever obstacle comes at them. They still have this I Want. And then to me it seems like then all the characters become the same. It’s like this relentless pursuit of their desire. And the world is a big place filled with remarkable people who have different experiences and not all of them are the I Want. That’s my rant about the I Want.

**John:** I like that rant. I would say that sometimes I notice that if things aren’t working it’s that the character wants something that I don’t really want for the character. Or the character wants something that I feel like I don’t think the story is set up to give them that want. You know, an example of like it’s a medieval dragon story but the character really wants to sing, or really wants a moment in the spotlight. And it’s like, yeah, but it’s not really a good match for that. It doesn’t seem like you created your universe and your character to fit quite right together. What you’re saying in terms of like there’s characters who like they’re so want driven that it’s the only thing you can see, I get that. And it can be–

**Linda:** It makes it really one-dimensional, or two-dimensional, but it just becomes that. So, then story becomes really simplistic in my view. You just have this drive to get what you want no matter what and then the interesting sub characters come in and out. And then the villain stands in your way. And then you get rid of them to get what you want.

**John:** Yep. You know, some of the fascinating movies, it’s not that the protagonist is opaque, but they’re self-defeating in interesting ways. Like, you may be able to see sort of what they’re going after, but they’re making choices that interfere with their ability to get that. And that draws you in closer because you recognize that weakness in yourself.

**Linda:** Right.

**John:** I think also part of the reason why we’re so attracted to longer form great dramatic television is because it doesn’t have that pattern of like this is the one-time story that you’re going to see this character go on this one-time journey that’s going to epically change everything. It just doesn’t happen that way.

**Linda:** No.

**John:** So they have a bundle of conflicting wants and you see them juggling those different things. And movies tend to be focused for better and for worse on that one road. You started here, you got there, and that is the path of this movie.

**Linda:** Yes.

**John:** Second question comes from Tommy in Toronto. He writes, “At what point during the process do you break down story days? Is this something you tackle in outlining? I’m nearing the completion of a new draft and it’s occurred to me that certain story days seem extremely packed in terms of events while other story days are quite light.”

So, what Tommy is describing is like let’s say you’re watching a movie that takes place, it seems to take place over the course of a week. And if you really look at sort of like day by day by day you could figure out like this would be the Wednesday of the week. I personally don’t find myself thinking about that too much. Do you find yourself thinking about like what day of story this is in your projects?

**Linda:** No. I don’t. I can only think of that where it happened if the time clock was part of the plot, then you would think, OK, well like in 24, whatever it was, this is hour 23. We better get it together. I’m just really old school. I think in the three act structure. And I just do. Beginning, middle, and end. You know, Billy Wilder’s quote, “Get your guy up a three, throw rocks at your guy, get your guy out of the tree.” I think it’s pretty good.

I’ve also never read a screenwriting book, so I don’t know anything.

**John:** Then you’re Craig’s hero, because Craig hates screenwriting books. He rants about them endlessly.

**Linda:** Screenwriting books?

**John:** Yeah. Just like, again, it’s that frustration of formula in the sense that everything has to fit this one model for how things work.

**Linda:** I guess because you’re always looking, you know, if you want to start something you’re always looking for like, because there is no path. There’s no path to being a screenwriter. There’s nothing like if you do this, and you do this, then you’re going to be a screenwriter.

So you grab onto what you can that’s going to guide you through that process. And sometimes screenwriting books are a help, I think, to a lot of people. I steer clear because I don’t want to be on a formula. I don’t want to put – I don’t want to shove my stories or my ideas into this formulaic how to do it.

**John:** Yeah. Getting back to Tommy’s question, I feel like sometimes it is good, like after you finish a draft to just take a step back and look at like realistically could all these things happen over the course of this amount of time. And does it feel like this is happening over the course of a week or a year? And sort of where you’d fall.

A thing that happened in the first Arlo Finch as I got notes back from I guess it was the proofreader or the first production editor was pointing out like the week logic, the week’s logic didn’t really make sense. Like if this was September and this was January, we skipped over Christmas, and so we should at least acknowledge that we skipped over Christmas. There were some interesting things where she was pointing out like, “OK, time does still happen in a normal fashion.” So, trying to figure out sort of when roughly some things could have happened was really good.

And the same thing will happen in movies. At a certain point, you know, they’ll break down and go into boards, but I think even before that process you need to look at did characters wake up twice in a row. I mean, there can be situations where like, OK, that’s actually not possible. Where it went day to night to day again but it’s still sort of the same day. So you got to be looking at that.

**Linda:** I do look at that. It’s like are we at night now? And, again, the time of day, the weather, all plays into it.

**John:** Totally.

**Linda:** Plays into whatever is going on anyway. So, I do step back at a certain point. I don’t realize I do, but I do I guess.

**John:** At a certain point in every project I have kind of a color scheme in mind for the movie or for the book in the case of Arlo Finch, and I sort of see myself moving from like, OK, I’m in here, and then into this new color, and then into this new color. And it’s a helpful way of me thinking about what’s changed along the way. I’m in the green section now. And so if I’m in this section it literally looks more green to me. It’s just the basis of how it is. But some of those logic things aren’t going to be such a thing because I’ve moved forward to a place where I’m in this section now and I know I’m in new days. I know I’m in new places. And even if I’m not like mentally changing the clothes on characters I know that they’ve woken up and gone to sleep again a few times. Things have changed in their life.

**Linda:** I know that actors do that. They’ll color code their script as per what emotions or whatever it is that they’re going through at the time. But that’s interesting. You’re in the green.

**John:** I’m in the green section now. Some interview I was listening to years ago was talking about My So-Called Life. And Winnie Holzman was talking about one of the crucial things she and ultimately the directors had decided is that they wanted her, the lead character’s wardrobe, to repeat. Basically like for her not to have new outfits every time, but to see that she would wear the same things again, because realistically characters do wear the same things again. And they never do on TV, but in this case they wanted to make sure that she was actually a middle class girl who has a limited number of outfits, which I thought was a genius choice.

**Linda:** That was good. Yes it was.

**John:** I’m thinking back to some of your movies and in so many of them characters don’t get a lot of wardrobe changes because they are theoretically just on one quest the whole time through. Like Belle–

**Linda:** Belle gets her yellow dress.

**John:** She gets her yellow dress. That’s crucial and iconic.

**Linda:** She wears her blue dress and then she gets her yellow dress. And then she gets her yellow dress. Or she goes home, and then she comes back and she has her yellow dress.

**John:** I guess with few costume changes each costume change is really meaningful and it really does, you know, it lands bigger.

**Linda:** Yeah. I think you’re right actually. And the yellow dress became such a big thing it needs its own agent. The yellow dress. That’s interesting. Alice shrunk, so she had to get a little mini wardrobe. What else have I written? In Lion King nobody wears clothes.

**John:** Naked people running around the whole time. Rafiki has some like beady kind of stuff, but that’s about it.

**Linda:** And let’s see, Homeward Bound, same thing.

**John:** Not a big wardrobe movie.

**Linda:** Yeah, yeah.

**John:** You know that Linda Woolverton, lovely. Won’t dress her characters at all.

**Linda:** Yeah, sorry, no clothes. You don’t get the clothes.

**John:** All nudists. We do a little thing on Scriptnotes called One Cool Things. Did I warn you about this? Do you have a recommendation?

**Linda:** You did. I was trying to think of – well, I guess, it is a recommendation?

**John:** A recommendation or something you like. If people want to check it out.

**Linda:** OK. Go to Shanghai.

**John:** OK, Shanghai.

**Linda:** Go to Shanghai, China. Go to Disneyland. Disney Shanghai, or Shanghai Disney, and go to the Pirates of the Caribbean ride.

**John:** So why should they check out at that ride?

**Linda:** It’s so awesome.

**John:** Tell me.

**Linda:** If you know Disneyland and the Disney ride, they’ve completely re-envisioned it for like the new version of Pirates, the Johnny Depp version of Pirates, but the whole thing is three domes. And you’re in your little boat. And you go under the sea–

**John:** Of course.

**Linda:** In this little boat. And you’re still on the floaty boat. It’s real water. But these domes are sort of like above you and they’re moving the boat around in circles. And there’s like creatures and there’s a big fight between battleships, you know, the ships. It’s really so imaginative and so impressive. So get on that plane and go to Shanghai.

**John:** My One Cool Thing was almost a Disney Imagineering thing also. So, I’ll put a little bonus. I read a great article, I think it was called Adventure House, and so they were going to do sort of a sequel to the Haunted Mansion. So they have the Haunted Mansion ride or attraction at Disneyland. They were going to build a second one called Adventure House. And so they have all the Imagineering plans for it and what was going to be there and there was like a sleeping bear in a bed and it sounded kind of great. And so I sort of wish they had built that.

But my actual One Cool Thing is an article I read this last week about Climate Central. And I’ll put a link to the NBC News article and also the real website. But what this organization does is a non-profit and they provide information about climate change to local weather stations. So if you’re watching the local news they always have the weather man who is mostly talking about the seven-day forecast. What this group does is they provide charts and graphics and little video packages for local news stations to talk about how climate change is affecting local places.

And so like how pollen counts are going up. And the effect of climate change on pollen counts or on hops brewing and how it will change beer taste because of climate change. It was just a very smart way of getting local news stations to talk about climate change.

**Linda:** Wow.

**John:** In ways they might not.

**Linda:** Interesting.

**John:** This was a really bleak news week and so this was like one of the few little moments of like, “Wow, there’s some really smart people doing some very clever placement of good information.” So, Climate Central, you’re a One Cool Thing.

That is our show. So, as always, our show is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is also by Matthew. 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. For shorter questions on Twitter I’m @johnaugust and Craig is @clmazin. Linda, are you on Twitter?

**Linda:** No.

**John:** Good. Safe. Stay away.

**Linda:** I know. Those knee-jerk reactions, not good. Yeah, no.

**John:** You can find us on Apple Podcasts. Just search for Scriptnotes. While you’re there leave us a comment. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. We’ll also have transcripts up within the week.

You can find all the back episodes at Scriptnotes.net. It is $2 a month. And you can get all the first 355 episodes of the show.

Linda, thank you so much for being here. It was so great to chat with you.

**Linda:** I know. So much fun. Thank you so much for having me. Bye.

Links:

* Thanks for joining us, [Linda Woolverton](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Woolverton)!
* Adjusted for inflation, Beauty and the Beast ranks [#133 in domestic grosses](http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm), above Toy Story, Iron Man, and other huge films.
* In [Episode 317: First Day on the Job](http://johnaugust.com/2017/scriptnotes-ep-317-first-day-on-the-job-transcript), we talked about the history of why animation writers are not represented by the WGA.
* In [Episode 92: The Little Mermaid](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-ep-92-the-little-mermaid-transcript), we did a deep dive on the animated film that changed the game.
* [Shanghai Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean](https://www.shanghaidisneyresort.com/en/attractions/pirates-of-caribbean/) ride is amazing. This [POV video of the ride](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vIchXwRw7U) is definitely a spoiler.
* [Climate Central](http://www.climatecentral.org) is an independent organization of leading scientists and journalists researching and reporting the facts about our changing climate and its impact on the public. It helps [localize reports](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/global-warming-now-brought-you-your-local-tv-weathercaster-n884831) of the effects of climate change.
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](http://johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew 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_356.mp3).

The original post for this episode can be found here.

John August: Hola y bienvenido. Soy John August.

Craig Mazin: Soy Craig Mazin.

John: Y esto es Scriptnotes, un podcast sobre la escritura de guiones y cosas que son interesantes para los guionistas.

Today we have the grab-baggiest of episodes with topics ranging from screenwriting competitions to toxic fandom to the new Apple deal, plus we’ll be answering questions about capitalizing on heat after a sale, Bad Robot, and NDAs.

Craig: Ohh. But can I do the entire episode in my telenovela voice? Soy.

John: Oh please.

Craig: Craig Mazin.

John: You absolutely should. So, I should say that I’m doing the Spanish because I am here in Spain. I’m in Barcelona at the moment, and it is great. Craig, you’ve been to Barcelona, right?

Craig: I have not.

John: Oh, put it higher on your list of places to go.

Craig: It’s pretty high up there. Just in the midst of all the work travel we sort of put other travel vacations on hold just, because I’m starting to hate planes and time zones. But, yeah, it’s definitely high up there. My daughter is quite demanding about it.

John: It is fantastic. I recommend everything that everybody always recommends about Barcelona. I was here in high school and did not like it, because it was sort of the first big city I’d been to and it was overwhelming. But it’s a really good, approachable big city. I was a little bit nervous about the Catalan of it all, but everyone here speaks Spanish and English. And it’s fun to watch what language they default to you in.

So, if they kind of recognize that you probably are a native, then they’ll speak Catalan. Otherwise they’ll speak Spanish. Unless you’re Asian, and then they’ll speak English.

Craig: Well, what’s going to happen with Melissa is they’re probably going to speak English to her because she looks so not Spanish. And then she will speak Spanish back to them. And then they’ll be surprised, which is one of the most fun things to watch for me.

John: Yes.

Craig: Watching native Spanish speakers listening to Melissa speak Spanish for the first time, they all make the same face. And the first face they make is what’s going on here? What is this? Is this one of those hidden camera shows? What is this?

And they start getting very curious because they want to know where she’s from. Because they’re quite sure she’s not American. Because her accent is too good. But it’s not their accent, so they start thinking are you like one of those German people that ended up in Chile? Or what are you? And thus–

John: She could have escaped–

Craig: The Nazis.

John: Who hid off in Argentina, yes.

Craig: Yeah, no, she looks like the great-granddaughter of some sort of Nazi escapee. Yeah.

John: But she’s a lovely woman and a great wife I take it.

Craig: Yeah. She’s none of those things.

John: She’s none of those things. Let’s get into this because there’s so much stuff on the agenda for today. So, we’ll start with what was going to be our feature marquee topic. We thought it was going to be a whole special episode and it is not a whole special episode. But to sort of give a little recap, this started on Twitter. Someone tweeted at you and me saying like, “Hey guys. You should be aware that there’s a giant scam going on. It’s about Coverfly.” I didn’t know what Coverfly was.

Craig: Me neither.

John: There’s a long blog post. You and I read the blog post. And it looked like, wow, there’s actually a lot here. And then it has all sort of dissipated.

Craig, can you talk us through what you’ve discovered so far, at least what this was?

Craig: I mean, vaguely. I mean, this is the same – so somebody was complaining about this group Coverfly. Coverfly apparently is a service that provides coverage for payment, I guess. And then also offers as part of its conglomeration with 12 other business names offers paid consulting – you know, the sort of thing that you and I don’t like very much.

However, Coverfly also provides a service to other screenwriting contests. They have their own contest, I guess. And then there are other screenwriting contests that become overwhelmed with submissions and need readers to evaluate these scripts. And so they essentially – I guess they outsource that to Coverfly.

Coverfly in turn has its own sort of like script hosting service I guess you’d call it. Right? It’s sort of like a Dropbox for screenplays. And I guess what happened was they started signing people up or migrating accounts to their service without people knowing and then people thought that essentially, “Look, I’ve entered the Austin Screenwriting Festival Competition for instance and suddenly I’m getting an email from these Coverfly people telling me that I can create an account for free if I want, which I didn’t want. And who are they? And why are they sending me ads?” And all the rest of that.

And so it seemed a little stinky and smelly. And interestingly enough it was the same guy that we had our last and final Scriptnotes Investigates episode on which was that former service where the whole thing went kablooey and people lost some scripts.

Anyway, it turns out it’s sort of not really any of that. It’s just kind of actually very mundane, boring, reality of the way businesses work. And it didn’t seem like there was anything particularly unethical going on any more than there usually is in this area of the world.

So, I don’t know, what did you think?

John: I felt we ended up in a place where there were sort of counter-balancing unethical things that were happening. So the initial blog post that we were tipped off to was taken down afterwards, but the Coverfly people had responded to it. I actually tweeted at the Coverfly guys saying like I know you’re going to do a blog post response to this, so I’ll just wait until you do the blog post response to this.

It was not clear who this anonymous person was who was putting up this thing. Whether it was a rival? Whether it was a former client? So the person we were talking to before was John Rhodes. This was back in Episode 191. And the service was called Scripped.com. They’d bought it out, some people lost their material that was on that. It was a special Saturday episode that we put out. Like I think it’s the only time we’ve put out a Saturday episode.

And so we talked with him about that way back when. This seemed like a situation where both sides were doing a lot of Googling of each other to figure out who the other person was and all these Coverfly businesses were related. But also the same guy had taken screenshots from a certain thing. It all got very forensic and kind of dull and boring.

Where I came out of this, and a question I asked on Twitter as it all sort of blew up, was I asked to Twitter at large, “Hey, can anyone tell me whether winning a screenwriting competition actually had a meaningful impact on your career. Like did it actually start your career?” And I said specifically I’m curious who out there has produced credits that they believe only came to be because they won a screenwriting competition.

And if so, which competition? And I think not surprisingly at all Nicholls Fellowship is meaningful. If you win the Nicholls Fellowship, great. That’s fantastic. It’s run by the Academy. Everyone knows what that is.

Some success out of Austin Film Festival. Very little success out of anything else.

Craig: Of course.

John: And that’s what we’ve always kind of said.

Craig: Yeah. I mean, it’s not surprising at all. And one thing that did come out of this which was a bit surprising to me is, look, the guy that made all these charges seemed like an Internet crank honestly to me. One of those people that just goes way, way deep in a Zapruder film-like examination of something. But they did make one point that I thought was kind of remarkable that this company – so the parent company that owns Coverfly and a bunch of other things is called Red Ampersand. And Red Ampersand owns ScreenCraft. ScreenCraft operates at least 15 different screenplay contests. OK?

So, the Coverfly Company is involved with 15 different screenplay contests that are run by itself, meaning its parent company. Also, they are supplying coverage for other people’s competitions. Meaning you’re kind of ultimately paying twice to submit to the same people. Now, what they say is, “Oh, we have different juries and judges for those different kinds of things. And so it doesn’t work like that.”

But here’s the truth. None of this is worth a damn thing and nobody should be using it. Apologies to everybody involved, because some of these people are nice people, but it doesn’t work. It doesn’t work. I don’t know how else we can say it and how many times we can say it. It doesn’t work.

There are so many people out there charging you money to enter contests, charging you money for notes, charging you money for consulting. It doesn’t work. And more to the point, not doing it has worked. In fact, not doing it has worked for literally everyone you and I know who works as a professional screenwriters. So at some point I think we’re asking people to take a leap of faith here and stop doing this. We know that the Nicholls Fellowship matters. It doesn’t always work, but it can work. We know that Austin to a lesser extent can work. Beyond that, stop.

John: Yeah. I do feel like screenwriting competitions are the astrology of our business.

Craig: It’s the homeopathy, right?

John: It is. It is. Just maybe entering one more competition is really what’s going to do it for you. It’s not.

Craig: It’s not. It’s not. And people are losing money and I have to also just point out that there is something at some point when you do look at the fact that the parent company owns 15 different companies, they each run – there’s 15 different screenplay competitions. It’s all promotional so that you’ll end up spending money. They are businesses to make a profit. And it starts to get byzantine and more to the point literally they’re charging you money for a lottery ticket and the thing that you can win is not money or prize but rather a brief moment of pride.

And perhaps even a brief moment of not feeling bad. Maybe that’s the best it can be, right? That’s all they’re selling you is false comfort. That is what that industry is. And I don’t begrudge people a right to make money doing a legal thing, but it is our, I think, obligation to tell all of you at home the truth, which is that they don’t matter and they don’t work.

John: So, when I talked with writers who did succeed off of Nicholls or Austin, like Stephen Falk of You’re the Worst was a person who wrote in saying like, yes, winning at Austin was incredibly helpful. And I asked him why and he said, “It helped me get my managers,” and that was important to him. Basically it provided some legitimacy so as he went in to talk with managers he could get over that next little step. That I could totally see and that’s why the prestige of Austin and the prestige of Nicholls Fellowship helps people start careers.

But these things you’ve never heard of, well, Craig and I have never heard of them. Managers have never heard of them. Winning it is not going to do anything for you and that’s what it comes down to.

Craig: Everybody at some point is going to say I was a semifinalist/finalist/winner of some blank fill-in competition named here. Nobody cares. No one cares. No one knows what those competitions are. You know what else they don’t care about in Hollywood? They don’t care about your college degree. They don’t care about your work experience. They don’t care about how many languages you speak. They don’t care about your skills, your volunteerism. You know what they care about? The document they just got handed. That’s it. Period. The end.

They read the script. They don’t care about anything else. So, stop.

John: Yep. Another group of people we’d like to stop are some fans of the Star Wars franchise who seem intent on destroying it, in a way. So, this has been sort of bubbling up for a while, but this is the most recent example was the stuff that happened to Kelly Marie Tran, who played Rose in Rian Johnson’s film, The Last Jedi. She left Instagram. We’re recording this about a week before the episode comes out, so who knows what will happen in the meantime.

But I wanted to just take a moment to talk about fandom and sort of this most recent wave of destructive fandom that you see out there. And see if we have any recommendations for creators dealing with it, or an industry dealing with it, because it just sucks. And it’s just so dispiriting to see every day.

Craig: I cannot explain this beyond the obvious explanation. It’s so bizarre to me. You and I – I look at a lot of these people out there that are complaining about Star Wars because they don’t like, I don’t know, the cast or something, or what happened to a character. These people certainly must be younger than you and I.

You and I grew up in the age of Star Wars. We were each about six or seven when the first movie came out, right? And then the second movie came out nine/ten. So, we are prime Star Wars generation. We are the Star Wars Generation. And nobody ever, ever, ever when we were young talked about these movies this way ever. Ever. Never. In any way, shape, or form. And part of the reason was we felt no ownership of it whatsoever. None. It was a gift that we went to go see.

We all saw them. And, yeah, you know what? I remember thinking the Ewoks were stupid. I didn’t care. Whatever. You know what? So then the Ewoks were stupid. What am I going to get angry? That’s not how it works.

I have no ownership over these movies. They’re movies. My ticket back then cost the same price to go see Max Dugan Returns. A pretty good movie, by the way. It didn’t matter what the movie is. You paid your ticket, you went down, you saw it. And now what has happened is, and I can’t put all of the blame on the fans. I put part of the blame on the companies. The companies have managed to monetize and exploit this fandom, this experience. I mean, you can’t say convention without con. It’s all a con to take your money. They are religiousifying their products in such a way that people begin to feel religious about it. What a shock.

And then they are surprised when it sort of bites them in the butt. I blame the butt-biters for it. However, I do think that the fact that we have kind of built these mythological and engaging worlds around these movies has engendered a certain problem with what I’ll call a problematic segment of our society, specifically young men, young white men, I’ll say between the ages of 15 and 30.

It’s interesting from an anthropological point of view, or a sociological point of view, they didn’t seem to have a problem with a black man in Star Wars. Well, they did, but they didn’t lose their minds. But when you start putting women in Star Wars then they start getting crazy. And my god, you put an Asian woman in Star Wars and they lose their S.

John: Yeah. There wasn’t backlash against older Leia because Leia was already established. She was cannon. People love Leia. She’s seen as a princess. Everyone sort of got that. It was the other women being added to the franchise that hurt it.

I think you’re picking at two very interesting aspects of this, which is that you have the religious fervor quality and whenever people become true believers in things that belief in things can be transformative and it can become dangerous. It can become sort of fanaticism. It can become this kind of zeal that is destructive. You see that happening again.

And also this sort of that 15 to 30-year-old white male culture, which is really the heart of the sort of troll culture. It’s the people who have grown up in the system of like always snapping back against the things they don’t like and feeling that they need to exert control over things because they feel out of control over things.

Craig: Yeah.

John: A related thing which I listened to this last week was a great piece on the shippers of Sherlock. So basically the people who watch the BBC Sherlock and believe that they are absolutely, 100% a couple and that the creators of the show are lying to them when they claim that they are not a couple. I’ll put a link in the show notes to a really great podcast that sort of explores, called Decoder, that explores how that fandom sort of came to be and how it became a giant schism within the community of the fan fiction writers for Sherlock and their fervent beliefs in the nature of that relationship and the degree to which the creators of the show are lying when they say that they are not a couple.

Craig: Yeah. Including the gay co-creator, Mark Gatiss. It just, ugh, I don’t get it. First of all, I have trouble with just anyone talking about shipping or ship instead of relationship, because it makes me itch. Just like I have a huge problem with people using the word stan for fandom, because it feels so blech.

John: And some of it is generational. Sometimes it’s us old men shaking our canes at things.

Craig: Some of it. Some it also is just like I think you guys are just making up words to make yourselves feel like you’re part of a secret group of people with inside knowledge or coolness. It’s not cool. It’s inherently not cool to explain to creators of a show why they’re lying to you about what their two characters should be doing. That’s it. That’s what they showed you is it. That’s it.

John: So do we have any theories about why some properties seem to be a little bit better protected from that sort of toxic backlash than others? Because when you look at the Marvel universe, it seems to have done actually pretty well at sort of keeping the main through line of the movies moving ahead fine. And all the shipping can happen over at the margins, but it’s not affecting the main product and you don’t see a backlash against the main product from the fans.

Same with Harry Potter I’d say. Like there’s always been a lot of shipping happening in Harry Potter. There’s always people who believe that Harry and Hermione belong together, but it never seems to come back to J.K. Rowling that she has done something wrong.

And I wonder what it is. I wonder what is the difference between those kinds of properties. Is it that Star Wars is perceived as being more adult and therefore adults are sort of more engaged with it? There’s something different happening there. If you could figure what that is it would be so useful for us as people creating these giant properties that go out into the world.

Craig: I have a theory. It’s going to be disheartening, but that’s what I do. I think that had Harry Potter begun to come out say two years ago it would be a nightmare for J.K. Rowling. Every single new book would be a nightmare of how could you do this, why would you do this, what happened to so-and-so, why aren’t they together, how could you lie. When she finally reveals seven years from now that actually Hermione and Ron get together, people go bananas. It’s just going to be – and every single who is or is not white, black, Asian, why are there no transgender characters? Why are there no openly gay characters? It would just be an endless thing. And it would be a very different experience. And the reason I would say it would be horrible for her is because every decision she would make would be terribly questioned.

As opposed to what used to happen where a creator would do something and that person’s creations would be considered “cannon.” In other words you would receive them. You wouldn’t question them or feel entitled to have a conversation with them. You would receive them the way we received Lord of the Rings or the way we received George R. R. Martin’s books, or the way we received the original Star Wars.

Now as things on go, it is no longer considered a receiving. It is considered a conversation. So when something new comes along, like the new Star Wars, it’s considered a conversation. Marvel movies are all based on old characters that have thousands of comics behind them. They don’t give us new ones. They just keep giving us old ones. And so they stay within the cannon that exists. These new movies are tellings of stories that have been around for a long time. Infinity War, that whole storyline has been around for a while.

So they’re weirdly not breaking new ground. The only times that they get in trouble is when they try and cast away from what the comics were, which created a huge problem with Doctor Strange.

In the case of what we’re seeing I think with Sherlock, again, they sort of remade a thing. They made it new. So it’s modern day London Sherlock and therefore people were entitled to have a conversation with it. And I think more than anything it is about the time you start something. And unfortunately if you start something now, that’s the world you live in.

John: Probably so. On the sixth or seventh episode of Launch, I guess it’s the seventh episode, we had Tomi Adeyemi on. And her new book, Children of Blood and Bone, is a bestseller. And so it’s the first of a three-book series. And I am fascinated to follow up with her to see now that the book has done so well and the second book comes out what the nature of her fan relationship becomes. Because right now people love the books. They love her. She’s fantastic. She’s exactly the right vessel for this book, but what’s going to happen when she makes tough choices in book two and things don’t go the way that people had expected. What happens in book three? What is the pressure as a movie comes out? It’s going to be fascinating to see what it’s like because your proposition that essentially any piece of popular culture you make right now that has a fan base behind it is going to face these pressures, she’s ground zero for that.

Craig: Yeah. And it’s terrifying because you cannot actually function as an artist if you are responding to the conversation. It’s just not possible. Well, you can, but you won’t do a very good job. The people out there will destroy that which they love. If you ignore the conversation entirely you just have to be ready to know that you’re going to get beaten around the head and face for a bit from now time to time.

A good example is Dan and Dave who do Game of Thrones got an enormous amount of grief in season, I guess we’ve just seen season seven, so season six I think – maybe season five – somewhere in there Sansa ends up getting married to, what was that guy’s name? He’s so bad.

John: Yeah.

Craig: We’re practically – it’s so terrible that I can’t remember his name. Anyway, that guy. She’s married to that awful, awful guy. And then they had a scene where it was just this very hard to watch, drawn out, difficult rape scene. And the show had already dallied in rape scenes a number of times. This one really sent people into a very bad place because it wasn’t in the books. This was something that they had invented. They didn’t take it from George R. R. Martin. And everyone felt it was just gratuitous and brutal to do to this character that they loved.

And then by extension Dan and Dave were misogynists. They were sick. They were A-holes. They didn’t understand – they were part of rape culture. Etc.

The next season they get the revenge and Sansa watches as Ramsay is ripped apart by his own dogs and everybody loved it, including I think all the people that had complained. And one of the reasons they loved it so much is because his brutal death had been earned by his brutal acts.

Sometimes we just have to be patient. Sometimes characters must suffer. Sometimes in really challenging art they suffer and do not survive. And people seem to not be accepting of this when they are engaged in conversation with the author.

John: Yeah. So to wrap this up, let’s go back and imagine The Empire Strikes Back, and let’s imagine that the Empire Strikes Back comes out now, so there already was a Star Wars. Now Empire Strikes Back comes out. It’s the same movie. Same incredibly great quality movie. But you end that movie with Han Solo frozen in carbonite. What is the fan reaction? How dare you take away my Han Solo? How dare you imprison him? Basically that sense of you don’t know what you’re doing. You’re getting rid of the best character of it all. You’ve made this fundamental change in the nature of Luke and Leia’s relationship. And you’re going to make us wait years to find out what happens next.

Craig: I think that people probably would have approached that the way that many people are approaching the end of the current Avengers movie which is to say, “Not really dead,” and in both instances I suspect, certainly in one different correct, and the other one almost certainly correct. But I think they would have had a huge problem with Luke being weak. They would have had a problem with Yoda. I’m sorry, a Jedi master is a stupid puppet, so now for kids we’re just doing dumb hand puppets. That would have been a meme within four seconds. They would have just absolutely trashed Yoda today.

John: Well, also he has Grover’s voice.

Craig: Exactly. So it’s Grover or it’s Miss Piggy. So, I’m sorry, the most powerful Jedi in the world is Miss Piggy? They would have made fun of that. They would have gone after that. And I think, let’s see what else, Lando, who is this guy? Social justice warriors obviously are demanding that the Colt 45 guy being in Empire Strikes – there just would have been racist stuff. It’s all the things that are just predictable. It’s the same thing every time.

And then for the third movie on the far left people would have been accusing it of being imperialist because it’s talking about white saviors and exploiting the native people of a jungle climate for themselves. You know. It would have been the thing. And we can all write that script. And it’s dispiriting because that’s how you know we can’t go on like this because it can all just be written ahead of time. Nothing will survive the crucible of these extremes on either side. Nothing. There is not art that can survive it except bland art.

John: We don’t want bland art.

Craig: No.

John: No, we want great, vital art.

Craig: Yeah. And you know what? I don’t mind mistakes. I also don’t mind bad movies. Just do them honestly. And so with the case of Rian’s Star Wars movie, I really like that movie a lot and it’s just so bizarre that it is a discussion involving politics. It’s Star Wars for god’s sakes. It takes place in a galaxy far, far away a long, long time ago. What the hell?

John: Frustrating. OK, last bit of new news. This past week the WGA announced a new deal with Apple. So Apple is moving into creating original programs. They have not announced the name of this service or sort of how the service is going to work, but they’ve started making shows and so they need to make a deal with the WGA to cover the writers on those shows. Some shows that Apple is doing are through a studio, like a Paramount, or a Disney, or some other place. Some of the shows they are doing are directly for Apple. And the so the WGA made a deal for those shows which Apple is doing directly. And the deal is better than it could have been.

There’s basically two ways these kind of deals work these days. There’s the deal we have with places like Netflix which are subscription based. And there’s places like Crackle, was the example, things that are free to people to watch those shows, and those deals tend to be terrible.

So, the good news is that the deal with Apple if Apple ends up making a free service, free to consumer service, it will be better than that deal which is a good sign because there will be things like minimums for writers to be paid, residuals, other good stuff along the way.

Craig: Credit protections I presume?

John: Credit protections, yes. So it’s a decent WGA deal by most measures.

Craig: And I think that in time these will become the deals. It seems all inevitable. I don’t know what the specific numbers are on these deals. But I don’t know if any of us have any clue what our contracts or our compensation would be on our initial self-negotiated compensation will be in, I don’t know, ten years. I don’t think we have any clue whatsoever. I mean, ten years ago it was 2008 and the iPhone came out in–

John: 2006 I believe. We’re past the tenth anniversary.

Craig: We’re just past it, right? So that’s how much has changed in ten years. So ten years from now, good lord, right? I mean, it’s going to be unrecognizable.

So, yeah, first generation iPhone was 2007. So, we have to keep doing what we’re doing here I think which is just sort of piecemeal-ing these things and going along. But there will be a reckoning.

John: For sure.

Craig: The reckoning will come. And here’s what’s interesting: when that reckoning does come, it will not come against our usual foes. You know, to strike a company that does nothing but exploit the work that we do is an interesting probability. It’s self-destructive but also other-destructive. To strike Apple, uh, OK.

John: Nope.

Craig: Good luck.

John: It is a challenging thing. So, I mean, the programming that Apple makes will be a very small percentage of the income for Apple overall, or maybe actually it will make no income for Apple, but they’ll be used – if it’s a free service – perhaps they will use the programming they make to sell Apple TVs, or iPads, and other things. So, you know, if we say, no, we’re not going to write your stuff, it’s like, well, it doesn’t sort of matter so much for them.

Craig: Yeah. I don’t think they’re actually running any of these shows in a sense to get people excited about a show. I honestly think they’re doing this just to hurt each other at this point. I don’t even know if Apple knows why they’re doing this beyond, “Well, why let Netflix be the only people that does a thing. That just sounds dangerous to us. And we literally have $80 billion sitting around. So let’s spend a little bit of it just to make it competitive. We’re not even sure why.”

Well, that’s a tough employer to negotiate with.

John: Yeah, but right now if they’re going to spend that money on us, as writers, that’s fantastic.

Craig: Yeah.

John: And what we should stipulate is that it’s not like people who are writing these shows these people weren’t getting paid or individually they might be able to get some good things in their contracts. The challenge is that that showrunner might get a really good contract, but it’s very hard to get a good contract for that staff writer on that show because there are no minimums. And so a union has to negotiate the minimums that any writer is going to get paid. And without that it’s just all the way to the bottom. And that’s what happened with Crackle.

Craig: Is there pension and health involved?

John: I believe there’s pension and health. I have not seen the final deal. I just know that there was a push to get good coverage on the whole shebang.

Craig: I mean, that’s really important.

John: Oh my god, pension and health is so crucial.

Craig: That’s kind of the reason we’re here.

John: If you talk to folks who work in animation, who write for animation, pension and health can be a huge deal, because there’s coverage sometimes through the animation guild, but if you’re working on some WGA projects, some non-WGA projects, it will be hard to keep your health together. So, it’s tough.

Craig: Yep.

John: All right, let’s get to some questions.

Craig: All right.

John: We’ll start with Evan in Philadelphia who writes, “I’m a former comic book author and in comics we call the space between the panels the gutters. The gutters are almost as important as what you see in the panels because your brain is actively filling in all those blanks as you move from panel to panel. Scott McCloud has a book called Understanding Comics for an excellent explanation. Do you ever think about the time that passes in between scenes of a script and what your characters are learning, changing, what’s happening to them, etc., in these interstitial spaces and cuts?” Craig?

Craig: Evan, that’s a fantastic question and a great observation. It’s a really interesting analogy. Absolutely. It’s not just something that I – do I ever think about it – I always think about it. The design of scenes from one scene to another, we talk about a lot of times when we’re reading scripts we want to feel compelled through. We want it to seem seamless. And so much of that is about designing the end of a scene and the beginning of another to acknowledge something is happening. And that’s how you can figure out what you don’t need to show.

A lot of times you’ll hear very broad-based advice like “Start your scene later than you thought you needed to, and end it sooner than you thought you needed to.” Well, that’s really referring to this interstitial phenomenon where we can fill things in. But you have to know what those things are. That’s the most important thing. And therefore you have to be thinking about what they are. And then rather than sort of saying, oh you know, hmm, I wonder what could go in this space, figure out what should be there first before you start thinking about what comes after. So I’m constantly thinking about all this. And for actors, one of the classic bits of acting instruction is the moment before. A scene begins, but what were you doing before it? Otherwise it just seems like you’re one of the hosts in Westworld that gets switched on, you know?

John: Yeah. Exactly. So that common advice, like starting a scene as late as possible, ending a scene, I always think about it as a scene ends and it needs to have a little bit of forward momentum. That’s why it’s sort of slanting into the next scene. You’re tipping that energy across the cut into the next scene.

But you’re also always mindful of what had to happen beforehand. And it’s really not you as the author who is filling in those details. It is the audience. So you have to think about expectation. What is the audience expecting to happen next? Or when they see that first shot of the new scene, what are they doing to expect happened that go them there? And if you can do that math in your head you can very often skip over a lot of things that people will just see what it is that they’re doing next.

When it comes time for direction, really literally like moving left to right across the frame versus right to left across the frame, our brains do stuff to fill in the things that we missed based on the way the camera is moving, the way the characters are moving through the scene. You do that work to figure out sort of what must have happened right before this moment and what’s going to happen next.

So, yes. And I think gutters is actually a really interesting way of thinking about those missing scenes, those missing connection pieces that we use all the time in screenwriting.

Craig: Yeah. That’s a great question. I love that. And we talked about this sort of from a different angle when we discussed transitions. We talk about it a lot when we do our Three Page Challenges because sometimes those things feel like they’re not there.

You know, it occurs to me that when people ask what do you need to become a professional screenwriter and work steadily we always say, look, talent, hard work. But talent in what? Vocabulary? Sentence structure? We’ll talk a lot about dialogue, so an ear for dialogue. Things like that. But I suspect that one of the most important talents that we don’t really talk about is what psychologists call mind reading. There’s this aspect of social communication that’s essentially mind reading where we’re trying to figure out what the other person is thinking. And then we shape our comments or thoughts to achieve a change in their thinking state.

The game of charades is just mind reading in that sense writ large, because you’re trying to figure out what someone is thinking. And when we’re writing we’re always trying to think about what our characters are thinking, how they can change what the other person is thinking. How much they’ve picked up on what the other person is thinking. And then in a meta sense, we are in a relationship with the audience where we’re trying to figure out what the audience will be thinking. So that’s predictive mind reading.

These things if you were bad at are going to limit you as a screenwriter. And possibly disqualify you as a screenwriter. It’s a talent that I don’t think anybody really talks about in film school, but it’s a huge part of this.

John: Yeah. And so when you’re getting feedback from somebody and they say like I was confused by this moment, I didn’t understand what this character was trying to do, really you’re discussing a breakdown in that mind-reading. You had not read their mind properly and they couldn’t figure out what was happening next, or where you were trying to lead them. When they talk about like “I kind of lost faith in it, I lost faith in where the story was going,” that’s again a breakdown of this mind-reading about what you’re trying to do and what those characters are trying to do next.

We can’t see inside their heads. We just don’t know what we’re watching.

Craig: Yeah. And none of us are 100% at it. Of course. We all make mistakes. But generally speaking you want to be more right than wrong with that sort of thing.

All right, well we’ve got another question for Miranda in LA. And she asks, “I have a question that NDAs, that’s non-disclosure agreements, and parting ways with an employer with whom you are working on an idea.” And I really like that you said with whom. “Here’s my scenario. For a while I worked as a writer’s assistant to an established screenwriter.” John, I’m already telling you my butt is clenching. OK. My butt is clenching.

“I had developed a concept for a show that needed a plot. Through the course of my work my employer said something that gave me an idea for the story and I ended up with a cool pitch for a show. I wrote up an outline, we talked about it once, and then I was let go a couple of weeks later.

“I’d like to pursue the project, but not with my former employer. I signed an NDA that grants ownership to everything I came up with to my former employer.” That’s not what an NDA does. “Does that mean I can’t work on this project without them or their permission? Or can I use my original concept and take out anything that relates to my former employer’s idea”

Oh. Good. Lord.

John: Oh. Good. Lord. So, first off, we will say that an NDA does not strictly mean that there’s ownership of ideas, but you could have signed something that including NDA language and included that all things discussed as part of work belong to your employer. Without seeing your contract I don’t know. So we cannot give you great legal advice here. And we’re not lawyers anyway, so we wouldn’t be able to give you great legal advice.

What I will say is as a person who has had a number of assistants who have gone on to have great careers, I’ve always had those kind of discussions about the things they were writing and I’ve offered them advice and they’ve gone off and they’ve done stuff. That kind of discussion should be encouraged and is part of the process. So, I hope your boss is not listening to this podcast saying like, “Oh, I know exactly who Miranda is and I’m going to get that idea back because that is a terrible person.” That is not what a screenwriter should be doing.

Craig: Yeah. We would destroy that person.

John: We would absolutely destroy this person. So that sense of like I have this story world, I’m working on this plot, I had those same conversations with assistants over games of pool and, you know, watching Martha Stewart, and all sorts of other discussions I have now with Megan all the time. And so this is not a thing that is unusual.

I would say it’s a little bit unusual that you signed this contract going in. I don’t know many writers who are having their assistants do that. But my instinct is you should feel free to pursue your idea that is your idea. But I would say just look through that thing you singed to make sure it doesn’t say that anything you ever brought up in the office is theirs.

Craig: Yeah. Certainly have somebody review that and have the discussion with them and just say, look, I’d love to do this and is it OK if I just go off and do that please?

Just a little tip. If you do review your agreement and it is – so non-disclosure agreement basically says you can’t talk about any of the stuff that we do here with other people. Right? So it’s pretty normal. If John and I are working on a screenplay that’s something that’s confidential in almost every case. So, we don’t want our assistant tweeting about it, right? Standard NDA sort of thing.

But then there’s this other agreement where you’re essentially saying anything that you think or say belongs to me. It’s my property. It’s considered a work-for-hire. Therefore the copyright is mine. If anyone asks you to sign something like that it has to be basically a company. And I don’t mean like just some random company. I mean like a studio-type company.

So, if say I wanted to talk to some scientist for Chernobyl, just interview him and get some information, he said, “You know what, I’ll write down some things for you and send them,” and I go, oh, if you’re going to write anything down and send it to me you need to sign this thing that basically says HBO now owns what you just said in this piece of paper because we’re not saying, “Oh, we’re looking for people to write a scene or anything. That’s not what we do. We’re just looking for some research or advice.” And as long as then they’re OK with that that’s the document they would sign with a company like HBO or a studio like Paramount, or Warner Bros., or anything. That’s pretty normal.

But if some person asks you to sign that, that’s an alarm bell. It’s a massive alarm bell. So, I think Miranda what you need to do is find yourself an attorney. Talk to them. And then assuming that that person gives you the thumbs up, reach out to your former employer and say I’d like to do this. Would that be OK with you?

John: Yeah. And hopefully it should be OK. And if the guy says no–

Craig: We’ll destroy him.

John: That was a bad guy. Yes, tell us what his name was and we’ll go after him.

The last thing I want to say is I think there’s understandable concern about NDAs overall and NDAs that are used to protect people from being called out on bad behavior.

Craig: Crime.

John: Crime. And creepiness. And so NDAs cannot and should not be used to protect people from doing terrible – certainly criminal things but also just bad things. And so I want us to always shine a spotlight on NDA abuse.

Craig: I agree. And so eventually there will be some sort of legislation with a different congress that will attempt to address this. And I think it could also be a state-by-state thing.

John: Yeah. California could totally do this.

Craig: California could do this. There is a weird thing that also happens where NDAs start to protect what I would call reluctant whistle-blowers. So people will say I have a whistle I could blow but I can’t because of my NDA. Well, I think you can. I think you can. I think you don’t want to. So, it’s a weird – it’s a whole weird thing. Anyway.

John: It’s a whole weird thing. All right, Dan has a question. He asks, “How do big production companies like Bad Robot work? They get a deal from a studio and that funds the company and the development of shows and movies? What’s the corporate structure like? When JJ is paid does it go to the production company and he just takes a salary? Speaking as a company owner, why would JJ want to deal with the business-running stuff? Wouldn’t he just work as a freelancer? What happens to the company if he’s off directing for six months? It would seem that the revenue that people like JJ would make as a company is insanely profitable. So, anyway, I don’t mean to pick on JJ, but I was just thinking of him as an example.”

So, Bad Robot is a company that makes Mission: Impossible movies, they make Westworld, they make other JJ Abrams movies. Like they make Star Trek. And so I’ve gone into meeting with them. I’ve never written anything for them. But they have really nice offices out in Santa Monica. They have a lot of people who work there and they’re really smart, great people. So they are busy doing stuff. Their deal is with Paramount, but they’re always doing other things. They just started a videogame company as well.

So, Craig, why do you not have a Bad Robot?

Craig: Well, no one has asked me to have a Bad Robot. I think that the prerequisite for these things is television. So, people think of JJ as a movie guy. He’s actually a TV guy. He came out of TV. And when you come out of TV and you’re making a few hit shows then there’s a massive revenue stream.

So earlier this week, Dan, there was a news story about Greg Berlanti who is an incredibly prolific television producer with Warner Bros. And they just made him I think it’s a 10-year deal for $400 million. That’s guaranteed $400 million. And then it goes up from there. And the reason why is he has 14 shows on the air apparently, which is insane. And so this is really a television empire business. And this has always been around.

There have always been these little mini studios that were mini studios making television. So, Chuck Lorre has a little mini studio. Back in the day Stephen J. Cannell who would make a lot of the action programs that John and I grew up watching, he had a little mini studio.

John: You had MTM.

Craig: MTM. And John Wells had a mini studio. So these have always been around. And now we have this crossover where they’re making television and also big movie franchises. So how does it work? Basically, yes, the studio will make a large deal with that business. They will guarantee them a certain amount of money. That money is used to cover overhead and employees. There’s almost always somebody other than the principal creative, which in this case is JJ, who is helping to run the business, like a principal business runner.

And then sub-business runners underneath. JJ and the company are paid as producers. JJ is then also paid individually as a writer. JJ is also paid individually as a director. So he has three different streams of income. And typically the production company is making a fee off of everything it produces and then that fee is either applied against, or in really great cases not applied against a backend percentage of profits or gross, depending on how good your deal is.

So the question is why would JJ want to deal with all the business-running stuff? Well, he’s not sitting there signing certificates for office insurance and handling human resources. There are people that do that for him. But he’s of the mindset of that. That’s what he likes to do. Same with Simon Kinberg. They like this kind of I make things but I also overlord things.

Our friend Chris Morgan has a – I mean, it’s smaller than JJ’s thing, but it is a similar kind of thing. I don’t have an interest in it. I like doing what I do. I mean, I suppose maybe one day, but I don’t want a building with a lot of people in it. I don’t want human resources. I don’t want development people. I don’t want it. I like my office. It’s me and then it’s Jacqueline Lesco who is my associate, who is sort of my editor, and it’s the two of us. And it’s wonderfully quiet. And I love it. So, I think maybe it’s a question of ambition. It’s basically is there a desire for you to do this and do you have the ambition to do it.

John: Yep. That’s really what it is. A talent, and a vision, and an ambition to do all those things. And I would hope that I have talent and that I have vision, but I do not have the ambition to have this massive company. And the overhead, the emotional overhead, of having all of those employees.

So I’ve got four. And four is plenty. Four is a lot for me. And so I’ve got Megan. I’ve got Nima. And I’ve got Dustin. And we make stuff. And that’s great, but really mostly my software company. Megan helps me out with my writing stuff — I am working as a freelance writer. I’m not working as some big production company entity.

I don’t want to have to go to some other office every day. I don’t want all that feeling. And so even though JJ Abrams would have really smart people to do all that stuff, and even though he gets to participate in lots of other projects because his company is making 30 things, that’s exciting. But he also has to participate in some of those projects. And I’m sure it is challenging when he goes off and directs a Star Wars movie in London for all the other stuff to get done. And that’s going to be the same challenge with Greg Berlanti running 14 shows, or Chris Morgan with Fast and the Furious, plus other franchises. But that’s a choice they’ve chosen to make and that’s great. But it’s just not a choice that I would want to make.

Craig: No. Not at all. And Spielberg has been doing this sort of thing forever. So he has his own at Amblin and then DreamWorks and then back to Amblin again. But then he does his own movies. And so, yeah, it’s really just a question of desire and scope.

Yeah, and by the way, even for Greg Berlanti. So he does most of the television shows, but then he does Love, Simon. Right?

John: Yeah.

Craig: I think that’s part of it also is that you like doing different things and you don’t mind never being at home. That must be a part of it. It seems like a very busy life.

Let’s get this last one in here. Alex in LA. Who knows, maybe we’ll get more than one more in. Alex in LA – I get all the LA people. He writes, “Recently,” or it could be she, writes, “Recently after years of struggle I finally made my first big spec sale.” Yay.

“While the sale is great, what I really want is to have a long and sustained career and not just be a one-hit-wonder. So my question is what can I expect to happen next and how can I maximize my opportunities when I’m in that rare moment where I actually have a nice Deadline write up and a little career heat? What are the traps to look out for?

“For context, I’ve had some minor successes before and I’ve even been on the bottle water tour when a previous script of mine got a lot of attention, but sadly no sale. So I’m not a complete newbie at this, but I’d like to know what happens when you move past the level of general meetings at random production companies and into higher levels of the industry.”

All right, John, we’ve got a new kid. What do you tell ‘em?

John: All right, so first Alex congratulations. I would say here are some priorities for you. Priority number one: let’s get that script made. So having sold a script is fantastic. Having a script actually produced and a movie is out is much, much better. So if there’s anything you can do to get this movie made, I say do those things to get that movie made.

So that is taking the notes, trying to make those notes actually work. Always asking about the next step. Always asking how are we going to get a director. What are the things that are happening next? Try to make that thing actually become a movie and not just one thing that you sold. So, great that you sold it, let’s make that a movie would be my first thing.

Second priority I would say let’s get you another job. Let’s get you writing something else. So, that could be a pitch that you’ve gone out with, that you’ve set up, that you’re going to be writing. It could be an assignment for something to write, a preexisting piece of material. It probably won’t be a rewrite if it’s so early in your career, but it could be a rewrite. But getting you as a person who gets hired and not just a person who has sold something is great.

Third I would say maybe you need to staff on a TV show. That’s not advice I would have given ten years ago, but I think most writers are working in television right now. And so if there’s a TV show that you could be staffed on I would look at staffing on that TV show, especially if your script is a perfect example of something out there. Maybe try to staff on a show, even like a short-run show for Apple. An eight-episode Apple show would be great experience for you and get you more scripts under your belt.

Craig: All fantastic. I’m not sure what I could possibly add to that other than you should continue to be concerned that this will end tomorrow, because that’s kind of the way it works. The trend is to get rid of you. You are a new infection in the body of Hollywood. It will try and get rid of you. The good news is eventually it will stop trying to get rid of you and then you will start to try and get rid of it and you won’t be able to. But that’s a long way to go.

So, get the next job. Get. The. Next. Job. Go out there swinging at as many things as you can to get that next job, to keep working. Nothing is sexier than a writer who is unavailable. And it’s a shame, because it has nothing to do with our abilities, but being unavailable is the thing that makes people excited about you because that means somebody else likes you, which means you’re likeable. That’s the mess of it all.

So, yeah, stay ambitious man.

John: Alex, you’re going to be very busy because you’re going to be rewriting your script that you sold. You’re going to be going out and pitching on a bunch of things which means you’re really going to be doing the internal writing of all these different projects. You’re going to be figuring out how you’re going to tackle these projects.

Plus, you’re going to be writing new stuff for yourself because where I do see writers who have sold that one thing who never sell another thing it’s because they never really wrote another thing. They just went out and tried to get that first movie made or try to get a deal and they never wrote something else new.

So, you’ve got to do all three things, which seems crazy because you worked so hard to get to this point, but you’re now going to be probably working a lot harder.

Craig: Yeah. And you’re going to have to assume that there are going to be some swings and misses along the way.

John: Oh yeah.

Craig: You may also work on something that doesn’t work out and you get fired off of it and then, you know, OK, well you’re going to have to deal with that fallout or whatever. But it won’t be your problem because you’ve already got the next thing lined up. So actually now is when you have to work harder than you’ve ever worked before. And you should enjoy and be proud of the moment, but I think honestly Alex your questions are implying the right mindset.

John: 100% agree. All right, let’s save that last question for next week and instead go to our One Cool Things. So, my One Cool Thing is an article by Avi Selk for the Washington Post called The Worst Sex in the World is Anglerfish Sex, and Now There’s Finally Video.

So, anglerfish are those things you’ve seen in cartoons. They’re these monstrous sort of Precambrian Jurassic fish that have the little lantern dangling over their heads. They live deep, deep in the water. They’ve never seen sunlight. But there’s video now of this anglerfish and it’s a female anglerfish you find out because female anglerfish are the giant ones and male anglerfish are tiny, tiny little fish. And when males mate they bite into the female fish. Their teeth hold on basically forever and they basically become subsumed into the bigger fish.

The video is fantastic and disturbing. It looks alien. So I just encourage you to see it. I’ll actually put two different video links in there. One which simulates what it would look like if humans did this, which is so disturbing.

Craig: It’s the best. I’ve seen this, too. It’s awesome.

John: Yeah. So I love that we live in a world that has such incredibly freaky creatures out there. And while it seems like, “Oh, that poor male fish is dying to procreate,” it’s also very kind of smart mechanism. Because literally all of his DNA gets in there because he becomes part of the other fish. So he’s both a parasite and he’s eaten by it. It’s all interesting and it feels alien in a wonderful way.

Craig: Yeah. I got to say once you get past the mammal situation and you get into insects and reptiles and fish, women – I think they generally win the whole battle of the sexes. They seem to be winning. And violently in all sorts of fun ways, like biting the heads off their mate. You know, I always love those things. But, you know, I’m a praying mantis fan.

John: Well, if you think about it there’s a reason why women should win because essentially if the goal of reproduction is to pass along your genes, ultimately the women are going to be the ones who are going to give birth and raise the children in many cases. So there’s a reason why you’d want them to be stronger and survive.

Craig: Yeah. It really comes down to math from what I understand. It’s a question of how many eggs, you know, so mammals are basically we’re pregnant with one offspring at a time. And then when you’re in reptiles, fish, and insects they’re pregnant with a million offspring at times. So, like the math has a huge impact on whose head gets chopped off basically. It’s a real mess out there. Biology is brutal and doesn’t care about our feelings. Isn’t that terrible?

Well, I got all geeked out yesterday and watched two of the E3 press conferences. The one was the X-Box press conference and then the other one was the Bethesda press conference. And really I was just watching the Bethesda press conference to see if they would finally just say, OK, yes, there will be an Elder Scrolls 6. And they did. There’s going to be an Elder Scrolls 6. But not for like four years probably.

And one of the reasons why is because it’s going to be the game they work on after the next game they’re working on. And the next game that they’re working on is their first original franchise in 20 years or something. Because Fallout was actually based on something they had purchased from another company. And then they made it what it is.

But in any case Bethesda, my favorite game studio, has a new game that they are going to be putting out I think probably for the next generation platform, so my guess is 2020. And it’s called Starfield. And what we know about it is it’s in space. That’s it.

But I have a feeling if it is remotely like what we have all come to love from Bethesda games then even if it’s just Fallout in space, I’ll be thrilled.

John: That will be great.

Craig: So, anyway, Starfield is hopefully heading towards us in 2020. And then I’m thinking Elder Scrolls 6 in 2022? Then at that point if I get hit by the bus I’m OK.

John: Yeah. Hopefully there will still be a planet in 2022.

Craig: Well–

John: No guarantees in this world.

Craig: There’ll be something.

John: There’ll be something. Will there be humans? Yeah. There will still be a planet.

Craig: I’m optimistic.

John: All right, good. I like the optimism.

Craig: I don’t why. Because I’m stupid.

John: You’re not stupid, Craig. You’re smart and you’re wise and you have umbrage for only the right things.

Craig: Thank you.

John: That’s our show for this week. Our show is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Jeff Mooney. 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 Craig and I are always delighted to answer your questions on Twitter. Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust.

You can find us on Apple Podcasts. Just search for Scriptnotes. While you’re there, leave us a comment. That helps people find the show.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes, plus links and such at johnaugust.com. You’ll also find transcripts. They go up the week after the episode goes out.

You can find all the back episodes at Scriptnotes.net. Last episode I proposed that we may end up doing a digital version of the USB drives down the road. We’re thinking through that. We still have a few of the existing USB drives if you’d like one of those. But they may be the last of their kind. So, we may end up going to a fully digital version. And let people download them in chunks or maybe batches of 100 so they can live on with–

Craig: I think that’s smart.

John: Yeah. It’s really the international users are really facing – sometimes the import fees on the USB drive which is hard to value.

Craig: Yeah, you know what, and then they have to pay those taxes that end up coming back to us as foreign levy fees.

John: Yep. Crazy.

Craig: That part’s nice. I finally get–

John: Actually that’s true. Craig is referring to writers get paid these foreign levy fees that are not residuals. They’re kind of like residuals but they’re not residuals. The WGA handles it which is controversial. But it’s nice extra free found money because of Europe and other countries.

Craig: Thank you Europe and other countries.

John: It’s nice. Craig, thank you for this discussion which happened in Europe for me, Los Angeles for you. Lord knows where you’ll be next time we try to talk, but–

Craig: I know where I’ll be next time. In Europe. When you’ll be in the United States.

John: That’s what it is. We’re always – someone is always safe and out of the country when we’re doing this.

Craig: Yep.

John: Cool. Craig, thanks so much. Bye.

Craig: Thanks John. See you next time.

Links:

• Coverfly’s response to accusations in a now-deleted blog post. Here’s a conversation on the Screenwriting Reddit page about it.
• In 2015’s Episode 191 The Deal with Scripped.com, we invited John Rhodes from ScreenCraft and Guy Goldstein from WriterDuet to investigate a data management crisis with Scripped.com.
• Toxic Fandom Is Killing ‘Star Wars’ by Marc Bernardin for the Hollywood Reporter
• Slate’s Decoder Ring podcast covers the Johnlock Conspiracy.
• Apple has made a deal with the WGA
• Evan in Philadephia recommends Scott McCloud’s Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art for a great explanation of “gutters.”
• JJ Abrams’ Bad Robot is an example of a big production company led by a creative.
• The worst sex in the world is anglerfish sex, and now there’s finally video by Avi Selk for the Washington Post. This video’s upsetting animation shows what the process would look like for humans.
• Bethesda’s Starfield has been announced
• The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!
• The USB drives!
• John August on Twitter
• Craig Mazin on Twitter
• John on Instagram
• Find past episodes
• Outro by Jeff Mooney (send us yours!)

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2018/upgrade).

**Craig Mazin:** This podcast has a little bit of strong language in it because Leigh Whannell has potty mouth.

Hello, my name is Craig Mazin and this is Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast I’m flying solo. Good news for those of you that hate John, all one of you. John is actually off handling some press for the next Arlo Finch novel, I believe, because you know he’s a mystery. But no worries as today I am joined writer-producer-director-Australian-and-actor Leigh Whannell. I will be talking about his generally terrifying body of work as well as his latest film, Upgrade. He’ll also be helping me answer some listener questions.

But first we have a little bit of follow up. And we have no follow up. Follow up is done. Leigh Whannell, welcome to the show.

**Leigh Whannell:** Thanks for having me. Long-time listener, first-time caller. It’s great to be here. You like me. You really like me.

**Craig:** I do. I’ve always liked you. So we met at Austin, at the Austin Screenwriting Conference back like five years ago.

**Leigh:** 2013.

**Craig:** OK, that is five years ago.

**Leigh:** And I never knew that film festival existed. I got an invite to it and thought, oh yeah, sure, this is fun, Austin. And got there and realized it’s all about writers and writers are king at this festival. And it was like heaven. It was amazing. And, yeah, we had a little gang going.

**Craig:** We did. We had a gang. And I talked to them and you’re coming back, so we’ll get you back for more gang activity.

**Leigh:** Well, we were kind of roughing up other people at the festival. People were afraid of us.

**Craig:** Obviously screenwriters–

**Leigh:** Easy people to rough up.

**Craig:** And also we’re intimidating as a screenwriting gang.

**Leigh:** Kelly Marcel was probably the most intimidating member of the gang.

**Craig:** Yeah. Did you see Gangs of New York?

**Leigh:** Yes I did.

**Craig:** So there is that woman in the bar who would jump on people and bite their ears off. And then she had claws. That’s Kelly.

**Leigh:** Exactly.

**Craig:** So let’s talk a little bit about what was happening with you before we met in Austin. Sorry, we have a microphone in between us so we’ll keep tilting our heads to see each other.

**Leigh:** We’re playing tennis.

**Craig:** So you came on the scene in 2004.

**Leigh:** Yes.

**Craig:** At least here in the United States. We came to know of you in 2004 with Saw, which you wrote and starred in, along with director James Wan. And you created not only that long-lasting franchise, but you also created the Insidious franchise which my daughter, I have mentioned to you, is obsessed with.

**Leigh:** It’s a good sleepover movie, Insidious.

**Craig:** She is obsessed with Insidious, and one, and two, and three, and four. So, but running it down there’s Saw, there’s Saw 2 and Saw 3. There’s Dead Silence.

**Leigh:** Yes.

**Craig:** There’s Doggy Heaven.

**Leigh:** It’s a short film. Paid for by PlayStation. Sony PlayStation I believe.

**Craig:** Nice. PlayStation. You wrote Saw the videogame, of course. Then there’s Insidious. And there’s Insidious and Insidious and Insidious: The Last Key, which I feel like there’s going to be another key. I just suspect there’s another key.

**Leigh:** Exactly.

**Craig:** And now Upgrade. And that’s an incredible run. We’re looking at 14 years and, geez, like almost 14 movies, right?

**Leigh:** Yeah, there’s The Mule, and Cooties is in there. I have had a pretty lucky ratio in terms of scripts written to scripts produced. Yes, I definitely am aware of how fortunate I am in that regard. Thus far I’ve written movies that are fairly low budget which is one way to make them easy to get made.

**Craig:** Right.

**Leigh:** You know, you write something that’s going to cost $100 million you’re going to enter a world of pain.

**Craig:** Little tricky.

**Leigh:** It could go on for years.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**Leigh:** The one movie I did write that was quite expensive was kind of a kid’s film, like a fantasy adventure along the lines of Labyrinth. That has never been produced. That is the great white whale that sits in my drawer. It was optioned by an animation company. They had it for a few years. So I’ve dipped my toe in that world and then I always run back to the comforting arms of low budget filmmaking where we don’t talk about making movies. You make movies.

**Craig:** You just make movies.

**Leigh:** Yes.

**Craig:** And you are a full-fledged producer of these movies. I mean, you do have the benefit of not dealing with not only the reluctance of people to spend $100 million, but when people agree to spend $100 million I got news for you. It gets even worse.

**Leigh:** Really?

**Craig:** It can. They’re like, “Hey dummy, we’re giving you $100 million. We have thoughts.”

**Leigh:** “We have some ideas.”

**Craig:** Yeah. “We have theories.”

**Leigh:** Oh man.

**Craig:** “And things you have to do.”

**Leigh:** See, that’s got to be a special skillset amongst writers. Like I’ve obviously listened to your podcast a lot and I’ve heard you and John talking a lot about this industry of working writers who will be brought in to maybe work on a draft. That’s why you go and see a movie you see 12 names in the writing credits. You realize it has gone through it.

Like that is something that I’ve never gotten into, not so much because I think I’m above it or whatever, it’s just I always like the idea of the movie you write is the movie that gets made.

**Craig:** Sure.

**Leigh:** But I imagine there’s a whole world of pain. They probably pay you a little better than they do in the independent world, but there’s a whole world of pain in terms of like, “No, we’re thinking a different movie.” Or like, “Actually, we’re going to scrap your draft and move onto something else.”

**Craig:** There’s a tremendous world of pain. Imagine, if you would, an industry that’s like a bathroom. And you wake up and you are shackled to a toilet and some puppet is demanding that you, you know, stab your own eye out.

**Leigh:** Yes, OK.

**Craig:** It’s not that good. That’s better than–

**Leigh:** I like that you kept it familiar to me, so I can get the reference.

**Craig:** I’m just using the one example I think you might understand. And I want to get back to the bathroom, which I spend a lot of time in personally. By the way, your bathroom is part of our spoof in Scary Movie 4, which we loved.

**Leigh:** And I loved that too. Before I knew who you were–

**Craig:** Thank you very much.

**Leigh:** I was like I have made it.

**Craig:** By the way, we only spoof what we love. That is true.

**Leigh:** This was the one with Shaq.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**Leigh:** Playing the Cary Elwes role.

**Craig:** Yes. And Dr. Phil.

**Leigh:** Dr. Phil! And then Shaq cut off the wrong foot.

**Craig:** Yeah. He cut off the wrong foot.

**Leigh:** See, that’s genius.

**Craig:** That was one of our better–

**Leigh:** That and The Sopranos were the two times where I was like, “Oh yeah, we’re in the culture.”

**Craig:** It’s a real thing. I still get residual checks for being the voice of our puppet.

**Leigh:** Nice.

**Craig:** Like I get $2.

**Leigh:** What you’re saying is that I’ve put food in your children’s mouths.

**Craig:** Snacks.

**Leigh:** Some of those sort of healthy kale snacks that you try and disguise as fun snacks, or chips?

**Craig:** Exactly. Yeah. So about $3 or $4 a year on residuals for that one.

So, when I saw – so I had to watch Saw very carefully and multiple times over and over. And I was grateful that I enjoyed it, because nothing is worse than – but it seemed to me that something happened around then, and I want to give you my non-horror guy’s view of the horror movie business. And tell me where I’m wrong about this or where I might be right.

My sense of things is that in the ‘70s horror got really edgy, like it started going way out there towards like – and the point was like how close to X or X can we be. And you had – so The Exorcist, which still the scariest movie I’ve ever seen in my life, had things in it that today I don’t think you could do. I mean–

**Leigh:** Not without being sort of relegated to some out of reach of the genre ghetto.

**Craig:** Correct. I mean, it’s just like intense crazy stuff. And then movies went from there and were like, “Oh, no, I’ll show you intense.” But then in the ‘80s with the rise of VHS this other thing happened where – so I would go to the video store and I would see a wall of tapes of just pun-based names. And most of the movies seemed to be kind of pushing forward either their version of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but kind of goofy. Or their version of Freddy but kind of goofy. I mean, Freddy started getting goofy.

So there was that kind of. And then in the ‘90s it was just like sort of gone. Like people went, “Remember horror movies?” And then you guys came along. And I feel like Saw started this era of new horror that has just exploded beyond anything I think has ever existed before in film history.

Right or wrong?

**Leigh:** I would say right. For a self-described non-horror person you kind of nailed it. I mean, I feel like horror was always seen as this bargain basement genre. You know, if you think about early Hollywood, the studios were making epics and musicals and war films. And then they would rush out these cheapies with Belo Lugosi and it was Dracula vs. The Mummy. So it was always thought of as a program. It was something to put on a double bill in some cheap theater and then it was the drive in era. And it never – it just never had that respect. It always dabbled occasionally with critical respect. Maybe you’d have a film like the Jacques Tourneur stuff where suddenly the critics were like, “Oh, this one is not so bad.” But mostly it lived in this ghetto.

Then in the ‘70s is where you suddenly had like marquee A-list directors making horror films like Friedkin and Kubrick. And for the first time horror was being seen through the lens of critical respect. The Exorcist was nominated for Best Picture for god’s sake.

It had this moment, but then you’re very right. Not to just repeat what you said, but I feel like what happened in the VHS era is that that bargain basement mentality took over because horror is cheap to make. It’s so budget-friendly.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**Leigh:** It’s hard to make a science fiction movie cheaply. It’s hard to make an action movie cheaply because fights and car chases by their very nature they’re not cheap. Crashing cars.

**Craig:** Comedies and horror.

**Leigh:** Exactly. Comedy and horror. You can crank them out. You put some guy in a vampire costume in the corner. It’s all on one set. You can do it. And so I think producers with a lack of resources and money have always gravitated to it as a grindhouse. And it has that built in audience.

The interesting thing about the horror genre is to horror fans the genre is the star.

**Craig:** Right.

**Leigh:** You don’t need a movie star.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**Leigh:** So all the way back to the ‘30s to today, if you’re talking some guy who is cranking them out in his office making low budget films, of course he’s going to lean horror. Because not only does he know he can get it done, but he knows that the audience will grab onto it. He doesn’t need Jennifer Lawrence.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**Leigh:** And so the VHS era I think was responsible for this slump. There was a real slump in horror. And it was weird in the ‘90s because that was kind of my era. I think Scream was kind of the high watermark of horror in the ‘90s.

**Craig:** Right. But the funny thing about Scream was it wasn’t duplicate-able. So the brilliance of Scream was what Kevin Williamson did commenting on the genre.

**Leigh:** He had to bring a ‘90s irony to the horror genre. He had to look at it through the lens of irony. He couldn’t do something at face value in the ‘90s.

**Craig:** That’s right. He had to essentially say look how silly this has all become.

**Leigh:** We were so ironic in the ‘90s.

**Craig:** God, we were. But also the brilliant move of putting then a non-ironic director in charge of it.

**Leigh:** Yes.

**Craig:** So the marriage of Kevin and Wes – by the way, I don’t know if you ever – did you ever spend time with Wes?

**Leigh:** I actually interviewed him once for a TV show I used to work on in Australia. And he came across as the most genial, nice guy ever.

**Craig:** Like the nicest. And just the last guy in the world you would expect to do–

**Leigh:** Exactly. But you know what? That happens continually in the horror genre. Like every person I meet is like, “Wow, I expected you to be some lunatic dressed like Marilyn Manson.” Everyone I know in the horror community in LA, they’re all so well-adjusted, nice. It almost is in direct contrast to the comedy scene where everyone is morose and depressed.

**Craig:** Terribly depressed.

**Leigh:** And they’re like supposed to make people laugh for a living. There’s some inversion happening there where the funny people are depressed and the horror people making depressing assaultive movies are super happy.

**Craig:** Super happy.

**Leigh:** It can’t be an accident. There must be something about the expulsion of that and the venting of getting that stuff on paper that lets you kind of be the sunny side of things. Whereas in comedy maybe it’s the opposite. It’s like I spend my whole day making people laugh. Don’t fucking tell me that I have to be nice right now.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think probably also you can’t really effectively make people laugh in a repeated way unless you’re miserable. Because that’s what comedy actually is. It’s a repudiation of reality. I mean, and what Kevin did. He loves horror, but also there was a part of him that was like this is ridiculous. Right?

**Leigh:** Yes.

**Craig:** So it’s that. But no one else could do it. Right? He did it.

**Leigh:** And they tried to do it, as with everything else in Hollywood.

**Craig:** Yeah, they copied.

**Leigh:** There came a little glut of copies that lasted a year or two.

**Craig:** Right. And then woo.

**Leigh:** But you know what happens with those trends, we see them all the time, not just in horror but just off the top of my head I’m thinking about a little Hollywood micro trend like body swap movies. The ‘80s. All of a sudden you’ve got Vice Versa. You’ve got Like Father Like Son. And what always happens, and what I love with the benefit of hindsight is when the dust settles a decade or two later you look back and there’s always one movie that stands the test of time. So no one remembers Vice Versa, but everyone still loves Big.

**Craig:** Right.

**Leigh:** And no one remembers Urban Legend – apologies to those horror fans listening right now who are like “I totally remember Urban Legend.” But in general no one remembers that. But Scream still holds up. If we were to put that movie on right now it’s still a great movie. And usually it’s the great ones that kick start a little trend. And like what happened with Saw was I felt like, you know, we made a cool little engine low budget movie. And then it kick-started this trend. And in a way I feel like James Wan and I were sort of retroactively blamed for inventing this torture porn. But a lot of the movies that came in Saw’s wake just weren’t very good movies.

**Craig:** I agree with you. It’s actually a great point. There was a genre that emerged out of Saw that isn’t what Saw is.

**Leigh:** It was a bit more extreme. It was pretty gory.

**Craig:** Well the point of Saw wasn’t like look how much torture I can apply. That wasn’t what was going on there. There was a lesson. Saw to me is more in common with Fincher’s The Game then it does with, I don’t know, whatever the torture porn movies are because I haven’t seen them.

**Leigh:** Yes. Exactly. Whatever.

**Craig:** But then what happens is people watch a movie and they take the wrong lesson, right? Which is you know what people love? Bathrooms and torture. So I’m going to make a movie called Rest Stop. It’s just bathrooms and torture.

**Leigh:** It happens all the time, doesn’t it? People will watch Clerks and producers will be like, “Ah, you know what people like? Cheap camera work and grungy dudes.” And it’s like, no, what they like is great humor and well-written comedy. “No, no, that’s not what they like.” And so you end up getting a glut of Clerks clones that don’t actually resemble that initial sort of thing.

**Craig:** Of course. Because they don’t know. And I always want to say to those people did you know that before Clerks came out? Because if you didn’t, then it’s not true.

**Leigh:** Exactly. Yeah, I mean, I will say that James and I at the time, we were so happy just to have made a film that people saw that none of this had an effect on us. We weren’t ashamed of that torture label because we were so busy celebrating. We were so busy being happy that somebody would let us make a movie.

**Craig:** Happy horror people.

**Leigh:** Yeah, happy horror people. And, you know, it’s funny. I grew up watching franchise horror movies. Every sleepover I ever went to from age 12 to 17 was like Halloween, Wishmaster…

**Craig:** Oh, Wishmaster.

**Leigh:** Candyman.

**Craig:** I’m kind of obsessed with the Wishmaster.

**Leigh:** Me too. Some of those ones that slipped through the net I love. I love Warlock with Julian Sands. That’s a VHS staple.

**Craig:** Oh my god. Warlock is amazing.

**Leigh:** It’s amazing, right?

**Craig:** Yeah.

**Leigh:** Carpenter’s run from 1980 to 1990 to me is flawless. Like even the films he made in that decade that weren’t great were super interesting. But, I mean, he did The Fog, The Thing, Big Trouble in Little China. It was crazy. And I grew up watching those movies. And so when Saw got turned into a franchise and they made Saw 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, I kind of looked at it with affection. Instead of being ashamed of it and being like, “Oh, this studio and these producers have sequelized our baby out of control,” I kind of was like, you know what, there’s some kid at a sleepover right now in some suburb who is watching Saw 4 and he’s loving it. And you know what, godspeed. Go with it. It’s fine.

And I can imagine your listeners saying, “Yeah, well, I bet you love the residual checks, too.” Sure! But the point is that creatively I wasn’t even that mad at it because I was like this is just–

**Craig:** It’s what happens.

**Leigh:** This is the Halloween of this era.

**Craig:** That’s right. It is. And it can go on and on. And you and I were talking before we started rolling, as they say, about how the success of a movie requires a little bit of time. There are movies that explode, people are obsessed with them in the moment, and then weirdly they’re just gone. There are Oscar winners that you’re like, “You win an Oscar,” and…

**Leigh:** I don’t want to know names, but I know the movies you’re talking about.

**Craig:** It’s like let us never speak of this movie again. And then these movies that maybe people look down on or whatever and then in ten or 15, or 20 years people come to you and say, “Oh, no, no, no, I’m obsessed with—“ Like for instance, the Wishmaster movies are not good movies. In a kind of I guess we’ll call it objective level.

**Leigh:** On a base level, right.

**Craig:** There’s mistakes. And there’s goofiness to it. But I’ll watch them because there’s something about the way the Wishmaster guy talks that makes me happy. Like why does he talk like this? I don’t know.

**Leigh:** It’s like the Leprechaun movies. I bet you’re a big fan of Leprechaun in the Hood.

**Craig:** Not that one.

**Leigh:** That’s the one.

**Craig:** Not that one.

**Leigh:** But, you know, that even happens to really good movies. I read an interview with John Carpenter. When The Thing came out it was shredded by critics. They hated it.

**Craig:** Hated it.

**Leigh:** And now it’s seen as a bona fide classic.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**Leigh:** And to me it’s a flawless movie, the survival horror. It had bad timing. It was released in the year of E.T. Everybody was like, “No, aliens are nice, you’re wrong about that.” And for some reason the critics shredded it. And if you look now at the reviews 20, 30 years later, they’re so reverent of that movie.

**Craig:** Well, of course. That’s the joke. The joke is – by the way, in that sense critics are just like producers.

**Leigh:** Right.

**Craig:** It’s easy to see after The Thing is a success that people love that The Thing is a success that people love.

**Leigh:** Exactly.

**Craig:** That’s not hard to do. And so these things do happen over time. But I want to ask you a little bit about the idea of sequels, because you did write two of the sequels to Saw. And you wrote all three of the sequels to Insidious, right?

**Leigh:** Yes. All of the Insidious.

**Craig:** So that’s three Saws, four Insidious. I know a little bit about writing sequels. It happens all the time to me. And I’m kind of curious. Comedy sequels are tough because comedy relies on a certain sort of freshness of premise. When you hear a joke that someone tells it’s funny. They tell it again five minutes later with a slight variation you’re like, “Why are you even talking?”

**Leigh:** Especially with a film like The Hangover where the premise itself was the star.

**Craig:** Kind of, right? It’s like what do you do?

**Leigh:** Guess what? They woke up in another room without knowing what was happening.

**Craig:** I mean, the theory was you can do an episode – it’s like episodes of James Bond. But that’s James Bond’s job. So you’re right. I mean, there’s a difference there. But with horror I feel like maybe sequels aren’t quite as challenging because the engine of fear doesn’t go away. It sort of finds a new person.

**Leigh:** Yeah. I think you’re right there. It’s one of the easier genres to sequelize. Especially since usually the bad guy is the star, so you just bring on the fresh crop. I mean, that’s how they make Nightmare on Elm Street movies. They go, hey guys, here’s the new class that I’m going to chop up.

**Craig:** He said in the trailer, “How sweet. Fresh meat.”

**Leigh:** Yes! Sweet fresh meat. That’s all it is, right? And that especially happened in the ‘80s. And I think as we were saying before that’s where horror really got its bad name by just repeating this trick.

So it is easier to write an installment, but the hard thing is to keep up quality. Like the law of diminishing returns I feel really applies with horror movies. And so with the Saw movies I wrote those first two sequels and I did the best job I could but I remember when I finished writing the third one I was like I’m kind of done here because I don’t have anything new to offer and I really feel like this is just work.

Whereas with the Insidious films I’ve tried to actually keep up the quality or I’ve made such a conscious decision to avoid the pitfalls of diminishing returns. I’ve tried to treat each new Insidious film like this is just an original that I’m writing that just happens to be connected to another movie. But sequels are funny because at a certain point you’re living your life right, you need to eat and earn money, so you’re like sequels are the one area, especially when you’re making independent films, where they pay you.

**Craig:** They pay you.

**Leigh:** They say we’ll pay you. You have this one chip on the board and, you know, fans or critics might come out and say, “Oh, he’s a sellout. He did all these Saw sequels.” And that’s their right to say that. And they shouldn’t have to think about those extraneous circumstances. But I’m living my life. And I’m like, you know what, it would be nice to be set up – I remember someone saying a quote to me once. Do one for the wallet, one for the soul. And so I would do a sequel and it would be like my yearly paycheck. And then I would go off and write two movies on spec. And I only could write those movies because I had done the sequel.

**Craig:** There is no selling out. There’s just you’re funding what you care about.

**Leigh:** Yeah. It is.

**Craig:** You’re funding what you care about.

**Leigh:** It is. It’s like this project you do–

**Craig:** The truth is that you can’t ignore the reality of, “Listen, you did an amazing job on Saw. Would you like to do another Saw?” You know what, no, I don’t do that. “OK, well we’re going to pay somebody else a lot of money to do that then.” Now somebody else is making a lot of – and also doing it wrong. Because you have your way.

**Leigh:** Right. I know what you mean. And, you know, an interesting thing happened with me also because I felt like I was learning on the job. The first Saw movie — I wrote the first draft when I was 23 and, I mean, obviously a different person than I am now. But I didn’t know anything. I read a screenplay book and I loved movies. But was completely unqualified to write one. And then it got made. And so James and I found ourselves in this situation of like being totally naïve. It wasn’t like I wrote 20 scripts and then did Saw.

A lot of people get their bad scripts out of the way before they start. And maybe someone listening right now is thinking like, “Oh god, woe is me. Your first movie got produced and it was a hit movie.” But it was an interesting situation to be in because it was very unexpected for us. And so when I wrote those Saw sequels I feel like I was learning the job. I was like hang on, so how do these things work? And obviously I haven’t stopped learning. Every screenplay that I write I’m still learning. But back then I was really like still getting it together.

So it’s been interesting to kind of look back at my resume to actually see the growth not just on paper but on film and go, “Ah.”

**Craig:** We learn on the job.

**Leigh:** You learn on the job. And James and I were both thrust into this thing of like, whoa, we’re on the scene with our first movie. It’s kind of like a band whose first album is a runaway hit and all of a sudden they don’t have years to build up their–

**Craig:** The terrifying sophomore slump. Like how do we match this?

**Leigh:** A band that toughs it out in small bars, by the time they have their hit album their skin is thick, they’ve learned a lot of lessons. We learned all our lessons at the cold place. Like for instance Dead Silence you mentioned. So what happened with Saw was we made this movie, it was a hit, and then as you know you do a little victory lap of Los Angeles. Sit in a lot of offices. A lot of people named Chad give you a Diet Coke. “Love your movie. My god.”

**Craig:** “Amazing movie. Visionaries.”

**Leigh:** “My assistant saw it. I haven’t seen it. But my god, he tells me it’s amazing.”

**Craig:** “But I’ve seen how much it made.”

**Leigh:** “I’ve seen how much it made.” And so we did all those meetings and we were having fun, like ooh, people are telling us we made a good film. And then we signed a deal with Universal and we made this movie Dead Silence. And that’s where we had this experience that you were talking about earlier of all the people – oh, but you have to incorporate our ideas.

And I feel like we learned a lot on the job. We made a movie that was bad and it wasn’t a hit movie. And neither James nor I are really proud of it. But when I look back I’m like thank god that movie happened so I learned what not to do.

**Craig:** Right.

**Leigh:** It kicked us up a few levels away from–

**Craig:** It has taken me, and I’ve been incredibly impervious to those lessons. But I’m slowly starting to learn them. Slowly starting to learn.

**Leigh:** It’s really tough to learn.

**Craig:** It is. They’re tough to learn. But it does seem to me that you have learned things because – so my daughter is a big Insidious fan. And we were watching, I can’t remember which one it was, I think it was maybe 3 where–

**Leigh:** It’s the one I directed.

**Craig:** The one you directed. Where somebody knocks on a door and she freaks out because it’s answering the question of something that happened in the movie prior where someone heard like a ghostly knock and it made them change.

**Leigh:** Oh yes, yes, yes.

**Craig:** So it seems to me that you in making the Insidious movies you maybe had a franchise in mind. I mean, when you started were you thinking big?

**Leigh:** No, not at all.

**Craig:** It just happened?

**Leigh:** Yeah. In fact any film I write – even to this day I’m always thinking in the back of my mind this is terrible. It’s not going to get made. No one is going to care. You’re a joke. Move back to Australia. And, you know, get a teaching job.

**Craig:** We’re going to get to that part of the podcast shortly. That’s where we conclude.

**Leigh:** We’ll get to the self-hate. Exactly.

And so I never think of sequels because I feel like planning a sequel even in my mind is an assumption of success that would anger the moviegoers. I don’t want to jinx the whole process. I’m way too superstitious. A lot of people said to James and I, back in the Saw days, they said, “Well you really left that first movie open didn’t you for a sequel?” And we would always say, “No, we literally closed the door.” The movie closed with a door being shut. And we thought that was a great closed ending, like a cool twist, cut to black, done.

**Craig:** That’s it.

**Leigh:** And the Monday after the movie came out, they didn’t wait very long. It might not have even been 12pm yet. The phone call came and we got a lesson in Hollywood commerce where the producers, god love them, they said, “All right, let’s start talking sequel.”

**Craig:** Yep.

**Leigh:** And we’re like, Huh? And they said, “Sequel. Well look at the numbers. We got to make another one.” And it kind of took us by surprise. I didn’t think the call would come on Monday. I thought there would be a few months of drinking Mai Tais.

**Craig:** Now it comes Friday night.

**Leigh:** Oh man!

**Craig:** Because they’ve gotten their box office stuff down to the point where sometimes it happens even before. Sometimes they’re looking at tracking and they go, “Oh, the movie is coming out in a month, but we should start talking about the sequel.”

**Leigh:** You know what’s interesting? You’re asking me this question the Monday after a movie I wrote and directed came out.

**Craig:** Which we’re getting to.

**Leigh:** Upgrade, yes. But all the tracking was not so good. But everyone was saying it’s OK. It’s a limited release. We’re not spending a lot of marketing. You can’t expect to.

And it’s been interesting to – all I want is for the tracking to be wrong. Not even for the sake of my movie. I just want the tracking people to be wrong.

**Craig:** It’s very often correct.

**Leigh:** I know. Frustratingly so.

**Craig:** Because humans are not unpredictable. I mean, yeah, but let’s talk a little bit about Upgrade. I want to lead into a lot of the creative things, but since you brought up the business aspect of it, my question is – and perhaps this is just Pollyannaish, but I don’t know, does it even matter? For movies that come out of this new horror model where they cost less than $5 million typically, as did Upgrade I believe?

**Leigh:** Yeah. Upgrade was around 5 American. But then we shot it in Australia, so you add some money to the gross with like tax rebates and exchange rates, etc. etc.

**Craig:** So I mean it’s in that zone. Very small budget. Who cares – I mean, yes, I would care in the sense of it would be amazing if it was one of those things where they put out–

**Leigh:** It was a Get Out or whatever.

**Craig:** Yeah. Get Out cost $3 million and it made $3 billion. OK, that’s amazing.

**Leigh:** And it was nominated for Best Picture.

**Craig:** And it’s nominated for Best Picture. It’s awesome.

**Leigh:** That wouldn’t be bad, would it Craig?

**Craig:** No. I don’t know what it’s like. But sure. I’m going to guess, no, it would not be bad.

**Leigh:** I’m going to guess it wouldn’t suck.

**Craig:** I’m going to guess that it would be OK. But it seems to me that at that budget level, and also with the way the horror community can function, who cares? Like, OK, whether it does this or that, we know that these movies are then discovered by people and take a life of their own on. So, I’m just kind of curious if that’s something that you have internalized or if the low budget horror business is as concerned with that opening weekend as the big movie business is?

**Leigh:** Well, look, I think the math of what Blumhouse does, this low budget horror filming, is it meant to be self-sustaining. You can make a movie for $3 million and if it only grosses $10 million you’re a hit.

**Craig:** You’re a hit.

**Leigh:** And that is Jason Blum’s model and to his credit he really sticks to that. He does not waver from it. He is not interested in making $30 to $40 million movies that need a star and everybody is crossing their fingers with a bottle of Xanax on the desk the weekend it comes out. He likes this model because he can make ten movies a year and if just one of them is a Get Out that movie pays for all the rest of them. Multiple times over.

**Craig:** That year and the next year and the next year.

**Leigh:** And the next year. So, he loves that. What it allows him to do is throw mud at the wall creatively. He can take a chance. Nobody would say to Jordan Peele, “Yes, comedy person, we’ll make your horror film.” It’s a crazy thing. Whereas Jason can.

**Craig:** Your race-based horror film.

**Leigh:** Yes. Exactly. And he had already been around town and everybody was like, no. Jason however is like, “Sure. Let’s do it.”

And so I think it does work well. I think for the filmmakers having seen what those movies can do – in fact, we’re living in a really weird time for movies. I mean, firstly they’re becoming so antiquated compared to like TV shows. You go to any dinner party in Los Angeles, the conversation is not what movie have you seen. It’s what are you watching?

**Craig:** Correct.

**Leigh:** TV is now the ruler. And you’re competing with so many other platforms that you weren’t – when Saw came out in 2004 it was movies and TV and a bit of gaming. Now you’re competing with people’s Snapchat accounts for their eyes. So movies are in a weird time. And it’s getting to a place where the only movies that get theatrically released are either mega budget superhero movies, or low budget horror movies.

**Craig:** I’ve noticed.

**Leigh:** Yeah. You’re either Get Out or Insidious, or you are The Avengers. And everything in between has now become an HBO series. So I think what happens is when you’re making one of those movies you’re hoping to be the Get Out. You aren’t satisfied with the nice little win. You’re going for the gold.

**Craig:** But I think you should be. I think you should be. I think that that becomes a dangerous game in and of itself. And in that game you start to see the seeds of destruction for the model. Because if Jason Blum were to start thinking that way he would start chasing. And kind of the system is, look, what happens is what happens.

**Leigh:** Right.

**Craig:** But if Get Out is the rare – I mean, it is rare – and it is sort of the, OK, it’s hard to do better than that, right?

**Leigh:** Right.

**Craig:** But there are these other definitions of success. Again, five years from now this may just take on this incredible life and, I mean, and it happens in comedy. Mike Judge, Office Space, right? So everyone has seen Office Space. Office Space is sort of for a generation it’s like Animal House. It’s just seen and it’s a touchstone and people quote it. It was a bomb.

**Leigh:** Bomb.

**Craig:** Not just a bomb. Like a smoking crater bomb joke. Like ”Oh my god, those idiots made a movie called Office Space, dumb-dumbs, and look who they put it in.”

**Leigh:** Yeah, exactly. Ron Livingston. And isn’t that – something happened during the video store era where movies would suddenly have this second shot at life. Same with Anchorman. When that came out it was like bomb.

**Craig:** Whiff.

**Leigh:** And then all of a sudden you look around and you’re like, wait, how come I know every line in Anchorman and so does everyone else around me?

**Craig:** Austin Powers.

**Leigh:** Yeah.

**Craig:** The first Austin Powers was a bomb.

**Leigh:** Really?

**Craig:** That movie cost like – I can’t remember what the numbers were. It was something like it cost $45 million and it made like $25 million. But then in video people became obsessed with it.

**Leigh:** And I’m wondering does that even happen as much anymore in the streaming version of things as it did in the video store era?

**Craig:** No, my guess is because there’s a lot less money involved. But now what happens is Netflix may see, OK, well these people are complaining that their Adam Sandler movie costs this much money to make and it only made this much theatrically. But what we know is our viewing base loves Adam Sandler. And they’re obsessed with Adam Sandler. They watch it a billion times over. We don’t send a lot of money over apparently, but they – so why don’t we just make the Adam Sandler movies? And they do.

**Leigh:** He’s almost just going directly to his audience.

**Craig:** He is.

**Leigh:** I’m going to talk exactly to the people that love me–

**Craig:** It’s not almost.

**Leigh:** And I don’t want to sell to anyone else.

**Craig:** And they remove all of the – the things that we love about the theatrical experience, right, being in that big room, and the lights go down, and it’s communal, and it’s an evening out also requires getting people to drive to it and park, which means marketing. And all that goes away with the Netflix thing.

But see brilliantly I think with your model, more people are going to buy tickets than what it costs. Upgrade will make money.

**Leigh:** Yeah, I think. And you know I read this David Fincher quote where he said, “The Oscars should be held ten years after the fact.”

**Craig:** Yes!

**Leigh:** We should be doing the Oscars for the movies that came out in 2000 in 2010. Because only then will we truly know what the best picture is.

**Craig:** Correct.

**Leigh:** Can you imagine, Goodfellas would have actually won Best Picture if it was done that way.

**Craig:** No question.

**Leigh:** Wouldn’t have been Dances with Wolves. That always happens with the Oscars is you look back and you’re like every now and again they get it right, but you’re like, oh man, clearly this was the best movie of 2014.

And, you know, that is a nice shelf life for a movie and with something like Upgrade I’m seeing a lot of great word of mouth online. Now we live in this time where you can put your movie out and instantly jump on the Internet to see what people think of it.

**Craig:** Correct.

**Leigh:** And I don’t love social media, but one of the great things about it is getting that instant, in the moment, feedback directly from the audiences. And I see this great word of mouth. And I think about what you’re talking about. And I’m like, you know what, I’d be so happy if this became one of those five, ten years from now genre staples that everyone goes, “How good was that movie?”

**Craig:** And I also feel like there are movies that everybody feels good about. And then there are movies that a few people feel great about. Like I feel great about Buckaroo Banzai. Like I do. It’s a big deal for me. Not many people, even now as a “cult film,” not many people have seen Buckaroo Banzai. And when it came out nobody saw it. I think it was me and like–

**Leigh:** Yeah. It was you in the theater with two others.

**Craig:** The family of the people that made it.

**Leigh:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So let’s talk about, because Upgrade is a departure for you in a sense.

**Leigh:** Definitely.

**Craig:** It’s the second movie that you’ve directed.

**Leigh:** Yep.

**Craig:** But it’s not really horror. In my mind it’s sci-fi.

**Leigh:** It’s kind of sci-fi action. What I wanted to do there — this was kind of an interesting problem for Blumhouse. So I had done the Insidious movies with Jason Blum and it was great. But it was a family and a house. It was all very budget-friendly.

What I wanted to do was see if I could make a sci-fi movie within that model. Because I loved the creative freedom of it. I loved the fact that they didn’t have time to waste and spend three years in development.

**Craig:** Right.

**Leigh:** But I didn’t want to just make another movie about a family in a house that’s being haunted by a demon. So I looked to movies from my youth such as the original Terminator. If you go back and study that movie–

**Craig:** $3 million, maybe?

**Leigh:** I know. And actually there’s a bond place, a movie insurance bond place on Sunset that has the budget for The Terminator on the wall in a frame. It’s one sheet of paper.

**Craig:** Amazing.

**Leigh:** It breaks down the $3 million, all typed. It’s a beautiful thing. I should have stolen it off the wall.

**Craig:** And it’s great.

**Leigh:** That movie, if you study that movie they dole out the science fiction so judiciously that they pull a little bit of sleight of hand on the audience. You think it’s a much bigger movie than it is. And Arnie, he is the special effect.

**Craig:** Correct. He’s the special effect.

**Leigh:** You buy that he’s a robot. But they really don’t show you that he’s a robot until the end. And so I used that as a model to say to Jason Blum and to everyone at Blumhouse, “We can make a sci-fi movie in this Blumhouse model if we make it like this original Terminator.” And I finally convinced them. And we went to Australia and we made this movie. We had a car chase. We had fight scenes. And it was all done run-and-gun. It was madness. It was like we were trying to shot The Matrix with the budget of Insidious, which I should have had my head examined trying to do that.

But somehow I was insane enough to try it. And I’m really proud of the movie we got. I think the crew in Australia was so dedicated that they didn’t laugh when I said, “I want to do The Matrix for this price.” They were like, sure, OK.

**Craig:** I feel like that’s a very Australian thing.

**Leigh:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** Someone says something crazy, like I want to jump and touch the moon, and they’re like, “All right. OK, mate.”

**Leigh:** Mate, I’ll tell you, the best example of that was our stunt coordinator. He’s a legend in Australia. Legendary stunt man. To give you an idea of how legendary he is, he worked on the first Mad Max film.

**Craig:** Nice.

**Leigh:** Before there were stunt men in Australia. That was just George Miller saying, “Hey mate, ride that motor bike into that wall.”

**Craig:** The crazy person with the–

**Leigh:** Yeah, the crazy person.

**Craig:** That wasn’t a stunt man. It was just some lunatic.

**Leigh:** No it wasn’t. It was just some lunatic. So Chris was the lunatic. And this guy, salt of the earth, he’s the type of Aussie that Americans think of when they think of Australians. I’m not that guy. He’s a guy who is holding a wild animal on a TV show. And I would say to him, say Chris – he’s so Australian that I would say, “Chris, can I have one car smash into another car and then that car smashes into another car and then that car smashes into another car and they all go sideways into the wall in unison.” And instead of saying, “Oh, I don’t know. I mean, we’ll have to have a meeting,” he would go, “Oh yeah, fuck yeah. Yeah, yeah mate.”

**Craig:** He was so excited.

**Leigh:** He was like, yeah fuck, give it a go, hey.

**Craig:** Give it a go! What’s the worse that happens? Four people die?

**Leigh:** Yeah, people could die. And I really think you’re right–

**Craig:** I wish I were Australian.

**Leigh:** I think that Aussie spirit of like, “Yeah, mate, we’ll give it a go, why not?” It really helped this movie because we shouldn’t have been able to do it. And I feel like if we tried to do it over here there would have been a lot of people saying, “Uh-uh.”

**Craig:** It is fascinating the culture of these things is remarkable. That there’s like a culture in the United States of – well, we’ll just call it like whatever they consider best practices of production.

**Leigh:** Right.

**Craig:** And then there’s European best practices which I have found, because Chernobyl is a European production, are very restrictive. I mean, they’re very, very like “Don’t hurt anyone.” And obviously you don’t want to hurt anybody, but sometimes it’s like the scene, we have a stapler, so “Everyone the stapler is live. If you are concerned about the stapler please call the following number.”

**Leigh:** Then you have Asian films like Hong Kong movies and Thai movies where it’s like, “So we need you to jump from this building to the other and we couldn’t afford any safety nets, so you really have to make it.” And the guy is like, OK. That’s the opposite. Australia is somewhere in the middle. We’re not quite Europe where it’s like Stapler Live, and we’re not quite Asia where it’s like, yep, I need you to jump from the helicopter into the shark’s mouth.

But there is a good sort of for lack of a better term Mad Max spirit of like I’ll give it a go.

**Craig:** I mean, watching the latest Mad Max movie you just got a sense that part of the reason it works isn’t that they’re doing crazy stunts. It’s that they’re so willingly doing crazy stunts. Like the guys on the poles want to be on the poles. They’re just thrilled.

**Leigh:** You could call it like a macho culture thing, or that Australian thing, but there is this crazy thing of like I’ll do the – you always go to a party in Australia, I mean, I’ve lost count of the number of times growing up that someone will be like, you know, it’s like, “Quick, come in the living room. Mac is going to hold his head in the fish tank for one minute.” And just like who is going to do the stupidest thing possible at this moment? And then that moment of course is well suited to be a stunt man. That’s the whole job.

**Craig:** I mean, it’s that great line at the end of Kung Fu Hustle. Like, you know, could be a doctor or a lawyer. Probably a stunt man.

**Leigh:** Probably a stunt man. Yeah, yeah.

**Craig:** Probably a stunt man. So, the choice of directing. I know people always ask this of writers. Why are you directing? But you have an interesting circumstance in that for a long time you were partnered with a director. And then somewhere along the way you said, “OK, now I would like to do this.” What changed for you? And the premise of this question is this: I don’t want to – I’ve directed. I’m just like I don’t want to do it. I like other people doing it. It’s so exhausting. And also I end up caring so much in a weird way that my head hurts and then I get paralyzed. Because it’s like I’m so intense about everything. Whereas if I’m not directing, somebody else is directing, I can kind of relax a little bit and breathe. You know?

**Leigh:** Right.

**Craig:** You obviously don’t have that. Did you always have the drive?

**Leigh:** I think so. I mean, I went to film school to learn to direct. I happened to meet James Wan at film school and I guess it was like, you know, you go to music school and you meet John Lennon. You’re like, you know what, I’m going to team up with that guy. He was a really good filmmaker. And so when we finished film school and faced the cold winds of reality I said to James, I just thought there was strength in numbers. Like we should team up and I’ll write and you’re direct. And I’m so glad that we did that because that’s why I’m sitting here. But in the back of my mind there was always that film student that was like, well, you’ll do it one day.

But I was perfectly happy. And I think directing was kind of forced on me in the end because James went off to do these huge tent pole movies. And it was like a little bit of a – almost a breakup. Like a benevolent breakup where I was like, OK, so who am I without James if I’m not one half of this duo? And I was like this is the time to direct. And Jason Blum kind of shoved me into directing the fourth Insidious film.

And I thought it was going to be what you described, just a constant stress. And I actually enjoyed it because I felt like – funnily enough I felt like directing was an extension of writing. You know, when you sit down at your desk you write a line like, “He walks into the room, papers in hand.” That’s all you write. But when you direct you get to decide what color the wallpaper in the room is and what’s the guy wearing when he walks in the room. All the things that you didn’t write down. Is he in a bad mood when he walks in or a good mood? The papers he’s holding. You’ll have set decorators coming up to you saying how many papers is he holding, ten or 100?

All those little micro decisions, I actually enjoy it because I feel like I’m coloring in between the lines of the screenplay. So the screenplay was the structure of the building and directing is putting the stucco, you know, to use a wonky metaphor it’s like I enjoy the feeling of being the last decision maker as opposed to watching someone else go, “Well, he’s carrying two papers.” And I’m sitting there as the writer going, “I was thinking 100, but whatever.”

**Craig:** See, television is fun because I can be like, “Mm, you know, I think it would be more like 20,” and they go OK. That’s interesting.

**Leigh:** But that’s directing. When you talk about TV, I feel like what you’re doing in TV has a foot in the directing camp as a writer.

**Craig:** Well, it’s producing, but the director is directing. I mean, there is an enormous amount there that they’re doing that is what they do. But like anything else I think any director is going to, I mean, good ones I think are always listening to everybody. So, the person that comes to you a lot of times will say how many papers. And you’ll say three. And then they’ll say, OK, just so you know that’s what this is going to look like. We’re kind of thinking it’s going to look a little weak. You know what I mean? Everybody is kind of–

**Leigh:** But I also love that about film sets, that collaborative nature. I feel like the director gets too much credit for the fact that–

**Craig:** I do, too.

**Leigh:** It is. It’s just crazy. And then maybe they get the blame when things go badly.

**Craig:** There is that.

**Leigh:** I love how collaborative it is. It’s funny, one of the best things I’ve ever done in terms of directing was go to the Writers Guild for a seminar. I opened my email one day and there’s an email from the Writers Guild with a subject heading “Are you a writer who wants to direct?” And I’m like, why yes I am.

And so I RSVP’d for it. A month goes by. I forget about it. And then I get this email saying don’t forget your seminar is coming up this Saturday at the Writers Guild. And I’m like, oh shit, I forgot about that.

So I go along and I remember it was raining. It was one of those rare LA days where the rain is pouring. And I’m thinking why am I going to this seminar? This is going to be some guy who directs wedding videos trying to tell me some crappy metaphor like directing is like capturing a firefly.

And then I get there and I swear I learned more in that five-hour seminar at the Writers Guild then I did in three years of film school.

**Craig:** Who taught it?

**Leigh:** It was Billy Ray. John Wells. And Nicole Holofcener.

**Craig:** OK.

**Leigh:** Already I’m like, OK, so I got my notepad out–

**Craig:** Also all three of them are incredibly pragmatic people. They are crafts people. I mean, they’re artists, too. But they understand the craft.

**Leigh:** But you know what was great? I couldn’t believe how practical and pragmatic each piece of advice they gave. Almost to the point of obviousness. Like one thing Billy Ray said, they talked for an hour or two, and then we split up and we had some time with each of them. And Billy Ray said at the end of each day you go up to every individual crew member and say thank you. Now you’re not going to get all of them, because some people will leave. And you’ll be running around like a chicken with its head cut off. But every day.

Which some people might think, well, that’s obvious courtesy. But if he hadn’t have said that I probably wouldn’t have done that. But I was furiously noting everything down in my notepad and I carried the notepad from that seminar around on my first film set like a bible.

**Craig:** Wow.

**Leigh:** And I would read it every morning. There’s a list of rules. And you best believe I ran around at the end of every day shaking, out of breath, like thank you. Thank you so much. By about the fourth day the crew was looking at me like, “You know you don’t have to do this every day.”

**Craig:** Yeah. Like the only other person that’s ever done this is that weirdo Billy Ray.

**Leigh:** Exactly. Has this guy been hanging out with Billy Ray? But it was amazing. At the wrap party two, to a man, everyone and a woman, every one of the crew was like, “Oh, we so appreciated that.” It was so amazing to get that from the Writers Guild. Like the Writers Guild just paid for itself in one hit just with this amazing seminar to have access to these people.

**Craig:** That’s great.

**Leigh:** And one of the things they talked about a lot is dispelling this myth of the director as auteur and the captain of the ship. And this whole like General Patton mythology of like I must lead my soldiers up the hill. It’s like, no, you’re a traffic cop and you’re helping technicians to make something. And if you come at it from that angle you don’t need to scream and yell. And here’s the words that no one wants to believe. It can be fun directing. It doesn’t have to be this like soul-shredding thing.

**Craig:** I think the thing that holds me back is just my general impatience.

**Leigh:** Yeah right.

**Craig:** Because the actual process of making movies is so slow. It’s just slow. And I get bored.

**Leigh:** And also takes up a year of your life.

**Craig:** And then there’s that.

**Leigh:** From like script to sound mixing stage you’ve just marked out a year. You could write four scripts in a year.

**Craig:** And the truth is I love the beginning and the end. I love writing and I love editing. It’s the stuff in the middle that I’m like can’t you just give me the footage?

**Leigh:** That’s why it sounds like TV is perfect for you right now.

**Craig:** It kind of is.

**Leigh:** Because that is exactly where the writer is working the most. Yeah, see, I mean, I think it’s amazing that there are people out there who just want to write. I think it’s so great because that’s the only way you’re going to get great writers is people dedicated to that. Like in Australia for example most people who write a script want to direct it. We don’t have an industry of writers like you have in the US. And when I came to the US I was just so in awe of this strong, healthy industry of writers who wanted to be better writers. And I definitely was in that world for a long time before I directed.

**Craig:** Think of how many scripts you wrote because you weren’t directing.

**Leigh:** Totally.

**Craig:** That’s the big difference I think just in terms of mastering screenwriting is if you’re just screenwriting you get way more practice at it.

**Leigh:** 100%.

**Craig:** And it takes practice.

**Leigh:** Exactly. Any time anybody says to me what’s your advice to screenwriter I just say write. You’re going to learn on the job. Watch great movies and read a lot of scripts and just keep writing. Your 20th script will be good and you’ll surprise yourself, but you need to actually do the work.

**Craig:** You got to climb up that hill. Well, why don’t we answer some listener questions before we wrap things up, because you know what? People deserve your wisdom. You’re obviously smart.

**Leigh:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** I’ll read them out loud.

**Leigh:** I’m not going to answer that one about how I maintain my physique. That’s not something I want to talk about on this podcast.

**Craig:** Tim from LA writes, “How do you maintain your physique?”

**Leigh:** Well, Tim…

**Craig:** No, this is a question I think you’ll have some good insight for. So, Tim from LA writes, he says, “I have the good fortune of being writing partners with an up-and-coming director.” All right. Sounds familiar.

**Leigh:** Sounds familiar.

**Craig:** “Whom is represented at one of the biggest talent agencies in Hollywood.” I think that should be “who” Tim. And that’s a tricky one, but I think it’s who. Regardless. “Our first feature script is making the rounds and we feel really good about its chances. I’m also writing scripts on my own. My writing partner got signed as a director based on his short films and music videos that he made prior to us partnering up. I’ve never spoken to anyone at this agency, nor have I signed any documents, but they have been sending out a script with my name on it. Are they technically my agency, too, or should I be pursuing representation with a different agency? Is it common for someone in a writing partnership to have a different agent for their solo work? That seems like a conflict of interest to me. I would love to hear your opinion on how I should proceed with this once my script is done.”

**Leigh:** Huh. That is a good question. It’s a little bit of a conundrum because they are going out there and effectively selling your product, but not directly on your behalf. If this were me, and you can weigh in Craig, I would probably sit down with that agency and say, “Listen, you represent my friend. But you’re taking my script out. What is your interest in me as a client? Because if not I’m going to go and get an agent.” I would go to them. I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing to have the same agent as your friend.

**Craig:** Right.

**Leigh:** I had the same agent as James Wan, so in my experience my version of your story is the agency, Paradigm, signed us both. And the same agent was both of our agent. So some could say is there a conflict of interest? I haven’t found it to be so because ultimately an agent wants all of their clients to do well. They don’t sign people that they don’t want. So I don’t think it’s a bad thing for his friend’s agency to sign him. But he needs to get some clarity from them real fast on whether they’re interested. Because if they’re not interested in signing him, which would be weird, they’re taking your script out, he should get himself an agent as quickly as possible because if this movie starts to get made and starts picking up steam and he doesn’t have anyone in his corner, he’s in trouble.

**Craig:** I totally agree. And also if they’re sending his script out, the script that he’s written with this writer-director, and he’s not represented by the agency that means that he’s not paying commission on it. I’m pretty sure that the agency thinks that they do represent him. That’s like my suspicion already.

But the person I would probably start talking with first is the writing partner and say, “Listen, you know I do solo work. I want to be represented with you. Basically make a proposal. I’d like for us to share an agent for the work that we do together. And I’d like to stay in that agency and either have that same agent be my solo representative or have another agent handle my solo work. It’s at the same agency.” Probably makes sense to have it be the same person. And then talk with the agency about it. And say, listen, fair question: are you interested in representing my solo work?

My guess is they would say yeah, because what does it cost them?

**Leigh:** Well the problem is if they’re not representing him and they’re sending his script out, my bet is they’re leaning pretty heavily on their client when they talk to producers.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**Leigh:** They’re probably not even mentioning this guy. So they’re like, “Oh, my client wrote this script with some other guy.” They would probably be painting a picture that it’s the friend’s script. And so he needs to–

**Craig:** Advocate.

**Leigh:** Have someone there putting his part of it up. But always honesty is the best policy with agents. Like if and when he does meet with the agency say I’m only interested in signing with you if you’re a fan of mine. Forget my friend.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. And I think being honest and open about these things is exactly what you do.

**Leigh:** It never hurts.

**Craig:** Yeah. And don’t be scared. There’s nothing to be scared about. You don’t have to invest any high drama into the question. It’s a pretty easy question.

**Leigh:** Totally.

**Craig:** But it seems to me the path of least resistance is, yeah, for them to share an agent.

**Leigh:** Yeah.

**Craig:** You got time for one more question?

**Leigh:** Yes. Of course.

**Craig:** Let’s do it. Grace in Burbank writes, “How do you get your physique?” No, she writes, “I’m a screenwriter and…” so many people are fascinated by your physique. Most of our viewers.

**Leigh:** It is something that doesn’t happen just by accident.

**Craig:** No. It’s obviously a lot of hard work.

**Leigh:** It is. And it’s worth it. It’s worth it.

**Craig:** You and Hemsworth both. And when I say Hemsworth I mean all of them.

**Leigh:** Yeah. I’m sort of all the Hemsworths put together.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**Leigh:** Not the Hemsworths we know. The Hemsworths that live in Boronia. I went to high school with them.

**Craig:** The Boronia Hemsworths.

**Leigh:** The Boronia Hemsworths.

**Craig:** They’re Bogans?

**Leigh:** Yeah. Bogans.

**Craig:** “I’m a screenwriter and director and I’ll be shooting my first feature soon.” Sounds familiar. “I would like to hire someone to do a punch-up pass to expand the comedy potential. I’m big on the drama, not so much the comedy. I know that this is common in the industry and that generally the writer hired is not credited, meaning the punch-up writer is not credited. My question is more about the ethics of being recognized or nominated or awards if that hired writer isn’t credited. I know Craig has mentioned doing this for scripts, and you guys have talked about weekly work in this area, so I wonder how you felt about it. Does the industry typically know when something like Bridesmaids had punch-up writers? And how do you feel about it? If I can find someone I’m thinking I’ll have this person sign an NDA. Is that reasonable and ethical in your opinion?”

Do you guys do punch-ups for horror?

**Leigh:** No. Not really. Punch-up, it is sort of the province of comedy, but it’s also the province of studios. Studios have the money and the resources to bring in someone like say Craig Mazin and pay them to do the work. And the money, Charlie Sheen’s, what is his quote about prostitutes? He says I pay them to leave.

**Craig:** Yes. You don’t have to pay them to have sex, you pay them to–

**Leigh:** You pay them to leave. The studio is paying these punch-up writers to come in, do their work, and then leave without saying anything. I’m assuming, maybe I heard incorrectly, she’s making an independent film?

**Craig:** It just says a first film. But I’m going to suspect independent.

**Leigh:** Let’s say it’s independent. You’re not probably going to have the money to pay someone properly to come in and do a punch-up. So I would find the funniest person you know, or writer, why not give them a credit? Why make them sign an NDA, unless you’re adamant that you take sole writing credit? If you’re directing the movie, I don’t think people look down on it. Usually people don’t know. What people look down on in the film industry is if somebody got screwed over.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**Leigh:** And those stories can filter through. So if this were me, I would bring on somebody and I would credit them. And I would give them a credit on the movie, an independent film.

**Craig:** For me it depends on what they’re doing. So, a traditional punch-up or like a roundtable, Grace, is where five writers will sit around a table and for four or five hours just talk through the movie, toss out some jokes. The jokes tend to be somewhat limited, dialogue based. Although inevitably there are some story suggestions, character suggestions. I mean, writing gets done.

I did a roundtable for a movie, and I don’t talk about the names of them, but I said, look, there’s a missing scene. It should be something like this and here’s what it would sort of go like. And that’s in the movie.

**Leigh:** Great.

**Craig:** The lines of it and all of it. I didn’t write it down, but that’s – these things do come out of these things. None of us expect credit for that. In fact, Writers Guild-wise we’re not eligible for credit because you’re working as like a five-person team or something like that. It just doesn’t work that you’re eligible.

**Leigh:** But you get paid for that punch-up.

**Craig:** You get paid for the punch-up. So here’s what it comes down to, Grace. The question is one of expectation. If you say to people, listen, this is a traditional punch-up. You come in. You do the work. You’re paid this much money. And that’s it. There’s no credit involved or anything like that. That’s an upfront deal. That’s an expectation. And how much can you do in one day? I don’t think anyone in one day can do enough to qualify for authorship.

**Leigh:** For a whole credit. Right.

**Craig:** So the question I guess does the industry typically know when something is – everything in comedy gets a punch-up table. Nobody ever is like, oh my god, the reason Bridesmaids is a hit is because Jimmy came in and had that great one-liner about whatever. It doesn’t work that way. That’s not why we love movies.

**Leigh:** Well, I guess then for Grace it comes down to making sure that person understands it. And being able to compensate them. Being able to find the money. It’s a different thing if you’re like come in and punch up my movie–

**Craig:** For free.

**Leigh:** I can’t give you anything. And you’re not going to get any credit.

**Craig:** No. Then that’s not ethical. Then that’s – professional writers should be paid for their work. Signing an NDA, I mean, we don’t do it because we just generally as a professional code. And per the Writers Guild, it’s one of our rules, if you work on a movie and you don’t have credit on the movie don’t talk about it.

Now, a lot of writers do violate that. I will see writers in their bios it will say, “And also was an uncredited writer on blah-blah-blah.” And I’m like then were you?

**Leigh:** Sounds like you’re credited now.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly. Like, I mean, I don’t ever do that. Ever. I think it’s just–

**Leigh:** But if Grace is working in the independent world and she thinks things might get sticky, maybe an NDA might help.

**Craig:** That’s the problem. In the indie world you may need that NDA.

**Leigh:** There’s plenty of horror stories about someone coming out of the woodwork later with independent films and saying, “Well, actually I need to get some of those profits because I had a big part in it.”

**Craig:** Well, the one thing that we definitely sign is all of our work away. So in Hollywood you come in for a roundtable, you have a full wad of contract paper. And it basically says anything you say or do in this room belongs to us.

**Leigh:** Do you enjoy doing those punch-up sessions where you sit around a table with five other writers and kind of–?

**Craig:** Depends on the movie and the writers. I did one for a Disney movie and there were four other writers, and I loved all four of them, and we had a great day. And we helped the movie. Not in any significant – and I always think to myself if they hadn’t done it the movie still would have been great. It would have been a big hit. All we’re there to do is like add maybe a little bit of pixie dust to it here or there.

But then the rough ones are the ones where someone says, “OK, we have a movie in trouble. It’s shot, right. We’re not about to shoot it. It’s shot. Come in, watch it, and then let’s all sit around a table and figure out how to save this patient’s life.” And that can be really tough.

**Leigh:** You have to throw in lines that they have to somehow wedge in with ADR looking at the back of someone’s head.

**Craig:** You can’t. Any time anyone ever says we’re going to save this movie with ADR, you don’t want me there. Because you’re delusional. And I’m not. Yeah.

**Leigh:** It’s so social though. I like that about – I always think of writing as such a lonely profession. I’m always sitting in my cave writing these horror films. Whereas you’re sitting around a table with other writers. It seems so social for film writers.

**Craig:** Yeah. But maybe twice or three times a year. Most of the time I’m in the cave as well.

All right, well it’s time for One Cool Things. I don’t know if you – I like to spring this on people.

**Leigh:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** You got one? Do you have a One Cool Thing today Leigh?

**Leigh:** A One Cool Thing, OK. You sprung. A One Cool Thing. So it could be a book, a movie, anything.

**Craig:** It could be a book, a movie, an app, food, a place, anything you want. It doesn’t have to cost money. It can cost a little, a lot. Anything you want.

**Leigh:** I did just read a book called I’ll Be Gone in the Dark by Michelle McNamara about the Golden State Killer.

**Craig:** It’s a terrific read, yes.

**Leigh:** Amazing book. And it’s just such a chilling true crime novel, but it has this tragic level of pathos to it, too, because you kind of know where it’s heading. You know what happened to Michelle. And so I can’t recommend that book highly enough. It sticks in your head in a scary way, but also in this kind of heart-wrenching way. So I would definitely recommend that.

**Craig:** Yeah. Michelle McNamara who is the late wife of Patton Oswalt. One of the funniest people on the planet.

**Leigh:** Exactly. And two weeks after I read the book they caught the guy.

**Craig:** They caught the guy.

**Leigh:** Could not believe it. Because I spent two weeks chewing my nails off thinking the guy is out there. He’s going to probably kill my family tonight. And then they catch the guy.

**Craig:** They caught him.

**Leigh:** She has a line in the book, she almost writes to him and says, “Once you step out into the light, all your power is taken away.” And it was funny – when I saw footage of the guy on TV he really looked just like a sad old man.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**Leigh:** He wasn’t a scary guy. He was just some sad, pathetic guy. And I was like she was so right. And it’s a really powerful book and I would really recommend that to anyone–

**Craig:** Yeah. She also said something like imagining the day he would be caught. You walk outside and there they come right up your driveway. And that’s pretty much how they got him.

**Leigh:** Yes.

**Craig:** They sort of walked up his driveway and said OK, we got you.

**Leigh:** Exactly.

**Craig:** It’s a very cool recommendation. That is a cool thing. My One Cool Thing this week – I don’t typically do things that cost a lot of money. But this one does, and I apologize for it in advance. But I’m a big Dungeons & Dragons fan and player. And the actor Matthew Lillard is also a big Dungeons & Dragons fan. I met Matthew over 20 years ago. I co-wrote a movie that wasn’t particularly good, but he was in it and he was very good in it. And we just never like, I don’t know, after that experience it wasn’t like we hung out or anything. But now with Twitter you can follow him, and he can follow me. And he was such a good guy, like such a decent human being.

**Leigh:** And a cast member of the original Scream.

**Craig:** Cast member of the original Scream. Not just cast member. Killer. Co-killer.

**Leigh:** That’s right actually. Didn’t want to, you know. The moment has passed. Spoiler alert.

**Craig:** I’m going to go with yeah. Yeah, spoiler alert. But Matthew and some of his friends have created essentially a Dungeons & Dragons module that is like a luxury item. It costs quite a bit. I think it’s hundreds of dollars. But it’s got like all of the figurines. Maps. Boards. Modules. Everything is just beautiful. Because like Dungeons & Dragons normally, you know, it can get pretty low tech where it’s just scratch pads. And your little wet eraser battle map and all that.

So this is a chance to go fancy.

**Leigh:** Go fancy with it.

**Craig:** And I don’t collect things. I don’t have like fancy art and so forth. But I understand when you love something that it’s OK, like spend a little extra on it because you love it.

**Leigh:** Well yeah. Everybody has that one hobby whether it’s boats, or whatever, they spend the money. Like football. So I pay outrageous prices to go see my team play. And that sounds cool. So it’s an actual physical, tactile, a whole board.

**Craig:** it’s got everything self-contained. Now, it’s pre-order right now, so you’re not going to get it right away. But we’ll include a link in the show notes, but it’s under Beadle & Grimm’s Platinum Edition, which already sounds cool anyway. Like who are Beadle and who are Grimm?

**Leigh:** That is great.

**Craig:** So thanks Matthew Lillard for that. And thank you very much to Leigh Whannell for joining us and being his brilliant Australian self.

**Leigh:** Thanks for having me.

**Craig:** Congrats on Upgrade. By the way, Upgrade in theaters right now.

**Leigh:** It is in theaters right at this very moment.

**Craig:** All around the world?

**Leigh:** Not all around. Just in the US. But all around in the world is going to come in stages. I think it opens in Australia for any Australian listeners on June 14.

**Craig:** Fantastic. Right in the dead of winter.

**Leigh:** Right in the dead of winter there. And then hopefully the UK soon after and etc. etc.

**Craig:** Fantastic. And it’s been getting wonderful reviews. And I guess the point is really ten years from now we’ll know.

**Leigh:** Ten years from now we’ll now if people liked this movie.

**Craig:** We’ll know if they liked the movie. All right, well that’s our show. It is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is from somebody amazing, so just wait. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also a place where you can send longer questions like the ones we read today.

For shorter questions, on Twitter I am @clmazin. John is @johnaugust. Leigh, you are?

**Leigh:** The best. The handsomest.

**Craig:** On Twitter.

**Leigh:** Oh. Yes. Of course.

**Craig:** You’re @thebest_awesomest.

**Leigh:** I am @LWhannell on Twitter.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**Leigh:** And you can find me there. Right now I’m ranting a lot about Upgrade, but I swear that will be finished soon.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s sort of the deal with us is that when we have things coming out we get a little obsessive, but then we return to tweeting about politics.

**Leigh:** Yes. Yelling at Trump.

**Craig:** And yelling at Trump. So, you can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you will find transcripts. We try and get them up about four days after the episode airs. You can find this show on Apple Podcasts at Scriptnotes. Just search for Scriptnotes. And while you’re there leave us a comment because John August loves comments.

You can find all of the back episodes of the show at Scriptnotes.net. And that’s our show. Leigh, thank you again.

**Leigh:** Thanks for having me. We missed you, John. But Craig, you did a wonderful job just all on your own.

**Craig:** I know.

**Leigh:** Robin doesn’t need Batman it turns out.

**Craig:** I know.

**Leigh:** You can do this.

**Craig:** Thanks man.

Links:

* Thanks for joining us, [Leigh Whannell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Whannell)!
* [Leigh](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1191481/) wrote [Saw](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saw_(2004_film)), [Insidious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insidious_(film)), and, most recently, Upgrade, (here’s the fairly violent [trailer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEnRNIvEKu8)).
* [I’ll Be Gone in the Dark](http://www.amazon.com/dp/0062319787/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) by Michelle McNamara
* Matthew Lillard’s company, Beadle & Grimm’s Pandemonium Warehouse, is releasing a luxury Dungeons and Dragons campaign called [Platinum Edition Dungeons & Dragons: Waterdeep: Dragon Heist](https://www.beadleandgrimms.com/platinum-edition/), which is available to pre-order.
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](http://johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [Leigh Whannell](https://twitter.com/LWhannell) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew 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_354.mp3).

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2018/bad-behavior).

**Craig Mazin:** Hi folks. Today’s episode may feature some strong language. So if you’re listening with your kids you may want to stop that. Or put some headphones on.

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 353 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast, we’ll be discussing the hot new trend of firing assholes off television shows and speculate about what happens next. Then we’ll be answering listener questions on feature comedies, biopics, and shopping agreements.

**Craig:** That’s great. You know what’s funny, John, is that those folks who are listening to this heard me just warn them that there might be some strong language. And then you immediately say asshole, which I like. You know, let’s just get right to it. We’re going to say asshole a lot today.

**John:** Yeah, we are. Because people have always been assholes and I think we’re calling them on it more now and we will discuss that trend of calling people assholes.

**Craig:** Wonderful.

**John:** But first some follow up. So back in Episode 348 we discussed the Elif Batuman story for the New Yorker about Japan’s rent-a-relative business. And we wondered How Would This Be a Movie. And the answer is someone will hopefully find out because they’re going to try to develop it as a series it looks like for Anonymous Content, Paramount TV, and Conde Nast.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t get it, personally. I mean, I do, but I don’t. I mean, the part that I get is the part where they think, “OK, this is sort of a good inspiration for a show.” The part that always puzzles me is why people feel the need to go get the rights to things. So I’m of two minds about this. One mind is that there are some things about these individual stories that people find really attractive and so just to close the loop on things and be safe and smart they go ahead and they get the rights. But another part of me, frankly the majority part of me, thinks it’s just general media company laziness. They feel like it’s not real unless they’ve purchased a thing to make it real. I just don’t see what the point of buying some of these things is.

**John:** I understand your concern there. I will say that by these companies coming together to say like, “OK, this is a real thing that we’re going to develop” — it gives them ownership – at least some sort of intellectual ownership, not even real legal ownership, of that idea space. And sort of scare somebody else off from trying to do something that’s like that in that space, because they are first out of the gate with the announcement saying we’re going to try to make this as a show.

I think also the idea of trying to do it as a show is a good one. I don’t remember whether we talked about that as whether it’s a movie or a TV series, but the more I think about it I think it is a TV series idea because it’s the ongoing relationships you form with these families, sort of like The Americans, you see people dropping in and playing different roles in different scenarios. That could be very cool.

**Craig:** It absolutely could be. And I think you’re right. That sometimes there is a certain claim-staking value to purchasing some of this material. But there is a flip side to that coin and that is that sometimes companies will do some stake-claiming with – I won’t say it’s like this where there was an article that was published, but rather there’s a book. So someone says, “OK, so-and-so is writing a book about blankety-blank.” And it’s a lot of times with big authors and big books they will pre-sell the film rights. So the book is going to be published in a year but we have the rights to it and we’re going to start developing something.

But meanwhile the writer is still working on the book. Well, actually that happened with Chernobyl. A little bit after I set Chernobyl up, which was just based on my own research. There’s no individual book that I said, “OK, we’re going to purchase this book and make a show of this book.” Another company and another producer, fairly well-known, very reputable producer did this kind of thing where he bought the rights to an unpublished book and then they sort of waited. They had to wait. I guess for the book to be done.

Meanwhile, you know, our show is shooting. So there is a little bit of a danger to that. Sometimes I think – and the only reason I bring it up is because it cuts against us, meaning you and me as writers, and anybody else out there as writers, this thing where companies are constantly buying material, sometimes when they don’t need to, diminishes our individual rights as writers.

So, I don’t know, I guess I’m just saying wouldn’t it be nice if these companies saved a little money and maybe afforded the actual writers of these things a little more credit.

**John:** Yeah. Let’s talk about that credit, because I think what you’re alluding to is that because this is going to be based on preexisting material there are scenarios in which whichever writer comes in to actually do this may not have the degree of rights to the property that they would otherwise have, such as separated rights. They might not have the ability to control spinoff sort of materials. Even if they were to hold onto some of those things, they just have less hand in the project overall because it’s not their thing, it’s the studio’s thing. And that is a power imbalance that will affect the whole project going forward.

**Craig:** It will. And I am constantly struck by the arbitrary nature of the birth of things in this business. And simply by a quirk of, “Oh, I happened to mention it to someone, well now they’re the producer of it.” Or they happened to read this article that no one needs to buy, because we’re not talking about using any actual elements from the article other than the things that are public record. Now they somehow will make more money than the writer who actually does the work.

There’s all these strange things that happen at the beginning of the inception of projects. And I do think that as writers going into the next decade where the, I think – I’m just going to go out on a limb here and say that the demand for content will continue to increase – we have a lot of power that we give away simply by not paying attention in the very beginning. That’s all I’m going to put out there.

**John:** Yeah. But I don’t want to undercut a thing we’ve said often on the show which is that the idea is not the thing. The execution is the thing. Well, this is a situation where the idea kind of is the thing and like they’ve chosen to put a lot of value in this idea or this notion of like, OK, it’s a rental family thing, and these people have bought this idea but not the execution. So it is just a really dangerous precedent that we’re sort of starting to set.

**Craig:** Well, yeah. I mean, look, the interesting thing is that these folks bought this idea, but you and I could write this idea ourselves.

**John:** 100%. Yeah.

**Craig:** So like what are they buying? That’s the weird part, you know.

**John:** They’re buying air.

**Craig:** Yeah, they’re buying air.

**John:** It’s tulip fever. On previous episodes we’ve talked about outlines and whether we outline and sort of what applications we use to outline. Folks have written in with their suggestions for things that they use for outlining and so I thought we’d talk through some of them. So, we’ll start with Workflowy. That’s what Craig and I are looking at right now. It’s how we do the outlines for the show. I use it sometimes for outlining for creative projects. I don’t use it a ton. What I like about Workflowy, it is a shared thing, so Craig and I are looking at the same document. We can update it in real time. That is genuinely useful. And it’s pretty minimalist. Like it just works the way I sort of expect it to work. So, I do like it for that.

But listeners wrote in with some other suggestions, so I thought I’d read through them. And we’ll have links in the show notes if anything is interesting to you.

The next one down here is called Gingko. So I tried that this afternoon. It’s weird. So it’s a web app. You create things on the left hand column. They can branch out into things on the right column, and then the third column to the right. And things can nest together. I never really got it. It could be a thing where you spent some good time with it and it becomes feeling very natural. But it did seem like a lot to learn right off the bat. And sort of a strange way of doing things.

**Craig:** So many of these things are – what’s the word–

**John:** Skeuomorphic?

**Craig:** That’s what I’m thinking of. Skeuomorphic, right? Where we’re doing digital versions of real life things, like index cards. And so this one looks very much like, here, we’ll give you index cards without index cards. But you know what I also have? Index cards.

**John:** You have actual physical index cards.

**Craig:** Which are wonderful.

**John:** So the next thing we have on our list is Cloud Outliner Pro. This is a Mac app. There’s other versions of it, too. This one looks a lot like Workflowy, except it’s actually genuinely a Mac app. It seemed fine. The controls for it weren’t as intuitive as what I’m used to in Workflowy, but I’m sure you get used to it. It seems fine. If you want an application that just does the outlining stuff.

**Craig:** I got to be honest with you. “It seems fine” is not enough of a recommendation for me.

**John:** It’s not a glowing recommendation from me.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** So if you want a really powerful one, an app I’ve used a couple times and I keep trying to love and I just have never fully fallen in love with is OmniOutliner Pro. It’s from Omni. And they’re a great Mac developer. This one is like our Workflowy. It’s like a normal outline, but it actually has columns. And so you can do complicated things with columns across. So you could have like this is the scene, these are the characters who are in that scene. I’ve tried to use it for that purpose before and it’s always felt like too much application for when I want to try to do this.

Someone recommended just using Pages and just using the bullets on Pages. When you’ve done outlines have you done them in Word before? How have you done that kind of stuff?

**Craig:** I do them in Word. And Word has kind of an automatic numbering system which you can format as you like. So, you can – sometimes if I’m doing a true-true bare bones outline I will do a kind of Roman numeral – I guess you’d call it a legal outlining system where you start with a number, then you go to a letter, a Roman numeral, a small letter, and whatever. So I can do that. But typically I’ll just do one, two three. A list, essentially. And it automatically formats that for you. It’s pretty simple to do.

And I do like that because if I go back and stick something between two and three it knows to make three and everything after a bump up one. You know, easy.

**John:** Yeah. And so Highland has a similar feature. So Highland automatically does lists for you, so if you add something between it will renumber the list and sort of make that all work. It’s totally doable and you can use the header formats to sort of break out stuff if you wanted to. But it’s probably not what people are talking about with outlines where you can just drag stuff around simply. That’s a thing that we can do in Workflowy which is really helpful.

**Craig:** Yeah. Workflowy is great, it’s just a little too minimalistic for me. For whatever reason I do like numbering things. I don’t know why. When I’m doing things on index cards, I mean, my proper outlining is to actually – I have a little template that I made for myself in Word that is an index card template. And I have a font that’s like Sharpie font, which is very comforting. So I just type them. I just type them and print them. It’s old school.

**John:** Are you laying those out on a table? Are you sticking them up on a wall? How are you doing those?

**Craig:** Ah, OK, so, folks at home prepare to envy me, if you don’t already envy me. Years and years ago, now we’re talking 15 years ago, when I first met David Zucker, we were in his office in Santa Monica working on Scary Movie 3. And he had this wonderful thing on his wall. It was this corkboard, but then it had two hinged wings that could close in. And the front and back of those wings were corkboard. So you essentially had six corkboard surfaces that could fold in and open up. And this, in fact, was the same corkboard that they were using for Naked Gun.

So he and Jerry and Jim had been using this – they had it built. And years later when David moved out of that office and just was working out of his home, this thing ended up in storage. And I was like I want it. And we got it out of storage. It was like in some lockup in Compton somewhere. And so we got it out of storage and they just gave it to me. And I have it and it’s in my office. So I have the Naked Gun bulletin board and I use it constantly. It’s the best thing. I don’t know what to do – if it should ever fall apart, I think I’ll just retire.

**John:** Oh, that’s charming and sad. So you have your big special corkboard. You know, when I’ve needed to use the actual physical thing I’ve not found index cards to be especially helpful. I’ve done sometimes just like on a big table. You can just lay them out there and that can be helpful. They don’t stay put that way, which is sort of the advantage I guess of a corkboard. But like a TV room I will just use a whiteboard. And just whiteboard and markers. And that’s honestly how most TV is put together is just on a big whiteboard and that’s another good way of doing it.

**Craig:** By the way, do you go horizontal or vertical?

**John:** I go vertical.

**Craig:** So do I. And guess what? We’re the weird ones?

**John:** Oh really?

**Craig:** Because everything I see, early on there were some skeuomorphic – I’m not saying it right, but I don’t care – apps where you could – it was like little index card/corkboard apps. And they would–

**John:** Final Draft still has that.

**Craig:** OK. They would default to horizontal. And for instance when Tom Schnauz, sometimes Tom will publish on Twitter a picture of what the index cards for a particular episode of Better Call Saul looks like. All their progression is horizontal.

**John:** So it goes left to right, then left to right, then left to right?

**Craig:** Yeah. And I’m a big top to bottom kind of guy.

**John:** Yeah. That feels weird to me. But everyone has their own way.

**Craig:** I know. But our way is right.

**John:** Our way is right. The last thing I will point people to, and Craig click the link on this because I’m curious what you think of it, it’s an app called Causality that someone had recommended. It looks just like a lot of app. And so if you thought OmniOutliner was too much, this is a thing that’s trying to actually build your screenplay in a way and there’s a timeline view.

**Craig:** Oh god.

**John:** It’s a lot of app.

**Craig:** Oh my god. This is like they’ve basically tried to Avid a screenplay. So like a stripped timeline with bricks. I hate this sort of thing. I apologize. I’m sure it is a wonderful app for a lot of people. I just look at these things and I think I’m further away from my story than ever. Now I’m into something else, this graphical representation of it. I’m adding layers between myself and the thing I feel. I don’t like it.

**John:** Yeah. You’re a long ways away from the writing in something like this.

**Craig:** Yeah!

**John:** And so for all my criticism of Final Draft, at least you are looking at the screenplay.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** This you’re looking at some just bizarro representation of what this thing would be. But you will know that there are templates you can download for it that build in Save the Cat, so that’s useful.

**Craig:** Is it? [laughs] I mean, this just seems like an amazing thing for bad screenwriting professors, which is nearly a redundancy, to use in a class to enforce some sort of rigid thing. It’s very pedantic looking. None of this is at all necessary when what you really need – and this is the most unsexy thing, and you can’t monetize this – is inspiration, talent, and either a pen and a pad or just–

**John:** The most basic way of just getting text onto a surface.

**Craig:** Right. And even if you want to just say, look, I think formatting is important to me ultimately. Then you’ve made the app for everyone. Highland 2. Here’s the cheapest solution that totally works. You can write in normal text. It turns it into a properly formatted screenplay. What you need is some kind of inspiration/understanding of how to tell a story. None of this stuff – I guess my point is I feel like if you need this, it’s probably not your business.

**John:** Yeah. Maybe so.

**Craig:** Probably not for you. But, look, I am notoriously a dick. So, there you go.

**John:** I’ll leave this segment on, outlining apps. Definitely use the thing that works for you, I just feel like in general minimalism is going to be your friend and a thing that gets you thinking about the sequences of your story and not about the technology behind it is going to be helpful.

What’s useful about some of these apps is that they’re freeform enough you can just drag stuff around and drop them the same way you could with index cards or something else. You can sort of see what the layout of your stuff is. But if it’s anything that to me is skeuomorphically trying to create Craig’s index cards is probably going to be worse for the process. Because you’re spending your time figuring out how to use the app and not figuring out how to structure your story.

**Craig:** I agree. The one thing you definitely don’t want your goal to be is a pretty outline.

**John:** Oh, a beautiful outline. Yeah.

**Craig:** Worthless. Absolutely worthless.

**John:** Color-coded. Good tags.

**Craig:** Feh.

**John:** Feh. All right, let’s get to our feature topic. I’m excited to get into this.

**Craig:** Here we go.

**John:** So over the past few months something kind of weird and unprecedented happened in TV at least. Is that two, actually three networks now have decided to let loose the stars of their popular series and fire them not because of sort of money or contract demands, which is the classic things, but because of their behavior. So first I guess we had Jeffrey Tambor who was booted from Transparent. We had Clayne Crawford who was knocked off of Lethal Weapon. So Fox agreed to pick it up but with a different star attached. And then this last week Roseanne booted from her show, or the show was canceled at Craig’s request, because of her racist tweet.

**Craig:** I think I did it. [laughs]

**John:** You did it. So, I want to talk about a couple things. First off, am I right in thinking this is actually something new?

I mean, that is in previous seasons the networks would have just hunkered down and made their way through it because the show was successful and they were just going to pretend they didn’t see it. And if it is new, then what’s changed? What are the reasons why we’re seeing this now in 2018 where we didn’t see it in 2017?

**Craig:** Well, it’s sort of new. I think that there have been incidents in the past. Is it Isaiah Washington? Is that his name?

**John:** Yeah, yeah. And I was thinking of him and I was also thinking of Charlie Sheen.

**Craig:** And Charlie Sheen. There have been incidents in the past where networks or producers have terminated stars of hit shows because of their bad behavior. I think what has changed beyond the culture around us, I mean, certainly since the – we are living in a Weinstein era. I guess we’ll call it a post-Weinstein era. That is an enormous difference.

I think the fact that we have a president who is also a many time accused sexual assaulter and also notorious and factually-proven liar has created a lot of sensitivity about these things. And thirdly there’s Twitter. And we now have a situation where you can’t get away with saying things the way you used to before simply because they weren’t noticed. I mean, Roseanne has been saying crap like this for years. Years. Which they knew. And people generally just sort of didn’t know. Or if it happened it happened and disappeared. That doesn’t occur anymore. I don’t think that’s a thing you can do now.

**John:** So the three stars I mentioned, they all had sort of different trajectories. And it’s worth maybe looking at what the commonalties are and what the differences are. So Jeffrey Tambor, there were specifics, sexual harassment allegations against him, but also increasingly just being a dick kind of problems that were surfaced about him, when he was let loose from Transparent. Clayne Crawford, it wasn’t a sexual harassment thing I heard about so much but just that he was the problem on set, or he was a significant problem on set and was an obstacle to actually making the show that they needed to make.

And Roseanne, the final firing line was over a tweet she did. And I think if you were to dial back five, 10, 15 years, these same people could have been in those positions but I think you’re right. There wasn’t Twitter to either let themselves – they couldn’t hoist themselves up by their own petards. They’d have to go through some other media platform to get it out there. So, they say something to a reporter and that gets reported, or they’re caught on TMZ doing something. But there were buffers between this. And Twitter has sort of taken away the buffers.

And in some cases, you know, it’s probably the case of Jeffrey Tambor, people are more willing to speak out because of sort of a Twitter culture that says I’m going to share my story about what actually really happened.

**Craig:** Yeah. And there was a time, too, I think in our culture where people were simply more naïve about how this stuff worked. And networks and studios took advantage of that. They would get rid of people for being huge problems. But they would do it under the guise of their character dies and it’s a bit of drama and then that person says, “Oh yes, I wanted to pursue other projects.” They would lie. So they were just lies.

A bit like, you know, in the ‘50s when a young woman had an unwanted pregnancy and needed an abortion then she would take a holiday or something. Go overseas to visit someone. And then would come back later. There was this weird Kabuki theater that people would do because there was a shame around these things. And everybody bought it. Or maybe they didn’t, I don’t know. But we don’t do that anymore. We don’t need to. We don’t have shame about those things. And similarly for people on television – I don’t think anybody would those excuses anymore. We’re too savvy. I think the culture is too savvy. I mean, remember when you and I were growing up nobody ever talked about box office. Now everybody looks to see what a movie has made by Friday at noon. Because we’re just movie and TV savvy now.

**John:** Yeah we are. So, let’s think about whether it’s useful to draw a distinction between a person who is a difficult and a person who is an asshole. Because you and I have both worked with difficult people, and sometimes it’s worth it to deal with difficult people because they are genuinely talented and they’re not actually mean or bad people, just they are a lot to handle.

And so there’s been people I’ve worked with and people will call me to ask like, “Should I work with this person in the future?” And I will tell them these are the problems you’re going to run into and here’s why you need to decide whether that’s worth it to you. But if someone is asking me is this person an asshole, that’s a different conversation. That’s like this is a bad person who will make your life miserable and will hurt people around you.

I’ve always felt pretty free to speak up about that, but I feel like overall we’re more empowered as a town to be talking about that just in the last year or two. I feel like those conversations are coming much more to the fore.

**Craig:** No question. And it is an important distinction to make. Because it is inevitable that you will work with people that are “difficult.” Everybody’s difficult is different. Sometimes people are difficult simply because the relationship with another person is just not a good fit. So one person may say, “Oh yeah, so-and-so is difficult to work with,” and another person may say, “Oh, no, they were a dream.” That can happen.

Also, “difficult” sometimes is a function of just a person’s way of doing their job, but they’re not trying to be malicious. They just are puzzling. Actors in particular can be difficult in that I find some incredibly gifted, wonderful actors may behave in ways that are illogical. They may behave in ways that are seemingly hypocritical and yet they don’t recognize it. They may say and do things that seem counterproductive or self-destructive. A lot of it is connected to fear and feelings.

And yet if you get through it and survive that process what you get is wonderful work and you understand that that person is being difficult because they don’t know how else to get where they need to go to give you a good performance. And that’s their job.

But then on the other side of that line is abusive behavior and mean behavior which is –- whether it’s part of their process or not — I don’t think is going to be tolerated anymore. And this is sort of the discussion that was going on around Arrested Development the last week or so.

**John:** Absolutely. So I didn’t dive too deeply into any of the articles but it was the question of if you’re doing a group interview and this topic of Tambor comes up, how do you respond in a group interview to the reality of what’s in front of you? And his behavior in relation to everybody else who is in that same room. That’s tough. And it doesn’t sound like people nailed that conversation.

**Craig:** Well, I listened to it and I actually was really impressed by everybody. I know people gave Jason Bateman a really hard time and he went out and said, “OK, I might have flubbed that one,” or he said, “I did flub it.” But I actually thought that there was a very grownup conversation going on about performance and acting and the different temperaments involved in acting. And the fact that the work product of acting is ideally a true emotional expression. Requires actors sometimes to go to strange places inside of themselves psychologically. It is naïve to expect that that will not have some sort of bleed through for some people when you’re not in between action and cut.

But I also thought that it was a very reasonable response to say, “Yes, until you are hurting other human beings,” and at that point we have to protect humans. It’s not fair. There is ultimately, I don’t think, an even balance between treating humans decently and getting a good performance. I’d rather that people just be treated decently. There is no single actor in their genius ability that to me justifies them being cruel to other people.

So, I thought it was a really interesting discussion. Note, this was not about the accusations of sexual harassment against Jeffrey Tambor. This was about Jeffrey Tambor’s behavior, essentially being verbally abusive and being a dick during the shooting of Arrested Development in some prior seasons.

And lastly I will say that it is my experience that a lot of times when we hear that someone is a bad guy, or a bad woman, and then I meet them in person I am sort of stunned by the fact that that is not the case, at least for me. And there are other actors, men and women, who are held up as paragons of virtue, good guys and good ladies–

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** And then I meet them and I go, “Oh god, no, you’re awful.” There is one person in particular I’m thinking of who is sort of lauded for being wonderful and my personal experience is that this person is a monster.

**John:** Yep. And that’s why you have some of those conversations before you cast somebody in a role. Ideally just know like, “OK, you’ve worked with this person before. Is there anything you want me to know about them?” And that’s why you talk honestly about sort of what’s going on there.

**Craig:** Yeah. And also I would just add that the person that I encountered and went, oh god, this person is a monster, you know, then I asked other people, “By the way, do you know—“ And everyone is like, “Oh yeah, no, of course. This ironically incredibly famous person is also ironically a terrible human being but we all just quietly move about our day.” And that part is shocking.

**John:** Again, I wonder if it’s worthwhile to distinguish between one blow up and a pattern of behavior. So, I was thinking back to Christian Bale’s notorious blow up on the set of Terminator Resurrection and all the brouhaha over that, versus if Roseanne had tweeted this one time and had never tweeted anything else like this I don’t think she would have been fired. If that had been one tweet, and that was the one tweet, I don’t think this show would have been canceled.

I think there’s a difference between a long pattern of behavior and sort of like this one-time blow up that people do look at very differently. And the decision to get rid of her was like, “OK, we’ve crossed that line and we’re never going to go back to a place of normal sanity. We’ve got to cut our losses and run.”

Do you see a difference between the one-time and the pattern?

**Craig:** Sure. I mean, we are human. Every single person on this planet has had a bad hair day, you know. Everybody has lost their temper at some point. Everybody has done something that they regretted. Everybody has said something that they wish they hadn’t said. We’ve all had moments where later we feel ashamed of how we acted and then we make amends. We apologize. First of all, Christian Bale’s thing, I was on his side. Because I’m still angry about the fact that a DP goes behind an actor while the camera is on the other actor. So Christian Bale is trying to do a scene looking at another human being, and meanwhile behind that human being is a guy moving the lights around while they’re shooting. That’s crazy. So I actually understand that blow up. I mean, yes, any individual blow up when you start to listen to it it becomes unhinged and a little scary because that’s what blow ups are. That’s what anger does. And Christian Bale I believe apologized later, because that’s how it goes.

That’s different. The people that I have found scary aren’t the ones that have had moments and then come back to you and say, “I’m sorry about that.” The people that I find scary are the people that have no idea that they’re being cruel and in fact cruelty is sort of their method. They live in a weird space where they show up angry, they continue angry, and then they leave angry. And while they’re there they’re just mean. And mean in ways that make no sense. Those are the people that I just find terrible.

**John:** Yeah. That’s where you start to look at the, like, this person may be a psychopath test.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** These are the people who cover their walls in pictures of predatory animals. They can fake human emotions but not actually demonstrate them. That is a real thing and you will see some of those behaviors.

But I want to talk about though these three examples we gave were all TV examples and there’s a difference I think with what we put up with in features versus what we put up with in TV. I think because TV you’re coming back for another season, you’re going to have to keep working with this person. Versus in features at least to this point we’re like “OK it’s only a month. It’s three months. We can get through this.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** “And so we just suffer through with this person and hope to never work with that person again until the movie is a huge hit and then we’re making the sequel.” That is an interesting thing and I’d be curious to see the first movie that fires a lead actor and just says like, “OK, no, you’re horrible, you’re gone.” I mean, Kevin Spacey is sort of an example of that because when they reshot all that stuff, but I’m curious what the first like while a movie is happening we’re just like “OK, no, we’re done, go away.”

**Craig:** Well, it doesn’t have to necessarily be an actor. For instance Bryan Singer was recently fired from the Queen biopic because of terrible behavior. Now, of note, Bryan Singer has been accused of terrible behavior practically for every single movie he’s directed in the last ten years, or more. So, again, it does seem like things are changing. The tolerance for this sort of thing is starting to drop to zero.

In the case of Roseanne, yes, if this had been the only time she had ever tweeted something like that then I suppose there would have been interventions, tears, apologies, the Ambien excuse may have possibly held a little bit of water. But the nature of it was so outrageous and so disgusting that I just don’t think it would have ever been able to continue even if it had been a one-time thing because there is a difference between a blow up where you are so dedicated to your work that you become enraged at inefficiencies or things that keep you from doing your job and incidences where you express thoughts or opinions or feelings that are just repugnant and completely out of line with the experience you want people to have when they watch your show.

**John:** Yeah. I think it’s worth pointing out was that Roseanne’s issue wasn’t about her being a bully on the set. It was about things she was saying off the set that were just abhorrent. And that was one of the first times we’ve seen that. So it wasn’t about what she was doing on the set. It was something unrelated that was causing her to be nixed from it.

So the last thing to sort of talk about, we talked about actors, we talked about directors, but some writers are notoriously assholes. And there’s been writers who have been famously fired or had big scandals that happened because of how they were running their writer’s rooms. Not so much on the feature side, because we’re not sort of in control very much, but there’s writers who are in control who are out of control.

One of the things I find so fascinating and frustrating is that we are one of the only places in the world where someone with no management experience is suddenly expected to manage a staff and be able to do all these things with no training and sometimes very little support around them. So I think it’s not a wonder that some people’s worst instincts come out in those situations.

**Craig:** Yeah. And to complicate matters further, what I said about actors is also true for writers. We’re emotional people, like all humans, but on top of it we’re doing something that is specifically emotional by design. We write and create these things. We do it with emotion. We do it to create emotion. And then we are, in television at least, placed in charge of the process to bring this about. And when things are different or don’t work right or are frustrating it is natural then to have strong emotional feelings about it.

And I think ultimately the best advice for all of us in these situations is when you have those responses, those strong emotional reactions, go have them quietly somewhere else. Have them to your heart’s content alone so as to not dump that on other humans. And then when you have calmed down and are able to be a little more dispassionate, come back and address the cause. Because you can fix things quite easily if you’re not enraged or frightened, you know.

It’s the anger and the fear in the moment that never – you might get what you want right then and there just by screaming or shouting or throwing a tantrum or being angry or afraid, but in the long run you’re damaging yourself, you’re damaging human beings around you, and you’re damaging the show.

**John:** Yeah. When you Hulk out you just destroy things. That’s what you do.

**Craig:** Hulk Smash.

**John:** Hulk Smash. All right, let’s smash our way through some questions. We will start with Mark. Mark writes, “What happened to feature comedy? It’s one of the genres I specialize in. Even though I’ve gotten positive feedback on my script from a variety of sources, people keep turning me down when I go in to pitch. In general the explanation is since comedy is no longer doing well in theaters they are only looking for small budget indie style comedies or ‘high concept’ bigger budget films with star talent attached. And, unfortunately, I fall somewhere in the middle of the scale.

“After doing research it does seems to be true that only dramedies like Bick Sick or Lady Bird or star vehicle comedies seem to be opening in theaters lately. And even then the numbers seem to be declining. Meanwhile, mid-budget comedies in the vein of Superbad, American Pie, and even something like Zombieland seem nowhere to be found as far as I can see. Is this reasoning just an excuse for executives to turn my scripts down, or is it true the feature comedy landscape is actually changing or declining?”

Craig, you write in this space. Tell me about it.

**Craig:** I don’t agree with this argument. Yes, it is true that there used to be more comedies because there used to be more movies. And it is also true that of the reduced amount of movies that now exist, we’re talking about theatrical films, a greater percentage of them are franchise movies which tend to be action films, super hero films, etc. The smaller movies a lot of times are mini-budget horror movies.

So I’m just looking at 2017 and so right off the bat I see Girls Trip. So when we talk about what he says, “Original mid-budget comedies in the vein of Superbad, American Pie, and Zombieland seem nowhere to be found as far as I can see,” it’s staring right at you right there. Girls Trip worked. And there was The House and there was Jumanji which I thought, I mean, it’s a larger thing but it was definitely a comedy. The made Chips which, OK, maybe didn’t work, but again in that same zone. There was Snatched.

Anyway, point is they do make comedies. Kevin Hart makes one a year as far as I can tell. So, they absolutely make these. Melissa McCarthy makes one to two a year as far as I can tell. It has always been the case that comedies are driven by comic stars. When one of them kind of comes out of nowhere then that person becomes a comic star and they keep making movies with that person.

I don’t think anything has changed other than the fact that they make fewer movies in general. If you get turned down when you go to pitch, you’re pitching to the wrong people. I mean, I don’t understand this. You go to pitch a screenplay for a comedy and the person says, “Oh, comedy is no longer doing well. We only want small budget indie style comedies or high concept bigger budget films,” who is sending you into these rooms?

**John:** That does feel weird.

**Craig:** Either you’re in the wrong rooms or they’re kind of just lying to you and really what they’re saying is, “We just don’t want to buy that.”

**John:** Yeah. I can see that. Another comedy that I really loved quite a bit was Game Night of this last year.

**Craig:** Yeah, Game Night, there you go.

**John:** Which was delightful. And, again, mid budget. Stars Jason Bateman. It’s the right kind of thing for what we’re describing.

I think they do still exist. I think Craig is correct that it’s mostly because we’re just making fewer movies overall, so in making fewer movies we’re making fewer of these comedies. I also do wonder is the kinds of comedies we’re talking about, even Game Night, even Girls Trip, as a script you could also make that as that lower budget thing, too. So I’m not sure you’re necessarily – unless it’s Jumanji where it literally is that expensive of a movie to make, or some of the other Kevin Hart things like Central Intelligence that requires a certain budget and scale, a lot of those scripts are going to look the same whether they’re kind of low budge or medium budget. So, write those scripts and if people want to make them they will make them.

And the reason they become mid budget is because they add on some stars and enough of a production value that it just costs that much and they shoot it in Atlanta. But otherwise it’s not that different of a thing. So, keep writing those scripts. And also I’d say writing those scripts is also probably a good way to get staffed on the many, many comedies that are shooting these days for TV.

**Craig:** Yeah. And they’re also making comedy films for TV, you know, Netflix for instance does this sort of thing. But, yeah, I think that there’s still plenty of life in the let’s call it $30 million comedy. Plenty of life there.

Christina from Malibu writes, “What is your opinion on postscripts at the end of a biopic? Are they necessary? Appreciated? Expected? Can they take away from the story you just told?” John?

**John:** They largely drive me crazy. Basically like we’re going to tell a story up to a certain point, and then we’ll roll some cards and tell you the rest of it. I tend to find them very frustrating. Sometimes they work when they’re done well.

What does drive me crazy on biopics is when they show the real people. It’s like, you know those actors you just saw, well these are the real people and this is what they really look like and isn’t that great? That drives me crazy. I can’t explain why it drives me so crazy, but I don’t want the illusion broken by showing me the real person at the end. It makes me nuts.

**Craig:** Well, do not watch the very, very end of Chernobyl, which is going to have a very long postscript only because there’s just so much to say.

**John:** Oh, of course.

**Craig:** But are they necessary? Are they appreciated? Are they expected? I don’t know. I mean, in a movie where you just spent 90 minutes or two hours and you’re a trapped audience member and you can’t go, there’s a limited amount of time there at the end. Basically people are incredibly patient for the first 20 minutes of the movie and I think they’re generally incredibly impatient in the last 20 minutes of a movie. And reasonably so.

So, whatever you say at the end should be quick, I think, if you are talking about people in a theater. For television at home, I mean, I think everybody can – it seems to me like it’s sort of information on demand, you know? The more you want to know, well, it’s there. And if you don’t want to know it, you just hit pause and go to sleep. You’re done. So that’s kind of my feeling about it. It’s sort of up to you. And the good news is it’s something that you can decide very, very late. I mean, you do need to know what it is you want to show at the end if you’re going to be putting up cards. You need to plan for that visually if you need to shoot stuff. But the actual decision of how much you want to put there and why, you know, that’s late – that’s a late sort of thing to worry about. And there’s chances to do it or not.

**John:** The one thing I would urge Christina to think about is that the card should not be the end of your movie. So basically the central dramatic question of your movie shouldn’t be answered by the card at the end.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Your movie has to answer the question at the end. If there is an extra beat that is meaningful or poignant or is very helpful for the audience to know after that, basically sort of how much longer this couple lived at the end, great. I can see the argument for that. But you have to really end the story as the movie and not as the card at the end.

**Craig:** No question. The cards really do have to have a little bit of irony to them or they have to be extra credit. Essentially if you love this story, and you love all this stuff, here’s some more that would be cool for you to know. But beyond that, yeah.

**John:** Cool. Tony writes, “I was wondering what your thoughts are about shopping agreements. I’ve adapted a novel I co-wrote and a small production company here in Australia is offering a shopping agreement, giving them the rights to represent the screenplay for 18 months. From what I can see on the intertubes, the agreement I’ve received is pretty standard to others out there, but I’m curious how effective these agreements are.”

**Craig:** I mean, pretty standard sort of thing. How effective are the agreements? I’m not quite sure how to answer that. I mean, what you’re really asking I think is how often do people that sign shopping agreements end up actually selling something, and the answer is I don’t know. And it doesn’t matter. Let’s say I gave you the average. Let’s say I told you that 0.5% of the time it works. What are you going to do? Cancel it? Of course not. You want to be the 0.5%.

So, I wouldn’t worry about any of that. Generally speaking if you want to work in this business and you’re starting out you need to make friends with uncertainty because that’s what you got.

**John:** Yeah. So to define terms here, a shopping agreement would be Tony making a deal with this production company saying that for this period of time you can be essentially the producer, the creative financial partner behind this thing as they go out and try to find more money to raise to actually make this project. They’re kind of standard. If you’ve looked up other ones online that would be good.

I would say that your trust and faith in this production company is worth as much as the actual contract is. And so hopefully you’ve done your research to figure out what else have they actually made. What is the reputation they have for things? You’ve talked with them about what their actual goals and intentions are with the thing.

I haven’t done a lot of these shopping agreements. The closest we came was a project that Jordan Mechner and I did together, which was to be shot in Asia, and we ended up partnering up with this small Asian production company which was trying to find the larger financing. It was fine. But, you know, it’s not a thing that Craig and I are doing on a regular basis. It’s a thing that happens more in indie finance things or things that are using a lot of international financing.

**Craig:** Correct. Nate writes, “Recently your colleague Josh Friedman was fired as showrunner on his TNT series Snowpiercer and was replaced by Orphan Black creator Graeme Manson. Friedman was hurt when Graeme failed to reach out to him and he said so on Twitter. What is your opinion on proper etiquette? Was Josh justified in making this public?”

All right, John, what do you think?

**John:** So Josh is a friend. I don’t know Graeme at all. I’ve known Josh for a good long time. And I knew Josh as he was headed off to make Snowpiercer and I know that he had a vision for the show and was not at all happy to be replaced on the show. And I think what I respect about Josh is he actually sort of openly communicated his feelings about how it all happened. Because there’s a tendency we have is to buckle down and pretend that everything is OK and that it’s all just fine and good and that’s just the way it goes. And it’s not always well and fine and just the way it goes.

And so Josh has been – back even from his blogging days has been just very up front and honest about sort of how it feels to be doing this job. And so I get that.

I would say overall protocols for when I come on to a project to replace somebody, when I am replaced by somebody, that reaching out, that conversation is good and helpful and just lets the person know where all the bones are buried. Just that little bit of a blessing to go forward. But it’s not always easy.

I can very much see it from Graeme’s side as well. I don’t know what the real situation was. I don’t know how bad things got or sort of who was saying what. I know it’s hard to sort of come in and make that first phone call to the person who just got let go. But I think I am mostly with Josh in the sense that it sucks. And I think it’s good sometimes to acknowledge that it sucks publicly because otherwise it seems like it’s all happiness and success in this town. And if you don’t talk about the failures people get even more distorted views of how the industry works.

**Craig:** I agree with that completely. And that part is very admirable. We should talk about our failures more than we do because it is a huge part of our lives. For many writers, probably most writers, it’s the majority of their careers is failure. Because this is a tough business and the odds are brutal. It’s why, for instance, when the critics ripped me open for Identity Thief that’s why we did that show, because I wanted to talk about that specific kind of fail. I mean, the movie was a success happily, but critically it was a failure. So I wanted to talk about that.

Look, that to me is – protocol wise I feel like our failures are ours. We own them and we are free to talk about them and I encourage that. And I think it’s wonderful – anything that avoids shame about that is wonderful.

However, I don’t take swings at other writers in public just as a matter of course because, again, I feel like even if another writer flubs it or blows it – and I certainly support always reaching out to writers. That’s something I’ve always done.

I just don’t like making other writers the villains. I feel like this business is brutal and a lot of times we just don’t know what’s going on. There are times when people are hired and someone says, “Listen, if we can’t keep this show going the following 150 people lose their jobs. We need you to keep it going. And for the following reasons we are asking that you do not have contact with the person we just fired.” Well, that’s a tough spot. And then it becomes tougher when you can’t respond and someone is taking swings at you in public.

Now I don’t know if that’s what happened. It may be as simple as that in fact it was just kind of poor etiquette. I don’t know. But because I don’t know – and because I generally think that taking swings at writers and taking swings at their work is not good for us as a community, that’s something that on that front I think it’s better etiquette to refrain from that sort of thing. But I certainly feel for Josh completely. And so as much as we can show empathy for each other I’m in full support.

**John:** So I don’t want to go back through the whole Twitter timeline right now to see who said what exactly, but my recollection is that Josh was talking about his situation and how he felt about not getting a call from the person who is replacing him. Is that taking a swing at the guy who replaced him? Kind of, but like there’s sort of no way to even talk about it without acknowledging that he hasn’t had any conversation with the guy who is taking over the show.

One thing I should say is that Josh and I actually developed a show together. So we did a show at Fox that didn’t make it past the pilot. And it was heartbreaking, but I’ll tell you that it is so much nicer to have a script not go to pilot than to go to pilot and not get picked up, or go to series and last a few episodes. The more you’ve done on a project, the more fully emotionally committed you are to something and it’s just devastating when it doesn’t go forward.

TV is just this crazy thing we make where we’ll shoot 30 shows and four will make it to the air. And there’s just so much buried labor in making TV.

**Craig:** It is an awful situation. And these things do happen – they don’t happen often, but they do happen. And they can be very upsetting. They should be very upsetting. I mean, to be asked to leave something that you love and care about is hard. And it’s happened to all of us. And it is very, very hard.

I’ll tell you what I do with writer etiquette and it’s just my way of etiquette. It’s not the right way, it’s just my way. I love to give positive examples. So I like to talk about how I feel when a writer calls me, or how writers react when I call them. Because I think that’s helpful. And then I also will from time to time I will send a private message to somebody who I think is doing it wrong. And certainly not in this case. Not Josh. I don’t think he did anything. I’m talking about other writers occasionally do things on Twitter and I go, “Oh no, no, no, nope, nope, nope. No.” And then I send them a little note. I’m like an old guy now, so I can say “I just don’t think that’s good for us as a group.” And I’m polite about it. And it has nothing to do with me, so I’m just an independent observer. I’m just saying this isn’t good for us. And every single time I’ve had that conversation it’s gone well actually.

I think a lot of times it’s just that we don’t see it. We miss it. And we’re human, right? We make mistakes. But we must protect each other and take care of each other. And when we fail to do so it’s weirdly even more important to figure out how to take care of each other while we correct each other. I think that’s just generally my feeling about these things.

**John:** Yeah. I’m sure I’ve said it on the show before, but I’ve become good friends with screenwriters who I only met because either I was replacing them or they were replacing me. And we had that phone call to talk through stuff. And it was fantastic. So, it’s just a way to do that. And especially in the age of Twitter now it’s much easier to reach out to somebody, even if you don’t have the mutual contact, to just chat about things and wish them well and let them know that you are there to listen if they have things they want to tell you about the baby that you were raising for those past months.

**Craig:** I mean, how often do you read something, have a reaction to it like, “Oh my god, this person has reported a story, they have been wronged, this other person is a jerk.” And then maybe you meet that person, or you meet somebody that knows that person and you hear a different story and you go, “Oh, OK, that’s not what I –“ that’s pretty common. And all the more reason I feel like there’s rarely any practical good that comes from this sort of thing in public. Far more practical good comes from it in private.

However, the big difference is the stuff we were talking about earlier. The abusive stuff. So now we’re not talking about etiquette. We’re talking about people that are bad people. They’re abusive. They’re hurting other human beings. Then I think actually we do ourselves a disservice by not talking about it in public.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** That’s where it gets dangerous.

**John:** It’s tough. And I think for far too long we’ve just assumed that saying nothing is the best approach and maybe a thing that’s happened over the course of the last 18 months is we’re starting to realize if we say nothing things will just continue.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s true.

**John:** All right. Let’s go to our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is a card game called No Thanks! I’m not even sure who first recommended this card game to me, but it’s really good. It’s by this guy Thorsten Gimmler. And the idea behind it is you are sort of bidding to not take cards. And in the bidding you are putting these chips on the card that shows up. And eventually you’ll decide like, oh you know what, I’m just going to take this card and get all these little chips. It’s a very clever mechanic and I’ve never seen it in any other game before.

It’s good for like three to five, maybe six players. But we really liked it, so it’s become a new Friday afternoon game here around the office. So it’s No Thanks! It’s by Thorsten Gimmler.

**Craig:** Excellent. I also have a little game this week. It’s the third chapter of a series that I enjoy called Faraway. This is an app on iOS and maybe it’s for Google, but as we all know I don’t care. And Faraway is sort of a puzzle solving game. John, did you play The Witness by the way, or I guess it’s just Witness?

**John:** I never played it. I know what it is though. It’s by the same guy who did Braid.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly. Jonathan Blow. Excellent game. The style of puzzles in Witness are I guess more complicated versions of what you see on Faraway, but it’s a very fun game. It goes through pretty easily, but inside each level there are three little hidden pieces, notes essentially, and finding two of the notes is usually very, very simple. Finding the third note is very, very hard.

I tend to like games that add little collectible hunts. It’s just an interesting little mechanic that makes me happy. So anyway, Faraway 3. Pretty cheap little game in terms of cost. But fun.

**John:** Nice. Cool. Well that is our show for this week. Our show is produced by Megan McDonnell. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by the great Jon Spurney.

**Craig:** The great Jon Spurney?

**John:** It’s a pretty great outro, so he gets the great for this one.

**Craig:** OK.

**John:** If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place to send questions like the ones we answered today. On Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust. That’s a great place for little short questions we can answer.

You can find us on any place where you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts. Just search for Scriptnotes. While you’re there you can leave us a comment or a review. Those help.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts. For all the back episodes you can go to Scriptnotes.net. For $2 a month you can get all the back episodes. There’s also an iOS app that will let you listen to them easily.

We still have a few more of the 300-episode drives. Let us know if you want us to make more of those because we were encountering situations, especially overseas buyers will say like it’s cool to get the drive but the import taxes on the drives are incredibly expensive so is there another way to do it. So we’re thinking through that. Let us know on Twitter what you’d like us to do about the drives, or the situation for that, because we might just go to a purely digital version of that. We’ll see.

**Craig:** Right. Yeah, I mean, because somebody can go and buy themselves a little thumb drive for $20 and then download just our archive right?

**John:** Yeah. So we’re thinking about maybe we could break them up into either 50-episode or 100-episode chunks that are like still manageable for downloads. We’ll see.

**Craig:** What will be the most profitable for me?

**John:** The most profitable for you would be anything. Really nothing would make any difference for you.

**Craig:** Right. Right. OK. Interesting. Interesting. Great.

**John:** Now, Craig, if you want to negotiate a split on this we can? Tell me what more you’d like to do on the show to ensure its profitability.

**Craig:** I feel like I do so much, you know, just in terms of personality labor.

**John:** Oh yeah. For sure.

**Craig:** Just like my glowing personality has a value.

**John:** So going back to Kevin Hart, so I went to the Survivor Finale which was great, because Jeff Probst who is a Scriptnotes listener invited me to come to the finale. And it was fantastic. But Kevin Hart shows up at it to promote his new show. And I really wonder about the business model of Kevin Hart’s new show, because it’s this competition show where it’s this silly thing where you’re racing across these obstacles and the other team is trying to knock you off these obstacles. Sort of like American Gladiators but with like–

**Craig:** Regular people?

**John:** Regular people doing American Gladiators. And he’s a charming host, he’s wonderful, but how much are you getting paid? What is the split that gets Kevin Hart to do that show?

**Craig:** So much money.

**John:** So much money. So like you, Kevin Hart has that sort of personality plus is what he gives.

**Craig:** So true.

**John:** He is the intellectual property. He’s the emotional property. That’s what it is.

**Craig:** Kevin and I go back. We go all the way back to 2008.

**John:** Was he in Superhero Movie?

**Craig:** He was in Scary Movie 3 and Scary Movie 4 and Superhero Movie.

**John:** So you directed Kevin Hart.

**Craig:** Yeah, I did. I don’t know if Scary Movie was his first movie, but it was close to his first movie. We hired Kevin because he came in – remember, he came in for like a fill in for a table read.

**John:** That’s so great.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** That’s great. And he was small back then. But he’s grown so much.

**Craig:** Well, he’s still physically small.

**John:** But now as a force of personality.

**Craig:** I have loved watching the rise of Kevin Hart so much because just to close the circle, let’s come full circle on our theme. Kevin is such a good guy. He’s always been such a good guy. He’s always been a gamer, up for anything, hard-working dude. Doesn’t get any like ego in the way. And he’s good at what he does, obviously. He’s just a delight. Kevin, every time he would walk on set, every single time he would go, “OK, it’s magic time.” That was what he would say every time. I loved that. He’s the best. I love Kev.

**John:** And the minute we stop recording we’re going to talk about all the actors who are not good people. Bye Scriptnotes!

**Craig:** By the way, I know, exactly. I made a mistake. I said 2008. I meant 2003. Sorry, Scary Movie 3 was in 2003.

**John:** Wow. We’re old.

**Craig:** So Kevin Hart’s first role was in a movie called Paper Soldiers in 2002. I don’t know what that movie is. But his second role was in Scary Movie 3. So that’s how far back me and Kev go.

**John:** Very nice.

**Craig:** Yeah. All right, that was a good show.

**John:** Good show. Thanks.

Links:

* A [series](http://deadline.com/2018/05/series-japan-rent-a-relative-business-in-works-anonymous-content-paramount-tv-conde-nast-entertainment-1202397497/) is in development based on Elif Batuman’s New Yorker [article](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/30/japans-rent-a-family-industry) about rental families.
* Some listener-recommended outliners include [Workflowy](https://workflowy.com/), [Gingko](https://gingkoapp.com), [Cloud Outliner](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cloud-outliner-pro/id1024917449?mt=12), [OmniOutliner](https://www.omnigroup.com/omnioutliner) from Omni Group, [Pages](https://www.apple.com/pages/), [Causality](https://www.hollywoodcamerawork.com/causality-videos.html), and good old index cards.
* Some recently fired examples include [Roseanne Barr](https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/roseanne-canceled-abc-1202824211/), [Jeffrey Tambor](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/jeffrey-tambor-officially-fired-transparent-wake-harassment-claims-1085236), [Clayne Crawford](http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/la-et-st-lethal-weapon-clayne-crawford-fired-20180514-htmlstory.html), and [Bryan Singer](https://variety.com/2017/film/news/bryan-singer-fired-bohemian-rhapsody-1202630247/).
* A [question of etiquette](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/fired-snowpiercer-showrunner-calls-replacement-an-idiot-not-reaching-1112964) regarding replacing another writer
* [No Thanks!](http://www.amazon.com/dp/B013FAC4FK/?tag=johnaugustcom-20), a game by Thorsten Gimmler
* [Faraway 3](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/faraway-3/id1336928392?mt=8), a puzzle game for iOS
* [The Scriptnotes Listeners’ Guide!](http://johnaugust.com/guide)
* [The USB drives!](https://store.johnaugust.com/collections/frontpage/products/scriptnotes-300-episode-usb-flash-drive)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Find past episodes](http://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Jon Spurney ([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_353.mp3).