Almost two and a half years now for the OWA's and they've yet to produce anything. At what point does it become reasonable to assume that there's no genuine opportunity there?
At 16 years and counting, my journey to seeing my first film made has been long, arduous and eventful. I'd like to say I've learned a lot - and I have - but mostly it's been a lesson learned here, start over, a lesson learned there, start over. Along the way, thank goodness, I wrote and therefore accrued a lot of screenplays to take to market. So, the biggest lesson? Never stop writing. And never give up on your old material; keep polishing it.
Yet, on July 1, 2018, I did stop writing. It wasn't writer's block, nor discouragement. In fact, it was a sort of encouragement, from a company who'd read a few of my things and told me they'd be interested in coming aboard if I had a package.
A 'package'? What's that?
Well, we all know more or less, but how do you get one? More email blasts? Um, well, I tried that and it was just another lesson learned, start over (sort of). But what it did teach me, and is possibly relevant to all of you - the more experienced you are and the more scripts you have at your disposal, the better - is that writers need to be more entrepreneurial. You're not applying (typically) for a full-time job, right?
But wait, don't we already give great deals to producers - like free scripts or low-cost options, or free polishes, etc.?
Naw, many of them want more, or something different. And, unfortunately, that 'something' also usually costs a pretty penny, so it's not like I have do-it-yourself or free 'key to the kingdom' advice, today.
Pitchdecks are close, and they may help the marketing department of a producer, which is useful, but what talks the most is MONEY. Aside from bringing money to the table, another option is to try to help to raise said financing. Nobody has millions to spare, but you can at least take that part of the job seriously enough to present to producers a document that proves your pitch statements that something is low-budget or mid-budget, etc.
Then, if you accomplish something in any way shape or form that's useful in the money side, it moves you a bit out of the writer's box and into the less regulated/non-unionized world of producing.
That's where I am these days - trust me, budgets, shooting schedules and finance plans are a lot more expensive than pitch decks or annual subscriptions to The Black List! But all of these documents are essential to a film production - even more than pitch decks. If you choose a professional wisely (I found my guys on LinkedIn), and you choose which of your scripts wisely to do this task upon, you're actually doing something that the producer would have to do anyway. It certainly shows more commitment, rather than "Hey, I've written a great script, wanna read it?"
And speaking of The Black List: I've always been fond of Franklin Leonard. I had a brief email conversation with him back in his NBC/Universal days. Things didn't work out, but neither did he bawl me out or tell me "no unsolicited submissions" or some such. I followed his Black List development with interest, but I never participated due to never having the money. Later, I found dozens of his readers on LinkedIn bragging about how many scripts they evaluated each day (one of them said 3-5!) and that was it for me.
But my main observation about his site is, I think technically he's charging the wrong side for participation. Why are the sellers paying, and the buyers getting it free? Of course, I get it that the market (we dreamers) dictates why he did it that way. Anyway, he may be bringing in under his $2-3 million annually, like he used to, so I have no sympathy. My advice to him? Start charging the producer/reps/executives $5 or $10 a month as an access fee. He must have them hooked by now, and he can then use that either to soften the financial blow to writers by offering a discount, or hey just use it to pad his account since he's the most prestigious game in town. No argument there.
Or, maybe he should consider what I wrote here, that there's a blurring of the space between writers in their little box over there, and all the 'movie-makers' over there in their big, powerful box. Why not another box that exists for producers to exchange proposals - even if they're 'mere writers' who have just antied up a few grand to get their script's budgets and shooting schedules done?
Never happen, you say? Possibly. I do think some on the producing side are terrified of writers finally figuring out that it just isn't that hard to make movies (aside from finding the financing), whereas it truly is hard to write a great script. And then there are those who just can't comprehend that a writer might actually be prepared to risk a little bit more (having already risked, by writing a spec script with out pay) and get involved in the business side.
By which I mean that I send my proposals around and, learning that I am 'the writer' (but not 'a' writer, for the past six years), a few producers STILL reply with 'no unsolicited submissions'.
The issue you've got is churn. By the time most people realise they've been buying into entirely the wrong approach, they're exhausted and lost artistically, so they quit - often quietly. Then the next batch of aspiring writers come in and buy into the existing delusion.
Screenwriting is really weird in that almost the entirety of people giving advice have barely even had a script read by an industry member, never mind optioned or produced, yet they give advice like industry stalwarts.
If the tides are changing, then that's wonderful. I do, however, remain skeptical and very much doubt writers will be guided in the right direction as a result.
I don't care for Nicholl much myself, I quit competitions after year one, but there's no doubt it's held in high, if not the highest, regard by those trying to break in.
"The issue you've got is churn. By the time most people realise they've been buying into entirely the wrong approach, they're exhausted and lost artistically, so they quit - often quietly. Then the next batch of aspiring writers come in and buy into the existing delusion."
The problem is that most of those trying to make it aren't suitably equipped to do so.
"Screenwriting is really weird in that almost the entirety of people giving advice have barely even had a script read by an industry member, never mind optioned or produced, yet they give advice like industry stalwarts."
Ahh, yes. Reddit and the rest of social media have dialed that up to 11.
It used to be we encountered such people on message boards, hawking their Screenwriting-by-Numbers Howto books while foolishly allowing prospective customers to read the author's screenplays. It was the equivalent of a surgeon trying to sell his services while at the same time giving guided tours of the morgue filled with the bodies from his failed operations.
"If the tides are changing, then that's wonderful. I do, however, remain skeptical and very much doubt writers will be guided in the right direction as a result."
These outfits prey upon the lowest of common denominators who are always desperately looking for the golden ticket. Good writers don't need them.
"I don't care for Nicholl much myself, I quit competitions after year one, but there's no doubt it's held in high, if not the highest, regard by those trying to break in."
Yet all they have to do is spend 30 minutes comparing the list of past winners with various sites, such as IMDb, et al to learn the truth. The few names still active were already established before they won. The rest? Most are gone. It's just another submission fee farming operation.
I created a Coverfly account as a backup backup for some of my work. In the time I've been backing up scripts to that site I've had precisely zero queries. This is because I refuse to waste even a single dime on the scam coverage services and contests they push.
Here at SR -- my primary backup site (outside Google Drive) -- I initially received a handful of read requests, but only up until I changed the status of my scripts to "Example of Work"... then nothing.
Yet, ever since I began posting my work at SimplyScripts, I've had requests from a dozen professional, student and amateur directors for permission to shoot four of my short scripts, due to the fact anybody can click a link and immediately view them. And none of these scripts were ever intended for any kind of development. They were just a bit of fun.
Aspiring writers are paying to create near-impenetrable walls around the things they most want people to see, on sites where thousands of others are doing the same, and where it's very probable no one in the business is looking.
It's not "such people" though. It's pretty much everyone. I could load up a random thread on any screenwriting forum, and it will be full of people giving advice as if they have experience/insight, yet it's just Chinese whispers based on what other amateurs have previously said or what they've concluded in their own heads. In the case of Reddit, the posters are mainly anonymous, so you can't do any due diligence.
"It's not "such people" though. It's pretty much everyone."
It can seem that way.
Look at the profile bios of many on the likes of X -- it's a hilarious laundry list of placings in screenplay competitions no one ever heard of. They list every script they ever wrote as if it's an Oscar-winning movie. Somebody posts a "nugget of wisdom" and within three days everyone else is reposting it without attribution.
IMDb used to have strictly-enforced notability criteria. Now it's nothing more than Facebook for every wannabe Hollywood A-lister. Anyone can create a page and list dozens of projects that are currently in pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-production, which is kiddie kode for "My brother and his friend came up with this one really cool idea for a movie and we're totally gonna write it for the web series we're planning!"...
"I could load up a random thread on any screenwriting forum, and it will be full of people giving advice as if they have experience/insight, yet it's just Chinese whispers based on what other amateurs have previously said or what they've concluded in their own heads."
Fake it 'til ya make it has always been a thing in the business, but social media has amplified it to the point it's hard to find anyone who isn't faking it.
"In the case of Reddit, the posters are mainly anonymous, so you can't do any due diligence."
True, just as with the readers and judges who are crippling the self-esteem of people foolish enough to pay them for the privilege.
However, there are also a bunch of not-so-anonymous guys on Reddit who sell themselves as "produced writers" because one time they sat in at a writers' room for a single episode of some show before not being invited to return.
As always, the proof of the pudding is in the reading. It's then that the facade falls off and the house collapses.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, pretend they can.
Maybe it's fake it until you make it. I don't know. It seems more cultural than that. I saw yet another thread on page count on a forum the other day, and it was full of people stating what is and isn't acceptable, and all I could think was, "What the fuck do you know?". None of the people replying had any real-world insight, and that's before we get into the absurdity of some sort of industry-standard rule existing. It's endemic. The blind are constantly leading the blind. I haven't been able to move the needle in over a decade of trying. Script Revolution suffers because I will not promote the same kind of deluded nonsense and promises other platform/communities encourage.
My limited experience producing has certainly given me a lot of insight into what makes a script appealing and, of course, what it takes to turn it into reality. Nothing is really like what we're told in most forums and blogs.
Regarding the industry member side of the Black List. One of my concerns there has always been the gatekeeping. You have to apply to have access. What about those producers/execs who cannot get on? Surely that's incredibly limiting for their ability to find material and gives those allowed to browse a huge competitive advantage. It's also the only platform I know (other than those which simply list pdfs as links) that does nothing to tell you who's downloaded your material - despite the fact it's from a registered account. Not only is that a huge issue in terms of potential theft and plagiarism, but it's also an issue if you have an agent out shopping your work and they don't know who's already read it.
It's not for me to say, and I don't see how anyone could have the insight to conclude that, but there's certainly a woeful lack of interest in craft development or even seeing this as an art form.
"...I don't see how anyone could have the insight to conclude that..."
On rare occasions I'll read a screenplay in which the writer has done everything right.
Sometimes I see screenplays that could be great with a few more passes and a polish, once the writer has got up to speed.
Often I read screenplays that are mediocre, with little real hope of being anything more.
Most screenplays I see are without merit, and it's almost always because they're written by people who lack any real talent for writing and who have no real interest in it. Their sole motive is that all important "breaking in to Hollywood" moment, and they view screenwriting as the least difficult way to achieve the goal.
Because "anyone can write a screenplay".
"...there's certainly a woeful lack of interest in craft development or even seeing this as an art form."
Yeah. It's always been the bottom rung of the art ladder, lower even than rock music. So, okay, maybe not actually lower than rock music. But way down there.
I'm not reluctant to say anything at all. I just don't know how anybody can make such a sweeping statement about what amounts to tens of thousands of scripts and thousands of writers. Plus, "right", "great", "mediocre", and "without merit" are all subjective anyway, so the exercise is pointless. All we can do, as individuals, is better ourselves as much as possible. I don't understand this obsession with other writers and their perceived level of talent.
"I don't understand this obsession with other writers and their perceived level of talent."
That's okay, I do.
The real obsession is with breaking in, not about writing great screenplays. If most wannabe screenwriters were told the easiest and fastest way to open the door to Hollywood was by writing the worst screenplay possible, that's exactly what they would do without remorse or a second thought.
For every aspiring screenwriter motivated by a love of writing and the desire to tell great stories there are literally thousands of others who just want to be able to tell everyone they're Hollywood insiders. This is why r/Screenwriting has 1.7 million members and almost none of them ever improve, no matter how much good advice they receive.
I don't blame anyone for wanting to turn a passion into a lucrative income stream. That's just logical. I do appreciate that writing has probably the lowest barrier to entry, and it's hard not to be beguiled by the fact that the creative arts has this lottery-like element that suggests anyone can be discovered and launched into a world of fame and fortune.
The big issue I see is that people come into this world with either a corporate or academic mindset, because they know nothing else, and it's the antithesis to how the creative arts actually works. They want rules, scoring, protocols, and hierarchy because it's logical, systematic, and ultimately comforting. In all fairness, the reality of how careers in the arts build is absolutely terrifying to comprehend. So much is based on luck and taste. Talent doesn't play anywhere near the factor people like to think it does, and neither does effort.
I wish people could see the standard of some of the screenplays that circulate within the industry, loved by high-profile producers and sometimes penned by working professionals. I've witnessed some that are truly diabolical, the most painful I've ever read.
I do believe, perhaps naively, that the average aspiring screenwriter could be very capable and efficient if the culture within break-in communities leaned more into the realities of studying the craft, developing a voice, and building a career. That would however mean doing a complete 180 on what's commonly accepted as doing things right, and one of the main reasons I no longer try to change things.
"I don't blame anyone for wanting to turn a passion into a lucrative income stream. That's just logical."
The problem is the nature of their passion: in so many cases it has nothing to do with writing or storytelling. Their passion is the idea of being part of Hollywood. Any part, they don't really care what it is. But nobody ever says, "Directing is easy" or "Anyone can be a movie star", which is why they focus on screenwriting. Because the common refrain is anyone can do it.
"I do appreciate that writing has probably the lowest barrier to entry, and it's hard not to be beguiled by the fact that the creative arts has this lottery-like element that suggests anyone can be discovered and launched into a world of fame and fortune."
It's as bizarre as it is stupid.
Imagine if somebody showed up for auditions at the New York Met only because they got laid off at the tire factory and need to make some quick money? Or if a guy tried out for [Big Sports Team] despite never having played the game before in his life but he likes the idea of telling the people back in [Home Town] that he's now a big shot pro sportsman?
That's essentially what we're seeing in the social media age of screenwriting. There have always been phonies and poseurs and delusional people, but they were never the majority of aspirants that they are today.
"The big issue I see is that people come into this world with either a corporate or academic mindset, because they know nothing else, and it's the antithesis to how the creative arts actually works. They want rules, scoring, protocols, and hierarchy because it's logical, systematic, and ultimately comforting. In all fairness, the reality of how careers in the arts build is absolutely terrifying to comprehend."
This describes the MBA Hollywood executive. They have no interest in the product they market. Hollywood is the largest tax evasion scheme in history, and that's what being an MBA is all about, and it's why corporations exist. They make artistic and creative decisions based on algorithms and spreadsheets.
But the defining characteristic of the literal millions of people trying to break in as screenwriters is their desperate desire to be able to tell people they're in Hollywood, and build a social media footprint consisting of selfies with celebrities.
Yes, they long to be rich too, but not in the same sense as the suits.
"So much is based on luck and taste. Talent doesn't play anywhere near the factor people like to think it does, and neither does effort."
It's always been a "Right Time, Right Place" business, but talent was a factor. Few truly bad writers prospered in the Hollywood of old. Profits were largely dependent on audiences buying into great movies. But that was before Corporate Hollywood purchased Corporate Entertainment Media, and before the Studio-Media synergy of today.
For one thing, every review of every superhero movie would have read, "Silly fun for kids. Overlong." Those reviewers would never have taken an Avengers movie seriously. Because why would they?
"I wish people could see the standard of some of the screenplays that circulate within the industry, loved by high-profile producers and sometimes penned by working professionals. I've witnessed some that are truly diabolical, the most painful I've ever read."
Grab any thousand screenplays at random from the current pool. At best, maybe ten of them would have been considered production worthy by pre-superhero era filmmakers and reviewers. But now half of them get high scores on TBL, because they're being "evaluated" by clueless kids who think Save the Cat is classic literature.
It's doubly awful when you bear in mind just how many crappy movies were made back in the "good old days". There were a lot. And yet most of those had better screenplays than the majority of scripts being written today.
"I do believe, perhaps naively, that the average aspiring screenwriter could be very capable and efficient if the culture within break-in communities leaned more into the realities of studying the craft, developing a voice, and building a career. That would however mean doing a complete 180 on what's commonly accepted as doing things right, and one of the main reasons I no longer try to change things."
This would probably be true if the average aspiring screenwriter was trying to break in because they love writing and movies and storytelling. Alas, the majority don't.
Again, I don't see how a lot of these conclusions can be drawn without assumption. Every aspiring screenwriter I've seen has gotten into writing because they have a passion for it. While the shot of fame and fortune is there, I wouldn't say I've ever picked up on it as the main driving force initially. I have seen some weird stuff, though. There was a guy on Stage 32 who said that he wrote a script to prove his stepdaughter wrong about faith - he sounded a hoot. I also do see a lot of references to the red carpet, awards, and Hollywood. I saw a guy on Facebook announce that those not talking to him now better not expect to be able to talk with him -when- he wins an Oscar. I appreciate that some people live preoccupied with where things might go.
I do also see parallels with the crypto investing world. R/screenwriting may as well be just wallstreetbets for writers, with the same deluded posts about what it takes and what's going to work.
What I feel happens is people come in because they want to write and quickly get caught up in this collective obsession with the top 0.1% of the business, usually at the expense of the remaining 99.9%. A lot of it is because that 99.9% just isn't really discussed, or is at least dismissed as second rate and not worth aiming for.
Regarding industry members. I've never met one who doesn't care about making a good movie. But then I've zero experience with the studio system.
I just rarely participate now. There's the pushback, the deluded, the haters, the stalkers, the hucksters, and the corrupt admin. I've got this platform. I've got my book. I'm not interested in trying to make a river run backwards.
It's such a social media perception of reality these days. Somebody pointed out a deficency? Hater! Shout 'em down until they're canceled and silent.
Most anyone can write a screenplay but few can write one worth reading and fewer still can write one worth producing. But of course we no longer differentiate between "anyone can write a screenplay" and "anyone can write a good screenplay"; because exclusive, and exclusive is bad.
Reddit Screenwriting represents the reality. It's a million deluded kids and their wretched screenplays about kids.
Oth, this site and the likes of SimplyScripts mostly (mostly...) attracts those who love to write and those who love great screenplays and stories. Hanging out here and at SS will skew your perspective. Reddit brings people back to Earth.
I mean, there's indeed a chance I've created a bubble for myself. I disengaged with most communities a while back. I tend to be seen as a bit of a heathen by the elders. I couldn't contribute to the big Facebook screenwriting group because some guy called Larry doesn't understand what Script Revolution is. Then there's some guy called Bob with a book he constantly pushes, who hates my advice because it isn't mean and trite. I can't contribute on r/screenwriting because the most efficient way for me to help people is to direct them to all the articles I've written - but posting links is banned. Then there's the numerous "consultants" I've pissed off over the years because I've always seen (and called out) many of them for what they really are - opinionated writers with no actual credits or industry experience. I used to be ignored, but since building up this platform (which got zero support outside of Simply Scripts and Stage 32 BTW), and breaking into the industry, the pushback has gotten more and more aggressive. Stage 32 is proving tough at the moment as I currently have a stalker on there trying to bash my reputation at every opportunity. Guess what, their writing partner is one of those consultants I called out years ago.
If I go on r/screenwriting now I know it will be one of three types of post;
a) Am I allowed to do 'x'? (Such as use the letter 'a' more than 26 times in the first act.) b) Here's my last 7 Black List evaluations, what do people think? c) I'm a top studio writer. Here's how it all works. No, I'm not going to give my name.
If I go on Facebook, it'll be;
a) You all suck. You should be ashamed. Buy my book. b) Which competitions are legit? I plan to enter a couple of dozen. c) jus finished my first screneplay... how do I e.mail stephen spielburg
In other news, I got my first pass for a Stage 32 OWA. Not a pass at the forwarding stage from Stage 32 but a pass from a named producer the script was submitted to. So the rejection is real at least. The message from Stage 32 was kindly written and didn't try to sell anything.
"I mean, there's indeed a chance I've created a bubble for myself. I disengaged with most communities a while back. I tend to be seen as a bit of a heathen by the elders."
Seriously, as an actual old guy myself, I believe there's some real justification for the ageism of Hollywood when it comes to screenwriting. The number of old(er) writers who don't become mired in Good Old Days land is depressingly small.
"Bah! The last great movies were made in 19xx! Everything since then has been crap! BAH!"
"I couldn't contribute to the big Facebook screenwriting group because some guy called Larry doesn't understand what Script Revolution is."
Wait. There's a Facebook screenwriting group? This shouldn't surprise me, I guess... yet for some reason it kinda does.
"Then there's some guy called Bob with a book he constantly pushes, who hates my advice because it isn't mean and trite."
The trouble is that almost any advice that isn't "Z0MFG, this is the best script I ever read, you're totally gonna be rich and famous!!!!11" is lambasted as "mean and trite".
Screenwriters have become snowflakes simply as a result of the massive influx of kiddies with big delusions, who demand "brutally honest" critiques despite that being the last thing they actually want or expect.
Reddit is almost certainly the biggest and best (worst?) example of this. Post anything but glowing praise about another writer's work and you'll be savagely roasted for being "mean" and for not being supportive of fellow writers. It doesn't matter how bad that writer's writing and how objective and impersonal your review: if it's construed as being in any sense negative you become public enemy number one; and it's always construed as negative.
"I can't contribute on r/screenwriting because the most efficient way for me to help people is to direct them to all the articles I've written - but posting links is banned."
Yep.
As is questioning TBL and/or screenwriting competitions in any way.
Also, don't post a good and well-written script if you're not a mod's pet, or it will be deleted as "Low Effort" (because they can't come up with a better reason) and you'll likely be permabanned.
In other words, the rampant insecurity of the mods and most of the sub's members is off the scale to an incalculable extent.
"Then there's the numerous "consultants" I've pissed off over the years because I've always seen (and called out) many of them for what they really are - opinionated writers with no actual credits or industry experience."
But... but... but... they talk so big on X and TikTok! Surely they are deeply embedded industry insiders with access to all the biggest players? Because no way would some 20-something nobody who has never been produced, never been sold, never been optioned, and probably never even completed a screenplay lie on social media about being a Hollywood bigshot!
"I used to be ignored, but since building up this platform (which got zero support outside of Simply Scripts and Stage 32 BTW), and breaking into the industry, the pushback has gotten more and more aggressive. Stage 32 is proving tough at the moment as I currently have a stalker on there trying to bash my reputation at every opportunity. Guess what, their writing partner is one of those consultants I called out years ago."
Were you ever active at the old IMDb screenwriting forum? How I miss that place. It was an asylum.
One regular there [who shall remain nameless] was either the cleverest troll ever, or just completely out of his mind. I'm going with the latter. But he posted endless lunatic comments about the challenges he faced as a professional screenwriter, despite the fact he never completed even a single screenplay. It may be that he never even begun to write one.
When IMDb deleted their forums and turned the site into Facebook for Wannabes, I assumed I would never again enjoy the pleasure of that guy's insanity...
...only to years later discover he had transferred his attention to the Stage 32 forums. Sad, because I had no idea those forums even existed until recently. The years of utter gibberish I missed out on. Makes me want to weep.
"If I go on r/screenwriting now I know it will be one of three types of post;
a) Am I allowed to do 'x'? (Such as use the letter 'a' more than 26 times in the first act.) b) Here's my last 7 Black List evaluations, what do people think? c) I'm a top studio writer. Here's how it all works. No, I'm not going to give my name.
"If I go on Facebook, it'll be;
a) You all suck. You should be ashamed. Buy my book. b) Which competitions are legit? I plan to enter a couple of dozen. c) jus finished my first screneplay... how do I e.mail stephen spielburg"
Lol. In a nutshell.
There's one HowTo book writer who stalked/flamed me for years. His screenplays are objectively awful, little more than near-perfect examples of how not to write screenplays, but he lucked into the direct-to-video era and sold a few for pennies that were eventually produced with a bunch of C-Listers.
Those films average 1-2 stars on IMDb.
However, the fact they were produced was enough to convince the guy he is God's gift to screenwriting, hence all the learned HowTo bibles.
Eventually he branched out into self-published novels, and those are at least as bad as his screenplays — "He had a meeting at the studio at 10 a.m. in the morning..." (an actual line from one of his books) — but of course now he's also God's gift to novelists, and attacks any who dare question this assertion.
"In other news, I got my first pass for a Stage 32 OWA. Not a pass at the forwarding stage from Stage 32 but a pass from a named producer the script was submitted to. So the rejection is real at least."
It often feels as if rejection is the only real thing in this business.
"The message from Stage 32 was kindly written and didn't try to sell anything."
Perhaps the years of criticism is finally sinking in with somebody.
In all fairness, my credited movies have been panned on IMDb, and I've ended up self-publishing a load of novellas. One of my trolls loves to point out the former, and there's not a lot I can do about that. It's brutal. The indie world has so little support. I'm lucky in that my films have been popular, so I have that audience validation, plus, there are respectable producers who love my work, but there's next to nothing to keep you going from the very world you're part of. Some of the negative reviews are very personal, and you'd think that's a line not to be crossed. There's a blogger/critic who hates any of my films becoming popular too, and has to make a point in his articles that he thinks the movies aren't very good.
The more experience I gain, the more I can see why anybody who actually makes movies chooses to check out of the online world. It's the upside down.
There is indeed a huge Facebook screenwriting group, and, like most of them, it's a bit of a hellscape populated with nutjobs.
"In all fairness, my credited movies have been panned on IMDb, and I've ended up self-publishing a load of novellas."
But do your characters have meetings at 10 a.m. in the morning? Or are you a competent writer instead....
One of the fun things about IMDb was browsing the user ratings and reviews of "small" projects. They almost always received one hundred 10-star ratings and one hundred 1-star ratings, and almost none in between, as the filmmakers warred with their critics.
The positive user reviews were obviously written by the filmmakers, who constantly dueled with negative reviews written by people determined to besmirch the filmmakers and their film(s).
Social media has almost nothing going for it.
"One of my trolls loves to point out the former, and there's not a lot I can do about that. It's brutal."
The only thing that differentiates this generation from any other is social media, and it's not a proud distinction.
"The indie world has so little support. I'm lucky in that my films have been popular, so I have that audience validation, plus, there are respectable producers who love my work, but there's next to nothing to keep you going from the very world you're part of."
It's a rough business, no doubt about that. But then, so is law, medicine, finance, and academia. And those fields usually demand far more from their aspirants.
"Some of the negative reviews are very personal, and you'd think that's a line not to be crossed."
That's when a review can be dismissed as worthless because it's obviously little more than the hatchet job of some fool with a demented vendetta.
"There's a blogger/critic who hates any of my films becoming popular too, and has to make a point in his articles that he thinks the movies aren't very good."
Because then he wins something something something somehow!
The best part, of course, is that in most cases those bloggers/critics have never written and/or produced anything anyone in their right mind would ever want to sit through, let alone pay for.
"The more experience I gain, the more I can see why anybody who actually makes movies chooses to check out of the online world. It's the upside down."
Understandable. The showrunner of the first Big Boy show to hire me warned everyone on staff not to visit the then-fledgling world of online fan sites. He was right to do so.
"There is indeed a huge Facebook screenwriting group, and, like most of them, it's a bit of a hellscape populated with nutjobs."
I've written before about my experience when I had a film sitting at around 8/10 on IMDb, and then a torrent of 1-star reviews came flooding in over the period of a few days. It was horrid and relentless. Again, IMDb does not have your back, despite the impact that's going to have on the performance of your film. Some say it's when a low-budget film goes onto the big piracy sites. Some say it's a result of people bulk buying negative ratings/reviews to tank projects. All I know is that I take IMDb ratings with a grain of salt these days. It's not policed well, and I'd question the purpose.
IMDb is effectively worthless. That site used to have strictly enforced notability requirements, but now anyone can create any entry for themselves as if it's Facebook, and their completely imaginary bio and filmography info is never challenged, even when it's some 17-year-old Bangladeshi kid claiming to be the lead in Ridley Scott's next five movies.*
Wrt user reviews and ratings it's long been a case of Shill vs Troll.
A page for a tiny "homemade" indie is created. From day one it has a bunch of gushing reviews about how it's the greatest film ever made and Hollywood is abuzz with Oscar talk. Everyone in the film is destined to be the Next Big Thing. The film receives fifty 10-star ratings and no others. All this is of course the work of those involved with the film via a bunch of alt accounts.
However, the trolls soon find it and pounce. It may be random or it may be targeted and personal, but whatever the motive they leave a bunch of stinkbomb reviews and fifty 1-star ratings, and nothing else.
IMDb attempted to combat this by tweaking the rating algorithm to largely ignore 1-star and 10-star scores, and so the shills and trolls began spreading the numbers a little, but there was no disguising the attempts of both sides to skew the results.
In the end there's a vast pile of little films with 5/10-star averaged scores and a hilarious mishmash of either wonderful or horrific reviews and nothing in between.
IMDb wants everybody to pay for Pro accounts. Great, but what happens to Pro when millions of people are using it and IMDb decides its margin is now too small to bother with moderating it anymore? Because no way they would ever employ more admins. Much more cost effective to just fire those few they have and turn Pro into the same worthless unpoliced free-for-all as non-Pro IMDb.
It all comes back to the fact almost everything on the Internet aimed at screenwriting and filmmaking is little more than a blatant commercial scam.
My biggest concern with IMDb is that it's owned by a big studio/distributor, and thus there's a massive conflict of interest. Surely it's in the site owner's interest to have films made by or distributed by competing platforms look as terrible as possible?
"My biggest concern with IMDb is that it's owned by a big studio/distributor, and thus there's a massive conflict of interest. Surely it's in the site owner's interest to have films made by or distributed by competing platforms look as terrible as possible?"
There's certainly no particular reason to trust the site to be impartial and unbiased. Then again, IMDb is hardly alone in this respect. Most film-related sites share similar conflicts of interest when it comes right down to it.
"Regarding the nutter on IMDb who ended up on Stage 32, would his name rhyme with Reno Pala by any chance?"
Not the one I'm thinking of, but then I almost never visit the site and so am unfamiliar with other members and users. Far as I could tell, the guy from the IMDb forums isn't a prolific poster at Stage 32's forum these days. SAD!
I just wondered, as there's been a few absolute nutcases on there over the years, including one who was on the run from the authorities for locking her kids up in cages. Each was allowed to post on there for far too long, and it was scary how many people they drew in.
"I just wondered, as there's been a few absolute nutcases on there over the years, including one who was on the run from the authorities for locking her kids up in cages. Each was allowed to post on there for far too long, and it was scary how many people they drew in."
Screenwriting does seem to attract its fair share of loonies, and now more than ever.
"Back on the topic of OWAs, it's been nothing but rapid rejection lately. Brutal."
The S32 Writers Room cost $39 per month. There are about a dozen OWA's per month. About four to five scripts get selected for each OWA. At an estimated membership of 3000 writers that works out to about a one in fifty chance of having a script selected per month. In two years I had two scripts selected. So my cost was almost five hundred dollars per script. Both rejected. The most successful Writers Room member has had about 26 selections. Nothing has come of any of those selections thus far.
At 16 years and counting, my journey to seeing my first film made has been long, arduous and eventful. I'd like to say I've learned a lot - and I have - but mostly it's been a lesson learned here, start over, a lesson learned there, start over. Along the way, thank goodness, I wrote and therefore accrued a lot of screenplays to take to market. So, the biggest lesson? Never stop writing. And never give up on your old material; keep polishing it.
Yet, on July 1, 2018, I did stop writing. It wasn't writer's block, nor discouragement. In fact, it was a sort of encouragement, from a company who'd read a few of my things and told me they'd be interested in coming aboard if I had a package.
A 'package'? What's that?
Well, we all know more or less, but how do you get one? More email blasts? Um, well, I tried that and it was just another lesson learned, start over (sort of). But what it did teach me, and is possibly relevant to all of you - the more experienced you are and the more scripts you have at your disposal, the better - is that writers need to be more entrepreneurial. You're not applying (typically) for a full-time job, right?
But wait, don't we already give great deals to producers - like free scripts or low-cost options, or free polishes, etc.?
Naw, many of them want more, or something different. And, unfortunately, that 'something' also usually costs a pretty penny, so it's not like I have do-it-yourself or free 'key to the kingdom' advice, today.
Pitchdecks are close, and they may help the marketing department of a producer, which is useful, but what talks the most is MONEY. Aside from bringing money to the table, another option is to try to help to raise said financing. Nobody has millions to spare, but you can at least take that part of the job seriously enough to present to producers a document that proves your pitch statements that something is low-budget or mid-budget, etc.
Then, if you accomplish something in any way shape or form that's useful in the money side, it moves you a bit out of the writer's box and into the less regulated/non-unionized world of producing.
That's where I am these days - trust me, budgets, shooting schedules and finance plans are a lot more expensive than pitch decks or annual subscriptions to The Black List! But all of these documents are essential to a film production - even more than pitch decks. If you choose a professional wisely (I found my guys on LinkedIn), and you choose which of your scripts wisely to do this task upon, you're actually doing something that the producer would have to do anyway. It certainly shows more commitment, rather than "Hey, I've written a great script, wanna read it?"
And speaking of The Black List: I've always been fond of Franklin Leonard. I had a brief email conversation with him back in his NBC/Universal days. Things didn't work out, but neither did he bawl me out or tell me "no unsolicited submissions" or some such. I followed his Black List development with interest, but I never participated due to never having the money. Later, I found dozens of his readers on LinkedIn bragging about how many scripts they evaluated each day (one of them said 3-5!) and that was it for me.
But my main observation about his site is, I think technically he's charging the wrong side for participation. Why are the sellers paying, and the buyers getting it free? Of course, I get it that the market (we dreamers) dictates why he did it that way. Anyway, he may be bringing in under his $2-3 million annually, like he used to, so I have no sympathy. My advice to him? Start charging the producer/reps/executives $5 or $10 a month as an access fee. He must have them hooked by now, and he can then use that either to soften the financial blow to writers by offering a discount, or hey just use it to pad his account since he's the most prestigious game in town. No argument there.
Or, maybe he should consider what I wrote here, that there's a blurring of the space between writers in their little box over there, and all the 'movie-makers' over there in their big, powerful box. Why not another box that exists for producers to exchange proposals - even if they're 'mere writers' who have just antied up a few grand to get their script's budgets and shooting schedules done?
Never happen, you say? Possibly. I do think some on the producing side are terrified of writers finally figuring out that it just isn't that hard to make movies (aside from finding the financing), whereas it truly is hard to write a great script. And then there are those who just can't comprehend that a writer might actually be prepared to risk a little bit more (having already risked, by writing a spec script with out pay) and get involved in the business side.
By which I mean that I send my proposals around and, learning that I am 'the writer' (but not 'a' writer, for the past six years), a few producers STILL reply with 'no unsolicited submissions'.
Pretty clueless. And probably A.I. generated.
The issue you've got is churn. By the time most people realise they've been buying into entirely the wrong approach, they're exhausted and lost artistically, so they quit - often quietly. Then the next batch of aspiring writers come in and buy into the existing delusion.
Screenwriting is really weird in that almost the entirety of people giving advice have barely even had a script read by an industry member, never mind optioned or produced, yet they give advice like industry stalwarts.
If the tides are changing, then that's wonderful. I do, however, remain skeptical and very much doubt writers will be guided in the right direction as a result.
I don't care for Nicholl much myself, I quit competitions after year one, but there's no doubt it's held in high, if not the highest, regard by those trying to break in.
"The issue you've got is churn. By the time most people realise they've been buying into entirely the wrong approach, they're exhausted and lost artistically, so they quit - often quietly. Then the next batch of aspiring writers come in and buy into the existing delusion."
The problem is that most of those trying to make it aren't suitably equipped to do so.
"Screenwriting is really weird in that almost the entirety of people giving advice have barely even had a script read by an industry member, never mind optioned or produced, yet they give advice like industry stalwarts."
Ahh, yes. Reddit and the rest of social media have dialed that up to 11.
It used to be we encountered such people on message boards, hawking their Screenwriting-by-Numbers Howto books while foolishly allowing prospective customers to read the author's screenplays. It was the equivalent of a surgeon trying to sell his services while at the same time giving guided tours of the morgue filled with the bodies from his failed operations.
"If the tides are changing, then that's wonderful. I do, however, remain skeptical and very much doubt writers will be guided in the right direction as a result."
These outfits prey upon the lowest of common denominators who are always desperately looking for the golden ticket. Good writers don't need them.
"I don't care for Nicholl much myself, I quit competitions after year one, but there's no doubt it's held in high, if not the highest, regard by those trying to break in."
Yet all they have to do is spend 30 minutes comparing the list of past winners with various sites, such as IMDb, et al to learn the truth. The few names still active were already established before they won. The rest? Most are gone. It's just another submission fee farming operation.
I created a Coverfly account as a backup backup for some of my work. In the time I've been backing up scripts to that site I've had precisely zero queries. This is because I refuse to waste even a single dime on the scam coverage services and contests they push.
Here at SR -- my primary backup site (outside Google Drive) -- I initially received a handful of read requests, but only up until I changed the status of my scripts to "Example of Work"... then nothing.
Yet, ever since I began posting my work at SimplyScripts, I've had requests from a dozen professional, student and amateur directors for permission to shoot four of my short scripts, due to the fact anybody can click a link and immediately view them. And none of these scripts were ever intended for any kind of development. They were just a bit of fun.
Aspiring writers are paying to create near-impenetrable walls around the things they most want people to see, on sites where thousands of others are doing the same, and where it's very probable no one in the business is looking.
It's not "such people" though. It's pretty much everyone. I could load up a random thread on any screenwriting forum, and it will be full of people giving advice as if they have experience/insight, yet it's just Chinese whispers based on what other amateurs have previously said or what they've concluded in their own heads. In the case of Reddit, the posters are mainly anonymous, so you can't do any due diligence.
"It's not "such people" though. It's pretty much everyone."
It can seem that way.
Look at the profile bios of many on the likes of X -- it's a hilarious laundry list of placings in screenplay competitions no one ever heard of. They list every script they ever wrote as if it's an Oscar-winning movie. Somebody posts a "nugget of wisdom" and within three days everyone else is reposting it without attribution.
IMDb used to have strictly-enforced notability criteria. Now it's nothing more than Facebook for every wannabe Hollywood A-lister. Anyone can create a page and list dozens of projects that are currently in pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-production, which is kiddie kode for "My brother and his friend came up with this one really cool idea for a movie and we're totally gonna write it for the web series we're planning!"...
"I could load up a random thread on any screenwriting forum, and it will be full of people giving advice as if they have experience/insight, yet it's just Chinese whispers based on what other amateurs have previously said or what they've concluded in their own heads."
Fake it 'til ya make it has always been a thing in the business, but social media has amplified it to the point it's hard to find anyone who isn't faking it.
"In the case of Reddit, the posters are mainly anonymous, so you can't do any due diligence."
True, just as with the readers and judges who are crippling the self-esteem of people foolish enough to pay them for the privilege.
However, there are also a bunch of not-so-anonymous guys on Reddit who sell themselves as "produced writers" because one time they sat in at a writers' room for a single episode of some show before not being invited to return.
As always, the proof of the pudding is in the reading. It's then that the facade falls off and the house collapses.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, pretend they can.
Maybe it's fake it until you make it. I don't know. It seems more cultural than that. I saw yet another thread on page count on a forum the other day, and it was full of people stating what is and isn't acceptable, and all I could think was, "What the fuck do you know?". None of the people replying had any real-world insight, and that's before we get into the absurdity of some sort of industry-standard rule existing. It's endemic. The blind are constantly leading the blind. I haven't been able to move the needle in over a decade of trying. Script Revolution suffers because I will not promote the same kind of deluded nonsense and promises other platform/communities encourage.
My limited experience producing has certainly given me a lot of insight into what makes a script appealing and, of course, what it takes to turn it into reality. Nothing is really like what we're told in most forums and blogs.
Regarding the industry member side of the Black List. One of my concerns there has always been the gatekeeping. You have to apply to have access. What about those producers/execs who cannot get on? Surely that's incredibly limiting for their ability to find material and gives those allowed to browse a huge competitive advantage. It's also the only platform I know (other than those which simply list pdfs as links) that does nothing to tell you who's downloaded your material - despite the fact it's from a registered account. Not only is that a huge issue in terms of potential theft and plagiarism, but it's also an issue if you have an agent out shopping your work and they don't know who's already read it.
In the end it still comes down to a talent for screenwriting, and the sad truth is most people do not possess it.
It's not for me to say, and I don't see how anyone could have the insight to conclude that, but there's certainly a woeful lack of interest in craft development or even seeing this as an art form.
"It's not for me to say..."
Your reluctance to say it is understandable.
"...I don't see how anyone could have the insight to conclude that..."
On rare occasions I'll read a screenplay in which the writer has done everything right.
Sometimes I see screenplays that could be great with a few more passes and a polish, once the writer has got up to speed.
Often I read screenplays that are mediocre, with little real hope of being anything more.
Most screenplays I see are without merit, and it's almost always because they're written by people who lack any real talent for writing and who have no real interest in it. Their sole motive is that all important "breaking in to Hollywood" moment, and they view screenwriting as the least difficult way to achieve the goal.
Because "anyone can write a screenplay".
"...there's certainly a woeful lack of interest in craft development or even seeing this as an art form."
Yeah. It's always been the bottom rung of the art ladder, lower even than rock music. So, okay, maybe not actually lower than rock music. But way down there.
I'm not reluctant to say anything at all. I just don't know how anybody can make such a sweeping statement about what amounts to tens of thousands of scripts and thousands of writers. Plus, "right", "great", "mediocre", and "without merit" are all subjective anyway, so the exercise is pointless. All we can do, as individuals, is better ourselves as much as possible. I don't understand this obsession with other writers and their perceived level of talent.
"I don't understand this obsession with other writers and their perceived level of talent."
That's okay, I do.
The real obsession is with breaking in, not about writing great screenplays. If most wannabe screenwriters were told the easiest and fastest way to open the door to Hollywood was by writing the worst screenplay possible, that's exactly what they would do without remorse or a second thought.
For every aspiring screenwriter motivated by a love of writing and the desire to tell great stories there are literally thousands of others who just want to be able to tell everyone they're Hollywood insiders. This is why r/Screenwriting has 1.7 million members and almost none of them ever improve, no matter how much good advice they receive.
I don't blame anyone for wanting to turn a passion into a lucrative income stream. That's just logical. I do appreciate that writing has probably the lowest barrier to entry, and it's hard not to be beguiled by the fact that the creative arts has this lottery-like element that suggests anyone can be discovered and launched into a world of fame and fortune.
The big issue I see is that people come into this world with either a corporate or academic mindset, because they know nothing else, and it's the antithesis to how the creative arts actually works. They want rules, scoring, protocols, and hierarchy because it's logical, systematic, and ultimately comforting. In all fairness, the reality of how careers in the arts build is absolutely terrifying to comprehend. So much is based on luck and taste. Talent doesn't play anywhere near the factor people like to think it does, and neither does effort.
I wish people could see the standard of some of the screenplays that circulate within the industry, loved by high-profile producers and sometimes penned by working professionals. I've witnessed some that are truly diabolical, the most painful I've ever read.
I do believe, perhaps naively, that the average aspiring screenwriter could be very capable and efficient if the culture within break-in communities leaned more into the realities of studying the craft, developing a voice, and building a career. That would however mean doing a complete 180 on what's commonly accepted as doing things right, and one of the main reasons I no longer try to change things.
"I don't blame anyone for wanting to turn a passion into a lucrative income stream. That's just logical."
The problem is the nature of their passion: in so many cases it has nothing to do with writing or storytelling. Their passion is the idea of being part of Hollywood. Any part, they don't really care what it is. But nobody ever says, "Directing is easy" or "Anyone can be a movie star", which is why they focus on screenwriting. Because the common refrain is anyone can do it.
"I do appreciate that writing has probably the lowest barrier to entry, and it's hard not to be beguiled by the fact that the creative arts has this lottery-like element that suggests anyone can be discovered and launched into a world of fame and fortune."
It's as bizarre as it is stupid.
Imagine if somebody showed up for auditions at the New York Met only because they got laid off at the tire factory and need to make some quick money? Or if a guy tried out for [Big Sports Team] despite never having played the game before in his life but he likes the idea of telling the people back in [Home Town] that he's now a big shot pro sportsman?
That's essentially what we're seeing in the social media age of screenwriting. There have always been phonies and poseurs and delusional people, but they were never the majority of aspirants that they are today.
"The big issue I see is that people come into this world with either a corporate or academic mindset, because they know nothing else, and it's the antithesis to how the creative arts actually works. They want rules, scoring, protocols, and hierarchy because it's logical, systematic, and ultimately comforting. In all fairness, the reality of how careers in the arts build is absolutely terrifying to comprehend."
This describes the MBA Hollywood executive. They have no interest in the product they market. Hollywood is the largest tax evasion scheme in history, and that's what being an MBA is all about, and it's why corporations exist. They make artistic and creative decisions based on algorithms and spreadsheets.
But the defining characteristic of the literal millions of people trying to break in as screenwriters is their desperate desire to be able to tell people they're in Hollywood, and build a social media footprint consisting of selfies with celebrities.
Yes, they long to be rich too, but not in the same sense as the suits.
"So much is based on luck and taste. Talent doesn't play anywhere near the factor people like to think it does, and neither does effort."
It's always been a "Right Time, Right Place" business, but talent was a factor. Few truly bad writers prospered in the Hollywood of old. Profits were largely dependent on audiences buying into great movies. But that was before Corporate Hollywood purchased Corporate Entertainment Media, and before the Studio-Media synergy of today.
For one thing, every review of every superhero movie would have read, "Silly fun for kids. Overlong." Those reviewers would never have taken an Avengers movie seriously. Because why would they?
"I wish people could see the standard of some of the screenplays that circulate within the industry, loved by high-profile producers and sometimes penned by working professionals. I've witnessed some that are truly diabolical, the most painful I've ever read."
Grab any thousand screenplays at random from the current pool. At best, maybe ten of them would have been considered production worthy by pre-superhero era filmmakers and reviewers. But now half of them get high scores on TBL, because they're being "evaluated" by clueless kids who think Save the Cat is classic literature.
It's doubly awful when you bear in mind just how many crappy movies were made back in the "good old days". There were a lot. And yet most of those had better screenplays than the majority of scripts being written today.
"I do believe, perhaps naively, that the average aspiring screenwriter could be very capable and efficient if the culture within break-in communities leaned more into the realities of studying the craft, developing a voice, and building a career. That would however mean doing a complete 180 on what's commonly accepted as doing things right, and one of the main reasons I no longer try to change things."
This would probably be true if the average aspiring screenwriter was trying to break in because they love writing and movies and storytelling. Alas, the majority don't.
Gift (.pdf, 5 pages + title)
Again, I don't see how a lot of these conclusions can be drawn without assumption. Every aspiring screenwriter I've seen has gotten into writing because they have a passion for it. While the shot of fame and fortune is there, I wouldn't say I've ever picked up on it as the main driving force initially. I have seen some weird stuff, though. There was a guy on Stage 32 who said that he wrote a script to prove his stepdaughter wrong about faith - he sounded a hoot. I also do see a lot of references to the red carpet, awards, and Hollywood. I saw a guy on Facebook announce that those not talking to him now better not expect to be able to talk with him -when- he wins an Oscar. I appreciate that some people live preoccupied with where things might go.
I do also see parallels with the crypto investing world. R/screenwriting may as well be just wallstreetbets for writers, with the same deluded posts about what it takes and what's going to work.
What I feel happens is people come in because they want to write and quickly get caught up in this collective obsession with the top 0.1% of the business, usually at the expense of the remaining 99.9%. A lot of it is because that 99.9% just isn't really discussed, or is at least dismissed as second rate and not worth aiming for.
Regarding industry members. I've never met one who doesn't care about making a good movie. But then I've zero experience with the studio system.
I just rarely participate now. There's the pushback, the deluded, the haters, the stalkers, the hucksters, and the corrupt admin. I've got this platform. I've got my book. I'm not interested in trying to make a river run backwards.
It's such a social media perception of reality these days. Somebody pointed out a deficency? Hater! Shout 'em down until they're canceled and silent.
Most anyone can write a screenplay but few can write one worth reading and fewer still can write one worth producing. But of course we no longer differentiate between "anyone can write a screenplay" and "anyone can write a good screenplay"; because exclusive, and exclusive is bad.
Reddit Screenwriting represents the reality. It's a million deluded kids and their wretched screenplays about kids.
Oth, this site and the likes of SimplyScripts mostly (mostly...) attracts those who love to write and those who love great screenplays and stories. Hanging out here and at SS will skew your perspective. Reddit brings people back to Earth.
I mean, there's indeed a chance I've created a bubble for myself. I disengaged with most communities a while back. I tend to be seen as a bit of a heathen by the elders. I couldn't contribute to the big Facebook screenwriting group because some guy called Larry doesn't understand what Script Revolution is. Then there's some guy called Bob with a book he constantly pushes, who hates my advice because it isn't mean and trite. I can't contribute on r/screenwriting because the most efficient way for me to help people is to direct them to all the articles I've written - but posting links is banned. Then there's the numerous "consultants" I've pissed off over the years because I've always seen (and called out) many of them for what they really are - opinionated writers with no actual credits or industry experience. I used to be ignored, but since building up this platform (which got zero support outside of Simply Scripts and Stage 32 BTW), and breaking into the industry, the pushback has gotten more and more aggressive. Stage 32 is proving tough at the moment as I currently have a stalker on there trying to bash my reputation at every opportunity. Guess what, their writing partner is one of those consultants I called out years ago.
If I go on r/screenwriting now I know it will be one of three types of post;
a) Am I allowed to do 'x'? (Such as use the letter 'a' more than 26 times in the first act.)
b) Here's my last 7 Black List evaluations, what do people think?
c) I'm a top studio writer. Here's how it all works. No, I'm not going to give my name.
If I go on Facebook, it'll be;
a) You all suck. You should be ashamed. Buy my book.
b) Which competitions are legit? I plan to enter a couple of dozen.
c) jus finished my first screneplay... how do I e.mail stephen spielburg
In other news, I got my first pass for a Stage 32 OWA. Not a pass at the forwarding stage from Stage 32 but a pass from a named producer the script was submitted to. So the rejection is real at least. The message from Stage 32 was kindly written and didn't try to sell anything.
"I mean, there's indeed a chance I've created a bubble for myself. I disengaged with most communities a while back. I tend to be seen as a bit of a heathen by the elders."
Seriously, as an actual old guy myself, I believe there's some real justification for the ageism of Hollywood when it comes to screenwriting. The number of old(er) writers who don't become mired in Good Old Days land is depressingly small.
"Bah! The last great movies were made in 19xx! Everything since then has been crap! BAH!"
Old (.pdf 13 pages + title)
"I couldn't contribute to the big Facebook screenwriting group because some guy called Larry doesn't understand what Script Revolution is."
Wait. There's a Facebook screenwriting group? This shouldn't surprise me, I guess... yet for some reason it kinda does.
"Then there's some guy called Bob with a book he constantly pushes, who hates my advice because it isn't mean and trite."
The trouble is that almost any advice that isn't "Z0MFG, this is the best script I ever read, you're totally gonna be rich and famous!!!!11" is lambasted as "mean and trite".
Screenwriters have become snowflakes simply as a result of the massive influx of kiddies with big delusions, who demand "brutally honest" critiques despite that being the last thing they actually want or expect.
Reddit is almost certainly the biggest and best (worst?) example of this. Post anything but glowing praise about another writer's work and you'll be savagely roasted for being "mean" and for not being supportive of fellow writers. It doesn't matter how bad that writer's writing and how objective and impersonal your review: if it's construed as being in any sense negative you become public enemy number one; and it's always construed as negative.
"I can't contribute on r/screenwriting because the most efficient way for me to help people is to direct them to all the articles I've written - but posting links is banned."
Yep.
As is questioning TBL and/or screenwriting competitions in any way.
Also, don't post a good and well-written script if you're not a mod's pet, or it will be deleted as "Low Effort" (because they can't come up with a better reason) and you'll likely be permabanned.
In other words, the rampant insecurity of the mods and most of the sub's members is off the scale to an incalculable extent.
"Then there's the numerous "consultants" I've pissed off over the years because I've always seen (and called out) many of them for what they really are - opinionated writers with no actual credits or industry experience."
But... but... but... they talk so big on X and TikTok! Surely they are deeply embedded industry insiders with access to all the biggest players? Because no way would some 20-something nobody who has never been produced, never been sold, never been optioned, and probably never even completed a screenplay lie on social media about being a Hollywood bigshot!
"I used to be ignored, but since building up this platform (which got zero support outside of Simply Scripts and Stage 32 BTW), and breaking into the industry, the pushback has gotten more and more aggressive. Stage 32 is proving tough at the moment as I currently have a stalker on there trying to bash my reputation at every opportunity. Guess what, their writing partner is one of those consultants I called out years ago."
Were you ever active at the old IMDb screenwriting forum? How I miss that place. It was an asylum.
One regular there [who shall remain nameless] was either the cleverest troll ever, or just completely out of his mind. I'm going with the latter. But he posted endless lunatic comments about the challenges he faced as a professional screenwriter, despite the fact he never completed even a single screenplay. It may be that he never even begun to write one.
When IMDb deleted their forums and turned the site into Facebook for Wannabes, I assumed I would never again enjoy the pleasure of that guy's insanity...
...only to years later discover he had transferred his attention to the Stage 32 forums. Sad, because I had no idea those forums even existed until recently. The years of utter gibberish I missed out on. Makes me want to weep.
"If I go on r/screenwriting now I know it will be one of three types of post;
a) Am I allowed to do 'x'? (Such as use the letter 'a' more than 26 times in the first act.)
b) Here's my last 7 Black List evaluations, what do people think?
c) I'm a top studio writer. Here's how it all works. No, I'm not going to give my name.
"If I go on Facebook, it'll be;
a) You all suck. You should be ashamed. Buy my book.
b) Which competitions are legit? I plan to enter a couple of dozen.
c) jus finished my first screneplay... how do I e.mail stephen spielburg"
Lol. In a nutshell.
There's one HowTo book writer who stalked/flamed me for years. His screenplays are objectively awful, little more than near-perfect examples of how not to write screenplays, but he lucked into the direct-to-video era and sold a few for pennies that were eventually produced with a bunch of C-Listers.
Those films average 1-2 stars on IMDb.
However, the fact they were produced was enough to convince the guy he is God's gift to screenwriting, hence all the learned HowTo bibles.
Eventually he branched out into self-published novels, and those are at least as bad as his screenplays — "He had a meeting at the studio at 10 a.m. in the morning..." (an actual line from one of his books) — but of course now he's also God's gift to novelists, and attacks any who dare question this assertion.
"In other news, I got my first pass for a Stage 32 OWA. Not a pass at the forwarding stage from Stage 32 but a pass from a named producer the script was submitted to. So the rejection is real at least."
It often feels as if rejection is the only real thing in this business.
"The message from Stage 32 was kindly written and didn't try to sell anything."
Perhaps the years of criticism is finally sinking in with somebody.
In all fairness, my credited movies have been panned on IMDb, and I've ended up self-publishing a load of novellas. One of my trolls loves to point out the former, and there's not a lot I can do about that. It's brutal. The indie world has so little support. I'm lucky in that my films have been popular, so I have that audience validation, plus, there are respectable producers who love my work, but there's next to nothing to keep you going from the very world you're part of. Some of the negative reviews are very personal, and you'd think that's a line not to be crossed. There's a blogger/critic who hates any of my films becoming popular too, and has to make a point in his articles that he thinks the movies aren't very good.
The more experience I gain, the more I can see why anybody who actually makes movies chooses to check out of the online world. It's the upside down.
There is indeed a huge Facebook screenwriting group, and, like most of them, it's a bit of a hellscape populated with nutjobs.
"In all fairness, my credited movies have been panned on IMDb, and I've ended up self-publishing a load of novellas."
But do your characters have meetings at 10 a.m. in the morning? Or are you a competent writer instead....
One of the fun things about IMDb was browsing the user ratings and reviews of "small" projects. They almost always received one hundred 10-star ratings and one hundred 1-star ratings, and almost none in between, as the filmmakers warred with their critics.
The positive user reviews were obviously written by the filmmakers, who constantly dueled with negative reviews written by people determined to besmirch the filmmakers and their film(s).
Social media has almost nothing going for it.
"One of my trolls loves to point out the former, and there's not a lot I can do about that. It's brutal."
The only thing that differentiates this generation from any other is social media, and it's not a proud distinction.
"The indie world has so little support. I'm lucky in that my films have been popular, so I have that audience validation, plus, there are respectable producers who love my work, but there's next to nothing to keep you going from the very world you're part of."
It's a rough business, no doubt about that. But then, so is law, medicine, finance, and academia. And those fields usually demand far more from their aspirants.
"Some of the negative reviews are very personal, and you'd think that's a line not to be crossed."
That's when a review can be dismissed as worthless because it's obviously little more than the hatchet job of some fool with a demented vendetta.
"There's a blogger/critic who hates any of my films becoming popular too, and has to make a point in his articles that he thinks the movies aren't very good."
Because then he wins something something something somehow!
The best part, of course, is that in most cases those bloggers/critics have never written and/or produced anything anyone in their right mind would ever want to sit through, let alone pay for.
"The more experience I gain, the more I can see why anybody who actually makes movies chooses to check out of the online world. It's the upside down."
Understandable. The showrunner of the first Big Boy show to hire me warned everyone on staff not to visit the then-fledgling world of online fan sites. He was right to do so.
"There is indeed a huge Facebook screenwriting group, and, like most of them, it's a bit of a hellscape populated with nutjobs."
Hard to believe. (/s)
I've written before about my experience when I had a film sitting at around 8/10 on IMDb, and then a torrent of 1-star reviews came flooding in over the period of a few days. It was horrid and relentless. Again, IMDb does not have your back, despite the impact that's going to have on the performance of your film. Some say it's when a low-budget film goes onto the big piracy sites. Some say it's a result of people bulk buying negative ratings/reviews to tank projects. All I know is that I take IMDb ratings with a grain of salt these days. It's not policed well, and I'd question the purpose.
IMDb is effectively worthless. That site used to have strictly enforced notability requirements, but now anyone can create any entry for themselves as if it's Facebook, and their completely imaginary bio and filmography info is never challenged, even when it's some 17-year-old Bangladeshi kid claiming to be the lead in Ridley Scott's next five movies.*
Wrt user reviews and ratings it's long been a case of Shill vs Troll.
A page for a tiny "homemade" indie is created. From day one it has a bunch of gushing reviews about how it's the greatest film ever made and Hollywood is abuzz with Oscar talk. Everyone in the film is destined to be the Next Big Thing. The film receives fifty 10-star ratings and no others. All this is of course the work of those involved with the film via a bunch of alt accounts.
However, the trolls soon find it and pounce. It may be random or it may be targeted and personal, but whatever the motive they leave a bunch of stinkbomb reviews and fifty 1-star ratings, and nothing else.
IMDb attempted to combat this by tweaking the rating algorithm to largely ignore 1-star and 10-star scores, and so the shills and trolls began spreading the numbers a little, but there was no disguising the attempts of both sides to skew the results.
In the end there's a vast pile of little films with 5/10-star averaged scores and a hilarious mishmash of either wonderful or horrific reviews and nothing in between.
IMDb wants everybody to pay for Pro accounts. Great, but what happens to Pro when millions of people are using it and IMDb decides its margin is now too small to bother with moderating it anymore? Because no way they would ever employ more admins. Much more cost effective to just fire those few they have and turn Pro into the same worthless unpoliced free-for-all as non-Pro IMDb.
It all comes back to the fact almost everything on the Internet aimed at screenwriting and filmmaking is little more than a blatant commercial scam.
* I base this example on an actual IMDb bio.
My biggest concern with IMDb is that it's owned by a big studio/distributor, and thus there's a massive conflict of interest. Surely it's in the site owner's interest to have films made by or distributed by competing platforms look as terrible as possible?
Regarding the nutter on IMDb who ended up on Stage 32, would his name rhyme with Reno Pala by any chance?
"My biggest concern with IMDb is that it's owned by a big studio/distributor, and thus there's a massive conflict of interest. Surely it's in the site owner's interest to have films made by or distributed by competing platforms look as terrible as possible?"
There's certainly no particular reason to trust the site to be impartial and unbiased. Then again, IMDb is hardly alone in this respect. Most film-related sites share similar conflicts of interest when it comes right down to it.
"Regarding the nutter on IMDb who ended up on Stage 32, would his name rhyme with Reno Pala by any chance?"
Not the one I'm thinking of, but then I almost never visit the site and so am unfamiliar with other members and users. Far as I could tell, the guy from the IMDb forums isn't a prolific poster at Stage 32's forum these days. SAD!
I just wondered, as there's been a few absolute nutcases on there over the years, including one who was on the run from the authorities for locking her kids up in cages. Each was allowed to post on there for far too long, and it was scary how many people they drew in.
Back on the topic of OWAs, it's been nothing but rapid rejection lately. Brutal.
"I just wondered, as there's been a few absolute nutcases on there over the years, including one who was on the run from the authorities for locking her kids up in cages. Each was allowed to post on there for far too long, and it was scary how many people they drew in."
Screenwriting does seem to attract its fair share of loonies, and now more than ever.
"Back on the topic of OWAs, it's been nothing but rapid rejection lately. Brutal."
How much do these rejections cost?
It doesn't cost me anything as it's part of the Writer's Room.
The S32 Writers Room cost $39 per month. There are about a dozen OWA's per month. About four to five scripts get selected for each OWA. At an estimated membership of 3000 writers that works out to about a one in fifty chance of having a script selected per month. In two years I had two scripts selected. So my cost was almost five hundred dollars per script. Both rejected. The most successful Writers Room member has had about 26 selections. Nothing has come of any of those selections thus far.
Pages