How Many Shopping Days Until Christmas?

(Well, every day is a shopping day nowadays, so it's 283 by my count.)

I've posted about it before, but thought I'd do a proper update on the Christmas TV project that I'm currently working on. It's been bubbling under other projects that either I or the director have been working for over a year - check any old posts tagged 'Santa Baby' - but now all systems are go, and it's shaping up to be very exciting.

The piece started work as a writing exercise with a writers' group I used to run long ago: a ten minute comedy short film set at Christmas. It came very close to being selected for development money from Screen South, but then they plumped for my other script (which became my first short film 'Lent'). Then, I pitched it on the weekly Wednesday Shooting People bulletin, where it caught the eye of Colin Stevens. Colin has made a number of short films (some samples of which are on the net - check 'em out) and we started out with a regard to making it as a short.

As we were developing it, and I was doing a few rewrites, Colin and I both came to the conclusion that the premise had potential in it to fill a half-hour TV broadcast slot. Colin has a few key production contacts who were interested in the premise. And the story fits into the family feel-good Christmas tale tradition, so it certainly would feel at home in that medium. So, we put our thinking caps on about to how to change and restructure the tale to fit thirty minutes, without stretching the material too thin, and without putting a dent in the central magic of the idea.

This effort culminated in a meeting last week, where we agreed the final changes and amendments over lunch in Canary Wharf. It was a very good meeting, with both us pretty much in accord about the shape of the thing, and both very enthusiastic about getting started. I'm now ironing out the storyline and turning it into a detailed synopsis document. Soon, we'll be going out selling this to other people, pretty hopeful that we can find some collaborators who are as enthusiastic as ourselves.

All being well, Colin will be launching a web presence for the project soon; I'll report on this when it happens. I'll also be blogging and tweeting about any developments as they happen. Watch this space, and wish us luck!

Heads Up

Very late notice, I know, but this is a little forewarning that a film what I wrote "Lent" is going to be screened at 5.30pm, at The Odeon, Aylesbury on Monday 15th September, as part of a programme of Screen South offerings playing at the Short Cuts Film Festival in Buckinghamshire. Details here: http://www.cliffproductions.co.uk/shortcuts08.htm

Alas, I didn't get sufficient notice of this to attend myself, I will instead be at the Writers' Guild event which the venerable Mister Paul Campbell advertises here.  But it's jolly exciting all the same...

Two year retrospective

It's my birthday today, and I'm now closer to 40 than I am to 30, so forgive me if you find me in contemplative mood. I'm currently in the middle of a course; it's nothing to do with screenwriting, it's for the day job. But it's being held in a training centre in Holborn that I attended another course at, almost exactly two years ago. And it was at that course where I took a call telling me my script had been picked for the Film Council's digital shorts programme.

I don't want to blow the event out of all proportion - before that I'd had lots of encouragement from industry professionals, had done lots of courses, written reams and reams, and made many, many no-budget short films. But that phone call meant proper recognition. And budget. So, I mark that day as a starting point of sorts.

Two years later, and I'm reflecting on what I've achieved in that time. I haven't stopped working - up to and including today, I've always had some contracted screenwriting on the go, as well as a healthy amount of spec work, which is good. Conversely, I haven't stopped working at the day job either - the screenwriting I've done has not paid well enough up front for me to reduce my hours toiling in the big smoke. But that's the UK film industry, and I knew what it was like before I started.

It comes down to a question of why one has chosen to write in the first place. I do it, and I don't think I'm a special case, because I'm arrogant enough to think I have something unique to say that might entertain people. I don't do it for the chance of money. Although that would be nice, because something else has happened in those two years - I've rather wonderfully got a family and a mortgage and commitments. And these commitments do impact on the screenwriting, there's no way they could not.

So, I have decided for now to concentrate on developing broadcast opportunities, which will mean trying radio plays and getting a script on Doctors for starters. I have one ongoing short film commitment, which the director and I hope will turn out to be a TV project of sorts too (very exciting - watch this space!). 

As I want to stay based in the UK, it makes sense to concentrate my efforts on an area which has the best chance of providing an eventual income for my family. And the day job allows me to not be in any particular hurry too, as TV's obviously a very competitive arena to break into. I won't be saying goodbye to film forever, and I will obviously revise this policy quick-smart if Steven Spielberg turns up at my door with a shedload of cash to replace Steven Moffat on the next Tin Tin movie. But barring that possibility, it's Au Revoir Cinema for a bit.

One Year On

Just over a year ago, I went to a Writers' Guild event about blogging, and became a convert. Of the crop of blogs that rose up after that event, I'm only aware of Helen Smith's and mine that have survived - but please feel free to post a comment if you were there, and are still posting, I'd love to hear from you. Helen has written a lovely post about her blog birthday, and also a perceptive article for the Guild, which she links to from that page.

I agree with Helen: the best part of blogging is that it has allowed me to meet so many other writers. Not many producers, but a lot of writers; though, one producer who had got my name from Screen South, but had dismissed me as not mature enough for her project because she thought that 'new screenwriter' equated to 'fourteen years old', did give me an interview after seeing a picture on this blog of grizzled old me, with my baby son. I still didn't get the gig, though.

I'm only aware of that one direct job opportunity, but the indirect benefits are massive: the confidence boost of turning up to do some networking knowing there will be a friendly face or two in the crowd, should not be underestimated. The advanced warning of schemes, comps and events; the useful information of the craft expounded by other bloggers; the crystallising of thoughts on my own approach by posting about my own writing; the availability of a willing group of peer reviewers; all these are wonderful things. Praise be to the Blog! And happy birthday to this one.

It seems a good time to revisit the goals I set myself in April last year, and see how I've got on. Here goes:

1. Get into the imdb. Nope - still not there, but now that the sound issues with 'Lent' are dealt with, and hoping it gets some decent distribution, I should be able to get my name in there soon.

2. Get another of my short film scripts produced. A couple of possibilities are still ongoing.

3. Get an agent. Haven't even tried, to be honest. I'm hoping by building up a portfolio of scripts, and getting more commissioned and produced work, that I'll be in a stronger position to approach some agents later on.

4. Get an afternoon play commissioned for Radio 4.No commissions, but some good scripts written in the last year, and some possible leads with producers.

5. Apply to the BBC Writer’s Academy.Applied. Didn't get in. Applying again this year.

6. Write an episode of Doctors. Nope, though I am writing more one-off thirty minute dramas, to learn, and to use as examples of my work.

So, lots of work still to do. If only I'd added 'Get commissioned to write a feature script', I could have ticked one off. I shall add one to the list:

7. Get more commissions to write feature scripts.

And I'll report back on progress in another year's time*


* I will be posting in between then and now too, of course: I know that should be obvious, but my posting rate recently may have caused some to doubt it!!!

Hiatus

Funny old time at the moment: everything has reached a natural pause after my completion of the first draft of the Full On Pictures feature earlier this year. We have received even more positive feedback from various readers, and are keeping our fingers crossed that we’ll hear back from a potential production partner in the next few weeks. Screen South, who are supporting the script development, are also organising a feedback report, and we’ll have a meeting with them soon. After that, I’m going to resume work with the second draft, but when exactly that will be is still up in the air.

So, I’m trying to fit in as much work on other projects into this downtime as I can, always aware that I might have to get stuck into a feature screenplay at any moment. I am continuing to push forward with two short projects that are in development. And, of course, there’s ‘Lent’, the digital short that I wrote which was produced last year. Had a conversation with the producer Ricci-Lee Berry yesterday, and we’ve been awarded some funding (yay!) but it won’t be enough to send our baby off to all the glitzy festivals we intended for it (boo!). We’ve got a lot of work to do getting it out there, and I'm sure I'll soon have some war stories from the crazy adventurous world of short film distribution to share with you. Watch this space.

Six degrees of Kevin Bacon. Mmm.. Bacon.

Not much to post about currently. I'm just working away on various things: mapping out the storyline for the Lou Birks short; got a meeting about draft 2 of the feature this week with producer-director Mark Jay (Mark just had a sell-out Cineworld screening/Q&A of his film 'Dolphins', which he wrote and directed. Kudos to him!); and, another director wants to option one of my screenplays - fingers crossed for that.

Idle musings meanwhile: I caught up the other week with the Extras Christmas special from my newly-purchased replacement PVR, and noticed in the credits that the make-up and hair was done by the wonderful Lisa Cavalli-Green, who also worked in the same capacity on the short film what I wrote, 'Lent'.

This means, trivia fans, that I am only two degrees of separation from Ricky Gervais. And therefore three degrees of separation from anyone he's ever worked with in Celebrity 'I'm not like this really, or am I?' cameo-stylee. Imagine - me and Samuel L Jackson, we're like that. And David Tennant too. Ooh!

Now, if only there was some way to turn this to my advantage. But, dear reader, I fear there is not.

Obviously, my New Year's resolution is...

... to not neglect my blog. Bad timing has resulted in intense periods of work (both writing and day job) interspersed with intense periods of Christmas holidays (where I had a much needed break), which have both combined to keep me from these pages. No more, dear reader (singular)... er, if you're still there. Hello!


Exciting developments have occurred in the first week of the year. My short film 'Lent', which has been in the can for some months, but needed a sound problem to be fixed, is finally on it's journey toward the screen. The producer, the wonderful Ricci-Lee Berry, is completing the distribution funding application for Screen South, and preparing the submissions to five international festivals to start with. I'm very excited, and hoping that we get into all of them!! Time will tell.

I've had a meeting in the last week about the feature project, with the director-producer Mark Jay of Full On Pictures. We discussed directions for the second draft. We're still awaiting feedback from the interested parties that were sent the script at the end of last year, but we weren't expecting much yet because of Christmas holidays. The responses that we have got are overwhelmingly positive, which is great, obviously. And Mark and I, having got some distance from the material after an intensive period of development, are still really loving this draft. More details on this anon.

Tonight, I have a meet with another director to discuss a new draft of a short screenplay we're working on, which we're hoping to be filming early this year. Again, I'll keep you posted.

It's great to be busy. Hope you are too. Happy New Year!

Update

No posts for a while. Apologies - work on the feature screenplay for Full On Pictures has resumed. I'm working on the revisions to the first draft at the moment, and met with the producer Mark Jay mid-week. It was a great meeting: there's some strong interest from production companies, so Mark and I have a busy time of it over the next few weeks getting the screenplay as good as it can be, and then getting it out there.

Meanwhile, all the short films I'm working on are progressing nicely too. The director of 'Santa Baby', the wonderful Colin Stevens, has managed to get the script to an actor who would be perfect for the lead, and to his production company. Fingers crossed that he likes it.

And it looks like the sound problem in 'Lent' has finally been fixed, and over the next week or two, the producer Ricci-Lee Berry will be putting together our agreed distribution list for 2008, and applying for Film Council distribution funding. With luck, and selection, 'Lent' should be playing a festival near you very soon. I'll obviously keep the posted with any updates.

Cubed

The Red Planet script I recently submitted was my first that utilised the ‘Power of Three’ peer review method, or at least a Chinese Whispers passed-down version of it. The experience was useful, but flawed. (This may be because I was using a Chinese Whispers passed-down version of it, having never attended Adrian Mead’s celebrated seminars where he expounds upon it properly).

Yesterday, I was musing about posting sometime soon about my experiences, as it may help someone learn from my mistakes (e.g. don’t use a Chinese Whispers passed-down version of it, you idiot!). Then, I read English Dave’s amusing recent post lambasting the whole process, even down to its name! So, it seemed timely to get my thoughts out there. And they are here:

In Robert McKee’s infamous tome, 'Story', he talks about pitching your script to someone, and watching their reactions: when are you losing them, when are they looking confused, excited etc.? This is a very useful thing to do for testing a pitch, and for testing the quality of your story. But, for a spec script, it’s all about how it reads, and – as anyone who follows Lucy Vee’s blog, will know – that read can go well or go badly, and this will often have nothing to do with the quality of your underlying story. So, what’s to do?

Amusingly, McKee tells us that the best reaction we could hope for is a hushed silence at the end of our pitch, as the pitchee takes in the God-like genius of our work. Anyone who has ever asked for peer review will know: this never happens. Never. (Or, at least, not to my scripts; and I suspect I am a God-like genius.) The reason for this is that, if you ask people what they think, they want to give you value. And blanket praise seems a bit empty; except to your Mum, maybe. (Your Mum – not mine: she’d give the late Alexander Walker a run for his money.)

Everyone thinks they’re a critic. And everyone is, of course, exactly right. So, who should review your work before you send it to the important someone who might want to make it?

1. You. You’re best placed to get this script right, but you’re biased. The only real way I’ve ever found to get the right objectivity is to leave a script in a drawer for a lengthy period. By then, though, that important competition deadline will probably have passed. Plus, there’s a lot of dick-swinging that goes on about rewriting. Yes, it’s important never to send out first drafts. But whenever I hear “I never show anything to anyone until I’ve done at least twenty drafts", I always think “What - no one?” All scripts are made for collaborative media, after all, or else you wouldn’t need a script; so, there’s something amiss to me in writing something so hermetically. But then, I’m not a rich, world-famous writer, so don’t take my advice.
2. Punters. There’s no shortage of them - we are all punters of TV and film, and we are all knowledgeable about what works and what doesn’t. But, unless you’re prepared to hand out scripts on the street, you’re going to have to know the person first. And that brings the problem of familiarity.
3. Friends and family with no screenwriting knowledge. Let’s face it - they’re probably going to be too easy on you, or too hard on you. The balance is hard to find, but not impossible.
4. Script reading services. Prohibitively expensive if you’re going to use them for every single draft of every piece of work you do. And readers employed by these services have their prejudices too. And it’s probably best to get more than one set of coverage on a screenplay to get a wider idea of its merits.
5. A screenwriters’ group of your peers. Screenwriters’ groups have two purposes: 1) to help people’s work become better with assistance and critique, and 2) to act as a friendly support group for aspiring/desperate writers. These two aims can end up being contradictory, and you often find ‘rules’ like “you must always start on something complimentary”. Which is no help to the writer if it’s a lie. You might find yourself in the position – as I have been – where you really want to say “This script has absolutely no redeeming features, and you should give up on it now”. But you keep quiet, and try to say bland things about what needs to be developed. Then, in the next session, it’s your turn and no one holds back. They tell you your latest opus is rubbish, and you’re wasting your time. You get upset. You leave the group never to return. True story. Ish.
6. Professional writers, producers or mentors higher up the chain that you. It’s hard to find someone who believes in you, and has the time enough to give feedback more than once in a while. I have been lucky enough to find more than one professional person who has offered to read my work on occasion, and has even tried to get it to people who might want to make it. Nothing’s come of these efforts, so far, but those contacts are there for ever (I hope). Whether they would still be speaking to me if I sent them scripts on a regular basis, though, is unlikely.
7. A virtual screenwriter’s group (i.e. your peers in the blogosphere). Similar issues to the screenwriter’s groups, but people find themselves able to be more honest in print, I think. And, there is the possibility that you might make contacts here that are in the process of becoming professional writers / producers / mentors, and will review and champion your work because they remember when you were very complimentary about them on their blog. (Everybody go to English Dave’s and say nice things. He might offer to read your work!)

As for the Power of Three method: I think it has many advantages, and specifically addresses some of the drawbacks I’ve mentioned above. The idea is to have three rounds of review, with three different people each time: 3 x 3. Hence the name – it’s got nothing to do with empowerment. It’s got nothing to do with the power of three, either, but it’s only a name, and it would be hard to sell a review method where you have to find 27 people to comment on your script.

The main drawbacks I found were mostly of my making: I’d missed the rule about only getting questions back from the reviewers, not comments or suggestions. Even if I had known, it’s hard to stop fellow writers making suggestions, so you need to be aware of it, and as disciplined as you need to be. A very wonderful, and much appreciated, PO3er gave me the note “I’d like to see more of the mother”. There’s not a lot I can do with that, unless I interpret it as “Where does the mother disappear off to?” But that might not be what he meant exactly.

Also, I hate the unbearable feeling of a being a clod. I get loads of notes in the first round saying “use less adverbs” and I always feel like I should have spotted that myself. Why do I use too many adverbs? I always do it. It’s my first draft sin (alright, one of them). Still, it’s cheaper for this to be pointed out by a scribo-mate than a professional script reading service.

I was unlucky with not getting stuff back in a timely fashion, and this seriously limited the time I had for my third round. I think it was my mistake for using this method for Red Planet. It’s a free competition, so obviously all my reviewers were working on their own entries, and I don’t want to be interrupting their script every five minutes to remind them to do feedback on mine.

Lastly, people sometimes argue. It didn’t happen to me, but I’ve heard tell of writer’s sending email after email explaining the intricacies of the screenplay that the reviewer has missed. You may even be tempted to reply clarifying something yourself. Don't. No one will thank you for it.

One final word about peer review: find a jaded cabbie.

I took a cab to the shoot of ‘Lent’ - a big deal for me, the first ever time a screenplay of mine was being professionally made. We were shooting near Pinewood (not actually in it, though - so near but so far) , so the driver had welcomed many film types into the back of his taxi over the years. He insisted that I pitch him the story while we drove, and I gave it my all. I'd been working on it solidly, and knew it inside out, and I swear it was the best I've ever told it.

I finished, dramatically, just as we were pulling up to the house where we were shooting. There was the crew, there were the vans, there was the camera. Best of all, there was the crane they'd just used for the opening shot. It looked very impressive, and I swelled with pride. The cabbie ruminated on my pitch for a second, then gestured towards the house, crew, crane, and camera, and said "This seems like a lot of old fuss, just for that." That's the last time I'm pompous enough to swell with pride, I can tell you. Welcome to the movies!

Links:

I’ve always wanted to put links at the bottom of a post, and feel like a big shot. So here they are. Hope they’re useful.

Adrian’s official, non-Chinese Whispers handout on Power of Three posted on Lucy’s blog

One of the reputable script reading services recommended therein!

English Dave’s recent post on Power of Three, and the informative comments made in reaction to it

David Bishop’s thoughts

An interview with Adrian Mead (Shooting People members only)

Robert Mckee’s Story Seminars

Digital Shorts - Part 3: Script Development

Another instalment of my writer's diary from the UKFC / Screen South Digital Shorts Scheme 2006/07. Parts one and two which I posted ages ago now, took the tale up to the selection of my script “Out of the Frying Pan” as one of the digital shorts 2007, and the attachment of a producer, Ricci-Lee Berry.

Late September 2006: arrangements are made for producers and directors to attend a training session at the NFTS. Ricci-Lee attends this. In the meantime, we both were scouring websites, and our contacts lists, for a suitable director. This was a long task, and obviously an important one. The worst thing that can happen is to end up working with a director that doesn’t have the same vision of the material as you do. But how do you tell who’s attracted to the material, rather than just attracted to the juicy UKFC funding already in place?

Well, you have to get to know them, and see if you like the cut of their jib. This can take a lot of time, and be very frustrating; and, it is where, with hindsight, I can see the advantages in applying to the scheme with a director already attached. Once you’re given a go-ahead and a budget, you want to spend every moment you can in development and preparation. If the director (and producer, if you can get one) has been with you from day one, then you can start the fun stuff straight away.

October 2006 – December 2006: Over the next month, I watch a lot of showreels, and towards the end of October, Ricci-Lee, Screen South Exec Miranda Robinson and I perform the first of our interviews. We whittled down the number of candidates over the next couple of weeks, and then we went quite a long way with one director, but things didn’t work out. It was mid-December when we finally appointed the third big member of the team: James Twyford - who had previously worked on the Digital Shorts scheme in 2005, with the comedy short ‘Little Things’ - was our director.

November 2006 – January 2007: While we hunted for a director, script development took place. I had notes for the next draft based on the discussions during the selection process, and Ricci-Lee had some good ideas. The marvellous Pippa Brill, script executive for half of the 2006/07 Screen South Digital shorts output, including our film, worked with me to realise these. Input came in from our initial director, and then from James.

I think in total there were about ten drafts before we submitted our final script to the UKFC, which isn’t a great deal in the larger scheme of things, but unfortunately not all of these drafts were for the better. Drafts 3 to 5 were a digression, and we kept little or no material from them when we reverted back to draft 2 as the launching point for all future work. [By the by, I’d recommend this approach if you get too bogged down - never be scared to admit you’ve taken the wrong track, and revert back to an older draft. It will stop you going insane.]

How did it happen? Simply: I didn’t know the strengths of my own material. It sounds dumb, but it is a very easy trap to fall into. When people get together to discuss scripts – and we did make the effort to all be in the same room occasionally, although a lot more was done on the phone, or by email - notes fly around, and creativity bounces off every corner of the room, and before you know it, someone - with the best of intentions - has said “Why don’t we set this domestic drama in –ooh, I don’t know – a spaceship?” and you’re saying, “Dammit, you're right”.

(That particular example never occurred, but we had a few mad ideas that weren’t far off it).

Luckily, I had Pippa to get me back on track. At that stage, I wrote down every point that I thought was good or worthwhile about the story, and I kept that piece of paper with me for the rest of the process. It wasn’t about being precious: it was just to remind myself what worked; had anyone tried to persuade me to change any of those points, I would have listened to their views. But everything on that list made it to the screen, because ultimately we all agreed that it was the heart of the film.

It was also during these months that the title “Out of the Frying Pan” became “Recipe” (for about a week), then “Pancake Day”, and finally “Lent.” So, we made it to the beginning of 2007 with a title, a locked script, and a shooting date for early February. All we needed now was a crew.

To be continued...

Only just resisted putting a ‘Cannes’ = ‘Can’ pun in the title here

It’s around this time each year that I don’t go to Cannes. I annually don’t soak up the unique atmosphere, don’t race around trying to get meetings, and don’t blag my way into parties or screenings.

Is this a mistake? I ask myself this every year. I’ve never had the readies, and I’ve never been convinced it’s particularly helpful for a writer. This year it was a particularly hard decision to make, though, what with the 60th anniversary and having written a film that’s there too. But my producer has gone over and is flying the flag (ooh, Scooch flashback – nasty!) for ‘Lent’ this week. So, I’ve saved my pennies for the Cheltenham Screenwriter’s Festival in July, which I think will be more useful for me at this juncture.

But, reading Sal Brown’s Cannes updates is wheting my appetite for when I finally give in and give it a go. Next year, definitely. And hopefully, with another short film to take with me…

Digital Shorts - Part 2: Selection

The continuing tale of my journey as a writer on the UKFC / Screen South Digital Shorts Scheme. Part one took us up to the selection of one of my submitted projects for the initial shortlist in August 2006.

17th – 18th August 2006: two days of interviews held in Brighton, for representatives from each applying team. I’m there for the first of the two days. I’m told around 200 teams applied altogether, and 18 interviews happened on the 17th, including mine. So the long shortlist was somewhere around 36 teams.

The interviews were 15 minutes for the one-minuters, and 30 minutes for the longer ones; they were embedded in a day-long seminar about comedy from Sam Snape, which involved Q&A, screenings of some comedy shorts, and Sam’s enthusiastic stand-up style of interactive training. Later, there was a session with Sam on documentary shorts, and the next day - which I couldn’t make – saw an all-day drama seminar, which all were invited to attend. Some people who couldn’t do the whole day just turned up for their interview, but I liked to think of the seminar as a prize for getting that far, and I stayed for the day. I had lunch with a few of the other attendees down on the beach, as the weather was nice.

I then met with Miranda Robinson, Screen South’s head of development, and Pippa Brill, who would be working as script developer / editor with the winning teams. Also attending was Ricci-Lee Berry, production and development assistant. They gave me some good notes about what worked and what didn’t, and what could be done differently; we discussed various ideas. It was very much like a script development meeting, and not an interview. I decide I really want to work with these people.

30th August 2006: Final deadline to write a new draft of the screenplay based on the notes from my interview. Most other projects will have been given the same task, but some may have been asked to submit different or additional materials. These will now be considered before announcing the final shortlist for second interview. I don’t know exactly how long this final shortlist was; best guess: around 20 teams will be left.

4th September 2006: I get a call informing me that I’m through to the next stage. I’m quite happy to hear this news (understatement).

11th – 12th September 2006: The second set of interviews, held at the Film Council in London. As well as Miranda, Pippa and Ricci-Lee, there are a couple of other Film Council board members. I am nervous, but - again - everyone is very complimentary of my work. There are a few questions, back and forth, but it’s painless and over reasonably quickly – I think it lasted twenty minutes in all. It is here that the possibility of my directing the short is discussed: I turn the offer down. I’ve only ever wanted to be a writer, and I want someone with a little bit of experience to direct the film.

15th September 2006: I’m called on Friday afternoon by Miranda Robinson. I’ve got the gig. I’m ever so slightly chuffed (another understatement). Twelve live-action shorts will be made in all (7 long ones, and 5 short). Miranda tells me that Ricci-Lee Berry is interested in moving into a producer’s role, and asks me if I would like to work with her on ‘Out of the Frying Pan’. As I’ve already met Ricci-Lee, it won’t mean building a completely new working relationship, so it’s ideal. She’s very enthusiastic, and contacts me within a couple of hours of Miranda’s call. We talk about the project, and what to do next: we need a director.

To be Continued...

Interrogation, without the Bright Lights

'The Dark Art of Script Development'
[NB: Jason Arnopp has also summarised this event, and the page is linked to from his blog here.]

The Date:
Wednesday 9th May 2007

The Panellists:
Dan MacRae (DM) was formerly Deputy Head of the Development Fund at the UK Film Council and an Executive at Working Title; his credits include RED ROAD and the forthcoming ATONEMENT.

Sarah Golding (SG) is currently Head of Development for Potboiler Productions and was previously Head of Development for Skreba Films, Development Manager at Zenith Productions and Script Consultant for Yorkshire Television and Fair Game Films. Her credits include THE CONSTANT GARDENER, DEEP WATER, BROTHERS OF THE HEAD and the forthcoming THE BEST TIME OF OUR LIVES".

The venue:
Lighthouse in Brighton: very nice squishy leather sofas, and minimalist studio-style décor. The administration was efficient (though perhaps some handouts with the speakers’ biogs on wouldn’t have gone amiss), and the bottle bar was inexpensive by Brighton standards.

Value for money?
The Q&A went from 7:30 to 9:00pm, with informal networking before and after. Dan and Sarah made time for everyone who wanted to speak to them, and were very pleasant to chat to. It cost only a fiver, and was well worth it. Lighthouse has an event like this on every month, though sometimes with focus more on direction than writing, and I will definitely be looking to come along again.

Why was I there?
The process of script development is very important, and something that any serious scriptwriter should be aware of, but what I – and probably many others – were interested in was how to get our scripts and ideas into development in the first place. This was covered to some degree. Others in the audience wanted to talk about the difficulties inherent in the UK Film Industry, which did tend to get a bit repetitive (there’s no money, too many films are being made, not enough are being seen) but again, the panel were happy to share their thoughts.


The Questions and Answers:

What is this intangible thing called Script Development?
DM: Working with writers to generate an idea, or adaptation of an existing piece, and turn it into a script that will attract talent, funding, and ultimately an audience. The script editor works to translate the feelings of all the interested parties, like financiers or actors, to define the right vision, and achieve consistency for the project. To make some parts stronger, say, or more comedic, as required, without unbalancing the script as a whole.

SG: A different approach if you are a freelancer, rather than working for a big company. Script Development can be more like writer development, helping the writer to hone their skills, project by project and sell themselves as a writer. Helping production companies to accumulate a slate of projects.

What’s the difference between script development and script editing?
SG: To edit something it must exist
DM: Development takes something up to script; after that, editing takes over.

How can an editor ensure that the aims of the piece remain the writer’s rather than the editor’s?
SG: Ask them lots of questions before starting, make sure you’re on the same page; it's an interrogation, but without the bright lights.
DM: Sometimes it isn’t the writer’s aims that need protecting. In ‘Mr Bean’s Holiday’ Rowan Atkinson and Working Title had more input than the writer or director, but the people employed to do those jobs are picked accordingly and aware of this.

What’s the process of development?
DM: It varies every time. You have to identify ambition, identify audience, identify the budget required, and identify how that budget relates to the possibilities of the material. Gain the trust of the team, find a shared vocabulary, identify strengths and weakness and where to go next with a new draft: are you developing plot, or tone, or the world of the story? You’re finding out what the piece is about ultimately, and that is very satisfying.

Should writers or editors try to second-guess the wants of an audience?
SG: Your own taste should be your guide. If I respond well to this, there’s a good chance other people will too. But ‘analysis’ is a better term than ‘second-guessing’. You have to provide security for the money invested. What satisfaction does the audience expect of the genre?
DM: Audiences are well served by TV. What is your film doing that’s different? Bleak and downbeat stories don’t sell so well, so you must be aware of this when thinking about your budget.

Are table readings of scripts important?
DM: Yes, both the UK Film Council and Working title have arranged them. They are usually helpful for comedies, but not so much for dramas where there might be lots of stage directions to read out.

Should the editor research more than the writer?
DM: Yes, it’s very valuable to have explored the subject (but this if you’re working for a company and therefore getting paid for it).
SG: As a freelancer, I wouldn’t expect to do as much research as the writer. There’s not enough money to be a researcher as well as an editor.

What potential is there for new ideas in a world of franchises, adaptations, etc.?
DM: Financiers like to have something more tangible than just a pitch. And an existing property has a built-in audience, which provides them more comfort. So make it a very good idea.
SG: Or write a spec script.
DM: The great thing about being a writer is all you need to do is write.

How would you work with a writer-director that used improvisation? How would you get budget to do this without a script?
SG: Detailed treatments are required. Funding would be based on the reputation of the filmmakers involved. Get a track record in radio or stage plays. Trust equals money.
DM: Establish a structure. Again it comes down to budget.
SG: Or just go out and do it – but you’ll need to find the right actors.

How do you identify a good script?
DM: Something enjoyable, compelling, with characters you can care about. There’s no elitism or mystery, just a response to the material. Write a good script, not a perfect script – something to start a conversation.
SG: It’s not just about good writing, but finding work with a specific voice. This needs to be taken to the right sort of producer.

How important is a good writing style?
SG: Quite important- clumsy technique can put you off a script you’re reading.

How important is 3-act structure these days?
DM: It’s at the heart of genre cinema, but you don’t hear as much about it in the UK as you do in the US.

How would you give advice to a unique voice / auteur?
SG: They need funding from an arts body. Financiers don’t usually want this kind of work.
DM: Auteurs need money from across Europe. Script editing doesn’t exist in France, for example. But the UK is not an auteur country, it’s a genre country.
What genres?
DM: Comedy, Action, Rom-Com, Teen Movies, Family Movies…
SG: Or something with a bravura performance from a star.

But unknown writers don’t stand a chance, do they?
SG: Everyone’s an unknown at first.
DM: There’s no desire to shut out new writers.

And what about getting paid?
DM: You priority must be to work with producers that have money.
SG: Producers with a track record shouldn’t be asking you to work for no money. But if both you and the producer are at the start of your careers, you can take a risk on a project together.

What can you do when the writer/editor working relationship goes bad?
DM: Who’s running the show? If it’s the producer, they need to step in and resuce the project.
SG: Find a new script editor. Go back to a draft you were happy with, and work from there.

Have you ever wanted to be a writer yourself?
SG: Absolutely not! That's why I do the job I do - I don't want to take over from the writer, I'd rather work with them.


Final thoughts
Through the evening, there was also some sharing of script development horror stories from members of the audience, and from the panel. In all cases, it seems it is best to be clear about your intentions from the off, and not be afraid to revert to a previous draft.

My experience (working on 'Lent' ) was very positive, but when I first went in, I hadn't fully formed my aims for the piece and written them down. I would advise anyone in the same position to do this, even if you change your mind about the content later. Luckily, I had a development exec that helped me to understand the strengths of what I'd written - and pull those intentions out of my woolly subconscious and onto the page.

Digital Shorts - Part 1: Submission

A few kind folks have expressed an interest in my experiences on the UK Film Council / Screen South Digital Shorts scheme over the past year. I’ll have to post this in a few chunks, when I find time. But here’s the first bit:

June 2006: I receive Screen South’s mailshot announcing the Digital Shorts scheme is open for applications, deadline in mid-July. There are three strands: ‘Long Shots’ for five to nine minute shorts, ‘Close Ups’ for one minute live-action, and ‘One Minute Wonders’ for one minute animation.

I have seen the scheme advertised in previous years, but not felt I had the right quality of script to put forward. And I had it in my head – perhaps correctly – that the scheme was not intended for writers who didn’t have anyone else attached to their projects. But, I have a strong nine-minute comedy screenplay perfect for the ‘Long Shots’ strand, and – scouring the guidelines - I find nothing in there about needing to have anyone else attached. In fact, one of the reasons for the scheme is to hook up talent, so I hoped my script would be enough for Screen South to put me together with director and producer.

July 2006: I polish the script, and put together the large amount of material required (this is certainly something that would be easier when applying as part of a team). Five copies each of the screenplay, my CV, a synopsis, a director’s statement of intent (I wrote this as guidelines for any director that became attached). Even though I didn’t have to submit any visual material, it was listed as an optional requirement: so, I drew up some storyboards, again as guidelines for future crew. I found out at my interview that the panel was impressed with the storyboards (though perhaps not with my stick-man art), so I’m glad I made the effort.

Mid-July: days before the deadline, I get the crazy idea that I should apply for the ‘Close-up’ one-minute strand as well. I’d had an idea rattling around my head for months that I was planning to write as a three-minute short, but it will be good practice to tell it in a disciplined way. It also might attract attention as it is a drama, and one-minuters are usually comedic. I have a day off work, write the script and prepare the materials, including more storyboards (five copies of everything). I put everything in the post, thinking that the long one is a definite contender, but that maybe it wasn’t worth rushing the short one, as it doesn’t stand much of a chance.

Mid-August: I get a call from Screen South. I’ve made it to the long shortlist. Hooray! But only for one of my projects: my one-minute drama “Out of the Frying Pan” is going through to the next stage of selection. The other one isn’t. Show’s what I know…

My name in lights (ish)

I arrived home this afternoon, after a long weekend away at a friend’s wedding, and found that interesting packages had arrived in the post while I was away. As well as two script books I won in Danny Stack's competition, there was also a DVD of the final cut of my short film ‘Lent’.

This is the first time I’ve seen it with the final mix, music and credits, and – look! – there’s my name floating up the screen ‘Writer: Stuart Perry’. Hooray! I exist. Next stop the imdb…

…actually, next stop is the Cast and Crew screening this week, when I’ll see it on the big screen for the first time. I’ll be sure to report back on how it goes.

Yes, I did use a metaphor concerning my tackle on a table.

I was given this idea by Paul Campbell’s instructive Scriptuality blog. He did this as a set of New Year’s resolutions, but since starting my blog, and watching uncrushed diaries blossom, it has felt like the beginning of something. So, I’m going to list my aims for the following year. Here goes:

1. Get into the imdb. I know it’s a bit sad, but I won’t believe I actually exist until my name is in there. I suppose this will happen somehow when my short film ‘Lent’ gets distributed more widely. But do I have to e-mail them myself? Or is someone else supposed to do it? I’ll be Stuart Perry [II] if I get in, as that guy from The Poseidon Adventure beat me to my name by a few decades.

2. Get another of my short film scripts produced. I’m working on various different possibilities, and it's looking good. I'll keep my fingers crossed and say no more, to avoid jinxing it!

3. Get an agent. I’m going to the WGGB’s ‘Meet the Agents’ event, and writing to a few. I’m not holding my breath on getting anywhere before the ’25 words or fewer’ UKFC scheme closes, though. If any interested agents are reading this – it could happen – please e-mail me (details are in my profile).

4. Get an afternoon play commissioned for Radio 4.One script is with the BBC Writers’ room, and I’m working on another to try to interest a producer. Perhaps I should have started with the producer route; has anyone had any positive responses going directly to the Writers’ Room? I imagine it’s a teetering slush pile. If any interested radio producers are reading this – it could happen – please e-mail me (details are, as I say, in my profile).

5. Apply to the BBC Writer’s Academy.That’s what I should be doing right now: writing this blog is my displacement activity. Hence the name.

6. Write an episode of Doctor Who. That’s an ambition I’ve had since I was ten. I should have tried submitting something then, it would have been easier. Actually, a friend did get my CV screenplay to Russell T Davies, but I’d imagine he’s been too busy to read it. I’m hoping by the time he is able to I will have successfully completed 1 to 5, and so will have a track record good enough to stand a chance of getting a commission. Although, to be honest, it might be better, if we’re talking about aims for the next year, to change that to

6. Write an episode of Doctors. And I’m not just being sensible: I love Doctors, and would give my right arm to write for it. I can’t believe Greg’s gone!

There you go: I’ve put my metaphorical tackle on the table for fate to whack it with a mallet, if I fail to achieve any of these. Better get back to that Academy application…