| [BACK]
COMMENTARY - DEFINE GOOD...
I recently "finished" (is a screenplay EVER finished?) my romantic comedy screenplay and sent it off to my Manager/Agent. She is a Producer in Hollywood with MANY connections and she read me the riot act (deservedly so) when I was in Hollywood for the Screenwriting Expo in november. The riot act went something like this: "WHY ARE YOU NOT WATCHING ANY MOVIES! YOU MUST WATCH MOVIES! YOU SAY YOU HAVE A ROMANTIC COMEDY BUT IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN "NOTTING HILL" OR "GARDEN STATE" HOW CAN WE DISCUSS IT OR COMPARE IT?" Okay, let me first say in my defense that I've seen well over 50 movies in the past six months. Let me also explain that at least 90% of those films are from the 30's and 40's (if not before) and, thus, she made a VERY valid point.
I tucked my tail between my legs and headed back to Seattle. And I then promptly watched these romantic comedies: "Notting Hill," "Garden State," "Legally Blond," "Kate & Leopold," and "13 Going on 30." Lets just say I was, well, unimpressed. "Notting Hill," the script she touted as the best "rom-com" in 10 years was funny AND romantic but I did not buy for a nanosecond that a person like Hugh Grant would live with a loser like Spike. There was really no reason whatsoever, explained or otherwise, why he would live with him. Now, since Spike was the "comic relief" I can see the comedy aspects of the film mostly flowed through him and the romantic stuff flowed through Ms. Roberts and Mr. Grant. All fine and good, but I didn't "buy" it.
Then there's "Garden State." Independently quirky and all that but my main issue was the simple fact that, supposedly, the Zach Braff character has been in boarding school and hasn't returned home in 10 years. Okay, that's all fine and good, but what of all his relationships with these friends he re-connects with. Were they all in boarding school too? If not, how did he interact with them? Seems like they all went to school together but, well, they weren't the, uh, "Boarding School" type. So is he reconnecting with them from when they were, uh, 10? 15? Doesn't make sense.
It's just like in "Broken Flowers" where I'm supposed to believe that in a year's time-span Bill Murray had sex with five different women. I'm sorry, I DON'T BUY IT! And if you can't buy the main premise (Zach's return home, Murray re-connecting with lost loves) - then it completely undermines the whole story.
So I finish my romantic comedy comparing it to the many I had just seen (and all those I remember: "Pretty Women," "Sleepless in Seattle," etc.) and I felt it pretty much stood on its own in comparison to those. I then sent it off to my Manager/Agent/Producer who wrote back that it would be another 3 weeks until she could read it.
A week later she writes to me and says: "Is this script any good?" Seems she doesn't want to read it and get "burned out" on bad scripts. I think this means that if I suddenly send her a hand-full of scripts that she thinks are crap (as opposed to the one script I wrote that she thought was brilliant two years ago) - she's going to "burn herself out on me." I can see it now: "Well, he's a great guy and I know he's a talented writer, but he wrote that one rom-com that wasn't very good and then I read that dramedy he sent me and I didn't much care for it and then there was that futuristic pet script which I just couldn't get my brain around and, well, done wasting time with this loser..."
Which, of course, begs the question of what is the definition of "good." Knowing film the way I do and the fact that everyone has an opinion about films (even classic well loved films are hated by some) - how do you define "good?" I will be the first to admit that I'm probably not the best writer in the world. Shakespeare pretty much cornered the market on that - but what of my screenplay. If I think it's great and she thinks it sucks...what then?
How do you define good?
When I teach my class I talk about how screenplays are like films (duh?) and that someone may LOVE "Titanic" while someone else may think it's over-done, over-blown, crap. I remember years ago seeing the film "The Manhattan Project" starring Matthew Broderick and John Lithgow. I then saw a review show where the two reviewers LOVED the movie. They loved the acting, the writing, the directing, etc. I then switched over to Siskel and Ebert and they HATED the movie. They hated the acting, the writing, the directing, etc. Did they see the same movie?
So where does that leave a writer like me? My Manager/Agent/Producer (who will now be referred to as MAP) sent the script to a friend who immediately took issue with the first 7 pages of the script. Seemed I was describing too much and not showing enough. Okay, I'll buy that. I'm not afraid of any criticism. So I went back into the first 7 pages and saw what they were talking about and fixed it. But still, my MAP said: "IF YOU THINK IT'S ON PAR WITH "SLEEPLESS" OR "GARDEN STATE" THEN SEND IT TO ME - IF NOT - MAKE IT BETTER!"
Well...what does THAT mean? Someone once said: "Art is never finished - it's abandoned." At what point does one say: "Enough!"
I've written 15 screenplays and have taught screenwriting for nearly 10 years. I've read good screenplays and bad screenplays and one of the things I have taught people is: "At some point you have to finish. At some point you have to look at it and say: it's done." Then you have to give it to other people to read and get their feedback. Well, I would send it to my MAP to get feedback but, the problem is, she has no time to give me feedback. When I sent a script to her about futuristic wild animals used as pets her comments were the equivalent of: "I don't get it. This script is terrible. Makes no sense to me." When she read one of my better scripts she once said to me: "Great idea, terrible writing." Now, I ask you, HOW am I supposed to fix it, or be a better writer if I get comments like that?
Now, in her defense, it's not her JOB to make me a better writer. It's her JOB to sell my finished scripts. Her job is to encourage and push and prod and make me seek out ways to become a better writer. She doesn't have the time, or energy, to hold my hand and go through the script page-by-page and say: "Well, on this page, Matt, I think you should have cut this scene and moved it to the 2nd Act - that would make it better. And what of this scene where..." I realize that, but, hey, throw a writer a bone.
So, I figured, if I'm to define it as such (with comparisons to "Notting Legally Sleepless State" (and the like) - I have to REALLY define it. Let's compare.
Boy. Check.
Girl. Check.
Likeable characters. Checkish. Is the character in "Legally" really that likeable, what of Hugh Grant's character and Julia Roberts in "Notting" and Zach Braff in "State" and habitual liar Natalie Portaman in "State." I truly believe that in most of the films I've mentioned, the actors make the characters likeable. Bill Murray as a rich retired jerk who sleeps around on women? Yeah, real likeable. Jennifer Garner as a uber-bitch (but not really ?cause she's 13 inside a 30 year old). Can we really root for ANY of these people?
Annoying Room-mate and/or friend. Check.
End of First Act Defining Moment. Check.
End of Second Act Defining Moment. Ch--- wait a minute. Now that I think about it, I really don't define the break between the 2nd and 3rd act. There really isn't a catalyst point that moves us into the third act! Why didn't I think of this before? I don't have the chase to the press conference like in "Notting." I don't have a person hiring me to take over their extremely important (but completely unrealistic) murder trial in "Legally." I don't have the annoying son who jumps on a plane in "Sleepless" and I don't have a group of self-absorbed friends choosing to go in search of a birthday present in "State." Dang!
Third act speech. Check.
Reconciliation. Check.
Happy ending. Checkish.
Still, my decision to go back in and put in a 2nd/3rd act break doesn't deal with the original issues the writer had with my script (too much description) or my MAP's issue (compare it to the others! How does it compare! Make it compare!).
Back to the drawing board.
Thoughts? Send to: [email protected]
|
