YOU KNOW ONE of the funny things about this business is how it goes from drought to storm in a heartbeat. You're punking along, dragging your heels on the rewrite, feeling vaguely depressed and out of sorts, and the next thing you know, you look at the two weeks ahead of you and see nothing but craziness. The script that you were waiting on is now a go. All those ideas you were half cooking need to get the hell out of the oven, stat. There's meetings and talk and more talk and more meetings and calls and meetings and calls and drinks and meetings and breakfast and meetings and stuff. A writing blog from Canada - 2005 to 2010, archived for whatever you may get out of it.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Holy Cowaledo!
YOU KNOW ONE of the funny things about this business is how it goes from drought to storm in a heartbeat. You're punking along, dragging your heels on the rewrite, feeling vaguely depressed and out of sorts, and the next thing you know, you look at the two weeks ahead of you and see nothing but craziness. The script that you were waiting on is now a go. All those ideas you were half cooking need to get the hell out of the oven, stat. There's meetings and talk and more talk and more meetings and calls and meetings and calls and drinks and meetings and breakfast and meetings and stuff. Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Homework!
Assignment 1: Review Your Canadian TV Policy...Review
“We’ve played by the rules and waited for this moment to address the decline in Canadian drama and the broadcasters’ overspending in Hollywood. The monetary issue of fee-for-carriage is a fight between the broadcasters and the cable companies, with Canadian artists and Canadian audiences being held hostage.”
Maureen Parker, Executive Director WGC
Maybe we need to stop playing by the rules, hmmm?
There's a big Canadian TV policy review scheduled for this fall, but you might not have heard about it with all the headlines this summer dominated by the broadcasters warring with the BDU's (cable providers) re: local programming and fee-for-carriage.. And now that the CRTC has decided to include fee-for-carriage in the November TV policy hearings, there's big concern that the key issue of Canadian content and specifically drama will be pushed to the sidelines. Nevertheless, the Writers Guild of Canada filed its TV policy submission today to the CRTC.
The short strokes from the WGC press release:
The Writers Guild of Canada filed with the CRTC its position on TV policy in Canada and its ideas for a revised regulatory framework that will apply to the conventional and specialty broadcasters. This much needed policy review was supposed to take place in 2007, and we have been waiting patiently to redress the failures of previous TV policy adopted in 1999. The WGC has come together with ACTRA, the CFTPA and the DGC in proposing a plan to help the CRTC achieve its stated goal of “ensuring that the Canadian broadcasting system is distinctly Canadian in its content.”
To ensure that high-quality Canadian programming will be produced and in the volume necessary to provide audiences with real Canadian choice, the WGC is proposing a three-point plan. First, the WGC recommends a specific Canadian programming expenditure requirement for all conventional services. Second, it recommends the continuation of existing expenditure and exhibition requirements for specialty services. And finally, in order to address the serious decline in drama, true documentaries and children’s programming, the WGC recommends that the CRTC set ownership-group-based expenditure and exhibition requirements for drama, documentary and children’s programming.
“This three-point plan gets to the root of the problem,” says Maureen Parker, Executive Director, WGC, “by ensuring an overall Canadian programming spend for the conventional broadcasters and creating a minimum group-based expenditure requirement for drama. The plan expands on the Canadian Programming Expenditure (CPE) in use for specialty channels by adapting the model to the entire ownership group – this model has proven itself effective in generating high-quality, high-cost programs. The plan also recommends an exhibition requirement to ensure those shows are aired at least once on conventional broadcasters, where there is an opportunity to garner a mass audience. The history of Canadian broadcasting tells the tale: only with both expenditure and exhibition requirements do we get both volume and quality. This proposal gives broadcasters additional flexibility while ensuring they meet their obligations under the Broadcasting Act.”
Nice. And go HERE and read the long version submission to get the bigger picture. It includes a very informative 'history' of Canadian TV and specifically the path traveled by drama production to this point in time. It's a somewhat daunting document, but I strongly suggest all newbies and students and up-and-comers make this their homework for the day and go read now.
Other worthwhile reads....
The Story So Far: a review of past CRTC measures
A Survey of Priority Programming Trends
Analysis of Canadian Television Programming Economics
Proposed Framework for Greater Support for Canadian Programming through a Group based Approach to Television Licensing
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Monday, September 14, 2009
The Teachable "IWNRYFS"
- What a dick.
- Yayyy! Wow, I'm so glad somebody said it!
- Gulp. I'm never asking a professional writer to read something of mine, ever.
"you created this situation. You put me in this spot where my only option is to acquiesce to your demands or be the bad guy. That, my friend, is the very definition of a dick move."
The story described was clearly of great importance to him, but he had done nothing to convey its specifics to an impartial reader. What I was handed was, essentially, a barely coherent list of events, some connected, some not so much. Characters wander around aimlessly, do things for no reason, vanish, reappear, get arrested for unnamed crimes, and make wild, life-altering decisions for no reason. Half a paragraph is devoted to describing the smell and texture of a piece of food, but the climactic central event of the film is glossed over in a sentence. The death of the hero is not even mentioned. One sentence describes a scene he's in, the next describes people showing up at his funeral. I could go on, but I won't. This is the sort of thing that would earn you a D minus in any Freshman Comp class.
I am stunned by the arrogance of these people, telling me that my professional success isn't the result of talent or hard work, but rather it is some kind of entitlement. And that by not reading their work, or listening to their ideas, or coaching them on pitching, I am an asshole. My time is their time to do with as they please. They also assume that I am not interested in helping anyone else achieve what I have.
These jerks know nothing about me, or the time and effort I devote to sharing my experience with others. They don't know about the many days I spend each year teaching TV writing, giving seminars, or speaking about writing at high schools, universities, conferences, and libraries locally, nationwide and around the world, mostly for free.
In the last six weeks, for example, I spent seven days at the International Mystery Writers Festivalin Owensboro, Kentucky teaching, speaking, and moderating seminars on tv and mystery writing to the public. At no charge. I taught a three-hour course on TV writing to students at Cal State Northridge. At no charge. And I spent a day giving a seminar on TV writing to a delegation from China Central Television.
But what I didn't do is drop everything in my life to read some stranger's treatment, listen to his idea for a TV series, and coach him on how to pitch.
So obviously I am an arrogant, talentless, asshole.
I have committed the unforgiveable sin of deciding how to use my time and how best to give back to others. And not letting some stranger decide for me.
Which brings us to an ugly truth about many aspiring screenwriters: They think that screenwriting doesn't actually require the ability to write, just the ability to come up with a cool story that would make a cool movie. Screenwriting is widely regarded as the easiest way to break into the movie business, because it doesn't require any kind of training, skill or equipment. Everybody can write, right? And because they believe that, they don't regard working screenwriters with any kind of real respect. They will hand you a piece of inept writing without a second thought, because you do not have to be a writer to be a screenwriter.
The answer is: don't look up, look sideways. If it's your first script, look for writers who are also on their first scripts, or second. Trade reads with them. You don't need a pro the first time out - because this is just another part of your learning process.The point is to get practice dealing with notes - listening to them, understanding them, and rewriting using whatever insights they provide. It's a skill unto itself, not some incidental step to deal with after you've written your brilliant screenplay.So save that fantasy that the pro is going to read your script and courier it right over to their agent/producer/network executive to be fast-tracked and make you the next Diablo Cody. Cozy up to it in the shower or at night while you're trying to fall asleep or when you need a natural high to get you through the next 5 pages. But keep it to yourself.Meanwhile, get out there and find someone reasonably useful who's at approximately the same stage as you are and start figuring out this notes business together. Until you've done that a few times, you really honest to goodness aren't ready to be read by a pro anyway - unless you're in a teaching forum.