EVERY ONCE IN a while, something occurs to me to write about and I think I've just thought it up and then just before I write the entry I realize, "oh waitaminit...I think I actually read that somewhere." It happens.
But sometimes you wrack your brain and you can't come up with whether you've come up with this, or someone else has. And this is such a case. I think this is my own idea, I'm about 90% sure it is -- but there's a nagging part of me that wonders if I read it on a blog somewhere, or in an article or something.
I'm aware that this is the start of the long slow slide that ends with me not being able to remember the word for can opener. I'm thrilled by that, yes, thanks for asking.
Okay. Here's the theory. I started thinking this in earnest when I was humbled completely late last year, or early this one by Jersey Shore, and how absolutely I enjoyed it. It was a hard and shaky lesson after years of turning up my nose at The Hills and other shows of that MTV ilk. But besides stupidity & violence, what the Shore had going for it was a clear, taut, easy-to-understand concept.
I'm doing a lot of development right now, and it is incredibly hard work. Creating a world that provides possible springboards for lots of stories, and offers good characters, an interesting franchise, natural story possibilities and relatibility is tough. So how do you know if you're there?
This isn't perfect; it's shorthand, but here goes. I call this The Snooki Principle.
Could it be a reality show? How would THAT show be constructed?
That's it.
Often when you try to explain your pitch you get led down weird blind alleys. But when you think of the shows that are really strong in their franchises, the truth is, you can translate them to the world of unscripted with very little alteration.
To wit:
Desperate Housewives spawned the Real Housewives of...
The O.C. gave us The Hills...
Right now they're casting about for a real life Will & Grace.
Modern Family could be a doc series tomorrow. So could The Office. (Those are easier, of course, because of the form.)
But look at the number of shows that have done the unscripted version of CSI.
Sons of Anarchy would be a great reality show -- and was, when Hunter Thompson did the book 3 decades ago and nearly got himself killed.
In terms of British shows, they have the comedy/caper show Hustle, and The Real Hustle.
Skins could be ported to reality easy-peasy.
And in our own backyard, I'm sure you could find a real life Trailer Park Boys if you went looking. Flashpoint, you might be able to do that too, though you'd probably have to shoot for a long time to get that many juicy stories. Slings & Arrows would work easily.
This obviously works less well for anything genre based. It's not that Being Erica isn't a decent show, it just would be...uh...hard to find its real-world analogue.
On the other hand, look at The Wire, and then find the Sundance Channel's Brick City, about Newark. Voila. There you go.
This is primarily a visualization exercise. One of the gifts reality has given us is that they tend to have sharp characters, clearly defined conflicts, and -- wonder of wonders -- they are very, very, very story driven.
If your original series is feeling a little loogey to you, take a moment and visualize it as the spectacular success it is meant to be, and then imagine how they'd translate it to the reality realm.
If you get hung up, or can't figure out how it would play, chances are there's something at the heart of it that just isn't quite there yet.
And if you don't solve that thing, you'll wind up in Celebrity Rehab with Tom Sizemore, or people will be doing an Intervention with you. Right before they throw you to the Ice Road Truckers.
Okay. Stopping now.
Friday, February 26, 2010
So Smart
FROM THE YES! file: (via Playback)
You start pulling a million viewers or more, stay steady, really service your audience and lo and behold -- you get yourself a smart little brand-extension where you can add a few guest stars -- and maybe even get a shiny DVD to market.
Honestly, isn't that better than whining that the internal politics of the CBC are doing this or that, or that you got poor promotion? Or this, or that, or the other thing? Do the good work. Do the hard work. Collect the reward.
Seems so simple.
Congrats to Heather Conkie and everybody involved.
Christmas is coming a little early for Heartland, which this week began production on a two-hour MOW in Calgary.
Known, for now, as A Heartland Christmas, the special has series director Dean Bennett working from a script by writer/exec producer Heather Conkie. The story sees the family's holiday interrupted after an avalanche traps a herd of horses in the wilderness. It stars regular cast members Amber Marshall, Michelle Morgan, Shaun Johnston, Graham Wardle and Chris Potter, with guest stars Nicholas Campbell (The Englishman's Boy) and Hélène Joy (Durham County).
You start pulling a million viewers or more, stay steady, really service your audience and lo and behold -- you get yourself a smart little brand-extension where you can add a few guest stars -- and maybe even get a shiny DVD to market.
Honestly, isn't that better than whining that the internal politics of the CBC are doing this or that, or that you got poor promotion? Or this, or that, or the other thing? Do the good work. Do the hard work. Collect the reward.
Seems so simple.
Congrats to Heather Conkie and everybody involved.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Banner Day
Just went to their site looking for some Olympic info, and the first thing that came up were a couple of big bold banners for two of the Canadian shows they have premiering next week. Dan For Mayor came up too, eventually, in the same rotation as LOST and Desperate Housewives and the Olympic Coverage.
So that's something I guess!
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Keep a Light, Hopeful Heart. But Expect The Worst.
ONE OF THE THINGS I worry about (among soooo many) is what the proliferation of blogs & books & software & contests have done to the modern wannabe screenwriter.
Forgive me for a "back in the day" thing -- especially since my BITD isn't that far in the past. But I was fortunate enough to start writing longhand and in the age of the typewriter (which did shape your attitude toward words differently; they felt more permanent when erasing them was so...difficult) and certainly in the age before the rise of the Screenwriting blog. I daresay that my friend Alex's was the first writing blog I ever read, a month or two before I found John August.
I looked for a bit of validation on the contest front at the beginning of my career; we all do. But most of them are scams or wastes of time -- at best, diversions, at worst, closed harbors designed to trap you into venerating your own self-regard & masturbatory tendencies.
And with very, very few exceptions, I think screenwriting books suffer the same problems.
What feeds good writing is reading. And finishing bad scripts, and maybe exposing your slightly less-bad scripts. I did this in theatre before I started making money writing for TV. I still believe, honestly, that one of the main reasons why I stopped writing plays was that I had too much respect for the people who were really good at that form. I remain an avid reader of plays, always.
In any case, it always comes back to the same three things: 1) writers finish stuff, 2) they know that it's okay to fail and 3) they do not motivate themselves exclusively through dollar signs.
All of that tenacity was kind of hinted at in the before-time, when it was harder to find info or interviews with screenwriters; where to most people writing a screenwriter & getting a response would be roughly akin to getting a personal response from Rocky the Squirrel or Elmer Fudd.
There's a certain cohort today -- and this always shocks me -- who want to be spoonfed to the extent that they think a writer should answer any question they email them in a timely fashion -- even if, you know, that question is answered in lots of places on the blog that supposedly sparked the person to write to that writer in the first place.
I mean, if you can't read, how can one expect you to have the stamina to live through 1) and 2)?
So it's with a bit of mixed emotion that I recommend a fascinating collection of advice on writing I've pored through in five mintue increments over the last couple of days.
It started from a few Twitter links, which led me to a Salon article by Lauren Miller. Miller was riffing off a special at Guardian Unlimited, celebrating Elmore Leonard's 10 rules for writing fiction. (And is there any more hilarious evocation of the perils of the modern proctrastophere than that last sentence?)
Anyway, the Guardian approached a bunch of Fiction writers, including Richard Ford, Margaret Atwood, Roddy Doyle, Neil Gaiman & others for their own lists. And though they're mostly talking about writing novels, I actually think the once-removed status of the advice makes it just as trenchant for screenwriters.
Here are a few random pieces from some of the different lists:
Of course, the craft wonk in me marvels and wonders at the possible significance at the fact that most of the advice I find most compelling, each writer has chosen to place in the middle of their lists. (Second act problems, maybe?)
But I also encourage readers to take a long look for some unexpected insight at Laura Miller's list at Salon.com. There's one entry that particularly caught my eye:
I think this is one of those elemental truths of writing. But what struck me most about this -- and longtime readers of the blog, you can probably see this coming -- is how often in a development meeting at Canadian networks or production companies, you have to deal with notes that work the back end of the list. You get a lot of talk from Telefilm or this Exec or that about Character, an awful lot about theme, and what you're "saying," and very, very, very little about story. And so often, we get highly celebrated Canadian films or TV shows where the story comes last. Coincidentally, story is the hardest thing for non-writers to talk intelligently about -- because it relies heaviest on the boring part of writing: the craft.
The funny thing about good writing about writing? Every once in a while, there's a break in the clouds of solipsism and you get to see the plain laid out starkly before you.
Ah well. Back to Webisodes & Project#2.
Forgive me for a "back in the day" thing -- especially since my BITD isn't that far in the past. But I was fortunate enough to start writing longhand and in the age of the typewriter (which did shape your attitude toward words differently; they felt more permanent when erasing them was so...difficult) and certainly in the age before the rise of the Screenwriting blog. I daresay that my friend Alex's was the first writing blog I ever read, a month or two before I found John August.
I looked for a bit of validation on the contest front at the beginning of my career; we all do. But most of them are scams or wastes of time -- at best, diversions, at worst, closed harbors designed to trap you into venerating your own self-regard & masturbatory tendencies.
And with very, very few exceptions, I think screenwriting books suffer the same problems.
What feeds good writing is reading. And finishing bad scripts, and maybe exposing your slightly less-bad scripts. I did this in theatre before I started making money writing for TV. I still believe, honestly, that one of the main reasons why I stopped writing plays was that I had too much respect for the people who were really good at that form. I remain an avid reader of plays, always.
In any case, it always comes back to the same three things: 1) writers finish stuff, 2) they know that it's okay to fail and 3) they do not motivate themselves exclusively through dollar signs.
All of that tenacity was kind of hinted at in the before-time, when it was harder to find info or interviews with screenwriters; where to most people writing a screenwriter & getting a response would be roughly akin to getting a personal response from Rocky the Squirrel or Elmer Fudd.
There's a certain cohort today -- and this always shocks me -- who want to be spoonfed to the extent that they think a writer should answer any question they email them in a timely fashion -- even if, you know, that question is answered in lots of places on the blog that supposedly sparked the person to write to that writer in the first place.
I mean, if you can't read, how can one expect you to have the stamina to live through 1) and 2)?
So it's with a bit of mixed emotion that I recommend a fascinating collection of advice on writing I've pored through in five mintue increments over the last couple of days.
It started from a few Twitter links, which led me to a Salon article by Lauren Miller. Miller was riffing off a special at Guardian Unlimited, celebrating Elmore Leonard's 10 rules for writing fiction. (And is there any more hilarious evocation of the perils of the modern proctrastophere than that last sentence?)
Anyway, the Guardian approached a bunch of Fiction writers, including Richard Ford, Margaret Atwood, Roddy Doyle, Neil Gaiman & others for their own lists. And though they're mostly talking about writing novels, I actually think the once-removed status of the advice makes it just as trenchant for screenwriters.
Here are a few random pieces from some of the different lists:
6 Have regrets. They are fuel. On the page they flare into desire.
4 Description is hard. Remember that all description is an opinion about the world. Find a place to stand.
8 Don't wish ill on your colleagues.
6 Don't drink and write at the same time.
5 Don't wait for inspiration. Discipline is the key.
6 Trust your reader. Not everything needs to be explained. If you really know something, and breathe life into it, they'll know it too.
5 Remember: when people tell you something's wrong or doesn't work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.
7 No one has ever achieved consistency as a screenwriter.
4 Defend your work. Organisations, institutions and individuals will often think they know best about your work – especially if they are paying you. When you genuinely believe their decisions would damage your work – walk away. Run away. The money doesn't matter that much.
5 You know that sickening feeling of inadequacy and over-exposure you feel when you look upon your own empurpled prose? Relax into the awareness that this ghastly sensation will never, ever leave you, no matter how successful and publicly lauded you become. It is intrinsic to the real business of writing and should be cherished.
5 Leave a decent space of time between writing something and editing it.
6 Take no notice of anyone you don't respect.
7 If you have to read, to cheer yourself up read biographies of writers who went insane.
Of course, the craft wonk in me marvels and wonders at the possible significance at the fact that most of the advice I find most compelling, each writer has chosen to place in the middle of their lists. (Second act problems, maybe?)
But I also encourage readers to take a long look for some unexpected insight at Laura Miller's list at Salon.com. There's one entry that particularly caught my eye:
3. The components of a novel that readers care about most are, in order: story, characters, theme, atmosphere/setting. Of course all these elements are interlinked, and in the best fiction they all contribute to and enhance each other. But if you were to eliminate these elements, starting at the end of the list and moving toward the beginning, you could still end up with a novel that lots of people wanted to read; the average mass-market thriller is nothing but story. If you sacrifice these elements starting from the beginning of the list, you will instead wind up with a sliver of arty experimentation that, if you're very, very good, a handful of other people might someday read and admire. There's honor in that, but it's daft to write something with the deliberate intention of denying readers what they love and want and then to be heartbroken when they aren't interested. If you want to engage with more than a tiny coterie, take storytelling seriously; if you think that's incompatible with art, you are in the wrong line of work.
I think this is one of those elemental truths of writing. But what struck me most about this -- and longtime readers of the blog, you can probably see this coming -- is how often in a development meeting at Canadian networks or production companies, you have to deal with notes that work the back end of the list. You get a lot of talk from Telefilm or this Exec or that about Character, an awful lot about theme, and what you're "saying," and very, very, very little about story. And so often, we get highly celebrated Canadian films or TV shows where the story comes last. Coincidentally, story is the hardest thing for non-writers to talk intelligently about -- because it relies heaviest on the boring part of writing: the craft.
The funny thing about good writing about writing? Every once in a while, there's a break in the clouds of solipsism and you get to see the plain laid out starkly before you.
Ah well. Back to Webisodes & Project#2.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Get The Balance Right
AFTER SEEING THE one spot CTV has for Hiccups & Dan For Mayor about a million times now during Olympics coverage (even though they're still being stingy with it) one is still struck by how hamfisted TV promotion is in this country, and how much we're held back by that.
Here you have record audiences set to promote your two new properties. You're building off a franchise that people loved, "Corner Gas."
So alright...I can understand doing a generic with them both that says, "Hey, you liked these guys when they were on CG and now they're in two new shows." But that's an awful lot to pack into a :30. So you'd think they'd also give each show its own :30 and mix it up a bit... oh, I don't know, maybe even tease out a few longer clips so that you get a sense of what the shows might be about? But nope.
So now -- best case scenario -- you'll have a slightly confused populace who isn't really sure whether there are two shows or one. And then when they turn in Hiccups, they're liable to be confused that Butt is only in a supporting role -- because they haven't been set up that Nancy Robertson is the star of the show.
Is that deliberate on CTV's part? I don't know. Even if it is, setting up expectations like that gives the show freight off the top that's just unfair.
When you tune in the pre-promos for any of the U.S. network shows in the summer, or even over Christmas for the mid-season shows, they are things of beauty.
Even sometimes when they take a run at trying to raise your awareness about an underperforming show, they're great. Over Christmas, NBC pushed "Mercy" so hard, and with such engaging and kind of sexy promos, they actually made me want to check it out again, after dismissing it as not my thing back in late October.
The thing that kills me is that since CTV swallowed the assets of CHUM, I know that they happen to have some of the most passionate, talented, and committed promo producers in the country. I know because I worked with these guys. And I know that for the past few years, they've been Ferraris asked to keep to school-zone speeds.
The talent's there. It's the will that's weak.
So it's left to the shows to try and promote themselves. Brent Butt's taken to Twitter, and Dan For Mayor has little videos up on YouTube, like this one:
Oh well. Maybe things will get better when CTV unloads that used podium. They really should have rented that thing. I think the whole podium market's in a big bubble now. I really do.
Anyway. Gotta go. Game's on.
Here you have record audiences set to promote your two new properties. You're building off a franchise that people loved, "Corner Gas."
So alright...I can understand doing a generic with them both that says, "Hey, you liked these guys when they were on CG and now they're in two new shows." But that's an awful lot to pack into a :30. So you'd think they'd also give each show its own :30 and mix it up a bit... oh, I don't know, maybe even tease out a few longer clips so that you get a sense of what the shows might be about? But nope.
So now -- best case scenario -- you'll have a slightly confused populace who isn't really sure whether there are two shows or one. And then when they turn in Hiccups, they're liable to be confused that Butt is only in a supporting role -- because they haven't been set up that Nancy Robertson is the star of the show.
Is that deliberate on CTV's part? I don't know. Even if it is, setting up expectations like that gives the show freight off the top that's just unfair.
When you tune in the pre-promos for any of the U.S. network shows in the summer, or even over Christmas for the mid-season shows, they are things of beauty.
Even sometimes when they take a run at trying to raise your awareness about an underperforming show, they're great. Over Christmas, NBC pushed "Mercy" so hard, and with such engaging and kind of sexy promos, they actually made me want to check it out again, after dismissing it as not my thing back in late October.
The thing that kills me is that since CTV swallowed the assets of CHUM, I know that they happen to have some of the most passionate, talented, and committed promo producers in the country. I know because I worked with these guys. And I know that for the past few years, they've been Ferraris asked to keep to school-zone speeds.
The talent's there. It's the will that's weak.
So it's left to the shows to try and promote themselves. Brent Butt's taken to Twitter, and Dan For Mayor has little videos up on YouTube, like this one:
Oh well. Maybe things will get better when CTV unloads that used podium. They really should have rented that thing. I think the whole podium market's in a big bubble now. I really do.
Anyway. Gotta go. Game's on.
Monday, February 22, 2010
2010 WGC Screenwriting Awards Finalists
THE WRITERS GUILD OF CANADA released their list of the finalists for the WGC Screenwriting Awards this morning. The finalist scripts were judged by a jury of peers, and now move into the final round of judging.
The big story here, I guess, is the unusual fact that four out of five of the half-hour nominations went to the same series, LESS THAN KIND.
This is the news that I was trying to allude to on Friday without breaking the embargo. That's just a tremendous achievement. It's also nice to see CORNER GAS get a nomination for its final season.
I find the noms for the 1 hour category equally interesting. A bit of genre, some western, cop drama, and a couple of superior entries from the criminally underrated ZoS series. It's an eclectic group, to be sure, but all the scripts are extremely high-quality and should make for a competitive category.
In the Feature Film category, too, there's some new blood, not the old same-olds, and that signals to me that no matter how dire the state of Canadian English Language film is said to be, there are fresh voices plying the trade. Stasis is not the problem.
People have written in the last little while that the WGA Awards in the USA are often a better barometer of the "best pictures of the year" than the Oscars. If you look at the ten scripts honored for Best Original and Adapted Screenplay this year, that's certainly true. They're a great group of movies and really do reflect an intelligent mix of the well-crafted & the popular.
I think the WGC also embraces this tradition. Last few years, the Geminis have had some wobbly and out-there nominations & oversights - and I'm not just talking about the complete lack of nominations for Corner Gas in its final season. Having done both in the past, I think there is a flaw in the Gemini process where the juries & especially the jury chair has an inordinate amount of power in choosing the nominees. This reduces the chance of their being any consistency in the yardstick from year to year, which undermines the legitimacy of the process. I'm not against nominating or recognizing little-seen shows that nobody has heard of -- in fact, I'm way in favour of it. But the last few years there's been an unfortunate tendency to play to a very small tent; the opposite problem of the Emmys.
By seeking out a wider peer review, the WGC process actually winds up being more fair.
What's nice, and what gives me a little bit of hope -- is that in the one-hour category, which I'm most famliar with, since that's mostly what I've written -- I know of very moving, funny, or just plain great scripts that didn't make the cut. That's the true test of talent ... there's actually a bit of bench strength.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. YMMV.
The big story here, I guess, is the unusual fact that four out of five of the half-hour nominations went to the same series, LESS THAN KIND.
This is the news that I was trying to allude to on Friday without breaking the embargo. That's just a tremendous achievement. It's also nice to see CORNER GAS get a nomination for its final season.
I find the noms for the 1 hour category equally interesting. A bit of genre, some western, cop drama, and a couple of superior entries from the criminally underrated ZoS series. It's an eclectic group, to be sure, but all the scripts are extremely high-quality and should make for a competitive category.
In the Feature Film category, too, there's some new blood, not the old same-olds, and that signals to me that no matter how dire the state of Canadian English Language film is said to be, there are fresh voices plying the trade. Stasis is not the problem.
People have written in the last little while that the WGA Awards in the USA are often a better barometer of the "best pictures of the year" than the Oscars. If you look at the ten scripts honored for Best Original and Adapted Screenplay this year, that's certainly true. They're a great group of movies and really do reflect an intelligent mix of the well-crafted & the popular.
I think the WGC also embraces this tradition. Last few years, the Geminis have had some wobbly and out-there nominations & oversights - and I'm not just talking about the complete lack of nominations for Corner Gas in its final season. Having done both in the past, I think there is a flaw in the Gemini process where the juries & especially the jury chair has an inordinate amount of power in choosing the nominees. This reduces the chance of their being any consistency in the yardstick from year to year, which undermines the legitimacy of the process. I'm not against nominating or recognizing little-seen shows that nobody has heard of -- in fact, I'm way in favour of it. But the last few years there's been an unfortunate tendency to play to a very small tent; the opposite problem of the Emmys.
By seeking out a wider peer review, the WGC process actually winds up being more fair.
What's nice, and what gives me a little bit of hope -- is that in the one-hour category, which I'm most famliar with, since that's mostly what I've written -- I know of very moving, funny, or just plain great scripts that didn't make the cut. That's the true test of talent ... there's actually a bit of bench strength.
Anyway, those are my thoughts. YMMV.
Animation
Grossology "New Recruits." Written by Richard Clark
Total Drama Action "Crouching Courtney, Hidden Owen." Written by Alex Ganetakos
League of Super Evil “Glory Hog." Written by Philippe Ivanusic-Vallee and Davila LeBlanc
Total Drama Action "The Sand Witch Project." Written by Shelley Scarrow
Preschool and Childrens
Max and Ruby "Max Says Goodbye." Written by Kate Barris
Max and Ruby "Ruby's Good Neighbor Report." Written by Shelley Hoffman & Robert Pincombe
Zigby "Zigby's Collection." Written by Louise Moon
Documentary
Malls R Us (Feature Version). Written by Helene Klodawsky
The Royal Winnipeg Ballet - 40 Years of One Night Stands. Narration Written by Robert Lower
A Time There Was: Stories from the Last Days of Kenya Colony. Narration Written by Donald McWilliams
Episodic half-hour
Less Than Kind "The Daters." Written by Garry Campbell
Less Than Kind "Fun." Written by Jenn Engels
Less Than Kind "Happy Birthday Sheldon." Written by Marvin Kaye & Chris Sheasgreen
Less Than Kind "Careers Day." Written by Mark McKinney
Corner Gas "Shirt Disturber." Written by Kevin White & Norm Hiscock
MOW & Mini-Series
The Summit. Written by John Krizanc
Paradise City: Degrassi Goes Hollywood. Story by Vera Santamaria, Matt Huether, Sara Snow / Teleplay by Vera Santamaria, Matt Huether, Sarah Glinski, Sara Snow
Guns (part 1 and 2). Written by Sudz Sutherland & Jennifer Holness
Feature Film
High Life. Written by Lee MacDougall
A Shine of Rainbows. Written by Vic Sarin & Catherine Spear and Dennis Foon
The Trotsky. Written by Jacob Tierney
Love and Savagery. Written by Des Walsh
Crackie. Written by Sherry White
Episodic one hour
Stargate Universe "Time." Written by Robert C. Cooper
Flashpoint "One Wrong Move." Written by Mark Ellis & Stephanie Morgenstern & James Hurst
ZOS: Zone of Separation "Bred in the Bone." Written by John Krizanc
Cra$h & Burn "Trust." Written by Jackie May
Murdoch Mysteries "Mild Mild West." Written by Derek Schreyer
ZOS: Zone of Separation "Shallow Graves." Written by Jason Sherman
Radio Drama
Afghanada "Episode 65." Written by Alex Levine
Afghanada "Episode 61." Written by Barbara Samuels
Short Subject
Being Erica I "Webisodes." Written by Jessie Gabe
My Pal Satan "Cheaters Never Perspire." Written by Dennis Heaton
How People Got Fire. Written by Daniel Janke
Variety
This Hour Has 22 Minutes XVII “Episode 6.” Head Writer: Ed Macdonald / Written by Mark Critch, Gavin Crawford, Kyle Tingley, Albert Howell, Dean Jenkinson, Joanne O'Sullivan, Tara Doyle, Erik Van Wyck, Mike Allison, Joey Case
This Hour Has 22 Minutes XVII “Episode 8.” Head Writer: Ed Macdonald / Written by Mark Critch, Kyle Tingley, Albert Howell, Shaun Majumder, Dean Jenkinson, Geri Hall, Joanne O'Sullivan, Tara Doyle, Erik Van Wyck, Mike Allison, Stephen Patterson
The Ron James Show “Episode 7.” Written by Ron James, Garry Campbell, Brian Hartt, Mark De Angelis, Chris Finn, David MacKenzie, Paul Pogue, Gary Pearson, Jennifer Whalen
Rick Mercer Report VI “Episode 17.” Written by Rick Mercer, Irwin Barker, Greg Eckler, Chris Finn, Paul Mather, Tim Steeves
Youth
How to Be Indie "How to Be a Mehta." Written by Anita Kapila
The Latest Buzz "The Wonderful World of Buzz Issue." Written by Brent Piaskoski
Family Biz "Breakaway." Written by Sheila Prescott
The Latest Buzz "The Comeback Issue." Written by Darrin Rose
How to Be Indie "How to Strike a Balance." Written by Vera Santamaria
Winners of the 2010 WGC Screenwriting Awards will be announced on Monday, April 19, 2010, at Maro in Liberty Village, Toronto. Ticket information coming soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)