OC Screenwriters Association

JOIN US ON OCTOBER 20th
Tickets on Sale!

YOUR STUDENT or TEACHER I.D.
GETS YOU A GREATLY REDUCED RATE 
AT THE BOX OFFICE
at the Regency South Coast Theater 

Tickets on sale online or at box office
the night of the screening!

Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 7:00pm
Q&A with writer/director Regina Crosby after film

 

film website

TEENAGE DIRTBAG intelligently tells the story of a popular high school cheerleader (Noa Hegesh) who is harassed by a delinquent classmate (Scott Michael Foster) until they are both placed in the same creative writing class. Through written words, they develop a strong bond of trust, companionship and love; but is it a bond that can withstand her elitist social pressures
and his brutal home life?

This film is inspired by true events.

Q&A with writer/director Regina Crosby after film.



 

John Woo's latest "Red CLiff" will be at the Regency South Coast Village Theater this Thursday, October 15th.  John Woo will be at the screening to do a Q&A afterwards.

http://orangecountyfilmsociety.com/

West Coast Premiere
Thursday, October 15th, 2009 - 8:00PM

Regency South Coast Village Theatre
1561 W. Sunflower Ave
Santa Ana, CA 92704

Film screening followed by Q&A session with director John Woo

$10 for non-members.

 

First, my bona fides. I’ve been in a classroom either as a teacher or a student for the greater part of 23 years. I’m a professional writer now (with 18 produced films) and a teacher. This is just to tell you that I’ve seen my share of critiques, story meetings and spitballing sessions under many different circumstances.

My students occasionally run into problems with what is being said in class. Some are confused, some are devastated - some occasionally just give up. Although I typically don’t censor what’s being said, I also don’t allow anyone to be an idiot when they’re making comments so all in all it’s a pretty constructive session.

But it doesn’t matter how thick your skin, negative comments, even ones that are surrounded by sloppy kisses, sting. We all want our work to work; I don’t know anyone who isn’t a bit chafed by the fact that people don’t see the same value we do in our screenplays or novels.

Here’s a couple observations based on years of experience. Take them for what they’re worth (but don’t critique me or I’ll just perish.) :-)

1) No matter how rough any classroom critique can get, it’s nothing to what you’ll get in Hollywood. Either they’ll (producers, directors, etc.) arbitrarily tell you to change things and you have to do it without any input - which actually isn’t bad since that probably means they bought something from you - or they’ll do the ultimate of disrespecting you which is to ignore you and not comment about your work because they’re not going to buy your script. Trust me, that’s a lot rougher than hearing your narrative needs to be smoother or your punctuation is wrong.

2) Sometimes people in classes don’t read your work carefully. Hard to believe, isn’t it? You’ve slaved over a hot keyboard for hours, tweaked things just right, and here’s Joe Wanna-Be sitting in class reading your work just minutes before he’s going to critique it. Oh, yeah - I see it all the time. If any student thinks he or she is fooling us when we can clearly see someone scanning a work on their desk then they are deluded. So don’t take it so seriously - sometimes Joe is just focusing on a point in your work to avoid our (the teacher’s) scrutiny.

News Flash - producers don’t read your work carefully either so you should probably thank Joe for giving you a real life experience. I once sat next to a producer on a plane who had five scripts he was “reading.” He literally went through each page as if it was a photo instead of text. He treated the material like it was a flip book that had to ruffled as quickly as possible to get the effect of the little man running. When I mentioned this to him - in nice terms of course - he deflected and said he had already read the material once. Sure. And the check’s in the mail.

3) People don’t always say what they mean or mean what they say. A lot of things get said in a critique group. Some are well-thought out, some are spur of the moment as the critique goes on. That’s one thing.

I’ve also heard statements like this before: “I don’t like your character.” What they probably mean instead is “I don’t understand your character” or “I’m not engaged by your character.” It’s a classic sociological phenomenon - we dislike or are disinterested by what we fear or don’t understand. Once someone understands something they are more likely to at least accept it - in general, okay? Don’t start jumping up and down and telling me how little I know about sociology - I’m just making a small point. Characters can be unlikable but understandable (or intriguing) and you will follow and accept them (think “Dexter” or the family in “The Godfather” or even Tony Soprano.) So listen to what people are saying but don’t always take their comments at face value. Try to understand the underlying reasons they are saying what they’re saying about your work and it will make more sense. Don’t, however, rationalize the negative comments. That gets you nowhere.

Another example: If I tell you, in a critique, that your work is boring, I can mean several things. Pacing is a result of many, many factors including structure, scene structure/length, dialogue, use of cliche moments, etc.  

For instance, we’re usually told not to do monologues. There’s a good reason for that - they’re bor-ing. But if you’ve ever seen the closing statement Paul Newman makes in “The Verdict” written by David Mamet, then you’re seeing a brilliant exception to that rule. Even on paper, without Mr. Newman’s astounding skills as an actor, that speech is incredible. It truly rivets you to your seat. Most of us couldn’t write and deliver a monologue like that and make it work if it was a naked Angelina Jolie speaking our prose so sticking some like that in is sure to get the dreaded - this is boring.  Or at best, too long, cut this.

4) Sometimes a simple thing is all that’s wrong but people are not focusing on a simple fix - they’re making you feel like your whole work sucks. The best critiques are those that mention a problem and also offer a solution that gets your mind working. But not everyone can offer that fix; sometimes all they can give you is the problem. This is typical in any critique group.

So what do you do? You listen, nod and think about how to address the problem without tearing your entire work apart.

For example, you can act tangentially on a problem instead of directly. I’ve seen a script saved by simply putting a scroll or voice over in the beginning. Just framing the story can make everything click into place. Imagine “Star Wars” without the famous disappearing scroll? Or perhaps “Blade Runner” without the voice over narration. Or “Transformers” without the opening framing that occurs to set the story about why trucks are turning into robots.

When someone in class says “I’m confused by your story” think in terms of setting some framing in place at certain points, like the beginning - this is a simple fix that has major repercussions.  

Character issues? One moment or sequence is sometimes all that’s necessary to fix that. Think about how much less likable the Billy Bob Thornton character in “Bad Santa” would have been without the bar scene where we get the sense that he is dealing with deep, emotional pain.

I’ll try to update this list in the near future. In the meantime, think about what people are saying and get a total picture before you start slashing your script (or your wrists.)
 

Do good work.

Mark

Mark Sevi is a professional writer who teaches through the Irvine Valley College Continuing Education department.



 

 'Arrested Development' script in works

21 hours ago | HollywoodReporter.com | See recent The Hollywood Reporter news » 

Narrator: Now the story of a wealthy family who lost everything ... and just may get some of it back.

"Arrested Development" creator Mitchell Hurwitz and his co-executive producer James Vallely are working on a screenplay for the long-debated feature version of their short-lived Fox series. Even as they prep a new Fox comedy series with "Arrested" star Will Arnett, the writers are spinning more bizarre encounters for the eccentric, spoiled Bluth clan for possible feature production in the spring.

Imagine, which produced the TV show, and Fox Searchlight are producing the film.

Hurwitz had said that he wouldn't start writing a film unless all the main actors, including Jason Bateman, Michael Cera, David Cross, Arnett, Alia Shawkat, Portia de Rossi and Jeffrey Tambor, were committed. Earlier in the year, speculation circulated about which wanted to return as the show's hyper-invested fans pushed from the sidelines and the actors themselves spurred excitement. »

 

Check out my new and improved website: http://www.torturechamberproductions.com/ 

Sorry it's taken so long to post these.  Congratulations to all who entered, not just those who won or placed.

By the way,  in case you didn't know, you can post files to the forums which means anyone who wants to begin a critique session can.

MAKE IT REEL SCRIPT to SCREEN CONTEST

WINNERS: 

  Brandon Tyra - 1st place: Harvey the Chicken Racist (in production)

  Gene Wagner - 2nd place: The Bowler

  Joe Swanson - 3rd place: Dawn of the Piggies

  Christopher Stires - 4th place: Death and Taxes 

  Sharon Holland - 5th place: Gongoma
 

HONORABLE MENTION:

  Kim Armstrong - Best Structure: My First Job 

  Anne Kruse - Best Title: Shoemantic Liaison 

  Gary Keene - Best Dialogue: Sunset Angels 

  Robert Semerau - Best Writing Style: A Kiss to Build a Dream On 

  Steven Sachse - Best Story Twist: Tres Generaciones

  Jeff Michaels - Most Creatively Disturbing: A Father's Love 

  Michael Orick - Best Setting: The Fiddler

  Chris Armstrong - Best Ending: Reverse the Curse 

  Daniel Angarita - Best Pacing: Borderline 

  Jessica Pollack - Best Melodrama: What Do You Want To Do That For?

 

 Check out the trailer for the MMA documentary I'm in.

http://www.ifmotheronlyknew.com/sizzlereel.html

Two new comedies on ABC - I sampled them both recently.  The verdict - they're both good for different reasons with my fav being "Modern Family."

MF reminds me of "Arrested Development" that brilliant, quirky comedy that has outlived its cancellation.  The gang in MF aren't quite as dysfunctional but they are definitely dysfunctional with the same funny results.  

The stories rotate around a patriarch, Ed O'Neil of "Married With Children" fame and his very young wife and her son.  O'Neil is just perfect in his characterization as is his Latina wife who is constantly propositioned because they think O'Neil is her father, not her husband.  The actor who plays the son is freaking hilarious are he dresses in white satin, puffy shirts and reads poetry to the "older girl" at the photo hut.  

O'Neil's immediate family consists of a gay son who is in a committed relationship and a daughter whose family is basically "normal" although the father character is so clueless about how clueless he is he is a constant source of hilarity.  "I'm one of those hip fathers.  I text.  LOL - laugh out loud, WTF - why the face."  Oh my - he is just painful and funny to watch.

There's funny and sweet in good measure here.  This show went immediately to my Season Pass on my Tivo.

Following "Modern Family" is "Cougartown."  Courteney Cox, Bill Lawrence (creator of "Scrubs") and funny sexual innuendo and chit chat. How could "Cougartown" miss? It does but only barely.

"Cougartown" has that Bill Lawrence touch of manic comedy that made "Scrubs" so popular. And Miss Cox is in fine, comedic form (and other form) for the role. If they just didn't try so hard to be funny. There was one line about "hooking up with my son" that simply made me cringe - among others. It all felt...forced. Like someone acting out at a dinner table trying to impress. They might say ten things that are not funny and/or cringeable and then one thing that is legitimately funny. Unfortunately that's not enough to mitigate the rest of the evening when they talked about boogers. That's this show. There's gags about Realtor Cox's friend (Busy Philipps) putting out those promo signs to sell a house with Cox's boobs nearly popping out of her top - her friend's explanation - "we need to get you out there again" (after a messy divorce, natch.) By the way, the actress Busy Philipps should really be spelled with a "t" because she is well-endowed and damned proud of those mams - they are put in a very good light whenever possible.  Thanks, Bill Lawrence.

Cox's son's character, a potentially legit bright spot,  is long-suffering because: all the kids want to steal the promotional posters with Cox's boobs popping out; his lame father gets a job at the high school cutting the lawn while rocking out to heavy metal, and he catches his mom having oral sex with someone almost her son's age.

But one major problem is that anyone who looks like Cox would have her choice of men so the plot to get her in the "action" again is just unbelievable. If there is any fat or cellulite on this woman's body (which they show over and over again in lacy underwear - another big ups to B) I'd be hard pressed to find it.  She looks very, very good.

I had my share of meetings with Ms Cox when I wrote a script for her company. All of them were very pleasant. She's a likable and funny woman. I wish she or her company had liked my script more but that's show business. They may have handled it wrong, so be it. That doesn't diminish the fact that I love her comedic skills or her simple likability as a person and it's apparent in abundance in this show. But she's struggling in this show most of the time because the concept is fundamentally flawed - I don't want to watch a totally desirable woman struggle to find sexual partners - it just isn't that funny and it's unbelievable. Plus, unlike "Scrubs" which had an amazing supporting cast, this one isn't quite as good and so it puts even more burden on Cox to be funny. Even in "Friends" Monica was a good, solid and funny character but we also had the others to go to - it wasn't so one note. Here we only have her. It's just not enough. Yet. This show may find its way although it probably won't be on my Tivo in the future.

With these two good shows the future of half-hour sitcoms looks good to me.