OC Screenwriters Association

It's the Summer - a time once-upon-a-time when all you got was reruns.  Now a lot of shows like "Rescue Me" and "Sons of Anarchy" premier to keep you more than amused and engaged while the big hitters are on hiatus.  "Louie" is  here to do just that...

Odd.  

That's really the only thing you can say about "Louie" that adequately covers this series.  A semi-autobiographical look at comedian Louis C.K.'s New York life, it follows the at-odds-with-the-world Louie as he does comedy, raises his daughter and dates.  He's recently divorced.

Like the old Seinfeld eps, Louis C.K. is seen doing standup throughout.  He's funny and personable in these segments although known as a "comedian's comedian" he isn't as likable or accessible as some.  He's not as angry as Lewis Black and not as squishy as Jerry Seinfeld - sort of in-between. 

A recent standup clip had him talking about sex with animals and how if he wasn't told not to do that, he'd totally do it.  I didn't find the monologe all that funny.  The premise of it was okay but it just didn't achieve anything all that humorous.  In fact, I don't find him all that funny in general and that's a problem - for me - and potentially for the show.  If you don't think he's funny then where do you go when he's doing his schtick?  I actually fast-forwarded through some of the standup parts.

The "dramatic" segments of the show - uneven - a lot like his comedy.  The end of a painful and somewhat forced and mostly unfunny disastrous date has the woman he's with so repulsed by the idea of kissing him that she runs away, hops into a helicopter and flies across the river.  That's funny in an oddball, Woody-Allenish way - that someone is so apalled at kissing you that they have to chopper away.  Not hilarious, but certainly smile-worthy.  Had the build-up to that moment been better it would have been a stronger payoff.

The opening to the second ep had Louis with his comedian friends, most of who you don't recognize unless you're a denizen of comedy clubs, having a free-association chat around a poker table.  They talk about a few things and then get into the meat of the conversation which is Louis' use of the word "fag/faggot" on stage.  One of his gay friends tells him the origin of the word - which isn't funny (and not meant to be) - and then, a bit predictably, the gay friend is again called that.  The segment worked although it was more amusing than funny.  The rest of ep #2 was better than #1 - it felt as if the show was finding its voice.  Not as forced.

I'm going to give "Louie" another chance or two.  I'm not wild about all the standup they throw in but the "dramatic" segments have potential.  I can't see this show making it as a regular on most people's Tivos but it's a decent start for a performer who has had a low profile for many years.  Perhaps if this one doesn't last the next one will - or the next one.  Because Louis C.K. has talent and a unique voice; it's just a matter of finding the right ways to make those elements shine.

"Louie" is on the wildly original FX on Tuesday nights.

More years ago than I care to admit as a 10-yr-old I discovered science fiction in the form of a young adult series of novels. Tom Swift Jr. became a gateway for me to other, more involved and adult forms of scifi that led to a lifelong passion and actually inspired me at some point to become a screenwriter and write scifi. In fact, I always thought Tom Swift would make a great young adult TV series that I would love to write.  Several attempts have been made for both TV and film but nothing has gotten far yet.  So maybe there's hope.

Victor Appleton is listed as the author of the books but it was actually Edward Stratemeyer, a writer from New Jersey who created them in 1910. The individual books were ghostwritten by many authors, including Stratemeyer, but Appleton is always the author listed.

Today, 100 years later, there is still a legacy of new, updated adventures although they have never really achieved the prominence and popularity of the series I read, Tom Swift, Jr.

Edward Stratemeyer , the creator of the boy inventor, was a remarkable man. He created the Tom Swift Sr. series that led to all the further iterations of the boy inventor including his son, Tom Jr., who, with his fast friend, Bud, had many dozens of adventures - 33 books and I excitedly read them all. 

But Stratemeyer was so much more than Tom Swift.  He also created Nancy Drew, the Hardy Boys, and many other children's series characters. Imagine  the hundreds of thousands of lives this man’s legacy has touched. A remarkable achievement.

The Jr. series was insanely good.  They were exciting, innovative and cutting edge -  utilizing concepts that were in the news or the imaginations of the world at the time. The first I ever heard of a VTOL airplane was in Tom Swift and his Flying Lab; rockets, atomic power, robots...they all played out in the books that I so eagerly devoured.  

Listen to some of these titles: Tom Swift and his Flying Lab; Jetmarine,; Giant Robot;  Diving Seacopter; Caves of Nuclear Fire; Deep-Sea Hydrodome; Polar-Ray Dynasphere - how could you not be intrigued and then captivated?  With Tom, I flew high, dove deep and explored "brave new worlds and new civilizations..."

On July 16th, 17th and 18th, in San Diego, a convention celebrating the 100th year of the creation of Tom Swift is being put on by collectors and fans of the eternally-young scientist whose explorer spirit touched and infuses many of us.

I’m going to try to get down there for at least one day. I owe it to Tom for giving me a lifelong joy for reading in general and scifi specifically. It sounds like the organizers have really done a bang-up job of putting this together and there’s a lot to do and see.

I’ll copy and paste the information I received from James Keeline, the man who is putting this on, so I don’t mess it up.  

Here is the main website:  CLICK

From the organizer, James Keeline:

"Friday (16th) is the museum and library tour. At the end of the day we'll arrive at UCSD Geisel Library to see the Tom Swift Centennial exhibit that we helped to put together, including loaning several items from our collections and those of a friend. Around 4 pm we'll see a live performance in a radio drama style based on Tom Swift and the Visitor from Planet X (1961 PD). We'll have at least three voice actors from San Diego's WriteOutLoud plus the sound effects and voice talents of Scott Paulson of UCSD Library.

"Saturday (17th) and Sunday (18th) are the main convention days with about 14 presentations on the schedule between 9 am and 5 pm. We'll have a 90-minute break for people to get lunch and an open-mic session each day with themes like "How I found Tom Swift" and "What Tom Swift Means to Me" on Saturday and "My Greatest Collecting Find(s)" or "The One(s) That Got Away" on Sunday. I imagine some may bring books or other items for show and tell during that period of time.

"Saturday evening we'll have a dinner from 5:30-7:30 with trivia, raffles, and possibly a Chinese Auction-style gift exchange if people bring nominal-value items of interest to Tom Swift fans.

"After the dinner on Saturday we'll have another radio show. This time it will be based on one of the original volumes, Tom Swift and His Airship (1910 PD). This show was performed at UCSD library on June 14.

"We have some samples of the Airship radio show and previews for Visitor From Planet X and the convention in general on YouTube .

"On Sunday one of our presentations will feature a museum curator who portrays Glenn Curtiss, the motorcycle and aviation pioneer who is thought to be a model for Tom Swift. He did a lot of his experimental work in Hammondsport, NY on Keuka Lake. This would make them the models for Shopton, NY and Lake Carlopa of the books. Curtiss also participated in the first U.S. air meet at Rancho San Dominguez in Los Angeles in 1910 and did some early flying boat and aircraft carrier experiments in San Diego.

"In addition to the presentations, we will also have a sale room with historical displays. These may include books and other Tom Swift collectibles plus old chemistry sets and a few parts from the full-scale "Aeroship" built for an attempt by 20th C.-Fox to make a Tom Swift film (1966-69.).

"We have some sellers who will set up tables and offer series books like Tom Swift and science fiction. One or two sellers may bring original cover art for series books that they have acquired and offer for sale. We will bring the Tom Swift cover art we have acquired for display."

Again, this sounds like a fantastic opportunity to learn about this seminal character or share your  enthusiam for the boy inventor.  I doubt you'll get another opportunity like this in the near future so grab your jetpack, hop on the 5 SkyWay South and head into the  future as envisioned by many generations of writers and fans.
 

It’s not fair to review these shows together - they’re so different and “Rescue Me” has five seasons of inventive and startling drama to its credit. However, the shows themselves point to a divergence of attitude in what’s being produced these days versus what was once-upon-a-time the current market in television.

“Rookie Blue” is like “Twilight.” As “Twilight” is vampire-light with pretty people acting like there’s serious issues at stake, “Rookie Blue” is cop-light with pretty people acting like there’s issues at stake. No doubt, being a rookie is frightening, exhilarating, satisfying and frustrating work. This show isn’t going to make you really experience or understand that. Instead it’s “Gray’s Anatomy” for the police world - which is the trend, of course, these days in network television.  Don’t dive too deep into those dark waters because there be monsters there.

Featuring four young rookies, the central character is Andy McNally (Missy Peregrym "Smallville" "Heroes") Her father was a cop  who is now (probably) an alcoholic (he has a “past”) and she’s satisfactorily androgynous for him starting with her name (Andy) and her tom-boy approach to her life.

She can pick locks, shoot a weapon well, rundown a suspect with aplomb, and is uber intuitive as a cop. She’s also very, very attractive. In fact,  Missy Peregrym has true star quality - expect her in a RomCom coming to a theater soon. I predict she is the next “It Girl” when it comes to looking cute, acting smart and breaking hearts in a really nice way like Julia Roberts or Katherine Heigl.

As a cop, Andy is the sensitive but tough one of the group; wears her heart on her sleeve, doncha’ know? She actually gives a drug user unprotected mouth-to-mouth and talks a nervous kid with a gun into not shooting her by telling him that it’s her first day and she really wants to do well (gack!)

And what about that kid-with-a-gun scenario? This dumb-ass geek shoots a drug dealer who is pumping his sister full of junk - and other fluids. So geekboy kills the drug dude, gets away completely free but is so stupid that he goes back to where he stashed the gun just as the pretty rookie is searching the abandoned building on a tip from an undercover cop whose cover Andy has blown - yeah, well, don’t ask and I won’t tell you anymore of this silliness.

No, plot isn’t exactly a strong suit of this series.

The rest of the rookies are handsome, pretty men and women with various generic stories. Honestly, none of them matter much because you can rotate the wheel and pick whatever backstory you want and it would work here.

All the  non-rookie cops are cranky but likable role models.  Where is the bad guys in this?  Who will make it difficult on the rookies to succeed?  Only pressure makes a diamond and there's nothing here - except the desire to be a good cop - that  seems like it will form and define these young men and women.  That's actually not just a problem but a huge problem dramatically.

Some horrible dialogue “Fake it ‘till you make it” (I think that is actually an Urkel phrase - really) and “I just got out of ladies prison, you’re the first man I’ve touched” are slammed into situations so unreal that you’ll find yourself losing focus on what the story is and wondering if your laundry is done yet so you have an excuse to leave. If you like your cop shows light and technically and emotionally unrealistic, then here’s one that you can really love.  But it certainly isn't "NYPD Blue" and adding the word "blue" onto this title is a pure insult to that remarkable show.

I myself won’t be adding “Rookie Blue” to my queue anytime soon.

On the other end of the spectrum is “Rescue Me.” This is a show so audaciously different and disturbing at times that it wildly fails and wildly succeeds in the span of minutes.  But it succeeds a great deal more than fails.  Last season's dream-induced musical numbers were perhaps a bit of a fail - but the scenes involving Tommy and his romantic triangle were  TV - drama in general - at its best.

The sixth season opens on self-destructive Tommy Gavin (co-writer/-producer Denis Leary) having a near-death experience and going to heaven? hell? both? While there he is greeted by all the firefighters who died on 9-11 including his cousin who has been a dead-like-me thorn in his side since the first ep.

At the close of last season drunk-ass Gavin was shot by his drunk-ass uncle for pouring the drinks that got the uncle’s drunk-ass girlfriend killed. The show leaves you with the uncle sitting calmly at a bar watching his nephew slowly bleed to death on the floor. A pretty grim scenario no matter how you slice it.

As the new season opens, Tommy is out of the hospital.  They don’t bother to show the resolution to that scenario, content instead to talk about it instead. Okay - so it's anti-climactic but it works - sorta.  Suffice to say that Tommy is fine. The uncle has been given a pass for his shooting (see what I mean about the sublime and the ridiculous?) and everyone in the cast is then given a moment to tell Tommy what an asshole he really is. Yes, he’s a jerk - admittedly so - but how the writers can come up with the idea that the uncle is justified and gets no punishement is beyond me. I guess the “some people just need shooting” is in play here.

Tommy isn't unaffected by this all although he pretends to be fine.  The ending shows him drinking in a church, sitting on the priest's chair and raising a toast to Jesus on the cross.  Similar to when Martin Sheen in "The West Wing" smokes in a church and puts his cigarette out in the aisle - dissing God and his holy horde.   Or perhaps acknowleding that there is a greater power than Gavin's ego.  Either way  strap in - it's gonna be a bumpy ride knowing the creators/writers of this series.

I hate to say this but I was underwhelmed by this opening ep. It didn’t ring like the rest of the show has. There was a bad season - I think #3 - that I wasn’t wild about also but they roared back in Seasons 4 and 5.  I will give the show the benefit of the doubt before I declare that it has jumped  the shark.  

Why?

“Rescue Me” tries so many different and unique things, it’s really worth allowing for some slack. The writers and producers have proven themselves over and over again as putting together one of the best dramas on TV. I will wait (a month! what is it with these programmers, for f*ck’s sake?) for the next ep and hope that this opening ep was an anomaly. But my fear is that there may be only so many ways to make the Tommy Gavin character an alcoholic jerk and then somehow redeem him. Perhap the writers/producers have gone to the well one too many times and can’t “rescue” this season.

If you haven't seen this show before and plan to watch it start at the beginning which was inspired by the  terrible sacrifices of the rescue workers caught in the 9-11 tragedy. To fully appreciate the nuanced and nightmarish world that these men and women work and live in, you need to understand where they’re coming from.  Plus, trust me, you can never fully grasp the depth of character here without those crucial earlier episodes.

As to my opening statement about the divergence of what was once television to the television of now, you need look no further than the recent hiring of David Nevins to run Showtime. Nevins is known for his “family fare” and not the challenging and flawed characters of his predecessor. I see this as writing on the wall. A general sea change away from dramatic fare like “Dexter,” “The Sopranos,” and “Nurse Jackie.”

We have enough darkness to deal with in our personal lives these days - apparently we don’t want it in our entertainment too is the thinking.  Monsters are being demystified and reclassified in an attempt to spin them into something new and perhaps less challenging.

It’s a hunky, shiny-vampire/sensitive-werewolf entertainment world now and we all live in it.

Ugh.  

Quick - where are my DVDs of "Cracker?"

Here’s an update on my journey as I chase “this TV thing,” and how I think my first career, engineering, can help me with “this TV thing.”

I’ve started thinking about what’s happened to me over the past two and a half years, and it's been amazing.  Almost how I imagined it...almost.  Two and half years ago, I decided to go for this “TV thing,” but I’d be smart about it.  I’d be slow and steady with it.  I did my research, saved up some cash, and went for it...somewhat cautiously.  There isn’t a lot of regret, but that will be for a different post.

So a few nights ago, I started thinking, what if I had done “this TV thing” sooner instead of engineering?  Would I have done better because I had more time?  Would I have developed my skills more?  Would I have “made it” already?

The only thing that I really know for sure is back when I was 17 and wanted to do “this TV thing” out of high school...I don’t know if I would have been as willing to work as hard for it  as I am now.  The other thing I know...I’m not sure if I would have thought about it enough to go about it “correctly.”

Now, there’s no “correct way” to go about “this TV thing,” but you can make yourself aware about situations that you might go through, and what other people have gone through, and maybe prepare yourself better for the journey. 

I’m not saying engineering is completely terrible.  It taught me some valuable lessons.  With the two engineering firms I’ve worked for, the training wasn’t the great.  I came to work for the engineering firms when the housing market was booming so training wasn’t always a top priority.  Sometimes, I was told to “figure it out yourself” or “call someone in another office.”  And as pissed as that made me because the managers were suppose to know that stuff or at the very least hook it up with people who knew how to get those projects done...I did it any way.

Then after spending extra time to “figure it out” sometimes for projects that involved public safety, I would be told that “I’m in-efficient.”  I thought that was complete BS since I had to spend extra time to figure out what I had to do before I could start doing it. 

So what would happen after one these “figure it out yourself”?

I’d finish the project...sometimes without being paid for all the time I worked on it.  Sometimes staying there until 3 a.m. only to show up at 7 a.m.  Then the project would come back from a city, Caltrans, whomever with just minor corrections.  By minor...I mean a font size or naming convention or changing a color so that it would be cleaner looking on the plan. 

The best comment came from a city engineer with my boss and clients present.  We were at the public counter having plans reviewed for a final time. 

When I handed the city engineer my 32 page plan set, he said, “I’ve seen you’re work.  They’re quality plans and very easy to review.  So I’m going to assume that my latest comments are incorporated into the plan, and I’m going to stamp them approved...Good work, Rudy.”

He said that in front of my boss and clients.  Yeah that’s pretty badass for a guy who’d rather be doing “this TV thing.” 

So the first lesson wasn’t really a lesson, it simply reinforced my hard worker mentality.  I’ve always had it in me, engineering just made sure it was there.  Next was figuring out stuff on your own.  And figuring it out fast.  Now, I always knew I had to figure out things on my own, but never thought it’d be as much as I’ve experienced...especially in engineering.  Really it’s only going to make me stronger with “this TV thing” when I'm under deadline and there's just seconds until my show is live.

The next lesson engineering taught me was how to deal with difficult people.  People on a power trip, people who are in-charge of you...but have no idea what’s going on, people who are suppose to help you...but don’t, people who tell you one thing...and do another, managers who will sit you down and tell you how you messed up and that you need to check your work, but when one of your coworkers does it...they suddenly “don’t know how to talk to that person because your manager suddenly has no balls,” and people who just don’t get their work done.  I can only imagine what this will do for me as I continue with “this TV thing.”

The main lesson I learned from working with difficult people is that if people intentionally BS you...they will eventually get theirs.  I use to be all about revenge, and screw this I’m going to get you...but now I realized things will eventually handle themselves...just as long as you keep working at it.  I got too many stories on this one...some just happening a few weeks ago.

Enough about engineering for now.  Since I started going for this “TV thing,” I’ve met some amazing people.  Some inspirational, some difficult, some people who have made it, who are making it, and most important people who are there to help and encourage you.

When I first started, I really had no expectations.  Well, I take that back...I expected to work really hard, to just shut up and do my job, and to take a lot of crap.  And since I was working as an engineer, with some of the conditions mentioned above...I also expected my time to be really strained.  I really expected it to be nothing but hard work.

And that hard work paid off.  Sometimes, I can’t believe the e-mails, texts, and phone calls I get asking me to help on productions.  Yeah most of them are un-paid, but I don’t really care it’s experience, and people want me on their productions.  That’s huge!  People want me!  Then just a few weeks ago...I found out that someone wants to pay me for some video work.  That really just made my day.  To be told by some people that “this TV thing” isn’t real or that I’m never going to make any money doing this...well I present Exhibit A, that e-mail.

So, as I sit back, and analyze what’s been happening to me.  It’s been one heck of a ride, and I’m just getting started.  For now, I’ve decided to take a step back, and go back full-time as an engineer for some personal reasons.  I’m not going to stop working towards “this TV thing,” but just need to re-think it.  For now, all I can say to anyone who wants “in,” just keep working at it and good luck.  Remember the harder you work, the luckier you get.

Here are some clips from OCSWA's first ever MeetUp.  It was held at The Ritz Restaurant in Newport Beach.

To see Mark Sevi, president and founder of OCSWA, talk about the orangization click here.

To see James Hirsen, featured guest and entertainment attorney, talk about the importance of knowing the business and legal side click here.

Enjoy!  And I hope to see you all at our next MeetUp.

As you might have guessed from the title of this post, I’m Italian. Family is a natural with me. Lots and lots of family. I can remember get togethers in Ohio where I was raised that involved dozens of men, women and children that I only recognized by faces in photos. When I was introduced to them it was always cousin, uncle, aunt or paisano which basically meant “friend of the family.” No matter the appellation, they were all “family” and I knew I was expected to be courteous, supportive and involved in their lives. We went to their parties when people were born, had a birthday or milestone like 1st Communion; we attended their funerals when they passed away.

When I started teaching, I never wanted my writing classes to be just classes - the students and I would form a “community” I posited. I started an email list to communicate with the students and they between themselves that still is used between students who are now in the far-flung regions of the world. And new students are added to that community each semester and contribute to the sense of sharing. I try to hold parties, social events (like going bowling or to a movie,) and contests that help to create and sustain that sense of community.

This is all to say that what I’ve been doing since beginning of my life and what I’ve always carried forward is “networking.”

But it’s not networking; it’s more than that. At some level, it’s really family.

The men and women that I met as a student myself in writing classes back in the Jurassic era are still friends of mine today. We talk on a semi-regular basis - about as much as I do to my cousins and aunts and uncles, actually. Some have been to my home and my family’s homes and others have become true members of my family - paisanos. We wouldn’t think of not inviting them to a family function.

I can’t not want to adopt people - it’s in my DNA. My house growing up was as chaotic as a train station. Everyone in the neighborhood came to our kitchen to have milk and cookies. Even today, go to any of my sister’s houses at any given time and there’s someone who I don’t know eating something, or having coffee and cake. It’s what we do. And networking, for me, is like that.  

I meet a lot of people in my roles as teacher, professional writer, martial artist, and president of the Orange County Screenwriters Association. Some of the people I’ve met through OCSWA are already fast friends. Point is, networking isn’t just about shaking hands and dropping cards. To me, it’s about forming relationships but more - maintaining those relationships and carrying them forward into all aspects of your life where approriate.

I think many believe that if they show up to an event, shove a card in someone’s hand and smile nicely that’s all they have to do. If networking is relationships that can become family then you really need to do so much more. You have to curry those relationships, remind people of who you are - ask them how you can help them. Like family. Sure, you may only see someone during an industry event but if you want a relationship that means something with that person you should make a point of talking to him or her at least for a few minutes every time you see them. Remind them who you are. How you’re unique. Romance them a bit in other words. These are the relationships that will fuel your future - the people you can reach to when you’re ready to ask for help to kick-start your career.

In reading this, I recognize that some of it can sound very cynical and self-serving. But life is filled with accommodations. We couldn’t exist without relationships. The very core of our early existence required that our ancestors formed mutually-beneficial bonds to survive. Relationships, networking, community - family - is necessary and welcome.

It’s how we survive and grow...

On this day of our first MeetUp (but not our first event) I am excited by the prospect of meeting you all and seeing some of you again. I specifically started the Orange County Screenwriters Association (with board members chosen from my "family" of screenwriters) to form a network of people who can help each other. I didn’t realize it directly at the time but what I was doing was creating a virtual kitchen where everyone can come and have something to eat and a cup of coffee; spend some moments laughing and talking about the world and our parts in it; commiserate with each other.

Hopefully tonight will make an impact on all our lives.  The people we meet will contribute to enriching our lives even more than it has been all these years.  For me specifically it will be by allowing me to continue to live and work in this wonderful family of filmmakers by creating new opportunities.

Who knows - maybe soon we’ll become such good friends, we’ll all be calling each other paisano - family.

Let’s put it in perspective immediately; it’s a game. It compares not at all with the people who deal with the daily horrors happening in the Middle East or the natural disasters that wipe out thousands in an eye-blink. Or the quiet strength of those with a life-threatening illness or financial ruin.

I know that. I understand that it’s just a basketball game.  

This past series between The Lakers (my team) and The (hated) Celtics had life lessons, though, in abundance. So many lessons in persistence, valor, and a will to succeed even when you feel like giving up.

Again, some perspective here. The men playing these games are millionaires; I could put up with a lot of failure and disappointment if afterwards I went home to my 5,000 sq.ft. house in Pelican Point or Beacon Hill. And yet, there is really no financial balm for the mental torture we can individually put ourselves through.

In 2008 the Boston Celtics rolled over the Lakers in the Finals kicking them to the curb by 39 points in game 6. Last year, the Celtics, beset by injuries, didn’t make it to the big show. This year they did, surprisingly by most accounts, and the re-match was on.

Failure can destroy or motivate - it depends on your perspective. A few years ago I successfully pitched a project to Coquette Productions, the company owned by Courtney Cox and husband David Arquette. They hired me to write it and paid me handsomely for it. It was something that I was passionate about - perhaps, like Kobe said in the last game, I was pushing too hard because of the desire to both “win” and tell this particular story. The end result, for me, was disaster.

They hated the script. Okay, they didn’t say that directly - most producers are too political to put it in those terms, but they said it was “unfilmable” and didn’t even want me to do any rewrites. As I’ve long told my writing students, having someone tell you something sucks isn’t the worst thing they can say to you - it’s what they don’t say that can kill you - that long silence, the un-returned phone calls. When someone is directly pissing you off you know they’re at least engaged in the process; when they don’t call, they don’t care and that silence is dreadful.

I like to think that I’m a pretty good damned writer. I’ve sold/produced more than nineteen films - I must be doing something right. Sometimes I joke that I’m a writing whore (and I am) but even a slut has to deliver. So, yeah, I guess I’m pretty good at delivering.

Which makes what happened a real devastation. Honestly, since my very early days I’ve never not made a production company happy that they hired me. What made the Coquette experience worse was that I was writing about something I knew well, wanted passionately to write about, and it would have been a good opportunity for me to step into the “A-List.”  

The experience wrecked me for, oh...an hour. Then I shrugged and started writing again. But, and this is an important “but” I never stopped fuming; somewhere in the back of my mind was the thought that I would prove the execs at Coquette wrong about me. That I’d kick ass on my next project or the one after that and show them the mistake they made but be gracious about it at one of the cocktail parties at the Academy Awards. Okay, so I dream big - it doesn’t cost you anything more.

Recognize this - a lot of what we do to succeed doesn’t necessarily come from a positive mindset. We all have to be a little ego-driven and immature to want to define our self-worth by someone else’s standards or opinions. Who really cares if you’re rich or poor or talented or whatever - isn’t it what you do for other people that’s important? How you live and give back? Sure, all that. And yet, most of my success has come from trying to do exactly the opposite. I want to prove, daily, that I’m like the old SNL Stuart Smalley routine: I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me as a writer.

Turns out, the Lakers’ players, the ones who were pounded by the Celts in 2008 and just won it all against them in 2010, feel similarly:

Lakers' guard, Derek Fisher: “We haven’t stopped thinking about it (the 2008 loss.) Great accomplishments come out of negativity, setbacks, adversity. There couldn’t have been a more embarrassing loss to have in front of the whole world than that night and the last two seasons we’ve tried to erase that.”

As a player, Fisher, who Kobe Bryant acknowledged as being crucial to their win, has been criticized his entire career and especially this season as being undersized, too old, too slow, and not skilled enough. Fish never listened to the doubters - for the last fourteen years he has just quietly kept on making essential play after essential play until he’s now earned his fifth championship ring alongside Bryant.

And D-Fish knows about perspective. He moved back to L.A., to play for less money, when his young daughter was diagnosed with life-threatening eye cancer and there was better treatment here for her than in Utah where he had gone seeking a payday a few years ago. He knows where to put the importance of a basketball game.

Each of the Lakers, like each of us, has our own stories about what we want but more importantly, why we want to achieve it.  

This from Kobe Bryant, a Laker’s guard who some consider to be the greatest guard to ever play the game: When asked what this championship ring (number 5) meant to him, Kobe said “One more than Shaq (former Laker center, Shaquille O’Neal.) You guys (reporters) know me - I don’t forget nothin’”

Three of the five rings Kobe has were achieved while Shaq and Kobe ruled the NBA together in the early part of the decade. Bryant has heard over and over again that Shaq was mostly responsible for his success as a Laker champion. Also, Shaq has been petty and critical of Bryant for many years after he left the Lakers. Kobe channeled all that into pushing his 31-yr-old body, beset by injuries, into some of the best basketball he’s ever played. He ran and shot and dished off like his hair was on fire for most of the year and especially the series; and was actually sat down for a bit because his coach thought he was trying *too* hard.

Say what? Kobe Bryant has got Shaq stuck up his butt? The man who has more individual honors and rings than anyone besides Michael Jordan (and continues to garner them) cares what a former teammate says about him?

This is why I love sports so much. No matter how many times I see these stories, they never fail to inspire me, to lift me to want to be better than I am.

Okay, so enough about the Lakers specifically. Their will-to-win and individual stories are indeed inspiring and a good lesson to all of us. If you lose today, you will win tomorrow as long as you don’t wallow in self-pity about how the world has treated you. Frustrated at your inability to get something sold - or even read? Good. Channel it. If you want to be a champion then use it all as motivation to continue to get better. Raise your game. Prove to the doubters that even down, you’re not out.

But no champion gets there because they repeat past mistakes. Champions absorb, understand, learn and move on. How much do you really want it is the question? If a setback can discourage you for a long time then maybe you’re in the wrong place. Don’t ever let those mistakes, those failures, define you. The lessons of life are given to you to constantly improve your skill set, and never quit, never stop trying. Remember, if it was easy, anyone could do it.

Just ask perennial madman Laker forward Ron Artest who said early in his career in semi-bitterness: “In the NBA, they don't promote guys like me. They like guys who like Cheerios, good guys.” (NOTE: Artest just got his face on a Wheaties cereal box as part of the 2010 championship team.)

Contrast that with these post-game comments about this, his first championship: “I’d like to thank my psychiatrist.” (seriously, he did) and then, after coach Phil Jackson praised him as the MVP of game 7: "He (Kobe) never passes me the ball, and he passed me the ball," Artest said with wonder, arms raised in victory. "Kobe passed me the ball, and I shot a three.”

And he made it helping to clinch The Lakers victory. This after missing some crucial shots during other games; after being questioned time after time again about his stability, his will to win, and his contributions to the Lakers.

Heroes aren’t born - they are forged from the red-hot crucibles of experience, formed from long hours of work, years of preparation for that moment when they can achieve success. They may be bent, battered, bruised, and bowed but they are never, ever beaten for long.

Mythologist Joseph Campbell said it right so many years ago - when you’re on the Golden Path, good things will come to you. That path being your belief in yourself.  You may have detours but eventually you will achieve the hero’s boon if you stay true to your quest.

Be strong and keep writing, editing, directing, acting - whatever it is. Don’t stop believin’ to quote a Journey song.

Even if you clank the rim, keep putting up those 3's. Play like your hair was on fire. Don’t listen to the doubters who think you’re too old, too slow, undersized.

Be inspired and do good work.
 

Too easy. It's too easy to say: "The Good Guys...isn't," uh, good. So I won't. But it isn't - not really. Maybe if you only had a choice between "Murder She Wrote" reruns or this you'd be excused for sitting through this odd (not in a good way) and uneven one hour comedy.

The premise - is there one? Two mismatched cops who do small-time property crime investigations (that always lead to real big cases) are partners.

Colin Hanks and Bradley Whitford play the mismatched partners - you can tell they don't belong together as a team because:

 1) One is old, one is young.
 2) One wears suits, the other wears...not suits.
 3) One is technologically adept, the other isn't.
 4) One is strange and wild and the other isn't.
 5) One is stuck in the 80's and...

...well, you get it, right?

Pay no attention to the stories - that's not the purpose. The entertainment value is in watching long-suffering Hanks deal with drunk?/high?/brain damaged?/serial oddball? Whitford as he mugs for the camera and comes on like an icky man-pig to every woman they encounter. Ah, and he calls things funny names like "computer machine" for laptop and talks to it like he's just done a tab of acid.

Oh, stop I hear you saying...my sides are splitting with unbridled glee already.

The pilot was written by creator Matt Nix ("Burn Notice") and directed by Tim Matheson and it wasn't bad. Unfortunately there was an episode 2.

The problem, in general, is that the humor most times isn't funny and it's so broad and goofy that you think "Smoky and The Bandit" is experiencing a reprise as a series. Only Whitford isn't Dom Deluise and Hanks isn't Burt Reynolds (although I think Whitford is actually doing a DeLuise/Reynolds thing all by himself); and, get a clue producers, this isn't really the 80's when that sort of thing might have gone over. 

Unlike "Psyche" and "Monk" that straddle the comedic fence, "The Good Guys" isn't able to do so comfortably. Nix, a capable writer, made it work in the pilot - mostly - but it was totally lost in ep2.

The curse of the one hour series premier is that sometimes you need two. See the opening ep for "V" as a blaring example of how not to do a 1hr pilot.  This one perhaps could have won me over had I seen more information about how/why this team came to be. I mean if you're going to try to capture the 80's (a real and horrible trend it seems these days) then do the "Lethal Weapon" thing and show us how the mismatched pair came to be from the start. A true origin episode. Instead, we're dumped into a Dallas police station and asked to accept these two with little or no information about them or their partnership. I know, I know - we'll fill it in as we go along. That is, if anyone sticks around long enough for that to happen.  NOTE: they have this really annoying gunshot s/fx between acts. Who do I gotta pay off to stop that?

The 1hr pilot played on the Colin Hanks' character's anger and irritation at being teamed with a burned out has-been. Much more of that would have served ep2 well but Hanks' character already seems to be accepting this pair-up from hell by ep2.  As mentioned, perhaps if there had been a 2hr premier and Nix had written it this would have created a better flow into the subsequent eps.

I am actually a big fan of Colin Hanks and Bradley Whitford but this is a long way from Whitford's roles in "West Wing" and "Studio 60," and Hanks'  promising "Orange County" start.
I may give this show one more episode but I am honestly not that motivated. Perhaps if I'm sitting in front of the Tivo when it's promoed and I can find it easily enough I'll stick a record tag on it and let it sit in my queue until I'm finished with all my "Murder She Wrote" episodes. Maybe.

Just to be complete about this, I watched ep2 first and the pilot online. I am not sure when the pilot aired but I think it was weeks ago - if at all. I was certain I had the first ep recorded until I realized that there was just too much they weren't explaining and I went back and found the pilot. Not sure how this came about but there it is. 

I'm also not sure what this means but in looking over the IMDB listing, Colin Hanks is listed on only seven eps where Whitford (one of the producers, by the way) is listed as being in eight.  Does this mean that Hanks bailed?  Do you care?

"The Good Guys" airs on Fox (our most schizophrenic network.)

Good luck in determining when.
 

I lured you in.  I did.  I put up a title that I didn't think you could resist.  A bit controversial and based on something familiar so you'd be even more compelled to read (a takeoff on the guru book Your Screenplay Sucks!) I shamelessly manipulated you into reading this but I did it for a good reason.  More on that later.  See, I did it again.  I created a mystery so that you'll stick around to find out what it is I have to reveal later.  Either that or you're already bored with me and you're moving on.  But you won't.  Oops - another shameless manipulative writing technique.  I can't help myself it seems.

Now you owe me thirty bucks.

A compelling, marketable title, setting up questions in a scene that the audience wants answered, and some reversals.  There's three writing tips I used in the opening that you actually probably already knew - all things you certainly could have discovered on your own had you just spent a little more time writing and less time reading about it.  But if I stuck those pearls of faux wisdom in a book you'd probably give me the money and thank me for the privilege.

 I've been writing professionally for almost twenty years.  Been studying writing for longer than that, obviously.  When I started, there was one, maybe two books on writing scripts.  Somewhere along the way, someone figured out that there was a lot of money to be made putting lipstick on a pig.  In other words, let's dress what's a very fundamental set of storytelling constructs in new clothes and tell people that we've figured out a better way to do it.

Wrong.  Wrong times ten.

First, what is a "writing guru" - I define them as any of a hundred "geniuses" who purport to tell you the "secrets" of how to write a script or a novel or whatever.  A writing teacher is different.  Why?  Usually because a writing teacher sticks with you for a period of time and tries to help you shape not only your material but also your writing process on a one-to-one basis.  They tend not to be these quick-answer, seminar-types who throw up a dog and pony show that is fundamentally  for the purpose of selling a book, software, or  a more expensive weekend seminar.

Now that we've defined terms (setting the mythology in script parlance) ask yourself this one simple, burning question:  if these people have it so right that they can write books about writing, why aren't they themselves selling anything?

 Answer:  they're too busy writing books on writing and not actually doing the one thing they're advising you to do - write a script.  And you're too busy reading these books to write so they're not only sucking you into their bull, they're ruining whatever chance you have at a career by distracting you from what's really important.

A quick survey reveals the following about some top scriptwriting book authors:

Your Screenplay Sucks! by William Akers - a somewhat credible source since he says he's been writing for 20 years.  But what has he been writing?  He's only had a few minor films made so take all that with a grain of salt.

Screenwriting Goldmine by Philip Gladwin - he's written some TV stuff but not much and not anything that I'd be watching.

Making a Good Script Great by Linda Seger - she's done "script consulting" mostly - not much writing of actual scripts.  

Screenplay: Writing the Picture by Robin U. Russin, William M. Downs - Russin has one film (in 1998) and Downs isn't listed in IMDB but perhaps he's done some plays.

Save the Cat! by Blake Snyder - two films, nothing since 1994 and yes, I know he passed away recently so don't get all up in my face about his lack of productivity.

The Screenwriter's Bible by David Trottier - two movies, nothing since 2001.

Syd Field, Michael Hauge (who I can't actually find anywhere on IMDB as a writer,) Robert  McKee ("Mrs. Columbo"  Seriously?) - all these men and women are not scriptwriters that I can tell.  They talk a good game but when it comes down to it, they haven't even dressed to take the field.

Is it impossible then for someone who isn't a writer to teach you how to write?  Anything's possible.  And some people are just better teachers than writers.  I'm all for studying the process, like Syd Field did, and reporting the results.

The problem is two-fold:  First, there isn't much more than can be said about writing scripts.  Most of these books spend a ton of time simply redefining terms like "Act I."  Second, when these gurus run out of their "pearls"  then the advice they give is next to worthless because they're guessing or pretending they know.

You need a plumber.  Who are you going to put more faith in?  Someone who has only touched the tools or someone who actually has legitimate butt crack?  A doctor?  Do you want the guy who wrote a book on anatomy or a surgeon that has done hundreds of heart operations (okay so that's not a perfect analogy but it almost works.)

Why in the world do you trust these people who just write books or put on seminars?  Honestly, if you can't watch 100 movies on your own and figure out what they're saying in the first three chapters of a book or 30 minutes of a seminar then you're sunk - you've already abrogated your writing soul.

I'm going to give you an example of why I think there is no substitute for a real scriptwriting teacher - one who has written and continues to write and sell stuff.  

I was watching a (in retrospect) dumb documentary on Agatha Christie's work.  Scientists had gathered to do a "Concordia" which is basically a word by word, phrase by phrase, book by book examination of how the famous author wrote and continues to sell more books than just about anyone else.  

What secrets will a "scientific" examination reveal?

Actually, nothing all that exciting and certainly no big surprises.  But while I was working out on the elliptical I figured I'd let it run.

It came to about the last ten minutes and the big reveal that had these scientists moist with excitement is the fact that Agatha manipulated the reader's speed thereby controlling the story experience.

Gasp!  A gem! A pearl!  

A load of dung...

The lead scientist said with scientific certaintly that Agatha controlled her readers by speeding up and slowing down said reader to get the effect she wanted.  Their proof?  Agatha wrote much denser material in the beginning of the book, thereby slowing the reader down and sped up the reader toward the end of the book when the prose was that much less dense.

I stopped, gob-smacked, as they say in Agatha's England.  All they had was a simple writer thing but because this brain trust had never written anything like an Agatha Christie novel they had no frame of reference.  Any writer of moderate experience knows the answer to why the prose is thicker in the beginning of a book (or script) - you have to describe more to do the setup.  Once a parlor is described, it's done.  You don't repeat that description again.  Plius, given the time period in which Agatha wrote (middle 1900's) and the inability to correct easily, I'm sure as she continued and became more comfortable with the work, she did far less searching for and exploring plot and character concepts but didn't see a reason to go back and do any trimming.  It's a lot harder to fix with a pen than it is with a word processor.

It's not a revelation they stumbled on, but rather an ordinary circumstance that most working writers find themselves in.  All they had to do was include a real writer on the team and that little bit of nonsense would not have made the final cut.    A working writer - not some theorist.  A similar situation to anyone writing books about writing who hasn't actually done much scriptwriting themselves.  How valid will their "revelations" be?  And because you haven't done much of it either, you're going to say "wow - that's cool" about something that is totally unworkable in real world terms.

I could go on and on about this but  I know I'm overstaying my welcome as it is.  Let me cover a few more things and I'll be done with it  (a  promise of an ending so you'll actually stick around until the end.  It's called "Act Three.")

We're basically lazy so we want someone else to do the work.  Don't.  Don't let these gurus convince you that they have something you can't get yourself.  Do the work and you'll be richer for it.

Having said that, it certainly doesn't hurt to use these "geniuses" to fill in some of the blanks and open your mind to possibilities.  But trust me, your time is better spent reading philosophy, mythology, psychology, and some core literature and scripts than a book about writing.

Another point: I differentiate between writing teachers and gurus but the truth is some teachers are simply MFA's and have no good knowledge of how to write a script.  Try to find a teacher who has actually written and sold some stuff and avoid the MFA trap.  Everyone always says that work muscles are tighter and tougher than gym muscles.  Believe it.

Figure it out yourself because, folks, like I said, if these people at these conferences really had it figured out then they would be doing it successfully instead of writing books about it.   

Writing isn't easy and your style, ideas, voice, and output cannot be found in a guru book.  To become a good writer you simply must write.  There - that's the secret.  

Now give me $29.95, quit reading this and go write something.

I was complaining to a friend of mine at my martial arts dojo one time about this business. After listening to my whining for a few minutes he looked at me and said "No one forced you to become a screenwriter." A bit harsh perhaps but he was right. My life, my choices.

My mistake was trying to express my frustration to someone who doesn't understand and work in this business. Had I complained about taking countless breakfalls or sore wrists or two separated shoulders and many dislocated joints from years of doing martial arts, I'm sure I would have gotten a more sympathetic response and then, of course, his list of injuries.
 

Community is more important than we sometimes give it credit.  Sharing pain and joy with people who understand that pain and joy is in itself a joy because the people with whom you're sharing understand you at a level that others don't. Anyone in the arts appreciates what an arbitrary business it can be; how commercial success is always at war with your artistic sensibilities. How someone with far less talent than you can succeed even as you don't.

In martial arts, as with most things, if you do everything right you succeed at a much higher rate than you fail at any given task. In our community, the entertainment business, success is at times arbitrary and fleeting. Even if I write that perfect script it may never get sold or even read by anyone but friends. A TV series can be as well-conceived and well-produced as anything you've ever seen and it will still be canceled because it fails to find an audience or because an exec is having a shitty day.

Success in our field  is a matter of hard work, timing, luck, and never taking "no" for an answer. People who don't work in the arts can't fully understand that rejection is our constant shadowy friend who lurks in the periphery of our sight even as we're completing that "perfect" piece of entertainment be it script, film, or monster makeup.

It's human nature to rail against our mates, our friends, our lives, our jobs and the world in general. Everyone gets that stuff. It's when you get into specifics like "My script got optioned but never got made," or "My stupid agent won't call me back" or "He said it was the best thing he ever read and then never bought it" that the differences come out.

May I tell you how many times I've heard: "This project you wrote is so good that it will change your life and make you an A-List writer" only to be ultimately disappointed by the vagaries of Hollywood?  I've peeked through the doors of the Emerald City and have been close but even after 19 produced movies, they've never opened quite wide enough for me to slip completely through.  See, now I know you like hearing that - that you'd appreciate it because it's probably happened to you or someone you know.

Not even my mom, who is insanely in love with movies and has always supported my career, really understands what I have to go through day after bloody day. She can't. She doesn't work in this business and just can't see how frustrating it can be.

No, for that you need people who are living it. Those who hear a thousand nos but never actually listen to them.  Those who see a dozen friends sell something while you're left wondering who you have to screw to just get read.

That's why community is so incredibly important.  We need the sympathetic sharing of common pains and common joys; an understanding that goes beyond the general and to the specific. Like sciatica sufferers who hold their backs in appreciation of pain that only they know. Everyone has back pain at some point but those who have gone through the torture of a sciatica attack can appreciate with a finer sense what another is actually feeling...just like this business - the biggest and most consistent pain in the, uh "back" you can ever experience.

So join us, you tired, hungry for a sale, you huddled masses yearning to "do a meeting."  Join us in spirit and in person when we have our events at the Regency South Coast Village Theater and our MeetUps and our pizza parties. Sit with those of us who understand you and feel free to moan and bitch about this business.

Let's kumbaya as one raucous voice until someone tells us to shut the hell up (or buys our stuff.)

We at OCSWA actually do get it. We get you because we've been there, done that, and bought the T-shirt (although we've all paid way too much for it and mine doesn't fit me anymore.)

But it's really not even about a bitch-fest (have a little cheese with that whine, Mark?)  It's about feeling like you're not screaming in a vacuum; knowing that there are others who feel the same way you do about what you're trying to accomplish and have the same hopes and fears and frustrations.

The Orange County Screenwriters Association is dedicated to bringing resources to this community - the community both physically here in The OC and virtually in all places online. Those of us who have been on the front lines can help you who haven't better understand the processes of this insane business.

At the very least we can pat you on the back and say "Hey, no one forced you to do this."  Kidding. I joke.  

We're here for you. Really.

So be inspired. Do good work.  

We'll appreciate it - even if  no one else does.

Mark