The Orange County Screenwriters Association
Be Inspired, Do Good Work
The climax of our story has arrived. The road of trials has left our hero scarred and battered but still standing. The stakes are now, at last, clearly defined. Failure means the loss of their galaxy … their country … their loved one … their cat, Sabrina … or whatever treasure the characters are after. Only the villain can stop our hero from succeeding. 
godlike, because he won't play by anyone's rules and is never bothered by things like human morality - which, at the end of the day is self-serving and artificial anyway. But at the same time, he exhibits the all too human traits of wanting to know where we come from, where we're going and how long we have here. This simple need drives him incessantly, pushing to kill to get what he wants when necessary. He never compromises to get what he needs. This makes him compelling as hell.”
Some villains have the power of authority assisting them. Nurse Ratched with administration approval in Ken Kesey’s One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Sir Guy of Gisbourne (Basil Rathbone) in The Adventures of Robin Hood has Prince John backing him up. Milady deWinter (Faye Dunaway) operates with the blessing of Cardinal Richelieu in The Three Musketeers. Noah Cross (John Huston) in Chinatown seems to have everyone from the police to the government to the underworld in his rich hip pocket. General Mapache (Emilio Fernandez) in The Wild Bunch with his army. 
ever created, is perched at the Number One villain spot on the American Film Institute’s List of 100 Years … 100 Heroes and Villains. He is a psychiatrist. He is a murderer and cannibal. He is Dr. Hannibal Lector (Anthony Hopkins) in Thomas Harris’ The Silence of the Lambs. From the moment he appears, the safety of our hero, Clarice Starling (Jodie Foster), is in jeopardy. Most definitely. 
This list of villains also includes: The Joker (Heath Ledger) in The Dark Knight, Stephen King’s Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) in The Shining, Travis Bickle (Robert DeNiro) in Taxi Driver, Matty Walker (Kathleen Turner) in Body Heat, Evelyn Draper (Jessica Walter) in Play Misty for Me, Alex Forrest (Glenn Close) in Fatal Attraction, Annie Wilkes (Kathy Bates) in Stephen King’s Misery, and Johnny Ringo (Michael Biehn) in Tombstone. 
I was predisposed to like "The Blindside." I like football and football movies; I like inspirational stories (most times) and I've always liked Sandra Bullock. All good and as expected.
Yeah, it's over the top on sweetness at times; yeah, Bullock has her moments of scene chewing; yeah, it's "movie" football with all the bad that endgenders. Even so this was a good, solid film about a remarkable story of how life can take us to unexpected places.
The story follows Michael Oher a supremely talented football player (he allowed no sacks in 2009) who is currently a starting offensive tackle for the Baltimore Ravens and how he came to that career through the strangest set of circumstances you can imagine.
A white, upper-class Southern family, Leigh Anne and Sean Tuohy (Sandra Bullock and Tim McGraw,) find Michael wandering the streets homeless. They take him in initially just to give him a place to stay temporarily, and through a long series of circumstances become his legal guardians since he's a ward of the State. They make it possible for Michael to finish high school with high enough grades to get a football scholarship to The University of Mississippi to play for the Ole Miss Rebels, the Tuohy's alma mater. This after being functionally illiterate and a D- student.
You can slice their motives for adopting Michael any way you want - white guilt, a desire to see this
talented football player play for Old Miss - or just plain guilt at their rich trappings - it's all explored in this thoughtfull and compelling film. Anything you might think, say, imagine as to the angles on this story are covered and covered well. I never felt like the information was being shoved at me but it was all presented in nice increments including Oher's background at being taken from his mother at a young age because of her addiction to crack cocaine.
The screenplay never falters pacing-wise. Dialogue sparkles with some terrific one-liners (Sean Tuohy: Who would've thought we'd have a black son before we met a Democrat?) and is delivered pitch-perfectly by the cast. The direction is solid and at times inspired. The acting is very good all around with Bullock seeming to have inserted herself perfectly into Leigh Anne Tuohy's spirit and sass. Even country star Tim McGraw does a very credible job. Kathy Bates shows up midway through to do a turn as "Miss Sue" Michael's tutor.
A fun segment was when college recruiting began and Oher was visited by
some of the big names in college coaching: Houston Nutt, Ed Orgeron (Oher's coaches in college), Nick Saban Lou Holtz, Tommy Tuberville, and Phillip Fulmer. They are all played by the real coaches although some of them are out of football and some now coach for different teams. S.J., Michael's younger (adoptive) brother. is shown finagling his own set of concessions from these men in various scenes to good effect. The actor who plays S.J. is Jae Head and he is very good in this.
The film goes to some dark places, perhaps not as deeply as some would have liked, but for me the story wasn't solely about the sickness infecting our inner cities that allows mothers to abandon their children, but rather how we are redeemed by each other. How we can only solve these intractable problems one kid at a time.
What the Touhy's did was indeed inspirational. I'm sure there were times where they seriously questioned their commitment to this young man - but doesn't every parent come to a breaking point anyway? Leigh Anne Tuohy and her family are heroes for stepping in when they could have looked the other way or just dropping a bundle of cash on a charity to assuage whatever guilt they felt. They didn't. And it's made the world just that much better for it. Their actions saved a kid from a horrible and loveless life. How cool is that?
On a side note, I liked that the screenwriter took the time to show us that yes, the Tuohy's had money, but also that they worked hard for it. Leigh Anne was constantly on the phone, making deals, berating distributors, getting better wholesale prices for her design company. Part of this is to show that she is a driven woman and can move the stars to get what she wants but it also had the effect of showing she's no slouch when it comes to being a working mom with a busy, active family.
The ending scrolls are sad in that they tell of children from Michael's neighborhood who didn't have the benefit of the intervention of the Tuohys - their stories weren't as inspirational and feel good - in fact, most of them ended up dead. A sobering lesson at the cost of turning away from the problems facing all children but expecially those in the inner city where life and death are realtime preoccupations.
The measure of any film based on true events for me is, at the end of the movie, do I want to read the book upon which it was based. Yes. I definitely do on this one. In fact, I want to find and watch the Oprah segment that dealt with this story and had the actual Tuohy family on.
This film earned Academy Award nominations for Best Picture and Best Actress (Sandra Bullock.) Both nominations are well-deserved.
See "The Blindside" and revel in the joy of this amazing true story.
"Precious" is a hard film to watch. The amount of misery and unrelenting pain that this film presents is almost beyond comprehension. Poverty, illiteracy, rape, incest, HIV, physical and verbal and emotional abuse...how could anyone cope with all that? How does the human spirit survive after being battered by all that? It's hard to fathom.
Like of lot of stories of this type before it, "Precious" explores familiar ground and expected consequences. What differentiates this one is the expert handling of the characters and plot narrative - it never becomes burdensome or overbearing.
Directed by Lee Daniels and written for the screen by Geoffrey Fletcher "Precious" is based on first-time novelist Sapphire's book "Push." Sapphire, according to background material, was a literacy teacher in Harlem and the Bronx for seven years. The character of Precious is a composite based on the women that Sapphire worked with for those years.
The movie version of Precious lives with her abusive mother. She is pregnant with her second child by her absent father. Her first child suffers from Downs Syndrome, a child also conceived by her missing father. Precious' life is a serious of mentally and physically abusive moments from school mates, neighborhood bullies and her mother. What is implied but never really stated is that Precious is abused primarily by a system that allows all this to happen without much in the way of regard or remedies.
And yet, for all the agony the movie presents there is a strong undercurrent of redemption and hope - especially when Precious enters a special school and is helped by a lovely teacher (Paula Patton) to learn and to explore her inner self. This is her true journey and the story of the film - we can help and redeem each other if we just listen and care.
First time actress Gabourey Sidibe has the lead role of Precious and she is really quite amazing. Her angry and confused mother is played by comedian Mo'Nique who is about as pitch perfect as an actress can get. You get the feeling that everyone here is channeling an experience that, if they didn't live it, they understand all too tragically well. I'm not sure this is necessarily just an African-American story but it is certainly a story about how poverty and the relentless drone of generational ignorance about life options can infect and carry through from parent to child.
I can't find much to fault in this story or its presentation. The use of background
narrative throughout from the Precious character ties together a spare and understated script. There are moments of violence and explosive emotion but the story is told so matter-of-factly that the horror of what is unfolding becomes even more overwhelming. A tribute to the light hand of both writer and director.
The ending, which is a bit predictable and simplisitic but perhaps necessarily so, could have been so much bigger, drama-wise. Lee dials it down, dials it back to a point where you just feel like you've been holding your breath a bit longer than you should. You exhale and everything is released. But not like you were choking for air - just like you missed a few breaths. It's a marvel to think that Lee avoided what would have been a natural moment for the actors to chew the scenery and instead just guided them into a soft splashdown.
The film was set in 1987. I didn't quite understand why since nothing I could see is specific to that time period and you never really got the sense that we were actually in a different era - except that no one had cell phones or iPods.
Bravo also to the actresses in this film who dulled themselves down to play these roles. Mariah Carey goes ultra-plain to play one of Precious' counselors. They sweat, have armpit hair, walk around in dirty shifts, and never try to look even one bit glam. It reminded me of how courageous actress Shirley MacLaine was in "Postcards From The Edge" when she was in the hospital.
See "Precious." Perhaps it's not a big screen film experience but it is a powerful and sobering one. It makes you ache for a way to actually help people to escape this cycle of violence and ignorance so artfully and powerfully portrayed here.
People say to me all the time that they don't make films like they used - yes, in fact they do.
This Friday, all the Oscar-nominated shorts will be shown at The Regency South Coast Village Theater (live action link / animation link)
I was lucky enough to get a screener and was able to watch them all.
The verdict: Worth every quick minute of time.
LIVE ACTION:
The live action set ranges from a horrifying look at post-Chernobyl consequences to a goofy and lovable wannbe magician.
“The Door” Juanita Wilson and James Flynn (Russian): Even though the disaster at a Russian nuclear plant was over two decades ago, the shock waves are still being felt. In this memorable short, we're shown how a family touched by the tragedy copes - or doesn't.
“Instead of Abracadabra” Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström (Swedish): funny, goofy, great spirit. The 
main character is a lovable loser who only wants to succeed as a magician despite his apparent lack of skill and his father's constant disapproval. My 2nd favorite.
“Kavi” Gregg Helvey (Hindi): This was a solid entry but didn't have enough power to push it over for me. The young boy, Kavi, has a terrible life but there was something lacking in the presentation. I think a bit more length, another few scenes would have helped.
“Miracle Fish” Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey (English): A very different and clever piece with a shocker for an ending. Nothing in this film is as you expect it to be.
“The New Tenants” Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson (English): This was my favorite although it really didn't start out that way. The opening few minutes irritated the crap out of me but slowly the film began to grow on me and I ended up smiling broadly and chuckling in appreciation at the end.
I have a hard time picking a winner in this set but I'm going to go with "The New Tenants" because it's more fully realized. Although because it's a black comedy and there are two socially-aware entries here the Academy might go with either "Kavi" or "The Door."
ANIMATION:
The animation set is as fun and diverse as the live action set.
“French Roast” Fabrice O. Joubert (French): A cute little animation that goes to some strange and wonderful places as a stuffy man struggles to figure out how to pay his cafe check.
“Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty” Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell (English, 6): A funny idea that didn't really carry me in its execution. I loved the little 
girl character and Granny was perfection but it left some things unresolved for me.
“The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)” Javier Recio Gracia (Non-dialogue): This one was a fun idea married to a tightly-paced storyline that reminded me of the old Looney Tunes cartoons in a very good way.
“Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin (English): Perhaps the most clever and unusual of all the films. I was entranced by the tapestry of this one. The sheer scope of it was mind-bending. I won't spoil it for you. My 2nd favorite.
“A Matter of Loaf and Death” Nick Park (English): Come on - Wallace and Gromit? How could anything or anyone compete with the incomparable Nick Park? It's all there - the fatuous and foolish Wallace, long suffering Gromit, a villain of epic proportitions (like the penguin-chicken in "The Wrong Trousers") and the incredible story-telling artistry and craftmanship of the man who has never not won an Academy Award for his nominated work. This was my favorite and has to be a fav going in. Simply amazing. How he does this time after time and tops himself is just beyond me.
My favorite and I think the winner in this category would be "A Matter of Loaf and Death" although Logorama" is so visually stunning it might just edge out Nick Park's incredible work.
All in all, neither set disappoints and either set is worth the time and money you'd spend.
Blase - that's the way I felt about the Winter Olympics. Still grumpy from the end of football season, I wasn't caring much about the competitions happening north of us.
Then my attention was caught by the horrible tragedy of the luge competitor who lost his life on a training run and it all became a much more sobering reality. While I might have a terrifying paper cut or get hemorrhoids from sitting on my a** all day, there is little chance I'm going to die pursuing my dreams. He did.
I tried to put it in perspective, failed. I kept watching, trying to find some sense of this, failed again. I couldn't shut down the television. I felt like if I did, Nodar Kumaritashvil's death would be too soon forgotten.
Still, I was underwhelmed by my brief taste of the opening ceremonies, tired of Bob Costas and his drone, defeated before I started by NBC's inanity...
Eventually, the coverage I was watching shifted to speed skating. I was hooked by the short track speed skaters and the dramatic Korean miscalculation in the 1500m final that propelled Apolo Ohno to silver and J. R. Celski to bronze when both Americans seemed out of the medals.
Perhaps had it been someone else I would have shrugged it off. But I knew about Ohno - not from "Dancing With The Stars" but from the Salt Lake City games when a Korean was DQ'd 
and Ono was given Gold because of it. I knew his journey. Knew that the Koreans were his nemesis. I remembered how dramatic that moment in Salt Lake was. I was beginning to remember it all - how there is nothing more compelling than these stories of insane success and devastating failure where a split-second miscalculation can kill your hopes.
The silver that Ohno was awarded in Vancouver gave him six medals - tied for the most of any single U.S. Winter Olympian. What a story - and it's only the first few days.
Then gold medalist Hannah Kearney who didn't even qualify at the last Olympics because of mental errors but never lost faith in her ultimate goal of competing and redeeming herself medalled. Her golden run was inspirational and totally insane when it seemed as if her knees were going to pop out of her snow gear as she raced down in the moguls and finally lifted her arms in victory
Canadian Alexandre Bilodeau - who? Exactly. He became the first Canadian to win an Olympic gold medal on Canadian soil. Wow. How's that for success? And he dedicated his gold medal to his brother, Frederic, who has cerebral palsy and is his biggest fan. My eyes teared a bit, my heart beat for his and his brother's joy.
The Chinese skating couple who met as children in training, fell in love, retired from skating, got married,
got back into skating in their mid-thirties and won the ultimate prize - gold. What satisfaction in their faces - the long journey had paid off with their dreams coming true both personally and professionally.
On and on and on. But also, for every success, a dozen painful, heartbreaking failures as years of training come abruptly to a halt. Didn't matter if it was American, Candian, Russian, Chinese - it was hard to watch and impossible to dismiss anymore.
I'd forgotten all this somehow. Even though the Summer Olympics had been a mere two years away, I'd somehow lost the intensity of this ongoing drama of competition. And the Winter Olympics are so much more dangerous and I'd fogotten that fact too - people die and are seriously injured out there. They lose lives going too fast on surfaces never meant for that sort of speed. Die for a dream. My Lord. Where exactly was my head at to be so dismissive of this incredible drama?
So I re-evaluated my perspective and once again began to truly appreciate all the stories that I was now vicariously living. Because at the end of the day, these people all have the same goals of excellence and accomplishment I have - to do it over and over and over again until you're so good that you outpace, outshine and out-perform anyone else in the field.
And still you can fail. For all reasons, for no good reasons. For vagaries of systems and weather and circumstances.
How about Lindsey Jacobellis who was a lock for gold four years ago and blew it on a hotdog move at the end of her run and had to "settle" for silver - and then came to Vancouver to redeem that failure and hit a gate and was DQ'd? How do you deal with that sort of failure? Amazingly so, she is, even if it's with a slightly trembling lip on the verge of tears.
What a bloody idiot I am. It's those stories, the ones that put my life in perspective that seem to catch and hold me at every Olympics. They're painful, joyful and everything in-between. What they aren't is boring. Not one of them. Because they represent hours and hours of sacrifice and single-minded dedication to a goal. They tell the entire human tapestry of life in a few short weeks of intense competition.
I'm full-on hooked in now. I've dumped John Stewart's and Steven Colbert's shows into the Tivo queue so I can mainline the nightly coverage, scour the Internet for details, read the online stories of how these amazing people gave up almost everything to get to where they are. I do get it - it's all of us out there on that hill, on the ice, in that sled or bloody and still on that icy track.
These are the stories of life; the ones I want to understand and channel everytime I sit down to write. They mean something to me because they mean something to us all. They are as simple as a smile and complicated as a life extinguished for no good reason.
It's the stories, stupid. The ones you want to tell. The ones you want to live. The ones you don't ever want to forget.
Is there anything sweeter than a good, short film?
This Friday, the Regency South Coast Village Theater will present all the Oscar nominated short films in one place.
In two separate shows (tickets required for both,) watch the five nominated Live Action and five nominated Animation shorts and decide for yourself who should win.
Go here for a taste of them (link) and then go to the Regency on Friday for a real treat to see them for yourself.
Animation Venue:
- "French Roast” Fabrice O. Joubert (French)
- "Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty” Nicky Phelan and Darragh O’Connell (English, 6)
- “The Lady and the Reaper (La Dama y la Muerte)” Javier Recio Gracia (Non-dialogue)
- “Logorama” Nicolas Schmerkin (English)
- “A Matter of Loaf and Death” Nick Park (English) (Wallace and Gromit return!)
Live Action Venue
- “The Door” Juanita Wilson and James Flynn (Russian)
- “Instead of Abracadabra” Patrik Eklund and Mathias Fjellström (Swedish)
- “Kavi” Gregg Helvey (Hindi)
- “Miracle Fish” Luke Doolan and Drew Bailey (English)
- “The New Tenants” Joachim Back and Tivi Magnusson (English)
Regency South Coast Village Theater (website)
AOL is apparently blocking our Opt-In newsletter. Opt-In means you requested this information, we are not spamming you.
Until OCSWA can communicate with AOL those of you with AOL email addresses will not be receiving the newsletter since AOL has apparently decided that we are spamming you and will block your communications without regard to your wishes.
We will post information here about upcoming events but the quickest way to find out about something happening with our org is to have the newsletter delivered to your inbox. Perhaps you should make your wishes known to AOL and ask them not to block legit organizations, like The Orange County Screenwriters Association.
Thanks.
Imagine you’re only able to tell a story by singing it. But then someone tells you can't actually use any lyrics and you can chart your tale only by using the rise and fall of the chord progression to get people involved and engaged.
What am I talking about and how does it relate to scriptwriting? The genius of Lady Gaga, that’s what I’m talking about. But what does she have in common with John Sayles, Lawrence Kasdan, Phillip Kaufman or Christopher Nolan?
Gaga’s recent “Bad Romance” is an amazing song. With the current album and this song in particular she steps away from the pack and shows her full stride as a songwriter of note (no pun intended.)
Never mind the stunning music video and the somewhat intriguing lyrics. This song makes me listen in wonder at her amazing non-verbal story-telling ability. Let me break it down.
Listen here: you tube video
You might have to listen to this song more than a few times to get what I’m saying
exactly but the principles will be easy enough to pull through. All I’m concerned about here is the music, not really the video or the lyrics. Just the music.
Imagine this song as a script. Structurally, you’ve got a Teaser, ACT I, ACT II Midpoint, ACT II resolution and ACT III. It’s also very high concept - it’s about a “bad romance.” Doesn’t that just fill your head with images about the anticipation of what that concept may deliver? It does mine. Who hasn’t been in a bad romance, out of control and both hating and loving it. Doesn’t the music spiral in and out of control? Listen to the rise and fall of the music - the pounding drums, the breathlessness of the song when she pulls it back only to slap you across the face again with the tough mayhem of her chords and melody line (the part you hum when you listen.)
Even at her young age, this is a mature songwriter using melody lines and chord
progressions to trap you inextricably into her story. Once you’re caught, she will reprise the things that make the song work but she’ll also toss in some tonal textures that you didn’t expect, just like a screenwriter who has to use the same characters he established but has to think differently about them and can’t directly “repeat the beat” as the phrase goes.
Sidenote: Interesting, don’t you think, that strong moments in scriptwriting are called “beats.”
At the same time that the music itself is familiar and that’s good because we come to this type of music to hear familiar things, Gaga elevates it to other place we didn’t, couldn’t imagine. Places that only her unique voice could take us - and I mean that not in the vocal sense but in the songwriting sense.We each go through three stages of creativity: primitive, mechanical and 
spontaneous. Gagas in that rarified orbit that we have to work years to achieve and it shows in how she tells this story melodically.
Watch the time codes as you listen. Everything I’m saying here is directly applicable to screenwriting - any storytelling really:
Teaser: 0-0:14
A promise of what’s to come. Sets the tone, establishes what type of song (movie) we’re going to see.
ACT I: 0:14-0:46
Setup. Paving the musical road.
ACT II: 0:46-2:44
Deepening and explaining. Sit back and relax for a few minutes ‘cause it’s about to get rocky on the fall out of midpoint.
Midpoint: 2:45-3:19
Build to this moment (false climax) and then decline away from it.
ACT II: 3:20-3:59
Faux resolution/reprise -
Reprise the theme but raise the stakes as we back to the beginning but complicate the chord progression with some new sounds (new images and plot lines.)
The Calm Before The Storm: 3:40-4:16
Build for ending - unreal suspense
ACT III: 4:17
Climax. Ultimate battle.
Kick it in the ass and race for the ending.
Coda/denouement: 5:01-5:08
Storytelling is conflict/resolution, ebb and flow. It’s pretty obvious in the great music and art and stories of any generation. Gaga doesn’t succeed by accident with her amazingly catchy and infectious music that is so perfectly crafted. She may not sit down and plan it out like Paul Simon does but she is using exactly the same principals of songwriting that we use in storytelling.
Static scenes. Ugh - the big “tell” that indicates to any producer that you are a rank amateur. What causes them? How do you fix them? A few simple techniques can make all the difference.
The preponderance of scenes that take place at a sit-down restaurant that I see in student scripts is amazing. The inexperienced writer rarely grasps that putting two people at a table and having them talk is probably the most static, unimaginative setting you can put on paper (unless you write it like the orgasm scene in “When Harry Met Sally”.)
How to make those scenes less static using several techniques is simple.
Resist the urge to use a talking head in anything - that’s really a television technique, not a great film technique. If you have to have a scene like that, and most times you can figure out a different way to go to get the information out, then put it in an elevator or something moving. Anything that moves is better than anything that doesn’t. They’re walking, they’re shopping, they’re picking up trash on a roadside as part of their court-enforced community service - anything else but sitting in one location works.
If the restaurant is the only place you can do this then insert some event that causes the reader/audience to be slightly on edge. How about trying to catch a waiter’s attention - everyone knows how frustrating that is and it creates a level of suspense under the surface of the scene. Spill something on someone and have that character wait to blot it up. We all hate that the liquid is seeping into the clothing or tablecloth or whatever and will subconsciously urge the characters to do something about it thereby distracting us from the static nature of the moment.
Or - how about the last scenes in "The Sopranos?" How suspenseful was that? I was crawling the walls waiting to see what happened. Imagine putting some necessary exposition into that context. Wow.
Alternately, how about setting that restaurant scene in a park (picnic) or a standup roach coach or one of those walkup fast food stands where you can sit on a stool. It’s an eating/talking scene but it’s outside where you gain all the excitement and visual interest of the outdoors.
Now I’m really not talking about suspenseful or action moments here. I’m talking about what I call “housekeeping scenes” - those moments when you really have no choice but to deliver on exposition - housekeeping.
Like, for example, the moment in “Raiders of the Lost Ark” where the Army people come to Indy looking for Ravenwood. Absolutely necessary and deadly static. To accomplish the scene, Lawrence Kasden, the writer, put four people in the scene to lower the narrative weight of one or two characters doing all the talking. Kasdan gets across a lot of historical and present-day information about Indy, the Ark, etc. in that scene by rotating who delivers the information and when. He takes that heavy-weight information and parcels it out between four characters in the room thereby reducing the narrative load that each character has and keeping the scene as visually interesting as possible. A simple but effective technique. He also had Indy draw on a blackboard and showed cool drawings from a ancient-looking Bible that helped deliver some of the information visually.
The best delivery of dry exposition I’ve ever seen is from the first “Terminator.” The scene takes place just after the nightclub shootout where Sarah Connor has just witnessed Reese, the good guy, apparently shotgunning another man, the Terminator. 
She is then dragged to a police car by this apparent madman and they are then pursued by the Terminator and a slew of cops. While being shot at by the Terminator and all the cops, and having to hold onto Sarah because she wants to bolt out of this car and away from this maniac, Reese tells her (us) the entire backstory. She doesn’t believe him of course but we do because we’ve seen the entire story so far. Tons of exposition, easily digestible and excitingly delivered. Simply brilliant.
Another really cool moment that I’ve never forgotten is from the movie “Truly, Madly, Deeply” called the thinking man’s “Ghost” written and directed by the late Anthony Minghella. In it, the main character, a woman meets a man late in the movie who she is 
romantically interested in. It is very late in the film and we need to know some things about him but the writer does not have the normal amount of scenes to bring us up to speed. What he does is masterful: the male character suggests that he and the female character hop while telling each other about themselves. It’s a beautiful distraction while we’re being given the necessary information.
Another problem is that visual storytelling is really under-represented these days. Hitchcock said you should be able to turn the volume off and still be able to follow the story. I wrote a script once where the lead actor asked me to reduce his lines by about 30%. I cut out hundreds of lines of dialogue and didn’t miss one of them. A real lesson for me going forward - show it, don’t tell it. And when you absolutely need to tell it, remember that we’re working in a visual medium and write accordingly.
Good luck. Be inspired. Do good work.
Why Begins With W
Check out our new book, rapidly climbing the Amazon hit parade, both domestically and internationally. A scintillating satire on murder, mystery and the mayhem of being a teenager.
"Sam Spade (with overtones of Holden Caulfield) meets a young high school detective of today. Hard-boiled slang is replaced with pitch-perfect teen speak, but all the good old-fashioned sleuthing is there, too. This is a detective novel that teens will eat up. It's definitely a can't-put-it-down-once-you've-started novel. Trust me!"
-- Barbara Brooks Wallace, Two-time EDGAR ® Award Winner, Mystery Writers of America
I was certainly predisposed to want to like "Human Target," Fox's latest brain-candy entry. I have been a fan of the lead actor, Mark Valley, since he headed up the superb and under-appreciated, quickly canceled "Keen Eddie" which also stared a funny and terminally-cute Sienna Miller.
Valley has massive comedic chops (and a marvelous deadpan delivery) and was and is physically able to deliver on any action moment the "Keen Eddie" producers threw at him. These talents are in ample display in "Human Target" the adventures of a private bodyguard who appears to be just that much better than everyone else in the business. We know this because his first client won't take "no" for an
answer when she's turned down by his...booker? Agent? Adrenalin Dealer? Action Pimp? - the also under-appreciated Chi
McBride late of the much-lamented-canceled-after-two seasons "Pushing Daisies." We also know this because in the opening gambit, Christopher Chance (the Human Target) takes down a crazy hostage-taker with aplomb (and that deadpan delivery) after warning him not to talk about doing something but just do it - and then he shoots the man who is also wearing a bomb belt, killing him and blowing up the entire building.
Welcome to "Lethal Weapon," the series. Crazy is as crazy does.
In the first ep, he's hired to protect the gorgeous designer of a bullet train. She claims to
have no enemies, has no idea why someone would to want to try to kill her (the killer plants sheets of plastic explosive in her car but they find it.) The whole protections adventure will take place on said bullet train while it is hurtling at nearly 200mph toward a tunnel. Hmmm. There's a joke in there but I wouldn't even touch it with your review.
The trick, and you knew there would be one, is that the brakes to said train have been fried from some gobbledy-gook the writer dreamed up and they can't possibly tolerate another use once they've been engaged. As they approach "Dead Man's Curve" (I'm making that up) the train's wheels will explode and all will die. Unfortunately, I'm not making that up. Now it strikes me that if this train had cost the billions of dollars they said it did, there would have been some testing of these brakes - a lot of testing - and perhaps a recognition that they can be fried in exactly this manner. But that's just me. Again, we're
not dealing in any sort of logic no matter how hard the producers try to convince us of that. Add to this hero-up-a-super-fast-tree scenario, there's an assassin on the train also stalking them to kill them while they're hurtling toward certain death in 20 minutes. Ticking clock indeed.
In the end, we discover the all too mundane truth - the train designer's husband has discovered her affair and wants some money or something so he decides it's easier to kill her than just get a divorce - and of course, Mark Valley has to put his crack staff (Chi McBride and the insanely good Jackie Earle Haley ("Little' Children" "Watchmen")) to find this out. You would logically keep this information about an affair secret from the person you're paying a King's ransom to protect you. Especially since you've stated very clearly that you have no reason to assume anyone would want you dead. Honestly, even Bill Clinton would have mention this to The Human Target - that's his job. And even the dullest street cop would have looked to the husband first. At least make this semi-believable. Eliminate the husband after doing due diligence but give us that moment.
I know "Human Target" cannot be viewed with your real-world glasses on. You have to slip on the alternate dimension ones where people can jump out of bullet trains using cargo covers and seat belts, shake off point blank shootings with Kevlar vests, survive bomb blasts that destroy buildings (I guess no one appreciates that the blast concussion alone would have shattered this guy's internal organs) and in general take more physical abuse than any dozen human beings can tolerate. Not the point, don'cha know that? Chance is having fun being a Human Target and so should you be, damnit. Do not even try to make it make sense. Like the idea, for example, that he won't take any money - for some oddball reason - and will only take swag in trade for his troubles. Is this an IRS thing? Did the writer have guv'ment problems? Just another quirky trait that is designed 
to make us shake our collective heads and smile? Probably.
I'm on the ledge with this one. At some point you just get tired of the eye-candy, adrenalin-laced action, and preposterous scenarios. It's like car alarms - people look up initially and then, as the alarm continues, we all ignore the noise and go back to our lunches. Mark Valley and his supporting cast are superb. The action is gorgeous, feature-class, balls-to-the-wall great. But I so wanted to spend a bit more time with Jackie Earle Haley and his quietly creepy character. "Now I'll take the beating," he says to two muscle goons who come to shake him down. "That's all you've been authorized to do. But afterwards, some night, I'll sneak into your homes and kill all your family." Then he procedes to tell them everything he knows about them which is a lot. "Your employer has a hard drive that he thinks is secure. It is not." Wow - now that's fun. Perhaps if I had just not had this hurtling train scenario in my face constantly I could have enjoyed this show more. Maybe ramp up to that, give me a little more time to slip into the hot water after dipping my toe in.
The producers perhaps need to trust the characters and the actors more. They are both compelling and infuse this nonsense with some much needed depth. I can hope as the series progresses, the characters will expand, the stories will settle down, get just a bit more logical although again, it's really not about the steak - it's about the sizzle. And Mark Valley, The Human Target, has enough beef cake and charm to make anyone feel like they're eating steak when it's really just tarted-up, form-molded hamburger.
More...
Today I received another rejection slip. Yes, one more to add to the ever-growing putrid compost heap that is my writing career. But do I let this get me down? Do I let this rejection trample on what is left of what little self-esteem I have left? Do I let this insult by some rat-faced scrote who wouldn’t know magnificent word prowess if it walked up and introduced itself get me down? You’re damn right I do! It sucks! Big time!
But then I am kidding?
I was meant to tell stories. I did not come into this knowledge until late in life. Better late than never, huh? What those who reject my work don’t know is I write because that is what I do. I write because writing keeps me sane in an insane world. I write because I was meant to tell stories. Don’t get me wrong I am not a purist. If fame and fortune knocks on my door I will swing that baby wide open, buy the BMW750i (cash), slap on the ray-bans, and buy a place on the beach. But you know what? If that never happens (and trust me it probably won’t) I would write anyway. Why? Because that is what I do.
Spoiler alert: I don't do spoiler alerts.
Yes, it's a somewhat tired story and yes, it's puerile in spots, and yes, it's also an amazing, astoundingly gorgeous film with so much visual detail that it made me tired just watching it. Wow and yawn. How does one filmmaker make me do both on such a regular basis?
The 3D? Meh - I can't do 3D properly because of a childhood cataract and lens removal when I was in my 20's - but even so, there were indeed a few floating objects and once I ducked because a flying ember came at me. I can only imagine what it must be like to the "normal-eyed" person.
The aliens were serviceable enough both culturally and story-wise - the female "lead" was terrific and believable - the rest less so. Lots of "types" in this film, character-wise. Stereotypes, unfortunately, not archetypes. The corrupt company man, the corrupt ex-Marine colonel, the hard-bitten scientist with the soft marshmallow interior...just one right after the other peeled off a stack of film types. But perhaps the worst of the lot was the male lead.
Here you had a chance to make a character give us the true experience of what it would be like to be something beside human and...zip. One run, a few leaps and he's back to filtering everything he does in his alien avatar through his human brain. And to that - why he suddenly "turns native" and sides with the indigenous peoples is beyond me. To
mean something, we really need to know why from Jake Sully's background. Cameron never really tells you that. He had a perfect explanation in the damaged legs and perhaps wanting to belong to a "tribe," like the Marines, who then turned their backs on him after he was injured. But they never take any of the narrative that they use in the film as a "videolog" and use it to illuminate him beyond the necessary plot elements.
Everyone has had the experience of going to a foreign country and falling in love with the culture - I became my father when I went to Italy. Suddenly, I was ciaoing this person and buena seraing this person - it's understandable. But let us know that in a better way than they've done here. Where's the excitement of riding a dragon thing? How about the amazing bioluminescent forest or the bizarre and dangerous creatures he encounters? Did nothing make a real impact on this guy besides Neytiri, the hottie female alien? He
gets the use of his legs back through the avatar experience - gotta be a huge thing - but that is quickly invalidated because he is going to get his real legs back anyway. Just a bit more depth, please, and I'll follow your character anywhere. This guy was mundane and very little inside him was revealed effectively. He bascially goes from being white bread to a French roll. A bit more crusty but still beige.
Plus, how many times are these stories going to go the well of the greedy corporation having to have it all without regard to the people they hurt? Slice them just a little finer, won't you? About the only thing missing was the twirling mustache and the black cloak. I don't know - maybe the effects were so consuming that no one felt the story was all that important.
I will say, even with this razor-thin plot there were many effective and moving moments. Cameron, the 10-yr-old who is love with heroes, sappy love stories, and sacrifice, is in full tilt here. The underdog strives and wins and that makes everything feel good. Even dead people aren't really, really dead. How's that for having your cake and eating it too?
It's a bit like the original "Star Wars" in that respect with all the good (and some bad) that that film engenders. Someone told me that Cameron felt he missed the "Star Wars" boat and wanted to make something similar but show off his creativity even more. He does. The story is just as simplistic and effective at times but the effects and vision-thing are truly masterful. Unfortunately, judging "Avatar" against the original "Star Wars" I'd still have to give Lucas high marks for creating a more compelling and understandable central character in Luke Skywalker (forget all the "prequels" - they are narrative garbage.) But did I mention how terrific the female lead was here? She was believable, her story compelling and her mannerism nearly perfect. Truly a great character. Too bad it didn't extend to the others including the male lead.
So instead of a great film, this is merely a good one - groundbreaking but not in a story way. Ceratinly one I'd see again for the effects but not necessarily because I was in love with the characters or the storyline.
Thumbs up - perhaps not "Star Trek Reboot" up - but up nonetheless. Maybe the sequel, and there will be one, will do more with the story since we've already seen all the effects now.
Hello all. I thought I would post my thoughts about this organization. I am not sure if other members can look at my profile so I will do a very brief bio. I am a published writer as well as a professional story editor and creative consultant. I am a partner in crime with Victor Phan and Torture Chamber Productions. This past Saturday, because of circumstances involving furniture(don't ask), I found myself attending the OCSWA board meeting. Not a board member and feeling like the odd man out I kept my mouth shut for most of the meeting making only cursory comments or a couple of suggestions that seemed to be well received. At least I think so. Maybe they were being gracious in not telling me to shut my piehole. What I wanted to share was how impressed I was by the passion and enthusiasm shared by those in attendence, especially Mark. This organization and website has the potential to be a huge resource to OC's aspiring writers. It deserves the time, energy, and commitment by those pledged to give that, and the heartfelt thanks of those who will reap the rewards. I just wanted to say "Thank You" to those board members who were there for Saturday's meeting.
I'm not a huge sitcom guy so it came as quite a surprise when I watched and enjoyed "The Middle" with Patricia Heaton ("Everyone Love Raymond" - or is it Everybody - whatever) and Neil Flynn, the janitor guy from "Scrubs." They play middle-class parents sorta-kinda living in the middle of the country. One of their children is the kid from "Frozen River" - a really talented actor named Charlie McDermott - in fact, they're all very good actors including the seemingly requisite "geeky kid."
It's perhaps not as comedically challenging or creative as "Modern Family" (another fav of mine) but it is off-beat and wacky at times and has solid, PG-13 comedy moments that can delight. I actually believe this family can exist - they seem real and their issues are as mundane as needing a new dryer or finding a job in today's horrible economy - but getting that dryer is a fun and enjoyable trip. Heaton's character is sunny and funny and bounces in and out of scenes like she's a comedy pixie sprinkling laughing dust on everything. She also narrates the eps. The father, played by Neil Flynn, is droll and sarcastic, a perfect foil for Heaton's unflagging optimism.
But at the same time, she can be hilariously wicked and vicious when someone tries to hurt her family. The younger actors do their jobs quite well and provide solidly humorous situations for the long-suffering parents who seem overwhelmed at time but never really out of control. The 
father, for example, imposes a punishment on the McDermott character (because they catch him macking on some girl instead of going to church or something) where he has to stay within five feet of an adult. And he's always, for some reason, in his boxer shorts. So this kid always trailing a parent, in his underwear, is just a visually funny moment added to the scenes. Really understated brilliance.
Heaton works at a used car lot with Brian Doyle-Murray and Chris Kattan (wow, where did this guy's career go after SNL?) The ep I watched had her filling a car with out-of-date Ronald Regan jelly beans as a promotional stunt so people could win prizes and then having those jelly beans melt together and fuse inside the car's interior. This is particularly devastating because the family needs all sort of financial help and Heaton's idea was to make her a used-car lot star. When she tries to open the door to the car and it sticks to the jelly beans, the look of "Oh, sh*t" on Heaton's face is priceless. Silly but funnily effective.
I loved the idea that the older female child, who is at that awkward age and is trying so hard to fit in, discovers she needs glasses and is happy about that - she's always wanted glasses, don't 'ya know? And the parents are happy too since they think that this
will solve her inability to swim in a straight line and make the swim team. Nope - glasses aren't the problem - she's just a klutz - like most of us. But she does make the team - as the 34th alternative.
I also thought the shopping excursion to the local outlet store, called The Frugal Hoosier, had delightful in-store scenes with ramifications all through the episode. Who hasn't shopped at a store, picked up something on the edge of being expired and prayed for the best when you went to eat it ? Heaton's ginger sniffing and dumping of the mystery meat she bought there was classic - nothing said directly about it - just this talented actresses facial expressions.
Each ep ends in an upbeat fashion, as does "Modern Family," and I like that. The idea that a sudden tornado has dropped a brand new dryer on their front lawn is oddly comforting that all will work out if you just keep trying to make it work. Of course, you also can't miss the broadly-based metaphor that "God" will deliver a solution. Nothing wrong with that but perhaps the sprinkling of religious overtones might bother some.
The producers and Eileen Heisler and DeAnn Heline have solid comedy backgrounds, including writer/producers on the wonderful "Murphy Brown" series among others.
I've only seen one episode but I did put it on a season pass. It reminds me a little of something that the old MTM Productions might have tossed up. Cute, funny and charming all rolled into one.