When An Actor Says "I'm Sorry, But I've Just Been Offered Paid Work"

It's day four of a six day shoot. You have invested all of your energy in putting this incredible project together. You managed to get an incredible cast, the best DP in independent film and you somehow managed to score an office location for the shoot for free. Everything is perfect. And then your actor awkwardly says "Um, I've been offered a paid job tomorrow, and I have to take it." Actually, they probably don't say that; they text it, or email it, or tweet it. This is one of the big elephants in the room in independent filmmaking. But this elephant gets around, because absolutely everyone has experienced it. So, on the one hand, I'm inclined to go into the big question of -- what do you do in this situation? But I'd rather focus on the one who is creating this conflict, the one who is taking the paid job. Because it is to them that we really need to say; what are you doing?

Of course, the simple wisdom is 'pay them something' and 'get them to sign a contract,' and these things sound lovely - but people still walk out after four days to do something else. So firstly, before we go on, I hope we can all agree that this happens, and in fact - it happens quite often. It's very rare for the person leaving to go to a paid job instead and feel good about it. They will defensively say they have to or that they have no choice, but they will feel bad doing it and know they are in the wrong. You know this because they'll text you their excuse and you'll probably never see them again.

The two main reasons given are: "I'm sorry, but it's paid, and I'm so broke right now that I have to take it." The other one is "This is a great opportunity, the guy who was AD on that spin-off from that show who made that thing that used to be on NBC is directing it!" - this, of course, is especially true with actors who think it's their big break.
But it's this idea of a big break which is the troublesome thing--- because, the big break doesn't exist. Being in a commercial or having two lines in a feature film directed by someone reasonably established isn't a big break. Real acting, like real directing, isn't about a big break-- it's about constantly creating opportunity through your body of work. A big break, if it happens, is temporary, and fleeting. One minute, you're in a magazine as "The Star of 2007" and the next thing you know, it's 2010 and you've not had a job in three years. A real 'big break' happens once a year, and it happens to Kristen Stewart or Andrew Garfield. If David Fincher wants you in a movie - I understand. But if the paid job you're ditching your indie flick for is a yogurt commercial - you really need to think seriously about your priorities, and your career.

Let's imagine it's 2005, and Mark and Jay Duplass ask you to be in their independent film "THE PUFFY CHAIR." They're shooting it for $15,000; they can't pay you anything. The film is about relationships and it's mostly improvised. You get a role and it seems like fun-- you don't know much about them and you don't totally know if it will work, but you take the role.

And then two days into the shoot you get a call from your agent, if you have one; and they've got you a role playing a young parent in a McDonald's commercial, and they're paying you two thousand. What happens here is most people take the two thousand, and go do the McDonald's commercial.

Now, of course, on the shoot -- the Duplass Brothers would be pissed because you've monumentally fucked up their movie, which you know; so you keep avoiding them, meanwhile you do the McDonald's gig because you desperately need the money and you want to get that big break.

So now it's 2010. Five years have gone by and that two thousand is long gone. Would you rather have done the McDonald's commercial or starred in one of the best independent films of the last decade? Which one is the best for your career? Reality check--- if you're in this business for the money, or for stardom, you really shouldn't be wasting your time in independent films in the first place. If you want to be doing good, meaningful work -- do it now, and dedicate yourself to it.

There are two very different roads to be taken on the way to 'success' in this industry. One is financial; it involves stardom, magazine covers, and the hope that one day you'll be Johnny Depp or Megan Fox. The other way is to do projects that move you, inspire you, and challenge you. You can start deciding to do those right now, TODAY. You can find the writers and directors who are really trying to do something that is about having something to say, and about putting out meaningful art. You can align yourself with them and there's the hope that one day you'll be Mark Duplass or Patricia Clarkson.

Next time you are caught between the paid job, and the great job - it's really a decision about who you are and what you're in this industry for. ESPECIALLY when the two of them collide, and ESPECIALLY ESPECIALLY when you have already agreed to do the no-budget project.

This isn't an article about being pretentious or about being purely about art. It's about realising there are different things we can be chasing. And if you get too caught up in success, you're going to lose out on a lot of amazing experiences. I know a lot of filmmakers who have been majorly let down by actors for these very reasons. And more often than not, the filmmakers go on to do great work and the actor's are still chasing down jobs and struggling. A 'big break' to me is either a) Getting cast in a big franchise and getting stinking rich --OR-- b) Getting cast in the next 'Once' or 'The Puffy Chair." As an actor, you should decide which one you're after. And then go for it completely.

Care to share?

Tweet

ADAM RIFKIN Writer/Director INTERVIEW

I had barely finished asking the first question before writer/director ADAM RIFKIN was displaying his incredible passion for films and filmmaking. Not that it was any surprise. Adam is one of those rare filmmakers who is absolutely passionate about every aspect of the industry. His own work segues seamlessly between the big movies that he writes for the studios, and the smaller, more personal projects that he loves to create.

His credits as a screenwriter include SMALL SOLDIERS, UNDERDOG and MOUSEHUNT, and he directed DETROIT ROCK CITY, which I absolutely love. His new series, LOOK, (based on his movie of the same name) is currently on Showtime; where its opening two episodes had the best viewing figures the network has seen in over two years in that time-slot.

We had schedule a five minute meeting, but once you get Adam talking about movies it's impossible to get him to shut up. But with all his wisdom, advice, and insight into creativity, directing and working within the studio system, I am not complaining. This is a MUST-READ for anyone interested in screenwriting or directing.

If you could only write -OR- direct, for the rest of your career, which would you choose, and why?

I would direct if I had to choose, because I got into filmmaking because I love directing and I love the act of making a movie. I write predominantly so I have something to direct that I feel passionate about and I relate to. I know a lot of filmmakers who are writers first, who direct. I'm a director first, who writes.

In 'Detroit Rock City' you really captured the magic of being young and being obsessed with music. Were you always passionate about music when you were younger, and if so, do you still feel that way now?

I love music and I am passionate about it but my main passion my whole life has really always been about movies. I just related my passion towards movies towards the character's passion for music, to be able to draw from. My number one focus, my number one passion, my number one obsession my whole life has always been movies first and everything else has always been a distant second.

Do you think that to be a good film director you have to have that passion, or do you see director's that perhaps operate differently to that?

No I don't think you have to. If you have a natural talent for it then you can be a great filmmaker and not have a passion for it. Talent is kind of non-discriminating that way, I mean, sometimes you have it and sometimes you don't. There's a great movie about talent called "BULLETS OVER BROADWAY" directed by Woody Allen, and it's very much about that. Which is: John Cusack has the passion for playwriting and he believes his methods and the meaning behind why he's doing what he's doing is merit enough to have the talent. He believes that because his heart and his passion are in the right place, that he deserves to have the success and talent that he wants, but he starts to realize, it's this hitman, who has the talent. I just think that's an interesting exploration of that topic.

I heard Woody Allen say once that he feels lucky that he has talent, because that enables him to express what is inside of himself -- and that there are millions of people that don't have talent, or don't have an artistic temperament, and they perhaps can't express what is inside of them the same way you or I might be able to.

Well it's not a surprise that Woody Allen was able to put that into words, because he's a talented guy. Hearing you say that he said that makes perfect sense.

Your first movie, "NEVER ON TUESDAY," one of the producers was Elliot Kastner; I was fortunate to meet him just a few months before he died, he was ill at the time. I was just wondering; he was such a fascinating character and obviously a great producer. I was wondering if you have any stories about him that might interest our readers?

Not only did Elliot Kastner give me my first shot and allow me to direct a movie when I was nineteen years old, he let me write and direct my first movie, I was nineteen, nobody does that. He was a rare guy that way. He started so many people's careers that way. He started William Goldman's career. He's one of the few people that I've ever met who just absolutely, 100% trusted his gut. He didn't believe in anything else other than what he believed was right. I kept in touch with him throughout his entire life, from that first experience of making that movie with him.

He was a loon. I mean, he was a crazy crazy guy. He was very obsessed with cleanliness, he yelled at everybody all the time; his temper was absolutely legendary. But, he was brilliant, he was creative, he loved movies, he believed in filmmakers and he never stopped working well, well, well into his old age. And suffering with brutal cancer he was still, still pursuing his passion for getting movies made.

Yeah, when I met him - he was still talking about all these plans he had and projects he wanted to produce. He's going to be missed.

Very much so. And he was the one who taught me, never take no for an answer. He's the one that taught me that it's not a business for shy people. When he gave me an opportunity to direct my first film, the one thing he said was "don't fuck it up!" So err, I say that to myself every time I'm about to start a project. "Don't fuck it up!" I don't always succeed, but I say it to myself, y'know?

I'm in the UK at the moment, and we've not had a chance to see "LOOK", your new show. But I've been reading all about it and it seems like it's doing really well. I'd love to hear more; how has it been received over there? And what are your plans for it?

Well "LOOK" is based on a movie I made of the same name. It explores the idea that the average American is captured on surveillance 300 times a day. I know that number is much higher in London.

You're probably right.

Yeah, London is the most surveilled city in the world -- and so, basically it follows several interweaving storylines; but the entire series is shot solely with surveillance cameras, cellphone cameras, webcams and flipcams and all the different cameras we live our lives in front of every day but never think about. Without being preachy about it, it just inherently explores the idea of privacy or our lack thereof.

The show opened to huge numbers. It was the number one show in its time-slot with higher viewership than Showtime network had for two years in that time-slot.

Congratulations.

Thank you. The number 2 episode also came in number one in its time-slot; so knock on wood, it's doing very well.

I've been reading some interviews, where you seem to take the middle ground when people ask you if you think all these cameras are a good or a bad thing. Do you not have any kind of opinions yourself, or feelings around the subject?

I would say that before I started the project, I would say I was leaning more towards the idea that the more cameras there were more of an invasion of privacy, I felt it was. But the more research I did into the subject, the more I really do see both sides. I definitely feel there are many many examples of camera abuses. And y'know, a very recent example is this poor freshman at Rutger's University who killed himself when his roommate turned on the webcam and filmed him having an intimate encounter with another boy, and posted it online.

In 37 States in the US it is legal to have cameras in dressing rooms and bathrooms. And that footage can often get into the wrong hands. The laws are very hazy as to who has access to that footage and what can be done with that footage. It gets out there, and that's a real invasion too.

But on the other side of the coin I think there are many many examples of cameras being used for good. In London, it's a perfect example; all those surveillance cameras caught the London bombers, y'know?

Yeah, of course, yeah.

I think it's a really complex issue and you can't really say; all the cameras are good, and that's it. Or all the cameras are bad, and that's it. I think there's a lot of levels there.

What I want to ask is really about advice for filmmakers. But I've seen you asked this question a lot, and your answers are always very inspiring; so I want to ask it a little bit differently.

Okay..

So many; whether it's screenwriters or directors.. a big problem they face is the idea of this inner-critic, y'know? The voice in your head that tells you you're not good enough, or it's already been done. Y'know, that thing that keeps people flicking around Facebook all day rather than writing that script or getting out there with a camera. So I'm wondering what you think about that, and how you get past that annoying thing that holds people back?

Well I will tell you that everybody needs to know that everybody has that. Even the people that are very successful in these chosen professions that we are all pursuing. Everybody that I know, myself; you sit down to write a script-- I know very few writers who sit down to write a script and love the process and everything that they write, when they're done they say 'man, I'm good! this is great!' All of the artists that I know are very self-critical, and sometimes that can be a real detriment to productivity. But what you have to do is you have to, as best you can, ignore that voice and keep pushing forward.

The hardest part about writing a script, is writing the script. Sitting down and writing every day and getting it done. Everybody is capable of coming up with a good idea, I bet you most people are capable of coming up with a good scene and writing a good scene. But it's the discipline to sit down every day like it's your full time job and bang out however many pages a day you're capable of banging out. And you just have to keep moving forward. I mean, you get to the end, and you realize most of this is crap and I have to rewrite it. But it gets better every time you rewrite it.

But I would say you absolutely can't let that inner voice slow you down, you have to bully past it and keep moving forward. The good news is, if you're talented, which hopefully you are-- you're gonna persevere and the talent is going to rise to the top, and you're going to make it. You just have to believe that and you have to be extremely confident in that idea. And don't let all the insecurities, 'oh this is crap,' 'who cares what these characters have to say,' 'why am I bothering? why am I wasting my time?' Ignore it.

That's great. I think that's really helpful. What are you currently working on?

Besides 'LOOK', I'm working on a movie that I'm not really allowed to talk about but it's very exciting. When I can, I'll let you know. At the same time my day job is writing studio-family movies. I just wrote one for Disney, and I'm writing one for Nickelodeon. Those pay the bills and enable me to do the passion projects, like 'LOOK' y'know.

With writing Studio films, obviously you need to be passionate about what you're writing, even if it's an assignment. How do you keep motivated when it's not something that has necessarily originated from within yourself?

If I'm writing something that isn't necessarily coming from my soul, it's not like I'm born to write it and I need to express it otherwise I'm going to die unhappy. If I'm doing it more for the fact that, you know, this is an opportunity that's come my way--- um, first of all I try to do the best I can with every project I'm involved with. I love all kinds of movies, I love big silly popcorn movies, I love small independent more artful movies, and I love everything in between. So I try to find a way to love everything I'm working on even if it's nothing that I necessarily would have originated myself anyway.

At the same time I also keep in mind that this job, let's say it's a big studio family movie that came my way--- this job is going to afford me the freedom to make the next movie I want to make which is a smaller more passion-project of mine. If it weren't for the big studio job I wouldn't have this opportunity. So for me, it's a great sort of give and take. I'll give this to the studio system, and in exchange - the studio system very graciously gives me the freedom to afford to do the smaller passion project.

I think that's something that's changed now. I think before, people use a phrase like 'artistic integrity' and think you have to be like Woody Allen and do exactly what you want year after year. But I think now, people like yourself, or Steven Soderbergh; it's that idea you do one for them, and hopefully then you get to do one for yourself.

I have found that that has been one great, lucky opportunity that I've been afforded. A lot of the filmmakers that I admire, John Sayles is a good example; and also, by the way, John Cassavetes and even Orson Welles. Cassevetes and Welles would act in films, y'know, specifically to make some money to get the freedom to make the films they were more passionate about. I don't feel in any way that it's a compromise to my integrity. To me I feel really lucky and fortunate to be a part of big studio Hollywood, and really lucky to be able to make smaller, more personal films too.

I really liked 'SMALL SOLDIERS' I think it's interesting with these types of films, because you're writing for two audiences, right? You're writing for the youngsters and for older people; because you don't want the parents sitting there bored. How do you achieve that mixture?

The biggest inspiration I take is from the Warner Brothers cartoons. I think about all the Bugs Bunny cartoons that I grew up watching. They were very funny for kids, but there was also a lot of adult themed humor, and double-entendre humor in what the characters say. I didn't understand a lot of that as a kid, but now as a grown up you appreciate it on a whole separate level. I think the best kids films do that, I always try to do that.

What is the one achievement you're most proud of. The one where you say "yeah, I really got that right."

I would say it's a two pronged answer. My sentimental favorite is "The Dark Backward". It was the first script I ever wrote. It was the first and one of the few times where I had total creative freedom. It was a great experience, it's my sentimental favorite.

I do feel though that I'm the most proud of "LOOK", the film and the series. I do feel that it's my best work. The characters and the character complexity, and the subject matter; I'm very passionate about it and I feel the best stuff I have done is "LOOK" the film and "LOOK" the series.

Is it hard to cast for? Because the acting has to be extremely natural, and it must be tough to get right?

We see hundreds of people for each part. It really is a different style of acting. I can't rely on movie tricks to manipulate a performance. I have to cast people who I believe can pull it off completely naturally, we have very few cuts and can't hide behind the tricks of fast editing or the camera pushing in to create tension. I like to believe we pulled it off, and we got great people. I'm really happy with the cast and so far the reaction has been great.

How do you deal with criticism-- when you read a review or you hear something about your work and it gets completely slammed. Do you read that stuff? Do you pay attention to it?

I read it occasionally. My feeling is: you can't take anything personally in Hollywood. If you start taking things personally, it will cripple you. To me, criticism and at the same time rejection - because in Hollywood when you're pursuing a career in making movies you experience a lot of rejection. You just can not allow it to affect you one bit.

I think a lot of that is just a function of just a natural ability to not let it bother you. I know a lot of people who are very bright and very talented, and no matter how many times they tell themselves they're not going to take it personally, they do, and they can't help it. I'm lucky that way; I just don't ever let rejection or criticism slow me down. It just does not affect me. When someone says nice things about my work I'm happy to hear it. But I don't rest on my laurels either. I don't get overly swayed either way by positive or negative. For me it's all about keeping my focus, keeping my eye on the ball, moving forward. I want to write that next script, I want to make that next movie. If they liked the last one great, if they hated the last one, great, irrelevant, I'm just going to keep moving forward and keep making stuff.

I guess the two extremes of loving it or hating it; it's much better than someone just walking out and not really having an opinion, right?

I would absolutely agree with that. Some of my movies that have enjoyed the longevity, the ones people are still discovering and appreciating.. were the ones that were hated by a lot of people and loved by a lot of people. So I'd much rather have a movie that has an extreme reaction than no reaction.

I think, as you work in the studio system, I think this is an interesting thing to ask; it's more of a screenwriting question. There are so many books and seminars now that say there's '12 steps to writing' and 'you must have this happen on this page,' all of these rules; and I think upcoming writers especially feel so much pressure to deliver a script that will please people, and it gets further and further away from writing what you want to write. How do you get that balance between pouring out whatever is inside of you, passionately onto the page -against- writing something that essentially people will want to make?

Well that is a great question, because all of the rules of screenwriting often completely strangle the creativity right out of it. If you love movies and you've seen a lot of movies and you want to make movies, and you've lived your life studying movies; you're going to kind of have a natural understanding of a movie pace and plot. I don't think you really need to over analyse what page this plot twist is supposed to come on, or when an act break is supposed to occur. You want it to be original, you want it to be creative, you want to be inspired by all the movies you've seen in your past.

One of the things that makes movies good and original; when you look at the movies you're researching and watching, and loving, and watching over and over again - is that they have originality to them, y'know? The perfect structured film is rarely the best film.

Definitely, yeah.

It doesn't hurt to know what a basic three act structure is, and it doesn't hurt to hear what some of these rules might be. But you kind of want to forget about them when you're sitting down to write. You want to be swept away in the story and the characters. You want to blaze a new trail for yourself, you want to be original. That doesn't mean write something that's absolutely non-sensical and call it original. You want it still to be a movie that people can digest to some degree, you know? But I think people get mired in the formula---- but I will tell you this: if somebody has a natural talent, that formula will not slow you down unless you allow it too. You have to trust your talent. The people who have no talent, all they have to rely on is the rules and the books and the formulas. It's like playing the piano, or a cookbook. If you have a natural talent for cooking, you're just gonna feel how much salt is gonna make it taste better. You don't necessarily want to measure salt grain by grain just because it says it in the book.

Linked to that question-- do you think there are certain character traits in people who are successful in this industry compared to people that aren't, or do you think it's just luck?

It's interesting. One of the things I like most about the movie industry is that there are absolutely no rules. If you go to medical school and you study and you get your grades, you come out the other side as a Doctor. You know what I mean?

Yeah.

If you want to be a filmmaker, there's no set path, no rules. You make up your own rules as you go along. Everybody does it different, and everybody blazes their own path. One of the things I like about the people who succeed in the movie business, or anybody pursuing a career in the arts of any kind, is that they just innately know that their way is the right way, for them. It might not be the right way for someone else, but it's the right way for them. And if it isn't working one way, you can shift gears and try it another way. The people who succeed at it are the people who know, 'yeah this is the way for me, this is the way I'm going to pursue this career for myself, and to hell with everyone else and the way they did it, I'm going to do it my way.'

Talking of doing it your own way, I'll finish on this one now. I'm doing a feature film in the coming months; without going into the details of it -- do you have any advice?

Don't fuck it up!

Care to share?

Tweet

Deadline Day For Screenwriting Competition

Today, the 21st, is the deadline for the screenwriting competition. I am happy to be as liberal as possible with this for any of you deadline-cramming crazy people. In Alofi, which is the capital city of Niue it is currently 1.10pm on Wednesday. LA time is currently 5.10pm. So, you can all pretend you're in Alofi if you need to work until four in the morning (regardless of where in the world you are.)

Good luck!

Care to share?

Tweet

Go VIVIDLY Into Your Memories

I can't remember what triggered me to do this last night, maybe I was thinking about an old friend or something; but there I was, at two in the morning, unable to sleep and thinking about my old school. I vividly imagined being on the grounds and walking into each and every building. I imagined walking down the old corridors that I used to walk down, every day, for years. I set myself a little challenge of remembering every classroom and what subject was taught there.

To my surprise, as I did this-- it brought things back really intensely. As I entered the classrooms, I would see my old teachers. Of course, they were as they were, all them years ago - they've surely aged a lot now and many of the rooms may have changed, or are not even there anymore. But in my memory, everything was so real. How often do you really take the time to truly use this power in your mind? To go back, intensely, into a past experience?

It wasn't just visual, but it brought back the smells. The aroma of the Food Tech rooms (which is not as nice as it sounds) or the carpet-y smell from the room where we were taught French, or the Drama Studio smell which I can only describe as the Drama Studio smell. If I could smell it right now I'd think "wow, that smells like the drama studio from school!"

The most interesting thing to me was how I saw all my old teachers in a new light. Back then, in the school days, Mr. Thomas was just Mr. Thomas who would be waiting there in History class for us. Twice a week, every week, for many years, there he was, delivering a class that we seldom paid attention to. Thinking back, did I even recognise him as a human? Did I care how his day was? Was I aware that he had good days and bad days? Did I know anything about his family? Did I give him a hard time? This was a very fascinating experience, to think back, because in my memory, I'm 15. But now, I'm not 15, I'm a lot older and arguably wiser, so it's weird to revisit a part of my memories with a new perspective. A perspective where I can see things a lot more from another point of view.

If I had to write a scene last night, or even right now, about a teacher-- I would be so much more prepared. I have written teacher scenes before, and done the usual thing of imagining it a little bit and then thrashing it out on paper. But now, with this different and more absorbing process, I am certain my writing would be a lot better. I literally feel like I jumped in a DeLorean and zoomed back to my younger days, and got to observe it all over again. Similarly, if I was an actor; I would be so much more prepared now playing the role of a teacher, because of this experience.

I implore you to do this tonight, before you go to bed. Go vividly into a past experience. School is a great one because, we spent so much time there, there is a giant warehouse of memories and ideas and feelings locked somewhere in your brain that you probably haven't accessed in years. Even just picturing old classrooms again-- you probably haven't pictured them in many years, but there they are, waiting for you. The memory is fascinating, and an incredible tool- be it for creativity, or for reminiscing or even just for passing time!

A bizarre thing for me was that some things I couldn't remember. The main building of our school was on three floors - and for some crazy reason, I can't remember the top two floors AT ALL, even though I spent as much time there as anywhere else. Why would my brain choose to disregard these areas? I have no idea.

You could use these skills you have to dive into the past for very specific purposes related to writing or acting, but I would recommend just doing it for the experience, it will unlock parts of yourself and places from your life that you've completely forgotten.

Care to share?

Tweet

BILL MURRAY In GHOSTBUSTER'S gear

I was doing what I normally do at 1AM in the morning, searching for "aging men in uniform," when look what I found.

It's BILL MURRAY! In GHOSTBUSTER'S stuff!


And that is the last time I ever blog about what someone is wearing.

Care to share?

Tweet

Frustration

I'm tired, tired of being passionate about the cinema. I want to be like my heroes, who speak of hiding away in cinemas and loving every minute of it. That is not my experience. My experience is usually one of disappointment. When I see something like 'The Social Network' or 'Juno' on the big screen, it's pure bliss; but in between, it's disappointment and frustration.

I keep thinking other people will be tired too. Tired of 'big' movies, tired of predictable storylines and stereotyped characters - but that isn't my experience. And this isn't pretentiousness; I don't want everyone making and watching 'artsy' films, I just feel we, as an industry and as viewers, set the barometer extremely low when it comes to quality.

It saddens me that film podcasts talk about how a film has a 'cool' marketing campaign, or that young screenwriters are driving themselves crazy trying to write a 'hot' screenplay. This is not why I love movies; but, I find it hard to grasp the general public and the way they approach movies. People are short changed, every time - but they seem happy to watch a film with a bigger explosion --it gives you two hours of distraction-- but what about afterwards? The films that truly excite people are the ones where fifteen years later you're still saying "Stupid is as stupid does" and eighty years later you're watching clips of 'City Lights' on YouTube because you're amazed by how funny Chaplin is. But so few people are being the best they can be; they're chasing a script sale, or fame, or trying write something purely to be controversial.

I'm frustrated because there is unlimited potential in how good we can be, as writers, directors, actors and everything in between. When we use truth, honesty, humor, and passion -- when we write controversial things not to be controversial but to challenge people to see things a little differently; that's when we're at our best. Yet most people aren't even trying. You meet a writer and they say "Im doing a horror script and a film about a guy who likes comics and I'm doing a superman-meets-godfather drama" - what does that mean? Nothing! Why aren't people writing things that matter? That inspire? The reason, in part, is that the industry doesn't support it. But it's a cycle that we play a part in every time we write the same old shit, or try to come up with something that's 'in.'

I'm tired. I feel like my 'passionate' side and my 'pissed off and frustrated' side are constantly smashing into each other. It's time to choose one. I choose art. I choose writing things that matter. I choose writing for the guy in the front row who wants to see a good story, I want to write for the girl at the end of the isle who's about to walk out because the films don't have the soul they had in 1960.

I understand all the screenwriting books and script guru's, and I understand they have to keep sharing their messages because it's how they make a living, but writing is not about rules and principles; it's not even about words --- it's about the life inbetween. Most writing fails because it suffocates that life, it doesn't recognize it and it doesn't have a chance to grow.

There is room for the next generation of incredible screenwriters. I'm not talking about a writer who gets rich making a smash hit; but the next Woody, the next Ephron, the next Kaufman.

Care to share?

Tweet

Scorsese Wisdom

From a Facebook Chat this morning..

KID

i drink an INSANE amount of caffeine

and the effects are only really negative

A FRIEND

i hear your confession

KID

i get distracted, i pee a million times a day,

i can't concentrate well, i need more, etc!

but i don't drink, don't smoke, don't mistreat women,

i need some kind of small vice you know

A FRIEND

scorcese rule:

only drink two cups a day

KID

what are his reasons?

A FRIEND

he is who he is

KID

good point

Care to share?

Tweet