Which one do women want in movies? A Rescuing Male who saves them? Or a kick-ass independent heroine?
Let us tiptoe gently into a touchy screenwriting topic.
It is the concept of The Rescuing Male...as found in reel life -- but missing in real life? Does Art imitate Life? Does Art ever really rescue anyone, or does he just watch golf on TV all weekend?
Considering all this might be helpful as we create characters, story structure and themes in our scripts. (Oh, and I'll only raise some good questions; I have no answers.)
The Rescuing Male has been a touchy topic for the last three or four decades, since God looked at Mankind, and then She said let there be the women's
movement, Chippendales, sports bras and female NASCAR drivers.
And lo and behold, every beast of the field and every bird of the air shalt now have a raised consciousness...except for the guy in your office three cubicles down. And your Uncle Charlie with his Playboyİ cigarette lighter.
And your last date. And...well, okay, not everyone got the word.
But long ago, it came to pass that contemporary women began to scorn the very idea of 'being rescued by a man' in normal life.
After all, women are smart, strong, equal - and what do they have to be rescued from? Technology and modern society has changed the need for (the physically stronger) men to rescue women from saber-toothed tigers or marauding casino-Americans. So this concept should have disappeared with disco, right?
Except...
Except , we often find this theme in many movies since the 70's.
So give it some thought, especially if you write a chick-flick (love story or romantic comedy). Or even for the boy-brain action-adventure genre.
Because if visceral appeal of The Rescuing Male ended three decades ago, why did women ticket-buyers create mega-blockbusters out of three overt female 'Rescuing Male' fantasies: PRETTY WOMAN, GHOST, and AN OFFICER AND A GENTLEMAN? (All written and directed by men, by the way.) At the end of OFFICER
AND A GENTLEMAN, Richard Gere is as close to a knight in shining armor as you can get in his white Navy uniform, marching into the grungy, dark factory where Debra Winger is a single wage slave. He literally sweeps her off her feet, carries her out into the sunlight, to marry him, taking her, as the song lyric clearly spells out, to completes the fantasy, 'up where she belongs.' She belongs, apparently, at upwards of $125 million, domestic box-office, caused by women loving this ending.
In GHOST, the fantasy of the Rescuing Male doesn't even stop at death.
The movie GHOST seems to offer the ultimate female wish-fulfillment fantasy: you can have this hunky husband who loves you so much that he'll even come back from the dead as a ghost to RESCUE you. ($200 million.)
And in PRETTY WOMAN, that full-on fantasy says a Donald Trump-esque rich guy will so love you, that even meeting you in the lowliest niche possible, immediately treats you with respect (that you apparently don't even have to earn; Julia Roberts played a street hooker), demands of others that you be treated with respect, gives you credit cards to shop with on Rodeo Drive, forgives a sexually off-putting past, proposes and carries you off to his castle (Fifth Avenue townhouse). Women LOVED this movie ($400+ million worldwide box-office; that's love) -- so was it every female's total adolescent romantic fantasy?
Gloria Steinem, you got some 'splainin' to do...
But to be fair, aren't movies the place for seeing ALL of our wildest, mostly unlikely fantasies played out sixty-feet high for two hours? Isn't this what movies often do: offering our unconscious wish-fulfillment dreams?
Most of us guys in the audience are not physical warriors, but we love watching our boy-brain fantasies in RAMBO, LETHAL WEAPON and LORD OF THE RINGS.
Female fantasies seem to be aimed at adolescence: boy meets girl chick flicks: love stories and romcoms. But male fantasies are PRE-adolescent!
We love action/adventure genres, about males successfully confronting a tough world and physically triumphantly (not the mushy stuff.)
A boy between, say, ten and twelve years old, is at the peak of his childhood physical power (but before puberty/hormones/sex/girls) so his boyhood
fantasies include being a space man (THE RIGHT STUFF, STAR WARS), a firefighter (BACKDRAFT), a warrior with a sword (ROBIN HOOD, ZORRO, BRAVEHEART), a cowboy
(THE UNFORGIVEN, QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER), a race car driver (THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS), a sports hero (ROCKY) or a cop (LETHAL WEAPON).
Then guys grow up and get cued (by comics, books, movies) that we're supposed to become a R
escuing Male where females are concerned. Then whatever is in both our male and female
psyches shows up on the big screen.
(Let me reveal my keen grasp of the obvious: girls want boyfriends; boys want swordfights. Such it has been, such it shall always be, world without
end, amen.)
I don't want to strain to make a point, but don't a lot of male-oriented action movies include this dynamic too? The guy known as ya-big-lug kept having to bravely rescue Fay Wray from KING KONG. Clyde rescued Bonnie from a boring, anonymous waitress life she hated. In THE PROFESSIONALS, a team of cowboy experts are hired to rescue a man's kidnapped rich wife. In KLUTE, Donald Sutherland rescued the Jane Fonda call girl from her psycho stalker. A big part of the original STAR WARS was Princess Leah being rescued by Hans Solo.
In both DIE HARDS I & II, Bruce Willis had to keep rescuing his wife.
Ah-nuld rescues females in PREDATOR, ERASER, COMMANDO, etc. BATMAN rescues all his women, usually mid-air catches. In LAST OF THE MOHICANS, when the hero says to the heroine, when they are forced to split up, "I will find you," we know he means it. And he rescues her. So many action/adventure guy-movies also have a Rescuing Male.
Seems hard to imagine now, but in the early 80's, BEVERLY HILLS COP was a breakthrough film. Why? It was a new hybrid, that, along with 48 HOURS,
invented a new genre, the action-comedy: serious violence but with a funny
comic. Guns and giggles, laughs and Uzi's, belly laughs and bullets. BEVERLY HILLS COP seemed to break all the rules, a trendy new genre, hip new star -- except for one classic scene at the end you probably don't even remember.
Eddie Murphy assaults the villain's mansion, and then there's a stand-off as
our hero faces the villain holds a gun to the heroine's head. The Rescuing Male moment was present, even in that rule-breaking, funny movie, as it was almost obligatory story structure moment, for success.
(Note two things in movies in general: how often a hero rescues a woman from the villain, and how often movies end with "Let's go home.")
Look at the mega-successful TITANIC. Any examples of a Rescuing Male?
Let me count the ways. Jack rescued Rose from a bad marriage to a cruel fiance, and rescuing her from loveless sex, showing her a steamy, passionate way instead. He rescued her from thinking she had no choices within her rigid class system. He rescued her from the villain chasing them through the sinking ship while shooting at them. And as the ship sinks, he rescues her from drowning. He makes sure she lives, as he sacrifices himself, glug-glug-glug.
Could there be a connection between so many Rescuing Male dynamics in one love story and the fact it's the #1 box-office hit ever? (Nah, probably just a co-inky-dink...)
Sometimes the lack of The Rescuing Male is so awkward it drives the plot.
In BRAVEHEART, the emotional trigger that propelled the Mel Gibson character to lead the Scots to rebel was English soldiers killing his wife; he couldn't rescue her and couldn't get over it. In OUT OF AFRICA, the only real plot conflict in that love story keeping boy and girl apart was that the Robert Redford character would NOT become Meryl Streep's Rescuing Male. He chose a loving, independent, healthy disengagement; she insisted on an engagement. He wasn't playing the societal role she expected he would play once they found love and that was their only real conflict.
The underrated movie, HERO, with Dustin Hoffman, Andy Garcia and Geena Davis, turns the Rescuing Male theme inside out for our amused study. When a selfish weasel of a con man is actually the hero who saves the heroine and others from a burning crashed airliner, he doesn't fit the stereotype. So a different hero is chosen in a plot mix-up, a handsome, modest, more traditional image of a Rescuing Male; gap between heroic expectation and scruffy reality drives the plot. Ben Afflect's plot conflict in CHASING AMY is that he's in love with a lesbian, who doesn't need a male to rescue her from anything, thanks anyway.
Any twists and reversals on this Rescuing Male theme like these only reinforce its power and remind us of its almost omnipresence in films.
There are more subtle variations on this this theme. In THE HORSE WHISPERER, the Robert Redford character rescues the heroine's family from falling apart, by healing horse, daughter's soul, and Mom's rigid/frigid yuppie-driven world view. In THE BRIDGES OF MADISON COUNTY, the Clint Eastwood free spirit rescued the Meryl Streep farm-wife character from a life that had everything but romance. In FRANKIE AND JOHNNY, Al Pacino rescues the Michelle Pffeifer character from a life alone after she'd given up on men.
The list is timeless, endless, so common we take it for granted.
However, I'm not trying to suggest this dynamic appears in all scripts or movies, or should. Not at all. And you may be thinking, okay, so a hero rescues the damsel in distress, what else is new?
But that's just it -- when there's any kind of Rescuing Male? We take it for granted, hardly notice it, don't even question it. It is a very ingrained part in our culture, our collective consciousness. Prince Charming will show up and save the fairy tale princess (which by the way puts a lot of unconscious pressure on men in real life to always be a rescuing hero too -- which they then get in trouble for trying, with their women. "Don't problem-solve everythingI say," she complains to him. "Just be a good listener!" And he can't win. Go figure...) So maybe all this deserves some thought, especially before you write your next screenplay.
However, by now, I know what you're thinking. You're wanting to say, dude, (okay, the dude part is optional) wait a minute. Your examples are a generation old! What about modern, kick-ass, self-empowering heroines?
Fair enough.
Except if SUPERMAN caught Margot Kidder in mid-air in the 1970's, and three decades later, SPIDERMAN catches Kirstin Dundst in mid-air, both Spandexed Rescuing Males, it's a 21st century thing too. In 50 FIRST DATES, a romantic comedy, a man rescues a young accident victim with permanent, daily short-term memory loss, from a life with no sense of love and forward movement. And many other contemporary examples of it.
However, let's now look at how more recent movies do reflect a complete change of attitudes from the old Perils Of Pauline, helplessly tied to the train tracks, hoping for a Rescuing Male instead of the 3:10 to Yuma.
Many, many contemporary love stories movies and romantic comedies are NOT about 'the rescuing male' but instead are about two equals just trying to find love together, without any rescuing factor. Examples of these include SLEEPLESS IN SEATTLE, YOU'VE GOT MAIL), SERENDIPITY, ALONG CAME POLLY, 10 REASONS, etc. and many, many other movies.
In realistic dramas, ERIN BROCOVICH rescued herself from her single, unemployed Mom situation. Even in more recent male-oriented adventure movies, Catherine Zeta-Jones gives as good as she gets in a swordfight with ZORRO; ditto Maid Marian in Kevin Costner's ROBIN HOOD. EVER AFTER with Drew Barrymore spoofed all this with a fairy tale heroine who is strong, pro-active, smart and rescues herself, confusing the hero and our expectations.
In MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING, the female protagonist made a pro-active break FROM her suffocating work-in-the-family-restaurant-schtick-and-cultural-bullying PRIOR to meeting Mr. Right THEN they went through all the funny famliy wedding shtick; she 'rescued' herself first.
Even broad comedies like SAVING SILVERMAN offer a kidnapped female victim Amanda Peet as able to outthink and outfight her two loopy male kidnappers; she saves herself.
Today's action/adventure genre films often don't even star men.
This is the era of the Kick-Ass-Female-Protagonist. In G.I. JANE, the CHARLIE'S ANGELS, and LARA CROFT movies, The X-MEN heroes included tough X-women; Carris Moss in MATRIX. Many of today's big screen women are totally able to take care of themselves, and rescue themselves, if need be. Clarice Starling goes after serial killers and Ellen Ripley keeps defeating the ALIEN, each rescuing themselves, each time. (Plus ALIAS/BIONIC WOMAN on TV.) So finally, women protagonists are totally capable in every way to men on the big screen, reel life mirroring real life on this (with women in combat in Iraq, women cops, women firefighters, etc.)
And yet...there's this wistful female call of the tame that still exists as mirrored in our big screen: the presence of the Rescuing Male in 21st century movies.
But when it's NOT a life-and-death situation, no one ever seems to ask just what a modern woman needs so badly to be rescued FROM?
I'm guessing but there seems to be a 'fear of 21st century neo-spinsterism (aging alone with career & cat)' -- and the 'rescue' from this takes the form of a loving husband who offers instead a life of marriage and Soccer-Mom-ness. (Married child chauffeurs are reading this now, in line at car pool, waiting for endless ballet recitals and Little League to end, and thinking: this is my salvation? What rescues me from the rescue?)
Still, Gloria Steinem in the 1970's said a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, which may be more glib than substantive for many women today (and I can't resist mentioning Ms. Steinem herself got married a few years ago; she decided to let her husband to keep him own name.)
In preparing this article, I emailed most of this to 6-8 female friends, for their opinions on what I suggest is the seeming contradiction between the escapist fantasy on the big screen of the Rescuing Male, and yet, after the movie, the politically-correct scorning of such a concept in reality.
Many admitted they long for a hero, but they are in short supply; they'd love a Rescuing Male in real life, but it just isn't realistic. They know they have to be able to take care of themselves, but in the dark escapist privacy a movie theater, they can enjoy a good fantasy, which is what films often offer. If a guy can love a movie where he's a tough DIE HARD-esque hero on the big screen, why can't a woman enjoy a Rescuing Male there too?
One young woman in her early 20's confided, "Of course I'd love a Rescuing Male -- I just won't admit it." She's presently working hard to be able to always take care of herself throughout her life; I'll keep her secret - but is this common? Wanting the politically-incorrect, retro-fantasy, the Rescuing Male?
So keep some of these questions in mind as you fashion your scripts.
Women today of all ages in going to the movies have every right to enjoy both types of contemporary women images now on the big screen. Those kick-ass women characters who are self-empowering, in all genres. And also the women characters on the big screen who enjoy an old-fashioned romantic cuddle with their hero who just saved them.
John Hill began writing as a professional screenwriter over 25 years ago. His
numerous credits include GRIFFIN AND PHOENIX (2006), starring Dermot Mulrooney and Amanda Peet and QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER (1990), based on his spec script,
starring Tom Selleck, Laura San Giacomo, and Alan Rickman. He has worked on staff as a
writer-type producer on QUANTUM LEAP and on L.A. LAW, where he won an Emmy in 1991. He wrote
a regular column for SCR(I)PT magazine for 5 years and now teaches writing and creativity at the
University of Nevada in Las Vegas. One-on-one mentoring in screenwriting is available.
He may be reached at Hillwithit@aol.com.
Before You Leap
By Ray Morton
You've been working furiously on your script for months. You came up with a great idea, worked it out to perfection and have been burning the midnight oil to get it down on paper. Spurring you on is the fact you've already informally pitched your story to a few industry contacts, all of whom have told you they can't wait to read it. Spurring you on even more is the steady stream of articles in the daily trades talking about how the spec market has never been hotter. Practically causing you to break the sound barrier is the fact that two movies in the same genre as your script have recently opened huge, creating a demand for similar product that you are certain you can ride to fame, fortune, and a great career. And now, here you are, typing out the last scene. The hero triumphs, the villain is vanquished, dangling plot strands are resolved and the principals ride off into the sunset. FADE OUT. THE END. So, what do you do now? The answer is obvious. You print that sucker out, run off a dozen copies at Kinko's, and blanket the town, right?
Wrong. At least in my opinion.
"You only get once chance to make a first impression," the saying goes and nowhere is this truer than in the world of screenwriting. The first read is the key moment in the life of a script. If the initial reader likes it, the script will move on up the food chain. If not, then the script will die on the spot. (Rarely will a script be given a second look if it has been found wanting on the first.) For a script to make an excellent first impression, everything about it has to be tip top, yet from experience I can tell you that most of the scripts that get submitted are not - either the plots are unclear or full of holes, the characters are poorly developed, the dialogue is fuzzy, or the presentation slipshod. The question then is, if writers know how important it is to present an excellent script, why do so many send out scripts that aren't? The answer, I think, is that these writers don't know their scripts are lacking. Given that these are talented, capable people, how can this be?
To me, the reason isn't hard to suss. Writing is, by its very nature, a solitary endeavor. Writers usually work alone, lost for months on end in the twists and turns of their stories and easily prone to being spun around by the constant thinking and rethinking any creative activity requires. Given this, it's not hard to see why even the best writers can lose objectivity concerning their work, without which they can miss seeing problems that an unbiased eye would easily catch. The issue, of course, is that if a writer sends out his script without catching and correcting these problems, he can find himself losing the race before he ever gets out of the gate. For this reason, I feel it is imperative for writers to find ways to get an objective view of their scripts so they can catch and fix problems and mistakes before they send it out to the marketplace.
To accomplish this, I suggest doing the following:
1. After finishing your script, let it sit for a few weeks. Put it in a drawer and go off and do other things - kick back, work on other projects, eat a lot of doughnuts. When the two weeks are up, give the script another read. After such a layoff your mind will be clearer and I guarantee that things will jump out at you that you never saw when you were caught up in the fury of creation.
2. Give the script to others to read. By definition, other people are able to see your work more objectively than you can. The trick, of course, is to choose the right people. Your Great Aunt Millie might make wonderful chocolate brownies, but she might not be the best person to assess your high-octane action adventure spectacular. Give the script to someone whose taste and opinions - especially about movies - you value and whom you know will be honest with you. This is tricky because people who care about you may have a hard time telling you that they don't like something. The problem, of course, is that potential buyers aren't going to care about your feelings, they're only going to care if the script works or not, so you really have to choose people you know are going to tell it to you straight. It's also important to ask more than one person to read your script. One person's opinion is only that, but if several people give you the same reactions to the same points, then you'll know that these are legitimate issues that you need to pay attention to.
Once your readers have finished, don't settle for a generic response such as "It was good," or "I liked it." Instead, ask your readers to tell you exactly what they did and didn't like about the script and why. To assess how well your plot works, ask your readers to tell you the story of your script. If the one they tell you is the one you think you wrote, then you're in good shape, but if it's not, then you better find out why your readers got a different idea than the one you intended to convey. What did they miss? What did you fail to make clear? What did you leave out or what did you include that took people off track? Ask your readers to tell you their favorite scenes Are they the ones you intended to be standouts? If not, find out what those scenes failed to make an impression and why the ones the readers did like made the impression they did. It's also important to make sure that readers identify your script's correct genre. If you think you wrote a drama and they tell keep telling you how gut-bustingly funny your script was, then clearly you have some retooling to do.
3. To assess how well your dialogue works, I suggest you hold a reading. If you know some actors, ask them if they will take part. If you don't, a group of enthusiastic friends will do just fine. Gather everyone together (offering to spring for beer and pizza is usually a great incentive), assign everyone a part, and let'er rip. Make sure you have someone whose sole job it is to read the stage directions to keep things moving. You shouldn't do this. In fact, you should not participate in any way in order to keep yourself clear and available to take everything in. Your only job at this point is to just sit back and listen. Hearing your dialogue spoken aloud by someone other than yourself is always an eye-opener - you can hear it if it sounds natural or stiff, determine whether or not the points you're trying to make are clear, assess the pacing and flow. If you're writing a comedy, then I believe that a reading is essential - it's impossible to determine how well a dialogue joke works until you hear it spoken aloud. You might consider taping the reading so you can have it available to review as you rewrite.
4. At the end of all this, you will have accumulated a tremendous amount of feedback about your script. The most important thing for you to do now is to LISTEN TO THAT FEEDBACK. It's hard to hear that something you've worked on so hard is not 100% perfect, but if you want to make your script the best it can be, it's important for you to resist the urge that so many writers can't to delude yourself. (The most common phrases uttered by a delusional writer: "You just don't get it." "It'll make sense when you see it on the screen." "Everybody else liked it." This last one is usually said with an adorably sulky pout. And, rest assured, it's not true.)
5. Use what you have learned to rewrite your script, addressing all of the problems and fixing all of the mistakes. The most important thing you need to do in this phase is to be absolutely ruthless with your work. Don't just tweak it here and there. Be brave enough to tear your script apart -- revising where necessary, rethinking where necessary and cutting where necessary (even if it means chopping bits you really, really love. Remember the adage - "In order to succeed, you must first kill all your darlings.").
6. When you're done rewriting, repeat this entire process from the beginning and then rewrite again. And again and again and again until you have made your script as good as it can possibly be.
7. These days, many people make use of professional script evaluation services. The best of these use industry script readers and story analysts and offer an excellent opportunity to get a sense of how your script will be received by Hollywood. I think such an evaluation can be incredibly valuable, but such services can be pricey, so you may want to wait until you're pretty sure you're finished before taking the plunge.
8. Once you've finished with the content, you must then address the form. Proofread your script - checking spelling, grammar, and format. If you're not confident of your skills in this area, then give the job to someone whose skills you do trust. If no one comes to mind, then consider using a professional proofreading service. When all of this has been done, print up a crisp, clean copy of your script - free of smells, stains, and any other weird, unidentifiable phenomena that will mystify, frighten, or nauseate a reader.
9. Now you're ready. Send it out.
Obviously, there are no guarantees, but if you follow these steps, you can rest assured that you've given your brainchild the best possible chance of making the best possible impression in an increasingly competitive marketplace. Good luck.
Ray Morton is a writer, script consultant, and script analyst. A senior writer for
Script Magazine, he writes its bi-monthly "Legends of Screenwriting" column.
Morton's first book, King Kong: The History of a Movie Icon, was published in 2005
and his latest book, Close Encounters of the Third Kind: The Making of Steven Spielberg's Classic
Film, has just been published by Applause Books. Both are available in bookstores and o
nline at Amazon.com. Morton is available for script consultation and can be reached at
ray@raymorton.com.
The Top Ten Reasons For When You, As A Writer, Need A Lawyer
By Robert L. Seigel
As an entertainment attorney, I have presented numerous talks concerning the legal and business issues concerning screenwriting for such venues as universities, film schools, the Independent Feature Project, New York Women in Film & Television, and the Association for Independent Video and Film. These lectures cover the basics such as rights definitions and protection, writing deals and different forms of compensation which a writer may receive.
A few years ago, in a David Letterman-inspired moment of whimsy, I compiled a "Top 10" List concerning the screenwriting business. Although it is not intended to be all inclusive in nature, this list does provide a solid starting point for writers to assess the need to consult with an attorney.
Therefore, with no commercial interruptions (but with some explanatory commentary), here is:
THE TOP TEN REASONS FOR WHEN YOU, AS A WRITER, NEED A LAWYER:
10. WHEN YOU FIND THAT BOOK, PLAY OR RECORD THAT WOULD BE A GOOD BASIS FOR A MOVIE AND YOU WANT TO START WRITING THE ADAPTATION--BEFORE YOU EVEN KNOW IF THE RIGHTS ARE AVAILABLE AND HOW MUCH IT WILL COST YOU.
If a writer decides that he or she wants to write a script which is based upon pre-existing source material (as opposed to writing an original script) such as a book or a play, the writer should contact the copyright owner or administrator for such underlying work. In the case of a book, a writer should contact a book's publisher subsidiary rights department. A representative in that department would be able to provide such information as whether the motion picture and/or television rights are available and whom to contact if such rights are available. A book's rights are generally controlled by the book's author or the author's agent or attorney. In some cases generally involving beginning book authors, the publisher negotiates such rights on behalf of the author and the publisher, and the author share in the monies derived from granting such rights.
A writer contacted me several years ago and wanted me to read his adaptation of one of the James Bond novels which the Ian Fleming estate had commissioned a writer named John Gardner to write. I read the adaptation and told the writer that it was quite good; however, the script would be used a good sample of how the writer could adapt existing materials into a script. In terms of his adaptation, I informed the writer that if he did not contact the Ian Fleming estate or the Albert Brocolli family which has produced the James Bond franchise for the over forty years and secured the appropriate rights (or, at least, secure an option to purchase such rights), he was out of luck and would not develop the script any further into a motion picture.
9. WHEN YOU WANT TO COLLABORATE ON A SCRIPT WITH YOUR SOON TO BE FORMER FRIEND.
A writing partnership is like a marriage and a collaboration agreement is the pre-nuptual agreement. The best time for a writing team to enter into a collaboration agreement is at the start of the relationship when hopes are high and the stakes are low. The longer a writing team waits to address issues concerning their collaboration, the greater the likelihood for misunderstandings and acrimony between the writers. The collaboration agreement would address such issues as who owns a script's copyright, how are monies allocated and paid to the writers, how decisions are made whether to option or sell the rights to their script and how disagreements are resolved. In the best case scenario, once the writers sign the collaboration agreement, they can put it in a desk drawer and never have to look at it until an issue arises between the writers. The writers then can open the drawer and read the collaboration agreement as a guide and a reference concerning their contractual relationship.
8. WHEN A PRODUCER WANTS TO OPTION YOUR SCRIPT FOR THREE YEARS WITH A "NO MONEY" OPTION.
If a writer has already written a script and has found someone who is interested in further developing the script with a view towards producing a film or television program based on the script, that person who is taking on the producer role will want the motion picture and/or television rights in and to the script. Since most producers have no or very limited funds to develop their projects, those producers will want to option the rights to the script rather than purchasing the rights to the script outright. By optioning the rights to the script, the producer is taking the script "off the market" so that he or she shall have the exclusive right to further develop the script and to seek possible cast and funding for the project. The producer may offer the writer a "no money" option even if the agreement states the option price is one dollar or some nominal amount. In an ideal world or one where the rules of the Writers Guild of America ("WGA") apply, the option price would be ten percent of the purchase price for the script's rights for a period of time ranging from six months to a year and a half with the possibility of such term being extended with another payment to the writer. In the non-studio world, a producer may option a script's rights for some nominal amount for a year the right to extend such option by paying a nominal amount to the writer.
Producers generally need an initial one year option period with at least a possible renewal term of another year since it takes time for script rewrites and getting responses from possible cast representatives and funding sources. Why would a writer take his or her script out of the marketplace for no money for as long as three years? A writer has to judge whether a producer has the passion or belief in the property to work on it for what may be years to have a project produced and the experience and/or contacts to take the script to those sources that can finance the project. At best, it is a judgment call for a writer to make and will serve as the basis of any negotiations between a producer and the writer.
7. YOU ARE NOT COVERED BY THE WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA AND YOUR SCRIPT COULD BE THE BASIS FOR FURTHER FILMS OR A TV SERIES AND THE PRODUCER WANTS TO PAY YOU A FLAT RATE FOR "ALL RIGHTS, THROUGHOUT THE UNIVERSE, IN PERPETUITY AND IN ANY AND ALL MEDIA, WHETHER NOW KNOWN OR CREATED IN THE FUTURE.
For the purposes of this article, let us assume that a writer is not a WGA member (or a "professional writer" as defined by the WGA) and that the producer is not a signatory to the WGA Basic Agreement. If the writer were a WGA member and the producer a WGA signatory, then such issues as compensation, credit, a writer's right to rewrites and how a writer shall financially participate in a script's ancillary rights would be covered by the WGA Basic Agreement. For the non-WGA member writer and the non-WGA signatory producer or a signatory producer negotiating with a non-WGA writer, almost all of the issues concerning the optioning and/or purchasing of a script's rights are a matter of negotiation. A writer and his or her representative and a producer can use the WGA rules as a basis for their negotiations of such deal points as credit determination and compensation; however, absent the use of such WGA rules, neither party is bound to such rules and whatever a writer can receive in his or her agreement must be discussed and negotiated preferably by the writer's agent or attorney with the producer.
One example of an issue which the parties should address is what happens if a producer cannot commence principal photography or complete production of a project after a certain period of time such as five or seven years after the producer acquired the script's rights. If this issue is not addressed by the parties, the writer's script could be left on the proverbial shelf to gather dust. Instead, the agreement could include a provision in which a writer could reacquire a script's rights if the producer does not produce a project within a certain period of time. The writer may regain the rights automatically or subject to a lien in the sum of money which the producer paid the writer for the rights and possibly for the writer's writing services. The producer generally does want the writer to set up the project elsewhere with the producer being out of pocket for his or development costs. How a writer deals with such a lien is a matter of negotiation between the parties. (The writer usually gets the producer or studio who wants to produce the project based on the writer's script to repay such development expenses to the first producer who acquired such rights.)
6. WHEN A PRODUCER GETS THE FINANCING FOR THAT PROJECT WHICH USES YOUR SCRIPT BUT THE PRODUCER WANTS TO GIVE WILLIAM GOLDMAN (OR SOMEONE'S RELATIVE) "FIRST CRACK" AT THE REWRITE.
One of the points of contention between a producer and a writer is whether the writer will have the right to perform the first rewrites which a producer may request. A writer usually can negotiate for the right to perform the initial rewrite or two. However, if the producer and the writer have reached a creative impasse or a producer does not believe that the writer can take the development of the script to the next level, the producer may seek to hire a more experienced writer to expedite the development process as well as be able to inform potential funding sources that a writer with a "track record" is now working on the script. In other instances, a producer may hire a writer with whom he or she as a relationship so that the producer has a sense of certainty that the script will be developed as per the producer's "suggestions."
5. WHEN A PRODUCER WANTS THAT "ONE LAST REWRITE"--20 TIMES AND FOR NO FURTHER COMPENSATION.
In negotiating his or her continued involvement in a script's development, a writer has to decide whether he or she is willing to work on one or two rewrites for no or very little money. If the writer requests compensation for each rewrite, a producer may decide to hire another writer who would be willing to rewrite "on spec" or for a very nominal amount. (In theory, this new writer should and/or would not be a WGA member since the WGA forbids no money or below WGA minimum compensation for their writer members' services).
Without that WGA safety net, a writer may wind up writing multiple drafts for little or no money. A writer should balance the need to be flexible when working with independent producers by providing perhaps a rewrite and a polish for no or a nominal amount of money and then should be compensated for further writing services.
4. AFTER WORKING ON THAT SCRIPT FOR NUMEROUS DRAFTS AND MONTHS, YOU NEVER RECEIVED THE CONTRACT THE PRODUCER PROMISED YOU ONLY TO DISCOVER THE SCRIPT IS GOING IN A "DIFFERENT DIRECTION" AND THE PRODUCER THANKS YOU FOR YOUR "HELP" AND THAT YOU WILL GET PAID ONCE THE FINANCING COMES THROUGH--ANY DAY NOW.
A writer can remove much of the vagaries and speculativeness of "spec writing" by negotiating and entering into an option agreement with a right for the producer to purchase the script's rights or a writing services agreements and ensuring that the agreement is signed by the writer and the producer. This agreement is a form of protection not only for the writer but for the producer as well as since any funding source will insist that a producer provide a "chain of title" regarding the script and any additional script versions. Such "chain of title" is similar to a "chain of title" to a house that one decides to purchase. A producer can prove that he or she has the right either to acquire the script's rights or has purchased and now owns such rights by providing the requisite signed agreements to a funding source. Otherwise, a producer will not be able to enter into an agreement with the funding source and the possibility of producing a project based on the script becomes increasingly dim. At worst, the absence of such documentation between the producer and the writer (as well as any other writers) can result in the parties behaving as if they are in a bad remake of "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" in which all parties fight over what each person should receive (similar to the scenes when the movie's characters fight over who owns the gold), resulting not in a motion picture or a television project but an environment which is ripe for litigation and acrimony by the parties.
3. YOU ARE NOT A WGA MEMBER AND/OR THE PRODUCER IS NOT A WGA SIGNATORY AND THE PRODUCER WANTS TO GIVE THE PRODUCER'S "SIGNIFICANT OTHER" SOLE SCREENPLAY CREDIT.
As previously noted, if a writer is a WGA member (or is deemed a "professional writer" according to the WGA guidelines), then the rules and definitions pertaining to writing credits shall govern. However, a non-WGA screenwriter and a non-WGA signatory producer can agree by contract to be bound to the WGA credit rules. If neither of these scenarios apply, then the issue of credit becomes a matter of negotiation between the parties. One of the reasons that the WGA has credit rules and arbitration procedures to determine writing credits for a script goes back to the early (and not so early days) of the motion picture business in which studios and producers were responsible for who received credits. A studio executive, the producer or the producer's crony would receive a credit and the writer had to hope or insure by persuasion or a studio's or a producer's sense of integrity (or its or his desire to continue a relationship with that writer) that the writer received the appropriate credit or any credit at all.
I remind many writers that the issue of credit is more than one of vanity. A writer's credits is what establishes the writer's track record and helps set the writer's quote of how much a writer has been paid for writing in the past and expects to be paid by a studio or a producer. This is one of the rationales for including a provision in any writer's contract that if there is dispute between the producer, and the writer and the parties cannot resolve such dispute, then the credit issue should be determined in accordance with WGA credit rules. Such rules determine the basis for a writer receiving a "written by" "screenplay by" or "teleplay" credit, a "story by" credit or any credit at all. By using the WGA credit rules, the initial writer generally will receive a sole "written by" credit or a shared "written by" credit unless a subsequent writer(s) significantly rewrites the script. If a script has been so extensively rewritten by a subsequent writer(s) that the subsequent writer(s) either shares the "written by" or receives a sole "screenplay by" credit, the initial writer may receive a "story by" credit. In a non -WGA situation, the producer and the writer can include a provision in their agreement that the initial writer would be entitled to receive no less than a certain credit regardless of whether the WGA credit rules would deny the initial writer such or any credit.
If a writer can receive a "written by" credit for an original script or share in the "screenplay by" or "teleplay by" credit with a subsequent writer(s), then the initial writer would be entitled to receive monies when such subsequent productions as prequels, sequels, remakes, television films or a television series are produced even if the initial writer does not render any services on such subsequent productions. These monies are called "passive payments." The irony is that if a writer is hired to write a script for one of these subsequent productions, that writer would negotiate compensation for such writing services but would have to forfeit the passive payments for that subsequent production since the writer is obviously no longer passive for that subsequent production.
2. YOUR SCRIPT BECOMES A FILM AND YOU GO TO A SCREENING AND SEE SOMEONE ELSE'S NAME AFTER THE "WRITTEN BY" CREDIT.
One day political humorist and writer Art Buchwald attended a screening of *Coming to America* starring Eddie Murphy and noticed that many of the elements in that film's script were quite similar to those contained in a treatment which Buchwald had written and submitted to Paramount Pictures-the studio which produced and distributed the Murphy movie. Buchwald was further surprised to see that he did not receive any writing credit in the movie. Buchwald eventually brought a lawsuit against Paramount Pictures and did win (although he received less than a $1 million rather than millions of dollars).
One of the reasons that Buchwald prevailed in his claim was that the claim was not for copyright infringement but for breach of an option agreement between Buchwald and Paramount Pictures, especially when the studio permitted the Buchwald option to expire before it produced *Coming to America.* Buchwald's breach of contract claim against Paramount Pictures could be litigated in California state court rather than federal court which is the venue for copyright infringement suits, and such breach of contract claims are easier to prove than a copyright infringement claim which calls for a fact-specific finding of "substantial similarity" between a potentially infringing property and the property owned by the person who has brought the copyright infringement suit.
1. YOU NEVER GET THAT CONTRACT THAT THE PRODUCER SAID WOULD BE HERE ANY DAY NOW.
Many writers are often surprised by how much time passes during the negotiation, review and revision process for a writing agreement with multiple rounds between the writer and the producer, the studio or the network.
There are several reasons for this protracted process. Although the writer is concerning with his or her deal, the business affairs executive or attorney for the producer, studio and network considers the writer's deal is one of many deals which are in different stages of negotiation and have different degrees of urgency and priority. In addition, the business affairs executive usually has to consult with the producer's, studios or network's legal department (which often sets contractual policy and precedent) that the business affairs executive must execute when negotiating with writers and their representatives. Therefore, as a rule of thumb, the more a writer and his or her representative want to propose terms which vary from the producer's, studio's or network's contractual precedents and policies, the longer the writer and the representative will have to wait for such proposed revisions to wind their way through a company's bureaucracy before the writer and the representative receive a response (favorable or not) to their proposed contract revisions.
Sometimes there is a delay in a writer receiving an initial draft and revisions to an option/ purchase or writing services agreement from a producer since that producer may be drafting or revising the agreement himself or herself rather than hire an attorney. The producer often is trying to cut down on costs related to the project or the producer believes that he or she can write or revise the contract since he or she has seen and negotiated many of these agreements. This approach by the producer is as "penny wise and pound foolish" as the writer who decides to negotiate his or her own agreement rather than incur legal expenses. Although some writers have agents who can negotiate a writer client's agreement for a ten percent commission, it is in the writer's best interest to have a lawyer at least review and comment upon the initial agreement and any revisions. An entertainment lawyer has the experience which comes from negotiating many agreements and is usually sensitive to certain details and nuances in agreement which may vary from the so-called "standard" contract.
A writer should realize that engaging and paying an entertainment lawyer is part of the cost of a writer doing business as a professional writer. An entertainment lawyer's services can ensure that a writer receives not just immediate benefits (e.g., greater compensation and credit) but also long-term contractually guaranteed provisions , even when such provisions (such as a more favorable definition of profit participation, passive payments; the right to render additional writing services on a project as well as for the scripts for subsequent projects based on the writer's script) only may become apparent and valuable to the writer several years after the agreement has been signed by the parties.
Robert L. Seigel (Rlsentlaw@aol.com) is a NYC entertainment attorney and a partner in the law firm of Cowan, Debates, Abrahams & Sheppard LLP. He specializes in the representation of clients in the entertainment and media areas.
Monthly Tip
By Marilyn Horowitz
Each of your main characters should have a secret
An effective way to improve or create a scene is to add secrets that each character hides from the other. Secrets are both things that our characters don't want other people to know, and things that they hide from themselves. You may already know what those secrets are but aren't using them, or perhaps you will have to create them at some point. Remember, everyone has something they think they need to hide.
Let's use When Harry Met Sally as an example. In the beginning of the film, Harry and Sally are driving from Chicago to New York, and they stop at a diner. In the diner, Sally's secret is that she has slept with Sheldon and broke up with him over the days-of-the-week underwear. Harry's secret is that he's attracted to Sally. When Harry claims that Sally has never had great sex, it gets her to reveal her own secret and creates the conflict in the scene. It is, of course, Harry's secret attraction to Sally that drove him to raise the subject of sex in the first place.
Sometimes characters even keep secrets from themselves. When Sally breaks up with Joe, she pretends that she's fine about it. The secret that she keeps from herself is that she's actually very upset about it. She pretends everything is okay until Joe gets engaged to someone else. Then she breaks down and innocently calls Harry to come and comfort her. Her sudden vulnerability is what gets her into trouble with Harry. Meanwhile, Harry's secret from himself is that he's in love with her. When she rejects him, he has to face the fact that he wants to marry her.
You can see how tapping into the secrets your characters keep from themselves and others can improve both your scene work and plot. Secrets raise the stakes and instantly add subtext.
Marilyn Horowitz is a Writing Coach and the president of ArtMar Productions, a script consulting and film production company based in New York City. She is also a Senior Writer for Script Magazine and has contributed articles to Hollywood Scriptwriter. Her private students include published novelists, award winning filmmakers, screenplay and television writers. Marilyn was the script consultant on the Warner Bros. film, Then Came Love, starring Vanessa Williams, Eartha Kitt and Ben Vereen.
In 2004, Marilyn won the coveted New York University School of Continuing and Professional Studies Award For Teaching Excellence, where she teaches Writing The Screenplay In Ten Weeks, a course based on her workbook, How To write A Screenplay In 10 Weeks. Marilyn also teaches Writing The Feature and Aesthetics II in the New York University Graduate Film Program. Her workbook is used as a textbook for both of these courses.
