"The Black List didn't get me a career so it's a total lie!"

There were 53 active players on the New England Patriots' roster last season. 53 players who got a Super Bowl ring after making it to the biggest game of the season and winning.

How many of them were the subject of stories in sports magazines? How many of them were on the cover of those magazines? How many of them will spend their retirement years living off of high profile sportscaster jobs and endorsement deals?

How many of them go home every night to a supermodel wife?

How many of them can you name right now besides Tom Brady?

So what would you think of a linebacker in his first year on the team who feels like he was cheated because he played for the same Super Bowl-winning team as Tom Brady and is furious that he's not getting endorsement deals left and right? They both won The Big Game - how come HIS contract's not even in the same ballpark as Brady's?

The answer to this is obvious, right?

This is the sort of thing that runs through my mind when I hear someone proclaim that the Black List (both yearly and website) is a sham because it didn't work for THEIR script. "I got on the Black List last year and I STILL haven't been paid for my writing! This is bullshit," they might say. "I got four 8s on the Black List website and was number 4 on the Top Lists and I still didn't get an agent! This whole thing's a grift!"

This post is semi-provoked by a conversation I saw on Twitter last week, but it's a fairly perennial topic in Screenwriter World, so don't take this as an attack on one particular person. Rather I want to say something about an attitude I see cropping up now and then. There's an apparent belief that if you reach a certain achievement, the industry owes you a career. That's not how things like The Black List work and it's not helpful at all to wallow in that delusion.

(Also, everywhere I say "The Black List" feel free to read "Nicholl Fellowship" or "ABC/Disney Fellowship" and so on. In general, what I have to say applies to all of these in some form or fashion.)

In its purest form, the Black List is a survey of industry tastes. It reflects the town, but as with the adage about staring into the abyss, the Black List reflects back at the town. It can elevate great material that thus far, hasn't found the right filmmakers to bring it to life. Perhaps the most important service it provides is shining a spotlight on something a little left of center, validating that writing's brilliance. There are plenty of documented cases of this exposure playing a part in a screenplay going into production, most recently being ARRIVAL. Eric Heisserer's script got a big boost after appearing on the 2013 Black List.

2013. It took three years from the Black List to the big screen - and that's probably pretty fast, on average. I'll put the question to you - if there is a single script from the 2013 Black List that DIDN'T get produced, does that "failure" mean that the Black List "doesn't work?"

It's a pretty silly question, right? Acknowledging that the Black List simply cannot make careers out of every honored writer and films out of every honored screenplay in no way rescinds the credit they are due for the instances when their exposure HAS made a difference. Just because something didn't work for you doesn't always mean there's something shady going down.

The value of the Black List can be found in the correlation between its selections and films that went on to acclaim from the industry's highest honors. 4 of the last 6 Best Picture winners appeared on an annual Black List and 10 of the last 14 Best Screenplay winners did. Does that mean they owe their Oscars to the Black List?

Hell no! But it DOES demonstrate that the annual list identified them as worthy well before they went into production. It gives credibility to their voters's eye for talent. If someone gets on the Black List and assumes they'll be collecting an Academy Award, they're taking the wrong lesson from the experience.

"All I need is to get on the Black List and I'll be set." "All I need is an agent and then I'll be getting jobs left and right." "All I need is a staff writer gig and I'll be working in TV for the rest of my career." - ALL of this is dangerous and wrong-headed thinking. It implies that all you need to do is reach the bottom step of the escalator and the mechanism will carry you to the top.

Motherfucker, those are STAIRS. Or in the rare case they are an escalator, they're moving in the opposite direction.

This industry is a series of ever escalating auditions and as with auditions, the pack of talent gets winnowed down with each progressive move forward. You get six votes that earn you mention on the yearly Black List. That's great. It means your work is going to be read by everyone in town. Now tell me who's responsible for getting you to the next step, whether that's getting an agent or getting a sale?

It ain't the Black List. It's you - YOUR material. When I interviewed Franklin Leonard four years ago, we chatted a bit about the possibility of the Black List being rigged, perhaps by people attempting to stuff the ballot box lobbying. His take was that it didn't happen that often, certainly not consistently enough to be anything other than an outlier. Is it possible? Sure. But if I was someone looking to scam my way onto the Black List, I'd of course realize that no amount of scamming would magically make my writing into, say, Sorkin-level brilliance.

But let's say you're a writer with an okay script that had enough fans to land it on something like the Black List. What does that mean really? Eh, maybe a lot more people read my so-so writing, and so if it's inadequate, my screenplay gets passed on by a higher volume of reps and producers. Perhaps I get a couple meetings, where again, the onus is on me to prove I have the goods and am "ready." If I'm an imposter, it ends there. If I'm that one-in-a-million writer who has it, I keep climbing.

Thinking this is easy is one of the worst traps to fall into. A few years back I had a script that was one of the top scrips on the Black List website. I got a number of reads off of that strength and even queried several reps citing my achievement. I got a lot of, "This is great writing, but this isn't what I'm looking for at the moment." If you're savvy, you can use that to find out what they ARE looking for and remember to query them again if your next script seems like something they want.

A rep who tells you, "This isn't for me" is actually doing you a favor. The goal is not to get A rep, it's to get the RIGHT rep. In my case, I ended up with a young manager who seemed to be the right guy for this kind of script. He got the script in to all the right people who should be looking at it and the result was a lot of meetings, the usual "we really like your work" and then the "We'd love to see the next thing you're working on." Ultimately, it didn't go anywhere, and I'm not bitter about that because it wasn't necessarily the most mainstream idea. Later, my rep left the business, and after I got over that shock, I realized, "If their heart wasn't in it, it's better that I find someone who is playing this game to win."

Celebrate rejection like you would celebrate the end of a relationship with someone who it'd be a complete mistake to marry. Would I love to hear that Steven Spielberg wants to direct my next script? Sure, just like how when I was a teenager, I'd have loved to have dated Katie Holmes. Of course now I look at it and realize Katie and I would have never made it work and that relationship would have been a mistake for both of us. I'm glad we both dodged that bullet, and it's a lot healthier than sending her letters every week saying, "Why won't you love meeeeeeeee?????!"

(Okay, that took a weird turn.)

Both Black List arms can boost your career - but they can't boost EVERY career and the onus is still on the writer to take responsibility for what needs to happen once the eyes of the town are upon you. You can blame the List for the false hope you cultivated, or you can go back to the computer and start your next (and hopefully better) script. Which of those two options is more likely to actually accomplish something?

It's American Idol and the Black List is like the end of Hollywood Week. That's where the show would be left with 36 semi-finalists. That's some great company that includes Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood. Does every AI semi-finalist have a career like Kelly or Carrie? Would you expect them to?

But they still wouldn't be multi-million dollar successes without AI. Likewise, the Black List gives you the stage and the mic. Now the town will see if you can sing.

Austin Film Festival deadline this week - May 20

Longtime readers of this blog know that I don't endorse many screenwriting contests. There are to few of them that mean anything to people working in the industry and I feel like if I'm going to tell you to drop your hard-earned cash somewhere, it had better be with an establishment I would give money to myself.

I've previously offered lists of contests and fellowships I endorse, as well as The Black List. You'll notice that among that number is the Austin Film Festival. It was brought to my attention that the deadline for teleplays and screenplays is this Wednesday, May 20th. Consider this a public service. Details below:


Austin Film Festival Screenplay & Teleplay Competition

Final Deadline: May 20

All submissions must be received or postmarked by 11:59PM PST on Wednesday, May 20

AFF’s Screenplay & Teleplay Competition is one of the most respected writing contests in the country with a rich history of championing and supporting writers. For the first time ever, AFF will provide Reader Comments to ALL entrants in the Screenplay & Teleplay Competition for FREE! In addition, all entrants receive registration discounts, with even bigger discounts when you place in the competition. Unlike other screenplay competitions, your experience with AFF doesn’t end after making the first cut. Second Rounders (the esteemed top 10-12% in each category), Semifinalists, and Finalists attend special panels, programmed specifically for them and not open to regular badge holders. 

This year, AFF has an exciting line-up of sponsored award judges including AMC for the One-Hour Pilot category, the Writer’s Guild of America East who will provide three established WGAE screenwriters to judge the Final Round of the Drama category, Enderby Entertainment who will be looking for scripts with an original concept and distinctive voice that can be produced under $5 million, and Frank Darabont’s Darkwoods Productions who will be reviewing this year’s top Sci-Fi scripts. May 20 is the Late (and Final) Deadline for screenplay submissions so enter yours before it really is too late! Now accepting short and digital series scripts! www.austinfilmfestival.com

Mailbag: Getting repped off contest wins and "They don't get my symbolism!"

So I was going through the old inbox and found a bunch of questions I had by-passed, in some cases for nearly a year. Some of this is because I've not been doing many mailbag posts, some of this is because I wasn't sure if these questions really were relevant enough to answer and in some cases... well, the questions were just too long and involved.

Being succinct is your friend.

First up is Brian,

I'm a longtime reader of your blog and first off just want to say thanks for doing it. I had a practical sort of question (or at least I hope is practical): my screenwriting partner and myself have just won first place in a screenplay competition at a film festival in NYC, Visionfest 14. We placed as finalists a few weeks back and figured we'd take last place, but instead we won the whole damn thing. 

Now, we have worked (slightly peripherally) in Hollywood for several years and have been through some ups and downs as hopeful filmmakers, including making our own micro-budget feature film and racking up the festival rejections (still waiting on a couple dozen at the moment), as well as landing an established agent some years ago when we were not at all ready for an agent, thus resulting in a relationship that went nowhere. Long story short, our parents and friends are really excited but we have learned the value of low expectations.

That said, I'm wondering if you think there is any value to trying to get representation based off this win, since 1st Place does sound pretty good. Then again it's not the biggest competition and I'm sure most people never heard of it even in the industry, so I can't exactly go around like I won an Oscar...

Besides our film, this script is our main trump card. It's got three 8 scores and a couple 7s on the Black List site. Now we have this 1st place win, in one of the first competitions we entered. If you were us, just starting off, what practical next steps might you take to capitalize on these developments (if any)?Any words of wisdom you can provide, it's greatly appreciated!

First up, congrats on your win. Let's get right to the meat of it: "Can you capitalize on this win to get an agent?" My hunch is "No." I've never heard of Visionfest and I suspect that an accolade from the festival doesn't really make much impact for any potential reps.

However, I - and just about everyone in the business - HAS heard of the Black List site. If you really have three 8 scores, you should be able to leverage that into getting a few reads. Since you didn't ask about how to contact these agents and managers, I assume you've done your homework and have that ready to go. I'd send out a brief email that quickly introduces yourself. Give a one or two-line pitch of the script, mention the Black List scores and if there's some really relevant reason why you chose to reach out to that rep, maybe add that too.

But keep it short. See the length of your email to me? Try for half that length.

Next up is Lee:

I'm a lapsed writer, who after many years of working in an unrelated field, finally decided to sit down and write my screenplay. I've received a good mix of reviews and notes (positive & negative), and the feedback has been mostly helpful. However, I'm troubled by the fact that some of the "Symbolism" / "Subtext" I've injected into the story seems to be missed by all 5 of the reads I've received (3Pro's, 2 Friends).

I don't know if this is a case of "speed reading" or "skimming" on the part of the people doing the coverage, but they all seem to be missing the subtext that explains away many of the criticisms of the story (Example: Story is filled with bad people. Well, they are in a "Bad" place, aren't they? Say, is anyone else really HOT? Let's ask the guy over there in the Red Pajamas).

Is this a symptom of Script Readers skimming the script and therefore missing the added layer of "meaning" in the story? Or do I need to be more explicit and "Talk Down" to my audience who may not be paying close attention?

Ah, the "they're not getting my subtext" question. This is hard to answer because I haven't read the script, but if you've got five people who you really trust - three of whom are writers themselves - and none of them even got a hint of the symbolism, the odds are the problem is more with the script than the reader.

That's not to say that readers can't miss that stuff. I think in a read, people are more inclined to take everything at surface value unless there are some key dog whistles in there. I think part of the issue might be that you're expecting the symbolism to explain away what are being called out as mistakes or plot holes. I can definitely understand using inconsistencies to force an audience to think more about "Wait a minute, why the hell would they do that?"

But if the symbolism is done in service of leading an audience to a revelation, the problem might be that such revelation isn't present in the script. To launch off of your "hell" metaphor, in The Devil's Advocate, attorney John Milton (Al Pacino) is revealed to be the Devil. Before that big reveal comes, we get a few clues and winks that allude to this truth, but by the end of the film, it's spelled out for us - he IS Lucifer. In the case of this script, that reveal leads to the climax of Keanu Reaves's character's arc.

In your script, it sounds like there might be some symbolism without any payoff. Maybe it's reading to them the way that Pretty Woman plays off of the Cinderella metaphor lightly without adhering to it strictly (We get a "makeover" scene with her "Fairy Godmother/Hotel Concierge" but the script doesn't go so far to have Vivian pass herself off as someone else, leave behind a slipper and have to be identified by her lost clothing.) Maybe your readers ARE noticing some of these things you've thrown in, but don't realize you intend them as more than mere asides. So I guess in that case, the answer might be to use the symbolism differently.

This is always a tricky question to answer because I can't say definitively if the problem is the writer or the reader unless I read the material myself. If many people are missing it and perceiving this as a plot hole, clearly you have to make some changes, though.

The Black List announces a partnership with Fox Broadcasting to discover network television writers

The Black List has partnered with the Fox Broadcasting Company.  Press release below:

The Black List is pleased to announce our first partnership with a broadcast television network.

Today we begin work with the Fox Broadcasting Company to help discover television drama writers for current and future FOX productions.

"As we build a year-round slate of high-quality programming, we are constantly looking for fresh voices that break out of the pack," said Terence Carter, Executive Vice President, Drama Development & Programming. "Given the Black List's impressive track record in features, they are the perfect partner for us as we seek out new drama talent."

Beginning today, writers with pilots hosted on the Black List website who have not made more than $500K for script or teleplay work in aggregate over the last ten years may opt into consideration via the site. The deadline for opting in is May 1, 2014 at 11:59 PM PT.

Shortly thereafter, the Black List will select a short list of five writers based on the data gathered about each script during its time hosted on the website. Each finalist will then provide a professional resume and one page personal statement, which will be reviewed along with their selected original work by Fox executives.

To be considered, simply opt in during the script upload process or on your My Scripts page.

For additional information click here.

For additional submission requirements, click here.
 
For the submission agreement, click here.


This joins the Black List's previous partnerships with Walt Disney Studios, TBS and TNT, the Sundance Institute Workshop, the Cassian Elwes Independent Screenwriting Fellowship,  and the blind deal offered via Warner Bros, as the newest of the opportunities it's made available to users. 

Two opportunities offered by The Black List and one from theOffice

Yesterday, the Black List announced yet another opportunity open to their users, coming on the heels of their recent partnership with TNT and TBS.

Black List is pleased to announce a partnership with the Walt Disney Studios to identify writers with diverse perspectives who have not made more than $250K for their screenwriting work in the last ten years for Disney's Feature Writers Program. This is the second such partnership between the Black List and a major Hollywood studio. 

The Walt Disney Studios' Feature Writers Program is a paid one year residency housed in Disney's live-action production group that provides up-and-coming feature writers with development and mentorship opportunities. 

"There are countless stories to be told and we're always looking for new perspectives at every stage of filmmaking, especially during the creation of a script," said Walt Disney Pictures President of Production Sean Bailey. "Disney is thrilled to partner with the Black List to uncover the next generation of creative and talented writers who will create the classic stories of tomorrow." 

Beginning today, writers with screenplays hosted on the Black List website can opt into consideration. On May 5, 2014, the Black List will select a short list of between five and ten writers based on the data gathered about each script during its time hosted on the website. Each finalist will then provide a professional resume and one page personal statement, which will be reviewed along with their selected screenplay by executives in the Walt Disney Studios live-action production group. 

To be considered, simply opt in during the script upload process or on your My Scripts page. 
For additional information, click here. 
For additional submission requirements, click here. 
For the Walt Disney Studios submission agreement and release, click here. 

It should be noted that one of those requirements is that the script be hosted on The Black List site for at least one week during the submission period.  So if you had a script up there and let it expire, you're going to need to reactivate hosting to qualify.  Looking over the forms, there don't seem to be any usual terms or conditions.

Also, late last night, Deadline reported that Jon Avnet and Rodrigo Garcia’s digital company WIGS has partnered with The Black List for their own search to name a writer to develop a YouTube series. According to Deadline, the digital studio specializes in scripted female dramas.  The Black List will come up with a short list of five writers to submit.  You may apply until May 6.

This joins the Black List's previous partnerships with TBS and TNT, the Sundance Institute Workshop, the Cassian Elwes Independent Screenwriting Fellowship,  and the blind deal offered via Warner Bros, as the newest of the opportunities it's made available to users.  The site's twitter account is also teasing that more announcements are yet to come.

I also was told about a new opportunity from theOffice:

If you're looking for the perfect place in LA to leave the distractions of life behind and finish that screenplay/novel/short story/what-have-you, enter now to win a FREE 6 month Premium Membership to theOffice.

theOffice is a quiet, communal workspace on 26th (across from the Brentwood Country Mart). There are 26 ergonomic workstations in the room equipped with Aeron chairs, wifi, a reference library and all the coffee you can handle.

Charter and current members include JJ Abrams, Mark Cullen, Matthew Carnahan, Sam Harris, Susannah Grant, Gigi Levangie Grazer, Gary Glasberg and many more. It's where serious writers go to GET IT DONE.

The contest is free to enter. All of the details are on the theOfficeOnlineBlog.com.

Deadline to apply is March 15th.
Send Submissions to: theOfficeFellowship@gmail.com

The Black List partners with TNT and TBS to help diverse writers break into TV

Yesterday The Black List announced another opportunity for writers via a partnership with TNT and TBS.  Here is their press release.  Scroll down for my thoughts:

TNT and TBS are partnering with The Black List on an initiative to promote diversity in the industry by identifying talented writers to develop scripts and concepts for the networks. TNT and TBS are the first television networks to team up with the Black List following the site's expansion into episodic content. The networks will be looking for writers from diverse backgrounds for possible blind script deals and staffing consideration on TBS and TNT series, with the goal of signing script deals with particularly strong writers in the half-hour comedy and hour-long drama genres.

The Black List is an online community where video content creators find scripts to make and writers to write them and where writers find producers, studios and networks to make their scripts and employ them. Since its launch in October 2012, the Black List has hosted more than 10,000 screenplays and teleplays and has completed more than 13,000 script evaluations. More than 40 writers have found representation at major agencies and management companies, while more than 20 writers have sold their scripts as a direct result of introductions made via the site. At any given moment, more than 2,000 screenplays and teleplays are being actively hosted on the site for perusal by over 2,300 film industry professionals, ranging from agency assistants to studio chairs and network heads.

As part of its program with TNT and TBS, the Black List will solicit teleplays to be evaluated via the Black List website by its community of industry professionals and readers. The Black List will then provide TNT and TBS with a short list of five finalists in each genre. The finalists will be chosen based on criteria the networks provide and on the evaluations received. The networks will then have the option to offer blind script deals. The list of finalists may also be shared with TBS and TNT's current showrunners, who will have the option to offer staff positions.

"As we continue to expand the original programming lineups for TNT and TBS, it's important that we forge partnerships not only with established producers but also with fresh talent," said Michael Wright, president, head of programming for TBS, TNT and Turner Classic Movies (TCM). "We're confident that through this initiative with the Black List, we're going to find an abundance of exciting, highly creative work from a wide array of emerging writers."

In addition to TNT and TBS, the Black List is currently partnered with the Writers Guild of America, East; the Writers Guild America, West; the Sundance Institute; and Warner Bros Pictures.

My thoughts: First off, I asked Franklin Leonard via Twitter how they defined "diverse writers," and he told me, "We use the WGA West Writers Report as a guide on the question of diversity."  So essentially that boils down to women, minorities and older writers of both genders.  (I believe that "older writers" is the age 41 and above bracket, but I could be mistaken and they're drawing from age 51 and above.)

Also, a writer cannot have earned more than $250,000 total for their writing work over the last ten years.  Further submission requirements can be found here.

Even though I'm not eligible under any of those requirements, I think it's exciting that aspiring writers have yet another avenue to break into the business.  The best part is that for writers already using the Black List, this is a competition available to them at no extra cost.  And if they weren't already on the Black List, the rules say they need only host the script on the site for one week during the submission period in order to opt in.  That costs a mere $25.

This is also a good time to bring up a number of other great programs for breaking into TV and their associated entry fees.:

Disney/ABC Television Writing Program -NO FEE.

The Warner Bros. Writers' Workshop - $30/script.

Nickelodeon Writing Program - NO FEE

NBC Writers on the Verge - NO FEE

CBS Writers Mentoring Program - NO FEE

New York Television Festival - $30 early fee; $50 regular submission fee; $100 late deadline fee.

And as the Black List press release notes, the site has a number of other partnerships as well and the cost to opt-in for any of those opportunities is free if you're hosting a script on the submission period. I'm very impressed with how the Black List site is quickly becoming a one-stop shop for a variety of programs and fellowships, including the Warner Bros two-step blind script deal and the Sundance Diversity Workshop, as well as the Cassian Elwes Screenwriting Fellowship.

I don't really see a downside here to submitting - especially if you've already put your wares on the website.  The participation of the Turner networks is impressive on it's own, but I also am very intrigued that showrunners may be given a list of the finalists, meaning there's the possibility that someone not selected as a recipient of a blind script deal could be hired on one of the TNT or TBS shows, provided their sample is strong enough.

I recommend the same introspection that I advise when it comes to entering any contest or fellowship, but from where I sit, this is just one more way for writers to break in.

I haven't followed the TV pilots side of the Black List as closely as I did the feature side.  Thus far we haven't gotten a full data-drop with regard to the number of pilots uploaded.  To my eye, it appears that the TV submissions are lower than the screenplay submissions were when they launched but that is TOTAL supposition.  That could be good for writers looking to submit because there may be less competition.

Also, in this Done Deal Pro thread, Franklin says he's heard of at least three instances of writers being signed with representation off of their pilot submissions.  None of the writers have been identified or announced officially though.  Hopefully a more formal announcement will be forthcoming, provided the writers wish to be identified.  (A number of reps find it advantageous NOT to make these sorts of announcements until the proper time.)

Webshow: "What Contests Do I Recommend?"

It's hard to know where to send your screenplay once you're done with it. This week's video looks at a popular option - Screenwriting Contests.



Here are the contests listed in this video:

Scriptapalooza
The Austin Film Festival Screenplay Contest
Final Draft Big Break

Webshow: "I wrote it, now what do I do with it? Part 2 - What to look for in a contest"

It's not uncommon for me to get a question along the lines of, "I wrote it, now what do I do with it?" It's a good question, and one with no easy answers. So don't think of this continuing series AS those easy answers. There are merely points to ponder. This week, I talk about what sorts of things you should look for in a reputable screenwriting contest.

I wrote it, now what do I do with it?

Mario asks:

Let's say you're an unrepped writer and that you've written what you believe to be the next hot property. To whom would you submit it first? 

With an abundance of contests, producers and web-hosting venues creating an atmosphere in which a potential hit could easily be labeled a dog, how would you ensure that your material gets objective attention?

Well, if it was me, my first recourse would be to submit to people I directly know in the business.  (And this usually comes after I've vetted the script through many, many readers whom I trust.)  I'd work every direct connection possible in search of finding someone willing to pass it on, take on the script, or otherwise work to advance the project.

Failing that, my next stop would be The Black List 3.0, for many of the reasons that we've discussed time and again.  I think the "do no harm" policy is a great way to test the waters.  If you're worried that your script will get some bad reactions on the site, you can always pull the script and the listing, so it won't impede any further queries that you do.

Step three would be targeted queries.  Notice the use of the word "targeted."  It's gotten very easy to dig up a bunch of email addresses for agents and managers.  The bitch of this is that if it's easy for you, it's easy for everyone else.  In the old days, if  you wanted to query an agent, you usually had to do your research, track down addresses and pay for postage to send your query.  With all those obstacles in place, there were fewer people submitting blindly.  They took the time to research their targets and the expense of sending snail-mail kept them somewhat in check.

That's not the case in the electronic age.  Today a simple Google search will probably locate an archive of email address.  The lazy submitter will havest those and blindly blast out the same query to several hundred people.  (The really lazy types will do it all at once as a bcc.)  On the other end of the internet, those emails will be treated like the spam they are and summarily deleted.

So when you go the query route, really take some time to research the reps who are most likely to respond to your material and craft your query accordingly

Then after that, that's when I'd turn to contests and fellowships.  But be smart about which competitions you chose to enter.

Thoughts on Emily Blake's "How I lost my faith in Scriptshadow."

Emily Blake dropped a helluva post on her blog yesterday, entitled "The Scriptshadow: How I lost my faith in Carson Reeves."  It's an incredibly well-written editorial that pretty much hits on a lot of the recent incidents that should give even former supporters of Carson Reeves pause.  Her post is coming from the perspective of someone who used to support and - I believe - even defend Carson Reeves's practices and that makes her revulsion at what the site has become that much more potent.

For her, the sea change came after Carson's efforts to promote The Disciple Program landed its writer representation. 

Suddenly, his cost for notes went up and up until he was charging $1,000 a pop. The ONLY reason you'd pay that much for notes is that you think he will pass your script onto his contacts. (As a contrast, the well-respected Screenplay Mechanic's MAX price is $325.) 

Then it started to feel like Carson was the one who made The Disciple Program happen. He posted entries less about Tyler's success and more about his own genius in finding a great script, as if this was somehow a really amazing skill, more amazing than actually writing the script. I'm pretty sure Marceca would have been found eventually, by someone. 

Carson's tweets became more and more self-serving, until they started to make me uncomfortable.

If you've been reading this blog for a while, you'll know that I've had my issues with how Carson operates. Following John August's posts about Scriptshadow, I realized that there were unintended consequences to what Carson does.  In fact, I wrote not one, but two posts about it.

That's one argument against him - that he harms working writers.  And yes, if you dig through the history, you CAN find working writers attesting to how the site made difficult for them.  Had John August not removed all the comments from his site, you could read an account from one writer of how an SS review torpedoed a pending deal. (Anyone know how to retrieve that somehow?)

[Update: someone did know how.  Check out comment 100 here by Michael Gilvary and comment 44 by "Working Writer" might also be of interest too.]

There's also this testimony from Marianne Wibberly. Screenwriter Gary Whitta talks about feeling violated by an unauthorized review. And someone posting on Done Deal Pro claiming to be an agent talks about a deal directly going south because of Scriptshadow reviews.

Other pros have weighed in on these two threads on Done Deal Pro.  PLENTY of pros have spoken out about how Scriptshadow makes their livelihoods difficult and how the dissemination and review of their intellectual property hurts them.  So know this - I do not recognize the validity of any counterarguement that says "I don't believe these reviews and script leaks hurt anyone."  Multiple people actually working in the industry at various levels have told you it does.  Accept it. 

But you know what? I'm gonna make it easy.  You can completely ignore that arguement.  There are plenty of other completely independent reasons why people in the business are not fans of Scriptshadow.

If you've read my blog for a while, you'll know I'm not a fan of people who charge insanely high fees for "coverage" while using the promise of access as bait.  Well, Carson charges $1000 for a few pages of coverage, promising to push the script out to his contacts if he likes it.  No one's notes are worth that much.  And it may be your money to spend, but this is a clear demonstration of Carson's credibility lapse.  Talk to any produced writer and they'll tell you you're a fool to pay that much for feedback (Justin Marks, Geoff LaTulippe and F. Scott Frazier are among those who have said so on Twitter) and only an unscrupulous opportunist would conduct themselves in such a manner.

But forget that too.  Remember all my posts about slimy "Producers in Name Only" who just want to attach themselves to your work and ride your coattails?  Scriptshadow wrote a post where he proudly declared he wanted to do just that.

Seriously, read that whole post.  I want you to look at that through the eyes of an industry professional.  Not only does Carson imply that being a producer is easy, but he flat out admits that he doesn't know what a producer does, then reveals his grand plan is to hook up with a bigger producer and take advantage of their hard work.

More than anything else, that post utterly destroys any credibility that Carson Reeves could hope to have in the industry.  It reveals him as a poser who knows nothing about what he's trying to do, all while arrogantly declaring it'll be easy for him.  He might as well have written a blog about how he planned on playing in the Super Bowl, so long as Tim Tebow took him under his wing.

Let's not forget that his notes service continued to be active even after this declaration.  This now made Carson Reeves a producer who was charging for notes.  That's one of the first things aspiring writers are told - "No reputable producer charges for access or notes."  It's incredibly unethical, as it would be if Jerry Bruckheimer ran a service where he'd read your script and give you notes for $1000.

No one who considers themselves a professional would ever do business with a "producer" who represents himself in that manner.  And then he doubled down on that last week by posting about how he'd gotten an early look at a script that was circulating town and thought it was brilliant.  This is exactly what he said:


Really hoping something good comes of it. And if not, well, that's not so bad either. Maybe then I'll be able to convince Todd to let me jump on board. This is the kind of franchise potential project producers dream of. I want to be involved! :) :) :) 

So he basically roots for this script to fail when it goes out wide so that he can attach himself as producer.  But why?  Just because he happened to look at it first?  What does he bring to the table?
You'd never see a post like that from Jon Landau or Jerry Bruckheimer.  But that's a bad analogy anyway - their attachment actually adds value to the package. Aspiring screenwriters - this is not a guy who can help your script by being attached to it.

I reiterate - no one in this town with any real power or professionalism would risk their reputation by pairing up with a guy who acts like that.

Which brings me to "The Industry Contest, presented by The Tracking Board and Scriptshadow."

Tracking Board has just announced their partnership with Carson Reeves for yet another opportunity for writers to separate themselves from their hard-earned cash for a shot at "breaking in."  Full details have yet to be announced, but considering the many concerns about Scriptshadow's professional credibility, I'd be wary of any competition that uses a partnership with him as a selling point.

Most of you who are active in the screenwriting blogosphere are probably aware that the Scriptshadow debate has been a fairly persistant one in recent months - on Twitter, on message boards and on blogs.  It's unlikely that someone could be active in the screenwriting community on the internet and not be aware of this.  Ergo, unless they are completely oblivious, Tracking Board should have had an inkling of this.

And if they aren't oblivious, then they partnered with him in full awareness of the many ethical concerns and debate about Carson, his notes service, and his producing aspirations.  It's worrying to me that none of that gave these so-called "professionals" pause, for it means that those legitimate concerns either meant nothing to them, or they were banking on people not raising those concerns.

Or to put it the way The Daily Show would - it seems that Tracking Board is either evil (for pairing up with someone who has huge ethical issues attached to them) or stupid (for not being aware of said issues.)

Other people have pointed out another concern with Carson's attachement.  What assurances does any writer submitting to this contest have that their script won't end up on one of Carson's "super-secret mailing lists?"  He sends out a weekly email with links to scripts he intends to review, as well as other desired scripts around town.

Let's say the next Tyler Marceca happens to submit to this Tracking Board competition.  Heck, maybe the script doesn't win, but somehow it manages to get some heat around town thanks to the writer passing it to the right person.  So it's the hottest spec in town, sells for six figures... and Carson Reeves has a PDF of it sitting in his hard drive.

How fast do you think he'd push that script out to his newsletter?  Does anyone think he wouldn't review it for his site?  It would be entirely consistent with his past behavior to do so.

There's too much potential impropriety here.  Which is why I'm urging that so long as Scriptshadow is attached to this contest, you're better off avoiding it.

Scriptshadow no longer has the luxury of sticking his head in the sand and waiting for this storm to pass.  His own words have left him more vulnerable than any attack from a John August or other blogger.  This is not an operation that any reputable industry pro would want to do business with, and it is not to your benefit to associate yourself with such an individual.

Why every aspiring writer should be excited about Black List 3.0

I'll say this for Franklin Leonard, he doesn't do anything small.

The Black List creator has just announced a new feature to the Black List website, dubbed Black List 3.0.  Just last week, membership to the Black List website was made free for all industry pros.  Currently the site has a tracking board of sorts, where those industry pros are able to rate scripts that are listed within the database.  (The scripts themselves are not stored, just the identifying information like title, writer, representation, attachments and so on.)

But the big move has come this week.  Starting soon, non-pros will be able to pay a fee to make their scripts available on the Black List site.  For an additional fee, the script can be covered by trusted industry readers, who will then evaluate and rate the script.  Thus, if I upload my spec BIG ROOSTERS & SOAKED KITTENS and pay both fees, the following will happen:

First, a Black List approved reader will read the entire script and rate it according to the sites metrics.  As expected the coverage will also detail the genre/s and most likely the budget of the script.  Then, that information will be made available in the database for as long as I pay the monthly fee.

(And let's be realistic, the fees are necessary if any industry readers worth their salt are going to take their time to read these submissions.  It's just simple economics - if you want quality gatekeepers, they're going to need to have some compensation for their time.)

So let's say the Black List writer really liked my low-to-mid budget comedy and gave it a score that averaged out to 8.5 out of 10.  Every member who searches for a script with those parameters will have access to my script, my coverage and my contact information.  So for the price of a late submission to a prestigious contest, I could end up with a script request from a major company or two.  Or ten.

And here's where the real brilliance of Mr. Leonard's scheme comes in.  The Black List is a brand that everyone in town knows.  It is perhaps the most coveted insider list and it's spawned more than a few imitators.  People trust the Black List... and Mr. Leonard just made access to the site completely free for them.  At present, I'm told there are over 1,100 industry pros signed up as members.

I don't care how many tracking boards most development people are already signed up for.  If something like this is free, they're gonna sign up for it, if only to have the inside track on the next Black List.  By doing this, it practically guarantees that The Black List will have a higher quality of clientele than something like InkTip.

Granted, InkTip is a little cheaper at $60 for six months, but there all you're posting is the logline.  At BL 3.0, there's a gatekeeper there who's going to play town crier for anything worth while.

This also solves the problem with Triggerstreet.  Over there, users can post their scripts for free... but they're only being read and rated by other community members.  Thus, there's less of a chance those readers will have the same discerning tastes as readers who work within the industry and in a worst case scenario, it could be the blind leading the blind.

And then there's Amazon Studios.  Look, you all know what I think of the site by now.  I think Black List 3.0 totally demolishes Amazon in every fashion.  Sure, Amazon was also free... but at the cost of giving them a temporary exclusive option and the right to buy the script for a predetermined price.  Plus, does anyone think Amazon's actually going to get a feature film released?

With the Black List, you're getting your material in front of people who've actually made real movies before - not dilettantes who were fixated on producing test films.  You own the script, you (or your representation) has full ability to negotiate the sale.  The Black List doesn't gloom onto your work at all.  They don't option it, they don't attach themselves as producers.  Their involvement goes only as far as making the introduction possible.  (They're basically going "Oprah, Uma.  Uma, Oprah.")

And let's talk contests and fellowships.  As we've talked about before, most contests are probably going to run you between $40-$75.  In most of those cases, that's just the fee to enter.  You rarely get coverage or anything else.  We've also mentioned that there are few contests that are really strong at jump-starting careers.  It's my supposition that you'll probably have access to more real industry insiders through The Black List than through most contest submissions.  Even if the cost for a month of posting is a little more than a contest submission, the potential benefit far outweighs that.

And then let's not forget the coverage/scouting services that evaluate your script and promise to pass it to their contacts if it's deemed good enough.  Coverage from ScriptShark will run you $149. Script Pipeline charges $350.  And then there's a lone reader out there who's currently charging $1000 a read.  (The cherry on top of that is that he also is trying to be a manager and a producer.  No one should ever have to pay either of those sorts of professionals for a read, as that's stepping into some very murky ethical territory.)

So if you're one of the people who would pay to enter a contest, or who would pay those huge fees just for coverage and the barest promise of "access," you should be jumping for joy about Black List 3.0.  It seems like a good idea on it's own, but when you put it in context with all the other "breaking into Hollywood" services there are, this has the potential to be a clear winner.

It's basically a Voltron of everything good about Triggerstreet, InkTip, Amazon Studios and most contests, with very little of the most derided aspects of those services.


I saw a lot of negativity about this venture last month when details started leaking out on Deadline.  That disappoints me for a lot of reasons, chiefly because I think this is unquestionably one of the best opportunities to come along for aspiring writers in a long time.  I see a lot of potential here and a lot of opportunity.  But opportunism?  No, I don't feel that at all.

I don't know Franklin well.  I've only met him a couple of times and have mostly communicated now and then via email and Twitter.  I can say that he's struck me as an incredibly intelligent and above board professional and I'm truly convinced he has the best of intentions with this site.

But I know that there will be a lot of questions about this, so I've reached out to Franklin Leonard and I'll be posting an EXCLUSIVE video interview with him tomorrow!  (That's right - that means the creator of the Black List is going to submit to questioning by a puppet!) Spread the word and come back tomorrow to see me interrogate Franklin about Black List 3.0

Related:

Go Into The Story: New Black List Feature for aspiring writers
Amanda Pendolino: The Black List Launches services for aspiring writers
The What, How, and Why of the Black List: The Long Answer by Franklin Leonard
Screenwriter Geoff LaTulippe with "My Thoughts on the Black List Project"

What Contests do I recommend?

So since I covered Fellowships yesterday, what about contests? There are a lot of contests that, frankly, I have a pretty dim view of. They’re virtually worthless to the writers, and often are little more than money-making scams for those running it. However, I don’t like getting sued. So how about instead I highlight a few contests that have the qualities you should be looking for?

Scriptapalooza seems to be pretty on the up-and-up. It only costs $40 to enter and for $75 you can get detailed feedback. The first place winner gets $10,000, but the most significant element is that every script is read by a producer, manager or an agent. They promise they don’t use readers. Their philosophy is to get the script in front of people who can do something with it. You can see a full list of judges and their credentials at the contest’s site. Their success stories include getting writers representation, a few options, and even some produced films among some of the winners.

The Austin Film Festival Screenplay Contest costs $40 to enter in the main category, but there are extra feels for specialized categories. Winners in Comedy and Drama Screenplay categories each get $5,000, while the Teleplay winners get $1,000. The vast majority of success stories are about their winners getting representation. You also get notes if your script made it past the second round.

The Final Draft Big Break contest costs $50 to enter. Judges are industry pros, but they only judge the top five and pick a top three from that pool. Most of their success stories involve getting the writers repped. First place gets $15,000, second - $4,000, and third $2,000. Look them up here.

I’m sure there are other fine contests I’ve overlooked, but hopefully these are a good representation of what a worthwhile contest looks like. It’s your money and your intellectual property. Spend them wisely.

What Fellowships do I recommend?

 I get asked a lot about which contests I recommend. As I’ve said many times, I’m extremely selective about which one’s I endorse. In general, I think that Fellowships are often a better bet than straight-up contests, but I see merits to both. If you win a Fellowship, they essentially pay you to write. It’s like having a real job and in some cases, the Fellowship arranges to get you a job.

Possibly the most famous screenwriting fellowship is the Nicholl Fellowship. They award up to 5 $35,000 Fellowships each year. During that year, the Finalists will be expected to complete one feature screenplay. A few of the Nicholl entry scripts have been produced, including Ehren Kruger’s Arlington Road, Mike Rich’s Finding Forrester. You can find more info at their website.

Another Fellowship worth a look is the Disney/ABC Television Writing Program. Winning writers are paid $50,000 over the course of a year. While in the program, writers work one-on-one with a current programming or development exec preparing spec scripts for shows currently on the air. The intent is to get the writers onto TV staffs and give them exposure to executives, producers and representation. To apply, you need to submit a spec script of a current broadcast or cable show. More information can be found at their site.

The WB Television Writer’s Workshop is similar to this. You’ll also need a spec of a current show in order to apply. Like the Disney/ABC program, it’s geared to getting its participants on staff. There are weekly lectures with entertainment professionals and participants also take part in a simulated writer’s room. At the end of the program, executives work to get those participants who pass the Writer’s Room get staffed on a Warner Bros show. Look it up here.

Another such program is the Nickelodeon Writing Program. It also offers a salaried position for up to one year and hands-on experience writing spec scripts and pitching story ideas in both live action and animation television. Writers work with creators, network execs, and show-runners and are assigned to an Executive in Charge of Production. To enter, you’ll need a spec for a half-hour TV show that’s currently on either broadcast or cable. Check out their site here.

You might also look into the NBC Writers on the Verge program and the CBS Writers Mentoring program. They’re similar to the others I’ve mentioned, though with the objective of increasing diversity. If you’re a minority of any kind, definitely check these out.

Tuesday Talkback: Any luck with contests?

Since I'm talking about contests this week, have any of you had any luck with contests?  Please feel free to share your experiences and if you'd submit to any of them again.

4 questions you NEED to ask about screenplay competitions

I get asked all the time about the best contests to enter. The truth is that I’m not a huge fan of contests. There are some good ones out there, but there are also a lot of them that probably aren’t worth the cost of postage for a hard copy of your script. How can you tell the difference? I’m glad you asked.

Question 1 – “How do I benefit?”    What is this contest going to do for you if you win? Is there a decent-sized cash prize? Is it a fellowship that essentially pays you to write for a year? You also might consider how well-known the contest is and if their name could open doors in the business. The Erie, Pennsylvania Script Rodeo might not be respected enough to open doors for you, but the Nicholl Fellowship is a different story.

Another benefit might be coverage or story notes. Getting an outside opinion can be useful, and professional coverage usually starts at $100-$150 – somewhat more than the cost of most entry fees.

Question 2 – “Who are the judges?” This is a subset of the first question. Are the final judges people with strong credentials in the entertainment industry? Or are they rubes fresh off the bus from Wisconsin? A competition like Scriptapalooza promises that every entry is read by a producer, manager and agent. Those are the people who you’re looking to impress in the business, so it’s best to find a competition where the people making the cuts actually know what they’re talking about. Well, at least as much as an agent knows what they’re talking about.

There are some competitions that list some impressive names as their final judges – but often those big names you recognize only read the top ten finalists and choose the winners from there. Look out for this bait and switch.

I don’t want to get in too much trouble here but the pay for contest reading is often extremely low. Add to that the fact that most contest submissions are rather weak, and you’ll quickly have an impatient reader who’s looking for a reason to pass on a script quickly so they can move on to the next script in the pile. This is especially common in the smaller contests – which is why I suggest not entering some of those.

 If you enter a contest where all submissions are read by mangers, producers, agents and development executives. They might make note of you and contact you even if the judges in the later rounds pass on it. It’s a sneaky way to get your work in front of the people who can buy, sell or produce it.

Question 3 – “What claim, if any, do they have on your work?” Don’t be a schmuck. Make sure you’re not giving away ownership of your script.

Question 4 – “Do they have any success stories?” The competition website should trumpet any successes, whether it’s prior finalists being signed to an agent, selling a script, or producing a movie. If they don’t list such things – that means there aren’t any. Steer clear.

So remember those four questions. With the internet at your disposal, there’s no good reason you shouldn’t be able to research in depth.

Reader questions: Diversity programs and waiting periods

Matt writes:

I love your site and I was hoping to get your opinion on something.

I've been debating entering the CBS Writer's Mentoring Program. 

I think my specs and my pilots are pretty solid but the problem is I'm white. More specifically, a straight white middle-class twenty-something male. And it seems that every program for TV writers is looking for diversity. Basically the opposite of me. 

So should I even bother applying to CBS, WB, Nickelodeon or the NBC program? Or should I save my time and money? 

I'd welcome anyone with more direct experience with these programs to weigh in, but my assumption is that any program that states in its objectives that it's looking for"diverse" applicants, you can probably count on white males being given the lowest priority.  If entry is free, I'd say you've got nothing to lose - but if there's a submission charge, your money is probably better spent elsewhere.

Amanda asks:


I've been lucky enough to have some agents and agencies respond to my queries with a request to read my work. Now I'm wondering how long this usually takes? I know it can take a while depending on the agent/agency, how much stuff they get, etc. (Someone told me that at a big agency, it's a good sign if they don't say no right away . . .) 

Anyway, I want to be polite and give them the space they need. What's fair? At what point, if ever, should I send a follow-up?

I'd say give them at least a month. Opinions vary on what's the best way to approach them after that, or if you even should.  Most of the time if you don't get a reply, you can safely assume they passed on you. 

When I've gotten reads, the responses have usually come within three or four weeks.  Usually it's either, "This doesn't suit our needs at this time" or "This isn't for me, but please send me your next screenplay."

If I don't hear back, I usually don't push it.  I just make note of it in my files so I know not to submit to that agent again.

Does anyone else have an opinion on these two questions?

The Auditorz of the Amazon weigh in on Amazon Studios' changes

Several times last year, I tackled the subject of Amazon Studios, a new venture that sold itself as being a gateway for aspiring writers to break into Hollywood.  For a more in-depth recap of what Amazon Studios announced itself to be, and my reaction to the same, go here.  Long story short, it smelled hinky to me.  It reeked of scam and I felt that their terms were going to end up taking advantage of a lot of desperate aspiring writers.

Another blog called The Auditorz of the Amazon took it as a calling to dissect every facet of the contest.  They not only took a look at the rules, they theorized what Amazon's motives where, uncovered what appeared to be suspicious and unethical game play on the part of entrants, and audited all of the finalist scripts each month.  The long and the short of it was: the quality of submissions was pretty poor, and the quantity of submissions was rapidly dropping.  It was fairly fascinating stuff, and I admired their dedication. 

The Auditorz abruptly went underground last summer, and in an interesting twist, it seemed to kill all conversation about Amazon Studios.  Without their arch foe keeping conversation about the contest alive, AS just plain fell off the map.  Even the winning scripts were announced without much fanfare. 

Last week, Amazon Studios announced some major changes to its program.  And I found myself wishing that the Auditorz were still around to do one of their incisive posts on what these changes mean.  I lamented that there was no way to see their reaction to this drastic shift in direction

Guess what?  The Auditorz contacted me this weekend - and provided me with a guest post that covered precisely that.  What follows is their submission, unaltered, and may not necessarily reflect my own opinions:

Well, after much conjecture and four months of waiting, Amazon Studios relaunched Thursday with absolutely no press, or fanfare.  There's no more "All your base belong to us" rules, or million dollar prize, but what there is instead is an ACTUAL opportunity for screenwriters.  Are there any "catches"?  Yes, nothing in life is free.   But at least this time around the rules are actually very favorable to the writers and not a repeat of the extremely unfavorable rules from the original contest.

What's gone:

Test movies.*

Screenplay contests*

Million Dollar Prize

Semi-finalists

Finalists

User generated test movies are (thankfully) for the most part gone.  Previously users had to guess the projects A.S. was interested in, or simply try to make their own project and HOPED Amazon liked it.  There are rumors that A.S. is going to fund -some- test films later but those details are still rumors at this point.

The monthly contests AND the million dollar prize are both gone, baby, gone.   This is great because it shifts Amazon from contest based crazy-town to an actual studio development environment.

Screenplay contests are now "Opportunities" and are much more focused this year.

What's new:

Screenplay "Opportunities"
Trailer Contests
PRIVATE submissions
45 day option
$10,000 cash money option up front (18 months)
$33,000 rewrite opportunities

The screenplay opportunities come in two flavors: Assignments and Original Ideas.  If you want to submit your original screenplay idea you can submit it either OPEN, or PRIVATE.  If you submit it open, you really don't gain much and stand to lose a lot.  Open means that any boob (like me) can come along and review your script and run it into the ground and give you "bad press."  However, reviews (supposedly) will NOT affect the internal Amazon Studios rating of your script.

And yes, someone could come along and steal your title/idea/story if it's out in the open, most of the open submissions for the A.S. development process are already looking identical to last years.  Here's a winner that was just submitted an hour ago.  It's called "MILIFARY,"  Another recent upload is "Spidletop" which has the author flipping the bird as the cover page.

Yes, in fairness, there are a lot of crazies out there, and all Amazon Studios (open) submission system has done is brought that to light. But from what I've been told, EVERY script gets read. Even stuff like "Defib: A Christmas Tale" http://studios.amazon.com/scripts/5674 A story about A prototype defibrillator that uses her warped programming to keep a struggling military academy open and off the radar of the man she fled. Yes, the story is about a sentient Defib machine.

There also isn't much of an audience for screenplays, or much of a community left on Amazon Studios, and to be honest, there really doesn't need to be with the new rules.

But the two big disadvantages to the OPEN/PUBLIC process is that A.S. can immediately make a test film of your script AND you also give them the COMIC BOOK RIGHTS for them to make a comic book.  Now I seriously doubt they'll make an ACTUAL comic book, but this provision/addendum was probably added simply so they could make "motion comics" and didn't want any rights loopholes, especially if they planned to drop $50,000+ on a motion comic.

Now I know what you're thinking, "Well, Amazon Studios did pretty good with that 'Nevsky Prospect" test movie, it looked really great!"   Well, they didn't do so good on the "Touching Blue" test movie.  It looked like "Dick Tracy and "Kim Possible" mixed together, and not in a good way. But really, unless you direct your own script with your own money, you're never going to see your own vision up there on the big, or small screen.

So that means that if anyone's interested in submitting they really should choose...

PRIVATE submissions:  Private submissions mean that nobody sees the project except Amazon.  So if you have a hot idea/script you obviously don't want it blurted out all over the internet, so this new way of submitting actually ENCOURAGES much BETTER writers to submit this time around.  Writers can submit their BEST material, instead of trunk scripts this time.

By submitting to Amazon Studios you grant them a 45 day review period.  If after the 45 day period they're not interested then you can simply remove your script.  NO rights are encumbered.  No hanging chads this time around.

IF they're interested then they can option your script for 18 months.  They will pay you $10,000 for the option which can be renewed twice (for a total of 36 months).  If they don't buy your script during the (36 month maximum length) option, the rights revert back to you.

Once under option the script goes into the "Development Slate" where Amazon Studios can rewrite the script, host rewrite contests, make comics/motion comics, trailers and test movies of the script.  Obviously, once the script hits the development slate it's open for the public to see as well, automatic inclusion in the rewrite contests, test movies, everything.

This is truly the only (possible) fly in the ointment.  A writer with a super hot idea/screenplay would probably do better shopping it around town first if they can.  Mainly because Amazon could option the script and then focus group it to death, greenlighting a movie well after the script's "sell by date."  Granted, this could happen with ANY studio, but at least if your script is super hot you might get a lot of money UP FRONT via a direct purchase, instead of just ten grand.

But if you're a writer living in West Union, West Virginia, Amazon is still a very good alternative.  Mostly all of the studios are like "F-U, don't send us your shitty screenplay, we'll pee on it and then send it back to you unopened."

If Amazon Studios purchases the script you get paid $200,000 with a $400,000 bonus if the film does over $60 million domestic box office.  The real kicker in this instance is that if you wrote a movie that somehow did $60 million domestic box office, a $400,000 bonus may seem like chump change, but the real payoff would be the amount of money you would get for your subsequent screenplay; obviously with a different "real" Hollywood studio.  I would image you would probably get a good rep and a manager as well.  Heck, you might even get an assignment or two from Warner Bros. which is Amazon Studios' producing partner.

Now here's something really good:

There is no scenario where someone can claim any of your rights money by revising your original script or movie via Amazon Studios.If someone creates a revised version of an original script, they may be eligible to receive a share of any contest winnings. But rights payments are not shared. If a theatrical movie is released from an original script on Amazon Studios, the creator of the original script or movie gets 100% of the rights payments. People who are revising scripts or making video content (like trailers) based on scripts are going for award money and are helping someone else get their movie made. But they are not sharing in the rights money. 

But I know what most of you WGA writers are saying to yourself, "Pffft!  I'm a luminary WGA writer and can't participate in such non-union baffoonery!!"

Well, now you can!

AMAZON STUDIOS PRODUCTION ARM (The People's Production Company) IS NOW A WGA SIGNATORY!!!

What is The People's Production Company? "The People's Production Company is the production arm of Amazon Studios. The People's Production Company is a signatory to the Writers Guild of America Minimum Basic Agreement, while the Amazon Studios site is not. So, if you are a WGA member, we encourage you to have your agent contact the People's Production Company directly in order to submit your original script or to apply for paid writing assignments." Also new is the $33,000 rewrite opportunities.

The GREAT thing about these new opportunities is that you don't have to rewrite the whole script, trying to guess and figure out what Amazon was looking for and hoping you were right.  This was another BIG problem with the rewrite contests during the first year.  Nobody knew what Amazon wanted, not even Amazon!  People did page one rewrites on one project only for Amazon to choose a punch up.  Another project the inverse happened.

Now you submit a proposal first and then if you're selected you get $10,000 up front and $23,000 on delivery.  In this economy I'm certain will see a lot of WGA writers writing "below their weight" to get what they think is going to be an easy $33,000 dollars.  This is actually fine by me as I love competition and real competition only makes things better.

As for the two rewrite opportunities up for grabs, I'd say "I think my Facebook Friend is Dead" is the more viable of the two projects up for grabs.  The million dollar winner from last year, "12 Princesses," is completely devoid of a story.  Good musical numbers, no story.  So it's really a page one rewrite.  So if you've got a good kids story you can shoehorn into "12 Princesses" then go right ahead.  If not, go for "Facebook Friend is Dead."

Another plus is that if you somehow get shared credit, or even sole credit (with a page one rewrite), then you can get a $100,000 bonus, or $200,000 bonus respectively. Keep in mind Amazon Studios is the sole decider of who gets credit, and I can only assume that this "bonus" will be more readily applied to WGA writers who sneak in through the PPC backdoor, seeing that (I assume) A.S. would have to adhere to the WGA rules.

* Subject to the terms of the writing services agreement, Amazon Studios intends to pay those writer(s) or team(s) as follows:

* USD $10,000 upon commencement of a rewrite, and an additional USD $23,000 when we accept the fully completed draft screenplay from that writer or team. The writer or writing team will have ten weeks to complete the draft screenplay from the date of commencement.

* If we commence principal photography on a full-length motion picture based on the screenplay for commercial theatrical distribution (which, for clarity, does not include test screenings to test audience response), and if, upon final determination of writing credits, the writer or team receives screenplay credit, the writer or team will receive a one-time bonus in the amount described below. If the writer or team receives shared screenplay credit, the one-time bonus will be USD $100,000. If the writer or team receives sole screenplay credit, the one-time bonus will be USD $200,000.

*If you're WGA and have some questions about how things would work through the Amazon PPC, ask your union rep and/or agent.

* Remember, regardless of what Amazon Studios pays the rewriter(s), the original author still gets FULL payment of $200,000. As an example, lets say that I rewrite "Facebook Friend" and Amazon loves it, and puts it into production AND pays me a $200,000 because my page one rewrite was so awesome. The original author still gets their full $200,000 as well. HOWEVER, I as the rewriter, would not get any further bonuses like the performance bonus of $400,000. BUT, once again, if my name is on a $60,000,000 domestic-grossing film as a writer, I'm going to be compensated by getting better offers on my future scripts.

Lastly, it appears that Amazon is shifting towards trailers to present ideas for projects instead of making whole test movies.  This is a more novel approach as the general public really doesn't have time to sit through an hour and a half long precursor to a movie.  A trailer could easily be used to gauge the public's interest in a project before large sums of money are dedicated to even test film production.

Overall, I was Amazon Studios biggest fan and biggest detractor last year.  My blustery hoopla on my old "Auditorz of the Amazon" site, the only site on the net that covered the contest from day one, had a lot of biting satire and humor, but also a lot of never-ending suggestions to make the contest and Amazon Studios better.  In the end, Amazon Studios did listen to myself, as well as the people that contributed to the "Auditorz" site, even following most of the suggestions to the tee, so I'm happy about that; we did make a difference in the end. 

This paradigm shift in Amazon Studios really does finally open some doors for the struggling writer (and director).  If you previously wrote off Amazon Studios, I can't stress enough that things have changed for the better.  Whereas A.S. 1.0 felt more like an episode of "Survivor," there is actual opportunity in Amazon Studios 2.0. And from what I hear, Amazon Studios is looking to get into "television" later on this year, which is also yet another opportunity.

Reader question: Should all readers recognize the same script as strong writing?

Matt asks:

A screenplay I submitted to Nicholl made semi-finals two years ago. I re-wrote the heck out of it, again, and again, and again, figuring out of ten sps this was the first to get any attention, so I might be onto something.

Submitted it again this year, and it went out the first round.

I realize there were over 6000 entries, what one reader likes, another hates, etc... Question is: If a script is really "that good" should it be recognized as such by most trained readers? Was it most likely a fluke it even made semis before (like maybe the subject matter hit the right reader on the right day cuz of something in his/her personal life etc)??

I could probably offer some long-winded thesis about criticism, personal tastes, and how the varying quality of submissions between the two years can contribute to these different results.... but I won't. This is the sort of answer that's bound to drive some aspiring writers nuts because they DEMAND automaton-like consistency from readers.

Here's the thing - that's not possible. Sure, you'll probably find general agreement about the very best screenplays and the very worst screenplays, but there's a whole middle section of that curve that's neither enough fish nor foul to get the exact same reactions from a plurality of readers.

The very best writing - the strongest writing that's eventually going to send those writers onto their career - will probably garner similar reviews from readers. Is it likely that all the scripts at the semi-finals are at that top level? Personally, I wouldn't stake my rep on it.

I'm not saying you're not a good writer, or that your work doesn't show potential. It might just be that you're still in the middle of the pack. You show promise, but you're not quite ready for "the show." Yet.

You also have to look at the fact you didn't submit the exact same script both years. You rewrote it, which could account for the difference in reactions. Maybe there was something in that more raw version that the readers were responding too. Perhaps the rewrite took some passion, some edge or some urgency out of the script. I've seen it happen before.

But look at this - you got to the semi-finals. You hit near the target. If you were an archer, you'd keep drilling, keep firing arrows until you hit dead center more consistently. Put the reader out of your head. Yes, sometimes you might get a crap reader. Sometimes you might get a good reader on a bad day. But none of that really matters.

Why?

Because there's nothing you can do about it. You accomplish nothing by worrying about this. Reasonable, intelligent people will sometimes come to very different and still valid conclusions about the scripts they read. I took a quick look at the comments at Scriptshadow and saw plenty of evidence of this. You see evidence of this in movie reviews. Heck, I'm willing to bet that there are movies that you love that your friends can't stand.

I've got a friend who will argue that Armageddon is legitimately one of the best movies ever made. Yet he and I agree on many other films. Corner him at a party and bring up (500) Days of Summer and you will see him physically react with disgust and contempt for that film. (So he's not ALL wrong in his cinema critiques.) Me, I'm stunned so many of my film classmates had near-religious experiences during Magnolia. I hated that film so much that it's pretty much put me off of Paul Thomas Anderson's work for life.

Seriously. You will have to drug me and throw me in a straight jacket to get me in that theatre. I don't care if the film gets 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. Blame everyone who put their hand to their heart in Oscar season 2000 and said, "SUCH a brilliant movie. Magnolia was incredible."

Liars. Every last one of them.

Anyway....

Keep writing. Keep working. And when you're really good, you won't have to worry about getting the "right" reader. Even bad readers recognize a home run.

Reader mail: Raising the stakes, Contests, and Queries

Greg asks a sort of general question:

I got gigged on this for two separate scripts... My protagonists each had an identifiable challenging goal... there were obstacles & complications, etc., but the stakes were never raised.

Any thoughts on how to raise the stakes?

That's a hard answer to give without knowing the specifics of the plot. Killing a character is always a popular way to raise the stakes. If the death happens in a way that leaves the hero with some guilt over the fact they might have prevented it, it leaves a scar on the character and probably makes them double their efforts. If the killed character is a mentor also could signify the moment when the protagonist has to stand on his own, without the guidence of those wiser then him. Obi-Wan Kenobi dying on the Death Star is a good example of this in Star Wars.

Maybe an even better example would be Wash dying in Serenity. He's killed off by the Reavers almost as soon as the ship gets on the ground. It's so swift and brutal that the audience is thrown for a loop. The real value of this death is that it established that the filmmakers were willing to "go there" and the action sequences that immediately follow have a lot more tension because of the sense that any character could bite it. If Wash wasn't safe, no one is safe.

There are plenty of other examples of death being used like this. Randy being killed off in Scream 2 is a major gut-punch because he is the stand-in for the audience and was a much loved character. It was a great way to show that the survivors of the first film weren't necessarily vulnerable.

Another good one is the moment in Taken when Liam Neeson finds his daughter's friend dead. The movie was pretty dark up to that point, but this moment leaves the audience wondering if it's merely a preview of the daughter's fate. The Dark Knight raises the stakes by not only killing off Rachel, but by permanently scaring (emotionally and physically) Harvey Dent.

You don't have to kill off a character. Sometimes all it takes is for a stable relationship to be ripped apart by conflict, or destroy a character's home or job. A good way to approach rasing the stakes is to ask yourself, "How can I make my lead character appear most vulnerable? What will it take to burst any bubble of security around him?"

Clint emailed this question:

What is the real-world take on screenwriting contests? Does anyone pay attention to them? And, if so, which contests are considered the best?

I don't think they help much. The Nicholl Fellowship is always held up as one of the most regarded, but speaking as someone who's read many of those scripts I find few of them are commercial. The bottom line is that this is a business. You might win a contest with your heartfelt drama about an 8 year-old boy who deals with the pain of an abusive home by teaching an ostrich how to fly, but odds are you'll have a hard time selling it.

But then, at least those scripts get read. Maybe I've just seen the dull, self-indulgent, navel-gazing Finalist scripts, but what I have read from Nicholl is usually so counter to what the market is even remotely looking for that I feel like something must be "broken" in the judging process. If I had to tell you to submit to one, I'd say the Nicholls but I worry that some snobby readers are working to quash anything that reeks of "commerical" to them.

Beyond that, I'd say the only contests of any value are ones where your work is being read by agents, managers and producers. Then you've at least got another way to access those people beyond queries and connections. Don't waste your time entering smaller contests in the hopes that you'll be able to put "I was a Finalist in the Hazard County Yee-Haw Script Round-Up" and expect that any agent or producer is going to say, "Egad! I must request this immediatley!"

Just my take.



Castor Troy wrote me with this question:

I want to better target where I send my query letter. Do you have any websites or books to recommend that list script agents by genre? Or, do you recommend doing some digging into the latest sales and find out what producers and agents are attached to projects in my genre?

I say the latter more than the former. Books go out of date pretty quickly, and if there are websites that collect information that specific, I'm unaware of them. When it comes to targeting your query letter, there's no substitute for doing your own research. Subscribing to tracking boards and industry databases like IMDBPro are a good start. The people over on Done Deal Pro's boards also seem to know their stuff when it comes to this kind of thing.

Around the blogosphere & Nichols musings

I'll be honest, folks, I got a surge of work this week and at the moment, I'm lacking in the free time necessary to compose an interesting and insightful post. But, I've seen a lot of really great posts this week, so why not put in a few plugs?

First, Scott over at Go Into The Story is running an interesting series, posting excepts from a Wrap article on Up director Pete Doctor, entitled "Pixar Movies Are Lousy... A First." Check it out if you haven't already. It's a fascinating look inside the Pixar creative process.

Nichols fans should check out Scriptshadow this week, as he appears to be reviewing a few of this year's finalists. I confess, I spent the time I usually spend writing my blog on composing a post for Carson's review of Victoria Falls, which he calls "a competition script. Plain and simple. You could send this logline to a thousand agencies and you'd probably get 999 rejections."

This provoked me to write the following comment:

Carson, you hit the nail on the head when you called this sort of script a "competition script." I haven't read this one, or any of the other Nichols Finalists this year, but I have read Finalists and Semi-Finalists from previous years and - as is pointed out in other comments - they tend to be dramas. HEAVY dramas. Yet the amazing thing is that within the industry, the perception is "drama is dead."

It seems like there's a serious disconnect between the scripts that get purchased and the scripts that win contests. Any theories on why that is, especially since so many contests boast judges that work within the industry? Do you think these contests feel obligated to reward scripts that might otherwise be tossed into the PASS pile practically on principle? Are they out to give an edge to overlooked scripts rather than single out one that is likely to be "discovered" anyway?

I just find it interesting that the conventional wisdom is that the Nichols is one of the ONLY competitions that anyone in the biz takes seriously... and yet it's winners are consistently of the unmarketable "competition script" variety. Makes one wonder if winning these is little more than a Pyrrhic victory.

Anyone here have any thoughts on this?