Director Bashing

No, this isn’t a post where I’m going to bash a director. I’m just surprised how much of what I read online involves director bashing. 

Or, if it doesn’t, the comments section for the articles are loaded with director bashing.

The director is a strange creature in my opinion (despite the fact I sometimes am one). They’re all incredibly different and, despite collaborating with huge crews to put something together, typically receive most of the praise (or blame) for a film, depending on how it turns out. Truth is, making a film is such a detailed and arduous process, that, vision aside, it’s very difficult to get a finished product to even closely approximate what had originally been intended.

But I digress...

The article that sparked this blog post was Terry Gilliam: The Difference Between Kubrick (Great Filmmaker) and Spielberg (Less So). Check it out. The core of Gilliam’s argument is that creating happy or successful endings (even for otherwise depressing films) is less “great” than creating films people have to go home and think about.

I regard both of these directors very highly. Kubrick is in my top two all-time favorite directors (along with Hitchcock), but Spielberg is definitely in my top ten, and close to breaking my top five. What shocked me reading through the comments section of this article is that it instantly became Kubrick vs. Spielberg. I mean, I understand why - the article is about comparing their styles, even though, as a few people pointed out, it’s like comparing ‘apples to oranges.’ 

But even so, the comments were less about comparing and more about ripping one or the other to shreds (and usually it was Spielberg getting shredded.) One participant who came to Spielberg’s defense - not ripping up Kubrick, but trying to show why Spielberg contributes something of value - got massacred by the others. 

The more comments I read, the more my jaw dropped. I think it’s obvious that both of these men are incredibly talented, and that anyone interested in film can benefit from studying both of their techniques. I understand feeling super-passionate about Kubrick (or whichever director affects you the most) but to go on to say that one director is COMPLETELY worthless just because you like the other one more is a bit ridiculous.

Who can argue that Spielberg has had a tremendous affect on cinema, and that he’ll go down as one of its legendary figures? How many images from Spielberg films have become an ingrained part of our culture?

A few people ripped on the fact that Jaws was only a success because the shark broke and Spielberg had to improvise... but isn’t the ability to creatively solve such problems on-set the hallmark of a great director?

I don’t think the entire body of work of one person (who is undeniably talented) can be totally discounted just because one person of (arguably) greater talent also exists. Have your preferences - but be open-minded.

Besides... Jaws is simply wonderful. :)

BONUS NOTE: I had one other thing to say about director bashing, because of all directors, this is the one I probably see get bashed THE MOST: M. Night Shyamalan. In my opinion, his undoing lies in the fact that his first movie, The Sixth Sense, is so amazing that everything after it fails to measure up. But honestly, he’s made quite a few movies since then that I’ve enjoyed. I thought Signs, The Village, and Devil were all pretty good, maybe with a few things I would have changed, but thoroughly enjoyable and engrossing none the less. Also with some excellent, artistic shots. If these had come before Sixth Sense, I think this might have been a director who developed a loyal following based on his knack for building suspense that later would have made him more main-stream. As it is, he was catapulted to major super-stardom overnight, giving everyone free reign to be super-critical of his future efforts.

But, feel free to disagree in the comments... just keep it all in perspective. :)

My First Distribution Deal!

About a week and a half ago now, I celebrated a pretty big milestone… I signed my first distribution deal with a web channel for my short films.

Meaning that, for each short film I churn out, I can actually be paid. Paid. For SHORT FILMS. Who knew?

Short films are up-and-coming. (Yet another reason to make shorts, in addition to learning about film-making, getting your name out there, building a resume, and making connections.)

Shorts have always existed, but in a way that was pretty much limited to film festivals. The average person didn’t see too many of them. Now, thanks to the proliferation of online content, shorter attention spans, and the encouragement of the big leagues (this year was the first year that the Academy of Motion Pictures released a DVD of the Oscar-nominated short films), they’re in demand.

What’s more, a number of web channels have sprung up and are looking for content, and this includes short films. I got my deal by responding to a post I saw on one of the many industry newsletters I subscribe to (I think it was Media Source) about how iflixtv.com was looking to build new content partnerships. I applied, submitted my links - and the rest is history.

I signed a 6-page contract (after asking about 1,000 questions) and will now receive 70% of what viewers pay to iflix to watch my shorts. I can upload as many as I like (once each short makes it through their clearance process, that is.) What’s more, the deal is non-exclusive, so I am still allowed to submit my shorts to festivals or post them to my Vimeo or Youtube pages if I so choose.

I think this will provide a great means through which to learn about what’s marketable and what’s not. Since my earnings correspond directly to what people will watch and how long they watch, this deal gives me a great new tool for gauging what people like and want.

The best part of all though is having both #1. Validation that my short films are worthwhile, and #2. Inspiration to make more shorts in the coming months. A producer friend and I are discussing one in particular, and this opportunity is making me reevaluate what I can do on my own, cheaply and quickly, to get more shorts up fast.

Also, since a recent study I read showed that people are more likely to watch and pay for ‘episodic content’ than to log on for one-off shorts, I’m mulling over ideas for a few series… stay tuned. J

Meeting Bob Goodman

Occasionally, I meet interesting people with the same type of creative dreams that I have and, occasionally, they agree to meet with me and answer a few of my questions about what they’re doing with their lives and why.

Bob Goodman is one of those people.

I met him during a Christmas party at an NYC film school and instantly wanted to know more about his two babies: The Actors Ensemble and Done in a Day. In that first meeting he described how he’d created these things because he’d often come across acting students who, out in the real world, had very little idea about how to approach their careers.

It sounded familiar. 

A SAG actor who has been teaching, performing, writing, and directing for 30 years, it was only when Bob lost a full time job of 8 years that he discovered a new opportunity to put his expertise toward his passions. He’d realized that, in other acting schools, film equipment was antiquated, teachers hadn’t actually performed in years, and students weren’t actually getting to be onstage or on-camera. It was no wonder that, after graduating, they were lost in the woods. 

It occurred to him that there’s no summer stock equivalent for film, a way for newcomers to learn through immersion. A typical acting degree consists of learning theory, having a few stage performances, and - usually - no TV or film experience. 

As someone who loves to teach, Bob found that not having an MFA caused him to hit a wall whenever he applied to bring his teaching methods to most institutions; so, he took matters into his own hands and started his own programs. This is the same DIY spirit that I try to embody with the No MFA Project. His emphasis is on small classes, so that his students get the chance to try, fail, and therefore grow. Everyone is involved in every aspect of production. Bob is even known to cause a few (on purpose) disruptions on-set so that flustered students learn what it is to cope with issues at work. As he says, “You can’t prepare trying to be perfect.”

Done in a Day is another one of his programs: within one day he guides student actors in creating their look and their image, does their headshots, brands them with social media, and follows it all up with an end-of-day acting class and panel discussion with industry professionals.

If you’re struggling to become an actor in NYC, I highly recommend checking him out:

www.theactorsensemble.com

My First Trip to L.A.!

So at the end of March, I took my first trip to L.A. It was a combination ScreenwritingU event, plus meetings of my own that I had set up. One of my key goals is to become a better networker, and these past two months have actually been jam-packed with great meetings - and the development of a new approach to such meetings.

But first, L.A.

I was a bit shell-shocked. I’d never been there before, and it was very different from NYC - and the industry people I met were a lot less schmoozy, which I would have expected to be the other way around. 

(Random note - for some reason, L.A. hardcore reminded me of an upscale India? I think it had to do with the open-air markets, the temperature at that time of year, the colors, and, sometimes, the dust.)

I think I was more unsettled about the trip than I let on, even to myself. On one hand, I was going to learn, to make connections... but on the other, there was that nagging inner voice insisting that I sell a screenplay ASAP.

It was an incredibly worthwhile trip, all in all... I have one producer who wants to see a treatment for an idea I have when it’s ready, and I connected with several others, a few of which have now even become Facebook friends. I had a fantastic lunch with the screenwriter of the last Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, the wonderful Andy Knauer (a former student of my dad's!), and got a great inside look at what his life’s been like since going through the process of making The Last Stand.

But still, the trip left me with this nagging, unsettled feeling.

I came back a little disheartened. (Of course, this was heightened because it was promptly followed by some hard times. Not to digress too much, but my husband and I had been trying to buy a place which fell through last-minute, and we lost our old apartment in the process... Don't worry, we found a new home! But that was a terrible week - even though the producers I met never would have known it by the bubbly messages I was sending them after our meetings!) 

Anyway, back to L.A... not one person I met there (and all in all, I met about 20) wanted to do an action film, which is what I was peddling. (Despite the fact that action right now is the genre in which the most scripts are being sold.) 

I learned an important thing: the success of your story is very much dependent on who you’re talking to and what they need at that moment. If they've done a particular genre in the past, it doesn't mean they'll want to do it again. While I’d mostly arranged meetings with ScreenwritingU folks and also with producers that I’d previously heard speak or had some other connection with, I hadn’t specifically sought out the right people for the project I’d just completed. It was no wonder I left feeling unsatisfied.

If you get in a room with a person looking for your type of project, you’re set - they’ll want to read it. (Then hopefully the writing's good enough that they'll want to see it made.) I saw this happening with friends of mine that week in L.A., who had quirky, very niche-audience indie scripts - and happened to meet with people specializing in just that.

The other important thing I learned is that, no matter if you meet someone who isn’t interested in a particular project at that time - they might be interested in something of yours later, or in developing a new idea with you (as is the case with me right now). So just make an amazing contact, be laid back, and be realistic. Look to the future.

To wrap this up before it gets too long, my new approach is all about #1. Assuming that you will be rejected most of the time, expect it, and then just keep moving forward (and always having new things to suggest) - and #2. Approach each and every meeting like you’re meeting with friends. It’s a very social business. People want to work with someone they can see as a friend - even to the point of creating something to work on with that person.

I read a fantastic article on Stage 32 recently (if you’re not on that yet, get on, it’s excellent) that said just those two things: embrace the rejection part. Put yourself out there 1,000 times without any expectations and approach all these meetings like you’re meeting friends.

This is what I’ve been doing now back in New York, and I’ve had one of my best months ever in terms of making connections with people and developing new working friendships. I don’t know when my next trip to L.A. will happen. It might be as soon as this fall, or it might be way in the future. But next time I go, it’s going to be an entirely different approach. :)

YouTube vs. Vimeo

Exactly two weeks ago, I posted a short, funny video based on the character Javert from Les Miserables. It was, actually, a Public Service Announcement where Javert denounced Jean Valjean in a message he ‘paid for and approved.’

Please check it out here.

This was a fun experiment for me for a few reasons (not the least of which was that it was impossible not to keep laughing while making this). Number one, in terms of knocking off a quick project, this was super easy. Since all I needed was a voice-over artist, I was able to audition actors over the phone.

Second, recording a voiceover is a lot easier than trying to record an actual scene or even a documentary-style interview like I did with Otherworldly Encounters. There’s no lighting to rig, no picture to set, no making sure your mics can actually pick up the voices of your subjects as they move around - there’s just a guy in a sound booth talking into a mic that’s directly hooked up to your camera.

But my reason for this post really has nothing to do with debating the pros and cons of video vs. voiceover. What I really want to talk about is YouTube vs. Vimeo.

Javert’s PSA was the first video I ever posted on YouTube. Prior to this, I was putting everything on Vimeo. This was mainly because I’d been influenced into thinking Vimeo is the site for ‘serious’ film-making professionals, and I grant you, there’s some truth to that. While just about any kid with a cell phone can and will post video clips on YouTube, on Vimeo you’ll find actors’ reels and serious attempts at short film and animation. Without a doubt, the people who see your work on Vimeo are the people who tend to really care about film.

BUT... when you think of things going viral, do you ever think of Vimeo?

Most likely, no. And now I understand why. 

Your Vimeo video will not link to any other videos on Vimeo. They won’t link to you. You can choose to ‘join’ someone’s page, but that’s only if you somehow first find them and become a fan of their work. It’s great if you fall into ‘staff picks’ and get featured on the home page, but with a ton of people vying for that honor each week, chances are slim. You do sort of get a feed of videos that might interest you, but apart from the title and cover image, it’s usually hard to know what they’re about without taking the time to click into each.

YouTube, on the other hand, offers links to other options at the end of and even during videos, so if anyone watched something similar to mine, mine would pop up and maybe intrigue them enough so that they’d watch it. Within the first few hours of Javert’s PSA being posted, it got 20 views - and I hadn’t yet sent it to one person in the world, tweeted it, or put it in my Facebook status. So, doing nothing, people had already begun to find it and like it.

“But No MFA Project,” you might say, “It’s not a fair contest. This video was based off of Les Mis, a movie that was up for an Oscar last week. It had built-in buzz.”

That may be, but in the case of Otherworldly Encounters, a collection of interviews with people who had had supernatural experiences, I released it just a few days before Halloween. It was also timely, with some built-in holiday buzz.

That was 4 months ago, and Otherworldly Encounters, even after my getting the word out, has had 97 views on Vimeo.

Javert’s PSA has been up exactly 2 weeks as of today and currently has... 461.

If your film is still in the festival circuit and you want to keep it mostly under wraps, yes, use Vimeo. If you only want other film people to be the ones checking it out, as opposed to the masses, yes, Vimeo.

But if you want sheer number of views, I’d go YouTube all the way.

How to Pitch Like a Pro!

At last - a post about how to pitch!

Pitching is presenting your script’s concept to someone in a position to help you. This might be a producer, director, manager, agent, or even high-profile actor.

You should be able to pitch in a very, very short period of time. Granted, if you get an actual meeting with a production company, you can discuss all elements of your script… but most of the time, you’ll need to get people’s attention ASAP (think pitch-fests, being introduced to an industry contact at a party, etc.) You want to be able to present your idea in under a minute – and, ideally, in just one line. (Referring back to an earlier post, most production companies want ideas that are ‘high-concept,’ and one criteria of high-concept is that you’re able to see the entire movie in just one line.)

I have some background with sales, so for me, pitching is just applying sales skills to a conversation with an industry professional. This means describing your product in a way that shows them why it is valuable.

I’ve had a great amount of success with pitching thus far – everyone I’ve ever pitched to has requested to read my scripts. Now, it’s time to pass that knowledge on to you! Below, I’ve listed out my basic guidelines for what you should do:

1. Know how much time you have and work with it. If you’re going to a pitch fest, they’ll tell you in advance how many minutes you have. However many it is, try to leave one or two (at least!) at the end for answering questions about your idea and exchanging contact info. At a pitch fest, when you’re out of time, you’re out of time, and if you don’t have their contact info, it was a waste.

2. Say the genre FIRST. I’ve heard this complaint a jillion times from people in the industry: a writer will launch into their pitch without telling the genre. Since you’re very involved with your script, it’s obvious to you if it’s comedy, drama, horror, or what-have-you. Not so for someone who is unfamiliar with your work. Nowadays, there’s lots of darkly humorous dramas, or serious storylines that are still considered comedies because of how witty the writing is. In fact, having a unique spin on what makes a ‘comedy,’ or any other type of movie, might just make your idea interesting enough for professionals to request. Do everyone, especially yourself, a favor by telling the genre first.

3. Open with your one-liner. Right after you sit down, say “My script, (insert title), is a (insert genre),” and give them your one-liner. Ideally, this one line should show off your high-concept idea and make them see the entire movie. It should be as interesting a hook as possible so you win them over for the rest of the meeting.

4. If time allows, summarize the story. Once all this is done, do you still have any time? If this was a chance introduction at a party, then you don’t – unless your audience is so fascinated they keep asking for more info. If it’s a pitch-fest, you have just a few minutes – enough time to give a very short synopsis of your story. I repeat, VERY SHORT. It’s not the time to get into a scene-by-scene breakdown. Instead, you just hit a few key points that tell the story, again making it all as juicy as can be.

5. Giving the ending – gauge what they want. Some people will tell you to never give the ending, since curiosity will make people request the script. Others say always give the ending because the person you’re pitching to can’t judge what they think about your story without it. I say, pitch without giving the ending – but then gauge whether or not they want it. Figuring this out doesn’t take a mind-reader: end your pitch at the end of your second act by saying something like “And then things really get interesting,” or “Which brings us into our final showdown.” You get the idea. End with a cliff-hanger. If they say, “Wow, I’d love to read it,” you’re done. Otherwise, they might ask what happens. If they do ask, tell them! You may feel like if they want the milk they have to buy the cow, but really, refusing to share the end will make you look uncooperative and will make them unsure about whether or not the whole story lives up to the great first two acts you pitched.

6. The obvious. Public speaking is harder for some than others and pitching is, in essence, a presentation. But practice. Have people you trust watch your pitch. You want to make eye contact, cut out the ‘umms’ and the stutters, use animated language and tone of voice, and be sure to move around a bit. I don’t mean flail your arms wildly, but show how exciting this idea is by, well, being excited – and excited people don’t sit perfectly still with stiff arms by their sides. Use your body language! Lean in, gesture, be enthusiastic!

I hope this helps you! If you have any other advice on pitching or have had an experience with pitching (good or bad) then please share what you’ve learned in the comments!

Two Years! (Part Two: Successes and Failures)

When pursuing a creative career, it’s difficult to define success and failure… just getting into a known person’s network is actually a great accomplishment, but not one that registers on anyone’s radar but your own. Selling a screenplay or making a film is obviously a success, but then if they bomb, you might have been better off if no one had ever seen them.

In school, it’s easier to define success – they give you grades. On your own, in life, you set your own benchmarks and have to honestly grade yourself.

In my not-so-unbiased opinion, I consider my No MFA Project a success. Of course, though, there are things I would have done differently. So here we go, part 2 of my two-year summary: what was great, and what I would have done differently.

What Was Great:

I feel short and sweet bullet points suffice for this section. The things that worked well speak for themselves. One thing I do want to especially point out though, for anyone pursuing a career in this industry – and that includes actors, who have a harder time than anyone else getting work – learn filmmaking skills. Being able to produce yourself is the key to showing yourself, getting attention, and having a real conversation starter with other people in this business.

That being said, here’s my list of "great":

-The amount of writing I got done

-The contacts I made (best found attending a film festival and taking a few one-off courses)

-The films I completed, and winning two awards for my first short film

-Learning filmmaking.

-Getting paid filming jobs (another place to meet people)

-Now being brought on to a few major writing projects 

What I would have done differently:

1. I pushed myself a lot, but would have pushed myself even more, particularly with completing more short films this past year. My issue was indecisiveness in choosing the script for my next short. A producer gave me the advice that, with two shorts under my belt, I was ready to do a short version of a would-be feature-length film, and to find a “name” person to star. His reasoning was that the piece could then be shopped around to studios, who would pay attention because of the star, and quite possibly opt to make the feature. This was great advice. However, I got so hung up on finding the “perfect project,” I stalled and didn’t make a third short. Looking back, I should have just kept on filming whatever I wanted to film so that I had ever more on my reel and learned more about the craft.

2. Maybe this sounds presumptuous, but I would have quit my job even sooner. I was there for more than three years and the last year and a half contributed very little to (or perhaps even took away from) my personal growth, development, and confidence. The sooner I got out, the sooner I felt like I found myself, started churning out more and more projects, and learned the things I needed to learn.

3. Networked more. It’s only been in the past three months that my networking has really exploded – and in the past three months I’ve been brought on to a TV series, asked to do the script for an independent feature film, and found interest in some of my stage play ideas. My recent status as social butterfly is owing to several factors: meeting people at the film festival; being lucky enough to connect with a supportive producer who then introduced me to a wide variety of film and broadway professionals; the fact that there have been a ton of industry holiday parties I was lucky enough to hear about, and the decision not to miss a single one. If I was starting all over, I would have sought out networking opportunities every week.

4. Overall, being more structured. The challenge to working at home and not being in school is the fact that no one is giving you structure and no one is checking up on you. It’s easy to procrastinate by running errands, watching TV, etc. While I was actually rigid about working every day, I still feel there was more time that could have been used productively. I would actually write myself out a daily schedule with weekly goals in the future.

The good news is, even though I’ve passed the two year mark (the length of an MFA program and technical end of the No MFA Project), my progress isn’t going to stop. I can take all of the above and apply it to my future. Which brings me to…

No MFA Project for Life.

Education shouldn’t stop with the end of school, and of course, it’s not going to stop for me at this point in my life. Doing this project has opened my eyes to all the possibilities for making a creative career a reality. The career is creative – the approach needs to be, too.

I’m going to keep going, keep learning, keep meeting people, and most importantly… keep writing. And sharing all my progress with you, up to the moment when, finally, I see my work on the big screen and my books in a bookstore.

Hope you’ll stick around for what’s to come.  :)