Archive for May, 2007

The perils of coincidence

Sunday, May 6th, 2007

Like several million people worldwide, I saw Spider-Man 3 this past weekend. And like a substantial percentage of these viewers, I got frustrated by the number of unlikely coincidences in the movie.

There’s nothing wrong with coincidence, per se. Almost every movie is going to have some incidents where one character just happens to be in the right place at the right time. In fact, many movies are built around a “premise coincidence.” In Die Hard, John McClane just happens to be in the building when the villains attack. That’s okay. McClane’s being there is part of the premise. Likewise, in the original Spider-Man, Peter Parker just happens to get bitten by the radioactive spider. No problem: it wouldn’t be Spider-Man otherwise.

The premise coincidence is one flavor of what I’ll call a Fundamental Coincidence: an accidental confluence of time, place and motivation which greatly impacts the story.

In a romantic comedy, when The Guy would have proposed to The Girl except that he just happened to overhear a conversation he interpreted the wrong way, that’s a Fundamental Coincidence. In the first Spider-Man, Norman Osborn just happens to be transformed into The Goblin just as Peter is becoming Spider-Man. That’s a Fundamental Coincidence, but we accept it because it feels true to the genre.

WARNING: MINOR SPOILERS FOLLOW. (Mostly things you’d glean the trailers or ads, but still.)

Let’s look at the Fundamental Coincidences in Spider-Man 3:

  • The asteroid carrying the symbiote (utlimately, Venom) happens to land near Peter Parker. Peter doesn’t hear it, doesn’t investigate.
  • The symbiote happens to attach itself to Peter’s scooter.
  • Flint Marko happens to fall into the sand pit at exactly the moment the scientists test their billion-dollar Dyson vacuum.1
  • Flint Marko happens to have been the man who killed Uncle Ben. (A retcon.)
  • Eddie Brock happens to be the only person in the church at the moment Peter tries to get rid of the black suit.

Any one (or two) of these Fundamental Coincidences would probably go unnoticed, particularly in a superhero movie, where credibility takes a back seat to spectacle. But put together, they make the plot feel rickety, particularly when you factor in the large number of what I’ll call Minor Coincidences — things that don’t fundamentally change the story, but feel convenient all the same.

  1. The police chief decides to tell Peter about Marko now, even though he’s known the details for some time, apparently.
  2. Sandman’s first attack just happens to coincide with Spider-Man getting the key to the city.
  3. Eddie Brock is newly arrived at the Daily Bugle, and wants Peter’s job.
  4. Gwen Stacy happens to be Peter’s lab partner.
  5. Gwen Stacy happens to be in the skyscraper during the crane accident.
  6. And she’s the police chief’s daughter.
  7. And she’s Eddie Brock’s love interest.2
  8. And Gwen happens to be at the fancy restaurant on the night Peter wants to propose.

Again, you could have several of these coincidences in any movie and no one would mind. It’s largely expected that familiar faces will become imperiled in a summer action movie, so #5 feels right. Likewise, the eventual discovery of Venom’s weakness is accidental, but that plays into the genre. No foul there.

My point is not to rip on Spider-Man 3, but to urge readers to look at their own scripts with an eye towards coincidence. If you’ve written a treatment, search for the following phrases: “at the same time,” “accidentally,” “luckily,” “unfortunately,” and “meanwhile.” They’re often a tip-off that you have events happening by coincidence. There’s almost always a better alternative.

Causality trumps everything

Given a choice, try to find cause and effect. One event happens because of something else we’ve seen — ideally, something the hero himself has done.

Instead of having the hero accidentally overhear a key conversation, get him actively trying to listen. Or have an interested third party steer him in that direction — perhaps for his own reasons. At every juncture where a reader could ask “Why did that happen?”, try to have an answer that isn’t, “just because.”

Although there are some convenient twists in the Harry Osborn plot (amnesia, for starters), the causality is clear: the New Goblin wants revenge on Spider-Man for killing his daddy in the first movie.3 It doesn’t feel like coincidence that Harry is flying around on his hoverboard. With two other villains desperate for scenes, the timing might not be opportune, but it’s clear why it’s happening.

Look for correlation

Rather than ask an audience to swallow a bunch of little implausibilities, try bundling them together.

In Heroes, imagine if each character had a completely unique origin story: Claire got her powers from a shaman; Sylar is an alien; Peter has a magic ring. You’d get frustrated pretty quickly, because a lot of screen time would go towards explaining why and how. Instead, the creators wisely decided the characters all had some mysterious gene mutation activated by an environmental change. The audience is willing to make that one big leap,4 because they’re not asked to make similar leaps each time a new character is introduced.5

For Spider-Man 3, I don’t have any magic answers on how to correlate these disparate threads — other than trimming one out, which wouldn’t be a bad place to start. But had the script dropped on my desk a month before shooting, here are a few thoughts I would have put out there in terms of the many coincidences:

  • Both Venom and Sandman are forms of disembodied consciousness that control their host subjects — people and sand, respectively. That seems thematically promising.
  • One asteroid feels random, while a meteor shower feels like an event that needs a superhero.
  • Could this meteor shower overlap with Marko’s transformation or escape? Even if it’s just in the background, it makes them feel more united.
  • Could Spider-Man be pursuing Marko at the start?
  • Could we see the symbiote choosing Peter, because he’s the strongest creature around?

Chop it out

Often, the best answer when faced with a nagging coincidence is just to remove it.

  • Do we really need the Uncle Ben retcon? It doesn’t have a lot to do with Marko’s sick-daughter motivation.
  • Couldn’t Eddie Brock already be a stringer for the Daily Bugle? If he and Peter already have history, great.
  • Does Gwen Stacy need to be Peter’s lab partner?
  • Do we even need the police chief?

Again, my point isn’t to rag on Spidey, but to urge reader-writers take a hard look at the role of coincidence in their own scripts.

Some coincidence feels genuine. In real life, we do accidentally bump into old friends at the mall. And surprise in general is a good thing — catching your reader off-balance is a worthy goal. But if a significant portion of your plot depends on chance, that’s a good indicator something’s not fully baked. The best time to tackle these problems is in the outline, asking yourself not only what happens next, but why.


  1. It’s never clear what they’re supposedly doing, or why they wouldn’t have, say, a lid on the pit. Or a videocamera to monitor the experiment.
  2. Revealing both of these points of information in one piece of dialogue was a particularly bold choice.
  3. I kept waiting for Peter to point out that Harry’s dad was a psychopath, but oh well.
  4. And a familiar leap, frankly, because of X-Men.
  5. Note that both the D.C. and Marvel universes do have multiple, often conflicting means of empowering their heroes and villains. This is good and fascinating, but I suspect it’s one reason it can be harder for a casual reader to pick up these titles. The time investment needed to get up to speed is significant. Quick: Is Scarlet Witch a witch? Ummm…Sort of.

Spider-Man 3 makes $148 million over the weekend

Sunday, May 6th, 2007
The Spider-Man franchise has reclaimed the box office throne from Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, as Spider-Man 3 raked in $148 million since Thursday at midnight, the biggest opening ever, based on Sunday's estimates. Up until laster year, the original Spider-Man had owned the three-day box office record of $114 million, only to be crushed by Pirates' $135.6 million opening. It's a fitting coup, as Dead Man's Chest really wasn't that good and didn't deserve the $135.6 million it made - of course, Spider-Man 3 ain't no Cinderella either, as it lacks the entertainment value of the previous two movies. Still, is anyone really that surprised that Spider-Man 3 took back the throne, and does anyone expect Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End to do better in a few weeks? I highly doubt it, but crazier things have happened. If you're wondering, the rest of the box office this weekend was scary, as Disturbia, the second place film, only made $5.7 million, which means that the rest were even worse. The only other new entry this weekend, Lucky You, saw its counter programming fail, as it came in sixth with only $2.5 million. Ha ha, I knew that one was going to tank!

First Teaser Poster for Kidman’s ‘The Invasion’

Sunday, May 6th, 2007

Filed under: , , , ,

This seems to be the week for posters for Nicole Kidman movies. Just on the heels of the release of the first poster for The Golden Compass. ComingSoon.net put up the new teaser poster for Kidman's sci-fi thriller The Invasion. It's no secret that the project has had a bumpy road to production. Back in March, the LA Times reported that Warner Bros. was less than thrilled with the first cut of the film by the German director Oliver Hirschbiegel (Downfall). The studio then hired The Wachowski Brothers to re-write almost two-thirds of the script, and James McTeigue (V for Vendetta) took over as director for some costly re-shoots.

This "Body Snatchers' inspired film stars Kidman and Daniel Craig in a story about an alien virus that claims its victims when they sleep, turning them into mindless drones. Kidman stars as a scientist separated from her son, who might be the source of a cure for the virus. Since this is only a teaser poster, they aren't giving much away with this one. Surprisingly there isn't even a glimpse of either of the film's two stars. There is also a website for the film up now, but there isn't much to offer beyond a glimpse at the poster and a plot synopsis. The release date for The Invasion is currently set at August 17, so WB is almost out of time to generate some buzz for the film that goes beyond talk of a production that might have gone off the rails.
Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

The Incredible Hulk finds Liv Tyler

Saturday, May 5th, 2007
Get this: According to The Hollywood Reporter, Liv Tyler will star opposite Ed Norton in Marvel Studios' The Incredible Hulk, signing on to play Betty Ross, the longtime love interest of Dr. Bruce Banner/the Hulk. Louis Leterrier is directing the movie. He is the man behind The Transporter films. Ross, a classic "Hulk" character from the comic book's beginning in 1962, is Banner's fellow scientist and an ally in his quest to rid him of his lurking monster deep inside. The movie will unfold with Ross estranged from Banner (Norton), but with the pursuit of the Hulk heating up and Banner on the run trying to cure his condition, Ross finds herself swept back into his life. Jennifer Connelly played the character in the 2003 movie Hulk. Filming on the new "Hulk" is slated to begin in the summer in Toronto. Universal Pictures is distributing.

Spider-Man 3 vs. X-Men: United – which one is better?

Saturday, May 5th, 2007
X-Men: United was a so-so sequel to two very good X-Men movies, as too much was crammed into a short running time. Spider-Man 3, is forty minutes longer but also crammed with too much stuff. So which is better? I was not a big fan of X-Men: United, but I must say I actually liked it better than Spider-Man 3. After all, it was action-packed, fast paced and had lots of interesting developments, whereas Spider-Man 3 is long, a bit boring and doesn't offer any "money shot" action scenes. I never saw that one coming... (also, read my new Spider-Man 3 movie review)

Being typecast as a writer

Friday, May 4th, 2007

questionmarkThis may seem like a strange question, but I was hoping you could answer it for me. I am an African-American aspiring screenwriter and I was curious about how the industry views us. Are Black screenwriters seen as being able to only write material with themes pertaining to our race?

I don’t know of very many African-American screenwriters working regularly in films today and the ones I do know of tend to write “Black films.” Should I send out a spec script specifically related to the African-American experience, or will my writing (or, more pointedly, will I) be viewed with colorblind eyes? Most of what I write is genre material (horror, suspense, mystery) and race is rarely an issue. Will this be a problem?

I hate to dump a huge issue like this at your feet, but I visit your website regularly and I’ve greatly appreciated your insights into the industry and screenwriting. Also, let me say, I am only interested in your opinion based on what you’ve observed. I am not expecting a definitive answer. I won’t hold you liable for what you say. I understand that this isn’t your field of expertise. I don’t expect you to explain how race works in Hollywood, but I would value your input.

– Ben
Los Angeles

Ben offered me so many outs in that last paragraph that I pretty much had to lob up some kind of opinion. Obviously, I have zero experience as an African-American screenwriter. The closest I come to minority status is being gay, and other than some awkward moments and a few jobs I wouldn’t want anyway, it hasn’t been a giant hindrance. All I can offer is a decade of watching how Hollywood works, and some predictions on what you might encounter.

First off, I’m going to assume you’re a genuinely talented screenwriter. This whole exercise is based on that postulate. A poor-to-mediocre screenwriter would find a different path in the industry, and I honestly get depressed thinking about the travails of untalented writers.

So for the sake of this thought experiment, you’re great. By that I mean, anyone reading your script would say you’ve got chops and an original voice. How will your being African-American affect your career?

Let’s start with meetings, since these face-to-face encounters with agents, managers, producers and development executives are a crucial part of a screenwriter’s job. Your great script will get you meetings, no problem. But how will you be received in the room?

My hunch: enthusiastically. Remember, the assumption in this exercise is that you’re very talented, so they’re inclined to like you regardless. But here’s what you might not know until I tell you: every studio and every network has public goals to increase their diversity across the board, starting with writers. Some places have special programs. Some have incentives for hiring minority writers. They’re all trying — sometimes not hard enough, sometimes in the wrong ways, sometimes ineptly. One could debate the merits of these programs. We won’t. We’ll just say that a talented young minority screenwriter is incredibly appealing. I know writers who’ve been able to get a first job because of minority hiring goals. If it helps open a door, by all means walk through.

But will you get pegged as “a black screenwriter?” Will you only get offered rewrites of Martin Lawrence comedies?

In my experience, you get typecast more by your work than who you are. My first two paid screenwriting jobs were adapting kids’ books. I got typecast as a soft kids’ comedy guy, which isn’t particularly me at all. It wasn’t until Go that I was even considered for an R-rated movie.

As far as race being a factor, my best anecdote comes from David Dean Botrell, who wrote Kingdom Come, which starred Whoopi Goldberg and a predominately Black cast. David told me that afterwards, he got called in for meetings on many other African-American centered projects, which was odd, because he’s whiter than I am. People mistakenly assumed he was Black. The reverse feels true as well: if you wrote Legally Blonde, they’d want you write that Kate Hudson comedy no matter what your ethnicity.

Should you, Ben, write a spec with African-American themes? Maybe. Less because of how frames it you than because there are specific production companies — and specific actors — who are always looking for material.

Again, I can only offer examples from limited experience. Shonda Rhimes was a classmate of mine at USC, whose spec historical drama centering on a young Black woman came close to production with Jada Pinkett (pre-Will Smith, as I recall). It never got made, but it provided Shonda some exposure. Her first major credit was Introducing Dorothy Dandridge, starring Halle Berry. Shonda’s next two credits were not Black-centered at all, and now she runs Grey’s Anatomy, which while diverse, is not particular to the African-American experience.

I haven’t seen Shonda in years, so I don’t know to what degree she feels that her Black historical spec helped open doors for her — it certainly wasn’t the only thing she wrote. Anyone interested in hiring her had a range of writing samples to look at, and that’s what I’d urge you to consider.

You say your tastes run more towards horror, suspense and mystery. Write those. Remember, for the sake of argument, we’ve agreed that you’re immensely talented. Your suspenseful thriller spec will find a receptive readership no matter what your ethnicity. You don’t generally see M. Night Shyamalan referred to as an “Indian-American filmmaker.” He’s known by his work. I think you can be, too.

The Writers Guild has a Black Writers committee, whose members would obviously have more informed opinions on the situation, along with many other organizations. There are numbers to look at, particularly in terms of TV staffing, but I don’t think they’re particularly helpful in describing what your experience would be like. Are there a Catch-22 situations, where Black writers write Black-themed movies, and then only get offered other Black-themed movies? Almost certainly. But I think talent can defy expectations.

And don’t worry about being typecast until you’ve gotten a movie made.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Friday, May 4th, 2007
Spider-Man 3, Sandman, Venom, Green Goblin, Sam Raimi In a valiant effort to combat internet movie piracy, the latest installment of Spider-Man 3 was released first overseas before coming to the States. After seeing the film, as much as I hate to say it, the practice of illegal movie downloading is the least of concerns. Right now, I would like to thank Marvel’s head Avi Arad for doing the worst thing possible, and that is to influence director Sam Raimi to include a specific villian just because ‘the fans want him’. With all due respect, “the fans” would much rather bear witness to a leaner, more effective movie than this pile of…sand. (more…)

New York Magazine Reads Peter Jackson’s ‘Lovely Bones’ Script

Friday, May 4th, 2007

Filed under: , ,

A man makes a few blockbuster films full of grandoise scenes of rings and hobbits, or a giant ape climbing the Empire State building, and his past is forgotten. However, as much as it seems strange for Peter Jackson to have adapted Alice Sebold's The Lovely Bones, and subsequently shop it around, it's old hat for him. In 1994, there was his highly-regarded feature, Heavenly Creatures. The film was based upon the true story of two young girls who murdered the one's mother in an attempt to stay together. It's a pretty highly-remembered true-crime story which is probably further fueled by the fact that one of the girls was none other than prolific writer, Anne Perry.

So, Jackson's been shopping around this script, which instead tackles a young girl as the victim, but there haven't been any takers. This could, perchance, be a result of the high price that he's attached to it -- $65 million plus producing and directing fees for Jackson. Or, could it be the script itself? New York magazine got their hands on the script and just gave it an interesting review. While they say that it starts off spot on, with the same initial line from the book, it fails in its accuracy. Now, I don't mean that it is inaccurate, but that the magazine says the screenplay is so accurate that it fails to find the magic: "So much of the novel's action is stuffed into the screenplay, in fact, that little of it registers as important -- to the family left behind, or to Susie." While I can't comment on the script, the magazine is spot-on in its overall evaluation of the project. Lovely Bones is a dark and intriguing story that screams indie treatment, but it's not really the stuff blockbusters are made of. Can Bones swim with the pressure of a huge budget, or is it doomed to sink before it even gets its first stroke in?
Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Malkovich In Talks for Coen Brothers ‘Burn After Reading’

Friday, May 4th, 2007

Filed under: , , , ,

Though we're only a few short weeks away from the debut of the new Coen Bros. pic, No Country for Old Men, at the Cannes Film Festival, all the talk of late has surrounded the casting of their next project, Burn After Reading. Following the news that George Clooney, Frances McDormand and Brad Pitt had signed on to star, comes word from The Hollywood Reporter that John Malkovich is in talks to star as Ozzie Cox, a CIA agent who loses the very important computer disk that holds his memoir. This will mark Malkovich's first-ever appearance in a Coen Bros. flick; personally, I feel this collaboration is long overdo.

With shooting to begin this August, plot details have been kept under wraps. However, word has it that McDormand will play Malkovich's estranged wife, and the person who steals the disk before accidentally leaving it at the gym. That's where Pitt's character (a personal trainer) comes into play; he attempts to use the disk to blackmail Cox. Meanwhile, Clooney will play a hitman hired by the CIA to "clean up" the entire situation. Based on this premise, it sounds like another fabulous Coen Bros. dark comedy, and the cast is as good as they come. No word yet on whether Coen favs Steve Buscemi and Billy Bob Thornton will make an appearance, but there's still plenty of time to announce more names as we creep closer to the pic's start date.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Ty’s picks for Friday, May 4

Friday, May 4th, 2007

graeme-obree.jpg

Most of the population of the free world will be going to see "Spider-Man 3" this weekend. Conveniently, that frees the rest of you to do whatever niche programming or soul-searching you want. Not much else in movie theaters, unfortunately, unless you're a cycling fan (proceed forthwith to "The Flying Scotsman," in photo above, and I swear the movie's not as ridiculous as that outfit), a Euro-football junkie ("Zidane: A 21st Century Portrait" at the ICA), or a gambling addict ("Lucky You"). That said, if you have a yen for adorable, calorie-free French comedies, "The Valet," from reliable farceur Francis Veber, stands to make you very, very happy. At the very least, you won't hate yourself afterwards, and I'm not entirely sure you can say that about "Spider-Man 3".

Community art porn at the Coolidge at midnight, tonight and tomorrow. God, I love that place.

At the Harvard Film Archive, a retrospective of the films of Spain's Alex de la Iglesia, who's mostly unknown here while Pedro Almodovar hogs all the press. The filmmaker himself will be present at Saturday's 7 p.m. screening of "La Communidad". Highly recommended.

If you're interested in Tibet, Buddhism, exotic cinematic tours, and/or eye-popping cinematography, the MFA has some dharma unspooling with the ongoing screenings of John Bush's "Yatra Trilogy" and the debut today of "Dreaming Lhasa," which makes up in poignancy and visual impact what it lacks in drama.

Or you could go outdoors. It is May, after all.