 |
Archive for the ‘Screenwriting’ Category
Friday, May 4th, 2007
 This 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.
Posted in Film Industry, Q&A | No Comments »
Tuesday, May 1st, 2007
Yeah, fine, it’s my dirty little secret. Sometimes I don’t have anything worth saying to you people. And yet, I know you’re out there. Running a blog is a little like being on the roof of the mall in Dawn of the Dead. I can forget about the crowd outside for a little bit, but when I look down…
…you’re all still there.
Hungry for brains.
Well, if that analogy hasn’t turned you off forever, allow me to stopgap things for a bit with some Q&A. Oh, and no, that guy in the picture isn’t me. He’s better-looking than I am, even passed out and rubbery as he is.
Q: Why don’t you use “funny names” in your spoof movies?”
A: Because they’re not really funny.
Well, there’s funny names and funny names.
Fielding Mellish is a funny sounding name, but it’s not a funny name.
“White Bitch” or “Captain Jack Swallows” from Epic Movie are “funny” names, i.e. they pull a Mad Magazine on the name of the character you’re spoofing.
There are two reasons we don’t do this when we make spoofs. The first is that it’s so easy, anyone can do it, so why would anyone actually laugh?
This brings to mind a great joke from The Simpsons. We see the writing room of Mad Magazine. All the writers are quiet. Then one says, “How about…Everybody HATES Raymond?” The other writers laugh, and the editor says, “Well, it took all night, but it was worth it!”
The second reason we don’t use funny names is that they’re not funny after the first mention. Nothing is. Repeated jokes try the audience’s patience, unless it’s a running gag that builds.
This brings to mind a not so great joke from The Simpsons. This week’s episode was about Little League. Nelson is the pitcher, but instead of throwing the ball, he tosses it up in the air and punches it toward the batter. Cute joke…the first time.
The third time? Yikes.
It’s the same with funny names. Even if you get someone to laugh at “White Bitch” once, they’re not going to laugh at it the twelfth time.
We call this rule “Can you live with it?”
There is one and only one “funny name” in the ZAZ pantheon (and I include SM3 and SM4 in that). First person to name it gets a nod of recognition.
Q: How does one go about writing a remake? Can anyone pick up an old movie and retool it for a modern audience? Or do you have to be connected with the
studio who owns the rights?
A: Carefully, no, no.
First, the easy part. Copyright includes control of so-called “derivative works”, which include screenplay adaptations. As such, if you’re serious about writing a script that will get produced, you do need to either purchase or option or receive a license for the adaptation rights from the copyright holder. For those of us who write professionally, this almost always means being hired by a studio that controls the underlying rights, although there are many inspirational examples of screenwriters taking the bull by the horns and going straight to the author on their own.
Some books have fallen into the public domain, so you’re free to adapt them as you wish.
The actual creative process of adaptation is its own unique form of screenwriting, and I’m simply not equipped to describe it fully. Having done two adaptations, I can tell you that it is essential to somehow carry with you a deep love and respect and total understanding of the material…as well as a simultaneous fearlessness to adapt and change it.
To me, the best adaptations aren’t the slavish ones, but the ones that alchemically transfer the heart and soul of the original material into a brand new work of art.
Read the novel “Out of Sight” and then watch the movie of Scott Frank’s screenplay. It’s a master class in how to adapt with soul.
Walsh/Boyens/Jackson’s adaptation of The Lord Of The Rings is another wonderful example of how to choose, omit and change and yet enhance the heart of the work, rather than diminish it.
Remember….love and fearlessness.
Q: I recently signed up for a screenwriting class. On our first day of class, myself and the other students eagerly asked our new teacher how many screenplays he had gotten optioned. His answer was long-winded and round-about, but basically amounted to: zero. So we asked him who his agent was, and he said he wasn’t represented, but didn’t need to be, because he was on a “first-name basis” with so-and-so big-name celebrities, who had agreed to “read anything I send them”. At that point, I started becoming concerned that perhaps I was not getting a quality education for my money.
Is this a legit thing? Is being able to say “I know four big wigs in Hollywood on a first-name basis” as good as being able to say, “I have optioned four screenplays” in the screenwriting world? Are all screenwriting teachers probably going to be people who have not actually sold screenplays (because presumably the people who are selling all the screenplays don’t need to teach to support themselves)? If you were me, would you drop the class and get your money back?
A: No, yes, don’t know.
I have a very dim view of the entire screenwriting “cottage industry” out there.
I think I’ll coin a word.
Paraliterary
These people are all paraliterary. They exist on the fringe, selling “secrets” and teaching lessons and dealing in confidence, but of course they’d be gone in a moment if they could sell a script or work as a screenwriter.
Mostly.
I do believe that some people are really good at teaching and guiding. We see this in sports all the time. Casey Stengel was a pretty mediocre baseball player, but a great manager. Teaching is its own art, so if you’re learning things that make you a better writer, than the class is worth it.
I am extremely suspicious, however, of anyone who starts featherbedding their resume by talking about how “connected” they are. This is a bad sign.
My only advice here is this: if you think the class is helping your writing, stick with it. If you think it’s a waste of time, dump it.
Just remember, folks, professional screenwriting really is a lot like professional sports. Most of you will never be able to hit a 95 MPH two-seamer no matter how much training you get…and the sad statistics are than most of you will not be able to maintain a career as a screenwriter either. It’s hard. Take help where you can find it, but keep a watchful eye out for the paraliterary.
They want your money.
Q: I’m writing from Canada (go hockey!), and I have queried four agencies up here that rep TV writers. They all said “We are simply not expanding our roster. Do not send us anything.” So… now what? Is that a January thing? Is that a test to see how determined I am? What would be a reasonable length of time to re-contact them? Any advice on approaching production companies (in Canada) this spring without an agent? Am I kidding myself?
A: No, no, don’t bother, some, no.
I’m enjoying this multipart question trend.
Many agencies will not take on clients who don’t already have agents. They’re either full, or they don’t want to break in new writers, or they’re over-committed already, and can barely keep up with the clients they have…and are perhaps considering dropping a few, much less taking on additional ones.
You have to try and find a way in beyond the cold-call of a query letter. You need a friend, a lawyer, a manager, a someone. Once you get that, you need material that will impress.
Remember, if writing is your Plan A and what you’re doing while you’re waiting is your Plan B, make your Plan B your Plan A and your Plan A your Plan B. Find a job somewhere in the business and do it really well. This is the best way to get yourself into a position where you can be read by people who can help matchmake you with an agent.
Q: Is R. Kosberg’s Moviepitch a ripoff or is it worth while to send him ideas?
A: If you’re using this, you’re not a writer.
I’ve spoken with Robert a few times. He’s a very nice guy, he really is known by everyone in town, and he really does sell things every now and again. He’s a legitimate producer, and he certainly has made a living pitching ideas.
What he’s not is a writer. He’s a producer. That’s what some producers (not the full kind, but some) do: they come up with ideas for movies or they find ideas for movies, and they set them up. Writers like me then come along and write the script.
Guess who gets paid more on that project?
(hint…I do)
The reason Robert is a success is that he deals in volume, and more power to him! If he sets up twelve projects a year and just two get made, he’s probably into the seven figures.
So…should you be using him as a broker? Yes…if you can’t write the script of your idea. In that case, you’re a producer looking for another producer to help you. If you’re a writer, then write the damned script! A great script will be found. A great script will make you a lot of money. A great script will launch your career.
Setting up ideas is silly if you’re a writer…unless you’re doing it yourself in order to write the script (i.e. a pitch). In this case, it sounds like Robert’s getting you option money for your idea, but you’re not going to write the script, because who the hell wants to bother with you?
If you were a writer…you would have already written it, right?
Hmmm…I have a few more questions stored up, but I’m not gonna answer them right away. Gotta have something saved up for another lazy day.
Next up, I’m going to take on “clams.” If you read Jane Espenson’s blog, you know what I’m talking about….
Posted in Q&A | No Comments »
Monday, April 30th, 2007
 What is the best way to find out if a novel has been optioned for a film/screenplay?
–Jon Hanemann
Union City, NJ
I could swear I’ve answered this question before. But in 30 seconds of searching, I couldn’t find my previous answer, so it’s unlikely you could. And it’s so simple, I might as well answer it again.
- Open the book to the publishing/information page.
- Note the publisher.
- Call 212.555.1212. This is New York City information.
- Ask for the phone number for that publisher.
- Call that number.
- Ask for “subrights, please.”
- You’ll likely get a voicemail telling you to fax your request. Follow their instructions.
- In your faxed letter — or in the event you connect with a live person — explain that you’re trying to track down film and television rights to THIS GREAT NOVEL by This Author.
You may need to follow up a week or two later, but you’ll eventually get contact information for the author, her agent or attorney. You then write to them to ask.
What if it’s not a New York publisher, or not a US publisher, or some other special case? You can almost always find someone who knows something. Eventually, you need to get through to the author or her representatives. They’re the only people who will really know the status.
Posted in Adaptation, Q&A, Rights and Copyright | No Comments »
Saturday, April 28th, 2007
I had a hunch there would be a lot of entries to the second Scene Challenge, but by the hammer of Thor, I never expected 162.
It’s taken hours to go through them, winnowing it down from a list of 25 to ten to the winner. There were so many solid entries that I found myself needing to stick pretty closely to the rules: it had to be about a guy picking up his clothes at a dry cleaner. This standard led me to ding entries that felt more like a laundromat than a dry cleaner. It also sidelined many scenes that created a fascinating situation but weren’t really about The Guy himself.
Believe me, I enjoyed the riffs on what a dry cleaner could be. A couple of times, I found myself thinking, “Yeah, I’d see that movie.” But since the competition was about introducing a character, the winning scene had to be about The Guy, not The World.
After a final battle between several really strong contenders, I ended up picking two that were very similar, each of which had aspects I really liked. The first is by Craig Ugoretz:
- EXT. DRY CLEANERS - DAY
- An ornery, ancient Honda careens into the parking lot, screeching into a space. Out tumbles CLARENCE MALLOY, unshaven, egg-beater hair, stained wife beater. All that’s missing are the wavy smell lines.
- He struggles out of the car, trying not to let any balloons slip out, and ends up slamming the door on his clown pants. He always does that.
- INT. DRY CLEANERS - DAY
- Clarence scurries up to the counter, out of breath. The cashier eyes him, wary.
- CLARENCE
- I lost my ticket. But it’s Malloy, a clown shirt? Bosco stains? Oh, and, I’m in a bit of a hurry.
- He tries a smile. It misfires.
Let’s look at what Craig did. The second sentence gives us a bit of a visual on Clarence, but it’s the “wavy smell lines” that stick. Honestly, it was one of the few descriptors I still remembered after 100 subsequent entries. I like the balloons in the car, but it’s too easy to miss. Adding something more concrete around “balloons” would help slow the reader down, as would breaking it into shorter sentences:
- He struggles out of the car, trying not to let any of the 57 balloons slip out. He ends up slamming the door on his clown pants. He always does that.
The action inside the dry cleaners doesn’t do that much, though Clarence’s misfired smile is a nice touch. It could even be the end of the scene, if we were to cut to Clarence showing up at his next gig.
The second is by Danny:
- INT. DRY CLEANERS - DAY
- A dust cloud enters.
- It slowly clears to reveal JOE SMELLS, wearing quite possibly the first pair of clothes ever made, and they’ve certainly never been washed.
- SMELLS
- Have your rates dropped yet?
- The cashier shakes his head ‘no.’
- SMELLS
- How about coupons, or specials going on?
- The cashier rolls his eyes and points to a sign reading: WE DO NOT CLEAN CLOTHES YOU ARE CURRENTLY WEARING.
- Smells sighs. As he exits–
- SMELLS
- All right, I’ll check back later. Again. You should really think about changing your policies though. They make you look cheap.
Most of the heavy lifting is done by the dialogue, and it works well. Danny relies on a single description to set up the visual. I’d love to know an age, and at least one other detail to give me a picture of who this guy is. Since we need “first clothes ever made” to help tie us into the dry cleaners, I might break that off as a second sentence and add some more goodness right after JOE SMELLS.
- It slowly clears to reveal JOE SMELLS, 32, the most confident homeless man in Phoenix. He’s wearing quite possibly the first pair of clothes ever made, and they’ve certainly never been washed.
Congrats to Craig and Danny. I hadn’t meant to split the prize — but I hadn’t anticipated 162 entries, either.
Given the setup, I guess it’s not surprising that I had my pick of clowns, wary cashiers and stinky patrons. But there were a few other trends worth noting:
- “A, but not A.” You describe a character as being one thing, then immediately negate it. “Friendly, but somewhat aloof.” “Impeccably dressed, yet his tie is askew.” There’s nothing wrong with this technique, but you have to be careful that it doesn’t verge on impossibility. I kept waiting for a tiny giant to show up.
- Laundronoir. I guess it’s natural that blood stains would be a common theme, but I hadn’t anticipated so many tickets from decades ago.
- Past tense. Several of the early entries were written in the past tense, common to novels. Screenplays are always written in the present tense. But it’s nice to see some new contributors who haven’t been exposed to screenwriting trying their hands.
- Smell-o-vision. Along the same lines, screenplays can only directly describe things that can be seen or heard. If you’re referencing smell, a character in the scene needs to make the reaction: “Candace half-chokes on the smell coming off him.” Or at least make sure the reader knows that this is just for his benefit: “He looks like week-old roadkill, and probably smells like it, too.”
Again, there were a lot of strong contenders, so my congrats to the many readers who contributed. If you want to comment on a specific entry, be sure to reference it by number, because there are several duplicated names.
Posted in Challenge, Follow Up | No Comments »
Friday, April 27th, 2007
Like everyone else near a keyboard, I've grown accustomed to Wikipedia.
I should probably wean myself.
Every now and again I'll check the IMDB discussion boards on movies I'm working on. It's pretty fascinating, if only as a study in the global game of Telephone that is the internet. My favorite debates are the ones where someone insists loudly and arrogantly and with supreme confidence that "This movie will be Rated R! I know someone at the stuido!"…even though the movie was never going to be R.
And yes, spellings like "stuido" are part of the fun.
So today, when I skimmed the boards for Superhero!, I was excited to see that someone was trumping the debate by citing the ultimate internet authority. Off I went to see the movie's entry on Wikipedia.
Wowsers.
Let's go through it…
Superhero! is an action/comedy written by Craig Mazin and directed by David Zucker, and produced by Robert K. Weiss. The movie will spoof famous superhero films. It is distributed by The Weinstein Company. It is uncertain what the release date will be. Some sites confirmed that it will be released on March 21, 2008.
Boy, only thirteen words in, and they've already blown it. I'm directing, not David. I've always been directing. I've never not been directing. I'm also producing with Weiss and Zucker. We've shifted positions a little bit, but the same basic team behind SM3 and SM4 is still in place.
I do believe we are on the schedule for March 21, 2008, though, so good on them.
Now, here's the "purported plot."
Fabtopolis' greatest supervillain, a magician who goes by the pseudonym The Great Jim (Chris Elliot), has just kidnapped the city's mayor (Leslie Nielsen) and his wife (Anna Faris). Four of the world's most spectacular superheroes are called to the rescue: Beakman (Greg Giraldo) - the leader of the group, Squak (Eric Christian Olsen) - the wannabee, Cleara (Carla Gugino) - the see-through hero, and The Stoner (Ben Harr) - a loser who becomes a large stone monster when he gets high. The Great Jim is building a device that will allow him to sound like anybody in the world and this group of superheroes must stop him and save the mayor or the entire city will be destroyed.
As they race against time to defeat Jim, they team up with many other superheroes to try and take down Jim and his allies, including the dreaded Dock Cock (Kevin Mcdonald) and Mephistopheles (Adam Arkin).
Not bad. The only things they got wrong were everything. Every single thing. Insane.
Fabtopolis?
Anna Faris married to Leslie Nielsen?
Dock COCK?
Folks, I know I've disappointed some audiences in the past. Maybe myself too. But if I ever write anything that even remotely resembles the above, I'm eating a gun. Okay? Here's a hint…we never do "funny names." Ever.
Then they move on to a list of the movies we will be spoofing.
Superman film series
Batman film series
Fantastic Four film seriers
The Hulk (film)
Spider-Man film series
The Prestige
Daredevil (film)
Ghost Rider (film)
We're not really specifically spoofing anything. We're taking on the entire genre. However, I can assure you that the vast majority of the movies mentioned above aren't even getting casually referenced.
The Prestige???
Here's my favorite part. "History." This is the part that sounds like actual information!
It is currently unknown whether David Zucker or Craig Mazin will direct. According to some sites, the film was supposed to be originally released on February 7, 2007. However the film's real release date has been reported to be delayed to March 21, 2008.
It was confirmed on March 2, 2007, that Adam Campbell will reprise his Superman role from Epic Movie.
Many cast changes were announced on March 13, 2007. Big name actors such as Josh Lucas, Laura Kightlinger, and Joshua Jackson turned out to be actors "considered" for the roles, but not actually cast.
The producers have decided to go with actors that are more familiar to this type of film. They've gone with Anna Faris, Kevin McDonald, and Chris Elliot to replace the others.
It's currently known. I'm directing. It was "confirmed" about wha-huh now about Adam Campbell? I've never even met the guy. He's not in our movie, and he's not going to be in our movie. Nothing against him, but he belongs to a different brand of…well…whatever genre Epic Movie is. Yeah, I was totally considering "big name actors" like….Laura Kightlinger??? I actually think she's very funny…but "big name actress?"
No, none of the actors mentioned in the paragraph above have been considered for anything in this movie (YET…because we haven't really gotten into casting yet…that's coming up in just a few weeks). But why should that stop anyone? Here's the "cast of characters!"
Greg Giraldo - Theo Payne / Beakman
Carla Gugino - Cleara
Leslie Nielsen - Mayor Jogen
Anna Faris - Mrs. Jogen
Eric Christian Olsen - Mark Ockle / Squak
Ben Harr - The Stoner
Chris Elliot - The Great Jim
Fred Willard - Alfred
Adam Campbell - Superman
Kevin McDonald - Dock Cock
Lil' Kim - Betty Sue
Jonathon Martes - Spider-Man
Penny Ulrich - Lindsey
Lochlyn Munro - Daredevil
Shannon Elizabeth - Elektra
Adam Arkin - Mephistopheles
Xavier Reboir - Lex Lover
I'll go in order, giving you a "yes" or "no". Presume that a "no" is both to the actor and the character. A "yes" is a yes to both.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no and no.
Other than that, it's a really accurate entry.
Posted in The Craft & Trade | No Comments »
Wednesday, April 25th, 2007
Following up on last week’s article about How to Introduce a Character, I think it’s time for the second ever Scene Challenge. ![[Scene Challenge]](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/scene_challenge.png)
For the first one, Masturbating to Star Trek, you had to write an entire scene. This time, you simply have to introduce one character. And trust me, sometimes that’s harder.
Here’s all I’m giving you:
A man is picking up his clothes at a dry-cleaner.
The man is a principal character in your script, and this is the first time we’re meeting him. What’s his name? What’s the story? What’s the genre? You decide, to the degree it matters.
You’re welcome to write as much of the dry-cleaner scene as you want, but the focus is on the man’s introduction. The winning entry might be one sentence long. You may wish to consult the how-to for helpful suggestions.
Here are the rules:
- Post your entry in the comments thread of this article. Please don’t attempt fancy formatting. It usually just screws up the margins.
- All entries must be submitted by 8 a.m. PST on Saturday, April 28th, 2007. Remember that comments are sometimes held in moderation. Don’t submit twice. It will show up. Promise.
- I’ll pick a winner later that day.
- Winner receives bragging rights, which may be exchanged for a sense of self-worth. Liz used her win to make an appeal for meningitis vaccination.
And…begin.
Posted in Challenge, Words on the page | No Comments »
Monday, April 23rd, 2007
Jane Espenson runs a terrific blog offering advice on writing TV spec scripts. If you’re at all interested in writing for television, it’s worth checking out.
Jane’s site has two quirky aspects. First off, she consistently notes what she ate for lunch. Second, she doesn’t offer any online mechanism for reader feedback. Not only are comments turned off, but she doesn’t even provide a contact email. Instead, she lists a post office mailbox. You’re supposed to write a letter the old-fashioned-way.
That’s her prerogative, certainly. But it makes it difficult to point out simple errors she might want to correct. For instance, this post from last week:
I’m sure there are many of these out there, but tonight I’m just presenting the first documented clamshell that has captured my attention. Remember these lines?
You smell like aftershave and taco meat. (Blades of Glory)
You smell like beef and cheese. (Elf)
You smell like sweet red plums and grilled cheese sandwiches. (The Wedding Planner)
You smell like old people and soap. (Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory)
That last one is from my script for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. (Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is the Gene Wilder version, and doesn’t feature that line.)
A simple mistake, easily corrected. But how am I to tell her? I suppose I’ll need to write her a letter, and find a stamp with which to mail it.
This got me thinking: Since she and I probably have a significant overlap of readership, why not provide a feedback mechanism for her? So here’s what I’m going to do.
Next Monday (April 30th, 2007), I’m going to print out this post and all attached comments and mail it to Jane. So if there’s anything you’d like to ask her, or a response to something she’s written, just leave it as a comment on this post.
Remember, these comments are for Jane’s blog, not mine.
Me? I’m having Quizno’s for lunch. A mesquite chicken sandwich, no bacon.
Posted in Resources, Television | No Comments »
Sunday, April 22nd, 2007
I got tagged with the Five Things Meme, in which I’m supposed to share five pieces of information most readers probably don’t know about me. Fair enough.
I’m an Eagle scout. I can tie all my knots, splint a broken bone, and build a fire without matches. Growing up in Colorado, I also learned to dig snowcaves, gut fish and cook a delicious snipe. My troop had the Frost Point Award, which worked thusly: for every campout during the winter months, they’d bring a thermometer. For every degree below freezing it fell, you’d get a frost point. The goal was to collect 100 frost points during the winter camping season. I got the award three years straight. Yes, in retrospect, it was crazy. Raspberries are my kryptonite. One raspberry and I’m curled in the fetal position, waiting out the abdominal pain and feeling like I’ve been poisoned. This has only been going on for a few months. I think it may related to some undercooked ostrich I ate. I was all-state orchestra. I wasn’t a prodigy, but I was very good at clarinet through high school. Then one day I realized I was never going to be great. I was never going to do it for a living. What’s more, I didn’t really enjoy it: I kept playing because I was good. So I gave it up completely. No regrets. I’m not the smart one in the relationship. By any metric, Mike is demonstrably smarter when it comes to math, history and languages. At a certain point, most couples divvy up responsibility for life’s chores: cooking, pet care, dealing with solicitors at the door. I have ceded all responsibility for calculation, navigation and scheduling. I have claimed baking, swimming instruction, and ripping the meat off rotisserie chicken. I was a vegetarian for seven years. I gave up meat during a summer film program at Stanford, largely for economic reasons — pasta was cheaper. Mostly through inertia, I stayed a milk-and-egg-eating vegetarian without complaint or incident, until I started working out and found myself ravenously, deliriously craving protein. Tuna was my gateway meat, and within a year I was eating KFC. But I still don’t eat mammals.
Posted in Meta | No Comments »
Thursday, April 19th, 2007
Nappy-headed schmoOh, blog, dear blog, I've been neglecting you. I'm racing toward a deadline on my script right now, so I've been keeping you at arm's length. Then, a couple of days ago, when I was thinking about posting, I gave myself a concussion (my head + underside of my son's wooden loft bed = pain and puking). But I can't stay away from you. I want to touch quickly on two topics that have been dominating the news.
First, the Virginia Tech jerk.
It's normal for everyone to navel-gaze and point fingers after something like this happens. One of the best classes I ever took in college was a course called "The Psychology of Justice." In that class, I learned about a phenomenon that is incredibly pervasive and persistent across all cultures: the Belief In A Just World. Belief in a just world often means that we deserve what we get, and we get what we deserve.
However, in cases like the Virginia Tech shooting, it's clear that the victims didn't deserve what they got. That doesn't mean Belief In A Just World goes away. Instead, the BJW theory says that great evils must have great causes.
The space shuttle doesn't blow up because a piece of rubber got cold—it blows up because of a culture of failure and the incompetence of an entire space agency and perhaps because of humanity's hubris… You know what I mean?
In this case, BJW says that video games, isolation, access to guns, non-access to guns, popular music, coarsening of culture and ultimately society itself is to blame for the tragedy at VT. Of course, the problem with BJW is that it's not true. The world is not just. Existence is not fair. Great evils sometimes happen for the most mundane reasons. The poor people who died at VT died because a mentally ill person made the insane choice to kill them. And if someone chooses to kill you, they are going to kill you, and there's nothing you can do about it. They might use guns, they might use gasoline and fertilizer, they might use poison…
…not a very comforting thought.
But that's life in an unjust, unfair world.
Of course, one can imagine Don Imus thinking to himself, "If only this asshole could have done the shooting a week earlier…I'd still have my job."
Frequent commenter Kevin Arbouet has a post up on the Imus situation. I agree 100% with Kevin that this is not a free speech issue at all. No one has the right to a radio talk show. The government didn't fire Imus. He's free to say "nappy headed-ho" all day long without fear of imprisonment or fines.
Now, when this whole thing went down, I was honestly puzzled. Imus has been saying stupid crap like that for years. So has Howard Stern. Have you heard the stuff the comedians say on the Friar's Club roasts? Hell, any four second sample of Lisa Lampanelli's act is waaaay worse than "nappy-headed ho's."
Should Imus have been fired? Yes, but years ago. For sucking. My view of this latest debacle is that it's an example par excellence of our nation's inability to discuss racial issues honestly. We have two cultures. The first culture is soaking in racial humor, racial observations, the n-word, bitches, ho's, racial suspicion, racial resentment and occasionally racial hostility. The second culture is a color-blind, multicultural rainbow coalition where no one sees race, no one ever says or thinks anything "offensive," and we all live, work and play in a bridge-of-the-Starship-Enterprise-like world of ethnic harmony.
The first culture is true. The second is a fraud. We all burble along in the first culture, until, occasionally, someone makes a stink. It's not always Jesse or Al. Sometimes it's the ADL, sometimes it's the guy from the Catholic League, sometimes it's GLAAD, sometimes it's O'Reilly yapping about the coarsening of culture. At that point, everyone suddenly pretends that the first culture is the anomaly, and the second, fraudulent culture is the reality. Somehow, we begin doing rhetorical backflips to denounce true culture as transgressive against a fictional culture that has never been and probably never will be.
But why Imus? Was Imus' "nappy-headed ho's" comment funny? No. Was it accurate? No, not even close.
The reason Imus said that comment is obvious to me: he thought he was sounding "cool." See, perversely, Imus is not part of true culture. He's out of the sphere of what is current. His attempt to be a part of that culture immediately rang false, and I think that's what caught people's attention.
If Howard Stern says, "Nappy-headed ho's," no one blinks. I guarantee it. Why? Because Howard has been manufacturing this kind of relaxed culture for years. Not Imus. When Imus tries it, it sounds tinny and fake and creepy.
Of all the stuff I've read about this affair, the best and most honest perspective is from this guy. I don't agree with everything he says in his piece (I don't have a stake in the cultural battles between black men and black women), and I think he's too hard on Cosby in particular, but when I read his essay, I thought, "Points for honesty."
When it comes to discussions of race in this country, we're in dire need of a Diogenes.
Posted in Miscellany | No Comments »
Tuesday, April 10th, 2007
Look around the site, and you'll see lots of little icons next to all of the links.
Welcome to Snap.
Instead of boring links that send you to sites unseen, if you hover your cursor on the link, Snap lets you see a miniature image of the page you're thinking about visiting. To visit the link, just click the image of the site. You can also search within the snap box. Kind of neat, I think (unless you use Safari…the search function seems to crash it).
If you hate Snap, just click on the options or disable link within the link bubble to customize your preferences. Admittedly, I've installed Snap if only to keep up with the Augusts (who went and installed a super nifty live comment preview function on his blog that's apparently super easy for WordPress blogs like his, but on par with nuclear fission for MovableType blogs like mine), but I really like it.
If any of you blog on MovableType or are familiar with functionality you'd like to see here, please let me know. I'm always looking to improve this site, and fussing with php tags at 1:30 in the morning actually keeps me young.
Posted in Miscellany | No Comments »
|
|
|
