Posts Tagged ‘agents’

Selling script or shooting script?

Friday, January 22nd, 2010

Yesterday I had one of those conversations with a client and then with his producer that made me wonder about the manipulative nature of what agents do. Not necessarily bad manipulation, more like the golden oil that ensures that your car starts smoothly.

The writer is anxious the producer won’t understand what he is trying to do in this draft of the script. The producer has issues with the draft. I sit somewhere between them.

I recommend that we get two reports on the script, one from an established script analyst, the other from someone with some knowledge of the history and geography of the location.

I propose that when we have these reports we can all be more dispassionate about deciding how to go forward. What I want is not a script ready to shoot, but a script that will attract a director and start attracting finance. Do they want the same?

My guess is that this is not the script that the writer wants to be shot.

So is there a useful distinction to be made between a selling script and a shooting script? I think so: after all until the director has had some input we cannot have a shooting script. Next week will be interesting.

Are agents pimps?

Monday, June 8th, 2009

Trying to think what writers most need in difficult times led me to 
wonder why times are so difficult at the moment? Is it that too many writers are competing for too few gigs? Is the reduction in commissions so great that there is generally less work around, despite the increase in cinema-ticket sales?

Reality shows have certainly used up available resources that might otherwise have been available for drama. Thinking back to my clients over the years: they wanted deal information and contacts rather than advice on what to write or how to write it.

Why this sudden introspection? Mainly because we are looking at the next stage of the development of the website for TwelvePoint.com and the advice from marketing guru Kate Adamson of Stark Moore Macmillan is to be a web portal not a magazIne on a website.

Migrating from providing about 100 articles a year as ScriptWriter Magazine, to providing a web-based resource in which those articles (wonderfully searchable now) are just one element, is like learning a new language.

The introspection is my attempt to get my head around the relationship between writers and their agents. I recall Steve Bochco’s immortal description in his novel Death by Hollywood, when he describes the state of denial most creative people in Hollywood live in: ‘And agents? By and large, we’re nothing more than well-paid pimps who represent our pooched-out clients as if they’re beautiful young virgins, offering them up to a bunch of jaded johns who know better, but these are the only whores in town. As the saying goes, denial is not a river in Egypt. It is a river in Hollywood, and it runs deep and brown.’

And then there is the conundrum: who works for whom in this relationship? Of course the answer is that it is a mutually supportive relationship. But I am sure you see the point.

So identifying who is buying what and what they pay and how to batten down the deal is probably more important than what I as an agent think of a piece of work.

For some clients we are the confessional (one said that after firing her agent and before joining us was like going out without knickers on), for others we are more like accountants. Some use us as editors and collaborators on the choice of story and the decision as to how to write it. Yet others see us primarily as friends. But knowing who is buying what and getting the deal to work seems to complement all of the above, to be the sine qua non bit.

So I think that is what I will concentrate on in TwelvePoint as much as we do in BFLA.

Agents moaning?

Friday, May 29th, 2009

Interesting evening at Women in Film and Television last night. Four agents (representing actors, presenters, writers and directors) on the panel, brilliantly chaired by WiFTV ceo Kate Kinninmont, all complained of not really actively looking for clients. All four of us (Vivienne Clore of The Richard Stone Partnership, Maxine Hoffman of Curtis Brown, Matthew Dench of Dench Arnold and me) have fairly settled client lists, take on very few new clients, think many of those who submit showreels or CVs or material do it badly. All of us get too many emails and more applications from prospective clients than we can do justice to.
There wasn’t a great deal of overt optimism but underlying the slight negativeness was a sense that there was still work out there, that training may not be as effective as those who do it assume, that being pro-active was more important than ever, and that writers in particular needed to start behaving like producers (in the early stages of developing a film; see current debate in Shooting people for Writers), that selling an option for peanuts was not necessarily the right thing to do (though I must admit that all writers love to be able to say ‘I have sold a treatment or script…’. Actors could also team up with writers and directors and indie producers since the sum of the parts may be greater the parts individually.
I think we need new business models: there is a democratization taking place where the very few gatekeepers (commissioning editors, producers) should not be a bar to the sensible development of scripts or stories. There are other routes than the conventional – writing a story as a novel enables you to sell it to two separate markets; making a micro-budget film could jumpstart a career faster than selling three options, and so on.
Maybe TwelvePoint should run a course in producing for writers? Now I have said it someone will beat us to it. Good, we are busy enough. As long as writers find ways of moving their careers forward and cease to see making an option sale as the most important thing, things will improve and agents will have less to complain about.

Are rejections better than silence?

Monday, May 25th, 2009

This long holiday weekend I tried to catch up with the workload that had grown like Topsy due to two bookfairs coming hot one after another. We once worked out that a film or bookfair really take three weeks of your life: one week preparing, one week travelling and being there, and a week following up. I have not started my Torino bookfair follow-up yet. I was intending to do it this weekend but other things happened like delightful visits from an 18 month old grandson. So I didn’t catch up with the office as much as I had hoped but I had a great time nevertheless.

Part of that catch up was to be chasing submissions where we have not heard from producers or publishers. Some, sadly, never respond at all unless they are chased (I will come to that in a minute). Others are meticulous and fast. Usually the faster the response the more likely it is to be a rejection.

Agents tend to become inured to rejections, well of other people’s work that is. No matter how much you love someone’s writing, how much you have worked with them on draft after draft, or how important you know it is to their financial stability to get a deal, it nevertheless does not hurt as much as a personal rejection, if for no other reason than as we are making submissions for 200 clients, we get many rejections.

Our overseas agents also make submissions on behalf of ourselves and our clients, which we don’t necessarily know about until we get a list of rejections and – often enough – a successful sale accompanied by the rejections.

I recall many years ago one book that in various drafts of the first chapters was rejected about 40 times over several years (including three times by the publisher who bought it) before being sold for £5,000. When paperback rights were offered by the hardback publisher they went for £100,000, a then record I believe for a first novel.

Telling writers about the rejections is never enjoyable, partly because it seems to be a failure by the agent and because you know it hurts. Some writers want to be told every grisly detail; other don’t want any details.

I know that many writers are very focussed on their own book or script, as they should be. So every day that goes by makes them wonder if anything is happening to their work. I suppose it is like letting your child go on a first date and worrying about what is happening. Like the joke about the mother pacing up and down because her daughter is on a first date. “Don’t worry,” says the father, “…she is a big girl.” “I know that,” says the mother, “…but she is out with a big boy.”

I wonder if writers know how often we have to chase submissions to get responses? What a waste of time that is, except if I am to be honest, I also need chasing so before any of you yell that I took ages to read something you submitted to me, I hold my hand up. Like most agents I have to prioritise existing clients. We get over 7,000 submissions from writers a year wanting to join the agency. Thankfully I don’t get 7,000 – there are six of us.

I try to read material from clients fast but even then I sometimes miss, either because of the travelling or because things do fall between the cracks. I am hoping to be far-better organised with the iRex electronic book I am trying out. It is the only e-book you can write on (I scribble notes all the time so a conventional e-reader will not do). I have started downloading everything I need to read so I have it all to hand. No excuses, except finding time.

After a 9 or 10 hour office day there has to be some family time and some time for TwelvePoint  (I still read and edit every article at least three times) , blogging and compiling the Buzz  for our members (which I am also slower on than I would like to be) before the script and manuscript reading can start, which is why I take longer than I would like to read work by writers who are not clients. What tends to make me speed up the process is knowing that they have been produced or published, that they work in or near the media, that they are very businesslike and have got good, commercial ideas and the first few pages read wonderfully.

Even then I still have to reject some writers whose writing I really like and who come across as great people to know (for us that is an important factor as is the opposite – writers who come across as difficult, pedantic, inflexible are likely to get rejected even if they write like angels).

But I would like to apologise for taking so long to all of you who feel I have taken too long. I wish it were otherwise. The submissions that are obviously inappropriate to me or the agency are easier to reject quickly. It is the close shaves that take longer precisely because they need more time to think about them or to share them with a colleague. The best advice I can give you (but don’t tell anyone I said so) is that even when agency websites say they won’t read if material is submitted to other agents, don’t tell anyone. The worst that can happen is that two agents want you. That is something you will find a way to deal with.

Julian

The long good Friday weekend

Friday, May 22nd, 2009

Didn’t manage to blog yesterday as there were 27 meetings and since I wasn’t going into the office today I had to clear my desk. A large box usually does the trick.

I realise on days like this that what I envy writers is time to reflect. I know that much of that time is spent reflecting how little income is coming in, or how stupid the editorial notes are, or is it time to take my agent out for lunch again. But it is the nature of representing people that there are multiple phonecalls, over 100 emails a day, shoals of meetings, lunch on the run most days. Don’t get me wrong: I enjoy it. Never a dull moment, never a moment really. It is necessary to be proactive and reactive which means you never sit still and you never know what the next call or email will be.

Every one could be an offer; more likely it is not good news. It is in the nature of making lots of submissions that many of them are rejections to which we become fairly thick-skinned. It always hurts and conveying disappointment is always unpleasant.

But the end of a long, short week makes for a nice feeling of anticipation: the three-day weekend will enable me to steal some time to reflect and to read a couple of mss and 4 or 5 scripts in a leisurely way, rather than at 11pm. Remember the story of the writer who was divorced by his wife because she never believed he was working as he stared out of the windown for hours? He was lucky because he could stare out of the window (maybe also because she divorced him).

I do my reflection at the gym (it is not the most strenuous gym, but cleverly makes you feel better without hurting too much). Watering the garden is another good time to reflect.

But those moments are brief because so much time not in the office goes into reading and hopefully being sufficiently transported by what I am reading that I forget to reflct or even forget about the fact that I don’t do enough of  it. Then there is the Buzz to do, the TwelvePoint articles to commission and edit, and now a daily blog. I must ask smeone if a daily blog means 5 times a week?

You can tell it has been a long week. I will be back.

Julian