Posts Tagged ‘Screenwriters’ Festival’

Publish so you are not damned

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

I gave a talk at the SWF in Cheltenham and many people who did not get into the room asked for a copy to be provided, so it is up as a TwelvePoint article. I was going to do a blog about the subject but decided to put the key points of the talk and article into a blog. Here it is.

I am suggesting that writing prose is a serious and complementary activity for scriptwriters. There are many reasons for this but the main ones seem to me to be as follows:

• Most of you have probably read more novels than you’ve read scripts and you would certainly have had some training at school and possibly university to write prose probably long before you had any training to write scripts.

• Compared to writing a script, writing prose is relatively straightforward and it does not require the same obsessional adherence to structural templates that scripts need to demonstrate for them to be taken seriously when submitted.

• I believe that one of the great fallacies in the teaching of scriptwriting is precisely that I do not believe we should be teaching ’scriptwriting’. Instead I believe writers should study (and learn to appreciate) storytelling. One of the most important motivations, apart from making money, for a writer should be that he or she is compelled to be a storyteller and after forty years of working with writers, I believe it’s easier to tell the story in prose than in script. As Alexander Mackendrick, the director of The Ladykillers said: ‘Don’t try to work out story in script form; do it in prose first.’

• A great advantage of writing a novel as opposed to a script is that you can describe what characters think and feel, something you can’t easily or acceptably do in a script. In other words, a draft of a novel can be a very extended treatment enabling you to work out the subtleties of character and plot for your proposed feature film. Admittedly it can take many months. As Robert McKee said when asked how long it should take to write a script, it should take about 6 months but you shouldn’t start writing the script for 5½ months.

• Whether you’re able to sell the novel or not, it might be easier to find a publisher for a well-worked-out manuscript taking us into the hearts and minds of the characters, the emotions, the pace and the plot – effectively a template for the film – than to find a producer willing to put up money for the script version. Furthermore, should a producer make you an offer to option your prose document, one of your deal points can be that you have to be given the first crack at the script. If a publisher therefore makes an offer for your novel, whatever you do, do not allow them to control film dramatisation rights; keep those yourself.

• My final argument for the value of investing time in writing a novel as opposed to working in a bar is that all things being equal, by which I mean if your prose writing ability is as good as your scriptwriting ability, novels and therefore novelists tend to make more money than scripts or scriptwriters. This may not be true in Hollywood where silly money can be paid for a script but it is true in Europe, particularly in Britain. You need to remember that in Britain we make about a 100 movies a year but we publish about 100,000 books a year.

The privilege of being a writer

Tuesday, July 28th, 2009

Strange day today: every few months the book and film/TV departments at the agency sit down and go through the entire client list so the film/TV agents can tell the book agents what is happening re their clients. Nice to see today that there was rather a lot to report: the two very different worlds (book as opposed to film/TV) can have great synergy.

Now if only all those options would be exercised and all of them would go into production?

Then we did an annual tidy up, clearing out all the paper that we no longer needed to keep, partly because the new scanner scans at 70 pages a minute. We have also started preparing for the Frankfurt Bookfair (in October) as meetings are already being set up for visits from publishers and scouts in the weeks before the bookfair, since we cannot get all the meetings we need to have into the 5 days of the fair.

Because we are coming up to the August holiday season, when things slow down, we expect deals to go slowly. For once they seem to be piling in faster than ever so that the writers can get cracking over the summer break. That is a turn up…

And the writers’ enthusiasm and appreciation makes me feel that despite the difficulties I have talked about in the blog recently, it really it a privilege being able to make a living – even if it is a difficult one – as a writer. George Orwell may well have been right about this: apart from egotism he gave three other reasons for being a writer: immortality, getting back at people who had put you down and changing the world. How many jobs give you that satisfaction?

That satisfaction is one of the abiding memories I have of the Cheltenham Screenwriters’ Festival: writers getting together to share their experiences in a cameraderie that makes the delegate fees so well worth while.

The BBC drama debate debacle

Tuesday, July 21st, 2009

Poor Ben Stephenson: damned if he does and even more so if he doesn’t. Looking at the responses on the Guardian website I wonder if there really is a debate?

It is great that people are responding but sadly much of it is either puerile or pointless. Someone wants plays with mainly dialogue? Go to a theatre. The world has moved on since Play for Today and, anyway, don’t the grumpy respondents realise that this is ‘broad’-casting, which inevitably means a certain amount of playing to the gallery.

I know we have digital channels that can be more specific and narrow-cast, but it is pointless criticising the BBC for being something that it is not and has never said it is.

Tony Garnett has done a ‘good thing’ in raising the questions about the state and future of drama: but the responses seem to represent flashes of anger (been rejected by the Beeb?) rather than coherent ideas about how to make it better.

Ben Stephenson is brave to put his head above the parapet: I know several writers who made appointments and have been to see him. How many people in his position have relatively open surgeries. Don’t just knock it if you come from Cornwall, realise that he is actually trying to make the BBC drama department a different place and you can have a go at persuading him. He will be at the Cheltenham Screenwriters’ Festival where hopefully there will be a real debate not a series of soundbite rants.

The real debate needs to be about two fundamental questions: what gets commissioned (that includes who gets commissioned) and could those shows be better and if so how?

I don’t see many useful comments in the Guardian blogs on this: so you don’t like Spooks. Well a lot of people do. This reminds me of the snobbish and snotty attitude many would-be feature-film writers have towards Soaps declaring they are a substandard form of drama despite the fact that they are watched and enjoyed by more people week in, week out than anything else.

Very little of the response of the angry mob suggests that they have any idea how to provide more compelling drama than we are seeing on air that will also interest a wider audience. As an agent I know how difficult it is to get even a good script into a small arena that is filled with material by relatively good writers.

Britain doesn’t produce that many hours of drama so there are relatively few gigs available. With the demise of Brookside, Crossroads, Family Affairs, half The Bill eps going west, jobs are harder than ever to get and more people feel more bitter than ever.

We don’t have the economies of scale of American TV series; we don’t have a Hollywood film production line either which is why we don’t make big movies like the Americans, but should we damn independent producers of films because they are not competing on scale?

Tony Garnett has raised serious issues: it would be reassuring if the responses were equally serious.