Pontivexmaximus at 2012-07-26 15:59:04:

I liked the piece, but I would add to it: not only do studio types not think like you...they are actively trying to prevent you from getting in. It's so much easier for them to depend on what they already know works, because the people who try to produce things, well, the money end is always looming over their shoulders, be it studios or independent financiers... To be honest, it sucks for them a lot more when your stuff is good, because it forces them to engage, and if the ROI is no good, they're solely responsible. What's worse is that even if they like you, they will probably say no anyway, only to learn later that someone with more balls (and money) has decided they like you enough to try something new.

Jay Finklestein at 2012-07-26 17:19:33:

They remind me of the Wall Street dickwits who think they're the smartest guys in the room despite crashing the economy. They're 'insanely busy' and yet manage to a) go to the gym, b) attend Dodgers games, and c) chat at school functions. There's a good, old-fashioned, way to determine if someone is smart and talented: judge them by their works. Executives have power, so we must kiss their asses. That's fine. That's life. But mythologizing them is maybe not quite so necessary. Also: What's a bridge scene, and why do you write them? The idea strikes me as violating one of Elmore Leonard's rules for novels: leave out the parts that readers tend to skip. If it's a bridge scene, taking up space between X and Y, isn't it better to cut it? I understand the need for pacing, but -- in a fast-paced movie, how to judge?

MarisaTorre at 2012-07-27 11:18:04:

Then should't they be assigning more prioity to managing their time and work force to FIND that talent? Shouldn't there be MORE scouts/readers/viewers That's like saying media outlets can't find good advertisers because there's SO many and only a few share their market target. I've found that there's too much emphasis on "gimme more of the same, but different" until an indie production talent hits big with something the big-boys-club passed up. The whole culture and cinema audiences shouldn't be deprived of true talent because the established big money industry is ineffective. Undicovered talent has to suffer from the irresponsible studio inadequacies, being ignored and subject to arbitrary luck. Untalented hacks need to be dicouraged. There's a big difference between passion and talent. There's a big difference between technical skills and talent. There's a big diffewrence between industry "training" that encourages mediocrity and natural talent that needs to be encouraged but nobody has time for them. Who knows what amazing voices, stories and evolutions of entertainment values we, as a society are missing because, THEY'RE just too busy and "they don't think"

Bitter Script Reader at 2012-07-27 12:19:26:

Forgive me if I come across a bit blunt here, but I really, really hate the underlying attitude of posts like these. Too often, it feels like the attitude is, "If they haven't found ME, they're not doing enough!" And let's dispense with one argument right off the bat - these people work hard. They work long hours, sacrificing time with their wives and spouses. I saw a few comments taking executives to task, implying that if they had time to "network" at baseball games, they clearly weren't working hard enough. To those who believe that, I would ask, "What is your job? And what would you say if someone told you that you were lazy because you took three or four hours to devote time to something not work-related? Here is the blunt truth - very few people who want to write are capable of being professional writers. There are some, sure, but the pool is smaller than you might think. For the industry, it would be incredibly inefficient to "cast a wider net" because you're going to catch more barnacles, not more tuna. It's best to put your faith in things like The Quest, which bring promising writers to the attention of those in power without the need for the initiative to be directly overseen by "The Man." Scott has worked hard to make this a positive, encouraging place and so I feel like a bit of a jerk saying that, but it's true. More scouts wouldn't solve this problem - all it would do is add to the glut of bad scripts. The people who are good - the people who are REALLY good, professional level - eventually find their way in. Sure, there are barriers in place that ensure that you can't just send a script to the head of Dreamworks and make sure THEY review it, but there are ways in. The trick is, with rare exceptions, they're not going to come to you. If you just want to sit there on your couch and wait to be discovered, then you're in for a long wait. Comedians works the club circuit, sometimes for years before they're discovered. Directors might spend years building up their reels, doing small jobs, directing short films to get noticed. Making the product is only one part of breaking in. You have to get it to people who matter. And yeah, there's no easy drop box where a completely objective person can review that submission immediately and pass judgment on it. But as Max Milimeter might say, "So fucking what? The desk jockey didn't know anyone in Hollywood and he got in because he wrote a fucking brilliant script!" You seem to think there's a vast wellspring of true talent that has gone undiscovered. I submit that population is far smaller than you would believe. That's not an insult, that's simple statistics. A lot of people like to play basketball. A fair number of them might have even been on their school team. A smaller number might have even been the stars of their respective teams. How many are ready for the NBA? Furthermore, would you blame the NBA for not "mentoring" and "nurturing" new talent rather than just selecting the best from the amateur leagues? Don't wait for Hollywood to make you a better writer - work towards becoming a better writer. If writing gives you pleasure, I'd never tell you to stop writing, no more than I'd tell someone to give up basketball just because they didn't get drafted by the Lakers. And if you did give up basketball just because you were denied a professional jersey, maybe you were playing the game for all the wrong reasons to begin with.

MarisaTorre at 2012-07-27 13:52:00:

Personally, the problem isn't that I haven't been noticed by the work I've submittted. the problem isn't that I haven't been recognized for my talent and I'm not lounging on my fat ass for THEM to come to me. The problem is that either: they like the work but they pass it up because it's not what they had in mind and they can't be bothered with it, or they want to change it to death until it's not what I had in mind When they pass it up because it's not what they had in mind, the problem is that another company DID have it in mind and made a BIG hit with someone else's credit. By the time I RE-submit mine, it sounds like "I'm" the copycat. And there's no glory or $$ in my "I told you so" No one can prove that anyone's ideas are being stolen and no one can defeat the chance of arbitrary luck and timing. And then there's the 'dead-end' options that are entirely politically driven sometimes to protect mediocre progects to which they've thrown out good-money-after-bad. But it would be nice, just once, if they would recognize the potential when they see it, instead of just chasing the fast NOW $$s. Trust me, concepts like THE ARTIST were around 10 years ago, and rejected because it was TOO different, too sophisticated, too not-technically-driven enough. The big studios need to be careful or their own ineffectiveness could undermine their own purpose in favour of smaller indie productions of quality across every genre and demographic.

Bitter Script Reader at 2012-07-27 14:19:36:

Not every story is right for every executive or company. An idea that was executed brilliantly by one creative team might have floundered in the hands of others. A successful movie is so much more than an idea. So you might have had a great idea, but were pitching it to the wrong people. That's life. you can't change that. Every producer can only make so many movies a year and if they don't feel it, they don't feel it. Who's to say that if the company you took your idea to produced the idea that it would have been as successful as the later one that eventually was produced? Who's to say that the resulting movies would have even been that similar? Compare FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS to NO STRINGS ATTACHED - in the broad strokes they have a similar idea at heart, but they're very different movies and stories. IRON MAN was a huge hit because Marvel produced it themselves, but for years before that it was with New Line. Had New Line gotten their act together, would that massive $585 million worldwide hit have been theirs? Maybe not. New Line's IRON MAN might have ended up with a totally different creative team - and almost certainly a different story. Every writer I know has a story about the idea that they were "beaten" on. It happens even to those "inside the gates." You can't change that. Nor is it really productive to say, "Dammit, I had the idea for GHOST PROTOCOL two years ago! That hit should have been mine!" That hit doesn't belong to the writer alone - it belongs to J.J. Abrams, Brad Bird, Tom Cruise and so on. Unless you had the whole package together that the competing hit had, it's hard to second-guess that your script would have been as successful. You bring up THE ARTIST, and I submit that it's not a sure-fire hit, and indeed, benefited from a very specific set of circumstances and producers, as well as a very strategic release and an Oscar campaign. It was never a Top 10 grosser in the States, yet it brought home $44 million domestic. It needed the right people at the right time to make that happen. Bring it out six months earlier, a year earlier, ten years ago, whatever, and you can't say with certainty it would have been as successful. The actors would have been different, the climate was different, and so on. So rather than waste so much energy shaking your fist at that, do you what's a helluva lot more productive? Sitting down and writing a new one.