Not to rain on his parade, but couldn't he have chosen another title than Paths of Glory? It really bothers me when people use titles that have already been used, especially when the earlier film is as famous as it is. Is it so hard to do an IMDb title search when you're writing the thing? Am I the only one bothered by this behavior?

They'll probably change the title of the movie. But the current project is based on a book called "Paths of Glory".

The interesting aspect for me is that writing quality doesn't seem to be the key factor in his success. You mention Orbit on his slate. Scriptshadow covered that a couple of months ago and I read it because it is such a great concept, but the script is very poor.

I say that from outside the business without knowing anything about the man, but just on the basis of reading the script. I couldn't stop thinking about it for days afterward, about what was wrong with the script (everything, on the macro and micro level) and how I would go about writing it if it were me. I was going to write a post about it but realized it was going to be way too long, just describing its failings.

From that script alone I took away the impression that force of personality and connections are at least as important as writing ability in succeeding. That's not a criticism, it's an observation.

terraling, setting aside the merits of the Orbit script (as I haven't read it), you raise a fair point about the importance of "force of personality and connections". And don't forget "heat," the perception Hwood has about a particular talent in terms of their success. All of those can and do impact decisions that get made as to who gets hired for what, increasing the odds that a project gets set up, etc.

With screenwriters, there's an additional wrinkle: Many people in Hwood are really smart and have a good to great understanding of story, and what works / doesn't work in a script. Many others do not. So whereas you may look at a script written by an established writer and see what you think are its flaws, others may not have an evolved story sensibility - and may not see those same flaws. In that case, personality, connections, and heat have even more sway on the decision-making process.

Finally, there are different writers with different strengths. Some writers are great at generating story concepts and working them up into a viable form to sell or kick-start a project -- but maybe they're not as good at delivering that next level of a draft. Other writers never generate original concepts, but they know how to write a script that attracts talent and leads to green light. Still others know how to rescue troubled projects. And so on.

In all honesty, I've never read a script by Turner. But the sheer weight of evidence, i.e., all the projects he has in development, pre, production, and post, would suggests that he has talent. A writer may be able to get along for this or that project based on connections or heat, but over time, scripts either work as stories or they don't. And if they don't, then that fact will rise to the surface.

So in sum, while personality, connections, and heat are important and do play a big role in a screenwriter's career, at some point they have to demonstrate talent and strong story sense in their scripts, or they won't have connections or heat for long.