The Ethics of Reading

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Re: The Ethics of Reading

    Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
    I've said this before and I'll say it again; people have been breaking into show business and figuring out how to write scripts for about a century, long before all this widespread distribution of scripts started to happen.

    And a whole lot of people now say that they "need" access to these scripts for educational purposes. And I'm sorry but I think that's just Buuuuuuullshit. It's not about "need" it's about "want". And it's about feeling cool and like people are part of the inside process (which is what Carson is selling all day long). Does that really make people more productive or better writers? I don't think so.

    There are lots of great scripts out there that are available without passing around someone's work without their implicit permission. All this crap that people need a spec draft or an early production draft to really understand how to write? I just don't buy it.
    I just got caught up on this thread. I was going to respond to a whole bunch of posts, but Geoff, you nailed it.

    Best,

    MB
    twitter.com/mbotti

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: The Ethics of Reading

      Originally posted by Bitter Script Reader View Post
      I'll tell another story to answer this. Botti'll love this because I'm talking up his clients.

      A few months back I'm working on coverage when an IM pops up. It's a good friend of mine who happens to work for a director mostly known for action and thrillers. As with many of my friends in the biz, we frequently have convos along the lines of "What do you know about this writer? Any good? You hear anything about this script, etc?"

      Her IM: "This is the best script I've read in a long time."

      My ears perk up, "Really?"

      "SEUSS. Have you heard of it? It's the story of Dr. Seuss and his wife."

      -"So it's a period piece."

      "I know what you're thinking."

      -"I know what my bosses would think."

      "It's an amazing love story. I feel like I'm going to cry reading this. It follows them in college and then later as adults."

      -"A period piece told in two time frames."

      "Seriously. It's good. You should read this. We're never gonna make this but someone should. I'll send it to you."

      I've brought stuff in to my bosses before, but I know what climbs the pole with them and at first blush, a period piece about a children's book author is far out of their wheelhouse. I know that even if I gave this thing amazing coverage, it'd be a hard sell.

      But a funny thing happened. Later that day ANOTHER friend at a completely unrelated company engaged me in a similar conversation. It was the same basic narrative: This is a moving script. I LOVE these characters. I'm never going to get my bosses to say yes to this but someone NEEDS to make this movie.

      And guess what? The whole reason THEY were reading the script was because someone passed to them after expressing the same feelings.

      You want to know how it got on the Black List? Because everyone who read it came out WANTING this script to succeed. Even with all the business reasons some companies might have for not making it, this writing moved people in a way most of what they dealt with didn't.

      I don't know exactly how Botti and the rest of his team sent out the script, who they targeted and so on. I can tell you that among development types, word of this script seemed to spread fast and with uncommonly strong goodwill. Those are the kinds of conversations and script-trading I've been talking about, when everyone is pulling for a script even if there's nothing in it for them.

      Eyal Podell and Jonathan Stewart wrote a helluva script, and I'd bet it got a boost from all the development folk who couldn't stop raving about it and passing it to their contacts.

      And you know what? With the way LINCOLN and a few other adult dramas have done this year, maybe all of us were wrong when we said, "Too bad no one will make it." It could be the right script at the right time with the right momentum.
      I love hearing these stories.

      -MB
      twitter.com/mbotti

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: The Ethics of Reading

        I gotta say this, we can't be hypocritical. It is wrong to post scripts on open forums or review them. But we all have read scripts as writers. I'm not gonna lie about that to make my point. Lots of writers did it coming up, we all did. I think even John August said he read lots of scripts when he started out to learn the craft.

        And yes it helped make us better writers. It helped me become a better writer by understanding storytelling better, developing my own style and voice. But I never put people's work out there or review them. Nor should people.

        So, if you want a blunt answer, no you are NOT the scum of the earth if you read other people's scripts. I have a script that has been widely circulated, which is fine. No one has reviewed it (thankfully). It's all in the game. Just keep your mouth shut and learn.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: The Ethics of Reading

          Originally posted by michaelb View Post
          *cough* Tied for 2nd. *cough*.

          And thanks!

          Best,

          MB
          Wow, just noticed.

          So Rodham is third and Michael B's client's script is second.

          I think we learned we should always start the names of our scripts with an 'a'

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: The Ethics of Reading

            Originally posted by sasqits
            Mostly agree but I think that most writers are looking for spec drafts as the closest comparison to their own drafts. They don't want scripts that have been rewritten after notes and input from all types of sources. These would not make for accurate or fair comparisons to their own writing.

            That being said, I don't think it's necessary. If anything, writers should strive to write like the versions that made it to the screen.
            re: BF'd line. This is far truer than the claims of needing to read sold specs or in-dev scripts to "learn" something. I agree the vast majority of people want to read them to bolster confidence that their work is on par or better than what just sold. And most people aren't honest with themselves when it comes to such self assessment.

            You see it in critiques of these traded scripts all the time -- "I wasn't impressed." "I couldn;t get past page 10." "I can't believe this sold and my script keeps getting passes." Blah, blah, blah. How often do you see comments like, "I learned how to better handle XYZ from this script." Rarely, if ever.

            If you want to know what the industry is buying, you look at current sales, most of which include a logline. That's all you need to know about the current buying trends of the industry.

            IMO, we can learn the most from produced scripts by the very top writers of our time. We see the successful transition of the written word to the screen. Personally, I think I learn the most from watching films. Period. Watching, analyzing, the finished product is very educational.
            Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: The Ethics of Reading

              Originally posted by Deion22 View Post
              I gotta say this, we can't be hypocritical. It is wrong to post scripts on open forums or review them. But we all have read scripts as writers. I'm not gonna lie about that to make my point. Lots of writers did it coming up, we all did. I think even John August said he read lots of scripts when he started out to learn the craft.

              And yes it helped make us better writers. It helped me become a better writer by understanding storytelling better, developing my own style and voice. But I never put people's work out there or review them. Nor should people.

              So, if you want a blunt answer, no you are NOT the scum of the earth if you read other people's scripts. I have a script that has been widely circulated, which is fine. No one has reviewed it (thankfully). It's all in the game. Just keep your mouth shut and learn.
              I think there's a point of balance when folks are learning. Perhaps one could make the case that putting a great deal of emphasis on reading specs is after a point a distraction. As well, how many people read something and then start to knock it off in their own work and create "competent forgeries" rather than something that is their own voice? I don't know, I'm not making a huge statement on this, but I think that the folks out there chasing down specs to read might be better served by spending more of that time writing. And, I completely agree that reading specs isn't terrible, but that discussing them on public websites is just plain wrong.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: The Ethics of Reading

                Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
                I think there's a point of balance when folks are learning. Perhaps one could make the case that putting a great deal of emphasis on reading specs is after a point a distraction. As well, how many people read something and then start to knock it off in their own work and create "competent forgeries" rather than something that is their own voice? I don't know, I'm not making a huge statement on this, but I think that the folks out there chasing down specs to read might be better served by spending more of that time writing. And, I completely agree that reading specs isn't terrible, but that discussing them on public websites is just plain wrong.
                I appreciate your response. I'm not advocating any sort of competent forgery. But as writers, there are all sorts of things we pick up from each other all the time. Tools that help us enhance the craft. Jeff Lowell once posted he saw something in a script he liked and he added it to his style. He wasn't committing any forgery. Jeff Lowell is one of the best writers in the industry. He doesn't need to read anybody's work. But, he strives to get better and showed you can always learn and evolve as writer, no matter what level you are on. That's an important lesson I'm always going to keep with me.

                GRRM has picked up things from Tolkein's books which added to his own storytelling in Game of Thrones. No forgery took place.

                I don't believe that writers are looking to commit forgery when reading scripts. I believe writers are looking to learn. We all learn from reading great scripts. Specs, finished drafts, etc. It helps our development as writers.


                I am totally against posting scripts in an open forum, or critiquing specs, or reviewing them. But I advocate reading scripts and as many as possible. That's what advice great writers gave me. And hey, if one of my scripts (If I'm lucky) teaches a writer something from reading my work. I proudly advocate him reading my script. Just keep it private.

                We writers need to stick together not alienate one another. Nor condemn others who are trying to learn the craft. I feel very strongly about this. There is a HUGE difference between CARSON REEVES, a guy who exploits writers in horrible ways for profits. Then some kid who wants to read a script of a writer so he can learn the craft.

                I don't want newbies thinking they are some terrible person for reading a script. This thread and others have come off like that.

                And that is false. Because coming up, I was taught by bigger writers, you want to learn screenwriting, read as many scripts as possible. Great and terrible scripts. I advocate the same to others.

                Just don't betray the writing community. Keep the scripts private and don't review them. Or critique them in open forums.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: The Ethics of Reading

                  I agree with the point that nobody really needs to read script after script to learn the craft or be a good writer.

                  I never agreed with the advice to "read every script you can find". I've always thought reading scripts is overrated.

                  It's a good idea to look at a few to get an idea of the rhythm & style-- the type of language used-- in SWing, but beyond a few you're reading for other reasons, like entertainment, appreciation or inspiration.

                  The best way to learn is to study the actual films & then break them down in order to analyze how they're put together.

                  Aspiring writers can get an idea of what types of specs are selling by reading the trade sites.

                  "Trust your stuff." -- Dave Righetti, Pitching Coach

                  ( Formerly "stvnlra" )

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: The Ethics of Reading

                    To say that reading unproduced scripts for educational purposes doesn't help a writer hone their craft, is simply wrong-- imho.

                    I've been fortunate to have a couple of mentors assist me in honing my craft when I first started writing. They always said the more scripts you read the better writer you'll be.

                    A few years ago, I received a link to the Black List screenplays.

                    I didn't know that it wasn't with 'permission.'

                    'They' said you have to read scripts. 'They' said you have to read scripts that haven't been made yet. That you need to know what's selling now, and that by the time a movies out, you're 5 years too late.

                    The Black List itself creates a desire to want to read the scripts. There were a lot of people sharing.

                    And I downloaded the Black List scripts and I read them. I didn't share them, and no one had to tell me not to-- I didn't.

                    And it made a difference in my writing-- at least I think it did.

                    Yeah, you can look at some good scripts of movies already made, but the truth is that movies are different now. Set ups are faster. Scenes come in later and exit earlier. The entire structure moves like a freight train in any current action film. New techniques are being utilized-- and it helps to see how it's communicated on the page.

                    So seeing techniques currently being applied helps.

                    And if you want to compete-- as I do-- you better have a good understanding of the competitive landscape if you ever want to improve your odds. Because that's what this is about-- competing.

                    I'm not out to hurt anyone, steal their ideas, or disparage anyone's writing. I want to be the best writer I can be.

                    I love reading scripts-- more than novels to be truthful.

                    It's easy for someone who already has access to unproduced screenplays to say, they "shouldn't be shared with anyone unknown because they can't be trusted." You'd feel slightly different if you were in my position.

                    And wasn't it an insider who critiqued scripts publically that created the problem in the first place (or am I wrong)? Not an aspiring writer striving to be one of the best writers in the industry?

                    When I read Inglorious Basterds I didn't even want to see the movie, the writing was so good, but I did, I paid for a ticket to support a writer I respect.

                    If it becomes a movie, I'll pay to see every script I've read.

                    I'm not disputing the ethics, but I am saying that as a writer reading Black List scripts improved my writing.

                    FA4

                    PS: There isn't an artistic craft where you don't study the masters to become one yourself. I mean, just because a painter loves Cubism and infuses it into their own paintings doesn't mean he's stealing or trying to paint copy Braque or Picasso. This is how a writer develops their own style.
                    Last edited by finalact4; 12-23-2012, 06:49 AM.
                    "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: The Ethics of Reading

                      Yes, as finalact above says in his postscript, in other disciplines, you study the masters to learn. You study their completed works of art. Not all the sketches and discarded attempts. The completed work. Aspiring novelists study published books. They don't swipe downloads of writers' early drafts.

                      Every year, most studio-run websites provide PDFs of their produced films (scripts they own) which are in consideration for the same year's Academy Awards. It's not like aspiring writers only get to read scanned copies of Casablanca online. You can read scripts produced months ago with the full permission of their owners.

                      This '5 years too late' rationalization I simply don't get. Outside of concept, which you can discover from sales boards, what are you learning from these sold specs or in-dev scripts that you couldn't learn from a script produced in 2012? Can someone answer this question for me?
                      Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: The Ethics of Reading

                        Originally posted by sc111 View Post
                        Yes, as finalact above says in his postscript, in other disciplines, you study the masters to learn. You study their completed works of art. Not all the sketches and discarded attempts. The completed work. Aspiring novelists study published books. They don't swipe downloads of writers' early drafts.

                        Every year, most studio-run websites provide PDFs of their produced films (scripts they own) which are in consideration for the same year's Academy Awards. It's not like aspiring writers only get to read scanned copies of Casablanca online. You can read scripts produced months ago with the full permission of their owners.

                        This '5 years too late' rationalization I simply don't get. Outside of concept, which you can discover from sales boards, what are you learning from these sold specs or in-dev scripts that you couldn't learn from a script produced in 2012? Can someone answer this question for me?
                        I certainly don't have an answer for you - I think it's a very subjective answer depending on who you are asking.

                        One small problem with your analogy - sketches, discarded attempts, early drafts of books (for the most part) don't sell, don't attract representation, aren't put out in the market to attract buyers. Specs are. Some writers could be looking to these works to see what it is that attracted an agent, a manager, a dev. exec, a prodco . . . something a finished script won't necessarily tell you. Of course others are just looking to read them as fanboys and/or collectors.

                        I think that a lot of people view specs as a completely different animal than a building blueprint, a recipe, a five course meal, a book, a piece of art, a house, a car, [insert noun describing product that goes through multiple stages before being considered finished], whatever. Yes, you can certainly learn a lot from any finished product. But, according to a lot of people, there is a lot more to learn from an "unfinished" script than in other arenas.

                        Right? Wrong? Who really knows. Seems everyone's compass may vary on this - and thank god - otherwise what else could one read about here on the forum - Scriptshadow?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: The Ethics of Reading

                          Originally posted by sc111 View Post
                          Yes, as finalact above says in his postscript, in other disciplines, you study the masters to learn. You study their completed works of art. Not all the sketches and discarded attempts. The completed work. Aspiring novelists study published books. They don't swipe downloads of writers' early drafts.
                          With all due respect, a lot of painters and laymen do take a keen interest in a master's sketches and often these are put in display in galleries. But, I digress...

                          Picasso wasn't "repainted" by several other painters. Picasso wasn't told to add a line here or a squiggle there by a cast of thousands. If I want a sense of Picasso's artistic vision, voice and style I can refer directly to his work for a reason - it is solely his work. The same applies to novelists.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: The Ethics of Reading

                            Originally posted by Geoff Alexander View Post
                            I've said this before and I'll say it again; people have been breaking into show business and figuring out how to write scripts for about a century, long before all this widespread distribution of scripts started to happen.

                            And a whole lot of people now say that they "need" access to these scripts for educational purposes. And I'm sorry but I think that's just Buuuuuuullshit. It's not about "need" it's about "want".
                            Nowhere in my original post did I claim I "needed" these scripts. On my list of human "needs", spec scripts don't rate a mention.

                            What I did try to articulate was why I feel that spec scripts often provide a superior educational tool for the aspiring writer. It may well have been bullshit but that's why I initiated the discussion.

                            Hopefully you'll agree that in the last hundred years the industry has changed significantly (I'm not just talking bolded sluglines). More and more, writers are expected to rewrite (or fix) other writers' unproduced scripts.

                            A minuscule percentage of aspiring writers will make it into the industry in 2013. I humbly suggest that, in addition to being great screenwriters, those who stay there will know a) How to produce a great treatment (and other development docs); b) How to read, analyse and improve an unproduced screenplay; and c) Why certain changes are made between an unproduced screenplay and the final film.

                            The thing that really baffles me about your opposition is that, either knowingly or unknowlingly, managers benefit from this activity. I'm not going to name the writer, but I believe michaelb recently signed someone who participates in this activity prominently. I doubt that writer would deny that doing so assisted his writing enormously.

                            Your claim is that reading unproduced screenplays is unnecessary and unethical. I wonder whether you question a writer prior to signing them about whether they participate in this practice. Because, otherwise, your claim that people are still breaking into the industry without doing so is suspect. I could name three writers in this thread alone who have obtained representation over the past year who openly admit to reading unproduced material.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: The Ethics of Reading

                              Originally posted by sasqits
                              And this is why some writers have a problem with people reading their scripts. It is helping their competition. Stakes are high, the game is fierce, why give any unfair advantage to the people who are competing against you?
                              That's not why. At all.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: The Ethics of Reading

                                Originally posted by sc111 View Post
                                Every year, most studio-run websites provide PDFs of their produced films (scripts they own) which are in consideration for the same year's Academy Awards.
                                Yep. This year I ran across something like two dozen Oscar hopeful scripts when I was checking out the various studio-run websites. If you read three scripts a week, that's enough to last you for a couple of months. And all with a clear conscience.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X