The thing about Mega Python Vs. Gatoroid - it was a big hit for SyFy Channel. The writer of that knows how to write something that people want to see - and that is a type of "quality" (and maybe the most important type, since a TV network cares about people watching). There are plenty of TV movies and TV shows that don't get anywhere near as many viewers.
As crappy as I think TRANSFORMERS was - people wanted to see it, and there are writers I know who can't wait for #3. Not easy to write something that people get excited about.
It's subjective. It depends on the needs of someone else. No two points A and B can EVER become one and make magic together if A and B differ in their purpose / goal / objective.
You might have a great script about a young woman, but to the producer seeking male driven material it means crap.
You might have the most excellent 18th century script ever written in the history of humanity, but if period films are considered unwanted and impossible to sell, good luck even getting it read.
Etc, etc.
For anything in this world to work, whether a relationship between two people or a writer and a rep / studio, there has to be some point of convergence, needs have to be met on both sides.
I used to work in a field where I was putting artistic people together. What constantly amazed me was people trying to work with people who had not one single thing in common with the other's objectives.
A mediocre script in a popular genre is probably more likely to get picked up than an excellent script in a genre that nobody gives a crap about. That's not exactly nuclear science.
But in all fairness, I do think the message generally out there is, Write a GOOD script that is MARKETABLE.
Ultimately, the question is does marketable = good, and that is really up to everybody's own personal standards, whether as writers, movie-goers, book readers, etc.
From a market point of view, if you have access to a buyer, it doesn't have to be good (when it's generally called a treatment or such like). You then hire someone to perfect it.
A mediocre script in a popular genre is probably more likely to get picked up than an excellent script in a genre that nobody gives a crap about. That's not exactly nuclear science.
It's a popular conjecture, but still a conjecture nevertheless. And it drives people to all kinds of assumptions e.g. Hollywood isn't really looking for good writers with original voices who can write great characters/stories etc. But it's interesting to know just how true that is. I agree about the level of subjectivity. Someone pointed out SUNFLOWER as an example on how screenplays don't have to be good, yet there will be many others who will be quick to defend SUNFLOWER in terms of goodness...
As per the other thread, many pros landed their gigs from non-commercial specs. I also recall reading about how most of the scripts that industry readers cover are bad to mediocre. But the rare few that do stand out -- they're the ones that get passed up the ladder. I also remember reading (and correct me here) how Jeff Lowell landed his first gig from a a spec in a very unpopular genre (black comedy). Ditto to Dogtown (fake or real) who posted his very unmarketable spec and talked about how it landed him work to write commercial/tentpole type scripts. The same with Craig Zahler's BRIGANDS (a dark western), who then went on to adapt ROBOTECH. Robotech! From a dark western to a famous 80s sci-fi cartoon!
In my opinion, people forget mediocre scripts and the writers who wrote them. And you don't want to be forgotten by peeps and rely on luck to carry you through the gauntlet. Writers still land gigs years down the line from their unsold breakthrough specs in unpopular genres. But the great writing is what makes them stick in the minds of producers.
But yeah, your end note is what I agree on: a script that is both MARKETABLE and GOOD. But don't force the marketable bit. Concentrate on the good -- because good outweighs marketable when you're trying to build a career, imo.
From a market point of view, if you have access to a buyer, it doesn't have to be good (when it's generally called a treatment or such like). You then hire someone to perfect it.
I hate to admit it, but this is true in at least one case I know of. An exec bought his girlfriend's treatment for mid five figures. I read the treatment. It was awful.
I almost said that "Screenplay has to be good" should be replaced with "A screenplay has to be marketable" for the statement to be true. I think that generally for a script to be marketable, it being good is part of the equation. Good writing is more marketable than bad writing.
Then I realized that Chalie Kaufman has barely written anything that could be considered "marketable", but yet keeps on getting movies produced. Maybe the secret is that he's not merely good - He's great. Maybe if you're great, you can afford to write less marketable material.
Comment