Carl Icahn Now Wants ALL Of Lionsgate 
FINAL MGM BIDS DUE FRIDAY: So Who's In And … 
Action Comedy TV: Showrunner Matt Nix 
SAG National Board Approves Joint Bargaining … 
BBC Drama Unfreezes Development Money; … 
Lionsgate Board Rejects Icahn's $6/Share 
Is Betting On Box Office Good For Films? 
Marvel Still Looking For Captain America 
'Sopranos' Creator To Film Rock Drama 
LIVE-SNARKING THE 82ND OSCARS... 
'ALICE' IS A MONSTER! $116.3M Blows Past … 
Oscar Not-So-Thriller: Diller Mogul Picnic 
'Precious' Sweeps 25th Indie Spirit Awards 
Howard Stern Won't Be Next 'Idol' Judge 
Justin Theroux Readying 'Zoolander 2' For … 
Here are some talking points for this weekend’s holiday parties. Jason Scoggins, a partner at the literary management and production company Protocol, has compiled what he readily admits is a "terribly unscientific" but which I find very interesting compilation of the 2009 feature film spec script market based on information culled from public and non-public sources. The numbers do not include pitch sales or the film rights to underlying material. He found that:
• 436 spec scripts came out in 2009, of which 72 sold (17%).
• 373 specs went out wide in 2009, of which 19 sold (5%). Of those 19, only 3 sold after April 30th, out of 178 attempts during the period (1.7%).
• As for spec sals by genre, comedies led with 32% of sales, thrillers 29%, action adventures 21%, while dramas and sci-fi/fantasies tied with 10%.
• Universal and Warner Bros bought the most specs among the major buyers (6 each). But Warner Bros bought only 1 spec script in the second half of the year. Paramount & Sony tied with 5 each not counting ony's Screen Gems which bought another 3. DreamWorks had 4. 20th Century Fox had 3, but adding all its three banners, Fox bought 6 specs. Lionsgate purchased 3. New Line didn’t buy any specs in 2009.
• Relativity and Intrepid bought the most specs among the other buyers (3 each).
• In the spec market scrum among agencies, CAA made 14 spec script sales out of 34 attempts, or 41%), followed by UTA's 10 sales out of 30 attempts, or 33%, and ICM's 10 sales out of 33 attempts, or 30%. WME didn’t form until May 2009, but when you take the numbers for all three of its component companies -- Endeavor, William Morris, and WME -- the combined agency would have been a dominant #1 in total scripts sold, with 18 sales out of 47 attempts, or 38%)
• Benderspink among management companies had the most spec sales (5 sales out of 11 attempts, or 45%). Kaplan/Perrone had 4 sales out of 12 attempts, or 33%. Principato-Young made 3 sales out of 8 attempts, or 38%, while Circle Of Confusion did 3 sales out of 15 attempts, or 20%.
Scoggins also found several interesting patterns:
1. The wide spec basically died on April 30, 2009. For the first four months of 2009, 8.2% of the specs that went wide to the town ended up selling (16 out of 195). Not a great percentage, but probably to be expected, all things considered. From May through the end of the year, however, sales of wide specs fell off a cliff: 3 out of 178 wide specs sold during that period, or 1.7%.2. Somewhat surprisingly, specs sold consistently throughout the year on a percentage basis. The Spring selling season is roughly twice as long as the Fall season: this year, there were 21 weeks in the Spring (from the end of Sundance to theweek before Independence Day) versus 10 weeks in the Fall (from the week after Labor Day to the week before Thanksgiving). So all things being equal, there should have been twice as many scripts and sales in the first half of the year versus the second. But not everything was equal in the latter part of 2009: there was significant studio head turnover, plus three studios put a moratorium on development spending. Spring sales were front-loaded into the first four months of the period (41 out of the 50 sales for the first half of the year), yet roughly the same percentage of scripts on the market sold in the first half of the year (16.7%) as the second (16.2%).
Loading ...
Thanks for the Scorecard, NF.
Cool stats! However, in looking back to prior years, according to some sources, the odds were much worse, where 100,000 to 150,000 total pitches and spec screenplay submissions resulted in < 400 movies produced?
Am I missing something here? Thank you again for compiling these!
Whats the difference between these two points?
• 436 spec scripts came out in 2009, of which 72 sold (17%).
• 373 specs went out wide in 2009, of which 19 sold (5%). Of those 19, only 3 sold after April 30th, out of 178 attempts during the period (1.7%).
Any numbers on how many of those scripts bought were actually turned into films?
U-G-L-Y.
Or is that spelled W-G-A?
Is there any breakdown on how many new writers sold scripts? I’m sure that would be sadly hilarious with 52/72 specs that were sold being repped by (what’s now) Big 4 agencies.
The agents don’t even respond anymore, in the early 00’s they at least sent you an email or made a phone call.
Specs are doomed for the next two years.
we do but it’s soooooooooo time consuming; reason–we get mail from around the world. TONS OF IT. But as for me, since I am hungry, and makin’ my bones. I read it all.
Interesting figures. It’s called cutting the fat from the steak.
As an ex Story Analyst I can say there is an UNBEARABLE amount of absolute dreck out there but, from time to time, that little gem does so shine (Then gets sold, overdeveloped and turned around).
Although I agree that there is a lot of “dreck” out there, it’s a little general to assume that specs aren’t being sold just because they are bad. Besides, that assumes that the ones that do get sold are good. If only it were that simple…
BFDealMemo reports on a 2.5 million dollar sale last night. Steve Carell attached to star.
They go on to list several big sales of the year. All A list names as writers or attachments.
Nikki– can you please report what the average price of the spec sales were this year?
How many had A list attachments and how many were by un-produced writers v. big names?
Feels more and more like we’re losing the middle class of the WGA post strike. . .
The entire country is losing the middle class!
In response to the post by Questions – that Steve Carell is most likely money that goes against his overall deal at the studio so it’s not a true spec sale by definition. It’s just spin.
2.5 was the backend if it got made and the writer got sole credit. Up front was close to to 2M. That’s how writer deals work in Hollywood, this one was just really huge. It was a “true spec”. Went out to all of the studios. I like most everyone else in town chased it. Carell was just only attached at Warner Bros.
This is very informative, if a bit confounding. I’m with the first poster, those first two bullet points are confusing (I assume not all specs went out wide, so the first number is the total sales count for the year? Why make the distinction?). Also, if you add up the numbers sold per agency as you’ve listed them here, the numbers add up to 52. I guess the smaller agencies’ sales aren’t worth mentioning.
Would love to know the stats for pitches.
What I’d like to know is how in the hell the smaller agencies are still eating?
Terrifying numbers and a reality check to all writers and would be writers out there. Selling a spec is turning into a lottery ticket.
I had a big spec sale a few years ago and did well, but this past year I made no money. I’m embarrassed to even do my taxes as the entire year is a total loss.
The assignments are drying up to. I worked on 3 different projects with big name producers this year that all went nowhere when it was time to go to buyers with them. The producers are not putting any money up. You’re working on “Takes” with them for nothing and in my and many other cases getting nothing in the end.
My agent told me to focus on spec’s this year after I freaked out about one of these takes going south when the producer couldn’t get the actor/director attachment they dreamed of. About a month ago my agent told me “spec’s aren’t selling anymore” to which I responded “WTF do I do then?” He told me to “hang in there”.
At this point you have to have a very high concept spec that is written very well to break through. If you have an attachment or two all the better.
Right now my team is working on getting actor and director attachments before going to buyers. Nobody is reading anything with any kind of speed though.
What sucks is the stuff I have set up at studios that have attachments are just sitting on the shelf. Some of it’s due to turnover at the studio. Some of it is due to the studio hiring a “closer” to rewrite me who then muddles the script up so much they lose interest in it.
In the past, they just went to buyers with my scripts and sold them.
The whole landscape has changed rapidly. I need something to get greenlit and do well at the box office or I’ll be back in a cube before I know it.
As a feature writer and part time gambler, I like these odds!
I am in the top 1.7% of hacks. No diggity.
this is a nice list – but not accurate. Spec sales are not always announced….
If you would like to see Jason’s weekly stats and the smaller agency/mngmnt company breakdown, it’s listed every week on The Business of Show Institute, where Jason writes a weekly column on the spec market.
To answer the first poster, the difference between those two stats is incredibly important for the following reasons: It goes to show that sending a spec out wide has ceased being a viable way to sell a product. 373 specs went out wide, but only 19 sold. But there were 72 sales – which means the other 53 came from projects that didnt go out wide – but went to select producers or had packages already, proving that you almost have to have a package these days to sell anything – it has to have a director, actor or producer of note already attached. This is a huge difference from years past and it means that it’s getting increasingly difficult for a new writer to break in by just writing a good script.
Sending specs out wide may still be a nice way to introduce a new writer to the town and get them meetings, or for small boutique agencies and management companies to get their name out there when they don’t have the contacts to just call a big producer, but it’s not the way to sell a script. Jason’s right – the spec market is dead.
R.I.P.
@Michael – The numbers for “wide” specs are a subset of the overall numbers. So of the 436 scripts I tracked this year, 373 of them went out wide to the town; the rest either went to just a handful of select producers or direct to buyers. I have mini-glossary here: http://blog.itsonthegrid.com/iotg-glossary.html
@Undercut – Good question (% of sold specs from new writers). Scott Myers at http://www.gointothestory.com is gong to dive into the numbers a bit deeper over the next couple of weeks, and I’ll suggest he include that in his breakdown.
@Questions – I don’t have good enough data on prices to come up with an average (and there are so many variables in reported prices that an average would be meaningless in any case). I haven’t down a breakdown on attachments, but it’s something I’ve included in my monthly Spec Market Rounds this year (they’re available in the archives at http://www.lifeonthebubble.com). I’ll suggest to Scott that he include that as well. And by the way, I think you’re right — the middle class of the WGA was been hurt the most by the strike and the overall economy.
@Answers – I basically agree — based on the Dealmemo post, it feels like something developed with Carell from the outset, as opposed to a script Fogelman wrote on his own and then brought to WME to package (they rep Carell and Fogelman). I could be wrong, but I think you’re right, that there’s some spin going on here.
@Unscientific – I make the distinction between overall sales and wide sales because going wide with a spec was the standard way to sell a script and break a new writer into the business for so long. This year, that became the standard way NOT to sell a script. As for the smaller agencies, I’ve got those numbers on the full report, which you can download here: http://www.lifeonthebubble.com Finally, I wasn’t well positioned to capture much data on pitches in the first half of the year, so I didn’t bother to track them until we launched http://www.itsonthegrid.com a month or so ago. We’ll have separate pitch stats next year.
Wrong about the Steve Carell project. Dan Fogelman wrote it totally on spec and then a completed script was sent to Carell. Carell and his company took it into Warner Bros. (they’re exclusive there) when it went to the rest of the town. This is one of those examples of everything working perfectly for a writer.
There’s no spin with the Fogelman spec. Probably the biggest spec sale of the year. Amazing script.
fascinating and those numbers really aren’t that bad… at least there’s still a market… one out of five sells… figure two or three out of five are garbage… so if you write a decent script you’ve got a semi-decent shot at selling it… ergo: KEEP WRITING!
So this is how it works, huh? Bummer.
Geesh! No wonder I have a stack of scripts gathering dust here.
The studio business model for making movies is completely broken. They aren’t buying product, and they sure aren’t cutting their byzantine layers of development executives to any great extent. Keep the development execs, but don’t do any development. Genius. Keep the costs and lose the product.
Box office is setting records, and though DVD sales are down, they are only down as much as all retail is down. Also I think consumers are weary of purchasing DVD’s as they are cutting back in general, in light of the Blue Ray format making their old DVD’s seem obsolete. It is obvious to ordinary consumers that digital downloads are around the corner and your DVD’s will soon seem as lame as big old clunky VHS tapes.
The audience is there, and if you talk to any normal person outside of this town, they just simply want to see good movies, and don’t think there are enough of them out there.
If, out of fear based decision making, all the studios want to make are 100 million plus tent poles out of board games and plastic trolls, who will step in to finance good movies that can be made from two to ten million?
Even with lowered DVD sales, a film with limited theatrical release that is made for under five million, with the great talent that is sitting around on its collective ass currently, still has an excellent business model.
In the ten to thirty million dollar range smart money should also be looking at the enormous profit margin on films like “The Hangover” and “District 9″ which did not have huge stars and really are just…ya know, good movies. They didn’t come out of studios development tracks.
Where is the smart VC money, and how can it get direct access to union talent with experience that can make those films? Certainly investing in real estate or T-bills isn’t going to get you a return for a while now.
Where is the smart money, and how can the actual creators of product in this town (union actors, writers, directors) connect with that money to eliminate the studios, who simply provide layers of costs and alleged marketing expertise. When you can digitally distribute both to the home consumer and to theatre exhibitors, why will you need studios? It’s not like studios are the only ones who can buy display ads and billboards and bus shelter signs.
And the studios certainly don’t control the internet or have much of a clue as to how to utilize social network marketing.
The figures that show that the readership of this blog now outscores the readership of the trades (BOTH online and in print added together) show that everything in this town has suddenly become a new, and way less clubby game, and the traditional show biz infrastructure doesn’t get it.
Where is the smart money? Who will put together a system where money reaches talent directly without having to go through the studios?
To WGA Writer – I agree with most of what you’re saying EXCEPT your first paragraph is very much incorrect. Companies are indeed cutting many layers of development execs! I am a former executive and on one of my tracking boards of almost 30 people, more than half have either lost their job in the last 2 years or have decided to transition to writing or producing on their own.
You may not know this, but there have been hundreds of cuts in development departments across the board this year. Not to mention that with the shuttering of Fox Atomic, New Line (in its original form), WB Independent, Picturehouse, Paramount Vantage, Rogue (in its original form), and Weinstein Company clearning house (only 1 LA-based Exec left), that there are hundreds of unemployed execs out there and less and less companies with the capital to employ them. Add to that the fact that the WME Merger left a number of assistants (not to mention agents) out in the cold and many production companies and studios jumped at the chance to hire an agency assistant with no exec experience who would work for much less money to be their new Junior Exec than hire an experienced executive!!
The job market for executives has been disgusting for about 18 months now. And guess what execs do when they are unemployed? THEY WRITE!
And execs who turn to writing have an automatic pipeline to studios and managers and agents, and are more likely to get read and sold than a first time writer trying to break in without any connections, which in turn, is making it even harder for writers out there. So while many writers might think execs are useless – they’re really not. The best way to help new writers break in is by keeping as many execs employed as possible!
EXCELLENT original post and follow ups (thanks Nik for all the info). To answer the WGA-BizSense poster…you are correct and have your hands wrapped around the entire forecast for the future of this biz. Sadly, if you wanna see how it plays out? Just look at the reversal of fortunes in the music biz.
The current death of major labels is what lies ahead for major studios unless something changes fast. On the upside, today you have any artist (or even a wannabe) from Trent Reznor to “Trent Smith in Podunk” all having access to the same opportunities and the same fan/consumer dollars.
Consider “Paranormal Activity”. Which is akin to a talented indie band making their own records and selling/distributing via TuneCore/iTunes/Rhapsody, etc. In the future, you will see many more “Paranormal” success stories (much like the wave of post-Reservoir Dogs or El Mariachi indies).
Yes, there will always have a place for the major tent-pole studio fare…just like you’ll always have Metallica, Snoop Dogg, Red Hot C.P., and Eminem on majors. But the hard part will be finding the filter to seperate the wheat from the chaff when every joe blow can distribute his own films via online distribution (not just via YouTube). It may be such a deluge of half-to-low-quality crap that film fans get overloaded (and the R.O.I. = about .20 cents on the dollar). Search for the Bob Lefsetz Letter (a music/tech blog e-letter) as he and Seth Godin delineate this much better than I.
Thus, we (as writers, content creators, etc.) have to find new ways to structure our deals. (I’m not bragging here – simply offering my own example of a recent success in landing a new deal via unconventional partnerships). I just set up a big tent-pole pic deal based on my own graphic novel – and signed the studio contracts yesterday. Without having yet written the actual graphic novel (or script).
I recalled reading about how eons ago Bob Evans at Paramount commissioned Mario Puzo to write the book for the “Godfather” while the script was being written simultaneously (and did the same with either “Love Story” or some other novel I think). Instead of Paramount paying outlandishly for book rights? They bought the story rights, paid to have it written in novel, and ended up reaping $$$ on the actual sales of the novel – and the film too. They made it, and they owned it.
I thought I might try something similar. Which is why you likely won’t read this in the trades for quite a while. It isn’t a script – and isn’t even really a comic/graphic novel yet. It was a story – a very detailed story set up in a manner to which it can be an entire franchise property in every media format.
Instead of writing spec? I decided to go “lo tech”, and storyboard the thing (and wrote a TV-ish story bible) for the entire property (or franchise – from book to film to games to music).
Two calls were made: one to a solid producer, and another to a mini-studio/backer (such as Relativity or Legendary, etc.). They jumped at the chance once they went online and saw it (on the scrawny dinky homemade website I built to show the rough project). The only other person who knew about it was my manager; and a female acquaintence of Alan Moore’s who somehow finagled his (written and signed) blessing (via his attorneys) to allow me to use his “review” of the project’s potential based on the core story alone.
With the support of this one producer and this one financial backer(and an unholy endorsement from Alan Moore)…I now have a signed contract with THE major studio for all rights in all media worlwide. They pay me nothing upfront – but the backend is a straight split (and no, not NET either!) – and they split costs of all the dev/prod costs with the financiers.
Will it ever be made? We’ll see – but I have ironclad reversion rights. At least the major studio (and the mini-major financiers) and I are ALL partners on this property. It was an unconventional proposal from the get-go…but I’m not a good enough writer to sell on spec. My pitch to them was simple and said it all when I asked them:
“What would you give to be able to go back in time to 1938 and sign a 50/50 deal with Bob Kane & Bill Finger when they created Batman; including ownership of every project, media, merch, story, and spin-off from then…flash-forwarded to today?”.
It was risky, and unconventional, but it worked. I’m not claiming a fraction of Kane’s or Finger’s talents – nor of my property being a fraction as good as Batman/Dark Knight. But my story is actually original (though the template already exists); I like it, and hopefully it’ll entertain folks of all ages all over the globe – even for a little while. If they walk out of the theaters (or finish the book, or comic, etc.) and can smile or feel excited? It is good enough. The money will flow from there.
The studio is out ZERO up front…and if it bogs in DevHell or is used for studio political football? I can always revert to just a book deal or graphic novel deal. Because I’m just a hack high-concept guy with a knack for good stories. I’m no Wm. Monahan or Eric Roth or Zallian for sure. Most of Nikki’s readers write better comments than I write scripts! But I found the best way for me to stay fiscally solvent is to be a flexible self-starter. I can’t spell, blow a bubble, or whistle. Other than that – I’m normal. Best of luck to all, and be safe and blessed in all you do in the coming year. Remember – never, ever, fade away or give up.
Keep diggin’!
Michael, thank you for your post! I just wrote a spec and am getting some interest but my gut says I have to be producer and creative and put the pieces together in order to get this done. How kind of you to share the details, nuances and creativity that ultimately lead to your signed deal. I will share mine as well but I sure hope for my sake there’s some $$ up front! Good luck to you!
Is this Michael Wasserman of The Unusual Suspects prod co? Curious. Incidentally, you played that pitch just right… we’ve all had to adjust to the studios’ new ‘you do the work, which we’re happy to read at no money down’ model.
“436 spec scripts came out in 2009, of which 72 sold (17%).”
Coming from a writer that is just starting out, this is pretty bleak news. Hopefully things will slowly start to pick up over the next few years.
Just be a good writer!
I’m trying! I’m on my last year of college at UCSB, got 6 scripts done, 4 of which I feel confident about. Moving to LA this summer to start from the ground up.
And as for Michael’s story, very interesting deal that you’ve set up.
Excellent work, Jason, you rock! It’s a bit depressing but it’s a great compilation of stats and I hope it heralds a new paradigm of opportunities for writers trying to break in down the line.
Julie Gray
Anyone got comp figures from previous years? Just how much worse is it?
thanks for the cool stat churning, Jason. Very, very interesting read.
– bobby the saint
Let me get this right:
Hollywood creates a greedy, dishonest and biased business, then because of those biases, they lose touch with the populace. Product doesn’t sell and now no one wants to give them money to make their condescending-devoid-of-quality-dreck.
WGA Writer With Business Sense:
1) Have enough creatives-with-industry-clout gone the Joss Whedon/DR. HORRIBLE route to produce product? If not, they are missing a bet.
2) Relatedly, the Jan 2010 WIRED issue has a nifty article on four alternative ways indie filmmakers can distribute their movies and make money without waiting for a studio deal.
“If, out of fear based decision making, all the studios want to make are 100 million plus tent poles out of board games and plastic trolls, who will step in to finance good movies that can be made from two to ten million?”
It couldn’t have been said any better!
In a normal credit & capital markets situation, you can raise money for damn near anything. The problem is that the traditional indie movie model (since you’re not talking studio with 2-10 budgets) doesn’t produce a useful ROI. If it does not get picked up and get solid distribution, it’s an expensive doorstop. Most stuff doesn’t get picked up and thus becomes a near total loss. So unless you are able to guarantee people’s investment with collateral or personal guarantees – which you wouldn’t have to if you actually had that much, you’d self-finance – it’s tough sledding.
If you can build a business model where you can get around the pickup problem, the paradigm changes. You still need something that can be distributed for money, though. Like it or not, that *IS* a chronic problem with indie productions. I’m a big fan of art, but if you are borrowing money, the bills need paid.
You’d also still need execs and readers to grade projects since most finance guys don’t have a clue on quality or actual commercial potential.
This is all quite meaningless to the writer who wants to break in. They’ll ignore even the worst news in the audacity that they are the exception. Also, this information doesn’t break down whether the spec script is an original story or based on prior material. I’d hate to read the figures then for the former.
@ WGA Writer with Business Sense: I’m a director – it makes me crazy to see posts like yours because, I’m the guy with the channels to the money – but I don’t have the project/script that’s got me jumping outta my chair with excitement, to take into the rooms I have the keys to. But here we sit – divided by a system, not the studio system though …
Director with business sense: an tantilizing as post appears, it smacks of the Deadline comment page equivalent of the Nigerian prince with millions of dollars only waiting for a generous soul. I got scripts falling out of my laptop pal. The WGA registered 50K+ scripts this year, and does every year. Your post is like saying “I was I could just test drive that Ferrari but my Gucci loafer is caught under the clutch pedal of my 911.” AKA a high class problem. All bitterness aside (too late admittedly), any time you want a project to jump you out of your seat, you come knocking on my car door, the one I’ll sleeping in this time next year.
Jesus, dude, you got scripts falling out of your laptop? Maybe they don’t sell because you can’t proof read worth a damn.
of course, you could just post your contact info and I assure you that you’ll get flooded with material and be forced to sift through the mess just like the rest of us… money or not, it is difficult to find a good project. everyone thinks their script is a masterpiece. good luck…
@Director with business sense:I agree completely with Writer/Producer with Content discontent: You can’t find ONE script in the entire town that gets you “jumping out of your chair?” Hm. Sounds like you either have ridiculous standards, are a frustrated writer, yourself, or your agent/manager needs to figure out a better way to get you quality scripts, since they are surely circulating.
Thanks to scoggins for the clarification, and to the posters who are describing their personal experiences getting stuff sold in this market. I’d love to hear more of these stories from the tiny percentage who did sell this year: how did you do it? My own story is that I work steadily, but not for the majors. My agent is negotiating a deal right now (yes, over the holidays) with a major LA production company and a financier overseas. Much of my work has been coming from overseas in the last few years, (none of which, by the way, is reported to InBaseline, and of course IMDb won’t post anything unreported in the trades anymore). I think agents have had to rethink what it means for their writers to work for a non-major. There’s more hustle now to get jobs outside the typical system, which suits me fine. Money is money to me, a job’s a job. Who wouldn’t want to make a couple of hundred grand in this economy (even though it would be reported as an embarrassingly ‘low six figures’ in the trades)? I feel lucky and grateful, and, frankly, relieved that focus has been taken, to some extent, off of the studios.
Studios are still punishing writers for the strike – it opened their eyes to the multitudes of specs they’d already bought but never made, as well as the successful franchises and pictures every studio has locked away in its vaults yet to be exploited. Why spend lavishly on a new, un-tested property when you’re already flush with tons of stories that maybe got the shaft in a wayward development process? If you’re a top-level exec forced by your overlords to cut costs, what better/faster way than to trim the fat from the spec-purchase/development part of your operation? Especially if you’ve got nearly a hundred years’ worth of films in the can itching to be re-made and entire floors of scripts that were purchased but never made?
Well, WGA Writer who will be sleeping in his car next year, with that attitude (not to mention your apathetic interest in spelling and grammar), I hope your 1992 BMW is comfortable.
Why would anyone actually take this info seriously based on some ass clown at a management company that is barely known in town? These numbers are way off and don’t count packages, pitches, books, articles, etc…
Still doesn’t change my overall perspective on the business. I might just be a simple custodian in beverly who types furiously on a 3GS but I expect the 17% and lower rate of acceptance. Just have to keep your game tight, or write something so formulatic or write for TV. I chose the Latter and to keep my game tight. Who knows if my crazed ideas will get anywhere, or if I will run the custodial staff of a boondoggle school district, I have try something.
As someone said before, the truth is, of the 436 that went out, (at least) 1/2 of them simply aren’t very good. I’m not going to knock on anyone’s talent, as everyone works hard, tries hard, and bad scripts come from all places. There are even very good writers in the world that write bad scripts, and then force their agents to go out with them. This happens from the big 4 all the way down. It’s not like we all haven’t read crap that comes from CAA.
An interesting parallel can be made to film festivals. More and more people are out there making films digitally, editing them on their home computers, and sending them through withoutabox.com to every festival they can find. So the numbers get inflated. More films, less % of them get chosen. Festivals love it, as it makes them seem more particular.
While the numbers really seem bleak on a surface level, I wouldn’t get too down on the system. Do your best to be original and remember that you are your best representation. Agents (and managers) are, eh. They do what they can (you hope), but sometimes it’s just not up to what you as the creator wants. And I say this from a place of knowledge, as I used to be a rep.
And being a former representative, there was never a more annoying call than a client calling in and saying, “just checking in to see what’s going on with my career.” I worked hard, but clients are rarely satisfied. I always encouraged them to get out there and help me do my job and sell themselves. Now, before someone starts crucifying me for having been a bad rep, let me say that I’m now on the flip side as a director/writer, and I take my own advice to heart and do everything I can to work with my reps in selling myself, not just expecting them to do it for me. It’s a hard world out there, and you have to fire on all cylinders to get something done. And for the skeptics of my “you have to sell yourself” mantra? It’s worked. Two movies written and directed in 5 years – one of which I called my reps and said, “I met this exec on my own at a party, we had some meetings with various people, and you’re going to get a call about a deal.” Not giant blockbuster hits, but I can’t complain.
At the end of the day, you can’t sit back and ask others to do the heavy lifting. Reps will appreciate your efforts – you hope.
It is so interesting to read the genuinely intelligent comments on this thread. I sometimes chide myself for wasting time commenting on this blog, and then I learn so much in response to what I’ve said.
To the unemployed executive: The ration of useful and talented executives to total pompous waste product executives is probably identical to the ratio of brilliantly talented hardworking writers to whining untalented lazy writers. I have been blessed to work with great executives who made my work better and total idiots who made me want to commit murder.
I even know former development execs who went on to become award winning writers, and it may surprise you to know that those are my favorites. However, I do think there should be a non-studio model where people with track records (and I would include not just obvious A-listers but also people who have had success in TV but want to do film, authors who’ve written best sellers who want to write and direct their own films etc.) can hook up with other artists (like the director who wrote here) and get funding in place to make good movies that aren’t 100 million dollar tent poles.
I’m sorry to say to you that I don’t think studio executives are the only people who are capable of deciding what should and shouldn’t be made. I think a model where a group of artists is willing to work at reduced salaries, with REAL back end participation, would probably produce as good of a ratio of hits to flops as a system where executives decide what to fund. I’ve no proof for that, because you can’t prove a negative, my model doesn’t exist yet.
To the Director with access to VC $$$: I’m a working writer who has had both TV and film projects that actually got made. I’ve got a number of spec scripts I’m holding back from the marketplace at this time because I don’t want to burn good material on development execs who are not authorized to buy. What I’m wishing for is a way for you and I to reach each other directly (both metaphorically and actually). You and I both know that if we don’t happen to be at the same agency (and that agency isn’t creative about introducing clients to each other) you will never read my material, and we will never meet. Maybe you wouldn’t like me, because what I really want to do is direct, but for now I bet I’d be happy to have you direct my work, especially if you let me observe you on the set.
Who will create this access among artists? I’m less interested in having first-timers be part of this model, unless you’ve got something to show that actually got made (a great novel that was published, a film you made that got some acclaim, a web series everyone said was amazing, etc.)
When will we all stop acting like Cinderella, sitting around our dingy hearths waiting for the studio princes to bring us our frigging uncomfortable glass shoes?
When I look at what Nikki has single-handedly created here, I want working artists to do the same thing, but it would require realizing that it’s not a zero-sum equation game. That greater access of working artists to each other’s talent to put together projects on an ongoing basis outside of the studio system would ultimately benefit us all. We would have to genuinely realize that someone else from this talent pool getting a film to greenlight would not be our loss, but that their success would clear the way for our success, as more and more good movies got funded and made through this talent pool.
It could be commercially viable because it wouldn’t be one-off projects, and by creating slates of product the risk could be managed more effectively (but of course not eliminated, as filmmaking will always be a high-risk investment).
To Michael Wasserman: First of all thank you for sharing your story, and congratulations. Secondly, thank you for your courage in posting your actual name, and I’m sorry that you felt you had to self-deprecatingly run down your own talent in order to do so. I’m all for a clean 50/50 split, and I think the reason smart money is wary of anything to do with filmed entertainment is that Hollywood accounting is synonymous with fraud. Of course the ways that studios construct film investment is one step away from a Bernie Madoff construct, and of course those hedge funds don’t want to be treated like rubes, so as the fear factor increases, they run screaming from us, even as viewership in ALL filmed entertainment is at an all-time high.
Our business has great profit potential, but investors regard us as con artists.
You’re now my role model. As a creative entrepreneur and a generous non-zero sum equation thinker as I’ve described above. Thank you.
I’m more than willing to bet on my own talent, and though I’ve gotten money for it, I’ve certainly gotten no joy from creating work I loved (and got paid for) that was buried alive in the incredible waste pile of studio development. It’s why I started risking my own time and money working outside the studio system.
But who will step forward and create this infrastructure of artist access that meets independent funding? Of course distribution is key, but the studio stranglehold on that piece of the puzzle is falling apart even as we speak, as a number of commenters have noted here.
Maybe I’m just not thinking creatively enough. Maybe the means to create this system of access is within my own grasp, it just hasn’t come together for me yet.
But I do get this great upheaval represents great opportunity for those who are willing to risk. For good or ill, that describes me.
To the last poster and anyone talking about coming up with a new ’system’. This is all fine and well, but where reality sits in is when you have your new system with it’s new and artistic product and that product finally has to overcome the inertia of audience interest. You would certainly have to find a ‘Paranormal Activity’ or something on the level of a District 9 (but done for about 1/100th the cost) and have that be your first release… you have to sugarcoat the pill of the eventual navel-gazing dreck I’m guessing most of these ‘new system’ companies would love to put out. It’s the same thing with the festivals… there are no more Pi’s, Primers, Clerks, or El Mariachi’s coming out of them… WHERE ARE THE INDIE GENRE FILMS? There are way too many indie filmmakers/writers who believe they have something to say without first figuring out whether they can simply entertain an audience and keep them interested. Comedy, horror, and scifi are almost completely utilitarian in nature and thus prove the most about a filmmaker’s ability to connect with an audience. Horror and comedy especially… because the audience is either scared/laughing or they’re not. I believe that there IS room for a system that puts out films in a lower budget range if they can find a new marketing/distribution angle, and with the extremely low cost of shooting in HD and doing post on a laptop (including titles, FX, etc.), I still cannot believe a Roger Corman/AIP-like model has not emerged. Where the problem exists is that even Roger Corman ‘accidentally’ hired a Scorsese, a Coppola, or a Bogdonavich who figured out how to elevate the schlock they were given to direct, even if just a little bit and use it as an ‘in’ or a proving ground for their talent. For some reason, I don’t see that happening now… if such a company were to emerge, the films would either be of the IFC/Sundance variety (i.e. – unwatchably pretentious to a normal audience) or they’d be of the straight-to-dvd/totally exploitive garbage variety. There seems to be nobody willing to find that middle ground and try to use the exploitation check boxes (gotta have some nudity, gore, toilet humor, zombies, guns, or aliens running around) while also allowing the makers a little creative freedom. Then you use the few genre successes you have to go and do something a little more dramatic and challenging. But I still believe that struggling writers and directors just do not realize how incredibly difficult it is to get an audience interested in seeing something. And I always hear this argument about films like District 9 and The Hangover (weren’t both financed independently? I know Blomkamp’s next film definitely is, anyway) proving a smaller model does exist, but then the people arguing for such a model would use it to make their tragic story of innocence lost or something… meanwhile, District 9 is an extremely violent film about ALIENS and The Hangover is an R-rated frat-boy type comedy. There’s some kind of disconnect on the indie/festival level between what they’re seeing become successful on a low budget and the kinds of films they think should be programmed/made. It’s like entering the frigging Twilight Zone.
MAYBE THESE BIG HOLLYWOOD PRODUCERS, AND AGENTS SHOULD TO TALK TO A NUMBER OF NEW WRITER’S AROUND THE WORD LIKE MY SELF AT TORCH LIGHT FILMS
WE HAVE 13 SCRIPT FROM THE CHALES MASON STORY TO A SPACE FANSTANY EPIC AND A FILM ABOUT THE YATI ,NOT BE DONE FOR A LONG TIME
THE HAMILTON JOURNALS A MONDEN DAY ROBIN HOOD ADVENTURE STORY FOR ALL THE FAMILY, IF THE PRODUCERS ARE LOOK FOR GREAT STORY PLEASE GET BACK TO TORCHLIGHT THANKS DIRECTOR
FAMILY
You’re kidding, right?
WGA Writer with Business Sense: Bravo! I couldn’t agree more. Imagine a site/web-platform where non-studio oriented scripts could be showcased and given a fighting chance of reaching people with real access to independent finance and real interest in producing such films – wonderful! Artists could meet artists outside of the agency system (though undoubtedly 10 percenteries would find a way in the back door in attempt to curtail their imminent demise, as would executive suits desperate to avoid missing that jewel of the nile)
Of course the biggest obstacle would be managing a democratic selection process of the material/membership and smart gatekeeping to ensure quality was kept of a ‘cinematically oriented’ standard. I guess a board of unbiased adjudicators or something (!? yeah, good luck with that) who could appraise relevant material to be listed and members who could access it. Tough to imagine how something like that could avoid the obvious pitfalls .. but I agree it would be brilliant and it’s absolutely within our reach. I know there are a number of web based screenplay listings but .. seriously, the loglines are enough to make my assistant consider going halves on a murder charge with her boss. And reliance on agents to actually be proactive enough to introduce people like you and I (unless there was a guaranteed spin up in it for them) is so 1995, we’d be foolish to not consider shaking things up at this juncture. The big guys are toppling, no question and, as they do, it’s our time to rise.
I’ll be there flying a small flag of determined defiance while they’re clasping to their tattered frays of entitlement and defeat.
Dear Aforementioned Director,
I am optimistic that this will be the decade that artists in Hollywood, who are, after all, the true means of production in our business, will end their dependence on gatekeepers of all kinds and begin to raise their own capital and be in control over their own means of distribution. Chaotic times make for great opportunity for those who are willing to risk. I’m grateful that I’m not an agent or an attorney or an executive in a media conglomerate. I’m grateful that I have the power to instigate change because, in the end, movies start with the artists. I’m confident that we will find a way to take the power of our hard work and talent and create a new business model that allows us to keep more of the rewards from the risks we have always taken (facing the blank page, walking onto a set).
I think artists would certainly do no worse than executives in deciding which projects to greenlight, and we have ceded our power to others for far too long. There is no perfect system, but there surely can be a better system.
I refuse to sit and wait for a glass shoe, metaphorical or otherwise. And I’d hate to see you and your assistant in the pokey just because of crap scripts and even worse loglines.
Here’s to a new decade and a new business model. Cheers!
P.S. To Aforementioned Director:
To be clear, the process I’m describing wouldn’t have to be “democratic” it would simply provide artist to artist access, and investor to artist access. We’d still be dealing with the marketplace and all its vicissitudes. We would be providing artists of some acknowledged track record or recent acclaim access to one another, minus middlemen, and we’d be providing investors who want to participate in our high risk ventures access to the actual means of production (artists) again, without middlemen (or middle women).
I was pondering, why does VC money willingly head toward bio-tech, knowing that they might lose every penny, and avoid entertainment?
Because VC money understands the concept of losing everything, but when they regard our current business models they see us as con artists. It’s one thing to risk everything and lose, it’s another to feel “taken.” Being “taken” has the same balance sheet result, but you feel way worse.
“Hollywood Accounting” is an epithet that even the least educated understand to be a rip-off, so no wonder the most sophisticated avoid the business that spawned it.
We can change that. We can create honest business models where money is invested directly with the artists who will actually make the film. We can make sure that marketing and distribution are done wisely and that revenues and expenses are accounted for honestly. We won’t always make a profit, it’s a high risk venture after all. However, sometimes our films will make a profit, and that will make us vastly different than movie studios, whose individual projects never make a profit, even as the conglomerates that own those film properties make profits and their executives make enormous bonuses.
We can do a better job than that. It’s a very low bar.
WGA Writer – I’ve had this on my mind for a few days and I think it would be terrific if you and I could connect for a chat. Rather than post my email address, I’ve sent Nikki my contact info – if you do the same, we should be able to connect and see if we can hatch a plan.
What about setting up a monthly networking event?
Aforementioned Director (Almost abbreviated it to A.D. but didn’t want to insult),
I will do the same. I hope Nikki will be kind enough to pass the info…
Aforementioned Director,
I get that Nikki is very busy running this site single handed, and it may not be fair to ask her to pass along info or vet whether either of us is a serial killer etc. etc.
So, if you care to, email me at a new address I’ve created WGAwriterwithBsense@gmail.com
I’m sure you can make it apparent to me that you’re not a psychopath (neurotic is both fine and expected, and you should expect the same from me) and then we can speak.