Agents & Other Party Animals
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
>> So do tell, Jerv. How 'bout those literarry agents. Do they ever sell a
script or pitch well to development, or was it all smoke up the ass and soak
up the sun?<<
It's a big Catch 22, pal. Money is the bottom line; their time, your money.
They have clients already established in the biz, so their days are spent on
the hustle for those clients. If you can get one to "read", which is to say
look at your property, they're more than apt to be looking at it with an eye
toward rejection just to get it off their desk and move on to something with a
stronger money smell to it.
If you were to ask me how I'd deal with an agent today? Okay, here's what
I'd do: Say I've got a hot property, okay? It's from a book (this is on the
level, I'm talking a real property, a real story, a real book that were I out
there in Hollywood right now, it's the movie I would want to do), and for
some reason, nobody in the industry has picked up on it yet. It's sitting
there, this book; it's the stuff of which boxoffice smashes are made; the
biography of a major figure in the music business, no longer in the land of
the living. Nobody has yet picked up on it because the book was cheaply
produced by a no-name publisher, and never hit the best seller lists.
Okay, this book has more hip, action packed, 50's to 60's chopped and
channeled, nosed & decked, raked in front period class than anything you could
lay hands on in a flood of John Waters' wet Chantilly Lace Dreams, and nobody
knows about it, see... but you and me?
Okay, look out now. What are we talking about? Enough money from one picture
to set the two of us up for life? No, not on your writer's hat, it won't;
not in my poor, stepped on, stained and faded gray felt dreams. Hell no. For
this, I become a "producer". It's nothing, a simple change of hats.
Hollywood is not the place for small self-images, small thinkers; for that
there are Buddhist monasteries in Arizona (but if the last Democratic Party
campaign is any indication, even they are thinking... "meditating" big these
days.
Now, we become committed to this story. You and me, we form an organization,
a production company - a covenant. We look at one another, and we say, this
is for life. We are going to make a few moves here, which if they are done
right, they will set us up for life. You must have perfect trust in my
commitment to this company, and vice-versa. I can't hand you this book until
our mutual confidence is perfect. Considering the stakes, this can mean only
one thing, in terms of this "commitment", and that is something that remains
as the bottom-line, unstated terms of the contract. I don't even have to tell
you what that is; you know what that is, and I know what that is. And that is
essential; that is what we have to get across in no uncertain, unstated terms
to the very next party who is brought into the contract, the first agent or
producer you talk to. That commitment is what you might call our "production
money".
Look at the present controversy over the Truman Show: The allegation is that
the bastards stole that script. It had already been produced as a play on
Broadway, it had copyright protection. So what? There is only one kind of
'copyright protection' and that is the kind of contract we are talking about
which cannot be stated in text. When you are talking about one blitzkreig of
creative effort which sets you up for life; nothing short of my life has to be
the earnest money on the promissory note. What am I talking about? Death?
Nah, life is what we talk about; a life in bandages if I welsh on you? Maybe.
Fine. Now, I go around town looking for two or three writers to get working
on the script, once they have seen the terms, stated and unstated in the
contract. I do not even dream of approaching the owner of the book until
there is somebody in the organization in a position to make a real offer. Now
I take a shot at getting an appointment with an agent. I choose my man very
carefully, it has to be somebody who has worked with the best, Scorsese,
Tarantino, the Cohen Bros, the two maniacs who did "Dumb and Dumber'? We
want an agent who has worked with maverick producers before.
Say we want to go for this Anderson who did _Boogie Nights_? Say that's what
we want. Okay, we get the cast list for that movie, we go to SAG to find out
who the actor's agents were. We should be able to do this over the phone;
just call and say, "Darling, this is Morgan Fiddlefart of Prairie Oyster
Productions and I need to know who "so-and so's" agent is, we MAY have a very
nice property for her.
Okay, now, if successful, we have the name of an agent who has worked with
Anderson in the past. We call that agent or his secretary. We say this is
Prairie Oyster Productions. We may have a part for Ms "So and So", and we'd
like to make an appointment to talk about it. And no, it cannot be handled
over the phone.
On the day of the appointment, you round up two of the writers and get them
all dressed up in good suits and hats, very especially good hats. This trio
has to show that it is something to be contended with or there will be no
fear of what is right placed in the heart of that agent. That fear is
created by body language, by a smoking cigar; whatever it takes to generate
respect. This agent must not be permitted to get the idea that he is the
bigshot in this meeting; he's not the one with the goods; we are.
When you get called into his inner sanctum, you introduce your partners. You
tell him you have a property you are working on for which you need the rights.
You tell him what a diamond in the rough this book is, and how committed the
three of you are to this production. You tell him that you are ready to name
the book in question right after you hear him say, on his word, that he won't
move an inch toward it without it's being in the interest of Prairie Oyster
Productions. Without that guarantee, you leave.
If you get the guarantee, you shake his hand saying that you can see that he
is not the kind of man who would expose his reputation to the serious injury
of becoming known as a welsher who is neither fit nor able ever to shake a
man's hand in this town ever again. If he should balk at that, overly and
ask what you mean; you should understand immediately that this is apparently
a man who has never before done any business on a truly maverick basis in
this town, and is therefore showing himself as a bad prospect.
When you find the agent who does not become daunted by what is right, you can
tell him that since we are asking, perhaps, more of this agent than is
ordinarily his due, he'll be in it for more than a mere cut from the writers'
fees, since it will be up to him to get it across to the money people that
they haven't got jack apple crap without what it is that we have to put into
the bargain which is the story itself, the discovery of a nugget of pure
gold. You explain that you don't give a damn what other writers are willing
to settle for. You put the brim of your producer's hat down at a mean slant
and you stand up to leave without having given him the title of the book. You
tell him to think it over, that you'll get back with him, but for now, you've
got some other agents to see.
The town is full of agents, pal. That's the one thing for sure I can tell you
on the subject of agents. Hollywood is full of 'em.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Geealexand
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
Glad to hear that. And, pleased to meetcha.
--
Jervis
NMS
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
(snip)
>If you were to ask me how I'd deal with an agent today? Okay, here's what
>I'd do: Say I've got a hot property, okay? It's from a book (this is on
the
>level, I'm talking a real property, a real story, a real book that were I
out
>there in Hollywood right now, it's the movie I would want to do), and for
>some reason, nobody in the industry has picked up on it yet. It's sitting
>there, this book; it's the stuff of which boxoffice smashes are made; the
>biography of a major figure in the music business, no longer in the land of
>the living. Nobody has yet picked up on it because the book was cheaply
>produced by a no-name publisher, and never hit the best seller lists.
>
>Okay, this book has more hip, action packed, 50's to 60's chopped and
>channeled, nosed & decked, raked in front period class than anything you
could
>lay hands on in a flood of John Waters' wet Chantilly Lace Dreams, and
nobody
>knows about it, see... but you and me?
If it's a cheap book that nobody knows about that's been sitting around
forever, then why don't you option it? Pop for the few thousand bucks (most
of which wil be legal fees).
(snip)
>Now, we become committed to this story. You and me, we form an
organization,
>a production company - a covenant. We look at one another, and we say, this
>is for life. We are going to make a few moves here, which if they are done
>right, they will set us up for life. You must have perfect trust in my
>commitment to this company, and vice-versa. I can't hand you this book
until
>our mutual confidence is perfect. Considering the stakes, this can mean
only
>one thing, in terms of this "commitment", and that is something that
remains
>as the bottom-line, unstated terms of the contract.
This sounds, I'm afraid like, "My personal guarantee" -- which, of course,
means nothing. If somebody told me what you just wrote above, I'd check to
see if he'd palmed my watch.
Businesses aren't about love or honor, or commitment, or "going all the way"
or sports analogies or anything else but money and obligation. That's what
contracts are for. To establish who gets the money and who has the
obligation. And to say, "Oh, that's just legalistic gobbledygook, don't
worry about it, what counts is the clearly unbreakable linkage between our
souls," is nuts.
A sure test of the honesty and seriousness of anybody is that an honest and
serious person has no problem at all putting everything that they agree to
in writing. If somebody doesn't want to memorialize it in writing, you have
to ask yourself why.
(snip)
>Fine. Now, I go around town looking for two or three writers to get
working
>on the script, once they have seen the terms, stated and unstated in the
>contract.
No. There are no such things as terms "unstated" in the contract. Don't ever
believe this or advise others to believe it. Contracts are not only
"inclusive" they are "exclusive" -- that is, it isn't only that what's *in*
the contract is binding, but what *isn't* in the contract is also,
explicitly *not* binding. That is, you can't sign a contract and then agree
to ignore its terms or add other terms that aren't in it. That's why people
write things into contracts -- so that clarifications or changes or new
terms will, in fact, be part of the deal.
In fact, virtually every contract ever written has a clause in it that says
that this contract is it -- the entire agreement, and nothing else has been
agreed to or offered or promised.
If anything else material has been offered or promised, it should be in the
contract. And if something "spiritual" has been offered or promised,
frankly, its bullshit.
I do not even dream of approaching the owner of the book until
>there is somebody in the organization in a position to make a real offer.
If you don't own the book, what are you doing? Forming a company to adapt
the book you don't own? And then hiring (presumably for no money up front)
"two or three" writers willing to write it (why stop at two or three? Why
not get twenty or thirty? Then the script will doubtless be ten times
better), and then going around town trying to sell this thing that you don't
own?
Now
>I take a shot at getting an appointment with an agent. I choose my man very
>carefully, it has to be somebody who has worked with the best, Scorsese,
>Tarantino, the Cohen Bros, the two maniacs who did "Dumb and Dumber'? We
>want an agent who has worked with maverick producers before.
>
>Say we want to go for this Anderson who did _Boogie Nights_? Say that's
what
>we want. Okay, we get the cast list for that movie, we go to SAG to find
out
>who the actor's agents were. We should be able to do this over the phone;
>just call and say, "Darling, this is Morgan Fiddlefart of Prairie Oyster
>Productions and I need to know who "so-and so's" agent is, we MAY have a
very
>nice property for her.
>
>Okay, now, if successful, we have the name of an agent who has worked with
>Anderson in the past. We call that agent or his secretary. We say this is
>Prairie Oyster Productions. We may have a part for Ms "So and So", and
we'd
>like to make an appointment to talk about it. And no, it cannot be handled
>over the phone.
And then they ask you a question. Is the project set up? In other words, do
you actually have the money, or are you just some bullshit would-be producer
who has nothing more than access to a phone?
Now you can say, "No," in which case the conversation is over. Or you can
lie and say "Yes" in which case they're going to ask you where it's set up,
and pretty soon it's going to be obvious that you're just bullshitting. Then
it's "No" plus, put this guy's name on the list of people never to do
business with.
Now, this isn't true for everybody, but it is true for virtually everybody.
The only actors who are actually looking for books and scripts are those who
have a development deal somewhere, and thus have development companies
which are looking for things for the actor to star in.
If you wanted to approach one of those companies with a script, you can. But
that means that they are co-producers if they decide to move forward. And
the first question they're going to ask is, "What's the book?" -- a question
which they will ask over the phone and for which your refusal to answer will
earn you a polite (or not so polite) hang up. And the second question is
going to be, "Do you own the rights?" and if you say no, they're going to
say, "Then what do we need you for?"
>
>On the day of the appointment, you round up two of the writers and get them
>all dressed up in good suits and hats, very especially good hats. This trio
>has to show that it is something to be contended with or there will be no
>fear of what is right placed in the heart of that agent. That fear is
>created by body language, by a smoking cigar; whatever it takes to generate
>respect. This agent must not be permitted to get the idea that he is the
>bigshot in this meeting; he's not the one with the goods; we are.
No. Because if you were truly the person why "had it" and they were truly
the person who "wanted it" -- you wouldn't be in their office. They would be
taking you out to lunch somewhere.
And people in Hollywood, as far as I can remember, never wear hats, and
unless you're famous, pulling out a cigar in somebody's office is a quick
way to get them pissed off at you.
Everything that you've described above could be done much more easily and
much more simply by simply walking in wearing signs around your necks
reading, "Amateurs who don't know shit about anything" -- because that is
what the Agent (who, by the way, you're not going to get to anyway with the
cockamamie story you spun on the phone) will immediately recognize you as
being.
>
>When you get called into his inner sanctum, you introduce your partners.
You
>tell him you have a property you are working on for which you need the
rights.
And the Agent would then look at you funny. How do you "have" the property
if you haven't acquired the rights? How can you be "working" on the property
if you haven't acquired the rights? Do you know if the rights are actually
available? And what, exactly, is this property?
>You tell him what a diamond in the rough this book is, and how committed
the
>three of you are to this production. You tell him that you are ready to
name
>the book in question right after you hear him say, on his word, that he
won't
>move an inch toward it without it's being in the interest of Prairie Oyster
>Productions. Without that guarantee, you leave.
Well, as an agent, as opposed to a producer, he wouldn't particularly want
to acquire the rights, but I'll tell you something straight out. Any such
promise is not one that can be relied upon. It's not a "contract" -- that
is, it isn't something where two parties agree to terms and consideration is
given.
In other words, all you have to "give" is the name of a book. All you've
given up to this point is a bunch of smoke. But, as an agent, I'm not going
to agree to any pig in a poke. I'd be crazy to. You know, Agents are often
extremely well-read, especially people who've worked as literary agents. And
everybody in a big agency gets all the coverage of everything that's read by
everybody else.
So, while I'm sure you think that nobody has heard of this book, there is
actually a pretty good chance that this agent already has. And then what
happens? He's promised not to work with anybody but you and gets nothing in
return.
I can't imagine that there is an agent in town who'd agree to something like
this, if for no other reason that the high degree of probability that it
would turn out to be impossible to do so. If they did, they'd just be
bullshitting you, much as you are bullshitting them.
>
>If you get the guarantee, you shake his hand saying that you can see that
he
>is not the kind of man who would expose his reputation to the serious
injury
>of becoming known as a welsher who is neither fit nor able ever to shake a
>man's hand in this town ever again. If he should balk at that, overly and
>ask what you mean; you should understand immediately that this is
apparently
>a man who has never before done any business on a truly maverick basis in
>this town, and is therefore showing himself as a bad prospect.
I'm sorry. This is just baloney. Hollywood is a town that deeply believes in
the illusion that it is a business based on relationships. And you don't
create relationships by offering some intangible project and then making
not-so-veiled threats about "smearing" people's names around town. As if you
had the power to do that.
>
>When you find the agent who does not become daunted by what is right, you
can
>tell him that since we are asking, perhaps, more of this agent than is
>ordinarily his due, he'll be in it for more than a mere cut from the
writers'
>fees, since it will be up to him to get it across to the money people that
>they haven't got jack apple crap without what it is that we have to put
into
>the bargain which is the story itself, the discovery of a nugget of pure
>gold. You explain that you don't give a damn what other writers are
willing
>to settle for. You put the brim of your producer's hat down at a mean slant
>and you stand up to leave without having given him the title of the book.
You
>tell him to think it over, that you'll get back with him, but for now,
you've
>got some other agents to see.
And then the agent buzzes his secretary and tells him not to let these nuts
in any more.
>
>The town is full of agents, pal. That's the one thing for sure I can tell
you
>on the subject of agents. Hollywood is full of 'em.
You know what else it's full of? It's full of people with no experience and
no credentials who think that their shit is ice cream. Everybody fears these
guys, because all they can do is aggravate you and waste your time. In a
business where you are forced to put up with a lot of bullshit, there is a
tremendous unwillingness to put up with any bullshit that you *don't* have
to put up with.
Agents and Producers spend their days working with other agents and
producers. They know what professionals in this business are like. It's
strange that someone who would never, for an instant, think that they could
go to a conference on high energy particle physics without knowing more
about it than they've picked up on an episode of NOVA, and convince
professionals that they were, in fact, particle physicists, nevertheless
somehow thinks that they can go to professional agents or professional
producers and do the same -- convince them that you're somehow "hot"
producers/writers.
You want to know what to do?
It's really quite simple. You find a book that you think would make a great
movie. You call up the publisher, ask for the rights department, and ask if
the screen adapatation rights for this book are available. If they are, you
can get the name of the agent. Then you call up and say you're a beginning
producer, you love the book, you'd love to have a chance to try to get it
set up. Can you get an option for a year?
If it's really as obscure a book as you suggest, you can probably get one
for under a thousand dollars, plus another thousand or two that you'll have
to spend on legal fees to an entertainment lawyer preparing the contract.
Once you have it, then you actually create a company to sell it. A real
company. The kind that has stationery and letterhead and a bank account and
file cabinets and that files its taxes quarterly. If you're also a writer,
then you'd better be a fast writer, because you don't want to waste most of
your option writing the script. If you intend to hire a writer, but not pay
them anything, good luck. Most writers who are worth anything generally
expect to be paid. Maybe you'll be lucky and find a great beginning writer
who'll agree to do it with no money up front, but even so, you will have to
sign a contract with him that specifies what he gets paid and when -- which
means more money to your entertainment lawyer. The last thing you want is to
sell what's his and *then* start seriously negotiating for the purchase
price.
This also means that when the writer writes the script, for hire, you get to
write "Copyright Prairie Oyster Productions" on the cover, and mean it.
So you have the script and you have the book. Now you don't have to bullshit
anybody. You can call up development companies, you can tell them that you
are a producer and that you have a wonderful script based on a great book,
and you'd love for them to take a look at it. And if you tell them a bit
about it and it sounds interesting and you sound half-sane, they will. And
if they agree with you that it's wonderful, and it's something that's right
for them, they may make you an offer.
If nobody makes you an offer then, as a producer you still have the option
of looking for funding elsewhere, or of chucking the whole thing as a bad
bet. But, at the very least, if the work is at all respectable (and a lot of
it isn't, by the way) you will have made professional contacts and if, as
you suggest, you are "in it" for the long haul, you'll have other things to
pitch and other properties to sell, and you'll be able to go back and see
these people who remember you as being a reasonable, intelligent
professional, instead of some bullshit artist who didn't know shit about
anything.
NMS
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
"NMS" <nmstev...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>>And people in Hollywood, as far as I can remember, never wear hats, and
unless you're famous, pulling out a cigar in somebody's office is a quick
way to get them pissed off at you.<<
Before I get around to making a reply to this post, I will leave it open to
others to state their opinions. Meanwhile, perhaps my respondant would be so
kind as to offer some substantial reason as to why his proposed approach to
'making contracts' and not wearing hats in Hollywood is - as opposed to what I
suggest - the right one? I.E., which movies can I rent to see his credits?
This respondant seems very sure of his position. We have seen how my
experience in Hollywood has led to my assurance of what is best. Now, may we
see what this respondant's experience has been, such that it leads him to
such a contrary view of what constitutes a Hollywood 'contract', sans hat,
sans cigar, sans the invisible fine print in the firmly placed finger in the
chest?
> >If you get the guarantee, you shake his hand saying that you can see that
> >he is not the kind of man who would expose his reputation to the serious
> >injury of becoming known as a welsher who is neither fit nor able ever to >
> >shake a man's hand in this town ever again.
> I'm sorry. This is just baloney. Hollywood is a town that deeply believes > in
the illusion that it is a business based on relationships. And you don't
> create relationships by offering some intangible project and then making
> not-so-veiled threats about "smearing" people's names around town. As if > >
> you had the power to do that.
"Smearing names", eh? Heh. It might be noted that what was stated, originally
was anything but, as this respondant suggests, 'spiritual'. As to any
'threats', or implications in the contract about welshers and/or in which
ward at Cedars Sinai they should generally be looked for, I should never
suggest that anyone should ever imply anything that he or she does not have
the 'power' or the self-respect to fully realize. May I say also, that I
don't appreciate the abrasive and disrespectful tone of your reply? So, I
suggest that you wipe your mouth off and try being a bit more cordial next
time, or don't hold your breath waiting for any further response from here.
Finally, I am certain, present company possibly excluded, that the
participants in this newsgroup are not so totally hatless and cigarless that
they are incapable of forming an opinion of their own about what may be the
best avenue of approch in these matters. In other words, I wouldn't worry
about it if I were you. Respectfully, Jervis
Sakar
wrote:
...a lot of very sensible stuff
>NMS
Quite simply - thank you!
Sakar
(email without X)
NMS
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6pim6h$bi4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>unless you're famous, pulling out a cigar in somebody's office is a quick
>way to get them pissed off at you.<<
>
>others to state their opinions. Meanwhile, perhaps my respondant would be
so
>kind as to offer some substantial reason as to why his proposed approach to
>'making contracts' and not wearing hats in Hollywood is - as opposed to
what I
>suggest - the right one? I.E., which movies can I rent to see his credits?
>
>This respondant seems very sure of his position. We have seen how my
>experience in Hollywood has led to my assurance of what is best. Now, may
we
>see what this respondant's experience has been, such that it leads him to
>such a contrary view of what constitutes a Hollywood 'contract', sans hat,
>sans cigar, sans the invisible fine print in the firmly placed finger in
the
>chest?
I worked in development for six years. I've written for TV. I've written
around 18 direct to video features that have been produced, and wrote,
produced, and directed my own independent feature.
I've made a living in this business, and dealt with others who've made a
living in this business for over ten years.
As to proving myself to you, frankly, I'll wait to see what your produced
credits are. If they are real, and you achieved them through doing the kind
of thing that you describe, and can actually give chapter and verse... then
I'll happily retract my claims.
Until then, I can only compare what you've said with the people that I've
met in this business. And of the two categories of people that I've met --
the category of professional people who know what they're talking about --
and the category of big talkers who frankly don't -- your post definitely
seems to belong to the latter category.
>
>> >If you get the guarantee, you shake his hand saying that you can see
that
>> >he is not the kind of man who would expose his reputation to the serious
>> >injury of becoming known as a welsher who is neither fit nor able ever
to >
>> >shake a man's hand in this town ever again.
>
>> I'm sorry. This is just baloney. Hollywood is a town that deeply believes
> in
>the illusion that it is a business based on relationships. And you don't
>> create relationships by offering some intangible project and then making
>> not-so-veiled threats about "smearing" people's names around town. As if
> >
>> you had the power to do that.
>
>"Smearing names", eh? Heh. It might be noted that what was stated,
originally
>was anything but, as this respondant suggests, 'spiritual'. As to any
>'threats', or implications in the contract about welshers and/or in which
>ward at Cedars Sinai they should generally be looked for, I should never
>suggest that anyone should ever imply anything that he or she does not have
>the 'power' or the self-respect to fully realize. May I say also, that I
>don't appreciate the abrasive and disrespectful tone of your reply? So, I
>suggest that you wipe your mouth off and try being a bit more cordial next
>time, or don't hold your breath waiting for any further response from here.
Am I to presume that you have both the "power" and "will" to do something or
other to me if I don't?
Come on. I may be a dog, and it may not be much to be a dog, but at least,
as a dog, I know the smell of another dog... and I know the smell of
something that isn't a dog that's pretending to be one.
Talk is cheap. In the business, there are very big people who have broad
reputations as thieves and cheats, and who have been identified as such by
other big people, and yet they continue to work.
The capacity for anybody to destroy anybody's career, in this business, is
small, unless it's you, destroying your own career. And the capacity for
somebody who's outside the business to destroy somebody who's inside is,
essentially nil. In order to destroy someone else's career, you actually
have to have a career yourself -- you have to work in the business, and
sell stuff, and get stuff made, which gets sold, and which makes money.
Because otherwise, nobody is going to pay any attention to you when you say
things like "Big Agent XYZ welched on me."
>
>Finally, I am certain, present company possibly excluded, that the
>participants in this newsgroup are not so totally hatless and cigarless
that
>they are incapable of forming an opinion of their own about what may be the
>best avenue of approch in these matters. In other words, I wouldn't worry
>about it if I were you. Respectfully, Jervis
I'm sure they are not.
And it's a rare thing, in virtually every office in L.A., and in New York,
for that matter, to even find an ashtray.
This is a hint. If you're big enough to be rude with impunity, you can smoke
anything you want. If you're just trying to give the impression that you're
big enough to be rude with impunity, you're asking for trouble.
And I repeat, and it may just be my own impression, but, apart from the
occasional schmuck with a beret, people don't wear hats. And even those few
that do, tend not to actually wear them during business meetings.
And just to make the point crystal clear, the scenario you describe for
getting a book, which you don't own, turned into a movie which you *do* own,
is nonsense.
If you've done it -- actually sold something you didn't own, without even
telling the people you were selling to what it was before they agreed to
your terms, then you may very well be the best salesman on earth. I've known
guys who sold ideas that were little better than nothing. Maybe you are one
of those.
But I strongly suspect that you are not, and that, in fact, you are speaking
through one of those proverbial hats.
NMS
Bob Miller
>excerpted...
>You put the brim of your producer's hat down at a mean slant
>and you stand up to leave without having given him the title of the book. You
>tell him to think it over, that you'll get back with him, but for now, you've
>got some other agents to see.
>
>The town is full of agents, pal. That's the one thing for sure I can tell you
>on the subject of agents. Hollywood is full of 'em.
Fellah (or gal), you sound, talk and write exactly like a guy I used
to work with whom I absolutely hated. Total, non-stop bullshit. You
use the same words, the same phrasing, the same cocky, silly-sounding
bluster that people can see through in a second.
Good luck, "pal" ...
Bob
Steven Weller
Hate to have to tell you, Jervis, but he was pretty much spot-on, point
for point. A handshake is a verbal contract, and we all know what has been said about those...
... for those of you who've forgotten, it's that their not worth the
paper they're printed on.
--
Life Continues, Despite
Evidence to the Contrary,
Steven
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
fellow's posts; and proceeding now quite briefly upon the presumption of the
intelligence of other readers here who have certainly noticed (if they are
even so much as bothering with this at all, as from the looks of it, they are
not) how absurdly my views are being totally bent out of recognition here
below, having been torn so raggedly and even, I might suggest, rabidly, from
their context, then twisted, crunched and stretched out of all semblance to
what they were; and presuming, as I say, upon the fairness and intelligence
of others here, I will not waste valuable time denying things y'all know I
never said or implied in the first place, as I'm sure to have your agreement
that utterly nothing can be more absurd than such a needless and worthless
exercise as that! And believe you me, that is what it is coming to, with this
guy.
Rather, what I intend to do with this is practise a little sort of Samurai
sword slashing upon this matter, in a very minimalist, sort of Zen approach
to the whole thing by fixing on just one element of this fellow's argument
which strikes me as being right at the crux of the whole failure to
communicate here, and in this we shall find out whether this 'dog', in
reference below, has the proverbial "Buddha Nature" of the venerable koan of
old, or not...
In article <6pj6o8$5p3$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"NMS" <nmstev...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
> Come on. I may be a dog, and it may not be much to be a dog, but at least,
> as a dog, I know the smell of another dog... and I know the smell of
> something that isn't a dog that's pretending to be one.
> And I repeat, and it may just be my own impression, but, apart from the
> occasional schmuck with a beret, people don't wear hats. And even those few
> that do, tend not to actually wear them during business meetings.
'People don't wear hats.' Okay, 'schmuck with a beret'? You don't give a
flat crap in a frying pan at Perkins Pancake House who you insult, do you?
You just called Dr. John The Night Tripper "a schmuck" - - - not to mention
Monica Lewinsky ferthechrissake. So, who else do you like to go 'round
beating up on besides women and geniuses of New Orleans Jazz? There oughta
be a law against a bastard like you. You willfully and purposefully ignored
that my hat was in my lap in that office, or dangling over the toe of my
shoe, a la Matt Drudge on the Letterman Show. That's what you did, you
twisted the truth to suit yourself, just as you've done throughout what's
below, and for what purpose? Say! I can't even guess. Your motives are beyond
the contemplation of a happy, peaceful and/or just consciousness.
Now, in all your born days, pal, you will never come up with a creation like
Dr. John's "Such a Night", or even the kind of 'art' that has endeared Monica
Lewinski to the President of the United States and maybe even the Crowned
Heads of Europe. What do you know of 'crowned head', you bastard? You will
never know because you've got your head in the vice of this very hatless
self-imposed mental pressure of what you see as "appropriate". If you see
hardly anybody wearing a hat these days, your immediate presumption is that
"people don't wear hats". That is your problem, because I am here to fill you
in on the news: SOME people wear hats - not the people you know over there in
the department where you conform to the pitiable grind of cranking out the
dullest most unenviable dribble the world has ever known for your salary, no!
No, fella; that is not Hollywood. Over here where we Mavericks are
operating, not a few of us still do wear hats. My hat is the roof over my
office; my sunglasses are the blinds over the windows to my office; I am a
one-man walking Independant Corporation, Mister, and nobody, I mean nobody;
and I flat out am telling you in no uncertain terms, that nobody tells me
that 'nobody wears hats'. Not when I am standing here under a white straw
genuine Panama with a black band AND cotton seersucker slacks AND white shoes
with pinholes to air my toes; AND garters to hold up my silk socks, you dog;
you schmuck; you doggy schmuck and you schmucky dog.
Is that me? No, not entirely...the hat, yes, the slacks, yes, the garters
and socks, no; those I'll have after I get - not the option - but the rights
to this book. You see, if I go and option this book, it immediately puts the
owner of the book wise to its value; and what do they do? They put me off
and go shopping around. I cannot afford, on my bank account to make the deal
sweet enough to stop them from doing that. As it is now, that book is safe
right where it is, while I am working on the screenplay. Like I said, I
don't even talk to those people, I will never talk to those people; it will
be the Executive Producer talking to those people.
All these careful little baby steps you propose are just so damn careful that
they self-destruct; and it's just like I told you before on the strength of
my experience in this town, there is only one protection against welchers
(thanks by the way, for the proper spelling - I guess you should know) and
that is not as you have misunderstood it, to be a fear of "smearing". You
have still failed to get the point, as people who choose your very careful
path through life always do. So, now, let us make it very plain for you: If
you are my agent and I have given you the title of this book, and now you
say, "So what do I need you for?" Huh? Is that the way you put it? Uh huh.
Now, what do I say? I say, "You need me for keeping you out of the hospital
for a broken nose, jaw, arm and a leg. You need me to protect you against
yourself, Mr. Big Shot who ain't a big shot but who is nothing but a go
between with a big swelled head."
Now you will say, "That's a threat!" No. The threat was, "So, what do I
need you for?" And now you will say, "It's still a threat!" And what will I
say? I will say that you still don't understand. The agent I choose will
never say that, because he will be informed in advance of what the
consequences for saying a low down, stinking, rotten, thieving thing like
that will be, capice?
But, I already explained that, you see; it was already very plain. I said,
"and if the guy balks at that", if he does not see the justice in it, he is
not to be trusted with the title to this book. I find the kind of agent who
perfectly understands how Hollywood works, and there are just a few. How
does it work? Like a pimp with his whore; like a black swell of a crack
dealer with his addict, like a cop with his crook; and if you don't know
that, pal, you don't know Hollywood from jack-apple crap-frappe at the Musso
and Frank's, since you are strictly from Burbank, which is, of course, the
case, so to speak - or is it maybe Disneyland?
>
> And it's a rare thing, in virtually every office in L.A., and in New York,
> for that matter, to even find an ashtray.
Then you use the inconsiderate bastard's "In-Box". Note that I did not say,
"the ruthless sonofabitch's eyehole." I wouldn't say that...might write it
into a very noir script about a very noir guy like Michael Douglas' character
in "Falling Down" who goes bananas and thereby gets a chance to do all the
things he'd really love to do were he not so damned civilized. Hmm.... Yeah!
Now I'm thinking like you, right? Sequels, like, "Falling Down II"! We fish
Douglas out of the drink still breathing, and set him back on Wilshire
Boulevard; he goes back to the Militia Guy's surplus store and revives that
hairy bastard; they team up! They hit every restaurant and cafe in L.A. and
smoke in the non smoking sections. Hell, it would make the opening scene of
Pulp Fiction look like Pocahontas. How 'bout it? Want first shot at the
option? Lookee here:
<c> July 1998 Jervis Dedalus
Call anytime between 3:30-12:00 p.m. when I'm not awake, or make an
appointment with the Vampire Woman at the graveyard gate.
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
just keep in mind one thing: This fool thought he'd seen some blood drawn on
ol' Jervis by that other ill-tempered pest; his blood-lust was whetted, and
now like a perfectly conditioned Pavlovian dog he too moves in for what he
dreams to be "the kill". And it's all dreams because he'd never dare say such
stuff to my face, since he knows what the consequences would be. Also, he is
at liberty to name time, date and place just in case he'd like to try it.
Would I really dirty my hands, waste precious time with such a pig? What if
he sent me the air fare? What if y'all were to take up a collection? Yeah!
How 'bout it?
In article <35bd3672...@fullnews.neosoft.com>,
bmi...@neosoft.com (Bob Miller) wrote:
> jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Fellah (or gal), you sound, talk and write exactly like a guy I used
> to work with whom I absolutely hated. Total, non-stop bullshit. You
> use the same words, the same phrasing, the same cocky, silly-sounding
> bluster that people can see through in a second.
>
> Good luck, "pal" ...
>
> Bob
>
> >
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
How 'bout if we just meet somewhere so I can twist that jack o'lantern off
your shoulders and put a candle in it? Shed a little light into that
grinning cavern of darkness you got in there, boy?
Tellya what: Do us both some good and just stay clear out of my threads,
okay? Seeing as how you feel the way you do, sonny-boy you have no need of
any goddam communication with me whatsoever, right? Right. So, You just
screw off, and stay screwed off, you scum of the earth. This is my last word
to you. Any post from you to me will be answered by a "no comment", unless
you want to apologize. Either you put your fists where your big mouth is or
shut up.
In article <35bd3672...@fullnews.neosoft.com>,
bmi...@neosoft.com (Bob Miller) wrote:
> jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >excerpted...
>
> >You put the brim of your producer's hat down at a mean slant
> >and you stand up to leave without having given him the title of the book.
You
> >tell him to think it over, that you'll get back with him, but for now,
you've
> >got some other agents to see.
> >
> >The town is full of agents, pal. That's the one thing for sure I can tell
you
> >on the subject of agents. Hollywood is full of 'em.
>
> Fellah (or gal), you sound, talk and write exactly like a guy I used
> to work with whom I absolutely hated. Total, non-stop bullshit. You
> use the same words, the same phrasing, the same cocky, silly-sounding
> bluster that people can see through in a second.
>
> Good luck, "pal" ...
>
> Bob
>
> >
NMS
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6pjvp6$34n$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>Considering that time ain't cheap, the abrasive and
(snipped several hundred words used to express two or three words worth of
actual ideas)
>
>In article <6pj6o8$5p3$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "NMS" <nmstev...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Come on. I may be a dog, and it may not be much to be a dog, but at
least,
>> as a dog, I know the smell of another dog... and I know the smell of
>> something that isn't a dog that's pretending to be one.
>
>
>> And I repeat, and it may just be my own impression, but, apart from the
>> occasional schmuck with a beret, people don't wear hats. And even those
few
>> that do, tend not to actually wear them during business meetings.
>
>'People don't wear hats.' Okay, 'schmuck with a beret'? You don't give a
>flat crap in a frying pan at Perkins Pancake House who you insult, do you?
>You just called Dr. John The Night Tripper "a schmuck" - - - not to mention
>Monica Lewinsky ferthechrissake.
Oh yeah. Samuel Jackson wears a beret too. And Arnold Schwarzenegger smokes
a cigar. And when you can pull in their kind of fees, you can dress stupid
and smoke to your heart's content, and people smile at you.
But when you're not -- they don't.
(snip)
There oughta
>be a law against a bastard like you. You willfully and purposefully
ignored
>that my hat was in my lap in that office, or dangling over the toe of my
>shoe, a la Matt Drudge on the Letterman Show. That's what you did, you
>twisted the truth to suit yourself, just as you've done throughout what's
>below, and for what purpose?
That's funny. Last thing I recall reading about this mythical hat was that
you were supposedly pulling its snap-brimmed edge down over you eyes to make
your non-threat threat to the agent that you went in to see.
What did you pull it down over? Your knee? Your foot? What you suggested is
that you and your (two or three) writers walk into the agent's office
wearing hats and smoking cigars, presumably for the purpose of coming off
like.... well, whatever you think you'd be coming off as, what, in fact, you
would be coming off as is four schmucks. But, of course, it's a fantasy
anyway, because you'd never get into the office of any agent in the world by
calling up and touting the virtues of an unknown book, the title of which
you're not prepared to divulge and which, by the way, you don't own.
(more over-written claptrap snipped)
My hat is the roof over my
>office; my sunglasses are the blinds over the windows to my office; I am a
>one-man walking Independant Corporation, Mister, and nobody, I mean nobody;
>and I flat out am telling you in no uncertain terms, that nobody tells me
>that 'nobody wears hats'.
Of course, what I meant was, most people don't wear hats, and, especially
for men, it's an affectation. In some cases, affectations can be endearing.
Somehow, in your case, I doubt it.
(snip)
No, not entirely...the hat, yes, the slacks, yes, the garters
>and socks, no; those I'll have after I get - not the option - but the
rights
>to this book. You see, if I go and option this book, it immediately puts
the
>owner of the book wise to its value; and what do they do? They put me off
>and go shopping around.
I see. Mister Maverick, you have now let everyone know that you don't know
what an option is. When you option something, you are buying the exclusive
*option* to sell the project for however long the option period is. They
*can't* shop it if you've optioned it. That's why you option something. You
get to keep it out of other people's hands without having to pay the full
fee up front.
I cannot afford, on my bank account to make the deal
>sweet enough to stop them from doing that. As it is now, that book is safe
>right where it is, while I am working on the screenplay.
And something else you apparently don't know. There are thousands of
development companies. And those companies have thousands of development
employees. And all they do, all day long, is look for stuff to turn into
movies. I've found obscure books thirty years old that nobody knew anything
about -- only to find out that it was bought outright by Columbia (or
somebody) when it was first published, for a pittance, where it has sat,
untouched and unnoticed since then. Well, if you don't find out ahead of
time whether this book has already been bought, or optioned by some other
genius, before you start writing the (no-doubt terrifying overwritten)
screenplay, you are being very stupid.
Like I said, I
>don't even talk to those people, I will never talk to those people; it will
>be the Executive Producer talking to those people.
And why is it that if your offer of an option "tips them off" as to how
valuable the book is, that the Executive Producer's offer of an outright buy
isn't going to tip them off even more -- and the more he offers, the more
likely they are going to be to try to shop it.
On the one hand, a little independent producer or writer comes out of
nowhere and offers a little money on a longshot for a book that's been
around for years -- that's like found money. I know guys who've done this,
and their phone call didn't trigger an avalanche of "competitive
bid-seeking."
You see, book agents, like movie agents, like professionals who work in this
business, know that maybe one out of twenty things optioned ever get bought
or made. And on a book that is decidely the opposite of "hot" -- an agent
isn't going to go wild because somebody with lots of passion but little
money and no credentials comes and wants to option the book for a year. As I
said, from their point of view, it's found money.
(snip)
So, now, let us make it very plain for you: If
>you are my agent and I have given you the title of this book, and now you
>say, "So what do I need you for?" Huh? Is that the way you put it?
No. Actually. Agents are in the business of selling their clients and their
clients work. This conversation, which, in your rather dismal fantasy, you
are having with the agent of an actor you want for your movie, you should,
presumably, be having with a producer who can actually make your movie.
All the agent can offer are either the services of his actor, which he isn't
going to do unless the money is already there, or, if he agrees to represent
you, then he can try to sell "you" -- as either a writer or a director or a
producer (although this is rather unlikely -- producers usually sell
themselves). But he certainly isn't going to shop around any project that
his clients don't have the rights to. So the instant you say that you don't
have the rights, the conversation is over. There's nothing he can do for
you.
Uh huh.
>Now, what do I say? I say, "You need me for keeping you out of the hospital
>for a broken nose, jaw, arm and a leg. You need me to protect you against
>yourself, Mr. Big Shot who ain't a big shot but who is nothing but a go
>between with a big swelled head."
And that's when he smiles and nods his head, and then tells his secretary
never to let you in again. But, of course, that won't happen, because you'd
never get in in the first place. And if you got in and mouthed off a tenth
as much as you're mouthing off on this NG, you'd be persona non grata in
that agency so fast (presuming that you got out of there without building
security of the the police being called) you wouldn't know what hit your
hat.
>
>Now you will say, "That's a threat!" No. The threat was, "So, what do I
>need you for?" And now you will say, "It's still a threat!" And what will
I
>say? I will say that you still don't understand. The agent I choose will
>never say that, because he will be informed in advance of what the
>consequences for saying a low down, stinking, rotten, thieving thing like
>that will be, capice?
So you introduce yourself. You say that you've found this really great book.
The agent asks "What book?"
"I can't tell you. But it's great."
The agent asks, "Why can't you tell me?"
"Because I haven't bought it yet. I need to find a producer. That's where
you come in."
Then the agent says, "But how can I find a producer if I don't know what the
book is?"
"Oh, I'll tell you the name of the book, but first, of course, I have to
know that I can trust you, so it's important for you to realize that anybody
who steals the `idea' of making this book, which I don't own, into a movie,
will get his arms and legs broken."
"Oh," the agent says, smiling, "Well, thank you very much, maybe when you're
back on your thorazine you can shop this thing to some other agent. Bye."
>
>But, I already explained that, you see; it was already very plain. I said,
>"and if the guy balks at that", if he does not see the justice in it, he is
>not to be trusted with the title to this book. I find the kind of agent who
>perfectly understands how Hollywood works, and there are just a few. How
>does it work? Like a pimp with his whore; like a black swell of a crack
>dealer with his addict, like a cop with his crook; and if you don't know
>that, pal, you don't know Hollywood from jack-apple crap-frappe at the
Musso
>and Frank's, since you are strictly from Burbank, which is, of course, the
>case, so to speak - or is it maybe Disneyland?
And so the idea is that the agent "wants" whatever it is that you have so
bad that he'll agree to this? Why? You haven't told him anything, and you
haven't showed him anything, other than that you are one of the countless
crackpot bullshit artists who clutter up the streets of L.A. pretending to
be "in the business" while, in fact, not knowing one thing about it.
>> And it's a rare thing, in virtually every office in L.A., and in New
York,
>> for that matter, to even find an ashtray.
>
>Then you use the inconsiderate bastard's "In-Box". Note that I did not
say,
>"the ruthless sonofabitch's eyehole." I wouldn't say that...might write it
>into a very noir script about a very noir guy like Michael Douglas'
character
>in "Falling Down" who goes bananas and thereby gets a chance to do all the
>things he'd really love to do were he not so damned civilized. Hmm....
Yeah!
>Now I'm thinking like you, right? Sequels, like, "Falling Down II"! We
fish
>Douglas out of the drink still breathing, and set him back on Wilshire
>Boulevard; he goes back to the Militia Guy's surplus store and revives that
>hairy bastard; they team up! They hit every restaurant and cafe in L.A. and
>smoke in the non smoking sections. Hell, it would make the opening scene
of
>Pulp Fiction look like Pocahontas. How 'bout it? Want first shot at the
>option? Lookee here:
No thanks. You see, in addition to not being able to sell books you don't
own, you also can't sell sequels to movies you don't own. But, of course,
you knew that.
NMS
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
This I can handle with no danned affront, and I'm sure it must be a minority
of people here who are spending most of their days with a jock-strap over
their face posting to the Chicago Bulls newsgroup, like this last bastard who
finally caused me to blow my cool.
I hate it when my cool gets blown by some monkey see/monkey do horses ass
with a feedbag of pissed on macho oats hung from his face. I see that this
basket of smelly sweat socks for a brain is an ex Army man. It should give
him no end of glee to discover that I am an ex Anti-Vietnam War Resistor; so
now let him hate my guts for all he's worth, nothing could give me greater
pleasure. There is nothing in this world that holds a lower echelon in my
esteem than the kind of suck-ups to authority that are often found in the
military on a voluntary basis. This does not go for all of them, mind you;
just the mean and niggardly kind who abuse that authority the minute they get
a piece of it. It's good this guy should recognize in me his enemy; the kind
of guy he hates; my life would be without meaning were this not the case.
In article <1998Jul28.0...@lafn.org>,
az...@lafn.org (Steven Weller) wrote:
>
> Hate to have to tell you, Jervis, but he was pretty much spot-on, point
> for point. A handshake is a verbal contract, and we all know what has been
said about those...
>
> ... for those of you who've forgotten, it's that their not worth the
> paper they're printed on.
Here is a perfect example of how what you never said, meant or implied in any
shape manner or form can come back to haunt you! Incredible. My good man, how
in the blazing hell can you have received the impression that I am suggesting
anything to the contrary? Why do you lend your credence to the distortion of
what I say rather than *to* what I say?
If you haven't read the original post without the twisted interpolations of
the initial respondent, it would be easy to have your perspective totally
thrown off, just as we see. There is much more involved here than a mere
'handshake'. Neither is there the least suggestion that written contracts are
not to be entered into after a solid, unshakeable understanding between the
parties. Where the hell does anyone get that idea?? This is the kind of
thing that causes me to blow my cool, when inferences are made from what I
say that have no basis at all in what I say. Have a look at the reply I made
under title of "Hatless In Hollywood", see if that doesn't get the idea
across over the barriers and bulwarks of all this cybernetic jamming of
cross-talk Chicago Bullshit. Hell! What I'll do is I'll just post the part
relevant to what you're talking about right here:
Okay, now, what I intend to do with this is practise a little sort of Samurai
sword slashing upon this matter, in a very minimalist, sort of Zen approach
to the whole thing by fixing on just one element of this fellow's argument
which strikes me as being right at the crux of the whole failure to
communicate here, and in this we shall find out whether this 'dog', in
reference below, has the proverbial "Buddha Nature" of the venerable koan of
old, or not...
In article <6pj6o8$5p3$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"NMS" <nmstev...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
> Come on. I may be a dog, and it may not be much to be a dog, but at least,
> as a dog, I know the smell of another dog... and I know the smell of
> something that isn't a dog that's pretending to be one.
> And I repeat, and it may just be my own impression, but, apart from the
> occasional schmuck with a beret, people don't wear hats. And even those few
> that do, tend not to actually wear them during business meetings.
'People don't wear hats.' Okay, 'schmuck with a beret'? You don't give a
flat crap in a frying pan at Perkins Pancake House who you insult, do you?
You just called Dr. John The Night Tripper "a schmuck" - - - not to mention
Monica Lewinsky ferthechrissake. So, who else do you like to go 'round
beating up on besides women and geniuses of New Orleans Jazz? There oughta
be a law against a bastard like you. You willfully and purposefully ignored
that my hat was in my lap in that office, or dangling over the toe of my
shoe, a la Matt Drudge on the Letterman Show. That's what you did, you
twisted the truth to suit yourself, just as you've done throughout what's
below, and for what purpose? Say! I can't even guess. Your motives are beyond
the contemplation of a happy, peaceful and/or just consciousness.
Now, in all your born days, pal, you will never come up with a creation like
Dr. John's "Such a Night", or even the kind of 'art' that has endeared Monica
Lewinski to the President of the United States and maybe even the Crowned
Heads of Europe. What do you know of 'crowned head', you bastard? You will
never know because you've got your head in the vice of this very hatless
self-imposed mental pressure of what you see as "appropriate". If you see
hardly anybody wearing a hat these days, your immediate presumption is that
"people don't wear hats". That is your problem, because I am here to fill you
in on the news: SOME people wear hats - not the people you know over there in
the department where you conform to the pitiable grind of cranking out the
dullest most unenviable dribble the world has ever known for your salary, no!
No, fella; that is not Hollywood. Over here where we Mavericks are
operating, not a few of us still do wear hats. My hat is the roof over my
office; my sunglasses are the blinds over the windows to my office; I am a
one-man walking Independant Corporation, Mister, and nobody, I mean nobody;
and I flat out am telling you in no uncertain terms, that nobody tells me
that 'nobody wears hats'. Not when I am standing here under a white straw
genuine Panama with a black band AND cotton seersucker slacks AND white shoes
with pinholes to air my toes; AND garters to hold up my silk socks, you dog;
you schmuck; you doggy schmuck and you schmucky dog.
Is that me? No, not entirely...the hat, yes, the slacks, yes, the garters
and socks, no; those I'll have after I get - not the option - but the rights
to this book. You see, if I go and option this book, it immediately puts the
owner of the book wise to its value; and what do they do? They put me off
and go shopping around. I cannot afford, on my bank account to make the deal
sweet enough to stop them from doing that. As it is now, that book is safe
right where it is, while I am working on the screenplay. Like I said, I
don't even talk to those people, I will never talk to those people; it will
be the Executive Producer talking to those people.
All these careful little baby steps you propose are just so damn careful that
they self-destruct; and it's just like I told you before on the strength of
my experience in this town, there is only one protection against welchers
(thanks by the way, for the proper spelling - I guess you should know) and
that is not as you have misunderstood it, to be a fear of "smearing". You
have still failed to get the point, as people who choose your very careful
path through life always do. So, now, let us make it very plain for you: If
you are my agent and I have given you the title of this book, and now you
say, "So what do I need you for?" Huh? Is that the way you put it? Uh huh.
Now, what do I say? I say, "You need me for keeping you out of the hospital
for a broken nose, jaw, arm and a leg. You need me to protect you against
yourself, Mr. Big Shot who ain't a big shot but who is nothing but a go
between with a big swelled head."
Now you will say, "That's a threat!" No. The threat was, "So, what do I
need you for?" And now you will say, "It's still a threat!" And what will I
say? I will say that you still don't understand. The agent I choose will
never say that, because he will be informed in advance of what the
consequences for saying a low down, stinking, rotten, thieving thing like
that will be, capice?
But, I already explained that, you see; it was already very plain. I said,
"and if the guy balks at that", if he does not see the justice in it, he is
not to be trusted with the title to this book. I find the kind of agent who
perfectly understands how Hollywood works, and there are just a few. How
does it work? Like a pimp with his whore; like a black swell of a crack
dealer with his addict, like a cop with his crook; and if you don't know
that, pal, you don't know Hollywood from jack-apple crap-frappe at the Musso
and Frank's, since you are strictly from Burbank, which is, of course, the
case, so to speak - or is it maybe Disneyland?
>
> And it's a rare thing, in virtually every office in L.A., and in New York,
> for that matter, to even find an ashtray.
Then you use the inconsiderate bastard's "In-Box". Note that I did not say,
"the ruthless sonofabitch's eyehole." I wouldn't say that...might write it
into a very noir script about a very noir guy like Michael Douglas' character
in "Falling Down" who goes bananas and thereby gets a chance to do all the
things he'd really love to do were he not so damned civilized. Hmm.... Yeah!
Now I'm thinking like you, right? Sequels, like, "Falling Down II"! We fish
Douglas out of the drink still breathing, and set him back on Wilshire
Boulevard; he goes back to the Militia Guy's surplus store and revives that
hairy bastard; they team up! They hit every restaurant and cafe in L.A. and
smoke in the non smoking sections. Hell, it would make the opening scene of
Pulp Fiction look like Pocahontas. How 'bout it? Want first shot at the
option? Lookee here:
<c> July 1998 Jervis Dedalus
Call anytime between 3:30-12:00 p.m. when I'm not awake, or make an
appointment with the Vampire Woman at the graveyard gate.
Bob Miller
Lordy.
Bob
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>Say there Bobby Boy,
>
>How 'bout if we just meet somewhere so I can twist that jack o'lantern off
>your shoulders and put a candle in it? Shed a little light into that
>grinning cavern of darkness you got in there, boy?
>
>Tellya what: Do us both some good and just stay clear out of my threads,
>okay? Seeing as how you feel the way you do, sonny-boy you have no need of
>any goddam communication with me whatsoever, right? Right. So, You just
>screw off, and stay screwed off, you scum of the earth. This is my last word
>to you. Any post from you to me will be answered by a "no comment", unless
>you want to apologize. Either you put your fists where your big mouth is or
>shut up.
>
>In article <35bd3672...@fullnews.neosoft.com>,
> bmi...@neosoft.com (Bob Miller) wrote:
>> jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>> >excerpted...
>>
>> >You put the brim of your producer's hat down at a mean slant
>> >and you stand up to leave without having given him the title of the book.
>You
>> >tell him to think it over, that you'll get back with him, but for now,
>you've
>> >got some other agents to see.
>> >
>> >The town is full of agents, pal. That's the one thing for sure I can tell
>you
>> >on the subject of agents. Hollywood is full of 'em.
>>
>> Fellah (or gal), you sound, talk and write exactly like a guy I used
>> to work with whom I absolutely hated. Total, non-stop bullshit. You
>> use the same words, the same phrasing, the same cocky, silly-sounding
>> bluster that people can see through in a second.
>>
>> Good luck, "pal" ...
>>
>> Bob
>>
>> >
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
"NMS" <nmstev...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> >'People don't wear hats.' Okay, 'schmuck with a beret'? You don't give a
> >flat crap in a frying pan at Perkins Pancake House who you insult, do you?
> >You just called Dr. John The Night Tripper "a schmuck" - - - not to mention
> >Monica Lewinsky ferthechrissake.
>
> Oh yeah. Samuel Jackson wears a beret too. And Arnold Schwarzenegger smokes
> a cigar....
---No further reply deemed necessary. All distortions, obfuscations,
ass-backward interpretations made _in perjoram partem_ dutifully snipped---
I'm going to tell a few anecdotes from my personal experience with agents and
producers which should serve to illustrate my point, which is that writers
must stop kissing the asses of people lower on the creative totem pole than
themselves. Nobody needs the goddam agents, okay? Writers could do great,
far better, without them. They are needless weight on the industry. Writers
have made of themselves the worst schmucks in the world for all this
ass-kissing as is touted as the way to go by this respondent. In my own
case, I learned that, at last, and found out that I could go straight to the
producers without their stinking, useless butts in the way. But, this guy
doesn't know about that avenue because he's too tightly laced into his corset
of misunderstood "propriety" to walk it like a mensch. I will tell you about
the mensches I met in Hollywood, the screen stars and producers with whom I
broke bread who got to where they are by BREAKING THE RULES. There is no
other way to break into the business big time. No GODDAM other way. Don't
listen to this schlameil, he doesn't know his penurious little pocket from a
hole in his sock.
grendel
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>Ha-ha! I love it! Love it! Keep them cards and letters comin' folks. But,
>just keep in mind one thing: This fool thought he'd seen some blood drawn on
>ol' Jervis by that other ill-tempered pest; his blood-lust was whetted, and
>now like a perfectly conditioned Pavlovian dog he too moves in for what he
>dreams to be "the kill". And it's all dreams because he'd never dare say such
>stuff to my face, since he knows what the consequences would be. Also, he is
>at liberty to name time, date and place just in case he'd like to try it.
>Would I really dirty my hands, waste precious time with such a pig? What if
>he sent me the air fare? What if y'all were to take up a collection? Yeah!
>How 'bout it?
I suppose that if I had such an artificially inflated hubris
as yours I'd be hostile towards barbs as well. But you're
going from the ridiculous to the delusional, here.
Believe me, you can't bully your way into being a writer,
and you can't bully your way into getting any kind of
respect around this newsgroup.
I'd suggest that you prop yourself back up on your own time,
and spare us the details of your psychopathology.
Though I admit that the whole thing is darkly amusing.
grendel
cbianco
>You just called Dr. John The Night Tripper "a schmuck" -
ahh. a james elroy fan.
cbianco
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
>
> I suppose that if I had such an artificially inflated hubris
> as yours I'd be hostile towards barbs as well. But you're
> going from the ridiculous to the delusional, here.
Support a damned fool statement like that. Thus you join the slavering herd;
what else is new?
>
> Believe me, you can't bully your way into being a writer,
Sure you can. I've already done it. Have the credits to prove it. Kiss my
royal ass you dweeb.
> and you can't bully your way into getting any kind of
> respect around this newsgroup.
Are you talking about a newsgroup or a herd? There may be a few packs of
baying hounds loose in this group, but we have already seen the enthusiastic
support I have had as well. You can't stand that, can you, punky?
>
> I'd suggest that you prop yourself back up on your own time,
> and spare us the details of your psychopathology.
If I ever do meet you in life, for that crack you will be sorry.
>
> Though I admit that the whole thing is darkly amusing.
>
> grendel
Jesus what a nerd! Don't bother to write again, asshole; you'll get no
response. You are a conformist drudge; a herd animal; the lowest form of life
on this planet. How can I not have hubris when I observe what there is in the
usual majority of your sort by comparison? What good would my greatness be
if it were as common as your mediocrity? There ought to be a zoo for critters
like you. Find some other set of bars to climb in demonstration of your
masturbations, monkeyface.
MwsReader
> Believe me, you can't bully your way into being a writer,
> and you can't bully your way into getting any kind of
> respect around this newsgroup.
> I'd suggest that you prop yourself back up on your own time,
> and spare us the details of your psychopathology.
> Though I admit that the whole thing is darkly amusing.
Amusing, but sad. As I read his words, I can easily picture
the clenched jaws and furrowed brows of the gatekeepers he'll
be unsuccessfully trying to talk his way past. I can't imagine
any agents having to worry about his furious threats, because
he's never going to get anywhere close to them. (Well, he may
rub shoulders with a few old timers at Musso's...)
Even when people in this business are pissed at each other,
plotting end runs around each other, or out to destroy each other,
it's done with at least a degree of civility. The screaming is done
behind closed doors. I'd suggest to Jervis that he try the same
thing. Vent elsewhere. You're never, ever going to find any
sympathy or respect in this newsgroup if you behave like a
jerk, so either mellow out a bit, or find another forum for your
illogical rantings.
The irony is that some good advice has been offered here.
People option material ALL the time, and sometimes they're
able to parlay those options into active development or
production deals. It doesn't require threats or stealth or
bravado. But it does require a modicum of good sense.
JohnRobie
P.S. Music bios are a tricky sell in any case. There's a new
thing about Frankie Lyman coming out soon, so you might want
to track its performance. Good old Joe E. has been trying to put
together an Otis Redding project for years, and even with the
rights to all of Redding's material in his pocket, he hasn't been
able to get it off the ground. So I'd caution you not to imagine
that you've got a sure thing here.
P.P.S. I wear hats in the winter to keep the rain off my glasses.
I'm rather fond of them. And I don't think I've ever lost any
brownie points for showing up to a meeting in a Homburg.
A baret, on the other hand, might result in a chuckle or two.
David R. Neff
[a bazillion lines of bizarro snipped]
If I am not being to presumptuous, perhaps now is the time to
start the real discussion here: Kook or Troll?
Two wheels good, four wheels bad. Bob Stinson RIP
ix.N e tc o m (without the spaces) is my domain.
Jacques E. Bouchard
> Rather, what I intend to do with this is practise a little sort of Samurai
> sword slashing upon this matter, in a very minimalist, sort of Zen approach
> to the whole thing
Too fucking late.
jaybee
Jacques E. Bouchard
> I will tell you about
> the mensches I met in Hollywood, the screen stars and producers with whom I
> broke bread who got to where they are by BREAKING THE RULES. There is no
> other way to break into the business big time. No GODDAM other way. Don't
> listen to this schlameil, he doesn't know his penurious little pocket from a
> hole in his sock.
I can tell that you write 210-page scripts. Right? Right?
jaybee
Jacques E. Bouchard
> I hate it when my cool gets blown by some monkey see/monkey do horses ass
> with a feedbag of pissed on macho oats hung from his face.
Parents "make" children go to bed; dog owners "make" their dogs roll over. No
one "makes" a grown man do anything. Take responsibility for your posts and your
reactions.
jaybee
B.J. West
and is now plunging headlong towards Beta, and already we have a new interloper
and a flame war. Can't you kids behave?
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > Believe me, you can't bully your way into being a writer,
>
> Sure you can. I've already done it. Have the credits to prove it. Kiss my
> royal ass you dweeb.
Well, we certainly have an expert on cornball tough-guy dialogue. Jervis, if you
are so damned good, why are you *here*? Hey, your agent is on line two. There's a
scheduling conflict between this year's Oscars and the Pulitzers. Since you can't
go to both, which do you choose?
Beej
----------
B.J. West - Art Direction, Design, Animation
http://www.strafe.com/bj
----------
Strafe's Guide to Streetspeak!
http://www.strafe.com
----------
"Screenwriters are tireless, overflowing with misplaced optimism, and
undeterred by rejection and failure. We are the marines of the
writing business. We are born to kill and afraid of nothing.
We crawl naked over broken glass through razor-wire fences
with our heads tied in plastic bags full of cockroaches to get to
our keyboards. If we find ourselves facing Windows95, we do
the same again to get to a Mac. We are fearless. We are winners."
--misc.writing.screenplays Anthem
B.J. West
Jacques E. Bouchard wrote:
Hey, does anyone else notice the resemblance between this verbose raver and the
lunatics who spilled over from alt.atrology a while back spouting huge
intellectual discourses rife with formulae but inevitably boiling down to *squat*?
Jervis Dedalus
Get this straight: You are the one making the "threats". When you
insult the health and integrity of another person's mind, you have
taken the first step toward putting that person in jeapardy of his
life in a goddam nut ward. You start a goddam dirty lie, a rumor, a
nasty little fucking whispering campaign. Okay, is that in your
head; is that clear to yoiu, how you have put my freedom under threat
by this piggish little insult? I'm telling you again: take that
back or FEAR the day you meet me face to face. FEAR that day. How
many more times do you want to HEAR it? You murderous fuck!
grendel wrote:
> In <6pl78k$gm4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
> jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >In article <35beecf9...@news.cgocable.net>,
>
> [...]
>
> >> I'd suggest that you prop yourself back up on your own time,
> >> and spare us the details of your psychopathology.
>
> >If I ever do meet you in life, for that crack you will be sorry.
>
> One of these days you'll threaten someone who doesn't have
> my sense of humor. Though thank you for proving my case.
>
> grendel
Jervis Dedalus
Well, it's my own fault - I responded to the thread, so I can't
complain that you "dragged me into this."
My first impulse in reading that was to cut the dialogue short right here! Don't
condescend to me for the sake of saving face with the rest of your fucking herd
here. I have NEVER been anything but cordial in your regard, you cowardly fuck. Is
there one man among you who has the balls to unabashedly stand of his own accord
without looking over his shoulder for the approbation or the censure of others?
What in the fucking hell is the matter with you bastards? Such rank conformity and
fear of the herd I have NEVER seen in my life before. Get a life you assholes;
learn to be different, to stand of your own accord. Are there no balls on any of
you? I'll answer in my most patient and cordial form all your questions below when
you fucking address me like a gentleman; and not before. Capish?
The problem, in its entirety, is the concept of the "solid, unshakeable
understanding between the parties". This is what CONTRACTS are for.
The understanding doesn't become solid and unshakable until it's all
written down, signed by both parties, and witnessed and/or notorized.
The process of GETTING to that point is called negotiation, which is
all about give and take (though we all know you don't GIVE, baby, you
TAKE. and you TAKE WHATEVER IT IS YOUR SAMURAI SOUL WANTS!). If I'm
understanding you correctly, you intend to go to an agent, looking for
representation on a project where you not only don't own the material
but won't tell the agent the title of the material. you then expect
him or her to enter into a solid, unshakable understanding on a verbal
basis, then have it all written up as a contract (does the agent still
not know what the project is at this point?), then this agent is supposed
to go out and attach a producer/investor/proco/whatever, who ALSO doesn't
know what the project is, so they can pony up the money to buy the property
for you, so you can sell it back to them - or are they just going to
buy this mystery property and guarantee that you'll be the screenwriter?
The pont of a contract is that it is the moment, crystalized on paper and
in the eyes of the law, at which there is no going back. Another way of
looking at it is that up to the point where everybody signs, there IS the
chance to go back. Either or both parties can walk away from the deal,
or try to negotiate some more, or whatever. The solid, unshakable understanding
between parties is neither solid nor unshakable - is, in fact, completely
fluid - right up to the point where everybody signs on the dotted line.
If you are, in fact, able to find an agent (and this town's full of agents,
I hear) who will sign up to rep both you and a property you do not own,
and then attach money to that project all without knowing what the project
is, then please, in the name of God and all his Samurai warriors, come
back and tell us how you did it. Though I can't imagine how you'll be
able to reach the keyboard of your computer, with such large testicles
in the way.
(Uh-oh.. I'll bet he's going to MAKE ME SORRY for that last crack...)
Willam Cory
my face. Such a self-fueled fire of frustration! I actually feel sorry for the guy
in a way -- he reminds me of the the character in "Falling Down," (See the
thread on that subject) -- so frustrated that he can't really function within the
real world.
And NMS, whom I fondly remember as one of the really knowledgeable
contributors to the "Agentesque" thread a couple months back, is one guy I would
like to have lunch with and ask lots of questions.
This oddball guy, with his screaming in print which probably exhausts any
creative energy he might be able to muster, is just to be pitied.
---
Bill
Steven Weller wrote:
>
> Is it just me, or is everyone else waiting for this guy's ravings
> to dissolve into tears?
> Life Continues, Despite
> Evidence to the Contrary,
>
> Steven
--
BC
grendel
Steven Weller
My vote - Kook.
There is a theory, perhaps eant to be tongue-in-cheek, perhaps not,
that Kennedy was actually assasinated by a consortium of habredashiers (sp?)
because he was the first president to eschew wearing hats in public,
and by so doing, caused the practice to fall from fashion. So this guy
is, what, only 35 years out of date?
All I know for sure is that when some punks broke into my apartment a
couple of years ago, and stole everything that WASN'T of reasonable
resale value (walked right past the computer, the VCR, the color TV,
went straight for the plastic toy guns and the winter coats - in LA,
no less), they did it in broad daylight, and were compelled to return
it all later that day.
All, that it, EXCEPT for my black, Howard Hughs-style fedora. Never
got that back.
COINCIDENCE?????!!!!!?????
--
Steven Weller
Is it just me, or is everyone else waiting for this guy's ravings
I'm not sure if it works this way when one is typing, but if this
conversation were live and in person, I imagine he would be getting
louder and louder, and as the rest of us stayed calm, he would even-
tually break down sobbing, wailing 'why won't anyone return my phone
calls?'
I may have missed some posts. Could someone direct me toward the
"the enthusiastic support I have had as well." ? I'd like to take
a look before I go back to masturbating on the jungle gym here in
my cage...
Steven Weller
Well, it's my own fault - I responded to the thread, so I can't
complain that you "dragged me into this."
The problem, in its entirety, is the concept of the "solid, unshakeable
Jacques E. Bouchard
> If I'm
> understanding you correctly, you intend to go to an agent, looking for
> representation on a project where you not only don't own the material
> but won't tell the agent the title of the material. you then expect
> him or her to enter into a solid, unshakable understanding on a verbal
> basis, then have it all written up as a contract (does the agent still
> not know what the project is at this point?), then this agent is supposed
> to go out and attach a producer/investor/proco/whatever, who ALSO doesn't
> know what the project is, so they can pony up the money to buy the property
> for you, so you can sell it back to them
And then they all launch into an elaborate choreographed song and dance with the
interns dancing on the desks and the clerks tap dancing on top of the cubicle
partitions as they march through the office. The title of the song: "Hollywood,
Hollycan! I've got success on my hands!"
Then he wakes up with drool on his pillow.
jaybee
Calix
Damn -- they just gave me an old Firestone on a rope.
And no hand cream, neither.
Pout.
On Wed, 29 Jul 1998 01:23:32 GMT, az...@lafn.org (Steven Weller)
wrote:
Althea Jones
> Life Continues, Despite
> Evidence to the Contrary,
>
> Steven
Thank you... this is just too precious. While I've spent many
entertaining hours as a voyeur to this group..."HATLESS" has me in
stitches. Now THAT'S entertainment... I wonder if I could get the
rights...
AFJ
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
az...@lafn.org (Steven Weller) wrote:
>
> Is it just me, or is everyone else waiting for this guy's ravings
> to disolve into tears?
Know what this is smart guy.......
:---zzzzz
Do ya?
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
az...@lafn.org (Steven Weller) wrote:
It may be that you don't believe in this idea, but in my experience, karma
happens. There is such a thing as payback in this life. Not a chance in hell
that it'll be comin' from me, but it is comin' to you one way or another.
There is nothing I can do to curb you from this childish and chicken shit
behavior, but there is a certain rationality to the way things work out in
this life. You got yours comin' to you, guy; and it is on its way. A
Fascistic chump and narcissist like you will never admit to the error of his
ways, and there is nothing I can do to cause you to grow a heart. I don't
care how low that rounder was who took your hat, but I'm sure it went to the
better man.
>
> My vote - Kook.
>
> There is a theory, perhaps eant to be tongue-in-cheek, perhaps not,
> that Kennedy was actually assasinated by a consortium of habredashiers (sp?)
> because he was the first president to eschew wearing hats in public,
> and by so doing, caused the practice to fall from fashion. So this guy
> is, what, only 35 years out of date?
>
> All I know for sure is that when some punks broke into my apartment a
> couple of years ago, and stole everything that WASN'T of reasonable
> resale value (walked right past the computer, the VCR, the color TV,
> went straight for the plastic toy guns and the winter coats - in LA,
> no less), they did it in broad daylight, and were compelled to return
> it all later that day.
>
> All, that it, EXCEPT for my black, Howard Hughs-style fedora. Never
> got that back.
>
> COINCIDENCE?????!!!!!?????
> --
> Life Continues, Despite
> Evidence to the Contrary,
>
> Steven
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
grendel
<jervis_...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>Okay Schmuck,
>
>Get this straight: You are the one making the "threats". When you
>insult the health and integrity of another person's mind, you have
>taken the first step toward putting that person in jeapardy of his
>life in a goddam nut ward. You start a goddam dirty lie, a rumor, a
>nasty little fucking whispering campaign. Okay, is that in your
>head; is that clear to yoiu, how you have put my freedom under threat
>by this piggish little insult? I'm telling you again: take that
>back or FEAR the day you meet me face to face. FEAR that day. How
>many more times do you want to HEAR it? You murderous fuck!
How many more times do you want to say it?
Anyway, I have a rule about teasing Kooks of the Month (or
even KotM nominees). I just don't feel good about it.
So the last word is yours. Go crazy.
Er, have fun with it.
grendel
Steven Weller
Actually, I don't know what this is:
:---zzzzz
If I had to guess, I'd probably say it's a zipper, part-way down, which
might suggest that Jervis wants me to do something with his penis, or
perhaps he with mine - neither prospect seems too appealing to me personally,
but I'm sure if you look around, you can find a willing guy around here
somewhwhere...
...anyone (Jervise included) want to let me know what the above bit of
ASCII art/emoticon/secret space alien code/message from Jawei is actually
supposed to mean?
Jacques E. Bouchard
> Okay Schmuck,
>
> Get this straight: You are the one making the "threats". When you
> insult the health and integrity of another person's mind, you have
> taken the first step toward putting that person in jeapardy of his
> life in a goddam nut ward. You start a goddam dirty lie, a rumor, a
> nasty little fucking whispering campaign. Okay, is that in your
> head; is that clear to yoiu, how you have put my freedom under threat
> by this piggish little insult? I'm telling you again: take that
> back or FEAR the day you meet me face to face. FEAR that day. How
> many more times do you want to HEAR it? You murderous fuck!
LOL! Oh man, I bust a gut laughing.
He's slipping. The typo's, the obscenity; I can imagine him with a
vein pulsating on his temple, spittling as he speaks, his face crimson...
I think he may cry very shortly.
jaybee
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
az...@lafn.org (Steven Weller) wrote:
>
> Actually, I don't know what this is:
>
> :---zzzzz
>
> If I had to guess, I'd probably say it's a zipper, part-way down, which
> might suggest that Jervis wants me to do something with his penis, or
> perhaps he with mine - neither prospect seems too appealing to me personally,
> but I'm sure if you look around, you can find a willing guy around here
> somewhwhere...
Say there, fella - - you really are a study for the Rorchak Boys; quite the
little ole cutie-pie, aren't you?
Now, tell me, what do you see when we look at this:
MORE INKBLOTS
Hah! Well, what you do in the privacy of your own closet are your affairs.
:---zzzzz Ha-ha-ha-ha!
Hell! I thought I was all through with this veritable Garden of Nerds you
call a newsgroup for "screenwriters", with my final "Can't We All Try To Get
Along" _coup de grace_. I mean, for what I should stick around, having
discovered that you're all nothing but a bunch of envvy-ridden losers, none
of whom have had a screenplay actually put into celluloid in a big way in
your entire absurd careers? Well, I take that back, there is one girl who
writes me privately since I showed up in this assinine 'Town Without Pity' of
yours, who has had a few credits to her name that are half-ass notable; but
she, as I, and/or anyone else showing the least sign of talent or originality
here have learned, well, we are just not welcome! Ha-ha! I'd love to see
what would happen if Paul Schrader (sp?) or Bo Goldman started posting here
anonymously; you cunts and pricks would run him out on a rail! He'd be, like
some Bacchic victim in a Dionysian revel, immediately savaged and insulted
beyond the desire or interest to remain.
Well! There is nothing for us of true talent and originality here anyway!
None of you are worth the powder to blow you to hell so far as advice goes,
or accomplishment; you live in your little fantasy of being screenwriters;
shelling out your sucker money to agents. Ha-ha-ha! Somebody who knows the
ropes comes along and starts to demonstrate by his own experience what a vain
little coterie of suck-ups to the Agency Con Game y'all are, and hoooo-eee!
Get a load of the reaction. Bunch of spineless, useless rich yuppie dweebs
is all you are; fools with money to burn.
You don't even want to hear the experiences of a guy who has 'been there,
done that.' It might shatter your fantasy, might force you to rethink your
perogatives; might wise you up to that agent who is laughing all the way to
the bank.
Ha-ha-ha-ha! No wonder that gal who writes me is thinking of becoming "an
agent". Ha-ha-ha-ha! Man! If there was ever a pack of suckers who deserved
being taken to the cleaners, here it is! Ha-ha-ha-ha! What more can be said
to you? Well, I'll give that 'grendel' or whateverthefuck it is some credit:
He/she so far as (it's?) narcissism permits, more or less retracted (it's)
insult about Jervis' falsely imputed "psychopathology". I wonder what he
thought there was to "FEAR"? What can a peaceful little ol' dweeb like me do
to anybody? I'm a pacifist, a former War Resistor, an old First Growth Hippe
of the First Water. I'll tell you what I could do, can do: Piss a person
off enough to take the first punch. Find you where you are and tell you what
I think of you. I can depend on your violence to do the rest. YOU go to
jail for assault and battery. Who's you? Anybody who tries to defame me by
the name of "Kook". I am a married man, a business man, a home-owner. Do
you think I'd really waste my time on people who so far as I'm concerned
could be swallowed by the earth tomorrow, and I'd care less, and the world
would be the better for it? Ha! What does a bunch of worthless scum like
you matter to me? You don't see yourselves in the larger picture; from what I
see from the height of my 53 years. You are utterly the most pitiful,
cowardly generation ever to come upon the face of this earth; you've never
had to fight a war or fight against a war; fight for the freedom of the
oppressed in the coal fields of Appalachia or in the swamps of Mississippi;
whom have you ever raised from a worse estate to a better. The feminist
revolution? Bullshit! That went from the better to the worse.
Love to see how our little ol' Kook Klux Klan Manifesto is freaking you out.
Wow! Do y'all hate to have your faces shoved into THAT true mirror of what
you really are, you punks, you fuckin' terrorists, you persecutors of genius.
We are not done with you yet you weak dweebs. I am a still active
revolutionary from the 60's you fuckin' "a" jack I am, and I am here to tell
you that you are everything that the Generation of the Sixties rose up to
tear down!! Yeah! It's come that time again. And you will NEVER hear an end
of me until that's done; until you have seen the error of your square,
bourgeois, self-worshiping, herd-brained ways and days. Yeah, I've got a
play in the works about your kind; you can read it; it's on line, "Dionysus
In Suburbia" - be prepared to meet yourselves face to face on stage,
displayed for the clowns you are.
http://www.dejanews.com/group/dejanews.members.soc.jervis_dedalus.hot-coffee
And say, while we are at it: Here's a picture of me to envy till your dyin'
day.
http://members.theglobe.com/harry_lymeii/index.html
Harry Lyme II? Yeah, that's me. Ha-ha-ha-ha! Want to go for a ride on my
ferris wheel you pussies?
P.S. Oh yeah...almost forgot.
>
> ...anyone (Jervise included) want to let me know what the above bit of
> ASCII art/emoticon/secret space alien code/message from Jawei is actually
> supposed to mean?
There's no 'supposed to' to it asshole,
:---zzzzz
is the way you give somebody the raspberries on the internet.
:---zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
You couldn't even figure that out?
Beam Me Up!
Keep watching the 'kooks' groups for more updates on the activites and agendae
of the Anti-Kook-Klux-Klan Too Cool Cyber Citizens of the World, Inc.
Smoke my farts you assholes!
:---zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Harry Lyme II
[Jervis]
> --
> Life Continues, Despite
> Evidence to the Contrary,
>
> Steven
How fucking trite can you get, "Steven"?
G. Finch
diatribe. But after reading that he's 53, I'm reminded of one of the
critiques of Marge Simpson's Montgomery Burns painting. "He's evil, but
he'll die soon. So it's all right."
MwsReader
Hey, come on! 53 ain't THAT far off for me! You trying to say that when
I hit 50 I should count on dying soon? Guess I should party more while
I still can!
JohnRobie
N/A
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
SNIP!
> Say there, fella - - you really are a study for the Rorchak Boys; quite the
> little ole cutie-pie, aren't you?
SNIP!
Wow. Okay, I'm pretty sure I wanna be from a different species now...
--
Robert W. Repp <winners(at)wwa.com>
Art Director, Internet, Winners & International
Successories, Inc.
630-820-7200x5681 Fax 820-6772
Geealexand
for the distance which electronic communications provide. Because, the last
time I heard someone rant and rave like Jerv was at a bad party. The fellow
drank too much, spoke too loudly and stayed too long.
So, shall we give this one a rest?
B.J. West
> I'm telling you again: take that
> back or FEAR the day you meet me face to face. FEAR that day. How
> many more times do you want to HEAR it? You murderous fuck!
Hey, everyone! Frank Booth is here!!
Skip Press
> Well! There is nothing for us of true talent and originality here anyway!
Hey, you're so right, Jervis. Get lost and spare us our ignominy.
Jacques E. Bouchard
> Say there, fella - - you really are a study for the Rorchak Boys; quite the
> little ole cutie-pie, aren't you?
Uh-ho, Jervis has hit the juice. Now his spelling begins to suffer.
Whassamatter, Jervis, couldn't put the bottle of Jack Daniel's down long enough
to look up "Rorschach"?
jaybee
Bob Miller
> Yeah, I've got a
>play in the works about your kind; you can read it; it's on line, "Dionysus
>In Suburbia" - be prepared to meet yourselves face to face on stage,
>displayed for the clowns you are.
>
>http://www.dejanews.com/group/dejanews.members.soc.jervis_dedalus.hot-coffee
I checked some of the "works" at your site.
Your dialogue sounds like a 12-year-old wrote it.
Bob
evo...@pacbell.net
that's his right.
Now I'm not saying I *don't* have a doctorate in Psychology, or that I
*do*. And I am not saying I *know* Jervis *perse*.
But from what I gather from the long post, from my years of not
*necessarily* accurate research in such matters, and my *own* knowledge
from what *could* be a variety of sources....
The long and the short of it is, what *I* take away from this post, and
what I take as being the only glaring insight anyone *should* gather from
it, is that
Mr. Jervis has a shrivelled little p***s.
Skip Press
> Skip Press wrote:
> >
> > Hey, you're so right, Jervis. Get lost and spare us our ignominy.
>
> Sure, use fisticated words to impress tha white man.
>
> Ignominy more $.29 Cheesburgers can I buy for a dollar?
>
Even Ducks should not be above dictionaries.
Jacques E. Bouchard
> jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I've got a
> >play in the works about your kind; you can read it; it's on line, "Dionysus
> >In Suburbia" - be prepared to meet yourselves face to face on stage,
> >displayed for the clowns you are.
> >
> >http://www.dejanews.com/group/dejanews.members.soc.jervis_dedalus.hot-coffee
>
> I checked some of the "works" at your site.
>
> Your dialogue sounds like a 12-year-old wrote it.
What do you mean, "like"?
jaybee
David R. Neff
[snip]
>
>You don't even want to hear the experiences of a guy who has 'been there,
>done that.'
OK, what *have* you done? What are your credits?
[huge snip]
Two wheels good, four wheels bad. Bob Stinson RIP
ix.N e tc o m (without the spaces) is my domain.
David R. Neff
(snip!)
>
> I'm telling you again: take that
>back or FEAR the day you meet me face to face. FEAR that day. How
>many more times do you want to HEAR it? You murderous fuck!
>
(and from a previous exchange...)
>>
>> >> I'd suggest that you prop yourself back up on your own time,
>> >> and spare us the details of your psychopathology.
>>
>> >If I ever do meet you in life, for that crack you will be sorry.
>>
Now tell us all again how you aren't threatening anyone,
please.
David R. Neff
> Get a life you assholes;
>learn to be different, to stand of your own accord.
Translation: Please swallow my absurd shit and tell me its ice cream.
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
bmi...@neosoft.com (Bob Miller) wrote:
> >http://www.dejanews.com/group/dejanews.members.soc.jervis_dedalus.hot-coffee
>
> I checked some of the "works" at your site.
>
> Your dialogue sounds like a 12-year-old wrote it.
>
> Bob
:---zzzzzzz
Gary Pollard
Gary
evo...@pacbell.net wrote in message ...
BetterDuck
>
> Ha-ha! I'd love to see what would happen if Paul Schrader (sp?) or
> Bo Goldman started posting here anonymously; you cunts and pricks
> would run him out on a rail!
Didn't I do that last month?
> None of you are worth the powder to blow you to hell so far as advice goes,
Depends on your powder I guess, in my case your probably fucking right!
Amen.
> You don't even want to hear the experiences of a guy who has 'been there,
> done that.'
See alt.shestrapson.experiences.
We just dream of meeting Xena none of us have had the fortune, dude.
> Do y'all hate to have your faces shoved into THAT true mirror of what
> you really are, you punks, you fuckin' terrorists, you persecutors of genius.
Thats plagerism, I heard that same speach last week on my answering
machine
from Dominick Dunne.
> Smoke my farts you assholes!
gotta match?
Better Duck
BetterDuck
>
>
> Hey, you're so right, Jervis. Get lost and spare us our ignominy.
Sure, use fisticated words to impress tha white man.
Ignominy more $.29 Cheesburgers can I buy for a dollar?
Better Duck
BetterDuck
>
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
> >
> > Your dialogue sounds like a 12-year-old wrote it.
>
Like the 12yr old that is Spielberg's new Koepp.
Better Duck
Paul Burke Jr.
>
> Jervis Dedalus wrote:
>
> > I'm telling you again: take that
> > back or FEAR the day you meet me face to face. FEAR that day. How
> > many more times do you want to HEAR it? You murderous fuck!
>
>
> Beej
LOLBAG! I can just see someone sitting at his/her/its computer,
taking hits off a room-dominating tank of <whatever the hell Booth takes
hits of in "Blue Velvet">, talking back to the screen in a wheezing
blatherous curse (or a curse-filled blatherous wheeze, or a wheezing
curse-filled blather):
"F**k, you f**ks, you think you're writers, you f**king bunch of
dumb f**ks! F**k that sh*t! Zimauh---er PABST... BLUE...RIBBON! F**king
call ME crazy, you crazy f**ks! I'm the f**king king of the f**king
world, you f..."
Blue Velvet, now that's a screenplay I think I'll read/study soon. I
mean, I'd love to read how the junkyard scene is written...you know, the
scene with the long-in-tooth disco-trailer-trash violence-groupie
mod-dancing as Frank get's a little violent on Jeffrey.
Paul E. Burke Jr.
Deus Ex Camera/Diskatopia Records/SunTribe
"Don't toast to my health, toast to my f**k!"--Frank Booth
Gary Pollard
> "F**k, you f**ks, you think you're writers, you f**king bunch of
>dumb f**ks! F**k that sh*t! Zimauh---er PABST... BLUE...RIBBON! F**king
>call ME crazy, you crazy f**ks! I'm the f**king king of the f**king
>world, you f..."
>
Reminds me of a certain letter to Kenneth Turan
Gary
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
evo...@pacbell.net wrote:
> Mr. Jervis has a shrivelled little p***s.
Only one way to find out. Seems to be at least one big mouthed lady in
this group who may be quite well qualified to come and more or less 'take the
temperature' of the matter, formulate a judgment? Not that it pleases me to
hafta deny you the opportunity since you've been the first to express an
interest in the....matter; but you are, after all, the wrong sex, my dear
fellow.
And furthermore,
:---zzzzzzzzzz !!!
--
Jervis
Oh, P.S. while I'm still slumming here - I would like to see that great
critic among you who states that my ability as a playwright is at the level
of a '12 year old', produce from the one final draft (Act One, Scene One) in
my forum some evidence and argumentation to support his statement, lest I
should continue to just chaulk this insult up to his envy, spite, and
immaturity? I mean you want to talk about a wrinkled green weenie? Try that
fellow's on for size. I've seen some "needle-dink the bug-f*ckers' in my
time but...hey! Pass the envelope, please.
Steven Weller
So THAT'S what that is.
A cyber-rasberry.
Silly me for thinking it was something immature...
Steven Weller
Originally, Frank's gas of choice was supposed to be helium ("mommie!
mommie!") but for whatever reason, that was scrapped. I can't imagine
Lynch giving up so surreal an element, but it wouldn't surprise me if
Hopper was uncomfortable with the image...
...they ended up with Frank sucking pure O2, like an athlete.
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
who
has ever seen life truly in the raw, is the only one with the humor and
tolerance to respond like a man. It just goes to prove what I said in my post
in re: "Anybody here been in jail".
Have I ever been in jail? If a man has not been either in jail or in war, he
is or in a war against war, in a revolution, a labor riot, strike or
dangerous protest of some sort, he is not worth the price of the rope to take
him out and hang him. Not only was I in jail, I was in a Mexican jail, which
nowadays, from the looks of the way things are going in this insane police
state, would be like "a country club". The worst thing I suffered was
malnutrition and a haircut. In 1971 that was a big loss, a lot of hair. I
went out of that place damned near bald in a pair of shoes that had been
weirdly cut into a form of sandals, given me by a priest; one sent pursuant
to my call to the American Embassy. On the day he arrived with those shoes,
I had no more Spanish under by belt than was sufficient to say to the gaoler,
"I want to call the American Embassy", and as the official considered the
circumstances of my existential situation, I suppose he thought that priest
the one person appropriate to my plight. Before he pulled the "shoes" from
that sack, I figured he was just there to read me my "Last Rites". Imagine
my surprise when a few days later, I was en route with an escort of Federales
back to the border. My crime? Well, the way this Federale put it, "You are
the only Gringo wetback I ever met."
In article <35C01C...@worldnet.att.net>,
CMay...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > Ha-ha! I'd love to see what would happen if Paul Schrader (sp?) or
> > Bo Goldman started posting here anonymously; you cunts and pricks
> > would run him out on a rail!
>
> Didn't I do that last month?
>
> > None of you are worth the powder to blow you to hell so far as advice goes,
>
> Depends on your powder I guess, in my case your probably fucking right!
>
> Amen.
>
> > You don't even want to hear the experiences of a guy who has 'been there,
> > done that.'
>
> See alt.shestrapson.experiences.
>
> We just dream of meeting Xena none of us have had the fortune, dude.
>
> > Do y'all hate to have your faces shoved into THAT true mirror of what
> > you really are, you punks, you fuckin' terrorists, you persecutors of
genius.
>
> Thats plagerism, I heard that same speach last week on my answering
> machine
> from Dominick Dunne.
It's "plagiarism". But how can anyone plagiarize from a schmuck who never
had an original thing to say in his life? Can't imagine why you'd be
bothering with that despicable little sycophant, except to give him a piece
of your mind.
>
> > Smoke my farts you assholes!
>
> gotta match?
>
> Better Duck
:---zzzzzz
NOTE: For the sake of the state of your amicable relations here, Better
Duck, don't even dream of getting 'friendly' with me. Listen: I am not
likeable anyway, so I don't worry about it, as neither, of course would you.
I have always regarded the presence of other people in my life as little nore
than a necessary evil, something to be tolerated through grit teeth. My wife?
She's the same way; we see eye to eye like Bonnie & Clyde; people know well
enough to stay the hell out of our way. Our favorite shared expression back
in the 80's, when we lived as gold miners in the fastnesses of the High
Sierra in a one room mountain cabin was, "Piss on 'em all!" A sentiment we
learned to enjoy from the attitude of the coyotes. Y'all wouldn't know about
it, but whenever a coyote in wild comes upon any human artifact, he either
shits or pisses on it. Oh, yeah. He knows where man is at, and exactly what
he's worth - in his natural, unenlightened state of course - man's that is.
The coyotes never shit on our shit, if that should tell you anything. We
cane to regard that fact as a sort of Nobel Peace Prize From The Wild. Yes
sir, there was no coyote crap on me, my 'friends'.
Jacques E. Bouchard
> I am not surprised to find that Better Duck, apparently the only person here
> who
> has ever seen life truly in the raw, is the only one with the humor and
> tolerance to respond like a man. It just goes to prove what I said in my post
> in re: "Anybody here been in jail".
[...]
This whole, uhm, post, it's some sort of weak attempt at self-glorification and
ennoblement, isn't it?
Has anyone taken on the task of counting the instances of "I", "me" and "my" in
Jervis' posts? He might break a record.
jaybee
grendel
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>Well, I'll give that 'grendel' or whateverthefuck it is some credit:
>He/she so far as (it's?) narcissism permits, more or less retracted (it's)
>insult about Jervis' falsely imputed "psychopathology". I wonder what he
>thought there was to "FEAR"?
Please note that my rule pertains to teasing kooks, not to
setting them straight when they misrepresent me.
So I must insist that I retracted nothing.
You continue to prove my point more thoroughly and
relentlessly than I could ever possibly manage. If you were
able to see this, perhaps you could begin to address the
problems you have relating to the world.
I don't expect you will, though--hence my reluctance to
bother with you. Still, I do find it fascinating that you
turned this into something to crow about.
grendel
Skip Press
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
[snip needed as usual]
> Imagine
> my surprise when a few days later, I was en route with an escort of Federales
> back to the border. My crime? Well, the way this Federale put it, "You are
> the only Gringo wetback I ever met."
Damn! A Southern American dumb enough to sneak into Mexico? What's the
matter, jerv, couldn't you grow your own? May a coyote shit on you.
|
v
Vince Johnson
Hi jaybee,
Don't you think that any post can be crammed with I's,
me's and my's without self glorification? For instance,
YOUR post could have been written like this:
I, myself, think this whole, uhm, post, is some
sort of weak attempt at self-glorification and
ennoblement, at least that's the way I saw it in the
perusal I diid.
I wonder if anyone has taken on the task as I have
of counting the instances of "I", "me" and "my" in
Jervis' posts? To my way of thinking, I think he might
break a record.
--
Very best regards,
Vince Johnson
-- ///
(* @"@ *)
|---oooO--(_)-Oooo-------|
|Don't never take no cutoffs.
| --The Donner Party
|------------------------|
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
mention a point well made in the body of the post. I lived right there, along
the trail of the "Forlorn Hope", read Stewart's book cover to cover a couple
times, visited all the Donner Sites. If you want to see a modern day Donner
Party Camp, just look around USENET, try sci.psychology.psychotherapy where
there are human bones scattered everywhere amongst those happy diners; this is
where the other reigning contender for the KOTM is a guy who is telling all
those psychologists that they are crazy. He's right, of course.
In article <35C0A017...@neworld.net>,
Vince Johnson <vgjo...@neworld.net> wrote:
> Hi jaybee,
>
> Don't you think that any post can be crammed with I's,
> me's and my's without self glorification? For instance,
> YOUR post could have been written like this:
>
> I, myself, think this whole, uhm, post, is some
> sort of weak attempt at self-glorification and
> ennoblement, at least that's the way I saw it in the
> perusal I diid.
>
> I wonder if anyone has taken on the task as I have
> of counting the instances of "I", "me" and "my" in
> Jervis' posts? To my way of thinking, I think he might
> break a record.
> --
> Very best regards,
>
> Vince Johnson
>
> -- ///
> (* @"@ *)
> |---oooO--(_)-Oooo-------|
> |Don't never take no cutoffs.
> | --The Donner Party
> |------------------------|
>
>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Jervis Dedalus
BetterDuck wrote:
> Rick Jones wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > The simple fact is that virtually all people in jail are criminals.
> > Criminals are, as a group, stupid. You don't become a criminal
> > because you're a genius; you become a criminal because you're too
> > stupid to do anything else. So, in short, a man who hasn't been to
> > jail is just likely to be much smarter than one who has.
>
> Nelson Mandella? Nicola Machiavelli? John the Baptist? Shall I
> continue...?
>
> Better Duck
Y'know Better Duck, My Man,
When I was in college, (University of Minnesota) I studied Sociology. My
Criminology professor was an ex-con, a former Bank Robber. Well, that's
one thing, here's another: I studied then what was at the time, a new
school of Social Psychology, _Symbolic Interactionism_. The whole idea
behind the concept was that people are creatures of symbols. First we
create the symbols and then the symbols somehow get started to creating
us; they control us. Take a word like "criminal". A Social Psychologist
of the symbolic interactionist school looks at a word like "criminal" and
asks, (1) What is this word and what does it mean to people. (2) Does
it have an emotive content such that it will give rise to fear and
loathing, joy or humor? (3) Is there a power of stigmatization, a
"Scarlet Letter" content to the word, i.e. can the word be used like a
concealed weapon to do harm or injury?
Okay, so now; in plain talk, in words that even someone with a name like
"Rick Jones" can understand, what are we talking about? Here is a guy,
Martin Luther King who sees that he is going to have to break the law and
go to jail for the sake of the freedom of his people. He knows the
danger that awaits him at the brunt of saps, dogs and billy clubs,
beatings in handcuffs, but he weighs the options and decides that the
stigma in the word, "criminal", is the price he must pay for the ransom
of his people. Is Martin Luther King "a criminal"? Yes. But, the fact
that M.L. King, Menachim Begin, Anwar Sadat, Jerry Rubin, Abbey Hoffman,
Che Guevarra, Paul Revere, Jefferson and Washington are all "criminals"
for breaking the law, even taking up weapons against the established
authority, it means that the word, "criminal" just loses a whole lot of
its punch in its power to stigmatize and give rise to fear and loathing.
Immediately, the person who wants that stigma to remain strong, so he can
continue to carry that word like a concealed weapon, as an instrument to
carry the projectiles of his fear and loathing, he must seek to redefine
it as meaning something other than just "a lawbreaker". It must refer to
a certain kind of lawbreaker, like a bank robber, burglar, rapist, an
American Wetback in Mexico, what have you? You may say, well, a
'criminal' is somebody out to hurt not help people, to help himself at
the expense of another. Suddenly we are looking at Levander Holyfield,
half the people in Congress, every businessman who wants to make a
profit. That definition won't work. It has to be somebody who breaks
the law to help himself at the expense of others. So, in that strict
sense the word has a purely descriptive power in it as a symbol, so where
does the power of its stigma come from, the fear and loathing connected
to it?
The word criminal must refer to a person acting according to the
definition of the word. It refers to a person who actively breaks the
law at another's expense. It cannot refer to a person who does not do
those things. It cannot refer to my Criminology professor because he is
abiding the law and doing good for others by teaching them sociology.
The stigma comes from the misuse of the word; it comes from stupidity, it
comes from a hateful impulse to do harm by the use of the word, to speak
libel with it, assassinate character, commit defamation; to break the
law, to become a criminal by making a concealed weapon of the word,
"criminal".
Vince Johnson
> Vince Johnson wrote:
>
> > Don't you think that any post can be crammed with
> I's,
> > me's and my's without self glorification? For
> instance,
> > YOUR post could have been written like this:
>
> Sure, Vince, but 15 lines with I's is an opinion.
> 200 lines with the
> same is a Jervis megalomaniac fest.
>
> jaybee
Sure. But any competent writer can edit out all of his
I's and me's and thus present his opinions as flat
statements, sometimes supported by fact, as you have
done in the above. Yet, even technical articles and
op/ed pages often contain the editorial "we," or the
vainglorious "this writer." Hard to avoid all opinion,
isn't it? Opinion is the basis of all writing,
including fiction, when you consider what the author
includes and what he leaves out. So nope, all Jervis
needs to do is edit out all his I's. It's simple to do.
Sam Stone
> We just dream of meeting Xena none of us have had the fortune, dude.
I have.
Sam .-)
Rick Jones
wrote:
>Have I ever been in jail? If a man has not been either in jail or in war, he
>is or in a war against war, in a revolution, a labor riot, strike or
>dangerous protest of some sort, he is not worth the price of the rope to take
>him out and hang him.
This would be easier to understand if it was written in English. All
that time in a Mexican jail didn't help your sentence structure.
The simple fact is that virtually all people in jail are criminals.
Criminals are, as a group, stupid. You don't become a criminal
because you're a genius; you become a criminal because you're too
stupid to do anything else. So, in short, a man who hasn't been to
jail is just likely to be much smarter than one who has.
A man who's been to war is simply unlucky. Some generations have wars
to fight, and some don't.
BetterDuck
>
>
>
> The simple fact is that virtually all people in jail are criminals.
> Criminals are, as a group, stupid. You don't become a criminal
> because you're a genius; you become a criminal because you're too
> stupid to do anything else. So, in short, a man who hasn't been to
> jail is just likely to be much smarter than one who has.
Jacques E. Bouchard
Skip Press
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <1998Jul29....@lafn.org>,
> az...@lafn.org (Steven Weller) wrote:
> >
> > Is it just me, or is everyone else waiting for this guy's ravings
> > to disolve into tears?
>
> Know what this is smart guy.......
>
> :---zzzzz
>
> Do ya?
Hmmm, less zzzz's. Is he running out of steam? Let's try nicing him. Love
you, Jervis. Love you!
Steve Holmes
There's a distinction between political prisoners and Mensa rejects who
are dumb enough to sign their holdup notes. My Significant Other is a
paralegal with a firm that represents a lot of prisoners. While
dedicated to and idealistic about her work, she says there's a reason
these guys are behind bars. With some exceptions, they ain't the
brightest bulbs in the socket.
--
Steve Holmes, Steve Holmes Productions
(helping companies communicate through award-winning video)
Iowa City, IA, USA
http://www.shpvideo.com
My address: sigerson "at" inav "dot" net (replace "" words with
symbols)
jervis_...@my-dejanews.com
<skippress-310...@pool016-max20.mpop2-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net>,
What? Me? Love me? Migod, would you take Samson to the lap of Delilah?
Superman to a rock garden of kryptonite? My good man, you might as well take
me like a paper suit to the cleaners. Great Caesar's Ghost! Whyt this is the
cruelest, most insidious idea yet! I'm shrinking, shrinking, ooooh Dorothy!
Jacques E. Bouchard
> So nope, all Jervis
> needs to do is edit out all his I's. It's simple to do.
Jervis needs to do a lot more than that. He needs a few pointers on
word economy.
jaybee