Talent vs. the Hollywood Scriptwriting Institute
Raymond Thomas-Hogan
Scriptwriting Institute--a wary word of caution: You don't need talent, just
lips that acquiesce below the belt line. The following is an open letter to
Donna Lee I wrote after completing her course:
Dear Donna:
I can honestly say that after having spent nine months and an odd
number of days pouring over your book謡hich I believe is a very good one預nd
successfully finishing this course on screenwriting謡ell, for me, nothing has
been more anticlimactic.
In my view, your opinion on my synopsis of "The Shroud" is a shallow
one, on two fronts. First, the story line is absolutely self explanatory and
unique, an apparent perception you obviously do not share. Second, if you
would have bothered to read the script, which is not a big thing to ask as a
return courtesy to the students who put in their hard time, money and effort,
you would have understood the full psychological impact of this story and why
this FBI agent behaves the way he does, and the killer too. But I can hear
your argument from here: "If a producer does not like a synopsis, they will
not bother to read the script."
True. But this is not your pat Hollywood formula story about bad guys
and good guys, revenge, victory, the hero wins, da da da! This theme is
amoral; full of ambiguities and grey areas. There are no bad guys and good
guys here. The story itself is the hero, and the characters simply the
instruments of its expression. We are, at the bottom line, and in the largest
sense, all heros, playing out our roles on the backdrop of time and space預nd
simply put, "to hell with winners and losers." Life is what it is. Now, maybe
that kind of concept isn't ready for Hollywood, but, then again, I don't think
Hollywood is ready for this script either. So be it. I'll try and sell it
independently.
As it stands now, I don't think Hollywood has got the slightest idea
of what is good and what is not good. I sat the other night for two boring
hours (before I walked out, which has happened to me several times lately) in
front of the screen watching "The Rock." Don't you know that even a row of
high school kids in front of me were getting bored with the whole damn thing.
Relentless, non-stop action just for the sake of action. Aesthetically, it was
like sitting in front of an eighty mile per hour wind and trying to enjoy the
smell of a carnation. Let's hear it for Hollywood, they managed to release
their stench on the flower again, in the form of belittling intelligence.
So, what are we studying at HSI? The formula script? The "saleable"
material? Or does anyone dare to take a few minutes to think: Is there another
way to move someone? Is there another way to explain something? Is there a new
paradigm for life's endless complexities? Let's write about something a little
different, shall we? Yawn!
Also, on a final issue, concerning the tutelage of Earl Blakesley
throughout this course, well, I care for that even less. He knew nine months
ago that I was writing a story on the subject of reincarnation, to which he
even admitted had a new and different twist to it. To wit, nine months later,
in a most discouraging fashion, he telegraphs me with the following: "Ray, one
element that might be diverting from the basic story line is the 叢ast life'
scenario. The script has enough basic excitement/interest to stand on the
general serial killer story." Wrong Earl! This story is about reincarnation,
and the tenuous dis-similarities between good, and its kissin' cousin, evil.
Read the script again!
If he hadn't cared for the theme in the first place, why not tell me
then instead of waiting nine months and one hundred and twenty two pages later
to relieve me (in his head) of my carelessly idealistic burden.
Donna, you encourage student critiques? Well, you have mine. In
closing, I can only add that I am not a headhunter, and neither is HSI a
punching bag for my anger. The instruction that Earl Blakesley offered to me
was, at best, courteous and mildly informative, and at worst, glib and lacking
true inspiration, offering nothing more than the basic rudiments of the
screenwriting process, which, alas, always makes a student, Oh, heck, you know
what I mean, 素eel like a student.' So, until we meet again at that BIG SCRIPT
SCHOOL IN THE SKY: In the name of the Father, the Son, and Hollywood
Scriptwriting, AMEN!
Raymond Thomas-Hogan
------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond Thomas-Hogan
tho...@freeway.net
Bill Hickstein
I just read your THINGY. I've been labelled by scrnwrit.listserv. as
arrogance, elitist etc. for my feelings on my four tenets of writing.
those being originality, creativity, innovation, and intelligence in
writing. I was thrashed. I'm impressed by what I heard re:your idea,
albeit little info., but I'm interested in your synop. NO, I'm no one
w/juice or connects, but I'd love to look at it. I'm as
bi...@mail.winternet.com
Brevity
tho...@freeway.net (Raymond Thomas-Hogan) wrote:
>In my view, your opinion on my synopsis of "The Shroud" is a shallow
>one, on two fronts. First, the story line is absolutely self explanatory and
>unique, an apparent perception you obviously do not share. Second, if you
>would have bothered to read the script, which is not a big thing to ask as a
>return courtesy to the students who put in their hard time, money and effort,
>you would have understood the full psychological impact of this story and why
>this FBI agent behaves the way he does, and the killer too. But I can hear
>your argument from here: "If a producer does not like a synopsis, they will
>not bother to read the script."
> True. But this is not your pat Hollywood formula story about bad guys
>and good guys, revenge, victory, the hero wins, da da da! This theme is
>amoral; full of ambiguities and grey areas. There are no bad guys and good
>guys here. The story itself is the hero, and the characters simply the
>instruments of its expression. We are, at the bottom line, and in the largest
>sense, all heros, playing out our roles on the backdrop of time and space—and
>simply put, "to hell with winners and losers." Life is what it is. Now, maybe
>that kind of concept isn't ready for Hollywood, but, then again, I don't think
>Hollywood is ready for this script either. So be it. I'll try and sell it
>independently.
>Raymond Thomas-Hogan
------------------------------------------------------------
>Raymond Thomas-Hogan
>tho...@freeway.net
Raymond,
Your letter sounds like a million other new writers who cannot
tolerate, or understand criticism. If you sat through a nine month
course that was teaching the Hollywood "method" if you will, or how to
write a commercially viable screenplay, and you didn't realize after a
week or two that you had no interest in this, the fault is entirely
yours.
If your complaint is, "You didn't understand me." it's might be
because you didn't make yourself clear. In describing your script in
the course of the tirade against this school, you make it sound like
different scripts. You are not clear even in your letter in
describing what your script is about and what new, exciting though
uncommercial ground you have broken.
Many birds sing this song.
Just to be clear, I have no connection with this school you attended,
and have no knowledge pro or con about it.
Rather than wasting your time whining that your writing teachers
didn't understand you, your energies, all of them, should be directed
at one thing, writing - and maybe selling a script. Every "guru"
and every insructor - Fields, Hauge, McKee - has detractors and those
who follow each of them kissing the hems of their Dockers. Different
people need different things. Go. Write. Learn. Get a second or
third opinion.
-B.
Daystar 2
I'm an Accredited Graduate Screenwriter of Hollywood Scriptwriting
Institute; now a post-graduate working to complete my script. However,
I've run into an almost total block because I was told that I should not
begin my story with a natural disastor. I feel that the study of human
emotions and actions after a natural disastor are, in my script, a
necessary component of my theme. However, if I re-write (and I've tried
after several trashed pages later) it will change my theme into that of a
love story. Period. The focus changes entirely. I end up with a basic
fairy-tale romance. I've been told that my script reads like
mystical/magical fantasy and I should concentrate on writing this for
animation.
Any opinions, info, creative critism, shall be appreciated.
with friendly greetings,
Monika
Gord Jeoffroy
days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
>I'm an Accredited Graduate Screenwriter of Hollywood Scriptwriting
>Institute; now a post-graduate working to complete my script. However,
>I've run into an almost total block because I was told that I should not
>begin my story with a natural disastor.
What was the reasoning behind that edict? TWISTER broke it, and while
it was far from a work of art it certainly was a financial
blockbuster.
Sounds like it would add a lot of drama at the beginning of the film
and really hook the audience. Just make sure the people element is
present (e.g., show the flood wrecking houses and sweeping children
away from their mothers, rather than show just a lot of water).
>I feel that the study of human
>emotions and actions after a natural disastor are, in my script, a
>necessary component of my theme. However, if I re-write (and I've tried
>after several trashed pages later) it will change my theme into that of a
>love story. Period. The focus changes entirely. I end up with a basic
>fairy-tale romance.
If you really feel this is true then your disaster definitely must
stay in the story. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that it must
come at the beginning of the story; it also doesn't necessarily mean
that a producer or director will want to keep it in.
>I've been told that my script reads like
>mystical/magical fantasy and I should concentrate on writing this for
>animation.
I wasn't aware there was a difference in writing for animation or
writing for live action. THE SECRET OF NIMH would've been great as
live action, if they could've trained the rats; FOREST GUMP would've
survived as a feature-length animation, though I doubt it would've
been considered a "mature" film.
--Gord
Tin_...@news.kincyb.com
Gord Jeoffroy (crs...@inforamp.net) wrote:
: days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
: >I'm an Accredited Graduate Screenwriter of Hollywood Scriptwriting
: >Institute; now a post-graduate working to complete my script. However,
: >I've run into an almost total block because I was told that I should not
: >begin my story with a natural disastor.
: What was the reasoning behind that edict? TWISTER broke it, and while
: it was far from a work of art it certainly was a financial
: blockbuster.
Holy moly, there are schools devoted to this? Use your judgement.
There are no "rules" in drama, only what works. The only problem
I can see by starting with a natural disaster is you haven't set up
your characters so your audience won't have anyone to feel sympathy
for. That will reduce their emotional involvement in a sequence
which is going to cost some producer a pretty penny. If you can
justify that with what happens next, though, go for it. There are
no rules in scriptwriting, only guidelines, and a writer who doesn't
think he can break any rules isn't a writer he's a hack. Even if
you don't like "Pulp Fiction" can you imagine how awful it would
have been had some screenwriting teacher gotten his hands on it
and asked for revisions? Go with your heart. Or hack it to death
just to please your professor, graduate, and then change it so it's
the way you want it to be. I think you'll be in trouble if you
take your professor's word as gospel, though (and while I've never
been in one of these programs I have known a few film professors
before and it's not exactly uncommon for a great teacher to be a
lousy artist...one person I met still teaches at NYU, is a wonderful
person, has an excellent mind, but the one time he had a chance
to make a feature film he wrote and directed this cross between
a European art film and "Porkys"...it was the sorriest film I've
ever seen to this day).
Jason Ramsey
Daystar 2 wrote:
>
> I'm an Accredited Graduate Screenwriter of Hollywood Scriptwriting
> Institute; now a post-graduate working to complete my script. However,
> I've run into an almost total block because I was told that I should not
> begin my story with a natural disastor.
I have one word...TWISTER. Write whatever's best for your story.
Arbitrary rules like, "Don't start your script with a natural
disaster," (based on what?) don't help the writing process.
--------------------
Script Tutor
Jason Ramsey
ja...@scripttutor.com
http://scripttutor.com
4647 Kingswell Ave., Box 138
Los Angeles, CA 90027
"Don't...bore...the...audience"
-David Mamet
Gord Jeoffroy
"Didi S. DubelyeW" <dd...@praxis.net> wrote:
> Animation doesn't really have to hold to the same Laws of Logic,
> ie. Gravity that Live-Action Scripts do. It's often more Flowing,
> The writer can pay lots of attention to designing the character's
> looks, etc. and not worry about whether an Agency will be able to
> Package it with their stable of Talent!
All very true, and certainly not things I was discounting. I think I
was very vaguely trying to say that good writing comes first, and good
writing is good writing regardless of what medium it's for. I was
speaking generally when I should've acknowledged the specifics. Thanks
for fixing me up.
--Gord
Didi S. DubelyeW
crs...@inforamp.net (Gord Jeoffroy) wrote:
>Er, Sorry Someone Else wrote this:
>>I've been told that my script reads like
>>mystical/magical fantasy and I should concentrate on writing this for
>>animation.
>
>I wasn't aware there was a difference in writing for animation or
>writing for live action. THE SECRET OF NIMH would've been great as
>live action, if they could've trained the rats; FOREST GUMP would've
>survived as a feature-length animation, though I doubt it would've
>been considered a "mature" film.
Gord:
Having written for both Live-Action and Animation, I think that
there is a quantitative difference, or can be, between the two.
Animation doesn't really have to hold to the same Laws of Logic,
ie. Gravity that Live-Action Scripts do. It's often more Flowing,
The writer can pay lots of attention to designing the character's
looks, etc. and not worry about whether an Agency will be able to
Package it with their stable of Talent!
Just my 2 cents,
Didi
Daystar 2
In article <31ED56...@earthlink.net>, Jason Ramsey
<sho...@earthlink.net> writes:
>Arbitrary rules like, "Don't start your script with a natural
>disaster," (based on what?) don't help the writing process.
Based on the Hollywood Scriptwriting Institute rules in their lesson
books; and as told to me by Donna Lee, the Founder of HSI.
No kidding!
And after all of these responses, I'm on my way to speak with Donna Lee.
Thanks!
Monika
Daystar 2
In article <4skn8n$n...@usenetp1.news.prodigy.com>, AUR...@prodigy.com
(Brian Hendrickson) writes:
>Try doing both. Treat it as two separate scripts. Take one the way you
>originally intended and take the other in a different direction and see
>which one you can finish.
Exactly! That is what I am now doing. Thanks for the input.
Monika
Brian Hendrickson
However, if I re-write (and I've tried
>after several trashed pages later) it will change my theme into that of
a
>love story. Period. The focus changes entirely. I end up with a basic
>mystical/magical fantasy and I should concentrate on writing this for
>animation.
Try doing both. Treat it as two separate scripts. Take one the way you
originally intended and take the other in a different direction and see
which one you can finish.
Brian
71650...@compuserve.com
days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
>I'm an Accredited Graduate Screenwriter of Hollywood Scriptwriting
>Institute;
That and $,25 will get you a minute in a peep show.
> However,
>I've run into an almost total block because I was told that I should not
>begin my story with a natural disastor.
Sounds like an odd rule. Before "Oklahoma" the "rule" was never start
a musical with a ballad. Rules can be broken but only if you
understand the rule, the rationale for the rule, and can explain why
you are breaking it...to what end...to what effect. Without knowing
more about your story...and perhaps without reading it entirely, it is
difficult to say whether or not it is best served by opening with a
natural disaster. I can't think of any reason not to. The
traditional structure would be to introduce characters first,and then
follow them through the disaster, but if you have a valid reason for
introducing characters afterwards, I don;t know of a cosmic rule that
says it is ipso-facto wrong. If you could explain more clearly why
not meeting them until after the disaster serves your story better,
then it might be easier for people to agree or disagree with you and
offer suggestions.
> I feel that the study of human
>emotions and actions after a natural disastor are, in my script, a
>necessary component of my theme. However, if I re-write (and I've tried
>after several trashed pages later) it will change my theme into that of a
>love story. Period. The focus changes entirely. I end up with a basic
>fairy-tale romance.
From the above, I cannot see how so radical change would come from
intoducing characters before the event. But again, this is with a
very limited knowledge of what you are trying to do.
> I've been told that my script reads like
>mystical/magical fantasy and I should concentrate on writing this for
>animation.
Mystical/magcal fantasy is hardly the exlusive domain of animation.
Think of films like "Time Bandits" which was all live actions, and the
current "Dragonheart" which is a mix, but is predominantly live
action.
Perhaps you should be going with your "accredited" instincts rather
than with outside opinions about what you should write and what the
"rules" are. That;'s not to say outside feedback isn't important,
but consider the source and don't accept it all at face value. Any
opinion is the opinion of one, and not even the opinion of one agent,
or one producer contain cosmic truth.
Hope this helps, if it hasn't just muddied the waters even more.
-B.
Daystar 2
>Holy moly, there are schools devoted to this? Use your judgement.
>There are no "rules" in drama, only what works.
There are exceptions to every rule. However, as I was told...I can choose
to send out numerous queries and take my chances...or I can write it the
way 'they' want it and sell it. I chose the latter to get my 'foot' in
the door.
Monika
s T e V e
In article <4sm0ar$t...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, days...@aol.com (Daystar
2) wrote:
> There are exceptions to every rule. However, as I was told...I can choose
> to send out numerous queries and take my chances...or I can write it the
> way 'they' want it and sell it. I chose the latter to get my 'foot' in
> the door.
>
> Monika
Too bad 'they' rule the world, huh? Kind of ironic how 'they' also
complain about the trash that comes across 'their' desks and the declining
quality of the Hollywood film (excluding 'their' work, of course).
You can sell your soul if you want, but how about holding out for a reader
who knows quality (assuming you've written quality).
Then again, screenplays will never themselves be artwork...but that's a
whole other beast to pursue.
s T e V e
cook...@pilot.msu.edu
Daystar 2
In article <4skb1j$8...@chile.it.earthlink.net>, 71650...@compuserve.com
writes:
>Perhaps you should be going with your "accredited" instincts rather
>than with outside opinions about what you should write and what the
>"rules" are. That;'s not to say outside feedback isn't important,
>but consider the source and don't accept it all at face value. Any
>opinion is the opinion of one, and not even the opinion of one agent,
>or one producer contain cosmic truth.
>
>Hope this helps, if it hasn't just muddied the waters even more.
>
>-B.
Thematic statement: An empire built upon greed shall fall; whilst
ever-sacrificing love conquers all!
In the midst of an enchanted, mystical forest, a thunderstorm and
earthquake devastates a village, causing great confusion to the
inhabitants.
Natural disastors cease. Among the eerie silence and flickering flames of
destruction, (a young man) puffed with pride, proposes a plan as he
courageously points toward a cave, shouting, "I shall build our kingdom
upon stone!" The (people) exalt him. His (younger brother) angrily
opposes his plan. {Thus, the two brothers become enemies (younger brother
and one young woman are exiled from the village as they become ridiculed
for their own beliefs.) I've purposely left out some info on the reason of
the opposition from younger brother.}
I am SHOWING the circumstances and reasons that initially cause the two
brothers to become enemies. Several years later, after the kingdom has
been built, the' king' rules over his subjects, seeks a' queen' who
happens to be the woman who was exiled (he happens upon her beauty one
day) and begins the battle of ...(several conflicts between characters.)
Any qualms as to why I should exclude the natural disastor from my
beginning (given that I've actually written the special effects that
include a mysterious 'light' at the crest of a mountain who, later,
re-appears and transforms into (character) as a revelation to 'it's'
meaning.)?
And I'm trusting all of you! (smiling) Hey, I've given but a mere morsel
to you. But you get the idea?
Monika
ba...@csnsys.com
In article <4shho1$1...@news.istar.ca>,
crs...@inforamp.net (Gord Jeoffroy) wrote:
>days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
>
>>I'm an Accredited Graduate Screenwriter of Hollywood Scriptwriting
>>I've run into an almost total block because I was told that I should not
>>begin my story with a natural disastor.
>
>it was far from a work of art it certainly was a financial
>blockbuster.
I am amazed at what these supposed institutes tell their students, and even
more amazed at what they leave out. I received a script from another
(he claimed) graduate of the Hollywood Scriptwriting Institute that was folded
sloppily into a 5x7 envelope, typed with a malfunctioning typewriter, and
filled with spelling and grammar errors. The cover letter was also rather
unprofessional. If this 'school' can't even spend ten minutes on how to
professionally submit a script, then what are they really teaching?
As far as the 'natural disaster', WHY NOT? If it works, and it leads into a
good story, use it!
>Sounds like it would add a lot of drama at the beginning of the film
>and really hook the audience. Just make sure the people element is
>present (e.g., show the flood wrecking houses and sweeping children
>away from their mothers, rather than show just a lot of water).
>
>>I feel that the study of human
>>emotions and actions after a natural disastor are, in my script, a
>>necessary component of my theme. However, if I re-write (and I've tried
>>after several trashed pages later) it will change my theme into that of a
>>love story. Period. The focus changes entirely. I end up with a basic
>>fairy-tale romance.
>
>If you really feel this is true then your disaster definitely must
>stay in the story. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that it must
>come at the beginning of the story; it also doesn't necessarily mean
>that a producer or director will want to keep it in.
>
>>I've been told that my script reads like
>>mystical/magical fantasy and I should concentrate on writing this for
>>animation.
Mystical/Magical Fantasy:
Conan the Barbarian
Conan the Destryoer
Red Sonya
Willow
Labyrinth
Need I go on? I don't recall these being animated...
Daystar 2
In article <4sifoc$c...@news.pig.net>, "Didi S. DubelyeW" <dd...@praxis.net>
writes:
> Animation doesn't really have to hold to the same Laws of Logic,
> ie. Gravity that Live-Action Scripts do. It's often more Flowing,
>
>
> The writer can pay lots of attention to designing the character's
> looks, etc. and not worry about whether an Agency will be able to
> Package it with their stable of Talent!
>
> Just my 2 cents,
> Didi
That's it!!!!! Your '2 cents' is the key that I've been scrambling with!
Thanks...thanks a whole heck-of-a-lot!
I've been stuck between the 'Laws of Logic' and the "Mystery of Fantasy."
...and now I am free!
Monika
Daystar 2
In article <cookeste-180...@macuser4.com.msu.edu>,
cook...@pilot.msu.edu (s T e V e) writes:
>You can sell your soul if you want, but how about holding out for a
reader
>who knows quality (assuming you've written quality).
>
>
Ouch!!! But you've got a point to be reckoned with.
Monika
Patricia A. Swan
days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
>In article <4sj8bc$p...@news.kincyb.com>, Tin_...@news.kincyb.com writes:
>
>>Holy moly, there are schools devoted to this? Use your judgement.
>>There are no "rules" in drama, only what works.
>
>There are exceptions to every rule. However, as I was told...I can choose
>to send out numerous queries and take my chances...or I can write it the
>way 'they' want it and sell it. I chose the latter to get my 'foot' in
>the door.
>
>Monika
I've got one story right now that's being written as a novel
instead of a script because of the running harassment I took in a
screenplay workshop because I wouldn't can my 45 year old heroine
and put a cute 18 year old bimbo with big tits in as the lead
(BAYWATCH with chainmail and swords was basically what they
wanted me to do). They didn't care that there wasn't a *story*
left at that point. The teacher informed me that there are no
older actresses who could play the role that anyone would go to
see--yeah, sure. In about an hour I had a list of 110 of them,
and it started with Meryl Streep and Glenn Close and went from
there.
This is also the man who was so proud of the fact that the
screenplay he'd been shopping around was far too expensive and
logistically impossible to shoot, but I was getting ragged on for
being aware of production costs, and writing as much as possible
for standing sets in my tv scripts, and not calling for wild
effects and outre locations in my screenplay unless it was
absolutely dramatically necessary.
Can you spell *induced writers block* as far as that particullar
story was concerned? The characters literally crawled in a hole
and flatly refused to come out. So the script went into mental
turnaround until I could get the characters dragged out of their
hole. :(
Take care,
Pat
--
*Patricia A. Swan, moderator, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated*
* newsgroup submission address: ras...@solon.com *
* moderator contact address: rastb5-...@solon.com *
* personal contact address: zaf...@cygnus-wnc.com *
* listowner-B5 discussion list: cygn...@deepthot.cary.nc.us*
Daystar 2
I greatly appreciate all of your generous imputs. Now, I am
glad...relieved...that I did not sell out to an opinion of ' someone'
just because 'she' sits upon a 'Founder of' throne in the questionable
castle of 'HSI' in the kingdom of Hollywood.
Thanx for making my 'search and discovery' a wothwhile effort, indeed!
Monika
Daystar 2
>I wasn't aware there was a difference in writing for animation or
>writing for live action. THE SECRET OF NIMH would've been great as
>live action, if they could've trained the rats; FOREST GUMP would've
>survived as a feature-length animation, though I doubt it would've
>been considered a "mature" film.
Neither did I until Donna Lee of HSI requested that I 'think' and 'feel'
animation as I re-write this story. ????? Yep, for several days, I changed
my visual perception.
After I shouted, "I can't visual in cartoon!" My friends, family, and
both daughters have deemed me as 'nutty'.
Monika
Daystar 2
>I am amazed at what these supposed institutes tell their students, and
even
>more amazed at what they leave out. I received a script from another
>(he claimed) graduate of the Hollywood Scriptwriting Institute that was
>folded
>sloppily into a 5x7 envelope, typed with a malfunctioning typewriter, and
>filled with spelling and grammar errors. The cover letter was also rather
>unprofessional. If this 'school' can't even spend ten minutes on how to
>professionally submit a script, then what are they really teaching?
This goes up on my bulletin board under the caption, "Don't be Fooled!"
Thanx.
Monika
Robert Gregory-Browne
days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
>In article <31ED56...@earthlink.net>, Jason Ramsey
><sho...@earthlink.net> writes:
>>Arbitrary rules like, "Don't start your script with a natural
>>disaster," (based on what?) don't help the writing process.
>Based on the Hollywood Scriptwriting Institute rules in their lesson
>books; and as told to me by Donna Lee, the Founder of HSI.
I've gotta throw in my two cents worth. This is ridiculous. Start
your script however it needs to be started. The idiots who come up
with "rules" like the above never cease to amaze me.
rgb
Gord Jeoffroy
ba...@csnsys.com wrote:
>I am amazed at what these supposed institutes tell their students, and even
>more amazed at what they leave out. I received a script from another
>(he claimed) graduate of the Hollywood Scriptwriting Institute that was folded
>sloppily into a 5x7 envelope, typed with a malfunctioning typewriter, and
>filled with spelling and grammar errors. The cover letter was also rather
>unprofessional. If this 'school' can't even spend ten minutes on how to
>professionally submit a script, then what are they really teaching?
It's the old cliché at work: those who can, do; those who can't do,
teach.
--Gord
Gord Jeoffroy
days...@aol.com (Daystar 2) wrote:
>Neither did I until Donna Lee of HSI requested that I 'think' and 'feel'
>animation as I re-write this story. ????? Yep, for several days, I changed
>my visual perception.
THAT, at least, was good advice, especially in light of what Didi said
earlier about the physics and the flow of animation.
>After I shouted, "I can't visual in cartoon!" My friends, family, and
>both daughters have deemed me as 'nutty'.
Ah! Then you ARE a writer <grin>!
--Gord
Gord Jeoffroy
zaf...@super.zippo.com (Patricia A. Swan) wrote:
>The teacher informed me that there are no
>older actresses who could play the role that anyone would go to
>see--yeah, sure. In about an hour I had a list of 110 of them,
>and it started with Meryl Streep and Glenn Close and went from
>there.
Gah! I was told I'd be INCREASING my chances of a sale if I wrote
parts for older actresses. They've still got clout and the studios
still want to use them, but there aren't any decent vehicles for them.
(Case in point: look at how great Kate Nelligan was in MARGARET'S
MUSEUM.)
--Gord, who still has major hots for Charlotte Rampling...