What sort of script competition would you like?
We are going to run a screen-writers competition with some partners later this year. You know the sort of thing, we’ll set a brief of some sort, have submissions and then winnow the field, the winner gets optioned and comes along on our development track with a shot of making their film.
The question we are knocking about, is what sort of brief for spec scripts is most helpful?
Before everyone rushes to answer, I think its worth abstracting the problem a level, the key question in this sort of thing is:
- What sort of constraints in a brief encourage creativity and interesting outcomes and which sorts inhibit it?
In my experience both as a writer and having run competitions like this before, there are certain types of criteria that are freeing and others that are limiting.
I think the difference between them is a conceptual one: the distinction (not mine but Guillemo del Toro’s, and Aristotle’s before him, but its useful so I’m nicking it) between the core genesis, the heart, the controlling idea of a story and the syntax that is then utilized to tell the story.
The former is the inviolate idea that comes from a writers psyche / muse. It doesn’t arrive ready formed, they come out of long invisible and unfathomable gestation processes in writers heads. They come from forgotten nightmares, buried neuroses, long abiding passions and pre-occupations. Orson Welles’ obsession with fame; Aaron Sorkin’s issues with displaced fathers and the love that can exist between groups of colleagues; Joss Whedon’s fascination with the underestimated power of women; Almodovar’s love of mothers; del Toro’s fascination with the distinction between being and becoming. These are the ideas that inform all these film-makers films, no matter how different their ultimate expression in different types of films.
This is the bit that I think we can’t and shouldn’t prescribe, because it would encourage false or forced entries. We want people to write about what’s inside them, not what we think people should write about. So I would beware of prescribing the themes we want people to write about. We don’t want to puppet writers.
The SYNTAX of a story, however, that is something that is more about audience / market / style then it is about guts and internal process. Orson Wells talks about fame and power as eloquently in KANE as he does in OTHELLO; Almodovar has explored the power of women in melodrama (TODOS SOBRE MI MADRE) and in sex comedy (TIE ME UP TIE ME DOWN); Wheedon deals with women’s power and the politics of it in both teenage vampire fantasy and in Sci-Fi Western (FIREFLY/SERENITY). Sorkin is exploring the same type of philia today on the set of Studio 60 as he did for 4 years in the White House. The tensions between Fascist political ideology and the freedom of fantasy that everyone loved in PANS LABYRINTH were already being explored in HELL BOY. (and apparently in its sequel!)
By Syntax, therefore, I mean choices of: GENRE, LOCATION, SETTING, MILIEU, TONE, FORMAT and PHYSICAL or CONCEPTUAL Limitations. I think this is where we should focus our criteria.
In as sense, there is nothing terribly radical in this thinking of mine. Its just the difference between a teacher who asks his class to write a sonnet about anything they want, but making sure they respect the form of the sonnet, and a teacher who asks everybody to write a poem about a frog who became a prince. The results of the former exercise tend to be more interesting, more varied, and have a greater chance of uncovering a real poet.
At least that’s what I think. What do other people think?
February 22nd, 2007 at 11:55 am
I think your instincts are spot on regarding competitions. Criteria that are too prescriptive (eg it MUST be a contemporary horror set in the Lake District) are only really useful if you happen to have that ramblers vs the undead screenplay already in your back pocket. I think specifiying a genre can be useful, but only if the organisers of the competition genuinely want to see only rom coms or thrillers. Your analogy of the teacher who sets a framework for his pupils rather than a specific story definitely applies.
If I were running a competition I think I’d want to be surprised and delighted by what came in, so I’d try to keep the brief open but intriguing eg. ‘the things people do for love’ or ‘Realising the your world isn’t as it seems’. The latter could generate anything from Matrix-style stories to conspiracy thrillers to someone simply finding out something shocking about the person they love.
Personally I love competitions. One of the mist terrifying things for anyone who writes is infiinite time and absolute freedom. Sometimes deadlines and restrictions are your friend…
March 5th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Check out Lars Von Trier’s The Five Obstructions for a great exercize in brief/ syntax vs. something deeper about the heart of the story. Von Trier challenges Jorgen Leth to remake a short film he did in the 60s five different ways, with five different sets of constraints. The results are quite interesting in terms of both how to get around restrictions of implementation and still tell the same story, and also how the they do affect the final product.
March 6th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
My comment doesn’t actually relate to the script competition blog (though i appreciated it greatly) but I couldn’t find a direct email address & I have a request for you…. - your thoughts on the recent blocking of GAAP funds by the government. Does this change impact you directly as a producer in the UK? Is slingshot run in such a way that it is not effected by the recent changes and prevention of sale & leaseback?
I’m curious because the Variety’s and Screen International’s are painting a very negative, dramatic picture with this news simply about how much money will not be invested in the UK industry & that it makes it ‘nearly impossible for the independent producer’ etc etc, so was just wondering what your perspective on it was…
March 8th, 2007 at 9:47 am
So we’ve decided on our competition theme…. “Teen Hitchcock”. Which we are delighted with. Watch this space (and the UKFC website) for further details.
March 21st, 2007 at 12:10 am
What’s with “teen” - just a reminder that (a) you don’t have to be young to be (i) a new-comer or (ii) talented; (b) There are more oldies than youngies.
Maybe next time “Pensioner Tarrantino” next time?
March 21st, 2007 at 8:38 pm
I think (or at least hope) that the ‘teen’ refers to the characters and world of the story rather than the age of the writers/directors.
While I agree that ‘oldies’ are often ignored as a film-going demographic, but if we’re talking about British film, teens are even more ignored than older people in terms of being depicted on screen.
To generalise hugely for a second; ‘Venus’ ‘The Queen’ amd ‘Mrs Henderson Presents’ all had clear appeal to older people, but it’s very hard to think of the recent British teen flick that’s a true equivalent to ‘Mean Girls’ or ‘Brick’. In fact, you have to go all the way back to ‘Quadrophenia’ and ‘Gregory’s Girl’ to find a teen movie that’s really connected in a big way.
I think it’s a top title!