No Meaner Place

February 24, 2010

“Roger Ailes, the head of the Fox News Channel, is denying reports that he sent President Bush a letter giving him advice on the war. In his own defense Ailes said I’m not in a position to give anyone advice, I hired Geraldo.” —Conan O’Brien

Filed under: Bernstein, Conversations With, Pilots, Pilots Spec Scripts, Writers — Tags: , — Neely Swanson @ 10:14 am

What’s Your Story? by Jack Bernstein

What: NBC has decided to do a low-budget equivalent of “On the Road” but their reporter is no Charles Kuralt.

Who: Extraordinarily self-impressed and ambitious, Steve Goodman worked his way out of his dirt-water anchor existence in Scottsdale by being in the wrong place at the right time during the 1995 Mexico City earthquake where he hires a cameraman to film him crawling out of rubble; and then again and again until he gets it right, complete with tear tracks on his dust encrusted face.

Steve: Lot of dust down here. (then) My dad died when I was seventeen.  He was a fireman. There was five alarm fire downtown and a woman told him her kids were still in the building so he went back in, even though the building was about to collapse. But there was nobody in there. She was mentally ill and who knows why she told him that.

Tears start streaming down his face, leaving tracks through the dust. There’s no attempt to cover them this time. Even his cameraman has a hard time keeping it together.

Steve: (cont.) At his funeral, the pastor said that you don’t get to choose how you’re going to die, you only get to choose how you’re going to live. He said, “Choose a life that’s filled with integrity, compassion and courage. Because in the end, what matters isn’t your success, but your significance.” My dad chose that life. I’m not sure I did, but I hope you’ll think I tried my best.

Steve panics as an aftershock rumbles.

Steve and his cameraman emerge from the rubble of the building quite easily. He angrily approaches two Mexican men and a young boy about seven who is covered in dust.

Steve: Look, José, I paid your kid five bucks to crawl in there and find me a safe spot that would—

Mexican Man: (interrupting) I’m Felix, he’s José.

Steve: You’re all José, okay?! (then) Do you have the video camera?

Mexican Man: Sí.

Steve: In English, José. This is American TV.

Mexican Man: Yes.

Steve: Okay. I’m going back in there. I’m going to dig myself out by hand. Make sure you get it on tape. I don’t want to have to do this twice.

As they head back towards the mountainous pile of debris…

Steve’s Cameraman: Hey, Steve, I’m really sorry about your dad.

Steve: What? Oh, that happened to a buddy of mine. My old man died in a bar fight with a dwarf. (claps his hands together) Alright José! Let’s make some magic!

From that point on, Steve’s career was strictly on an upward arc, from the covers of Time, Vanity Fair, and billboards that proclaimed: “Steve Goodman. The Most Trusted Name in News.”  Until an errant mike left on after the end of a broadcast caught Steve proclaiming that

“…people in Arkansas consider fifth grade to be their senior year…they think “Deliverance” was a documentary.”

Not known as a one-trial learner, Steve’s seemingly sincere, tear-stained on-air apology to the great state of Arkansas is undermined when, again off camera,

“…Jesus! I’m apologizing to people who pronounce the word “cat” with three syllables.”

By the time Steve is summoned to the office of the news division president, Wayne Julius, his newest comments, captured by a disgruntled stagehand, had already gotten 2 million hits on YouTube.  Despite his numbers, his Emmy and his status as one of People Magazine’s 50 Most Fascinating People, Steve is summarily canned and blackballed.

Unable to find work anywhere, Steve gets wind of a new Sunday morning show that Wayne will be launching and convinces Wayne to give him one more chance. This ends up being one of those “be careful what you wish for” situations because Steve will now be living on a bus, going to jerk water towns, taking orders from a producer who was once his very sexually harassed intern, and anchoring a show where they “pick a name at random out of a digital phone book of the United States” presumably because everyone has a story to tell.  First up, Eleanor Johnston, 90s, resident of the Walhalla, South Carolina Nursing Home.  Grandmother of the racist governor, Eleanor has quite a story to tell about how she kept her family afloat during the depression. The governor is not amused but Steve has climbed one step out of the ravine, with many more to go.  Next stop:  Fayetteville, Arkansas.

No Meaner Place: To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports on the death of the half hour comedy have been greatly exaggerated; well, at least as far as what’s out there in script form.  Bernstein’s premise and set up are exceptionally strong with an opening that grabs, surprises and amuses the audience.  The staged “rescue” is straight out of Geraldo and the portrait of Steve as an anchor is everyone’s vision of the local news pretty boy.  But giving the story a surprising level of depth is that Steve, though totally egocentric, oblivious and disloyal, is no Ted Baxter; he actually knows what he’s doing, he’s just too vain and arrogant to do anything but coast and believe his own press.  There is originality in the premise as this is both a “fish out of water” story, as well as one of redemption, with a heavy dose of cynicism.

Bernstein’s strongest suit may be his crisp, laugh-out-loud dialogue.  Upon meeting Booey Maguire, the new show’s bus driver/cook/handyman:

Steve: Hey, how’s it going?

Booey: I’m thirty five years old, I’ve got two masters degrees and I drive a bus.  How do you think it’s going?

Steve: Nothing wrong with driving a bus.

Booey: Really?  Wow. I feel so much better now.  Like my life has purpose.  Thank you.  I can’t wait to tell my family.

Most of us are Booeys, wingmen for the Steves of the world.

Life Lessons for Writers:  Lead with a joke; end with a joke.

“According to the New York Daily News, Geraldo said he is now carrying a gun, and he will personally shoot Osama bin Laden if he finds him. If Osama also has a gun, this could work out okay.” —Jay Leno

Conversation with the Writer:

Neely: Jack, as you know, I was a huge fan of this pilot when I read it at David E. Kelley Productions and your manager Ross was trying to get us to produce it.  Unfortunately that didn’t work out.  So did you take it to anyone else that year?

Jack: No.  I wrote the script during the strike and when the strike was over, David was the first to see it.  Then I ended up on “Monk” and was contracted to USA.  I could do features, but not TV as long as I was working on “Monk.”  I wouldn’t have been able to anyway because “Monk” took 100% of my time. Even if I had been able to set it up elsewhere, I was on set 65-70 hours a week.  I just couldn’t have done anything else.

Neely: That’s pretty all encompassing!

Jack: So the script just kind of hung around.

Neely: What about this year?

Jack: I had a two week window of opportunity between the end of “Monk” and landing on “Royal Pains.”  I didn’t know it was going to work out that way.  In those two weeks it went out to the four networks.

Neely: Any bites?

Jack: They all passed.

Neely: This is so NBC or even FBC.  How did they react?

Jack: I have no idea what they said about it, if anything.  “No” is “no” and the reasons why don’t change that, they just annoy you. It’s just one of those things. It was sort of a “bad news, good news” situation:  It didn’t get produced…and…It didn’t get produced; meaning it is still theoretically still alive.  There’s the old saying, “Dying is easy.  Comedy is hard.” I can walk into a room of 10 people and point a gun at them and  all 10 will have the same reaction. I can walk into a room with the same 10 people and tell what I think is the funniest joke in the world and 5 will laugh uproariously,  2 will chuckle, 2  won’t think it’s funny and I’ll have to explain it to 1 person – usually my mother.  That’s comedy.

Neely: The hope is that an unproduced great pilot script could be revisited.  That is always the case in features, but seemingly never the case in TV.

Jack: I once wrote a spec feature that was passed on at Gold Circle and then a few weeks later the producer got it to the head of Gold Circle who read it and loved it and we set it up there.  I did two rewrites for the director and then it went into turnaround.  I have it back and I’m ready to take it out again.

Neely: Well let’s talk a bit about inspiration.  Was there any particular incident that occurred that inspired “What’s Your Story”? Was it something that you’d been mulling over for a while?  What triggered this story?

Jack: It was a collision of a couple of ideas.  This was a character I really wanted to do – someone whose incredibly successful career is based completely on a lie. He’s taken advantage of it, but then his true self comes out and he has to start all over again.  The basis for the show within the show that the character is doing has its roots in “On the Road with Charles Kuralt, “Everybody Has a Story” by CBS correspondent Steve Hartman, who took his idea from a journalist in Iowa who wrote a column called “Everyone’s Got a Story.”   I took it from all three of them.

I watched Charles Kuralt when I was a kid and I remember the shock I felt after he died and it came out that he’d had a mistress “on the road” all those years.  That disconnect was a definite influence.  But my guy is definitely not Charles Kuralt by any stretch of the imagination.

Neely: Let’s talk a bit about you and your amazing background and I’m actually not talking about “Ace Ventura Pet Detective”, which we’ll discuss later.  What I’m talking about is the fact that you are a very well established 1 hour writer who has written a slam bang ½ hr. comedy.  Didn’t anyone tell you that it’s only ½ hour writers who can transition the other direction?

Jack: I originally came out here to write ½ hour.  My dream job would have been “Cheers.” I was writing spec ½ hours, spec “Cheers,” and spec features. One of the spec features brought me to the attention of Peter Roth who was running Stephen Cannell’s company at the time. I got my first job in TV at Cannell who was doing “light” 1 hours. The first show I did was “Sonny Spoon” starring Mario Van Peebles; Randy Wallace was running the show and he’s now one of my closest friends. We both wrote features that came out within a year of each other.  He did “Braveheart” and I did “Ace Ventura, Pet Detective.” You can see we have similar writing styles. A few years later, a producer I knew told me about a meeting he had with Cannell’s head of development.  The producer was being pitched a bunch of writers and he responded that they were all “TV writers” and then the head of development used Randy and me to negate his argument.

Neely: I guess I shouldn’t really be surprised by your foray into comedy.  You have credits in every genre – Sci/Fi with “The Dresden Files;” procedural with “NCIS”; and dramedy with “Monk.” Of course that’s just the tip of the iceberg. You’re on “Royal Pains” right now with a couple of my favorite writers – Jessica Ball who worked as a producer’s assistant and then the assistant to Scott Kaufer, the showrunning writer on “Boston Legal” the first year; and Jon Sherman (see the earlier article on Nomeanerplace about “The Compleate Pratt.”) who was a half hour guy who went into 1 hour.  How is the comedy infusing the drama on that show?

Jack: I’m actually surrounded by Jessica and Jon.  Jessica has the office on my left and Jon has the office on my right.  When I watched “Royal Pains” before I was on the show, I thought they had a great balance between the comedy and the drama, which is the hallmark of a USA show.  My goal is to not screw that up.

Neely: Any past TV experiences really stand out (for good or ill)? Can you elaborate?

Jack: I did a pilot with Steven Weber.  I love working with Steven because he is so talented.  It was called “The Expert.” It didn’t get picked up and is the single greatest disappointment of my professional career to not get that on the air.  And of course working with Tony Shaloub and the entire cast and crew of “Monk” was as good as it gets.  I guess another goal I have is to work with all the actors of “Wings.” So if you know how to get a hold of Tim Daly…

Neely: Why didn’t “The Expert” get picked up?

Jack: I think we chose the wrong network. We went to CBS and we probably should have gone to Fox, who also wanted to do it.  CBS had only one slot that year for a one hour show, it was on  Friday night and it went to a Glen Gordon Caron show that lasted one season.  It wasn’t their type of show.  Originally I had pitched it to Nina Tassler, one of the great TV execs, when she was at Warners and we sold it to CBS. I turned in the script to her and then didn’t hear back from her for a week. I was suicidal, thinking she hated it, my career was over, I’ll never work again, all those things that go through your mind. Then she called to say it was perfect and she didn’t have any notes.  She sent it to CBS and they passed.  I got the script back, then a year and a half later I had Steven Weber and Nina was at CBS and she said “Let’s do it.”  I don’t know what goes on in a network room when they’re moving their cards around on the schedule; but what are you going to do?

Neely: Clearly the elephant in the room, and at this point it’s a teenage elephant, is “Ace Ventura, Pet Detective.”  You mentioned it was originally a spec script.

Jack: It got lots of attention and most people loved it.  The place it had the most traction was at Paramount.  I actually got a hold of their coverage – I couldn’t have written a better or more glowing coverage myself.  At the top of the page it said “Fast, Fresh, Funny”; and then at the bottom it said…”Consider.”  Consider?? What’s a Recommend?  A lot of things have to fall into place to get a film off the ground.

David Nicksay at Paramount was a huge fan but he couldn’t get them to buy it.  About 6 months to a year later he left Paramount to become President of production at Morgan Creek.  “Ace” was either the first or second project he bought for Morgan Creek.

Neely: Wow! What a money maker that was for them!

Jack: Not according to their books.

Neely: I’m convinced that these guys keep 2 sets of books like the mob.  One for the shareholders and another for the creatives.

Jack: There are probably more than 2 sets. They put the Mafia to shame the way they do their accounting.

Neely: What was your original conception of “Ace”?

Jack: “Ace” was a combination of me wanting to do a comedic “Sherlock Holmes” and watching “stupid pet tricks” on Letterman.  My brother asked me what I was doing and I said a movie about a pet detective and he started laughing.  I asked him if he was laughing at me or with me and he said “a little of both.”  It was just something no one had ever explored and I happened to stumble into it.

Neely: What kind of currency did that give you?

Jack: Well, I sold a couple of features but none that got produced.  I’m not all that interested in writing other people’s ideas and I’m not interested in doing rewrites.

Neely: But isn’t that TV?

Jack: Not to me. TV to me…it’s part of it.  I draw different lines.  With features it’s one off.

Neely: I remember David Kelley talking about why he preferred TV and it was because with a feature it was over and done, but with TV he could continue to explore the characters.  You can do so much more with character in TV; you can continue to explore.

Jack: I feel the same way as David; he just says it more eloquently.

Neely: In looking at the credits on Studio System, I noticed that Jim Carrey, the star, and Tom Shadyac, the director, inserted themselves into the writing credits.  How did they change your original idea?

Jack: I originally wrote it as a straight drama.

Neely: Really???

Jack: No!  The great idea Tom brought to the table was changing the bad guy and his back story, making his motive personal. It was a great lesson. It’s better to have the bad guy have a personal motivation than a monetary one, which is what my original bad guy had.

Neely: How did the final credits read?

Jack: Story by Jack Bernstein; Screenplay by Jack Bernstein and Tom Shadyac & Jim Carrey.

Neely: Can you share any experiences, pratfalls, heartaches, joy from that film?

Jack: It was good and bad.  I spent time on the set and Tom Shadyac, in addition to being a great director is a wonderful person.  Jim Carrey was absolutely brilliant.  I’ve never been on a set and seen someone do what he could do.  He arrives on set and finds a piece of business to do that would enhance the scene.  It was astonishing to watch.

On the other hand, Morgan Creek is the worst company in town.  My bridges were all burned over there because I had the audacity to ask to be paid for the work I was doing (rewrite after rewrite). They were shocked because I was supposed to be grateful they were making my movie and why would I be entitled to be paid.  The minute I filed for arbitration my relationship with them was over. I won the arbitration, by the way.

Sometime around 1999, I was coming out with a new spec at a time when you could still ‘come out’ with a spec and go to lots of places, etc. Anyway, Morgan Creek caught wind of it and their Senior VP of Production who was a friend and with whom I still am friends, asked me to lunch.  And we had a good time and all, then as we were leaving, in the parking lot, he said, somewhat embarrassingly, ‘I gotta ask, I know you’ve got a new spec coming out.  Is there any chance we can take a look at it?’ And my response was, ‘Larry, if my children were starving, and you were the only company in town willing to read it or buy it, I still wouldn’t send it to Morgan Creek.’   The post script to that story is that the script (“Mike Margarita Must Die”) got multiple offers on day one. I sold it to United Artists and I was attached to direct (not that I have a burning desire to direct but I did have a burning desire to shave 2-3 years off the development cycle); I did one rewrite for them which they loved; we went out to actors; then UA. was collapsed into MGM.  The head of UA lost her job, and the script went into turnaround.

Neely: So what’s next?  Is there still life in the pilot?  If it’s only timing, maybe there’s another time?

Jack: Right now I’m noodling a new spec pilot.  I’m backing into the bad guy – using the lesson of making it personal instead of about money.  When I drive to work I think about it. I have the bones to it, but I’m still moving some pieces around.  And of course, there’s Royal Pains, which so far has been a fantastic experience and I’m looking forward to starting production in April.

Neely: I love your writing and I hope to see more. I’ll be sure to catch the next season of “Royal Pains.”  And please send me your favorite unproduced feature.

I’ve posted a new article on pilot writers.  Please take a look.

http://www.blssresearch.com/research-wrap?detail/C7/where_have_all_the_women_writers_gone_long_time_passing

February 17, 2010

“One of the women who claims she slept with Tiger Woods says they never talked about golf while having sex. However, contractually Tiger was obligated to talk about Nike, Gatorade and American Express.” – Conan O’Brien

Filed under: Conversations With, Evans, Pilots, Pilots Spec Scripts, Writers — Tags: , , , , — Neely Swanson @ 10:18 am

“Game” by Thompson Evans

What: Perini Sports Management Company is the largest sports agency in the world representing the most famous and most important sports figures of the last quarter century, but what really sets it apart is one player – Jay Marly, the company fixer.

Who: Jay Marly lives in the shadows reporting only to Alan Perini.  When a represented athlete gets into trouble, Jay is there. Chad Willis, all pro NFL Quarterback, recent recipient of the Walter Payton Award as the league’s most charitable player, is a spokesperson for Christian Outreach, spreading the liturgy and love of Christ throughout Latin America, and his wife’s new charity “Blaze a glorious Path,” an “organization dedicated to helping girls and young women make good choices through the guidelines outlined for them in scripture.” Chad has other ways of helping young women with their choices, but it involves drugs, alcohol and sex and not the scripture.  Jay, who sees most and anticipates all, finds Chad in a room at the Waldorf Astoria waking up on the king size bed, white powder bleeding from his nostrils and two porn stars comatose on the floor, one choking on her own vomit and the other without a pulse.  Springing into action, Jay clears the airway of the one, injects the other with adrenaline and instructs Chad to clear out immediately while he removes all signs of his presence.

The public perception of Perini’s athletes must be maintained and Jay is there, behind the scenes, for damage control and crisis management.  He maintains contacts with the great, near great and the humble by doing favors, providing product, or dispensing information because a favor given is a favor owed.  So important is that give and take that when an up and coming online tabloid, ZZM.com, is given the scoop about the homosexual preferences of Devin May, star NY Nicks player, they quash it when Jay offers them up an even tastier tidbit.  Jay, procurer for Devin’s “weakness,” having gone to Madame Ling’s Chinatown brothel for the services of “Wizard,” a young white junkie, had paid handsomely for his silence; now he knows that there will be more heard from Wizard unless he gets there first.  And the tidbit?

Chad, short of memory and limited in the grateful department, has been meeting with a rival agency, Silver Wentz, hoping for a bigger push in the endorsement arena.  Warned by Jay that there will be consequences if he jumps ship, Chad is convinced that he’s invincible and signs with the other agency, having been assured by them that Perini would never dare do anything because it would kill relations with their other clients.  Silver Wentz was wrong and Chad was arrogant because Jay immediately took the steps he warned Chad about.  He feeds ZZM.com the video tapes of Chad’s Waldorf encounter, and is behind the lawsuits filed against Chad by “Tigra Backdoor” and “Connie Cummer,” the professional names of the two porn stars, for reckless endangerment, furnishing narcotics and dozens of other claims.  In short order, Chad is dropped by the new agency, loses all previous endorsements, and is well on his way to losing his wife Hilary and half of all his possessions.

INT. CHAD’S MANSION, MASTER BEDROOM – NIGHT

In the huge bedroom, Hilary, Chad’s wife is balling her eyes out and throwing any heavy object she can find at Chad’s head as he stands across the room, athletically dodging each projectile and looking very guilty.

Hilary: Porn stars?! Cocaine?!

Chad: Baby, it’s all lies!

Hilary: When it’s the same story, over and over, your whole life?! You’re never going to change!

Chad: You’ve changed me! Christ has changed me!

The mention of Christ causes Hilary’s face to boil up with fury. She looks around the room for something particularly lethal to throw at Chad’s head, finally settling on A HEISMAN TROPHY on the bureau, holding it high in the air.

Chad: Oh, no, baby. Not the Heisman.

Hilary: Is this what really matters to you, Chad?!

Chad: No, of course not. You matter to me. And the kids. Our family. Nothing else. (beat) But, don’t get me wrong, the Heisman’s a big deal.

Hilary throws the Heisman as hard as she can. Chad ducks and the trophy sails through the window behind him in a crash of broken glass. It lands in the back yard with the sound of a dog squealing painfully.

Chad rushes to the window and looks down with deep concern on his face.

Chad: Jesus, baby, you killed Crackers.

Hilary: Get out!!!

No Meaner Place: As I’ve said before, there’s just nothing like a really juicy soap and this one is truly sudsy.  The world of sports is rarely entered outside the realm of telecast games and competitions; but given the sheer numbers of viewers, there doesn’t seem to be a lack of interest.  And what about sports scandals? In so many ways they are so much more interesting and shocking than those of actors and celebutantes if only because the general public seems to hold them to a higher standard.  Now why that is, I have no idea, especially since so many are a rather uneducated lot, despite the meaningless years in college, who often come from impoverished backgrounds and spend their new found riches like trailer trash hitting the lottery.  Were we not shocked by Tiger’s fall from the pedestal and Kobe’s trial in Denver?  How about Michael Jordan and Charles Barkley and their gambling addictions? These men were clearly in need of a fixer like Jay.

Certainly I’m not surprised that this wasn’t picked up by ESPN, especially after their aborted foray into scripted drama with “Playmakers,” the football themed series that threatened their relationship with the NFL.  The show was no great loss creatively, but the reasons for its cancellation show just how powerful the sports entities are.  Still, with a slight tone down (and the graphic homosexual act between Devin and Wizard was the only truly censorable scene) this could have been a good 10:00 show on network.  But then again, there is always the long arm of the NFL and the NBA to contend with.  I wonder?

Life Lessons for Writers:  Nothing is out of bounds, unless it’s off limits.

Conversation with the Writer:

Neely: I have to say I just loved the pure evilness of this.  It was so steeped in Old Hollywood and how they used to buy off the police and then swoop in whenever there was a mess to clean up.  The William Desmond Taylor murder in the 1920s was a perfect example of this.

Tom: I felt like the idea of a “fixer” was so right for today.  In the olden days you only had a few forces you had to control or pay off; but today it’s just infinite.  Think of the number of media outlets and the countless on or off the record sources out there.  Also law enforcement is much more sophisticated.  In today’s world a “fixer” would have to be an octopus.

Neely: Was this always meant to be set in the environment of major sports?

Tom: I toyed with it being in Hollywood but that’s just too obvious.  Professional sports are a better metaphor for what the series is about.

Neely: What is it about?

Tom: Branding.  The branding of professional athletes as a metaphor for the branding we all do of ourselves.  The distance between who we want to be and who we truly are.  For the main character, Jay, that distance is constantly evolving and mutating depending on his circumstances and the childhood demons he’s trying to reconcile.  In the end, I think the show is trying to say that our basic morality depends on how much distance we can close between our brand and ourselves but just like a professional athlete trying to live up to a two dimensional ad agency created character to endorse sneakers or sports drinks or sports watches, the endeavor is doomed to fail.

Neely: Without trying to sound too naïve, do you think this actually goes on?

Tom: Of course.  Don’t you?

Neely: The money that is involved is staggering.  Besides the athlete, who stands to lose the most?

Tom: The athlete’s agency, for one, but especially the corporate sponsor.  Ultimately, how much will Nike, by standing by Tiger Woods, lose?  It’s a good template.

Neely: Who was this taken out to and what was the reaction?

Tom: It went out fairly wide, mostly to cable and the producers who sell to FX and AMC – those kinds of places.

Neely: Any constructive notes?

Tom: Well, the reaction was that it was too dark; too subversive; that the sports world is too rarified.  I didn’t get any specific notes; the criticisms were general and to address them I would have had to change the whole thing.

Neely: The concern I voiced earlier was that the professional sports organizations have a way of acting in concert and although this is a delectable morsel for the TV viewing audience, the big organizations have every reason to want to quash this.  It is unfortunate but true that a great many viewers believe that what they are seeing on television is true or based on fact.  For both good and ill, people will view this as a “roman à clef.”

Tom: I was trying to write an authentic, compelling drama; in doing so you run the risk of drawing the audience in too close.  It’s possible they (the buyers) were running scared. Given the amount of money the networks have invested in professional sports, it wouldn’t surprise me.

Neely: So how can you save the concept and go forward?

Tom: I could always go back to the Hollywood scene but that would make it run into a whole new slate of problems.

Neely: Yes, but in Hollywood there’s this tendency to enjoy the pain of others.  Besides, no one ever sees themselves in the equation – the clueless belief that it’s always about someone else.

Tom: Yeah.  It might be more suited to “Entourage” in tone.  I hadn’t really thought about it.  It’s a conversation I need to have with Jack.

Neely: Let’s talk a bit about you.  I see you have had several features in development, but so far no produced credits.  How did you get started?

Tom: I went to Gettysburg College, a small college in Pennsylvania, where I majored in Political Science with an eye toward going to law school.  But I always wanted to write and when I had a near-death experience after college, I realized life was too short not to do what you love. After I got out I just started writing, and I wrote and wrote and wrote and then sent all my scripts out to everyone I knew in Hollywood – which consisted of about 3 people.  Eventually that got me a manager.  I was able to option a few things for very low money…and then I got my first sale to Escape Artists which allowed me to be a full time writer and quit my day job, so to speak (I was managing a telemarketing office).  My first sale was a feature script called “Wedlocked” in 2001.  Meg Ryan and Richard Gere were attached for a long time; but when after 5 years Meg dropped out, wanting to take her career in a different direction, the whole thing imploded, but it did get me an agent.

Neely: Which of your films is the closest to getting out of development hell?

Tom: “Hit List,” the script I wrote in 1995, and was the script that got me a manager, was just finished as a low budget.  We’re still looking for a distributor.  Minh Collins, a friend, scraped up the money to film it, and he directed it.  The rough cut is due in a couple of weeks.

Neely: What’s it about?

Tom: It’s a dark romantic comedy about a woman who goes through life making a list of all the people she’d like to see dead, from the guy who took her virginity to the guy who took her parking spot and everyone in between.  She ends up falling in love with a guy who unbeknownst to her, is a hit man.  He finds her list and makes it come true.

Neely: Was this based on any personal experiences?

Tom: In the mid 90’s I joined a cheap dating service because I was too broke to pay for any of the reputable ones.  This led to some incredibly scary and incredibly entertaining dates with women who tried to recruit me into drug trafficking rings, steal my identity and use me to make their federal prison inmate husbands jealous.  I’m really lucky to have lived through it.

Neely: You know, besides a movie, there’s a series there – one about the people who run a cheap online dating service and the situations that occur.  But anyway, moving back to you. I know you don’t live in these here parts – where are you based?

Tom: Oregon.  I lived in LA for over 15 years, but when my wife and I had kids, we wanted to give them a more rural upbringing and we couldn’t do that in LA.  I commute to LA one week a month.  I still own a house here and could relocate at any time if need be.  I do a lot of driving.  I’m still a working writer and I’m still living off the things I previously sold and optioned.  The reason I’m trying to break into television is because I’m hoping to branch out.

Neely: I notice a recurring theme in several of your screenplays – that of someone trying to overcome his or her past and make amends.  Is this theme personal and if it is, can you share some of the reasons?

Tom: The quest for redemption is as fundamental to our nature as human beings as the quest for love and far less attainable. It’s an instinctive drive that really lends itself to drama because it’s so perpetual and universal.  I’ve done things in my life that make me wonder if I’m worthy of redemption and wondering this inevitably becomes an investigation into my own soul which inevitably becomes an investigation into the nature of the universe.  There’s really no right or wrong conclusion to these investigations which is what makes them so beguiling.  And so much fun to watch.  I hope.

Neely: Let’s talk a bit about development hell.  What is missing from the equation of your films? Is it financing, although I notice that there are some fairly prominent financial backers on most of them, or distribution, or all of the above?

Tom: It’s a number of factors. Luck is certainly one, and I’ve had quite a bit of bad luck.  But the principle reason, if I had to pick one, is that I tend to write stories that are difficult to market and more and more financiers are only investing in stories that lend themselves to dynamic marketing campaigns.

Neely: I have the students in my class analyze the structure of Fox Searchlight because I want them to notice that the largest and probably most important department is Marketing and Publicity.  They, like most other studios, won’t greenlight unless they can visualize the poster.

Tom: I need to write something that lends itself to marketing.

Neely: That’s not to say you can’t be part of the process.  Looking back on your films, come up with your own poster.  If you can’t, who’s going to go see it?

Tom: True.

Neely: Any advice for the young writer/filmmaker?

Tom: If you feel it in your bones, never give up.

Neely: What’s in the hopper?

Tom: I have a bunch of things – several features.  My only TV is “Game.” I’m giving serious thought to taking the concept into an unexpected arena.

Neely: You might also look at selling it to British television. They aren’t so afraid of ruffling feathers as we are. I definitely look forward to reading more of your material in the future.  Thanks for spending the time with me. I have attached the link to the trailer for “Hit List.”  It’s hilarious and I think everyone will enjoy it.  Please keep me posted on the opening.

http://www.azmovies.net/hit-list.html

February 10, 2010

“Hey there Little Red Riding Hood, you sure are looking good. You’re everything a big bad wolf could want.” Sam the Sham and the Pharaohs

Little Red by John Kirk & Erik Gardner

What: Little Red Davies and her parents, Jennifer and Michael, are on their way to Grandma’s house when they are attacked by “wolves.”

Who: Driving in their Land Rover to Grandma’s house, Michael is much annoyed when all four of his tires blow out when they hit the camouflaged chain of road spikes at the entrance to Granny’s protected compound in the woods.

Michael: You said you told the old lady we were coming.

Jennifer: She promised to clear the path.

Michael: Look at this!  Shredded!

Little Red: Can’t we just walk the rest of the way?  The cottage isn’t far.

Jennifer: You stay right here on the path.

Little Red pouts, mumbles…

Little Red: I don’t like it in the woods. I want to see Granny.

Michael: I’m calling the tow service.

Jennifer: You know she won’t let outsiders on the property.

Michael: Yeah? Screw Granny.

But Little Red takes off on her own and it is then that death and destruction rain down in the form of a wolf; not just any wolf, but –

“The biggest in God’s creation, standing on its hind legs like a human, dripping saliva from eight-inch canines. Its eyes are like silver mirrors, dappling reflected sunlight over Red’s face.”

Acting on protective animal instinct, Michael and Jennifer run to Red’s aid.  Red is able to escape, at least temporarily, but both Michael and Jennifer are mauled and shredded by the Wolf.  Slashed by the Wolf, Red’s wounds miraculously heal instantaneously and her screams alert Granny, who

Steps out of the woods; tough broad, intolerant of shit, rigged out head-to-toe in camo. She racks an AK-74U assault rifle and blasts rounds into…The Wolf…Force of the bullets ripping into its chest lifts the Wolf off its feet and slams it down on its back…She approaches Camera, looking down at the dead wolf, O.S.

Granny: (to the Wolf) Born or bitten?

Now an orphan, Red is brought up by Granny who teaches her about the conspiracy and survival, as well as how to handle an M4A1 short barrel automatic and other helpful artillery. For ten years Granny prepared Little Red by challenging her in war games, but nothing prepared Granny for the day that Little Red informed her that she was leaving the compound to attend college.

Granny: I’ve never submitted your home-schooling records to the state. (beat) How can any college accept a girl who doesn’t exist?

Little Red: I hacked into the state university mainframe, created my own records.

Granny: You make your Granny so proud.

Red, following Granny’s advice, makes every effort to be inconspicuous, or at least as inconspicuous as a super hottie can be.  She barhops with her girl friends, she has a boy friend, and she attends classes; but when she donates blood at the blood drive the results trigger a panic that travels far and wide and leads to an SOS from Granny in the form of  four young survivalist conspiracy freaks, Axel, Izzy, Clarence and Squire, sent to bring Red to safety. Knowing that Red is still unconvinced, Axel plays a DVD presentation by Justin Marrs, the conspiracy theorist.

Justin Marrs: All of the organizations that rule the people of this planet, that keep us living like cattle…are werewolves.

Red shakes her head, dismissive.

Red: Another conspiracy crank.

Justin Marrs: Think, people. If you were an advanced species, relatively small in number, and you had the ability to take human form…would you sweep the streets… or run the world?

Arriving at the bunker meeting site, an abandoned Wal-Mart, Granny is nowhere to be found. The missing Granny only seems to confirm Red’s doubts about the guerilla group.  If only she knew that at that very moment two werewolves, Maya and Rausch, sent by international headquarters, are blasting Granny’s compound to bits.  Entering the cottage in human form they immediately set about mauling Granny.

Worried that Granny has not arrived at the compound, the group takes off for the cottage in their Hummer.  Arriving at the cottage, Red finds something with silver eyes lying in Granny’s bed.  It was Red that they wanted, Red, the only human in existence to have been slashed by a werewolf and not “turned.”  A full scale attack on Red and her posse ensues, with Red as the victor. But her most important task is to find and rescue Granny. Too late…Granny has transformed and Red must make the final sacrifice – emptying her Ruger into Granny’s chest, because the only way to kill a werewolf is shoot it through the heart or sever its head.  Bringing to mind Granny’s words:

Granny: Always empty your clip, Red. (beat) One thing the world will never run short of is bullets.

Axel and the boys lead Red back to the bunker.  No longer in any doubt about the threat facing the world, Red will lead their revolution against the forces of darkness.

No Meaner Place: In some ways reminiscent of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” and “True Blood”, but only as far as the creatures that inhabited both shows, “Little Red” is a tongue-in-cheek girl-as-action-hero slam bang filmic comic book.  Everything is black and white and red all over, if you’ll excuse the pun, and larger than anything life has to offer.  All the adults in responsible positions are evil – ministers, deans, professors – and the good guys are in a definite minority.  What’s not to like about a story where the secret password of the conspiracy theorists is “Dick Cheney is a werewolf”?  Red, like Buffy, is an empowered young woman with the ability to lead.  How could you not love a hummer-driving Granny who wears camo, booby traps her compound and carries an assault rifle with a bandolier full of ammo?  Pity she dies in the opener.  Of course there are the mystic mysteries, none of which were mentioned in the synopsis; one of which promises to be an Indiana Jones-type search for the holy grail through an Anasazi Navajo ruin. Pacing, character, thrills, chills, conspiracies, world domination, and werewolves, this series has it all.

“Little Red” would have been enormously expensive to make with the special masks and make-up needed for the werewolves and the location shooting and car stunts.  What is surprising, though, is that despite the expense no one nibbled on this one.  “True Blood” takes a somewhat intellectual approach to other worldly monsters in its racial prejudice take; “Supernatural” is fun in its alien-of- the-week approach; and “Buffy,” now gone, had that high school subtext viewpoint.  I’m shocked given the multi-network edict last season to find interesting takes on fairy tales that someone didn’t latch on to this ultra modern retelling of Little Red Riding Hood with its wolf, granny, and potential hunter-hero in the guise of State Trooper Burns. Rescuing mankind from world domination by an axis of evil would seem to be natural television story telling.  The lack of interest in this one leaves me dumbfounded.  I thoroughly loved this script and I absolutely hate Sci-Fi, proving once again that great writing is great writing.

Life Lessons for Writers:  Don’t go off the beaten path unless you’re armed with a great script and an AK 74U.

Conversation with the Writers:

Neely: Well the first question that jumps to mind is WHERE THE HELL DID THIS COME FROM?  Were you sitting around and discussing “Fractured Fairy Tales?”

John: At the time, Erik had this brilliant idea that coincided with a manager telling him that fairy tales were going to be hot.  The picture he had in his head was of Little Red Riding Hood with two silver six-shooters in her hands killing werewolves.  It was the perfect one sheet.  At the same time I had an idea for putting together a series based on conspiracies; also the 2012 Mayan Prophecy was getting hot (the Mayan calendar predicts that the world will end on the winter solstice in 2012).  What if you had a cabal of werewolves running the world – that would be the conspiracy element.

Erik: I was a big “Buffy” fan but I felt it was a bit hokey.  I had done a horror film for Lionsgate entitled “The Mangler Reborn” and thought: what if we did a horror TV show with a strong heroine, and instead of vampires, how about werewolves?  It wasn’t consciously thought to be a twisted fairy tale.  I mentioned my idea to John and we went from there.

Neely: It wasn’t a well kept secret last season that all the development departments were looking for updated (and presumably skewed or skewered) fairy tales.  Until this week, my assumption was that the only successful pitch was by Jason Katims, although I don’t see any sign of it having been approved to script.  Then on Monday (2/1/10) SyFy announces a MOW project on fairy tales that will include one entitled “Little Red” about a descendant of Little Red Riding Hood who fights werewolves.  That’s uncomfortably close, especially since I assume this script was pitched to them.

John: SyFy did get “Little Red” and we know many people at SyFy read the script.  Since their success with “Tin Man” and the general call for projects based on fairy tales, it’s a fair bet that they’ve read a dozen scripts and taken dozens of pitches based on Little Red Riding Hood.  You hear stories that development execs cherry pick, but I can’t say for sure that’s the case here. I’m curious to see if the SyFy film has an underground conspiracy element.   RHI had their own Red Riding Hood project.  They read ours, but only after theirs had already gone out.

Erik: Ideas are a dime a dozen, I guess.  It’s a let down but onward and upward.  So you come up with ten other things.  I’m curious if the SyFy show is the RHI picture that they were calling “Red.”  John and I have a deep rooted love for horror.  Are these other people rooted in the genre or did they just come up with a good idea?  Do they understand that horror is much like comedy from the standpoint of “set-up” and “pay-off.” You set up the scare and then there’s the pay off.  For instance, the set-up is a girl is walking down a dark hall and hears something; and then someone grabs her from behind – that’s an easy pay-off.  When you work with a partner it allows you to check one another so you don’t always go down the easy path.  I get really passionate about this stuff.

Neely: Regardless, their budget is very low and the concept is much more limited.  Let’s talk about Granny – what a fabulous character. I hated that you killed her! What was your inspiration?

John: Don’t worry; she’s not dead.  Remember, the only remains in the tiger trap at the end belong to the original werewolf from the teaser.  Both Granny and Squire are missing.  As an interesting aside, we named Squire and Clarence after two musicians in the Stone Roses; Axel and Izzy were named after band members from the original Guns ‘n Roses. I love Granny.  She took on her own life.  The advice she gives Little Red about always making sure to empty your clip because the one thing this world will never run out of is bullets is a brilliant philosophy. I remember looking up from the monitor and wishing I could live my life that way.

Erik: My Grandma, God rest her soul, was a tough cookie who everyone thought was so cute.  They just didn’t know. You didn’t dare cross her or she’d kick your ass.  So Granny was inspired by my Grandma. Kathy Bates would be so cool in that role.

Neely: I love the fact that the women are so strong.  It was certainly one of the great appeals of Buffy.  Sci Fi, and again I’ll emphasize that I neither read nor watch it, seems to be a bastion of male/female equality.  Why do you think that is?

John: Believe it or not, I’m not a big Sci/Fi reader either.  I just think that strong female protagonists draw a wider audience – I guess that’s the easy answer.  It’s about empathy.  A woman in danger is easier to empathize with.  The image of a woman who stands up for herself and gets herself out of danger is very powerful.

Erik: I don’t know.  Maybe they feel they can take more chances in Sci/Fi. But I do know,  a lot of women love girl power and Men love to see hot, ass-kicking women.  It’s win/win.  I’ve written this one horror pic where the main character is a guy but in talking it over with my girlfriend, I think I’ll change the character to a woman. It broadens the appeal.  Sometimes though, character gender just comes out of the story process.

Neely: A couple of questions here about the script.  If I followed it correctly, Catherine, the evil leader, might actually be Little Red’s mother transmogrified.  Does that mean she was born rather than bitten?

John: We want people to believe that, but Catherine is actually Little Red’s other grandmother.  Little Red was part of Catherine’s secret project – Red was born a hybrid. Season two would have revealed the many unsuccessful attempts at creating hybrids.  It’s like in “Alien Resurrection” where Ripley reappears and sees all the previously failed attempts to bring her back.

Erik: John has given it all away!

Neely: As any writer knows, you write your heart and your passion and your story and worry about production details after.  Clearly you wrote your passion, so let’s talk about production which, no doubt, freaked out any unimaginative development executive who read this.  This is an unbelievably expensive project.  How do you think this could get done on a network or cable budget?  Of course in an ideal world HBO would have picked this up and budget questions would have been (somewhat) moot; but even Showtime watches every penny.

John: This may have been partly our mistake. No one ever mentioned that the budget was too high. It was too easy for them to say “no” and move on to the next thing.  Did we get nibbles? Yes, but no one ever talked about us rewriting to lower the budget.  In reality, “Little Red” just got us the opportunity to pitch our other potential projects.  Our mistake was probably not addressing the expense.  We wanted the execs to get the full impact of our vision. Lots of people were impressed with the writing and our “world building” – where we set out the whole world inhabited by these creatures.  I was really proud of that. I’ve worked on shows where it was clear the showrunner did not know where the show was going – the season arc, the series arc, character development – and that was the direct reason for those shows failing. Erik and I agreed from the start that we would not make that mistake with “Little Red”. We knew we’d get that question during meetings: “So what happens in episode 10?” Not only could we tell them the story for episode 10, we could tell the stories for every episode through the first season.

Erik: Could it have been done on budget? Yes! I understand how these guys think, but I know how to do this on a present day “X-Files” type budget.  You’d crew locally; have some great EFX guys make the werewolf suits; blood is cheap; the vision is there.  CGI is what costs, as well as the time to render it.  I’d shoot on the RED (a camera in HD format) and shoot it practical.  The technology has advanced so far.  When shooting with the RED camera what you see is what you get.  You don’t have to wait and worry for the film to come back.  It’s just an easier medium to work in and can sometimes be ultimately cheaper.  Yeah, most people said “it’s big.”  The show might have sold if we could have pitched how we’d have filmed it.  But I have to say, the most constructive note we got was when we were told that you have to be able to take out the horror and still have a story there.  You need to think about what is there besides the horror; where’s the story? I think about that a lot now.

Neely: Have you given any thought to repurposing the material?  This could make a fabulous Young Adult book series – it’s a bit too graphic to be the successor to Harry Potter, but it certainly has the makings of a Twilight-style series.  And of course then you would get to double dip because this sure fire book series would lead to a features deal.  Or how about a feature in which the fate of the world is resolved in the end, but only to the degree that a franchise series of films is born?

John: Well, so far our agent, Jack Dytman, has been most interested in the television possibilities, but I think there are feature franchise possibilities too.  I do write fiction and have published some stories in magazines.  You’re right about the serial novel idea.  But Red’s future is up in the air because our writing team partnership no longer exists. Jack’s a decorated veteran in the TV business, and he’s been telling us for a while that he’s taken Red about as far as he can.  As far as I know, he’s never suggested that we try to turn the script into a feature spec.  Then again, I’ve never asked him if we should.

Erik: I’ve thought about doing it as a low budget horror film, so yes.  We also talked about making it a comic book or even a video game, but those talks haven’t really gone anywhere.

Neely: There are royalty arrangements that could be worked out with the two of you, even if only one of you is actively writing the books.

John: I don’t know much about book publishing so I’d have to educate myself about that.  You’re right, though, a book series would build the audience for the future film.

Erik: I used to write kid stuff, so a book series is a great idea.  I know John is a master at prose and has written a bunch of acclaimed stories.

Neely: Let’s talk a bit about you guys.  How did each of you get started?

John: Back in ’96, I moved out to Burbank, renting my own apartment, after an X-Files spec I’d written got me a TV agent.  Within two months of moving, I got my first freelance script, and in less than a year I had my first job as a staff writer on a show called “Roar,” a cult favorite that starred Heath Ledger and Vera Farmiga.  I went on to become a story editor and later picked up freelance scripts thanks to producers I’d worked with on previous shows.  In late 2004 my wife was diagnosed with a serious illness.  Over the next two years she endured five surgeries, all of them at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City.  I stayed with her throughout, but thanks to a good friend – another producer I’d worked with – I was able to keep a very cheap sublet in Los Angeles.  That’s how I was able to be out there in 2007 when Erik first talked about creating a show based on Little Red Riding Hood.

A producer named Tom Towler was the one who sent our initial proposal for the “Little Red” series to Jack. Jack liked the proposal but said he would not consider the project without a completed pilot spec.  He didn’t want to read any other specs and my resume didn’t matter.  To his credit, as soon as he read the pilot he signed us.

Erik: I went to film school in Philly; I wanted to be a DP.  I was supposed to go to Maine for this DP workshop where you got to work with all these famous DPs for a month, but the week before I was supposed to go, I was in a fork lift accident and crushed my foot.  I had to be off my feet for 6 months.  In the meantime a buddy said that we should move to LA when I got better; so we did.  The first thing we bought was a fax machine and I started faxing everywhere looking for PA jobs.  I was obsessed with Sam Raimi’s work and one day I got a call from Universal about a PA job for Renaissance Pictures, Sam Raimi’s company, on a TV series called “American Gothic.” I had a meeting with Robert Palm and Shaun Cassidy. I had no idea who these guys were, I was just excited it was Sam Raimi’s company. They interviewed me and liked me because I laughed so much (I’m sure it was because of how nervous I was).  I got to be their writers’ PA.  I was so nervous meeting Sam for the first time and he was so great. There were some terrific writers at the beginning of their careers on this show – Steve Gaghan and his then writing partner Michael Perry, and Mitchell Burgess and Robin Green. Steve De Jarnatt was a producer on that show and he used to come in with his theremin (it’s an electronic instrument that sounds like a singing saw) and want me to be his audience.  These guys fed me all this information – read this, write that, watch this.  It was all great! I took it all in.  And the bonus was there was lots of time to write. Shaun was my mentor, big time.  I was employed by him for 5-6 years. The last show I was on with him I was supposed to write an episode but I got a full time writing job on another show.  Honestly, I wish I would have stayed.

Neely: When did you become a writing team?

John: Erik and I had been friends for about ten years when he first suggested we work together on “Little Red”.  We spent time face-to-face working on the world building. We talked through the outline for the pilot, developed characters and broke stories for season one and beyond. It’s true, on a smaller scale that process goes on in staff story meetings all the time.  As I said, I’d never worked as a partner in a writing team before, and I’ve never sat in a room with someone and written a script.  I don’t think I could.  Our writing partnership wasn’t the usual in that sense, but I believe “Little Red” proved that it worked.

Erik: Two and a half years ago MGM was sold and we were all laid off.  John was out staying with a friend.  I told him my idea, wrote some pages up, and we said we should do this and see what we can do.

Neely: In looking at your credits, it would appear that you both have probably been working at other jobs as well since both of your credits show some significant lapses between writing jobs.

John: You can be quite successful and then have years out of work.  It’s tough and you need to have people around you who are willing to help and support you. I’ve been lucky that way.

Erik: On and off for the last ten years I’ve been working at MGM, first in development and most recently in distribution.

Neely: If you had to choose one medium to work in, what would it be and why.

John: I like both television and film.  I like the immediacy of TV; you write an episode and then a couple of months later you see it.  I have to admit that features can be like pulling teeth to get the script read, let alone getting it made.

Erik: I’m a filmmaker. I love to write and direct film and TV.  That’s my passion.

Neely: What else do you have in the hopper?

John: I’m working on a new pilot spec and I’ll give that to Jack before the start of hiring season.

Erik: John and I developed something for an independent producer who has studio ties.  It has a female heroine and it’s supernatural and I don’t want to say anything that will jinx it.  My name was thrown into the hopper as director for this presentation project and I’ve been working on it for free, so far.  I hope to finish in the next month so it can be sold to cable outlets. I’ve also been writing a feature and a TV pilot for Jack.

Neely: Thanks for your time and keep me posted on “Little Red”.  Really think about other ways to pursue this project.  I know there’s an audience, and probably a very big one, for your take on this story.  You’re writers, so write.

February 3, 2010

“Revenge is an act of passion; vengeance of justice. Injuries are revenged; crimes are avenged” – Samuel Johnson

The Associate by J. Mills Goodloe

What: Thom O’Daniel has just been accepted as an associate in the powerful DC law firm of Rittenhouse & Clover LLP.  All is not as it would appear.

Who: Fifteen years ago an innocent young man was sent to prison for a murder he didn’t commit.  An outsider at a prep school catering to the rich and powerful, Andy Linus was framed in the death of a female classmate during a raucous party at which he passed out.  By the time his case went to trial his alleged co-conspirator turned state’s evidence; Andy’s fingerprints and DNA were conspicuously at the scene of the crime; additional witnesses mysteriously appeared; his public defender gave up on him; and the judge sped through the trial eliminating most of Andy’s defense. Worse yet, as far as he was concerned, the letters he sent to his childhood sweetheart, Clara, all returned, unopened.  Angry, helpless and without protection Andy falls prey to guards and wardens intent on keeping him within their walls; but he remains determined to escape and clear his name, or at least discover who ruined his life.  Into his life and cell appears Milan Dotheo – a master of disguise and his future mentor.  Learning of Andy’s situation, Milan proposes an escape plan, predicated on Andy’s education.  Milan has kept a diary within his Bible, a diary that recounts his adventures and one that will reshape Andy into a brilliant man of the world.

Thom O’Daniel, Fulbright scholar, graduate of Stanford and Cambridge, with a three year stint in Paris at a law firm is the only associate candidate hired by Rittenhouse & Clover.  Step One of Thom’s plan has been set in motion, as he informs Gia, his young sister, partner and confidante, an expert in surveillance. At the law firm Thom insinuates himself onto the legal defense team of Gibson Logan, U.S. Congressman on trial for assault against a young female intern by pointing out that Logan is being defended by childhood friends, men whose familiarity with him might cause them to miss details. Thom quickly impresses the others with his preparation and knowledge. Working with the others on the team, Rex Filkins and Hutch Rittenhouse, son of the named partner and grandson of the founder, he observes that they begin to line up false witnesses beginning with a bartender who will testify that the girl had drunk 7 glasses of wine that evening.

Thom: Seven glasses of wine?

Hutch: …What?

Thom: I mean, at 110 pounds this girl would be unconscious.  Maybe the bartender should testify she had three, maybe four.  It’ll sound more plausible.

Rex thinks for a beat.

Rex: Re-interview the bartender. Have him testify the girl had four glasses of wine.

Thom and Gia’s carefully planted surveillance devices turn up the interesting detail that the law firm is on the Fed’s radar and that an FBI agent, Harold Jenkins, has been planted; more interesting is that the head of the firm is aware of it. In an “eerie” coincidence, Harold will later be killed in a convenience store robbery.

Relationships at the firm become more complicated when Preston Rittenhouse, name partner, anoints Rex as the next partner instead of his own son. Hutch had virtually guaranteed his beautiful wife that he was assured of this partnership.  Not only will this be devastatingly embarrassing for him but will cast a pall over the black-tie charity event they will be hosting that evening.

Thom is nearly undone when he is caught with a stolen file on Logan revealing Logan as the co-conspirator turned prosecution witness in a murder long ago, the murder for which Andy Linus was convicted.  Finessing the situation, Thom is able to use the file to uncover the nuances of the old case.

Thom: Andy Linus was convicted in a felony criminal case in which Gibson was originally included as a codefendant but later re-categorized a witness. So are you going to finally tell me what this is about?

Hutch: Andy Linus was a kid from school.  He was the son of an administrator, a kid from the wrong side of the tracks who we barely knew and who never fit in. One night, I guess something snapped – jealousy, envy, resentment.  Who knows what was going thru this guy’s head. He killed a fourteen year old girl and left her body under a bridge.

Thom: Did he confess to the crime?

Rex: He didn’t need to confess. His blood and fingerprints were all over the crime scene. He was convicted. He was sentenced. End of story.

Thom: Is there a chance this scumbag Linus might resurface? Because if he does, our defense will be blown to  hell.

Rex: You don’t have to worry about Andy Linus showing up.

Thom: How can you be so sure?

Rex: Because Andy Linus is dead.

Moving ahead with the defense, Rex has located a security tape from the garage on the night the assault allegedly took place and plans on asking for a dismissal based on the tape.  Hutch strenuously objects because it could backfire; they could win just on the elements.  Rex, the new partner, disdainfully dismisses his friend’s concerns, further exacerbating their rift. Thom, however, discovers that Rex had been looking at the tape from a different floor and that the real tape reveals the assault in gory detail.  He surreptitiously substitutes the tapes and assures jail time for the Congressman.  Step Two has been accomplished, but there are still many more steps to go in his pursuit of justice and retribution.  Step Three is set in motion on the night of the charity event when he “re”-introduces himself to the love of his life, Clara, now the wife of Hutch.

No Meaner Place: Legal shows are the fodder of TV land and this one breaks out by combining internal mystery and suspense with the legal workings of a law firm and the courtroom.  The suspense is not whether Andy/Thom will be caught, because therein lies the 100 stories, but how he will achieve his goals and how elegantly he will be able to do it.  This is surely not “convict a partner a week,” as we’d soon run out of stories, but it is a marvelous platform for unveiling and unraveling the corrupt practices of power in an extremely interesting venue – Washington.

An additional hook is in the flashback, a technique that I generally don’t enjoy, that would serve to fill in more of the interesting details of how Andy Linus became Thom O’Daniel – an “Educating Rita” with a sinister side.  There is actually no limit to the back story with its shady mentor, Milan Dotheo.  And think of the locations – prison, Switzerland, Paris, law school, Washington. Revenge, reward, adultery, closeted homosexuality, duplicity, family dysfunction, justice; what more could you ask for?  Network or cable, it fills a lot of gaps.  Once again – what am I missing here?

Life Lessons for Writers:  If it was yours to sell in the first place, sell it again. Someone out there is just waiting for the opportunity to prove that the last regime made the wrong choices.

Conversation with the Writer:

Mills: I hadn’t looked at this script in a really long time when I got word that you wanted to write about it. I think the dialogue could have been better and maybe I could have made it a bit less confusing, but overall I think there’s a great show in there. So thanks for making me revisit it and thanks for expressing such confidence in it.

Neely: How did this project come about?

Mills: I had pitched something to Fox Studios and they liked it; but when they took the pitch out it was passed on in record time by 3 networks.  Fox gave me a blind script as part of their commitment and I wrote “The Associate” for them. It never got off the ground but it will come back to me in April.

Neely: Maybe they were worried about the 100 stories.

Mills: Don’t know.  I only took it to the 4 broadcast networks.  I should have taken it to cable.  I sort of soured on the whole process and went back to the feature world that I understood better.

Neely: The bar for good legal shows (that was a terrible pun, wasn’t it?) is quite high and you jumped over it with this one.  I saw the influence of traditional legal shows as well as films like “The Usual Suspects” and “Inside Man.”  What inspired you to write this one?

Mills: I had done an adaptation of a non-legal John Grisham book – Bleachers – which, coincidentally had a character named Neely.

Neely: Let me guess.  It was a boy and his full name was Cornelius.

Mills: Right! Anyway, I wanted to know more about Grisham’s writing, so I started reading his legal thrillers. I thought The Firm captured lightning in a bottle. Why not do The Firm for television? Around that time I was also considering doing The Count of Monte Cristo as a feature, and that became my primary influence.  Structurally, “The Associate” is more like The Count of Monte Cristo than The Firm.  It’s about someone who’s one person and then he’s wronged and comes back as a different person to take revenge.  I also knew I had to add a procedural element.

Neely: Besides the partners, who else will Thom avenge?  After all, he can’t always undermine the firm’s cases.  I also loved the possibilities of uncovering the circumstances of the FBI agent’s death as well as the juicy details of what was being investigated.

Mills: Actually I had 70 people on a bulletin board that Andy had made while he was in prison – judges, DAs, cops, wardens, and then leading up to the clients of the firm in DC, all of whom were complicit in sending him up or keeping him there.  This law firm has files on everyone, much like the mob controlled law firm in The Firm.  Andy/Thom is a mole.  But there is ambiguity because a lot of the people he thinks were wrong, weren’t.  There are shades of gray.  He’s judge and executioner and sometimes the lines aren’t so clear cut.

The “A” story would be about The Firm; the “B” story would be The Count of Monte Cristo.

Neely: Who was this written for? Did you get any good notes?

Mills: As I mentioned, this was part of a blind script deal.  Their main edict was that it had to be procedural with soapy elements.  I wasn’t comfortable with some of the soapy elements, like the father/son conflict; the closeted homosexual; the home life difficulties. I would like to make it a cable show and pull back on some of the soap.

Neely: How close did this come?  Any thought on trying again with it or putting it into a different medium – mystery/thriller novel or even feature film (where the odds are just a slim if not more so than television)?

Mills: The networks passed on it very quickly.  I didn’t understand the process.  You just sit by the phone and wait to hear if they bought it; unlike in features where you have some interaction with the potential buyers.  I have thought of making it a feature.

Neely: But if you made it a feature you’d have to tell the story linearly and that would take away one of the most interesting elements – the back and forth between Andy’s ongoing learning process and the present day with Thom.  With a novel you could weave back and forth in time and be allowed a more expansive expository style.

Mills: That’s true, but I’d like to think I could sell it as a modern take on The Count of Monte Cristo. As for a novel, that would take at least three years, but, yes, there’s a lot I could do.  One thing that really annoyed me about television was the 6 act structure.  I was always being told that I needed to have a POW element before cutting to commercial.  It seems so arbitrary.

Neely: How did you get started?  I noticed that before this, your whole career had been in features, starting as Richard Donner’s assistant.  Let’s talk a bit about your beginnings in the industry.  What was the first job you got in the industry?

Mills: Working for Richard Donner was my first job.  In college, I went on an overseas program called “Semester at Sea.”  Chris Silbermann, now one of the heads of ICM, was a classmate and his dad, a senior marketing executive at Columbia, got me the interview.  I didn’t know anything about anything and started as Donner’s third assistant, eventually graduating to producing some of his films.  I left in 2000 because I had written and directed an Indie called “A Gentlemen’s Game.”  Richard was very helpful to me and I had learned as much as I could.  It was time for me to be my own man, which he encouraged.

Neely: Working as a director/producer’s assistant is usually more the path for a producer.  What did you do for him and how did that lead you to writing.

Mills: Writing was always my chosen profession.  Working with Richard brought me into contact with some really talented writers like Brian Helgeland, Channing Gibson, Al Gough and Miles Millar.  Brian wrote “Conspiracy Theory” and I was a producer on it.  Channing, Al and Miles wrote “Lethal Weapon 4.”  I learned from them.

Neely: It was quite a long apprenticeship.  How did that first screenplay assignment come about?

Mills: When I left Donner it was to direct a film, and the only way I would be allowed to direct was if I wrote the script.  I found a wonderful novel called A Gentlemen’s Game and that was the start of my writing. It was financed through private equity.  I raised the money and made the movie.  Then I wrote a second script called “August and Everything After” that was supposed to be my second film.  The script was very well received but I still haven’t found the funding.  I just haven’t been able to put the whole thing together.   Annette Benning and Pierce Brosnan were interested in starring.  In any case it helped me get my agents.  It’s also when I realized that I needed a career and was able to get some writing assignments.  The Grisham book, Bleachers, was my first assignment and then I was well on my way making a living as a writer.

Neely: I noticed that you have quite a few scripts in development.  How many are on the cusp of production and what is in development hell.

Mills: “Wonderful Tonight” is pretty active and so is “Playing for Pizza,” another Grisham adaptation.  “Bleachers” is stalled because it was with Revolution Studios and it took quite a while to extricate it.  Phoenix Pictures is now trying to put it together.

Neely: Are you still interested in developing for television?

Mills: Yes.  I’ll just have to approach it differently.  I’ll definitely jump in this year. I think my writing has definitely improved since I wrote that draft – or at least I’d like to think that my writing is taking that arc. I’m glad you prodded me into reading “The Associate” again.  I know just how to do it better this time.

Neely: How do you view the writing process overall?

Mills: I’ve had a good run and I hope it will keep going.  I have real hopes for getting “Wonderful Tonight” off the ground.  Christine Jeffs has come on board to direct and we’ve had some great meetings. She did “Sunshine Cleaning.” I’ve written 14 or 15 drafts of “Wonderful Tonight.” There are some scenes I’ve gone over hundreds of times. I really love this piece.

Neely: So are you still in touch with Chris Silbermann?

Mills: We fell out of touch over the years but we’re going to reconnect soon.  I just got an email from another friend from the “Semester at Sea” who has proposed a reunion.  So it’s going to happen.  I think of Chris’ father so often; he was such a talented and generous man.

Neely: Let me know how it goes. Maybe there’s a script in this reunion.

Tomorrow I will be posting an article on Baseline Studio System entitled “Women Can’t Create and White Men Can’t Jump.” This year’s pilot season has been horrible for women writers.  Please read and let me know what you think.

http://www.blssresearch.com/research-wrap?detail/C7/women_cant_create_and_white_men_cant_jump

neely@nomeanerplace.com

Powered by WordPress