Damon and Affleck last film is a perfect example of selling out to Netflix to make their $100 million movie "The Rip". I think it's arguably the worst tgebg they've ever done.
I can't even express how deeply the sentence, "Life is too fragile and brief to waste time making meaningless shit," resonates with me right now, having just quit my job as a well paid TV writer to go back to earning nothing to make indie films I actually care about.
Power to you, Corey! Big moves pay off :))) wishing you all the luck in the world and please lmk if I can help in any way. Thank you so much for reading and sharing your response! Your engagement means a lot to me.
Thank ya, sir! Btw I so very much dig your campaign for Atomic Fondue and I’m planning to contribute in the coming days :))) It’s super fun and clever! Very inspiring. I’m taking notes!
You have no clue how much this means to me. This is exactly my thought process.
As a writer coming from a totally different field (the social sciences), my goals have been to provide accurate information of how society functions, the systems that impact it, and how each of us has a role in improving it in multiple modalities. I have researched for years, developed courses, taught students, etc. and through that found interesting ways people learn. But just like in academia where the message is that only through writing papers for journals can we really make an impact in society, I have found the same mindsets in almost every industry.
The route is either to be excessive and build a following on SM to make a point, hope you don't lose yourself, and get funded through ads and spamming what's trending, or just already have resources and connections to follow what's trending or whatever you want (which is often just whatever everyone else is already doing. 🙄) Either way, these almost unrealistic blueprints that are meant for a mindset that is only reliant on what is popular for the sole purpose of getting rich is part of the core problems that effect us socially.
I want to comment on everything you said, but it'd get too long. So, I'll end with this: I am working on a script for a TV series now that I plan to start finding funding for, hoping to reach half a mill (less if I can figure out how to do more things myself and with my cousin). Sometimes I want to give up due to many issues, but when I look at what is going on in Hollywood and in many Asian countries due to how big spenders like Netflix, Disney, Apple, etc. have controlled the field (also how, sometimes, people get greedy), I am grateful for my creativity and lack of interest in making it big just to fit a mold unlike myself.
If this is the only script I write, I'll be happy to get out what I've been trying to say in other modes to reach people in a way I hope resonates with them and provides a pathway and hope for an improved future. If there is no recognition, but I have fun anyway, is that "hobby" really a bad thing? Is it so bad to induce no harm and hold joy for the sake of the craft?
Awwwww Asia! Your response means so much to me! And I must say, as somebody with a background in education as well, I really love how you frame this in the context of the different ways in which people learn. I too have been really interested in my own work to explore ways for pedagogical models to interact symbiotically with filmmaking.
And then keeping it fun and not didactic! How can the medicine taste delicious?
And then it's super interesting to bring this line of thinking to the importance of supporting a diversity of stories and styles.
And also, like, the world is so so complex. We should be making work that embraces complexity, and encourages the viewer to be more comfortable dealing with complexity.
About your TV series script. I'd love to learn more about it.
PLEASE PROVIDE ME WITH ONE SENTENCE AND I WILL IMMEDIATELY DETERMINE ITS VALUE IN THE MARKETPLACE.
hahahahaha of course just kidding. Shoot me a DM if you want! I'd be happy to just learn more about the project and spitball and support however I can :)
And remember that a TV pilot can actually be lots of different things on its journey to the screen :)))
Thank you again for reading and sharing your thoughts, Asia! I look forward to a continued conversation.
😆 Just one sentence? It took me 6 months to shrink it down to the "formula." It was like a MadLib contest. One adverb + 2 but no more than 5 characters + one location. Like, what!? Haha
I feel so relieved that you're using language I understand. Haha My research is in complex and dynamic systems and trying to simplify that is like teaching a toddler to juggle while reading physics and dancing. 🙃
You should certainly experiment. When I watch (really study, haha) South Korean and Chinese shows, they have this interesting way of making a point. Chinese are good for complex systems, SK for processes. Even anime has an intriguing way of expressing emotion and lessons. My son and husband watch them and I used to laugh at it until I gave it a chance. I ended up using those shows and lessons to teach history, government/politics, and other subjects to my high school students. It was the funnest research I've done!
Anyways, I will take you up on that offer. It may be a while, but I will. Your perspective is refreshing. Thanks again!
Nicely written, I love the Miyazaki misunderstanding, it really shows behind the curtain. These blockbusters have gotten more and more out of touch over the years, turning more regular people against going to the movies. Thanks, Adam!
Thank you, Alan! As you know from the essay, I’m totally with you! Whenever I hear about a massive budget, I’m like “jeez, you could’ve made fifty smaller movies for that same amount”. I think that the more movies attempt to be for everybody, the more they end up being for nobody.
This entire essay conveniently ignores a section of mine that is relatively precise about what I believe a commercial movie actually is, a part of the definition you seem to ignore and then fall victim to the same fallacy that I call out in the text itself:
"And one more [question you should ask yourself when you're trying to assess whether the idea you're working on is 'commercial'], ONE THAT PEOPLE TRY TO PRETEND RUNS COUNTER TO THE REST [caps here for emphasis]. It doesn’t:
IV. THE DNA
Is it yours? Would this be flatter, safer, less funny, less scary, less interesting if someone else wrote it? Commercial doesn’t mean generic. It doesn’t mean male or white or straight or Christian. It can be any of those things, and it can be everything else too. Commercial just means that you built the door wide enough that strangers want to pay to walk through it.
Once it is and the premise is saleable, (please) bring everything else you’ve got: your obsessions, your politics, your humor (please bring your humor), your weird little takes about the world and what it means to be human. That’s what takes people higher on the way out. But if you can’t get them in, none of it matters."
I'll also add that there seems to be a bizarre preoccupation with being "cool" in this and elsewhere in your comments, which is odd, because it's a term I've never invoked nor particularly care about.
My essay does not ignore that, Franklin. In the second paragraph I say "My critique is about the “moral” framing of his argument, not the screenwriting tips (which are useful)."
My argument is much more complex and multi-faceted than "commercial movies are generic." I am careful in my essay to make space for screenwriters who naturally prefer to write broad/big-budget/four-quadrant films. I believe those are a part of a healthy, robust, diverse ecosystem, and I personally enjoy many of them. If someone wants to write a superhero movie, great! Just do it first and foremost because you're passionate about it. And yeah, of course "bring your own DNA" to it. Why wouldn't you? Who on Earth would encourage a writer to do otherwise? We can certainly agree on that.
But like I say in the essay: "I am against the idea that pros write eight-figure films and everyone else is a hobbyist."
I don't think there is anything inherently moral about that mindset, and I do not think it leads to the "highest art".
Your advice to inject personality into commercial work doesn't really acknowledge or respond to the thrust of my critiques. For example: what do you think of my claim that "reality is so much more complex and full of possibilities than this [professional-hobbyist] dichotomy suggests"? Or when you claim that films cost "tens of millions to make and market", what are you saying about the films and filmmakers operating (well) below that threshold? And what about the Miyazaki of it all?
As to your observation that I use the word "cool". Um, yeah. You got me. I also used the word "art" 14 times. You use the word "commercial" 13 times in your essay. But I wouldn't bother basing a critique around this useless observation.
I really truly liked your post/idea today that the world needs a Ruth Carter menswear line.
It is evidence that you def know what cool is, and that it matters to you at least a little :)))
I sincerely appreciate you engaging, Franklin. I think this is a very important conversation to have as we all work together to imagine and build a better film future.
LOL Franklin what are you even talking about? The inadequacy of your response to my critiques is STAGGERING. I guess it’s true what Upton Sinclair said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
You seem to believe for some reason that I owe you deep engagement on your terms (untrue) and that my unwillingness to engage beyond noting that all of your responses indicate a preoccupation with the notion of cool represents some sort of victory for you (also untrue.)
I will simply say this:
My essay was written in an attempt to distill more than two decades of experience into concrete guidance to anyone who hopes to keep a roof over their head and food on their table via their writing for the screen. The distinction between professional and hobbyist was deployed insofar as I wanted to make clear to those people how to navigate the chasm between the two if they had interest in doing so.
Personally, I don’t have much use for that distinction - or labels, like cool, generally - beyond that sort of communication.
If you’re lucky enough to make art without a financial need for substantial compensation for it, bravo and brava. I wish you the best. Call yourself whatever you want. Truly. I will be cheering you on. I’m simply uninterested in debating these sorts of things outside of practical realities.
Thanks so much for the response, Franklin. I am an absolute proponent of deep engagement in most reasonable situations. I think it’s an essential part of living together in a shared world and society. I’m not sure what you mean by “my terms”. I read your essay, took copious notes, did a bunch of research and then formed my essay around a variety of questions and evidence. I tried to be fair and respectful, while also being true to the heart of my critique and, to use your words, “not pulling punches”. I also tried very hard to make my argument evidence- and text-based and in good faith. I’m not particularly interested in “winning” or “losing” but much more interested in providing a variety of perspectives and viewpoints. I apologize if my writing or approach suggested otherwise.
And if I haven’t made this super clear: I respect all the things you’ve done to support screenwriters and movie-making. I think it’s okay — and in fact, totally healthy and important — to sometimes challenge and question folks we admire. As you eloquently stated at the beginning of your essay (paraphrasing): we must not be afraid to tell the truth as we see it.
So I really hope you see my essay and our dialogue as an extension and embodiment of that crucial and life-affirming notion. I definitely don’t think this is a situation where one of us is totally right and one of us is totally wrong. Like most complex situations, I think the most useful truth emerges in the tension between our contrasting ideas and approaches.
Like I said in my essay, if your piece had been titled How To Write and Pitch a Commercial Spec Script, I wouldn’t have had any issues with it. The practical parts of your essay — the nine questions to ask before fade in — are helpful for ALL WRITERS, and I appreciate that you care enough to take the time to share what you have learned with others.
However, you go very much beyond the “practical realities” when you frame the essay morally and make claims about what is the “highest art”. Which, as I’ve said many times now, is the main thing I’m critiquing.
fwiw I could sit around all day and discuss deep philosophical questions without finite answers like “what is art?” and “what is a moral life?” and “what does it mean to live a moral life as an artist?” And I do personally believe that exploring these abstract questions concretely influences the choices we make and how we live our daily lives and interact with the world.
I’m glad we agree that terms like hobbyist and professional don’t really matter! I guess where we disagree is that there is a meaningful chasm between the two :)
I appreciate your sincere support, Franklin, and I wish you all the best as well. I look forward to more dialogues in the future.
What if I told you that my title was designed to demonstrate the point the essay makes? That it got a lot more attention because of its provocative title than it would have with the title you suggested? That selling out is in quotes to bait people like you when it was meant to be a reference to selling out theaters?
That is a fair point. However, I think that might be more of a marketing thing? I would point out that you most likely decided what was the most important thing for you to write, wrote it, and then came up with the provocative title at some point during the writing process. I assume you didn't first decide what title would get the most traction and then write an essay accordingly.
100%. Thanks so much for reading, and for the thoughtful response. BTW I dig your writing too :)))
I appreciate Leonard’s essay for providing us with such a clear example of how these folks think of themselves.
I do think that many Hollywood people (Leonard included) truly love movies, and are truly trying to make things better and more equitable.
But I’m also reminded of that Upton Sinclair quote (which was included in earlier drafts of the essay):
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
At the end of the day, Hollywood depends on self-mythologizing. Leonard’s response below shows the industry’s utter inability to acknowledge valid critiques.
Thanks again for reading. I put myself out there with this essay, and your engagement means a lot.
Damon and Affleck last film is a perfect example of selling out to Netflix to make their $100 million movie "The Rip". I think it's arguably the worst tgebg they've ever done.
I can't even express how deeply the sentence, "Life is too fragile and brief to waste time making meaningless shit," resonates with me right now, having just quit my job as a well paid TV writer to go back to earning nothing to make indie films I actually care about.
Power to you, Corey! Big moves pay off :))) wishing you all the luck in the world and please lmk if I can help in any way. Thank you so much for reading and sharing your response! Your engagement means a lot to me.
Great stack!
Thank ya, sir! Btw I so very much dig your campaign for Atomic Fondue and I’m planning to contribute in the coming days :))) It’s super fun and clever! Very inspiring. I’m taking notes!
Awwww, thanks!!! And yes, anything is welcome!!!
You have no clue how much this means to me. This is exactly my thought process.
As a writer coming from a totally different field (the social sciences), my goals have been to provide accurate information of how society functions, the systems that impact it, and how each of us has a role in improving it in multiple modalities. I have researched for years, developed courses, taught students, etc. and through that found interesting ways people learn. But just like in academia where the message is that only through writing papers for journals can we really make an impact in society, I have found the same mindsets in almost every industry.
The route is either to be excessive and build a following on SM to make a point, hope you don't lose yourself, and get funded through ads and spamming what's trending, or just already have resources and connections to follow what's trending or whatever you want (which is often just whatever everyone else is already doing. 🙄) Either way, these almost unrealistic blueprints that are meant for a mindset that is only reliant on what is popular for the sole purpose of getting rich is part of the core problems that effect us socially.
I want to comment on everything you said, but it'd get too long. So, I'll end with this: I am working on a script for a TV series now that I plan to start finding funding for, hoping to reach half a mill (less if I can figure out how to do more things myself and with my cousin). Sometimes I want to give up due to many issues, but when I look at what is going on in Hollywood and in many Asian countries due to how big spenders like Netflix, Disney, Apple, etc. have controlled the field (also how, sometimes, people get greedy), I am grateful for my creativity and lack of interest in making it big just to fit a mold unlike myself.
If this is the only script I write, I'll be happy to get out what I've been trying to say in other modes to reach people in a way I hope resonates with them and provides a pathway and hope for an improved future. If there is no recognition, but I have fun anyway, is that "hobby" really a bad thing? Is it so bad to induce no harm and hold joy for the sake of the craft?
Thanks for this. I truly enjoyed this piece!
Awwwww Asia! Your response means so much to me! And I must say, as somebody with a background in education as well, I really love how you frame this in the context of the different ways in which people learn. I too have been really interested in my own work to explore ways for pedagogical models to interact symbiotically with filmmaking.
And then keeping it fun and not didactic! How can the medicine taste delicious?
And then it's super interesting to bring this line of thinking to the importance of supporting a diversity of stories and styles.
And also, like, the world is so so complex. We should be making work that embraces complexity, and encourages the viewer to be more comfortable dealing with complexity.
About your TV series script. I'd love to learn more about it.
PLEASE PROVIDE ME WITH ONE SENTENCE AND I WILL IMMEDIATELY DETERMINE ITS VALUE IN THE MARKETPLACE.
hahahahaha of course just kidding. Shoot me a DM if you want! I'd be happy to just learn more about the project and spitball and support however I can :)
And remember that a TV pilot can actually be lots of different things on its journey to the screen :)))
Thank you again for reading and sharing your thoughts, Asia! I look forward to a continued conversation.
😆 Just one sentence? It took me 6 months to shrink it down to the "formula." It was like a MadLib contest. One adverb + 2 but no more than 5 characters + one location. Like, what!? Haha
I feel so relieved that you're using language I understand. Haha My research is in complex and dynamic systems and trying to simplify that is like teaching a toddler to juggle while reading physics and dancing. 🙃
You should certainly experiment. When I watch (really study, haha) South Korean and Chinese shows, they have this interesting way of making a point. Chinese are good for complex systems, SK for processes. Even anime has an intriguing way of expressing emotion and lessons. My son and husband watch them and I used to laugh at it until I gave it a chance. I ended up using those shows and lessons to teach history, government/politics, and other subjects to my high school students. It was the funnest research I've done!
Anyways, I will take you up on that offer. It may be a while, but I will. Your perspective is refreshing. Thanks again!
Nicely written, I love the Miyazaki misunderstanding, it really shows behind the curtain. These blockbusters have gotten more and more out of touch over the years, turning more regular people against going to the movies. Thanks, Adam!
Thank you, Alan! As you know from the essay, I’m totally with you! Whenever I hear about a massive budget, I’m like “jeez, you could’ve made fifty smaller movies for that same amount”. I think that the more movies attempt to be for everybody, the more they end up being for nobody.
This entire essay conveniently ignores a section of mine that is relatively precise about what I believe a commercial movie actually is, a part of the definition you seem to ignore and then fall victim to the same fallacy that I call out in the text itself:
"And one more [question you should ask yourself when you're trying to assess whether the idea you're working on is 'commercial'], ONE THAT PEOPLE TRY TO PRETEND RUNS COUNTER TO THE REST [caps here for emphasis]. It doesn’t:
IV. THE DNA
Is it yours? Would this be flatter, safer, less funny, less scary, less interesting if someone else wrote it? Commercial doesn’t mean generic. It doesn’t mean male or white or straight or Christian. It can be any of those things, and it can be everything else too. Commercial just means that you built the door wide enough that strangers want to pay to walk through it.
Once it is and the premise is saleable, (please) bring everything else you’ve got: your obsessions, your politics, your humor (please bring your humor), your weird little takes about the world and what it means to be human. That’s what takes people higher on the way out. But if you can’t get them in, none of it matters."
I'll also add that there seems to be a bizarre preoccupation with being "cool" in this and elsewhere in your comments, which is odd, because it's a term I've never invoked nor particularly care about.
My essay does not ignore that, Franklin. In the second paragraph I say "My critique is about the “moral” framing of his argument, not the screenwriting tips (which are useful)."
My argument is much more complex and multi-faceted than "commercial movies are generic." I am careful in my essay to make space for screenwriters who naturally prefer to write broad/big-budget/four-quadrant films. I believe those are a part of a healthy, robust, diverse ecosystem, and I personally enjoy many of them. If someone wants to write a superhero movie, great! Just do it first and foremost because you're passionate about it. And yeah, of course "bring your own DNA" to it. Why wouldn't you? Who on Earth would encourage a writer to do otherwise? We can certainly agree on that.
But like I say in the essay: "I am against the idea that pros write eight-figure films and everyone else is a hobbyist."
I don't think there is anything inherently moral about that mindset, and I do not think it leads to the "highest art".
Your advice to inject personality into commercial work doesn't really acknowledge or respond to the thrust of my critiques. For example: what do you think of my claim that "reality is so much more complex and full of possibilities than this [professional-hobbyist] dichotomy suggests"? Or when you claim that films cost "tens of millions to make and market", what are you saying about the films and filmmakers operating (well) below that threshold? And what about the Miyazaki of it all?
As to your observation that I use the word "cool". Um, yeah. You got me. I also used the word "art" 14 times. You use the word "commercial" 13 times in your essay. But I wouldn't bother basing a critique around this useless observation.
I really truly liked your post/idea today that the world needs a Ruth Carter menswear line.
It is evidence that you def know what cool is, and that it matters to you at least a little :)))
I sincerely appreciate you engaging, Franklin. I think this is a very important conversation to have as we all work together to imagine and build a better film future.
Yet again your comments pivot to a preoccupation with cool. I genuinely don’t understand it.
LOL Franklin what are you even talking about? The inadequacy of your response to my critiques is STAGGERING. I guess it’s true what Upton Sinclair said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
You seem to believe for some reason that I owe you deep engagement on your terms (untrue) and that my unwillingness to engage beyond noting that all of your responses indicate a preoccupation with the notion of cool represents some sort of victory for you (also untrue.)
I will simply say this:
My essay was written in an attempt to distill more than two decades of experience into concrete guidance to anyone who hopes to keep a roof over their head and food on their table via their writing for the screen. The distinction between professional and hobbyist was deployed insofar as I wanted to make clear to those people how to navigate the chasm between the two if they had interest in doing so.
Personally, I don’t have much use for that distinction - or labels, like cool, generally - beyond that sort of communication.
If you’re lucky enough to make art without a financial need for substantial compensation for it, bravo and brava. I wish you the best. Call yourself whatever you want. Truly. I will be cheering you on. I’m simply uninterested in debating these sorts of things outside of practical realities.
Thanks so much for the response, Franklin. I am an absolute proponent of deep engagement in most reasonable situations. I think it’s an essential part of living together in a shared world and society. I’m not sure what you mean by “my terms”. I read your essay, took copious notes, did a bunch of research and then formed my essay around a variety of questions and evidence. I tried to be fair and respectful, while also being true to the heart of my critique and, to use your words, “not pulling punches”. I also tried very hard to make my argument evidence- and text-based and in good faith. I’m not particularly interested in “winning” or “losing” but much more interested in providing a variety of perspectives and viewpoints. I apologize if my writing or approach suggested otherwise.
And if I haven’t made this super clear: I respect all the things you’ve done to support screenwriters and movie-making. I think it’s okay — and in fact, totally healthy and important — to sometimes challenge and question folks we admire. As you eloquently stated at the beginning of your essay (paraphrasing): we must not be afraid to tell the truth as we see it.
So I really hope you see my essay and our dialogue as an extension and embodiment of that crucial and life-affirming notion. I definitely don’t think this is a situation where one of us is totally right and one of us is totally wrong. Like most complex situations, I think the most useful truth emerges in the tension between our contrasting ideas and approaches.
Like I said in my essay, if your piece had been titled How To Write and Pitch a Commercial Spec Script, I wouldn’t have had any issues with it. The practical parts of your essay — the nine questions to ask before fade in — are helpful for ALL WRITERS, and I appreciate that you care enough to take the time to share what you have learned with others.
However, you go very much beyond the “practical realities” when you frame the essay morally and make claims about what is the “highest art”. Which, as I’ve said many times now, is the main thing I’m critiquing.
fwiw I could sit around all day and discuss deep philosophical questions without finite answers like “what is art?” and “what is a moral life?” and “what does it mean to live a moral life as an artist?” And I do personally believe that exploring these abstract questions concretely influences the choices we make and how we live our daily lives and interact with the world.
I’m glad we agree that terms like hobbyist and professional don’t really matter! I guess where we disagree is that there is a meaningful chasm between the two :)
I appreciate your sincere support, Franklin, and I wish you all the best as well. I look forward to more dialogues in the future.
What if I told you that my title was designed to demonstrate the point the essay makes? That it got a lot more attention because of its provocative title than it would have with the title you suggested? That selling out is in quotes to bait people like you when it was meant to be a reference to selling out theaters?
That is a fair point. However, I think that might be more of a marketing thing? I would point out that you most likely decided what was the most important thing for you to write, wrote it, and then came up with the provocative title at some point during the writing process. I assume you didn't first decide what title would get the most traction and then write an essay accordingly.
100%. Thanks so much for reading, and for the thoughtful response. BTW I dig your writing too :)))
I appreciate Leonard’s essay for providing us with such a clear example of how these folks think of themselves.
I do think that many Hollywood people (Leonard included) truly love movies, and are truly trying to make things better and more equitable.
But I’m also reminded of that Upton Sinclair quote (which was included in earlier drafts of the essay):
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
At the end of the day, Hollywood depends on self-mythologizing. Leonard’s response below shows the industry’s utter inability to acknowledge valid critiques.
Thanks again for reading. I put myself out there with this essay, and your engagement means a lot.