About Me
- Howard Casner
- PLEASE NOTE: I have moved my blog to http://howardcasner.wordpress.com/. Please follow the link for all my updated postings. Thank you.
Friday, February 3, 2012
WARRIOR
Saw Warrior last night, a story about two brothers who end up fighting each other in a mixed martial arts tournament. It's almost insultingly formulaic, but the acting (especially Hardy and Nolte) is first rate. And once the final tournament begins, just try not to watch; just try. But as emotional as it is, the writers painted themselves into a corner and they didn't really have a satisfactory exit strategy, though the director and actors works very hard to make you not notice.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
INDIEWIRE ARTICLE: 10 MUST SEE INDIE FILMS FOR FEBRUARY
I've seen two of them. Michael, which didn't really work for me, and Rampart, which ultimately doesn't quite come together, but gets you going for the most part and one of Woody Harrelson's best performances (maybe his best).
http://www.indiewire.com/article/the-10-indie-films-you-must-see-this-february
http://www.indiewire.com/article/the-10-indie-films-you-must-see-this-february
BACKGROUND ON SCREENPLAYS HUGO, BRIDESMAIDS, MARGIN CALL, THE DESCENDANTS
An article giving some background to some of the screenplay nominations this year, mainly Hugo, Bridesmaids, Margin Call and the Descendants.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/movies/awardsseason/oscars-for-screenwriters-are-a-cliffhanger.html?_r=3&ref=movies
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/movies/awardsseason/oscars-for-screenwriters-are-a-cliffhanger.html?_r=3&ref=movies
LENGTH OF SPEC SCRIPTS: INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION ON SCREENWRITERS NETWORK FACEBOOK PAGE
I try to keep to keep my scripts in what I consider the "Goldilocks Zone"...100 to 110 pages. As for what prodcos are looking for, my contacts in Hollywood tell me they're looking for Thrillers right now. I just had a thriller requested by an agency.
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
DECLARATION OF WAR
Just got back from Declaration of War, the French entry in the Academy foreign film category. It's an autobiographical film about two parents who learn their two year old son has a very serious health issue. It's often moving and I was never bored. At the same time, the direction, by writer and star Valerie Donzelli (she co-wrote with the father of the child, Jeremie Elkaim), which is obviously influenced by French new wave directors like Truffaut and Godard, is a bit too hit and miss, sometimes connecting, but also too often not. It doesn't quite come up to 50/50.
MY HUD REVIEW GOT A NICE DISCUSSION GOING ON FACEBOOK
Jim Hoffmaster I doubt your average movie-goer gave it a second's thought.Monday at 9:05pm ·- Jim Hoffmaster (Great movie, though.)Monday at 9:05pm ·
Bob Fish Yeah, I'd say so, though I doubt "degeneracy" is exactly the right word -- more like "failing" or "decline." And that's because of his misanthropy, certainly not his perfectly polished physicality. I totally bought it, and I'm thrilled that I still do. Without much hesitation at all, I rank "Hud" as my favorite pic of all time. It's seamless, contemporary while simultaneously universal, and the acting is at Nigel Tufnel's 11 across the board. You can't GET me to say a bad word about that film, and I'm one of the pickiest of nit-pickers. Didn't realize you were a virgin. Glad you saw it and liked it.Monday at 10:21pm ·
Howard Casner I can't say I liked it; I found it entertaining enough. But I had serious issues with it as well. My main issue with Hud as a symbol of degeneracy is that every generation somebody writes a book or makes a movie about how the previous generation was perfect and that the new generation is bringing the world to an end, yet the world keeps on going until the new generation writes a book about how the previous generation (the one that was earlier considered to be the end of the world) was perfect and the new generation is going to destroy the world, so I can't really take that part of the movie seriously. In addition, I think that the focus is off. The central character is Brandon De Wilde's Lonnie who is suppose to choose between Hud and his grandfather, but Newman's Hud or Newman himself took away so much focus from that, I didn't felt this conflict in Lonnie's character was strongly dramatized enough (and his final scene of walking on down the road at age 17 to become his own man was something I had difficulty taking seriously as well; was his life on the ranch really that bad, really?). I also couldn't take seriously the grandfather's overwrought speech about how he would not sell an oil lease because it wasn't a way to make money he wanted to (because he couldn't go out and touch it or some such that never worked for me); I could buy this if he could still raise cattle, but I couldn't feel the same empathy when he was now just being stubborn and unrealistic. For me, Hud would have worked better as a character study of a sociopath (which Hud almost is), rather than a symbol of America. On the plus side is that incredible camera work and Newman and Neal. The dialog was also wonderfully Texan at times, especially Lonnie's dialog.Yesterday at 5:07am ·- Bob Fish Well, I never really thought of him as a symbol of America, though people are welcome to that sort of expansiveness if it suits them. I've always seen it as a character study, and I believe the title when it says it's Hud's story rather than Lonnie's. Lonnie can be considered the narrative voice or perspective. As for Grandpa, old people can often be stubborn and unrealistic. Hud as a borderline psychopath is pretty accurate, I'd say, and to understand him and all the rest of the family, we should understand the stultifying force of that place and its rigid society. They're all victims, which is not popular these days, but they're such fascinating victims that I'm suckered in. Compassion's the key, I think, to accepting these people and their behavior -- a Greek tragedy, really. I think it was the perfect picture for its day. (I saw it first run --Jesus God!)Yesterday at 5:20am ·
- Howard Casner I think we'd have to say we did see a different movie (which is what going to movies and viewing art and arguing about it is all about and why I love doing it). The dialog where the author tries to make Hud this symbol of America is when Lonnie and his grandfather have a conversation about Hud and Lonnie says Hud doesn't seem all that different from others and the grandfather says that's the problem, it didn't use to be this way, but this is the way the new generation is heading and Lonnie is going to have to make a choice (which he does at the end). I also didn't see the town as stultifying or rigid; it actually seemed rather unstultifying and unrigid if Hud could be one of its most popular citizens (it's the grandfather who is coming across as stultifying and rigid--he only loosens up when he sings Clementine at the movie theater ). I think the movie would have worked better for me if it had been about Hud's sociopathology and Lonnie's reaction to it rather than try to make more of Hud that he is. I just saw Last Summer again about some teens involvement with a sociopath (Barbara Hershey). I never got the idea that the author was saying this is what the new generation of teens is like and American is headed for the scrap heap; which is maybe why I found it more powerful in its message and more universal. But Hud was superior from a technical standpoint.
SEX AND PROFANITY IN SPEC SCRIPTS: An interesting discussion from Screenwriters Network page
- I believe those things are script-specific. Depending on the story, the characters and the audience you're funneling your script towards, each script will bear it's own weight. I tend to cuss like a drunken sailor on shore leave -- well, until kids came into my life -- and I love creative uses of curse words (The Last Detail). I will say I use it now far less than I used to in my writing. And as far as sex...I love a good romance but watching two people in a graphic sex scene on film...ugh. I can think of only a handful of times it's been hot on screen (The Big Easy, Sea of Love...hello, Ellen Barkin, Postman Rings Twice Nicholson/Lange.) Unless you're using it for comedy (one of the best scenes in Bridesmaids) once two characters fall into bed, time to let the imagination take over.
- Howard Casner Like Bart, it's script specific. For most of mine, though, I'm very frank about sex and language. For others, I hold back. It's part of parcel of the milieu I write about. Most of my films would be rated R or even NC 17, unless a very creative director came aboard (and since they are often gay oriented, they automatically will get a higher rating for types of scenes that in a non-gay oriented film would receive a lower rating). There are exceptions and I've written a Disney type family film that could be rated G and a sci-fi that would be rated PG probably. I would add one thing--you can be as frank as you want in dialog, but I strongly advise ever using vulgarities in the narrative (always say have sex or make love, not f*ck like rabbits). The reason for this is that the narrative is you speaking whereas the dialog is the character. Producers often have a very different reaction to vulgarities in the narrative than in the dialog. It's the same reason for never using politically incorrect ethnic terms in narrative as opposed to dialog. In the end, though, I don't expect most of my films to be of interest to the studios, but are aimed toward the indie market.
- Agreed definitely script specific in both cases. And also, avoidance to gratuitary sex/violence etc is best IMO, I find it can overwhelm the story and detract from the storyline one is going for, watering down it's arcs/intensity etc. The characters one is creating, should allow them to gauge how much of each is needed if at all. Just my opinion! :0) Hey there Marty, hope you're well! Been a while, been out of the loop on here a bit.
- I have used both sex and profanity in my scripts - but like everyone else, it's script specific. I wrote a kids film - no profanity. There was a love interest, but that amounted to two neighbors dancing in silhouette beside a backlit window.
But when I write about something like a satanic themed rock band, the profanity just seems natural. Or if it's about a relationship between a high school senior and a wealthy, lonely cougar - well the sex is a big part of it, and it's meant to make the audience uncomfortable. Of course, there are tasteful ways to imply things, and I do try to keep that in mind. - Yup, script specific and never gratuitous. And I allude to "making love" but leave the "choreography" and extent to the director and actors. A script is merely a blue print. AND I have simply gone to identifying Me-the-Writer as S. J. Walker because some of my scripts have gritty characters with grittier language that doesn't quite "fit" with a "Sally." I made a Navy Captain laugh when I said I couldn't imagine a Navy SEAL or 3-tour Marine saying "Gosh darn, you are a terrible idiot!"
- When I was younger, in my first attempts at writing, I ripped off Tarantino, who was huge at the time, and tried non-stop swear words. But soon after that, I tried the opposite and kind of stuck with it ever since. In most of my writing, I put in about two or three swear words, or none at all. And as for sex, haven't written anything like that yet.
- Howard Casner But what if you don't want your sex scenes to be poetical? And what if you don't want your F words to carry meaning, but simply to reflect a certain reality?
- Howard Casner But the decision for Portman not to show anything wasn't the writer's decision, but was probably made up of how much the director wanted to show; the rating they were trying to achieve; what Portman's contract said; etc. Other directors might have shown everything.
- Howard Casner why do you think sex scenes in films are cheap unless it's an important part of the overall story? It's a feeling many people have and I've never quite understood it, to be honest (it may partially be because I don't know what "cheap" means exactly). Do you feel the same way about violence? It's interesting how morals and mores vary from country to country and culture to culture. Some places are more open to sex, some more open to violence. I prefer sex.
- @Howard, i.e. instead of "he clamps one hand on her breast and the other between her crotch", I try to make it read less like blue and more like sparkle...and when telling one to F off, I inject a little more swagger in the creation. That is, a little more "ouch" in the wording. Note: the F word is fast losing its place on the stage of remarkable inventions ;-)
- ...and there is a reason the films that will stay in our hearts and minds long after our own dust to dust settles is because of the writer's talent for creating the whirl of imagination in many a film goer without having to resort to the naked nipple and the F & C words. From Casablanca to When Harry Met Sally to Ben Hur to All About to Eve to Alien et al.
- Howard Casner I have to be honest, I don't think I understand what you are saying or how it responds to my response. I've already said that narrative should never be "blue", but I'm not sure what sparkle means or why that would be poetical. I also am not sure what "swagger in the creation" means or what "the F word is fast losing its place on the stage of remarkable inventions" means. I also don't know what "having to resort" means. If someone chooses realistic language or a realistic portrayal of sex, I don't think that is "having to resort", I think that is making a considered choice and I think as writers we should be more open than closed about each others decisions and encourage each other to find their own way. Joe Pesci told a story once about the shooting of Goodfellas or Raging Bull (I'm not sure which) where the producers suggested to Scorcese he reshoot some scenes and tone down the language so that when the movie was on TV they could replace the scenes; Pesci said to Scorcese, "I didn't know you made movies for TV" and with that Scorcese got furious and didn't reshoot any scenes. Different people have different philosophies about sex and violence in movies, but I'm not sure one is any better a philosophy than the other; like others have been saying, it's script specific. I think All About Eve is one of the greatest movies ever made, but I'm not sure I want to return to those restrictive times when it comes to writing a screenplay.
- Howard, yes, you are right, it is not the writer's decision. I agree with you completely. What I meant was that there is really no need to worry about actual nudity. If I need a naked stripper for the story, then I can write that she is nude.
Then of course I should consider what would happen if the director chooses to show everything I write and if it still would be a film I would have my name on. - Howard Casner I have read scripts where people detail sex scenes and I have to tell them, you know, this isn't going to be your choice. So sorry for misunderstanding you, because you're right. As for whether you would want to have your name on it, funny story: when Gore Vidal wrote Caligula, they weren't going to put his name on it, and he fought to have it put there; then when he saw the film, he fought to have it taken off. In the end, what's really odd (well, not really, there's a reason for it) is that the WGA has the final say on whose name goes on as writer and even if you want to remove it, you might not be able to.
- Less is more as far as the sex goes. You don't have to get into detail, unless you're writing porn. As for profanity, use it if you need it. It's great for bringing a character to life. Real people swear. They also cheat on their partner, and showing a sex scene can really have an effect on how an audience feels about a character. Sure, you could show a couple leaving a cheap motel together and it would suggest the same thing as showing sex, but showing it can really turn a stomach, and that's the business we're in; making people feel things. So it's up to you to figure out what the best way to tell the story is. In my opinion, getting into detail on a sex scene is pointless and a waste of space on the page. Be brief! When the script goes into production they'll use their own vision of how the sex should be shown.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
