What, When, Where is a weekly guide to select screenings, discussions and events in the NYC-area of interest to screenwriters. Have an event you'd like to see listed here? Give us a heads-up at info@screenwritersleague.com.
Opening this week...
DEAD SNOW, written by Stig Frode Henriksen and Tommy Wirkola, dir. by Tommy Wirkola
Premise: A ski vacation turns horrific for a group of medical students, as they find themselves confronted by an unimaginable menace: Nazi zombies.
Playing: IFC Center
Zombies. Zombies, I say! Nazi Zombies!
$9.99, written by Etgar Keret, dir. by Tatia Rosenthal
Premise: A stop-motion animated story about people living in a Syndey apartment complex looking for meaning in their lives.
Premise: An eccentric older man encounters a Southern belle and promptly falls in love. But how will the couple, her family, and his New York City friends mix?
Playing: All over.
This was made from a shelved script Woody wrote in the 1970s, and from the early reviews it sounds like it was better off hidden away. But, it's Woody Allen, so I'll see it eventually. The logline, though... old man, young girl. And this was written before Soon-Yi?
I was pretty excited to see The Hangover. I am a twenty-four year old male, who enjoys drinking and has experienced more black-outs than I’m proud of. The day after a black-out includes me sheepishly calling a friend, recounting my few memories, and subtly trying to inquire about my post-blackout actions. Then, after the initial laughter, I am forced to reconcile said actions with who I am as a person. This movie was made for guys like me.
It's not uncommon for guys to take their buddies to Vegas for a last hurrah, drink too much, and do stupid things they don’t remember…stupid, meaning, going $400 over budget or getting thrown out of a casino. What the fine gentlemen in The Hangover get into is beyond surreal. Their night begins innocently enough with three friends (Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis) toasting their soon-to-be buddy Justin (Doug Billings) atop a Vegas rooftop. And then…they wake up. They can’t remember a thing, but with the room trashed, they guess they had a good time. Until they discover the groom is missing.
This begins the arduous process of piecing together the previous night which includes – but is not limited to – the following discoveries: a bed atop a Vegas hotel; a baby in their hotel room; a tiger belonging to Mike Tyson; a missing tooth; a valet ticket which gets them a police car instead of their convertible; a Chinese gangster inside said convertible. Though incredibly random, the movie is able to make it work within a logical timeline (which is the only logic necessary, given that most drunken behavior is illogical).
And yet, I left the theatre pretty under whelmed. It’s a pretty basic story, held above water by the reveals and the jokes that go along with them. I feel like most of the action in the now was not spent paving over the previous nights' events, and that we were treated to a slew of characters saying variations of, "Oh, you don't remember what happened? Oh, you were so wasted..." I didn’t love the cast, nor did I feel that they would have actually been friends (Galifianakis is a HUGE exception; everything he says is gold). And the Chinese gangster bit, though initially funny, gets tiresome.
I still liked it, in that I can remember and laugh at certain jokes and moments. But I definitely expected more. If we judge the movie from the box office, it was insanely successful. I don’t know…maybe after X years of drinking, I’m a bit desensitized to this sort of stuff?
(Speaking of change, this Writing Week has the pleasure of appearing on a Tuesday. Ooops.)
Anyway, as we all know, writing is a process of evolution. Not only do we evolve as writers, honing our skills and abandoning amateurish tendencies, but our projects evolve, as well. That gem of an idea you had evolves from an indie, two character drama set in a beach house to an ensemble shoot-em-up that takes place in Manhattan. It happens. Different drafts often mean different movies altogether. It's not something that necessarily meets with resistance; often these developments go unnoticed as we make them. Notes come in and the script goes a completely different way.
Take, for example, Simon Kinberg's "Mr. and Mrs. Smith." We all remember the action flick about a couple who find out that neither is what the other thought. But look at these two very different loglines that I found on Done Deal Pro.
A bored married couple discover they are enemy assassins hired to kill each other. Logged 2/26/2003
and
A couple forms a bond while escaping a coup in Colombia. Logged 1/15/2002
Obviously, Kinberg's script evolved. But where did the changes come from? Who influenced them? In re-working my post-Apocalyptic spec, I am incorporating notes from my new manager and from the producer who is trying to set the picture up. Luckily, the changes don't create such a drastic re-inventing of the script as Kinberg's loglines make it seem that he experienced. Nonetheless, what was merely an interesting, albeit briefly visited location in the draft I sent out is now becoming a much larger focus of the script - to the point where I've been encouraged to work it into the title. My character's arc now ends with triumphing over forces in this location, whereas before, any obstacles he faced there were merely hurdles before his greater goal.
Similarly, I've been mulling over a new idea recently. I haven't bothered to put anything down on paper about it, because there are some very large, very obvious questions I have to address first. I've spoken to Onyx at some length about it, and his suggestions have already started to reshape my original idea. I'm not displeased with where it's going - I actually like it a lot - but I can definitely see the differences. It's funny, considering that there isn't a whole lot to it at this point, either. The basic framework is largely the same, but some of the fundamental ideas woven into it have been altered.
Writing is evolutionary, there's no doubt in my mind. I think that's one of the things I like most about it. And who knows, the superficial action that my post-Apocalyptic spec is becoming to help its sale along will hopefully evolve into something deeper and more meaningful, something I had envisioned for it initially.
"These are - the eyes of a man possessed! - by the greatest power in the universe!"
It's the brain from planet Arous, not "Planet Arouse" - yes, I made that mistake, too. There's nothing sexy about this movie.
By far the scariest thing in this trailer (and in the movie) are that guy's eyes. They're the first thing you'll see:
Trailer Trash is a weekly tribute to oddball, cheesy and often just plain terrible movie trailers. Writers: These movies got made... so can yours! You can read through our archive by clicking here.
Let’s throw this out first: I really enjoyed Up. I went in the theater not really knowing what the film is going to be about, trusting that Pixar will not disappoint. It didn’t. But I was a bit weirded out.
Traditionally, cartoons and anime are geared toward kids. With the rise of adult-friendly Pixar films, the plot has become better, the writing smarter. However, the themes are still the all-age relatable ones: find true love, be accepted for yourself, struggle and triumph against odds. Both kids and adults can connect with them. Which is why Up was so surprising. Its theme is “how to move on after a spouse has past away”, or simply “how to let go of the past.”
The opening to Up was beautiful: quickly setting up young Carl and Ellie’s meeting and their shared dream of going to the mysterious Paradise Fall, followed by a touching montage of the decades they spent together, ending with the death of Ellie. This was especially effective since if the film simply started with the 78 years old Carl, the audience will laugh and enjoy watching a grumpy old man who talks to his house, but not relate to him. By starting from a point we can understand-- youthful fantasy for adventure, finding your true love— and taking the audience by the hand, leading us through the big chapters of Carl’s life, making sure we relate to his decisions every step of the way, we reach the end of the montage still connected to Carl at his old age. While feeling tearful for Carl’s lost, there was something eerie about the intro. In the back of my head, I could not help but feel the film was pointing out something no one wants to think about: This will eventually happen to you.
Carl didn’t do anything wrong: he got the girl, he didn’t really have any character flaw in his adult life, he loved and cherished his wife while she was alive, there was no foul-play in Ellie’s death. But in the end, enviably, Ellie died. This seemed wrong. Villains should have murdered her, turning Carl into a vigilante. Young Ellie should have snubbed the shy Young Carl or simply never knew he was alive. Their parents should have been against the marriage. Ellie should have been a mermaid (or Carl could be).
The second thing that’s all wrong is in a typical “let go of the past and move on to better/newer things” movie, the audience want the protagonist to move on throughout the film. We see before the protagonist does that the new girl/mom/school/etc is better. The new girl/mom/school/etc also welcomes and wants the protagonist to move on. Not so in Up. We love Ellie and the house they built together as much as Carl does. It’s painful to see the mail box he and Ellie painted together be bashed. When Ellie’s photo falls off the wall, we really really want Carl to catch it. Even when the house literally becomes a burden, we’re still behind Carl. We’re not that far ahead of Carl, but instead journeys with him in seeing how the past is stopping him from making the right decisions.
In a certain way, Pixar really did pick a theme that’ll apply to more of us than the usual anime subjects would. After all, most of us don’t need to battle against enormous odds, have friends that accept us, and probably go through life never actually talking to that attractive guy/girl (or do, and it was kind of anticlimactic). Being left behind during old age on the other hand, it something that has a good chance of happening. But because of this, Up doesn't just have a happy ending: it’s uplifting. Despite the flying house and talking dogs, Carl’s inner struggles have always been very realistic, and because of this, there is a feeling that, when this happens to the audience, they also have the ability to triumph.
The only bone I have to pick is I feel Carl could have kept something from the house. When people move on, they don’t forget about what had happened. They keep the memory without letting it hold them down. The house and all its content is Carl’s love and memories of Ellie materialized. In order for Carl to save Russell and Dug, he needed to throw all the heavy furniture out of the house. But I was extremely saddened seeing the matching chairs that symbolized all the years Carl and Ellie sat side by side together left behind. In the end, as we watch with Carl at the house drifting away and disappearing into the clouds, we come to the same sober sad conclusion as Carl: it had to go. But he could have kept a small token: the wood bird on the mantle or the framed photo of the little gap-tooth Ellie. The credits vaguely try to remedied this showing photos of Carl’s new life in the My Adventure Book the belonged to Ellie, but in the plot that would have actually gone away with the house.
That point aside, I really did enjoy the film. It has the expected goofiness and crazy villain, and the unexpected tear-jerker and uplifer. I walked away not too sure how I feel about my future, but all that said and done, Up earned my15 bucks fair and square.
What, When, Where is a weekly guide to select screenings, discussions and events in the NYC-area of interest to screenwriters. Have an event you'd like to see listed here? Give us a heads-up at info@screenwritersleague.com.
Opening this weekend...
TETRO, written and directed by Francis Ford Coppola
PREMISE:Bennie travels to Buenos Aires to find his long-missing older brother, a once-promising writer who is now a remnant of his former self. Bennie's discovery of his brother's near-finished play might hold the answer to understanding their shared past and renewing their bond.
PLAYING: Landmark Sunshine
Notably, this is Francis Ford Coppola's first original screenplay since The Conversation, which was way beyond awesome. I heard he's not a shabby director, either...
MOON, written by Duncan Jones and Nathan Parker, dir. by Duncan Jones
PREMISE: Astronaut Sam Bell has a quintessentially personal encounter toward the end of his three-year stint on the Moon, where he, working alongside his computer, GERTY, sends back to Earth parcels of a resource that has helped diminish our planet's power problems.
PLAYING: Loews Lincoln Square, Landmark Sunshine
Sure, it sounds a bit like 2001 or Solaris. But I really like both of those movies, and it's directed by David Bowie's son? I'm intrigued.
PREMISE:Zorg is a handyman working at in France, maintaining and looking after the bungalows. He lives a quiet and peaceful life, working diligently and writing in his spare time. One day Betty walks into his life, a young woman who is as beautiful as she is wild and unpredictable. After a dispute with Zorg's boss they leave and Betty manages to get a job at a restaurant. She persuades Zorg to try and get one of his books published but it is rejected which makes Betty fly into a rage. Suddenly Betty's wild manners starts to get out of control. Zorg sees the woman he loves slowly going insane. Can his love prevail even if it comes to the worst?
PLAYING: Cinema Village
I don't usually highlight re-releases, but this is a really good one. (And Beatrice Dalle sure is purty, ain't she?)
PREMISE:Armed men hijack a New York City subway train, holding the passengers hostage in return for a ransom, and turning an ordinary day's work for dispatcher Walter Garbe into a face-off with the mastermind behind the crime.
PLAYING: Everywhere
Here we've got a remake of a remake of a film based on a Morton Freedgood novel. There's a lot of talent involved in this one, but has this story been beaten into the ground already?
Saw this on the Village Voice's Topless Robot blog a few weeks back and haven't been able to stop laughing at it: Arnold Schwarzenegger and screenwriter/director John Milius giving a DVD commentary for Conan the Barbarian. These guys sound stoned out of their freaking minds.
John Milius (who already had the Apocalypse Now screenplay under his belt at this point) went on to write both Clear and Present Danger and Red Dawn, as well as co-create HBO's Rome. As for Arnie, I hear he went into politics or something.
The Screenwriters League is a collective of NYC-based writers sharing their experiences as they build their careers from the ground up, and hoping to impart any knowledge they gain along the way.
only logic necessary, given that most drunken behavior is illogical).
