All About Koepp

[clockwork]

Link to great article about blockbuster screenwriting mainstay, David Koepp.

http://mediabistro.com/articles/cache/a9571.asp

[dpaterso]

Who? ...oh yeah, this guy! (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0462895/)

Writer:
Spider-Man 4 (2009) (announced) (in talks)
Fourth Installment of the Indiana Jones Adventures (2008) (pre-production) (screenplay)
Zathura: A Space Adventure (2005) (screenplay)
... aka Zathura (International: English title: short title) (USA: promotional title)
War of the Worlds (2005) (screenplay)
Secret Window (2004) (screenplay)
"Hack" (2002) TV Series (unknown episodes)
Hack (2002) (TV)
Spider-Man (2002) (screenplay)
Panic Room (2002) (written by)
Stir of Echoes (1999) (screenplay)
Snake Eyes (1998) (screenplay) (story)
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) (screenplay)
The Trigger Effect (1996) (written by)
Mission: Impossible (1996) (screenplay) (story)
... aka Mission Impossible
Suspicious (1994) (written by)
The Shadow (1994) (written by)
The Paper (1994) (written by)
Carlito's Way (1993) (screenplay)
Jurassic Park (1993) (screenplay)
... aka JP (USA: promotional abbreviation)
Death Becomes Her (1992) (written by)
Toy Soldiers (1991) (screenplay)
Bad Influence (1990) (written by)
Apartment Zero (1988) (screenplay)

Sheesh, nobody likes a show-off! :)

-Derek

[seanie blue]

Right! And starting with Toy Soldiers, almost all of it a hack's garbage. In a heaven for writers, Koepp gets taken to the town square to face his peers with rocks in their hands.

And here's the ultimate Hollywood insider B.S.: like the singer from Boston, Koepp is a miserable soul. Sure he's brought in billions. So what? Where's the gem? Carlito's Way? Give . . . me . . . a . . . break. Can't wait to meet him so I can commiserate on how rotten life can be.

[Parkinsonsd]

huh?

[clockwork]

Right! And starting with Toy Soldiers, almost all of it a hack's garbage. In a heaven for writers, Koepp gets taken to the town square to face his peers with rocks in their hands.

And here's the ultimate Hollywood insider B.S.: like the singer from Boston, Koepp is a miserable soul. Sure he's brought in billions. So what? Where's the gem? Carlito's Way? Give . . . me . . . a . . . break. Can't wait to meet him so I can commiserate on how rotten life can be.

Yawn.

If I have even half the success of this guy in my screenwriting career, I'll die happy. I'm not in it for the art, I'm in it to write films I'd want to see and to make money doing it.

[Joe270]

Clock,

I'd take a tenth. That's still 2 sales, with the rest of your life to capitalize on that success.

He must be great to work with, otherwise he'd never be brought in on so many project. My hat's off to him, he's a real survivor in a seriously tough and finicky business.

[maestrowork]

This guy can do no wrong. I couldn't believe he wrote Apartment Zero -- his first screenplay. I really dug that movie.

[maestrowork]

huh?

Sour grapes, I believe.

[dpaterso]

It's always refreshing to hear different opinions. Even if they make you go :eek:

-Derek

[Ragnarok]

I'm with SB. I couldn't care less about his material. It's not just him. With the average multiplexgoer's tastes, I'd rather get shot than watch a blockbuster.

[Hillgate]

I'm with SB. I couldn't care less about his material. It's not just him. With the average multiplexgoer's tastes, I'd rather get shot than watch a blockbuster.



Do you have any idea how difficult it is to write a blockbuster, let alone get hired by someone who's willing to pay you a ton of money to set finger to keyboard? Big respect to Koepp.

[xhouseboy]

In a heaven for writers, Koepp gets taken to the town square to face his peers with rocks in their hands.



Or alternatively gets a pat on the back for making a success of his life.

[-XL-]

Or alternatively gets a pat on the back for making a success of his life.

And for writing the fantastic STIR OF ECHOES.



ETA: and yes I am aware it was an adaptation.

[Joe270]

I have kids, and I really enjoyed Zathura. The title killed it, but it was an adaptation. It sure beats "Land Before Time".

Can you argue with Spider Man? I liked Panic Room, too.

[seanie blue]

Sour grapes? You bet!

But don't tell me Spidey was a hit because of a script! Koepp is a safe, clean bet because he listens to producers and doesn't spank them. Cool, a good strategy. But the script is marvelously unimportant in a vehicle on which a studio sinks 100 freaking million dollars in advertising. What if the movie was called "Peter's Web," and not a penny was spent throwing it in your face? You'd have a gross of what? Ten million, twenty million? Okay, I know nothing. How about fifty million, how about $75 million. What did that movie cost to make? Without the advertising, the executives do not work in Hollywood.

Why doesn't someboy jump up and down here and say Great Marketing Campaign?

But the sour grapes, hey, taste good to me and I laugh as I chew. I'm a happy hack, stuck in my arty-farty fifty grand world, but my orbit intersects with Koepp's in the strangest ways, and I had an Oscar nominee here last weekend saying Thanks for the Karma with a smile on his clock because he hates hates hates hates Hollywood and all the tinsel dung he can't get off his shoes while I walk around in my pajamas laughing.

Koepp would like to make a fifty dollar movie with me, believe me, and even his producers say so.

But let me own up to the sour grapes. You bet. And you could put one million dollars on my stoop to write Spidey Quatro and I will not open my door, and that attitude gets me gratitude every day here, and I can have shrimp cocktails in Santa Monica if I want to because I would not be caught dead with dreck like Spidey, bless his latexed superness.

I should say I'm full of it about Stir of Echoes and Apartment Zero, and I take back what I said about it all being hooey. I'm wrong. But that stuff was a while ago, right?

[Ragnarok]

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to write a blockbuster, let alone get hired by someone who's willing to pay you a ton of money to set finger to keyboard?

Writing a blockbuster doesn't take a genius. An overwhelming majority of them is an adaptation which does over half the work of the writer by offering him characters and their universe on a silver plate. And in most cases it's bond to mechanically draw the original work's fan base (unless the writer really screws up), which can amount to up to half the planet for harry potter.

Then you have action movies and comedies for the easily pleased. There's a sadly funny article on 2 recent top-grossing comedies here (http://defamer.com/hollywood/norbit/hollywood-moviemaking-101-fuck-the-critics-give-the-people-the-shit-they-crave-242752.php)

That's for the writing part. All the dozens of millions of $$$ sucked up by special FX and/or stars, rights bought from the original author, etc... ensure it has to be funded by a major studio which will then have the power to flood multiplexes with thousands of copies and will dish out another 10 millions or two on promotion. (meanwhile some indie movies with start out in a couple of theaters only).

Now our blockbuster churning writer still has to come up with a plot that will appeal to masses. The more basic and unthreatening to the average viewer, the better. When you blow $300M on a movie, you wouldn't want to inadvertently scare away any wallet carrier. So keep it easy on the brain. Sprinkle hints (or chunks if you're greedy) of mushiness here and there. In a comedy, fire away your whole collection of bodily noises/fluids jokes. In action movies, stuff has to blow up and/or be chased. Happy endings are a granted.

So all in all, what's the actual input of the writer's creativity in the blockbusting success? 10%?

There are a few counter-examples like pixar studios that do create successful out-of-the-box films. It's still too family oriented for me but they do a great job.


Big respect to Koepp.

I tend to only have Big respect for authors and directors who strive to offer a personal vision that shuns the beaten path: the cohens, russ meyer, kubrick, woody allen, lynch... even if I don't like all of their movies, I'm in awe of their artistical integrity. I find it really depressing most of them are dead or elderly.

[clockwork]

Good Lord. Let's review before this turns into another tedious and Sisyphean Hollywood vs Independent snore-fest. (Hollywood is about advertising and money - no way! It's almost like it's a business or something...)

The link I provided was to an article about, "blockbuster screenwriting mainstay, David Koepp." No-one said he was a genius or artistic savant. He is, however, an immeasurably successful working Hollywood screenwriter and if that's the world I want to enter, I can't help but admire him and hope to replicate even a fraction of his success.

[seanie blue]

What is tedious about Hollywood versus artistic independence? If somebody wants to holler about Hollywood being a dangerous rip in the fabric of American society, what's wrong with a little discussion? Is it a snorefest to accuse Eastwood & Scorsese for making entertainment more and more violent and scuzzy? I'm not going to trash anyone's personal opinion about Koepp by yawning at their posts or saying their ideas induce sleep. If I don't think much of the man's writing, can't I say that here? I won't call any poster out with language indicating I think he or she is a moron, or boring, so why should this happen if I air my opinion on a very public person whose work I have no respect for?

Chris, I admire your honesty about your motives. Cool.

[clockwork]

Sorry it's nothing personal, seanie. Your original post was a bit melodramatic for my tastes and came off as an embittered rant which was hard to understand considering this was just a link that might have been of interest to screenwriters.

But I do apologise for the yawn. Gut reaction.

Sounds like you're itching to debate Hollywood and I'm happy to play Penguin to your Batman but why wait for a tenuously-related thread to surface before we hear what you have to say? Why not start a more relevant thread? I'm game.

[caspary]

I'll give DK props for CARLITO'S WAY, STIR OF ECHOES, and SPIDER MAN (especially for the latter, because it is a rare comic-book movie that deals with the basics and has respect for its source material.) But the rest...a pretty impersonal lot.

[dpaterso]

I'll admit to not being a huge fan of a some of these films... but I'll also admit to being impressed by any screenwriter who can claim to have written that number of produced scripts -- and has earned himself such a reputation that he's even considered for projects like Indy 4 and Spidey 4.

-Derek

[caspary]

...and one could argue DK at least brings more literacy/story skills to the table than Akiva Goldsman. ;)

[dpaterso]

Yeah, that chump Goldsman (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0326040/), what the heck does he know anyway? Man, wouldn't you just hate to have his resume?

Angels & Demons (2008) (pre-production) (screenplay)
I Am Legend (2007) (post-production)
The Da Vinci Code (2006) (screenplay)
Cinderella Man (2005) (screenplay)
I, Robot (2004) (screenplay)
A Beautiful Mind (2001) (written by)
Practical Magic (1998) (screenplay)
Lost in Space (1998) (written by)
Batman & Robin (1997) (written by)
A Time to Kill (1996) (screenplay)
Batman Forever (1995) (screenplay)
Silent Fall (1994) (written by)
The Client (1994) (screenplay)

;)

-Derek

[icerose]

He seems like a very down-to-earth kind of person. I thought it was an excellent article, thanks for sharing.

[NatJM]

I enjoyed the interview, even though i'm not a big fan of the films he's written.

The way i see it, there's always something to learn from any writer, especially when they discuss their writing methods. The process is very interesting for me, disregarding of whether i like the result or not. But then, my favourite page in Writing Magazine is the "my writing day" article they always have at the end ;)

[maestrowork]

But don't tell me Spidey was a hit because of a script! Koepp is a safe, clean bet because he listens to producers and doesn't spank them. Cool, a good strategy. But the script is marvelously unimportant in a vehicle on which a studio sinks 100 freaking million dollars in advertising.


I beg to differ. Spider-Man and its sequels are constantly considered above the cut among comic book movies because of its writing. It boasts Koepp as well as Michael Chabon in the credit. The scripts were super important -- unlike, say, drab like The Hulk, which is also a tremendously popular comic book.

I think by saying Koepp's scripts are not important for the films' success is to cut down screenwriters. Why the heck do we write screenplays, then, if we're not important? Just because you don't care for the screenplays he wrote or the movies that were made doesn't mean he's not a good writer. Like someone said, it's very difficult to write a blockbuster, and it's extremely rare to write one blockbuster after another. We can't just dismiss the guy's talent simply because you don't like his movies.

Sour grapes or not, writers deserve some respect.

[Joe270]

Maestro, your post highlights a writer we all, with few exceptions, hope to emulate. Thanks for the post. I respect him and all his works, the great, the okay, and the ugly.

He's done what we want to do, each of us. Thanks again for the post.

[seanie blue]

Maestro --

Did I say Koepp's scripts are unimportant or marvelously unimportant to the success of Spiderman? Perhaps I exaggerate to make this point: I think Spiderman is a joke as literature, but I'll concede that the movie and the character play an economic role in society and I cannot with a straight face say that they are bad for literature or for the movie business.

But please don't push the idea that Koepp's script somehow made a great movie, because nothing could be further from the truth. One hundred million dollars spent worldwide on marketing got those movies into the black; the word-of-mouth disappointment with the story, the CGI, and even the acting are legendary. Critics like AO Scott and Kevin Thomas and Stephen Hunter were pulling for the movie (the first one) when it came out because they liked Spiderman and I'll never forget that first week of release when the critics and the Lalaland producer community all issued a collective "oh oh" when the first weekend returns showed that more advertising budget was necessary to sell the movie and that word-of-mouth would be NOWHERE NEAR what was expected.

I have a great deal of respect for Chabon because he is a genre-buster. I'm not sure he'll ever write anything of real literary quality again, which sentiment you can easily find on the web emanating from himself, and his presence on any 125-page script with Koepp is evidence of problems with a script and not a strength. Children of Men just recently suffered from too many cooks at the cost of an Oscar. I won't put that charge against Koepp, but others have, especially in Tinseltown.

Koepp, in my opinion, gets the writing gigs because he's safe, because he listens to the producers and acknowledges that they could write a blockbuster if they only had the time. I had a pal here Thursday night who has a TV series coming out on AMC, and all he could talk about for 24 hours was how every producer in Hollywood wants his own ideas or his own fingerprints in the script. Writers regularly walk away from gigs in which the producer wants to exert creative influence, and Koepp is not one of those people, according to my scuttlebutt, which of course might be sour grapes (definitely on my part), but might also be a reflection of Hollywood's wrong-headed business practices.

I have nothing personal against Koepp. I don't believe for one minute he thinks he's producing literature, and I'm willing to think that he cares about literature and wishes he was capable of Nabokov or even Tennessee Williams, but nobody will convince me that Koepp writes a script and on the strength of his "writing" turns an idea into two hundred million dollars. Just look at the list of his credits. What are the dogs doing there?

I know some of the people who work with Koepp. They listen to me rant like this, and they repeatedly tell me to do something of my own if I think I can do better. Why not? Perhaps because I don't have the juice, the skills or the temperament? Guilty! But I keep my ears open and my mouth shut when I have to and I've managed to wiggle my way into a very special standing in Hollywood as an independent writer/producer who can actually get budgets paid and discs distributed but who won't do so for fear of embarrassing himself by making crap. Part of my self-regulator is the realization that I would not under any circumstance want to be associated with a piece of junk like the Spiderman franchise. And that part is not sour grapes, not one bit. I will aim higher than that even if I never learn how to hit the target, and Koepp can have his millions because he'll never get any respect from a writer like me. Does he care? Of course not. Maybe.

I'd like to see Koepp try to adapt Lolita. I'd like to see him write a novel like Lolita. I'm willing to lay tremendous odds, 500 to 1, that he never will.

And Maestro -- you can conclude a lot about my sanity from this riposte, but don't fool yourself for a moment that I cut down screenwriters or screenwriting. Exactly the opposite. My entire existence as marginal as it is in Lalaland is based on never-ending urging of writers and actors and set people and musicians to do better, to strive for more, and I make my living as a font of encouragement, believe me. I cut down Hollywood. Period. Because it's a bloated joke, and the people who wish to enter there would mostly run screaming if they could see the price paid in terms of self-respect. And nobody in Hollywood is taxed more in terms of self-respect than the writer.

[maestrowork]

Right! And starting with Toy Soldiers, almost all of it a hack's garbage. In a heaven for writers, Koepp gets taken to the town square to face his peers with rocks in their hands.

And here's the ultimate Hollywood insider B.S.: like the singer from Boston, Koepp is a miserable soul. Sure he's brought in billions. So what? Where's the gem? Carlito's Way? Give . . . me . . . a . . . break. Can't wait to meet him so I can commiserate on how rotten life can be.

These are your own words. The contempt you have for the man. And why? Just because he didn't write Lolita?

Gee, that horse you're on is a mighty high one.

And then this:

I have nothing personal against Koepp.

I smell BS. Piles of it.

[clockwork]

One hundred million dollars spent worldwide on marketing got those movies into the black; the word-of-mouth disappointment with the story, the CGI, and even the acting are legendary. Critics like AO Scott and Kevin Thomas and Stephen Hunter were pulling for the movie (the first one) when it came out because they liked Spiderman and I'll never forget that first week of release when the critics and the Lalaland producer community all issued a collective "oh oh" when the first weekend returns showed that more advertising budget was necessary to sell the movie and that word-of-mouth would be NOWHERE NEAR what was expected.

Really? Rotten tomatoes lists 90% of critics as filing positive reviews for Spider-man and a quick search on imdb says Spider-man made $114,844,116 in its opening weekend - certainly short of the $139,000,000 budget and not taking into account advertising costs, but still an enourmously successful opening weekend and, I believe, a record breaker at the time.

As for advertising - massive advertising campaigns are the norm these days. It is wholly expected that the majority of theatrical releases will actually lose money in theatres (unless a major hit) and that the money will be recouped in global sales, merchandise, DVD, pay-per-view and television rights. Even so, $114 million dollars in an opening weekend (the uh-oh weekend as you call it) is a clear sign that Spider-man would easily recoup its budget and, to date, has done so to the tune of $821 million dollars in ticket sales alone. But to say that its success is due to a massive advertising push after the opening weekend is absurd! Spider-man was one of the most anticipated films of recent years. Everyone on the planet knew that film was coming out.

And your assertion that "the word-of-mouth disappointment with the story, the CGI, and even the acting are legendary," is baffling. I'd say that was an accurate description of something like Battlefield Earth but Spider-man? Sorry, not buying it.

[seanie blue]

Maestro -- The horse is high. I fall off it or get knocked off it fairly regularly. But it's the only horse I want to be on. My opinion might smell, I grant you that, but there's no B.S. unless you're alluding only to the line that "I have nothing personal against Koepp." I can see where you'd think that. But don't slander me personally for my opinion, please. My life has a fair degree of B.S. in it, and I am responsible for some of it, I'm the first to admit. But nothing written in this thread and very little written elsewhere on AW or other forums is an attempt by me to say anything but what I think is the truth, however imperfectly I see it. If you want to articulate exactly what you think about my post or posts is B.S., no problem, I posted the info, I'll defend it. But don't dismiss me as a liar or for being untruthful if you don't have a clue of what or who you are making such a charge against.

As for the advertising budgets and the word-of-mouth claims to Chris: the CGI in particular was a problem with Hunter, Thomas and Scott, and was generally regarded as a little bogus. Am I misremembering? Let me ask you if you weren't disappointed in the effects? Or do you not remember there being a general sense of the effects being hokey? If you disagree, I am willing to stand corrected on that score, but my memory is pretty vivid about that movie's opening, for several reasons. The advertising budget WAS affected by opening day, but I may be mistaken about the sequence or timing: the budget was extensively increased within weeks of opening. I should look at the gross figures for the second week, which I thought were still pretty strong, but NOT what was expected. You're right that the movie was anticipated, and probably over-anticipated by Hollywood. And of course you're right that the budgets are stratospheric and the "norm," but isn't that just another support for my claim that the Koepp-blockbuster-Hollywood trifecta is more about marketing than writing? If some of his other movies had been given $100-million in advertising, they would have been hits, too. Most of his movies have sunk out of sight, not nominated or otherwise commended, and that's my point about Koepp. Spiderman made profits in the millions and as a business model is something that can be admired. I'm just annoyed (sour grapes) that the marketing effort gets overlooked in a forum of writers willing to celebrate writing calibrated so crassly to the mass market. So when he is held up as a bastion of screenwriting, I feel compelled to criticize his effort or to point out that the success of his enterprise was due to a marketing blitz few products ever experience.

Why not give the kudos to Stan Lee? I wouldn't have any problem with that. But to Koepp, for what? Can somebody quote me a line straight from the dialogue or tell me that a scene was particularly well written?

I don't want every screenplay to be "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?", but some of them should be, especially at the expense of a write like Koepp. I'll take away the phrase "hack," which was low of me to write, but I'll stand behind the rest of it, especially the misery part, despite whatever hackles it raises in people who think they know better without knowing anything about me or with whom I consort and glean my information.

[clockwork]

CGI effects - honestly, I thought they were great. And this is coming from a guy who studied computer arts for his honours degree. Not entirely photo-real but certainly not hokey, IMO. I've seen worse, way worse.

As for Koepp, ain't nobody here holding him up as a bastion of screenwriting in the artisitc sense. I've said to you in a previous post, I'm not in it for the art, I want to be successful and to make money. That's why I hold Koepp up - because he's an example of someone who has succeeded in that regard. He's not Paddy Chayefsky but whoever said he was? It's possible to admire him for his craft, staying power and ability to play the game. Yes, the Koepp-blockbuster-Hollywood trifecta is more about marketing than writing but again, that's not exactly a newsflash. You'd never see me trying to tell you anything different.

I actually greatly admire the Hollywood system, the marketing and all that. I find it fascinating in a puerculiar kind of way because I wholly understand that Hollywood is a business. They make a product intended to make money. I'm OK with that. Koepp's OK with that. And the majority of the movie-going public are OK with that too.

Anyway, let me summise my position on all this, for your records. and lest we go around and around.

-- Koepp is a screenwriter who writes material catered largely to a generalised, mass-market audience.
-- Hollywood is a business that largely makes generalised, mass-marketed products.
-- Koepp is very good at doing that for them and therefore very successful at his job.
-- I want to do that.
-- I admire Koepp because of this.
-- Koeep is not Shakespeare.

And that's about it. :)

Now let's hear yours.

[dpaterso]

Can somebody quote me a line straight from the dialogue or tell me that a scene was particularly well written?
When the Green Goblin is blowin' stuff up and everyone's running and screaming, and Tobey Maguire just stands there with the crown milling past him, and he's looking up at this flying dude and you can tell he's thinkin', I can take you, man. Coolest two seconds of the film.

I don't get the link between Koepp and the CGI, which I remember as kinda fuzzy and unimpressive, as if there weren't enough frames or similar? I could be wrong.

-Derek

[seanie blue]

Hey Chris --

How can I argue with your summary, when I agree with it? I don't have a beef with any of your items, and as I've said before I admire the honesty of looking at Lalaland as a business opportunity. For all my ranting and raving from atop this dumb horse I ride, I enjoy putting the pieces of the puzzle together to make everyone unite behind an idea; the deal of business-making in Hollywood is as fascinating to me as it is to you.

It would have been interesting to start this thread with your summary and a post to that article. Would posters have lashed out at you for denigrating Koepp? You've got a lot of respect on these boards, and your original post looked -- to me -- as an endorsement without qualification. Certainly without qualifications as strong as those in your list above.

I totally overreacted to your post. I don't care if Koepp tries to emulate the Bard or not. I just wanted to express my opinion that Koepp does not write a movie or scenario that becomes a blockbuster, but is given instead the duty of writing or shaping a blockbuster that will be a blockbuster because of brand recognition and furious marketing. If Koepp writes the next Blade Runner from scratch, I will shut up and salute. But to take another unneeded swipe at the guy, it's my contention that he can't and he won't, and this opinion is shared by many of my acquaintances in Hollywood and the Valley. Some writers, like me, might express our dislike for Koepp's work because of sour grapes, but some writers with gravitas would express their dislike because they're working entertainment writers with serious standards. Even mass-market standards.

So my summary is as succinct as yours, and intended to be as final:

-- Koepp is a screenwriter who writes material catered largely to a generalised, mass-market audience.
-- Hollywood is a business that largely makes generalised, mass-marketed products.
-- Good luck to Koepp, sincerely. But he's got no respect from me, sincerely, and I'll tell that to him in person.

Thanks for asking for my opinion and rebuttal. I appreciate that very much. As I have done with other writers on this board, I invite you to a beer or a vitamin water when you are in Hollywood or Studio City or the Hills, and I will be as interested in your opinions in person as I am on this forum.

[clockwork]

I suppose, in sooth, I didn't expect such an opposing reaction as yours, believing some would enjoy the content of the link, three or four posts and that would be it. Absolutely nothing wrong with your opinion, I just didn't expect it.

Glad you feel like you've been able to have your say. I'm all about the discourse and I respect your viewpoint on this subject. I don't fully understand it ( :) ) but that's cool too.

Thanks for the invite. Consider it accepted and a similar one in return if I ever do make it.

Just don't heckle at my first Koepp-style premiere, OK?

[clockwork]

Re-reading your post, this--

I just wanted to express my opinion that Koepp does not write a movie or scenario that becomes a blockbuster, but is given instead the duty of writing or shaping a blockbuster that will be a blockbuster because of brand recognition and furious marketing.

--in my opinion, sums up your point of view most honestly and I can understand and sympathise with what you're saying.

And just out of curiosity (and without judgement) what are your own career ambitions?

[Ragnarok]

It's not about Koepp but the quote says it all about the blockbuster spirit...
Jurassic Park is a textbook example of blockbuster craftsmanship. If you're looking for subtle artistry in character and plot, you've come to the wrong place. But if you want to learn how to use story structure and genre to write a hit Hollywood film, this is the place to start.

http://www.truby.com/jurassicbd.html

[seanie blue]

Actually, Ragnarok's post is an interesting addendum to this thread: Jurassic Park was Koepp's fifth produced screenplay, and led of course to the Spiderman opportunity. And I am sure that JP was a "work-for-hire" situation.

And in answer to Chris' query about my own ambitions, it would be safe for me to reply that I would like to write/produce/direct a movie more or less along the lines of Apartment Zero, Koepp's first produced script.

These two things -- Ragnarok's post and my admission to aim for Apartment Zero -- lead me to try as briefly as possible to illustrate my frustration with the ambitions of writers I know or meet, especially in Hollywood:

How many of the two million screenplays kicking around Hollywood are blockbuster genre types of the JP magnitude? And how many are like Apartment Zero? I think it is almost impossible to make it in Hollywood by copying JP. But if you can write in a small cinematic scope something like Apartment Zero, you will get your chances to a) make a living and b) write a hit. But most people I know or meet are trying to write JP 4 or Scorsese-type scripts without any idea of how much it actually costs to film an exploding car or a gun battle.

Does this make any sense?

As for my own realities, Chris: I have been incredibly lucky that two underground movies I made were noticed by the mainstream, and continue to attract attention from mainstream producers, talent and lawyers. I've written about this ad nauseum elsewhere. I also got lucky when a young singer I coached hit it rich with Hollywood Records, and the $900K + contract is something I can use to open any door in Hollywood; you're rated on your financial impact first, and artistic acumen second, and delivering a million-dollar package to the industry is a serious introduction. Also written about elsewhere on these boards. So my opportunity right now is to drop off a screenplay for a modest amount of money. $15K to $30K guaranteed option. No way. Instead, I'm producing a musical, managing a music show, writing & producing an Emmanuelle-type erotica silliness which I nevertheless regard as literature, producing a business deal for cable called BadTV in which the programming changes every few seconds to reflect the remote habits of TV viewers (wherein the actual programming is a combination of 50% nudity with 50% science news), and negotiating with an independent publisher to put out three art books, while trying to deal with letters of interest from Taschen, from an art gallery in Houston to put on a show of my photos, from one of the very few serious theatres in Los Angeles, and from the porn industry convinced I could be part of the Holy Grail crossover into the mainstream (which I firmly ignore). That's reality, today. I am supposed to be in Beirut on April 14 to film two projects: Scuba Diving in Beirut about a young marine biologist who I believe can be a role model for Arabic women everywhere, and to make a comparison of young people in Beirut and Tel Aviv called "Beirut vs. Tel Aviv" in which my aim is to show that the cool young pretty things in both cities are exactly alike; support for this, financial and intellectual, is unlimited, given the state of geopolitics. But I'm trying to get out of that trip and staple myself to a scout in Tobago for filming whale sharks. That's my reality tomorrow.

I don't have any problem being stuck in my situation, but I have my dreams. As they relate to script-writing: Why not make an American movie in Farsi and distribute it in the Iranian underground? Okay, a Chinese distributor is interested. Why not do it in Mandarin and hit the Chinese underground? I've put out feelers; what lawyers are interested in making a $50K movie that will land on a hungry Chinese audience like petrol on flames? I would very much like to do this. And then: Why not make a very small movie in an apartment in Manhattan, just me, two actors, sound man, and co-producer to help with reflectors and scripts and cops and the other riff-raff that movie-making attracts, and cast an Oscar nominee into the role? The Oscar nominee balks coz he's a writer who gave up on acting years ago, and he offers Eric Roberts instead. I want my friend, not Eric Roberts, but this gets me to thinking: What about Peter Fonda and just Peter Fonda? How good an actor is he? Ulee's Gold was one of the best American films I've seen, but what since? And I've got the story, finish it in a week, and get it to Peter Fonda. Isn't the marketplace 100% ripe for a tiny tiny movie with beautiful heart-stopping dialogue and no guns or violence or the other trashy stupidity of the current American cinema?

That's where I'm at, Chris, tonight, in New York City at 7:27 a.m. I don't know that any of this is a career. I hope not, since I don't know very many people who have had much happiness with their "careers."

I meet a lot of people in Hollywood whose schedules are enormously grand and elegant, but they all seem to want to come with me to the Amazon or the Kalahari or make a movie for two thousand dollars. And I constantly constantly advocate writers or producers to ignore the festivals and submission process to throw themselves into the currents of channeling creativity, where they can hone their own voices instead of having their self-expression drowned out by the Hollywood screech for profit. Let's make a movie in the desert for one hundred bucks about life and life and send it to Gus van Zant and say, Top this. Let's take a band to play the tin mines in Bolivia, let's drive motorcycles from Malaga to Johannesburg and get BMW to underwrite it all. Let's . . . etc., etc. Instead, from an enormous remove, so far away he can hardly see the glitter, a writer folds his screenplay into a paper airplane and shoots it toward that distant orb, Hollywood, and models his designs on a creature he can only read about, such as Mr. Koepp? I admire the dedication it takes to have that sort of discipline and hope, because I don't. I've been dead a couple of times already and I'm not going to wait for somebody to give me the keys to the club. I'm a writer. I can write my own reality, and create a role for everyone else, too. And I can draw and take pictures, the same way everyone on this board can, too, so what am I waiting for? The desert is right there, beckoning, so why not produce something, now?

It will sound strange to anyone who watches it, but I made this small video ten days ago in my own house in LA, inspired largely by a series of writings and reactions and posts right here on AW. I brought a producer over one night and had him say "I like your idea and I like the script, but every time I think of you I feel like I am losing money," and this was to be the start of a series of writers and producers literally saying what I wrote in these AW posts about writing and Hollywood, but as all ideas do this one metamorphosed into a completely different exercise, an attempt to rescue myself from falling into the skin and games of the Valley. It was shot on one day, written completely in the presence of the actress, and edited in 7 hours; I've got two distributors offering jackass money already (ten grand, twelve grand, seventeen grand if I bring a lawyer to the meeting), and I am embarrassed to say the writing is horrible, the sound is terrible, and that I can do better, etc., but I'm posting it here because it isn't a theory or an opinion but rather a piece of a writer's reality who has absolutely no desire to bend or break his skills into the Hollywood mold:

Bikko Flies Into the Sun. (http://www.brightcove.com/title.jsp?title=712981507)

Thanks again for the priming, Chris. I will tell anyone who objects subsequently that this post is your fault.

[icerose]

I quite liked spiderman one and two and am looking forward to seeing number three.

As for my ambitions, even though no one asked I'm out to tell good stories. That's it. Money would be really great though so I hope my good stories will bring in that.

[billythrilly7th]

Right! And starting with Toy Soldiers, almost all of it a hack's garbage.

Toy Soldiers is a great movie.

[icerose]

I liked Toy Soldiers too, especially the chick that hacked up the guy who tried to rape her.