UPDATE: Monumentally Frustrated...

[kevacho]

I want to thank everyone who helped with advice.

It seems everyones initial instincts were correct. The man I was in contact with no longer works for New Line. I got a new name, and a new number... so, I'll attempt the laborious task of trying to get another person interested in my work. (... sigh) :Shrug:

Live to write, write to live...

Regards,
Kevin
www.kevacho.com

[nielsty]

At least it wasn't a silent pass.

[NikeeGoddess]

just as a warning...
so, I'll attempt the laborious task of trying to get another person interested in my work.
you'll probably have to do this hundreds of times. be prepared to not let yourself get down over each and every one. you can't be so sensitive and let one experience frustrate you so.

hint: don't start with your tagline. tag is something for the end or for the poster, not your query.

p.s. if you get to the point where you start taking meetings and they still turn you down then check your deoderant. nerves usually make men stink! ;)

[RainbowDragon]

Exactly - you can't afford to take it personally. If you're not going to give up (good sign), resign yourself to the fact that you will have rude rejections, polite rejections, interested people who ultimately can't get your script made (but may hire you someday to work on something else). Be personable with everyone, but don't take the responses personally. If you're getting good feedback on the writing itself, all you can do is try to get as many reads as you can without spending more than you can afford for postage, etc. Settling in for the long haul is step one, learning not to ride the roller coaster of soaring hopes and crushing disappointment is a process we all have to work on; it seems to get easier with time.

[clockwork]

This kind of sudden job departure is extremely common I'm afraid. In the two years I've been meeting people, I know of five development execs who have left high profile jobs with great companies - that's when they're not on holiday or maternity leave. :rolleyes:

[Write_At_1st_Light]

Actually Kevin -

Go ahead and take it personally. And don't be nice and polite to them. Figure it this way: THEY lost out, not you. They could have had a good story, gotten together some talented folks, made a good movie and some nice profits. Maybe even would have been a flick that had staying power, down through the ensuing decades. But noooooooo. Hey - they screwed up. You didn't.

You know what we gotta do? All of us talented people who think that rejection is the status quo? Start a new Hollywood. Start the whole damned thing, all over again. Good, hard storytelling. Talent at all phases. Get people back to buzzing about movies like they used to. Know what's funny? I keep hearing folks say this. I think we should do it.

[DanielD]

A new hollywood?
I'll second that.
Just need a catchy name though.....Mmmmmmm.
Daniel.

[zahra]

A new Hollywood? ooh, can I come?

But I wonder how long before it would turn into the old one all over again...

[kevacho]

You guys are great! (Oh... and sorry 'bout the "dudes"... dudes.) "Write at 1st Light", I like the cut of your jib.

I will not give up. Which, admittedly, could be my downfall. Regardless, I will fail or succeed on the strength of my conviction. To date, that conviction has yet to fail me.

Live to write... write to live, and never... ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

Best regards,

Kevin
www.kevacho.com (http://www.kevacho.com)

[Write_At_1st_Light]

A new Hollywood? ooh, can I come?

But I wonder how long before it would turn into the old one all over again...
Yes you are invited and so is Daniel. Long as you can write good stories. :)

Eventually it WILL turn into the old one all over again, but during the runup? Woo-Hoo! We'll have some kinda fun making movies the way they used to be. And when Hollywood Two gets re-ruined? Why then we'll Re-Three it all over again!

I'm actually rather serious about this.

I heard a radio show a month or so ago. The guy was talking about seeing the latest recycling of the "Bourne" story. Bourne whatever - what's it now up to, Ultimatum? With more to come. Anyway he was mentioning how disappointed he was that he did not get a theater seat way in the back because then he wouldn't have been affected so much by the Shaky Camera Crapola and the Vomit-Cam Garbage. He specifically mentioned his puzzlement as to why the camera had to be shaking all over creation when the scene was: Guy and girl in restaurant eating and talking.

See what Hollywood is today? It is now an entity that creates a product that is HAZARDOUS TO THE HEALTH OF SOME PEOPLE. For example, I can't really watch films in theaters anymore - because of Vomit-Cam. I am not going to pay to leave the movie halfway through - and be embarrassed - because the talent level in Hollywood is at such a nadir that cheap carnival mesmerization tricks have to be used to rivet the viewer's eyes on the screen. I'm susceptible to motion sickness and I am not going to pay to puke. Sorry.

Motion pictures used to be about superior writing, directing, acting, music, sound effects, wardrobe and so forth. And THAT is what I, and many others, wish to get back to. Look at the great films. See any Shaky Camera or Vomit-Cam? NOPE! Never needed that hokum back in the day.

[nmstevens]

Yes you are invited and so is Daniel. Long as you can write good stories. :)

Eventually it WILL turn into the old one all over again, but during the runup? Woo-Hoo! We'll have some kinda fun making movies the way they used to be. And when Hollywood Two gets re-ruined? Why then we'll Re-Three it all over again!

I'm actually rather serious about this.

I heard a radio show a month or so ago. The guy was talking about seeing the latest recycling of the "Bourne" story. Bourne whatever - what's it now up to, Ultimatum? With more to come. Anyway he was mentioning how disappointed he was that he did not get a theater seat way in the back because then he wouldn't have been affected so much by the Shaky Camera Crapola and the Vomit-Cam Garbage. He specifically mentioned his puzzlement as to why the camera had to be shaking all over creation when the scene was: Guy and girl in restaurant eating and talking.

See what Hollywood is today? It is now an entity that creates a product that is HAZARDOUS TO THE HEALTH OF SOME PEOPLE. For example, I can't really watch films in theaters anymore - because of Vomit-Cam. I am not going to pay to leave the movie halfway through - and be embarrassed - because the talent level in Hollywood is at such a nadir that cheap carnival mesmerization tricks have to be used to rivet the viewer's eyes on the screen. I'm susceptible to motion sickness and I am not going to pay to puke. Sorry.

Motion pictures used to be about superior writing, directing, acting, music, sound effects, wardrobe and so forth. And THAT is what I, and many others, wish to get back to. Look at the great films. See any Shaky Camera or Vomit-Cam? NOPE! Never needed that hokum back in the day.


Unfortunately, you hear this sort of thing all the time -- when are they going to stop making movies like "X" and go back to making movies like "Z" -- and the cold, cruel answer comes down to the same thing.

This past summer was the most successful in movie history. The third Bourne movie was a huge hit. The Harry Potter franchise -- none of which I'd classify as great and some of which were no better than mediocre, has now topped the charts as the most financially successful movie series in all of film history.

There was a recent Variety article touting the fact that, next summer, without any big sequels to rely on, Hollywood was going to have to rely on "original" movies -- and then they gave some examples --

Get Smart, The Incredible Hulk, Iron Man.

When are they going to stop making movies like the Bourne Ultimatum?

Right around the time that they stop making over a quarter of a billion bucks. That's when.

Hell, I can tell you at great length all of the things that were wrong with Cameron's Titanic.

Like he or the studios that made it really give a hoot about my opinion about that movie, which made more money than any movie in history.

If I was in their shoes, you know what I'd say? Write up your list of mistakes so that we can keep making them, because obviously, whatever we did in that movie, good, bad or indifferent, it worked just fine and we'd love to be able to do it again.

And that's exactly what they did with the Bourne movies -- they'll just keep doing it again until it stops making money, and with every other movie that hits -- they'll keep making it until it stops making money.

And if you think they did it differently in the past, you need to look more closely. Universal never made a horror movie before Dracula. It made it. It was a big hit. Next thing you know, it was in the "horror" business, cranking out one horror movie after another -- for as long as they made money.

Just like Warners with gangster films and MGM with musicals.

It's always been about trying to find out what the public wanted and giving it to them until they were sick of it and then moving on to something else.

That Hollywood, "this" Hollywood -- any Hollywood.

NMS

[DanielD]

Mmmm.....Good point nmstevens.
Showbusiness being more business than show.
They can't lose churning out sequels.
Why risk an unknown idea( concept), when a sure win formula exists.
Hey! It worked for the Rocky franchise.


I look at movies, the same as I do with music.
From each generation and within each genre, there are good movies/songs and there are Bad movies/songs.
There are very few true experts on either of these art/crafts, though we all have our own preferences as to what constitutes a quality film/song.
I remember a statement which said something like " In Europe movies are seen as an artform(Non commercial), in hollywood artistic movies are frowned upon( due to their lack of commercial viability).

I think I read on the Wordplay site, an article relating to the importance of writing with broader appeal in mind, thus garnering a larger audience.

My own tastes range from movies considered classics(Some were not immediately recognised, for example China Town), to movies which may one day be percieved as modern classics, even though they are highly commercial, for example (Lord of the rings).
And a whole lot more in between.

Whether a movie is commercial, or isn't commercial doesn't necessarily mean it's a great movie/story, or not so great movie/story.
Daniel.

[kevacho]

Again, you guys are great. "Write at First Light"... I agree with you emphatically on the whole "shaky camera" phenomenon. "Shaky Camera" can be used efficiently and effectively, however, I think it's a bad sign when you rely on camera movements to instill tension and conflict in your movie, and or, television show. Hell! That stuff should be in the script and story. "Lost", one of my favorite shows at the moment, does, in my humble opinion, way... WAY too much "shaky camera" crap. The thing that's so annoying is that the stories and characters are great, they don't need to go for the cheep thrill in every scene.

I also have to concur with you, Daniel D. I have adored big, Hollywood blockbusters and small, independent films equally. What really matters is story, and character. I truly believe, at the end of the day, that is what sells your work. And I think a good example of this is Pixar; there movies are inundated, quite literally, with technology, but they've concentrated on story and character first. I think that's why they've been so successful.

Again, thanks... you guys.

Write to live... live to write...

Best regards,

Kevin
www.kevacho.com

[Write_At_1st_Light]

Mmmm.....Good point nmstevens.
Showbusiness being more business than show.
They can't lose churning out sequels.
Why risk an unknown idea( concept), when a sure win formula exists.
Hey! It worked for the Rocky franchise.
Hi Daniel -

I don't disagree with your assessment - from THEIR narrow, shortsighted perspective. You're correct - that is how Hollywood sees things. What I'm saying is: I'm sick of it.

Sick of good writers like you and me and many others here, and elsewhere, being shoved aside for the "safe" crap. The forgettable swill. Making money is fine (and by the way, Hollywood put FEWER butts into the seats this summer than they did a year ago) but we writers aren't just about making money. And I don't think the viewers are just about being amused for two empty-headed hours.

You've done this - I know you have: You have given your script to people (but NOT writers - remember, writers will rip the work of other writers to shreds just on principle). You've given your script to a cross-section of readers who are simply going to react to your work as it hits them. As if they are sitting in a theatre. And what have those readers told you? "I'd LOVE to see this made into a movie! I'd go in a second!"

And the stuff you are writing is NOT swillish, commercial, head-exploding garbage. It has drama, probably some violence - but it SAYS something. It's original. It has rich characters. It has unique dialogue. It presents something in a fashion no one has ever done before.

How many of us have written stuff like this, and then end up having to feel defensive about it? Because the incestuous Hollywood machine either won't look at it, or pays someone to look at 3 pages and then toss your work into the garbage? You're not wrong - HOLLYWOOD is wrong. It has devolved into an entity so focused on business and promotion and recycling safe material, that mostly it has forgotten its core function: Good, original, creative storytelling. Where is that? After slogging through sequels and remakes and comic-book swill - where's the art part?

I know. Hollywood is not interested in art. Only in green. But that's where there should be an opportunity to do both Art AND Green. I do NOT mean independent films. I mean the big, full-blown pictures.

But of course we know these Hollywood companies are hard at work on Spiderman 4, Bourne whatever-the-hell, Jackass 3, Remake this, Redo a stupid 70s TV series into a dippy Dukes of Hazzard that...

I want to build a huge studio here in California, original movies only - and then distribute directly to the Internet. Bypass the current distribution. We know the Web is where film is going anyway. Already there, in various permutations.

But I have no money. I think I'll get a paper route and save up! :)