They asked me to read their screenplay.
And I said okay.
I said “Yes”, not because I liked them, which I
unqualifiedly do. The fact is, however,
is that in my entire history of “Would you read my screenplay?” requests, I do
not recall saying no to any of
them. Whether I liked the requester or I
didn’t, especially when I didn’t, because turning them down put me in fear of
the discomfiting follow-up:
“Why not? Don’t you
like me?”
Cowardly as that behavior admittedly is, I would rather read
ten screenplays than open up that poisonous
can of worms. How long would it be
before I heard the dreaded and the opposite of anticipated,
“Well I don’t like you
either!”
“Then why did you ask me to read your screenplay?”
“I respect you as a writer.
But as a person, I have always hated you.”
So I read their screenplay.
To avoid the unpleasantness.
But like them or hate them, having said “Yes”, an unasked-for
burden inevitably begins. The nature of
that burden?
A person is standing naked in front of you.
“I want you to be totally honest. What do you think?”
What do I need that for?
Even if it’s a metaphorical “naked.”
Who wants that kind of responsibility?
“There are parts I like, and there are parts I’m not crazy
about.”
Do you really want to be the person who tells somebody that?
At least in this situation, the script-reading burden did
not involve an e-mailed attachment, a compounding obligation involving time, a
concerted effort and a hundred and twenty pages of my own paper required print
up the script I would, all things being equal, prefer I did not have to
read. (Not to mention the shame of
e-mailing back to say that I’m having
difficulty opening the attachment.)
(I have subsequently learned to re-insert the printed-on
pages “contents side up” and print out my own stuff on the other side. But not infrequently, I mistakenly insert the
pages “contents side down”, and what
I subsequently print out is an illegible mishmash, not dissimilar to
hieroglyphics.)
Okay, we are dealing with a factual reality here. The script is now in my hands. And I have been asked to evaluate it.
My first question is,
Why?
My suspicions in that regard are these: I am a professional writer, I had a certain
amount of commercial success, and they know
me – the latter being essential because if they didn’t know me, I would be entirely in the clear.
They do not have to know me that well. In this case the writer is the daughter of a
woman who has some uncertain (to me) connection to my brother’s daughter in
Toronto. It takes as little as
that. And you’re reading a stranger’s
screenplay.
The thing is this:
My success was in network situation comedies, of which feature-length
screenplays bear minimal resemblance. It
is also not a very recent success. And on top of that, the three spec (original
and unsolicited) screenplays I wrote and the two assigned rewrites I worked on
had, all five, ended in ignominious failure. Would you entrust yourself to a surgeon with that track record?
SURGEON: Okay, all my patients died. Does that mean I'm incompetent?
Yes!
SURGEON: Okay, all my patients died. Does that mean I'm incompetent?
Yes!
The equivalent of that is who you're asking to evaluate your movie script. Is that really who you want?
And yet…
Somebody asked.
I inquired of the aspiring screenwriter if they had given
their script to other people as well, and was informed that they had. Knowing this took a little of the pressure
off me. The responsibility would be
shared. (Though on some level I was also
a little miffed. Here I am, volunteering
for this service, and the supplicant is already hedging their bets. How’m I going to look if the other readers
loved it and I didn’t? Besides, is my
informed judgment to be second-guessed by nonentities? It’s outrageous!)
I went on to ask if the script had been submitted to the
writing team the aspiring screenwriter had been working for, and was told that
it hadn’t been, the explanation being that the aspiring screenwriter was
concerned that their evaluation would emerge through the lens of “This is what we would do” (a “this” the aspiring screenwriter did not entirely
respect.)
My response to the “through the lens” issue was, “Doesn’t everybody do that?”
And therein – for me – lies the thorniest difficulty of
all. Having seen reviewers respond to a
show I had written with reactions all “over the map,” varying from huzzahs to
“P.U”, I have developed the belief that reviewers, inevitably seeing through
only the lens they have available to them, substantially, though not
exclusively, review themselves.
Yes, I can pore over a script, red-penning the
insufficiencies in logic, the inconsistencies in the storytelling, the
overwriting or, conversely, the gaps in structural development, the personal
appeal of the premise and the originality of its execution.
I can do the best job I can.
But I am using my brain and my highly subjective, and not
necessarily transferable sensibilities.
What does that have to do with what the original writer had
in mind?
I once critiqued a friend’s screenplay – this time, the work
of a professional writer – and his reaction, which seemed to me somewhat
prickly was,
“Your observations were so ‘Earl.’”
What the heck did he expect?
(My guess: Unqualified approval.)
It is an onerous assignment, reading somebody else’s writing. They are handing you their hopes and
aspirations, which I find to be a serious weight, and they are asking for your
help, which, despite its expertise and sincerity, may not actually be helpful.
Oscar Wilde once said,
“The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.”
I guess that’s how I feel about this.
The only thing worse than being asked to read somebody’s
screenplay is never being asked to read anybody’s
screenplay.
And there, I shall call it a day, and move on to other
responsibilities.
Somebody’s “Page One” is calling my name.
3 comments:
Bonjour Monsieur Earlo,
I would judge the surgeon only about: how his patients died. If the roof fell during the surgery or if the electric power was lost…
I have been asked to read screenplays sometimes. The one problem i have noticed is that the requesters never pay attention to the readers's sensibilities. For instance, i would not ask Mr Earlo to read a spec "Fight Club" Or "Saw". But i would ask him to read a spec "Secrets and lies" or "Little miss sunshine". The right person for the right screenplay. Now, about the screenplay forms, it's another topic.
Good day
I am amazed that this posting isn't followed by a long chain of people asking you to read their screenplay.
wg
As I'd been a reader at the studio which hosted Barack Obama yesterday, had my own screenplays work-shopped at Sundance and made an indie feature film, I also had a steady stream of friends and colleagues who requested a read and critique of their screenplays. Give'em the studio treatment, they demanded. Slash and trash its weaknesses as I would any studio reading assignment, they said. So I did. I alienated many now distant friends by giving them the brutally honest feedback they'd requested. I'd read them as writers, professionals who could withstand criticism rather than as people who were innately vulnerable. And I thought I was doing them a favor. I hadn't yet learned the lesson you teach in this blogpost, Earl: When it comes to friends and acquaintances who ask for brutally honest criticism, they're lying. They don't know they're lying, but what they really want is to be re-assured and pointed in the right direction. Comforted, consoled and encouraged. When someone you know asks for a read and critique of a screenplay, they're presenting their bare soul to you, and your job is to protect and nurture. Let the anonymous studio readers be brutal. After all, they're getting paid to do it.
Post a Comment