[BOOK REVIEW] The Writers’ Room Survival Guide by Niceole Levy
Anyone can become a screenwriter, but being a successful screenwriter is not for everyone. In fact, research shows you’re more likely to get hit by lightning while winning the lottery before succeeding as a professional screenwriter. It’s a career, passion or delusional dream that takes dedication, persistence, thick skins, honing and crafting, hard grafting, talent, and luck.
You can learn your craft, immerse yourself in films and television, write consistently, read produced and unproduced screenplays, develop unique and brilliant concepts, evolve strong characters, network like a demon, shape industry relationships, work your way up from the post room, enter and possibly win writing competitions, and have the grind of Sisyphus and foolhardy zeal of Wile. E. Coyote by never ever giving in. One can have all this and still not achieve a modicum of success.
Yet, despite the litany of obstacles, people do actually make it. Successful writer and the ultra-talented Niceole Levy has worked on multiple shows and films and is now executive producing shows for Netflix. She has also created an effective guide for those writers who have won the golden ticket and managed to enter the hallowed grounds and well-paid realms of a television writer’s room. But all that glitters is certainly not gold.
In this expertly written (obviously), intelligent, dynamic, and witty work, Levy whips us through the personalities, staff, managers, hierarchy, politics, schedules, production ins and outs, room dos and don’ts, lingo, diversity matters and many more aspects of keeping your job, sanity and maybe even progressing in television. Thus, I really enjoyed Niceole Levy’s inspirational and honest inside look at Hollywood TV production. Especially the descriptions of those monstrous showrunners who should be avoided. Alas, names are withheld, for fear of litigation perhaps.
Ultimately, as an outsider NOT working in Hollywood, I could not fully engage empathetically with certain situations and anecdotes. There were a fair number of useful hints at improving my own writing and standing in the industry. However, there was a heavy leaning toward overcoming internal writing room politics rather than how to resolve creative issues during the making of successful television programmes. Nonetheless there are many entertaining and insightful experiences on record.
Lastly, the grass is always greener. If you think you’ve made it when you enter the privileged place of TV writers’ rooms, well, think again. According to Niceole Levy you’re either floating or sinking, waving, or drowning. So, get swimming and kick fast because the sharks are circling. Don’t forget to use this essential book as a float board!
Michael Wiese Productions (MWP) was launched in San Francisco in 1976 primarily to produce films. Today, the company is known worldwide having published some 200 books. Some of the bestsellers have been translated into 28 languages, are used in over 1000 film courses, in the Hollywood studios and by emerging filmmakers.
[Book review:] The Hollywood Standard: The Complete and Authoritative Guide to Script Format and Style (3rd Edition) – by Christopher Riley
INT. BASEMENT OFFICE – RAINDANCE FILM SCHOOL – NIGHT
The WRITER (early 50s), balding, could be in better shape but he’s a slave to his work and not the gym. Hunched over his laptop the Writer stares at a blank screen. Thinking. Suddenly a flurry of TYPING.
INSERT COMPUTER SCREEN:
INT. BASEMENT OFFICE – RAINDANCE FILM SCHOOL – NIGHT
BACK TO: the Writer YAWNING.
THE WRITER (V.O.) Nothing like a looming deadline to help get things done. Everything except hitting that looming deadline. Cleaning. I tend to clean a lot when I have a deadline. My flat and office have never been so clean The kitchen too. It wasn’t even my kitchen.
The Writer checks his watch. It’s 8.15pm. Rubs his eyes.
THE WRITER (V.O.) I’d been tasked with writing a review of Christopher Riley’s formidable guide script format and style called The Hollywood Standard. I was struggling. How could I write this review in an interesting way? What could I say that hasn’t already been said by way more talented people than me? What I can say is this book is the bible and a must buy for screenwriters of all levels. Not only does Riley write with authority about the basics of script formatting, but he also gives us a vital chapter on ‘Deadly Mistakes to Avoid’ while writing one’s screenplay. I mean, you may have the greatest story known to humanity, but if you don’t write with clarity, accuracy and follow the basic rules, then those hard-to-impress studio script readers will throw your hard work and dreams to the proverbial pyre!
The Writer’s mobile phone BUZZES with a text.
Looks at his phone. Eyes roll. Pushes the phone away.
THE WRITER (V.O.) Moreover, Riley brilliantly backs up pages of fine advice, with examples of classic scriptwriting by the likes of Vince Gilligan, Guillermo Del Toro, Jordan Peele, and the Coen Brothers.
The Writer’s mobile phone VIBRATES from a call.
THE WRITER (to the PHONE) Not now! (won’t go away, so answers) Yes. . . sorry. I’m tired. Got stuck here writing this book review. (listens) Soon. . . I know I work too hard. (listens) Okay, my dear. . . The book? It’s brilliant. I’m close to concluding. Just about to write how important a clear writing style is when conveying your cinematic vision on the page. (listens) Funny you should ask, Riley covers dialogue, action, dream, montage, flashback sequences, CAPITALIZATION, sounds, texts, [parentheticals], transitions, and more. . . Yeah, The Hollywood Standard is invaluable. . . I’d better go. Need to get home. (listens) Yes, I know this conversation’s in my head. I’m just typing this for a meta-conclusion. To be clever. The review is finished. Got to start writing that feature film I’m getting paid for. You’re right! Right! THAT fridge won’t clean itself.
Michael Wiese Productions (MWP) was launched in San Francisco in 1976 primarily to produce films. Today, the company is known worldwide having published some 200 books. Some of the bestsellers have been translated into 28 languages, are used in over 1000 film courses, in the Hollywood studios and by emerging filmmakers.
(Note from THE WRITER: I know the script above should be in Courier New font, but WordPress won’t let me change it or I don’t know how.)
A Sense of Dread: Getting Under the Skin of Horror Screenwriting by Neil Marshall Stevens
As a filmgoer many people are willing to be frightened and induce anxiety and be sickeningly entertained through horror cinema. But why go out of your way to scare yourself? On the other side, many others in society consider horror films to be depraved and lead to copycat crimes. I am not one of those individuals. I love horror. I love gore. I love watching and telling horror stories. I love being scared in the dark by sounds and images from the silver screen.
Other than being entertained on a primal level, horror cinema distracts me from my own mortality too. This artificial dread paradoxically relieves me from the fear of the end. It’s a way for me to face my fears head on, but safely hidden behind my popcorn.
Further, the horror genre provides one of the most shared experiences for audiences at the cinema. Collectively, this group experience scares us and provides ultimate relief by the time one leaves the cinema. Indeed, horror films are often a staple for teens or young adults looking for thrills on a Friday or Saturday night. They can also make great date movies that allow you to get closer to someone as you both share the fear in front of you.
Don’t ever forget that horror cinema is big business. Often on a very low budget. The Blair Witch Project (1999), Eraserhead (1977), Paranormal Activity (2007) and the seminal, Night of the Living Dead (1968) are all great examples of low-budget horror films which did incredible numbers at the box office. Which is why if you’re a horror screenwriter or looking to get into creating fear on screen, A Sense of Dread: Getting Under the Skin of Horror Screenwriting by Neil Marshall Stevens is an invaluable guide to get you started.
Neil Marshall Stevens is a screenwriter and film lecturer with many credits to his name. His book explores the nature of fear and developing the concept of fear within the horror genre. The opening chapters look at the science and biology of what scares us as a species. Are we born with such fears, or do we learn them? After which the writer digs downs into the specifics of what scares people and animals. We are animals after all. This takes in a plethora of phobias, creepy crawlies, urban legends, and things that go bump in the night. Stevens also superbly analyses the many fears prevalent within the real world and our nightmares. The final chapter exercises further cement the theories and concepts with valuable practical advice.
The second half of the book introduces the brilliant idea of the ‘Toolbox of Dread.’ Here Stevens takes some famous horror films and horror conventions and illustrates how filmmakers unnerve and frighten audiences. The ratcheting of suspense, fake tension and the classic jump scare are all explored in depth. These chapters certainly gave me great confidence when I write my next horror screenplay.
Stevens also further develops these ideas in analysing a treatment and scenes from his unproduced screenplay Horrorvision. Not only does this provide an excellent insight into the writing process, but it drills down into how to create tension and dread on the page. Ultimately, Stevens developed Horrorvision in 2000, but it never went into production due to the budget size and being too similar to another project.
I really connected with this book. It gave me a whole new set of approaches and ideas to bring to my next horror projects. It is written in an intelligent and digestible style and gave me a renewed appreciation of the horror film genre. Yes, of course many horror films can be exploitative and often produces some truly terrible movies. However, when directed by the horror experts such as: George A. Romero, James Wan, Ari Aster, John Carpenter, David Cronenberg, Wes Craven, Sam Raimi, and Julie Ducournau, to name a few, horror becomes a powerful and primal expression of the cinematic form.
Michael Wiese Productions (MWP) was launched in San Francisco in 1976 primarily to produce films. Today, the company is known worldwide having published some 200 books. Some of the bestsellers have been translated into 28 languages, are used in over 1000 film courses, in the Hollywood studios and by emerging filmmakers.
SIX OF THE BEST #34 – AMAZING FILMS I DO NOT LIKE!
Are there box office hits, cinematic phenomena and damned fine films loved by critics which you DO NOT like? That isn’t to say they aren’t great films, but subjectively you just don’t enjoy them? I mean some people dislike much of Christopher Nolan’s work! What!? Okay, Interstellar (2014), was not his best, but hey that’s just my opinion. It’s all just opinions.
Now, I like to be positive on this blog and have critical balance when writing my reviews. In fact, some films I choose not to review because I don’t want to slag something off which is just not for me. I also generally avoid reviewing films I consider terrible because I prefer to avoid negativity.
Thus, this article is not about having a pop at classic films or saying they are over-rated for attention. The truth is – I AM IN THE WRONG HERE! But I think it’s interesting to examine why I don’t like these six excellent films. After all, many talented people have worked passionately on them, so in no way do I want to disrespect their craft. Which is why, I repeat, I am wrong!
*** CONTAINS SPOILERS ***
AVATAR (2009)
James Cameron is one of the greatest genre filmmakers of all time. He is also a technological innovator and genius. In Avatar (2009), he truly topped himself in regard to creating not only the beautiful world and inhabitants of Pandora, but by using never-seen-before motion-capture cinematic techniques. Moreover, the film would go on to make over $2 billion at the box office, so I’m not worthy enough to criticise Avatar (2009). But the script is incredibly flat and derivative. The lead characters are mostly unlikable and I genuinely found the amount of blue on show irritating to the eye. Worst of all is the hypocrisy that a film this expensive, and with a carbon footprint this big, is critiquing capitalist corporations who destroy the natural world.
THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT (1999)
Yes, this horror film had one of the smartest and ingenious marketing campaigns of all time. Yes, I should be praising it because I love horror films and also get excited when indie filmmakers hit the big time with low budget films. But, The Blair Witch Project (1999) has no real story as it just a clever series of jump scare set-ups. More importantly, it has no characters you can root for as they are so stupid and obnoxious. Worst of all it wasn’t scary or suspenseful. That’s because I wanted the bickering trio to die. I mean, who throws away a map. They were morons! Plus, this expertly crafted movie committed the worst crime of all – bringing back the found footage film! Now, don’t get me started on THAT cinematically moribund subgenre!
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (1977)
What’s not to like about an award winning, box office smash directed by arguably the most brilliant director of a generation? Furthermore, Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) also contains some of the most breath-taking and ground-breaking special effects. So, with the Oscar winning cinematography and majestic score, why don’t I enjoy this Steven Spielberg sci-fi masterpiece? In short, I cannot stand the choices Richard Dreyfus’ character makes. I did not believe his journey. Why would you want to go to space and connect with aliens? Why would you abandon your family and head off on some frantic search for something from the sky? Eat the mash potato! Don’t make mini-mountains out of it. I get that there is pseudo-religious metaphors going on, but why were we meant to care? Amazing spectacle, but devoid of emotional connection and an ending that didn’t make much logical sense to me.
THE MASTER (2012)
I really love films and documentaries about cults. Especially where religion is used to control human beings and make them do crazy things. What possesses another person to want to control others? They are often extremely charismatic and talented people too, so always fascinating to explore. In Paul Thomas Anderson’s The Master (2012), and while this has been denied, he studies the relationship between a lost soul drawn to a movement that may or may not be a reflection of Scientology. Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix), a World War II veteran is pulled toward Lancaster Dodd (Hoffman), a leader of a cult known as “The Cause”. But not much happens other than Quell having a series of breakdowns amidst post-traumatic stress and alcoholism. Anderson is one of the great humanist and existential filmmakers working today, but The Master (2012) was too impenetrable and alienating for me.
MULHOLLAND DRIVE (2001)
I am a massive fan of David Lynch’s oeuvre. He is one of the most incredibly idiosyncratic and original voices is cinema. Lynch is visually, aurally and cinematically able to deliver both coherent and surreal narratives that blow your mind and heart out. After bamboozling audiences with Lost Highway (1997) he delivered an emotionally moving road movie in The Straight Story (1999). After that I’m not sure what was in his damn fine coffee when Mulholland Drive (2001) was devised. My understanding was it was a rejected filmed pilot which transmuted into a feature film. Crossing many genres including thriller, detective, horror and romance, the narrative splinters via many characters in Hollywood, notably Naomi Watts portraying an actress experiencing a career and identity crisis. That’s just the tip of an extremely enigmatic iceberg and the bottom line was I just didn’t care. Critics love Mulholland Drive (2001) and it often tops best film lists. I have absolutely no idea why.
THE WITCH (2015)
My filmmaking and screenwriting career is more a hobbling hobby these days. Other than not getting on the right career train, or getting lost in the smoke of an overcrowded creative platform, one main reason I may not have succeeded is because I arguably don’t have an original vision. Maybe I am just too generic. One cannot say that about Robert Eggers. This is one truly talented filmmaker. His debut film The Witch (2015) was a low budget folk horror masterpiece which became a sleeper hit at the box office. Set in 1630s New England, it is an authentically designed and brilliantly acted period drama with Anya Taylor Joy standing out. But aside from the historical accuracy of the language, locations and costumes the story was SO slow. I realise The Witch (2015) is an arthouse classic, but I just did not connect with the characters and was bored all the way through. There are some occasional scares, but it’s more a film which draws horror from underlying dread and enigma rather than the classic horror style I prefer.
Produced by: Jason Blum, Alix Madigan, Christopher Tricarico
Written by: Veena Sud
Based on: We Monsters by Marcus Seibert and Sebastian Ko
Cast: Mireille Enos, Peter Sarsgaard, Joey King, Cas Anvar, Devery Jacobs, etc.
Music by: Tamar-kali
**MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**
It’s a difficult job writing a screenplay. There are a myriad of choices to be made and you can make good ones and also terrible ones. That’s why many film scripts go through many drafts and, in certain cases, many different writers. As a screenwriter myself I am always fascinated by the decisions that are made at script stage. More specifically, I often struggle with the choice of making characters empathetic or taking a risk and possibly making them unlikeable. I mean, why should the audience get involved in the story if the characters are loathsome or at the very least, there is little empathy for their situation? Sometimes the central premise is strong enough that the characters do not necessarily have to be likeable, as long as the conflict they face is compelling enough. But what if the characters make really bad decisions or the writer makes bad decisions for them? How long before the audience give up on the characters because they are just so stupid?
Centred on the Logan Family consisting of teenager Kayla (Joey King), her mother Rebecca (Mireille Enos) and estranged father, Jay (Peter Sarsgaard), The Lie (2018), poses the highly dramatic question: how far are you willing to go to protect your child? The film opens with Jay driving Kayla to a ballet retreat in the wintry Canadian woods. They pick up her friend Brittany (Devery Jacob), but during the trip a tragedy occurs and Kayla, after an argument, pushes Brittany off a bridge. Jay and Rebecca then decide, against all moral and legal judgement, to attempt to cover up Kayla’s crime. Clearly this decision is wrong, and their crimes are exacerbated by the fact that Kayla is either emotionally unhinged or socioopathic. Indeed, Joey King’s performance, while admirable, veers inconsistently from scene to scene. But I guess that’s the nature of her character. However, because of this and Kayla’s parents terrible life choices, I ultimately found the Logan’s very difficult to empathise with.
Based on a German film called We Monsters (2015), this Blumhouse production for Amazon takes a brilliant idea and kind of throws it away with a weak set-up and increasingly dumb decisions by the main characters. But, as I say, it’s a great premise that Hitchcock in his heyday would’ve had a ball with, such are the intriguing twists and turns present. But Hitchcock would have made you feel connected to the Logan family and given them even more powerful reasons to cover up the crime. Don’t get me wrong, I actually really enjoyed this B-movie thriller. I was able to shout at the television throughout with a high moral superiority over the characters. When the final act twist comes, and it’s a good one, I was genuinely laughing at the stupidity and tragedy of their actions. We are all prisoners of our own life choices and this entertaining but daft thriller certainly proves that.
One of the main reasons I watch films is because I love a good story. I especially like working out the ins and outs of the plot lines too. So, it stands to reason that some films may have inconsistencies in their story or even plot holes. I would define a plot hole as a gap in the story which remains unexplained by the writer or writers. Sometimes these can spoil the film, but more often than not it can add to the enjoyment. They may in fact be known to the writers, however, they may have left it as an enigma for the audience to work out. Either that or the writers made a mistake or they could not be bothered to, or were unable to close the hole. In fact, they may be hoping we don’t notice or care.
There are so many films out there and I’m sure one could nitpick holes in most stories. Here I have picked out six of my favourites. I have chosen well known films so as to differentiate between good and just plain bad storytelling. Moreover, I have also omitted horror films where people just make stupid decisions. Likewise fantastical, surreal and dream logic narratives are avoided. Lastly, the major Marvel franchise plot hole is skimmed. You know the narrative hole that occurs in the stand alone entries. E.g. in Spiderman: Far From Home (2019), if the world is being threatened why don’t the other Avengers help poor Peter Parker? Oh, they’re conveniently busy. . . hmmm. Anyway, here are six of the best plot holes I like. If you can think of more please let me know.
***CONTAINS MASSIVE SPOILERS***
KING KONG (1933 / 1978 / 2005) – how did they get King Kong back to New York?
This question is not always one that is brought up as an obvious plot hole. However, think about it. Kong is captured on Skull Island, but is suddenly revealed in New York. How did they manage to find a boat big enough to carry him to America? And what if he woke up? He would destroy any ship carrying him with a yawn and stretch. Plus, because we do not SEE him being transported a massive hole in the narrative occurs.
HALLOWEEN (1978) – who taught Michael Myers how to drive?
It chills the bones when Donald Pleasance’s Dr Samuel Loomis finds on a dark evening on October 30th, the day before Halloween, his most feared patient, Michael Myers has escaped from a maximum security facility. Myers has stolen a car and sped off into the night. The big question is, given Michael was six when he committed the murder, how the hell did he learn to drive? Obviously given Myers is a manifestation of pure evil, he somehow mastered driving through psychic force.
STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE (1979) – the V’Ger probe would be coded as Voyager!
Talking of William Shatner masks, Star Trek is a wonderful science fiction television series and film franchise. It’s loved by many and given the numerous narratives involving time travel and alien species there are no doubt more plot holes in there. I mean the number of aliens who talk English and look human is quite something. However, in Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979), there is a major plot hole involving the “V-Ger” probe. Indeed, the entire twist of the plot centers around “V-Ger” actually being “Voyager,” as demonstrated by the corroded name plate on the probe. It seems weird though that nowhere in its programming (or anywhere else) did Voyager have its name recorded. It would be like if a label of a computer, say “Dell”, had the “D” covered up, the boot-up screen would not read, “ell” during post, it would still read, “Dell”! Thus, the plot hole is entirely illogical, Captain.
THE TERMINATOR (1984) – why not just destroy the time machine and stop Kyle Reese going back?
There are loads of plot queries in James Cameron’s classic sci-fi thriller. The one I like the most is more paradoxical than plot hole, but similarly this illustrates flaws in Skynet’s overall plan. Given Skynet and The Terminator have detailed files on everyone, why didn’t they know Kyle Reese was John Connor’s father? If so, just destroy the time machine to stop him going back. If killing Sarah Connor in the past stops John from ever being born, perhaps killing Kyle or stopping him time travelling would have the same effect.
SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION (1994) – when Andy escapes, how does he put the poster back so perfectly?
This is one plot hole I love and is in fact, given Andy Dufresne’s incredible struggle to escape, one you can certainly understand. I mean, thematically speaking, Andy is coded as a spiritual Christ-like figure throughout the film. It’s very subtle, but it is there. Thus, perhaps, he had some divine intervention during his escape. He definitely earned it. Lastly, I also love that it is literally a plot hole and Andy escaped right through it.
SIGNS (2002) – why did the Aliens raid a water-based planet when it hurt them?
While the director has had his fair share of critics, I generally enjoy most of his early films and some of the more recent ones. Signs (2002) is a fantastic sci-fi thriller with themes of faith, family and alien incursion. The major hole is the aliens have to be incredibly stupid to want to invade a planet that is 70% their biggest weakness. However, as some have pointed out, it wasn’t an invasion, but a raid to get some people. However, given people are made up of water and water is in Earth’s atmosphere, perhaps Shyamalan should have made their weakness alcohol or even actual acid. Still a very entertaining film though.
In all the excitement, I seemed to have forgotten about this feature, but will reignite it here. Essentially, I pick a favourite film actor or director or writer or composer or film craftsperson, who I have followed and admired for some time, and pick out five of their works which resonate with me. Usually it is difficult to stick to just five selections, however, I find writing with a rule or discipline sharpens the critical mind. Today’s choice is one of the greatest actors to have walked the boards, appeared on the box, and graced the silver screen. His name is of course, Denzel Washington.
Born in Mount Vernon, New York and having initially attended a military academy, Washington would later gain a BA in Drama and Journalism from Fordham University. He began by acting in Summer Stock theatre, but his first major break was in the television series, St Elsewhere. His performances as Dr Philip Chandler would lead to castings in prominent film roles, notably as Steve Biko in Cry Freedom (1987). In that film he would receive his first Academy award nomination. From then on Washington would go from strength to strength traversing stage and screen roles with incredible range and skill. As writer, director and actor he is an artist who can span genres and disciplines, equally brilliant in commercial projects and more arthouse productions. Here are just five roles which I very much think he excelled. But to be honest, there are many, many more I could have included.
GLORY (1989)
Glory (1989) was the first major Hollywood film to profile the fight of black soldiers to free themselves from slavery in the context of the U.S. Civil War. It is an excellent drama with some brutal battle scenes and memorable characters. None more so that Washington’s portrayal of Private Silas Trip. He is quite understandably an angry man determined to fight all the way against oppressors. Washington delivered a searing performance which would earn him a Best Actor in a Supporting role award. It is an outstanding portrayal full of power and strength.
MALCOLM X (1992)
Washington worked with Spike Lee on many film productions and Malcolm X (1992), is arguably their most significant and impressive film. It charts the life and death of a man born Malcolm Little who would grow to be anything but. After a troubled childhood he became a drug dealer and criminal in order to survive. Having converted to Islam he rejected his slave roots, going on to become one of the most outspoken voices against black oppression the world has ever known. Both Lee and Washington should have won Oscars for their work, and Washington’s intense performance stands as a fine cinematic tribute to a true spokesperson for a generation.
TRAINING DAY (2001)
Washington has played his fair share of heroic and complex anti-heroes trying to find their way in the world, but in David Ayer’s brilliant cop drama Training Day (2001), he revels in the role of bad-ass corrupt cop, Alonzo Harris. Washington and Ethan Hawke are both brilliant as the mentor and apprentice narcotics officers who are about to have a very intense day of plots and double-crosses. Washington spits and chews up Ayer’s meaty dialogue as Harris, who has a devilish plan up his dirty sleeves. Ultimately, the respect between the two erodes and a violent power game ensues with surprising twists ahead. Washington won the Best Actor award at the Academy Awards, and while it was well earned, it was arguably more for his body of incredible film performances overall.
MAN ON FIRE (2004)
While not necessarily the best film on Denzel Washington’s amazing acting C.V., Man on Fire (2004) is one of the more memorable films he made with uber-Hollywood genre filmmaker, Tony Scott. Washington clearly respected Scott as a man and director, and while Scott’s flashy and bombastic style could drown his actors, Washington’s talent always shone through. As John Creasy, Washington’s characterisation is that of a broken ex-military man who has killed for his country, and now realised it was all for nothing as he lost and alone. Alcoholic and suicidal, Creasy finds redemption in the guise of a young girl, portrayed brilliantly by Dakota Fanning, who following her kidnapping, goes on a vengeful kill-crazy-rampage-search-for-justice. Washington’s acting is both muscular and tender in equal measure as Scott delivers an explosive genre film of the highest quality.
FENCES (2016)
Denzel Washington’s honest, down-to-earth and heart-cracking drama is a formidable character piece and acting tour-de-force. Adapted from August Wilson’s prize-winning play, the narrative bristles with authentic working-class lives of 1950s Pittsburgh, and is littered with some wonderful stories and dialogue. At the heart of the drama are Denzel Washington’s complex character, Troy Maxson, and his long-suffering wife, Rose; portrayed with significant humility by Viola Davis. Troy’s character is charismatic, and he delivers some hearty yarns from his past, but he’s also bullies everyone around him. Moreover, Washington directs brilliantly, “fencing” in the characters to create a sense of claustrophobia and intensity. By keeping the players mainly in the yard and the house we feel as trapped as they are by society, social status and their life decisions. It’s an intimate film about proper characters and real lives and overall, the performances alone make the film feel cinematic.
FILMS THAT GOT AWAY #6 – THE UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG (1964)
Written and Directed by: Jacques Demy
Produced by: Mag Bodard
Music by: Michel Legrand
Cast: Catherine Deneuve, Anne Vernon, Nino Castelnuovo, Marc Michel, Ellen Farmer, Mirielle Perrey etc.
**MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**
I knew there were good reasons to get married. The obvious one is the positive nature of a caring relationship and not becoming a lonely, bitter old man. The other is that given my wife loves films too, she will introduce me to the occasional classic film I may have missed. Thus, we went to the BFI and watched the classic musical The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964). While she is a massive fan of the musical genre, I can take or leave it generally. Every now and then though I will really love a musical film. The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964) is now one of them.
Starting in 1957 and structured over three acts that end in 1963, we follow the lives and loves of two main protagonists, Genevieve (Catherine Deneuve) and Guy (Nino Castelnuovo). The ups and downs of their romance drives the narrative. The two struggle to keep their love alive amidst the obstacles of military conflict, social convention and family pressure. While the story is relatively simple, Jacques Demy’s wonderful script and direction warms you to the two young lovers. So much so, by the emotionally gut-wrenching ending, even a grizzled cynic like myself felt like crying.
The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964) is not your classic all-singing-all-dancing musical. It is more an opera of everyday life and love. The actors sing the dialogue all the way through and once I got used to this, the device really worked well for the story. Of course, Michel Legrand’s incredible score literally drenches the colourful sets and mise-en-scene with wonder. Moreover, Demy’s cinematographer, Jean Rabier, works miracles; his camera gliding around the actors in small spaces such as shops, garages, apartments and French cafes. Lastly, Catherine Deneuve and Nino Castelnuovo are such an attractive, but beautifully tragic screen couple. Clearly their touching story, amazing music and Jacques Demy’s cinematic brilliance had a massive influence of Damian Chazelle’s splendidLa La Land (2016).
Cast: Adam Driver, Golshifteh Farahani, Barry Shabaka Henley, Cliff Smith, William Jackson Harper, Chasten Harmon, Nellie the Dog etc.
Music: Carter Logan
Cinematography: Frederick Elmes
**MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS**
I’ve recently been working on a screenwriting development programme with someone studying at the National Film and Television School. The idea is to further develop one of my feature film scripts and hopefully improve it. The Script Developer is assessed on the work we do together.
I tell you this because we discussed my script, which is a slice-of-life-bittersweet comedy, in relation to character journeys and arcs. I was keen to present a script made more of humorous and dramatic situations that do not necessarily bring about change in the character. I wanted to go against the general rules of screenwriting manuals to create something more akin to the works of Mike Leigh or Jim Jarmusch.
Eventually, I have decided that the screenplay did need a bit more narrative impetus, however, a film such as Paterson (2016), brilliantly shows what cinematic beauty you can achieve without having a critical character journey or narrative arc. It is cinema of poetry, repetition, small moments, character interaction, and subtle performance full of emotional impact. I’m not sure why I missed it at the cinema, but there you go.
Paterson (2016) is set in Paterson, New Jersey. Adam Driver is a bus driver who has the same name as the place he lives in. This amusing coincidence is mentioned a few times throughout the film. Paterson lives with his wife Laura (Golshifteh Farahani), who spends her days working on her art and has a love for black and white patterns. Farahani and Jarmusch fill this character with an idealised innocence and energy which perfectly complements Paterson’s more deadpan insouciance. I sensed that perhaps Paterson was depressed but I think he was happy deep down. The couple themselves are very content with their simple existence.
We spend a week with Paterson, his wife and Nellie the Dog and his days are pretty much the same. While some may wonder where the story is and when something will happen, I was hypnotised by the repetition. Jarmusch infuses the bus driving, dog walking and quiet moments of reflection with excerpts from Paterson’s and other poets’ works. These are recited by Driver with a laconic charm and mesmeric power.
Personally, I could watch Adam Driver all day. He has such a subliminal and easy acting style, yet you feel such empathy for his character. I thought the back-story of Paterson being a marine was underplayed, but also intriguing. The performance is so good we do not need to know what happened in Paterson’s past, because we can feel it in Driver’s face and being. Moreover, via Paterson we get introduced to another set of eccentric Jarmusch characters which dip in and out of his days.
In conclusion, Jim Jarmusch has created another exquisite character study where very little happens in terms of plot or character development. But that’s the point with this beautifully rendered slice-of-life. The care and love he pours into the lead protagonists, supporting characters and his passion for poetry, make this a modern mini-masterpiece. It is also a charming tribute to all those creative people who work a regular day job but aspire to express their vision of the world around them.
Last year I wrote, produced and directed my second short film called Tolerance. Post-production was carried out and completed including artwork and the music. It was finished earlier this year and I am now releasing the film online here.
SCREENINGS
TOLERANCE premiered at the Unrestricted View Film Festival, London in April 2019. Also, it was nominated for best art direction award at http://www.uvff.co.uk.
Also screened at:
Fix Films Ltd Film Night, London, March 2019 UK Monthly Online Film Festival, April 2019 Lift-Off Online Sessions, Pinewood Studios, April 2019 Direct Monthly Online Festival, April 2019
PITCH
Tolerance is a story of obsession, revenge and murder. It concerns a dinner “date” which takes a murderous turn. Inspired by narratives by Hitchcock Presents, Tales of the Unexpected and Inside No. 9, it suspensefully examines both personal and societal issues when a relationship breaks down.
On the surface it is essentially a suspensful thriller and dark comedy. However, within the subtext I attempt to examine the harm people inflict on each other with their relationship choices. Lastly, with the recent #MeToo furore that correctly highlighted the horrendous toxicity of human behaviour, I wanted to consider wider concerns of gender politics.
CAST AND CREDITS
Written and directed by: Paul Laight Starring: Georgia Kerr and Patrick Tolan Sound: Marina Fusella Camera: Edward Lomas Lighting: Kato Murphy Make-Up: Camille Nava Music: James Wedlock Editor: Jodie Williams Set Designer: Melissa Zajk
![[BOOK REVIEW] The Writers’ Room Survival Guide by Niceole Levy](https://thecinemafix.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/niceole-levy.jpg?w=672&h=372&crop=1)
![[Book review:] The Hollywood Standard (3rd Edition) – by Christopher Riley](https://thecinemafix.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/og-hollywood-standard.jpg?w=672&h=372&crop=1)
![[BOOK REVIEW] A Sense of Dread: Getting Under the Skin of Horror Screenwriting by Neil Marshall Stevens](https://thecinemafix.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/100-best-horror-films-of-all-time-featured-10-panels-min.jpg?w=672&h=372&crop=1)
The Cinema Fix presents 