The Orange County Screenwriters Association
Be Inspired, Do Good Work
Anaheim International Film Festival - Day 3 & Still Smoking Hot!
Mark Sevi
GET YOUR BUTTS OVER TO THE AIFF AT GARDEN WALK - JUST 2 DAYS LEFT.
This evening I viewed 7 spectacularly professional shorts. Most were from domestic sources and at least one with sub-titles (someplace European I think). Every short kept the audience fully engaged - the likes of which I have not seen before - what a pleasure to witness.
As a producer I would have been proud to have my name associated with any of them. The theme was CUPID and each script was clever, I dare say exceptional, with only one being somewhat predictable - what a creative treat. There are at least two more series of shorts before the festival is over and I suggest it is really worth an hour or so of your time. Use that as a warmup before you go to one of the very fine feature length movies.
I highly recommend "Under The Boardwalk: The Monopoly Story" a fascinating movie about the game everyone grew up with. It screens again at 7:00 PM on 
Sunday. There are plenty of others to chose from.
Once again, compliments need to go to the organizers for having put so much time into selecting these gems out of the sea of submissions they received. I'm planning on going back at least once more. And the staff, at all levels, are just great. It is obvious they love what they are doing and are committed to having all guests have a great experience.
DON'T FORGET TO GET YOUR PARKING TICKET VALIDATED AT THE TICKET COUNTER. It will save you a bundle.
A Huge Success!
That's the phrase that immediately comes to mind to describe the The Anaheim International Film Festival which kicked off its inaugural events tonight at the brand new UltraStar Cinemas at Anaheim GardenWalk. The Orange County Screenwriters Association is a sponsor of the festival and we attended with five members and two student film makers who are doing a documentary on OCSWA.
I had the opportunity to talk to Founder and Chairman Sinan Kanatsiz to tell him how impressed we all were with the presentation and organization. Had I not known this was the first night of the first year I would have never guessed. Everyone who worked the desks, the red carpet and security were professional and pleasant. The check-in and red carpet were handled expertly. I felt immediately that AIFF has a real chance of challenging the Newport Beach Film Festival as a premier film event in Orange County. I can see that a lot of that good vibe comes directly from Mr. Kanatsiz himself who was so well-spoken and personable that I wondered why he wasn't himself an actor.
While OCSWA board members Rudy Garcia and Eric Hensman worked the very long red carpet, OCSWA co-founder Sterling Vozenilek and I went to the shorts screening which was the venue that OCSWA specifically sponsored. The beautiful theater was packed and the enthusiasm high. A lot of aspiring filmmakers attended along with a good representation of actors, directors and producers of the shorts being shown.
Derek Horne, short film programmer, was a man on fire as he introed the shorts and described his process of choosing the eclectic mix of films to represent the festival. His energy matched that of the room as he told of hours spent culling films from every corner of the globe.
Representing most of the various styles that will play over the course of the film festival, the films included Joshua and Rebekah Weigel’s BUTTERFLY CIRCUS; Max Lang’s and Jakob Schuh’s THE GRUFFALO; Iram Haq’s LITTLE MISS EYEFLAP; Natalia Mirzoyan’s MY CHILDHOOD MYSTERY TREE; Lilli Birdsell’s ONCE UPON A CRIME; James Redford’s QUALITY TIME, starring Jason Patric; Cordell Barker’s RUNAWAY; and Peter Meech’s WINNER BEST SHORT FILM.
All the choices were well-done, fun and some were truly fantastic. Unfortunately, there were a lot of technical problems (new theater and all) including "Quality Time" which was shown in all green tones. "The Gruaffalo" had to be cut short because the sound could not be heard - a shame since British acting luminaries such as Robbie Coltrane, Helen Bonham Carter and John Hurt lent their vocal talent to the cool, little animated film.
My favorite film was perhaps "Runaway" an animated gem that reminded me stylistically and tonally of "The Triplets of Belleville." The short by Canadian cartoonist Cordell Barker was just so well done and delivered that the audience laughed from almost the first frame to the last.
The inspirational and beautiful "The Butterfly Circus" was made even more stunning by the attendance of the writer/directors most of the actors and performers including the lead, limbless actor Nick Vujicic.
Sterling and I didn't attend the after-party because I was too worn out from my week to be of much good schmooze and Sterling had to get home to her family. But we agreed that from the moment we got the invitation to be a part of this festival to the moment we left, we both smiled broadly and enjoyed ourselves throughly.
A special thanks and kudos to Director of Publicity Sandy Moul who tirelessly answered questions, helped secure passes and made the experience of the first night a smooth and rich experience. It's no small accomplishment to handle both press and sponsors and Sandy did it like she had been doing it for decades.
All in all, this is an amazing and terribly well-done film festival - look for it to become a huge event here in The OC.
More reports to follow (I'm going again on Friday at the least) with some red carpet footage from Rudy Garcia and Art Kirsh who helped us with the camera work tonight.
The Anaheim Film Festival runs through Sunday night.
The inaugural Anaheim International Film Festival opening night was OUTSTANDING.
Mark Sevi
I just got in from attending this evening's activities and while exhausted from a long day today and with an early call tomorrow morning, but it would be negligent of me not to tell you how outstanding this festival is and urge you to attend one or more movies over the next few days. It is being held at the Garden Walk in Anaheim (link).and continues through Sunday the 17th.
The festival was well thought out by people who obviously have a passion for film. They arranged for experienced festival operators to help them set it up correctly (I met some people from the Temecula and San Diego festivals).
From the red carpet to the after party, you'd have thought they've been doing this for years. I suspect they will be around for a long time and would not be surprised if they become one of the "must attend" festivals.
I will write additional information about the festival in the next day or two but for now - IT'S A HIT! Congratulations to Sinan Kanasiz and the other founders.
Go, you'll have a good - no, a great time.
The Orange County Screenwriters Association is a proud sponsor of the Anaheim Film Festival starting October 13th and running through October 17th. Join us!
Anaheim International Film Festival
October 13-17, 2010
UltraStar Cinemas
321 W. Katella Ave.
Anaheim, CA 92802
(at Anaheim GardenWalk)
ANAHEIM INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL OVERVIEW:
The Anaheim International Film Festival will debut October 13-17, 2010, marking the addition of a world-class cultural event to Southern California and the international film festival circuit. For five spectacular days and nights in October, the festival will screen approximately 120 of the latest and best contemporary feature films, documentaries, live action and animated shorts and student films from around the globe, as well as hold industry workshops, parties, and star-studded gala events.
The Orange Country Screenwriters Association has transfered the Zombie Walk event to OC Zombie Walk - we are no longer sponsoring it.
We are supporting the event with promotion and any help we can since it's for a beautiful cause - the OC Food Bank.
Please go to their website for further updates and information.
website: OC Zombie Walk
Thanks!
I've seen two episodes of "Detroit 187" starring Michael Imperioli (Chris-ta-fah from "Sopranos.") I couldn't put my finger on what I thought the problems were with this show until I watched the second ep. Now I think I see why I probably won't watch this show going forward.
187 is the code for homicide - murder - the "sexiest" of the detective bureaus - at least according to Hollywood since there are so many shows about it. Detroit is the setting - at least in title.
The first issue is that even though it's called "Detroit 187" there is nothing unique so far about the setting. In a recent review I did of the new "Law And Order: Los Angeles" I mentioned that this version of the famed series had a uniquely L.A. flavor as opposed to the typical street grittiness of the all the previous L&O's which were set in New York city. And it worked well. Detroit should provide a unique flavor to the narrative of this show and it just doesn't. The dark streets and gritty urban environment could be Anywhere U.S.A. - what do detectives and people in Detroit feel about their city and the way the cops operate? Detroit has one of the highest crime rates in the U.S. and that is never drawn into the show. It's too generic - in fact, in general, the show feels like it's written by someone from Brentwood who watched too many cop shows.
From Wikipedia this note: The show's executive producer, David Zabel stated, "This is a crime show but we will explore various nooks and crannies in the communities and within that context there's a lot of opportunity to see what's positive in the city and see what's heroic about the people fighting for what’s best for the city of Detroit."
Well, good thought but not yet they don't. I saw nothing of why this show shouldn't
be called "Atlanta 187" - which is where it was actually shot.
Another huge problem is the format. The show follows two different murders with two different teams of detectives. This keeps the viewer from getting bored (I guess) but it also prevents us from becoming engaged. It also prevents the characters from displaying real emotions. This came to the fore in the 2nd ep when a newish detective and his partner team up with Imperioli who is temporarily partner-less because the partner was shot in the 1st episode (now where have I seen that before? Oh, yeah - "Hill Street Blues," first episode.)
The newbie detective has to arrest the brother of a murder victim who has himself shot the man he thought killed his football-star sibling. Instead of going into the community to see how important this kid would be to his "hood," the writers focus on the false notes of the white detective who has no connection (or little) to this kid.
To make matters worse, the detective suddenly has adopted fraternal feelings for the dead star's brother based on...what? One conversation? Because that's all that precedes this sudden emotional connection. What happens is a tragedy, sure, but these guys see this kind of thing all the time. Any patrol cop, before he or she becomes a detective, will have experienced their share of this street drama (see below when this exact same problem manifests differently.). There is simply not enough time, because of the dual investigation format, to establish why this case would be different to this cop and why he's take such a personal interest in this particular murder. The writers may know it - but they aren't saying and the whole segment felt false and silly to me.
Weak writing shows itself especially in the false moments - the times where you should be moved but aren't because the writers haven't worked hard enough or been clever enough to get you emotionally engaged. Lines spoken through clenched teeth like "Why couldn't you just trust me?" have little or no impact if you don't understand why those lines should have impact. They are probably the right emotion intended but the weak setups or false notes of the setup make the lines seem forced and silly. No actor in the world can make those moments have impact if there isn't the right amount or type of setup.
Another non-starter for me is the Imperioli character. Detective Fitch is abrasive, quirky, funny and just weird at times. In fact you are told "he's just weird." Told not shown - an issue in and of itself. But why is he that way is the operative question. Give me a hint, a clue, a breadcrumb trail I can follow and I'll go anywhere you lead.
Imperioli is able to infuse this character with some real charisma - but the moments where he's supposed to be inward and thoughtful fall flat because we know nothing about Fitch or why he is this way. Not even the writer's shorthand (drugs, missing parents, ex-wife, alcohol, etc.) is used here. Fitch is the way he is just because.
This show is generally filled with these false notes. I almost shut it off during the first ten minutes of the first episode when Fitch's brand new partner (there's a lot of them floating around apparently) rolled with him to a liquor store shooting.
One of the victims was shot in the head. We're shown the victim and his bloody head on the floor of the store - TV style. Anyone who gets shot in the head has brains spilling out normally. Lots of blood here but no brains in sight.
There are patrol cops there reporting to the detectives - which is what always happens - beat cops roll to the scene first. They see the worst of it. It's only after they report in that detectives come on the scene to pursue the investigation.
But Fitch's new partner is in the corner vomiting because supposedly he can't handle what he's seeing.
Really? A detective becomes a detective only after being a beat cop for years - the same type of cops who respond to these calls by the dozens a week. So, this new detective is suddenly seeing something he's never seen before? A victim shot in the head? Again, really? Okay, so let's stretch credulity and say he's never actually seen a head wound before - he's still seen enough violence and results of violence to steel himself against suddenly yacking all over the crime scene. Which he does to my head-shaking amazement.
Now any of this stuff I'm mentioning can work - it's all in what the writers make us believe. I could understand a detective responding in any way you can imagine if you set that up correctly. As written, these moments feel like they were put in there because there are certain "rules" to gritty homicide cop dramas according to an arbitrary TV bible of some sort, or that the writers just didn't have the strength or skill to find a reason for that detective to vomit other than the scene looked gross. Use the guy's newborn - that he had this sudden realization at how fleeting life can be and what would his son do without him. Anything. Something. Please!
Perhaps the creators of the show figured they'd get us engaged over a period of time - fine, I get that. We get to know the characters slowly, understand them as we watch them go from ep to ep. But the first episode of shows like "NYPD Blue" (a show this one is being compared to which is really an insult to both shows) had me from the opening moments and never let me go because real or not it felt real - or real enough.
There is some information that this show had to undergo a transformation from a "mockumentary" (which I think is the wrong term here but it's used regarding this) to what it is now, but that's no excuse for putting this out the way it is.
Do the homework. Talk to cops. Include the city. Set your characters up properly and maybe this show will work. As it stands now, despite strong performances by the ensemble cast, it doesn't work and I won't be tuning in again.
Before anything else, let's all honor Dick Wolf the creator of the "Law and Order" franchise. For twenty years, the original show and its spinoffs have been wildly successful creating a media empire for Mr. Wolf that would have made Aaron Spelling envious.
The original, titled "Law and Order" will take it's final bow this year. But taking its place is the first of the franchise spinoffs to be set outside of NYC (besides the British and European versions.)
And the differences are both vast and nothing at all.
Cold opening with someone murdered, detectives quickly on the case. investigation, surprises, prosecution of criminal(s), surprises, sometimes more surprises, sometimes moribund ending. Check all that. Next case.
So, a lot is the same. The original formula called for an investigation half and a prosecution half. The other Law and Orders didn't follow this but L.A. does so it is a direct replacement for the New York version. Like the original, the writing is good, the characters and acting even better (I still miss Jerry Orbach) and the stories continue to be interesting with unexpected moments and turns down the path to justice served.
What's mainly different - and it's a big thing - is the setting - the city of angels. 3,000 miles away geographically from New York and an entire cultural universe distant.
You won't find these men and women hoofing it around town and eating from food carts - more likely it'll be a car down the freeway and a food truck serving Asian fusion.
Like many good features, the location itself plays an important part in the storyline and story themes.
Although NYC has its share of celebs and movers and shakers, there is a decidedly Hollywood flare to this show. The pilot features a group of kids robbing celebrity homes, masterminded by an ambitious stage 
mother with a Lindsey-like daughter - not as silly as it might sound.
You feel the soul - or lack of it - in these stories immediately. There's a strong sense of the roller coaster that bigtime celebrities are caught up in - the moral ambiguity, the never-ending parties, the inability to question their lives too closely less. Relationships are based in what they can do for each other, not love or caring. It's perhaps not as gritty as the New York version but it's so much more desperate. And I hate to admit it but it feels right and it feels very L.A. Perhaps it's the liberal use of actual clubs and gossip rags like TMZ and Perez Hilton.
Skeet Ulrich, Corey Stoll (terrific) Rachel Ticoti, Alfred Molina, Terrence Howard (who didn't show up in this ep) Regina Hall, Megan Boone and Peter Coyote (who also didn't show up in this ep) form the core cast.
Two detectives, two D.A.s, twisty crime "ripped from the headlines," lots of sometimes snide commentary - yep, it's "Law and Order" all right even with the obvious differences.
And even after 20 years, the formula works and it's still pretty damned good.
Mr. Wolf - you are a true media genius.
Disclaimer(s): I haven't seen probably even half of the new Fall offerings. I've seen about seven shows. I don't get the premium channels - just no time to watch - so I am not going to comment on some of their offerings of which I understand a terrific new show called "Boardwalk Empire" on HBO has emerged.
And truth be told, I don't have a lot to say about the shows I have watched except that of the seven, I am only still watching one - which took an odd turn in the 2nd episode and intrigued me to a point that I decided to stick around for at least another one or two. That show "Terriers" went in a decidedly dark direction that I thought was interesting and the characters exhibited a bit more depth than I had seen in the pilot. So I'll give it another few eps to see where it's heading. It was decent to begin with, now it's better.
I'm just wondering what's happening to these shows? Where is the amazing concepts, the terrific writing, the unusual characters? I haven't seen "Hawaii 5-0" yet or "Law and Order: Los Angeles" but will there be a reason to? I already am familiar with the concepts - the characters will be new of course but will they elevate themselves? I don't see how given that they are basically retreads of old or established shows. Of course the reboot of "Battlestar Galactica" surprised us all, didn't it?
Last season I got hooked on "Justified." And, of course, the wonderful "Modern Family" and the oft-times funny "The Middle." This season I am afraid of 'The Event" because I'm afraid it will be another in a series of unresolved episodes like
"Lost" and "X-Files." "Chase" was decent but just didn't grab me. Nothing I've watched has really held me maybe that's okay because I am not really the demographic that these shows want anyway.
I don't know how any of these shows will shake out and I hope that they are all hits but I have my doubts. The writing just doesn't seem sharp enough - scratch that - it's really not that - it's a sameness to it all - like we've seen it all before with minor variations.
"Justified" wasn't like that - the same. It was fresh, unique, funny, dangerous - had
characters that had an oddness to them instead of a sameness. It was a short season and some of the time it felt like they were struggling to make the Timothy Oliphant character continue along his designed path but all-in-all it was a solid and unique piece of television. Which I don't see yet this season.
I know how hard it is to come up with something unique and original but isn't that what we need to do as writers and producers? Or am I being naive? Are people not interested in the fare that regularly gets canceled at Fox, our most schizophrenic of networks?
I'm wondering now, what percentage of any new shows make the cut? How many last even one season? I don't think it's a lot. I'll have to check that out someday - it will make an interesting article.
I have enough with new shows to keep me occupied certainly. But it would have been nice to get obsessed with something like I did when "Rescue Me" hit the airwaves. Heading into the final season of that amazing show next year there will be a hole in my viewing life that I'd love to fill. So, maybe the mid-season stuff will be more interesting. We can only hope.
An unprecedented opportunity to tour one of the premier production locations in Orange County and network with media professionals.
Friday, September 24th 4:00pm-6:00pm FULL DETAILS
DETAILS: Orange County Great Park in conjunction AMCI Global and with the Media Alliance of Orange County and the Orange County Screenwriters Association is offering a fun afternoon at the county's most exciting new facility for filmmakers.
Come tour the grounds which includes outbuildings, hangers, air traffic control towers, and huge runways that can be used for vehicle stunt work and which have recently been cleared for landing planes.
THE AFTERNOON INCLUDES:
- A Bus Tour of the Grounds and Facilities
- Networking with other media pros
- Free Balloon Rides (weather permitting)
- Food - pizza wedges, chicken wraps, Italian sausage and peppers, crab dip with crackers, cheese and grape trays, desserts, and ice tea and lemonade. Beer and wine can be purchased.
- A presentation on the present and immediate future of Orange Country Great Park
- Hanger 295: basecamp for various film productions
- Free Parking
- Admission to "Waltz Me" Dancing as part of the normal OC Great Park summer schedule (details here) - Lessons at 7:30, music at 8:00.
-
Sunsets of incomparable beauty
ORANGE COUNTY GREAT PARK is ready for filmmakers:
Great photos here;
Orange County Great Park is 1,400 acres in total and all will be built out eventually. Once finished Great Park will be bigger than Central Park.
Currently, Orange County Great Park has 30 acres built-out including the Hanger cafe, a green belt, and large areas of land.
There are outbuildings, hangers, air traffic control towers, and huge runways that can be used not only for landing planes, but also for vehicle stunt work.
"Terriers" is a recent offering from F/X's original programming. I don't love it enough to recommend it but I don't hate it enough to tell you to skip it.
Created by Ted Griffin ("Oceans 11") it stars Donal Logue and Michael Raymond-James as loser private detectives who almost always end up on top of the situation in a (sometimes) funny way. The pilot and 2nd episode that I saw was uneven and at times just plain lousy and dumb. But, and this is the rub, there are also moments of real fun, sincerity and solid drama that elevate this show.
Series today really don't get a lot of chances to find an audience and I'm wondering if the USA network Psyche/Monk/In Plain Sight/Burn Notice crowd is going to want to adopt this one.
F/X has some remarkable shows like "Rescue Me" "Justified" and "Sons of Anarchy" that are pretty heavy - this one is lighter - a lot lighter. Dogs, sex and cracking-wise play into a lot of the situations that these two slacker detectives find themselves. Although it's not as fun as "Psyche" and not as heavy as "Rescue Me" there are times when it does achieve those shows' particular strengths.
In the 2nd episode, the Raymond-James character, who is in a long-term relationship with his girlfriend, notices something licking his...uh, dangling man parts as he is making love to said GF. It's a dog they both hate and have adopted to their unending sorry. Now, I don't think I've ever seen that particular moment anywhere else (on TV 
) - and it was funny.
Logue, who looks like a refuge from the Manson clan can deliver a serious and touching moment with the best of them. He's a recovering alcoholic (of course) and is divorced from his wife (of course) and an ex-cop (of course) but he's buying the house he and his wife once owned to wallow in the self-pity of his current situation - well, he doesn't actual express that but his AA counselor does. When he goes in to take possession of the house, he flashes back to when they first moved in and everything was ahead of them and rosy. The look on his face is heart-rending. And anyone who has been there can feel his pain.
But then there are those moments, like when Logue is being deposed for a trial, when he does nothing but wisecrack to the deposing attorney and comes off sounding like the kid in school that you just wanted to slap. That and some very "precious" devices like Logue's cop ex-partner who is giving up smoking and is sucking on a plastic cigarette filter every time you see him that make the show less than wonderful.
"Terriers" has potential and it's on my Tivo's Season Pass for a while longer. We'll see how the show develops over time. It does have one of the cooler theme songs I've heard written by Robert Duncan.
A show I have no ambivalence about is "The League" - it sucks. It sucks enough to give a black hole an inferiority complex.
It's a semi-scripted comedy about several friends who every year apparently devote a great deal of their lives and energy to winning the fantasy football pool they all belong to - hence the title. Their league is comprised of various misfits and dumbshits who are smart enough to make fun of each other and pull really idiotic and unbelievable practical jokes but not really smart enough to realize how stupid they are acting.
This show is in its second season and for the life of me I can't figure out why. Perhaps the 1st season had sharper comedy and better writing. Honestly, I really disliked this show so much that even though I wanted to write this review about it, I shut it off - twice.
Who really thinks it's funny that one of the characters is so in love with his fantasy football lineup that he'd go to his hotel room with the league chart and jack off to it, saying the names of the players on his team as he does. I mean imagine that - really - all right, never mind don't. sorry to have put the image in your head. And then, of course, the rest of the guys come in, catch him and hilarity ensues - read the word 'hilarity as sarcasm because it definitely was - sarcasm - and definitely not funny. Or how about the clever scne where the guy who won the trophy last season falls and the trophy goes up his ass? Actually, I'm somehow making that sound funnier that it was. OMG - I mean, who writes this stuff?
Chad Ochocinco (Cincinnati Bengals star wide receiver) as a guest star was as painful a segment as can be imagined. Absolutely not funny, not well-acted, not well-anythinged. Ochocinco should stick to running like a gazelle down the sideline. He really doesn't need any more grief in his career anyway and guesting in the show probably reduced his net worth by a few mil.
I'm a huge football fan and this seemed like a promising premise for people who like sports. But "Arliss" or the terrific "Sports Night" it is not.
Phew - this whole show was just painful.
A scene is a basic unit of scriptwriting; put enough scenes together and you have a sequence. A few sequences and you have an Act - enough Acts and voila! - a script.
There’s almost a one-to-one ratio of pages to scenes. Checking a few scripts I finished recently I find about 100-110 scenes per script. That’s pretty close. All those scenes need to function at a pretty high level so your script doesn’t get bogged down.
There are many possible scene functions - foreshadowing, information, action, comedic, etc. but all scenes should serve one of four masters for them to work properly:
The principles of scene conflict:
1) Surprise or Shock
2) Curiosity
3) Tension
4) Suspense
We would like to have a creative tension in everything we write - this would be an ideal, something to which we should aspire. There are those scenes that you think won’t be shoved into that constraint but it is *essential* never to write a scene just to give information. That’s not film.
So how to elevate our scenes? Apply one (or more) of the four principles to them:
Let’s take the easiest of the four terms to define: surprise or shock. Director Alfred
Hitchcock defined surprise as a bomb the audience isn’t aware of under a table suddenly exploding and suspense as knowing about the bomb and waiting for it to explode - good enough for now.
In “The Untouchables” Brian DePalma working from a David Mamet script opens on a little girl going into a bar to get her father some beer. While we’re amused and distracted at the idea of this since something like that wouldn’t happen today, DePalma is quietly at work setting the behind-the-scenes scene.
A man sitting at the bar notices the little girl but says or does nothing beyond exiting the bar. We’re probably still not suspicious of this since it’s such an innocuous moment and mood.
Then the bar suddenly explodes. Welcome to Prohibition Era Chicago. Hold tight - we know it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
That’s surprise - more like shock probably but it wonderfully sets the tone for the film and the Wild West nature of Chicago at that time. If you don’t think something is going to happen in a scene and it happens, then you are surprised or shocked. The ending of the fine little gangster film “Layer Cake” has an interesting surprise in store for us at the end. Check that out too.
Curiosity is easy too. What’s perhaps not easy is applying at least this simple principle to every scene but this is a fundamental - no excuses. If someone is sitting around talking and nothing else is at work in that scene then it’s going to be as flat as yesterday’s beer. Your audience must be curious at the very least about the information and if possible, that information should be setting up a future 
moment that’s going to work the other three principles into it.
You’re following Clive Owen’s character as he heads for his morning train in the film “Derailed.” Being the whip-smart movie watcher you are, you know this is the setup for something but then again, lots of lazy directors have had entire sequences of people riding a train for no good reason so it may not be anything either.
But it is.
On the train, Owen meets Jennifer Aniston. Since we don’t know either character and there is no emotional charge to this moment, it’s a curiosity moment - how will Aniston and Owen interact? The scene is absolutely necessary but it doesn’t create shock, tension or suspense. It does however pay homage to our little list and create curiosity.
In the incredible film “Girl With The Dragon Tattoo” (the original one) there’s a scene where an old, rather staid gentleman is given some information while walking with another man in a business environment. They end up in a conference room with a woman who we find out is a central player. At this point, we don’t know this. We don’t know why the man is there, who the woman is, why she’s dressed in 
leather in this corporate environment or a dozen other things. It’s an incredible scene and you could no more turn the movie off at this point than you could an amazing car chase or fight scene - and yet, no one is shot, maimed, slapped or anything else - it’s just people talking. However, the principle of curiosity is applied like a thick layer of Nutella and you eat until you’re full.
Same applies to the opening of the movie in which an obviously rich, old man receives a framed presentation of pressed flowers. He sees the picture, breaks down in tears. Curiosity. We want to know why. Why would something so innocent have such an impact on this man?
Easy enough. Now we get to the knotty two - tension and suspense.
Most of us use the words tension and suspense interchangeably. A dictionary defines them differently as so should we as writers, especially for the sake of our scenes.
Let’s both generalize and specify immediately and say tension has lesser stakes than suspense. Tension is more likely to be a precursor of a suspense scene that either immediately follows or soon after.
An example of both is easy to find in the very well-written “Rescue Me” series.
Okay, so Tommy Gavin, an unrepentant drunk and womanizing firefighter, goes to his on-again, off-again mistress Sheila’s apartment to tell her that they’re finished. Tommy and his wife are reconciling and Janet, the wife, has laid down the law - no
more Sheila. Tension is already simmering because we know the history of these two and their wild ways, emotionally and sexually.
The scene is wonderful. Tommy and Sheila snipe at each other all through, trading insults and hard truth. We sit through it not only because it is well-written but also that given their history of sexual explosiveness we can pretty much figure out where this one is going. Sure enough, after Sheila challenges Tommy’s kissing ability comparing him unfavorably to her current boyfriend, Tommy’s cousin Mickey, they end up on the couch with Sheila’s dress off and Tommy between her legs. So much for his vow to his wife to stay away from Sheila. This is classic Tommy Gavin.
With Tommy and Sheila about to take this current passion to a whole ‘nother level, in walks Mickey, Tommy’s cousin and Sheila’s current BF.
Now there’s gonna be trouble. But not yet - Mickey turns and walks out and both Tommy and Sheila are crazed but for different reasons. End episode.
So, this then is tension, a precursor to the harder-edge and higher-staked suspense. Sometimes you get the convivial partners, tension and suspense, together in one scene or scene sequence. Sometimes they are separated by many minutes or pages. And sometimes you just get tension and no suspense - or even suspense and very little tension preceding it. An example of this would be a killer stalking someone to kill them - say the generic Victim #2, a throwaway character who needs killing. Gotta have some victim fodder. Anyway, those types of scenes can be suspenseful without being tension-preceded.
So, next ep we get the suspense as Tommy goes home to dinner. “Anyone call?” he pseudo-innocently asks his wife, Janet, dreading that Mickey would have called and busted him for being on top of Sheila. “Nope.” “No one, really?” “No, now sit down to dinner.” Tommy does so happily thinking that Mickey didn’t do what he had feared.
Janet calls the other daughter to dinner and when the younger daughter comes into the kitchen, guess who she’s got in tow - yep, cousin Mickey who just “happened” to come by to visit. And Janet has invited him to stay for dinner knowing how much he likes pasta.
This then is suspense as surely as those men have guns under the table aimed at the other. Mickey tortures Tommy, ratcheting up the suspense until it’s almost unbearable. He continually mentions Sheila in seemingly innocuous ways, causing Tommy to choke - or fake it - so he doesn’t have to respond. Tommy does
such a good job at faking that he actually begins to choke - now it’s getting physical, which is also another way to tell tension from suspense - suspense ends most times in a physical expression.
Janet yells at Mickey to help Tommy as he’s choking and in the process of giving Tommy the Heimlich maneuver, Mickey is also mercilessly punching Tommy in the kidneys - unseen by Janet and the girls, of course.
And then the trigger to the moment is pulled and the fit really hits the shan - Sheila comes over, sees Mickey beating Tommy and rushes in confessing to Mickey (and Janet) that he saw wasn’t what he thought it was.
A puzzled Janet says that Mickey was just helping Tommy unstick food - what the hell did she mean? Sheila realizing her mistake wilts.
Game on. Now the stakes are even bigger because a new player has been introduced - Tommy’s wife who has been through this many times with him.
Tommy and Sheila are interrogated mercilessly - and this section does go on too long because it reduces the wonderful suspense they’ve built up. But yeah, Mickey finally pops Tommy in the mouth and like the climax to a sexual union, the payoff to the suspense buildup is spent.
Below, following, is an example of suspense with no preceding tension - but, and this is key, there is implied tension because the characters have been defined properly. And perhaps I shouldn’t say “no tension” because there’s a small build-up to the climax of the suspense - what I really mean is this scene can sit by itself without any earlier setup.
In “Kill Me Again” a neo-noir film about betrayal by John Dahl, Michael
Madsen playing the psychopathic, Vince Miller (does Madsen ever play anything but a psychopath?) is trying to find out where his money has gone. It’s in the hands of Val Kilmer and Joanne Whalley-Kilmer who have pretended to be murdered and run away.
The scene, in the middle of the film, opens with Madsen having tied up Kilmer’s friend - the excellent character actor Jon Gries - in a chair. We know that Madsen isn’t a nice guy; we anticipate violence and so it goes. After burning Gries with a cigarette numerous times to force him to reveal the couple’s whereabouts, Madsen summarily cuts his throat. Suspense is delivered on in brutal fashion. There is internal tension to the scene but really no preceding tension.
So, can you see the difference? It’s really degrees mostly. Tension can be a precursor to suspense but suspense is rarely, if at all a precursor to tension. We know Madsen is nutso-cuckoo so the scene with him cutting Greis’ throat doesn’t necessarily create more tension except that we do now know that perhaps Madsen will be that much closer to finding the cheating couple.
And when he does find the couple shacked up in a hotel, there is a tremendous amount of tension, but really, no suspense. Watch the movie to see the scene but honestly you never feel that overwhelming sense of suspense that you did in the scene where Madsen had Gries in a chair. This is an unfortunate function of our medium - you’re pretty sure that no one who is central to the story is going to get killed so suspense in scenes like that is reduced to simple tension.
How about one more example - one that combines all four principles:
The insanely good "The Long, Good Friday" features British mob boss/powder keg Bob Hoskins on the eve of a big deal with an American Mafia counterpart facing disaster; all his pubs are blowing up and he has no idea why. Having had enough, he orders his thugs to bring in the usual suspects so he can question them. After gathering, when the next scene opens, said thugs are in a meat locker, hanging upside down.
Shock - who expected these guys to be questioned while hanging upside-down on meat hooks? It's a moment you will never forget.
Curiosity - what will he do and what will be revealed when he questions them. We're just as confused as he is although we do have a hint or two that the mob boss doesn't.
Tension - that's pretty obvious. Hoskins starts off mild-mannered and reasonable but it is amazingly painful and tension-filled to continue to watch these men hanging from hooks while they are being questioned.
Suspense - the longer the scene goes on, the more certain you are of a climax of horrendous proportions. I won't spoil the scene for you but it's worth the wait - but perhaps not in the way you imagine.
Brilliant, brilliant filmmaking. You are in nail-biting, skin-picking agony for the entire scene. This scene - the entire movie - uses all the principles to great effect.
To recap:
1) All your scenes, to be effective must use of at least one of these four techniques to make them snap. Simply delivering information in a scene will never do. You’ll lose your audience. It’s lazy writing.
2) All four techniques are also very dependent on timing. It is essential, in fact. Delivering the surprise or shock too late or two soon kills it. Not building suspense up enough really just gives you surprise or shock.
3) Tension and suspense are dependent on some backstory or understanding of the situation or characters to be effective. Surprise and curiosity don’t really need either.
4) Tension is not as serious or extreme as suspense. Suspense is going to get someone physically involved, perhaps hurt or killed - tension may hurt some feelings or result in a good bonking but it’s rarely never more than that.
The next time you’re watching a particularly effective film or TV sequence, try to identify one of these four elements. The more you see it, the more you’ll use it.
Good luck.
More...
Robert Rollins is a man on the move. Just ask him - he’s more than (enthusiastically) willing to tell about the dozens of projects he’s either done, has in production, or is in pre-production with.
A prolific writer and producer Robert takes his craft very seriously. He doesn’t just sit around and dream about being a filmmaker, he wakes up every day and thinks to himself - “How can I get ‘The Magic Hourglass’ and ‘Lanterns for the Dead’ done?” “Who can I talk to who will fund my productions?” “What can I do next that will get my company, Robert Rollins Pictures noticed?"
The key? “Flexibility and keeping yourself open to all possibilities,” he says as we’re having coffee at Kean Coffee in Newport Beach.
“Like when I was doing ‘Pumpkin Hollow’,” he says, “a film no one but I believed in. I didn’t have any idea where I was going to get a set designer who could make my film look good.” “Set designer?,” he laughs as he remembers, “I
couldn’t even afford to rent a pumpkin stand for the film so I had to build one out of old wood in the backyard myself.
Then the problem of what to fill it with came up and all I could think of was how much it was going to cost to put pumpkins inside it. But because I had bronchitis, we had to push the shoot to after Halloween and I managed to get all 
the pumpkins I needed because no one really wants pumpkins after Halloween. I ended up with three hundred pumpkins in my condo - that was a bit surreal.”
Robert has an infectious manner. It’s hard not to be enthusiastic along with him when he’s detailing his many adventures as an independent filmmaker. His love for what he does is evident - it informs his face and brightens his eyes, triggering that engaging smile of his. He is always intense but never overwhelming.
“My love for movies started when I was a kid. I’d let myself be absorbed into those worlds and disappear. It was magical. I know now that it’s a lot of hard work, but in many ways, it’s still magical and will always be.”
Who were your role models, your influences, I ask. “Rudi Fehr (video) was not only my mentor, but was my dear friend.
I met Rudi in my freshman year at California Institute of the Arts - I was taking editing. Rudi and I became friends instantly even though he was many years older than me. He saw something in me that he had in himself - a unabashed love for movies and a willingness to work hard to get to my goals. He gave me more than I could ever give back to him. He’s passed on. There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t miss him.”
For once, Robert’s million-watt smile fades as he remembers his friend and mentor. “Rudi listened. Always. It’s something that he taught me to do - listen more, talk less,” Robert says with more than a twinge of sadness. “I can never forget how much he meant to me. Never.”
Rudi Fehr was an immigrant to this country who joined Warner Brothers in 1936 as an editor. In 1952 he became a producer and was elected to the board of governors of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences. He also did many of Warner’s foreign language adaptations. In 1980 he joined Coppola’s Zoetrope Productions and in 1984 he cut “Prizzi’s Honor” for John Houston - a film that garnered him an Oscar nomination.
I asked Robert to give me 3-4 quick tips for aspiring filmmakers:
- Ask for it - whatever “it” is. You can’t be afraid to ask for what you want in this business because no one is just going to come up and say “here, take this.”
- People believe in something when they see it. A script, a short, storyboards - when you make it real for yourself, you make it real for investors. Do the initial work and the selling part will go much easier.
- Stay flexible - nothing, and I mean nothing, goes according to plan. The only thing you can count on is that it won’t be as you imagined or planned it to be.
- Adapt, don’t collapse. If you’re defeated by a crises, you can’t succeed. Be like a pinball and bounce. But don’t go down any holes. Keep moving and bouncing
- Goes without saying - love what you’re doing. Of course, right? Your passion impassions others. Just like going to a baseball game and having the people around you jump up and cheer and you do too, people will catch your enthusiasm and stand with you. Maybe even cheer a little.
What are you working on now, I asked him as we clear away the pastry crumbs from the table.
“‘The Magic Hourglass’ and ‘Lanterns for the Dead’ are my latest projects. I am currently in the pre-production phase of the short film ‘The Magic Hourglass’ and we will be shooting in November.
The story of ‘Hourglass’ is a sort of prequel that follows the characters from ‘Lanterns of the Dead.’ Once completed the short will not only be shown in film festivals and posted to the Internet, but will be included as part of the business plan and investor packet we have put together to raise financing for ‘Lanterns for the Dead.’ And I cannot wait to stand on the set, to feel the magic that film brings, and say the word ‘action’ again.”
Robert is on the board of directors for the Orange County Screenwriters Association. He is also involved in theater and working on a play script and heading off soon to be lecturing at a film class at Fullerton College.
Since no one succeeds without the help and support of friends, Robert asked if he could acknowledge the following people who have helped and continue to help in his goal to rule the film world:
Robert and Deanna Rollins
Rudi Fehr (in memory)
Edward Fik
Phil Martin
Joseph Guimond
Craig Russom
Jeremy Borum
Steven Oda
Ken Hobbs
Barbara Horvath
Don Dalis
Christopher Dominguez
Mark Reid
Chris and Kathleen Eric
Here are links to Robert’s projects and videos:
Robert Rollins Pictures
Since this is the beginning of football season, I’m going to use former Rams/Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner to illustrate a point about our business. There are many differences, true, between football and film but there are also a lot of similarities.
I think we all have a little voice in our head that says one of two things loudly and the other thing softly. If you’re doing well or have an inordinate amount of arrogance or confidence then the loud voice is saying “I’m a star.” The small voice in the back of your mind is saying “I suck” because there’s always this sneaking suspicion that you’re not as good as you think or others say you are. However, if you’re failing or lacking in confidence at the moment then reverse those - the loud voice is saying “I suck” and the small voice is saying “I’m really a star.”
I myself alternate constantly between those loud and soft voices. Many times, I’ve said to myself - I am a star - my work is fantastic, I’m at the top of my game and nothing I’m doing is wrong. Then, a cold reality hits me in the form of someone rejecting my work and that loud voice becomes “you suck” but the small voice still believes I’m a star - it’s just been drowned out by circumstances.
Kurt Warner must have had this same situation many times. His story.
INSPIRATION
Kurt, a man from a small town, after a fairly undistinguished high school football career attended the University of Northen Iowa and was made a third string quarterback on his college football team - which means, dead last in the depth chart. When he was finally given a chance to start in his senior year (after three years of riding the bench,) he did so well that he was named Offensive Player of the Year by the Gateway Conference. I’m sure at that point he was saying “I’m a star.”
Warner went undrafted out of college but was given a chance to work out for the
Green Bay Packers in 1994. Unfortunately, he was up against another future hall-of-famer Brett Favre and got nowhere in training camp. His quarterback coach at the time, SuperBowl winning coach Steve Mariucci liked Warner and said he had enormous potential but then also told him he wasn’t ready to be an NFL quarterback. Little consolation to a man who has to go back to his family and admit he didn’t make the cut.
When no other team would give him a workout, Warner went back to Iowa and stocked shelves for $5.50/hr. and also found work as an assistant football coach at his former college - just to keep in football. All the while, he never stopped looking for a way to get back into the game he loved more than almost anything else.
PERSPIRATION
He found work as a QB in the Arena League. Not exactly the NFL - not even really close - but it was football, sorta. Warner took advantage of the quicker nature of the AFL to hone his skills, doing so well that he was named to the AFL's First-team All-Arena in both 1996 and 1997; years in which he led the Barnstormers to Arena Bowl appearances (that league’s Superbowl.) His performance there was so impressive that he would be named twelfth on a list of the twenty best Arena Football players of all time.
Wanting to get back into the NFL, Warner requested and got a tryout with the Chicago Bears - they were willing to see him now based on his amazing stats as a QB in the Arena League. But a spider bite caused a serious injury to his elbow and Warner once again was out of the NFL before he had a chance to show what he could do.
At this point, Warner could have easily given up. That little voice ("I suck") was probably becoming much louder. Self-doubt about his chances as an NFL QB had to be creeping in. It’s particularly daunting when you see people around you doing well and climbing a ladder that you can’t even find let alone put your foot on. We cannot help but measure ourselves against others - but that is wrong-minded. Kurt Warner only ever measured himself against himself even when those voices said "you suck."
Warner was eventually signed by the St. Louis Rams but not the NFL team - the, at the time, farm league called NFL Europe - a wasteland for players who teams think might work out but in whom they lack enough confidence to actually sign to an NFL position. Instead of cursing his situation, Warner flourished - he lead the league in both touchdowns and passing yards distinguishing himself and forcing the Rams to take notice of him. Inspiration, perspiration and...
DETERMINATION
Kurt was finally brought into the Rams team as 2nd string QB - pretty good but not the starting QB. Hotshot Trent Green was. But at the final game of the preseason, the highly-touted Green - in whom everyone on the team had placed their hopes - went down with an injury. The Rams and everyone else thought the season for the team was done.
They didn’t account for Warner’s fire and his passion to show everyone they had been wrong about him all these years.
“The Greatest Show on Turf” was the name they eventually gave Warner’s offense which set records for highest completion percentage, most yards in a single game and many other equally impressive records. He is considered to be one of the greats in the pantheon of NFL QBs and is almost certainly a Hall-of-Fame inductee when he becomes eligible (you have to be out of football for three years to become a Hall of Fame candidate and Warner just retired last year.)
Warner’s story continues to be one of the more inspirational ones in any profession. As quarterback, the leader of the team, he eventually took the Rams to a
Superbowl marking them as one of the premier teams in the league while he stood behind Center. He did suffer an injury during one season but came back to set even more records in passing and completions.
When the Rams released Warner thinking his best days were behind him, Warner went to the New York Giants who had gone 4-12 the previous year. Under Warner during the first seven games, the Giants were 5-2. But Warner, for reasons not clear, was benched in favor of young up-and-comer Eli Manning. The Giants went 1-6 when Manning was quarterback. Not exactly inspirational. To his credit, Warner never disrespected the coach, Manning or the decision to bench him for a much less ready QB.
The Arizona Cardinals, a one-time junkyard of football players, took Warner after the Giants released him early out of his 2-year contract, not as the starter but as a veteran backup. However, he performed so well, taking every advantage of his opportunities, that he quickly was made a starter under Coach Denny Green and eventually led the Arizona Cardinals, long considered to be a league joke, to a Superbowl that they almost won, only losing a close game by three points against one of the powerhouse teams of the NFL.
Can you see the parallels here? Can you understand that wanting something is the first step to achieving it - but that wanting it is not enough. You have to work hard for it. Warner’s work ethic was unparalleled - he threw and threw and worked until he was perfection itself. But even that’s not enough. You have to stay at it no matter which voice is shouting at you the loudest because not all of us make it on the first try; or the second; or the tenth.
Inspiration - see the dream. Visualize it.
Perspiration - learn your craft. get your “chops” to a point where you can do it blindfolded. How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, practice, practice goes the old joke.
Determination - do not quit. Do not give up simply because you’ve not gotten to where you think you should be or where someone else is. The trap here that so many fall into is seeing someone else’s progress and measuring yourself against that person. No, no no! My martial arts Sensei says your opponent is not out there somewhere - he is the person staring back at you in the mirror. Osu, Sensei.
The next time you’re ready to give up, remember Kurt Warner, completely out of football and stocking shelves in an Iowa grocery store - and then flash forward to him hoisting the Lombardi Trophy at the Superbowl just a few years later and eventually, taking his place among the greats of his sport in the Pro Football Hall of Fame - the highest achievement any football player can aspire to. When Warner ascends that stage to unveil his Hall of Fame bust, knowing all the greats that came before him, understanding that he was once considered "not good enough" to succeed - if he isn't overcome with emotion, doesn't break down in tears then he'd have to be made of stone.
Warner was only able to accomplish what he did because he never gave up and he stayed strong in his skills and his attitude. And when that “I suck” voice got loud and obnoxious, Warner pushed it aside and said “I may not be a star yet, but that doesn’t mean I won’t be one.”
Perceive, believe, achieve. It can be done - whatever the dream - just remember that it may not be easy and it may not be quick.
Just ask superstar quarterback and former stockboy, Kurt Warner.
Wow! Upcoming events for the OC Screenwriters Association...more details
linkInfo on some events coming very soon - please check back!
Not all of these are directly film related - some are just fun like the beach party and the zombie walk. There will be more specifics later - this is like a "save the date" reminder. http://www.ocscreenwriters.com/newsletter/newsletter_20100825.htm
Lately, people have asked some of the following questions:-After working a 12 hour day in engineering, why on earth would you drive an hour to come see me act in a scene that only lasts 5 minutes?
-Why do you spend time reading and giving me honest feedback on whatever I’m working on without being a prick?
My answer to those questions begins in 2002, when I graduated high school.
In high school, I dealt with everything behind the scenes: musicals, school rallies, and the daily announcements show on the school’s closed circuit TV system. That daily show gave me the greatest high on earth. It was like a drug addiction at times, and I loved it. So when college came around, I knew I wanted to work in TV news but just didn’t know how to do it. I did know that it would be hard work, but that never really scared me.
I listed Film/TV as a major on one of my colleg apps - boy, was that a mistake. When my mom saw that, her eyes had a shocked, surprised, and discontented look, and she told me, “You’re going to school for engineering.”
I tried to argue with her, but that failed. She told me that if I didn’t study engineering in college, she wasn’t going to pay, and I wasn’t going. Well screw me. Being 17, I didn’t know what to do. The only thing I knew is that I had to go to college so I caved and accepted her judgment.
I entered UCI in the Fall of 2002, and began studying electrical engineering. I
hated every minute of it. I argued with both my parents almost every day and some nights, the discussion would last until one in the morning. I’d blame them for everything: failing tests, not being able to party, having labs on Friday night until 10 p.m. Eventually, my parents told me that I could switch, but being so far into it and stubborn, I decided to stick it out. The sense of isolation I felt was intense but I didn't understand how to change any of that at the time.Since I hated my major, but was doing well enough to pass, I decided that I should get a job. At least, I’d have some money so I can have some fun. I got a job as a parking attendant then worked my way up to a traffic director.
I didn’t get support there either; as the head of the parking/transportation department told a group of new hires: if you’re an engineering or science major you won’t last here since you can’t handle the chaos and the people.
Great. Screw me times 2. Here I was with a major I hated and a job where I was already told that I wouldn’t make it. And it was only Day 2. Support? What's that?
Eventually, I worked my way up to a traffic director, and I was so good at controlling the flow of traffic and pedestrians that I became a traffic trainer without going through the official training. One year the Irvine and UCI Police departments wrote letters saying how impressed they were with my skills and professionalism while directing traffic at accident scenes. The Irvine PD even called my direct supervisor after an accident saying how effective I had been. Not bad for someone who was initially told he probably couldn't handle the chaos.
At the end of that year, I shifted majors and got an engineering internship. I had my traffic director gig, and was doing better than I ever had in engineering. My job dissatisfaction was somewhat resolved but I still felt like I was alone on an island of emotional turmoil without anyone who understood what I was going through.
At the height of the economic boom in 2007, I graduated with a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering. A job with a signing bonus was waiting for me. While I didn’t always like engineering, I did like the pay. Money solves a lot of problems and quiets a lot of those inner voices shouting at you about how you're not doing the things you want to od.
Fantastic, I thought, I’ve done everything right. I finished college, have a job, and will be making some decent coin. I flew up to San Jose to celebrate with my family and friends feeling pretty good about myself and what I had accomplished.A day before the celebration, I showed my mom my signing bonus. She had that same shocked, surprised, and discontent look in her eyes that I had seen years earlier. “What? Is that all you make," she said with a voice that sounded like nails on a chalkboard to my ears. "Did you know that nurses make more than you do?”
She showed me one of her pay stubs. Pointing at her hourly wage, she asked me if I could read “that number.” How could I compete with that? She’s been a nurse for over 20 years at a county hospital, where I’m just getting started.
That was like a kick to the stomach. I felt sick. I stormed off just as angry when I found out that I had to study engineering. To this day, I hate seeing my degree. I took the copy I had off my office wall, and always feel like ripping it off my parents wall every time I go back to San Jose.
That night, I told myself that I had to do this TV thing I had dreamed of for so long no matter what. I spent the rest of 2007 researching. I went to the local community college for classes. I started a little slow, but when the economy crashed in 2008 I decided to drop to part-time as an engineer to take more classes in the field I loved.As I started getting more involved with my classes, I started meeting a lot of different people in the industry. People who were either living my dream or working toward it.
Eventually, working and hustling made some connections that allowed me do press coverage for the Orange Country Screenwriters at the Newport Beach Film Festival I got to tape interviews at the opening night of the Festival for OCSWA and it was like a wide-awake dream. I ended up not being able to sleep that night since I was so high.
The Orange County Screenwriters Association is really my first support group. I never really got the support I needed all along my eight year journey The Orange County Screenwriters is one of the few places that does provide that support - it's in their mission statement. It is support that I never knew existed in this industry or this area.
I can’t work in news full-time yet, so I’m living this crazy (to me) double life. Engineer by day, and TV news guy by night.
It’s rough sometimes, but now I’m so lucky to have found the support that I’ve been needing. I’m grateful to everyone who has shared their stories with me, and supported me in the a way I never thought possible.
Just know that if I show up at your show, or read your material, or drive an hour or so just to see you perform for five minutes, it’s because I believe in your talent, and want to give you the damned support that I never really got - until now.