The Co-Op
Things have officially gotten weird with the Big-Shot Producer. I fired off the fourth draft of my confusing conspiracy thiller, Dying Proof on Monday. I expected the usual month (or two…or three…) of silence, followed by an unenthusiastic “What else you got?” followed by me scrambling to turn one of my demented scripts into something reasonably mainstream. Instead, I received a lengthy response urging me to join some sort of bizarre co-op.
Here’s a succinct explanation that omits the weird sales-pitch aspects and new-age feel-goodery: a group of professionals — among them studio readers, agents, executives, writers, and producers — exchange material on a semi-weekly basis. The group is large enough that you’ll keep getting things to read every week or two, even if you aren’t submitting anything for a few months. Somehow I qualify by having a tenuous business relationship with Big-Shot, and that makes me wonder if it’s like 80% unemployable losers, 20% legitimate people. I don’t know, because it’s anonymous.
“Anonymous?” you ask, as it gets the Hmm, this whole thing sounds like bullshit gears a-grinding. I’m not saying it’s not bullshit — I’m just telling you what I know: this guy is legitimate. His creepy co-op may not be, but I’m far more interested in keeping in his good graces, and if turns out to be beneficial, good. If it’s a waste of time…well, that’s less good, but at the moment I have time to spare.
The anonymity factor, as he explained it to me when I asked for my details, comes from the fact that the readers and executives (and maybe even agents) will add your script and title to their coverage databases if it’s a piece of shit. With no names and fake titles, they can’t shut you out like that, which is good because the whole point of the co-op is to foster development in the writing. You can’t do that if you’re going to get blackballed for submitting a shaky first draft.
Of course, I have a solid fourth draft that I’m unashamed to have this man read, because I know him. When it comes to anonymous people commenting anonymously, I am uneasy. In my experience browsing Internet message boards, I know that anonymity breeds cruelty and contempt more than healthy discussion and debate. Then again, I’ve gotten notes before. I can tell the difference between good, constructive notes and awful, half-assed notes. I’m fine with negative notes when they’re constructive. I’m even when when they aren’t constructive, because then I know I can just ignore them. Still, it’s difficult to read somebody trashing something you spent a lot of time on, especially if they’re off-base.
Trying to look on the bright side: this is a group of people taking time out of theoretically busy schedules to volunteer to read shit they don’t have to read. The thing that lures some people in is the idea that they might find something really great; for others, it’s the idea that their really great thing might be found. With the shroud of anonymity, if it’s universally panned, nobody will know you wrote it. Big-Shot added that if it gets a majority of good feedback, and/or reaches a point where some anonymous person is legitimately interested in it, the shroud is lifted. That’s a good thing for me, assuming it’s not just a hook to get me to do free coverage.
But free coverage I’ll do, because hey, at the very least it’ll keep my skills sharp. At the slightly-above-very least, Big-Shot — the only person who knows our secret identities — may consider throwing me some paid reader work. I wouldn’t complain about that.
After waiting for the details and then thinking about it for a few hours, I agreed to take part. Tuesday night, he sent me two scripts. One was anonymous; the other was not.
In fact, it was so non-anonymous that I Googled the writer, and he has a feature in the works that I’ve actually heard of (full disclosure: I’ve only heard of it because a super-hot actress I have a crush on is in it). So non-anonymous that he’s repped by a legitimate agent from a huge company. So non-anonymous that Big-Shot listed himself as the producer.
Suddenly I found myself in the same ethical quandary as I did with The Manager, only worse because the Big-Shot Producer isn’t a useless tool. Back then, I felt uncomfortable because when The Manager sent me a script he himself wrote, it felt like a conflict of interest. Did he really expect to get honest feedback? Was it an absurd test, and if so, did I pass by lobbing him softballs or by giving him brutal honesty?
Things got worse here; granted, it’s not a conflict to have people outside of your specific offices look at a script you’ve got your name on, even if it’s not as the writer. But when you’re sending it to somebody who wants something out of you, and you aren’t keeping it anonymous, do you really expect to get brutally honest feedback? He says they’re a tough crowd, but are they tough on him?
I read the script, and while it’s a passable romantic comedy (certainly better than the bulk of what The Manager sent me, albeit still kind of bland and formulaic), I have some big issues with it. Worst of all, the issues I have focus on writing problems that, I sense, are caused by a writer trying to please a producer — meaning, the writer’s inept incorporation of Big-Shot’s ideas have sunk the entire thing.
I’m not sure what to say, but I doubt it’ll be honest.
Posted by Stan on April 2, 2008 10:53 PM | Permalink | Print-Friendly | Career-Based Rambling | Digg It
Post a Comment
Powered by Ajax Comments