An alternative model for script
development at Screen Australia.
In brief:
(1)Screenwriters do not apply for script
development funding; they are invited to apply by Screen Australia Project
Managers.
(2) Project Managers invest time and energy
in script development applications proportional to their quality or potential.
High quality projects and those with the potential get more attention than poor
quality projects.
Here, in broad brushstrokes, is
how it could work with fair and equitable outcomes for all involved and a
better use of Screen Australia’s limited human and financial resources.
STEP ONE
Screenwriters register with
Screen Australia and, perhaps, even paying a
modest fee to do so. S/he then uploads her screenplay/synopsis/treatment
to the Screen Australia website as either (a) for Screen Australia eyes only or
(b) for other registered filmmakers also.
A screenwriter’s registering and
uploading of a project in development does not constitute an application.
STEP TWO
Screen Australia Project Managers
are free to view all the screenwriters’ materials online and form opinions
regarding the quality of what is on offer – individually and collectively.
STEP THREE
Imagine 100 hypothetical script
development applications. Divide them into four categories. These are my categories,
based on my own experience. Screen Australia may decide on a different set of (and
more appropriately named) categories:
(1) Non starters, (2) Not overly
impressed but perhaps further down the track? (3) Maybe, but lots of work required and (4) Great
project and/or great potential. How can we help?
(1) Non starters
Out of 100 script
hypothetical development applications,
fifty are amateurish, badly written, reveal little or no understanding of the
craft of screenwriting and have no discernible potential, in the view of the SA
Project Manager(s), to become screenplays that are likely to be produced on any
platform.
This 50% is, obviously, a ballpark guess on my part but I suspect not
far from the truth for those who have to read all 100. (The Project Manager
might be wrong, of course – always a possibility with any assessment process.).
There are various polite ways in
which these 50 applicants are not invited to apply for script development funds
without resorting to a form letter. It would take less than ten minutes for a
Project Manager to suggest (on the phone) that the applicant learn more about
the art and craft of screenwriting and/or come up with more compelling stories before
posting this or any other project online again. In the process, the Project Manager could
acknowledge s/he may be wrong: “If you feel passionately about your project
don’t let anyone, including me, saying ‘no’ stop you from pursing your filmic dream.”
(2) Not overly impressed but
perhaps further down the track?
Some potential here but not
enough to warrant investment. Twenty of the hundred (ballpark guess, again) fit
into this category. They show
promise (or the potential thereof) but
there are some glaring problems that need to be addressed; problems that the
screenwriter seems to be unaware of and perhaps is ill-equipped to solve.
The
Project Manager, who should be experienced in the craft of screenwriting, may
be able, in a ten minute telephone conversation, to help the screenwriter
identify the problems and suggest that s/he do another draft and post their
screenplay in development again in a few months. Or, the Project Manager might
suggest that whilst Screen Australia is not prepared to fund a full draft at
this point, it is prepared to consider an application to fund the employment of
a mentor or script editor or to make a screenwriting workshop available to the
screenwriter to improve their craft skills.
NOTE
So far, up to 70% of potential
applicants are much more in need of advice from an experienced filmmaker
(Screen Australia Project Manager) than they are of actual funds. If they are
not prepared to write their screenplay in the absence of funding they are in
the wrong business! Most screenwriters, indeed most filmmakers, work for zero
or close to zero income most of the time. This is simply a fact of life.
(3) Maybe, but lots of work required.
My guess is that around 20% fall
into this category. These screenwriters understand the craft, are probably
experienced and need funding to buy the time needed to develop their project to
the next stage. They may be onto a winner or they may not be. The Project
Manager can’t be sure. But s/he can be sure that the screenwriter is competent
and has the requisite skills to pull off what s/he is attempting to achieve in
story-telling terms. In conversation with the screenwriter (more than ten
minutes now) the Screen Australia Project Manager seeks to discover how best SA
may help. In conjunction with the screenwriter, The SA Project Manager
recommends a course of action in the screenwriter chooses to make an
application.
NOTE
The screenwriter may be part of
a team (producer and or director) but the same guidelines apply.
(4) Great project and/or great
potential. How can we help?
The screenwriter, in conjunction
with the Project Manager figure out a game plan that is going to maximize the
chances that the next draft, the next stage of development, is going to result
in a screenplay that has the “wow’ factor that lies at the heart of what
separates a good story from a ‘must see’ story.
Bearing in mind that these are
just ballpark figures, 10% of the projects
posted online receive the lion’s share of the Project Manager’s time and
energy and 50% receive minimal attention because, in the view of the Project Manager(s)
they are nowhere near to being up to scratch.
Is this undemocratic. Probably,
but if those who fall into the 50% whose projects are not invited to apply
(though they can if they want to) come back with a more developed version of their project, they can ask that
it be looked at by a different Project Manager. Let’s face it, different
Project Managers are going to like, be attracted to, different projects. What
one Project Manager might see as a project without merit, another might see as having
the potential to attract an audience – even if only in a niche market. There
is, after all, no accounting for taste and we are all (thank God) surprised every
now and then by a film that captures the audience’s imagination but which did
not appear on paper to have the potential to do so.
I am working on the presumption
here that Project Managers can be wrong and that ample opportunities are made
available to screenwriters to prove them so.
So, instead of every Tom. Dick
and Harriet making an application and, in the spirit of democratic process,
having their project assessed by two Reader/Assessor/Project Managers (time and
energy consuming), some Toms Dicks and Harriets are invited to apply for what
they have agreed to in conversation with the Project Manager. And others are not so invited.
A significant advantage of such
a system is that the amount of time spent by a Project Manager in assessing a
script application becomes proportional to the quality and potential of the project.
7 of the 10 would not need to be read by a 2nd Project Manager under
most circumstances but all 7 would have the opportunity to speak briefly (at
least on the phone) with a Project Manager.
This idea – invitation to apply
replacing the right to apply - has been expressed in broad brushstrokes only here
but the finer details are not hard to work out.
At the outset, as it is being road-tested, ‘application by invitation’
could run alongside what is currently in place – every Tom, Dick and Harriet
being accorded the ‘right’ to have even the most dreadful of screenplays (or
ideas in development) read and assessed by two Reader/Assessor Project
Managers.
Regardless of the fate of any
particular project as far as Screen Australia is concerned, (and the reality is that only a small number
of projects are going to receive funding) all registered screenplays will be
available online (if the screenwriter/filmmaker so wishes) and may attract
attention from others in a position to help get the story onto a screen – big or
small.
No comments:
Post a Comment