Film Industry

Will the digital mediums replace emulsion photography, even if only partially?

–N

If you’re going to allow me the “if only partially” escape clause, then certainly. Well-regarded films such as TADPOLE and PIECES OF APRIL are already being shot on digital video, as are the SPY KIDS movies and the STAR WARS prequels. On the distribution side, most new theaters are being built to allow for digital projectors (which will be installed whenever someone figures out who should pay for them).

Speaking in vast generalizations, digital is usually cheaper and faster than film. Videotape costs less than film stock, particularly when factoring in development and printing costs. Editing is already an almost-entirely digital process, so shooting digitally saves you a step. And studios dream of being able to digitally transmit their movies directly to the multiplex, saving the cost of striking and shipping 2,500+ film prints.

What’s more, the recent generations of digital projectors are quite good. You could switch over every movie theater in America and most people wouldn’t notice any change.

For all the progress that’s been made in digital cinematography — and it’s considerable — film still has some significant advantages that will keep it viable for decades to come. First, there’s a lot of entrenched experience. Cinematographers know film and love it. Second, film technology itself has improved dramatically. Today’s film stocks allow you to shoot in lighting conditions that would have been impossible a decade ago, and techniques like silver retention and skip-bleach processing allow for a lot of creative freedom. Third, the resolution of digital cameras still can’t match film — and when they do, there will be other creative reasons (such as film grain, focus and contrast) why you might still not be satisfied. Finally, on an $80 million movie, the film costs aren’t prohibitive, so there’s no reason for many movies to switch to digital video. (There is, however, a lot of pressure for one-hour TV shows to switch to digital cameras. Many are making the change.)

On the other end of the spectrum, digital video is a godsend for the $80,000 movie, where film and processing could eat the entire budget. Since it is these smaller movies where tomorrow’s filmmakers get their start, I can envision this new wave rising up through ranks with digital cameras in hand, and never trading them in for the “old” film cameras.

If you sell a script to a studio, what are your rights regarding the first re-write? Do you have to be a member of the WGA to demand this?

–Anonymous

Simply on the basis of morality, ethics and artistic vision, the original writer should always have the first crack at rewriting his script. Unfortunately, morality, ethics and artistic vision are sometimes in short supply when it comes to making movies. That’s why it’s good the Writers Guild of America (WGA) has its “creative rights” provisions, which cover situations like this. You can find a full list of them here.

If you’re not a WGA member and you sell a script to a studio, are you still covered? Almost certainly yes. The major studios have agreements with the WGA which basically state that any writer they employ has to be a WGA member — so if you’re not a member when you sell the script, you have to join right away. And it’s certainly worth it. Not only does the WGA offer screenwriters these up-front protections, but it also offers health insurance and collects residuals for writers’ work.

So are you, Paul, absolutely guaranteed the first rewrite on your spec script? No. There are at least two scenarios where this wouldn’t happen. First, you might sell your script to a company that is not a WGA-signatory. Even relatively big studios (like Miramax/Dimension) have divisions that aren’t WGA. In that case, you wouldn’t be guaranteed the WGA creative rights. A second scenario might have you waiving your right to the first rewrite as a condition of the script sale. I’ve never heard of this happening — it feels morally, ethically and artistically wrong — but it’s conceivable, so I’m sure it has happened to some writer at some point.

Finally, I like that you use the word “demand” in your question. No studio will be inclined to give you anything just because you ask politely. If having the opportunity to rewrite your script is a priority for you — and it should be — don’t accept a deal that would shut you out.

(While you’re at the WGA site, you should also check out the “Independent Film Program,” which can offer some helpful protection even for non-WGA members.)

How important is it to be in Los Angeles to truly make it
as a successful screenwriter? Is it possible to make it outside the City of
Angels, or should
one realistically think about relocating?

–T. Sexton

You don’t need to live in Los Angeles to write a screenplay, although the reverse
sometimes seems true. Everyone in L.A. eventually writes one, though usually
they shouldn’t.

Writers move to Hollywood for the same reason long-distance runners move to
high-altitude. By making things more difficult for yourself, you hopefully
improve. And let’s face it, there’s something romantic about being a struggling
screenwriter in the big city, living from ramen noodle to ramen noodle, doing
your laundry with other aspiring filmmakers, complaining about Jerry Bruckheimer
movies while finishing your spec script about terrorists.

After a year or two the romance fades, and if you haven’t had any success,
you become bitter. That’s not to say you wouldn’t have become bitter wherever
you came from, but in L.A., it’s more expensive. (On the plus side, the weather’s
better.)

Do you need to move to L.A. to become successful? Probably. While there are
major screenwriters who don’t live here, most of them did at some point in
their careers. Part of the job of a beginning screenwriter is to take 1000
meetings with 1000 young development executives, listening to them spout on
about their pet projects which will never get made, and that means living in
town.

Should you, T. Sexton, move to Los Angeles? Only if you’re really serious
about making it as a writer. Just as nine out of ten actors who move here don’t
succeed, probably a greater proportion of writers strike out. The difference
is, actors have to go out and audition, while writers can fail in private.

But some writers, including many of my best friends, do succeed. And truth
be told, it can be a great job. Don’t let the fear of failure keep you from
trying. Pack up the U-Haul if that’s your goal. Just make sure you have a script
or two finished first.

Hello. Thank you for existing. Reading your answer about the job of a writer’s
assistant made me wonder: where and how do we find the feature writer who needs
an assistant?

–Sandrine

In the back of the trades (which means Variety and the Hollywood Reporter),
you’ll often find listings for "assistants wanted." Some of those
will be good jobs, a lot won’t. Personally, all the assistants I’ve hired have
been either referrals from friends, or people I worked with before. For instance,
two of my assistants worked in the production office on GO. My current assistant
came to me via my agent, who taught one of his classes at USC.

An internship, either paid or unpaid, is a great way to make contacts who
could get you a job working for a writer. If you attend any screenwriting symposiums,
it’s worth a shot talking to any writers there about the kind of job you’re
looking for. Even if the writer himself isn’t looking for an assistant, he
may have a friend who is.