Geekery

So, here's the thing. I used to be cool. Not Shoreditch faux-cool, bordering on Nathan Barley, but I lived in East London, worked in advertising and subsisted on free drinks. I attended media parties with champagne on tap and those little mini versions of sausage and mash or teeny-tiny burgers, as seemed to be de rigueur. Rumour had it the industry had a three strikes rule on cocaine, necessary due to the huge number of people caught by their bosses hoovering it up in the workplace.
Now since I've had this change of heart on my career there's no room for a quick drink after work turning into a 3am night bus nap home. Instead of Time Out magazine my shelves are filled with screenwriting bibles: Story by Robert McKee, The Writers' Tale by Russell T Davies, The Screenwriter's Handbook 2010, Studying Plays, Scriptwriting for the Screen by Charlie Moritz...The list goes on, and I haven't even started on the podcasts that fill my ipod (recommend Danny Stack's Scriptwriting in the UK), or the scripts printed off from the BBC Writersroom site. I am doing the thing I think necessary to suceed - which is to immerse myself wholly and completely in this industry. I am currently living and breathing this, and no doubt it will slowly drive me insane. But at least it proves I'm serious.

Excluded

Last night there was a new drama on BBC2 as part of their Education season. This was Excluded by Brian Fillis, who I hadn't previously heard of though he was nominated for a BAFTA in 2007 for his drama (now, don't laugh) Fear of Fanny, charting the career of TV chef Fanny Craddock. Despite the silly name wish I'd seen it as Fanny and Johnnie Craddock were played by Julia Davis and Mark Gatiss who are both brilliantly funny and pretty dark (just watch Crooked House, Night-Night or the criminally underviewed pilot Lizzie and Sarah). Anyway, I digress. I tuned into Excluded because it was billed as 'partly improvised' which interested me. It's a very brave writer who allows people to improvise. An interview I once saw between Larry David and Ricky Gervais demonstrated both ends of the spectrum, obviously David's Curb Your Enthusiasm being the best example of improvisation and Gervais saying he scripted The Office to within an inch of its life, no improvising allowed. I was interested to see how the improvisation worked in Excluded, but with a classroom full of kids it was hard to see what was scripted and what wasn't. It's a risk to let people improvise, and even more of one to let kids do it, who have a tendency to over-act even within the limitations of a script. It was a good show, but for me didn't have the magic that should have been there. Though I admire Fillis' bravery. More of that, please.

Elliot Grove Q & A at the BFI

The BFI Southbank is currently running a lecture series on screenwriting. Writers appearing in the series include: Sir David Hare (The Hours, The Reader), Simon Beaufoy (The Full Monty, Slumdog Millionaire), Peter Morgan (Frost/ Nixon, The Queen, The Special Relationship), Aline Brosh McKenna (The Devil Wears Prada, 27 Dresses) and Ronald Harwood (The Pianist, The Diving Bell and The Butterfly). Although I don’t have any particular interest in getting into film writing I am interested in all aspects of writing for the screen. The lecture I opted for was perhaps the most relevant to me, as it was about the art of writing rather than about films generally. Elliot Grove is the founder of the Raindance Film Festival, started in 2003 to support the British Independent film industry and they now provide training for writers and film-makers (which, as with all these courses, is extortionately expensive at £290 for two days).

Grove seems like a fascinating man, growing up in a rural Amish community he describes his first experience seeing a film and how he got into films via art school and set design. When it came to setting up Raindance he said he realised one thing: that Brits can be snobby about something new and unbranded. They like to know what they’re going to get. So to his first film few film festivals the audiences were mainly American or from elsewhere in Europe. However over the next few years it grew, and now is a huge event in the film lovers calendar. This got me to thinking – I don’t have to sit and whine, I have to set something up myself! It would be great to have some sort of support or networking system for young people who want to get into TV who are under 30 with limited experience. It’s all well and good to get advice from established professionals now, but let’s be honest – the nature of the beast is very different from ten years ago.

The rest of Grove’s talk was anecdotes from his work, and a good chunk of advice:

-Learn how to format correctly and uniformly.
-READ scripts. Look for patterns in the scripts, both good and bad. Most bad scripts make the same mistakes so make sure you recognise them in others to avoid making them yourself.
-The industry is surrounded in mystique. Try to break that down.

They don’t want to meet new talent. They say they do, but they don’t. They’re worried you’ll be good and steal their cheese.

-The reasons why people don’t write are i) Lack of confidence ii) Self-destruction iii) Procrastination.
-The best way to write is to write a little every day and to keep that time sacred. Don’t let other tasks get in the way.
-The biggest thing is to entertain; if you’re not doing that you’re in the wrong business.
-The four basic tools for story-telling are: the characters, what they do, what they say, and the setting. Weave them together so the seams don’t show.
-Fim-making is about commerce. A writer has to inspire everyone else making the film, and once it’s written let it go.
-Don’t put reality into your script as we see it every day. Shape it into a story.
-People are voyeurs, put something on the screen that they would want to watch.
-Writing is a very minimal art form, so select your words carefully for maximum impact. Think about the impact of walk versus rushes, dashes, limps etc.
-But don’t overwrite. Every time you write something down re-read and ask yourself: is there a quicker way to say that?
-You aren’t writing a screenplay for the audience. You write it for the reader (who is invariably white, male, middle-aged, middle class). The role of a film-maker is to illicit emotion in an audience but the role of a writer is to illicit emotion in a reader.
-You will stumble on misfortune, don’t take it personally. Ask yourself if every hit film good? And therefore is every good film a hit?

All in all very useful and, more importantly at the moment, very inspiring. I’m off to adapt Senses as a stage play and see if I can have any luck getting that produced.

"I'm a writer, I'm northern and I'm ready to be nurtured"

Brilliant. Corrie: The Road to Coronation Street is right up my...street. What a fabulous thing for the BBC to do, airing such a celebration of Corrie. And even the inclusion of Eastenders' Kat Slater as Pat Phoenix didn't seem like a dig (though her accent could've been better!)
If you haven't already I'd highly recommend you check it out on iplayer - only four days left! Will write a bit of a longer entry on it when I get chance but now I have my fingers crossed tighter than ever before about the ITV story associate workshops. Literally my dream job.

Him and Her - second try

Nope, sorry – I’ve persevered with Him and Her into episode two against my better judgment (read my first impressions here) and I’m still not feeling it. I read the Dom’s World blog entry by Dom Carver on the subject, and he’s a man who has it on great authority (Russell Tovey, who as I said, hasn’t yet put a foot wrong for me) that the series improves. I can definitely see where Carver is coming from with the frightening assertion that he is Steve, however I don’t believe the show is reflected accurately, nor is it distorted in such a way that it heightens reality and makes it funny. It just sort of…is.

There’s an improvement, perhaps, but so miniscule that it makes little difference to me. For a start I didn’t believe the premise: the main character, Steve, was pretending to be ill on his birthday so he could stay home alone and watch porn while his girlfriend went out. I could believe it if he pretended to be ill on her birthday to stay in and watch porn but surely he’d like a pint on his. After all, they have a lot of time on their hands – am sure they can go to the pub and watch porn. I wasn’t aware it was an either/ or choice. There were some witty moments in conversation, but still too much on the graphic bodily functions for me. Her rooting around for a massive bogey up his nose (ick) and him needing the toilet but happily “swallowing it back”.

I’m guessing the writer is trying to make some satirical comments about ignorance in society, but exchanges such as:

"Badgers?"
"I used to like them when I was nine."
"Did you also used to like picking flowers and sucking cock?"

don’t quite hit the mark for me.

Having said all this, the pay-off of the episode is great when Steve’s friends haven’t quite left for the pub yet and see him wanking in front of his laptop with headphones on. It’s an obvious punch-line, and I could see it coming a mile off, but was casually yet eloquently executed. Please please let the rumours be true, and for this show to keep improving. If I was sent this script I’d definitely want to read more by this writer, but maybe just not more of the same.

Holby placement advice

I recently recieved a charming email from a gent who spotted my profile on the Feedback Exchange, noted that I did a placement on Holby City and requested my advice. Well, for a start I was just flattered to be considered a 'success' in any aspect of script work, especially bearing in mind my current knack for eliciting rejections at every turn. So I thought I'd post my advice here too.

He said:
I hope you don't mind me emailing you, I came across your details on 'The Feedback Exchange' and noticed that you did the BBC's Holby City Script Department work placement.

I'm currently studying Scriptwriting for Film & Television at Bournemouth University and looking for work experience myself. I'm hoping to go into script editing so I'd give anything to land that particular placement and I've applied 3 times but predictably with no success (always the way!). I know the competition must be very strong but clearly you did something right in your application so I wondered if you might be able to tell me a little about what you said in yours, particularly if you ever told by anyone on the show what it was they liked about it? Any tips I could get that might improve my chances of being chosen would be hugely appreciated!

Sorry for the bizarre request, I know you put your details up for the feedback exchange service but I don't know anyone that's done that placement (or landed ANY BBC placement for that matter!) so in my eyes you're pretty special! I'd be happy to read anything of yours in exchange for any info and insight you could give me, although I can't tell you how useful you'd find my critique.

Thanks for your time, hope to hear from you soon.

And my response was:
Hope all’s well with you. Firstly SO sorry for being completely rubbish. I kept remembering your email but didn’t want to dash off a quick reply. But, here goes. Of course I don’t mind you emailing – I figure the Feedback Exchange should be for any kind of script-related advice.

I did the placement last October, and was fortunate enough to be accepted on my first application. Seeing your email I’m surprised, as you seem to have more directly relevant experience than I did at the time. However I think they were impressed by my related experience, rather than direct script knowledge. I did an English degree, specialising in 20th century American drama, so talked a lot about script reading and analysis in my application. I also have lots of amateur theatre experience, though again not directly related to television. I think showing you’re diverse would help. Out of the four researchers there when I did my placement they all had very different backgrounds (one used to be a director on Eastenders but I think wanted to get into script writing, one was a producer on Blue Peter and another came from working on radio plays in BBC Manchester).

I assume the application questions are similar each time, so I’ll go through each of them in turn. I’m not saying these are definitive tips, but as I don’t know much about your strengths and experiences, bar your obviously relevant academic background, I’ll just go by what worked for me.

Q1) Why are you interested in this particular placement and how you think it will benefit you:
I flattered them, did some research on the show so it’s obvious I knew my stuff. Give a little of exactly why you want the placement, what makes it so right for you rather than any of the other applicants. In addition make sure you really sell yourself in: do you do any extra curricular activities that relate? What made you realise you wanted to work with drama scripts? Are you involved in the Feedback Exchange? Do you keep a blog (if so, you should follow mine on http://penenvyandotherstories.blogspot.com/ A bit of shameless self promotion there!)

Q2) In relation to the criteria, please provide details of any interests or activities which support your application for this placement:
Go through each of the competencies and give an example of why you fit the bill. It might feel a bit prescriptive, but I’ve been advised that often people read job applications very fast and actually do just sit there with a checklist and tick of all the core criteria.

Q3) (Holby Storylines) What do you think have been the most and least successful sorylines of the last 12 months, and why?
This was my favourite question – I definitely let loose a bit on this, and slated one of the storylines, however also added in a suggestion of how to make it better. I’m sure you’re an avid viewer of Holby already in preparation for this, but I watched all the back episodes I could. Plus the Holby and BBC websites have really detailed back stories of all the characters for the last few years if you need any gaps filled in. There’s also some chat rooms which can give you an idea of what the viewers are thinking, and what does and doesn’t work for them. Basically give your opinion and back it up – I’m sure this is the sort of feedback you must work on quite regularly.
I really hope that’s of some help. And I guess if all else fails just let them know you’ve applied three times before. God loves a trier!! I know it probably doesn’t help with your frustrations, but I have a friend who’s now a successful nature show producer for the BBC who never managed to get a placement there. And conversely I got my placement first time but can’t seem to get a job at the beeb for love nor money!
Good luck, and let me know how you get on.
Hannah

I hope he gets it. And with any luck maybe I'll have some good news with my Holby application and will be on the other side of the placement applications for a change.

Dejection and rejection part III: The Return

It’s been a funny old month in Trying-to-be-a-writer land, and things aren’t going quite as planned. It’s not the knock-backs that are the hardest part; it’s the lack of feedback. Am I wasting my time? Should I re-think this whole TV drama plan? Frustrating in the extreme. Didn’t even get an interview for the Eastenders Script Co-ordinator position which I was pretty disappointed about at the time, as can be seen in this in an email to a friend:

Life is hard. Life is reeeal hard. Just got turned down (not even an INTERVIEW) for Eastenders (script co-ordinator aka secretary) role. WTF. Seriously, what's wrong with us?! I am brimming with qualifications. I have As and A*s coming out of my ass. I have enthusiasm and freebie work experience. And, more importantly, I'll blow ANYONE.

I am, of course, joking about the last part, however desperation is beginning to set in. Feedback would be invaluable at this stage; am I under-qualified? Over-qualified? Inexperienced? Did they already have an internal applicant lined up? Am I just cr*p? These are the questions, my friends. Fortunately there’s good news as well, in form of a new job on the BBC website for a Holby City researcher. Thankfully this time there isn’t the specific requirement of 1 year experience as a story researcher (see my disappointment here) and instead it’s worded as ‘significant experience’ to which I firmly ticked YES. Significant is a very subjective word, don’t you think…?

There’s also a very exciting job advertised on the ITV jobs page this week, for a group of ITV Studios Story Associates. God knows what one of those is, but I get the feeling they’d like to invite young, relatively inexperienced storyliners to workshop ideas for the show. It sounds right up my street, and with questions like ‘What makes a good story?’ and ‘Who’s your favourite ever fictional character?’ I can really let loose on the application form. Fingers crossed for that, and I also need to apply for an ITV placement today too.

Sadly the Eastenders job is not my only disappointment of the fortnight. I also received script rejections from the BBC Writersroom and the Red Planet film prize. Again, both without feedback. It hurts a lot more having writing rejected, rather than a regular job application, because it’s so much more personal. You put a lot into it, and really believe in the characters and their reactions to events. Reading back over my script I know the mistakes I made, and can see how to improve on my next one. However maybe I’m getting a little tied up with the writing – that was never meant to be the plan. I wanted to get a job in script editing and learn my trade that way. I’m starting to see writing as more than a hobby, which it was never supposed to be. I’m getting bogged down in the details and the rejection, when this extra day to freelance was supposed to be about getting out to meet people, to do work placements. I’ve gotten myself now into the mindset that even when I go back to working five days a week instead of four I’ll still force myself to write in my spare time. So this last six months of working four days a week hasn’t been wasted, as I’ve really readjusted my attitude to what I want to do. Bring it on!!

U Be Dead

Another great drama by Gwyneth Hughes (Five Day, see my blog on it here) in the form of U Be Dead (ITV). The true story of stalker Maria Marchese in 2005 provided the foundations of a fantastic tale, but Hughes really made the most of it. The first forty minutes was nail-biting and atmospheric as the anonymous stalker haunted victims Jan Falkowski and Deborah Pemberton. Lines were pared down, giving just the right levels of information and emotion for the audience to really empathise with the victims.

At first I disliked the practice of printing the name of the place at the bottom of the screen. It seemed to be over-telling the story; I could tell they were in a police station and didn’t need ‘Poole Police Station’ printed starkly in front of me. However as the threatening messages and emails came rolling in this technique, printed in the same text, mimicked the constant tracking of their stalker. Canny 360 degree camera work and long range shots evoked the feeling of being watched. Crashing waves, squawking seagulls and loudly chugging trains interspersed with eerie silences heightened tension at every turn. By mid-way through the drama I was fully engrossed in a traditional cat and mouse game, which became a cacophony of ringing phones and car chases. I’ll admit, being home alone was not the most pleasant way of watching the first hour of this show.

Once the perpetrator was caught the programme became something else. The tables are turned on the whodunit when the stalker, Marchese, accuses Jan of raping her the year before. Hughes uses all the dramatic twists and turns of the original case to her advantage, creating an engrossing, exciting and ultimately fulfilling 90 minutes of television. Dramatic and with just the right injection of personal details and stolen moments.

Him and Her

Weirdly one of the title suggestions for my script now has a namesake show on BBC3. Hopefully the title is where the similarity ends, as it’s not something I’m really aspiring to. Him and Her, written by Stefan Golaszewski (Cowards, Things Talk) is described as an anti-romantic comedy, but unfortunately for me it was something of an anti-comedy too. Now, don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t completely without charm – I can see exactly what Golaszewski was trying to achieve, with a down-beat comedy on an everyday relationship but with sparks of romance. Not the hearts-and-flowers romance, but more the aw-you-look-so-cute-sitting-their-on-the-toilet romance. It is a show trying to capture the glimpses of affection every couple has, and trying to imitate the familial moments in The Simpsons that are touching without being saccharine sweet or, perhaps more pertinently in the case of Him and Her, of the tender scenes in the Royle Family. Perhaps the casting hasn’t helped with this, as the usually fantastically likable Russell Tovey as Steve fails to raise any sort of empathy. Many of the dialogue consists of Everyman lines; they convey little of the characters. It is as though Golaszewski has formed a collection of not only his own relationship one-liners but those of his friends as well, resulting in a lack of tangible character traits.

And for a low-key show there’s too much movement. One of the most beauteous, and in that pre-Office era, strikingly individual things in the Royle Family was its stillness.

There were moments of humour and, perhaps once the show hits its stride and becomes comfortable with what it is, could even be described as funny. There’s a great moment when Steve is being mocked (about his penis size, but more about that later) feels cornered and lets slip that his friend Paul has cheated on Laura:

Laura: His [Paul’s] dick’s so big he can’t even wear shorts.
Steve: Yeah, well that’s funny because Paul can’t keep it in his pants.
Laura: Are you trying to say Paul can’t keep it in his pants?
Steve: (Realisinge he’s made a mistake) Noooooo.

However the vulgarity is another thing that makes the show a little less palatable. I’m not usually the prudish type, but this is the grossest kind of sex. It’s a grubby, leaky, squelchy kind of sex and makes the whole thing very unappealing. The sexual gratuitousness is on a par with Two Pints of Lager and a Packet of Crisps, but at least that is played out in the glorious technicolour of neon vest tops and garish Ikea sofas. Him and Her is all a bit dim, as the couple fester in their beige-toned bed-sit. I can cope with Steve’s ‘Dick Dance’, but less with the bit of loo roll caught in his foreskin. And when I thought that was low enough he asks Becky to sniff it.

It’s a shame for me that this show hasn’t quite aligned itself with any genre. It isn’t the slap-stick Two Pints, nor the oddly perky film 500 Days of Summer that also deigns itself anti romance, and it hasn’t quite got the fluid realistic dialogue of the Royle Family. Choosing a strength and playing to it would benefit this show no end as Golaszewski is clearly a very talented writer (though not, as I heard him blasphemously described as ‘the Alan Bennett of our generation’ God, I love Alan Bennet). And maybe going light on the unnecessary scatology wouldn’t go amiss either.