Culture Creative’s message to me:
Hey Erik,
Hope you are doing well today!
Thank you for checking in, we have had a chance to look through your materials.
Your sample was a fun read, but ultimately Paul believes that it would be a better fit elsewhere.
Please see below for comments on your script that members of the CCE team had complied after reading PERSONAL DEMONS.
“A story of misfits bonding together over a common cause is always a story worth exploring. One part of the story that worked for me was the group coming together as horror lovers. This bond between them felt strong and I understood how the group leaned on each other for support while in high school. However, I found that although this was an ensemble driven story, the characters felt unexplored and inaccurate in their representation as late teens. Across the board, these were characters that spanned the ages of 17-18 years old and yet their actions and speech felt more on par with early teens (12-13). There is a huge mental gap between these two age ranges. These characters often felt as though they lacked common sense, and their general portrayal felt like listening to young kids embark on a “journey” to kill a demon. It took the reader out of most of the story. While I find the angle of demons interesting, this story did not turn this trope on its head but rather played it safe in the portrayal of the monster. There was nothing unique/exciting about the description of this demon or even in the way in which it could be defeated.”
Thank you again for sending your materials our way, wishing you the best of luck moving forward!
-EG”
Preamble to my rebuttal:
1.) First, perhaps it is because what they are writing about are, essentially, my children (my writing, my screenplays), but I always take criticism so personally. I do think I’ve developed relatively thick skin, but I can’t help but feel that criticism doled out by industry insiders is always insulting and condescending.
2.) I’m glad I got this early into Spooky Season. If I had received it closer to Halloween, it might have ruined the holiday for me. Now I have all of October to live with this rejection and get used to it (wait for it… I’m already over it).
3.) This does kind of suck because these guys (Culture Creative) were perhaps my most hopeful prospect after Pitchfest. I seemed to have a great rapport with the agent (Paul), with whom I met over Skype, and they seemed like a smaller agency that might take a chance on an unknown writer. But oh well… if they didn’t get it, they didn’t get it. Someone else will.
4.) On that same note, it’s a bit strange, and disconcerting to me, that the agency is so small (to my knowledge, they don’t even have a webpage, just a LinkedIn page) yet my only contact with an actual agent was on Skype during Pitchfest… after that all my contact was with his assistant. I guess that’s the biz, but it seems like, if they are a small agency, and are trying to discover and cultivate relationships with new, undiscovered talent, they might give a little more personalized attention to those writers. But what do I know.
5.) At first I thought that the agent (Paul), again, with whom I met over Skype, had read my script. But as I went back and read the coverage, it was ambiguous as to who read it and how much they read. Note the early use of the pronoun “we” (who is included in that?) and that they “have had a chance to look through your materials” (What does that mean? They skimmed in? Read 1/3 of the script? Every other ten pages?... None of these would surprise me). Then there’s the vague reference to whom actually read my script (and they did say that these comments were “complied [I guess they meant “compiled”?] after reading”): the “CCE team” (Who is that? Is it the agent’s assistant with whom I’ve been back and forth? Unpaid interns? The agency doesn’t seem that big!) Ah well. Mysteries all.
6.) I tend to think that if I had had something to recommend me (and I do… all of my festivals inclusions and competition wins… but I’m sure those went in one ear and out the other to the agent to whom I pitched over Skype… had I sent him a query letter (which I’m convinced are always thrown in the trash) he would have had it in front of him, reminding him that this script has already accrued a lot of industry accolades), then I might have received a more diplomatic consideration from this agency.
My rebuttal to their specific comments:
First, their comment “the characters felt unexplored”.
On that I call nonsense.
I gave nearly five pages of character exploration and development for each of the leads.
Not only did the reader/viewer get to see what each teen’s home life was like, but they got to see how they exist within the social dynamic of their high school, and how they interacted (comfortably) among their peers and in their element. Most movies (classics and modern films) don’t attribute this much substance to their characters. I dare you to prove otherwise.
Second, their comment that the characters felt “inaccurate in their representation as late teens. Across the board, these were characters that spanned the ages of 17-18 years old and yet their actions and speech felt more on par with early teens (12-13). There is a huge mental gap between these two age ranges.”
To this I have to ask: how many teenagers have they (the shadowy figure(s) whom read my script) spent time around?
Myself, I’ve spent time around nothing but teenagers (ages 16-18) for 7 hours a day, 5 days a week, 10 months out of the year at my job. I feel like I know how teenagers act and talk better than most.
And since I’ve taught in mostly inner city and semi-rural/suburban schools, I kind of have a line on all the demographics that would line up on a Friday night to watch this movie (hopefully) on an Imax mega-screen around Halloween.
So, again, I have no idea whom read this script or what their experience is being around teenagers, but I doubt they have the experience I have. I talk to teenagers every single day about movies, books, comic books, video games, TV shows, etc.
I know them.
Period.
But, again, I said all this to the agent to whom I pitched on Skype, but he probably forgot. If he’d had my query letter in front of him, I don’t think they would have used this particular excuse to reject my script because they’d know that I have an edge and an air of authority about genuine teenage behavior and speech.
But I can see how they felt it was safe excuse to reject my script. After all, Brooke Busey (or her pretentious pseudonym, Diablo Cody) made a whole career on inaccurately portraying teenage behavior and speech, so…
Third, their comment of “These characters often felt as though they lacked common sense”.
To this I only have to ask: how would you react when faced with a literal demon?
It’s an unprecedented situation.
And these are teenagers!
Am I foolish to explain these things?
Fourth, their comment that the character’s actions and dialog “took the reader out of most of the story”.
Well, all I have to say is: in The Black Phone, the character of Gwen, when she is talking to the police, and calls them “F’ing fartknockers!” it took me right out of the movie. And this is a movie directed by a seasoned Hollywood director and based on a short story by Stephen King’s son! First, I know for a fact that suburban white girls in the 70’s did not talk to cops that way. Second, I don’t even think the insult “fartknockers” was coined in the 70’s (I think it was invented in the 90’s by Beavis and Butthead creator Mike Judge). But… Black Phone made $150 million worldwide box office on a $16 million budget.
I think I’ve made my point.
Fifth, their comment that “While I find the angle of demons interesting, this story did not turn this trope on its head but rather played it safe in the portrayal of the monster. There was nothing unique/exciting about the description of this demon”.
Perhaps the demon, in my physical description of it, was not unique, but sometimes it doesn’t need to be! Sometimes the traditional route is an okay route to take!
Vampires haven’t really changed much over the years (they still have fangs and bat-like qualities).
Werewolves are still hairy and lupine!
Zombies sure haven’t changed over the years (except sometimes they run).
And all of the aforementioned monsters are still big business, despite most storytellers’ hesitation to deviate from the archetypes.
Also, I just want to point out that, in a radio interview sometime in the 00’s (or 2010’s, I can’t remember) Kenneth Branagh said (when asked why his Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (which is perhaps the most faithful cinematic adaptation we’ve had yet) tanked) that the public still had the Karloff image of Frankenstein’s Monster burned into their cultural consciousness, and that, if the public was ever given a Frankenstein Monster without green skin, a box head and bolts in its neck, that they would not accept it.
Plus, while my demon may not be physically discernable from the commonly accepted visualization of this supernatural antagonist, there is a scene, near the end of the script (pages 90-1), where my demon absolutely delineates himself (itself?) from any other iteration. This scene actually makes the demon a character in the tale and gives it motivation and solidifies my mythology and world-building.
Finally, they talk about how the demon was unoriginal “even in the way in which it could be defeated.”
All I have to say to that is that, given my German Protestant upbringing, there is a distinct Christina theology guiding (and providing the backbone for) this narrative. How else would one dispatch a demon when their universe is grounded in this real world theology?
I do introduce some new methods (previously unexplored in recent cinema, to my knowledge) of killing or harming demons: smudging (with Sage), iron, salt, etc.
But at least I didn’t default to the “Super Soakers filled with Holy Water” trope (that began with 1994’s Night of the Demons 2 and was then copied by 1996’s From Dusk ‘Till Dawn and Tales From the Crypt Presents Bordello of Blood).
Whatever.
Bottom line, they didn’t get it.
Their loss.
I’ve received hundreds of this type of uninformed rejection.
And I will most likely receive hundreds more.
And when Personal Demons finally gets made and (again, hopefully) is released around Halloween on drive-in screens and Imax theaters everywhere, Culture Creative (along with many other agents and producers) will be kicking themselves… if they even remember rejecting me… which they probably won’t.
And so, I soldier on….
No comments:
Post a Comment