Screenwriting Expo - Be a Writer, or Deduct Like One

Screenwriting Expo IV was held this past weekend in L.A. I went and had a reasonably good time despite a rather demoralizing experience in the writing tournament and three days of cheap, disgusting, overpriced convention center food. I went to a bunch of the seminars, some of which were useful, others not so much. I think the organizers are sincere in their desire to use the expo to build a supportive community of writers, but I couldn't help thinking that many of the 4000 attendees, most of whom haven't a snowball's chance in a Hotpoint of ever selling anything, are being exploited by the constant onslaught of sales pitches for books, CDs, DVDs, software, and consulting services. Is there any other profession that has spawned such a remora-like "how-to" subculture?

Of course, that just might be the sour grapes talking...

I didn't do any of the pitch sessions, and I'll write about the writing tournament in another post, but here's a rundown of some of the seminar's I attended.

Friday:

I'm working on a script based on a family-member's true story, so I went to a couple of classes on adaptation and the current state of the market for true stories. The first teacher was mostly about self-promotion ("work real hard and maybe one day you'll be lucky enough to be just like me!"), but made some good points about developing your story and about obtaining life rights. The second class was an interesting rundown on the popularity of true-stories in made-for-cable movies. The teacher listed the various cable channels and what kind of movies they look for. She then took a dump all over my project, so screw her and her advice. (Sour grapes, yummy, yummy).

The highpoint of the expo was a seminar that had nothing to do with writing. Accountant Scott Rubenstein did a session called "How to Deduct Your Writing Career From Your Taxes." It was a revelation. Like many, I thought one had to have writing-related income before one could deduct writing expenses. Not true! All you need to do is declare yourself a writer and keep track of your reasonable expenses in a journal and, where possible, with receipts. He provided a sample tax return and detailed which expenses are deductible.

Saturday:

I started out with a self-help session on dealing with one's criticial inner-voice. The teacher's advice was interesting: be more like the Donald Kaufman character in "Adaptation" and less like the Charlie Kaufman character - people will like your project more if they sense your enthusiam for it, but the class was mostly a sales-pitch for life coaching services at $200 an hour. Forget the Donald Kaufman, maybe I should be more like that guy!

I also went to two of Pilar Allesandra's classes on Dynamic Dialog and Story Brainstorming, which were very helpful. She's a very engaging speaker and presented her material in a fun way. True, she also spent time pitching her classes and consulting services, but she had the grace to be somewhat apologetic about it.

Linda Aronson's class on Flashback structure was probably the most academic and fascinating class I attended. She shed new light (for me anyway) on the structures of movies like Shine, The Usual Suspects, and Memento. Good class.

I finished the day at Bill Martell's class on theme. Theme is one of those subjects I have trouble with, so I found this class to be very useful, and Bill's an entertaining speaker. (I heard his horror class was SRO). The lesson here is that it's important for you to be able to articulate your theme in order to write a great script. Just don't hit the audience over the head with it, and don't expect the producers to get it.

Sunday:

Linda Cowgill's class on common script problems was informative, but I was pretty burned out at this point, so I don't have much more to say on that. I also went to a panel of TV writers whose main advice was to write great spec scripts. Duh. One of the panelists was a writer on "Andy Richter Controls the Universe", but I resisted the urge to go up to her afterwards and gush.

I was at the conference with my writing group, and we went to the closing ceremonies together. Unless I'm a finalist in one of the contests, I'll skip it in the future. It was two more hours of self-congratulatory bullshit. Hey, Mercurio, shut the fuck up already and give out the awards. Some of us have a plane to catch.

Sweet Chewy Democracy

The cafeteria at work is offering a free cookie to anyone with an "I Voted" sticker today. Bonus!

California's Special Election - Nix the Six

For those who haven't heard, California is having a special election next Tuesday, called by Der Gropenfuhrer in a last-ditch attempt to bypass the state legislature via "the will of the people."

California's initiative process is seriously broken. Anyone with a million bucks can get enough signatures to place propositions on the ballot that attempt to address complex issues with deceptively simple verbiage. For example, Proposition 81, the "Puppies are Nice" initiative sounds good, but did you know the fine print actually calls for power companies to cover the Monterey Peninsula with a vast array of exercise wheels on which tens of thousands of puppies will toil daily to generate up to 10 Kilowatts of electricity?

Okay, so there is no Prop 81. Unfortunately, there are Props 73 through 78, all of which are bad ideas that will empower corporate and idealogical special interests to the detriment of ordinary Californians. Here's the rundown:

NO on 73: Proposition 73 would prevent pregnant minors from getting an abortion unless their parents have first been notified by the doctor. Sounds reasonable, right? What parent wouldn't want to be notified if their daughter is having a medical procedure. But look at it this way, if your daughter doesn't trust you enough to come to you for help with a problem of such magnitude, would you rather she seek medical care in a safe modern clinic, or in a back alley somewhere? Nearly three decades of research show that most affected teens already inform their parents when they need help, and that the ones who don't would rather risk their health than do so. The proponents of Prop 73 are willing to put teens in danger in order to further their agenda of restricting access to abortions. Get the facts at: No on 73 and then Vote NO on Prop 73.

NO on 74: This one is typical of California initiatives. Rather than try and deal sensibly with the problems of our educational system (underfunding, overcrowding, underfunding, lack of resources, did I say underfunding), this proposition posits that all our problems are due to tenured teachers. Its proponents want you to vote for this so you can feel like you've done something and then go back to sleep. In fact, Prop 74 does nothing to help our schools. It exists only to punish the teachers' union for standing up to the Governor's budget cuts. Read about it here and then Vote NO on Prop 74.

NO on 75: This one is especially pernicious to anyone who is pro-labor. It would require unions to get written permission every year from members before their union dues could be put towards political campaigns. It would, in essence, stifle a union's ability to promote progressive causes at the ballot box without putting any such restrictions on corporations' abilities to promote their own agendas. People who think, in principle, that union members ought not to be forced to finance campaigns with which they don't agree should know that members already have the option to opt out. This proposition is a sick, cynical attempt at limiting debate on issues that affect working people, and anyone who votes for this ought to be ashamed of themselves. More info is here. Vote NO on Prop 75.

Are you sensing a theme here, yet? Onward...

NO on 76: Not much to say here. This is a pure-and-simple power grab by the Governor to take direct control of the California budget. It would relieve him of the burden of having to actually negotiate with the legislature. Even if you trust Arnold with this amount of power, how will you feel about it when the next Gray Davis is in office? Besides, if this one passes, can annexing the Sudetenland be far behind? More on 76 here. Vote NO.

NO on 77: I'm not saying that redistricting isn't an important issue, or that it might not be necessary to address it via the initiatives process, but this is the wrong Proposition at the wrong time. Scientist and science-fiction writer David Brin recently wrote a thoughtful piece on the evils of gerrymandering at his blog, but even he doesn't support Prop 77. Aside from the fact that there's no proof that redistricting will result in more competitive elections (only campaign finance reform will do that), consider these two facts before voting: 1) Prop 77 would force immediate redistricting using census data that is five years old. California's demographics have changed quite a bit since the tech bust. How can we have fairer districts if they're not based on current data? 2) Redistricting won't affect only our state legislature, it will also affect our Congressional delegation in Washington. Texas recently redistricted to ensure a Republican majority in their delegation. California Repugs are hoping that redistricting here will do the same for them. Read more here and vote NO on Prop 77.

Can you stand one more NO vote?

NO on 78: As the old saying goes, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit. An effective grass-roots effort (no million-dollars for paid signature gatherers) put Prop 79 on the ballot, which would force drug companies to negotiate discounts with the State for its uninsured citizens. In a panic that they might have to do something good for society, Big Pharm quickly bought enough signatures to put their alternate Prop 78 on the ballot. Prop 78 calls for voluntary participation by drug companies, with more restrictions on who would receive benefits. Hoping to further scare and confuse the voters, DrugCo has also mounted an expensive media campaign against prop 79 without really pushing for 78. Machiavellian. Learn more and vote NO on 78.

And just so you think I'm not totally negative:

YES on 79: It's not the universal health care that we need, but it's a first step. I've said all I need to above, but you can learn more about why Prop 79 is a good thing here. (Have you ever known Consumers Union - the Consumers Report people - to take a stand on a public initiative? I don't think I have.) YES on 79.

YES on 80: This is another grass-roots initiative to restore regulation and reliability to our power market by requiring businesses to buy their power from public utilities. There's some good information at CalPIRG's site. No more Enrons. YES on 80.

Help take a stand against executive power, corporate greed, and fundamentalist ideology. Vote NO on 73 through 78. Help support grass-roots involvement. Vote YES on 79 and 80.

Punish California

The President's tax reform panel has released its recommendations for "revenue-neutral" tax reform (see the CNN story), which eliminates the AMT on the backs of residents of "blue" states. Instead of revamping the AMT so that the wealthy continue to pay their fair share of taxes without unduly burdening the middle class, the proposal eliminates it, and restricts the mortgage interest deduction and eliminates the deduction for state and local taxes to make up for the lost revenue. This will mostly effect coastal states where inflated housing prices require large mortgages and where the state and local tax rates are higher than the rest of the country. In essence, residents of these states are to be punished for voting Kerry in 2004. We'll see if the democrats in congress are willing to show a little backbone and stand up to this nonsense.