Plenty to keep me busy on my show, though, and I’ve become embroiled in an audio book project that promises to be fun.

Hope the winter is treating anyone out there well.

Mostly just waiting…

…and waiting…

…and waiting…

And each one understands their own little piece of the puzzle.  The product manager says “less locations – too much budget” and a good writer (as I hope I am) says, “okey-doke” and starts consolidating scenes.

Or the director says “What about another action sequence in this area, it’s a bit slow paced.”  and the writer says “No problemo!  Coming right up!”

But when someone suggests swapping genders on one of the main characters, then sometimes the writer has to exlpain why this is a bad idea.  No matter what people today like to think, men and women are not interchangeable, and a swap like that isn’t a simple rearranging of pronouns and a change from “Bernard” to “Bernice”.

A good relationship story is built with specific things in mind – from the similarities that could bring the characters together to the obstacles that must be overcome.  The primary obstacles may be differences in age, gender, ethnic/religious background, sexual orientation, political rivalry, etc.

A good relationship will be imbued with the elements it has chosen to revolve around – and to change a core element (such as, in this case, gender) means rewriting much of the interaction, regardless of whether a male could speak lines written for a female, or vice versa.

There are many other reasons beyond that to veto such a change, and most of those are actually far more compelling, on a grand scale, but this one is more interesting from a writing viewpoint, and thus more attractive to ponder.

Went to a lovely H.P. Lovecraft Film Festival, saw much good stuff (a bit envious – sigh, movie making is soooo slow).  Wrote to several of the auteurs whose work I liked most.  No one creative ever gets enough praise – not really.  At least not directly.  I know how little feedback I get on my audio dramas, so I really wanted to pass along my kudos.

Have been trumpeting the merits of full length films “The Burrowers” and “Primal” and the shorts “40 Years”, “Silas and the Tomb” and “Frank Dancoolo”. (google the latter one, it’s streaming)

Each of these impressed me for different reasons, both from a pure enjoyment stance, and from a technical viewpoint.

The Burrowers was a visually spot-on western horror movie that was apparently done on a microbudget, and involved some super effects as well as stunning costuming, etc.

Primal really ran on the strength of the actors, particularly a blonde chick who I would normally instantly dismiss as being the first to die for being stupider than a sack of hammers.  And she stole the show.

Frank DanCoolo took a stylistic choice and ran it stright up into camp territory, and never let go.  It’s humor and eyepopping color and truly bizarre effects, and actors who played every moment to the hilt.

40 Years impressed the hell out of me by opening with a dream-like sequence that, through a minimum of odd visuals, informs you instantly that there is something “not quite right” with the protagonist, and hints at what is wrong.  The clues are there, and it all comes together beautifully by the end.

And Silas and the Tomb (the only short I couldn’t find a direct way to compliment the director on) was another that relied absolutely on a single actor, and while it was played a bit broad (for comic effect), told an entire Lovecraft story (one of his less cosmic ones – in fact this is the only direct Lovecraft adaptation that TRULY stuck in my head this time) without any words (or maybe there were a couple of expletives….)  Everything was there, though, whether you were familiar with the story or not.

Had only one thing to do on the screenplay in the last week or so – added a sex scene at the behest of one of the guys.  Long dry spell in the first half of the movie.  Actually, it was a great idea, not only got some more boobies in there but changed up some of the character dynamics (at least in the perception of the audience).  In other words – it’s illicit nookie.

Means I have to sit down and ponder shifting a couple of scenes, though, to properly build up to it.  If character A is nice and THEN betrays character B with B’s boyfriend, it’s a bit of a shock, while if it happens the other way – audience sees the nookie, then A is all nice, it makes for a completely different reaction – suspicion, mostly – to the conciliatory scene.

Interesting puzzle.

But my block has actually been on one of my audio drama scripts.  I just have to suck it up, jump in with both feet, and ask myself “what is the worst possible thing that can happen right now?” and no matter what turns up, I must run with it.

ME:  “Film X?  Really?  I thought that was a more straightforward serial killer film.  Never saw it, though.”  and looked it up on IMDB while we were still on the phone.

Long story short, I pointed out that (a) I could name a half dozen films off the top of my head that were more similar to mine than film X, not to mention that mine was being told from a very different viewpoint.

If anything, I said, a Britt Ecklund vehicle from the 1960s was far more influential on me (having been warped by it as a child, not as in “story inspired by”).

Besides, nothing is really “new” any more.

I don’t think we’ll have a problem, but I also promised that if need be I could post a question on one of the horror movie websites and could probably get names of at least a score of similar movies in a couple of days.

Ah, Hollywood!   Where everything old is new again.

It’s so much different working to alter something you created to suit someone else’s requirement, than it is to alter to suit your own moods.

But it’s exhilarating, too.  A game, a challenge.  Working your way through the maze of possibilities, trying to stay on the sunny side of your own creativity, while still lurking in the shadows cast by others…

My main goal is to get to do this again.

The entire psychological reason that 18-25 year old guys relate to the classic horror-movie survivor girl is she can express all the self-doubt, the crying, the wetting herself, the torment, etc. that they are sociologically incapable of sympathizing with in a male character.  That’s why movies like Halloween, etc., have sold so very very very well.  Guys can go along for the ride of the surrogate character because they don’t have to disconnect, the way they would from a male character who cries, gets hurt, pees himself, etc.  It plays to a very deep psychological need on the part of teenage males – the vicarious feeling of rising above humiliation, helplessness, and adversity and KICKING ASS.

This is my genre, remember?  What was the last horror movie you watched?

There’s a reason the movies that sell so well DO sell, and it’s the RISE to badass – not JUST the badass, because without the layers (even if the audience doesn’t understand the layers are there), the movie will fall flat and never be seen again.  Horror movies are all about helplessness, pain, fear, and the struggle to overcome them.  Anyone too initially powerful is seen as superficial – those are characters for the action/adventure genre.

Yes, we’re selling to the boobie crowd, but if we can rope in some of the thinky people money and chick money too, there’s actually a market out there.

The more you say “it doesn’t have to make sense” the more I can point you to MANY MANY reviews that absolutely speak to the contrary – and I’m NOT talking reviews like Ebert, I’m talking reviews like the Splattercast, Cadaverlab, and Drunken Zombie podcast.  In other words, pretty much exactly the demographic you’re saying we want to aim for.  Remember, I hang out with these people.  Maybe the slightly more informed end of the pool, but if they pee in the water, those other guys still feel the heat.

A chick who starts out that tough would walk out long before anything happened, no matter the provocation.  Or she would beat the crap out of someone and end up in jail.

Semi-kidding aside, above all, I’m NOT saying this won’t work, I’m saying WHY NOT go for the entire package?  Why settle for the lowest common denominator when we might be able to get some actual rewatch value and word of mouth from people who don’t breath through that selfsame mouth?  THAT’S what will get a film picked up for distribution outside of the film festivals (which mouth-breathers don’t attend anyway).

[If it helps the movie that MOST wowed the online horror community year before last was LET THE RIGHT ONE IN, which I'm pretty sure had no boobies at all, fairly minimal violence, and wasn't even in English. And the remake is about to hit the theaters.]

To clarify and summarize – I am not insisting that my initial story is perfect or untouchable.  I am not whining that it doesn’t need work.  I am arguing that I want to make a movie that will actually go over well with the critics IN MY GENRE and sell beyond the opening box office weekend, and which has a chance of not just going straight to the redbox and scifi network.

Have a great day!

As I was able to explain – writing the initial script, all you think about is the story.  Budget comes later.  So now we pare down, beef up, and play to the groundlings….

We went over ways to add more violence, and I think I got a really great handle on what I can do to beef that up.  As the guys pointed out – I’ve got a good script for the thinking audience, but now we have to put in the stuff that keeps the groundlings happy.

What are groundlings?  Well, in Shakespeare’s day, the theater had upper tiers of boxes and a big open space, like a mosh pit, right in front of the stage – that’s where the poor and less sophisticated audience members stood to watch.  Being less concerned with the language and plot, they were kept entertained by the violence and broad comedy.

A lot of work to do on a horror movie, right?  Audiences just come for the blech and yuck, and who cares about the depth of story or positive character arc, right?

I look at it this way – it’s my first produced movie.  I should start the way I plan to continue.  And I do plan to continue.  If I make my first film with no regard to quality, then either I will be on the slippery slope to the SyFynetwork, or I will never get work again, since everyone else knows it’s sloppy work, too.

So I’m using the additions to enhance the character arc, strengthen the inter-character relationships, and deepen the depths.

Pacing, and spacing, and product placing.   Oh. My.