Accept this artistic challenge and ill do what I can to make you a star

I'm not denying that that's a legitimate post.
However, I'm not asking to be paid for my script either. Also, any filmmakers who participate will retain full ownership of the final product.
I think all of this comes down to the exposure that all artists need to be successful. I'm offering to generate as much exposure as I can for those filmmakers who choose to participate. I think that's a kind of "payment."
 
crowdsuasion said:
I think that's a kind of "payment."
Click to expand...

Monopoly money is a "kind" of payment. So is real money.

To be a bit more constructive: if you want people to come out and play, stop treating this like you're doing them a favor by allowing them to direct your short scripts. There are millions of short films, short scripts, short film contests, and all other similar ideas all over the internet, so unless you're offering a cash marketing budget to literally promote the finished product with their name attached, you're wasting their time. Take a look at the DVXfests on this board: nobody does them for the prizes or the name recognition, they do them because this community is fun and we believe in making movies. The DVXfests combine those two things.

You've got an interesting idea here with your website: crowdsourced content. It's not unprecedented, but you can make it work if, as things go, you can make it work. To do that, you're going to need to offer one of two things: cash/gear prizes for filmmakers, or fun. If you can establish a sense of community, and give people screenplays that are worth shooting, you can actually build something from this site. I'd recommend NOT using your own scripts, but instead involving writers from the online film community - both for the sake of better quality/less vague scripts, and for the sake of professionalism (making it "all about you" looks egomaniacal).

But please, for the love of god, don't ask people to produce your scripts under the guise of you doing them a favor. And unless you're Brad Pitt or have the personal wealth of Elon Musk to put into "promoting" these people, nobody's going to become a star by producing your scripts, so you might make your presentation a little more grounded in reality if you want people to believe you have something of worth to contribute.

Good luck!
 
Those are all good points. I didn't intend to make it sound as though I'm doing anyone a favor. If that's how it's perceived, then I apologize. If there's a way for me to change the title of the thread (to make it look less fantastical), I'll do so immediately.

I'd love to be able to offer prizes in the future. And, in the future, I'd love to elicit scripts from others. These are all part of the "master plan," but at the moment, my site is only a few weeks old, so I'm not yet in the position to do any of this. For the moment, my intention is to have some fun with this. I hope others will respond in kind.

I need to comment on "making it all about you looks egomaniacal." I'm not to make a name for myself. My website contains zero personal information about me. In fact, I try to avoid using the first person in most cases. Also, I'm not looking for any writing credits or any credit at all.

Also, the open-ended (i.e., "vague") scripts are intentional. I'm hoping that this will give the artists involved to inject some additional creativity into the scenes.

Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate all of it. As I said, I'm in the initial phase of this website, so there will inevitably be some growing pains.

Cheers and thanks.
 
Well, here's the major question -- is this post intended to be an opportunity for collaboration? Or is it intended to introduce and promote a commercial site? Because it smells an awful lot like the latter.

Here's the difference:
1. I'm a wealthy advertising magnate. I have a script, but no filmmaker for it, but if you produce it I'll partner with you to promote it and turn you into a star.

vs.

2. I'm trying to establish a new site called "crowdsuasion", which will be a commercial site that I'm trying to make go viral, so I can make money on it. By posting here, I'm hoping to take advantage of all the hard work LandMine and all the mods have done to build this site into such a huge, highly-trafficked resource, so I can just come along and do none of that work and just take all the eyeballs that are already coming here. That way everyone will see my site and I can siphon off this forum's users and take advantage of the community here for my own gain.

Which does this sound like to you? I know which one it sounds like to me.
 
Maybe there's a 3rd option that sounds less sinister.

Some background:
I've been writing creatively "off the side of my desk" for 20 years now (and I didn't start writing as a teenager :-). I've written several scripts (short and feature length) and many articles intended for newspapers & magazines.
I've had a wee bit of success on both fronts, but nothing substantial enough to quit my day job.
When I first started writing, there wasn't much of an Internet, so every pitch (for full-length scripts all the way down to 500-word articles) was done via snail mail. As you can imagine this was a LOT of work. In fact, one could easily spend as much time writing/sending letters as writing creatively. I mention this because I soon found myself spending a smaller and smaller proportion of my time promoting my work. But I didn't stop writing.
So, after all of this time, I have many unpublished articles and several unproduced screenplays.
I've now dusted off my writing, and my goal with crowdsuasion is to see my work produced. That would be fantastic.
I also think it would be interesting to see the many different ways that a single script can be interpreted. This, I think, is different from other challenges out there (but perhaps I'm wrong).

As far as the site going viral and becoming a commercial enterprise, sure it'd be silly to deny that I want the site to be considered fun enough to warrant such attention. HOWEVER, I'm realistic enough to realize that writing (or any form of art) should, first and foremost, be its own reward. I'm not trying step on anyone's toes, steal community members, or get away with not offering compensation to hard-working artists. I'm just exploring whether or not artists are interested in working on projects that are more narrowly defined than other projects.
 
crowdsuasion said:
I'm not denying that that's a legitimate post.
However, I'm not asking to be paid for my script either. Also, any filmmakers who participate will retain full ownership of the final product.
I think all of this comes down to the exposure that all artists need to be successful. I'm offering to generate as much exposure as I can for those filmmakers who choose to participate. I think that's a kind of "payment."
Click to expand...
Allow me to translate that for you

If you provide your services for free I'll give you a credit
Click to expand...

I hear variations on that phrase an awful lot, it won't take you too long to find numerous very eloquent responses on the internet.

But just to drill down to a few basic specifics:

- how much do you think it would cost someone to produce your four pages of script?
- if more than one person has a crack, which one would you promote? Or are you prepared to promote all of them, equally?
- you state that they would own the content, do you understand that this would mean you would therefore have no right to show it on your own website, if you were granted permission it could be accompanied with a fee?

Apologies if that comes across harsh, however you do seem to have a somewhat skewed perspective on the worth of your script and any associated credits/exposure vs the worth of a decent filmmaker.
 
I'll try to answer your questions.

1. How much do you think it would cost someone to produce your four pages of script?
The fast answer: "as much as one wishes."
Student/amateur filmmakers might do so for a few bucks.
Pros could spend MUCH more.
Of course, the production values will fluctuate wildly, depending on the budget :-)

2 if more than one person has a crack, which one would you promote? Or are you prepared to promote all of them, equally?
The overriding goal for all of my challenges is to encourage several submissions based on the same script. Each submission will be promoted equally. In fact, the videos for a specific script/challenge will all appear on the same page so that visitors can see the many different ways that a single script/concept can be interpreted.

3. you state that they would own the content, do you understand that this would mean you would therefore have no right to show it on your own website, if you were granted permission it could be accompanied with a fee?
All of the scripts that accompany video challenges should be treated as though they're in the Public Domain. So, I fully understand that the filmmaker owns the end product. Once completed, I encourage filmmakers to upload their work to YouTube (or Vimeo etc) and send me a link. As long as the link is not dead, the artist's work will air on my site. If a filmmaker chooses to pull the video, then that's his/her prerogative.

4. You seem to have a somewhat skewed perspective on the worth of your script and any associated credits/exposure vs the worth of a decent filmmaker
As a writer, I value my work. Do I need to get paid or receive credit for that work? No. In fact, I've happily had my work published under pseudonyms.
Regarding the "worth of a decent filmmaker" comment, I'm not expecting fully established filmmakers to participate in this endeavor. I suspect that this may only be of interest to budding artists looking for fun/challenging projects and perhaps something to add to their portfolios.

By the way, I don't think you're being harsh. You've raised some important questions that should be addressed.
I think there are many stages to any artist's career. I just think you're at the stage where the expectations regarding your work are different from the expectation of those just starting out. Nothing wrong with that.
 
OK. I think you mean well, but here are a few things.

I think you realize by now you probably went about this the wrong way, which appears to be from simple inexperience. No biggie there. You know how you can do better.

But here's a problem which has to do with the with the rules of the message board.

In the user guidelines, we have the "8 Ps," and each P is a big thing we don't allow here -- DVXuser cardinal sins, if you will, any one of which can get you booted immediately, depending on the circumstances.

One of the 8 Ps is:

7. No Poaching
If you have something to contribute to the community, please contribute it here, don't just say "hey everyone, look what's going on over on my own site." That's just a lame way of trying to build your own site up by poaching our members, and it's just not cool. Don't be a "taker", be a contributor.
Click to expand...

Which, I'm sure you realize, is pretty much exactly what you did. Oftentimes, that WILL result in an immediate boot from the site, but throughout this thread, you've realized some of your mistakes, and I don't think you really meant any harm.

So, just in the future, be mindful of the rules . . .
 
All that said...got any better scripts? I'm looking.

If I want to change some dialogue I'll do it, but I don't want to have to write it in the first place.
 
Okay, I'd like to talk story for a minute.

The ending is a little muddled to me. I don't understand it. Is there supposed to be a twist here? Is it that Todd and Sue actually ARE perverts and WERE spying on the naked Carl? (Which would explain the photo of a naked Carl.) If so, the end needs a little something -- like maybe Sue heaving a sigh and saying 'Now what are we going to do for entertainment?' Or something better.

Even if that is the intended case, it's not a very strong ending. Carl obviously has mental problems, or else he would just keep his blinds and curtains shut when he's naked, like everyone else in the world.

I find no sympathetic characters here for me to care about. The story, to me, simply isn't compelling -- it's essentially one event that happens, in various situations, three times.

To me, the story would be more compelling if it were told as Todd and Sue's story -- them having to deal with the crazy naked man next door. Shocked and appalled at everything he does. Stressed, feeling like prisoners in their own home. Sue keeps telling Todd that they 'have to do something about that crazy old man!' But Todd is reluctant to get involved. Finally an event happens that is so outrageous, Sue has no choice. She takes matters into her own hands. Sue calls the cops and has Carl taken away. Peace is restored -- until we see Todd go down to his basement workshop and open a drawer, which is stuffed with pictures he's taken of the naked Carl -- along with pics of other naked old men. Todd is a gerontophile -- the opposite of a pedophile. Looking through the pics of Carl fondly, Todd sheds a single tear of sadness.

That's not a great story either, but at least it centralizes the only characters we can possibly sympathize with and care about. And it still contains the essence of your story.

Just my 2 cents.
 
A bit of a correction needed -- the first scene with Todd and Sue is headed "TOP FLOOR KITCHEN". Obviously, it should be "GROUND FLOOR KITCHEN".
 
There would be some challenges to shooting this.

Ideally, you would need two 2-story houses, side by side and close together, whose owners would allow you to shoot in them. It could be done with 2 houses nowhere near each other, but that would be more challenging and time consuming.

Your shot locations are:

Street at night
Carl's bathroom
Todd and Sue's kitchen
Carl's bedroom
Todd and Sue's driveway
Sidewalk in front of Carl's house
Carl's front yard
Carl's front porch
Carl's driveway
Todd and Sue's living room

That's a goodly amount of coverage. And it would need to be somewhere where you can have a naked old man running around outside or in front of windows, and nobody in the neighborhood (or driving through) would get offended and call the cops.

You would also need a police car and one or two uniformed officers.

Not easy at all.
 
Wow, your critique is almost as long as the script :-)
Those are worthy suggestions to make the story different. I won't debate whether they make the script any funnier, since debating humor makes as much sense as debating the existence of god.
Thanks for the input though.
 
David W. Richardson said:
There would be some challenges to shooting this.

Ideally, you would need two 2-story houses, side by side and close together, whose owners would allow you to shoot in them. It could be done with 2 houses nowhere near each other, but that would be more challenging and time consuming.

Your shot locations are:

Street at night
Carl's bathroom
Todd and Sue's kitchen
Carl's bedroom
Todd and Sue's driveway
Sidewalk in front of Carl's house
Carl's front yard
Carl's front porch
Carl's driveway
Todd and Sue's living room

That's a goodly amount of coverage. And it would need to be somewhere where you can have a naked old man running around outside or in front of windows, and nobody in the neighborhood (or driving through) would get offended and call the cops.

You would also need a police car and one or two uniformed officers.

Not easy at all.
Click to expand...

Agreed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top