He will not read your F*ing script

ChipG

Carbonite Member
Classic, very good service he just performed. A must read.

Uneddited version: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/i_will_not_read.php?page=1

I will not read your poo pooing script.
That's simple enough, isn't it? "I will not read your poo pooing script." What's not clear about that? There's nothing personal about it, nothing loaded, nothing complicated. I simply have no interest in reading your poo pooing screenplay. None whatsoever.
If that seems unfair, I'll make you a deal. In return for you not asking me to read your poo pooing script, I will not ask you to wash my poo pooing car, or take my poo pooing picture, or represent me in poo pooing court, or take out my poo pooing gall bladder, or whatever the poo poo it is that you do for a living.
You're a lovely person. Whatever time we've spent together has, I'm sure, been pleasurable for both of us. I quite enjoyed that conversation we once had about structure and theme, and why Sergio Leone is the greatest director who ever lived. Yes, we bonded, and yes, I wish you luck in all your endeavors, and it would thrill me no end to hear that you had sold your screenplay, and that it had been made into the best movie since Godfather Part II.
But I will not read your poo pooing script.
At this point, you should walk away, firm in your conviction that I'm a dick. But if you're interested in growing as a human being and recognizing that it is, in fact, you who is the dick in this situation, please read on.
Yes. That's right. I called you a dick. Because you created this situation. You put me in this spot where my only option is to acquiesce to your demands or be the bad guy. That, my friend, is the very definition of a dick move.
I was recently cornered by a young man of my barest acquaintance.
I doubt we've exchanged a hundred words. But he's dating someone I know, and he cornered me in the right place at the right time, and asked me to read a two-page synopsis for a script he'd been working on for the last year. He was submitting the synopsis to some contest or program, and wanted to get a professional opinion.
Now, I normally have a standard response to people who ask me to read their scripts, and it's the simple truth: I have two piles next to my bed. One is scripts from good friends, and the other is manuscripts and books and scripts my agents have sent to me that I have to read for work. Every time I pick up a friend's script, I feel guilty that I'm ignoring work. Every time I pick something up from the other pile, I feel guilty that I'm ignoring my friends. If I read yours before any of that, I'd be an awful person.
Most people get that. But sometimes you find yourself in a situation where the guilt factor is really high, or someone plays on a relationship or a perceived obligation, and it's hard to escape without seeming rude. Then, I tell them I'll read it, but if I can put it down after ten pages, I will. They always go for that, because nobody ever believes you can put their script down once you start.
But hell, this was a two page synopsis, and there was no time to go into either song or dance, and it was just easier to take it. How long can two pages take?
Weeks, is the answer.
And this is why I will not read your poo pooing script.
It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you're in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you're dealing with someone who can't.
(By the way, here's a simple way to find out if you're a writer. If you disagree with that statement, you're not a writer. Because, you see, writers are also readers.)
You may want to allow for the fact that this fellow had never written a synopsis before, but that doesn't excuse the inability to form a decent sentence, or an utter lack of facility with language and structure. The story described was clearly of great importance to him, but he had done nothing to convey its specifics to an impartial reader. What I was handed was, essentially, a barely coherent list of events, some connected, some not so much. Characters wander around aimlessly, do things for no reason, vanish, reappear, get arrested for unnamed crimes, and make wild, life-altering decisions for no reason. Half a paragraph is devoted to describing the smell and texture of a piece of food, but the climactic central event of the film is glossed over in a sentence. The death of the hero is not even mentioned. One sentence describes a scene he's in, the next describes people showing up at his funeral. I could go on, but I won't. This is the sort of thing that would earn you a D minus in any Freshman Comp class.
Which brings us to an ugly truth about many aspiring screenwriters: They think that screenwriting doesn't actually require the ability to write, just the ability to come up with a cool story that would make a cool movie. Screenwriting is widely regarded as the easiest way to break into the movie business, because it doesn't require any kind of training, skill or equipment. Everybody can write, right? And because they believe that, they don't regard working screenwriters with any kind of real respect. They will hand you a piece of inept writing without a second thought, because you do not have to be a writer to be a screenwriter.
So. I read the thing. And it hurt, man. It really hurt. I was dying to find something positive to say, and there was nothing. And the truth is, saying something positive about this thing would be the nastiest, meanest and most dishonest thing I could do. Because here's the thing: not only is it cruel to encourage the hopeless, but you cannot discourage a writer. If someone can talk you out of being a writer, you're not a writer. If I can talk you out of being a writer, I've done you a favor, because now you'll be free to pursue your real talent, whatever that may be. And, for the record, everybody has one. The lucky ones figure out what that is. The unlucky ones keep on writing shi*ty screenplays and asking me to read them.
To make matters worse, this guy (and his girlfriend) had begged me to be honest with him. He was frustrated by the responses he'd gotten from friends, because he felt they were going easy on him, and he wanted real criticism. They never do, of course. What they want is a few tough notes to give the illusion of honesty, and then some pats on the head. What they want--always--is encouragement, even when they shouldn't get any.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to tell someone that they've spent a year wasting their time? Do you know how much blood and sweat goes into that criticism? Because you want to tell the truth, but you want to make absolutely certain that it comes across honestly and without cruelty. I did more rewrites on that poo pooing e-mail than I did on my last three studio projects.
My first draft was ridiculous. I started with specific notes, and after a while, found I'd written three pages on the first two paragraphs. That wasn't the right approach. So I tossed it, and by the time I was done, I'd come up with something that was relatively brief, to the point, and considerate as hell. The main point I made was that he'd fallen prey to a fallacy that nails a lot of first timers. He was way more interested in telling his one story than in being a writer. It was like buying all the parts to a car and starting to build it before learning the basics of auto mechanics. You'll learn a lot along the way, I said, but you'll never have a car that runs.
(I should mention that while I was composing my response, he pulled the ultimate amateur move, and sent me an e-mail saying, "If you haven't read it yet, don't! I have a new draft. Read this!" In other words, "The draft I told you was ready for professional input, wasn't actually.")
I advised him that if all he was interested in was this story, he should find a writer and work with him; or, if he really wanted to be a writer, start at the beginning and take some classes, and start studying seriously.
And you know what? I shouldn't have bothered. Because for all the hair I pulled out, for all the weight and seriousness I gave his request for a real, professional critique, his response was a terse "Thanks for your opinion." And, the inevitable fallout--a week later a mutual friend asked me, "What's this dick move I hear you pulled on Whatsisname?"
So now this guy and his girlfriend think I'm an asshole, and the truth of the matter is, the story really ended the moment he handed me the goddamn synopsis. Because if I'd just said "No" then and there, they'd still think I'm an asshole. Only difference is, I wouldn't have had to spend all that time trying to communicate thoughtfully and honestly with someone who just wanted a pat on the head, and, more importantly, I wouldn't have had to read that godawful piece of shi*.
You are not owed a read from a professional, even if you think you have an in, and even if you think it's not a huge imposition. It's not your choice to make. This needs to be clear--when you ask a professional for their take on your material, you're not just asking them to take an hour or two out of their life, you're asking them to give you--gratis--the acquired knowledge, insight, and skill of years of work. It is no different than asking your friend the house painter to paint your living room during his off hours.
There's a great story about Pablo Picasso. Some guy told Picasso he'd pay him to draw a picture on a napkin. Picasso whipped out a pen and banged out a sketch, handed it to the guy, and said, "One million dollars, please."
"A million dollars?" the guy exclaimed. "That only took you thirty seconds!"
"Yes," said Picasso. "But it took me fifty years to learn how to draw that in thirty seconds."
Like the cad who asks the professional for a free read, the guy simply didn't have enough respect for the artist to think about what he was asking for. If you think it's only about the time, then ask one of your non-writer friends to read it. Hell, they might even enjoy your script. They might look upon you with a newfound respect. It could even come to pass that they call up a friend in the movie business and help you sell it, and soon, all your dreams will come true. But me?
I will not read your poo pooing script.
 
Being successful must be just terrible, the poor baby. IMO, this why a Pro's policy should be, I'll read it, but it will cost you such & such. By using this exchange route everyone involved can determine if it's really worth it or not. The recipient of the advice will value the costly advice more than free advice, while the Pro will be justly compensated for the time and effort. The asking price reduces the number of silly off-the-cuff requests and gives the Pro some peace.
 
That script he read was mine.

What I was handed was, essentially, a barely coherent list of events, some connected, some not so much. Characters wander around aimlessly, do things for no reason, vanish, reappear, get arrested for unnamed crimes, and make wild, life-altering decisions for no reason. Half a paragraph is devoted to describing the smell and texture of a piece of food, but the climactic central event of the film is glossed over in a sentence. The death of the hero is not even mentioned. One sentence describes a scene he's in, the next describes people showing up at his funeral.


Only because my characters were fighting zombie werewolf hookers!
 
I would think anything to do with zombie werewolf hookers would command the highest respect and attention. He must be a complete fool.
 
He will get a script a day in WB and P's certified logo complete with letterhead forged by someone who's name might be signed by a midget elvis in vegas, but yea, lots of people are going to have fun with this.

Ohhh come on... Honesty sucks.
 
He really should have specified the difference with people who haven't built up a suitable relationship asking him, versus close friends. It would make the article not come off so assholeish.

As far as people in the comments asking sarcastically if we would just give away the efforts of our profession... yeah, I do it all the time. Even lawyers are up for that one on occasion. Picasso stories are great, but he's not Picasso.
 
He really should have specified the difference with people who haven't built up a suitable relationship asking him, versus close friends. It would make the article not come off so assholeish. ...
He does. Not right off the bat, or out front, but he says he has two piles of scripts, one from friends, one from agents that he's supposed to read for work. When he reads the work scripts he feels bad for neglecting his friends. When he reads the friend scripts he feels bad for neglecting his work. So he doesn't like other people asking him at parties and stuff to read theirs - like the subject of the article. a guy who's dating a (now former) friend or person he knew.
 
Yeah, I meant to say he should have done so more. I think that's what he's going for, but it doesn't come off clear enough. As indicated by reading any of the comments that completely disregard that sentence.
 
Picasso stories are great, but he's not Picasso.
Maybe not, but he's been nominated for the Oscar, the BAFTA, and the WGA award, among others. That's pretty big-time.

Whether you agree with how the guy said it or not, there's a lot of truth in what he said.
 
Ugh -- I read through that entire hatefest trying to find what you were referencing. Where in it did Josh Olsen say that he was a "top earner"? Or did I miss the point?
 
Yes, and I do agree strongly with what he said. People have a sense of entitlement for things like that, and tend to take it as a personal insult when their greatness isn't realized. To be clear, I'm not saying I disagree with his wording or take offense or anything like that. The point of my comments is mostly that I hope some of the people who need to get it actually get it.
 
Last edited:
And if you ask him, he will gladly tell you that he is a top earner.

Actually, he'll repeatedly tell you that whether you ask or not.

http://defamer.gawker.com/5357518/oscar-nominated-screenwriter-lacks-creativity-to-lie-to-friends.

Headline: Oscar Nominated Screenwriter Lacks Creativity To Lie To Friends

Translation: He was honest

The media likes to grandstand, be the good guy when people are bad, be the bad guy when people are good etc. HORSEshi*! but it sells and drives traffic.

He is a top earner (now), what's top mean? Top 2, 10, 100? He's up there. You don't want to know what he is making right now for an adapation for P and a few other projects. He is up there.

I can't believe how many people are offended by this. Producers love him, same thing, will you watch my f*cking movie I shot on my camcorder.
 
Last edited:
Well

Well

Eh, whatever, I mean I agree with Barry on this one. I'm sorry but I'm busy enough and I'm a nobody, I just run a small company in startup mode and I keep very very busy with my own stuff. I don't really have time to read other people's scripts right now. Sure, I want to do some exchanges, and will get to that, but it has to be part of a fair exchange where you read mine, I read yours kind of thing. I can't just spend time reading stuff at random. And he's a professional, who makes a living off this, where you could potentially be his competition, then you want him to read your stuff? I don't get it.

Nobody's time is free. He has a right to express that. I don't blame the guy, I get so annoyed by everyone in this town thinking somehow the way to get everything done is FREE, FREE, FREE. It's just full of a bunch of takers, a bunch of users, selfish people who are stupid. It's GOOD to be selfish, if you can be smart about it, but only stupid people come across as selfish. Smart people ARE selfish, but they just don't seem that way.

It's like when I have people come ask for my equipment, they just want me to give them my $5,000 camera for a day or two, or my P2 cards, or whatever else it is. If they were smart, they would approach me and ask if there is any way they might be able to help on one of my shoots, like perhaps they are a good grip or DP or actor, and they would be willing to trade a day of labor for use of my equipment. I may even never collect on that, I may say, "Nah don't worry about it," but at least the way they approached me, I will never see that person as a user, I will always see that person as someone who "gets it." Someone who sees me as another person, with goals, dreams, ambitions of my own, and when he comes to ask me for something, takes that all into account, and tries to put it in a way like, "Hey, I need something from you, but I'm willing to help you in whatever way I can, maybe we can make a trade?" That is a respectful way to approach someone. But in this town, 90% of people are goddamn morons who have no understanding of basic courtesy. You can only conclude they are flat-out STUPID people, not just lacking courtesy but in general stupid people who were never educated properly on the basic art of social tact. You just don't go asking for things for free without offering something in return. That you could reach your 21st birthday and not understand this is remarkable to me.
 
Jonathan... unfortunately we live in the age of entitlement.

I'm amazed at how many people expect selfless contributions from others... as if your payment is the honor of simply being asked.

There are many layers in the film industry... and it's like a caste system where you must do something pretty good on your own to get into the next layer... or get lucky enough to find a kind soul... but the pervasive attitude of entitlement is disturbing.

What I'm trying to say is I agree with your analysis of the situation.
 
But they also don't go on the Internet, acting all self-important, talking about how they're much too important to ever think about dealing with those plebes who haven't yet had the good fortune of breaking through (especially since it wasn't that long ago that he was among the plebes himself begging people he didn't know for free reads and a bit of help).
But -- is that what he said?

The way I read it, he's got stacks of scripts that he reads, including those from friends.

His resentment was being put in a no-win situation. He didn't do anything to deserve it, the guy put him in the no-win, he tried six ways from sunday to find a way to win, and in the end he decided that the only way to help this guy was to tell him the truth. And he lost the friendship over it. Which he would have done anyway, had he just said "no".

So his point is: don't put me in a no-win situation, it's seriously not cool.

What I think I'm picking up from your post is like you said - if someone else had written it, anyone but him, you wouldn't have such a problem with it. Which I interpret as meaning that it's not so much the content of the rant, but the additional expectations and colorations you bring to reading it, from your prior interactions with him.

I'm basing my reaction strictly off the rant, taking it at face value.

Yes he could have written it differently. Yes he comes off as certainly not as flattering as he might otherwise have wished. But that doesn't negate the underlying validity of much of what was said.

That's all.
 
Back
Top