Ted Spencer
Veteran
If there isn't already, there should be a special Razzie award for just this. Only thing is, M. Night Shyamalan would probably 'win' it every time he releases a film...
Last edited:
Likelihood of Screenplay Theft
- Thread starter JonathanLB
- Start date
If there isn't already, there should be a special Razzie award for just this. Only thing is, M. Night Shyamalan would probably 'win' it every time he releases a film...
Nektonic
Veteran
I wouldn't worry about professional screenwriters stealing things. Most of them have their own original ideas or are working on assignment adapting a comic book, novel, old TV show, board game, video game, etc. for a studio or production company.
There is no reason to really steal something because Hollywood is so averse to making original work and then with the possible legal ramifications, why risk stealing something that has not much of a chance anyways? An established pro would look like a real schmuck if they were caught stealing from an unestablished young writer. It could ruin their rep around town, which in Hollywood is everything. If a case of screenplay theft went to court and the big shot Hollywood screenwriter theif lost, then there is the financial hit they can take plus not getting as much future work.
Also, most pro scribes are probably not sitting around reading the work of up and coming writers. A lot of them will be of the mind that most of the scripts from unproven or unproduced writers will be shi*e anyways. Personally, I don't believe that, but Hollywood is so narrow minded in terms of what they want that it is nearly impossible to please the gatekeepers. Add to that the whole remake and reboot craze that has taken the town by storm this past decade, and it is usually the case that nobody wants to make even the most brilliant of spec screenplays.
Now, if some nobody writes a brilliant script or two, and then gets and agent who then takes this new writer's work around town, then it is sort of protected by the fact that everyone will be reading it. I guess what I'm getting at is that if a script doesn't catch fire in Hollywood, not nearly as many people will be reading it and will not want to steal from it, while the ones that get a lot of attention from the industry will be high profile enough that it would be too risky to steal from it without raising suspicion.
Another factor is that what a writer might think is a brilliant original high concept idea for a script, is actually not as brilliantly original as they thought, because others have thought of this idea. The big difference is in the actually quality of the character development, plot, theme, dialogue, and how entertaining and emotionally engaging each script is to the majority of those that read it. Really, ideas are a dime a dozen, but the forming of those ideas into a sale-able piece of work like a screenplay or a novel is what makes the studio boss take out the checkbook. No one can outright Xerox another writer's script without being a blatantly obvious thief.
There is no reason to really steal something because Hollywood is so averse to making original work and then with the possible legal ramifications, why risk stealing something that has not much of a chance anyways? An established pro would look like a real schmuck if they were caught stealing from an unestablished young writer. It could ruin their rep around town, which in Hollywood is everything. If a case of screenplay theft went to court and the big shot Hollywood screenwriter theif lost, then there is the financial hit they can take plus not getting as much future work.
Also, most pro scribes are probably not sitting around reading the work of up and coming writers. A lot of them will be of the mind that most of the scripts from unproven or unproduced writers will be shi*e anyways. Personally, I don't believe that, but Hollywood is so narrow minded in terms of what they want that it is nearly impossible to please the gatekeepers. Add to that the whole remake and reboot craze that has taken the town by storm this past decade, and it is usually the case that nobody wants to make even the most brilliant of spec screenplays.
Now, if some nobody writes a brilliant script or two, and then gets and agent who then takes this new writer's work around town, then it is sort of protected by the fact that everyone will be reading it. I guess what I'm getting at is that if a script doesn't catch fire in Hollywood, not nearly as many people will be reading it and will not want to steal from it, while the ones that get a lot of attention from the industry will be high profile enough that it would be too risky to steal from it without raising suspicion.
Another factor is that what a writer might think is a brilliant original high concept idea for a script, is actually not as brilliantly original as they thought, because others have thought of this idea. The big difference is in the actually quality of the character development, plot, theme, dialogue, and how entertaining and emotionally engaging each script is to the majority of those that read it. Really, ideas are a dime a dozen, but the forming of those ideas into a sale-able piece of work like a screenplay or a novel is what makes the studio boss take out the checkbook. No one can outright Xerox another writer's script without being a blatantly obvious thief.
Randall_Oelerich
Veteran
I'd like three dozen original, good ideas for feature screenplays please. Drop me a PM with them, let me know where to PayPal you the $0.30 Seriously, if they are original ideas and I can have them legally for my use, my offer stands.
Randall
Randall
Tom Shortridge
Well-known member
Shh, you'll spook him.
Ted Spencer
Veteran
Nah...I only steal ideas from children, old ladies and underprivileged minorities...
Nektonic
Veteran
I usually just blackmail successful writers into ghost writing novels or scripts for me while I collect fat paychecks and drink frozen margaritas on exotic beaches with topless women.
I just came up with this great idea with battles in space with beam swords.
I shall call it.... Wally's day out.
astigmatic
Well-known member
I don't buy this theft thing. It's just like any other creative field. 100% chance someone else already thought of it.. the goal is to get it done first. That's where the whole amatuer thing comes from. Pro's realize early on that their ideas ain't so brilliantly new after all. It's not about the ideas. It's about the ability to make ideas reality.
Charli
cool little "title"
A couple sued over the "Terminator II" Liquid Metal idea, stated that had written the script and somehow Cameron got a hold of it. I think it made it to the appeals process.
Just write.
Get feedback.
Sell the script.
If you feel you have a unique idea then PM people, call them, talk to friends, family.
You don't have to show the world.
But you do need FEEDBACK.
Just write.
Get feedback.
Sell the script.
If you feel you have a unique idea then PM people, call them, talk to friends, family.
You don't have to show the world.
But you do need FEEDBACK.
Nektonic
Veteran
A few years ago, the same type of suit was filed against both The Terminator and The Matrix, all by the same person. This writer claimed that James Cameron and the Wachowski bros. both had seen her script and that all three of them stole the story. The funny thing is that both films feature a lot of things that have been used before by writers and filmmakers as well as themes that had already been covered in science fiction literature -- messianic heroes journey, prophecy, machine overlords, gritty blue-hued post apocalyptic future setting, etc.
Also, one of the outrageous accusations this person's attorney made against the Wachowski's was that they didn't even direct The Matrix. According to the plaintiff's attorney, supposedly John Woo "ghost directed" it and decided to not take credit for his work. Yeah right. Great defense there Matlock.
As for the T2 liquid metal thing, if somebody writes a Terminator sequel and sends it to James Cameron then what is so wrong with him using it? Let's say he lifted the liquid metal terminator idea from it. That is really not illegal because he was using an idea. If he didn't steal the story or any major plot elements then what is there to sue him for? Plus, it is actually his intellectual property, or say the studio's which would've been the now defunct Carolco back in the late 80's early 90's.
If I write a supposed sequel (aka fan fiction*) to say Avatar and send it to James Cameron's company without any kind of agent or manager representing my work, what is there to stop them from stealing ideas from it? It's not like I wrote an original piece of work and registered it with the WGA or the copyright office. Even if I had it sent by an agent would it really matter? Plus, what if my fanfic script had some ideas that were similar to what they were already going to do anyways? It's not like they are going to drop anchor on the production and sit around trying to figure out what to change because some nobody wrote a fan script. Of course, this is all based on the caveat that they would actually read it and if somebody did, it still wouldn't have much of a chance of reaching James Cameron's desk. So I doubt he'd even read it or know of if anyways.
* I have nothing against fan fiction at all -- I just think it should only be done for the enjoyment of it and that someone writing it shouldn't have any illusions about it doing anything for their career
Nektonic
Veteran
That's it.
The other thing is that a big part of storytelling is being inspired and excited by other's work. Everyone has influences. It is nearly impossible to completely shake them. I find it annoying that a lot of film message boards and blogs harp on and on about there being "nothing original" anymore.
The thing is, storytelling is an evolutionary process. Sure someone occasionally comes out with something really original and mind blowing, although usually these are not from the mainstream. Then there are the innovative people like Lucas and Cameron who marry new technology with timeless stories wrapped in a new skin.
But really if you think about it, storytelling started around the fires of early man. They didn't have paper or word processors. They couldn't send PDF files of their tales to the next tribe. Joe Caveman didn't have an HV20, an iMac, and a YouTube account. For ages, stories have traveled and evolved through oral retellings. I actually think that kind of thing is fascinating. Take an old epic like Beowulf. The way one Norseman told it was probably different in many ways than any other Norseman told it.
These days when someone writes a book or makes a film that is not 100% mind-poo pooingly original, then people come out of the woodwork to sue, to heckle, to yell HACK HACK HACK into the wind, and the web. The thing is, stories aren't valuable for their originality, but for their deeper meanings. Stories are valuable because they can put is in somebody else's shoes and understand. Stories can probe our subconscious selfs, and ask questions... and on rare occasions, stories can change the world. Good stories not only entertain us but also enlighten us. Originality is really not a requirement in crafting a compelling tale that has value beyond mere superficial entertainment value.
Look at WWII films. So many have been made since the war ended. Why is Spielberg lauded with praise for Saving Private Ryan, while Cameron is called a hack for making Avatar? Both films contain traditional elements, yet both films are innovative in multiple and various ways. Both films are valuable and contribute something beyond their entertainment value. Some people will like one better than the other. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but it doesn't change the fact that both films were financially successful, innovative technically, and told a not completely original story in a way that was compelling as well as entertaining for most viewers.
I guess I've always thought that stories were meant to engage the people experiencing them. You go too weird and most of your audience doesn't have an way into your world and characters. You go too conventional and they might be bored, but that is still a much safer bet than writing something that is bat shi* insane. Take the films of David Lynch. I love some of his work. He is definitely an original dude, however, some of his films are so abstract and bizarre, that even his fans are sometimes perplexed. Maybe that's his point, and that is one way to make art. I just get tired of people who make unwarranted accusations against writers and filmmakers who choose a slightly more conventional path for their work to tread, and then get lambasted for it.
Maybe I have a warped sense of what storytelling should be, or maybe there are a lot of people out there who have confused it with the novelty of invention. Of course, there needs to be a balance. Not every story need be a tumble down the rabbit hole of innovation, while it would also suck if everything was devoid of originality, which is sadly starting to be the case with so many darn remakes, reboots, and re-imaginings.
JonathanLB
Carbonite Member
Haha
Haha
You guys are funny!
Well I'm not saying I have some mind-blowingly original idea that would make you go, "Whoa, that's just amazing!" It's really in the execution of the script and the characters that I like.
But I think it's pretty cynical and, excuse me for saying, ignorant for people to say, "Oh well there are no new stories, they've all been told before." It just comes across as someone trying to reduce everything to some basic elements and that's not really fair, I don't think. It's like saying there are no original people or that people never do anything new because we all eat, drink, sleep, etc. That's ignoring what is really important. There are ALWAYS new stories and new ideas, and always will be, primarily driven by technology and people's interaction with that technology. Before the Internet, there was NO STORIES EVER about the Internet, obviously, as there was no Internet. Now there are stories specifically about things that can happen in the Internet age. Or space travel, or medical advances, etc.
My script is not original as far as the basic story elements, duh, it's still characters who experience growth throughout the course of the story and their character arcs are basically 99% similar to anything else that has been done in a variety of films. But the issue they are dealing with, in the way they are dealing with it, has never been done before in a film. The basic notion of the story, however, has been done numerous times I can think of already. It was always fantastical, however, almost never based in scientific possibilities. There hasn't been something like this before, but when you say everything is a new twist on an old idea, well sure, that's natural. I just think it's an oversimplification to say that there are 5 stories or something and they constantly get retold. I don't really agree with that. I think you could say there are a certain number of types of stories, and each fits into one type, but it's like saying, "Well that's a computer, this is a computer, here's another computer, they're all the same, they're all computers!" When one is a lousy HP laptop with a Celeron processor, one is a Macbook, and one is the top-of-the-line MacBook Pro. No, they are not anything like each other, actually. Yes, they are computers, what a genius observation, but no, they really have little in common besides that. They have more in common with one another than, say, a lamp and a CD, or a computer and an animal, but that's again stating the obvious and comes across as a brain-dead way to simplify the world by turning your brain off and reducing everything to some basic component that in the simplest possible world view leads you to say that one thing very different from another is in fact "the same, basically."
"Well people are all the same, they are water-based life forms, made up of certain molecules, really people aren't that different." It just comes across as weak.
Haha
You guys are funny!
Well I'm not saying I have some mind-blowingly original idea that would make you go, "Whoa, that's just amazing!" It's really in the execution of the script and the characters that I like.
But I think it's pretty cynical and, excuse me for saying, ignorant for people to say, "Oh well there are no new stories, they've all been told before." It just comes across as someone trying to reduce everything to some basic elements and that's not really fair, I don't think. It's like saying there are no original people or that people never do anything new because we all eat, drink, sleep, etc. That's ignoring what is really important. There are ALWAYS new stories and new ideas, and always will be, primarily driven by technology and people's interaction with that technology. Before the Internet, there was NO STORIES EVER about the Internet, obviously, as there was no Internet. Now there are stories specifically about things that can happen in the Internet age. Or space travel, or medical advances, etc.
My script is not original as far as the basic story elements, duh, it's still characters who experience growth throughout the course of the story and their character arcs are basically 99% similar to anything else that has been done in a variety of films. But the issue they are dealing with, in the way they are dealing with it, has never been done before in a film. The basic notion of the story, however, has been done numerous times I can think of already. It was always fantastical, however, almost never based in scientific possibilities. There hasn't been something like this before, but when you say everything is a new twist on an old idea, well sure, that's natural. I just think it's an oversimplification to say that there are 5 stories or something and they constantly get retold. I don't really agree with that. I think you could say there are a certain number of types of stories, and each fits into one type, but it's like saying, "Well that's a computer, this is a computer, here's another computer, they're all the same, they're all computers!" When one is a lousy HP laptop with a Celeron processor, one is a Macbook, and one is the top-of-the-line MacBook Pro. No, they are not anything like each other, actually. Yes, they are computers, what a genius observation, but no, they really have little in common besides that. They have more in common with one another than, say, a lamp and a CD, or a computer and an animal, but that's again stating the obvious and comes across as a brain-dead way to simplify the world by turning your brain off and reducing everything to some basic component that in the simplest possible world view leads you to say that one thing very different from another is in fact "the same, basically."
"Well people are all the same, they are water-based life forms, made up of certain molecules, really people aren't that different." It just comes across as weak.
Nektonic
Veteran
I agree JonathanLB.
To me, the value of stories are the telling and the experience of the telling by the audience. A story that relies on elements that have been done before can be extremely entertaining and compelling, while a story that was generated from the most whiz-bang original high concept idea can be awfully executed and be a real turd of an experience.
It all really depends on the writer, their skills, and how much time and effort they put into crafting their story, script, film, novel, etc.
To me, the value of stories are the telling and the experience of the telling by the audience. A story that relies on elements that have been done before can be extremely entertaining and compelling, while a story that was generated from the most whiz-bang original high concept idea can be awfully executed and be a real turd of an experience.
It all really depends on the writer, their skills, and how much time and effort they put into crafting their story, script, film, novel, etc.