The Great Hollywood Rip Off (idea thieves)

memento515 said:
I actually have a file on my computer of my loglines/concepts, at least 2 of which I genuinely feel are good enough to steal n their own.I would never share them with anyone, until Ive already written a great version of a particular one. In which case, Im selling the -script- not the idea. .... Focus on being such a good writer that someone will be eager and excited to use the script you wrote (and/or you for rewrites) rather than pluck it for trimmings. Than again screenwriting is full of rewrites and firings and multiple writers and all that anyway, so worry about only what you can control
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
I think the un-tread territory of screen writing and getting outside feedback/help and wanting to protect your baby is a natural instinct. I also think there is a reason that every professional screenwriter that I read about all refer to "an inner circle" of readers (other screenwriters usually) they trust. And it seems to me that someone who really knows what they are doing (we all would like to assume there is intellectual pride/integrity over crafting one's own) would not rip off someone--but I suspect it happens. Listening to the dialogue series there are cuts and hacks that some of the interviewed screenwriters make at what I presume are other screenwriters who "borrow" people's ideas. So, Randy, I suspect it happens. I also think its probably good to get the idea out to see if others think its a good idea, concept, etc. There is risk involved but the gain could be worth it (a better story, improved plot, characterization, etc), but continue to protect those (copyrighting, etc) as best you can. This is un-chartered territory for me as I haven't sold a script yet. Maybe Kyle or someone who has had their script out for development, feedback, help, etc. can chime in?
 
Tony Ferguson said:
I think the un-tread territory of screen writing...
Click to expand...

Tony's first post here on dvx! woohoo! Losing your dvxuser posting v___ity, lol (Tony is a friend of mine)!
This is a great place for discussions on sw and filmmaking Tony, hope to see you back here more in the future! (spend more time here, less time on Facebook!)
:) randall
 
It surely happens, but I'm not sure how much it actually happens. Either way, this is one reason why I don't believe in pitching. Your completed script is your protection against this.

If you have a great idea, write the story. If it's not great enough for you to write, don't waste your time on it and move on to something that is great enough to you to write the whole story yourself. Life's too short to waste on stories that only work for you as loglines.
 
Randall_Oelerich said:
My concern is that if I have a great HIGH concept story idea (logline, synopsis) to pitch to a major hw studio-- well, they can easily just steal it and have a big hitter writer on their A list of writers they have worked with to take it and write a great screenplay from it, and they know it will be great, rather than take a chance and a year of writing with an amateur (moi, me).
Click to expand...
Of course they will. Why wouldn't they? This is exactly how it works.

Not that I'm condoning such behavior. Just recognizing that it's there.

So, as has been said, I think the solution may be to only send hw the completed great screenplay, and deal with a reputable agent on the WGA list of agents. Pitching just 'ideas' to hw is perhaps better left to the major proven hitters that the studio would just give the green light to and know what they are going to get, and fast.
Click to expand...
And that's exactly how you protect yourself. Make the brilliant script, and submit it only through a reputable agent, and document exactly every pitch that agent makes: day and time, who they sent it to, who saw it at what company, etc.

Then, on top of that, you really do have to realize that your "brilliant once-in-a-lifetime high-concept idea" has probably been pitched to them about sixty times before you did. Ideas, even brilliant ideas, are a penny a dozen. Everyone thinks their brilliant idea is so unique, but it's very rare to actually have that unique idea. When an idea's time has come, it comes, and hollywood will be flooded with pitches. When I took McKee's seminar a decade ago, he talked about this and about how writers always think they have just the absolute most fantastic highest concept ever, and just to point it out he said "if I hear one more pitch for cloning Jesus from the Shroud of Turin"...

Ideas, in and of themselves, are pretty meaningless, and are inherently not copyrightable. It is only the execution of your idea that matters. Hollywood will not steal your script -- it's much, much cheaper and easier for them to buy it from you, then throw it away and rewrite it with an A-lister, than it is to defend themselves against a lawsuit. But they will steal your idea. If your idea is great, and your script is brilliant, you can sell it for millions of dollars. If your idea is great but your script is awful, they'll steal your idea.

How they execute the idea is up to them. Look at two examples: Disney's Pocahontas was one of their biggest flops. James Cameron's Avatar is the most successful film ever made. Are they in any way similar? Look at this.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, and the irony was that they cheaped out on The Lion King because everyone wanted it out of the way so they could work on Pocahontas, which they thought would be the Biggest. Thing. Ever.

But that's for a different thread . . .
 
Barry_Green said:
Disney's Pocahontas was one of their biggest flops. James Cameron's Avatar is the most successful film ever made. Are they in any way similar? Look at this.
Click to expand...


Just for the record, District 9 is the same story too (except done well).

I wont explain. Think.

Blew your mind didn't I....
 
memento515 said:
Just for the record, District 9 is the same story too (except done well).

I wont explain. Think.

Blew your mind didn't I....
Click to expand...

District 9 is in such a greater league than the Pocahontas or Avatar that I don't even see that connection. Not sure I want to because District 9 is in my Top 5.
 
This is an excellent lesson...focusing on winning 'the war', even if it has to come at the expense of losing 'a battle'...

Jim Brennan said:
THere is much logic here, because this is all part of the game.

A good friend of mine was asked to do a take on a project that has recently been in (and quickly out) of the theaters. As an up and coming writer he quickly jumped in (through his agent of course) and submitted. They loved his ideas, he flew out to LA and was about to finalize the deal. Then they signed a director who was well known and also a screenwriter who wanted to write the script himself. So my friend got the door. No big deal. That stuff happens all the time.

Then he saw the trailer on TV. Not only did it have very specific elements from his take, it also had his suggestion for a new title.

He was pissed and called his agent.

So what did they do? They sent a nice basket over to the studio with a follow up e-mail that said something like. "Hey, we saw the trailer and it looks great. Congratulations. So and So (the writer), really liked it as well. Best of luck". The e-mail also contained all of the correspondence they had, including the writer's original take.

Their way of both taking the high road and reminding the studio that some of the best ideas in the movie came from this writer.

Could he have sued and won? Sure. Would that have helped his budding career? Nope.

Going through a good agent protects you. Not just legally, but with their experience in negotiations and positioning in a crowded marketplace.
Click to expand...
 
jscottprice said:
District 9 is in such a greater league than the Pocahontas or Avatar that I don't even see that connection. Not sure I want to because District 9 is in my Top 5.
Click to expand...

Different strokes then...I liked "Avatar" a lot, and didn't care much for "District 9" (although I have to admit having a pet peeve for improvised dialog in non-comedic films, and "D9" was heavily improv-ed).

The commonality to both films/stories, and to Pocahontas as well, is (as Barry's linked article illustrates) the intrusion of an outsider/antagonist into a foreign culture conflict/war, and his/her subsequent conversion into a staunch advocate/freedom fighter for same. It's pretty much the primary character arc of all three, if not the story arc as well...
 
And of "Dances with Wolves", and "The Last Samurai", and ... on and on.

The genesis of an idea is a powerful thing, but it's what you DO with that idea that matters.
 
Ted Spencer said:
Different strokes then...I liked "Avatar" a lot, and didn't care much for "District 9" (although I have to admit having a pet peeve for improvised dialog in non-comedic films, and "D9" was heavily improv-ed).
Click to expand...

I'm glad someone said it. I could barely get through D9. Great premise, original story, but several plot elements fell flat IMO.

But wasn't the antagonist forced to fight for the shrimp-thingies because he was turning into one and being hunted by his own people? He did not experience a sympathetic change of heart as I recall (its been a since I saw it.). Unlike Jake Sully in Avatar, who was forced into avatar-ING, but once he met the Na'vi he experienced his OWN change of heart. Avatars hero is much more powerful because of it.
 
You mean the white-man-being-the-only-hope-the-native-has-of-fending-off-the-white-man genre? White America gets to absolve itself of any lingering guilt while simultaneously declaring 'lesser races' incapable of defeating them. I guess I can see why that sort of self indulgence is a win-win for a large section of the movie going public.
 
Last edited:
vcassel said:
You mean the white-man-being-the-only-hope-the-native-has-of-fending-off-the-white-man genre? White America gets to absolve itself of any lingering guilt while simultaneously declaring 'lesser races' incapable of defeating them. I guess I can see why that sort of self indulgence is a win-win for a large section of the movie going public.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that my preference for an arc-plot hero is racially motivated?
 
Avatar sucks so hard.

Avatar sucks so hard.

<<<But wasn't the antagonist forced to fight for the shrimp-thingies because he was turning into one and being hunted by his own people? He did not experience a sympathetic change of heart as I recall (its been a since I saw it.). Unlike Jake Sully in Avatar, who was forced into avatar-ING, but once he met the Na'vi he experienced his OWN change of heart. Avatars hero is much more powerful because of it. >>>>>


Nah, dude , your off on this one. Avatars hero has a change of heart cause he found a hot piece of exotic native poontang and gets to walk and run and commune with nature and be giant and ride awesome birds and control animals and stuff. It pretends to be a story of redemption, but its a story about a white dude finding out that not-white people are awesome wicked cool, and then basically joining them (wouldnt you? not much of a "hard choice") and then eventually LEADING them and TAKING THEIR HOTTEST CHICK because hes even MORE wicked cool awesome (why? erm... he's the hero..I guess....that makes..him qualified....). Avatars so morally and thematically broken, its kind of sickening.

In D9, yes, the main character only changes sides because he -has- to. He acts selfishly for almost all of the movie and everyone pays for it, including himself. His final climatic moral act isn't enough to undo the damage he was a part of. He pays at the end. The story works from a thematic/moral standpoint- everyone gets what they deserve, for the most part. Plus the characterization of the main character was INCREDIBLE- whose never known a guy like that? That's high level writing, based on observation of -real people-, not cartoon comic book archetypes.

also the squidy aliens, are truly alien to us- they are not pretty-awesome-hippy-beautiful. we have to -work- to find our similarities with them. They dont exist to give us awesomeness and hot blue cat love- they exist for themselves and on their own terms.


District 9 is true grown up science fiction for man- nerds like us.

Avatar is sparkly blue eye candy for 14 year old girls.

Im not trying to put down anyones taste, but you gotta see how bad Avatar is, on like ten levels. Its unreal.
 
azharrison said:
So you are saying that my preference for an arc-plot hero is racially motivated?
Click to expand...

I couldn't imagine that I am since I hadn't read what you posted. I'm speaking to the tangent, not anyone in particular. I'm saying that there's a difference between an arch-plot and a racially motivated one, yes.
 
I guess I'm a biggoted 14yo girl because I perferred the storyline of Avatar to D9. I also didn't care for Cloverfield, Signs, or Preditor either. Just my preference.

The aliens in D9 were annoying and comical... slurping snorting and grunting... distracting from the dialog for me. just like spielbergs token "dinner table" scene in his first several movies - with plates clinking, kids squirming, eating while delivering dialog... that used to distract and annoy me to no end. It may have be raw and realistic but i never thought it added much to the story.

... and cat food? cliche and corny. But I'm glad you liked it. Good on ya mate.

JMHO.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top