The Morning Read: Why Amazon Studios is a very bad idea for writers

Plus Eli Roth's doing right by horror and talking 'Star Wars' with kids

The Morning Read:  Why Amazon Studios is a very bad idea for writers

Barton Fink is a good example of of what happens to screenwriters in Hollywood, and he got off easy.

Credit: 20th Century Fox

Welcome to The Morning Read.

Let's kick off today's column with a bit of a public service announcement.  Have you read about the Amazon Studios announcement?  Basically, Amazon decided to get involved in the production of content, and they've created a brand-new program that is part contest, part development fund, and all garbage.

I've gotten several e-mails from people asking me my take on this, several of which were from very excited writers looking at this as a way to finally get around the "no manager or agent" conundrum.  And I empathize with any writer out there with a script who can't get people to read it.  I get what is attractive about the idea of a brand-new way of getting around the system, but this is not it.  Have you read the Development Agreement or the Contest Terms and Procedures?  They are fascinating and revealing and completely insane. 

I'll put it this way:  if you upload your script or your movie to their contest, you are essentially kissing it goodbye forever.  Line after line of the legalese on these pages just confounds me.  "You agree to be automatically entered into any future contests for which your work is eligible.  The specific contest rules for future contests will be posted on this page when they are announced."  And considering one of the rules of this contest grants Amazon Studios a free 18-month option on your work the moment you upload it, the idea that they can enter you in a contest later and tell you the rules after they do so seems positively batty.  The "development agreement" is a contract you're signing, not an entry form for a contest, and in it, you grant them a free option on your work for a year and a half, and if they do end up producing your work, there's a set fee.  Period.  That's all it is.  A set rate.  The same no matter what the project is, and no matter what happens with it.  That is, simply put, immoral.

Beyond that, once your script is uploaded to Amazon, anyone can revise it.  Try to wrap your head around that.  Anyone can revise your screenplay.  They can do anything they want to it.  And if that revision ends up being what gets made, that person becomes part of that set price I mentioned earlier.  It's a mind-boggling proposition, and runs completely counter-intuitive to the idea of giving writers a platform for their work.  The thought of some random person having the legal right to revise my screenplays makes me sick to my stomach, and I seriously believe that the people who created the Amazon Studios idea are either very stupid or very evil.  It is an idea designed to exploit and strip-mine creativity, and it sounds to me like someone's idea of a social media experiment gone wildly wrong.  There's nothing about this that sounds to me like it will result in good filmmaking.  The entire notion of a "test movie" is bizarre, especially when you're talking about having people shoot entire feature films as tests.  That side of the contest is so much weirder than the screenplay side that I can't even really understand it.

Look, collaboration is one of the key components of filmmaking.  I absolutely believe that.  But I also believe that you have to be able to pick your own collaborators based on their history, your history, common artistic goals, respect, and much more.  "Crowdsourcing" is a big buzzword right now, and under the right conditions, I can see how useful that is.  But for filmmaking?  This is poison.  This is very bad thing.  To me, this smacks of the sort of "let's suck someone's blood" mentality that marks the very worst of Los Angeles. 

I've spent the last few years entangled in a business arrangement with a producer who I will simply refer to here as "The Gimp."  At the very beginning of our relationship, The Gimp talked a good game.  He promised easy access to production funds.  He spun fanciful stories of lands where tax incentives just fell of the trees, ready to be picked up and spent by any filmmaker who just happened along.  He told tales of the cast that was eager and ready to go, and he even went down the road of hiring a director and making premature announcements.  All of it was what I wanted to hear.  All of it sounded great. 

But the truth about The Gimp is that he is all talk.  Those production funds always managed to stay a week or two away from escrow.  The tax incentives only seemed to be opportune in states without soundstages.  Or film crews.  And that cast that was promised seemed to vanish into thin air when push came to shove.  And not just once.  Not just twice.  It was a cycle, a pattern, a twisted game of self-affirmation that The Gimp was playing at my expense.  And because of the option The Gimp had on the material, there was nothing we could do to reclaim it from him.  At that point, it's a waiting game, but at least we'd been paid for the option, which is the way it should work.

In the end, the worst part is the feeling that The Gimp never cared at all about the story we were trying to tell.  Instead, what we offered was a film that could be made at a price just low enough that it would justify a padded budget that could be pocketed, an easy way out of potential bankruptcy, and until he actually made it, there were other ways to make money on our work, ways that had nothing to do with actually telling our story.  I've got stories stretching back twenty years about people indulging their own ego and greed at the expense of writers who genuinely just want to tell a story. 

Amazon Studios throws a ton of numbers at you up front, and it claims to be about giving power to the people, but it smells to me like one more case of the writer being the bottom of the pile.  Seriously… I implore you… if you believe your work is of any value whatsoever, don't fall for this.  I'm curious to see if other writers or advocates for writers weigh in on this one.  For now, John August is the only one I've seen jump in, and he makes the point with elegance as usual.

The worst part of saying all that is I know how defensive some people will get, because they will want to believe that this is the short cut they've been looking for.  The truth is that there are no short cuts at all.  You've got to work to get your ideas in front of people, no matter who you are, and the business is getting more competitive as it contracts and changes.  There is nothing more important than a well-executed good idea, and if you're looking for something to give you hope, then why not look at the example of "Clown"? 

Remember that?  A few weeks ago, I ran a piece about "Alma," the animated film that Guillermo Del Toro is helping to turn into a feature based on an acclaimed short done as a personal side project by Rodrigo Blaas.  In that piece, I also included a YouTube trailer for a fake movie called "Clown."  One of the things that was really ballsy about the "Clown" trailer was the way they threw on the title "A Film by Eli Roth," even though they had no connection to him.  Well, now it looks like they do.  Roth is producing the film, with Jon Watts and Christopher D. Ford, who made the short, directing and writing the film together.  I have to say, I loved the "Clown" trailer, and I'm excited to see the film, and I love the way the film got in front of Eli, and then made the jump from joke to reality. 

There's another film Eli also just helped set up that sounds great, the new one from Nicolas Lopez, a Chilean filmmaker whose earlier films "Promedio Rojo" and "Santos" both showed huge personality and promise.  The notion of Lopez taking his personal observations about the February earthquake in Chile and what happened afterwards and turning that into a horror film is exciting because this isn't something born from somebody watching old movies and just regurgitation someone else's ideas.  This is personal, and those are often the best films. 

That's why I find that whole Amazon Studios thing so unsettling, and the way the media is just swallowing it without digesting it or analyzing it or looking at how it treats the people it professes to help is disturbing.  When you're telling a story, it's not just about putting events in a certain order or creating some clever gag or sequence.  It's about voice and perspective and tone, and it seems unlikely you'll get that from something anyone can alter at whim.  Explore alternatives, but be smart about it.  There are always new ways in, new ways to get attention for a good project.  Put your faith in yourself and your idea, not some horseshit Amazon Studios Ponzi scheme that will just use you as oil in their machine.

And now, to lighten the mood a bit… shadow puppets for the digital age.

I love this piece about bullying, "Star Wars," and gender roles.  Heartbreaking in places, and really sweet overall.  And believe me… this is an important issue.




I am astonished by this.  I love "Fifth Element," total mess that it is, and one of the things I love most is the performance by the alien diva in the film.  I have no idea how Devin Faraci found this, but it's incredible.

And speaking of music and amazing things, how about a new Spike Jonze video?  It feels like it's been a while since I've said that, and for him to end up shooting "The Suburbs" for Arcade Fire?  Bliss.



 

On that note, I have to cut it short today.  I've got two press days, and have to leave my house by about 8:30 AM to make it to the first one.  I'll be back later today with a review of "Heartless," which is opening in limited release today.

The Morning Read appears here every Monday, Wednesday and Friday.  Except when it doesn't.

Get Instant Alerts - Motion Captured
By subscribing to this e-alert, you agree to HitFix Terms of Service, Privacy Policy and to occasionally receive promotional emails from HitFix.

Follow Drew McWeeny and Motion Captured on

RSS Facebook Twitter
 

 

 

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    just a tech guy I think people are making way too much out of the "community revisions" aspect... If so many writers don't like that option, what makes you think it'll be a popular one?

    Is it something you should think about before submitting your script? Sure, but is it a reason to completely dismiss the contest/studio aspect of it all? If you're a writer with ZERO access to the movie biz or if you have a script that's actually been sent around Hollywood and absolutely nothing has come from it, not even a general meeting -- what's the harm in submitting your script to Amazon?

    I'm not sure how someone could claim to be sympathetic to aspiring writers with zero access to the industry while at the same time pooh-poohing one of the biggest efforts in ages to give access to new talent that'd otherwise have no professional outlet. Strikes me as a little argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative, not to mention a little self-serving.

    November 19, 2010 at 12:14PM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew Talent will always find an outlet. It's not easy, but as I said, there are no short-cuts. They're counting on people like you to buy into this, and they're counting on your exact reaction.

      November 20, 2010 at 12:21AM EST
  • RE: The Amazon thing. I, for one, will be submitting short scripts that are the most bugfuck thing I can muster, just to screw with anyone who takes this preposterous and ugly "announcement" seriously.. I'm talking 4chan bugfuck. In fact, maybe we should take this to 4chan and see if those crazy bastards will crowdsource an Amazon script just to

    November 19, 2010 at 12:47PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Now that is a morning read, instead of a link-fest. Refreshing. Really, much better than usual. Now, if we can just keep that link count to under 10 every time....

    November 19, 2010 at 2:05PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      mmcb105 Aren't the links the whole point of the morning read? I like seeing the things that caught Drew's eye on that particular day. Otherwise it just becomes like a run of the mill op-ed piece or something. While not necessarily bad, I don't believe thats his intent.

      November 19, 2010 at 3:51PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Mark I too was foolish enough to "Follow Amazon Studios little Yellow Brick road."Forget about the "Fine print,cryptic rules, and LEGAL Nonsense. This had become "Almost an experiment." Go for the glory. If it hadn't been for a Password problem, (and three weeks of nonsense correspondents .. (NO answer from Amazon studios Tech support) four emails, and three direct phone calls.
      Bottom line- Worthless support, and no resolution. I was so pissed off, I requested they close my account. I finally received A "Dear John" style response ... basically blowing me off, and explaing they were too big a company, and they were under staffed... So, they really couldn't help me.. Sorry!
      ... Oh, hope to see you at the Studio. Insulted, wouldn't even begin to express my outrage.
      Has anyone, had a similar experience?

      May 2, 2011 at 8:42PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    kjhalvy Respectfully to JUST A TECH GUY: The harm is, they own your work, and you have no recourse in reclaiming it. And let's say you do get a general meeting: now you get to cancel it because your work has been optioned by Amazon(for a year and a half or more).

    Furthermore, this isn't "one of the biggest efforts in ages to give access to new talent," this is an effort to idea-farm a community of people who have become disillusioned with the industry after disappointment or rejection. But this is simply taking a semi-broken hollywood system and breaking it more.

    The Amazon Studios game plan is wholly the opposite of putting the power in the hands of the writer/filmmaker. You have no one to protect your interest. The "community revisions" is not something a submitter has a choice of. If I submit a screenplay, it's not like a get a checkbox that says, "do you want to restrict edits to this screenplay?" There are no choices here... other than NOT participating.

    Remember writers/filmmakers: Simply because your script isn't being turned into a movie at the moment doesn't mean it doesn't have value. Everyday that goes by another breakthrough in technology or business ideology comes about that truly DOES give rise to real opportunities. Amazon Studios more than likely realizes this and wants to capitalize on your great ideas before you make the next Paranormal Activity.

    November 19, 2010 at 3:03PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Brian Regarding the Amazon thing, it's going to be built on the desperation of fan-fiction writing amateurs, and if they ever do end up producing anything from this mountain of slop, it's going to make Project Greenlight look like a gold standard in comparison. Anyone with half a brain on their shoulders will tucker down and find a way to self-produce versus buying a screenwriter's lottery ticket where the only possible outcome is the eventual discovery that there is no Santa Claus.

    November 19, 2010 at 4:06PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    jesseharris Yeah Amazon Studios is a bad idea as it is now. It could have been a great thing. Here's my take that: http://nffty.org/explore/your-say/amazon-the-movie-studio-yeah-right

    November 19, 2010 at 7:32PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Rocky_talkback_profile

    TimB These Morning Reads are becoming the highlight of my day whenever they pop up. Perhaps thats a sad indictment of my life, but hey! Keep up the good stuff, Moriarty my man.

    November 19, 2010 at 7:53PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    GuanoLad A slim chance is better than no chance. And if you submit a decent script that isn't your real baby, it's no big deal to have it optioned for 18 months, just to see what happens. It may be nothing, but if it's something it could be a great first step.

    November 19, 2010 at 7:57PM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew No... it really couldn't. But they're certainly counting on that false hope.

      November 20, 2010 at 6:40PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Zero Degrees Just a Tech Guy: I'm curious how you don't have ANY industry connections? If you're a writer, you should know other writers. If you're a film writer, you should know other film writers and filmmakers, right? If you have a top notch script ready to go, at least ONE of your friends/associates will know a for-real producer they can pass it along to without fear of disgracing themselves. If you genuinely have ZERO industry access, then you're doing something wrong. This Amazon thing is for dreamers. If you're a dreamer, then you deserve to get screwed over. Dreamers are a worse scourge on the industry than ruthless opportunists because they think everything happens by fate or magic, not craft and hard work.

    November 21, 2010 at 8:50AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Jan Eagle Thanks for the warning & insight! Artists need to be given more respect & the legalese nowadays on websites/contests are getting out of control... Stomp 'em to the ground!!

    November 22, 2010 at 4:25PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Bob Another BIG PROBLEM @ Amazon Studios --> Their popularity ranking system is totally bogus. Anyone can learn how to game the system and create a top rated script. Scripts like Villain, Electric Sunset, Eyes of Darkness and Undesirables are perfect examples of poorly written screenplays that appear to have been gamed using the Amazon Studios ranking system. This is a poorly flawed system for representing the top ten scripts.

    January 11, 2011 at 12:07PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    James Anderson Drew, is this really any worse than the way Hollywood typically does business? In fact, there are a lot of advantages to this business model, for Amazon Studios and the content providers as well.

    They're already improved the process for collaboration. Content providers can select one of three options for their projects--open to collaboration, closed to collaboration, or collaboration by permission.

    The biggest disadvantage remaining is the automatic option: they shouldn't be able to snag the option on the material until money changes hands--that is, either the content provider wins money in a competition, or the project gets bought by a producer.

    The world is changing. I think we need to change with it.

    February 16, 2011 at 8:34AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Sean Martin The Amazon thing... okay, whatever. But what I find a tad ironic is how everyone's talking about protected rights, and here we have a video of someone covering a song from Fifth Element and then offering it for sale at iTunes. Did I miss the permissions credit for that somewhere?

    June 29, 2011 at 1:12PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Angelos Fernandes But somehow, Amazon Studios allowed the deletion of the script per request. What do you think of Amazon Studios' current Dev. Notes?

    October 10, 2011 at 8:35AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Bruce Arrington "Beyond that, once your script is uploaded to Amazon, anyone can revise it. Try to wrap your head around that. Anyone can revise your screenplay. They can do anything they want to it. And if that revision ends up being what gets made, that person becomes part of that set price I mentioned earlier. It's a mind-boggling proposition, and runs completely counter-intuitive to the idea of giving writers a platform for their work...."

    This is just one of the errors posted by this writer. Look at the site again: the author has the choice to keep the script closed (no one does anything to it), with permission (by the author) or open; and they retain the original script submitted.

    I don't see anything wrong with a flat fee of $200,000. Plus I see nothing wrong with an additional incentive of $400,000 if the movie makes more than $60 mil at the box office.

    These facts alone make me question the author's own research.

    February 2, 2012 at 12:56AM EST Reply to Comment
Drew McWeeny

About This Blog

Los Angeles has changed since 1990, and Drew McWeeny, all-around Chauncey Gardner of movie fandom, has seen it all as an industry insider and screenwriter who wrote for 12 years as "Moriarty" for Ain't It Cool News.

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook