
I’m back from a five day stint at the Southampton Screenwriters Conference, which was held at Stony Brook University, Southampton, Long Island.
What a wonderful experience! Back in May when I was accepted to the conference I had some very specific goals in mind. I was going to workshop my feature script Through the Broken Glass. By the time of the conference, I had finished my fifth draft and was ready to run it through the ringer.
Surprising to me, was just how many things I learned during the conference both internal and external of my script.
The Workshop
Each morning began with the core workshop. I attended “Mastering Scene Writing” with actor/writer/director Peter Riegert in a small class of about six people. In this intimate environment Riegert proved a sharp guy. He offered a wealth of anecdotal advice based on both his acting experience and his experience writing and directing his Oscar nominated short By Courier and his feature length film King of the Corner.

Merrel Davis (me!) and Peter Riegert
It was refreshing to hear a consummate actor such as Peter Riegert read lines from my script. A lesson emerged from reading, a lesson of cleverness and simplicity and their places. I had written something (in a much earlier draft) that tickled me pink, and I was proud of it. But as Riegert said, “wit runs only so far.” My clever scene with a visual trick with an overly complicated execution didn’t really add to the my story, in fact it detracted.
The rest of the workshop explored simplicity and profundity as a way to “rise to the occasion” in a scene. Many view scriptwriting as severely limiting – Riegert encouraged us to “exploit what is limited.” Part of filmmaking is to embrace the limitations (no internal dialogue, visual storytelling, et. al.)
The Classes
In the afternoon, there were electives available to all screenwriters and playwrights. I took an elective course “What Lies beneath” about psychology and screenwriting with screenwriter turned psychotherapist Renee Shafransky. [Note: Look for a full post about just this topic in the near future.]
She opened quite compellingly with the statement “Every good screenwriter is a psychologist.” She focused on the concept of “Why Now?” The idea of why are we seeing these characters in a certain state at this moment, what pushed them there? Shafranksy stated: “This will give the urgency to your story. What’s so urgent today that wasn’t urgent yesterday?”
“Writing for the Camera” with Robert Emmett Ginna focused on how the visual narrative can show so much, without a word of dialogue. He spoke about his time on the set of Lawrence of Arabia and regaled us with tales of old-Hollywood. We watched Kurosawa and talked about how important visual is to the story telling component. A real old-school Hollywood filmmaker.
“Based on a true story” with Carla Singer, whom had done many made-for-tv-movies for lifetime and others, was an interesting exploration of life rights, life story rights, and legal problems associated with basing a script on real events.
Lastly, I attended “Editing and Rewriting” with Carol Dysinger. We spent much of the class deconstructing the script and film version of Barton Fink. Dysinger was on point with no-bullshit advice advice about screenwriting. She convinced me to “kill the leather notebook” — I’d been hanging onto the vestiges of a sub-plot that existed in the first draft(s) that had proved problematic. It involved the protagonist receiving a leather note book as a child. I spent so much time trying to make this component work, when really it just didn’t belong.
Dysinger left two things seared into my mind: “Manifest the movie in the mind’s eye of the reader” and “Dialogue should be Haiku.” I couldn’t agree more.
The Speakers
Novelist/playwright/screenwriter Peter Hedges, perhaps best known for penning the novel and screenplay of What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, spoke at length about his creation process. I asked Hedges to share the differences he saw in adapting his own work or others. He said that early on he was afraid to betray the voice of the novel, even his own. Hedges later realized it was the story which mattered and began to focus on developing story for screen without rigidly focusing on the novel counterpart.
Screenwriter and AMPAS Nicholl Fellow Will Chandler posted some great notes on Peter Hedge’s Q&A over at the ScriptMag blog.
The following night, Alec Baldwin and Jon Robin Baitz took the stage to discuss writing for film and television. Baitz spoke of how he entered television writing as a way to financially offset his love of playwriting. He cautioned playwrights against going into television writing for the money, as too many never come back into the theatre fray. Baitz said “be responsible for what you write” – he stressed culpability for the work you produce.
Alec Baldwin spoke similarly of the responsibility of an actor. He once turned down a $750,000 gig to read a ‘part of a cop killer’ for the Grand Theft Auto games. Baldwin also said “the time of the writer/director has arrived” – if not for any other reason than, budgets are shrinking and why pay for 2 people when you can pay for one?
The Atmosphere
The lovely setting of Southampton, with its beautiful sprawling land and the beach so close, proved the perfect setting to clear my head. The Stony Brook University campus was accessible and inviting, and the organizers took every step to accommodate conference goers.
Unbeknownst to me until arrival, a playwriting conference was also taking place, and as a result I spent my time mingling between actors, playwrights, and screenwriters (and a couple of poets and novelists for good measure.) There was a sense of camaraderie between the “students” and the “teachers.” But really were all students and all teachers.
As there was a concurrent playwriting conference, I had the oft not indulged luxury of going to see some theatre. I attended a reading of “The First Day of School” by Billy Aronson, directed by Robert Davenport. It was a great experience, and made me wish to go to the theatre more often.
Also, be sure to check out Laura Thompson’s recap of the event. She attended Christina Lazaridi’s workshop on “Understanding Film Structure.”
Was it worth it?
Walking away, I feel invigorated. I’ve met new friends, made new professional contacts, and damnit I enjoyed myself! Something interesting emerged from the conference that I wasn’t expecting; I connected. Not just with my own work, but with fellow creatives. I have new goals to compliment my already riotous and fast paced journey.
4 Comments
It’s great to see that you got something worthwhile out of the conference. I always find that being around like-minded people motivates me much more.
What are your thoughts on the writer/director combo deal? I always imagined that would be my end-game – complete control over my story, but many have argued against a single person’s ability to do both.
Well, if you want control, I suppose you could become a producer. Those with the money ultimately control such things in many instances.
Over the conference I remember hearing the comment: “If you want total control of your work write a novel.” (Even then you have an editor)
Filmmaking is a collaborative process every step of the way. It’s amazing that sometimes anything gets done!
Your work will change from the page to screen, no question. Even if it is your script and you are directing, there will be instances during production where something just doesn’t work and it needs to be scrapped on the fly.
Since budgets are shrinking, in many ways you become more valuable to a team by being able to wear two hats. You won’t get 2 pay-checks but you may be able to stay, where just a writer may depart (especially in television.)
Good point re: producers/team environment etc. I guess I meant more in terms of trying to get across the initial point of my story, there is the fear that once a director has it in his/her hands, then it has potential to become the opposite of the writer’s intention. But then I guess if you have a strong script, you should be able to entrust it to someone else and have it come out close to the way you planned.
You should always be comfortable in allowing your work to be in the hands of others.
I recently read a post by Ashely Myers over at Sellingyourscreenplay.com that addresses this:
http://www.sellingyourscreenplay.com/screenwriting-faq/how-to-decide-if-you-should-option-your-screenplay-to-a-producer/
“2. What changes do they want to make to the script and how do they intend to address those changes?
This is a huge part of the equation. Producers and directors will always want some changes made to your script. Get used to it. If you don’t want your script re-written you need to become a producer, too, and producer your own material. Most producers will want you to make changes for free. This is a big issue with me, not because I think my scripts are perfect and shouldn’t be changed, but because my time is so precious.”
4 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
[...] This post was Twitted by ttimechitchat [...]
[...] http://www.merreldavis.com/blog/2009/08/04/southampton-screenwriters-conference-a-look-back/ [...]
[...] of the great things about the Southampton Screenwriting Conference was the relatively small and intimate environment. The social events allowed for some informal [...]
[...] final draft of the script, or as Oscar nominated Director/Actor Peter Riegert said last year at the Southampton Screenwriting Conference: “Your script isn’t finished until opening [...]
Post a Comment