Inside the Brain of E.C. Henry

A Writer's Work is Never Done

JUST finished the latest draft of my latest teen comedy spec. script.

Scoreboard:

Current draft's page count: 112 pages

Separate file with "cuts": 200 pages

Previous draft of the script: 227 pages

Okay, so you just did the math, and shit didn't add up.  112 + 200 = 312 -- not 227!  But what this equation does not figure in, is the fact that along the way of the current draft I did considerable rewriting, and adding in of new details. 

A writer NEVER goes from draft-to-draft without incorporating new stuff into the mix.  Even on final polishes, I add stuff.  It's just the way writing is done.  And the most changes come from 1st draft to 2nd draft.

So what comes next?  Well, I hafta start gearing up for my one week vacation to Southern California next week.  So, I'm going to stop writing on the the latest spec and tend to some necessary details as pertains to the Sherwood Oaks trip.  Namely: updating my one-sheets, and getting a CD soundtrack for my latest spec.  I also want to buy a new Seahawks hat, leather gloves and tennis shoes.  Am also going to register the latest spec with the WGAw and copyright office, as this is the prudent thing to do, BEFORE discussing the story's merits with perspective buyers and people who might me interest in actually doing this movie. 

When I get back from Sherwood Oaks post-registration work with recommence on the script with the goal being getting this script ready to for the February 22 deadline for the Pacific Northwest Writer's competition in the screenwriting sub-category.  YES, the script will have already been registered, but that doesn't mean I can work it and make it even better. 

A writer's work is never done.  And right now it feels like I'm slogging my way to the finish line.  As up here in (the state of ) Washington it's been in the 20's to low 40s for the past three weeks.  And now to make matters worse it's starting to rain too.  Big shock, eh?  Rain in Washington, who knew!  Joke: this state is known to be the gloom capital of the U.S. September through March at it can literally rain for 7 months straight.  So my trip to sunny California couldn't come at better time, eh?  California BETTER be sunny right now.  God knows I need to see the sun again. 

Anywho, I'm kinda sick right now.  On the threshold of the flu.  Headaches, upset stomach, bogger-filled nose, on-and-off again bouts of the chills.  Lotta "not good" happening inside my body right now.  Still, I soldier on, the Sherwood Oaks 4-day event is upcoming and I've got to suck it up.  Put myself in the best possible place for success.

Does that mean I plan on coming back from L.A. with an offer to buy in my back pocket?  I'm not THAT naive.  I used to be that naive, but not anymore.  Had my heart broken by disappoint so many times that I expect now is failure.  So, I just wanna go down to sunny California, have some fun with Gary Shusett and crew, and just chill.  Time to have some fun, make a fool out of myself, which comes quite easy for me as you probably already know.  

I feel I'm ready to break in and make a script sale, but it takes two to tango. 

So I soldier on...  I hope all is going well in your world, and as always welcome your comments should so you care to make them.

P.S. I started writing this post a couple days ago, and now as I wrap this post up I've got some exciting developments to share.  Namely, I've submitted my latest spec. script to the WGAw, AND filed it with the U.S. copyright office.  Still don't have the script EXACTLY where I want it, but it's close enough.  I don't see any major, plot logic changes being made. 

So what's the script about?

Well-p, I have updated my script logline page.  And you're welcome to check it out.  Mabye I'll talk about that more AFTER I get back from L.A. next Saturday.  But for now, here's a visual I cooked up from my latest spec. script which is entitled, "Bubblehead Saves the Day":

Making the Necessary Cuts

Didn't think I'd get around to making a blog post this weekend, BUT here I am, doing this mostly out of obligation.  You see I feel a burning desire to keep posting on this blog, ideally twice a week.  That remains the goal.  One major, content post over the weekend.  One smaller post sometime throughout the week.

Unfortunately, right now I'm also pushing myself to complete a script I've been laboring on for some time now.  For the past week I've been logging some serious time at the keyboard trying to edit down the page count of this script. 

Scoreboard:

Earlier draft started at: 227 pages.

Currently I'm down to: 124 pages.

Pages cut from the script: 178

Pages left to cut: At least 4.

Outcome: Currently E.C. Henry is winning, but it's the 4th quarter and there's still time to go. 

Why the push?  Well, I'm going to L.A. next Monday for a 4-day Sherwood Oaks event, and I'd like to have the script done by then.  Don't know if I'll get there.  As even after I finish getting the page count down to an industry preferred number (= or < 120 pages) I still hafta make sure the logic of the story is sound. 

One of the key considerations that any writer needs to be cognisantly aware off is maintaining one's plot logic when editing the content of the story they're working on.

Heck, their's a lot of stuff in the back of my mind right now.  Namely:

1. Can a reader who is unfamiliar with my story follow it without getting tripped up by gaffs in plot logic?
2. Have I cut to much?  Have I cut out stuff that is funny and should remain? 
3. Is this truly the story I want to tell?  Are my beats right? 
4. Are my shot heading's consistent?  As when you write it's very easy to change your description of the very same place in different way is different places in your script
5. Can I add back some of the cool stuff I like from previous cuts?
6. Have I given my leads enough screen time?  Do I have a compelling protagonist that a reader can identify with and root for?
7. Have I maximised each scene that I have chosen to keep?  Have I applied the William Goldman axiom of getting out early and getting out late too much?
8. Do I have the base groundwork completely laid out, and am now ready for merely "polish" drafts?

As one can clearly see, their is a lot of clutter in a writer's mind when the do 1st draft to 2nd draft editing.  And one can always say a scripts never done.  One can always say that there's room for improvement in any draft.  But I'm also of a mind that is a time and place where a writer has taken his or her given story and done as much to it as they can, and it's time to put that story away.

I am a long way away from having this story done.  But with ever cut, and every edit I'm getting THAT much closer to having a draft that I feel good enough about to show other people.

Right now, I'm totally geeked about this teen comedy I'm writing.  It's different enough from other things I've written that I can honestly say I think this is an original story and not deviate rip-off of other things that E.C. Henry has penned in the past.  YET it is also feels somewhat familiar.  I'm not too far removed from territory that I've charted before.

So I feel good.  All-in-all I'm quite pleased with the trajectory this story is on.  No, it is not there yet.  But it's not so far off that I can't see the forest through the trees.

Just need a little more time.  A little more time behind the keyboard to finish this puppy off.  Then I can hang my hat on the FACT that I've written 18 spec. scripts, 17 of which are available for immediate sell (one my re-envisioning of "The Planet of the Apes" will ALWAYS be contingent on 20th Century Fox approval to continue, as I still have that cease and desist e-mail from a VP, who put it to me in nice terms that I didn't have their approval to write derivative material off property under their control).

I'm not a big numbers guy.  But finishing all these script does fill my heart with pride.  E.C. Henry is a closer.  He finishes what he starts.  And soon he'll have number 18 finished too -- and I can't wait to show the world what I've been working on!

Got lots of stuff going on this upcoming week.  The day job: 8-12 hours a day, will TRY not to have to do O.T. this upcoming Saturday, we'll see...  Going to update my one-sheets, and try to create two new ones.  Going to try to draw cover art for the CD soundtrack of my latest spec. 

Got a new promo shirt in from my shirt making place on the East coast.  Quality was kinda lacking, and I told 'em about, and they said they print out replacement shirts and have them to me by Friday.  We'll see...

Sooooo...  Till we meet again.  Stay well -- and stay outta trouble!

Sorrell Booke's Boss Hogg; Celebrating Characters in Cinema: Volume III

How many people make you laugh JUST by showing up on screen.  For me Sorrell Booke's "Boss Hogg" from "The Dukes of Hazzard" (TV series: 1979-1985) was such a person. 

Now his character wasn't overly complex.  If memory serves me right Boss Hogg's modus operandi was some get rich scheme -- and of course to, "Get those Duke boys!"  A task he would often place in the change of the sherrif, Rosco P. Coltrane.

What made the "Dukes of Hazzard" watchable was the humorus exchanges between Boss Hogg, and his inept enforcers of the law.  I NEVER bought into the central characters that you're SUPPOSED to be rooting for: Bo and Luke Duke; played by Tom Wopat and John Schnieder.  And I never thought much of Daisy Duke (Catherine Bach) and her short shorts and her presumed "sex appeal" either.  Uncle Jesse (played by Denver Pyle) didn't do much for me either.   And just so you know I thought the "Duke of Hazzard" movie (2005), which stared Seann William Scott, Johnny Knoxville, Jessica Simpson, and Willie Nelson, was pretty much a misfire -- through surprisingly the "good guys": Bo and Luke Duke worked much more than the pitiful attempt at "re-envisioning" the villains in this forgettable film.

So what was it about Sorrell Booke's "Boss Hogg" that worked?  A short, fat, bald guy in a Cournell Sander's, all white suit, for starters.  Couple that with the actor's confidence to be a serious fool.  Serious in the fact that he took his weekly shenanigans seriously.  Fool in the fact that Sorrell Brooke had a knack for delivering in clownish fashion on time when the situation called for it.  Sorrell Booke was a master at delivering key facial expressions: happy at devising a plan that would make him rich or bust the Duke boy, sad when his plan failed, or angry when his law department let him down.  

Is it okay to laugh at a short, fat, bald guy?  Depends on the context in which you're laughing, I guess.  What made it okay to laugh at Sorrell Booke's "Boss Hogg" was the fact that he was comfortable with who he was.  Say Sorrell Booke was uncomfortable with his weight and looks.  Is it okay then?  Probably not.  In that context it's cruel.  

But was it cruel to laugh at Boss Hogg's folly?  No.  It was a central attraction to the "Dukes of Hazzard" series.  And Sorrell Booke ran with his "Boss Hogg" character and made it one of the most memorable sit-com characters of all-time, in my humble opinion. 

Off IMBD, Sorrell Booke's page I learned:

1. Sorrell Booke's father was a physician
2. Sorrell Booke's family's encouragement to entertain relatives by doing impressions and telling jokes helped him find his calling as an actor.
3. Sorrell Booke studied at Yale and Columbia University.
4. Sorrell Booke mastered 5 different languages, which he used in a counter-intelligence role during the Korean war.

Sorrell Booke was born in Buffalo New York in in 1930, the son of a local physician. He found his calling early in life, like most actors, when his family encouraged him to entertain relatives by doing impressions and telling jokes. He went on to study at Yale and Columbia University, and mastered five languages. During the Korean War, Booke worked in counter-intelligence where his lingual talents served him well.

Sorrell Booke.  Born January 11, 1930 in Buffalo, New York.  Died Febuary11, 1994.  And in the internhe carved out one of the most memorable characters in the history of 1-hour, TV sit-coms: Boss Hogg.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

P.S. Going on vacation later this month.  Got a week of the job, and I'm flying down to L.A. to attend another Sherwood Oaks function.  I'm psyched about it.  Will get to meet Quentin Tarantino.  Huge fan of"The Q."  The plot techniques he implored in his breakthrough film, "Reservoir Dogs" (1992), greatly influenced the 6th script I wrote, entitled, "The Judas Project" which I wrote in 2006/2007.   

P.S.S. As a result of that I don't know how regularly I'll be posting between now and February 2nd, the day I'm slated to return from this trip.  Need to work on my one-sheets, and finish my latest teen spec.   The goal is to have this script done before I go down to L.A.  Currently my page count is at 168.  Down from 227.  It's shaping up.  I'm working hard at it.   Don't know if I'll achieve my goal of completing this script before I go down to L.A., but I'm going to give it my best.  And that's all you really can do.

So till we talk again... Stay well.  I love you, my loyal readers!  And don't be afraid to post comments.  I'd love to hear from ya!

Subtext and the 4-year-old; Exploring Issues in Rom-com Movies: Volume XV

 

Ah the ability to say what's on one's mind clearly.   Ah the ability to express one self without filters.

The who behind what I'm talking about us my 4-year-old nephew, Brycen Ray.   The guy who can call you his "best buddy" or say "I love you" at the drop of a hat, with or without reason.  These are the things that melt your heart.  Rarely said amongst adults, yet readily said by an aforementioned, 4-year-old: Brycen.  

Why is that?  And what exactly does that have to do with romantic comedy movies?

The what I'm talking about is subtext. 

Subtext: a message which is not stated directly but can be inferred.

You see my 4-year-old nephew Brycen knows NOTHING of subtext, and I think he's all the better for it.  If Brycen loves, he says so.  He's told me a few times that he loves me.  Usually after I've done something with him for a while.  And Brycen has told me I was his "best buddy ever" on a couple occasions too.  High praise indeed.  The boy may only be 4 years old, but he already knows what to say that can warm your heart.

Why do we, as adults, stop being so loving and nice to other people, and start foraying around with such devious devices as subtext?  I would offer to you that we really don't change too much from when we were kids -- like Brycen, but what we do  veil the true intent of our feelings in subtext.  Now as adults we're supposed to pick up on the clues that "you're my best buddy ever" and "I love you." 

Some might say that in a romantic comedy movie you're supposed to have your dialog latent with subtext: say it without saying it.  Like the ending scene in "Four Weddings and a Funeral" (1994) where Hugh Grant professes his love for Andie MacDowell's character through a rather long-winded, rambling confession. 

But I ask you, is that love?

Yeah, it is.  But it's also rather painful.  I mean at least the guy told the girl that he was interested in her, but he did so in a roundabout way.

I'm NOT a big proponent of subtext -- even in adult romantic comedies.  Why?  Because I think at their heart romantic comedies exist to reaffirm the power of love and to sooth an audience members desire to experience that for themselves.   Saying, "I love you," shouldn't require finding the pearl in a proverbial oyster shell.  

I found that as you get older you get away from being emotional raw and honest.   I guess this is a reaction to peer pressure and pain; you vail your true feelings because you fear a mean-spirited response.  

So perhaps there's a deeper meaning to this post.  In life we need to be looking for the pearl amidst all the rigmarole that people force upon us.  The inner pearl of love.  The inner pearl of a deeper, heartfelt meaning on the outside crust of a life's hardened shell.  Ut-oh, deep-end of the pond thinking again.  Are you up to its challenge?

But romantic comedies are supposed to be a safe place where place where people can go to see the ideal worked out.  Romantic comedies are supposed to be a place where love can be found and fully realized.   Romantic comedies are supposed to heal what it missing in our own lives.  But how is that supposed to happen when everything is veiled and people are supposed to follow the verbal and non-verbal clues that the path of intention leads too?

I find subtext frustrating!  What if I don't get your clues?  I lose out?!  Fuck that!! 

I guess you could say that subtext is a mirror to what we experience in life.  I've grown accustomed to using it.  But generally I use it as balm to soften the blow of painful news.  

An E.C. Henry foundational belief of romantic comedies:

Celebating women in games of courtship.

I am a firm believer that it is good for a prospect couple to openly admit their feelings for each other through, "I love you."  Now in real life, that doesn't happen so much.  But we're not talking about real life, when you're in a romantic comedy movie.  Rather, you're dealing in the realm of wish fulfilment, in genre more tailored for meeting women's needs then men.  And what women doesn't want to hear that she's loved.

So in conclusion let me just say if you're the type of person who enjoys "finding the pearl in middle of the oyster" amidst it's hardened shell and gooey, messy inside, more power to ya!  I'm just more of a guy's guy in this regard.  If you love me, let me know -- directly without the puzzling rigmarole!

Brycen continues to train me up in the way I should live -- except in matters of potty training, which unfortunately is still a work-in-progress with him.  Still, Brycen has no problem saying, "I love you," or "You're my best buddy ever" and I think there's a lesson in that.  Direct speak can really warm your heart, and I prefer that over dissecting some jigsaw puzzle, rambling message with a hidden undertone. 

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

P.S. Going on vacation at the end of the month.  Going back down to southern California for another Sherwood Oaks, meet-and-greet with actors' production companies and Hollywood movie directors.  Will this FINALLY help me land a sale?  Don't know, but I'm going to go down there and try to have some fun.

P.S.S. Got the currently draft of my latest spec down to 187 pages from 227 when I started.  Don't know if I'll have it done by the end of the month, which is my new goal, but I'm trying.  I'm also having a lot of fun with it.  Having a 1st draft underneath you is such a relief.

Dances with Wolves; Movies that Move Me: Volume II

To be 100% honest I was actually moved knowing I was going to watch "Dances With Wolves" (1990) even BEFORE I even put the DVD in the player. 

Why?

Well, because I'd written a movie (I don't say script because in my mind I don't see a script I see a movie that's already been filmed) entitled, "Indians of the Ancient Plains." See the "spec. script" listing page off to the side.  Wanna see some of my heartache on full display.  See it right here, as in "Indians of the Ancient Plains" vs. "Dances with Wolves": how one movie can NOT get made, while another flawed movie (as I will later explain) gets made, wins the Academy Award for Best Picture, and lives forever as a classic, honoring an entire actually living body of people: the Sioux Indian tribe. 

A further glimpse into E.C.'s heartache: I actually have a scene in "Indians of the Ancient Plains" where a group of Indians hunt buffalo. 

Now, after I got over my heartache, I TRIED to get into "Dances With Wolves" but found this movie way too slow, and too heavy handed in it's simple dimple as pimple theme: white man bad, red man good.  Huge fan of red man.  Red Man chewing tobacco that is, in fact I think I'll have a chaw right now!  

Now, I did like the way the "Dances with Wolves"/"Stands with a Fist" (Kevin Costner/Mary McDonnell) love-story played out.  THAT worked.  So did the individual, Sioux braves themselves.  But the lead character?  After the opening scene in the movie he totally sucked!  Sorry, Charlie, bad protagonist.  No, I did not identify with him, and if he would died early I think it might have been for the best.

THAT one is for the ladies out in the studio audience.  Ladies who may have a crush on Kevin Costner.  And YES this scene is in the movies ladies.  Kevin Costner buck-ass naked.  Guess you'll just have to watch the movie for yourself to see how much of a foremention, Mr. Costner you get to see.

And as for Kevin Costner.  LOVED him in "Waterworld" (1995)".  And overall I think he's a fine actor.  It's just his character of Leutenent Dunbar didn't resonate with me past the opening scene. 

Back on point. 

Now I realize that in pioneering days our forefathers were underhanded with the Indians.  AND I realize in this movie, "Dances with Wolves" we are SUPPOSED to empathize with the Souix Indians -- and I do.  But to have so many of the Americans in this movie are dumb, unlikable hick types.  And that was just too much for me.  White man bad, Red man good.  Come on, dude.  Tell your story in a less-heavy handed way, please.  And too end the movie the way they did: Kevin Costner and Marry McDonnell running away from the Sioux village in vain hope of sparing lives in the Sioux tribe, then to have a superimposed text paragraph telling us that in 13 years the Sioux way of life would be destroyed.  Come on, dude, what a downer.  NOT into that all.  

Movies do not have to marry or be conformed to history.  Look at "The Patriot" (Mel Giboson, 2000)"The Patriot".  Lots of liberties taken there.  You get a feel of the way of life back then...  But it doesn't end on a total downer.  

Don't get me wrong, there was a lot to like about "Dances with Wolves": the Indians in it are great.  They are portrayed in a fashion that honors the Sioux and their way of life.  I totally get why this movie won the Oscar for best film for 1990; it is deserved, this is a fine, fine film.  I was deeply moved late in ACT III when one of the Indians named Wind in His Hair, who had befriended  Kevin Costner's character, went up on a cliff and yelled down to everyone in the village that, "Dances with Wolves is my friend."  And that, "He will always be my friend."  

I'm not a guy with no heart.  You can pull my heart strings.  But that heavy-handed theme -- for my money -- torpedoes a lot of the good-will that this movie has going for it.  

Point: don't make your theme too heavy handed.  Do that and you risk alienating your audience and turning them against your film.   

Lessons to learn and movie-making axioms to live by:

1. People aren't stupid, treat your audience with respect.  If you write and make your movie the right way you need to trust that they will pick up the underlying intent that you're trying to make, whether they agree with it or not. 
2. Allow people to enjoy your movie on their own terms.  Treat them with respect, and don't beat them over the head with heavy-handed themes that you demand they adhere too.  A "good movie" will place well in several different categories.  Don't ruin your chance of them liking it by making your theme too heavy-handed.  

THAT being said, I do realize that "Indians of the Ancient Plains" has a VERY DEEP theme to it.  One which may affect some people the wrong way.  But hopefully I've written the story good enough that whoever reads this script will enjoy the other things I've purposely grafted into it to soft-sell the deeper theme, for those of different temperment. 

Should I ever sell "Indians of the Ancient Plains" one area I will never concent to is changing the ending of this movie.  Rest of the movie, sure; I'm open to suggestions.  But tamper with the ending I've penned, and I can garantee you right now, I'll be whistling a differnent tune.  You see, in my humble opinion the ending of "Indians of the Ancient Plains" is the best ending of a movie, ever, period.  I can't believe I penned it.  And I am absolutely resolved that this ending stays, and will never be willing to change it, no matter how much money is offered me.  Yeah, I think this ending is that good, and I would hate myself later if I ever caved in and changed what in my heart-of-hearts is a classic, memorable, once-in-a-career ending.  I know this may not make sense to you now, BUT if you were ever to read to story, I think it would make sense why I just lobbied the way I did. 

Not what you were expecting from a "movies that move me" post, eh?  Well-p, just label me the proverbial "zag" to societies proverbial "zig."  Not sure if that makes any sense or not.  I'll let you be the judge of that.

- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA

P.S. Did a lot of editing this holiday season.  Got a lot done.  AND, more importantly, I'm feeling where the cuts and changes need to be.  Wshew, THAT'S a relief.  Still not there, but the latest E.C. spec. is inching closer to completion.