by Mark Rasmussen

Perhaps even more remarkably, I am making my way and achieving results.

And that’s great. I need that. I need to know I am on the right path as a writer and uprooting myself from a comfortable, safe life, to that of the unknown and following my heart, has been a good decision.

But it’s a path fraught with danger, rejection and loneliness.

It’s the last part that is the hardest to take. Especially for someone who despite enjoying and loving my own company, loves being social, meeting people, talking and conversing and simply mixing it up.

As humans we need this as it feeds our soul and enriches our lives.

LA’s a lonely city. Not many people walk around. As a writer, I couldn’t have chosen a more solitary pursuit but when mixed with a city that’s all but desolate of life out on the streets (except the freeways which are teeming with people), it’s a lonely city.

LA’s a lonely city. Not many people walk around.
As a writer, I couldn’t have chosen a more solitary pursuit

Thankfully for an outgoing guy like myself, I just get out there, do fun things and talk to everyone. It also helps that I have one or two really great friends who have taken me out and shown me sites and introduced me to people. Without them I would be lost.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart, especially to one in particular who is just so inspiring, unique and special. You know who you are but know I am deeply grateful.

I choose not to whine or complain about loneliness, it’s simply the nature of the beast here. On the flip-side, however, things have been going great. Better than expected (if I had any expectations).

I came with the 16th annual Hollywood Pitch Festival in mind. A weekend of pitch meetings with companies and agencies – 20th Century Fox, Warner Brothers, Disney, Henson, ICM, Paradigm – that you would never get the chance to meet let alone sit down in front of and discuss your ideas and scripts.

Despite having five ideas, I soon whittled it down to three but after discussing them with two considered friends in the industry, I decided to pursue my strongest. I’m glad I did as it paid dividends.

After much rehearsing my pitch at home, I was as ready as I was ever going to be. To say that my first ever professional pitching experience was a baptism of fire would be an understatement. But surprisingly I didn’t feel overwhelmed, nervous or afraid. I simply felt I had a very good idea and like almost all the other writers at the event, I belonged.

I went in pitching a family comedy. First company was Disney. Although initially I had wanted to get warmed up and into a routine, another writer merely pointed out that it was good to get them from the get go. They were fresh, hadn’t been swamped with tons of pitches and would be more than enthusiastic.

This is exactly how I approached it. Enthusiastically. Besides, what’s the worse that can happen? They can only say no. My life and my writing do not end on the back of one rejection.

I got such great feedback and input throughout the entire weekend (some even complimenting me on my pitching technique), and from a total of 35 companies that I sat and met with, 20 asked for my one-sheet/synopsis, while two on the day requested my script. With two more after the dust had settled, also asking for it.

That’s a win in any one’s language.

from a total of 35 companies that I sat and met with,
20 asked for my one-sheet/synopsis,
while two on the day requested my script.

Only thing is, I then needed to work my arse off to get a virtually nonexistent script up to scratch and completed. All inside a one-two week timeframe.

Again, no need to panic. I am a writer. I have been taught by a great mentor, guru and friend. I’ve been around other writers who have offered their thoughts and opinions and I had some help from a revered professional screenwriter and master, Blake Snyder (through his books). Sadly, Blake is no longer with us.

I structured it all out first, laid out my beats, had my spine, then created a board of 40 scenes and simply filled in the blanks.

It worked!

As yet, I do not know how well (or how badly) but my script is with four companies. That’s four more than I would have had before coming here and pitching.

My mentor had told me not to rest on my laurels, as “writing is rewriting,” he would say. It’s true. For now, I let it sit for a week as I play catch up with life.

You see, I still have to live. I need to buy food, a car, get a California drivers’ license and find another apartment once this current sublet is up. But all the time I am thinking and writing in my head.

Thinking as I shop at Ralph’s (the US’s major supermarket). Writing, as I test drive a car. Doing both as I set up a US cell phone number or traipse through yet another apartment or room.

All the time I am thinking and writing in my head.

It all helps. It gets me out of my cave and out into the real world. A world that as desolate and lonely as it might appear here in Los Angeles, is fun, enjoyable, exciting, new and real. It really is.

In the two months I have been here, I have had some great, fun conversations. From a guy who told me, “ Don’t forget to push the magic button,” as I waited at the lights, to my very frank conversation with my phone guy about how women in their 40s will want to take me out for dinner, and more.

It’s that contact with everyday people that makes me realise LA is not all that lonely a place to be. It’s like anywhere really.

What you put in, you get out.

In two months, I’ve been on two film sets, one even had the Hollywood sign in the background as we stood on a rooftop filming. That was both a very surreal moment and one of pure joy.

In two months, I have kayaked the LA river. Something only 200 people in all of LA County have ever had the lucky privilege of doing.

In two months, I have spoken with numerous writers, I have pitched to 35 companies, and banged out a script in a week.

In two months, I have smiled, laughed, rejoiced at how far I have come in such a short space of time.

Who knows what will happen in the next two months or the two months after that. One thing I can tell you for certain, this is an incredible journey and I am so grateful to have taken the leap of faith, follow my heart (and passion) and simply embrace life, LA and everyone and everything in it.

The city of Angels a lonely city? Not bloody likely.

-Mark Rasmussen

Mark Rasmussen has been a professional writer for over 15 years covering music, sport, travel, plays, web and more.
In 2011 Mark was involved in six film projects, three of which he wrote, produced or co-produced. One of his films ranked inside the Top 10 of a public vote.
Mark’s currently working on six feature scripts and two shorts and is now based in LA to chase down dreams.

Here’s my weekly selection from the blogosphere. Feel free to recommend anything or give your feedback in the Questions and Comments below.

And don’t forget you can subscribe to our posts so you don’t miss any of this, ever.

• Robert McKee goes Campbell: Culture makes no difference
• “CUT TO:” – Cut it out.
• Final Draft adds highlighting – Easier PDF.
• Emily confused about Happy Endings. WTF is wrong with them?
• You can’t proceed without a PLAN: the crucial plot element
• How to write good characters: observation and mimicry
• Know bad writing so there’s no bad writing
• Breakdown of Indie “The Dinner Party”, writing lessons applied
• The Climax: finding the hero on villain turf
• More hypocrisy in our industry: 10 noms for Ward’s ugly egg
• Do’s and Don’ts for your spec script
• Don’t turn the lights out on your story: writing scenes in blacknessCOMING SOON to the Story Department:

• Structural breakdown of THE UNTOUCHABLES (Monday night midnight)
• Paul Gulino: Screenwriting, the Deadline Approach.

Enjoy!

Karel

“We are a lying, hypocritical, duplicitous group”, says Tony Ginnane, giving the audience the results of his mature reflection on an industry he has inhabited longer than most.

It was a packed house at the Chauvel cinema in Paddington for Metro Cinema’s forum discussion on “Oz Films versus Oz Audiences”. Some fireworks were expected from the glittering panel of speakers, and Tony Ginnane, recently re-elected as President of SPAA, didn’t disappoint. His point was the bipolar nature of the film industry – was it art or was it commerce? When a film is a commercial success we praise it, when it wins prizes and bombs at the box office we still praise it. What is the benchmark for success?

OZ FILM VS. OZ FORUM presented by Metro Screen from Metro Screen on Vimeo.

Andrew Urban, from Urban Cinefile, introduced the session with a video of vox pops. It appeared that most Australians have clear views about Australian films (not all negative), but when later asked what was the last Australian film they had seen, few could remember. Those that did almost universally mentioned Australia though they weren’t entirely sure that it was Australian.

“Audiences should be more supportive of their own culture.”

Susan Hoerlein of Tsuki Marketing, spoke in Marketing Language about Australian films as a Brand. Clearly people recognised the brand, and if the brand had failed, then it would have to be changed and a new marketing campaign launched: not for a specific film, but for Brand Australia. But Troy Lum of Hopscotch, scotched the idea that people saw a film because of its country of origin: “Oh, we’re too late for the Swedish film, let’s see if there’s a Canadian one showing instead”.

However, both Margaret Pomeranz (At the Movies) and Rachel Ward (Beautiful Kate) felt that Australian audiences should be more supportive of their own culture. “Bloody lazy” said Pomeranz. “Could be more embracive” said Ward.

And so discussion moved to the content of Australian films: often seen recently as” dark”. Garry Maddox of the Sydney Morning Herald noted that most successful films were “hero films”: they didn’t necessarily end happily, but the main protagonist stood for something important.

“Telling our own stories should not be a driver for making Australian films”

This part of the discussion was brought to a focus with an invited contribution from the audience by Karen Perlman, who is Head of Screen Studies at AFTRS. Her iconoclastic proposal was that “telling our own stories should not be a driver for making Australian films”. This leads, she said, “to a dire state of naturalism in films”. Instead, the purpose should be to “contribute to our own myths”.

In a paper due to be published in AFTRS’s new journal Lumina later this year she will suggest that there are three aspects to good cinema: big scale (cinematics, staging, or emotion); dynamics (variation in tension, pace, scale, movement), and audience ownership: the film must not be the filmmaker’s story, but “our” (the audience’s) story.

Andrew Urban was quick to reflect that Australia had all three boxes ticked: scale, dynamics, ownership.

Later, Clare Stewart (Sydney Film Festival) would note from the audience that programming for the last Sydney Film Festival had also considered the purpose of films: she offered a few such purposes: “make me laugh”; give me a kiss”; “push me to the edge”.

“Big scale, dynamics and audience ownership.”

Representing the Australian Writers’ Guild, Louise Callan spoke in favour of the writer’s key role in the film, and wondered if too much money was spent on the apparatus of script development rather than directly funding writers. But Dr Ruth Harley (Screen Australia) was emphatic on the importance of building a craft-based culture, “otherwise we’ll just have to go on throwing money”.

Returning to the question of benchmarking success, Victoria Treole, also from the audience, said it was meaningless to compare Samson & Delilah with Australia. Many have looked at the overall profitability of each film, with Warwick Thornton’s film so far taking $3.5m at the box office, higher in proportion to its budget than Australia with ten times the box office takings in Australia alone. But she said Samson & Delilah was about giving a chance to a talented team of filmmakers, not about returning a profit.

Margaret Pomeranz wondered if Samson & Delilah” would be considered as much a success (on the strength of its Cannes Festival selection) if it had only taken $100,000 at the box office. Most of the panellists had difficulty in discussing success in terms other than box office success – and Tony Ginnane pointed out that most films all around the world lost money, before moving on to suggest that the industry needed to decide if it was a cultural or a commercial sector. “Why not both?” came from the audience.

Moving on to distribution and marketing, Andrew Urban asked if government tax subsidies (along the lines of the Producer Rebate) would be helpful to distributors. Troy Lum thought not, and Tony Ginnane (clearly from his perspective as a producer) agreed: distributors have no trouble making money, he said.

But Troy Lum was very clear on the trouble distributors had making money on Australian films, that were made or lost on their first day of release in the face of the publicity and distribution juggernauts of Hollywood films like Transformers 2. He conceded that Hopscotch was distributing Mao’s Last Dancer, currently worth $9.7m at the Australian box office. Susan Hoerlein later suggested that film promotion needed to start earlier – during the production – rather than a few days before the (usually too short) release.

Screen Hub asked whether the relative popularity of Australian films in the 1970s and 80s had any lessons for today’s industry: Tony Ginnane recalled a greater degree of cooperation between distributors and filmmakers, while Gary Maddox noted an entrepreneurial sense that showed through in Not Quite Hollywood.

A suitably subversive closing note (or call to arms) came from Jonathan Wald – leader of the campaign to save the Chauvel Cinema when it was threatened with closure a couple of years ago. He suggested that film industries rarely made money, and why should they? “We subsidise the army, we don’t expect it to make a profit: why can’t it be same for the film industry”.

Dominic Case

Dominic Case, until recently the Director of Communications for Atlab and an Australian Film Commissioner, has over 30 years experience in the film industry. He is the author of Film Technology in Post Production (Focal Press) and a Fellow of both SMPTE and BKSTS. In 2002 he was awarded SMPTE’s Presidential Proclamation for his dedication and outstanding reputation in the industry.

Reprinted with permission from ScreenHub.
Daily jobs and news for film and television professionals

Karel FG Segers

Karel Segers wrote his first produced screenplay at age 17. Today he is a story analyst with experience in acquisition, development and production. He has trained students worldwide, and worked with half a dozen Academy Award nominees. Karel speaks more European languages than he has fingers on his left hand, which he is still trying to find a use for in his hometown of Sydney, Australia. The languages, not the fingers.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel!