I am so happy to be able to share this interview with you today. Stacey Menear is the author of one of my favorite scripts of the last few months, “Mixtape,” a coming of age story about a young teenage girl who finds a mixtape that belonged to her deceased parents. When she accidentally destroys it, she uses the song list to go on a search for all the music. For those who read my review of Mixtape, you’ll remember Stacey’s script was on 2009’s Blacklist with 14 votes. But more importantly, it’s number 19 on MY LIST. This is probably my favorite interview so far because Stacey gives some great advice. Stacey is managed by Jim Wedaa and repped by Valarie Phillips and Ida Ziniti. I’ll shut up now so we can all learn something.

SS: First of all, how long have you been writing? How many scripts had you written before you wrote Mixtape?

SM: I visited my parents over the holidays and my mom reminded me that before I could actually write I would dictate stories to her about the further adventures of Indiana Jones. I don’t remember the particulars, but apparently in my version Indiana befriends a talking snake and the two of them travel the world together going on exciting archeological adventures. Sounds like a good reboot for Indian Jones, if you ask me. So I guess I’ve been making up stories as long as I remember and while I haven’t been writing screenplays all that long I’ve always written short stories and stuff like that. I’d written around 3 screenplays before Mixtape – with various starts and stops and other projects along the way.

SS: I’m sure I’m not the first one to erroneously assume that because your name was Stacey and because the script was about a 13 year old girl, that you were, in fact, female. Two questions. Do you think that assumption helped you (i.e. gave you more credit for understanding what a 13 year old girl would go through?) and what inspired a grown man to write a 13 year old female coming-of-age story?

SM: My name definitely throws people off. Though my mom denies it, my dad, who is a very manly logger living in Oregon, claims the name was a sort of “Boy Named Sue” attempt to make me grow up rough and tumble – an attempt that failed. But I’ve had more than one person tell me that my name is a benefit. I think its surprising when, instead of a 21 year old girl, this sort of nerdy looking guy with a receding hairline walks in – and if I surprise people hopefully they’ll remember me. Every little bit helps, right?

As for the inspiration…I think it came from a lot of different places. I grew up in the Northwest and I remember thinking that the Riot Grrrls were the COOLEST thing ever. I still do actually – in fact, I’m listening to Cadallaca as I write this. Unfortunately for me, I was decidedly uncool back then. I played sports, stayed at home doing homework and rarely, if ever, stuck it to the man. But I’ve always been interested in the movement/era and in girl bands in general. I also knew I wanted to do something about music – and a specific kind of music that you don’t necessarily hear on the radio. And, as you might guess, I’m a big fan of mixtapes. I still have a box full of mixtapes given to me over the years – many of them are broken, but I still have the cases and the amazing art work that someone obviously spent hours on. It was really fun over the course of Mixtape to go back and listen to some of them. They really are these frozen moments in time that capture events and emotions. One of my favorites is a break-up mixtape and on the cover is this really simple drawing of a broken heart and then the tape is just “Forever Young” playing over and over. As for why, specifically, a 13 year old girl? I just kept picturing the girl, Beverly Moody in my head; this chubby, awkward looking girl with big headphones on. I could hear her voice really clearly and it just went from there.

SS: I’ve recently received some e-mails about writers stuck in a rut, thinking their current screenplay sucks, and unable to muster up the enthusiasm to work on it. How long did it take you write Mixtape? Were there any tough times where you thought it wasn’t working? And how did you get through them?

SM: I usually work on two scripts at once – I’ll be doing the actual writing on one while doing the early outlining/brainstorming for the next one. The actual writing for Mixtape took around a month. It was really quick and easy by the time I sat down to write it. Most of my tough times on a script come in the outlining/earlier phases. My writing method includes feeling so anxious that a story won’t work that I stay up all night in bed unable to sleep and just go over the story again and again in my head. And then waking up the next day, still feeling anxious and doing a lot of pacing and mumbling and eating many bowls of cereal. How to get through the tough times is something I’m still working out. I think doing two scripts at once is one solution. It takes some of the pressure off. If you’re having trouble with one, simply go to the other one. I also don’t write scenes in order. I write the scenes that I’m excited about first. If I’m having trouble on a scene it usually means there’s a piece of the puzzle missing, so I’ll move onto something else and come back it later. For me there’s always at least one scene, character, detail that I’m excited about writing. If I focus on that one part I can keep going. It’s when I start thinking about the script as a whole – and the parts that aren’t working – that that I lose enthusiasm for the story.

SS: As everyone in filmmaking knows, music rights are expensive. Was using rare music in Mixtape purely a creative choice, or were you thinking about keeping the budget low to make the script more appealing to buyers?

SM: The musical choices were almost entirely chosen for creative reasons. I wasn’t writing this script for anyone but myself – not a studio or producer – and so I thought I might as well choose the music that I liked and that I thought the parents in the story would have actually listened to and put on this mixtape. In some cases the songs were taken from mixtapes that people made for me, like the Bikini Kill song, and in other cases they were songs that I researched. For the Blue Hearts song I knew that I needed a song in a foreign language, but it took a while to find a song that I thought worked well and fit the story. I never really thought about budget concerns during the course of writing it. I always figured that if someone was really interested in the story I could change the music to fit their tastes.

SS: The thing I like best about your script is the emotional component, which resonates very powerfully in places, yet never goes over the top. Can you tell me how you approach the emotion in your screenplays, and what the key is to not tipping over into melodrama?

SM: That’s nice of you to say. I don’t know if this is a good answer, but my approach is this: I write a scene, then I read it over and ask myself, “Is this cheesy?” And I do that over and over. I was aware that Mixtape could wander off into terra-melodrama – and so, I think just being aware of what kind of story you’re writing is one of the keys. Also, I think that when we talk about melodrama, what we’re actually talking about is monodrama. The film is hitting the same emotional beat again and again. The best films – and most emotional films in my opinion – are the ones that take you through a whole range of emotions. E.T. comes to mind. It’s scary when Elliot first meets E.T. It’s somber when they mention that dad is in Mexico (a scene I love). It’s sad, of course, when we think E.T. is dead. And then unbelievably joyful when he’s not and the boys all fly away on their bikes. And so when you get to the end and E.T. is leaving, you’ve been through all these different emotions – you’ve been up and down and all over – and, if you’re not crying at this point, then you simply don’t have a soul. If the movie was just an alien dying for an hour and a half the movie would suck, for one, but also wouldn’t resonate emotionally the way it does. And so I think if you’re going to do an emotional story you need to hit on a variety of emotions.

SS: How did it feel to land on the Black List? And did getting on the Black List open any previously closed doors for you?

SM: It felt great. Honestly, I had never heard of the Black List until about 2 months before it came out, so it was a pleasant surprise for me. And it feels pretty rad to see your name on the same list as people like Aaron Sorkin. It’s also generated some additional interest in me. There was a first wave of interest when Mixtape first began to leak out and get passed around and being on the Black List has helped keep the momentum building, as well as generate another round of meetings.

SS: I was informed in the comments section of my review that your script won the Zoetrope screenwriting competition. I feel like with you winning, the answer to this question is obvious, but do you support screenwriting competitions? Had you entered a lot of them before? Was Mixtape rejected by any notable competitions?

SM: I love them! When I finished Mixtape I really didn’t know what to do with it. I was living in Los Angeles but didn’t know anyone working in film. This always seems to surprise people, but it is, in fact, possible to live in L.A. and be completely outside the film industry. So, without any idea of how to get Mixtape in someone’s hands, I entered it into Zoetrope (and another competition that I never heard back from). My manager, Jim Wedaa, found the script through the competition and then hooked me up with my agents Valarie Phillips and Ida Ziniti. I’m very thankful to Zoetrope for helping me along – and, from my experience, would highly recommend people try it out if they think they have a good script.

SS: In one of the greatest interviews I’ve ever listened to about screenwriting, Christopher McQuarrie noted that when he wrote his Oscar-winning screenplay, “The Usual Suspects,” it was really a patchwork effort just to get through the thing, and he really had little idea what he was doing. It was only afterwards that he learned the “rules” of screenwriting, and although he doesn’t say it, he implies that he’s still never written anything as good . What are your thoughts on the rules? Do you follow a set structure when you write? Do you break the rules? Should writers follow rules at all?

SM: This is actually something I’ve thought about quite a bit and here’s what I’ve come up with: for geniuses rules are obstacles, and for the rest of us rules are helpful. I feel like rules and limitations in what I can and can’t do in a script frees me up to be creative. Having said that, I don’t necessarily use the rules I’ve read online and from books. I’ve made up a lot of my own rules as I’ve gotten better at writing. And I think that’s what it’s about – the rules should fit your story and they should fit what you do as a writer. I tend to write in four act structures and always build stories around, what I view, as three premises that could stand on their own as films. I can imagine that as McQuarrie was writing “The Usual Suspects” having little idea of what he was doing was perfect. It helped create this hugely surprising and satisfying twist in the film because not even the writer saw it coming. But I imagine that same style wouldn’t work in doing something like adapting a novel. Anyways, the point is – unless you’re a genius it’s probably a good idea to use the rules. But find the ones that work for you and your writing style.

SS: What is that one thing in a script you try to get right above all else, and what’s your process for achieving it? (ie, plot? character? dialogue?)

SM: I have a sign above my desk (I’m looking at it as I write this) that says, “Character, Dialogue, Motivation, Archetypes, The Unexpected and A Hook”. So I guess those would be the aspects that I focus on. To that list I would add simplicity. I really like simple, elegant scripts. I like scripts that let me know a clear goal, the obstacles, etc. And I like my scripts to read quickly. One of the best compliments I can get for a script is, “I read it in one sitting.” I always think of the person reading my scripts. They’ve read tons of scripts, they don’t want to read mine – so how can I keep them reading?

SS: Let’s go back to the day you decided to pursue screenwriting. When having an agent or a manger seemed a million miles away. If Present You could go back and give that young buck advice on the fastest way to breaking into the business, what would you tell him?

SM: I would pass on this article to my past self http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp02.Strange.Attractor.html. My first script was pretty much the most lugubrious, melancholy and hopeless script ever written by man. I would let you read it, but I’m pretty sure it would make you lose the will to live. Not only was it depressing, but it had no real hook at all, no premise. It was just this embarrassingly personal exaggerated account of living in a small logging town. And the worst part was that I worked my ass off on that script. I spent hours and hours writing it and re-writing it. So, if I could go back and to talk to my past self, I’d give him that link and tell him to work on things that at least have some small chance of ever getting made. And also, something that I strangely only learned after writing two full scripts, write the kind of movies you like watching.

SS: Care to tell us what you may be working on next?

SM: Right now I’m finishing up a spec script that will hopefully done in the near future and will be a much different – and much bigger – story than Mixtape was. I’m also sorting through open assignment and trying to find something that I can really get excited about and that I feel fits my writing style. It’s actually a really interesting place to be in – and one that I haven’t heard many people talk about. There are lots of websites and books about writing, but not much about the process of choosing projects and doing pitches etc. So I’m enjoying learning about the next stage and hopefully you’ll be hearing from me again soon.

Genre: Drama
Premise: Three corporate men must deal with the specific challenges of getting laid off during a recession.
About: The Company Men debuted at Sundance with many impressed smiles, despite its downbeat subject matter. Many are calling it, “The film Up In The Air should’ve been.” Man, are we already committing verbal terrorism on the 37,000 foot Clooney vehicle? Well, I certainly had problems with it, but this isn’t the time or the place to get into that. The Company Men stars Tommy Lee Jones, Ben Affleck, and Kevin Costner. Its writer, John Wells, is also its director. Wells has spent the majority of his career executive producing such films as Infamous, One Hour Photo, I’m Not There, and over a dozen more. He’s also written and produced a ton of TV, including that tiny passing fad on NBC known as ER. This is his first feature writing and directing project.
Writer: John Wells
Details: 120 pages (January 2, 2009 draft)

Affleck will play Bobby

Being an executive producer for over a decade, I’m betting John Wells has read a thousand scripts. Looking through his resume, the man clearly thrives on risky independent fare, and you have to respect him for it, because producing films that sunbathe on the indie circuit more often leaves you with a bright red sunburn (both literally and in the old bank account) than a bronzy head-turning tan. I suppose residuals from ER even it all out though. That pedigree of limitless TV work, and not just reading tons of scripts, but reading tons of scripts that actually strive to be different and good, gives Wells a huge advantage on his first trip to the big screen as a writer-director.

I have no idea if this is Wells’ first feature script or simply the first one he’s done something with, but The Company Men suffers from a technical style that, combined with its technical subject matter, makes for a tough read. As always, it should be noted that this is a writer-director script, which means he’s writing it just as much for himself as for others (namely actors he’s trying to lure). Combine that with the fact that this seems to be a shooting draft, and I’m prepared to excuse at least some of the clinical storytelling. Still, there’s so little warmth, in both the style and subject matter here, that I felt it difficult to connect with the material.

The Company Men follows three employees on different rungs of the company ladder. There’s Bobby, the 30 year old “corporate warrior” with the pretty wife, the two kids, the mortgage, the Porsche, and the membership at the most expensive country club in town. There’s Phil, the aging “Jack Lemmon in Glengarry Glen Ross” type whose difficulty keeping up with current trends may be why he can’t pull in the same mega-deals he used to, and then there’s Gene, one of the few corporate men who still has a heart, trying to save as many employees as he can, at the expense of the bottom line.

Jones will play Gene

All of these men work for a huge company called GTX, a sort of “does-it-all” super-corporation whose divisions are vague enough that I can’t remember any of them. This is one of the first things that turned me off of The Company Men. The company, in its vagueness, obviously acts as a stand-in for every mega-corporation in the U.S.A. Which would’ve been fine, except we spend an enormous amount of time discussing the boring specifics of how the company operates and what’s going on inside of it. I wasn’t sure if I was reading a screenplay or hanging out with Warren Buffet.

When the script gets hunkered down in this discussion about stock shares and sub-divisions and conglomerate theories, it almost enters the realm of anti-entertainment. I didn’t understand any of it which means I had to work twice as hard to enjoy the story. And the problem is that Phil and Gene’s stories through the first half of the screenplay are stuck inside this world. So it’s nearly impossible to get into them.

The good news is that the script has a saving grace. And that grace is in the man who saved our planet from an asteroid. Or at least, the actor who’s playing that part saved us. Bobby’s (Ben Affleck) story isn’t about stock shares or consulting tactics or board room politics. It’s simply about a guy with a family and a mortgage who loses his 120,000 dollar a year job and quickly begins to freak the fuck out when he realizes he may not find another one. Every time we’re with Bobby the script feels like it’s been lifted out of molasses, because it becomes about something. Bobby hasn’t hit any roadblocks in his life before this. He’s one of those people who assumed the good life would just keep on being good. So when his shiny cars are threatened, when his country club membership is threatened, when the very bed he sleeps in is threatened, he refuses to accept it. He goes into Stage 4 denial and simply keeps on living the life he’s used to living. But it doesn’t last. It can’t last. And watching his meltdown is depressing but also the most entertaining part of the script.

Costner will play Phil (now “Jack”)

Unfortunately, Bobby only pops up every once in awhile, his story getting wedged between Phil and Gene’s redundant boardroom politics and backroom parties. And we have to tread through all that molasses to find that little bottle Bobby’s hiding in again, if only for a few minutes or a couple of scenes. Eventually, the Gene and Phil storylines take on a less technical tone, and focus more on the personal side of their journeys, and while it’s a desperately welcome change, it’s too little too late. I had a hard time caring by that point.

The weird thing is, I didn’t feel much sympathy for any of these characters, despite their sympathetic situations. I mean, it’s not like these are high-school flunkies working at Wal-Mart, getting fired from the only job they know how to do. That, to me, is the true definition of a catastrophe. These men all have nice houses, ‘59 Corvettes, and VIP memberships at every establishment in town. I mean, they’re pissed at their company’s outrageous overspending which resulted in their termination. But they’re just as guilty, lavishly overspending in every aspect of their own lives. Who makes 120 grand, 300 hundred grand, 1 million dollars a year, and isn’t smart enough to put a big chunk of it away in case things get bad? And maybe that’s what Wells is trying to say. That we all live above our means and haven’t shit-proofed enough of our fans. But I wanted to root for these characters and their stupidity gave me enough pause to think twice about it.

I guess people are now saying that Up In The Air is “The Company Men for Dummies.” But I’d switch that around. I’d say The Company Men is “Up in the Air For Rocket Scientists.” It’s so entrenched in corporate-speak and CNBC’isms and the technical details of what’s happening at the top, that unless you’re familiar with that world, it’s a tough story to get lost in. It’ll be interesting to see if the movie stresses those things, or focuses more on the personal aspect, which is the where the focus should be.

[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[x] wasn’t for me
[ ] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius

What I learned: The Company Men was a huge reminder of how important it is to focus on your characters and their relationships. Whatever subject matter you choose to tell your story in, it’s obviously important to give us enough of the details that it feels authentic. But if you go overboard, you’re going to lose your general audience, the ones who don’t know enough to be able to follow the specifics of that subject matter. Never forget that the thing your audience cares about is your characters’ journey. We don’t walk out of a theater remembering how GTX fucked over Phil by stonewalling his stockyard division by cutting a secret deal with the Koreans. That’s not what stays with us. What stays with us is an embarrassed Phil having to tell his daughter she can’t go on her school trip to Italy because he can’t afford it. Never forget that. It’s always about the characters.

Wanted to give a congratulations to everyone associated with Buried, the risk-taking trapped-in-a-coffin project that had a big night this weekend, becoming the first film sold at Sundance, when Lionsgate picked it up (for between 3-4 million). I always saw this as something that could light up the independent circuit, but the strong word of mouth from the festival as well as the Lionsgate pick-up means this project could have much more ambitious goals. Check out some of the reviews from Aint-It-Cool , Firstshowing, Variety, as well as Slash-Film. You can also go back and read my original review of the script back in June, as well as my interview with its writer, Chris Sparling. To this day it remains the second most downloaded script from the site (the first is Source Code) and I truly believe you guys helped build the pre-buzz that made sure a lot of eyes were on the film when it debuted this weekend. I’m telling you, this is the new way to get buzz for your film. Get your script out there. :)

Should be a fun week. With Sundance going on, I decided to review a couple of popular scripts from the festival. Make sure to sign up for my Twitter or Facebook (links to the upper right) so you can be informed when those reviews go up and maybe snag copies of the scripts. Don’t know how long they’ll be up so act fast. I also have an interview coming from a recent Top 25 writer. He gives some great advice so you’re going to want to check that out. And finally, expect a review of a flick opening this Friday by one of the biggest writers in town, William Monahan. Right now, Roger brings us that rare genre mash-up, the vampire western! Let’s see if he liked it.

Genre: Western, Horror
Premise: Wanted in their home state of Texas, a brother-and-sister gunslinger duo lie low in the Old West town of Bone Orchard. When the “Coolies”, Chinese immigrants slaving away on the Transcontinental Railroad, summon an ancient Chinese vampire to avenge their collective mistreatment, the gunslingers are forced to form an uneasy alliance with the Texas Ranger who hunts them if they want to survive.
About: Optioned by U.K. based production and development company, Red Sparrow. John Landis (An American Werewolf in London, Animal House) is attached as director. Russel Brand and Mila Kunis are said to be circling.
Writer: M.D. Presley

I can see why “The Bone Orchard” appeals to John Landis. Like me, he obviously shares a love for the Genre Mash-up. Not for the faint of heart, mashing two genres together is an alchemical balancing act of irony and contrast. Not only do you have to understand the intricacies of each of your chosen genre’s conventions, you have to have a bit of the lunatic in you to even attempt such a narrative feat. In the early 80s, financiers thought John Landis’ werewolf script (a little screenplay called An American Werewolf in London) was too frightening to be a comedy and too funny to be a horror film.

So here’s a feature I hope will become a regular thing on Scriptshadow, where we run down the major events in the writing world each week. It may even one day replace the Friday review. But don’t worry, I’d add another supremely awesome feature to offset that – namely a quick synopsis of a script too hot to review traditionally (like, say, a PTA script). Anyway, I’d like to introduce you guys to Jessica Hall, who will be providing us with this feature. Let me know if this is something you want to see more of…

Just a week after SPIDER-MAN 4 was officially scrapped, it’s back on again with a new director and a slew of [false] casting rumors. Marc Webb ({500} DAYS OF SUMMER) is set to direct the franchise reboot geared towards teens and tweens. Rumors about Robert Pattison and Joseph Gordon-Leavitt were quickly quashed in favor of a yet to be determined cast of relative unknowns. New storyline will center on a teen struggling with the knowledge that he could have saved his uncle. Working from Jamie Vanderbilt’s (ZODIAC) script, shooting is expected to start this year with a budget of around $80M. (http://bit.ly/5uRhDn)

Lots of news this week about writer Michael R. Perry. It’s rumored that Ben Stiller is circling his 2009 Black List script THE VOICES (ScriptShadow says it’s “Impressive”). Meanwhile, Perry has signed on to write Paramount’s PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 2 with Kevin Greutert to direct.

The Duplass Brothers (BAGHEAD) are set to write and direct JEFF WHO LIVES AT HOME with Jason Reitman producing. It’s about a stoner who sets off on an elaborate search for wood glue.

THE CHANCELLOR MANUSCRIPT attached Marc Forster (QUANTUM OF SOLACE) to direct and Peter O’Brien (2008 Black List script UNLOCKED) to adapt from Robert Ludlum’s novel. Previous drafts have been penned by Allessandro Camon and Michael Seitzman. O’Brien is also writing the game story for the Microsoft game “Halo: Reach.” Marc Forster is also set to direct MACHINE GUN PREACHER, which Gerard Butler is circling. (http://bit.ly/6ibAcG)

Summit continues their fascination with the undead, hiring Jonathan Levine (THE WACKNESS) to write and direct zombie love project WARM BODIES. (http://bit.ly/57AmJD)

DreamWorks added attachments to two projects. DJ Caruso (EAGLE EYE) signed on to direct I AM NUMBER FOUR from a script by Gough & Millar while Ronald Harwood will write UNTITLED MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BIOPIC. Harwood, who hails from South Africa, won an Oscar for THE PIANIST and was nominated for THE DRESSER and THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY. Caruso is also attached to direct THE DEFENDERS for DW and Kurtzman/Orci. (http://bit.ly/6qzM8l; http://bit.ly/8IS4Fl)

British director Andrea Arnold is the third director to attach to WUTHERING HEIGHTS. She replaces Peter Webber, who replaced John Maybury. This is the first time Arnold has not directed from her own material instead working from Olivia Hetreed’s (GIRL WITH THE PEARL EARRINGS) script. (http://bit.ly/5zhxif)

PROTECTION has replaced its lead actor and director with director Patrick Alessandrin (District 13: Ultimatum) and actor Clive Owen. Brandon Noonan, who wrote the script, also has ARROW set up at WB with Rob Cohen attached to direct. (http://bit.ly/83Pjck)

Sundance has arrived and Paramount Pictures has claimed the first acquisition of the festival. Studio plans a fall release for Davis Guggenheim’s new doc “WAITING FOR SUPERMAN. This time around, Guggenheim (AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH) tackles the crisis in public education. (http://bit.ly/6FvC5z)