Back before the internet, film studios used to spend untold millions on predicting the box office. The closer they could get to predicting a movie’s opening weekend, the more accurately they could plug the numbers into their “hit-maker” equation for the next round of summer tentpoles. Of course studios still spend a ton of money playing Nostradamus, but let’s face it – These days, anyone with a love for film and a few key movie blogs bookmarked can predict a film’s opening weekend within three million dollars. We know the hits before they hit us. We know the duds before they’re dumped on us. It’s not like the mid-nineties, where guessing a movie’s opening gross made you some sort of internet rock star.

However, even with all their tools and their stat-charts and their polling and their surveys and their test-screenings. And even with our Playlists and our Slash-Films and our First Showings and our Colliders…every once in awhile a film comes along that bucks the predictions. You would think this would be cause for celebration. But oh how it is not. It is a cause for fear. If a movie ends up being way bigger than the professional trackers thought it would be, that means they didn’t do their jobs. So everyone scrambles to try and figure out: What the hell went wrong?

Their answers quickly turn into a list of excuses. And most of those excuses revolve around two words: “Middle America.” Middle America can pretty much be used as an excuse for any miscalculation ANYWHERE. I’m not just talking about movies. You accidentally put too much ketchup on your hot dog? Middle America’s fault. Your boss is pissing you off? Middle America. Celebrity Trump? Middle America. Okay, maybe that last one is true. But come on, let’s be serious for a second. We can’t pin all our bad predictions on the that pudgy central section of the country. Sometimes, we have to take responsibility for our actions (the key word here is “sometimes” – not always).

So it’s with this spirit that I want to take a look at five surprise hits and see what we can learn from them as screenwriters. I do not claim to have all the answers here. I merely want to figure out what I believe we can learn from each film, and open up a discussion for you guys to add your thoughts.

Now I know a lot of people are going to point out that marketing and casting and directing had a much bigger effect on these box office successes than anything a screenwriter did. While I won’t discount that there are many variables involved in a film’s success, I will say that it all starts with the writer, and he/she has a much bigger impact on that final number than he/she’s often given credit for. The writer (assuming the idea is theirs) is responsible for two things: A great concept – something that can be easily presented and marketed in posters, TV spots, and trailers. And secondly, of course, a great story – something that moves audiences, something that titillates, excites, and entertains them. The former brings them into the theater, the latter brings them and their friends back. Except for adapted material, writers are responsible for both of these things. So keeping that in mind, let’s see what we can learn from these surprise hits.

ZOMBIELAND
Rough Projected First Weekend Gross: 12-15 mil
Actual First Weekend Gross: 24 mil
Rough Projected Total Gross: 35-42 mil
Actual Total Gross: 75 mil
Written by: Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick

What we can learn: People kept trying to get me to read this before it came out but as his been my M.O., I wasn’t exactly thrilled by another zombie clone. Then I saw the trailer and I realized this was anything but the newest boxcar on the stock zombie train. This was a film that took the zombie premise and turned it into something fun. That fun is what brought so many people into the theater. But where Zombieland excels, is in how it keeps you in the theater. The script does something rare for a film aimed at a young audience – it put its characters first. In a world where we’re used to zombie films birthing cardboard cutouts whose depth is measured by how many three-syllable words they can use, Zombieland dares to go deeper. And in a straight comedy no less. Each of these characters is trying to overcome a lifelong series of walls they’ve put up to guard against the world. Each of these characters is trying to learn how to connect with other human beings. In other words, they’re going through the same types of things that a lot of us are. Columbus has led his entire existence shutting himself off from the world. Tallahasse hides behind his anger. Wichita refuses to trust anyone besides her sister. These clearly defined characters are what separates Zombieland from so many other horror films out there. Now you may be saying, “Carson, do you really believe that character development has anything to do with why this film did well at the box office?” Hell yes I do. Giving us characters with depth in a genre known for its lack of depth is exactly what gave this film such a fresh feel. When you don’t do that right in a horror comedy, you get Jennifer’s Body, a movie that by all accounts should’ve left Zombieland in the dust at the box office. It co-starred two of the hottest young actresses in Hollywood for Christ’s sake. And yet still it bombed. So never underestimate the power of character depth, particularly in genres where it’s usually ignored.

DISTRICT 9
Rough Projected First Weekend Gross: 20-23 mil
Actual First Weekend Gross: 37 mil
Rough Projected Total Gross: 60-70 mil
Actual Total Gross: 116 mil
Writers: Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell

What we can learn: There are two ways to approach spec screenplays. Two ways to write a screenplay that sells. The first is to take a known formula, and execute it perfectly. Think the heist flick Inside Man, the buddy cop film 48 Hours, or the romantic comedy Notting Hill. None of those movies rewrote the book on screenwriting, but they were all expertly executed for what they were. The reason I don’t favor this approach is that it’s really hard to execute anything perfectly. Of course it *seems* easy – but once you start writing, you realize it isn’t easy in the least. It’s much smarter (and easier) to do it the way District 9 did. Take a well-known story and find a new angle to it. I just talked about this yesterday in my review of “The Resident.” We’ve seen “Fatal Attraction”-type thrillers a hundred times. But we hadn’t seen it with shifting points of view. Same thing happens here with District 9. We’ve seen the “aliens invade earth” plot a thousand times. Aliens come down, aliens try to wipe out or enslave humans, humans fight back. So director Neill Blomkamp said, “Well what if aliens came down, and instead of them trying to enslave us, we tried to enslave them?” Every single thing you knew about the genre was flipped on its head. Every area you explored was going to be unique because it’d never been done before! This is why District 9 feels so fresh and new. And fresh and new is what brings people into the theater. So when you get an idea, you need to challenge yourself. You need to ask yourself if it’s been done before. And if it has? You need to pick at it and pry at it and flip it and redesign it until it’s unique. I’ll give you a scary fact. The number 1 reason a screenplay fails is that its concept isn’t interesting enough to be made into a movie. So stop worrying so much about what’s happening IN your story, and make sure it’s a story worth telling in the first place.

TAKEN
Rough Projected First Weekend Gross: 10-12 mil
Actual First Weekend Gross: 25 mil
Rough Projected Total Gross: 50-60 mil
Actual Total Gross: 145 mil
Written by: Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen

What we can learn: Taken explores one of the most powerful dramatic situations there is, the kidnapping. The genre itself is pretty simple. All you have to do is: a) Make us fall in love with a character. b) Have that character get kidnapped. c) Have our protagonist try to find him/her before it’s too late. But while most writers enjoy focusing on “b” and “c,” they forget that the key to making the genre work is “a.” WE – MUST – LOVE – THE – CHARACTER WHO GETS KIDNAPPED. Period. Surprisingly, writers don’t spend enough time introducing us to this character. As a result, we don’t care if our hero finds them. And if we don’t care about the chase in a chase movie, honey child, you don’t have a movie. HOW much time you should take introducing the character is up to you. But the less time you give us with them, the more impactful those scenes must become. Great writers can make us fall in love with a character in a single scene. But for most of us, it takes longer. Taken actually takes a big chance– spending a full 25 minutes with the daughter before she’s kidnapped. In my opinion, this was the big risk that made Taken work. The first act definitely dragged in places, but because we were around this daughter so much, because we were allowed to see the love our protagonist had for her, it solidified our understanding of their relationship, and sent our desire to see them reunited through the roof. – A side note to all this is that the “kidnapped” genre is very similar to the “revenge” genre. In both cases, our protagonist is going after the bad guy. There’s one key difference though. In the kidnapped genre, there’s the benefit of the character being found alive. This not only gives us the hope of a happy ending (translates into: more marketable) but it includes a natural ticking time bomb. Every second that our protagonist doesn’t get to our bad guys is an extra second where the kidnapped character could be killed. In that vein, it’s a smarter genre script to write than revenge, because in the revenge script, there is no urgency or ticking time bomb (they’re already dead) and there’s no hope for a possible happy ending (did I mention they were dead). I liked “Edge of Darkness,” but it was clear as soon as the daughter died that the script was going to end very darkly. Unfortunately, as great as this formula is, the market’s been saturated with Taken-like scripts for the better part of a year. So you’ll have to wait awhile to write yours. The only way to make it work now is to put another spin on it (read “District 9” above). Set it in the Old West. Show both points-of-view. But please, don’t write another staright-forward Taken clone.

THE BLIND SIDE
Rough Projected First Weekend Gross: 14-18 mil
Actual First Weekend Gross: 34 mil
Rough Projected Total Gross: 50 mil
Actual Total Gross: 245 mil
Writer: John Lee Hancock (based on the book written by Michael Lewis)

What we can learn: Whoa. Just give me a second here. Whoa. This is the one movie surprise that I still haven’t wrapped my brain around. And for that reason, I’m very tempted to blame Middle America. But being the good soldier and screenwriting-warrior-in-search-of-truth that I am, I will look to find another reason why The Blind Side became the most shocking surprise hit of the year. Maybe I should explain why I’m shocked first. It’s quite simple really. The screenplay for The Blind Side wasn’t very good. The story, as far as I could tell, is about a well-off family who takes a homeless kid in who ends up parlaying the opportunity into an eventual career in the NFL. Despite this, there isn’t a single down of football played until page 60! The first 59 pages are dedicated to the family getting to know the kid. Sixty! Pages! To make matters worse, despite all that extra time, the character development outside of Sandra Bullock and the boy is paper thin. But alas, as I dug further into this scrap pile for meaning, there IS something I realized we could can learn from it. It doesn’t exactly explain why the film made 245 million dollars. But it does help that struggling screenwriter looking for an advantage over his competition: Write a screenplay with a compelling female lead character. Remember, the majority of writers out there write screenplays with male protagonists. This leaves virtually no options out there for A-list actresses in search of a great lead role. This forces them to search out meaty parts on the risky independent circuit (i.e. Charlize Theron in “Monster”). And the problem with that is, that world is extremely hit or miss. So when a Super Femme A-Lister finds a great leading role AND that role is in a film that will actually be seen? They’re going to fight over that can of meat like a pack of rabid wolves. Once you have an A-Lister like Bullock attached to your project, you’re going to get your big payday, and your shot to become next year’s surprise shocker being debated on a tiny screenwriting blog. Like The Blind Side.

THE HANGOVER
Rough Projected First Weekend Gross: 30-33 mil
Actual First Weekend Gross: 45 mil
Rough Projected Total Gross: 90-100 mil
Actual Total Gross: 277 mil
Written By: Jon Lucas and Scott Moore

What we can learn: Let’s get something out of the way quick. The Hangover gained a lot of momentum coming up to its release. So it wasn’t a total shocker like a few of these others. But nobody, and I mean nobody, expected it to make 277 million dollars and finish as the 6th highest grossing movie of the year! With that said, let’s get into it. — If there’s any film on this list that owes its success to its screenplay, it’s this one. The script was widely accepted as one of the funnier scripts around town before it was made (It was in my Top 25 before it came out), it didn’t have any stars to guarantee an opening weekend, it went up against the best of the best – the 150-200 million dollar behemoths studios put out in the summer, its word-of-mouth was the best of the summer. If you are a comedy screenwriter and you are looking for your next idea, The Hangover is your bible. But what is it you’re specifically supposed to take away from this film’s success? Well, it reinforces one of the oldest and most important rules of screenwriting: Concept Concept Concept. The Hangover did 90% of its work before it was ever written: It came up with a high concept highly marketable idea that inspired an endless supply of comedic scenarios. I remember reading an earlier version of the script, and there were 3 or 4 main sequences that were different from the final film. And they were all just as funny. Legendary producer Lynda Obst once said about the film “Flashdance,” which was famously developed for over 10 years and had dozens of different incarnations, that in the end it didn’t matter. It was the concept of a female dancer who was a steel worker that ensured the movie would succeed. Same thing holds true with The Hangover. So before you do any writing, you need to make sure you have that great concept. But how do you know whether you have that great concept? Well, you gotta do something that not a lot of writers are comfortable doing and it’s something that Blake Snyder used to publish entire books about. You have to pitch your ideas to people and you have to force them to be honest with you. Preferably, do it to their face or on the phone. It’s so easy to tell if your idea is good just by the look on someone’s face. Do they look confused? Is there a long pause? Are their eyes dead as you explain it to them? Are they drifting? These clues tell you everything you need to know about your concept. You know your idea’s good when people immediately get excited about it. When their eyes come alive, when they’re offering suggestions or actively engaging you as you explain it to them. Another approach I’ve learned is effective is to mix in your idea with a few other ideas you have, and then include some other movie ideas as well (good ideas of films in development that the general public doesn’t know about). Send that list out to 20 of your best friends and ask them what their top 3 favorite ideas are. If your idea isn’t consistently finishing 1 or 2, I’ve got bad news for you, it’s probably not good enough.

To summarize, right now you should be thinking of a high concept idea that flips a typical plot on its head, where someone gets kidnapped, the lead role is played by a woman, and all of the characters are well-developed. Anyone care to pitch their new concept in the comments section?

Genre: Thriller
Premise: A woman moves into a large apartment, only to realize that someone may be watching her…from the inside.
About: The Resident will star Hilary Swank, Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Christopher Lee. Newcomer and hot video director Antti J. Jokinen is directing from a script that he co-wrote. The new production arm of Hammer Films is producing. They are probably best known as the company who will bring us the American remake of “Let The Right One In.” And they are not in any way affiliated with MC Hammer. As far as I know.
Writers: Robert Orr and Antti J. Jokinen – rewrite by Erin Cressida Wilson
Details: 99 pages (April 9, 2009 draft)

“Hi, I’m not crazy or anything. Totally normal guy. You can trust me. Here’s a flower I made out of skin from my last girlfriend.”

Hilary Swank’s film “Amelia” was one of those doomed projects from the outset. It had to be made, because in this age of biopics, Earheart’s story is too compelling not to make, but – and I hate to say this because of how Hollywood it sounds – there’s something about Earheart’s look that doesn’t appeal to me. I don’t know if it’s the short hair. I don’t know if it’s the energy. I don’t know if it’s the subject matter, but just like I wasn’t interested in watching Johnny Depp play gangster dress-up, I wasn’t interested in watching Hillary Swank play doomed pilot dress up.

And here Swank is, by most accounts a perfect choice for the role, getting sucked into that black hole. She could’ve given the best performance of her life, and no one would’ve known because nobody showed up to see it. So when you’re a star and have a public bomb, the next project you choose is an important one. Hollywood may be a little more tolerant of their actors than their directors, but string a trio of duds together, and you’re looking at a co-starring role opposite Val Kilmer in a movie called “Passion Kill” that’s cutting side-deals with local Redbox Kiosks to have their poster featured on the new release panel.

Hillary Swank right before hair and make-up.

And when you’re in that quagmire, the thriller is the perfect genre to take a chance in. Because when you think about it, you’re really not taking that big of a chance. Thrillers are cheap to make, so if the studios realize they’re bad after they’re done, they can skimp on the advertising and cut their losses. We the consumer don’t notice that “Big Name Actress A” is in a new film, so when it bombs bigger than Nagasaki, it does so under the radar and the star’s profile is kept intact. It’s like getting a mulligan. On the flip side, a good thriller has the potential to really break out. Silence Of The Lambs, Seven, Kiss The Girls, Double Jeopardy, The Ring (Horror-Thriller), these kinds of movies can propel a struggling actor/actress back onto the radar. It’s the movie equivalent of low-risk high-reward.

So it’s no surprise that Swank has hinged her next effort on the genre. Now all you need is a good script and it’s back to battling for Oscars. Simple, right?

Juliet Dermer is an ER doctor whose life drastically changes when she finds her husband in bed with another woman. Forced to go on her own for the first time in a long time, she faces a far more challenging task than fixing a marriage. Yeah, I’m talking about finding an affordable apartment in New York. After the expected glut of garbage options (studios barely bigger than a walk-in closet) she happens upon a beautiful sprawling living space in an old building, and guess what? It’s going for 1/10 the asking price of similar apartments. One of the first lessons my dad ever taught me was that if it’s too good to be true? It probably is. Juliet’s father obviously never taught her this lesson.

I heard Morgan spent an entire month practicing hiding for this movie. As we can clearly see, it paid off.

Max, a studly man’s man who looks an awful lot like that guy who died in Gray’s Anatomy (not that I’ve ever seen it) is the kind but slightly odd owner of the building. About as comfortable in a social situation as your local Spelling Bee champ, Max spends every waking hour working on and improving the building. He plays off the super cheap apartment price by pointing out its many problems (including an underground maintenance train that runs through every so often). But you still get the sense that it’s just a little…too cheap. Well, at least we get that sense. Juliet, on the other hand, is fed up with looking. She just wants a place to sleep at night and this building, with all its imperfections, is far and away her best option.

So Juliet moves in, and her and Max begin a slow but meaningful friendship. During this time, she’s sizing him up. Here is a man who could have any woman in the world, yet has such a warped sense of his self-worth, he’s barely able to look them (or her) in the eye. Now to you or me that might equal: Red Flag. To Juliet though? Boyfriend material!

In the meantime, Juliet’s picture perfect apartment is starting to show its imperfections. All the things she fell in love with about it initially, don’t seem so charming anymore. That warehouse-type space? It sure causes a lot of shadows at night. And she knows its not possible but every once in awhile she feels like someone might be…in those shadows. Watching her.

Oh yeah, this looks healthy.

Juliet then makes the intriguing decision to invite Max over for dinner, afterwards hopping into the bedroom with plans to go to the bone zone. Only right before the deed is done, Juliet has a change of heart, and tells Max that the date was a mistake. Uhhhhhh…yeah. This is going to go over well. Cause the guy who sometimes acts a little “weird?” The guy who has a key to every room in the building? Those nights you think you’re being watched? Well, they might be more connected than you think, sister.

As I was reading The Resident, I couldn’t help but feel like it was too plain. I really like simple thrillers, and for the most part, I was enjoying myself, but I wanted something more from the material. Luckily, after we head into the second act, I got my wish. The Resident shocked me by jumping back in time, and telling the same story but this time from Max’s point-of-view. This was exactly the twist I needed and it really works. We begin to see why Max is so strange, and just how deep that strangeness goes. But the reason it works so well, is that we learn that Juliet was right. She was being watched. And now we get to see where and how Max watched her. Now I’m not going to lie. The Resident makes some questionable choices with this technique, flipping back and forth between terrifying and silly. But for most of the story, we’re pretty fucking terrified by what’s going on.

There’s quite a few things I enjoyed about the script. First of all, it does a great job at shaping sympathy for both characters. Everybody knows how awful it feels to be cheated on, so we like Juliet right away. But strangely, we also sympathize with Max. The guy’s clearly had a fucked up childhood and when it comes down to it, Juliet screwed him over in a big way, so when we’re in Max’s point-of-view, spying on Juliet, there’s this tiny evil part of us that almost understands him. As much as you can understand a fucked up psychotic weirdo potential serial killer who watches a woman from the shadows of an apartment, of course.

I’m also starting to better appreciate how writers texture their screenplays. Once you’ve done all the heavy lifting (plot, character, structure), how do you give your story a distinctness that sets it apart from everything else? I loved how Orr, Jokinen and Wilson placed this building over an underground maintenance train that rolls through every once in awhile, shaking its bricks and rattling its pipes. We’ve seen this kind of thing before, but making it a maintenance train – a train devoid of any human beings – almost ghost-like – that’s what really got me. It’s a minor detail and yet it brings the building alive, almost makes it a character. It’s easy to forget how much of an effect those kinds of things can have on a reader.

The Resident is a cross between Fatal Attraction and Psycho. It’s got enough going for it to justify its existence, and I quite enjoyed the read.

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

What I learned: Where I’m from, there’s two type of folk. Those who ain’t. And those who are knee-high on a grasshopper. Which type ain’t you ain’t? You all come back now. — Okay, that’s not what I learned. But that is the funniest line I’ve heard in ages. And 10 extra credit points for anyone who can tell me what show it’s from. – As for what I learned. This script was a great reminder to never give up looking for a different way to tell your story. Most beginner/amateur writers would’ve written this story with a straight-forward approach. And while it probably would’ve been decent, it wouldn’t have stood out the way it does by switching POVs. So take a step back from the script you’re working on and ask, “Is there some way I can make this story different from every other story like it?” You don’t want to force anything. In other words, switching POVs wouldn’t have worked for every script out there. But I guarantee you there’s something you can do to make your script stand apart from the pack.

I don’t have a lot to say about this week other than that I read a great script which I will be reviewing Thursday. The rest of the week will be a mystery. However next week, we’re going to be doing another theme week, and I’ll be announcing what that is Wednesday or Thursday on my Facebook and Twitter feeds. So if you’re not already following, please do (click over to the right there). Here’s Roger with a review of “Mr. Right.”

Genre: Action, Romantic Comedy
Premise: Mr. Right is a retired hitman with a code of honor. He only kills the people that try to hire him for jobs. When an organized crime family tries to draw him out of hiding, Mr. Right must save his only friend, a girl he’s fallen in love with who may or may not want anything to do with him.
About: Max Landis is John Landis’ son. They wrote the Masters of Horror episode Deer Woman together. A few years ago, “Mr. Right” made the rounds around town, impressed people, but ultimately was never purchased.
Writer: Max Landis

Martha McKay is a wreck.

If the text messages about hot tubs and anal sex indicate anything, Marth McKay’s boyfriend has cheated on her. A lot. She’s spent the past fifteen days in bed crying.

Right needs to be more psychologically grounded so he doesn’t seem like such a schizophrenic character. I feel like he’s written two different ways, and it’s hard to get past that.
TL:DR? It’s like True Romance had a threeway with Leon and Grosse Point Blank while Busby Berkeley watched from the corner, touching himself the whole time.

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

What I learned: Frankly, I really like Landis’ voice. Great dialogue that reminded me a bit of Martin McDonagh with innovative, well-written action.

In fact, a friend sent me this script because they wanted to show me how Landis writes action. It’s pretty interesting. Check it out:

He snatches away A’s gun, slaps B and C, kicks A in the balls, shoots D with A’s gun, snatches away C’s gun, shoots A with C’s gun, pokes B in the eye as he raises his gun, slaps C and stabs B in the neck with it, and then shoots C in the head with A’s gun.

Now, this prose style is kinda peppered throughout the script, mostly during the fast-paced and chaotic close-quarter fights. I think the prose appropriately reflects the frenzy and confusion of the fight. Each individual move is there, but it’s a blur. Like Right’s combat style itself. And you know, this type of thing is a matter of taste, but as an action writer myself, it makes me think of how I choose to write my action scenes. Studying other writers and their prose expands the toolbox.

First of all, congratulations to Jamie Linden, writer of one my favorites scripts, “Dogs of Babel,” for his big take last weekend. The movie he adapted the screenplay for, “Dear John,” tore it up at the box office. Maybe this will force more people to look at Babel. It definitely needs to be made. I’m hearing that “Safehouse,” the big spec sale of the week (600k) is a solid thriller. A couple of my trusty readers gave it a “worth the read.” I’d review it but it really isn’t my thing and I probably wouldn’t be into it. Also, the Alien prequel draft floating around is not real. I hear that Spaihts isn’t even finished with the first draft yet. The project that most catches my eye in this batch of updates is “Treatment,” about a screenwriter who feigns addiction to get into a rehab clinic to pitch an A-List star. Sounds hilarious. Enough of my opinions though. Here’s Jessica Hall with another weekly rundown!

The spec market is back this week….

In a bidding war, Universal picked up David Guggenheim’s spec SAFE HOUSE for Stuber to produce. Script follows a junior CIA agent who must find a way to transport a dangerous prisoner to a safe house, outmaneuvering various forces that want them both dead. Guggenheim also has Medallion set up with McG as producer. (http://bit.ly/9MMing)

A sale is all but imminent for Shawn Christensen’s spec ABDUCTION. Three studios submitted offers for the teen thriller starring Taylor Lautner. Christensen’s last spec, KARMA COALITION, sold to Warner Brothers for $750,000 against $1.5 million.

Warner Bros. paid mid to high-6 figures for a pitch from William and Scott Bindley (THE GREATEST ESCAPE) for Russell Brand to star. Brand will play the Emilio Estevez role from MIGHTY DUCKS in the untitled flick about an underdog soccer team. (http://bit.ly/atoh2z)

Steven Soderbergh will direct the latest spec from Scott Burns (THE INFORMANT!). Project revolves around the threat posed by a deadly disease, with multiple plotlines in the style of Soderbergh’s “Traffic.” Star-studded cast includes Kate Winslet, Matt Damon, Marion Cotillard and Jude Law. Participant will finance and produce with Double Feature. (http://bit.ly/bMsO62)

Shauna Cross (WHIP IT!) will adapt HESIT SOCIETY for Warner Bros. and Di Novi Pictures. (http://bit.ly/aB8Cln)

One of our favorite scripts, SUNFLOWER by Misha Green, may be moving forward with Wes Craven in talks to direct. The thriller is about two women, imprisoned by a sociopath, who battle both one another and their captor in a struggle to survive. (http://bit.ly/9N8FXt)

New Line announced NEW YEAR’S EVE, the unofficial follow up to this weekend’s new release VALENTINE’S DAY. Katherine Fugate and Garry Marshall will return as writer and director, respectively. The story — with some of the same characters from “Valentine’s Day” — would be set in New York City on New Year’s Eve. (http://bit.ly/cqC4lJ)

Etan Cohen (TROPIC THUNDER) will write the new DreamWorks movie about the Museum of SuperNatural History. DreamWorks announced last week that they had picked up feature rights to the museum and its website, http://www.musunahi.com. Story centers on the curator of a covert organization known as the Museum of SuperNatural History who must seek out and protect the world’s best-kept secrets. (http://bit.ly/bdvdYI)

Über-writers Kurtzman & Orci (STARTREK 11) will write and produce LOCKE & KEY for DreamWorks. Comic adaptation was previously set up at Dimension. (http://bit.ly/aYzoA3)

Sean Nelson (THE FREEBIE) will write as well as star in TREATEMENT, a comedy about an unsuccessful screenwriter who checks into an exclusive rehab to pitch an A-lister his script. Steven Schardt (producer HUMPDAY) will make his feature directing debut. Filming is already underway in L.A. (http://bit.ly/cFlaq0)

New Line has hired Jonathan Goldstein & John Francis Daley to write VACATION, the update/sequel/remake/reboot of the Chevy Chase classic. David Dobkin was formerly attached to direct, but will now only produce. Pic will focus on Rusty Griswald, now a father on his own family road trip. Goldstein & Daley are currently involved in three other projects at New Line, including their original spec $40,000 MAN and rewrites of HORRIBLE BOSSES and BURT WONDERSTONE. (http://bit.ly/bq6Ncy)

Hughes Bros. (BOOK OF ELI) are set to direct AKIRA for WB. The current draft was written by Fergus & Ostby (IRON MAN) with a prior by Gary Whitta (BOOK OF ELI). Film takes place in post-WWIII Manhattan, where a group of motorcycle-riding teens must stop one of their members from abusing his newly acquired telekinetic powers. (http://bit.ly/bkipxh)

DUNE gets a new writer. Chase Palmer has been hired to work director Pierre Morel’s (TAKEN) ideas into Josh Zetumer’s (INFILTRATOR) draft. Morel is looking to stick more closely to the source material. Palmer is also working on two original projects that he will direct, NUMBER 13 and WILD WILD EAST, as well as writing DALLAS BUYER’S CLUB and NO BLOOD, NO GUTS, NO GLORY, which was on last year’s Black List. (http://bit.ly/ahwzgw)

Female team Lutz & Smith (THE UGLY TRUTH) will write BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSE IN TEXAS for Uni. Musical comedy will be an update of the 1982 Dolly Parton flick. Writers also penned a draft of ONE FOR THE MONEY, which is being fast-tracked by Sony for Katherine Heigl to star. (http://bit.ly/97rgIg)

Established novelist Dennis Lehane will try his hand at feature writing, signing on to adapt his own short story ANIMAL RESCUE. Story revolves around a killing that results from a lost and contested pit bull. His novels include MYSTIC RIVER and SHUTTER ISLAND. Lehane has also written for “The Wire.” (http://bit.ly/94Hdya)

Visual effects producer Grant Boucher will make his feature debut writing and directing JOURNIES, starring Jamie King. Story takes place in the world of online entertainment news, where an aspiring online journalist gets the scoop of a lifetime when a one-on-one interview turns into a date with Hollywood’s hottest young ingénue. (http://bit.ly/9BMq7D)

DREAMGIRLS duo Bill Condon and producer Larry Mark are reuniting for THE SONG IS YOU. Condon will write and direct from a book by Arthur Phillips, who also wrote the short story behind WENCESLAS SQUARE. Music-infused pic is about the unusual relationship that develops between a middle-aged commercials director who fixates on a young woman he hears singing at a bar. (http://bit.ly/aUOcA1)

Ronnie Christensen (PASSENGERS) will adapt EARTHBOUND. Richard Matheson’s novel, recently optioned by Parkes/MacDonald, follows a couple on their second honeymoon as they attempt to rekindle their marriage. The husband is visited by a beautiful stranger and succumbs to her temptation. When he attempts to end their affair, however, he begins to suspect that the enigmatic lady may be a ghost. (http://bit.ly/9twFTT)

BREAKING DAWN, the final book in the Twilight series will be made into two back-to-back movies. Melissa Rosenberg will continue to adapt. Summit is looking at “high-end” directors. ( http://bit.ly/da5YJs)

Fox is in the early stages of planning a feature version of hit show “24” and has brought on Billy Ray (BREACH) to write. Studio is waiting to see this week’s ratings before deciding whether to order another season of the show, a decision that will impact any feature adaptation. (http://bit.ly/acPcKX)

For his next writing and directing project, Peter Bogdanovich’s will adapt Kurt Andersen’s 1999 novel “Turn of the Century” for Das Films with writing partner Parish Rahbar. The novel, which opens in early new-millennium 2000, follows the MacTiers, a Manhattan power couple with three kids who are managing their troubled marriage in a world where BarbieWorld has opened in Vegas and Charles Manson’s parole hearing is live on TV. (http://bit.ly/bJVuS4)

Genre: Comedy
Premise: After a freak plane crash, an awkward teenage boy must enlist the help of a sexually frustrated dwarf, a smokin’ hot cyborg, and an idiot in a bunny suit to defeat the Nocturnal Wench Everlasting and restore sunlight to the bizarre land of Spectre Leaf.
About: This is the official winner of the Scriptshadow Logline/Screenplay Contest. 1000 Loglines were submitted, which were narrowed down to 100, of which I read the first 10 pages. From those, the 28 best were selected, of which I read the entire screenplay. “Oh Never, Spectre Leaf!” was the clear cut winner. As for C. Ryan and Chad, they wrote a script called “The Wake” (a zombie anthology) that won them Screenplay Of The Month on Triggerstreet in 2007. That led to signing with a manager (Jewerl Ross of Silent R Lit). The South Carolinans then came out to LA to take some meetings in 2008, but unfortunately nothing came of them. So they went back to South Carolina to think up their next masterpiece. Which turned out to be…THIS. Something I thought was really interesting to hear, was that Ryan reviewed 150 scripts on Triggerstreet in a single year. Now to some that might sound like torture, but the second I heard that, everything made sense. This script exercises the kind of skill that only comes from someone who understands all the pitfalls that make a read boring. Turns out those 150 reviews paid off.
Writers: C. Ryan Kirkpatrick and Chad Musick
Details: 110 pages

Oh man, where do I start with this one? I guess we’ll start with the logline. Because I almost didn’t pick it. Quite honestly, it’s not the kind of story that appeals to me. But it was so bizarre, I felt I just had to give it a chance, even though I was 99% sure that they wouldn’t be able to pull it off. These sort of “throw everything and the kitchen sink” at the logline approaches definitely make the logline stand out, but it’s rare that the writers can actually back it up. When I read the first 10 pages, I thought, “Hmmm…this is actually really good.” It was one of the few scripts I marked down immediately as a finalist. There was hope!

But again, I was skeptical. As I noted before, a bad First 10 Pages almost guarantees a bad script. Unfortunately, the flip side of that doesn’t hold true. A *good* first ten pages does not guarantee a *good* script. This is mainly because it’s not hard to write an intriguing first 10 pages. Have someone of prominence get murdered. Have a woman defy physics as she’s chased by mysterious “agents” across city rooftops. Throw a giant alien ship over Johannesburg. It’s really not that difficult when you think about it. But the second act is like an amateur screenwriter graveyard. It’s where scripts go to die. This is where screenplays truly get their mettle tested and I had already experienced too many screenplays that didn’t know what to do once they left the safety of the first 25 pages. Having a clearly definable goal. Building a story. Developing characters that arc. Raising the stakes. Placing obstacles in your characters’ paths. It’s that complex juggling act that you can only learn by doing it over and over and over again.

Now if just writing a good screenplay weren’t enough of a challenge, C. Ryan and Chad decided to make their job even tougher. The story (if you couldn’t tell by the logline) is a reimagining of The Wizard Of Oz. I can’t tell you how many scripts I’ve read that were reimaginings of The Wizard Of Oz or Alice In Wonderland. And every single one of them was, to put it nicely, not good. I’d even go so far as to say nearly every MOVIE that’s ever tried to reimagine these two classics has failed. The problem is, you’re trying to out-imagine two of the most imaginiative stories of all time. Talking lions, card people, tin men, shrinking heroes, flying monkeys. Writer’s attempts to put a new spin on this stuff usually ends up in cliché, failure, or worst of all, embarrassment. Oh Never, Spectre Leaf is the first script I’ve ever read where they reimagine all these things in a fresh new way.

But creating crazy characters is only half the battle. We still have to want to go on the journey with them. And while some of these characters are about as cuddly as a rabid porcupine, you’re always dying to hear the next thing that comes out of their mouths. Probably the thing that impressed me most about this script was just how distinguished all these weird characters were. The dwarf is sexually frustrated, Death is manically depressed, the Wench is eternally cocky, we even have a Shakespearean werewolf. Combine that with each character talking their own way, acting their own way, and the level of uniqueness here just leaps off of the page.

So how does it all go down?

I’ll be honest, it’s kinda hard to summarize Oh Never, Spectre Leaf. It wasn’t designed to light up a coverage report, that’s for sure. But I’ll give it a shot. Holden Tucker is a typical geeky teenager with typical geeky teenager problems, namely that he can’t get laid. His best friend to the end is his pet iguana, Wyclef. When Holden’s single mom gets an unexpected call informing her her mother’s just died, Holden’s forced to jump on the next plane to attend the funeral (and just so you know these guys’ geek cred isn’t in question, the flight number is “815”).

We’re off to see the wizard! The wonderful wizard…of…….Spectre Leaf?

The pilots must not have received the entire flight plan because the plane ends up disintegrating in mid-air and scattering across the mysterious island of “Spectre Leaf.” Why is it called “Spectre Leaf?” Because, as one of the characters explains, tongue-in-cheek: once you’re there, you can never “’spect to leave.” Spectre Leaf is basically Joss Whedon’s wet dream. There are enough creatures on this island to fill up every movie and TV show he ends up doing for the rest of his life.

As for Holden, part of his plane landed on and killed what we assume from the two hooker boots sticking out from under it, was probably a prostitute. And that prostitute happened to be a very angry dwarf’s date for the evening. Dink Ledbetter, four feet of muttonchops and the worst mouth this side of Richard Prior is livid. This was, for all intents and purposes, his one chance at getting laid, and Holden and his damn plane ruined it all. If you thought you were prepared for this script before, you might realign your prognosis when Dink hits you with this line: “I was on a picnic, jackass! And I was half a jar of full-moonshine away from cramming my funstuff in her shitbox!”

Despite how much the gun-toting dwarf would like to blow Holden’s face into oblivion, the two find themselves with other problems, such as the Siamese werewolf that just showed up. Mecutio and Pippi Hemingway inform Dink that the Nocturnal Wench Everlasting is on her way and she wants the boy. Not that Dink could give a shit, but he apparently hates the Nocturnal Wench more than he hates Holden, so he grabs him and the two make a mad dash into the sewers of Spectre Leaf.

Eventually they end up at Dink’s old Orphanage, where Holden learns his purpose. The land of Spectre Leaf has been expecting him. For the last three dozen years, the island has been cast into darkness by the Nocturnal Wench Everlasting, and if Holden can get his hands on a set of three golden keys, he may be able to unlock the chest that has kept this place in darkness, breaking the wench’s spell and bringing light back to the land of Spectre Leaf. A very unhappy Dink is assigned to protect him on his journey. And a half-retarded man-bunny named Harvey (of course) will also join them for…well, it’s not clear why Harvey’s joining them but it’s a half-retarded man-bunny so I don’t think we’re supposed to ask questions. The trio (along with Wyclef his Iguana) jump onto the “Highway to Hell” and off they go.

Although all Holden wants to do is get back home, his journey takes him through a cast of characters unlike any you’ve ever seen. There are large-breasted cyborgs, serial killer ninjas, Cyclopeses, tiny men in large wheelchairs, and even Death himself (who’s a manic-depressive due to the Wench Everlasting’s relentless abuse). And that’s just the first half of the script. They say that watching the original Wizard Of Oz on acid is the quintessential “perfect trip.” I say Spectre Leaf is the result of C. Ryan and Chad going on this trip one too many times. :)

And yes, I can hear some of the skepticism now. I can hear it seeping out of your cynical brains and into your keyboards and clogging the internet. “It’s too much! It’s too crazy!” I think if I were in your place, I’d probably be saying the same thing. But here’s the difference. These guys know how to write. They’re talented enough and smart enough to make it work. As I mentioned before, I’m not the audience for werewolves and witches and angry dwarves. The writers even said to me themselves that due to my well-documented taste in quirky independent character fare, they figured they had no shot. And yet still, I made this leap of faith and I loved it.

Is it perfect? No. If I were offering feedback to the team (nudge nudge) I’d develop the characters a little more. When I look back at the original Wizard of Oz, Dorothy really isn’t the one who changed. It was everyone else (the tin man, the scarecrow and the lion). But that was the 30s and we approach characters a little differently these days. I feel like all of the main characters should go through some sort of transformation (however slight) and I have to admit, Holden felt a little thin. We know so little about his life beforehand (his wants, his desires, his flaws) that there really isn’t a whole lot to explore once we get to the island. I’d love to see that change.

Also, despite my earlier comment, there are a few places where it is sensory overload. There are so many crazy characters and so much going on that there are sequences that feel like great big blobs of shiny colors. I had to step back and go, “whoa, wait a minute, what’s going on here?” But for the most part, these guys maneuver their way through these moments skillfully – almost as if they’re sensing your concerns – and we’re right back to the story before you know it.

I also sense that the main criticism will be that a script like this will never get made. The budget would be too high. I wouldn’t say that criticism is outrageous, but I’m not so sure you couldn’t market this film as a reimagining (or different take) on The Wizard of Oz and get a decent box office return. You’d need to land a director who could handle the material but stranger things have happened. I actually think if “Alice In Wonderland” does well, it could propel the profile of this script quite a bit. But that’s neither here nor there. I’ll let the people with money answer that question.

My one final question for C. Ryan and Chad is…why no musical number? It seems like a natural nod, and would fit perfectly inside this bizarre world you’ve created.

This script is proof to me that there are talented writers out there who simply haven’t gotten their shot. All they need is a little exposure. Hopefully this review makes it a little easier for them.

First Ten Pages of Spectre Leaf: First Ten Pages (If you’d like to read the full script, contact C. Ryan and Chad at flanagancrk@aol.com).

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

What I learned: Putting your characters on a physical journey (walking, flying, roadtrip) is a great device for a story because the goal of the characters is always clear to us. They’re trying to get to [whatever place they’re trying to get to]. So you don’t have to manipulate the reader and come up with some forced artificial goal that propels them forward. The journey structure does all the work for you.