TAKING A TIME OUT...

- but as Arnie so eloquently put it – “I’ll be back!”

With 9 projects lined up on our development slate – 5 of which could be ready to go before the cameras within a few months – the lack of financing and generally poor economic situation in the film industry means that I will be going on an extended leave from Zeitgeist Film.

Since first joining the company in 2002 as a script reader who hardly knew any Danish, I have read hundreds of scripts, met with a large number of exceptional writers and been involved in active development on more than 30 projects.

Some of them held fast and became a permanent entry on our slate, jostling for position with the others to see which film would be the next to be greenlit.

The problem comes when there are too few resources available and a minor hiccup in one production can cause a chain reaction right the way down the line.

Well, that hiccup (in the form of an investor who backed out of ‘Det grå guld’ (Grey Gold) at the last minute) happened a little over a year ago, and now we have a slate that is full to bursting point.

To take on and begin to develop any more projects would not only be unfair to the writers of those new projects, but also to the very patient and understanding writers and directors we have already attached to the projects on our slate.

Now that post-production on ‘Det grå guld’ is about to finish, Zeitgeist Film can go into production on 2 more films this year and then the momentum we had a few years ago will return.

In the meantime, I am taking an extended leave to go off and do some developing. I have created a website called scriptguyphil.com, which should be live within a couple of weeks. Developing scripts is what I do best and its what I enjoy the most.

Whilst I undertake the challenge of getting scriptguyphil.com up to speed, it will give Zeitgeist Film a chance to make some movies without me adding to the backlog, and then we can finally aim for our goal of making two films a year – every year!

Happy writing (and see you soon!)

BULLHEAD goes to Berlin!

Matthias Schoenaerts, Michaël R. Roskam, Nicolas Karakatsanis Photo: M. Vanden Abeele

In February of 2008 I read a script by Belgian writer Michaël Roskam called The Fields. I liked it a lot, and Michaël thought the feedback I gave him was useful enough that the production company, Savage Film, took me on as a script consultant.

The following two years proved challenging and enjoyable, and last year the film was shot.
Now called Rundskop (Bullhead) it will be released in Belgium on February 2nd, almost three years after my first involvement.

However, a couple of days ago, Michaël called to tell me that the film has been accepted onto the World Cinema section Panorama at the Berlin Film Festival.

Apart from being very happy for Michaël, I felt a sense of pride that the hard work that we did on the script is paying dividends.

And we needed to work very hard...

Rundskop (Bullhead) is a complex crime story set in the world of illegal growth hormones for cattle, but it is also a moving story about how a traumatic incident in their childhood has put two friends on opposite sides of the law.

The script contains a parallel structure as we follow the present day crime story intercutting with flashbacks from the boys’ childhood. Where and when to make those cuts was discussed, debated and argued about throughout the development process. These cuts were, of course, refined and adjusted in the cutting room, but if Michaël and I hadn’t spent many hours on this challenging problem at the script stage, the editing would have taken much longer and been a much tougher task that it already was. It is also more cost effective to do it at the script stage, which is something I wish more producers would take into consideration more often.

Despite having a clear main character, the script also has more than a dozen large supporting roles. As the film needed to be brought in at around the 2 hour mark, it was essential that all the supporting characters were clearly defined and multilayered as economically as possible – especially considering that some very important characters had such a limited screen time. We brainstormed them all working out how best to make these characters real and avoid cliché and stereotype.

All of the development work we did was via e-mail and most importantly Skype. There was many an evening where we would both sit in the dark in our respective houses in our respective countries talking about how to make the script better. In this digital age it means that people from all over the world can work together, whenever. I think this really helped in this case as Michaël and I worked well together and plan to do so again on Michaël’s next film.

What I am looking forward to now is, finally, at long last, meeting Michaël face to face in Berlin, and getting to see Rundskop on the big screen.

For the international trailer, go to:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZnPqAHd1_4

and for more information on the film, visit the production company’s website.

http://www.savagefilm.be/home/

Happy writing.

A NEW PERSPECTIVE

Still taken from “Field of Dreams” – Kevin Costner & Dwier Brown


Or how a change in your life affects your movie watching

(Warning – this blog post contains spoilers for Field of Dreams including the very end of the film!)

I first saw Field of Dreams, written and directed by Phil Alden Robinson, in the cinema when it opened in 1989. It was a film that I liked a lot – the first hour absolutely flies by in a very hypnotic way. I bought the film when it came out on video and must have watched it a few times in the following years.

Cut to 2010 and my wife finds a DVD of the film in a bargain bucket and buys it – she’s never seen it and knows that I like the film. A few days later we settle down on the sofa, pop the film in the player and start watching. The first hour or so moves along in its usual hypnotic fashion and it is actually better than I remembered. Then the strangest thing happened,...

- I began to cry – a lot.

About 20 minutes from the end, tears formed in my eyes and my stomach tightened. Then, for the last ten minutes it is very hard to focus – I’ve reached the point when there’s no chance of hiding or controlling the emotions I’m feeling.

Now, I remember it being a moving ending, but it had never hit me this hard before. Until I remembered what the approaching final scene was – Ray (Kevin Costner) finally got to meet and play catch with his estranged father who had actually died a number of years before. To play catch with each other was the remedy for the emotional pain the men had been through.

In 2002, my own father died, and the reason the film hit me so hard is because this was the first time I had seen it since that major event in my life.

The simple act of a game of catch helped remind me of the good times we had, but also awoke certain longings in me, making me yearn for the opportunity to kick a football with him again.

Our daily lives and the people around us affect the way we watch movies, but they will also have a deep effect on how we make them.

An actor has to delve deep into a character to be able to mine and use all the emotion in order to help their performance.

As a writer, you need to delve deeply into ALL of your characters to mould them and shape them in a way that helps you say what you want to say. I’d suggest that this is practically impossible to do without utilizing your surroundings and the things that affect you in your day-to-day existence.

It is important to look at both the little things and the life-changing moments in life and how they offer a new perspective on your work. Try and recall the moments from your past that have provoked the strongest or most unusual emotional response. An ability to access these emotions is strong tool to have in your toolbox.

How does your daily life influence your work? Or has there been a major event in your past that has helped you take your writing in an unusual direction? Let us know.

There’s a little piece of you in all your characters after all, right?

Happy writing.

THE INVISIBLE INFLUENCE

Matthias Schoenaerts, Michaël R. Roskam, Nicolas Karakatsanis
Photo: M. Vanden Abeele


Recently I had the pleasure of watching a film from Belgium called Rundskop (Bullhead). Apart from really enjoying the film, written and directed by Michaël Roskam, I was lucky enough to work as a script consultant on the project.

One of the things that I liked most about the film from a script perspective is that my influence on the final film is impossible to spot. The film is Michaël’s vision, it is his story – and that is exactly the way it should be.

If I had a motto it would read something like “helping you make your story better”.

My job as a script consultant is to help the writer find out what they want to say and then to make sure that they have all the options and ammunition to tell a story that helps them achieve their goal in the best possible way.

I ask questions rather than give answers. Naturally, I will always come up with suggestions and ideas about how to solve specific problems if that is what the writer wants, but in an ideal world I will use questions to prompt and probe the writer in a way that will get them to find the solutions based on what they want to say with the script. This is the most satisfactory outcome for all concerned and in my opinion it nearly always creates a better end result.

If I put my fingerprints all over the script, then the writer’s vision is being diluted, which defeats the whole objective of film as an art form. I know that I had some influence in the way that the script of Rundskop was formed, Michaël has said as much and the differences in the drafts from when I began on the project to the finished film are clear. However, it is Michaël that has done the hard work creatively, I have just been his guide – an invisible influence.

For a teaser trailer, go to:-

www.rundskop.be

and for more information on the film, visit the production company’s website.

www.savagefilm.be/home/


Happy writing.

VARIETY IS THE SPICE OF LIFE

LOVEFilm is European for Netflix and up until now I have seen 60 films.
One of the things you can do is to rate each film with 1 – 5 stars. Now this is a bit arbitrary and not something that I like to do – for me, enjoyment and analysis of a film is more complex than 1 – 5 stars!

However, late one evening when I wasn’t quite ready to go to bed, I was browsing the site and decided on a whim to rate those films that I’d seen.
The vast majority got between 2 and 4 stars, but there were three films that reached the Phil-Rutter-rating-nirvana that is 5 stars!

Those films were:
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
The Prestige
and
[REC]

A slow-burning, exquisitely shot and detailed Western, a mystical drama thriller full of twists and turns, and a visceral, shoot-from-the-hip Spanish horror film.

Apart from being pleased that there was a certain amount of variety in these three films showing that I don’t gravitate to a particular genre or film type, I soon realized why these films had reached the heights of the top of my DVD rental list –

I had a strong emotional reaction to everything about them.

That emotional reaction is the main thing I look for in every film I see and what I look for in every script that I read.

I never know where the emotional connection I have with a story is going to come from, which is why it is important that I remain as open as possible to all genres and storytelling styles.

Keeping an open mind will add variety to your life, as well as to your movie watching and movie making, so take each film as it comes and try not to pre-judge – you may find a new experience waiting to ambush you.

Happy writing!

THE LONG DRIVE

- OR HOW MUCH MILEAGE DOES THIS RELATIONSHIP HAVE
When I’m assessing when to take on a new project or not, there are a number of things to consider. The majority, naturally, concern the script. Is it any good? Can the writer write? Does the writer have the necessary skills to take the project all the way to production? How’s the structure, characters, etc, etc. The list is long.

One of the other things to consider concerns that of the writer as a person. Regardless of whether the development process takes months or even years, the writer is someone that I will be spending a lot of time with.

I have to ask myself a key question – am I going to be able to work with this person?
After the first couple of ‘getting to know you’ meetings I pose myself a simple scenario.
“How would I cope if I was alone in a car with this person on a 500 mile drive? Would the relationship flourish or crumble?”

I’m not saying that I try to be best friends with every writer that I work with, but there has to be some sort of personal connection for me to realize that the development process will be a collaborative and productive one. If a writer is simply not a nice person and refuses to respect those that they are working with, then it means that the level of collaboration necessary to turn a script into a film just won’t be there.

There have been 2 occasions in the last 10 years where the development process stalled simply because a writer was not pleasant to be around. Cantankerous and being argumentative about absolutely every little detail are not good qualities when it comes to teamwork.
The majority of producers and production companies have several projects in development and if the writer/producer relationship isn’t working and there is a certain amount of animosity, then 9 times out of 10 the producer will call time on the project if it is becoming too much of an issue, regardless of how good the project is.

I love working with good writers, but when push comes to shove and they are people that aren’t enjoyable to work with, I get the feeling that life is too short, and I will look for good writer who is nice instead.
Happy writing!

READING BETWEEN THE LINES

- AN EXAMPLE OF SUBTEXT IN LOST IN TRANSLATION
One of the constants in the scripts that I read is that the good ones will utilize strong subtext, and the not-so-good ones won’t.

Subtext gives character and dialogue depth in the form of an extra layer, and the more meaning you can give the subtext, the richer your script will be.

It is especially important in scripts that are more character driven. When you spend a lot of time with characters that drive the story through conversation, then it is imperative that the dialogue you give those characters invokes as much response from the audience as possible. If the dialogue is continually matching precisely what the characters are thinking, then the script will soon become tedious.

As an example of a strong use of subtext, here is one single speech from Sofia Coppola’s Lost in Translation.

It comes exactly 31 minutes into the film and is the moment when Charlotte (Scarlett Johansson) and Bob (Bill Murray) speak to each other for the first time. We have seen Charlotte acknowledge and show interest in Bob in the bar in an earlier scene, but otherwise there has been no interaction until now.

The scene plays out like this:-

CHARLOTTE
So what are you doing here?

BOB
A couple of things. Taking a break
from my wife. Forgetting my son’s
birthday. And getting paid $2 mill
to endorse a whiskey, when I could be
doing a play somewhere.

Now, bearing in mind that the interpretation of art is subjective and that there is no right and wrong, here is the subtext that I read into this dialogue:-

Taking a break from my wife --- I’m available

Forgetting my son’s birthday --- I can admit my mistakes/I have compassion

Getting paid $2 mill to endorse a whiskey --- I’m mega-rich

When I could be doing a play somewhere --- I still have artistic integrity

When I see this scene play out, it’s like a double punch. The first and third lines convey his status and pave the way to impress others (the ‘public’ Bob Harris), but the second and fourth lines indicate how Bob is or at least wants to be (the ‘real’ Bob Harris).
All in all, it shows Bob in a good light and we can understand that Charlotte becomes fascinated by him. It also feels very practiced from Bob’s perspective and it is easy to imagine that this is something that this is a skill that Bob has cultivated over the years to get on the right side of his ‘public’.

However you read the subtext in this scene, it goes to show that the more information you can put behind the words, the richer it can be.
An example of how a lack of subtext makes dialogue feel a bit flat is the exact same speech in the shooting script!

BOB
My wife needs space, I don't know my
kids' birthdays. Everyone wants
Tiger Woods, but they could get me,
so I'm here doing a whiskey
commercial.

There’s something about this piece of dialogue that doesn’t give any information other than what is being said – other than a minor inferiority complex over Tiger Woods!
Regardless of what happened between the shooting script and the finished film, the speech we get to see, which comes at one of the story’s key moments (the first meeting of Charlotte and Bob), is a much richer piece of writing and gives the relationship that will become the driving force of the film a certain amount of weight at just the right time.
Happy writing!

PHIL RUTTER

My name is Phil Rutter and I am the Head of Development at Zeitgeist Film in Copenhagen.

My aim in this blog is to give a little insight in the script development process and the day-to-day workings of how a script moves through the various stages to production.

I’m very much a nuts-and-bolts kind of guy who sees each and every script as a new, inviting challenge. That means that I’m going to tackle specific issues with these posts and look as often as possible at the aspects of script writing not as readily discussed.

But first, a little background.

After 10 years as a dramaturge in the UK theatre industry, I went to the European Film College, Denmark in 1995. The following year I took the intensive film-makers course at the New York Film Academy.

In 1998, my feature script Over the Wall was optioned by Polish production company Open Door Entertainments, but sadly never made. It was during this development process however, through more re-writes and meetings than I care to remember, that I realized my strengths lay in development rather than writing as I learnt the ins-and-outs of a film script and how the process worked.

In 2002 I was hired by Zeitgeist Film to re-write science fiction script Under the Stars, and soon after I was reading scripts and developing the projects on their slate. Once fluent in Danish in 2006, I became Head of Development.

I also work as a freelance script consultant – scriptguyphil.com - and have worked on materiel by, amongst others, Nikolaj Arcel, Ole Bornedal and Rune Bendixen, and for film companies such as Zentropa, Nimbus Film and Belgian company Savage Film.

I have also studied with and been mentored by Christine Vachon, Ted Hope, Linda Aronson, Stephen Cleary, Paul Schrader and Philip LaZebnik.

On a personal note, I have been based in Copenhagen since 2000 with a Danish wife and two children, and the film quiz team I play on has been Danish champions for the last two years and we are well on our way to making it three years running!

So stay tuned and hopefully they will be something here that you like. If not, then please let me know and I’ll happily turn your suggestions into blog posts.

Happy writing