Kenneth Atchity's Blog, page 133
September 14, 2017
JST DAVID Receives Inaugural Dan Ireland Scholarship
David Jones II, aka JST DAVIDSinger-songwriter David Jones II, aka "JST DAVID" has been awarded the inaugural Dan Ireland Memorial Scholarship by the Louisiana International Film Festival (LIFF) and the Dan Ireland Legacy Committee.
He will use the scholarship towards a private listening event for the album hosted by LIFF at the Peppermint Club in Hollywood, CA on Saturday, September 23rd. David will be performing two shows scheduled at 4:00PM and 6:00PM. Doors will open at 3:00PM. More information and RSVP online are available here, or click the ticket below:
Notable industry RSVP's include Russ Regan - former President of Motown, UNI, Polygram and 20th Century Records. Regan is one of two individuals in the music industry to ever sell over one billion records as an executive, discovering and breaking artists such as The Beach Boys, Elton John, Neil Diamond, Barry White, and many others. He currently serves as Executive Consultant to JST DAVID, alongside Executive Producer Michael Winchester - saxophonist, musical director and the creator of "Motown 45".
JST DAVID has been involved with LIFF and the Mentorship Program for several years, performing at LIFF's annual film festival in Baton Rouge in 2016 & 2017. His debut album "Day One" is slated for release in October, which was co-written and produced by Grammy nominated, multi-platinum producer Preston Glass.
Dan IrelandDan Ireland resided in Los Angeles, CA, and was a revered mentor to a countless number of acclaimed actors, directors, music composers, producers, writers and more, serving as Artistic Director of LIFF from its inception in 2012 until his untimely death in 2016.
In celebration of his legacy, the Louisiana International Film Festival & Mentorship Program (LIFF) along with generous Patrons created the scholarship commemorating Ireland's dedication to new talent, storytellers and visionaries. Louisiana artists and filmmakers are eligible for consideration, and funds from the scholarship are dedicated towards an event, showcase or internship in Los Angeles on the recipient's behalf.
For sponsorship opportunities for brands & businesses for the September 23rd event in Los Angeles, call Peggy McDonald at 310-709-2851, or email peggy@lifilmfest.org.
The Louisiana International Film Festival & Mentorship Program (LIFF) is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization founded in 2011 dedicated to the development of Louisiana's film, music and innovation talent and representation of that talent to the world via the annual Louisiana International Film Festival & Mentorship Program (LIFF), Louisiana Film Society and Special Events. LIFF aims to provide a platform where talent can foster ideas, skills and relationships that enable them to fulfill their full potential as artists and innovators.
LIFF has hosted luminaries in the industry, such as Academy Award-Winning Actress Renee Zellweger (JERRY MAGUIRE, THE WHOLE WIDE WORLD), Vincent D'Onofrio (FULL METAL JACKET, BROKEN HORSES), Academy Award-Nominated Actress Sally Kirkland (ANNA), Christy Turlington Burns (GIVING BIRTH IN AMERICA), Kelsey Grammer (FRASIER, BREAKING THE BANK), Academy Award-Winning Cinematographer Maro Fiore (AVATAR, TRAINING DAY), Princess Shaw (PRESENTING PRINCESS SHAW), Bernard Rose (CANDYMAN, IMMORTAL BELOVED, FRANKENSTEIN, THE DEVIL&'S VIOLINIST), Xavier Samuel (THE TWILIGHT SAGA, FRANKENSTEIN), Leslie Zemeckis (BOUND BY FLESH), Academy Award-Winning Documentary Short Team Jeff Consiglio (LIFE ACCORDING TO SAM, INOCENTE), Library of Congress Photographer Bob Adelman (1963 Retrospective Exhibit), Emily Best (CEO Seed & Spark), Chris Garrity (Head of Innovation for Superbowl), Iman Sadeghi (Google), Scout Raskin (Comedy Central) and many more.
LIFF 2018 is scheduled to host a showcase of world class film, music and educational programming April 12-15, 2018 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
September 13, 2017
What do you get when you give a design tool a digital nervous system?
Computers that improve our ability to think and imagine, and robotic systems that come up with (and build) radical new designs for bridges, cars, drones and much more -- all by themselves. Take a tour of the Augmented Age with futurist Maurice Conti and preview a time when robots and humans will work side-by-side to accomplish things neither could do alone.
September 11, 2017
Fran Lewis: Just reviews/MJ magazine Reviews Rat Pack Party Girl: Jane McCormick with Patti Wicklund
From her 1960s sexcapades with the likes of Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Peter Lawford, and Vic Damone, to sex-trade survivor and women's advocate the former Rat Pack high-roller tells a wrenching story of endurance!
Some stories are told with passion, heart and feeling. Some stories need to be told in order to enlighten the world about events that might not always be in the headlines of a newspaper or a newscast but need to be brought to the public. This story needs to be told and retold so that women, children, young boys and girls, young adults become aware of the pitfalls of falling for the lies, deceits, deceptions and unsavory behaviors of those that would prey on the weaknesses of others.
In 2007 Jane McCormick's perspective on life took on a different turn and Jane would decide to write a book called Breaking her Silence: Confessions of a Rat Pack Party Girl and Sex Trade Survivor. The title was Patti’s idea and a good one. Printing over 2000 copies and things changed greatly as the interviews came and Jane met with FBI agents, law enforcement agencies and more hoping to help other women. Jane explains how she and Patti have helped other women, dealt with her adversities and had the courage, bravery and forethought to come out and tell this story.
This is a story that although some of the scenes are graphic and the language strong should be read by young adults and adults starting out in life teaching them what never to do. Never let anyone own you body and soul. Never become someone you are not. Never let anyone tell you that you are worthless and never stay silent when someone abuses you. Schools need to be more vigilant, parents need to be more aware and Jane your story needed to be told.
Some women wind up with STD’S, AIDS, and other communicable diseases some just give up. Jane chose to stand tall and look herself in the mirror and be able to realize she is special, she counts and most of all deserves the admiration of so many for telling this amazing first hand account of what happens when you have to do anything to survive. Told in narrative form and told with heart and soul this book deserves
FIVE GOLDEN STARS.
Fran Lewis: Just reviews/MJ magazine
Some stories are told with passion, heart and feeling. Some stories need to be told in order to enlighten the world about events that might not always be in the headlines of a newspaper or a newscast but need to be brought to the public. This story needs to be told and retold so that women, children, young boys and girls, young adults become aware of the pitfalls of falling for the lies, deceits, deceptions and unsavory behaviors of those that would prey on the weaknesses of others.
In 2007 Jane McCormick's perspective on life took on a different turn and Jane would decide to write a book called Breaking her Silence: Confessions of a Rat Pack Party Girl and Sex Trade Survivor. The title was Patti’s idea and a good one. Printing over 2000 copies and things changed greatly as the interviews came and Jane met with FBI agents, law enforcement agencies and more hoping to help other women. Jane explains how she and Patti have helped other women, dealt with her adversities and had the courage, bravery and forethought to come out and tell this story.
This is a story that although some of the scenes are graphic and the language strong should be read by young adults and adults starting out in life teaching them what never to do. Never let anyone own you body and soul. Never become someone you are not. Never let anyone tell you that you are worthless and never stay silent when someone abuses you. Schools need to be more vigilant, parents need to be more aware and Jane your story needed to be told.
Some women wind up with STD’S, AIDS, and other communicable diseases some just give up. Jane chose to stand tall and look herself in the mirror and be able to realize she is special, she counts and most of all deserves the admiration of so many for telling this amazing first hand account of what happens when you have to do anything to survive. Told in narrative form and told with heart and soul this book deserves
FIVE GOLDEN STARS.
Fran Lewis: Just reviews/MJ magazine
September 9, 2017
Barbara DeMarco-Barrett Discusses Dennis Palumbo's Therapy Practice with Writers in the Latest Issue of the Authors Guild Bulletin
The Writing Life The Enemy Within 
Most writers I know, from rank beginners to seasoned professionals, give themselves a hard time one way or another, at one time or another. We’re not good enough writers, we procrastinate too long, we worry over how what we’re working on is going to turn out. When we get notes back from friends we asked to read our drafts, our hackles go up and we experience everything from shame to embarrassment to anger. Sound familiar?
Los Angeles psychotherapist and author Dennis Palumbo has heard it all. Writers make up 80 to 90 percent of his practice. The rest work in other creative fields, so he deals with these issues every day of his working life.
Palumbo is a former writer for screen (My Favorite Year) and TV (Welcome Back, Kotter) and the author of Writing from the Inside Out: Transforming Your Psychological Blocks to Release the Writer Within (Wiley). He has published a collection of short stories, is currently working on his fifth Daniel Rinaldi mystery novel for Poisoned Pen Press and writes a column for PsychologyToday.com.
Palumbo was a successful screenwriter having his best year financially when he decided to leave screenwriting to become a therapist. While in Nepal working on a Robert Redford film on mountain climbing, he had what he calls “a little bit of a Razor’s Edge experience.” He returned home, started seeing a therapist and began taking psychology classes. He had no intention of becoming a therapist, he says, but decided it wasn’t a bad idea for a writer to have a master’s degree in psychology. As part of his training, he ran a group therapy session for schizophrenics. He was meeting with a producer about a movie the producer wanted him to write when his thoughts drifted to his patients and triggered a second insight. “I had a Road to Damascus moment and thought, I don’t want to do this anymore.”
Twenty-eight years later, he’s a licensed psychotherapist who specializes in creative issues and has no regrets. He continues to write, but only what he loves. He spends most days with patients and their issues: writers’ block, procrastination, anxiety, the inner critic, author envy and more. During his lunch hour, he writes fiction.
It will likely come as no surprise to hear that writers’ block is the most consistent of patient concerns. No matter how many successes writers have, he says, they suspect their success is a fluke. “With the next thing they write,” he says, “they’re sure they’re going to be found out.” He tries to impress upon patients the fact that writing is hard — very hard — and he encourages them to resist making themselves the problem. “What writers are trying to do is difficult,” says Palumbo, “and the difficulty is not a referendum on their character or their talent.” It’s easy, he adds, “to imagine that you alone suffer from this fear, that Agatha Christie, F. Scott Fitzgerald, name your favorite writer — never struggled with it.”
And when writers are having a hard time, or thinking too much about the future of their writing, it can lead to procrastination. “If you’ve had good reception to your first book and are afraid of the critical reception you imagine awaits your second book, you’ll procrastinate.” And while you may think you’re procrastinating because you need to know exactly what you’re going to write before you begin, in Palumbo’s view, it’s more often caused by fear of self-exposure. “For many people, the smaller shame of procrastinating is better than the bigger shame of what people are going to say about you when the work is done.”
As with most issues writers bring to him, he reduces that fear to “family of origin” issues. How you take criticism is a direct offshoot of how you experienced criticism as a child and echoes the messages your parents gave you as to your inner worth. It’s up to the writer how that criticism is interpreted and personalized. “A parent can say, ‘You’re an idiot,’ and one kid laughs it off while another crumbles. If you come from a family where you were highly criticized, criticism is horrible. If you were praised to the sky, you will also find criticism extraordinarily hard and painful.”
The more a writer understands that criticism is subjective, that it’s the opinion of someone with different artistic or commercial goals, the less it’s seen as a critique of you as a person. “But,” says Palumbo, “we’re all human and it’s very difficult not to take criticism personally. When an agent of mine once said I shouldn’t take the rejection of a script of mine personally, I said, ‘How should I take it — impersonally?’”
Which is one reason he says screenwriters are the unhappiest writers. Apart from not owning the copyright to their work, screenwriters must deal both with too many people who have script approval over them and with the stream of notes that continually churn the writer’s original story, something that rarely happens with fiction. The number-one horror of being a screenwriter, Palumbo says, is that “the writer is removed from his or her unconscious and begins to accommodate the studio or the star. The screenwriter, who knows the most about the story and character, and has labored hardest, sees his or her work changed in a minute. I was in advertising before I became a screenwriter and screenwriting is a lot like the advertising business. People come to Hollywood looking for an approving parent,” he says, “and that’s the worst place to find one.”
Unlike a novel, the screenplay structure is unforgiving. “Structure is everything and every scene has to move the movie forward. Movies are mostly plot driven and the director is king. The best stuff for writers now is on television. It’s character driven, like novels. In TV, the writer is king. Every screenwriter in my practice is developing TV projects.”
Writer envy — and worship — rarely yield happy results. “So many writers come in and say, ‘I’m no John Updike,’ and I say, ‘That job has been filled by John Updike so be the best you can be.’” Because “if you think that Hemingway was a great writer and that you’re a piece of crap, it’s going to be hard starting your next novel.” Smart writers compare themselves to themselves rather than to someone else. And one of the many self-defeating forms of comparison is thinking you don’t have an interesting enough life to be a writer. One of my favorite chapters in Writing from the Inside Out is “Write About Dogs.” It’s a takeoff on an old Booth cartoon and it has to do with using who you are as the raw materials for your work. “The thing about writing,” says Palumbo, “is no matter how particular or idiosyncratic your story is, it can generalize out to everyone. You didn’t have to grow up in Dublin to understand Angela’s Ashes. Ray Bradbury said there’s only one story in the world and it’s your story.”
Many writers believe that self-aggrandizement is a lousy quality and that it’s better to be humble. Humility is great, Palumbo says, but “successful artists of all stripes need a good amount of healthy narcissism. At some level, it has to feel urgent.” And if you don’t believe in you, who will? He goes on to say that writers should feel like that five-year-old coming home with a drawing: If you draw it, it has to go on the wall. The same goes for writing. It has to feel like a calling. You feel good when you write and bad when you don’t. “Annie Dillard said if you write long enough, your body changes on a cellular level, so if you’re not writing, it feels wrong.”
That belief in the writing self is paramount. No matter when you started writing, you need that belief in yourself to be able to withstand rejection and all of the other obstacles the writing life brings. Writers who started at a young age usually see themselves more clearly as writers than those who come to writing later. But those who’ve had success in another profession can bring the same skill set, work habits and self-regard to writing that got them through med school or law school. “There is no one answer,” says Palumbo. “What motivates or hamstrings one writer is not the same for all writers. There’s no ‘one size fits all.’ I say keep giving them you until you is what they want. I see so many patients who say they want to write the next big seller. When The Da Vinci Code came out, a lot of my patients wanted to write that. When you do that, you’re dead. The best thing is to write your own reality. If it’s your karma, the powers that be will want that. We all know stories of authors who’ve written books we love that were rejected by dozens of publishers.”
The goal of therapy, says Palumbo, is self-awareness, to be aware of the behaviors that are tripping you up. “I say insight is the booby prize of therapy. People don’t change with insight. People change with courage. You have to coexist with that which makes you anxious. You can be anxious or fearful that what you’re writing is not any good, but you write it anyway. If you sit around waiting to feel confident, you’ve got a long wait.”
So does perseverance pay off? In his 28 years of practicing psychotherapy, Palumbo says he’s never had a patient not achieve an element of his or her dreams. It may be that the person who wanted to be a TV writer ended up writing a web series. The would-be novelist becomes a successful writer of nonfiction books.
“It may not be everything you want, but the ultimate goal for a writer is to develop a healthy relationship with his or her own writing process. Agents come and go, publishers come and go, trends come and go, but having a profound, intimate relationship with process is the best protection there is. It’s the only thing that sustains.”
Barbara DeMarco-Barrett is a writer in Southern California. She is the host of Writers on Writing on KUCI-FM and teaches at Gotham Writer’s Workshop. She has noir fiction in USA Noir: Best of the Akashic Noir Series and her book, Pen on Fire: A Busy Woman’s Guide to Igniting the Writer Within is in its 11th printing.
Read more
Most writers I know, from rank beginners to seasoned professionals, give themselves a hard time one way or another, at one time or another. We’re not good enough writers, we procrastinate too long, we worry over how what we’re working on is going to turn out. When we get notes back from friends we asked to read our drafts, our hackles go up and we experience everything from shame to embarrassment to anger. Sound familiar?
Los Angeles psychotherapist and author Dennis Palumbo has heard it all. Writers make up 80 to 90 percent of his practice. The rest work in other creative fields, so he deals with these issues every day of his working life.
Palumbo is a former writer for screen (My Favorite Year) and TV (Welcome Back, Kotter) and the author of Writing from the Inside Out: Transforming Your Psychological Blocks to Release the Writer Within (Wiley). He has published a collection of short stories, is currently working on his fifth Daniel Rinaldi mystery novel for Poisoned Pen Press and writes a column for PsychologyToday.com.
Palumbo was a successful screenwriter having his best year financially when he decided to leave screenwriting to become a therapist. While in Nepal working on a Robert Redford film on mountain climbing, he had what he calls “a little bit of a Razor’s Edge experience.” He returned home, started seeing a therapist and began taking psychology classes. He had no intention of becoming a therapist, he says, but decided it wasn’t a bad idea for a writer to have a master’s degree in psychology. As part of his training, he ran a group therapy session for schizophrenics. He was meeting with a producer about a movie the producer wanted him to write when his thoughts drifted to his patients and triggered a second insight. “I had a Road to Damascus moment and thought, I don’t want to do this anymore.”
Twenty-eight years later, he’s a licensed psychotherapist who specializes in creative issues and has no regrets. He continues to write, but only what he loves. He spends most days with patients and their issues: writers’ block, procrastination, anxiety, the inner critic, author envy and more. During his lunch hour, he writes fiction.
It will likely come as no surprise to hear that writers’ block is the most consistent of patient concerns. No matter how many successes writers have, he says, they suspect their success is a fluke. “With the next thing they write,” he says, “they’re sure they’re going to be found out.” He tries to impress upon patients the fact that writing is hard — very hard — and he encourages them to resist making themselves the problem. “What writers are trying to do is difficult,” says Palumbo, “and the difficulty is not a referendum on their character or their talent.” It’s easy, he adds, “to imagine that you alone suffer from this fear, that Agatha Christie, F. Scott Fitzgerald, name your favorite writer — never struggled with it.”
And when writers are having a hard time, or thinking too much about the future of their writing, it can lead to procrastination. “If you’ve had good reception to your first book and are afraid of the critical reception you imagine awaits your second book, you’ll procrastinate.” And while you may think you’re procrastinating because you need to know exactly what you’re going to write before you begin, in Palumbo’s view, it’s more often caused by fear of self-exposure. “For many people, the smaller shame of procrastinating is better than the bigger shame of what people are going to say about you when the work is done.”
As with most issues writers bring to him, he reduces that fear to “family of origin” issues. How you take criticism is a direct offshoot of how you experienced criticism as a child and echoes the messages your parents gave you as to your inner worth. It’s up to the writer how that criticism is interpreted and personalized. “A parent can say, ‘You’re an idiot,’ and one kid laughs it off while another crumbles. If you come from a family where you were highly criticized, criticism is horrible. If you were praised to the sky, you will also find criticism extraordinarily hard and painful.”
The more a writer understands that criticism is subjective, that it’s the opinion of someone with different artistic or commercial goals, the less it’s seen as a critique of you as a person. “But,” says Palumbo, “we’re all human and it’s very difficult not to take criticism personally. When an agent of mine once said I shouldn’t take the rejection of a script of mine personally, I said, ‘How should I take it — impersonally?’”
Which is one reason he says screenwriters are the unhappiest writers. Apart from not owning the copyright to their work, screenwriters must deal both with too many people who have script approval over them and with the stream of notes that continually churn the writer’s original story, something that rarely happens with fiction. The number-one horror of being a screenwriter, Palumbo says, is that “the writer is removed from his or her unconscious and begins to accommodate the studio or the star. The screenwriter, who knows the most about the story and character, and has labored hardest, sees his or her work changed in a minute. I was in advertising before I became a screenwriter and screenwriting is a lot like the advertising business. People come to Hollywood looking for an approving parent,” he says, “and that’s the worst place to find one.”
Unlike a novel, the screenplay structure is unforgiving. “Structure is everything and every scene has to move the movie forward. Movies are mostly plot driven and the director is king. The best stuff for writers now is on television. It’s character driven, like novels. In TV, the writer is king. Every screenwriter in my practice is developing TV projects.”
Writer envy — and worship — rarely yield happy results. “So many writers come in and say, ‘I’m no John Updike,’ and I say, ‘That job has been filled by John Updike so be the best you can be.’” Because “if you think that Hemingway was a great writer and that you’re a piece of crap, it’s going to be hard starting your next novel.” Smart writers compare themselves to themselves rather than to someone else. And one of the many self-defeating forms of comparison is thinking you don’t have an interesting enough life to be a writer. One of my favorite chapters in Writing from the Inside Out is “Write About Dogs.” It’s a takeoff on an old Booth cartoon and it has to do with using who you are as the raw materials for your work. “The thing about writing,” says Palumbo, “is no matter how particular or idiosyncratic your story is, it can generalize out to everyone. You didn’t have to grow up in Dublin to understand Angela’s Ashes. Ray Bradbury said there’s only one story in the world and it’s your story.”
Many writers believe that self-aggrandizement is a lousy quality and that it’s better to be humble. Humility is great, Palumbo says, but “successful artists of all stripes need a good amount of healthy narcissism. At some level, it has to feel urgent.” And if you don’t believe in you, who will? He goes on to say that writers should feel like that five-year-old coming home with a drawing: If you draw it, it has to go on the wall. The same goes for writing. It has to feel like a calling. You feel good when you write and bad when you don’t. “Annie Dillard said if you write long enough, your body changes on a cellular level, so if you’re not writing, it feels wrong.”
That belief in the writing self is paramount. No matter when you started writing, you need that belief in yourself to be able to withstand rejection and all of the other obstacles the writing life brings. Writers who started at a young age usually see themselves more clearly as writers than those who come to writing later. But those who’ve had success in another profession can bring the same skill set, work habits and self-regard to writing that got them through med school or law school. “There is no one answer,” says Palumbo. “What motivates or hamstrings one writer is not the same for all writers. There’s no ‘one size fits all.’ I say keep giving them you until you is what they want. I see so many patients who say they want to write the next big seller. When The Da Vinci Code came out, a lot of my patients wanted to write that. When you do that, you’re dead. The best thing is to write your own reality. If it’s your karma, the powers that be will want that. We all know stories of authors who’ve written books we love that were rejected by dozens of publishers.”
The goal of therapy, says Palumbo, is self-awareness, to be aware of the behaviors that are tripping you up. “I say insight is the booby prize of therapy. People don’t change with insight. People change with courage. You have to coexist with that which makes you anxious. You can be anxious or fearful that what you’re writing is not any good, but you write it anyway. If you sit around waiting to feel confident, you’ve got a long wait.”
So does perseverance pay off? In his 28 years of practicing psychotherapy, Palumbo says he’s never had a patient not achieve an element of his or her dreams. It may be that the person who wanted to be a TV writer ended up writing a web series. The would-be novelist becomes a successful writer of nonfiction books.
“It may not be everything you want, but the ultimate goal for a writer is to develop a healthy relationship with his or her own writing process. Agents come and go, publishers come and go, trends come and go, but having a profound, intimate relationship with process is the best protection there is. It’s the only thing that sustains.”
Barbara DeMarco-Barrett is a writer in Southern California. She is the host of Writers on Writing on KUCI-FM and teaches at Gotham Writer’s Workshop. She has noir fiction in USA Noir: Best of the Akashic Noir Series and her book, Pen on Fire: A Busy Woman’s Guide to Igniting the Writer Within is in its 11th printing.
Read more
September 8, 2017
September 7, 2017
What do you get when you give a design tool a digital nervous system?
Computers that improve our ability to think and imagine, and robotic systems that come up with (and build) radical new designs for bridges, cars, drones and much more -- all by themselves. Take a tour of the Augmented Age with futurist Maurice Conti and preview a time when robots and humans will work side-by-side to accomplish things neither could do alone.
When ‘Based on a True Story’ Becomes a Lawsuit
A judge has greenlit a trial for author Gerald Brittle against Warner Bros. for the rights to paranormal specialists Ed and Lorraine Warren’s story, specifically the events featured in his book “The Demonologist” and The Conjuring movie franchise. Claiming the rights to a true event seems like a bold move, but this case is a convoluted one. However, Warner Bros. could have avoided this huge lawsuit.Before writing his book in 1978, Brittle made an agreement with the Warrens that for the rights to their story, there cannot be any “competing work,” which included movies. This provision in their book deal is still in effect today but Brittle was never asked for permission to use the events in his book in The Conjuring. Instead, the producers went directly to Lorraine Warren, who gave her okay.
Warner Bros. explanation for their disregard for Brittle’s book deal is that one person cannot have “a monopoly to tell stories about true-life figures and events.” The Conjuring claims what happens in the film is based on real events of the Warren files, but Brittle begs to differ.
There is no historical evidence of the witch, Satanic child sacrifices, and even possession that is featured in the movie. Those events take place in Brittle’s book, which he says the Warrens fabricated (unbeknownst to Brittle at the time of writing the book). So Brittle argues that the movie is based on his book instead of facts. He even goes into arguing that the production company told screenwriters not to read his book because they didn’t have the rights to it. How Brittle would know that is unclear.
This will be a tough case to decide on, especially since the subject matter is paranormal activities that can’t be truly proven. With that in mind, it might have been smarter on Warner Bros.’ part to cut the “based on historical events” claim, fictionalizing the story altogether. What makes the film interesting was apparently fiction anyway.
Without connecting itself to the Warrens’ case, The Conjuring is a movie filled with horror tropes and stories that have been told before. Horror films have been dealing with demonic possession, haunted families, and exorcisms long before The Conjuring franchise. Those things aren’t unique to the Warrens. Therefore without the Warrens’ name and the claim that the events are based on truth, The Conjuring could have been just as scary and successful as a regular fictional horror film without all this legal trouble.
Real events inspire horror movies all the time, but filmmakers can get away with making movies about them by not claiming any connection to them. Stating that a movie based on possession and ghosts is a true story should be taken with a grain of salt anyway, considering it’s very hard to prove those things are even real.
Read more
September 6, 2017
Story Merchant Books Launch's Andrea Aguillard's "The Meander Tile of Lisa Greco" Romance of Mythic Identity Book 2
Second generation Italian-American Lisa Greco is about to receive the reward she's worked her head off for--but she's not sure it's what she wants anymore.
She's always postponed exploring her creativity, and discovering her Neapolitan origins. So she throws the dice, and goes to Naples where she meets a mysterious Japanese-Italian professor of mathematics and itinerant tenor who's in search of his own roots. This leads her to do something she's never done before. She takes his hand as he leads her into the darkest recesses of the ancient excavations that reveal the key to both their identities.
September 5, 2017
What Types of $10M – $20M Films Break Out?
An investigative report from Film Industry Analyst Stephen Follows and Founder of The Numbers Bruce Nash
In recent articles, we’ve looked at what it takes for films to break out at two ends of the indie budget spectrum. We started out with low-budget films, made for between $500k and $3 million. Last time we looked at higher-budgeted indies, made for $20 million to $50 million. This time around, we fill in half of the gap by looking at films made for between $10 million and $20 million.
As before, we’ve reviewed all the films in Nash Information Services’ database in that budget range released between 2000 and 2016. We then identified the sixty most profitable movies, after accounting for all sources of revenue and estimating marketing and distribution costs. That gives roughly three films a year from the period under consideration. For more details of our methods and criteria, see the Notes section at the end of this piece.
This analysis produced a result that’s slightly different from our previous investigations. Rather than having a fairly even split between several different categories, there’s a significant cluster of films that share the same audience.
Model One: Senior Cinephiles
By far the biggest category in the list is a group of films that found an older audience – what we’re calling Senior Cinephiles.
At the risk of upsetting every 36-year-old reading this article, we’re considering anyone over 35 to be “senior.” (Essentially, if you lost count of how many Spider-Men there have been, you fall into this category). In our defense, this is how the demographers segment the market, so it’s the data we have to work from in the first place.
Films in this category have an audience that is roughly 55% over the age of 35, compared to around 22% for the market as a whole. To give you a sense of how much these films differ from the norm, see below for the demographic data for these films as they relate to UK cinema audiences.
Unsurprisingly, high-quality drama, often with a grey-haired lead, dominates the upper reaches of this list. Notably, around half of the films in the list are foreign, including The King’s Speech, The Queen, Philomena, The Artist, The Imitation Game, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Downfall, Pan’s Labyrinth, and Les Intouchables. The other half tend to be US-produced films that vied for (and sometimes won) Oscar glory: Brokeback Mountain, 12 Years a Slave, Sideways, Into the Wild, The Hurt Locker, Black Swan, Spotlight, The Fighter, and Letters from Iwo Jima, for example.
So it’s fair to say that going after an older audience with a high-quality drama is a good bet for success at this budget range. But there are a couple of films that stood out to us for being a little more targeted at the older set, and a little less awards-focused: About Time and Under the Tuscan Sun. Also lurking on this list is sci-fi drama Ex Machina, which had broader appeal, but skewed towards a much older audience than is usual for the genre.
So, as always, good films rise to the top, but we think that this budget range also skews older, regardless of the quality of the film.
Model two: In Your Face Comedy
In our analysis of $20m-$50m films, we found that lowbrow was the order of business for comedies. At this lower budget range, there are vestiges of the lowbrow genre (Jackass and Harold & Kumar feature, for example), but this group has a more concept-driven feel to it. Movies like Legally Blonde, Neighbors, Bad Teacher, Borat, Hot Fuzz, and Think Like a Man all have a central theme or characters that poke fun at society, rather than the more situational comedy we saw at a higher budget.
When looking at the group as a whole, they all share a trait that we feel is best described as “in your face.” The filmmakers take a concept and run with it as far as they can. The concept itself can come from anywhere—Borat and Beverly Hills Chihuahua don’t share much of the same demographic—but it’s all in the execution.
These are all films for which a significant portion of the audience came out thinking, “my friend would love this.”
Model three: Mature Horror
In keeping with the theme of this budget range being fertile ground for older audiences (where, as we have noted “older” means, depressingly, over 35), the horror movies we found this time tended more towards the psychological, and less towards the gore. All of the films build suspense through drama, usually with older protagonists.
Note, however, that there are only six films in the horror genre in this list: about one every three years between 2000 and 2016. There were no horror films in the $20m-$50m budget range, so this is an improvement. But few horror films made for over $10 million really break out, at least in comparison to other genres, and certainly compared to low-budget horror.
Model Four: Music-based films
Sometimes this analysis throws up a surprise. At higher budgets, we found a group of age-reversal family films. At this budget range, there’s a sizable group of films that are based on music and dance, most of them lighter fare such as School of Rock and Step Up, but also last year’s Oscar darling La La Land.
The films’ musical styles tend to cluster around the mainstream. There’s no punk, blues, or classical music to be found, which is frankly a little disappointing. But going for what works with general audiences seems to be what works financially.
We excluded sequels from this research as we felt that their existing audience was a large factor in their success. However, had we not done so then this category would also have included Magic Mike XXL, High School Musical 3: Senior Year and Step Up 2: The Streets.
Analysis
As we’ve looked at different budget ranges, it’s been consistently surprising to us how much films will cluster into groups in each range. Now we’ve completed three of these articles, it’s remarkable how each analysis throws up a very specific category of film that “works” at this budget range, and not at others. There was only one hit (Chicago) in the $20m-$50m budget groups that was first-and-foremost music- or dance-based, but we found six of them budgeted between $10m and $20m. Similarly, age-reversal comedies stood out at the higher budget range, and there are none in the list this time.
Whether that has implications for filmmakers is something worth thinking about. Certainly, if you’re looking to make a musical, keeping the budget under control looks like a key consideration. And, particularly at this budget range, appealing to a more mature audience looks to be important.
Read more
Copyright © 2017 Stephen Follows and Bruce Nash. All rights reserved.
