Hi Tony, thank you for the insightful and fascinating read! I'm an independent filmmaker just starting out in the business – my work in the ultra-indie scene has landed me representation, and with it an introduction to the "one for them, one for me" system you've described here. Truthfully, I've found this paradigm a bit confounding, and have been told my loglines are too "execution dependent", or otherwise lacking in immediate salability to pitch as a clout-less director with no mainstream industry credits. In racking my brain for more "commercial" ideas, I've found I keep returning to one difficult, almost stupidly simple question: what makes a film commercial in the first place? How does one write "commercially" while also maintaining enough creativity and ingenuity so as to make the film one with which you still connect? Perhaps this is too personal a question to be answered by anyone other than myself – and my apologies for wasting your time if that is the case – but your post here resonated with me and I thought it worth asking what you thought of all of this. Thanks again for reading, and for this article – you've got yourself a loyal new subscriber!
Hey Max. That's a great question. Before I try to answer, I should offer a caveat: I don't think I've ever broken through with a truly commercial project. I've sold plenty of scripts, even had some made, been hired to write for shows and to adapt properties. But as of yet, I haven't had something go from my brain to enough screens to make the industry go: there's a hit.
That said, in my experience, the industry has a very short memory, and gets very fixated on whatever the most recent hits or misses have been. I'm talking a six month window of perception at the most. So, an industry perception of what is commercial seems to be -- in my experience -- heavily colored by this. Complicating things: chasing trends as a writer/filmmaker is a fool's errand, since by the time something is a hit, there's already going to be a few things in the pipeline already in position to take advantage of it.
That's why I generally frame my projects via genre. Trends come and go, but certain genres feel fairly eternal. I like genre anyway, tho my tastes veer very much in the "dad story" vein: I like crime stuff, western stuff, sports stuff, some horror stuff. Things like that. I generally just write and pursue the stuff I genuinely get psyched about -- again, usually it's already got at least one foot in genre -- then when it comes time to try to sell it, I peek my head up and look to see if there are recent comps that I can use as sales tools. I don't chase trends while writing, but I certainly use them if it seems helpful while trying to sell a project.
I've also gotten the "execution dependent" note throughout my career. And again, I've never taken off into any kind of stratosphere. But I've also carved out a pretty steady and satisfying career for about 12 years by just writing this shit anyway. The original things of mine that have gotten made -- my TV show DAMNATION and my movie AMERICANA -- were diagnosed by my reps as the longest of long shots. I wrote them anyway. Just a data point. I find myself mostly just chasing my passions and obsessions, then ruthlessly doing whatever I can to try to present and position them as commercially viable -- but after writing them.
Hey Tony, thanks for such a thorough response! Really insightful stuff, much appreciated. I've been chewing on this advice for the last few days and find your emphasis on genre is proving really useful to me. Most of my writing has been in the realm of character-driven dramas (each infused with some kind of genre aesthetics or tropes) but I'm realizing now that I've never gone to write and simply decided, "I'm going to write a western" or "a mystery" or "a horror film" – I think this has left me with immensely personal work (and work that I stand by!) but work that is perhaps not so readily understood in the eyes of those whose job it is to sell scripts by saying "It's like X meets Y!". I'm realizing now that at this point in my career it may be best to work within more established genre narratives, trust in the fundamentals of my writing, and find ways to include and focus on the things that I get psyched about within that. Hopefully this will allow me to build up a catalogue of work across multiple genres, and then capitalize on the relevant trend-of-the-week when it does happen to align with something I've written. Even so, I suspect my creative desires will always be at least little bit unreasonable in the eyes of The Money People, and maybe that's okay – my goal now is to find the happy medium that allows me to make great work and also get my career off the launchpad.
In any case, thanks again for getting back to me – I'm young and new at this and don't know many working writers/directors whose wisdom I can draw from, so the advice and encouragement means a lot. Would love to buy you a coffee whenever you're back in LA!
Tony's right, of course. Forget trends - thinking genre instead is useful. What makes a film commercial is, of course, an eternal mystery. Nobody knows anything and all that. But for executives 'commercial' essentially equals 'whatever they see as having successfully worked before for big audiences.'
Essentially, though, steer clear of aiming to please, to deliver that which might fit someone else's tastes. There are too many doing just that and it will never lead you to delivering your best work. Your best work gets on the page because of your genuine passion and your unique voice. And that - regardless of what anyone may consider commercial - is that one best chance you have of standing out. All the best, Max!
Your posts are gold; thank you for writing them. A couple questions: 1) Do you ever write and publish work as short stories (or some other genre) before attempting to sell/pitch them as scripts? The thing that kills me about the film industry (at least from my reading around) is how much stuff might get bought but never made. How to ensure that the stories you want to tell don't end up in limbo somewhere? That's why I'm wondering about writing/publishing in other genres first, like short fiction, and then adapting your own work -- so if it never makes it to screen, at least it exists in the world somewhere. 2) As an English lit prof with screenwriting aspirations, I really appreciate hearing about your trajectory. Going into tv required a complete break with academia for you; do you think it's possible to keep one foot in academia if the focus is on writing features? (Yes, I am trying to have it both ways; and yes, I submit that might be ridiculous. But I am always looking for a third path.) Appreciate any thoughts you might have on any or all of the above. Thanks again.
Thanks Jessica. I'll try to answer, tho I don't think I'm an expert on either question. 1) I haven't written or published stories in literary form before pitching/adapting/selling them. Not yet, at least. There is the risk of them going into limbo, but unless something is wildly autobiographical, I always figure that's the price of admission and I trust that there's more stories lurking within. That said, I'm getting a sense that the short story is becoming a more valuable property within the industry. Just this last year I found myself among those pitching on an (incomplete!) short story that was published either on a substack or on reddit, but by a writer who suddenly had industry cachet. I didn't get the gig because my take was too dark. But I hear rumblings that execs are having less and less patience for actual spec scripts and are more likely to read short stories. I've always figured that if/when my Hollywood careers peters out, I'll switch to fiction. But who knows, I may at some point try turning a story idea to a short story with the idea of both publishing it that way but also adapting it into something to write-direct. 2) I think it's very possible to keep one foot in academia and one in screenwriting, especially if you're wanting to focus on features. I would usually add a caveat of making sure you can visit LA to take meetings in case a script of yours goes into circulation (that's what happened to me years ago), but in a zoom meeting world, I don't think that's the case. Even a number of TV writing rooms are conducted primarily over zoom, tho there could be a conflict in terms of academic obligations and being potentially on set. But for features, I don't think there's that much of an inherent geographical disadvantage, other than the difficulty of getting your scripts into industry hands. My wife is an academic, which is the main reason we're in LA, as she's at USC. If she wasn't, we'd likely be located in Arkansas full time and I'd be working from there, with occasional LA trips sprinkled in. Hopes this helps.
Thanks, Tony. This is really helpful and encouraging. I'd like to get into literary adaptation eventually, so the rising interest in short stories sounds promising. One more follow-up question re: sold-but-unmade scripts: do you ever get your copyright back after selling (i.e., does the copyright ever "time out" and revert back to the author) or, once it's sold, it's out of your hands for good?
I don't really know. I'm usually I'm too excited about some new idea or script in progress to bother with something from years ago. I think there are certain WGA stipulations in place for the copyright eventually reverting back to the writer, but I'm honestly too much of a space cadet to keep any of that straight in my head. I just keep writing new things. I've had cases where I've thought about resurrecting an old sold but unproduced script, but I've never actually gone thru with it all the way enough to go thru the actual process.
I'm so with you, Jessica. Years back I looked at the specs that had done their job, had opened doors, won contests, gotten me my agent and work, but that never got made. Their chances would never improve as long as they only collected dust on the shelf. So I published some straight-up as scripts and reworked others to publish them as novels. It gives them new life, it allows those characters to finally come to life, if not on screen then at least in readers' minds - and yeah, it also improves (if only by very little) the chances of interested parties discovering them. Wrote about that here > https://danielmartineckhart.substack.com/p/breathe-new-life-into-your-spec-scripts
Oh - and Substack's great in terms of exposure, too, of course! I was hired to write the adaptation of a historical novel. Good work, good pay, great script - everyone happy, but, as happens most often, it got stuck in development hell and never got made. So now I'm using a Substack to recount the adaptation journey from proposal through research and drafts ... again, chances remain near zero - but near zero is better than nothing - and it's fun to relive those times and share those development tales. And, one truly never knows, someday someone with the right clout and connections just may come across that particular thread and go - I want to see this on the silver screen! > https://danielmartineckhart.substack.com/s/the-coffee-trader
I’ve spent all strike writing short stories because I came to the same realization-it’s nice not to have all the attachments that come with “one for them.” But whenever this wraps up I’m ready for “them” again.
This was a great post, and for someone like me who's in his early 30s and in the middle of a shaky career transition into video editing, your anecdote about not making a livable income until 35 really resonated with me. Thanks for sharing as always, Tony.
Hi Tony, very interesting read! I am aspiring to be a writer and have been working on and off on several personal projects and taking different classes like Sketch Comedy writing and improv at my local theater which has been great for expanding my comfort zone, but even more so for the networking with other creatives. I am working at an engineering job that I really dislike though because of different reasons, but mainly it drains all the life and energy out of me so I find it difficult to work on one of my few spec writing projects that I have started. My current job feels like a one for them, but since I feel drained all the time, its been tough to work on the one for me at times. I feel like taking a big swing and quitting my job, selling my house for a bit of profit, downsizing, and finding a restaurant job where I can be less stressed and have a schedule that will allow flexibility to work on my writing projects more consistently. Potentially I think it would be amazing if, once the strike is over of course, I would be able to find a staff writing job somewhere and follow a similar approach that you wrote about here of writing "something for them" and "something for me." I am curious what kind of general advice you might offer for someone who is still relatively early in their future career of being a writer/creator?
Hi Brandon, I don't know how much advice I can give that's specific about breaking in circa 2023 -- especially in terms of when to ditch the day job, etc. I only quit my professor job after I had the Longmire job (two freelance episodes in season one) and three pilot deals at different studios lined up. And even then, it took my wife's encouragement for me to step away from the day job. It's obvious, but everyone's situation and risk tolerance is different.
I broke in back in around 2011, which was a totally different world. I did so after a writer buddy of mine got reps and was staffed on a TV show -- he shared a script of mine w/ his agents, they loved it, and became my agents. They sent my script around town and setup a week and a half of meetings. I flew into LA and it went well enough that I lined up the above gigs and quit my professor job. Such an experience was rare then, and I don't know if it's even that possible now.
In my experience, everything comes down to the script itself -- both how people respond to the writing, but also how the script frames you as a writer who could potentially be hired for a show or an open writing assignment (very few spec scripts get sold). I did a video talking about this awhile back: https://youtu.be/UgU89GzNiXc
Thanks for the tips! I understand that most situations are unique, so just hearing another experience is at least helpful to understand different paths, etc. I will check out your video though, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
I really like how you've characterized this approach, which recognizes that markets are real and we have to feed the beast sometimes in order to feed ourselves. Even those projects out there that we despise manage to do SOMETHING "right," and we need to give a nod to that. Do we want merely to serve a boutique market with our "for me" projects? Do we sometimes allow ourselves to "sell out" with "for them" projects? It's okay to answer yes to the latter question in order that we can say yes to the former. At the end of the day, no one will care about our market approach or our purity of purpose. There will just be the works and their individual impacts on the world. Thank you for taking the time to fully develop and explain your approach here, Tony. Definitely worth a read and many re-reads, and I'm going to recommend this essay to all my clients who I'm coaching in this space.
Hi, Tony, I first heard of this regarding John Sayles. He'd write a "Hollywood" script (Battle Beyond the Stars, Alligator, Piranha) and take the money to make one of his own films. I feel like he was the only one who REALLY followed this model. Eastwood's "them vs. me" are almost the same as you say and Nolan is in a pretty unique situation where his huge "me" films (so far) have managed to make enough money to keep going.
I'm often disappointed to see the huge paychecks on those "them" films causes filmmakers to decide to keep doing those instead of those personal projects they said they'd pursue. They also are aware of pitfalls: see Levinson's Toys.
Hi Tony, thank you for the insightful and fascinating read! I'm an independent filmmaker just starting out in the business – my work in the ultra-indie scene has landed me representation, and with it an introduction to the "one for them, one for me" system you've described here. Truthfully, I've found this paradigm a bit confounding, and have been told my loglines are too "execution dependent", or otherwise lacking in immediate salability to pitch as a clout-less director with no mainstream industry credits. In racking my brain for more "commercial" ideas, I've found I keep returning to one difficult, almost stupidly simple question: what makes a film commercial in the first place? How does one write "commercially" while also maintaining enough creativity and ingenuity so as to make the film one with which you still connect? Perhaps this is too personal a question to be answered by anyone other than myself – and my apologies for wasting your time if that is the case – but your post here resonated with me and I thought it worth asking what you thought of all of this. Thanks again for reading, and for this article – you've got yourself a loyal new subscriber!
Hey Max. That's a great question. Before I try to answer, I should offer a caveat: I don't think I've ever broken through with a truly commercial project. I've sold plenty of scripts, even had some made, been hired to write for shows and to adapt properties. But as of yet, I haven't had something go from my brain to enough screens to make the industry go: there's a hit.
That said, in my experience, the industry has a very short memory, and gets very fixated on whatever the most recent hits or misses have been. I'm talking a six month window of perception at the most. So, an industry perception of what is commercial seems to be -- in my experience -- heavily colored by this. Complicating things: chasing trends as a writer/filmmaker is a fool's errand, since by the time something is a hit, there's already going to be a few things in the pipeline already in position to take advantage of it.
That's why I generally frame my projects via genre. Trends come and go, but certain genres feel fairly eternal. I like genre anyway, tho my tastes veer very much in the "dad story" vein: I like crime stuff, western stuff, sports stuff, some horror stuff. Things like that. I generally just write and pursue the stuff I genuinely get psyched about -- again, usually it's already got at least one foot in genre -- then when it comes time to try to sell it, I peek my head up and look to see if there are recent comps that I can use as sales tools. I don't chase trends while writing, but I certainly use them if it seems helpful while trying to sell a project.
I've also gotten the "execution dependent" note throughout my career. And again, I've never taken off into any kind of stratosphere. But I've also carved out a pretty steady and satisfying career for about 12 years by just writing this shit anyway. The original things of mine that have gotten made -- my TV show DAMNATION and my movie AMERICANA -- were diagnosed by my reps as the longest of long shots. I wrote them anyway. Just a data point. I find myself mostly just chasing my passions and obsessions, then ruthlessly doing whatever I can to try to present and position them as commercially viable -- but after writing them.
Hey Tony, thanks for such a thorough response! Really insightful stuff, much appreciated. I've been chewing on this advice for the last few days and find your emphasis on genre is proving really useful to me. Most of my writing has been in the realm of character-driven dramas (each infused with some kind of genre aesthetics or tropes) but I'm realizing now that I've never gone to write and simply decided, "I'm going to write a western" or "a mystery" or "a horror film" – I think this has left me with immensely personal work (and work that I stand by!) but work that is perhaps not so readily understood in the eyes of those whose job it is to sell scripts by saying "It's like X meets Y!". I'm realizing now that at this point in my career it may be best to work within more established genre narratives, trust in the fundamentals of my writing, and find ways to include and focus on the things that I get psyched about within that. Hopefully this will allow me to build up a catalogue of work across multiple genres, and then capitalize on the relevant trend-of-the-week when it does happen to align with something I've written. Even so, I suspect my creative desires will always be at least little bit unreasonable in the eyes of The Money People, and maybe that's okay – my goal now is to find the happy medium that allows me to make great work and also get my career off the launchpad.
In any case, thanks again for getting back to me – I'm young and new at this and don't know many working writers/directors whose wisdom I can draw from, so the advice and encouragement means a lot. Would love to buy you a coffee whenever you're back in LA!
Tony's right, of course. Forget trends - thinking genre instead is useful. What makes a film commercial is, of course, an eternal mystery. Nobody knows anything and all that. But for executives 'commercial' essentially equals 'whatever they see as having successfully worked before for big audiences.'
Essentially, though, steer clear of aiming to please, to deliver that which might fit someone else's tastes. There are too many doing just that and it will never lead you to delivering your best work. Your best work gets on the page because of your genuine passion and your unique voice. And that - regardless of what anyone may consider commercial - is that one best chance you have of standing out. All the best, Max!
Thanks Daniel! Really helpful to hear :)
Your posts are gold; thank you for writing them. A couple questions: 1) Do you ever write and publish work as short stories (or some other genre) before attempting to sell/pitch them as scripts? The thing that kills me about the film industry (at least from my reading around) is how much stuff might get bought but never made. How to ensure that the stories you want to tell don't end up in limbo somewhere? That's why I'm wondering about writing/publishing in other genres first, like short fiction, and then adapting your own work -- so if it never makes it to screen, at least it exists in the world somewhere. 2) As an English lit prof with screenwriting aspirations, I really appreciate hearing about your trajectory. Going into tv required a complete break with academia for you; do you think it's possible to keep one foot in academia if the focus is on writing features? (Yes, I am trying to have it both ways; and yes, I submit that might be ridiculous. But I am always looking for a third path.) Appreciate any thoughts you might have on any or all of the above. Thanks again.
Thanks Jessica. I'll try to answer, tho I don't think I'm an expert on either question. 1) I haven't written or published stories in literary form before pitching/adapting/selling them. Not yet, at least. There is the risk of them going into limbo, but unless something is wildly autobiographical, I always figure that's the price of admission and I trust that there's more stories lurking within. That said, I'm getting a sense that the short story is becoming a more valuable property within the industry. Just this last year I found myself among those pitching on an (incomplete!) short story that was published either on a substack or on reddit, but by a writer who suddenly had industry cachet. I didn't get the gig because my take was too dark. But I hear rumblings that execs are having less and less patience for actual spec scripts and are more likely to read short stories. I've always figured that if/when my Hollywood careers peters out, I'll switch to fiction. But who knows, I may at some point try turning a story idea to a short story with the idea of both publishing it that way but also adapting it into something to write-direct. 2) I think it's very possible to keep one foot in academia and one in screenwriting, especially if you're wanting to focus on features. I would usually add a caveat of making sure you can visit LA to take meetings in case a script of yours goes into circulation (that's what happened to me years ago), but in a zoom meeting world, I don't think that's the case. Even a number of TV writing rooms are conducted primarily over zoom, tho there could be a conflict in terms of academic obligations and being potentially on set. But for features, I don't think there's that much of an inherent geographical disadvantage, other than the difficulty of getting your scripts into industry hands. My wife is an academic, which is the main reason we're in LA, as she's at USC. If she wasn't, we'd likely be located in Arkansas full time and I'd be working from there, with occasional LA trips sprinkled in. Hopes this helps.
Thanks, Tony. This is really helpful and encouraging. I'd like to get into literary adaptation eventually, so the rising interest in short stories sounds promising. One more follow-up question re: sold-but-unmade scripts: do you ever get your copyright back after selling (i.e., does the copyright ever "time out" and revert back to the author) or, once it's sold, it's out of your hands for good?
I don't really know. I'm usually I'm too excited about some new idea or script in progress to bother with something from years ago. I think there are certain WGA stipulations in place for the copyright eventually reverting back to the writer, but I'm honestly too much of a space cadet to keep any of that straight in my head. I just keep writing new things. I've had cases where I've thought about resurrecting an old sold but unproduced script, but I've never actually gone thru with it all the way enough to go thru the actual process.
Sounds like a good way to be - just keep moving and not attached to "one for me" projects that don't work out. Thanks again for your input!
I'm so with you, Jessica. Years back I looked at the specs that had done their job, had opened doors, won contests, gotten me my agent and work, but that never got made. Their chances would never improve as long as they only collected dust on the shelf. So I published some straight-up as scripts and reworked others to publish them as novels. It gives them new life, it allows those characters to finally come to life, if not on screen then at least in readers' minds - and yeah, it also improves (if only by very little) the chances of interested parties discovering them. Wrote about that here > https://danielmartineckhart.substack.com/p/breathe-new-life-into-your-spec-scripts
Oh - and Substack's great in terms of exposure, too, of course! I was hired to write the adaptation of a historical novel. Good work, good pay, great script - everyone happy, but, as happens most often, it got stuck in development hell and never got made. So now I'm using a Substack to recount the adaptation journey from proposal through research and drafts ... again, chances remain near zero - but near zero is better than nothing - and it's fun to relive those times and share those development tales. And, one truly never knows, someday someone with the right clout and connections just may come across that particular thread and go - I want to see this on the silver screen! > https://danielmartineckhart.substack.com/s/the-coffee-trader
I’ve spent all strike writing short stories because I came to the same realization-it’s nice not to have all the attachments that come with “one for them.” But whenever this wraps up I’m ready for “them” again.
Did you see years ago when Jonah Hill roasted a pre-canceled James Franco? He said James had his own version of this: “One for them, five for nobody.”
That's hilarious.
I read your entire column thinking PLEASE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS JOKE so I could show off how cool I was! Yay! Thanks!
This was a great post, and for someone like me who's in his early 30s and in the middle of a shaky career transition into video editing, your anecdote about not making a livable income until 35 really resonated with me. Thanks for sharing as always, Tony.
Excellent post!
Hi Tony, very interesting read! I am aspiring to be a writer and have been working on and off on several personal projects and taking different classes like Sketch Comedy writing and improv at my local theater which has been great for expanding my comfort zone, but even more so for the networking with other creatives. I am working at an engineering job that I really dislike though because of different reasons, but mainly it drains all the life and energy out of me so I find it difficult to work on one of my few spec writing projects that I have started. My current job feels like a one for them, but since I feel drained all the time, its been tough to work on the one for me at times. I feel like taking a big swing and quitting my job, selling my house for a bit of profit, downsizing, and finding a restaurant job where I can be less stressed and have a schedule that will allow flexibility to work on my writing projects more consistently. Potentially I think it would be amazing if, once the strike is over of course, I would be able to find a staff writing job somewhere and follow a similar approach that you wrote about here of writing "something for them" and "something for me." I am curious what kind of general advice you might offer for someone who is still relatively early in their future career of being a writer/creator?
Hi Brandon, I don't know how much advice I can give that's specific about breaking in circa 2023 -- especially in terms of when to ditch the day job, etc. I only quit my professor job after I had the Longmire job (two freelance episodes in season one) and three pilot deals at different studios lined up. And even then, it took my wife's encouragement for me to step away from the day job. It's obvious, but everyone's situation and risk tolerance is different.
I broke in back in around 2011, which was a totally different world. I did so after a writer buddy of mine got reps and was staffed on a TV show -- he shared a script of mine w/ his agents, they loved it, and became my agents. They sent my script around town and setup a week and a half of meetings. I flew into LA and it went well enough that I lined up the above gigs and quit my professor job. Such an experience was rare then, and I don't know if it's even that possible now.
In my experience, everything comes down to the script itself -- both how people respond to the writing, but also how the script frames you as a writer who could potentially be hired for a show or an open writing assignment (very few spec scripts get sold). I did a video talking about this awhile back: https://youtu.be/UgU89GzNiXc
Thanks for the tips! I understand that most situations are unique, so just hearing another experience is at least helpful to understand different paths, etc. I will check out your video though, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond.
Great advice.
Love reading about your writer's life. You've made it to a place where there IS that 'one for them, one for me' option. Kudos!
I really like how you've characterized this approach, which recognizes that markets are real and we have to feed the beast sometimes in order to feed ourselves. Even those projects out there that we despise manage to do SOMETHING "right," and we need to give a nod to that. Do we want merely to serve a boutique market with our "for me" projects? Do we sometimes allow ourselves to "sell out" with "for them" projects? It's okay to answer yes to the latter question in order that we can say yes to the former. At the end of the day, no one will care about our market approach or our purity of purpose. There will just be the works and their individual impacts on the world. Thank you for taking the time to fully develop and explain your approach here, Tony. Definitely worth a read and many re-reads, and I'm going to recommend this essay to all my clients who I'm coaching in this space.
Hi, Tony, I first heard of this regarding John Sayles. He'd write a "Hollywood" script (Battle Beyond the Stars, Alligator, Piranha) and take the money to make one of his own films. I feel like he was the only one who REALLY followed this model. Eastwood's "them vs. me" are almost the same as you say and Nolan is in a pretty unique situation where his huge "me" films (so far) have managed to make enough money to keep going.
I'm often disappointed to see the huge paychecks on those "them" films causes filmmakers to decide to keep doing those instead of those personal projects they said they'd pursue. They also are aware of pitfalls: see Levinson's Toys.
Keep up the good work! Roger