Ghost Rider What IF

(pic from Deviantart-ist ~joker5063)

I have not seen GHOST RIDER: SPIRIT OF VENGEANCE. But I had a blast at CRANK. I love LUTHER so Idris Elba’s presence pleases me and it’s no secret I adore Nic Cage and would happily punch heads on his behalf. BUT… for about twelve minutes, Patrick and I thought we might actually get the chance to make GHOST RIDER 2.

I’ve written similar entries in the past. You can find a screenplay that birthed both MESSENGERS and MESSENGERS 2: THE SCARECROW. There’s also a post explaining how Mark Haslett and I were attached to COWBOYS AND ALIENS for about three minutes. And then my and Patrick’s pitching the FRIGHT NIGHT remake at two different companies. Since they are the most recent three entries in the Essay section I won’t bother linking.

So let’s talk GHOST RIDER 2.

First off, I still have my Ghost Rider #1 and my Marvel spotlight #5. I always LOVED Ghost Rider because he wasn’t squeaky clean. Ghost Rider was supposed to torment the innocent but chose to use his powers to punish evil. And his head caught on fire.

Here’s the quick and dirty version to catch you up.

Patrick and I wrote DRIVE ANGRY. Our agents sent it to producers. We met with those who responded favorably. The moment we met with Mike De Luca, we never met with another. Patrick and I were in manlove.

Then we sent DRIVE ANGRY to studios. MOST everyone reacted with excitement. Even the passes were favorable. Except the company that brought you DIE HARD and LETHAL WEAPON said it was too violent. It should be noted that the economy was not good at the time. Studios weren’t making the movies they used to make. In fact, one Studio Head told us “When we were making 40 films a year this would be a no brainer but now that we’re making less than ten…” Although we had interest De Luca decided to send the screenplay to Nic, who responded the same day. He loved it. Once Nic was attached the falcon finally hit lightspeed. Deals were made, locations discussed… it was happening.

During one of our many meetings, De Luca, who had produced Ghost Rider, suggested we come up with a pitch for Ghost Rider 2. We said yes with much enthusiasm. So Mike set a meeting with Avi Arad that we might meet and discuss the franchise. And we had a blast. We met Avi and his son Ari (who sat with me and Tom Jane during the My Bloody Valentine premiere). We talked superheroes and what made Ghost Rider different. We talked through what Vilains we could legally draw from. It was a perfect meeting.

Patrick and I returned to the ghostcave and worked our magic. We decided to not only create a pitch but since there were so many entities involved (Avi, Marvel, Sony and De Luca) we would create a document we could leave behind. A doc that would represent our story, our characters and our tone. And that’s what we did.

When we returned we were pumped. We had nailed it. It may seem arrogant to say that but DUH. Isn’t that the point? Why would you ever go back if you didn’t think you nailed it? During the initial chit chat I said something along the lines of, “We know there are several entities involved here but we think we’ve found a story that fulfills everyone’s concerns.” Avi then informed me that there was only one entity that mattered. Everyone laughed. I gulped.

And the pitch was fun!

We knew De Luca dug it. Later we heard that Sony loved it.

But in the end Avi passed. He said it was too violent.

Hate not getting the job but I’ll take TOO VIOLENT as the reason any day of the week.

Just follow the link and you decide. :)



Horror Movie A Day

What in God’s name is a Fletch!


Megan Ganz Community Coffee Table Book

I will never be as cool as Megan Ganz. Writer. Comedian. Assassin capable of constructing weapons from a single sheet of paper.

Meeting Notes 6/21/11

She is a writer on the NBC sit-com COMMUNITY. One of several talented, mostly insane, writers and producers who have made Dan Harmon’s Community a reality. It is, in my opinion the best sit-com since ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT, another show you likely have never heard of. That’s because both shows are single camera sit-coms in a world where single camera sit-coms may be dying.

Meeting Notes: 6/28/11

There are single camera and multi-camera television shows. Lemme break that down for you in the I’mma-simple-dummy-from-Kentucky sort of way. Because, well, that’s what I am.

Meeting notes: 7/7/11

Multi-camera shows are the norm. Here’s why. They are easier. You are basically performing a play on a stage with several cameras shooting different angles at the same time. Not long ago there were live audiences. Great thing about a live audience with a sit-com is the immediate feedback. If a joke falls flat you have a dozen (in the old days, now you got 4) writer/producers rewriting the dead jokes. Of course, live audiences are more work so the norm now is to shoot it on a stage and PIPE in a laugh track. That means the actors perform the joke then later a sound mixer toggles a switch and the viewer HEARS prerecorded laughter. Hii-larious!

Meeting Notes: 7/8/11

Single camera shows, like COMMUNITY are hard. Because it’s like shooting a movie. They don’t have laugh tracks because those don’t tend to work unless you subconsciously KNOW the show is on a stage. If you are driving or on a bridge or in the ocean then a PIPED in laugh track sounds dumb. Thus the show has to be FUNNY on its own. You don’t have the cheat of someone telling you when to laugh.

Meeting notes: 7/13/11

Here’s an example of single camera shows thru the years: 30 Rock, Andy Griffith Show, Arli$$, Beverly Hillbillies, Brady Bunch, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Dream On, Drew Carey, Entourage, Freaks and Geeks, Get Smart, Gilligan’s Island, Gomer Pyle, Happy Days, Hogan’s Heroes, I Dream of Jeannie, Larry Sanders, Leave It to Beaver, Lizzie McGuire, M*A*S*H, Munsters, My Name is Earl, The Office, Scrubs, Ugly Betty, Weeds, Wonder Years, etc.

Those are all great shows because the single camera format obviously allows for some wonderful creativity.

Meeting Notes: 8/2/11

Multi-camer examples: Barney Miller, Different Strokes, Archie Bunker, Jeffersons, My Wife and kids, Two and a Half Men, Third Rock from the Sun, Big Bang Theory, Friends.

Those are all great shows too but do you see the difference? Singe cameras tend to move all over the place. Mulit-cams tend to stay in one, two or three locations. Look at Friends. Two apartments and a coffee shop. From a production standpoint much easier, much more time efficient and cheaper.

And I’m NOT suggesting multi-camera shows are easy. No shows are easy. BUT, multi-camera shows do have less challenges.

Meeting Notes: 8/4/11

And certainly the writing of mulit-cam isn’t easier than singel cam. Writing is tough. In some cases, single camera writing may be easier because you don’t have the same location constrictions.

But shooting in three constant locations is way easier than shooting in several locations that come specifically and uniquely out of the writing. And shooting with one camera requires you get both close ups and coverage separate which is time consuming. Multi-camera shows are designed to get both in one shot. See?

Meeting Notes: 8/12/11

Since multi-cam shows are shackled to their locations their creative freedom is also somewhat shackled. Single cam shows are more free because they can travel. Move. Fly. Look back up at the list of both. You can see the journey of the single camera shows.

Meeting Notes: 10/18/11

And on top of it, multi-cam shows tend to be cheaper because shooting in the same three locations is… well… cheaper and faster. Also faster because you have multiple cameras shooting at the same time. Less set ups.

Meeting Notes: 10/20/11

If you needed proof that COMMUNITY was something special then you should, by now have your proof. Just LOOK at Megan’s meeting notes!

Meeting Notes: 10/21/11

There was a time when shows were allowed time. Some just needed time to find an audience. Others needed time to grow. Watch early episodes of Seinfeld and compare them to later seasons. Different show. That’s because the show had to grow to find an audience. In fact, the show opened with very low ratings. Folks just didn’t understand a show about nothing.

Then came the WGA “threat” of strike. The industry changed due to a little show called Survivor. Reality TV took hold with a vengeance. It was Script vs. Reality. Suddenly you had multi-cam and single-cam shows competing against shows with NO WRITERS (or at least no guilded writers). No longer could the Networks give a show time to find its audience nor time to “grow”. If you didn’t have the ratings after a couple episodes, you were gone.

Meeting Notes: 10/26/11

Add to that the influx of cable channels which brought new pros and cons. HBO, TNT, FX. While the networks were busy whooring reality, the cable guys were creating pretty solid scripted television. This meant the ratings pool was suddenly spread out. Rather than NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox owning the airways, they had to share and in some cases, get their asses handed to them.

On the pro list, this meant a show with lower ratings could hang on a bit longer. You’d think that was great but with so many new outlets (competition), it was that much harder to find an audience.

A roller coaster. Ratings that would get you cancelled just five years ago were suddenly considered strong ratings.

Meeting Notes: 10/27/11

NBC pulled COMMUNITY mid-season.

Meeting Notes: 11/9/11

If you haven’t seen it. Grab the first season on DVD.

Meeting Notes: 11/11/11

Because COMMUNITY will be back. And when it returns we need you to be ready. All you gotta do is watch season one and you’ll know.

Meeting Notes: 11/16/11

Community is a smart show. Community is a funny show. And it achieves this without you being told when and where to laugh. Single camera shows think outside the box. I love the box, but what a creatively vast and wonderful world lives beyond it.

As the meeting notes should reveal.

Meeting Notes: 12/6/11

I want a Megan Ganz Meeting Notes Coffee Table Book.

Because that would be…



Jason XI and XII

In answer to a Twitter thread from last night between Robert Fure, Brett Gallman, Mike Breiburg, Fred Topel, and Tyler Foster…

Ignore the fact that Jason X opened at 6.8 million and was considered a bomb (that’s 1.8 million more than Drive Angry for the kids keeping score). When I started working on it I always had delusions of grandeur that we’d shoot two follow ups. Why two? Well, before Jason X was just a squirt in daddy’s pants, much of the time spent at Cunningham Films was spent working on versions of Freddy Vs. Jason that would never see the inside of a theater. One of the best scripts, in my opinion, derailed after SCREAM opened at 6.3 million (that’s 1.3 million more than Drive Angry) but grew to 100 domestic. Suddenly FvsJ HAD to be self aware like SCREAM. Those self aware drafts never worked but SCREAM had truly changed the face of horror. AND rumors started floating around that Kevin had always designed SCREAM as a three picture story. I wondered if that was BS but either way it was a brilliant way to create hype and anticipation for two more movies. So, I figured why not do the same with Jason X?

The opening of Jason X was supposed to take place sometime after FvsJ. At least in my mind the plan was to never name a date of Jason’s freezing so that the present day storyline (FvsJ, FvsJ 2, etc.) could continue without JX getting in the way.

At the end of JX, Uber Jason’s remains would end up on Earth II.

In JXI he would be brought back in a lab from DNA that survived reentry. Or magic. Or religion. Or lightning. What? Those too far fetched? The bulk of the story would take place on Earth II in a Bladerunner city (that was the original take by the way but deemed too expensive to shoot). Unable to kill the varmint who can’t be killed, Earth II survivors send him back in time to kill his former self thus wiping his existence from History. What? Too far fetched? The object of JXI wasn’t to see that plan fulfilled, but to simply get him into the worm hole. Thus, someone eles… sometime eles’s problem.

JXII would open on a young, pregnant but barely showing Pam… as Uber drops from a wormhole. Or portal. Or Tardis. But Uber stalking young Pamela “Conner” was considered a bit too Terminator so a plan B was created.

JXII would open in the past allowing us to meet past Rowan just before the military action that would lead to the secret underground base at the opening of Jason X. Rowan goes ahead to the lab to prepare. But then Jason spanks the military. A complete and utter wipeout. The boys in camo never had a chance. As Jason is just about to kill Hot Scientist girl, Uber Jason drops from a worm hole… or portal or Tardis. Run, kill, chop, slash. Hot Scientist figures out Uber is from the future because she’s like a scientist and stuff. If Uber Jason kills past Jason then metal version vanishes and both are gone. Of course, Uber Jason does not kill past Jason. Other way around. Past Jason barely survies the final fight leaving him vulnerable to the military. Movie would end with the military taking advantage and capturing Jason, locking him in chains and taking him the the secret underground facility where Rowan prepares to run tests on him. Circle of life, complete.

Are there holes? Sure. Could they be fixed? Sure. Am I gonna fix them? Nah. There’s no money in it. :)

But if I were asked tomorrow would I do it as mapped out above? No. Lots of things I’d do differently now. Brian Collins wondered in his JX review at Horror Movie A Day, why we didn’t tie Jason’s regeneration to the regeneration technology used in the future. It’s both a brilliant idea and a no brainer but we never thought of it. So if we were gonna do a follow up today there are lots of considerations created by ten years later. BUT that’s not the point of this. The point is, this is what I was thinking back in 1999: sequel on Earth II, Finale back in time on Crystal Lake.

As for now though, I’d be happy with a blu-ray. And a screening at the New Bev. :)


Twitter is a dick

So I watched a movie last night but I made the mistake of announcing my intention to Twitter. Stupid stoopid dummkopf that I am.

It’s not that Twitter responded by announcing, “Darth is Luke’s daddy!” Or “Bruce is a ghost!” It was more subtle. Several commented that said movie was either good, bad or meh. But most commented on how emotional it was. “You’re gonna cry and cry and cry.” “Be prepared to cry.” “Keep a box of Kleenex near.”

Is this a bad thing? You’d think no but I’m about to argue a big honking YES it’s BAD.

I actually love emotional (tear-jerker) movies. I write horror most of the time so watching an emotional movie is simply glorious. Old Yeller. The Champ. Heck, during a fancy WGA screening of Return of the King I made one of them loud sucking in of air wimpering noises as I struggled not to weep. Earlier last night I teared up several times while watching Harry Potter 7.5. Damn that Severus, the bravest man I’ve ever known.

But tonight, while watching unnamed movie in question. Nothing. Did I feel an emotional surge or two? Sure. But my expectation had been highjacked. I was EXPECTING tears. And as a result my internal defenses were up. I did not hit the floor because I knew the punch was coming. In fact, I didn’t even get hit. Just sort of dodged in anticipation.

And that pisses me off.

Therefore, Twitter. You sir, are a dickhead.

Not only had I not asked for opinions, it occurred to me, every single early comment was by someone who had seen an early screening. You know, watching a movie early is not a life accomplishment giving you the right to blather on about your opinion.

If you wanna poop your opinion to the internet, great. Go for it. Start a blog. All the kids are doing it. A blog will make you important. You’re reading a blog now. See how very very important I am because of it? Then go on Twitter and say, I just saw Star Wars and here’s what I thought.

But there are things you should not do:

1. Please don’t mini-review on Twitter.

2. If I say I’m going to watch Star Wars, that does NOT mean, “Hey Twitter, what did you think of Star Wars?”

3. Please don’t live tweet your movie and or TV watching experience.

Of course there are no rules and I’m certainly not the boss of you. But I am the boss of me and here’s what may happen. If you break 1 or 3, then it’ll likely get you unfollowed. You break 2, it’ll likely get you blocked.

You see, I don’t wanna know. I’ve not seen the Hobbit trailer. Nor the Dark Knight trailer. Why would I? I’m going to go see the movies. What possible purpose would I have in seeing the trailers? To make sure the filmmakers are doing it right? Like I have any influence either way. Plus, Nolan, Jackson and teams have a pretty good track record. So, would I watch the trailers to add my two cents to the blur of noise about it on the internet? No interest. No, the reason I watch a trailer is to decide if I wanna see a movie. For a movie like Hobbit or Dark Knight, I’m already decided. I’m going to go. Therefore I stay away from the trailer. Like staying away matters. Twitter tells me everything about each trailer without asking if I want to know. And it’s the same thing Twitter says about everything. Some think it’s good, some think it’s bad, some think it’s meh. Movies are subjective. The Trailers advertising them are subjective. No one wins the debate. The only thing the debate manages to do is spoil details for me. Thanks Twitter. You are a dickhead.

BUT that’s what we’re good at. Manufacturing opinion. While China leads the world in exporting goods and services, we are world leaders of opinion. Movies. TV. Goods. Services. Deaths. Ideas. Breasts. You name it, we’ll tell you what we think of it. We’ll even opinionate about opinons.

I’m intrigued when someone who judges movies for a living speaks about against award shows that judge movies for a living and then proceeds to put out a year’s top ten list. But, that pretty much sums up Twitter. Millions of tiny opinions that don’t care about any other opinion.

Of course, this is just my opinion.