"BEYOND THE LIGHTS" IS BEYOND EXCELLENT

“Beyond The Lights” is not a story about a singer. It's a story about a singer's circus replete with hangers on, shady music executives, a stage mother from Brixton (move over Mommy Dearest) and the ringleader, a singer, Noni Jean, who has lost her voice. No, not physically, but spiritually and mentally. The songs she sings, the excessive life she lives, and the risque stage performances are all an outlet for a persona, not a real person. Throughout the film, you can visibly hear and see Noni Jean regain and reclaim herself as a woman, a singer, and a performer tremulously and triumphantly. Noni Jean eventually reigns in the madness around her and within her in a moving and profound performance from Shakespearean trained actress, Gugu Mbatha-Raw (Belle, Undercovers). It's a truly astonishing, inspiring, and breathtaking feat.

Gugu-Mbatha Raw effortlessly channels Rihanna, Beyonce, Mya, and the ill-fated Aaliyah as convincingly as her endearing British accent flows from her lips. I'm not suggesting that she is attempting to mirror a particular singing star or even create a composite- her performance is totally original, touching on familiar stories of burnt out young celebs, while offering balanced layers of emotions, motivations, attitudes, and internal conflicts. She's sexual, she's vulnerable, she's innocent, she's rude and it all blends into a believable, complicated character. And the girl can really sing, too!

Nate Parker (Officer Kaz Nicol) epitomizes the officer and the gentleman that women swoon over. Resembling a younger Denzel in appearance and manner, his slight vulnerability is tempered by an undeniable masculinity. Heroically saving Noni from suicide by literally taking the full burden of her dead weight, he unpretentiously sees it as all in a day's work without appearing trite or plastic. His “savior” instinct is realistically built-in to the character without being buoyed up by some false “I was bullied” backstory. Parker's dynamism as both protecting and domineering, loving and slightly smothering is played with incredible tenderness and strength. As Noni's “man”, he never allows himself to become an accessory to her career or celebrity status, but maintains his course and integrity while gently awakening hers.

Minnie Driver nails it. All I saw was her character, Macy Jean, a hard-nosed and domineering mother, delivered in an electric, unapologetic performance. Danny Glover brings a sobering touch as Kaz' community oriented father without stealing the show (he could have if he wanted too). Machine Gun Kelly (Kid Culprit) was a new face for me but his raw, merciless portrayal of a jilted celebrity ex makes you pay attention every time he's on screen.

The chemistry between Noni and Kaz is so real because it successfully harmonizes two strong independent, driven characters like two cellos, or a piano and a harp. Neither is “bigger” than the other, but they play oh, so well together! The parallels between Kaz and Noni are obvious. Both are talented young people, groomed for a certain path by strong single parents. Both periodically resist and succumb to external pressures. Both take the way out that they see. But only one of them is self-destructive. And only one of them can save.

I laughed, cried, and experienced the passion of new love and lurid fascination with the fast pace and underworld of stardom, which is what a great movie about a young singer should do. I anticipated

this movie with a mix of fear and dread. After Gugu's exquisite coming of age performance in “Belle”, I wondered if her career would take a slide in America because of our resistance to the British, especially Black British. I couldn't have been more wrong.

The filmmaker doesn't offer explanations or apologies for celebrity burn out or bad behavior as much as she offers suggestions for confronting it or avoiding it. Almost like a big sister quietly laying out an alternative outfit without saying that she hates what you're wearing. There is a cathartic scene between Noni and her domineering mother, which leads you to believe that Macy Jean wants to be that tender, cookiesn'milk mom and truly reconcile with her daughter, but the script refuses to take that easy way out and uses the moment to include another dimension to their complicated familial/professional relationship. Personally, I came away with a more sympathetic view of some of today's reigning young queens (and kings) of music.

Beyond the Lights is simply a “must-see” film. No moment on the big screen is wasted or gratuitous. Every frame is set up to capture the emotion or action needed to achieve the greatest impact.

So treat yourself to a front row seat and a back stage pass as Beyond The Lights takes you on an unforgettable emotional journey beyond the stage.

"HERCULES"...NEEDS HELP

***Spoiler Alert

They had The Rock. How do you mess up a movie starring the Rock? Casting Dwayne Johnson as one of the world's most recognizable heroes should have been his capstone role, but instead was plagued by a rushed story, obscure humor, and choppy editing.

Hollywood continues its troubling trend of recasting heroes as villains and villains as heroes in this latest interpretative tome. Hercules is portrayed as a mercenary who gets paid by the rich and keeps it for himself and his motley crue of bandits, sort of like a reinvented Robin Hood. He plans to use his ill-gotten gains to retire quietly one day. Yes, he actually says that in the movie.

The story is not interesting and easy to tune out. The movie opens as Hercules nephew is about to be castrated by an  unsavory band of pirates and buys time by charming them with tales of his uncle Hercules amazing triumph over his 12 labors brought on by the vengeful goddess Hera. At any moment, I kept waiting for Zeus or Hera or really any Greek god to appear, but they never do. 

Unfortunately, I spent the next 90 minutes expecting one of the gods to appear and spice up the fairly predictable action scenes. Hercules rescues his nephews from the pirates using the behind-the-scenes skills of his gang. Each member has a particular skill. Nothing like teamwork instead of a real super hero.

I was expecting a brand new movie, however this Hercules borrowed heavily from the animated Disney movie, which actually had a better story. This story seemed to rely on the premise that the audience was already familiar with the complete Greek legends of Hercules and decided to simply pick up where the last Hercules production ended. Sort of like, "Whatever happened to Hercules?"

The stellar cast are all well-known actors with tons of accolades under their belts. I wasn't expecting any award winning performances, however, much of the dialogue was clichéd. None of their roles seemed to bring out the best in them. Actually, the ensemble never really seemed to click (i.e. The Avengers).  All the actors were forced to utter terrible one-liners that were totally out of character. Whoever heard of a funny Amazon?

I haven't discussed the plot much because it was all over the place. This is not an action movie in the truest sense. There is not a common villain. The villain who actually killed Hercules wife and kids doesn't die in an ironic manner. It's not "300", though it could have been. It lacks the non-stop incredible feats of a Marvel comics superhero. In short, this movie failed to really hit any particular note. It doesn't stand out in any way at all, which was a tremendous disservice to those of us expecting to see the Rock spin/toss some animal by the tail.

It's unclear to me at this stage why the story chose to focus more on a choppy and convoluted double-cross theme than just to focus on Hercules 12 Labors. It would have been far more inspiring and creative to actually see the Rock battle some beast than to be cast in a role of a conflicted good guy/bad guy, which was confusing and disappointing.

If you haven't seen it in theaters, you may certainly wait for DVD/Redbox without feeling that you've missed something momentous. The only thing missing is Hercules, the Hero.

Dear Disney, We Hate Female Villians and Like It That Way!

A misunderstood stepmother doesn't have the same resonance or significance as an Evil Stepmother. This is the lesson Disney once had down pat. Lately, it seems, Evil Stepmother has been to counseling and discovered her inner child, but does she have to share it with us?

Complaints have been levied about Disney's formulaic and highly successful narrative of a beautiful, innocent princess abused by an evil stepmother. The accusation is unfair because of the hundreds of movies released by Disney since the 1940's very few are about a princess and an evil queen.  However, the handful or so that did follow this pattern featured an evil woman so beyond redemption that it scared the pants off us and made us hate her...and we loved it.

Take Maleficent. I haven't seen the Disney update, but any one who can transform themselves into a fire-breathing dragon probably isn't nice. And we like fire-breathing dragons Disney. Have you seen the fan response to Smaug?  From what I've heard about the "new" Maleficent, she was once a kind fairy...huh?

Then there was Frozen (see my review "Frozen: Gave Me Hypothermia"). The most interesting creature in the movie was the Abominable Snowman. For some reason, Disney chose to make the true queen a misunderstood princess who just wants to be herself. But if she could create an evil monster, doesn't it stand to reason that she herself is evil?

We loved Snow White and the Huntsman because it showed the truly depraved nature of the Evil Queen (Charlize Theron) and the authentic goodness of Snow White. If the antagonist is not truly evil, then what's the point of the protagonist trying to destroy them?

Even The Grimm Brothers movie (Matt Damon) got it right. The queen was beautiful, vain, and evil. Made sense that her just reward would be that she age, disintegrate, and shatter into a million pieces like her magic mirror.

This is not formulaic. It is good character arc. All of those "evil" women grew more and more jealous or evil over time (despite having chances to change). This is what makes us hate them all the more and then compare them to our least favorite relatives.

I've heard that the Broadway hit, "Wicked" is about the evil witch from Wizard of Oz, who actually isn't evil? Sorry I can't wrap my mind around that one after years of gleefully watching her melt into a pile of green slop in the original classic.

Ursula, in the Little Mermaid, was classic. Smooth, seductive, and evil. The perfect prototype for a villain. This is not anti-woman. It's common sense. If you must give us a multi-layered villain with a backstory and personality make it consistently and progressively wicked. (Was Ursula really once a good fish who got on the wrong side of King Trident, puh-lease!)

The Incredibles movie made a great villain out of Buddy, the annoying child, who eventually grew into a self-made super-villain, Syndrome. No one was sorry to see him get sucked into that turbine, lol!

I'm cherry-picking my personal favorites of course. But the point is that all movies need someone you love and someone you love to hate. We know the characters are not real (hopefully). But we need something real to experience. And if the plan is to dissect the personality of a villain to find some good in them, then there really is no villain. Snow White and the Queen are actually equals which isn't very interesting. There's just a Droopy-type fringe character, shuffling around the screen, crying out for help and attention instead of creating havoc and obstacles for the protagonist.

If you want to update a villain, follow the example of The Hobbit or How To Train Your Dragon or even Hercules (animated version). Make a villain so big, so bad, so larger than life that our eyes get big, our hands freeze just as we're about to take a bite of popcorn, and we go "Whoa!"

If you want someone different to happen at the end of your movies, let us walk away cheering for the good guy (or girl) and excitedly chattering about the demise of the bad guy (or girl), not trying to figure out what the difference is.

I Miss Books

Kindle and I are over. There is no more fire in my Kindle Fire. I glance resentfully at it wondering why I thought it was such a wonderful gift. When my sister re-gifted it to me, I was sure that my life-long avid reading would go on hyper-drive. Now I would be able to download books at the speed of light (and I have) , but it's finishing and enjoying them that's the problem.  Kindle doesn't excite my love of reading, it dampens it.

You see, a Kindle Tablet is not just an electronic house for books. It's a small tv that always seems to be on and full of commercials. Every time I turn on my Kindle with the intent of reading, an ad for a new gadget, a flash sale, a movie trailer or some other advertisement is there. Rarely, do they even show an advertisement for a book. When I go to download a book, I am bombasted by offers of the movie version, app, or online game.

When I read a book, there are no distractions or attractions. I am pulled into the world of written words and imagination whether it's a beach in Nantucket, 19th century Europe, or a modern romance. Reading has begun to resemble, in some ways, checking email. Sure, I like the convenience of being able to highlight interesting passages with my finger or quickly bookmark a page, but the glow of the "page" doesn't hold the same appeal as reading a book at night, illuminated by low light.

With summer reading season upon me, I remembered a great book I read last year and I missed the feeling of touching the cover, folding the book back, dog-earring the pages, and flipping back to re-read something that amused me. That's what books do. They give you a world you can touch and that touches you. And who can resist the smell of book paper (aka pages)?

I'm  not sure when I'll be turning my Kindle on again. I long to run to Barnes and Noble (last bookstore standing) and buy 2 or 3 heavy books knowing that it will take me a while to get through them. I might forget my place or spill coffee on a page. I'll have to keep a highlighter nearby if I want to mark a provocative paragraph, but that's what I want. To have a book, not a Nook.

Christian Movies Must Evoke Serious Discussion and Change-Not Feel Good Emotions

Now that the brouhaha over the accuracy of Noah has died down, I want to reflect on this movie which I did not see. I have no regrets either way. I don't feel a responsibility to see every so-called Christian movie and tv show that appears. I don't feel a need to call out every director for not ensuring that every word of dialogue comes verbatim from the Bible.

The controversy over Noah disturbed me because of the virulent attack on the movie by Christian "leaders". Leaders who believe the only way to make "real" Christian movies is to dress white people in long dirty robes and set it in a desert. Or make a movie with an obvious and rather unchallenging moral ending (e.g. Fireproof, "reconcile with your wife").  I enjoyed Fireproof, by the way.

A formulaic approach cheapens the movie-going experience, insults the dignity and intelligence of the movie-going audience, and spoon-feeds a "version" of God without challenging people to really discover how who God (the God of the Bible for the purposes of this discussion) is. For that matter, who is the Son of God?

When a movie too carefully defines or filters the "message", then there is no message. I've seen examples of atheistic or Buddhist written/directed movies strongly pushing their "message" as if the audience has no right or choice but to accept their way of thinking. Ultimately, such strongly themed movies turn audiences off and tune out the need of individual movie goers to find themselves within the character and story.

When I'm paying for a movie ticket, I expect to form my own thought, not have it "thought out" for me. I was never into the Harry Potter series, but a friend (and church sister) felt strongly that the movies showed that magic was the way to solve your problems ; in other words, a way of being self-reliant rather than God reliant.  I countered with Narnia. Didn't those movies show magic too? She disagreed and felt that the Narnia movies were pointing to a God-centered life. I still haven't seen any Potter movies to amend my opinion and probably won't. However, the fact that there was enough of a contrast to start a discussion is exactly how a movie, especially when it's purported as a Christian movie, and not just in church groups.

Lord of the Rings is another series that, to me, clearly shows good triumphing over evil. Jesus triumphing over Satan. The fact that a Hobbit is the "savior" of the series is even more compelling since they are the lowliest creatures in Middle Earth. I'm not suggesting that there is one theme to take away from Lord of the Rings or The Hobbit, but when millions of people around the world see a movie and resonate with it, they are clearly being touched in a deep and meaningful way.

The latest slew of Christian movies hasn't affected me much since I already know that they will follow the formula of portraying Christ as essentially a white, philosophical type man in long robes, disrespecting the racial and cultural demographic of today and ignoring the historical evidence of the time as well as glaring Biblical proof that describes Christ as a complex human being with a socially complex and conflicted life;  mixed emotions, anger, questionable friends and acquaintances, a sacrificial nature, and a forgiving spirit.

Every movie with a "church scene" is not a Christian movie. In fact, most of them probably aren't. It numbs and degrades Jesus lovers when a director uses a "sudden conversion" church scene as the inception of the Christian life or the usual route to Christianity. Where are the stories of the drunk who gets saved in a seedy hotel room? Or the addict who has to o.d. in order to come to Christ? Those stories are real and lack the lulling effect of seeing Abraham and Lot for the umpteenth time. The Old Testament accounts are very compelling, however the lack of fresh perspective and apparent research of how desert nomads (Bedouins) actually live and thrive in the desert is not.

As Hollywood seems to make a little room for different religious perspectives, they must accept that at times the perspectives will be harsh and offend all kinds of people. They are often not politically correct and non-inclusive.  Isn't that what good movies do? Quite a few non-Christian directors are adulated and practically deified for their brash, violent "tell it like it is" style, yet they are heralded as movie making mavericks and pioneers of post-modern storytelling.

For Christian movie makers, the new and more difficult challenge is to transform the safe Bible stories into the palpable and gritty realities that are chronicled therein, not make it more palatable for families only or into a Scripture filled Sunday sermon that can't be understood by non church goers.

"FROZEN" : Gave me Hypothermia

This review comes more than 2 months after Frozen was released to suspiciously overeffusive critical acclaim and box office records.

Usually when a movie garners too much extreme attention, I let things simmer down so that I can have the most objective and positive experience as possible. Such was the case with Frozen.

Supposedly, the story was all about "girl-power". I suppose it's pointless to ask why a demographic of 5-10 year olds need a feminist heroine, but I digress. Speaking of gender imbalance, Disney has portrayed surprisingly few male heroes with their own titles-exceptions being "Hercules". But again, I digress.

The story seemed simple enough from the trailers.

Once upon a time a beautiful ice princess lived in a beautiful castle. One day a handsome prince arrived and...happily ever after. Unfortunately, Disney chose a discombobulated, circuitous route of getting to the "happily ever after" that's not actually that happy. The ice princess never actually experiences romantic love. She's sort of a spinster. She actually kills two men. And she's not that good looking either and doesn't have a particularly catching trademark Disney song. But her sister (yea, there's a sister and she's not evil or very interesting) gets the guy, who's not a prince. Well, her first engagement was to a prince, but it didn't work out (he was evil) but her second relationship did! I kid you not,  this is the real story. It reads more like an animated version of "When Harry Met Sally" than a movie appropriate for families.

The girl was not supposed to use her powers (not sure why). She was the only one in the royal family with powers. After making a cool ice and snow playground for herself and her sister she accidentally pierced her sister's mind with snow. The king and queen (later conveniently killed off at sea) took her to the stone/troll people where a troll witchdoctor helped out. It was an accident for crying out loud!

The story was broken from the first scene and continued splintering for the rest of the movie. How a critic could ignore the most basic element of a movie or even praise a movie despite a confusing and poorly written story does a tremendous disservice to the movie going public and encourages studios that sociopathic feminist driven dramas are acceptable. They are not, especially for $12/ticket.

There are a string of open-ended storylines as if the writers wanted to empower the audience to make up our own stories, which is what the major theme of the movie was. It's actually not that empowering or fun to pay to see an animated movie and then leave it feeling unresolved.


As a girl, I loved Cinderella and Snow White. I thought it would be cool to be able to use magic to make my own clothes. I never believed the prince hindered or domesticized the dreams of the heroine. Cinderella's relatives ended up poor and the Wicked Queen in Snow White got killed-what could be more just than that?

I had thought the movie was going to be about an ice princess saving the world, not about her feeling awkward and being sort of indifferent and cruel. She didn't really use her ice power for anything really cool (like Frozo in The Incredibles) except to build herself an isolating ice fortress and transform her elegant queen's gown into a slutty evening gown with a thigh high split. Oh yeah, and she killed those two guys with ice and sent a raging Abominable Snowman after her own sister.


I won't say anymore because that weird feeling- the one that comes when you gulp a scoop of ice cream too fast and your entire tongue, trachea, and esophagus feel stunned- is starting to settle in again.

If Frozen's point was to make me feel stronger as a woman it failed. It only made me feel....cold.

"Belle": Beautifully Tells the Ugly Story of European Slavery (No spoilers)

The only difficulty with Belle is where to start. Pivotal social issues of race, rigid social structure, women's rights, and slavery are delicately and artfully balanced within a textured coming of age and love story. The movie begins with the obvious contrast. Belle's father, an English aristocrat, claims her from the slums of London. Moments later, we are immersed in a country estate rivaling Downton Abbey. Dido (her given name) is quickly accepted into the family and grows up fully enjoying the trappings of the good life.

Dido, portrayed by the stunning English actress, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, is layered and interesting. She is completely believable as an 18^th century English aristocrat and also reveals a complex and emotional performance as the child of a slave. Her gradual awakening to the miseries of the slave trade and the vagaries of her own social

 position as a person of color are portrayed authentically and consistently.

Tom Wilkinson offers a heavy weight performance as Lord Mansfield,  Lord Chief Justice of England and Dido's uncle,  his love and protection of Dido paralleled with his duty to execute judgment in the case of the Zong, a slave ship insurance fraud case.

The performances of all the actors don't merely provide support but stand on their own as individual accomplishments bringing pointed and fresh dialogue to the social issues at hand and infusing the major plotlines with unexpected perspective.

This movie while being extremely well written, directed, and acted in its own right offers a creative counter weight to “12 Years A Slave.” We finally get to see the extent of European complicity in the slave trade and the impact of England's legal directives on African slavery. Also, the appearance of Blacks in the English courtrooms provides a glimpse into the active role that former slaves and freeman played in abolishing slavery and impacting global slave laws (including America's Fugitive Slave Law). Some may believe that Dido's mixed-race parentage was an isolated incident, but to do so only denies history and perpetuates the tragedy that more of these movies haven't been made before now.

I can't overemphasize the importance and quality of this movie. The story is monumental. It compels and immediately demands further research, discussion, and retrospection. It doesn't “tell” a story as much as it immerses you in their lives and thoughts and hearts. I would do this movie a severe injustice if I revealed more of the plot.

This movie is unequivocally 5 stars. Every emotional note is plucked without resorting to convention. Every character utters complex and interesting dialogue, worthy of 2^nd and 3^rd viewings. The costuming is as detailed and beautiful as Coppolla's Marie Antoinette. Most importantly, the historical accuracy and meaning of this movie as a pivotal shift in the narrative of slave movies cannot be overstated. Please insist on seeing it for yourself.

Also contact Fox Searchlight Pictures if this movie is not playing in your area.

Writer's Log- Advice for Writers (What to Write About)

Welcome to the 2nd log of what I hope will become a daily writing advice log for freelance writers or those hoping to become professional writers. I have met many people who talk of wanting to write, but feel either academically unprepared or creatively inadequate. More often though, the challenge is deciding what to write about, which arguably can be based on a process or by freewriting; a loose term where you simply write about the first thing that comes to mind in whatever style you feel, paying little heed to grammar, content, or thought continuity.

Writer's block is a far reaching term that describes an inability to write or even think of a creative sentence; even a lack of creative "energy". The causes of writer's block can be an overly active mind, busy schedule, a creative lull, emotional issue, laziness, or forgetfulness. These are just the tip of the iceberg. Sometimes writer's block can be overcome with a process or series of triggers that break up the block. This can be particularly effective if your blocks seem to occur around the same time or after a certain set of circumstances.

Since I am a screenwriter, I am going to start with how I solve the block of a story outline. Most of my ideas are purely spontaneous, meaning I did not plan the story; the thought simply occurred to me (i.e. "What if a young girl fell down a hole and entered a magical world with white rabbits?") When this happens, I feel very blessed because then it is incredibly easy to simply write out the story synopses before I type one word of dialogue. I can clearly hear my characters voices, see them, and can type the script as if I was transcribing it straight from a movie screen. However, as one writes more and more scripts, this occurrence happens less frequently.

If you are attempting your first script, novel, or article without an idea in sight start Brainstorming. Brainstorming is probably the most effective way to get your brain in creative mode and start churning out ideas so you have a Pool of ideas from which to choose. Writing on a sheet of paper, make 3 or 4 columns and categorize your ideas (i.e. Real Events, Places I Want to See, Personalities I Dislike, etc.). Please limit your columns to 8 ideas or less, otherwise you will stay in brainstorm mode too long and never actually develop any of your story ideas. I know people who are always talking about these great ideas of theirs, but are creatively paralyzed and have no idea how to get past go.

Randomly pick one idea out of each column. Write a paragraph (no more than 5 sentences) describing each idea. Whichever one  holds your interest long enough that you pick up enough steam and write more than a paragraph is probably going to be the one you should start developing in detail.

Some writers worry that what they choose to write about will be dull or too controversial or complex for the public. Don't worry about that. If 5-10 people tell you they don't like your idea, it is either before it's time or a really bad idea. Sorry but 5 strangers don't lie.

Notice how I didn't tell you to write about what interests you because most writers have too many interests to count or make broad sweeping judgments about what will appeal to the public. Normally, it is more interesting to write about a subject that is new to you so you can learn something as you write, which often prevents writer's block.

So I hope this helped. Until next time.

Write On!

Writer's Log - Advice For Writers (Log 1)

I was supposed to launch this blog yesterday, February 1, but I procrastinated, like many writers, and didn't start writing it until now. But, before I launch into my full spiel, I want to write a few lines about what these "logs" will cover.

Since my journey as a screenwriter began several years ago, I have learned a lot. I have learned a lot about screenwriting and even more about the movie business, both indie and Hollywood. Some of what I learned I've had to relearn or dismiss altogether. Other lessons have been "trial by fire" where simply by saying or doing the wrong thing or associating myself with self-appointed entertainment "pros", I was hurt or misled. As you can see, I've survived.


Granted, a lot of this was pure naïveté. When you start down an ambitious road such as writing feature films, you will not escape unscathed, nor should you, nor should you want to. This is your story, your script. The foibles, the gaffes, the faux pas, the terrible storylines (i.e. "The Adventures of Alien and Housewife") and the like. Many writers develop a fossilized root of bitterness in their souls and unfortunately cause their work (and business relationships) to suffer as a result, because every one has been burned at least once.


I've been blessed too. I've gotten to meet celebrities and bask in the glow of successful writers (the ones who eat everyday) and filmmakers. Many have been generous to me with their time and invaluable advice. Their advice was not meant to warn me away from, but to prepare and mature me for what should be a long, long career as a writer. Beware of people who try to warn you away from a profession you love, especially if they are working in that same profession.


So back to the log contents. You will get advice from me, I will steer you (gently and sometimes with an electric prod) onto the righteous path of Great Writing. I will occasionally review a film, discuss a director or tell you about projects I want to write or work on. I will also direct you to do things that writers don't normally like to do like socialize, sometimes for business and sometimes just for fun or just plain schmooze.  I've met people years ago who end up doing all kinds of interesting things in the entertainment business and I am oh so glad I was nice. Being nice to a stranger doesn't always result in a script or movie deal, but it is better than getting bad-mouthed. I'll try to teach you a few things you can say to people to leave a long term positive impression.  I'll also chronicle my upcoming excursions to film fests, which every writer should be attending (more on that later).


There's also a few things I won't do. I won't read your script; that is to say, I won't be the first one to read your script. I have been a script reader. I have been overly picky and downright nasty. I have wept and laughed after reading amazing scripts. Script writing and reading is a long process. It requires commitment. You have to get to know your script. Many writers who want their work read are really submitting a draft, which is not a document that should be read publicly or critiqued because it is not ready.  So don't be surprised if I direct you to local sources first for all your script reading needs.


I have a fairly prolific social media presence, so I'll give you the assignment of "finding" me, lol. We'll talk about that in an upcoming blog; the effect of social media on screenwriters. It's actually a very profound subject.

I'll end here otherwise I'll start writing the material for the next 3 or 4 blogs.

I welcome you to the Writer's Log and look forward to sharing the most beneficial of my screenwriting experiences with you all.

Reflections of Martin Luther King, Jr

On Instagram this past week, I was blessed to see some "never before seen" color photos of Martin Luther King, Jr. and his wife, Coretta Scott King. These photos showed them sharing playful, smiling, and romantic moments. Their faces were relaxed, their gazes didn't completely meet the eye of the camera. Instead they seemed caught up in the euphoria of young love. The brown flesh of their faces cast out that beautiful sepia glow.

I wondered what they were thinking. If they had known with certainty the day and moment of their untimely earthly separation, would they still have been smiling, unburdened and carefree? Did they realize that they were completely photogenic and beautiful, an easy assignment for any photographer?

Also this week, a tacky poster superimposed Dr. King's image on a gold-chain wearing body. Obviously, the  creator felt that it was okay to use someone's image without permission and completely out of context. The poster designer hi-jacked a powerful image for a rootless and worthless concert promotion.

Dr. King's face didn't belong on that poster - that is obvious. The only good thing about it was that at least they properly captured the tone and jolly dimensions of his face.

We are used to seeing the somber, black & white video of the late 1960's, which is where his life ended. I find it ironic that he was killed in an era of black and white media, just before color tv became an American staple. While many movies from the 50's and earlier have been colorized a la Ted Turner, media coverage of Dr. King seems forever stamped in black and white.

The famous "I Have A Dream" speech might be less resonant in color. Had his speech been filmed today, the focus would be on the color of his tie or his suit designer, rather than the words.

So, Dr. King's political life will likely remain starkly colored in the unforgiving monotones of black and white. However, those personal moments, usually fully of super-white, halcyon smiles shining out of perfectly smooth brown skin, pre air-brush.  It seems that the truly great always are taken just before a significant shift in society. King, the champion of all Blacks, bane to the racist white society, never lived to see how color changed the face of tv, but I see his influence even there. Color (HD) and content are the two single most important media issues in today's time, though of course, in a slightly different context.

Now that I'm thinking about this, I'm going to do a search for colorized images of Dr. King, both in personal and public moments, and see what I can find.

The hues and contours of Dr. King's face, his expressions, radiate in black and white and in color, encompassing the color spectrum.

Downton Abbey 4 – So Glad to be Back Home Again

**spoiler alert

Well, they did it again. The tremendous cast and production team of Downton Abbey has again reignited our slavish addiction to the upper class world of 1920’s England, inviting us over for another “week-end.”

After the shocking death of Matthew, everyone’s favorite heir, I wondered whether the show could really go on without the love story of Lady Mary and Lord Matthew, but it has. I was surprised that they picked up the story so soon after Matthew’s death, just 6 months later, but that is the brilliance of Downton – to carry on with life in the Abbey practically the day after a shocking event, let us mope for a bit, and then immerse us in the daily duties and scandals of the rich folks and the poor ones.

Not many shows could hope to survive after the loss of so many popular characters. We, as viewers, have been coaxed and sometimes forced into accepting a different character or unexpected plotline over and over and over again. Matthew’s death didn’t override the theme of acceptance and moving forward in this new season. It was all succinctly paraphrased in one grief-stricken outburst from Lady Mary that "he survived the war only to die in a car accident.”

Just as at every other shocker and scandal, writer Julian Fellowes explores another avenue or opens up another personality just as one or more comes to a close. The truly unexpected departure of O’Brien, the most evil maid on earth, elicited not just surprise but also a bit of sadness. However, her partner-in-crime, crafty Thomas, already has a new cohort in the reintroduction of Edna, the ambitious maid, who is apparently not done with climbing and skirting the hierarchy of servitude. She's not at all likeable, but still appealing because her certain downfall is sure to be spectacular!

A secret pact between Branson (i.e. Tom), Carson (of all people), and Mrs. Hughes to hide Branson’s near affair with Edna is just as compelling as the fate of Lady Mary's vast inheritance.

What I like most about Downton Abbey is how the stories always suggest events that are happening behind the scenes in the house. The writing doesn’t stick to a straightforward structure in which the characters only reference situations that the viewers are aware of. So when Thomas appeared to be slandering Nanny West early in the season premiere, his vague accusation actually led to a much deeper and darker discovery of child abuse. Underlying tensions and attractions that are suggested with a fleeting look or one cryptic phrase suddenly explode into a full blown social disaster, for both classes. Other darker plots, like the strange cover-up between Thomas and Edna to discredit Anna for no apparent reason, followed later by sinister laughter,  and overheard by Bates and Anna clearly suggest some future show-down, but when, where, and how? Other plot lines appear to be secrets forever, like how O'Brien caused Cora's miscarriage.

Downton is classified as a soap opera, but really it is an epic, standing in a class of its own. The isolation of Downton and the Grantham Family in Season 1,  its immersion in the war in Season 2, and the focus on personal relationships (beginnings and ends) in Season 3 demonstrate the strength and flexibility of the writing. Looking back, I assumed that the show would largely focus on the lives of the rich, spoiled girls, but clearly, it has gone far beyond another history of the lives of bored country aristocrats. The show doesn’t rely on flashbacks to “fill us in” or remind us of what transpired last year – it just moves forward, fast. (Sorry for those of you trying to figure out what all the brouhaha is about).

There are a few cracks in Downton. It has been plagued by the "secret" letter syndrome since Season 1, when Edith sent a letter to the Turkish ambassador informing his colleague that the poor young man died on top of Lady Mary.  The latest “secret” letter assures Lady Mary’s inheritance, just as Lavinia's “secret” letter freed Matthew from their engagement before she succumbed to Spanish flu a couple of seasons ago, followed by the “secret” will Lavinia’s father wrote, making Matthew his sole heir to millions and millions of dollars. Convenient, but a stretch. Also, the continuous beatings that Lord Grantham has to take from his disrespectful family seem undeserved. Neither his wife, mother, daughters, or his Scottish son-in-law seem to respect his opinions, making him seem like an unwanted stepchild for no reason.

 

Rose, the wildchild,  first annoying, but now showing a few signs of maturity, while still infusing the family with her unpredictable ways. Cora needs a storyline because she hasn't had an interesting one since she blamed Robert for Sybill's death. I think everyone is happy that Lady Edith is moving forward with a new beau, though he is highly unsuitable.

Downton Abbey, Season 5 is already in production and I’m sure they can pull it off. With writing and cast that are not afraid to risk the viewers wrath, coupled with fresh new faces, new scandals, and a devil-may-care head on push into the future, Downton is an international show that appeals to almost everyone. How many shows can boast a successful crossover of dozens of countries and 2 centuries?

Network shows that have tried to copy the Downton "model" of a rich family with secrets have not been successful because they quickly become formulaic (e.g. sex, violence) and are so rigid in their racial, economic, and story structures that nothing fresh can survive.

I, for one, am more than willing to wander the halls of Downton Abbey for Season 4,  excited to see all that the Jazz Age holds for the Granthams, including a Black character, who is not a servant, a maid who wants to be a lady, and a real Lady who becomes a landlord. Only at Downton.

Downton Abbey airs Sunday nights on your local PBS station.