My Blog

Chicks Dig Movie Bootleggers

by

The LA Times reports that Johnny Ray Gasca was convicted yesterday of seven criminal counts relating to his bootlegging of movies and flight from justice. One major piece of evidence against him was his diary, where he bragged that he made $4000 a week illegally taping movies with his camcorder. Gasca, who defended himself, explained the journal this way:

In a deep voice with a thick Bronx accent, Gasca told the jury that the journal
was a work of fiction written to impress girls.

"And I gotta tell you,"
he told the 12-member jury, "it worked."

I can just imagine the scene. Gasca goes up to a girl in a bar.

"Hey, baby, I’m a movie pirate."

"Really? Where’s your eyepatch?"

"I don’t have an eyepatch," he says, "but I keep a journal. Would you like to read it?"

"Sure," she says.

He takes out his journal, opens it up to key page, and shows it to her. She reads it, looks up at him, and says breathlessly:

"You sat in a movie theatre and taped THE CORE off the screen with a camcorder?"

He nods and, in doing so, redefines suave.

"That is so hot. I-I-I,"  She grabs the bar and shudders. "Oh God, I just climaxed thinking about it. Take me home, now, so I can make love to you all night."

"I have a better idea. I have my camcorder with me," he whispers. "What do you say we go to the AMC and tape SPY KIDS?"

She shudders again. "Stop. Torturing. Me. I don’t think I can take much more of this, you incredibly hot, bootlegging stud…"

Pros and Cons of POD

by

The Sacramento  News & Review ran an interesting, and very balanced, article about the pros-and-cons of Print-On-Demand publishing (ie "vanity presses").

there’s a difference between the POD printing technology–which has many
uses–and POD publishing. In recent years, a number of companies have begun to
offer POD publishing services to authors who want to see their books in print
but haven’t been able to interest a traditional publishing house in their work.
These writers often turn to companies with names like AuthorHouse, iUniverse and
Xlibris to publish their books for them. For a fee, which varies depending on
the level of marketing, editing and other services the author selects, POD
publishers will set up the book and print copies as they are ordered.

Wales, who published his first novel with AuthorHouse, makes a distinction
between using a POD publisher and self-publishing. “The basic difference,” he
said, “is that when you use a company like AuthorHouse or iUniverse, they are
the publisher. That means they own the ISBN [International Standard Book
Number], and all payments for the book get channeled through them.” But because
the author has paid for the publication, and the company has no input into
content other than banning obscenity or pornography, according to Wales, “those
companies are vanity presses.”

“They’ll set you up,” he said, “but they don’t have any sort of criteria for
what’s going to be published and what isn’t.” Wales initially went with
AuthorHouse (which was called 1stBooks at the time) because he’d had difficulty
finding an agent or publisher for his first book, a rather epic fantasy novel.
It runs more than 600 pages–more than 300,000 words–in length.

…Many would-be authors decline to use the editing services offered by POD
publishers–either because it costs extra or because they think, wrongly, that
editing isn’t necessary. Without the agents and editors of the traditional
publishing system to weed out the unprepared and unworthy, some really bad books
are out there.

The folks at Pod-dy Mouth (where I found the link to this article) exchanged emails with the reporter, Kel Munger, while she was writing the article. In one of them, the reporter said:

I’m genuinely torn between a
healthy respect for access to publishing for all and aggravation that so many
people think anybody can write a good book. It’s like saying anyone can be a
brain surgeon; it would be nice if it were true, but it’s just not so.

I recommend the article for anyone who is thinking about self-publishing their book.

Why Bother Going to the Movies?

by

My wife always wants to see something "light" on our date night. So she dragged me to both THE HONEYMOONERS and BEWITCHED. After enduring these two inane, laughless "reimaginings" of TV classics, I think both films should be formally classified as crimes against humanity and the film-makers brought in chains to The Hague. I also think Congress should pass a law making it a crime, from this point forward, to remake a TV series as a feature film ( a law which should have been enacted after the feature versions of THE AVENGERS or SGT. BILKO). It’s too late, I’m afraid, to save us from DUKES OF HAZZARD.

Lately, there’s been a lot of head-scratching in the trades about why boxoffice revenues are taking a steep dive. There’s a simple answer. Because movies these days suck. I don’t just mean these TV revivals, but movies in general. I honestly can’t remember the last time I saw a good Hollywood  movie and, sicko that I am, I see just about everything (Yeah, I saw STAR WARS…and found myself rooting for the bad guys and wondering when George Lucas lost his writing talent. And yeah, I saw BATMAN BEGINS, and I couldn’t wait for BATMAN ENDS. It was boring  and cliche-ridden). 

Overall, there’s much better stuff on TV these days than there are in the theatres… so why would anybody want to pay a babysitter, endure the traffic, pay exorbinant ticket prices, get gouged for popcorn and soda (it’s cheaper to eat at Ruth’s Chris than my local Regal Cinema)  put up with a noisy crowd and sit on sticky seats?

And the studios wonder why people are staying home?

(PS – I just thought of the last good movie I saw: it was either MILLION DOLLAR BABY or THE INCREDIBLES. How long ago was that??)

The Eyes of a Ranger Are Upon You

by

Walker is back. Chuck Norris is returning to Dallas next month Clintto shoot "Walker Texas Ranger: Ring of Fire," a two-hour movie for CBS that producer/director Aaron Norris hopes will relaunch the franchise, which was cancelled in 2001. Norris tells Variety:

"Reunions are more about one-offs," he said. "I would like to do more of
these."

To that end, action in "Ring of Fire" will pretty much pick up "as if we’ve
been doing the show the whole time," with Walker simply doing what he’s always
done: collar criminals and kick bad-guy butt (and not necessarily in the that
order).

Plot of "Ring of Fire" has Walker investigating whether one of his Ranger
buddies is a serial killer — or just being framed. He’ll also try to track down
a teen on the run from a crime syndicate.

The big question is, will Chuck still sing the theme song?

Do Mermaids Cry?

by

Robert Parker’s errors in APPALOOSA reminded me that a few weeks ago, my 10-year-old daughter Madison spotted a logic flaw in RL Stine’s book DEEP TROUBLE. In the scene, a mermaid is held captive in an aquarium full of water. RL Stine wrote:

The mermaid cooed. Then I saw her wipe away the tears that had begun to run down her face. She’s crying again, I thought, feeling guilty and miserable. She’s pleading with me. I put my face against the glass, as close to hers as I could get it…

"She’s underwater," Madison said. "How can he see tears running down her cheek?" That’s a darn good question, I replied. You’re very observant. You ought to be a detective.

I suggested that she write to RL Stine and ask him the question. She did. So far, he hasn’t replied.

No Rewrites, No Editing

by

I remember reading an interview with Robert B. Parker somewhere where he said he doesn’t go back and rewrite his work…he just bangs it out and moves on.  Apparently, his books aren’t edited by his publisher, either. Bill Crider posts the evidence.

From Appaloosa,

p. 266: "The room was quiet and
noisy."

p. 238: "Bragg took a tan leather case out of his inside coat pocket. He offered a cigar to Bragg and
me."

Chelsea Quinn Yarbro says NO to fanfic

by

Holly Lisle is hardly alone. Celebrated author Chelsea Quinn Yarbro is no fan of fanfic, either.  From her "official" Yahoo discussion group:

Please note:
CHELSEA QUINN YARBRO does NOT ENDORSE FAN FICTION

Any attempt to violate her copyright will result in criminal prosecution by her legal services.
Since becoming the official Chelsea Quinn Yarbro Group we will no longer be able to post personal poetry or other works by members anywhere within the group pages or posts. This is due to recent developments that aren’t with this group, but for other legal reasons.

In Globe and Mail article, Yarbro describes some of her run-ins with fanficcers.

"I have absolutely no sense of humour
        about copyright infringement," she writes. Yarbro has dealt with four
        instances of infringement during her career, including one where a fan
        story was printed in a magazine against her express wishes and the writer
        even mentioned as much in an introduction. Although Yarbro has managed
        to settle these issues out of court, she points out that in the U.S.,
        "willful infringement, meaning you know the writer has said no and
        you do it anyway, carries with it a maximum federal fine of $250,000 and
        a maximum of five years in a federal penitentiary."

When asked whether non-profit on-line fan fiction constitutes
        at least a grey area, she responds: "I think it is nonsense — and
        that is a mild word for the one I would prefer to use — and that fans
        who do it show a profound disrespect for the writer and the work they
        misappropriate in such cases. If fans want to write, they should make
        up their own stories with their own characters. That’s what fiction is
        all about."

      

Megan Lindholm says NO to Fanfic

by

Fantasy author Megan Lindholm/Robin Hobb comes out strongly against fanfic on her site. She tackles all the usual "pro-fanfic"  arguments one by one and in great detail.  Among her comments:

“I should be flattered that readers like my stories enough to want to
continue them.”
        That’s not flattering. That’s insulting. Every
fan fiction I’ve read to date, based on my world or any other writer’s world,
had focused on changing the writer’s careful work to suit the foible of the fan
writer. Romances are invented, gender identities changed, fetishes indulged and
endings are altered. It’s not flattery. To me, it is the fan fiction writer
saying, “Look, the original author really screwed up the story, so I’m going to
fix it. Here is how it should have gone.” At the extreme low end of the
spectrum, fan fiction becomes personal masturbation fantasy in which the fan
reader is interacting with the writer’s character. That isn’t healthy for
anyone.

On the notion that fanfiction is good "practice" for becoming a writer, she says, in part:

      
  No. It isn’t. If this is true, then karaoke is the path to become a singer,
coloring books produce great artists, and all great chefs have a shelf of cake
mixes. Fan fiction is a good way to avoid learning how to be a writer.
Fan fiction allows the writer to pretend to be creating a story, while using
someone else’s world, characters, and plot. Coloring Barbie’s hair green in a
coloring book is not a great act of creativity. Neither is putting lipstick on
Ken. Fan fiction does exactly those kinds of things.

Her long, self-described "rant" is worth a look.

Guilty Pleasure

by

1629Today at Costco I found a heck of a deal… a $16.00  DVD boxed set of three of Frank Sinatra’s  crime dramas: TONY ROME, LADY IN CEMENT and THE DETECTIVE.  As I’ve mentioned here before, these three films are among my guilty pleasures, especially the two TONY ROME movies. The TONY ROME movies are based on the novels by Marvin Albert, who wrote screenplays, original novels under a variety of pseudonyms (Nick Quarry, Tony Rome, Albert Conroy, Ian McCallister, Mike Barone), and movie tie-ins (including a novel based on Woody Allen’s screenplay WHAT’S NEW PUSSYCAT!)

Run out to Costco and get yourself this boxed set…you can’t beat the bang for the buck.

DVDs Bring in Billions of Dollars… and What do Writers Get? Bupkis.

by

Variety reported Friday that sales of DVD boxed sets  accounted for $2.8 billion in sales in 2004, up from $160 million in 2000, making TV shows "the fastest growing sector of the US vid biz."

The TV DVD sector account for 18% of  the US disc retail market last year…American shows dominate the DVD market not just in the US but in most Western European countries…

"In economic terms, this trend has been the equivalent for the Hollywood studi0s of striking oil in one’s own backyard, as they discovered lucrative new vehicles for exploiting brands they already own," according to the Screen Digest report.

What is the writer’s take of that gigantic windfall? About zero. Screenwriter John August crunches the numbers, using the DVD of his movie BIG FISH as an example.

the formulas used for home video residuals are based on videotapes, which are
relatively expensive to produce, and sell for a fairly low price. Technology
changes. DVDs are cheaper to produce, and sell for a higher price. But the
formula for paying residuals is still locked into the old paradigm. Studios make
a hell of lot more on each DVD they sell, but the writer (and actor, and
director) still get the same amount.

residualsA recent campaign
by the WGA East does a graphical breakdown of the numbers, but let’s take
Big Fish as an example. According to Video Business, its
MSRP is $28.95, but most people will pay less than that. Let’s say $20, which is
what you’d pay on Amazon. And Amazon is still pulling a 25% markup at that
price; it buys the DVD wholesale at $16.

How much does it cost to manufacture, package, distribute and market each
DVD? On average, $5.45. So the studio is making a profit of $10.55 on each DVD
sold. For Big Fish, that means Columbia/TriStar has made $21.1 million
profit in just one week. Of that, the writer gets the “point-one.”

The studios refuse to give writers, actors, or directors a bigger piece of DVD revenue, not even as little as 1%,  arguing they need  it all to 0ff-set losses in other areas. The income from TV shows on DVD, as well as movies on DVD, more than make up for any losses incurred by short-lived shows in primetime or films that tank at the box-office (In fact, the take from movies on DVD are often much, much larger than the box-office revenues)

For TV writers, DVDs are the future of reruns,  not syndication or foreign sales.
Experts quoted in the article predicted that US sales of TV shows on
DVD will reach $4.4 billion  by 2009.  Currently,  TV shows on DVD account for 30% of all DVD purchases in Western Europe, adding up to $2.1 billion in sales.

We caved on the DVD issue in this negotiation because the studios said there was no way they’d increase our take. They declared it a non-negotiable point. So we, and all the other guilds, settled for small bumps in other areas (and we wrangled a $37 million infusion of cash into our health fund, still a pittance compared to the revenue we won’t see from DVDs).

I think it’s imperative, for the future f the WGA and the financial security of writers, that we make getting a bigger share of DVD revenue a line-in-the-sand in the next contract negotiation…that we align ourselves with our sisters unions on this issue and  make it clear to the studios that we won’t accept no for an answer.