Making it in LA

Los Angeles is certianly one of the hardest cities to "make it" in.

It's very big, very spread out, and totally decentralized. The mass transit is poor, on it's way to being 'fair'. You will need a car to have a decent quality of life in LA.

LA is also very clicky. People here are very clicky and are not easy to warm up too. Most people spend a lot of time isolated in their cars, they don't interact with strangers as much as other cities. Unlike, say New York where most people travel packed together in subways, or walk on the streets side by side. LA people are not forced to interact with anyone they don't specifically want to, unless it's at places they specifically go to.


I think this is why Europeans (at least my European friends) don't really like LA that much. They don't understand it, and have trouble navigating it. They like SF so much better because you can stay anywhere and go anywhere in the city easily. Some Europeans I met in Europe said of their time in LA, that they never met any LA/CA natives. It takes a while to find your 'spots' or your mix in LA, because it is so spread out.


People love to bash LA, and I def come from the camp of, shut up or ship out. LA is awesome. If you don't like it, or can't handle it. Leave. One less car on the road slowing everything down.

Some of my friends always say how LA is dirty, and gross. Parts are, sure, but LA also has parts that are really amazing and really nice. It's just that they are harder to find than in most cities.

I love LA, it is actually a truly amazing city. Built on dreams, full of dreamers. A truly postmodern place, on the edge of Western Civilization.

2011

What will happen in Hollywood in 2011?

The rich will get richer, but the spec (and media biz) is changed; if you don't see that, it will be far harder to crack for you in 2011 than it was in 2010. It's not going to get simpler, or go back to the way it was, that is for certain...

The rules have changed, they players have changed and the game has changed. Selling "projects" -- don't get stuck on spec screenplays, that is so 'first 10' as I call the 2000-2010 decade -- or getting them made and distributed is actually getting easier. It's getting $100 million cash to make a movie that has gotten harder in the last 5 years. This could be changing.

In my mind, social media, "crowd sourcing" and other tech driven innovations are going to make raising capital a whole lot different; in some ways, for some people/projects, a whole lot easier.

Once the studio distribution model for +$100 million Features is figured out, -- 2010 brought big changes to it -- and the Major studios find a method that works, the cash and economy of the film biz will kick into gear. 2011 will likely give rise to distribution models that can work for more than just "known brands".

2009 & 2010 was the virtual implosion of the old studio model:

Theater > DVD > HBO > TV

I'm not going to try and map what I think the new model looks like, but obviously the INTERNET has shattered the old model for good.

2011 -- as I see it -- will be about rebuilding. Better, bigger, faster, global, and more efficient means of distribution. This will free up money and a "New Wave" of cinema will be born.

That is my predictions for 2011 and 2012.

Review: Love & Other Drugs

Witty. Fun. Predictable. Sexy. Heartfelt.

I liked the story and script, both were good. I like concept of a promiscuous Drug rep, and his tribulations, and arc into a caring loving man. The idea of selling drugs and of Viagra makes for great plot devices. The story centers around a carefree man (Jake) who meets a woman (Anne) with Parkinsons, she doesn't want a relationship because she knows she will inevitably need to be taken care of, and will be huge burden as her disease worsens. But their casual sex, turns into love, which both of them struggle to deal with in their own way.

Fun insight and look/take on the Medical and Drug business.

Parts of the story seemed forced. The brother character, he's supposed to be super rich and yet he crashes on his brother's (Gyllenhaal) couch? Also some parts involving the doctor played by Hank Azaria, but all in all it worked well enough.

Jake Gyllenhaal gave an okay performance; nothing great, not bad in any particular way. Anne Hathaway had some great moments in it, but overall I found her performance unconvincing. I like her a lot, and she is great, and she pulls it out at all the right places, but I didn't really see her character most of the time, I saw her acting. I do like, and respect her desire to bare all in the film. It takes guts, but I feel like it kept her focus away from the scenes, and affected her performance somehow.

Jake, I think, likes to be naked in films. He is someone who has been working hard on his body for years now, and wants to show it off. That is how I see his performance. But he does have a good body, so it works.

A fun movie. Very watchable and warm.

Amazon.com and the New Hollywood 2

I think the best comparison to this deal is actually YouTube.

If you put something up, don't do it for the money, the odds are electron-microscope small. You should only be looking for recognition; and even those odds are micro. That said, some people have gotten six or seven figure deals from YouTube... Hence the allure.

However, what you post, will no doubt be rehashed and used by thousands of other people -- much like YouTube -- and your "credit" will be lost in that mix, and your chances for money are almost non-existent.

In my mind what Amazon Studios will become (or wants to become) is a searchable library of scripts, that writers -- maybe teams of writers hired by, or in cahoots with Amazon Studios -- use to find templates of script to rewrite. Or maybe even a diamond in the rough, with the right polish could be sellable.

Because the whole thing cost Amazon nothing, and they only (imagine to / might) pay out money when the real prospect of money is in sight -- i.e. when a studio or other party has actual interest in a project -- so the real coup for them is the library of material they will accumulate, and the traffic to the site / publicity. In essence, they have already won.

I can totally see Amazon hiring a writer, or rather a group of writers, to rewrite the best of the scripts on the site, also for pennies, and thus they have totally reduced to cost of getting a (strong?) piece of material for their studio at rock bottom cost. They are even looking to foster mass comment/contribution by the masses via a thread like this, giving notes/ideas for free, and who would thus likely go see the film even though they will get no credit or money...

-- See how this is all working? --

If they can get one feature film off the ground to make at least $50 million. It will be a massive profit for them, where as for a normal studio, it likely would not be.

"New Hollywood"

Amazon.com and the New Hollywood

Amazon is getting into the movie biz...

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Amazon-Amazon-Studios-Warner-Bros,news-8920.html

You can upload your script for free, but they lock you into an 18 month option...

*

Did somebody say "New Hollywood"?

***

I finally got my script optioned! I'm like a professional screenwriter!

All I had to do was upload onto the website!

***

I'm joking. BTW

I would never accept such a contract. But I think it's funny how people in this thread are so surprised by it being offered.

If you are Amazon, it cost you virtually nothing. You do no work, and just *like that* you have a vast library of material at your disposal. All of it in contract, for up to three years. AND chances are people -- from anywhere in the world, likely not LA -- will rewrite it or make suggestions on it that could be helpful. So then Amazon -- or a studio they team up with -- can make content based on the script without paying the writer a cent.

It's genius, in many ways. Evil genius, but that's show biz!

Fast forward five years when Amazon has millions of scripts (no doubt the contract terms have changed to be more beneficial to Amazon) and is making them into content which it shows/sells on it's site.

Looks like someone just got into show biz in a big way!

I could even see them teaming up with major Hollywood studios to make films that they have locked in, acting as a sort of Agent/Manager of scripts/projects... It's very interesting, and how it will all unfold remains to be seen.

I see the potential for a Facebook, to this Myspace.

But these sort of "they're just using us!" deals are commonplace throughout all of show biz, so why people are so shocked is strange to me.

For instance, if you go onto a reality TV show, they pay you ONCE -- or for many they don't even pay you EVER -- and they have the right to air it as much as they want, re-edit and air it elsewhere, throughout all media, in perpetuity without paying you another cent. Don't like it?

Bye then! NEXT!

Look at the MTV 'Real World' cast members. MTV has made billions from reruns and reedits of those shows and they don't to pay any of the 'actors/people' another cent. It's simple supply and demand. Huge supply of people -- WRITERS -- with very low demands.

I don't have all facts, but I do know that many actors never specifically negotiated residuals from old shows like 'The Brady Bunch' and so they get nothing (or next to it) while the studios rake in money from these old shows still to this day. Same goes for the writers I am sure.

The point is, the Amazon Studio is just a new model based on an old system.

It's actually quite brilliant in it's Devilish sort of way.

On the flip side it could very well help people, like YouTube, it could launch people into the big time, at which point they could make sweet deals for themselves moving forward...

I do feel, however, the savvy writer should just avoid the Amazon model as well. If you are skilled writer with real talent (and especially if you can get yourself to LA) you can use the web to "crowd source" your work and refine it to perfection, while still holding onto all the rights. It's just a matter of tapping and find the right "crowd" of people.

Maybe you give up a few plot secrets in the process (never all if you are smart), but at least you retain power and control. And in the "New Hollywood" it's all about power and control.

Once you have something truly great, it's just a matter of getting it into the right hands.

That's my thoughts any who.

Postmodernism?

Pharaoh - The Pitch 2

"The most imaginative and potentially lucrative un-produced ‘Epic Trilogy’ since Star Wars for whoever decides to make it!"

Millions of people have diehard interest in exactly this subject matter.

It’s a story with global appeal and universal themes.

Super-hero style fantasy + History gives a feeling of realism, but the fun of being larger than life.

A story ahead of it’s time, that taps right into the lucrative pulse of controversy...

Connects science and religion. Controversial topics. Neutral yet incredible story.

PHARAOH is ground breaking and cutting edge in it’s detail, content and structure.
A classic hero's journey -- an outsider being brought in to save the world from the powers that be.

A PERFECT STORY TO UTILIZE 3-D TECHNOLOGY!

* * *
A trilogy in the vein of Star Wars -- set right here in our very own galaxy, our world -- in that at it's core is a powerful empire (a Secret Society in PHARAOH's case) and a generational power-struggle.

The story connects Holy Blood, 2012, Nano-technology, Artificial Intelligence and Secret societies with the great Mysteries of Egypt...

These are the subject-matter of many of the most successful films AND books ever produced. But no book or film has brought them together quite like PHARAOH.

It draws on some of the most basic and fundamentals of Hollywood Blockbusters but spices and shakes them so well they taste totally fresh and new.

It gets people talking, because it’s so interesting...
Much like “The Da Vince Code” and “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” did… But it’s not any farther ‘out there’ than what is already being shown on TV (the History Channel) and in other classic blockbusters.

Taps into popular culture’s religious symbolism and conjecture.
PHARAOH is full of symbolism, but neither promotes nor denounces any religion or science. Rather, it incorporates both as part of the human experience and part of the story...

A story about secrets… Secrets we are all dying to know. Secrets that millions of people all over the world love to hear, see and talk about. Making this script:

"The most imaginative and potentially lucrative un-produced ‘Epic Trilogy’ since Star Wars for whoever decides to make it!"

When you read the script and you realize it's true:

PEOPLE WILL LOVE THE STORY

“This script has all the ingredients of a blockbuster film.”

IT IS EXACTLY WHAT HOLLYWOOD IS LOOKING FOR.

Why?

Because it's what THE AUDIENCE is looking for.

Can you explain?

Well... What defines the success of many films today is: CULT FOLLOWING

Whether it's Twilight, Comic-Books, Sex and the City, or The Da Vinci Code.

Success comes from tapping into and drawing out that base, that "cult following". By creating a product that appeals to them, and they will buy. They go/buy because it's something that they know about, and they want to see and weigh in on, or be a part of...

PHARAOH has just that. Stuff people are interested in and follow with cult like dedication and interest.

How so?

An inherently multi-prong approach. It deals with, and taps some of the largest and most lucrative cult-followings that are consuming media products today. Comic-book and Fantasy appeal in the youth. Intellectual controversy, speculation and religious symbolism appeal in the adults. It taps the more discerning, the crowd that doesn't go out and see every movie, but they will when it's about something that interests them...

The subject matter of PHARAOH has been the interest of young, old, poor and royalty... for over a 1000 years. Global appeal today. It would play well in every world market, because it's subject matter is universal.

What subject matter?

Secrets • Ancient History • Humanity, Mortality and Eternal Life...

And more recently:

Ever wonder how “The Matrix” and Artificial Intelligence comes in to be?

What happens when computer intelligence becomes greater that human intelligence "the Singularity"?

PHARAOH actually connects all these questions and answers into a thrill ride of 119 pages. As they say: You think you know... but you have no idea…

Okay... Huge cult following of those subjects. Lots of movies. Millions of books on those subjects are sold annually. Got it. But how does that translate into these 'cult-followings' buying into your script?

PHARAOH offers fascinating and fantastic answers to these questions. Questions people are paying money to read, hear and see answers too. As a film it becomes a powerful new kind of entertainment, a kind of postmodern religious experience. Something people pay good money for.

PHARAOH is a mythos of our (neo) real world, in the way that Lord of the Rings is a mythos of pre-industrial Europe.

A world where fantasy is the reality...

Visually and intellectually stimulating --perfect to be made in and utilize 3-D -- which makes it stronger cinematically, and more moving / enjoyable.
'The Dark Knight' was deep and engrossing because it felt plausible, realistic -- intellectually stimulating.

With the rate the world is changing, we are confronted daily with concepts and ideas that seem crazy, but we are learning are actually becoming real. FAST. Things like AI, cloning, and Secret Societies... Hence a new reality.

Neo-realism > "new-realism" > new way of looking at and projecting reality

IT SELLS. PEOPLE EAT IT UP.

Think AVATAR. It pretends to be the real world -- our actual future -- and it uses the story to take this "real world" or neo-real-world to a place of fantasy. The fantasy is the reality, the reality where we are exploring other realities... Get it? Doesn't matter, because the point is:

PEOPLE LOVE IT

Why do they love it? Because it's a deeper movie going experience when you connect to it. People feel they got more out of it when they connect -- like it was worth the money and they want to have the experience again... and also buy the DVD.

Some people say: "it was the cutting edge visual effects that got them in, not the subject matter."

True. But the effects are only as good as the story that employs them. Many films with the best visual effects but no story find little success. But the ones that can truly utilize and showcase cutting edge technology within the context of a great story find true Blockbuster "cult following" success. Think ‘The Matrix’ and the Renaissance in Super-hero movies it created in Hollywood. When a great story, can utilize great effects, the combined effect magnifies the profitability/marketability. The impact and selling power of it is much stronger.

It takes a good story to begin with...

PHARAOH is a good story.

Once you read it, you understand why it's

"The most imaginative and potentially lucrative un-produced ‘Epic Trilogy’ since Star Wars for whoever decides to make it!"

See Also: http://mr-postmodernistic.blogspot.com/2010/04/pharaoh-pitch.html

Be Creative!

Selling a ‘tent-pole spec’ screenplay in this day and age is no easy task, even for seasoned pros. It takes not just a brilliant idea, with global appeal, that is easily marketable to an ever more intelligent metropolitan population. But also a comprehensive understanding of how your idea fits into the current media (business) market.

How your film will make money must be quite clear. What is the market for it? Media Executives want to know: How do people respond to it? How does it fit into the market trend/trajectory.

Ultimately selling a ‘tent-pole’ spec script is about marketing. It’s about selling ideas and experiences, and the internet - social networking, web pages - is the future of this. The internet is where ideas and experiences are now made and shared. It is where 21st century commerce takes place. It's just the fact now.

Some people think that using the internet to market and sell a screenplay can make you look “desperate”. They could not be more off base. The truth is, not using the internet to market and sell your ideas will be like not using email today.

If you think creating web a page, social networking, Twittering, blogging, or in anyway being creative about reaching out / networking on the internet is "desperate", you do not understand the media business of today (and tomorrow). We are rapidly accelerating irreversibly into ‘The Digital Age’. Not using social media, being creative with it, and the internet is “media career suicide”. As ‘Hollywood/Media’ merges with ‘Silicon Valley/Computers’ the old business models of the entertainment business are falling apart faster than new ones are finding success. The game is changing. FAST. This change is giving Geeks more clout. The NextGen, tech savvy youth more advantage and hobbling the tech-challenged. It is changing the way we consume and create media, in new and exciting ways, often faster than anyone can keep up. What’s the best way to not get left behind?

Get creative.

Don’t worry about looking desperate to anyone. As long as you are being creative – trying new models, new ideas -- you are part of the future of the media business. Those that know how to use the internet to create experiences and new business models are the next wave. They are rapidly changing Hollywood.

How does this relate to screenwriting, you ask?

Well, if you are trying to market and sell a ‘tent-pole’ spec screenplay you are going to need to be aware of the market trends and developments. When it comes to studio specs:

“It is all about commercial viability.”

The financial success or “commercial viability” of a script, is based on the market. Getting a hit Studio film nowadays is like hitting a moving target, it takes great perception and skill to determine where the market will be once the film is released – where the target will be in the future. If you can aim right, i.e. know the market trend, you are far more likely to hit the target.

With the success of 'Inception' there is a realization in Hollywood that people want smart, ground breaking films that make us think. This is combined with a renewed interest in original material, and a diminished interest in “established” or “known/old” material. The numbers are clear; they don’t lie. Chris Nolan has the incredible and rare ability to take an established franchise like Batman and make it new; intelligent. He raised the bar via ‘Inception’ and the market likes it.

It’s about being intelligent and “Twitter-buzz-worthy. If it’s not original – at least made in an original or smart way -- it is unlikely to be intellectually stimulating or worth talking/tweeting about. But if it is both original and smart. The tweets will fly, the interest will soar and money will pour in.

The global film market is also rapidly changing. Because the amount of media we consume has gone way up - Netflix, HBO, Cable TV – we are beginning to demand more from our films, and box office movie going experiences. Combine this with the fact that the metropolitan film markets (the main source of ticket sales) are getting more ethnically diverse, more educated, and more selective. As people get smarter, more globally aware, higher in consciousness, they demand better entertainment.

Advertising fatigue has also made “word of mouth” more important than ever. The best way to get ‘word of mouth buzz’ is to make something smart that people want to talk about. It’s the best, most effective marketing, and it is free. The only catch is that you need to make a really good movie that people want to talk, tweet, and blog about...


Today the story/script and the marketing, are very much the same thing, two sides of one coin; inextricably connected. Because contests and competitions are not usually the best route for tent-pole, blockbuster films, you will need to find alternatives. Don’t avoid contests per say, but don’t rely on them either. Most ‘tent-pole’ films would not win a screenwriting contest. So assuming you have a great idea, that you truly believe in, and know would make a great film, you will need to get creative.

How well can your script/story be marketed – sell - commercially to a global marketplace? The first test starts with you the writer and the internet. How well can you market and sell your idea to people? To an agent, manager, director or producer? How do you stand out and get attention on your polished and market ready screenplay?

Be creative!

Test your idea. Your talent.

Make a website. Make a YouTube movie. Blog! Reach out.

Get exposure.

Get the story “pitch” out there to as many people as possible. Use your talent to showcase your “commercial viability”. This will get your script read; which is the first goal. Therefore a website, or connection for a script, has the sole purpose of GETTING THE SCRIPT READ. Like a headshot gets an actor an audition. Then your script will need to speak for itself; land the part.

You will never be considered if you are never seen/read. So how do you get your script read?

The rule is: “Whatever works”

“There are no rules.” Anyone who says differently is trying to sell you something, or keep you down.

Be creative.

Today, increasing amounts of the new talent, and development deals are coming from the internet. From YouTube obscurity, as was the case with Fede Alvarez who got a 7-figure deal with Sam Raimi (Director of Spider-Man) from a $500 budget YouTube video. It’s the ‘Justin Bieber effect.’ It started with bands and artist that have been given record deals from myspace pages, from virtual obscurity. Now it’s doing the same for the movie business. The internet has effectively intensified the competition in Hollywood; leveled the playing field in many ways. It’s now a global talent competition, running 24/7.

Bottom line: If you have the substance, the talent, showcase it as best you can, however you can. Don’t be afraid to put your work out there. Putting it out there – making web pages, YouTube videos, Blogging, or Band Pages -- is the name of the game.

1) Use the internet. 2) Be creative. 3) Get seen. 4) Get feedback. Get an audience. 5) Be able to back it up, in person, and for a writer, on paper. 6) Get a deal.

Hollywood is a creative industry/business. Get creative, or get (shut) out.

Worrying about “looking desperate” or being afraid are creativity killers. Was Justin Bieber desperate when he made YouTube Videos? No. Do what you love. Being innovative/creative is never desperate. You think it is, or won’t/can’t even try to create/innovate, then you are in the wrong business. If you can’t be creative – try new models, test new ideas -- you won’t make it in the New Hollywood. It goes for everyone. Screenwriters too.

Being negative is also a creativity killer. Before you say something sucks, or “no one has sold a screenplay from a website, or the internet”… Just remember, no one had gotten a 7-figure deal from a YouTube video… until one day: Someone did.

Is it possible to sell a screenplay with a website or social networking?

It most definitely is.

Maybe I’ll be the first. Maybe you will. Maybe someone reading this will. You could say that all the YouTube Videos / Web Pages you have seen suck, but that doesn’t mean someone isn’t posting one right now that is fantastic, and it will land them a meeting with a manager or executive. Rather than say they suck, you should try and make a better one…

Be creative.

That’s the game. That’s how it works.

Just wanted to share my thoughts. Hopefully this helps!

Best,

Julian Tyler

www.juliantyler.com

Review: Dinner for Schmucks

Over-the-top. Hilarious Moments. Contrived story. Inconsistent. Very funny.

While this movie had some great moments and at times it was really funny, over all it left me feeling very strange about it. It made 'Meet the Parents' seem realistic in that it was so over the top, so far from any sort of reality, but often acted like it was reality, that it left me with mixed feelings. They create all these huge problems and then wrap it up in the end with voice over, which I was not a fan of.

Steve Carell is very funny, but his character was inconsistent for me. I didn't understand him. He was crazy, and then not. Logical and then totally illogical. He basically ruins peoples lives in the movie and no one is upset with him, which made no sense to me.

Paul Rudd gave a moderately bland performance for me.

Zach Galifianakis was the highlight of the movie for me. He was awesome.

This film has the potential to be a sort of cult classic. It has some great lines and seriously memorable moments. But because the story is so slapstick, but many characters are played so dramatically, it doesn't quite come together. The Steve Carell character basically ruins the life of Paul Rudds character, and then the movie ends. It didn't really make sense to me.

That said, I do still laugh when I think about parts of it.

"Keeping up with the Media"

In one sense 'the model will fall away'. But the studios are not going anywhere, and tent-pole filmmaking is not going anywhere. They will change with the market, as all good businesses do.

'The Calculator' is on the right track, but seems to have missed the how and why.

The studios are not going to be like the Record Labels -- virtually dissolve -- they are going to be like the Networks (ABC, NBC, CBS, etc) and diversify -- embrace cable (new models), and "buy into the change."

The Studios (and networks) are all part of massive media conglomerates so they change their models/strategies often, and the media business is booming like never before. People consume more media today than imagined possible 10 or 20 years ago. Smart phones, iPads and emerging markets like China and India will provide ever increasing patrons and opportunities, which will often require ever more 'models' and strategies to tap into these markets. But the demand for big films is there.

If you ask me, looking forward, studios are better suited to look at more universal themes -- not just known American remakes -- for making tent-pole films because those will play better in a global market place.

Original ideas about science, religion, the mind, and the human experience have potential to sell in a global market, and we are fast transitioning into a totally global market place for films. America's big cities are very much 'a diverse global market' - hence a lack of interest in 'established American brands'.

The diversification of the studios into video games, web & cable programing allows for the funding of synergized 'tent-poles' projects. But idea of TV shows and video games becoming tent-poles is a model that I think is not as viable as once thought... It's already become stale. I think people prefer smart, original entertainment if they are going to pay a premium; which makes perfect sense when you think about it.

Even 3-D is in it's infancy. The recent abuse of calling films 3-D, when they really converted, not shot in 3-D, is really annoying though. It's a waste if you ask me. If it is not filmed as 3-D >> IT'S NOT 3-D.

3-D as a way of filmmaking is bursting with mind blowing potential, as the technology rapidly improves, creative geniuses will find ways to tap this and pair it with powerful stories, and thus will be able to top even Avatar - which had universal appeal - box office numbers.

Because of this, it is my belief that the 'tent-pole' box office has the potential to get even bigger.

Superhero tent-poles that tap ever improving film technology, is a model is not going anywhere either. I just hope they don't skimp on the writing. Chris Nolan can't oversee them all...

Media is one of America's largest/greatest export products. No other economy in the world is capable of funding 20-30 $200 million motion pictures a year, but even America has it's limits. Which is why the studios have cut back the 'irrational exuberance'. That should not be confused with the breakdown of the studio system. The costs are up, so fewer are made.

It cost about $30-$60 million -- so it needs to be worth it -- just to market a film these days, so it's either go all-in-big, or go the indie route. The studios are going big.

But the indie world is also going strong. Technology that was once only available to the studios is now available to anyone with a laptop. Hence the pressure for the studios to go big and make 'tent-pole'.

The markets are changing very fast, so the studios are also cutting the lag time in development so that they don't miss the market/mark. That is why the recent duds have happened. People were over the trend even before it was able to set in. The market changed before the films even came out...

Try and keep up!

The beauty is that anyone can make movies these days, and market them virtually for free on the internet. If it catches on -- Justin Beiber effect -- it can work out real nice. If not, try again!

It's an exciting time to be in media.

And if you keep up, it is very exciting.

Feeling this...

I'm feelin' this...

Reminds me of blink 182

Life is good.

Still thinking about the book I read up in Chico.

Sorry mostly read

My Mom finds the best books

We share that. We both love to read books

We both love the study and quest for knowledge and wisdom.

I have the same blood type as my mom? Could the be related?

Is the world that weird? That connected

Everything is related and connected

Everything is Anything

Anything is Everything

Anything does not equal Everything

What is Everything?

Everything is ALL there is, comprehended and not; 100% of matter and energy

This dimension and every other dimension

Anything usually denotes one thing, of the everything

These 'things' are sort of a thing

Things are ideas. Realities. Systems vibrating together.

Its so basic. So simple. Yet so beyond comprehension

Can a creation ever truly know its creator?

Is there a Creator and what does that mean?

I always want everything to mean something

I think it's because I'm a very positive person

I feel everything has meaning and purpose

I feel I have a place in this world, this system of life

This dynamic macrocosmic quantum relative energy

It's all in your head

ALL of it is inside your own mind.

The outside world is essentially in you

Can you feel it?

Favorite Movie Quotes

REPOST: Via "Favorite movie quotes" thread on a LinkedIn Group.

• Someone asked a similar question a short while back (or perhaps it was just one's favorite quote), but this is such a great question. I've numerous quotes that I incorporated into the materials I use for a law school course that I teach on entertainment financing - they're not from films, but about the film industry, and too good for me not to share (sorry to be so long, but I hope you'll all enjoy them):

“I always thought the real violence in Hollywood isn't what's on the screen. It's what you have to do to raise the money.” - David Mamet

“Law students have taken over Hollywood. To them it's all about making money.” - Tobe Hooper

“Hollywood held this double lure for me: tremendous sums of money for work that required no more effort than a game of pinochle.” - Ben Hecht

“If people don’t want to go to the picture, nobody can stop them.” - Samuel Goldwyn

“If I knew what makes a movie catch on, then I'd make hit after hit.” - Jerry Bruckheimer

“When you overpay small people you frighten them. They know that their merits or activities entitle them to no such sums as they are receiving.” - Ben Hecht

“I went to Paramount because I wanted protection. Directing a picture and being responsible for whether there was toilet paper in the bathroom was too much for me.” – Ralph Bakshi

“Studio executives are intelligent, brutally overworked men and women who share one thing in common with baseball managers: they wake up every morning of the world with the knowledge that sooner or later they’re going to get fired.” – William Goldman

And the ever-popular: “Nobody knows anything.” – William Goldman, Adventures in the Screen Trade

And as for actual film quotes, Norma Desmond (Gloria Swanson) in "Sunset Boulevard": "I AM big. It's the pictures that got small."

“Here's the Remains of the Day lunchbox. Kids don't like eating at school, but if they have a Remains of the Day lunchbox, they're a lot happier.” - “Waiting for Guffman”

By
Peter Levitan
Entertainment/Film Lawyer - finance & production specialist
Greater Los Angeles Area

Via Linked in.

RAW MILK!

Subject: Raw Milk

Hello-PR contact for Organic Valley
I am one of the Northern California raw milk consumers who has been affected by Organic Valley's recent decision.

I have a few thoughts to share:

1. Organic Valley has a lovely Website and I have spent some time going through it. I "met" the farmers, I read the Mission and GOALS professed. Well done.
To make a point let me repeat a few of your Goals, copied and unchanged from your website.
I believe you must see that are moving backward not forward toward these and many other of your stated goals.

PROMOTE a respect for the diversity, dignity, and interdependence of human, animal, plant, soil, and global life.

Please note that we here in California do not feel respected for our diversity.

...another goal says...

ENABLE a healthy human livelihood by providing quality employment, cooperation, organic education and community growth.

Please note that we in California are not enabled - but in fact have been Disabled by your board's decision. It is due to cooperation, education and community growth that Organic Raw Milk sales have been increasing. You have tremendously marred the success of this goal.

...another goal says...

ENCOURAGE a farming future emphasizing ecological and economic sustainability.

Please Note- that here in California Your decision is DIScouraging a farming future which has been proving successful in meeting this Goal.

2. Why move backward and this crucial crossroad. The success of your model is Outstanding, and now perhaps a bit outdated. Why not stay at the forefront and take your successful model to the next level. These are a few ideas:
* Why not incorporate the Cow Share model into Organic Valley. THINK ABOUT IT,
I would pay Organic Valley a price higher than that of pasteurized milk for it to be left in the tank at my LOCAL Dairy. There would be more paid for this milk and less cost incurred in transport; pasteurizing; packaging etc... NOT TO MENTION the positive P.R. in the sustainable, ecologically LOGICAL, GREEN as Grass, public eye,,,etc
Imagine..... this cow share venture has been so successful with zero promotion that you have to cancel the sale of milk to consumers.... Imagine if it were consciously directed with GOALS such as you already have in place.
Start with us here in California!!!- If it isn't Organic Valley supporting the Raw Milk and Local Economy, the Sustainability and future in GRASS FED beef and Dairy that is only beginning to take hold...If it isn't Organic Valley, it will be another Dairy Coop.
Why let this error in judgement Weaken your previously successful model.
Take the Leap. Jump In. We in California are ready and waiting for the opportunity to hugely support THE GOALS of Organic Valley.
Don't Let us Down. Don't Let your Farmers Down.
If your board does not see this as an opportunity to become stronger, Your farmers eventually will.
Don't Blow It. And if you should not revise your decision, please do Revise Your Mission and Goals.

With Sincere Hope ,
Teresa
Chico California

Film School

When it comes to film school, you get out of it what you put into it.

If you go and just expect to become a pro and jump right into the biz after you graduate, you will likely be sorely disappointed. But if you go to film school, and network, use the resources, talk to people, get internships, focus, learn about film making, study the history of film, the direction the film/media business is going, and make films, then it will certainly not be a waste of time or money.

It is definitely true that you do not need to go to film school to be successful in the film business. Working in production I have met a lot of people who flat out state how they hate "film school people" -- usually because they never went. But if you know you are one of those people that is truly die-hard into film then film school WILL help you. Most of the top film makers -- the best ones -- are well versed in film history.

I went to UCSB and I loved the Film Program. It focused more on writing and film theory -- which I loved -- and not as much on production; which some did not like. Production was done on your own time, and as elective classes. But this was perfect for me (and others) because you can learn production in the field -as you go- but you will not learn the history of film working on film sets or offices. And when you hear big producers/directors talking about Goddard and the 'French New Wave' or Felini's 8 1/2 -- recently loosely remade as '9' -- or Film Noir (Blade Runner) and Neo-realism (Slumdog Millionaire) you know the historical context of the styles/genres and what that means in terms of look and feel, you will know and be able to contribute thoughts when asked. I've had Producers ask me about films, and it felt really great that I knew what they were talking about, and they loved that I actually was able to offer opinion/insight into films they were talking about and what they were looking for in terms of their next project idea. It totally helps pitch ideas, and know what you are talking about.

That was when I knew film school was totally worth it.

Not to mention that half of the jobs in the film biz -- agency and business side -- require that you have a four year degree. If you don't want to limit yourself, and know how to utilize resources, and actually want to contribute to film history > I say go. Learn. > Make/write/producer great films.

You don't have to go to culinary school to be a great chef, but if you do go, and learn about all kinds of food and cuisines you will absolutely be a much better chef, and know what kind of food you like.

It's the same with film.

Media Derivatives 3

Here's a much better explanation of Film Future Trading:

http://jeremyjuuso.blogspot.com/2010...-cycle-of.html

****

A very detailed article wasn't it?

I was talking to a friend of mine about Media Derivatives and the MPAA and they were saying one of the reasons the studios are against it, is that it would force more transparency in determining how much films actually make.

It's no secret to anyone that the studios can make Avatar look like it barely broke even. So I can understand why they would not be interested in 'Wall Street' or outside businesses trying to pry into their business model and practices. No one would want that. There may be many other reasons as well, some of which could be good; I really don't know. I am simply fascinated by the whole thing.

It is very interesting to watch how this unfolds, the more that I look into it, the more that I realize there is that I don't know about it. Derivative markets are highly complex, and boggle the mind when you try and figure them out -- hence computers! -- but that doesn't mean they don't serve a purpose. They are essential in many aspects of the economy.

My initial thoughts were that it would encourage film production -- people would fund films -- because they would want to 'bet' or buy and sell futures on them, to make money. You can't sell futures if there are no films. So even if the movies don't make money at least SOMEONE did, and thus they would be willing (or should be required) to fund more films. Right?

The MPAA might say "well we wouldn't make money when the film flopped, and we are forbidden from trading in the futures because that would be classified insider trading."

True. Fair enough. But it seems like the logical solution is to allow the studio to buy 'special' futures/derivatives/insurance at the inception/funding of the film -- from the exchanges --that would insure that if the film does flop, they would at least not lose their capital investment. The studios would be allowed to hedge their risk under certain rules, and non-investors in the film "speculative bet-makers or traders" would be governed under separate rules. This would have the effect of the studios never actually losing money, and not worrying about the trading of futures. They could simply focus on making the best --or most profitable-- films possible. They would do their best to make money, by making good, appealing and even risky film ideas. Like farmers and their crops, they don't usually get involved -- as I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong -- in the futures markets of their crops, they just focus on growing the best and most that they can, and if the crop fails (for whatever reason) at least they don't go bankrupt or lose the farm. Better luck next year. But if the crop is great, they make a nice profit.

In my mind it's also like betting on Football or basketball games. The team players and coaches don't get involved in the betting, they just focus on winning -- doing good -- and collect their money/bonuses when they win big. They can't be stopped from betting for or against their team, but if they don't play well, they will be benched/fired for sure.

Maybe they could just require a tax/fee on Media derivative to go into financing films, or to the studios 'Art film fund', or too film student scholarships. Or the taxes on film futures/derivatives profits could fund the winning script of screenplay contests -- more to bet on. In this way, artsy films or big risk ideas -- Avatar, Star Wars types -- would be made. These films are also the best fodder, being the most speculative and unknown quantities, to trade futures and derivatives on, so it feeds into the system > putting more people to work, allowing more traders who take risks to make big money.

I think the MPAA should work with the box office futures and media derivatives exchanges, find a way to structure the exchanges so that it's a win-win for both. This is entirely possible, it seems.

I don't really know though. I could be way off.

I just hope someone figures out a way to get more artistic and original ideas funded and into production. More people working and making money!

Right?

The debate rages on!

Think Global > Act Local

Dear Governor,

My name is Julian Tyler, I grew up in Chico.

The recent news about the spill in the Gulf of Mexico and the toxic mess it is causing got me thinking about our local environment. I recently visited Upper Park, and Butte Creek and noticed how beautiful it is, but also that there is pollution in the water -- beer, urine, other chemicals --, trash and other graffiti in areas of the park.

My question is: What is being done to preserve, clean and restore the beauty of the local parks of my home town -- Upper Park and Butte Creek -- and all other places of natural beauty and resource like them?

I currently live in Southern California and I love the growing movement I see towards acting locally and thinking Globally.

I think that every CA county and city should set up an Agency / Group / Body to study the current state of their local natural resources, with the idea of:

1) Identifying problems/pollution

2) Learn where the pollution coming from, how to fix, stop and solve it

3) Create a plan for restoration and preservation

4) Begin to clean up, raise awareness and promote the beautification and sustainability of the parks and resources

I truly believe that the entire state of California should be doing this. Every city. Every resource. We need to find out what is polluting, find out how to stop it, and make our state -- city by city, county by county -- the most clean and beautiful as it can possibly be.

This will create jobs. Involve volunteers.

This will create richness > food, health, beauty, tourism

This will allow us to make sure that the parks and nature is better than ever, every passing year. Rather than worse!

We have the resources. The people. The ability.

The state can help. The schools of all grade levels. The universities. We need as many people as possible to know that it is time to bring it back to the way it naturally was -- CLEAN, full of life -- before it is too late.

If we did this in every state, America will become the most clean, beautiful, healthy and prosperous nation in the world. We can do this. It is ENTIRELY possible.

It starts local.

Best,
Julian Tyler

I love the natural beauty of California, but I know it needs help. It's time to give it.

Media Derivatives 2

When it comes to Media derivatives, if Hollywood does not get on board, get involved, then they will miss the rescue boat, and go down with the sinking ship.

I think it's funny, when people are like "it's just going to lead to people wanting films to fail, or betting against them." >> This happens already!

The point is, good or bad, it would encourage and fund film production. Media Derivatives will get films funded and made >> Get people working again. So regardless of the success or failure of the films (artistically or financially) all the working class people at the ground level would be employed and once again making money.

People working and making money = more people buying entertainment

By getting people working again you will get people going out to the movies again and spending more money on entertainment. Its basic economics, once you get the snowball rolling it will get bigger and bigger. It will get the economy growing again.

Media Derivatives will encourage the betting on artistic projects that currently Hollywood is ignoring as 'high risk'

High risk = High $ potential >> Wall Street loves that

One thing I find interesting is the how people are caught up on 'Box Office' and media derivatives. The media derivatives contracts could be based not on the box office, but on gross receipts for the first year (or five years) of the revenue of a film. In the Old Hollywood, 'US Domestic Box office' was the best indicator of how much a film will make in its lifetime. This is changing so don't get too caught up in box office.

With that in mind it becomes much harder to sabotage a film. Someone who places 'put options' on a film -- wants it to fail -- would have to work very hard to make it fail all over the world, TV and the internet, if it would otherwise be promising and artistically viable to the global entertainment consuming world.

People also worry about sneaky producers (or studios) who will 'bet against' films they are working on, try to make them fail, so they can make money. This is easily dealt with by making sure all producers/funders have more interest -- more to gain -- from the success of a film. A simple way to fix this >> Only allow certain types of insurance/derivatives/put-options to be placed by those with proven investment in the film. Pay producers in "shares' of the film -- cutting upfront costs -- this way, they will win more by the film succeeding then they would by it's failure; however should it fail, or not meet financial expectations they will not be bankrupted.

Remember how betting works, someone has to win, and the 'jackpot' is only created by people ON BOTH SIDES taking opposite stances. So there will always be people rooting for a film, wanting it to succeed and make money, in order for anyone to make money by wanting it to fail. Just like boxing or sports teams. Why would a basket ball or Football player bet against his own team? It happens, but when it does, people can tell, they will ask why, and then that player, referee or who ever will be outcast. Banned from play.

TRANSPARENCY IS THE KEY >> A transparent market will not allow cheaters to hide

Another exciting thing I am personally looking into is setting up films like a Silicon Valley upstart. Getting Stars and people on board as a package, offering it as an IPO on a market exchange, creating a product and a marketing team, pay top employees and talent with shares of the film/company and then traveling the world promoting and selling the film. We could pay dividends to stock holders, people could sell their stock in the project, Studios could even buy shares in the project as part of a distribution deal... It's all very exciting!

'Hollywood' no longer has a monopoly on the film making process, and if they try and fight the 'New Wave' -- rather then embrace it -- they will surely lose. I think Wall Street is on team 'New Wave' : )

I am already talking to like minded people up in NorCal about ways to get projects I have ideas for funded and made. There are many skilled film makers all over the world, so the sky is the limit. If 'Hollywood' continues on the path it's on -- shunning new talent, 'Big ideas' and creative minds -- it's future is not bright. It will lose some amazing talent that will not wait around for it to come to it's senses.

Media Derivatives?

I've been reading a lot about media derivatives and am curious what people think about it?

The Studios are opposed to it I hear, and I am trying to understand why that is. For me it seems like the best idea ever.

Media derivatives have the potential to jump start film production in a big way.

I think about it as comparable to Horse Racing and betting. The films would be the horses and the race is the amount of money it makes. People would be betting on how much a movie will make essentially.

People groom and breed their horses in the way that Agencies groom and recruit their stars and 'packages'. But the odds don't seem to matter as much as you would like once the race starts -- or the film is released.

Media derivatives also allow for whole new structures of funding and financing films and media products. You could essentially sell 'shares' in movies (like an IPO) and even pay top stars and talent in shares. This would encourage them to go out and make the film a hit. But in case it's not a hit, the investors who put $100 million up for it, could buy insurance on their investment to mitigate the loss...

Right?

The other thought I had was offering people the chance to invest in a film that they would want to see.

The Studio shares the risk of funding the movie by selling shares or CDOs of the film to thousands of 'Joe Moviegoer' or businesses, or even the crew of the films themselves.

So if I invests $1000 in the film. Once the film hits say $100 million I get my $1000 back, if it makes $150 million I get $1100 -- you get the idea.

If I was a partial owner of the film, I would work much harder to promote it!

In essence the studio shares the risk of the film by teaming up with everday people, the crew and other potential investors. The studio itself could potentially never lose any money in making films if it can structures the deals such that they get all their invest back first...

"There are many ways to skin that cat"

...if the studio is really afraid, or puts up a lot of money itself, it could buy derivatives -- insurance -- on it's own portion to further hedge it's own risk.

Just thinking of ways to get more film production going!

What do you think?

The New Hollywood

The current Hollywood model is totally melting away, and the problem is that no one knows what the new model will look like, and the least likely people to figure that out -- the ones INSIDE the melting model -- are the ones trying to. They are failing. Most will go down with the ship...

In Hollywood, the "Old Guard" has all the money, and is more interested in back scratching than they are interested in making powerful, meaningful film and "movie going experiences". Or they simply don't know how to any longer... a sad thought.

"What if we put like 10 movie stars in one film together!"

The solution of: "Lets just remake old stuff. If it worked before it can work again right?" is fast becoming another failing model. People can see right through it, it's not worth a box office ticket price, much is not even worth Netflixing!

Because of things like Netflix and the web people are watching all the old movies, and thus many film buffs reject the idea of a remake, especially if they liked the original. Because people are also going backward into older films, the desire to go 'forward' -- to the theater -- for unoriginal films becomes less practical or appealing.

For me to go see a movie in the theater, I want something original. I want to be wowed with not just effects, but with story. I want to have my mind blown and my "reality and possibility" foundations rocked. At least for a couple hours.

I also feel that many old guard writers have peaked in what they can offer, but they, and their agents and managers have no interest in stepping aside for new writers, new voices and original stories. So they scratch backs and make crap, literally trying to cram it down the throats of the world audiences.

Karate Kid = Really? Jackie Chan is Chinese! Karate is Japanese! It's all a big joke. I feel like either they think the audience is just a bunch of pigs that will eat whatever trash they dump in the trough, or they themselves are just idiots, blinded by Nepotism and greed. "We'll just use the name of 'Karate Kid' because it was successful, we don't even need the Karate. Oh and we can just invite the cast of the original franchise to give it street cred." It's like making Godzilla, but instead of a Giant reptile, it's a Polar Bear! 'Karate Kid (2010) is major low point in cinema if you ask me. A perfect case study in how Hollywood is currently (not) working. Even if it did open at 54 million...

Bottom line is Hollywood is changing fast. Faster and faster by the day. And if the studios don't wake up to this fact, to the reality of the global film markets and what they want, to the new talent out there bursting with potential, then the (new) wave of change will sweep them all away...

Media Derivatives have the potential to be 'Hollywoods' 'Napster' but also create a huge boom in global film production. If Hollywood doesn't get ahead of the curve real fast they will end up like the record labels. Still there, but mostly stripped of their power and prestige.

Media derivatives could also place the ring of power in the hands of the agencies like CAA who are already in the biz of arranging financing. I see this trend as potentially taking off, the Studios could find themselves as merely renters of studio space.

If I was a Hollywood studio exec. I would be looking for a mind blowing story, with built in global appeal, able to utilize rapidly advancing 3-D technology... Concepts based on religion, cutting edge science, speculation... topics that already have universal appeal and recognition...

Scripts like the one I wrote!

Being Positive

Someone once asked me: Have you been reading some kind of "positive thinking" books lately?

I said, I have read them in the past, but they reafirmed what I already knew, and hold true. Positive thinking works, if you truly, actually think and stay positive.

It's funny how it became "trendy" or “in” and then "out" like it's a scarf. That shows that most people do not understand the depth and power of “postive thinking.” The hidden purpose of "positive thinking" is that if you are truly a positive person, you will make your surroundings more positive/energized/happy. If you are not truly creating a postive energy or “vibe” you will not be making your surroundings more energized, and thus will not be feeding into a system that will make your life more positive. It’s like wishing for more money in the bank, but never putting any money in the bank.

Most people think watching a movie or following a "trend" will make them “positive” or “prosperous.” It’s not quite that simple or that easy. Too many people are not willing to do the (internal) "work" required to become a positive/uplifting person. Work like, letting go of anger and resentment, identifying and correcting negative forces or actions in your life/lifestyle, ect. First you “think positive” then you must “act postivie”, many people do not take that critical next step. Taking the step means consciously realizing you have a choice to make things positive, negative, or neutral/indifferent.

Choose positive. Sometimes this requires some inner strength, but it’s that choice to rise above, to take the high road, the uplifting way, that will raise your energy and put “money” in your positivity “bank.”

Money by the way has nothing to do with being postive. Some of the most negative people in the world are fabulously wealthy – albiet spiritually poor. Being positive can make you more materially wealthy, but that comes from helping ground you in what you really want, and opening the doors to real happiness.

We must get rid of the notion that you can watch a movie, or read a book and -- POOF! -- You are now a positive person! It’s misguided.

You know how some people just want to just take a pill to be thin, "fit" or healthy? They lose some weight, maybe look good/better but they are not really thin, they are just malnourished. It's fake. Soon they crack -- "go negative" -- and gain back all the weight and more. They never become the 'healthy thin' they dream about because they don't/won't do the work. You can no more pretend to be positive than a sick person pretends to be healthy. Don’t get stuck in that cycle.

I have always been a naturally optimistic and positive person. My Mother was the same way. "Be true to yourself, uplifiting/positive towards others and do what you love." Every Many dreams I have dreamed, and pursued has come true. Because I do the work. I'm realistic, driven and I'm smart. I don’t drag anyone down. I only ever bring them up, or walk away – be neutral at the minimum. I won't let negative people/things drag me down. If I was you I wouldn't either.

My generation has to be positive. The world seems to be falling apart faster everyday, and the least productive thing to do is whine and complain; that’s what I see too much of.

Don’t sit and tell yourself and others "there is nothing I can do" or "I give up".

Giving up on being positive, is giving up on yourself; on self improvement and on the world. Make a difference in the world. Make the world a better place, and be willing to do the work to make it so. Just by doing what you love, and "being positive" you’re helping.

I wish more people would. But it seems to me, lots of people just like to focus on tearing people down. Being negative. These are not positive people and they will never be truly happy or successful, even if they become materially successful in the process.

You can't save the world, but you can save/uplift yourself. If everyone did that, imagine how great the world would be.

PHARAOH - The Pitch

PHARAOH

'The Da Vinci Code' meets 'The Matrix'

Logline:

The discovery of an ancient Egyptian Artifact -- containing the Holy Blood of the first Pharaoh -- sets off a power struggle in the worlds oldest Secret Society, as one man must clone the blood and bring the Pharaoh back to stop Artificial Intelligence from taking over the world.

* * *

• A trilogy in the vein of Star Wars -- set right here in our very own galaxy, our world -- at it's core is a powerful empire (a Secret Society) and a generational power-struggle. It's a story built on ancient myth and legends of humanity.

• A story that connects Holy Blood, 2012, Nano-technology, Artificial Intelligence and the worlds oldest and most powerful secret society with the great Mysteries of Egypt...

• These are the subject-matter of many of the most successful films AND books ever produced. But no book or film has brought them together quite like PHARAOH.

• It draws on some of the most basic and fundamentals of Hollywood Blockbusters but spices and shakes them so well they taste totally fresh and new...

• It's controversial. It will get people talking. Much like “The Da Vinci Code” and “Holy Blood, Holy Grail” did… But it’s no more ‘out there’ than what is already shown on TV (the History Channel) and in other classic blockbusters.

•A classic hero's journey, similar to 'The Matrix' -- an outsider being brought in to save the world from the powers that be.

•An 'Indiana Jones' adventure that gradually unfolds. It uses and dives into popular cultures religious symbolism and conjecture.

PHARAOH is full of symbolism, but neither promotes nor denounces any religion or science. Rather, it incorporates both as part of the human experience and part of the story...

A story about secrets… Secrets we are all dying to know. Secrets that millions of people all over the world love to hear, see and talk about. Making this script:

"The most imaginative (potentially lucrative) un-produced Epic Trilogy since 'Star Wars' for whomever has the guts to make it!"
I know it will turn some people off; but it will also turn the right person on.

Someone -- with access to capital and a vision for the project -- will be turned on, because they will read the script and they'll realize it's true > PEOPLE WILL LOVE THE STORY.

This script has all the ingredients of a blockbuster film.

IT IS EXACTLY WHAT HOLLYWOOD IS LOOKING FOR.

Why?

Because it's what THE AUDIENCE is looking for.

How so?

Well... What defines the success of many films today is: CULT FOLLOWING

Whether it's Twilight, Comic-Books, Sex and the City, or The Da Vinci Code.

Success comes from tapping into and drawing out that base, that "cult following". By creating a product that appeals to them, and they will buy. They go/buy because it's something that they know a little about, and they want to see and weigh in on, or be a part of...

PHARAOH has just that. Stuff people are interested in and follow with cult like dedication and interest.

How so?

An inherently multi-prong approach. It deals with, and taps some of the largest and most lucrative cult-followings that are consuming media products today. Comic-book and Fantasy appeal in the youth. Intellectual controversy, speculation and religious symbolism appeal in the adults. It taps the more discerning >> the crowd that doesn't go out and see every movie, but they will when it's about something that interests them...

The subject matter of PHARAOH has been the interest of young, old, poor and royalty... for over a 1000 years. Global appeal today. It would play well in every world market, because it's subject matter is universal.

What subject matter?

Secrets • Hidden History • Humanity, mortality and Eternal Life...

And more recently:

-- What happens when computer intelligence becomes greater that human intelligence "the Singularity".

-- How does Artificial Intelligence come to be?

PHARAOH actually connects all these questions and answers into a thrill ride of 133 pages. As they say: You think you know... but you have no idea…

Okay fine. Huge cult following of those subjects. Lots of movies. Millions of books on those subjects are sold annually. Got it. But how does that translate into these 'cult-followings' buying into your script?

PHARAOH offers fascinating and fantastic answers to these questions. Questions people are paying money to read, hear and see answers too,

As a film it becomes a powerful new kind of entertainment, a kind of postmodern religious experience. Something people pay good money for...

PHARAOH creates a mythos out of our (neo) real world, in the way that Lord of the Rings is a mythos of pre-industrial Europe. It creates a world where fantasy is the reality...

It would be visually and intellectually stimulating --perfect to be made in and utilize 3-D -- which makes it stronger cinematically, and more moving / enjoyable.

'The Dark Knight' was deep and engrossing because it felt plausible, realistic -- intellectually stimulating.

With the rate the world is changing, we are confronted daily with concepts and ideas that seem crazy, but we are learning are actually becoming real. FAST. Things like AI, cloning, and Secret Societies... Hence a new reality.

Neo-realism > "new-realism" > new way of looking at and projecting reality

People want NEO-REAL and the neo-realism of today is... Fantasy.

Think AVATAR. It pretends to be the real world -- our actual future -- and it uses the story to take this "real world" or neo-real-world to a place of fantasy. The fantasy is the reality, the reality where we are exploring other realities... Get it? Doesn't matter, because the point is:

People love it.

Why do they love it? Because it's a deeper movie going experience when you connect to it. People feel they got more out of it when they connect -- like it was worth the money and they want to have the experience again... and also buy the DVD.

Some people say: "it was the cutting edge visual effects that got them in, not the subject matter."

True. But the effects are only as good as the story that employs them. Many films with the best visual effects but no story find little success. But the ones that can truly utilize and showcase cutting edge technology within the context of a great story find true Blockbuster "cult following" success. Think ‘The Matrix’ and the Renaissance in Super-hero movies it created in Hollywood.

When a great story, can utilize great effects, the combined effect magnifies the profitability/marketability. The impact and selling power of it is much stronger.

It takes a good story to begin with...

PHARAOH is a good story.

Once you read it, you understand why it's

"The most imaginative (potentially lucrative) un-produced Epic Trilogy since 'Star Wars' for whomever has the guts to make it!"

See also:
http://mr-postmodernistic.blogspot.com/2010/08/pharaoh-pitch-2.html