Saturday, September 21, 2013

Casablanca's Ending

"We'll always have Paris." "Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she has to walk into mine." "Round up the usual suspects." "Louie, I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship." "Play it, Sam." -- Has there ever been a movie with as many iconic lines as Casablanca? By the way, no one in movie ever says, "Play it, again, Sam." Both Ingrid Bergman as Ilsa and Humphrey Bogart as Rick say to Dooley Wilson as Sam, "Play it" meaning their signature song, "As Time Goes By." According to several books about the movie and biographies of the stars, Bogart and Bergman played the movie without knowing how it was going to end. Would Ilsa go off with Rick, or with her husband, the noble resistance fighter Victor Laszlo, played by Paul Henreid? One reason the audience was unsure, was that the actors were unsure. The writers were still working on the script during shooting, and wrote two different endings. Ingrid Bergman said she asked the director and writers who she would end up, and they said, "We don't know. Play it in between." Her uncertainty increased the audience's anxiety,and made this love triangle romantic and mysterious. Even though two endings were scripted, Director Michael Curtiz only shot one -- the famous ending we have today where Rick sends Ilsa off with Victor, and reminds her "We'll always have Paris... If that plane leaves and you're not on it you'll regret it. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of your life." It makes me wonder if Curtiz knew how he wanted the movie to end all along, but didn't tell Bergman to make sure she played it the way he wanted. You can do that when you're directing actors in a movie. You just need to capture the result you want once, and it lives forever. Casablanca won the Academy Award for Best Picture, and many film historians consider it one of the greatest movies ever made. How is that possible, with the amount of rewrites in production and uncertainty about the ending? Sometimes, creative chaos produces the best results. I don't mean total chaos -- after all, the movie did get shot even though the script was being rewritten. All that off screen creative uncertainty has a way of feeding the on screen energy. On the Casablanca set that uncertainty about the ending probably helped keep the performances fresh throughout. It helped that the ensemble cast was one of the deepest and finest assembled for a Warner Brothers, film. It was so good that Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet played only small (but crucial) parts. The reasons why one piece succeeds and another doesn't remain mysterious. If they weren't mysterious, then anyone could create a successful film, and no movie would ever fail. That's why it's important for content creators to keep going and finish their pieces despite the chaos. There will always be chaos. Don't let that stop you from making your content the best it can be.

Thursday, September 12, 2013

"The Butler" outgrosses "Lone Ranger"

As of September 8, 2013, the Disney film "The Lone Ranger's" domestic box office gross stood at $88,806,000. That's a tremendous disappointment for a film that reportedly cost $250 million to make. As of Sept. 8, after only four weeks of release, "Lee Daniel's The Butler" grossed $91,901,000. The reviews and word of mouth on the movie have been so good that it's sure to increase its lead over The Lone Ranger, and many other summer box office failures. The budget for The Butler is estimated to be $30 million, making it tremendously profitable. What happened? The obvious answer is that audiences liked The Butler and didn't like The Lone Ranger. In my July post 'A $250 million Flop" I outlined some of the more obvious mistakes Disney and its creators made with the Lone Ranger. Lee Daniels, producer and director of The Butler, made right decisions, starting with casting Forrest Whitaker and Oprah Winfrey, who the audience loved and could play those parts believably. The Butler also opened up a world for audiences that most of us do not know -- behind the scenes of the White House. It constantly surprised us in a way that draws people into a story -- we thought we knew the history, but The Butler showed us a side we didn't know. The Lone Ranger had no surprises -- we may not have known the specific stunts going in, but we knew everything that was going to happen. The Butler's success also proves two other things: 1. $30 million dollar films can still make money, if they are well made and reach the right audience. 2. We'll soon see several movies dealing with African-American history -- the upcoming "!2 Years a Slave" is just one example. Does the success of The Butler and failure of The Lone Ranger mean studios will change the way they do business? I'm sorry to say no. It's true The Lone Ranger's budget would fund 8 movies like the Butler. But personal, quality films like the Butler bring their own challenges. You need to have a quality script. You need stars willing to work for less than they usually make because they believe in the project. It's not easy to make high-quality, intelligent, films that reach a wide audience. Finally, Studio executives don't get jobs because they make $30 million movies; they get jobs because they've supervised $100 and $200 million movies. If you greenlight a bunch of $30 million movies and they fail, not only did your films fail, you couldn't attract big budget elements. When The Lone Ranger fails, at least you've shown your ability to bring name talent to your studio. The business isn't set up to nurture inexpensive or even reasonably priced films. For content creators, the lesson of "Lee Daniels the Butler" is that there is a market for quality stories that inspire people. We never really know what stories will capture the audience's interest. Keep working to make your stories, films, poems, and web series the best you can, and let your audience find you.

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Final American Idol Judging Panel - You Make the Deals You Can Make

The rumors, stops and starts, and time it took to fill the judges' chairs for American Idol this summer are a clear sign of the show's problems. With its ratings plunging last season, and expected to fall further in 2014, top talents didn't want to be associated with the show. The show's new producers, stuck with high expectations, either couldn't or wouldn't take the chance of creating a panel entirely of successful former contestants. It's possible Kelly Clarkson, Carrie Underwood, and Jennifer Hudson didn't want to take time from their busy careers to sit in the judges' seat -- at least not for the amount of money Fox was willing to offer. Instead, with their backs to the wall (production starting this month)the producers first re-signed Keith Urban, whose nice guy persona will at least make contestants comfortable. With a year of experience and a different panel, perhaps this year he'll get a word in edgewise. Next they reportedly spent $17.5 million to re-sign Jennifer Lopez, a judge the previous regime had tossed over the side just a year ago. Lopez was probably happy to get the gig. Her music and acting career is stalling, and after her recent divorce she probably could use the money. After they lost record producer Dr. Luke over contract conflicts of interest, reports are they signed Harry Connick, Jr. to fill the third slot. Harry also has a nice guy persona like Keith Urban, so perhaps Jennifer Lopez will fill the Simon Cowell role of acerbic truth teller. Further rumors are that Randy Jackson will return as mentor. I think bringing Randy back in a different role is a great idea. For long-time fans, Randy provides continuity to the glory days of idol. In earlier blogs on this topic I said, and still believe, the problem with Idol wasn't the judges, but the contestants. America needs people they can care about. I just can't believe out of the thousands who audition every year they couldn't find more compelling contestants than the ones chosen for last season's show. Rather than spend $7.5 million on a single judge they would be better off spending $7.5 million on talent scouts and coordinators to make sure only the most interesting contestants and story lines get to the finals. I'm sure they could find a former contestant who's had some success to judge the show for just $10 million -- Chris Daughtry, Adam Lambert, Fantasia, Ruben Stoddard, and maybe Jordin Sparks would consider it. What content creators can learn from this hoopla is: sometimes you have to make the deals you can make. The producers may have wanted to take the judging panel in a different direction (they certainly tried to sign other judges first. Their production deadline meant judges had to be signed by a certain time, and the longer it took, the less leverage they had to find the ideal judges. I'm sure that Harry Connick's price went up after Dr. Luke dropped out because he knew they needed him and were out of time. When you're creating a movie or a television show you can't always sign your ideal cast or afford your ideal production values. Successful producers and directors make it work anyway by focusing on the key points of the story they're trying to tell. It's possible that the current Idol judge panel will work, as long as the most important part of the show -- the contestants -- capture the viewers' imagination. When you're creating your content don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Make the deals you need to make things happen, and protect the core of the story to connect with your audience.