Working with a Composer on a Film Score

You don't have the money for the London Philharmonic and you can't afford the rights to Air's Walkie Talkie - but you do have a small budget (or grant, or sponsor) and you've decided you want someone to score music specifically for your film.

There are several ways to go about this.

Approach a professional composer

Composers who do really good work are often good because they are very particular about their compositions. They may be used to working in isolation and, in effect, are already directing music in the same way as a director is directing a film - or a novel writer their book. It's possible that a musician will frown upon the idea of sitting in the same room with Herr Direcktor whilst seeking audience with their muse.

So how do two brilliant and yet temperamental animals work together? Well - the director has two choices; Show them the finished film or don't show the film.

The first choice can often result in the musician re-writing the director's work in musical form. This might be okay if that's what you want. But hearing the same story that is being told can sometimes come over as tautological. This doesn't always happen. Some musicians understand that music has to assist or even ultimately take back seat to story - illuminating some aspect of character or even running counterpoint to your protagonist's emotional journey.

What you don't want is the tautological retelling of the emotional story in sound. It's a horrible thing to watch.

The second method is to just sit with the composer and describe the scene in detail. There's no pressure for the composer to perform and the environment is familiar. Scoring to nothing (essentially) can result in a more natural, less pointed and unencumbered piece of music.

I recently rocked up to a composer's studio without a cut of the film (in fact - there was only a rough draft) and the composer was able to - freely - create a piece of music. I knew I wanted a 1 minute uninterrupted piece and several 10-15 second transitions. The composer enjoyed working this way and was able to score for a variety of moments in the film just by picking up on body language and brief verbal character sketches.

Admittedly, this was a series of short films and so the rigors of constructing a (non-derivative) melody for an entire feature film or TV series are quite different - but at least the filmmaker can get a taste of what is possible.

It's also important to have some boundaries when you sit in with the composer (such as segment length, rough story shape) as the session can end up, basically, becoming a jam session which can go endlessly on into the night or day.

But, as life is short, that may not actually be such a bad thing.

Script development on a budget

Most people abhor criticism and nobody likes to open their wallet. If you are either, don’t - whatever you do - write a feature film screenplay. I almost guarantee that nobody will read it without being paid.

More importantly never go into production on a script that hasn’t been very heavily criticised, rewritten, analysed, rewritten gain, ripped apart, gutted and finally ... rewritten. I'm sure you can name a thousand movies with huge plot holes or character problems. Problems which could have easily been patched up with just a few bucks investment.

Criticism is not the same as rejection.

While Mum will happily read your screenplay, getting constructive feedback from industry professionals costs money. Constructive criticism is the key to morphing an ailing screenplay into a great feature film. Nothing else will do this. Unfortunately, getting anyone who’s not your mother to read your screenplay (or read beyond your synopsis and director's notes) costs money. Even if you don't get feedback!

In Australia, state and federal government film bodies may give you money to develop your screenplay if they like the idea and you have a producer attached. Development money usually consists of a script editor’s (or script doctor) fee, some travel money, a producer's fee and a small pittance for the actual writer/s.

The traditional Aussie way

Here’s a run-down of how much development can cost (in Australia). I live in the West and this is roughly how an $18,000 script development budget might run:

1. Script editor $6,000 (pretty standard in Oz).
   
2. 3 x return airfares $2,000
   
3. Per diems $2,000
4. Producer fee $2,000 (coast to coast 2-3 times)
5. Writer’s fee $5,000 (split two ways)
6. Other expenses $1,000
   

This took us from a rough 2nd draft on one script to a 3rd draft, but I felt it needed another, so we paid David Caesar from ScriptCentral to give it another going over.

Keep in mind that in Australia - more than 60% of a film's budget is usually government financed and getting your hands on the few million that Australia has to invest in film is extraordinarily competitive (although not nearly as competitive as in the USA). About 1 in 100 , fully-developed screenplays will get a guernsey here in Oz - and you'd better have a good director or name actor on-board . . . OR . . . most preferably . . . a great script.

The American alternative

If you have no luck competing for Aussie state or federal development money, you can get good bang for your buck feedback by entering American Screenplay competitions. Don't even think about winning one of these comps - they have up to 3,000 entrants each year. And even though a script report can take many months to hit your inbox, the feedback is top notch.

Four of the more high profile competitions are:

1. Bluecat Screenplay Competition
2. Nicholls Fellowship (the Oscars)
   
3. Austin Screenplay Competition
   
4. Slamdance

Several comps do script coverage

1. Slamdance sample script coverage
2. Bluecat sample analysis

Australian film authorities no longer give written assessments because readers are expensive. The government bureaucracy can take 6 months to send through a pro-forma rejection letter!

In that light - the US comps are a great way to get feedback and develop your screenplay further. And for a little extra ( maybe as little as AUS$50) some will send additional notes from one of their many professional readers.

Entry fees are up to around AUS$100 - but the notes you get are absolutely excellent value for the money when compared to the Aussie way.

I usually go both ways and like the US take on writing. It's refreshingly different to ours.

What should one do with all this feedback?

It's taken 5-6 months and you've finally received feedback on a draft that was binned early in the year. How does one make sense of all these belated notes, feedbacks and analyses?

Once you have your script reports, you can carefully abide by these rules;

1. Read it through once.
   
2. If you are a beginner writer (not used to criticism) - wait 2 days before reading it again. You’ll be amazed by what you think they wrote.
3. If one person tells you something about your script - take it on board, but treat it as subjective criticism and look for the constructive bits - things that you are willing to do / change.
4. If two (non-colluding) professional writers/directors identify a problem - give it some serious consideration. You don’t have to kill your main character or change genre - she is probably just undeveloped.
5. If three or more independent, professional analysts tell you that something particular is wrong with your script - believe it! . . . Something is wrong.
6. Ignore words like “genius”, “well done” and “masterfully crafted” (unless you didn’t pay for the feedback). These people are going for repeat business.

You could go into production on your movie right now. But unless you work with constructive feedback and tightly hone your script - you are probably - like most filmmakers - wasting your time on a poorly written story.

Feedback will fine-tune your screenplay and eventually turn into a film with a big audience and a long shelf-life. Heck - you may even get to do it all over again.

The AWG / ScreenWest "Pre-VIZ" Australian Feature Film Marketing and Distribution meetings

Behind the beautiful Australian Writers' Guild (WA location)

Some interesting facts:

• The average Australian film needs to take $1m at the box office in order to cover a distributor's Promotion and Advertising (P&A) expenses.

• Most Australian films (about 16) released over the last year or so took around $200,000 at the box office. Only Kenny, 10 Canoes and Happy Feet recouped these expenses and made money.

• An additional 10 or so credit card films that were made did not see the light of day or attract distribution partners (probably due to poor screenplays).
  

• When a distributor invests in an Australian film, they are taking a huge risk. A risk which is as much about passion and commitment to an idea as it is for the production team (writer, director, producer).
  

Phil (w), Carmelo (p) and I (d) are in the middle of the AWG / ScreenWest's (weirdly titled) pre-VIZ consultation program with Beware the Stingray.

The current screenplay has already been blasted by Victoria Treole (ex AFC and Miramax) and Sue Murray (ex Fineline and Miramax, EP on 10 Canoes and Tom White) for a straight three hours.

Thank God we're not too precious.

Today we have another 3 hour script-bash with Mathew Dabner (ex Icon, current FFC assessor, writ/prod The Square, The Best Things, Freshwater).

And then at the end of this week - we have to re-pitch our project to these nice people.

It can be soul destroying having someone rip your idea into shreds, but Phil and I are used to it and it seems to be leading somewhere. We have approached David Caesar - another tough cookie (with a string of feature film credits) - to help us rework our current draft and then we will (probably) be heading off to the SPAA Conference.

I'll let you know how the afternoon goes...

Questions for the Editor

In my 25 years as an emerging filmmaker, I've worked with many film editors - some experienced, some not so. Some newbies who would rather be directing and others born with a burning desire to cut film. One thing is for sure - all editors approach editing differently.

As a director, I think it's polite to ask how a person likes to work - whether they have a tried and true process or not. "How do you like to work?" I ask. In many cases, the question is met with a blank or even perplexed stare. "I usually get the footage and start cutting," comes the (often embarrassingly predictable) reply. "What other way is there?"

Obvious? ... Maybe. But we directors have to listen carefully to our creative accomplices, which often means learning to read between the lines.

Here are a few other responses an editor might give you.


1. Process? Just give me the script and the original footage.

This always works well with very experienced editors. Hand the script and the footage over.

I once had the opportunity of working with Tim Wellburn - an Australian feature film editor with over 40 years of feature films to his credit. He knew how to read scripts and get to the core of the character via editing. As a general rule, it's always polite to leave the experienced editors to do their thing. There's no need to look over his/her shoulder.

You might get the same reply from an inexperienced editor. Perhaps let them have a go at it and see what they come up with. But make sure they know that you will, ultimately, want final say and that it may have to be done again ... and again ... and again (and in my case ... again).

2. Give me the footage. I don't need the script.

Okay. For me - this answer rings alarm bells. The story (providing the Director has captured it on film) should be in the script. It's the blueprint. It's what attracted the actor/money in the first place. Something there has already worked - especially if you are in production.

Respect the script!

Having said that - many beginner editors have shown me new and interesting things when I've left them to it. I try not to hover. In most cases, we eventually come back to the screenplay. If you have an iconoclastic editor on your hands, it might be a nice idea to see what they come up with. Sometimes the Director's intentions weren't manifest on the day and throwing things up in the air like this may be a good way to solve coverage problems.

3. I dunno. What do you want?

Good. Here is an editor willing to open lines of communication. Or - they might be tired or suspicious because they've heard this question before - hearing it as I'd like you to do it my way. And there's nothing more annoying for an editor than a director looking over your shoulder while you make - every - single - cut!

Be sensitive, Directors. Or - choose an editor who (you think) is better than you are at editing in the first place.

In other words, Directors, find a way to trust your editor. Editors should be adding something to a work - maybe even fixing director's mistakes!

4. I have no idea what I'm looking at. I need your script, notes, camera sheets etc.

The admirable answer. This editor knows that his time will be cut in half if he gets inside the director's head. In most cases, directors don't know what they want. Giving the editor as much information as possible cuts time and frees up the editor. You want your editor involved! Although this answer will mean more work for the director.


5. Let's have a cup of coffee.

Another good answer. But beware. It could be another alarm bell.

Getting along with your editor doesn't guarantee great work. Even though an afternoon coffee may turn into an all night pub-crawl and finding your new best friend, it doesn't mean that you are both on the same page. The first rough cut will tell you that.

Make sure, if you do have coffee and biscuits with your editor, that you talk about the film. Don't talk too much about life and philosophy. The person you are talking to may not be a good listener - or what you are hearing makes sense in a different way to what your editor intends.

You really need to get into the cutting room after the editor has had a go at the film.

Whoever said that a director's job finishes at "It's a wrap"?

NB: The knife cuts both ways. An editor might ask the director how he/she likes to work. Each and every film - whether drama or documentary comes with its own cutting-room challenges. Ask the right questions, be nice to people and don't treat your editor like a splicing machine.

Working with Children

So far, I have directed three short documentaries for DADAA's the Lost Generation Project and apart from some minor technical hitches, everything is going really well. The sound and images are great and the personalities of our talent is coming over well. I'm lucky to be working with such fascinating characters - disabilities aside.

This week we start editing the films and, while that is happening, I'm hoping to get the odd pick-up. We've already happily picked up a couple of shots which didn't work out in the original shoot - but we may have to get more in editing. Luckily all our subjects are in the one location, so it's pretty easy to run off and get a shot of someone while shooting someone else.

Being filmed for the entire day - with a camera right up your nose - is irksome to say the least and already patiences have been tried and tested. I have asked the producer if we can shoot two films over two consecutive days - with each subject being shot in two half days.

The closest experience I've had to working with the mentally disabled and disadvantaged was my experience teaching at Filmbites where I was working with children. They lasted about half a day, too. Eight hours is a long time for anyone put under the microscope.

It is curious to know that there is a law which governs filming minors. Kids under the age of twelve are limited to 4 working hours due to wavering attention spans, moods and tolerances. I'd say the same goes with the Lost Generation people...