Shame shame.

I don't find myself as an easily embarrassed person. But here are some things that do embarrass me:

1. My car. More specifically, the windshield wipers on my car. I turned them on yesterday in order to clean my windshield. And then they didn't turn off. They stayed on. My windshield wipers won't turn off until I turn my car off.

2. How difficult home decorating is for me. Hollywood Guy was teasing me the other day because I couldn't pick a set of sheets. "What's the big deal? Grab a set and go home." Easy for him to say. I don't think his roommate is the next Pier One Martha Stewart. I carry paint chips with me wherever I go. Do you think I've ever cared about matching my sheets to my walls to my curtains to my bookcase before? Then I asked HW Guy what his place looked like. Undecorated, that's what it looks like.

2.5 How I'm starting to recognize Ikea employees. [And think of them as friends.]

3. Time management. Or how I don't have any. I waste so much time. I have this great opportunity to NOT be working right now, meaning I can work all day on my writing. Today was the first day in about two weeks that I logged some good writing time. In about an hour and a half I had a rough bare bones treatment for Current Draft, "The Exit Strategy." In just an hour and a half of my day. If I actually utilized all my free time, do you know how quickly I could bang out a first draft? It's just like -- when am I going to get serious about this? [And now I'm moving from being embarrassed to being annoyed at myself.]

4. My research. Both "The Exit Strategy" and the other Rom Com I was working on previously require some interesting research. Mainly research into psychology and self help books. [Side note: Do you know when you type "psychology" into the subject search on your local library catalog, the second book to pop up is a Bernstein Bears book? Why??] When I was researching the other Rom Com script, it was all self help books on love and dysfunctional relationships. In fact, I never actually checked any books out of the library because I couldn't bring myself to be that girl who comes to the front desk with a stack of relationship help books. For "The Exit Strategy" I need to know about grief and loss. Today I checked out a book called -- Welcome to Your Crisis. It's very difficult in these circumstances to not just blurt out "It's for research!" all the while smiling broadly to prove *you're* not in the middle of a crisis.

Blast.

I knew coming to Starbucks was a bad idea.

I usually like to go to more Michigan-y coffee shops, but Starbucks was right here and I had a gift card and they usually have quality AC. Bad move, Amy.

I've been working pretty steadily on my rom com. Plagued with self doubt as I do it, but I think I've finally gotten past my two or three false starts into my first draft for real. I've been knocking off a couple pages a day because, well, I'm not working so I should be doing something productive. And as I was sitting in Starbucks, typing away and trying to ignore my phone because it's the ultimate distraction these days, one of my friends who's a summer starter at the law school walks in.

I adore my friends, but this just furthers my hypothesis that law school ruins peoples' lives.

We say, "What are you doing here??" like it's a surprise to see someone at a Starbucks on campus (actually just I did that. Because I'm socially awkward), chit chat, and then he asks me what my script's about. And I give him the long version of the log line because even though I don't like talking about my scripts and I hate summarizing, it's a skill that I've got to learn.

And he goes, "Oh, it sounds like that 'How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days' movie."

And then he leaves me to wallow in the dazed and broken pieces of my spirit.

Because on one level, he's very right. Almost too right. As in, I haven't written anything since he's left. And I remember, from somewhere in the parts of my mind where I put things to forget, having had this conversation before I started writing this stupid script. Only I can't remember how I justified it being different enough. And I know it is different enough because it's my story. Naturally it's going to end up being a very different beast. Right?

Hollywood's built on "the same, but different" principle. Maybe my rom com will just slide gracefully into that category. After all, can't ever story be reduced down to similar synopsises? Well, I mean, probably When Harry Met Sally and Predator don't boil down to the same plot, but within genres at least.

Or I'll turn out to be a talentless hack who can only reguritate unoriginal story ideas. Maybe that will happen.

Structure Fail

This is what Keys to the Garden looked like when I originally postnoted it and tacked it up on my wall (at least note that the number of cards/scenes and number of pages are unrelated):


Huge fail. Is Act II actually SHORTER than Act I?

Here's where I went so terribly wrong -- When I wrote the screenplay, I hinged the Act II turning point on a particular beat. However, when notecarding the beats out, I realized that I was completely wrong. The beat that was my former Act II turning point was really just a moment right before the climax. When I posted the beats up on my wall, I separated them into acts based on what are the CORRECT turning points. I had the correct one in there. I was just putting the wrong emphasis on the wrong beat.

I knew Act II had major problems anyway. It is -- obviously -- too short, making the whole story too simplistic. Even when I was notecarding I had my solution. As I've been restructuring it this past week, I've written an entirely new Act IIa. It was actually a pretty simple solution. I had a great backstory for a character which works better -- and is more dramatic -- not as a backstory but current events in Act II that mess with the characters.

I have Act I restructured and re-notecarded. Act II is restructured, awaiting carding. Act III isn't going to change much. The ending was always the ending, and with a hard and fast resolution that I'm not going to change, there're only so many ways you can play with the scenes funneling down to it. But maybe that's where I get stuck sometimes.

Also, this is a great article for anyone interested in writing a rom com. So glad I read it before starting my own.

And, if I can't find someone else who articulates it better than I will before my next post, I'll give my thoughts on Bigelow's Oscar and what it means for women in film.

When a girl skips class to bake you cake...

First of all, anyone else notice how sappy the Olympics are? I nearly cry every time I watch it. I'm a veritable waterworks anyway, and then when they throw in the stories of Olympic athletes in life threatening accidents and their doting families, I'm pretty much a goner. Have not cracked yet, though.

Kevin Pearce

I was talking with Dear Friend G. the other day. I'm trying to overcome my dislike for the phone, since the distance between my friends and I is not getting any shorter. We were talking about our lives and we brushed on relationships, and I told him, "I think everyone should have their heart broken at least once." He did not seem as gun-ho about that idea. Listen, I'm not being flippant. I'm not saying everything about heart brokenness is great. It's a rather unpleasant experience, in the whole. But I've also found a whole lot of growth, maturity, and self knowledge in it. I've known people who've never had their heart broken. Sometimes I think they're too scared to. Once you've had your heart broken once, you know what'll be worth the risk again.

Of course, on the flip side, I once bought Dear Friend G. "A Walk to Remember" for Christmas. I was sort of joking. He loved it.

Talk about waterworks!

Day 3 - Ironed out the rom com logline, I think. Might test it out with a few more people. Broke down the first act of Keys to the Garden on notecards. Most productive writing I've done in the past few weeks... without actually writing. I'm gettin' back into it.

Amy Goes to the Movies

First of all, Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland is looking more and more amazing. And last night I found out it's going to be in IMAX 3D. Not gonna lie, I might be more tickled about Alice than I ever was about Avatar.

Of course, when they make a biopic about me, I will be played by Helena Bonham Carter. Because, you know, that makes sense, considering she's about 15 years older than I.

Curly hair sisterhood. Never mind that she plays mostly twisted characters.

Last night I went to see When in Rome. It was free movie night, so no, I did not go out of my way and pay to see this movie. It was actually a second choice anyway. We were going to see Up in the Air, but it was sold out. When in Rome was actually funnier than I expected, though still absolutely ridiculous. Let me tell you, the audience did not laugh like that when I saw Leap Year. And I had difficulty distinguishing Will Arnett from the magician character, especially when Jon Heder used "illusions!" instead of "tricks."

versus --

Alliance approved

Since I'm (sorta) writing a rom com right now, I've been thinking a lot about the stereotypical characters that seem to be really tired from running the gambit recently. I think this especially concerns female characters, who are often writing flat or shallow. As When in Rome opened, HS Friend L leaned over and whispered to me, "Let me guess -- another anti-love uptight workaholic." And yes, Kristen Bell even monologued about how she didn't need a relationship because she was married to her job.

I haven't done any hard research, but I'm pretty sure most of the Hollywood produced rom coms of the past few years have featured career-driven female leads. These numbers radically peak when you examine Katherine Heigl films alone. But what's on the flip side? If Katherine Heigl can be the spokesperson for the female rom com lead stereotype, who represents the male characters? I used to think that women were being short changed in this laziness of character development until I realized that the boys don't fare much better. They are the models of man-boyhood for every teenage boy who sees Knocked Up to aspire to. The "opposites attract" model of the last decade has been workaholic uptight responsible woman clashes with laid back fun loving man boy. Billy Mernit is really the guru here. He talks a lot about it - and with much more eloquence than I - on his blog.

I understand why. I understand that the biggest transformation will occur if you have one character who's focus is not on love but on their work. I understand that the female audience being targeted is increasingly more educated and professional (and the corresponding cultural question of whether or not a career is just a woman's placeholder for a relationship). I understand that having an oppositional female character allows the female audience to play into the wish fullfilment of being pursued. I understand this is the easy way to write a rom com because that's the way I want to write mine and it's a real challenge to figure out how to flesh out my characters so that audiences will see something new.

Maybe this is why films like (500) Days of Summer are so refreshing. Finally -- the audience is introduced to someone new.

I've been poking at my rom com idea. It's difficult to start it in earnest. Because I'm lazy.

Anyway, I've been trying to outline it and such, but I quickly get lost in the second act because I haven't done any research yet (seriously. Who wants to do research after college? No one. Wish I had an assistant already) and without a second act I have no clue what will happen in the third act. The third act of the rom com is usually the point where the two meant to be lovers get together, but not having plotted a second act I'm not sure which candidate it will be, if any.

And I haven't solidified the theme yet. The third act is going to play the theme out to its fullest. Since I don't know the theme, who my protag is going to end up with. Or I could play the theme very realistic and not have her end up with anyone. (I'd love to say I'm writing the next (500) Days of Summer here, but I'm not. Hello, commercialism, goodbye, realistic endings.) My favorite possible theme was just because one guy is a sleaze doesn't mean they all are.

But really, I think it makes for a more enjoyable writing process if the theme is a question, not a statement. It's more fun to have your character grapple with questions like are all guys sleazebags or just the ones she's dated so far? Do all men have dysfuntional relationships or is it really her? Sometimes it's more fun to explore a question than pontificate a theme. (And just so we're clear, those are my character's questions. Definitely not... mine) Then your characters are more than just pawns in your story's soapbox. They are the story.