|
|
 |
 |
|
Monday, January 08, 2007
Writing for pictures (moving or still)
As I come up to my last few semesters in college I'm faced with what aspect of my budding writing career I want to spend most of my professional life concentrating on. Right now most of my time spent writing professionally is doing journalism and criticism for various publications. I enjoy that but don't want to do it for the rest of my life. I want to tell stories and for the most part I want to tell them in visual media. I'm seriously wondering whether I should start attacking writing for comics or writing for film. There are many that do both but those writers seem to come in two types. Writers like Joss Whedon and Allan Heinberg started in television and film and used the success they reached in that medium to write the characters they grew up enjoying. Then there's the opposite of that formula. Geoff Johns and Brian K. Vaughan have both taken their notoriety in comics to television gigs. I know there are other writers whose situations don't quite match the above examples but I chose those examples because it leads to the questions I have been asking myself, one I take to a public forum seeking advice for others: which trade shall I make my name in? Will I write comics, the medium most near and dear to my heart, and take on other gigs as the opportunity arises? Or shall I take my hustle to Hollywood and break into comics when my resume includes work you can put on your Netflix queue? I've laid out the cases for each based my impressions of both worlds. I'm sure I've probably gotten a few things wrong and if I have please correct me.
The case for comics:
I think comics is the best medium to tell stories in. I don't mean "for me." I mean it is the best medium we as human beings have to tell stories in. It has the best aspects of film and literature combined into something that is completely it's own. The beautiful work of Alex Toth, Jack Kirby, Chris Ware, Grant Morrison and many others confirm this for me whenever I feel apathetic about comics. I often do because like many I love the form of comics but am bewildered by the industry. We can get to that later, though.
I would like to create with artists a book you could hold in your hand. Within that tome are visuals that fool the reader into think he/she has left reality and a story that makes them want to stay there. I would also like to create comics that gives readers reason to look at that reality they cannot escape from with different eyes. These are things I can do with film, of course. But in comics all that power of storytelling comes down to two parties (often they are the same person), the writer and the artist. They are telling stories only they can and, as Stephen King has wrote, are conducting a certain type of telepathy with the reader. If I'm writing a creator-owned project for a small company, which is what I would like most of my work to be, than the final product is all on me and the artist. I can feel confident having my name on the book. I would rather take criticism on something I am responsible for than take a compliment on a compromised project. That being proclaimed I realize when economic factors are to be considered some compromising has to be done, something that will strike in both comics and film.
Writing creator-owned graphic novels for small companies is artistically satisfying but it is rarely self-sustaining. To live off my income writing comics (and I should now note that I absolutely detest the idea of getting another job that doesn't include creativity to keep a roof over my head) I would probably have to do some work with a bigger publisher. That probably means Marvel and DC. Here there are more restrictions on what I can write, which I accept. Working in a corporate owned shared universe means story ideas get shot down and content can only go so far. Hey, if it pays for the more personal work I want to do that's fine. At least I'm still writing. I envy the career of Warren Ellis who splits time between work-for-hire and work he has created. Even his work-for-hire stuff like Nextwave has a definite "Ellis style" to it. I would like to reach that level some day.
The last reason to stick with comics is a more personal one. I can live anywhere I want and write comics. I love the Bay Area and would gladly live here the rest of my life. Still, I wouldn't mind giving New York, Dublin or London a shot. The power of e-mail and a laptop means no matter where I am I can still write comics. For film I would, at least while starting out, have to live in Southern California. I was raised near Los Angeles and while I enjoy some parts of the area overall I hate it. I believe that the dependency on personal automobiles and fossil fuels is one of the worst turns humanity has ever taken. I would prefer to live in a city where I can take public transportation and not be responsible for giving my grandkids an environmental calamity to deal with. I don't want to do deal with urban sprawl that yields traffic arteries clogged with SUVs and Hummers only headed to malls, mini- to mega-, that sell food clogging up the arteries inside the body. There actually is culture in L.A., the actual type that enriches the soul, but it requires anyone to spend so much time in a box on wheels it hardly seems worth the trouble.
The case for film:
Let's get the big one out of the way: it pays better! The old adage is "Hollywood treats its writers like shit but pays them well to make up for it." It's a hustle filled with egos, be they bruised, inflated or some other mutation, but it can pay well if you stick with it long enough. I could find my myself in the position of working on a movie or running a TV show where my idea, which might otherwise have found itself in a graphic novel reaching only a few thousand people, reaches millions. I could live off that without having to imagine "what would Wolverine say here" in the meantime.
That graphic novel would probably reach less people but as I wrote earlier, it would be mine. Film, even for writers, is an extremely collaborative art. That leads to many projects that never reach a potential they posses. It could mean my name will be on something where most of the flaws are not of my doing. It could also mean my ideas would improve based on working with other writers, the director, producers, etc. I'd learn valuable lessons from working with people far more talented than me. In some ways that can be more rewarding than holding something in your hand and saying "this is me."
For all the stupidity in the television and movie industries, and there is a lot, we all know people will still watch movies and TV in the future. I'm not as pessimistic about the future of comics as others are but I pay close attention to the moves of publishers and distributors and I really wonder if it's a game I want to get in. I wonder if it's game I can get in. What if I hook up with a small publisher and they're the next Speakeasy comics? What if I want to tell a story in a genre that is already so flooded with crap that a retailer's eyes will just glaze over by the time they get to my book's solicitation (I pity anyone who actually has a legitimately interesting zombie story to tell!). I actually have ideas for superhero concepts but I agree with Larry Young here. Ideas that involve individuals with hyperreal abilities can lead to many great stories, I would use AiT/Planet-Lar's Demo as an example, but I'm hesitant to introduce them to the a conservative market run by the BIg Two. If I've got a superhero idea I'd be more likely to turn it into a film than a comic. There's a market for superheroes there but the concept hasn't really been explored yet.
The case for ending this post already:
When I'm in a more negative mood I feel that I, a writer interested in stories that including elements of the superhero, sci-fi and horror genres, has two options. I can have my work barely seen in comics or seen in a diluted form in film (and then probably still barely seen). I don't want to be negative, though. I want to make a good decision about my future. Right now I'm leaning towards to film. For someone who just enjoys writing it seems better suited to me. I don't want to look for an artist, although I've found better success at that than I thought I would, pitch to a whole bunch of publishers only to have to pitch my product all over again to potential customers because the book itself barely gets promoted. All that effort leads to a handful of readers. Working with a development company and/or a studio can be a headache but at least it seems I can spend more time writing.
Call it ego, I certainly would, but I want to reach millions of people for years and years to come. I believe my stories are that good. I would even put up with the 101, the 10 and, yes, even the 405 for that.
Still, just the feeling of having a great artist interpret your words...
Permanent Link: 11:28 AM |
3 comments
Comments:
Honestly, before you make these kinds of decisions I would do some comics and film work to see how you are with the writing formats and the rewards.
Do some comics, man! I'll help you anyway I Can.
# posted by Chris Arrant : 7:07 PM
For all the bad rep film and TV gets for sharky suits and inflated egos, I've found it far easier to work in than either journalism or comics. (the trick is breaking in)
Of course, the money does help you ignore behavior you'd find hard to tolerate writing $40 film reviews for your alternative weekly, or trying to collaborate with a Bob Kane or Dave Sim clone, and each person's experience is different.
And okay, the flattery's hollow, but it's way better being called "genius" than "loser" and "geek," plus the union ensures that the momey is good and arrives on time. If you can live under pressure and uncertainty, I think it's the way to go.
(also, my former Marvel artist acquaintance whose style's a bit passe' is doing well as a concept artist for SF films.)
# posted by Jack Ruttan : 1:33 PM
Speaking as someone who's five years down the road from your position, I can tell you that it's equally difficult to break into comics and film/TV. But if you think you want to write movies, move to LA and give it a few years while you're still young and are able to take chances like that. It's relatively easy to get a PA job (and even easier to get an unpaid internship at a production company), and from there it's not too difficult to meet people and work your way up to something better, and while you won't be getting paid to do what you really want to do, you will be working in the industry and making contacts (yes, a lot of it really is "who you know"). That kind of system doesn't really seem to exist in comics.
In the meantime, you'll have to write constantly. As I'm sure you know, that's the only way to get good. And though it may not seem that way from watching your average TV show or movie, you do have to be really good to get work. 99% of the writers in Hollywood are really smart, incredibly driven people, even if, say, the average episode of "According to Jim" doesn't reflect that.
Of course, you can still write comics, and if you know a good, reliable artist who's willing to work for little or no money, latch on to him and never let go. (But if you know that person, you might also know Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.) Making your own comic is pretty much the only way to break into comics, if you're not already Joss Whedon.
# posted by Gardner : 4:37 PM
-- Home
|
|
