Interview (Part 4): Emile Gladstone

Recently I had an in-depth conversation with movie and TV producer Emile Gladstone. Previously a talent agent at ICM where he was a partner and co-head of the Motion Picture Literary department, Emile is currently in post-production on his first film Army of One, written by Rajiv Joseph and Scott Rothman, directed by Larry Charles and starring Nicolas Cage.

Today in Part 4, I ask Emile some questions about the writing craft:

Scott: Would you advise aspiring writers to focus on one genre, or to write whatever stories they want to pursue?

Emile: I think that writing is a craft. I don’t think that you shouldn’t jump around. First of all, write what you’re passionate about, but remember you’re a slave to the structure, and mastering that structure takes time and practice. You’re not going to get it the first time out.

You should write a few action movies before you jump to writing a comedy. Once you feel like you understand the mechanics of structure, and really understand it, really understand it, then storytelling is just storytelling.

Writers get burned out. They shouldn’t write three action movies in a row if they’re not super passionate about the action genre. But they should master the structure before jumping to a new genre.

Passion for the genre is a huge key. No matter if its the most innocuous one line, man on the run action movie, it’s defined into something special by a passionate writer that redefines the car chase, and redefines the shootout, and does it in such a fucking cool way that you’re blown away when you read it on the page. that passion can jump off the page. I think it’s a common error that writers jump around genres too much early on in their career. I think that they should, without a doubt, practice, practice, practice.

You’re not going to get it right the first time. You think that you’re ready to write your “Memento,” you think that you’re ready to write your “Pulp Fiction,” you think you’re ready to write your, “Cabin in the Woods,” and deconstruct the genre, when you haven’t figured out how to actually construct the genre.

Scott: Given your initial interest in writing and working with writers as closely as you have, I thought it would be fun to ask you some craft questions I ask writers when I interview them and get your perspective on it.

Emile: Sure.

Scott: How important do you think the story concept is to the overall strength and commercial viability of a spec script?

Emile: For a studio spec, paramount. You have to understand the process. For the most part, the actual decision maker that decides whether or not to buy it will not have the opportunity to read it. Certainly the CE will have read it. The VP will have read it. The producer perhaps will have read it.

Certainly the producer’s VP will have read it, but the actual person, the president of the studio that is responsible for development spend will not have read it. That VP is waiting all day, maybe two days, to get an audience with that president for maybe 10 minutes.

Then that VP is going to say, “Joe Blow wrote an action script.” “I know that name,” the president will say. “Do I know that name from something? Oh, yeah, he wrote that draft of…” or, “He’s a new writer and he sounds like that other guy,” or whatever. They make a little joke or whatever. “So, tell me what it is.” The VP has an opportunity to share a logline, and then mention possible directors or stars the studio has relationships with or wants relationships with that would be great for the material, and sell the president on why to they need to buy it.

The president rarely will have had the opportunity to read it. You’re going to live or die in that logline, and if you’re writing for the studio system and you can’t compartmentalize your story in one line before you write it, then don’t write it.

Scott: Isn’t that also buttressed by the fact that so many dollars are having to be spent on marketing and they would prefer, if it’s an original story, to have something that’s got a strong story concept, easy to digest for consumers?

Emile: Of course, not just for our consumers, but it’s a worldwide audience. If it can’t be translated into 70 languages, if these aren’t common themes that are relatable, then you’re already up against it. Because if you don’t have a brand, if it isn’t a sequel, prequel, or remake, if it isn’t based on underlying material, if it is an original idea, then it’s going to live and die on that trailer, or that title, or that poster. You have to think like a marketing executive.

A writer has to wear many hats because ultimately they’re going to be spending the most equity, their time, on something. They need to think it through. It’s OK to write for you, but then you’re not writing for the studio system and you should know that from the get-go. “I am writing this because I just love it, and I don’t care if it sells or not.”

But if it’s, “I am writing this to make noise in Hollywood. I am writing this to potentially sell this to Universal or Warner, or Sony,” then they better be a marketing executive and a producer before they are a writer.

Scott: When you’re looking at material, how important are the characters to you in the script?

Emile: I think the characters are incredibly important. It’s going to evolve a lot, so it’s not like in a first draft that is the most paramount thing, because you’re going to want to attract a director, and the director’s going to attract the actor.

The character is going to evolve, but you want to give that character enough conflict and enough opportunity for backstory, so if it’s not there, that we can layer it in there without it feeling forced. Character is really important, but more important is the character’s emotional journey, to me. I may not feel like the character is as worked through as I would like, but I buy his emotional journey.

I buy that he loves his wife, or his child, or I buy that he doesn’t want to get divorced or is running from his past. It’s the emotional journey, the relatable emotional journey, that’s more important than the actual flesh and bone of the character in the first step, because we have to care about the movie.

I don’t care if it’s comedy or a horror movie, an action movie, a thriller. If you don’t care, then it’s not going to stay with you. It’s not going to be good, and that care comes from emotional stakes. You teach screenwriting, you’re a writer, and every writer 101 knows you’ve got your physical stakes through your movie. I’ve got to stop the bad guy, or I’ve got whatever the McGuffin is, but the emotional stakes are ultimately more important.

Scott: Circling back to Army of One, you’ve got that high concept of the guy going off to get Bin Laden, but it was an emotional journey. That thematic element about the powerlessness of America at the time of 9/11 and this guy trying to feel empowered. You connected with that, right?

Emile: 100 percent. That’s exactly correct. I’m sitting here, in middle America, my country has been attacked and there’s nothing I can do. That’s a horrendous victimized feeling. That’s a terrible thing to feel. But we have a new hero.

It’s sort of like Borat, you don’t really think that Borat’s going to marry Pam Anderson. You just don’t want him to get hurt, and you love that he’s going after her, even though it’s an impossible, Don Quixote like quest. That’s completely what I keyed into emotionally in the movie. We all knew that the audience will know that the guy is not going to catch Osama Bin Laden.

I just wanted them to care enough about him so that they worried about him and the journey that he wasn’t going to get hurt, and that he stood for something that they, the audience, also could stand for, which is this feeling of taking some power back, of doing something.

Scott: It’s interesting you used the phrase “emotional journey” because it seems to me that that’s quite a bit of overlap with the idea of theme. Do you think that’s fair?

Emile: Sure.

Scott: For Army of One, the theme of empowerment, that was pretty clear. How much time do you spend thinking about theme when you’re working with writers?

Emile: A lot. Every situation is different, and you want to recognize the writer’s process, and then you want to mold to it. You don’t want to change the writer’s process to suit you as a producer.

I gave a lot of notes as an agent. It’s not about you telling them how to write. It’s more about recognizing what their process is and then molding yourself to the process while giving the leadership the 50,000 foot point of view, because writers are on the ground, inches away.

For me, the most important thing is, let’s start with the structure. What’s the inciting incident, where do the act breaks, what is the false victory and what is the all is lost moment. Those very basic notions and cliché that are incredibly important, because that’s the very spine. That’s the first thing.

Once I have an idea, once I recognize a movie idea, whether it’s an article, a book, my idea, a writers idea, whatever it is, that’s where I go to first. Let’s come up with these big beats. Then, from there it’s let’s really build the theme and the emotional journey of the character. The physical stakes will be defined in the logline. The physical stakes are what usually is the one liner that someone pitches.

Now, at this point, we have our basic physical stakes, and there’s going to have to be reversals, red herrings, and all sorts of tools and tricks that one uses to keep the audience engaged along the way.

Tomorrow in Part 5, Emile offers advice to writers on breaking into the business.

For Part 1 of the interview, go here.

Part 2, here.

Part 3, here.

Twitter: @emilegladstone.

Comment Archive