Andy Bobrow: Hi and welcome to the blogcast. We’ve talked about a couple big changes that have been affecting our careers - residuals, foreign content, both of which are related to the rise of streamers. This time we want to focus on something that’s shaping the writer market in a huge way and throwing a lot of us off balance, and it’s not just a streamer thing. I’m talking about the huge shift to IP. We saw it happen in features first, but it’s become this force of nature that’s in every writer’s life now. Your agents, your managers, executives, every one of us has at least one person who tells us original ideas are hard to sell and we should focus on IP. It’s gotten way bigger than it ever used to be, and frankly way bigger than it logically should be. What’s going on here, what caused it and how is it affecting you guys?
Holly Sorensen: It’s a little quippy to say, but it seems like the Golden Age of TV is turning into the worst age of features, and a part of this is the obsession with IP. When you think about the shows that organically break through and have the coveted word of mouth spread and go on to win awards, it feels like you’re talking about originals like Severance, Stranger Things, Ted Lasso, Hacks, Abbot Elementary, Squid Game, White Lotus, etc. And yet, everyone wants IP. Of course IP, both known and unknown, is an important part of development, but it seems like certain shops won’t take anything without it, even if that IP is little known. It’s like a kid with a security blanket. I created an original pitch and spent a week reading books that might possibly tie in, however tangentially, just to have IP to go in with. There is something wrong with that.
Original shows break through because they are fresh and new. But they require thoughtful smart executives and those require support from corporate - and clearly the powers that be are becoming more risk adverse, and that is the death of originality. I would also say sadly that the end of packaging was a big blow to original programming. Agents could package around an original idea, and make it more palatable to buyers.
Putting aside the hellscape that was Miramax, that company was a talent and awards magnet because they were ready to take swings and support talent. In this time when certain corporations are shelving films and not giving a damn about talent relationships, there is a real opening and a place for a studio to be known as talent friendly. Most people would give up money for that kind of respect and cooperation.
Eric Tipton: I’ve been thinking about IP quite a lot lately. I mean, it isn’t a new thing. The Wizard of Oz was based on IP, along with other national-treasure hits like JAWS, and the list goes on. So, IP on its own isn’t a bad thing – UNLESS – and this is where we seem to be going as an industry – it completely supplants original ideas. And I know that’s splitting some hairs because obviously, the IP was, at some point, an original idea. We’ve just fallen into this seemingly endless cycle of IP/Reboots/Remakes and original work is pushed further and further into the background.
Like probably everyone here, I’ve developed numerous projects based on IP. I’ve also been able to sell some originals. I don’t have anything against IP in general – and like most writers, there are some big-ticket pieces of IP that I wish I could have pitched on, or been hired for. But I also think the need or perceived need, for IP has gone completely off the rails.
There is at least one manager I know of at a company you’ve heard of, who has started encouraging younger writer clients to write the beginning of their projects first as a ten-fifteen page short story so it can then be called IP. There is even a small cottage industry of writers who crank out these high-concept short stories – they don’t even need to get them published anywhere – and entities that will buy them or option them for a nominal amount to pass on to screenwriters for development. THAT is where things are getting crazy. This idea that even an unpublished short story can be considered “IP” and that IP is SO necessary to move any needle that we’ve been reduced to this. It dovetails a bit with one of our previous conversations about how to stay relevant and working and the general consensus I believe we reached that said we need to be generating our own IP – novels, comics, what-have-you.
AB: That is insane and it makes me wonder if there’s some business angle to IP that I’m not seeing. I understand the concept of buying a proven piece of material, because it theoretically brings a built-in audience, cuts through, and probably costs less to market. So that I get. But to just do this extra step of basically turning a pitch into a blog post or self-published kindle story, just to pitch it? It feels almost like there’s like a hidden tax loophole or something going on. Like if ten years from now someone said “yeah all the IP purchases were actually a complex way to hide your boat from the government,” I would go, “oh, at least that explains it.”
The only other explanation, although the boat thing is my current frontrunner, is maybe it lets executives peruse material somewhat anonymously, so they don’t have to schedule a meeting? Could it be that dumb? Like is it a way for an exec to say to a “I’ll license your pitch, I don’t want to meet you, and I’m giving it to some writer I’d rather sit down with?” Like maybe the whole thing is just to make their lives less awkward?
Marc Guggenheim: Oy, do I have a lot of feelings about IP. As a comic book fan, I love that I’m getting live action versions – and really good ones – of the characters and concepts I read and loved as a kid. I don’t think IP, per se, is a problem for our business. What is a Really Huge M*th*rf*ck*ng Problem, however, is the decision makers’ – studio execs, network execs, and producers – fetish for IP. I understand that, especially given today’s merger-mania, everyone is afraid of losing their jobs, so there’s a certain comfort in being able to say to one’s boss, “Don’t blame me. I bought an idea with pre-awareness.” The problem is that “pre-awareness” has been reduced to pre-existence. Like Eric said, writers are writing short stories – micro-stories, really – just so someone can say that the property existed in another form prior to it being pitched as a television show or feature.
This is so ridiculous, so lacking in any basis in logic, that it beggars description. My use of the word “fetish” above wasn’t accidental. There’s nothing practical behind the requirement of preexisting IP for a sale. It’s just become an irrational fixation at this point. When you’re scraping the bottom of the barrel for board games and unpublished short stories, you know there’s something wrong. And it’s certainly not a good thing for the art forms that are television and film.
Angela Workman: It’s such an odd turn, because up until maybe five or six years ago, no one wanted to come out of pocket to pay for underlying material. No one wanted to pay for it, or to wait for it (dear god no), because it can take months and sometimes years to secure IP. Now it’s almost impossible to sell anything without it. Execs don’t trust their own taste and instincts now; even if an original story is immensely moving and cinematically compelling, it doesn’t seem to matter very much anymore. (And don’t get me started on the demand for decks and sizzles and proof of concept and attachments etc etc etc.) I’d love to hear from writers who have managed to sell original work in the last year or two. I’m out with an epic feature now, and going out with a smaller project soon. I’d love to know there’s still a market somewhere, but I’m unclear where it is, or if it even exists. (I’ve been told, for instance, that TriStar is looking for the next ‘The Woman King.’ I don’t know about IP expectations though.)
HS: The fact, obviously, that the next this is that - that the next new thing they want is derivative of that thing - is case in point.
AW: Yes, but I think that was always true, to a degree. And something derivative can be originated by a screenwriter. Now they demand underlying IP, to be able to say, see, it started elsewhere, and not with the screenwriter. We’ve lost our authority.
AB: Totally. When you came into this business, you believed that screenwriters were at least analogous in some way to authors. Yes it’s a collaborative medium, and the finished product is the creation of many people, but, like authors, we’re the ones in the chain who have labored to maintain the very critical relationship between the idea and the words. But the IP movement has reinforced this other workflow - one where we do the words, but someone else does the coming up with. What’s really ridiculous - I’m sure we’ve all had this awful encounter where a friend or acquaintance or some jackass says “I have this great idea, I just need someone to write it…” And that sentence pisses off writers because it completely devalues what we’ve worked so hard to learn how to do. And in a way, now that jackass is being proven right. You could say to that person, “hey cool, just stick your idea on a t-shirt and then a studio will hire me to write the script and you’ll get your million bucks.” Sorry this is becoming a gripe-fest but it’s fun. As my penance for pissing and moaning, I will say I just got an IP gig and I’m so grateful for the work. So call me a hypocrite I guess (or just call me a working writer, same diff).
AW: Seriously though, congrats to you.
AB: Well thank you! In terms of our discussion here, I’m getting nervous that we’re presenting a problem without being able to pitch solutions. But clearly it’s not so much a problem, because we can just adapt and the market chugs on. It’s more an observation. Something is happening that seems dumb. Do you guys think this is a cycle that will eventually just come back around to originals? Like will there be a Home Alone that sends all the studios looking for original ideas once again?
I mean, it seems like the Marvel and DC franchises will get at least a little bigger before we burn out on those guys. But I have to believe at some point the “American mythology” slot that these movies fill in our shared popular culture is going to start looking different. Someone will make a big Western, or a big sports movie and I have to believe that at a certain point, Americans will be pointing to the superhero movies and saying “well that was very early 2000s of us, but they look dated now.” I guess my question is how do you see this playing out?
Carter Blanchard: Westerns were dead until Dances With Wolves and then everyone had a western in their development pipeline. I remember being told not to write horror in the 90s. It was a dead genre for a while. Then Scream came out in 1996 and there were a slew of similar projects like I Know What You Did Last Summer, etc. And then I seem to remember even after that there was another stretch of “don’t write horror” until Platinum Dunes remade Texas Chainsaw and then everyone was rebooting old, even relatively obscure horror films from the 70s and 80s. Original specs were THE thing in the 1990s. Then it was reboots. Not too long ago short films were getting people in the door. Lately short stories are a thing. A friend of mine was told to write his pitch as a short story. It went out and was fought over by huge producers and is now being packaged with an A-list director to take out as a pitch, “based on” his own IP - an unpublished short story he wrote. All I know is that trends are always changing. In fact I’d bet my life’s savings that original specs become the thing again at some point in the next 10 years.
And maybe it’s going to be different moving forward because of the corporate merging and algorithmic approach to everything now, but I still think at the end of the day, formulas have shelf lives, people get bored with the same ol’ and thus trends will always change.
AB: I think that’s where I’m netting out, although there’s this other trend we can all see coming and it’s a cousin to this IP thing: The trend of creators being discovered on TikTok, Instagram, etc. People who create and star in their own content, prove their viability on that platform, then get a deal to adapt themself as “IP” for tv and film. In comedy, this is an evolution of the “standup-to-series” thing that has been around for decades. It’s really exactly the same idea, but without the traditional standup gatekeepers (comedy club owners and talk show bookers). You can also think of scripted podcasts as the new pilots. Great deal for studios - they get to offload their development expense to the creators. So there’s a non-bonkers version of this phenomenon, which is someone proves themself somewhere, either on social media or in a book or magazine article, and that IP gets mined by studios. And then there’s a completely-bonkers version of that idea, which is the IP just gets self-published, but not proven in any sense of the word, doesn’t find an audience, doesn’t demonstrate any hint of being successful in a smaller venue, and still gets bought as IP. I don’t know what the fuck that is. Is it possibly a hostage situation? Like does some attorney who specializes in IP clearance have everyone’s family locked up and he’s showing all the execs a video feed and their kids are saying “mommy, daddy, please do this one as an IP deal?” If it’s not that or the boat thing, it’s just executives preferring to read a pitch rather than hear it.
CB: Yes and a long time ago I was terrified of pitching so I’d always ask why I can’t just write it up and let them read it to a resounding NO from my reps. But you’re right. That’s what the unpublished short story actually is with an overall tweak to how it’s formatted. I’ve read as many of these as I can get my hands on and here’s the other thing - they’re often just teasers. The story ends at the first act break. Not all, but enough to make me think - wow so not only does this circumvent the traditional path to selling your own idea, it can be way less work. Granted, in my friend’s case (and I assume most others as well) once a producer signed on they had to develop a full pitch to bring to the studios along with the package. But still, it got the ball rolling for them in a big way.
Tiffany (Romigh) Yeager: I’ve been trying to find a workaround for the necessity of IP. As a novelist, it’s thrilling to think about your work being adapted (as hard as it can be to do yourself at times!) As a realist, I’ve certainly pitched and lost many things with big IP attached. As a(n increasingly starving) feature writer, I adapted a book that I love this year that’s kinda shiny and sparkly. Am of 100 minds on this topic. But as someone who mostly has something personal to say, I’ve tried something lately that seems to be working, at least in part, similar to what Andy was saying above about the trend for creators – I’ve been leaning way into my experiences and then backwards pitching myself as the existing IP. It gets a laugh in the room sometimes and has broken the ice and made it easier to sell weirdo original ideas. Plus, it’s cheaper than therapy.
Eric Tipton: Yeah, the “adapting your own IP” thing is interesting and a bit irritating. I had sold a spec pilot to Alloy and WBTV some years back. Alloy being a publishing company first, thought it would be a good idea – not so much as a way to sell the show because we had already sold it to Warners, but as a way to build an audience for the “inevitable” series that would follow – to have us turn the pilot into a novel. As Hollywood would have it, the novel was published by Alloy and Simon & Schuster. The show never got made (although it’s possible that could change at some point). But that leads me to a question – trying to be prescriptive and not just griping because as writers we all do enough of that – given that we are all ostensibly here to tell our own original stories, how much time do you devote, or maybe should we think about devoting, to the creation of our own IP, or at least the search for existing IP we can then try to get a shopping agreement on, or an option, or whatever. Sure, producers will bring you IP, but that street works both ways and I find (sadly) executives at whatever level perk up just that much more when you lead off with some version of, “So I found this book…” Personally, I’m probably (again sadly) 70/30 in terms of how I’m dividing my time. 70% is reading IP people have brought me, or seeking out IP to attach myself to, and 30% is working on purely original scripts – spec features, pilots, etc. I do wish it were the other way around, but, as IP is very much a current trend, you have to adapt (pun intended) to stay in the game – at least until the next trend cycles in.
HS: I teach college screenwriting occasionally and for certain projects I do tell the students to write the novel first if I feel they have that aptitude and that is the best expression of the story they currently have. If it’s something you have the creative drive to do, it can be smart. And the financial upside of a hit novel is so much higher than a hit movie, as my friend Steve Chbosky reminded me. I think the Tik Tok phenomenon and the IP are separate in this way: Producers have always wanted to find the next young or new thing, that is part of their job. And as much as established screenwriters might not like it, this is an entrepreneurial business. There is no prize for ‘I got here first’. Those Tik Tok people that have been mentioned are, in fact, brilliant and using the technology brilliantly to connect with people. And the proof is in their numbers. That is finding new talent, that is part of development. And to Eric’s point, any new and upcoming writer with that skill can start a Tik Tok, and they should.
But needing something, anything on a piece of paper in addition to a screenplay reveals an insecurity, lack of creativity and a laziness, which is not their job. It's just plausible deniability for failing, and that is a terrible way to start a creative relationship. Everyone feels it. I think one thing we can do is to try to reward the shops that take bigger swings and back bigger swingers by sharing that information with each other. If you have a hot project, surely the people that are not afraid of creativity are the people you want to give it to, not just the folks who give you the most money. And I think if you are one of those shops or one of those executives, you have to let it be known. In some ways HBO has always been and continues to be a holy grail because they let creative people be creative. They supported Mike White through Enlightened, which was brilliant though not hugely buzzy, and now they have The White Lotus.I think the ultimate expression of the IP fetish might be ‘The Rings Of Power’. It felt almost always too big to succeed. To say we are going to take IP - and not even the whole IP - and it will become our next huge franchise and we will spare no money to make it so almost started as antithetical to what the creative process should be.
AB: Is it a cult maybe? Or like did a nutritionist come out with a theory that IP is a natural appetite suppressant? A super fancy nutritionist that all the executives have told each other about, who’s really hard to get ahold of?
Flint Wainess: Look, I love IP. Superman, Wonder Woman, Pez dispensers, Archie’s cousin Ken who shockingly never made it to Riverdale, The Bible. I became a writer to pursue my dream of turning IP into content.
JK, it’s obviously a hellscape that will eventually eat itself. Obviously there are plenty of books that have been turned into great movies. And true stories, when done right, can speak truth to power and make viewers challenge some of their most basic assumptions about history/society/truth/who the protagonist really is in a story. But for the most part that’s not what’s happening. Boldfaced name writers are fed the IP studios want to make, and then they find a way to rationalize that this is the story they’re dying to tell. Non boldfaced name writers are mainly left with endless free work to try to get jobs that are going to a small list of names.
Here are a few IP jobs I’ve gone after: CANDYLAND. After years of trying to find the right writer for this, Hasbro went with my take, which was basically seeing the world of Candyland as if it’s Game of Thrones (minus dragons and nudity, as no one wants to see Lord Licorice like that). The only thing left, and I was assured this was just a formality, was pitching their new partners at Paramount Plus. Paramount Plus passed. Months of free work down the drain (chute? Chutes and Ladders? Is that next?). DUKE NUKEM. Thought I had a really fun take, didn’t get the job. Really like the producers, wasn’t upset about the time spent. And then there’s something that happened recently that was really painful. A foreign show I absolutely loved that I brought to the attention of a great producer. It took forever, but we got the rights to shop it with a major studio, I got an if-come with the studio, worked out a take, had endless meetings about it, did many passes on it, only to find out the studio had removed the show from their service to save a few dollars which meant the studio lost the rights to the show, which meant all the months of work, rounds and rounds of notes, were for nothing. They were to sell a show we didn’t have the rights to. The studio then tried to buy the rights back, but were rebuffed. Which meant, I got paid zero dollars for everything. And that’s happening to a fair amount of writers these days, and that’s not okay.
Of course, I do know people who are cleaning up in the IP/assignment world, and good for them, but what kind of victory is it really? Do we need six more Superman stories? 39 more Santa Claus movies? 16 more grisly true crime stories that retraumatize the victims? Or is that just crowding out good, interesting, original storytelling?
Think about it this way: EVERY MOMENT YOU’RE WORKING ON IP YOU’RE NOT WORKING ON SOMETHING ORIGINAL. That’s A LOT of lost original stories.
On the other hand, Damon Lindelof’s take on “Watchmen” was so fucking good that maybe it makes it all worthwile? And Andor. Would watch one million hours of Andor. So I guess my proposal is Disney Plus gets to do five more IP shows and HBO/HBO Max can do their superhero stuff and that’s it. We draw the line there.
CB: True stories! That was another trend for a few years. “Based on” or “Inspired by” or any other version of that was sought after. During that time, any original idea I had, my rep would ask if I could find some article out there that I could point to as the inspiration for it. So I’d have to find something and reverse-engineer my own story to be “based on” some long-forgotten story (I’d love to say I went to the library to research old newspapers on microfiche - because who doesn’t love a good microfiche scene). I think I did this once or twice without success.
But with any of these IP trends, does anyone REALLY think audiences care - or even notice - what any given movie or TV show is based on? A big novel or comic book or video game, sure. But a short story? Even a highly-acclaimed one? No. If they watch a movie trailer and it gets them excited enough to go see it in a theater, it will have zero to do with being based on some short story they never heard of, let alone read. So the focus on being based on some IP of any kind at all costs in order to move a pitch or spec up the ladder is kind of inane.
HS: I think in addition to hoping that something has been published before is closer to a sure thing, they want any kind marketing leg up in this insanely crowded marketplace. But it is inane to think its going to come from just any IP. So money counters, if you’re listening, your reliance on IP over original pitches is costing you time, money, business affairs people hours, more phone calls from more agents, the chance of losing the IP in a mistake and then you are pregnant with it and have to pay out the nose. Straight original pitches in addition to being the surprising fresh thing people want are arguably cheaper, faster, and more efficient. And if you’re a writer with an overall? Fight for originals.
AB: It’s funny, I was worried that there was really nothing we could say here to change reality, but Holly I think you have the best plan. The plan is we just want to remind our friends and business partners, the execs and producers and studio heads who we truly do appreciate, that there are advantages to making original stories. All the IP you’re mining was once just a writer with an idea. There’s no reason that this very simple equation will stop adding up. Don’t give up on it!
And since I get to say when the article ends, I’ll end it here. Thank you all for participating. We have lots of big topics coming up, as well as more stories from writers about how they broke in. Thanks for reading. And by the way, when looking for art for this article, I discovered the incredible Justin Bryant on Instagram. Follow him, support him, enjoy what he adds to the world! https://www.instagram.com/1126artstudio/