Tracy - very well written analysis of what we heard last night. You hit so many nails on the head here you've built a house. Or at least a cabin. I was also dismayed by how one-dimensional the characters were and how easy it was for the writer to fall back on "cultural shorthand" for the Indian and Black characters. If this story needs to be told, and I'm not convinced it does, spending more time with the characters and defining their exact motivations is what will save it. I say, on to the sixth draft.

Good job, Tracy, as usual. Was there last night too and can only hope the filmmakers take your well-considered analysis to heart. I didn't get the impression that they will based on the tone of the after-reading talk. One thing I noticed that would make the script a friendlier read is for the writer to do a seek-n-destroy on all cliches, all of which really slowed it down--"like a sack of potatoes!"

I'm glad you dug deep into your extensive vault of movie memories and referenced Jonathan Glazer's Birth as with this story I am reminded of the Robert Wise Audrey Rose from 1977 about a man, Elliot Hoover, mistaken for a molester/pedofile after psychics tell him his dead daughters soul is reincarnated in Audrey Rose.

As I recall, the central premise in Audrey Rose, based on Frank De Felitta's novel, is the disbelief in reincarnation as an acceptable alibi for older men sulking around young girls regardless if you believe in reincarnation or not.

Has anyone spoke with Shirley MacLaine lately or the Scientologists in Hollywood about where to draw the line?

BTW, best dramatic film I've seen to date on the subject = Wandâfuru raifu (1998) by Japanese filmmaker Hirokazu Koreeda.

I'm afraid I was one of the many folks who clapped. I have a few reactions. First, regarding the reading in general - with respect for Tracy who certainly writes reviews with a very pointed viewpoint, mentioning anything that could be negative - We all gotta understand that one must look at any of these "readings" as being, "like a stage play's first rehearsal with actors holding their scripts". No matter how brilliant or imaginative an audience may be, they simply Can NOT form any clear VISION of what the movie would be like. PERIOD. All of the visuals, music, and sound effects are missing. Seeing this project at this stage...well I sum this comment up by saying, I can't believe anyone from a newspaper would even choose to write a review in the first place. Let's all go to the Twins Stadium on Week 4 of construction and talk about how much we hate the stadium!!! Common, it's not done yet folks.

I caution reviewers of any stature to Clearly Watch This Point. Comments such as, "and two weathered film/TV vets from LA, Chris Mulkey and John Ashton" serve no purpose except for Tracy to Jab one more negative into his review.

Regarding the story, I agree that the typical mental level of the average audience would be challenged by a story with so many individual sub-stories. But I'd like to see something different that what Hollywood so often churns outs, which is the ONE-story scenario. I'd personally love to be challenged by something a little different, and I feel Incarnation fits the bill.

As far as similarities to rencarnation films already made. Tough to form a totally new script concept. I heard someone say once, "you can't do any story that Star Treks haven't already done". Be that as it may, I personally liked the mental challenge this script offered. Reality Shows are breeding like rabbits because Hollywood and TV are out of ideas. They keep remaking old TV shows. So, I am in dispute with "reasons not to do something similar". You're left with doing a story based on a real event, and should you choose fiction, then obviously something is going to have already been with similar script elements, that is unavoidable. I personally can't wait to see it as a film.

John

I take John's point that this is a staged reading, script-in-hand, work-in-progress and that it takes a particular kind of ear and eye to watch a cast workshop production of a script.

But the purpose of a workshop staged reading of a feature film script (they also do them in L.A. and New York) is the get feedback from other writers, film enthusiasts, and informed film watchers like Tracy McCormick.

Tracy has been watching and writing about films for years and it is rare that I turn a look at an audience at a film preview or Q&A with the filmmkaers before the house light go down and she's not there, row 30 form the back in her center seats. And she's not always paid and rarely comped to be in the audience. She loves film and the literature behind it.

To take your analogy further John, I would not be adverse to mspmag.com writers, architectural critics, and structural engineers going over to the Twins stadium while it is being built, looking at the underbelly, the tied-rebar, reinforced concrete, etc. and being CRITICAL if they find problems BEFORE I have to go there for opening day.

I am of the mind that we all stand to benefit from the feedback of workshop production and those who benefit the most are the creative artists themselves if they chose to listen.

Dean and I want to express our sincere and heartfelt thanks to Robb Mitchell, the Screenwriters Workshop, and the great actors who lent their talent to the recent reading of INCARNATION at the Ritz. We also want to thank the folks who came out last Tuesday night to experience this stage in the script’s evolution.

Feedback sheets have been compiled and scores tallied on the INCARNATION reading. The first question on the sheet was: "How did you feel overall about INCARNATION?" Respondents were asked to rate it on a scale from 1-5, with 5 being "excellent".

I am happy to announce that INCARNATION received an overall rating of 4 on the surveys.

Of course, Dean and I would have loved it if the script would have garnered 5s across the board on this survey, but neither of us expected that. In fact, I think either of us would be hard-pressed to rate it there, ourselves. We know that it is a work in progress, and we appreciate all of the constructive feedback the ScriptNight process has yielded.

Three weeks ago, I was having lunch in LA with a former studio exec at Paramount who is starting up a production company with the former head of Paramount Classics. This person, by the way, loved the current draft of INCARNATION (though he was far less fond of even the last draft), and is one of several Hollywood folks interested in it. Anyway, he told me that as a writer, you know you're on to something when people either absolutely love or absolutely hate your script...if all of your feedback is just okay, you've failed artistically as well as commercially. This is one of the "truths" this man believes has been revealed to him over 25 years in the Hollywood development trenches.

Well, I am happy to say that it looks like INCARNATION successfully passed another milestone. People love it, and people hate it.

I guess we're on to something.

As I write this, Dean and I are considering opportunities presented by at least three players with Hollywood ties to produce INCARNATION. And these are just the expressions of interest that came to us as a direct result of the reading. Again…what a debt of gratitude we owe to Robb and company for providing us a venue to make that happen.

We’re in the process of compiling and considering all the great feedback we’ve received, weighing it against what we experienced and the feedback we’ve gotten from Hollywood production companies that have expressed interest in the project. The next incarnation of…well, INCARNATION already feels palpable, as you’ve helped us to see a number of ways to make it a better movie.

One person that attended the reading had, I believe, the most insightful perspective on INCARNATION in its present form. He had read the script two drafts ago and wanted to see how it had changed over the two subsequent drafts. His comment was that he really liked the “quiet and touching art house version” of the script he read before, and he also thought that we would like the “emerging Hollywood movie” that the current draft represents. His take, however, was that it felt like the script was still in transition—wanting to be one or the other, but not quite deciding which one it wants to be yet.

That comment made perfect sense to me. It’s what I knew, what I felt, but it was an amazing thing to have someone else speak it back to me. The cool thing about this script right now is that there is so much commercial interest and audience interest from both sides of the fence—art house and mainstream—that our job now is to land on one side or the other, then to hone the thing to a sharp edge. Because that’s all part of the process. We know that the company and the people we opt to work with to bring INCARNATION to the screen will help us in that, and we’re excited to take that next step in this journey.

So…INCARNATION. Thanks for loving it, and thanks for hating it. Thanks for sharing this moment with us. It means everything to us. And everything to our project.

And thanks for your encouragement, for your voices, and for your ongoing support of filmmakers who decide to live here.

Bill:

Thanks for responding and adding your comments here. I am reminded of Dean Hyers pre-curtain speech at the Ritz when he asked the audience for their thoughts and said, "...we don't need your encouragement, we need your honest feedback."

As the writer of this screenplay did you see during the reading any areas that need improvement? How do you feel about the comments that said the characters of Polly, Eric and Davanshi as being a "cultural shorthand" of the black single mother/prostitute, black drug dealer/pimp and mystical Indian woman guiding lost souls?

Do you feel this feedback is warranted and will it cause you to give these characters greater dimension or aspirations and depth beyond what some in the audience perceived as stereotype?

The most obvious qualities of Hollywood development executives is to shower creative people with faux and faint praise while actually damaging or rejecting a scripts prospects. Their intent is not always evil because, mostly, the tactic is a coping mechanism to process the hundreds of thousands of scripts that flood the industry and their offices annually.

All too often we turn to Hollywood and studio executives for affirmation of our art and value as creative individuals. Sometimes, we need to check our own hearts and creative intellect and not elevate their feedback above all else.

The more I am involved with script development and the older I get, I find the most difficult thing for filmmakers is to remain honest to your vision. The risk with remaining honest is you might not get a boatload of money. The reward to remaining honest is your create art and a film that will last forever.

I hope that doesn't sound too 60s Pollyanna-ish because more and more, even outside the realm of artistic endeavor in science, technology, and business as well, I think intellectual honesty is a guiding force for quality.

This truth can be especially difficult if you are turning to Hollywood development executives for daily affirmations.

Robb,

I hear you, but feel like two things need to be addressed before I answer.

1. Far more people--of varying ethnicity and backgrounds--liked the Polly, Eric, and Devanshi characters than disliked them. For every registration of concern we've received from the folks who were present at the reading, we've gotten at least four times as many "I loved the characters". That said, I also know that the characters I chose proposed some challenges, and I further know that they become more "real" with each subsequent draft. It needs to be said, though, that not just Hollywood executives, but casting directors, producers, and actors have all unanimously given a big thumbs up to INCARNATION. Quite frankly, they love it--especially actors and casting directors, as they've told me that it's one of the rare scripts they've read recently that provides meaty roles for actors with characters that have depth and great arcs to them.

So...go figure. Right now, I have to admit that I am scratching my head a bit and trying to figure out what the right answer truly is.

2. I am, under no circumstances, seeking affirmation from Hollywood executives. I am looking for their money. I want them to spend millions of dollars to produce this movie. That said, you bet your bottom dollar I am going to listen to what these folks have to say. I will, as I did with my first movie, stick to my guns on the few hills that I believe are important enough to die on, but those are few and far between. And if I have to choose between something (no offense) Tracy McCormick says or "Richard" says or "Rebecca" or "ScriptCat" says and some person in Hollywood that can produce or lead to producing this movie says, I gotta tell ya...there's no contest.

The bottom line for INCARNATION is that it is finding its way to becoming the script (and the movie) it needs to be. I don't know what that is yet. I do, however, know that it's neither perfect nor at the beginning. Tracy and company are neither right nor are they wrong. And nothing anyone has said here surprises me.

And, quite frankly, the comments we received were too across the spectrum to shed immediate light on any specific changes. A few people hated it. More people absolutely loved it. Most people--as expected--were somewhere in the middle. The folks in the middle had concerns (most of which, I have mentioned, are in direct opposition to the feedback we've gotten from Hollywood types...which was a bit of a shock to me), but all skewed heavily on the side of genuinely liking the story and the script.

It's anyone's guess right now what the exact answer is. I can say that I genuinely appreciated the opportunity to hear it read and learned a lot about the story, the characters, the script, and screenwriting--all of which will be reflected in the next draft of INCARNATION and every subsequent script I work on. But to go back to the beginning or toss the baby out with the bathwater right now? That's not the answer either. Contrary to what "Rebecca" writes scores of people--industry people and regular folks, Hollywood types and locals from all walks of life--believe this is a story that DEFINITELY needs to be told, and they like the way we're telling it.

Of course something needs to happen with INCARNATION...it's next evolutionary step. I get it. I have always gotten it. Heck, it was draft 11 of my first script, RUNAWAY, that sold and draft 15 that was shot. And I am told those numbers are low in terms of number of drafts to achieve each of those milestones (LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE, for example, clocked in at draft 50 at the point it was sold).

Okay...to come in for a landing. I appreciate the dialog. But please don't assume that because a few vocal individuals expressed concerns about the script that it means that's what everyone thinks.

The feedback we got as a result of the reading was about where we anticipated to be. AND IT WAS OVERWHELMINGLY POSITIVE. That was their "honest feedback"...I don't want that point to be lost here. We were surprised about some reactions, but that's okay. In fact, it's a good thing. We've gained some valuable perspective for the next draft. I am looking forward to jumping back into it sometime next week. I guess things will become a little more clear then, eh?

The good news is that the project is still moving forward. People are excited to get behind it--even more so after the reading.

Thanks again!
Bill

Hi everyone. Dean Hyers here. I just wanted to voice my gratitude for all the feedback we've received, good and bad. While we don't always get what we want, this IS what we want because we need an audience reaction to juggle with our own opinions and Hollywood feedback while things are still in flux. So thanks, and send more!

This is one of my favorite "tough love" experiences in film, and as a Director, it's a gift that just keeps on giving as a project evolves. This feedback comes before any money has been spent – I don't want it when it's too late to do anything about it, and we're way ahead of that curve! Awesome! Bring it on EARLY!

My goal in having this read so early is that I needed (and got) some big-picture questions answered that didn't relate to the obvious structure and script readiness questions (which readings are also about). I was flying the helicopter pretty high and trusting we work out the pavement-level issues before we start shooting. Once you get a script in a nearly perfect state, you're too far down the path to ask some of the questions I was asking. So I wanted audience DURING the creative process as opposed to just at the end of it. I got many of my answers, so thanks.

People have asked, "will we take the advice." Well, technically, that's impossible because we got a lot of different people offering differing advice. But figuratively YES, of course we will. We learned a lot and actually agree with some of the good and bad feedback. We will process it all along with our own (remember this was OUR first experience of this material outside of our own heads) and then we'll decide what to do next along with the new partners who are getting behind us (who see value now as well as future potential, as do we).

Thrilled and warmly appreciative of the audience and the fine actors who came together to give us this glimpse! Thanks everyone and feel free to share more.

Dean