by Shirley Long
Where would we be in life without free will? The one thing certain besides death and taxes is that you make not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of choices when you write a screenplay. What is your central juicy question? Who are your riveting characters – the ones who will struggle and grow and transform – or fall flat on their faces? What is the perspective of the universe that you, God, are creating? And will your villain be named Boris or Varkov?
One crucial choice combines burning social significance with eternal metaphysical consequences – Should you use three brads to bind your script, or two?
When the five ISA founders held their first meetings at Des Moines's Algonquin Hotel – The Drake Diner – editor Sean Gannon received universal praise for the creativity of his newsletter title – Three Brads and a Passion. That one pithy phrase seemed to blend all the symbolism of practical hard work and applying the seat of the pants with imaginative insight and soaring heights of creative passion.
But there has been a growing movement, the perpetrators of which insist that the only fashionable way to submit a script is with TWO BRADS.
Why, you may ask, should this be of concern to Iowa scriptwriters? Did this movement originate in Sioux City, Waterloo, Davenport, Muscatine, Denison – or even Des Moines? NO. Do we Iowans have time for such things? Aren't we busy writing and producing? Folks, the “Two-Brad Dictum” was handed down – or rather over – from Hollywood.
In the coffeehouses and edit suites, from Court Avenue to the West Side Diner, in production vans and telemarketing suites, the debate rages – three brads or two? These heated exchanges have caused three divorces, the break-up of two companies, and the dissolution of at least six affairs (and these are only the ones I know about).
Now the controversy threatens to divide the Iowa Scriptwriters Alliance into two opposing camps – and that is where I draw the line. Are we going to let the important business of state –– writing and producing –– be derailed over something that should be a matter of personal choice? Where could this lead? Pretty soon, we'll have Hollywood dictating the kinds of movies we write, the marketability, the distribution. Even states rights could fall by the wayside. Are we going to impeach our editor and ride him out of town on a rail, simply because the title of his newsletter is out of date?
Didn't Orson Welles stand his ground? Art Buchwald? James Garner? Paul Robson? Should we expect anything less of Sean Gannon?
We want to hear from you, the members. Sure, if producers and agents have only two brads to remove, it may be quicker to duplicate many more copies and spread them around Hollywood. But are you really willing to destroy the rain forests just to increase your chances of selling a screenplay for $200,000? Think about it.