Trending Lounge Discussions

Hey @Sonny thanks for sharing about your books. I'm currently reading Faceless Killers by Henning Mankell, the first in his acclaimed Wallander series, so these sound up my alley. Which one of your four would you recommend checking out first?

Thanks, Pat. Since there are only four in the series I'd recommend starting with the first one, 'The Murder Game'. If I had 30-50+ books in the series (like one author I follow, JD Robb, who has 60+ in the series I read!) I might give a different answer, but since it's only four I think it's worth starting at the beginning. Book #2 in the series is 'Glitz. Glamour. Murder.', #3 is 'Blood & Vengeance', and #4 is 'Divine Deception'. I hope you enjoy!

Welcome Sonny, thank you for sharing your work here and wishing you all the best.

Thanks, Ed. I'm excited to be part of Stage 32.

Damilola Jabita I really like the space you’re exploring here — that feeling of a story pushing back and revealing something deeper as you write it. My process is almost the opposite, but I think it comes from the same place of vulnerability.

Because of my background, I tend to backwards‑plan everything. I don’t usually start unless I already know the concept, the emotional spine, and the direction I’m heading. The details shift, sure, but the core is pretty locked in before I ever type page one.

And for me, the vulnerability isn’t in discovering something new mid‑draft — it’s in deciding which part of myself I’m willing to put on the page. I joke that I don’t write about things that would send me to therapy; I write about the things I’m already in therapy for. That’s the string I tug on.

So even though our processes are different, I connect with what you’re saying about the fear. Writing the thing that feels closest to the bone — whether you discover it or plan it — is always the thing worth finishing.

Honestly this is every script I write lol, try as I might to hold back when I know someone will read my words... my subconscious says "screw that" and I end up spilling some dark secrets.

It's why admittedly I am absolutely terrified of Lunar Window in particular getting sold. I didn't mean to put so much of myself into it, including my own personal experience of what I called "nunhood;" the desire to purify and abstain in the name of something higher, when in reality it was glorified punishment. And now I'm about to do the same with Niveous Reverie, where I attempt to concentrate a lifetime of impossible, maddening love for someone into something readable (and dare I say, one day, observable).

Therapists have nothing on me lol

Damilola Jabita, I think so too. The stories that feel uncomfortable to write usually come from a more honest place, and that’s what tends to stay with people.

Working on a script.

Whoop! Whoop! I have a script that matches an OWA! Submitted! Thanks for these updates, Sam Rivera!

Exciting new opportunities!

Lol technically mine fits two of these so here goes nothing~

I've got a powerful drama, alright!!

Sorry you're feeling that way. we all get like that sometimes. I've been trying a new thing to keep my spirits up. I listen to positive affirmation videos from YouTube as I sleep. they supposedly tap into the subconscious mind and rewire your thinking to manifest good things in life.

Indeed, the motivation follows the work and not the other way around. Well said, Geoffroy Faugerolas!

Anthony McBride I get this more than I’d like to admit. I dealt with imposter syndrome every single day on the teams — and the wild part is, most of us did. You’re surrounded by high performers, constant criticism, and zero room for error, so you learn to live with that voice in your head telling you you’re not enough.

Then I jumped into writing, which is the complete opposite: almost no feedback, no immediate read on whether you’re doing anything right, just you and the page. And that same voice shows up again, just in a different uniform.

But here’s the thing I’ve learned in both worlds: the only thing that cuts through imposter syndrome is showing up. One foot in front of the other. Doing the work even when your brain is screaming “what the hell am I doing.”

If you’re still writing — even slowly, even reluctantly — you’re not an imposter. You’re a writer. The doubt is part of the job, not a sign you don’t belong.

Anthony McBride I'm in a constant state of doom and gloom. Maybe it comes from being too self-aware of ourselves. I know I may never be great. I know I may not WOW someone in a pitch. But, I keep trying to be really good at it. The hope is that effort is recognized. We just need one person to believe and hopefully tell another. Then another. Until then, try to be a little better today than you were yesterday.

Anthony McBride, I don’t think this is imposter syndrome as much as it is creative burnout. It happens when you’ve been pushing your brain in one direction for too long. Everything starts to feel flat, even things you usually enjoy.

For me, taking a bit of distance from the work for a day or two usually helps more than forcing it. It resets how I'm seeing things.

Jason Green Thank you so much for sharing this — I really appreciate your perspective.

For me, the personal point of view has always been essential in my writing as well, but with this project in particular it feels even more important.

There’s something about telling a story that comes directly from lived experience that just hits differently, and I’m still figuring out how to balance protecting that instinct while giving it the right structure.

Your insight about using the personal instinct as a compass really resonated with me.

Paulina Wróbel This is a really honest and relatable place to be creatively.

I think when something comes from a personal space like that, it’s important to protect it in the early stages and not rush to structure it too quickly. Sometimes those quieter, more internal stories need time to reveal what they actually are.

At the same time, once the core emotion is clear, shaping it with structure can help it connect more strongly with others.

Feels like you’re onto something meaningful here.

I've had it both ways. An idea that's been fermenting in my head for a while with it being an aggregate of many things I find interesting.

And then, a gut feeling that I just knew I had to write down. Many of these are just blurbs in my idea pool, but I did write one out and refine and it's the one that has gotten me my first shopping agreement.

A good story can come to you in any number of ways.

Paulina Wróbel, I usually try to protect that instinct early on. If I shape it too quickly, it starts to lose what made it feel personal in the first place. Structure comes a bit later for me.

Paulina Wróbel This is really interesting, especially that shift from a structured sci-fi collaboration into something more internal and personal.

When work starts feeling like it “appears” rather than being planned, it usually means you’ve tapped into something emotionally authentic. I think at that stage it’s often helpful to protect the instinct for a bit just let it breathe without forcing structure too early.

At the same time, even very personal material eventually benefits from light shaping just enough to keep the emotional thread clear as it develops into a pilot format. The key is usually not to structure it too soon, but also not to lose sight of where the narrative focus naturally wants to go.

I’d be curious how it evolves as you continue writing it. Those kinds of projects often reveal their true shape a little later in the process rather than at page 9.

Abhijeet Aade I really appreciate that — and I’m glad that came through.

That balance between idea and human experience is something I’m constantly trying to stay aware of. It’s easy to get lost in the concept, especially with themes like power, but without the emotional core, it doesn’t truly connect.

For me, the challenge is making sure the system never overshadows the people inside it — but instead reveals them.

Thanks again for the encouragement, and I’d love to follow your work as well.

Kristia Nakhoul Thank you, I really appreciate your interest — that means a lot.

I’m still in the development stage, focusing on refining the story and characters, but it’s great to know the project resonates with you in that way.

I’d be happy to stay connected and keep you in mind as things progress. Feel free to share any of your work as well — I’d love to see it.

Best,

Tomás

Tomás, this sounds like a compelling and timely concept, especially with that blend of political drama and sci-fi grounded in character. As you move into this next phase, we recommend leveraging Stage 32 pitch sessions and networking opportunities to connect directly with producers aligned with this space, and we’re always here to help guide you every step of the way!

Tucker Briggs Thank you for sharing this — I really like your approach, especially the focus on refining without losing the writer’s voice.

That “almost there” stage is exactly where I am with my current project, so I understand how important it is to have the right kind of feedback at that point.

I’m currently doing a lot of internal refinement, but I’d definitely be interested in learning more about your process and how you usually work with writers.

Let’s stay connected.

Laquan Copeland Thank you, I really appreciate the support and guidance.

That’s exactly the direction I’m aiming for — continuing to refine the project while building the right connections around it. I agree that finding producers who align with the tone and scope of the story is key.

I’ll definitely be exploring the pitch sessions as I move forward. In the meantime, I’m focused on making sure the project is as strong and clear as possible before presenting it.

Thanks again — looking forward to being more active here.

I have many loglines/spec scripts/outlines. Right my friend Damian Melcher is helping to write one idea Black Dragon into a script.

In the news today, Disney lays off 1000 workers. Their plan is to utilize AI to a greater degree.

We need to find balance with AI.

Disney doesn't believe so.

Leonardo, do you know of any agents who would represent me or work with me? I have tried to find someone but have hit only dead ends.

Meriem Bouziani Yes! More time to spend on the writing!

How can I pitch my multiple projects to your team?

this link isn’t working but feel free to contact me here for a pitching session whenever your team is ready. I have borrow, thriller,comedy, action adventure and dystopian/ fantasy etc.

Yes, absolutely Geoffroy Faugerolas

This is great, Geoffroy Faugerolas! Updated. =) Could you kindly suggest and ask them to also update the genres under the logline category? Right now for my project "The Manhattan Agreement" I have "Period Piece/Drama" where it should read and be categorized under "Historical Drama". Also, for "Gaia's War" all I have is science fiction. I would love to add the word "thriller" as well, but cannot because that word alone is not available. Thoughts? Thanks so much! =) =)

The title, Surgarenk refers to a term of endearment, like "sweetie" or "little sugar" as the suffix "-enk" appears to act like a diminutive of "Surgar", or sugar.

Intrigued how that name came about, what it refers to in your work.

I hope to collab with you further on projects like this. I have a few of my own seeking representation.

Hi Corey!

You have an incredible intuition! You are absolutely right about the "enk" suffix — it adds a layer

of soul and warmth to the name. "Surgarenk" is a very personal and symbolic title for me,

representing something fragile yet resilient within a harsh world. I would be happy to tell you the

full story behind it in our further conversation.

I am glad that the project resonates with you on such a deep level. Regarding the collaboration

— as I mentioned, I am looking for a creative alliance where we can combine our strengths to

bring this story to th

Collaboration on "Surgarenk" & "Apokalypse" – Moving forward

Dear Corey,

Thank you for your insights and the refined translation of my recent post. It captures the

essence perfectly. Regarding your question about Surgarenk — it is a foundational concept in

my work that represents [здесь вставьте краткое объяснение значения, которое мы

обсуждали, например: the duality of human soul and the remnants of lost civilizations].

I am very pleased to hear about your interest in a deeper collaboration. As a creator, I value

professional initiative, and since you have expressed a personal connection to these themes, I

would like to propose the next concrete steps.

To give you a better sense of my creative range, I am attaching a screenplay draft titled

"APOKALYPSE". It is a story set in a world where algorithms have replaced mercy, and human

worth is measured by an "existence quote". I believe this atmosphere of "logic's decay" aligns

well with the cinematic interests we both share.

I am ready to provide more extensive materials from the "Surgarenk" book series to start our

work. However, I would like to hear your professional vision:

1.

2.

How do you see the roadmap for adapting this material?

What format of collaboration would be most effective for you at this stage to bring this

project to the right tables in the industry?

Your experience and Hollywood accolades speak for themselves, and I believe that by

combining my world-building with your screenwriting expertise, we can create something truly

impactful.

Looking forward to your thoughts and a potential meeting.

Best regards,

Alexej Owtscharenko

Aleksii Ovcharenko From my guides and writing partners, the Ascended Masters: "We hope to make you better than you are. But in the meantime, you'll have to learn from the conventional wisdom in Stage 32."

Regarding our collaboration / My focus Hi Cory,

Thank you for your message and for sharing these resources.

However, I would like to be clear about my goals. I am a professional author, and my primary

interest is in creative collaboration, script development, and finding a producer for my project.

While I appreciate the educational aspect of the platform, I am not interested in marketing

services, PR, or general "wisdom" packages at this stage.

I was looking forward to a more direct, professional partnership regarding the story itself. If you

are interested in discussing the development of "Surgarenk" as a creative collaborator, I am

open to that. Otherwise, I prefer to focus my time solely on the production side of the industry.

Best regards,

Aleksii Ovcharenko

Sandra Isabel Yes. So true. And who gets the recognition no matter how little they contributed to the end result? The director. And you can thank the French Nouvelle Vague (New Wave) with their auteur "theory" for that. So... In my view, writers are, in particular, and most especially, the first directors.

Andrew Sarris, in his Introduction to INTERVIEWS WITH FILM DIRECTORS, Avon Books, 1967, p. 12, wrote:

“...screenwriting involves more than mere dialogue and plot. The choice between a close-up and a long-shot, for example, may quite often transcend the plot. If the story of LITTLE RED RIDING HOOD is told with the Wolf in close-up and Little Red Riding Hood in long-shot, the director is concerned primarily with the emotional problems of a wolf with a compulsion to eat little girls. If Little Red Riding Hood is in close-up and the wolf in long–shot, the emphasis is shifted to the emotional problems of vestigial virginity in a wicked world. Thus, two different stories are being told with the same basic anecdotal material. What is at stake in the two different versions of LITTLE RED RIDING HOOD are two contrasting directorial attitudes toward life. One director identifies more with the Wolf—the male, the compulsive, the corrupted, even evil itself. The second director identifies with the little girl - the innocence, the illusion, the ideal and hope of the race.”

Okay, wait a minute. Did he say “two contrasting directorial attitudes toward life”? So, if you make a film it isn’t about the story in the film, it’s actually your take on LIFE? This may have more to do with Sarris’s personal predilections than any interpretations of the story. After all, there is an interpretation in between his two examples that has to do with a hungry and wily predator trying to hunt and eat defenseless prey as is its nature. This, rather than some kind of twisted and corrupt expression of pure, yet sexually perverse evil, or contrarily, some innocent expression of racial hope. You know he is over-thinking this when he employs P.C. buzz terms like “sexually perverse” and “racial hope.” It’s all too politically self-conscious, pandering as it does, to his “choir” full of cineastes, for my taste. Perhaps Sarris has been reading too much Freud. Perhaps it’s the ‘60’s. And perhaps, as are we all,

He gets it, but he doesn't stop there. Where a film's story is a reflection of a particular view, the writer's came first. So, in exalting the director while ignoring the writer, "auteurists" fall into the cineaste's version of the cult of personality. Sarris is a product of his times. The trick is to recognize it and transcend them.

But the reality is that before there can be a close-up or a long-shot, there must be a subject to be shot. And the assumption that the narrative left an interpretation of the subject to some neutral medium-shot until a director could come along and take a position one way or another is actually ignorance of an emphasis that is almost always already present in the narrative, placed there by the writer, and ignored by the director in favor of wresting control of the narrative for his own reasons.

For example, one can describe an action in several ways: as pure and focused (close-up), as within its immediate location (medium-shot), or as within and against its surroundings or environment (long-shot). It can even be described in such a way as to evoke a mind’s-eye view suggesting an up-angle to yield a powerful or dominating subject, a straight-on angle to yield a power-neutral subject, or a downward angle, suggesting a subordinate and helpless subject. The lighting influencing that mind’s-eye view can be (and often is) adjusted in the writing. When a writer describes characters and action in any of these ways, the writer is influencing the reader’s interpretation of the story in service to a vision that precedes the coming collaboration. This is to specify that vision toward production of a film that serves it. The fact that the director comes along and changes it doesn’t necessarily indicate a superior vision, it merely indicates, a superior control of the result.

Sarris, again, p. 14:

“It is fashionable to say that the screen is a director’s medium and the stage is a writer’s medium, but it is difficult to say that a Broadway-to-Hollywood-and-back director like Elia Kazan is any less in command in one medium than in another.”

Why is it difficult? It’s because every production, stage and film, both, is a unique case when it comes to collaboration involving who did what, and how much. Sorting out film credit is worse than herding cats. It’s closer to herding herds of cats after particularly difficult negotiations with each of the various and sundry Cat Guilds. Better to accept the collaboration for its own strengths and dispense with what amounts to aesthetic idolatry at the expense of facts. Produced narrative works don’t demand some kind of religious “leap of faith” to enable one’s deepest appreciation.

The stage is a writer’s medium because plays are re-produced, and survive any given director. Therefore, the writer’s vision is the only constant. Meanwhile, films are rarely re-produced, so the director’s version is generally the sole version. Add to that the writer exits the thing, willingly or not, early. The implication, then, is that the writer will lose control of his/her vision because, he/she is not the “last man standing.” The director is.

Director Arthur Penn has gone on record in THE DIRECTOR’S EVENT, by Eric Sherman & Martin Rubin, Atheneum, 1970, p. 120 – 1, taking an unabashed writer-be-damned view:

“In the theater, the script is embalmed. It is The Text, a revered work. A man’s written it, and it’s meant to be delivered as such. In the cinema, the dialogue is only a guide. My writer friends are often offended by the literary level of the scripts of my films. On the other hand, I keep thinking it doesn’t matter a great deal, and I’m sort of offended sometimes by the look of their plays.

“An awful lot of vanity is inherent in the movie-making event. It’s a seductive event. Seldom in one’s fantasies can one achieve the kind of power that you have on a movie set. Power corrupts; movie power corrupts absolutely. Dialogue in the cinema only serves as a guide to a kind of visualization, and if this be megalomania, so be it. There is only one event in making movies, and that’s the director’s event. It’s not anybody else’s. I don’t care how well written the script is. You can get into a motel room in Texas, and the dialogue can be exquisite, but what you choose to look at and how you look at it is everything.”

Now, don’t get me wrong, I like a number of Penn’s films. His “writer friends” must be novelists or those exalted playwrights, because they surely aren’t screenwriters. Penn, though, has become “hoist by his own petard.” He admits to the corrupting influence of the role of the director, and then exercises that corruption when he says, “...what you choose to look at and how you look at it is everything.” The key word there, however, is “what.” Without the script, there is no “what.”

This ain’t a small thing, folks.

And by its presence, script having been read, that “what” has been “viewed,” so a view-point is established: the writer’s viewpoint.

The maximum that the director can bring to the film is an interpretation of what was already there or a forced re-write to that director’s specification. In his “corruption,” and because of his theater-based notion of screenwriting as merely dialogue, and “suggested” dialogue, at that, he believes direction is ‘The Text.’

Perhaps this is all really sour grapes, and, like his single screenwriting experience trying to make a two-hour movie from a twenty minute song (ALICE’S RESTAURANT) it’s based on his experience directing those playwrights’ untouchable words for the stage. With his elevation of the “what” and “how” one chooses to “look” with the camera, he implies that all screenwriting only exhibits a neutral point-of-view; that, other than scene transitions, it implies no cutting; that screenwriting is actually mis-named and really amounts to just suggestive dialogue-writing, the action ignored; and that dialogue doesn’t compare to camera placement, the use of which is “everything.”

Let him shoot that motel room in Texas with no script: with just the improvising actors, without those characters saying those written lines; and without that story (in fact, without that motel room or even Texas!). He’d find himself without that audience. I wonder how different it would be from the Penn family’s home movies. “Slick sh*t,” to borrow a phrase. And...

WritERS aren't the most important thing in filmmaking, writING is.

For me, the main concerns are the structure and the writing. That is exactly why I booked the 30-minute session: I want to know how I can strengthen the script and make it market-ready.

This is one of the most underrated truths in this business. The writer decides what is possible before anyone else shows up. Every choice about the world and the setting and the rules of the story are production decisions disguised as creative ones. When you write a scene that needs a specific location or a system that behaves a certain way you just committed someone else's budget and schedule without them being in the room. That gap between creative freedom and downstream reality is what makes the writing phase so consequential. The writers who feel that tension and work inside it instead of ignoring it are the ones producers actually trust.

As a writer, I have realized that I cannot do it alone!

There are four elements or groups of people involved: The story, written by the writer (this is the person who ignites the fire); the actors who give life to the characters; the director who brings magic and essential elements to the story; and finally, the editing team that puts all the pieces together.

Therefore, as a writer, my main issue is bringing everyone who shares the same vision together.

I love this post Sandra Isabel. I think I'm going to print it out and attach it to every contract I sign from here on out. My biggest challenge right now? Time. I'm grateful for the source of income that provides for my family. I just wish I could focus on what I love and provide at the same time.

Ah I do this as well! For my feature, I have a certain set of songs that set the tone by lyrics or melody and sometimes even describe the dynamic between certain characters. it makes sense in my mind anyway!

Ashley Renee, I listen to music most of the time I'm working on scripts...and I'm looking forward to getting back to listening to it ALL THE TIME when I'm writing.

What I listen to depends on the kind of screenplay (or TV pilot in the case of "Edna's Garage") I'm working on. (Speaking of "Edna's Garage..." when I wrote that pilot out, I listened to a lot of records from New Orleans R&B artists, since the story took place in America's Big Easy.)

Love that. I'm big on techno and electronic scores—The Social Network and the Industry HBO score are in heavy rotation. Cold, propulsive, and somehow makes writing tense dialogue feel like a sport. Do you have a go-to track for when you're stuck?

This is a great question! When I write (and I say this as a musician), I prefer quiet. I think it's because I'm worried that if I'm listening to something, it could influence how I write, and I don't think I want that necessarily. I want the scene to decide that, which means focusing on the character, the world, etc., and wondering what does it demand for sound?

Later, though, when I'm not writing, I will listen to music on shuffle through the lens of that scene I'm thinking about. I will imagine the scene in my head, and as the music plays, try to notice how it makes me feel, think, or re-think something.

Thank you for sharing your playlist. I would be so happy to listen to your favorite songs.

I also love listening to music and songs while writing. It helps my mind feel calm and focused. And somehow, each story becomes attached to a specific song or piece of music.

If I listen to Il Divo ballads, hhh, even though I do not understand the lyrics, they take me back to the days when I was writing the Arabic version of The Disabled Puzzle.

And when I listen to romantic guitar strings, they bring me back to the journey of The Silent PFC War.

Would love to hear your thoughts and feedback.

it amazing man, i.am also an animator as well.

I would love to connect with you