As for suggestions, S t o w a w a y is only very loosely traced out; it is nowhere nearly as developed as two of the others that were in our top five. Perhaps that was its appeal? One senses the potential in it. Our imaginations run wild with the potential. I think that the story needs to be clearly delineated before any attempt at a screenplay. It is like a well-crafted, crystal bottle that plays with the light and makes its contents look exquisite and appealing. We still need to agree upon the wine (the contents) that fill that piece.

imo... we should got by RRRR's recommendation and settle on two or three writers, (and yes, even an editor, and probably a "show-runner" type to act as chief producer to oversee all the stages, departments, and total story development and execution. As for the writing, imo, we should (1st) pick those roles and get the writers to work on their own webpage, to agree on story amongst that group; (2nd) get the core writing team to agree on an outline to present to the total group; (3rd) after unanimous approval, move to drawing out definable beats to the story; (4th) upon group approval, move to write it out as a treatment (i.e. a short story); (5th) upon approval, reform that story into a rough-draft screenplay; (6th) upon that approval; develop a 1st draft screenplay. At this point, as feedback continues to come in from the total group, the two or three writers can keep refining the screenplay into second, third and final drafts. Perhaps hiring out professional proofreaders would be advantageous at this point. Meanwhile, once we have a 1st draft -- the show-runner and the directors can start to plan out the how-to process. (This could be done now, at this pre-screenplay stage, but I think (a) story must be king and (b) whereas the details of the participants must always be considered -- such as ability, access to budget, or not, experience, geography, etc. -- this should not necessarily dictate story: story should be crafted only with those things in mind, not the other way around).

I think the power of this project comes from its (nearly) sheer originality, from its democratic process and from the zeal of its participants. We should protect that to see this through to the end and to maintain or enhance its inherent appeal. Nevertheless, I think to elect a show-runner will be necessary to keep this ambitious project from unraveling and to ensure that it remains coherent and unified enough to be competitive in the motion picture marketplace. To avoid the (fear of a) show-runner evolving into megalomanic that derails this, a sound choice as to who that person should be can be tempered with a group commitment to keep the story as king (as opposed to any one person being in charge just for the sake of being in charge). That show-runner would have to be accountable to the story. The story would have to dictate all of his/her choices. And all along, the group is agreeing on the story.

Don't worry @paginate! This things happen all the time in the forum world. ;)

I like your approach. I only fear that with so many stages (not so many for a conventional project but maybe too many for an online collaborative thing like this) the project will get stuck in development hell at some point. In any case my suggestions for choosing the writer (or writing team) were probably too simplistic anyway. Maybe an intermediate approach would be the right thing to do. I don't know. Let's hear what the rest of the guys have to say.

Well, I for one will take a crack at it.

So, we have at least 2 now who will work on it. I think one or two more should suffice!

And yes, I agree with @atticusd that we can't have the script writing process too complicated.. IMO we should give free hands to the writer and editor (whoever it is) to develop the whole thing as soon as we have decided on a particular writer or team of writers. I suggest that if there are someone who wants to collaborate and write as a team (I have bad experiences with "forced" collaboration), they should start now at this point to create the treatment together..

That sounds good, Imaginate.. I remember @thepalalias offering to be an editor.

IMO; once we have selected the script to go forward with (the writer, and then the editor) we should give the writing team a couple of months at least to go as far as they can with the script - and maybe then open up for comments rather than more voting.

I offer myself as a proofreader / collaborator type -- for the writer team to use me as a first-wave second opinion (throughout all the stages of pitch to final draft). I recommend Google Doc for this process, so we can see other's comments and comment on comments, etc. Great initiative, Imaginate, to get you three going on a beat-sheet and treatment before March 1st! I'm not opposed to that and lend my vote to you, Philip and Martin going ahead.

I agree that beat sheets and treatments are both important. Perhaps we could move beat sheets up to the week before March 1, and have treatments due on the 1st as suggested. This will allow for others to chime (unofficially) in a bit early.

As Imaginate said, 25 pages is just too much. We have less than a month and we haven't yet agreed on what we should do next. Besides it would be more work for the people involved having to read 25xN pages, being N the number of potential writers. In my opinion we should keep it short and simple. A beat sheet or a really short story (2000 words or so) and maybe a couple of scenes should be more than enough to see what kind of writer we'd be talking about and whether people would want the movie written by him or not.

I didnt get to vote on the poll but im thumbs up on atticus idea, i like the concept of the supernatural power on the backround and the character conflict being the main force.

im affraid tought, of two things if i may say so:

• spectators dont understanding whats going on.
• looking too much like the movie jumper (please no offense)

also im concerned with no using the strengh of our global team and locations.

anyhow seems we can pull this out, please dont let anyone excluded, too much hollywood like production may make it harder for some!

Cheers.

Ok, does my proposed plan sound good to everyone? Let's make something official before the weekend.

I think the layout of how the treatment is made is up to the individual writer - let's just decide on some limits, like 3000 words maximum including script pages and beat sheet.. (equals about 3 semi dense a4) and restrict all imagery to stills (maximum of 10) at this point. This should be enough to provide a clear vision.

And if the deadline for the writers is moved a week ahead, that should not be a problem.

(sorry for bumping in, but I think we can keep it simple in terms of presentation guidelines and voting).

Ok. For the sake of time, here is the official skinny. Anyone putting themselves forward as a potential writer should submit before the 25th of February up to but not exceeding 8 pages of wonderfulness, which should include a beat sheet and some script pages. We need at this point to get into full concrete beats/plot outlines, and we need to see examples of each person's script writing capabilities.

If the writer feels compelled to include more than just script pages and beat sheets, that is fine. But those two things I think we need to see for sure. 8 pages should be more than enough space for a good writer to capture an idea and give us a taste of their talent.

I will just ask, is there anyone who ABSOLUTELY can't get with this plan of action? If not, we will move forward. Speak now or forever hold your lunch.