Battlefield Earth Screenwriter Accepts Razzie

An anonymous reader writes "The New York Post has a story about J.D. Shapiro, and his gracious acceptance of a Razzie award for writing Battlefield Earth. He first offers an apology to anyone who has seen it, then he offers a funny, outsider's perspective of dealing with Scientologists, and the subsequent mangling of his script for what was once allegedly referred to by John Travolta as 'The Schindler's List of Sci-Fi.'"

Comments

Why?

[zippthorne]

I mean, he did the best he could. Do you really think someone else would have come up with a better screen play from the same source material?

Re:Why?

[M. Baranczak]

If we believe his story, then the original screenplay was nothing at all like the finished product. The Scientologists asked him to totally rewrite it, he refused, they fired him and got someone else to rewrite it. So at that point it became a choice between taking his name off the credits or getting paid. I'm honestly not sure what I would have done in that situation.

Re:Why?

[Tiger4]

Writers, uhhh shall we say, fictionalize, about this situation all the time.

They, like all of us, have certain principles they will not compromise. They also have a lot of things they would happily, or not so happily, do for money, if the money is right. Someone asked for changes to his precious baby of a script. It happens all the time. Nothing new about that. Certainly not unique to Scientology being attached. The only thing to know here is where the tearing point really was. They wanted changes. Did he really just refuse, or was it more of a negotiation, "I can add that scene X, but I need to rework Y", "No, add X and leave Y. Don't touch Z either", "but Z won't make sense anymore! Howabout..."? This goes on for a while until someone gives up. For the right price, the writer caves. After enough silliness, the writer says, "I'm out", or the producer says it for him.

But don't buy into the Writer's Crusade for Artistic Purity. They're craftsmen, like anyone else, and they give the client, more or less what they ask for.

Re:Why?

[NibbleG]

For a long time I wondered why John Travolta, being the scientologist that he is, thought that he was actually paying tribute to Hubbord. I read the book, and I loved it. Then I realized all scientologists are fucking nuts... thats it... there is no extra step called profit, they are just nuts.

Re:Why?

[Tiger4]

The novel isn't good. It is however a page turner. Hubbard was a good pulp writer, and Battlefield Earth is pretty much a pulp cliffhanger series, 1000 pages long. Lots of short chapters, in which our intrepid hero is always about to be killed or captured. The story never makes a lot of sense, but its fun watching it go along. It would make a great half hour summer filler series. Each chapter feels about like The Venture Brothers level of dramatization. As a movie, you have to cut out way too much to get the right campy feel.

Re:Why?

[nibbles2004]

not only take there money but make Scientology look like the idiots they are, win, win

Re:Why?

[Hurricane78]

Who would make such a contract in the first place? I do work under a contract that gives me money for the work done, NO MATTER WHAT!
Just like when you buy no-name stuff, you still have to pay for it! (Normal price for no-name, premium price for getting the right to put my name on it... if I allow it at all.)

The above rule makes as stating in the contract, that for every time your client blinks while reading it, the costs go up by 20%. Completely retarded.

Re:Why?

[DaTroof]

I don't think he presented it as cut and dried as you infer. According to his own account, he refused the second set of notes, not the first, and there was clearly some discussion about it.

If the client's new demands threaten to damage the project irreparably, I can understand any craftsman's desire to distance himself from it. Sometimes "Yes, but..." isn't enough. Sometimes you need to say, "This is so unfeasible that I'd rather not take any responsibility for it." Hence my ridiculous example of a papier mache watch. Even though you're giving the client exactly what he wants, the end result makes you look incompetent. You're the clockmaker, not him. You should have known better.

Granted, there's more objectivity involved in writing an entertaining screenplay than making a functioning clock, but either way, the client is totally free to do what the producers of Battlefield Earth did: ignore the craftsman's advice and let their own vision lead them to colossal failure.

Re:Why?

[mestar]

"Ellison would use his 'Cordwainer Bird' pseudonym to both distance himself from work that he felt had been mangled beyond repair"

Well, so nice to see that it worked so well.

Re:Why?

[Frosty Piss]

The problem is, attaching your name to something that you know will be a disaster is bad for your career in the long term.

You're thinking in *normal* situations. We are talking about Hollywood here. Different rules.

Re:Why?

[The Archon V2.0]

not only take there money but make Scientology look like the idiots they are, win, win

Given that he claims to have turned in a GOOD script that was hacked up, I think it's less about making them look like idiots and more about sitting back and letting their natural idiocy shine through.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sir Nick Knack"? Really? He might as well have gone with Oddjob or Jaws.

Truth be told, that's probably why the refused to let him use it. I mean it's nowhere near as plausible a name as Cordwainer Birds, is it?

Re:Why?

[dargaud]

[BE is] arguably better than Mission Earth (which was a 10 book series that I think violates the UN Human Rights Charter to make someone read)

Having read both, I still want to defend BE (the book) like the GP did. It may not be deep but it IS entertaining. On the other hand I fully agree with your assessment on Mission Earth: that thing is guantanamesque torture. I kept hoping for something to happen but only the 1st and 10th book have anything that can remotely be called situation development (and let's not even talk about character development). It's a perfect example of starting with one (bad) book and saying: "so, now, how can we extend it to 10 volumes without adding any extra content?"

Re:Why?

[geekoid]

It's a fun and entertaining read.

, "OMG, this is some crazy bat-shit from a whacked-out conspiracy nut" until you learn that Levenda is an extremely well-respected, erudite and diligent historian who carefully sources every single item"
So? You acts as if those two things can't coexist int he same person.

Re:Why?

[Mursk]

I think you missed his point. As I read it, he's not talking about the radioactive material itself decaying, but the effects of the radiation on the other components of the bomb over time. I don't know enough about it to say either way, but I agree that after 1000 years the uranium/plutonium would likely be the least of your worries in terms of functionality.

This guy rocks

[GNUALMAFUERTE]

Now, looking back at the movie with fresh eyes, I can't help but be strangely proud of it. Because out of all the sucky movies, mine is the suckiest.
In the end, did Scientology get me laid? What do you think? No way do you get any action by boldly going up to a woman and proclaiming, "I wrote Battlefield Earth!" If anything, I'm trying to figure out a way to bottle it and use it as birth control. I'll make a mint!

Read the whole interview. It's totally worth it. A mans odyssey while trying to get laid at all costs.

The reason why Battlefield Earth Won the Razzie

[djdevon3]

The reason why Battlefield Earth deserved worst film of the decade was because it tried to be a serious film and fail Fail FAIL FIALED epiccccc fail. The premise wasn't bad, the execution is what killed it.

Didn't think it through....

[drjuggler]

FTFA: "In the end, did Scientology get me laid? What do you think?" That's why I became Unitarian! Not much screenplay material here oddly enough...

ALERT-- Important Notice

[MarkvW]

This time, TFA really, really, is a good read!!!

No way it was the worst

[jdayer]

I can't even begin to talk about how much worse other movies have been. Every year a few hundred movies that are so bad DVDs are never made of them. In a nut shell there are millions of people who are interested in being involved in movies. Some of these people end up on lists of potential investors that production companies purchase. When I say production companies I mean con artists, but, con artists just this side of legal. These guys solicit money from these "interested investors", they put together a really bad film crew, some really bad actors and they make a movie. Sometimes they hire a has been or two for walk ons, they put together a lame party for the "investors" with the has beens as main course. Typically the only distribution these movies get is a short run (sometimes the producers make the copies themselves) that is sent out to the investors. The movie is submitted around to film festivals, distributors and is summarily rejected by everyone. I have some internet friends in the production business that complain about these losers because it makes it harder for independents to raise money. Not to hard though, there are always people who want to be in the movie business.

Reason for a huge flop

[mestar]

You need a bunch of very powerful people with no connection to reality. Nobody can stop them, nobody can correct them. Thus that movie.

I won't begrudge anyone a paycheck, but . . .

[SlappyBastard]

Did this guy really not think the involvement of the Church of Scientology was gonna cause the whole endeavor to get a tiny bit weird?

Also, there were major red flags. For example, he says that he pretty much repeatedly insulted them to their faces and they just kept on with the offer. It's pretty clear they were using him to get L Ron's unsellable script through the door far enough that the studios would accept there was no going back. They used him to front a sellable, perhaps even awesome, script to the studio when they knew all along the were filming their version of the movie.

They didn't bat an eyelash at his misbehavior because he was their frontman.

It's pretty psychopathic behavior when you get right down to it.

Re:I thought it was a good movie

[CharlyFoxtrot]

Science Fiction != Bullshit.

Just saying.

Any sufficiently advanced technology will be indistinguishable from complete bullshit.
"You can't do that, that's complete bullshit."

I actually saw it at the theaters!

[Aaron32]

I remember this movie vividly as it's my single most biggest disappointing movie, EVER!

Seeing the previews I just KNEW it would be a fantastic show and on the same level as The Matrix. Boy was I ever wrong. My friends still to this day rub it in my face that I saw it at the theaters.

I was so let down, it's not even funny. I think what really clenched it was when the cavemen taught themselves how to "break in" a harrier jet the same way they would break in broncos.

However, the good side of it is I'll never forget this lesson, and IMDB is my friend when questioning whether I'm about to see another Battlefield Earth.