GENRE GEEK

One of the more popular set of classes at the Screenwriting Expo this year is bound to be those centering on the horror genre. Julie Marsh will be one of the many guests covering the subject. The Los Angeles-based producer and writer has been involved with feature film story development for more than a decade and has become sort of a genre expert. The self proclaimed “geek” is also the co-author of an upcoming book on story analysis and a consultant for DEKAfilm Diversified, New Visions Fellowship and various other writers, producers and managers through her consulting company Your Best Draft. You may have seen or heard about one of her most recent projects and not even known it as she was head writer for the short spoof “Cats On A Plane,” which is quickly become an internet sensation. Here Julie talks to PollyStaffle.com about horror, some of it’s psychology, the difference in male and female horror fans, what the future may hold for the genre, as well as a bit about what she’ll be discussing at Expo 5 and some of her future projects.

CCF: The first thing I wanted to get into was how it came about that you are teaching sessions on horror and science fiction at the Expo?

JM: Part of the reason I choose horror is I talk pretty broadly about the process of screenwriting and story... Any kind of story. How to tell a story, how to build tension and how to meet and manipulate expectations of genre or storytelling in general. I always find when you are talking about something the best way to hold people’s attention is to use the most extreme examples. Of course the examples in horror stories are as extreme as they can be. When you are talking about something like a point of view everyone remembers, it’s kind of burned into your memory, the point of view in “Halloween” when Jamie Lee Curtis is standing on the door step peering out into the darkness. Everybody remembers that. It’s both a visceral and visual memory and an interesting example. Also, horror films succeed or fail very spectacularly. That is part of the reason I chose it sort of as the medium to discuss storytelling in general. The other reason was it’s kind of is a window on another part of the entertainment business that I think most people from the outside don’t really have a good understanding of - how independent film works. You know you can follow all the press releases and the celebrities to get a snap shot of how studio Hollywood works. But independent Hollywood is quite different. It’s much more sort of nonlinear and decentralized. And yet we see a lot of it. Especially right now since it is very successful, as it was in the mid 1990s. So when I saw that coming back around I thought, well this is a good way to talk about that. It gives screenwriters a better understanding of Hollywood in general.

CCF: Are you a big fan of these movies?

JM: Yes, I am a big fan of genre movies. I admit to being a true blue science fiction geek. I spent four days at Comic Con this year and last year. I love science fiction and I love good horror movies. I think I lean a little bit more toward the ghost story. The gruesome, visceral, violent, frailty of the human form sort of horror movies don’t necessarily appeal to me. I understand why they work, but they don’t appeal to me personally. Not to discourage them in any way because people obviously really respond to them. You know, there is a reason. The basis for a lot of genre films is thematic. It goes to our very core. To our instincts and the bottom of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs in terms of where our fears are seeded. It’s frailty of the human form. Those are all down in the survival instincts - sex, safety and subsistence. So that’s why people respond as strongly as they do to horror movies. It’s really a deeply seeded genre.

CCF: What are some of your favorite genre films if you had to pick a few?

JM: Honestly, I love “The Haunting.” The Robert Wise film. I wouldn’t say it’s my favorite, but I love it just because the use of off screen space is so powerful. One of the reasons for the gruesome movies that come out today is it is so hard to shock people. A movie like “The Haunting,” if you watch in the right setting or can see it projected, the off screen space really opens up something in storytelling and in the genre that is incredibly powerful. It kind of forces the individual viewer to reach into their own imagination and come back with their worst case scenario. So when there are these noises out in the hallway in that movie and all you are getting are little shots of architectural detail like a jiggling door knob. In your mind you are imagining what is in the hallway and that is a so much more subjective experience. It just seems really powerful to me. I think eventually you do have to see the monster though. I actually thought the M. Night Shyamalan movie. The one with the aliens...

CCF: Oh yeah, I was actually thinking of that one as you were saying that - “Signs.”

JM: It was so good at concealing the monster. I do think if you are going to eventually show the monster it has to be spectacular. If you are going to hide the ball, the reveal has to be something else. I think probably people’s level of disappointment with the monster in that was high. The same a little bit with “The Village.” You have already accessed your worse case scenario and your expectations are very specific to you, very individual and very powerful... But there are other horror movies I really love. I love “Alien.” I think “Alien” is definitely a horror movie. I think it’s brilliant. I love “Session 9.” In that case, I love the creepy use of the environment as a character. It’s set in this old decrepit mental hospital and people are removing asbestoses...

CCF: I agree with you on that one. That is one of the most underrated horror films that has come out recently. It seems like it for whatever reason didn’t catch on, but “Session 9” is a wonderful movie. Definitely creepy.

JM: Yeah, the haunting use of the voice over. Eck. It’s just top to bottom creepy. It’s not really a ghost story even. It’s another one of those like “The Haunting” where you come out of it and you’re not sure if it was the psychology that was all that was at work in the thing. Very disturbing. In terms of literature and I’m not really sure that I have ever seen it really well executed, but “Frankenstein” is one of my favorite pieces of literature. I think it really rides the line between science fiction and horror. It’s really powerful. Part of it is because, I think going back to thematic material, the issue of identity. It’s the same reason zombie movies are so powerful. The identity, the loss of identity, the lack of identity. It’s what makes “Frankenstein” really interesting. I think the best adaptation of that particular story is “Frankenstein Unbound,” which is oddly enough a science fiction take on the story. I’m a geek.

CCF: I’m a huge fan of the “Frankenstein” story as well. I actually like the original “Frankenstein” movie. I can still watch it today and it’s powerful.

JM: Even “Young Frankenstein.” Oh my God. It’s one of the all time great movies. (LOL) It’s not a good adaptation but it does work. I think because comedy and horror use some of the same strategies. The surprise, expectation and all that other stuff. It’s kind of funny sometimes how those two go hand and hand effectively.

CCF: You hit on something early I wanted to talk about. You said you didn’t really care for the blood and guts type of horror and that’s generally the opinion of most females it seems. They like the scary aspect, but they don’t like the extreme violence and gore. To me it seems like there is kind of a split with horror movies these days. You’ve got the PG-13s like “The Grudge” and “The Ring” on one hand and then you’ve got the other end of the spectrum with the mean spirited, really grizzly throwback movies like “Hostel,” which are even too mean spirited for me. According to Lions Gate there are getting to be more and more female horror fans. Is that split in the genre due to the increase number of female fans or what do you think?

JM: You know what I think it is? It just depends on what scares you and what is your core fear. Some people respond really well to vampire movies, which have a very sexual subtext to them. I know some people who will see any zombie movie and again those are about identity. I think it’s tied into whatever personal trauma you had as a child. It’s what ever lurks in your closet is kind of what you end up responding to on some unconscious level. I think that’s natural that it breaks along gender lines. If you think about it it’s the core difference of the sexes that come into play. Men tend to respond more to the visceral stuff and women tend to respond more to the psychological horror. One of the biggest things you can find between two different brains is gender. We’re just hardwired differently. I think it makes sense when you are talking about stuff that goes to really core thematic concerns like frailty of the human form. People that are wired to hunt and respond more visually are going to respond more to the more graphic and gruesome subgenre of horror. The sort of slaughter fest. Women have a different integrated brain. It’s not to say one is better or worse. They’re just different and they are now kind of scientifically showing that. Like I said I’m a geek so I do think about this kind of stuff. I think it does come into play and then it comes into play in the market. They have to market to men and women differently. I think women like movies like “The Ring” because it has such a good female protagonist. I think women sometimes have interesting roles in the movies because of a way of rounding out the marketability of a film. A movie like “The Ring” has a really strong female lead character in it, which makes women more interested in seeing it. I think it is a very dynamic thing. If you think like a producer and I kind of do. I understand marketing, I understand genre and marketable of scripts. These things do come into play and they are considerations. I don’t know. And then there are “Snakes on a Plane.” (LOL)

CCF: Is that where the whole slasher subgenre kind of came from? You know with the one female surviving. Was that because of marketing? Is that where it came from originally?

JM: From marketing? I don’t think so. When you look back at movies like “Halloween” I don’t think that was marketing coming into play. Modern film marketing really came about after the great blockbuster “Jaws.” Honestly, movies were just a different ball game before that. It was really the late 70’s that changed the way movies are sold to audiences where demographics really came into play. These older movies, I think it is just women are perceived as being a bit more vulnerable since they aren’t as physically strong. That increases the stakes and the risk. That makes these movies more interesting to watch. The less powerful person outwitting and overcoming or some how this instinct to survive coming through. The more vulnerable the character who survives the whole thing makes it more empowering and uplifting.

CCF: Right. I was just thinking maybe it was just a subconscious thing. But maybe it was like you said the more empowering aspect of it. I think that is something key to making these movies work. You’ve got to like the character and you’ve got to really fear for them and for them to over come, it’s a big deal.

JM: Then it’s a greater triumph. When it is the least likely hero. It’s also more personal to each of us. Each of us wants to think we would step up and be heroic like that.

CCF: And going back to “Hostel” which I brought up. I really hate that movie. I don’t know if you saw it, but the characters in that I did not like and I just wanted them to die...

JM: (LOL)

CCF: and I wanted the villains to die as well. You can’t have that and it work.

JM: It is the level of identification too. It’s not just women as the character that emerges. I also like a movie like “Pitch Black,” which is a sci-fi/horror genre blend. You’ve got some really strong characters and you’ve also got a nice array of interesting well developed characters. And it’s scary. The idea of what’s in the darkness, going back to the use of off screen space. Again a lot of times the survivor is the one who can think. The smart person can outwit the monster, so it’s the nerdy/geeky guy that pulls it out.

CCF: With more and more females getting into writing and directing and the number increasing with the fans, are we going to get more and more women involved in genre projects and eventually see like a female Wes Craven emerge? It seems like there would be a lot of untapped themes and ideas since we have been dealing with so many male horror movies for so many years and we might get some different takes on a lot of things.

JM: I don’t see why not. Especially since the independent end is so less establishment driven. It just requires a certain amount of tenacity to get projects made in that environment. And the women who want to make horror movies.... The thing is, women’s brains, and this isn’t being sexist, our skills tend lie more in relational situations then in the sort of hunt and kill. I think some of the story lines would be more mysterious and complex then just the straight ahead horror movies. The horror genre is really successful now, but this is a cycle. Right now people love horror movies. That may partly have to do with the political environment. Part of the reason I feel like there was such a big zombie cycle a couple of years ago was people felt so alienated from one another. You know, “How could someone possibly think like that?” Our country is so divided politically. You just can’t put yourself in the place of someone else. There’s sort of a breakdown of empathy. I kind of look for the seeds of some of these cycles as they come up and the raw brutality of some of them. There are people out there fighting and dying. There are really brutal, real life circumstances in downtown Baghdad, so I think on some level we know that is taking place somewhere.

CCF: Yeah we had the really great boom of horror in the 70’s at the close of the Vietnam war and also cycles with film noir right after world war two and you’ve got some of that coming back as well. It hasn’t boomed like the horror...

JM: Yeah, but it will. As a matter of a fact one of the projects as a producer that I am actually developing right now is something I’m calling a vampire noir. It’s a pretty straightforward Sam Spade movie, but the damsel in distress that really needs the help of the detectives turns out to be a vampire in distress. It’s a twist of both genres and it sort of deconstructs both of the genres to an extent. Any time you reach the end of a cycle you sort of get into the films that deconstruct the genre a little bit. It was written by Michael Reeves, who has tons of credits. He’s writing hardcover “Star Wars” books right now. He was a story editor on “Gargoyle” and has done a lot of TV animated stuff like “Batman.” It’s a competent story and I think it’s interesting for that very reason. And as far as noir we just had “Brick.”

CCF: Yes. I loved that movie.

JM: It was an interesting deconstruction of the teen stuff. I do really enjoy and appreciate the cycles as they come and go. I think horror definitely has its place right now. I think after 9/11 a lot of us feel really insecure. People feel insecure and that is perpetuated by the media. Horror creates an effective catharsis for that. That’s really what we are looking for in our entertainment on some level, the catharsis.

CCF: That whole boom though of horror, is it coming to an end fairly soon? Because I know there are people like me that were huge horror fans before all this and we’re getting sick of it. We’re like “Okay. Done. Enough with the sequels and remakes already. You don’t have to remake all of these old 70’s classics.”

JM: I think the end is on the horizon. From what I’ve heard and I don’t know if I can really confirm this, but the scuttlebutt is the distributors are becoming less interested in horror. Producers are still on the band wagon, but the distributors may have cooled a little bit. The market is somewhat flooded with it. Making a horror movie fits this other Hollywood. This independent, low budget Hollywood. People respond to it so viscerally that it doesn’t need to be big and glossy. If people are scared, they’re scared. That’s why Roger Corman had such a long history in Hollywood. He’s been tapped into that for such a long time and he really understands you don’t need to spend a lot of money to scare people. So right now with the technology changes and the ability to make movies with a few thousand dollars, the market is a bit cluttered right now with stuff that may or not be good.

CCF: Will it help bring down any of the bigger Hollywood epic “let me spend a hundred million dollars on this movie” stuff at all? It seems like that kind of stuff has taken a hit. I don’t know if it is from the success of horror, but that sort of cinema seems to be hurting.

JM: Well, I don’t know. And then there are “Snakes on a Plane.”

CCF: (LOL)

JM: It’s the “The Blair Witch Project” of studio horror movies I guess. (LOL) A lot of times it just comes down to marketing. It really does. Marketing is really crucial and nobody can market movies like the studios can. They’ve used an independent mode of marketing by accessing the internet. I’m still scratching my head over the whole “Snakes on a Plane” thing. But you’ve got to be huge for just a weekend. It’s just like “Blair Witch.” I’m sure the hype is so much bigger than the movie.

CCF: Yeah, I don’t get it.

JM: I don’t get it either. (LOL)

CCF: Let me see, I want to get to some of the stuff you are going to talk about at the Expo.

JM: Oh yeah.

CCF: What are some of the things you’re going to be covering with the two sessions?

JM: If I had my wishes, I would like to see science fiction come back in a strong way in the next cycle. On thematic levels it’s about societal fears. It would be nice to imagine people are thinking about how to make society better and listening to cautionary tales. I’ll be talking about some of that and the nature of science fiction. In the horror class, I’ll be talking about a lot of the stuff we’ve been talking about in a bit more detail, the cycle and really expectations. Stories just turn out to be about expectations. Rewarding them, frustrating them, teasing them and ultimately gratifying them. There are some other really amazing people that are going to be at the Expo this year that are involved in horror. Leigh Whannel from “Saw,” Stephen Susco who wrote “The Grudge.” Ron Shusett regarding “Alien” and Stu Gordon, who did “Re-Animator.” I love the Expo. It’s like my favorite weekend. Although I love Comic Con too. I think they have really done a well job of developing it over the past five years. I’ve been watching and have attended each year. I think they’ve really responded and made it better each year. It’s becoming more valuable to people besides just writers. There’s so much going on. It’s really amazing. I’m a big fan of that many writers in one place. It just makes me happy. (LOL) I just feel like at the Expo you can tap anyone on the shoulder and have a perfectly good conversation with them.

CCF: Yeah. I went two years ago and I just feel like I’m getting better at writing just sitting in the same room with William Goldman and people like that.

JM: Oh yeah. Absolutely. And they’ve really tricked out the contest this year with the comic book prizes. Cross publishing and stuff is really key to the market right now. Understanding other markets is so key. That’s why I go to Comic Con, Book Expo and all these other things. I want to understand how all of these businesses work. So for them to bring in the graphic novel prize and now getting Pixar to come in with the animation. I’ve been suggesting for many years to get more TV stuff and they have done all of that. I think it is a great event and it’s not like Comic Con were they are selling a lot of stuff and the floor is all about memorabilia. This really is just a great resource of information and wisdom about the craft of writing and the business. I think there are plenty of writers with lots of great screenplays under their bed who will never be successful because they will never manage to find their creative professionalism. Craft and professionalism have to be developed side by side. If you end up with one and not the other you just will not have a real career in Hollywood. As I often tell my clients through my consulting business, it’s the service sector job - writing. You need a reliable and repeatable writing process. I think a lot of people when they are writing a screenplay they feel like they are writing a lotto ticket. But if you’ve seen the statistics, a huge percentage of people that win the lottery declare bankruptcy within a couple of years. It’s a great parallel. and analogy for screenwriting. You have to have the relationships in place to take advantage of a big sale, an option or whatever it is you are doing. All the resources that you need, wisdom and advice and the understanding of the marketplace, you’ll find bits and pieces of it in every room at the Expo. I highly encourage screenwriters to attend.

CCF: Yeah and I think the way it’s getting to be, especially this year with the sessions on directing and producing, it’s more than just writers. If you are a filmmaker. If you are in film in anyway it’s very valuable.

JM: Absolutely and I would love to see more writer-producers. It’s a tough hyphenate, but actually one of the reason I love speaking at Expo is because I can get in front of a room of screenwriters and explain to them that until they have a contract with someone else that has that title, they are the producer, the director and actor of their movie. Until someone else comes aboard to do one of those jobs, you’re it. You are the producer and you need to make the contacts and kind of do the work of the producer. As you are writing the script, you need to direct the script. You need to deliver the images the way an editor will deliver them in a finished film. It has to look like a movie when you read the screenplay. I love any opportunity to be able to explain to writers that they all should be writer-producers. I think the information they need to do that more effectively can be found at places like the Expo.

CCF: Getting back to related stuff we were talking about earlier, when writing a true genre piece and you’ve got these expectations that are built in, how does a writer make sure to meet the expectations, but at the same time stay away from clichés? It seems like there is a real balance there.

JM: Well there are a couple of different kinds of expectations. Again this is why I like horror as an example of how to write anything. Take like the expectations of what a vampire is. Everyone sort has a rule set in mind for that. So if you are going to deviate from that, audiences need to know it’s not just because you are dumb. You have to acknowledge the expectation and then deviate. I think a movie like “Blade” does that pretty effectively with day walking vampires. They make a big point of that and use it as a reveal early in the story and you get juice out of that kind of thing. Those expectations are really critical. What I like to say is you set the expectation and then spike the deviation. The expectations should be viewed as resources, not as restraints that way when you do something fresh, when you give it a new twist or turn, it’s spectacular instead of it being straight ahead. Instead of people wondering if you knew vampires can’t see themselves in the mirror or not, they know you knew that and understand you are adjusting it a little. You know what I mean?

CCF: Yeah.

JM: So, I think that’s the way you do it. You use it to set up whatever it is you are going to do. Your fresh material should be spotlighted as much as anything by what people expect. Take what people expect and turn their expectations. That’s really where surprise comes from. That’s the source of comedy and that’s the source of shock. Just take what someone expects and give them something different.

CCF: With horror it just seems like a very fine line. Specifically if you are talking about certain subgenres like a slasher film. If you made one and then your last character to live isn’t a female, it’s not a slasher film any more. You know what I mean? It just seems like you’ve got to meet so many expectations.

JM: Well I don’t know. By the time you get to the end of a story, it’s about whether you gratified. You subtly create the expectations. Something I see a lot with writers is they kind of get to the end of the story and there’s sort of just, you know, the whole tacked on ending thing. The way to overcome that is in the rewrite. You go back and you create the expectation so whatever it is you want to happen in the end is a satisfying ending. There are more than just the expectations that come along with the genre. There are the expectations you create as a writer. So you generate those expectations through characters, through their behavior and you follow through. You set things up very meticulously. It’s not just you needed to use and acknowledge existing expectations. The other key is to carefully construct expectations that will lead the audience to feel a certain way in the end. It’s about manipulating all kind of expectations and bringing as many as possible to the table. That’s how you create tension. That’s how you color things. Asking a question is often one of the most powerful ways to create an expectation. You ask a single question up front. An example I like to use is there was one question that drove seven years of television because it was a very powerful question. That was what happened to Mulder’s sister. I think it was seven, how many years was “X-Files” on?

CCF: I don’t know. I wasn’t a fan. (LOL)

JM: Most murder mysterious are set up like that. There’s a murder. Who killed them? Will they be caught? Those are two questions. I love “The Bourne Identity.” That movie asks so many questions in the first ten minutes it’s ridiculous. It’s a good screenplay because of that. It creates tons of tension. There can be characters asking those questions aloud and the questions can be implied. But that’s how you create those expectations. The moment you ask the question and the moment you answer it are linked together. The further apart you can put them, the more tension there is between them. They’re story tactics. The difference between an amateur writer and a professional is the amateur is sort of controlled by the narrative. The professional has a little bit more mastery over the expectations. The difference really is just experience and thoughtful study of the craft and sometimes raw talent. That can help too. (LOL)

CCF: We mentioned film noir earlier. With the way it’s slowly picking up steam, just curious why you aren’t teaching on it at the Expo?

JM: I don’t know. I do enjoy that genre. I actually co-wrote and co-produced a short film (“Silver Patriot”) last summer that was a film noir serial for the 48 Hour Film Festival and it won a few awards. I don’t know, honestly, that there would be that many people show up for it. Last year I spoke on the action genre and it was my smallest group. So I’m actually not speaking on it this year because I don’t think action stands very well on its on. I think it needs a blend of another genre to bring something a little more thematic and dynamic to it. It’s more of a mode of story telling like thriller. Noir is a mode of storytelling as well. I can think of a number of subgenres to it and what I would love to see is - now that I am thinking like a producer I’m like, “Ok where can I get one of these.” There’s a whole subgenre called the “Gaslight genre.” It’s movies like “Rebecca,” Hitchcock’s “Suspicion” should have been one and the movie “Gaslight.” It’s a very formulaic story that is repeated and it’s a woman’s story of a whirlwind romance. She’s taken back to his ancestral home and she begins to suspect he is trying to kill her. There are just a whole bunch of movies like that and I think those are kind of fun. But it didn’t occur to me to do noir. Maybe next year, if it indeed gets some attraction as a genre.

CCF:You worked with Arthur Leeds for awhile?

JM: Yeah.

CCF: You didn’t have anything to do with the “3 Ninja” movies did you? I was just curious. (LOL)

JM: I was with him when he did the second or the third or the fourth. I don’t know, there were a bunch of those. I didn’t do story development on them though. A lot of the projects we did are ones he sold. Pitches and stuff that never got made. He though is an uncredited producer when he was still practicing law on “Piranha” for Corman. But he doesn’t like horror movies. I’m not working with him any more and actually when I stopped I was like, “Ahhhh… Now I can address horror.” He’s just one of those people that does not like horror at all. So it was kind of funny for me since I am somewhat fascinated with it.

CCF: What are some of the movies you’ve had a hand in? Are there any that did end up getting made?

JM: Really, most of the ones over the past several years that I’ve had something to do with, a lot of them are in production or not been released. As for the years I worked in development, one of the reasons I decided I wanted to produce was I want to be more active. It’s really hard to get movies made on the studio side of things. They will develop upwards of 40 scripts for every one they make. It ends up being heartbreaking over a long haul spending a lot of time with incredibly talented people on projects that never get made. That’s one of the reasons I like the independent model so much. If you can go find the financing and attach the talent, you can do that. That’s why I have shifted my attention to independent filmmaking a bit more now that I am on my own.

CCF: What are some of the ones you have in development now?

JM: “All Eyes” I’ve been working on with one of my clients. It’s sort of a paranoid somewhat political thriller. The script is still in development on that one. Then we have what I mentioned earlier, the vampire noir script. It’s called “Blood Kiss.” My producing partner just finished producing her first feature with Brendan Sexton and she and I have several other projects we are working on. So, yeah, I’m turning attention to producing. A couple of those happen to be horror movies.

CCF: Well, the paranoid one and the vampire noir sound really interesting. It’s the perfect time for the vampire one.

JM: Yeah, I think so. I’m so genre oriented, so I really love a good twist to a genre and this is a good twist to both genres. Its fun. It operates more like a thriller than a horror movie. There’s violence and vampires in it, but the narrative operates like a film noir story.

CCF: I think that is about it. But lastly, I wanted to get your opinion on how much you feel events like the Expo are able to help an individual writer?

JM: I think any place you can find inspiration to write helps. Here’s the thing, there are a lot of quote/unquote screenwriting gurus out there and I’m not really interested in being one myself. (LOL) But at the same time, everybody sort of needs somebody who thinks like they do. Everyone’s brain works differently. Everyone’s creative process is different. If you can find somebody who writes about the craft that thinks very much like you do, I think you can get a better handle on craft. Anything that inspires you to keep writing is good. I always walk away from the Expo and want to sit down and write. Understanding how the business actually works is crucial to anyone who is really serious about screenwriting. I think creating realistic expectations for yourself and for your career are important and having an understanding of how it all works is invaluable. It is there. People know what they are talking about at the Expo. I’m really looking forward to it.

CCF: I appreciate you taking the time to talk with me. I’ll probably go to at least one of your sessions. I’ll make sure an introduce myself.

JM: Oh great. It will be very nice to meet you. And thanks. Thank you to for your thoughtful questions.

- CCF, August 2006

JULIE’S EXPO SESSIONS

Genre Works: Horror
October 21, 10 a.m.-11:30 a.m.

This session will unlock the potent elements that isolate the horror genre from all others. Examine what makes horror a unique mode of narrative in this ideal story lab for writers of all genres and a classic indie film business model. Looking to build a better monster movie? The solid story tactics will be provided here to do so.

Genre Works: Science Fiction
October 22, 10 a.m.-11:30 a.m.

Decipher the codes that spin new worlds and upend social structures as the focus is on the story tactics that make the science fiction genre tick. Take a dynamic approach to realizing your best intentions within this inventive, challenging genre.