SCREENWRITER/ PRODUCER MARGARET NAGLE:
Yeah, it is, because the people who voted on the award are the people that have won the award in the past. So it’s Tony Kushner and Eric Mann and Justin Lance Black. They're awesome writers, classy guys, who have projects that have taken a very long time to get made and that they’ve had to nurture and protect. So it means a lot, coming from them, because we write with a very character-driven, human interest kind of style. Eric Roth. It’s an interesting list of people who have won it. And they all are always sort of thinking about exposing something going on in the world that nobody was talking about. There’s a theme with winning the Paul Selvin Award. It seem to be about sticking your neck out there with a story that no one’s talking about. And so it’s incredibly validating. And it’s a real honor to get it from my Guild, because the Writers Guild is a great guild. PCC: What had initially fascinated you about the story of the Lost Boys of Sudan? NAGLE: Well, it’s such a shocking story. And it happened on our watch. The ignorance of the United States about Africa. The geography of Africa, the history of Africa. And then you have this story where millions and millions of people have died in a mass genocide. And these children were able to survive. And luckily, a handful of them, percentage-wise, were able to come and have a second chance at life in the United States. So it’s interesting, shining a light at somewhere it’s dark. But I think it’s an intimate, epic story, showing that genocide does happen again and that we have to be really careful. Also, we have immigration policies right now, the children down in Mexico, there are human rights violations with our immigration policy, if you want to take it that far. And what kind of country are we, if we ignore the needs of children, on that level? So the film doesn’t answer these questions. It just raises a lot of questions. And it’s also extremely entertaining and hopeful and it’s very funny. The film is very funny. It’s not what people think it’s going to be. Someone who is very high up in the NGO World For Africa, she said, “Gosh, there are no fly babies in this movie.” And I was like, “What are you talking about?” She goes, “You know - babies with flies on their eyes.” And I was like, “Oh, my God, no! This is nothing like that.” She says, ‘Yeah, but you don’t understand what we deal with every day and how people resist understanding that these stories and what’s happening in these countries, it’s just like all of us. And we’re all the same.” And this isn’t the kind of movie where you have to look away. Actually you kind of lean into it. Audiences who have discovered, it really love it. And it’s been helping to move the conversation about South Sudan forward in other parts of the world, as well, where they can step in and give aid and help bring a positive energy to South Sudan. So it’s a good thing. PCC: Is it always a fine line, balancing the need to entertain, as well as uplift and inform? NAGLE: Oh, yeah, completely. I’m not making a documentary. That’s not what I’m doing. That’s for somebody else to do. You’re trying to get into the personal point of view of someone who’s gone through this. So it pulls you into the story. And it’s the big what-if. Drama is always about what-if. What if this happens to me? Part of the job of writing a play or a movie or a TV show is that you who view it can identify or find your way into the character. And what’s interesting is that, when you write, it’s not about making the character more universal. It’s about making the character more specific to their world. So the more specific you make a character to their world, the more identifiable they actually are. And it’s a misnomer that, if you make a character unlike anyone else, or whatever Hollywood considers like everyone else, those are the characters and the stories that audiences don’t universally love. You have a movie like “Shawshank Redemption” and people in every language relate. It’s the most popular movie in the world. And it’s deeply specific to the world that it’s in. But people go, “I’m just like that that person. I’m just like that character. I identify.” So when you try to blur the edges of a character or a story to make it “appealing,” you actually kill what makes a story identifiable and powerful and will universally connect audiences to it. So, when you take a story like the Lost Boys, it’s actually a story about some brothers and a sister and what they go through. Their story and their relationships, the sibling relationships, the family dynamic - those are universal. Families are in every culture and every language. So I choose to write in the personal. And the things that are historic, those are all in there, but it’s about the personal. So you’re in that point of view, as a viewer. And that’s a better place to be. PCC: When you first go into screenwriting, is it in the back of your mind that, in some small way, you can bring about change through film? NAGLE: Not at all. I think I was just born in Berkeley. I think I was just born with seeing people talk about and feel connected to what was happening in the world. You grow up in Berkeley and you see people putting their neck out for ideals and trying to fight for all people. And whether you agree with the politics of that world or not, I always observed adults putting themselves out there for the suffering or the hidden stories that were happening to people just like them. And using their right of free speech, going back to Mario Savio and that ideal of Berkeley. That Berkeley, more than a radical left, Berkeley the town is founded, to me, on these ideals of free speech. At least the town that I grew up in, I experienced the aftereffect of that, the aftershocks of free speech. So that’s how I learned storytelling was from watching those people in the street, as a really little kid, and what I saw as I walked to school every day. And we lived right by the campus. So I think that had more of an effect on me, and how I write, subconsciously, than anything. PCC: In terms of writing great roles, how beneficial was your background in acting? NAGLE: Yeah, a background in acting is fantastic for a writer, because you’re actually speaking and inhabiting the writing of someone else. So if you’re doing Chekhov or Shaw or Pinter or Bruce Norris’ writing or Tony Kushner, you’re inhabiting their storytelling, the way they arc out drama, the way they create character, the way they resolve things... or don’t resolve them. You are inhabiting and having to make sense of it, because that’s your job as an actor is to make sense of their writing and tell their story. So by doing that, you’re living another writer’s work and being exposed to it on this really internal level. And I think that so many actors are great writers. And a lot of writers and directors don’t talk about their acting training. But like Clint Eastwood or Winnie Holzman, there are so many people who studied acting first and then they realized that they wanted to tell stories in a different way. But that acting training is right there under the surface of all their work. I think acting is essential for being a writer. And I don’t think it messes up your original voice. I think it empowers you to use your voice, because, when you act in a play or a movie, the writing, if it’s good, it’s very much out of the voice of that screenwriter. Justin Lance Black doesn’t write like anybody else. And Cameron Crowe doesn’t write like anybody else. And whoever. Or Matt Weiner or whoever. What made “Mad Men” great was that it was Matt’s point of view, Matt’s voice. So it empowers you to use your voice, because if the writer’s voice isn’t strong in dramatic writing, it doesn’t work. PCC: “Warm Springs,” that was your first script, as well as your first script sold? NAGLE: Yes. That was my spec. I wrote it on spec. And I’d never written a movie or a TV show. That was my first script. I learned how to format and everything with that script. PCC: So were you surprised that it turned out so successfully? NAGLE: Yeah... I wasn’t thinking about if it would be successful. I was so concerned that the script would be good enough for me to get an agent. And then when it sold and got made... I don’t know, I’d spent years on the script, because I knew that, when you had a cold read from somebody, you only have one read. And you can’t go back six months later or a year later and say, “Oh, I did a really big rewrite and it’s really good now.” You have one read. So I had worked so hard to make the script something that was a great read, that was sort of undeniably good writing, good storytelling, good character and a great idea for a movie. I had worked on it for so many years. But I’m always surprised when something does well and I’m surprised when something doesn’t do well, because there’s so many great things that don’t do well commercially, but then people find them later. So I’m always surprised. You can’t ever second-guess what ignites people’s imagination or makes them want to get out of the house or turn on the television. By trying to figure that out, Hollywood wastes a lot of time. They should just make really writer-driven material and it’ll sink or swim. And again, the stuff that we all talk about and we all care about, at least in TV certainly - and “Warm Springs” was on television, it was on HBO - are the things that are very writer-driven. TV is a medium that is all about writing, because it’s a small screen. So dialogue and story becomes more important than on a big screen where imagery and action and things like that become more important, because you’ve got to fill hundreds of square feet. So they’re very, very different. So was I surprised? Yeah. I'm always surprised - by anything.
One of the reasons you were attracted to the FDR story was because your brother was physically challenged? NAGLE: Yeah, my brother is physically and developmentally disabled and he used to work at the gallery Creative Growth in Oakland. He was there 25 years. He was a sculptor and a painter, outsider artist. And he now lives in Los Angeles with me, because our parents have died. So yeah, I grew up with a disabled person. He was in a car accident in Berkeley, when he was two and he severed his brain stem. He was in a coma and he woke up and he’s sort of a spastic quadriplegic. That would be the terminology. So yeah, I lived with someone trying to learn to walk again. And shared a room with him, growing up. So the idea of someone losing that ability and having to recover in whatever way their body would allow them was a journey that I was very familiar with. And I had grown up with that happening in my house. So when I discovered that FDR was actually, medically, a paraplegic from polio and that he went off to this supposed health spa to have a miracle cure and then he ended up being there for four years and then kept going back there for the rest of his life and that he died at Warm Springs. I thought, “Oh, there’s a big story there. I know a little bit about what that’s like. I’ve been to a lot of rehab centers.” They say you have to write what you know. And I went, “Oh, I kind of know something about that.” And then the more I researched it, the more I learned about his particular journey, the more I realized, “Oh, this is a great story and it hasn’t been told directly.” He would never have been President, if he hadn’t had polio and become disabled. He would never have been President, if he hadn’t seen the world from a wheelchair. That’s what finally empowered him and woke him up and broke him through the spoiled trust fund, playboy pseudo-politician that he was and turned him into a man. So I also liked the idea that the worst thing that could ever happen to a person might be the best thing that could ever happen to a person... or happen to us, that someone else’s terrible tragedy actually benefitted the world. To me, that was an incredible way to view a tragedy happening to one person. So it interested me on that level, too. PCC: After all the work you’d put into that first script, watching an actor like Kenneth Branagh breathe life into your words, did that seem surreal? NAGLE: It was amazing. We had a reading in Georgia and it was him and Kathy Bates. And I had this film poster of “Henry V” with Ken’s face on my wall, in my office, just because I liked it. So I had written the movie with Ken’s picture over my desk [laughs]. I’d never thought of him for FDR. And HBO said, “We need Ken Branagh.” And I was like, “Oh, that’s crazy! His picture...” And then David Paymer, who played Louis Howe, he’s someone I had acted with on an episode of “Who’s The Boss?” And then his career took off. He was nominated for an Academy Award. And then Kathy Bates, I had always loved her as an actress. I had written the part for Kathy Bates, in my mind. And I’d written the part for David Paymer, to play Louis Howe in my mind. So then HBO called me and said, “Kathy Bates is really interested. We’re going to sign her. We’re going to get David Paymer.” I was like, “Oh, my God! That’s crazy!” I didn’t think of Cynthia Nixon at all for Eleanor, but she’s quite remarkable and I absolutely loved her in the part. I’d pictured, when I wrote it, the real Eleanor. I never pictured an actress playing Eleanor, whereas I’d pictured actors playing all the other roles. So that was really fun. And Ken, the first read-through, we had Jane Alexander playing Sarah Delano Roosevelt. And it was pretty incredible to sit there in this sort of warehouse and have them sit there and read the script out loud. I couldn’t quite believe it. I think I was in shock. PCC: You’ve worked with Martin Scorcese, worked with Ron Howard and Brian Grazer, how important is it for you as a writer to have a strong creative relationship with the producers? NAGLE: Well, I think what they do is they give you permission. Some producers don’t let you write the way you’re meant to write. They want to control it to such a degree. And when I’ve had a project go wrong is during the really super creative part of writing, they were going to impress their own stuff on it. And those are producers that either don’t understand writing or don’t trust it. And so to work with Ron Howard, in particular, and this woman Karen Kehela-Sherwood at his company, were so supportive. They made such a supportive environment with which to work. And then Martin Scorcese, when he’s around, everyone leaves you alone and lets you do the job, which is always the best part. And they don’t give you a lot of notes. They trust that it’s all going to work out. And it does. So what those experiences did, they just build your confidence as a writer. And confidence is a huge part of it, when you have people like that. And I just worked with Steven Spielberg, too, and he was really incredible, in terms of support. They go through so much to hire you and look at so many people that when they actually pick you to do something, they’re all invested, right then and there. So you’re not having to prove yourself, doing the job. You had to prove yourself to get the job. PCC: Are you to the point where you would not be daunted to go into a meeting with Steven Spielberg? NAGLE: I only wrote the pilot of the series “Red Band Society.” Spielberg produced it. So I sat in editing with Steven Spielberg. We had a lot of fun. He’s a great guy. He’s lovely, so calm, so clear. He knows exactly what he wants. He’s terrific. I got a migraine after I spent like five hours in editing room with him, because I didn’t realize I was so stressed, while he was in the room. But I didn’t realize it at the time. I was like, ‘Oh, my God!” And he just walked into editing for five minutes and stayed for five hours. And we had a blast. But then when he left, I was like, ‘Oh, my God!” I didn’t eat or get up to pee the entire time he was in there, because I was afraid, if I let the room, he’d like disappear. But every project is completely different. And every project is equally hard. All projects are hard. Nothing is easy, because there’s always a stumbling block somewhere, someone in the chain. There’s such a long chain of people and things that have to go right for a movie to not just get made well, but get released and marketed and distributed and publicized. It’s such a long chain of events. Any break in that chain can destroy a project. It can just throw it into the wilderness. PCC: “Red Band Society,” that must be another project that’s close to your heart. NAGLE: Well, the pilot was. The series I didn’t have anything to do with. But I loved the pilot. It was directed by an incredible director - Alfonso Gomez-Rejon, who is such a talent, whose movie is going to be the highest bidded-on movie at Sundance this week. And he is a great director. And I loved, loved the experience of working with him. And I loved being able to choose the cast and sort of set the tone for what the show would be. Making that pilot was one of the best working experiences, in a complete way, that I’ve ever had. It was really like making a small movie. That’s how we looked at it, because Alfonso’s a real film person and so am I, who are visiting the television world. We love TV, but we love film so much and that’s where we started. It was fun. We made a beautiful 50-minute movie. We had enough money and enough resources, because, when you make a pilot, you’re given more time and more money and more resources, because it sets the tone. And then it’s up to everybody else after that. You never know. It’s all a big crapshoot. But it’s a fun creative process. PCC: And “Boardwalk Empire,” working as supervising producer, as well as writer, what was that experience like? What did you see as being your mission with that show? NAGLE: My mission - we really needed to break the story in season one. And we broke it, like a novel, in chapters. So I really just worked on the development of season one. And I did a little story work on season two. But season one was about setting that world in stone. They gave everybody the creative time to make the show as rich and beautiful as possible and to find the right cast. So it was fun, too. I mean, it was Terence Winters’ show, but it was fun to be in the room, helping to facilitate this novel, which was a very intricately woven tapestry, that show. So it was great to be able to work on that level, and think on that level. And use history, use Prohibition and the vote and politics and learning the birth of the mob and how every mob in every city works. The learning curve was really huge, to be able to work in specificity in the world of “Boardwalk Empire.” I ended up becoming an expert on the Purple Mob, which was out of Detroit. That was a great mob. And learning all about what was happening in the White House and what was happening in the stock market. And all the social issues of that time. So it was really fun. And I write equally for men and women. I grew up with brothers, so men are very fun for me to write and I write men very well. That’s one of my real strengths, is getting into certain guy elements. And I write women well, too. But I’m a woman who can write men. I really love writing men. PCC: And one of your next projects is about a female country band in prison? NAGLE: Yeah, it’s called “The Goree Girls” and t’s actually the first all-female country-and-western band that’s known to have existed. They were developed in the Goree state prison system in Texas. The Texas prison system held up the Texas economy during the Depression. And still it’s a big part of the Texas economy. And out of the Texas prison system, they created prison baseball, which created minor league baseball and major league baseball. So the prisons would have baseball leagues play each other. They’d sell tickets. The public would come. They'd have concessions. They were a big deal. They’d have prison rodeo. You could throw a prisoner on a bucking steer. It was like gladiator time with that. And then they had music. And the music really put them over the top. And prisoners could sing for their life, before the electric chair, on, I think it was Tuesday nights. The governor of Texas at that time, Pappy O’Daniel, if he liked your singing, he would pardon you. And it was on the radio. And it became the number one radio show in the world. They went around FCC rules and they put a tower into Mexico and it broadcast into Mexico. And the women in the Goree state prison, they were all being forcibly sterilized. And they realized that they were going to die in that prison. They didn’t have the death penalty for women, but they would die there anyway. So they created their own singing group. There was a guy in Texas who was a lot like Bill Graham. And he was this big concert, live event promoter. Just an amazing guy. And they got the chance to meet with him and play for him and he realized, if we put the women on the show, that’s going to take us over the top. So it was like, “She killed her husband over a loaf of bread!” And people really fell into it. And they were really good singers. And ultimately, it’s how they each got pardoned, how they each got out. And it’s a true story. And they’re in the Smithsonian. So in 2003, Skip Hollandsworth, in the Texas Monthly, wrote a piece about them. And people have been trying to get a film made ever since. So we have the rights to it. And the plan is to shoot later this year and go down to Texas or Mexico or somewhere in there. And it’s awesome. The music is great. There’s phenomenal music in it. It’s a male and female story. And it’s shocking. And it’s true. And it’s very funny. And ultimately, they were triumphant. PCC: Overall, what has been the most satisfying aspect of the career? And what has been the most challenging? NAGLE: The most challenging part is trying to convince Hollywood, and the people that finance entertainment, what people want. And I live very much in the real world and I have a very strong sense of what people want. And it’s very hard to convince the people in power. A show like “Transparent,” on Amazon, it’s just the greatest show. And that show “Empire” on on Fox, I knew that show would be a smash. I told everyone it was going to be the biggest hit - it’s this big, loud, operatic mess of a show that has this music and the actors are incredible and it’s going to be an absolutely addictive piece of TV. And I had seen just a second of it and I know the writer of it. And everybody just blew me off [laughs]. And I was like, “No! Seriously, you guys, get ready. This is going to bring people to TV that have not been watching TV, because it’s different and it’s loud and big and fun and juicy.” I’ve been trying to say that the soap isn’t over, for example. It’s not that I want to write a soap, but I have a really strong sense of what people want. So it’s always very hard. And hopefully with Netflix and Amazon, the people here will start to loosen up and realize that they can take a lot more risks with material. They were given a lot of freedom with “Empire.” And the shows that are successful are the ones that have more creative freedom. And the movies that are more successful are the ones that have more creative freedom. And that’s separate from comic book movies and those big action sequel movies, because that’s not about creativity so much as - it is about creativity, but it’s about reproducing a brand, kind of idea. And I do think that Pixar, because we have creative control, is definitely the most successful, the most impactful and powerful and pure storytelling medium. And the sheer level of talent and storytelling - those are actually films that 100 and 200 years from now will still be up and running. They are still going to matter. PCC: You continue to think of yourself as a storyteller, rather than a manufacturer of product? NAGLE: Yeah, you can manufacture product and you can make money, but that’s so boring. You know, it’s hard to write. It’s hard to be inspired. Storytelling has to be inspired for it to be good. I can’t be inspired unless the story is endlessly interesting. Or something that no one knows, that’s like an archeological dig and we’re going to find the treasures of Tutankhamun. For example, Pixar is a studio that spends a lot of time on story. And they worked really hard to learn what good storytelling is there. And they bring the best storytelling teachers in the country, in the world, to come and talk to them continually about what makes great story. And so their films, they’re brilliant on all these other levels, but at heart, the stories are so powerful, so they work out. And so Pixar doesn’t manufacture product and they’re very successful. I guess what I'm trying to say is that they manufacture a product that’s continually reinventing and inspired and original. So they’re different. They make the bar so high for everybody else. It’s good that they are in Emeryville and that they can be left alone, frankly, to do what they do. But no, I’ve never been able to make product. It’s too depressing... to me. Learn more about this writer/producer at www.margaretnagle.com |
