Screenwriting

Most creators don’t realize this yet, but your intellectual property can do more than sit on a hard drive or wait for a deal — it can function as collateral, just like real estate or equipment.

On November 26, 2025, I filed and perfected the first IP‑Backed Security Entitlement (IPBSE) under UCC law.

This filing documents the assignment of four unpublished works valued at $2.5M, establishing a new precedent for how creative IP can be structured, valued, and recognized.

What this means for creators:

- Your scripts, music, characters, and worlds can be treated as financial assets

- Unpublished work can carry real valuation

- You can structure your IP in a way lenders and companies understand

- You gain leverage without giving up ownership

This isn’t theory — it’s now a recorded, circulating financial instrument.

For creators who want to understand how their own IP could be structured or valued, I’m happy to share what this means and how it works.

The CollateralVerse grows with every creator who learns to treat their ideas like real assets.

I am thrilled to announce that I have officially signed a Co-Writer Collaboration Agreement for the premium sci-fi pilot, 'THE PHOENIX'. I’ll be partnering with Lead Creator Jay A. Swendris to bring this high-stakes, 'Earth-themed' story to life.

We’ve already hit the ground running with the first polished pages, and the response has been incredible—even catching the eye of a potential financier before the year is up!

It’s an honor to be Jay's first choice on this journey. I'm looking forward to a massive 2026 as we move toward the 'Ocean Path' and beyond. Grateful for this community and the connections that make these projects possible.

Let’s get to work!

I gave ChatGPT this prompt: I recently got a first ten-page review of my script from Stage32.com. That makes me wonder something, mostly because I have a different sense of humor. I'd like you to take on the role of a Stage32.com reviewer, and be fair but tough, as you analyze the first part of, say, Hamlet, by William Shakespeare. (This could be interesting.)

The output is amazing. (And it makes me feel better about my own results.)

This is interesting—and a good stress-test for taste and tone. I’ll take on a Stage 32–style First 10 Pages Script Coverage, aimed at being fair, professional, and a little tough. I’ll treat Hamlet as if it just landed in the submission queue today.

STAGE 32 FIRST 10 PAGES COVERAGE

Title: Hamlet

Writer: William Shakespeare

Format: Stage Play (would likely be evaluated today as a Feature or Limited Series pilot)

Genre: Tragedy / Psychological Drama

Pages Reviewed: Act I, Scene i–ii (approx. first 10 pages)

OVERALL IMPRESSION

PASS (with notable strengths)

The opening establishes mood and thematic ambition quickly, but the first pages lean heavily on dense dialogue, exposition, and tonal solemnity that may alienate a modern audience before the central dramatic engine fully ignites. There is clear mastery of language and atmosphere, but accessibility and pacing are immediate concerns.

CONCEPT & HOOK

The supernatural cold open—guards on watch encountering an unexplained apparition—is a strong conceptual hook. Starting with uncertainty, fear, and unanswered questions is effective and genre-forward, bordering on horror. That said, the hook is atmospheric rather than narrative. We don’t yet know whose story this is or why we should emotionally invest beyond curiosity.

From a Stage 32 perspective, the opening lacks a clear protagonist POV within the first few pages. Hamlet himself does not appear immediately, which delays audience alignment.

Strength: Immediate mystery and tone

Concern: Delayed emotional anchor

TONE & GENRE CONSISTENCY

The tone is relentlessly serious, somber, and formal. While appropriate for tragedy, there is virtually no tonal modulation early on—no levity, contrast, or rhythm changes. This can read as monotonous to contemporary readers, especially in a first-ten-page evaluation where engagement is critical.

There are moments of dry, situational irony later, but they do not surface early enough to signal range.

CHARACTER INTRODUCTIONS

The Guards (Bernardo, Francisco, Marcellus): Functionally effective but interchangeable. Their dialogue serves the plot rather than revealing individual personality.

Horatio: The most grounded presence so far. He acts as a rational observer, which is useful dramatically, though his skepticism is stated more than dramatized.

Claudius & Gertrude (Scene ii): Politically efficient but emotionally distant. Their relationship dynamics are implied rather than felt.

Hamlet: When he finally appears, his emotional state is clear, but his internal conflict is delivered in long, formalized speech rather than active behavior.

From a development standpoint, Hamlet is compelling, but he enters late and introspectively, which may test reader patience.

DIALOGUE

The dialogue is eloquent, elevated, and unmistakably confident. However, it is also:

Dense

Repetitive in emotional beats

More philosophical than dramatic

Characters frequently articulate themes directly rather than allowing subtext or action to carry meaning. In modern script terms, this would likely be flagged as “on-the-nose,” even though the language itself is impressive.

PACING & STRUCTURE

The first ten pages are heavy on:

Setup

World-building

Political and emotional context

There is minimal forward momentum in terms of plot escalation. The supernatural element helps, but it remains abstract rather than actionable at this stage. For a contemporary audience, the inciting incident feels postponed.

MARKETABILITY (MODERN CONTEXT)

In today’s marketplace, this would likely struggle unless:

Reimagined with a clearer genre frame (e.g., psychological thriller)

Streamlined in dialogue

Anchored sooner to a central POV

The material feels prestige-oriented but niche, and better suited to an audience already inclined toward classical or literary drama.

STRENGTHS

Strong thematic ambition (identity, truth, morality)

Confident voice

Effective atmosphere

Memorable central character once introduced

WEAKNESSES

Slow burn without early payoff

Dense, formal dialogue

Limited character differentiation early

Delayed protagonist focus

RECOMMENDATIONS

If this were a Stage 32 submission today, I would recommend:

Introducing Hamlet earlier or reframing the opening to tie the mystery directly to him.

Reducing dialogue density and allowing moments to breathe.

Finding tonal contrast earlier to maintain engagement.

Clarifying the central dramatic question within the first ten pages.

FINAL NOTE (Stage 32–Style)

There is undeniable talent and ambition here, but the opening prioritizes intellect over immediacy. With refinement and modernization, this could resonate strongly with the right audience—but in its current form, it asks a lot of the reader before giving them a reason to stay.

I’m Shahin Rashidhashemi, a screenwriter based in Marbella, Spain. I write prestige horror / dramatic thrillers with a focus on ethics, institutions, and human cost. My flagship series is FRAME / SMALL HOUSE — contained institutional horror (tonal space: Severance × The Grudge).

I’ve completed 4 full seasons (season arcs + episodes are finished and production-ready). I’m now trying to be strategic about making money from the work and moving it toward production.

Question for producers, reps, and writers who’ve done this:

What’s the best real-world path to monetize a completed multi-season TV series like this?

Specifically, I’d love guidance on:

1. Representation first vs producer attachment first — which opens doors faster?

2. Should I lead with a pilot + series bible, or is it smart to package S1 only and keep later seasons as leverage?

3. What’s the most effective route: option, shopping agreement, paid rewrite, IP sale, co-production, or indie proof-of-concept?

4. If you were in my shoes, what would be your first 3 steps this month to turn completed seasons into income?

If you’re open to it, I can share the logline + 1-page pitch in the comments or DM. Thanks for any real, practical advice.

For me, it was the fall of my pro wrestling career.

I spent 27 years in the wrestling industry, performer, voice, and eventually the booker, the guy who writes the shows. I had everything I thought mattered: respect, a position people wanted, friendships that felt real in a very make-believe business, and a voice that people listened to.

And then it all disappeared.

The calls stopped.

The texts stopped.

My Facebook went silent.

On my birthday, I got two messages, one from my mother, and one from an ex I hadn’t spoken to in over 20 years.

I sat alone in a hotel room for two weeks, unsure how to continue living… or if I even wanted to. What hurt most wasn’t just losing the career, it was realizing I had lost myself somewhere along the way.

So I started writing.

I poured every ounce of anger, grief, regret, and fear onto the page. I didn’t outline my pain, I survived it sentence by sentence. And for the first time in years, I didn’t stop halfway through. I finished something.

That script , my first feature, is loosely based on my story. It’s imperfect, raw, and deeply personal. But it’s also the thing that reminded me who I was before the applause, before the titles, before the validation.

Losing everything is what finally pushed me to do the work I’d been afraid to do for years.

For me becoming a writer didn't start with inspiration, it started with having nothing left to lose.

Would love to hear everyone else’s moment.

Hi everyone!

I’m about to start writing a new TV series — I already have a solid first version of the show bible, but I’d love to stress-test it a bit before diving into the script.

Do you know of any tools or frameworks that help check the strength and completeness of a show bible?

Bonus points if it also helps structure a pitch deck from the same foundation.

Thanks a lot in advance! Happy to share notes if others are working on similar things.