What do you feel about insisting to take the lead role in your story?? Is it good or bad for business? "Stallone attempted to sell the scrip he wrote to multiple studios, with the intention of playing the lead role himself. Irwin Winkler and Robert Chartoff became interested and offered Stallone $350,000 for the rights, but had their own ideas for the lead role, including Robert Redford and Burt Reynolds. Stallone refused to sell unless he played the lead character and eventually, after a substantial budget cut to compromise, it was agreed he could be the star. Rocky was nominated for ten academy Awards, including Best Actor and Best Original Screenplay nominations for Stallone. The film went on to win the Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Directing and Best Film Editing"
Screenwriting : ...like Sylvester Stallone??? Taking the Lead Role in your script... by Jerry Doubles
Other topics in Screenwriting:
Check out Trending Discussions
Register / Log In
Owen, you have a point.. (y)
1 person likes this
If you feel that strongly about your story then go for it. Beware though it will be a much harder sell if you insist on being the star.
1 person likes this
Billy, so right. Considering a scale of 1-10, 10 being the highest and 1 the lowest, rate how many writers who have really become successful actors taking roles in their own written screenplays... from your personal experience.
Is the Stallone example the last time that happened? Stallone did have five movies in supporting rolls and three "featured extra" parts under his belt at the time he held out for the part in his screenplay. Is there no more current example?
I don't know of any stars that wrote their own movies. Some writers can't keep ego out of their work. I wrote a screenplay a few years ago and never had any intention of changing a single thing. After I got a deal with a con man, I destroyed the old version and made it so much better. I remember another sample of letting go in the form of the movie "Messengers". The first movie was rewritten and that's the one I loved but later the original screenwriter released his first version. The studio dubbed it Messengers 2 and it seemed good for half of the movie.
1 person likes this
Jerry, unless you're financing it yourself, it is literally the kiss of death for any script. DO NOT do it. period. And the Rocky story is a myth.
1 person likes this
The Stallone/Rocky story has been shortened and altered a bit to make it more exciting but like any "myth" there is truth in it. The script was good enough to be optioned by UA and Stallone did lobby hard with the producers to play the lead. The producers had a deal with UA - make the movie for under one million and they have full control. The couldn't afford a star on that budget. Another part of the myth is the producers showed the movie "The Lords of Flatbush" to the studio heads and they thought they were supposed to look at Perry King. They agreed thinking that actor was playing Rocky. Both stories have some truth in them. The first one gives writer/actors the hope they can write a script and hold out to get the lead - the second shows how stupid and careless studio execs are. And we all love to believe both. The truth is somewhere in both those stories. The chances are studio heads aren't that stupid and it's not that easy for a writer/actor. It seem that this was a one time thing that has never been repeated. Not in the studio system. On the independent level it might happen. A producer who really believes in the script and the actor and a very low budget.
3 people like this
As these projects exist mostly only in your imagination Alle, I will eat my hat if any ever get finished. In fact I'll eat my hat, socks, shoes AND pants.
2 people like this
lest we forget, Rocky was over 30 years ago. The game has changed, people. if you can't find another more recent example, then you have your answer.
Danny, thanks.
I had this deal and was planning to do something silly-- but thank God for you all.