Goodnight, Oscar drama - thoughts?
Posted: 10/9/22 at 6:21pm
I don't think it's anywhere near as juicy or scandalous as that writer seems to think it is.
Posted: 10/9/22 at 6:26pm
Kad said: "I don't think it's anywhere near as juicy or scandalous as that writer seems to think it is."
The industry was surprised this week, Kad.
Posted: 10/9/22 at 7:28pm
The only surprise is that the guy chose to go public with something that is normally handled privately. When something like that happens, the typical reaction is that he has no case in court and has been told that by lawyers. His biggest beef seems to be that he was held to his option contract until it expired, not the stuff of victorious litigation. Maybe some find that sort of hard ball to be scandalous but the dude was paid his money. Beyond that, it is not really that unusual that people try to make a show, part company, and go their separate ways. The only thing that would make this juicier would be if some intellectual property was misappropriated but I have not seen anything saying that and, like I said, if he had a viable claim, he presumably would have a lawyer who would tell him to keep his mouth shut. (And when you are writing about a dead man's biography, it's hard for a lot of the intellectual property to belong to first playwright.
Posted: 10/9/22 at 7:50pm
Isn't it pretty common for properties in development to have significant, if not complete, drafts written/composed by one creative, to only be discarded by producers and then developed by others? The option holder has the rights, and therefore the ultimate right to do with it as they see fit; even if they hurt someones feelings in the way.
And not mentioning the first writer in public interviews doesn't seem out of the norm to me -- I wouldn't want to be mentioned as the initial writer they parted ways with. And it certainly doesn't sound like Adjemi is claiming they used any part of his draft in this production -- which would, of course, be a big issue both morally and legally. Maybe I'm missing something, but Doug Wright did not use the "Amadeus" structure or any material from Adjemi in the final script -- meaning Mr. Adjemi isn't owed so much as an "Idea by" or "Additional Material" credit. To me, the whole genesis of the project most likely is in the middle of both sides stories.
Updated On: 10/9/22 at 07:50 PM
Posted: 10/9/22 at 8:08pm
TheatreMonkey said: "The option holder has the rights, and therefore the ultimate right to do with it as they see fit; even if they hurt someones feelings in the way.
... And it certainly doesn't sound like Adjemi is claiming they used any part of his draft in this production -- which would, of course, be a big issue both morally and legally."
I think you've got it all right here, but just to underscore, unless there is a claim that the producer and/or their new writer stole elements of the first writer's work (which could be in the draft or perhaps merely an idea that was not yet incorporated), there is no ongoing obligation. Some people demand that their work be acknowledged after they depart a project, but like everything else that would be a matter of contract. That famous box that Floria Lasky negotiated to surround an acknowledgement of Jerome Robbins's contributions do not continue to be included in playbills out of kindness.
Posted: 10/9/22 at 9:00pm
HogansHero said: "TheatreMonkey said: "The option holder has the rights, and therefore the ultimate right to do with it as they see fit; even if they hurt someones feelings in the way.
... And it certainly doesn't sound like Adjemi is claiming they used any part of his draft in this production -- which would, of course, be a big issue both morally and legally."
I think you've got it all right here, but just to underscore, unless there is a claim that the producer and/or their new writer stole elements of the first writer's work (which could be in the draft or perhaps merely an idea that was not yet incorporated), there is no ongoing obligation. Some people demand that their work be acknowledged after they depart a project, but like everything else that would be a matter of contract. That famous box that Floria Lasky negotiated to surround an acknowledgement of Jerome Robbins's contributions do not continue to be included in playbills out of kindness."
That's such an important point as well! And it's kind of a perfect distillation of the argument Adjmi is trying (I think) to make -- but doesn't hold water. If Adjmi had any provisos regarding his current grievances in his contract, he'd have a (potentially) slam dunk claim. Kinda telling that the Dramatists Guilds statement talks about the "toolbox for contracts" they offer; Adjmi should have gotten *all* his expectations -- for good and bad -- written down in the first place.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 9:30am
Someone I follow RT the Twitter thread the writer did ranting away at everything and everyone and (without ever having heard of the production or any of the people involved) I thought he was incredibly immature and classless, and whatever beef he had with the theatre (though honestly you admit you “didn’t respond to the material” and had to talk the artistic director into a different idea, you’re clearly not creatively aligned) it was flat out bullying for him to attack the other writer personally, for simply doing his job.
I noticed he RT lots of his friends going “David’s script is the best thing since Shakespeare and the other writer’s script was a big pile of doo doo.” Just so incredibly childish and egomaniacal.
I would actively avoid this person’s work, on the basis of their online conduct. Clearly the original play didn’t work for the theatre, which happens all the time - it’s happened to me loads of times.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 10:41am
If I was a playwright here's how I would handle it: Steve Martin wrote a play called Picasso at the Lapin Agile. No lawsuits there because he did it on his own. So I would follow his lead and call my play Oscar Levant at the Lapin Agile. Then I would replace Einstein with, say, Debbie Reynolds, put Gene Kelly behind the bar and proceed from there. After finishing I would copyright the hell out of it and pity any producer that would attempt to top it. Then the only lawsuit I'd have to worry about would be from Steve Martin and if the play was funny/good enough as good a guy as he is I'm sure he'd give me a pass.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 12:58pm
Beth Williams - the producer in this story has quite the track record as a lead producer: Diana the Musical, Escape to Margaritaville, Tuck Everlasting, Doctor Zhivago, Hands on a Hardbody, and On A Clear Day with Harry Connick Jr.
Her investors must desperately need tax write offs. Or they’re really pissed off.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 1:26pm
He's got Jeremy Harris defending him now. Turning out to be quite the drama.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 2:08pm
First there was all of the drama about Adjmi's alleged plagiarism on 3C (his "Three's Company" 'parody'". Now all of this nonsense. Any smart producer should now be well advised to steer clear of him. Or maybe he can co-write a show with Jeff Whitty??
https://playbill.com/article/3c-playwright-david-adjmi-comes-under-fire-from-threes-company-lawyers-com-195790
Posted: 10/10/22 at 2:53pm
It's a whole lot of nothing. David was paid for his work via the commission and option. Had he a better agent (and/or a better career to begin with), that agent would have ensured that he receive a small royalty from the production even if HIS version of the play was not produced.
Nobody is being taken advantage of here.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 6:20pm
Adjmi doesn't have a legal leg to stand on, so he's trying to gin up support in the court of public opinion. That's the whole of it.
Posted: 10/10/22 at 7:04pm
JSquared2 said: "First there was all of the drama about Adjmi's alleged plagiarism on 3C (his "Three's Company" 'parody'". Now all of this nonsense. Any smart producer should now be well advised to steer clear of him. Or maybe he can co-write a show with Jeff Whitty??
https://playbill.com/article/3c-playwright-david-adjmi-comes-under-fire-from-threes-company-lawyers-com-195790"
To be fair in the case of 3C, Adjmi was correct- his work was protected by fair use and the rights holders to Three's Company had no leg to stand on in demanding a cease and desist, and a judge ruled in his favor to that effect. But you'd think Adjmi would've learned something about fair use from that whole affair, and his plea to the public here appears to be an attempt to replay the a similar strategy that garnered him support in that situation.
If nothing else, it seems like Adjmi really needs to get better representation. I believe it was Wilde who wrote,"to cause one controversy may be regarded as a misfortune; to cause two looks like carelessness."
Updated On: 10/10/22 at 07:04 PM
Posted: 10/11/22 at 8:56am
Would we hear about any of this if the show wasn't moving to Broadway? Is it a strike while the iron is hot sort of thing?
Posted: 10/11/22 at 6:31pm
This sounds a lot like the embarrassing caterwauling of Jeff Whitty regarding Head Over Heels. Creatives need to read their contracts better rather clutching their pearls when things don’t go the way they hoped. It’s a business.
