_JPG.jpg)
This picture is from June of 2007, the summer before
I turned 30 and saw my life change quite dramatically.
I was working at a job I loved, and it was a job that loved me back. That's Rian, Connor, and Eduardo, with little Jack on my lap. (And then some rando stranger kid who kept barking at the marine life. It was so uncomfortable.) My hands gripping the fence in view of the camera is a textbook example of how to hold children who are not your own. It is used in Social Work textbooks everywhere.
In college, my frat bros played sports.
I was lured in by a HS buddy on the
volleyball team, and the first guy I met
is now Tom Brady's agent. Forgive me. Another kid had me carry his b-ball bag around while pledging, so people would encroach upon my personal space, only
to be disappointed with their findings.
By contrast, another peer had me wear anything with "Smithtown" emblazoned
on it, figuring people from Long Island
would stop me on the street to chit-chat. From there, connections would develop and blossom. Now, I didn't need the help,
but 9/10 recommend. The 90s were wild.
The manuscript I wrote at age five was about an Indian-American boy from Long Island. The current manuscript is about an Indian-American man from Queens. In terms of spirit and joyfulness, I haven't strayed far from the kid I was in 1983. So with considerable editing and dogged revisions, I expect to have something well-crafted and heart-warming to put forth in the world.
If you need my writing help, or would like to help with the draft, do reach out. It may take several days to respond, but I'm here.
Also, the button-down should be white, and the V-neck is absurd. Thankfully, I'm cuter now, and able to dress myself in kind.
UPDATE: I finished the manuscript (for now).
UPDATE 2: I finalized a screenplay. Some smart folks in Hollywood liked the story back in 2015, and the Uppercut title as well.
That said, I don't know whether to go with Uppercut or Shiva the Destroyer. Both have their merits. I prefer Uppercut.
As expected, the manuscript is better than the screenplay, for all the obvious reasons. The book is better than the script.
UPDATE 3: I submitted the script to The Black List under a pseudonym. Here are some of their thoughts.
Strengths:
This is a boxing movie unlike any we’ve seen. It's packed with laughs and heart, and has broad appeal and a modern feel. It evades the overly-earnest machismo of traditional movies about fighters. It refuses to treat women as prizes or victims of male aggression. It also refuses to turn its Hindu protagonist into an over-Americanized rebel against his family’s culture. It’s funny at many points throughout. Welterweight Shiva fights with his heart, his wisdom, and his keen sense of humor in real life just as hard as he fights physically in the ring. He’s Indian-American. His widower father, precocious younger sister, and lawyer older sister duck all the stereotypes. Characters are extraordinarily well-voiced and as diverse as the true population of the well-evoked setting. Even their longer speeches are engaging and readable. The action is clear and cinematic without being “voicey”. It seems impossible that Shiva could win until shortly before the last-minute climax, which is delivered as a memorable high-stakes nail-biter. The denouement will leave audiences smiling through tears.
Prospects:
SHIVA THE DESTROYER is the kind of cinematic, subtle, powerful film that breaks marketing departments because it's so many things. Audiences ranging from art movie fans who hate sports movies to action addicts of all genders who roll their eyes at indie dramas and comedies will enjoy it equally and it's a strong candidate for theatrical stardom. It’s hard to compare it to existing boxing movies because it knocks them all out cold. However, it has the groundbreaking underdog-hero power of the original ROCKY or MILLION DOLLAR BABY mixed with the multi-cultural authenticity of BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM or the teen series NEVER HAVE I EVER (more for the comedy than the cultural setting). While the street and crowd scenes and action make it a medium-budget rather than a low-budget project, the potential audience reach makes it viable. The brilliantly-written supporting parts could attract A-list talent, while the role of Shiva is the perfect breakout role for an up-and-coming Indian star. The writer is gifted; a new star.
That was certainly nice to read. Again, however, the manuscript is better than the screenplay. The book is better than the script.
Professor John Barna swooping in with the three page, hand-written letter.
This is how you get into NYU on an sizable academic scholarship, flunk out, get back into NYU for grad school, but don't attend.
More or less to follow. (1/8)
“Recommendation for Neeraj Katyal.”
Hm. Let's parse that for a moment.
“I have known Neeraj since his freshman year at NYU [in February 1996] and was his advisor until he left. I have kept in touch with him intermittently ever since. [His similar recommendation to The University of Chicago was dated 2/10/06.] As his personal statement indicates, he has lived through circumstances which would daunt most, and I will say only that such survival attests to his strength of character. My estimation of Neeraj is a superlative one despite --”
(Given my druthers, I would've preferred Barna to have both begun and ended this recommendation letter right around here.)
Regardless, Barna continued from there, at length. Let's give him his due respect and this recommendation an honest look.
(Despite the worst dud of an opening line a highly-regarded professor at a relatively-prestigious college could ever muster.)
“I have known Neeraj since his freshman year at NYU and was his advisor until he left. I have kept in touch with him intermittently ever since. As his personal statement indicates, he has lived through circumstances which would daunt most, and I will say only that such survival attests to his strength of character.
My estimation of Neeraj is a superlative one despite an unusually disastrous record at NYU that only he himself can explain fully. Otherwise he has always impressed me as remarkably intelligent – perhaps he was not challenged by us enough to sustain what in him is a strong and abiding intellectual curiosity. He may not have read the assigned textbooks while at NYU, but he did read anything he could get his hands on: no subject failed to interest him; no book or conversation failed to stimulate him, and those of us who listened to him were also stimulated.
His most recent schooling with the University of Maryland at least indicates his true capability. He has an intense interest in learning for its own sake, and although not successfully applied at NYU, such reading eventually equipped him in various employment until returning to college.”
“Neeraj let me peruse his finished personal statement for this application in order for me to refer to it if need be. I was impressed with his forthrightness about everything he had gone through, showing a genuine strengthening, I believe, in emotional and interpersonal skills. Most importantly perhaps for the purposes of this recommendation, the essays reminded me of his writing as an undergraduate, certain ones he has shown to me from time to time. I have a small and manageable group of advisees, and am able to look into more details of the students' academic life than is normal.
Whatever the writing project was, Neeraj demonstrated the kind of fine mind which is capable of analyzing problems and of putting the imagination to work with an energy that would daunt most. This ability is evident in Neeraj's whole approach to writing: it not only reflects cogency, logic and the ability to reason abstractly, to conceptualize, but also has genuine creativity and imagination. His writing shows a depth in thinking which indicates much care in preparation. His topic or thesis is always accompanied by thorough research leading to a well-thought out point of view. He refuses to take short cuts, but rather investigates a problem until a bona fide conclusion can be reached.
As in his written work, Neeraj speaks articulately; when discussing a project he employs some of the same approaches which animate his writing – clarity of ideas, seeing all sides of an issue.”
“...seeing all sides of an issue, making the kind of comments which are always intellectually stimulating. His enthusiasm in all endeavors is contagious; moreover, he is a good listener: he responds with great consideration to the ideas of others and is always sensitive to points of view other than his own.
When at NYU he was generous with his time in community charity work. Neeraj did this with his fraternity: NYU's fraternities are unique in that among other duties assigned, they are required to perform community service. In that organization I would also add that he mixed well with everyone and supported others with his particularly mature outlook and was highly regarded and respected by his peers who often sought his advice
Neeraj is good, moral person. He is honest and straightforward in his dealings with people. He has a strong sense of duty, putting priority on work. But he is at the same time no “drudge”: he knows when to socialize and when to work. If the committee decides to overlook the NYU record, I predict outstanding success in Graduate social work (and career) by virtue of both high calibre intellectual and personal characteristics. I give him the highest recommendation possible -- and at this time in Neeraj's life I have no reservations is so doing.”
Whatever.
Moving on:
Here is a cuter recommendation, because I was 21 and Sam Esmail was 21 when he wrote it for me. This was long before he won a Golden Globe for creating Mr. Robot and that landed that 100MM Netflix deal. Anyway, I was interning freshman year for Marvel Entertainment and Barbie Magazine for a woman name Polly Chevalier. (What a 1990s publishing name.)
But yeah -- it was all pretty typical as far as internships go, and I loved it every single minute of it. (2/8)
Ms. Christie Griffin of Muncie, Indiana is one of the kindest, most intelligent, and talented people I've met in New York.
Perhaps most importantly, Ms. Griffin evinces a certain joy and enthusiasm for life that is as contagious as it is inspiring.
I consider myself lucky to have met and known Christie Griffin. In sum, I feel honored to call her a true and trusted friend.
(3/8)
No one really knows what Condé Nast is these days. Which is fine; I couldn't care less either way. It's a major publishing conglomerate, if you care about that sort of thing. Either way, if people don't know what Condé Nast is, they definitely don't know what the scoop is on all the “Condé Nasties,” and that's probably a great thing for all those terrific women involved.
Anyway, I know where all the bodies are buried, and then some, because I'm from the 90s. I went to both high school and college in the 90s, and if there's one thing I learned during my time over that period, it's that there were absolutely no rules.
There were no rules in the 1990s. And I mean none. Especially in New York and on Long Island.
You could do anything. Anything at all.
The 90s were a cruel, unsavory environment, but also an idyllic, whimsical Eden full of private beaches and lush vineyards.
In any case, I never interned at either The New Yorker or VOGUE. But it begs further exploration and discussion; I know.
(4/8)
