Go Into The Story Interview: Brent Delaney

My interview with the 2023 Nicholl Fellowships in Screenwriting winner.

Brent Delaney wrote the original screenplay “Brownie Mary” which won a 2023 Nicholl Fellowship in Screenwriting. Recently, I had the opportunity to chat with Brent about his creative background, his award-winning script, the craft of screenwriting, and what winning the Nicholl Award has meant to him.

Here is my complete interview with Brent.

Scott: I believe you’re from Canada. Are you originally from Toronto?

Brent: Yeah, but I grew up mostly in Aurora, which is the next town over from where Jim Carrey was born.

Scott: You’ve got quite an educational background. You’ve got a BA, an MFA, and a PhD. Could you walk us through that academic journey?

Brent: Sure. When I was a teenager, I wrote my first feature script. At age 17. It was a pastiche of A Beautiful Mind. And, from that point on, I knew I wanted to go into creative writing.

I thought Michael Ondaatje taught at Glendon College at York University, so I went there for my undergrad in English Literature. Much to my dismay, I soon discovered that Michael Ondaatje was only a professor emeritus, who didn’t actively teach anymore. So, I was on my own.

During that time, though, I wrote and directed several plays in this little black box theater, which was a great experience. Then, after that, I completed my MFA in screenwriting.

At the end of my MFA, I started working and trying to get into the Canadian film industry. But I was struggling with my writing because I realized — after a decade of learning the craft — I didn’t know what to write. I thought that writers were supposed to have some kind of wisdom to share. I was like, “I know a lot about the craft, but I don’t know anything about life.”

So, I developed this autodidactic curriculum around 2011 or so, and I just started reading from the beginning, starting with every one of Plato’s dialogues. That lasted for a few years, and then I enrolled in a PhD program, which I completed after five years.

And when I was finishing up my doctoral dissertation, it was finally time to merge what I learned in the program with my broader screenwriting ambitions, which is what I always wanted to do.

Scott: Yeah, I think you hit on a really important point. People can spend all this time on these how‑to screenwriting books, but ultimately you really do have to have life experience. You have your own process of learning. You were reading all this stuff. You figured this thing out. You wanted to immerse yourself and learn as much as you could.

Brent: Yeah, and I had been interested in philosophical questions for a long time. I had this epiphany when I was 16 or 17 years old after watching Richard Linklater’s Waking Life that, in retrospect, led me toward both film and philosophy. And so, I spent a decade on screenwriting and a decade on philosophy.

Scott: Before you went into the doctoral program, you did have some professional experience. There was three episodes of a 2012 TV series called “In Counseling.” You made a short film that then later on went into development. Maybe you could talk a bit about that experience.

Brent: “In Counseling” was just a small web series. It was pretty much self‑funded and produced with other people I had met in film school. The short film was produced with a director I met through a friend. He was great to work with. And, eventually, I wrote a feature based on the short film that was optioned by a producer in Toronto.

The producer and I developed the script for a bit, but it got stuck in development hell. After that, a few different Canadian companies picked up some of my other scripts, but they were just free shopping agreements which didn’t result in anything tangible.

Scott: But you did then have some measurable success. There was a Page Screenwriting Award‑winning script. Then you were working the whole Nicholl thing. You had a semifinalist script, “Perfect Flower,” and the top 50 finalist, “We Are Living Graves.” Maybe you could talk a little bit about that journey of doing the whole screenwriting competition angle of things.

Brent: Well, after I finished my PhD, I came back to screenwriting with a much more mature mindset, with things I really wanted to say with my work. And so, I revised “Perfect Flower” which was a script I wrote in my MFA. And it placed as a 2020 Nicholl quarterfinalist and then as a semifinalist in the 2021. That same year, my first new script I wrote, “We Are Living Graves” — which was informed by my study of animal ethics — placed as a top 50 finalist. So, the results were much better after I gave myself a chance to mature as a writer.

Scott: That’s impressive. You’re repped by Range Media, is that right?

Brent: Yeah.

Scott: How’d that happen?

Brent: I had sent the script to my manager last spring. And he was open to staying in touch as the Nicholl results unfolded. And when I won, we decided to work together. Over the year, he had read a few other samples of mine and we developed a relationship. He’s incredibly smart and open and supportive, and so I feel very lucky.

Scott: That script you sent him was, was that “Brownie Mary”?

Brent: Yeah.

Scott: Yeah, so that’s the Nicholl‑winning script. Let’s dig into it because it’s a terrific story. I’d never heard of it. It’s strange. I’ve lived in California half my life, even Northern California, and I’d never heard the story before.

Logline. “At the height of the AIDS crisis, Mary Jane Rathbun, illegally distributes cannabis‑infused brownies to heal thousands of gay men in San Francisco and inadvertently becomes the face of the first medical marijuana movement in US history.”

How did you stumble on or find, or maybe even you knew all along, this real‑life individual, Mary Jane Rathbun?

Brent: Yeah, it was a confluence of events, actually, because I grew up with gay uncles who introduced me to the history of queer culture when I was a kid. It was wonderful. And so, I’d heard about Brownie Mary while growing up, but I was reintroduced to her story when my fiancé, Lana, was working in the cannabis industry and reminded me of it.

Scott: I guess that she would be something of an icon in the cannabis industry, right?

Brent: Yeah. Very much so.

Scott: I always talk to my students when they first come up with a story concept before they launch into it and say, “OK, we get the kind of green light to go ahead and write it.” I always ask this question, what’s your emotional connection to the story?

You’ve got to have some passion or emotional connection to the material, I think, to be able to get through it. You’ve got your two uncles that you’re familiar with, your fiancé that works in the industry. Beyond that, was there another thing, another dimension to it that really sparked your emotional resonance with the material?

Brent: Yeah, I think the moment when I really knew the story had to be told was when I read a particular quote by Dennis Peron, who said that Mary Jane had lost her child but adopted every kid in San Francisco as her own. That was the main emotional component to it, the spine of the story, the overarching theme.

And I realized that the theme of treating others as family resonates both on an emotional level, but also on a philosophical level. It’s an idea, I think, that needs to be continually updated from generation to generation. What if we treated everyone around us as family? That, to me, is a profound idea. It’s a way of life.

Scott: Dennis Peron’s comments that she lost her child and adopted all these other people, that’s a character arc right there, isn’t it?

Brent: Yeah. What I noticed, too, and what I look for when evaluating stories, is an inherent contradiction in the protagonist. Mary Jane lost her child and was faced with the exact opposite of what she wanted: to see young kids dying all around her. That’s one of the great things about Pixar’s storytelling. They always seem to find that contradiction between want and need.

In Mary Jane’s case, that’s her character arc. She wants to protect herself after losing her only daughter by closing herself off to the world, but what she needs is to face her grief through caring for the young, vulnerable people who are dying from AIDS around her.

Scott: There’s obviously that direct emotional, philosophical connection to it, but Hollywood has a long history of movies featuring real life underdog figures taking on the system, like Norma Rae, Silkwood, Erin Brockovich, Milk to name a few.

When you were considering this, did you ever put on your producer’s hat and say, “Well, this might be something that could appeal to people in Hollywood because it does seem like there’s a track record here.”

Brent: Yeah. I’d like to think I put my producer hat on more now, but at that particular time, I just really wanted to write her story, to be honest. I generally operate with the mindset, “one for them, one for me,” and this one was for me.

In fact, I thought a political activist story would be a much harder sell. And it’s a period piece. So, it seems like a much tougher movie to get made than a genre piece, for example. For that reason, even with my producer hat on, I think I took more of a risk than anything. [laughs]

Scott: Often, adapting these real‑life characters, that’s a challenge because you’re trying to find the arc. I remember reading an interview with screenwriter Akiva Goldsman who adapted A Brilliant Mind. He read the book and he thought, it was perfect three‑act structure: Genius, Madness, Redemption.

With “Brownie Mary,” you’ve got the Protagonist’s character arc you could lean into. Did that give you some comfort as a writer that you knew where the story was going to go?

Brent: Yeah, I thought it fit the three-act structure from the outset. Mary Jane started out without a family, helped a community, and then gained a new family.

Of course, there were parts of the historical record that I had to freely adapt to make the story work. For example, Jonathan West’s character had to be included in the 1970s, when in fact he wasn’t Dennis’s partner until the 1980s. That way, Mary Jane and Jonathan could build a relationship over the course of the entire story, so that Jonathan comes to represent all of the young people who died — Mary Jane’s ‘kids’.

Scott: In Hollywood, they have a saying: “Don’t let the facts get in the way of the story.” What you did with Jonathan makes for a much more powerful subplot.

Brent: One of the questions that I like to ask, too, when writing a true story with political and social import is: would the real life figures look at this story and think it serves what they were trying to do with their lives?

You know what I mean? Would Jonathan, Dennis, and Mary Jane watch this film and agree that it supports their broader political aims? Does the story represent the spirit of their lives?

Scott: Absolutely. You did a wonderful job on that. Let’s dig into some of these characters. The Protagonist is Mary Jane Rathbun. This is how you introduce her in the script:

“Mary Jane Rathbun, 51, rocking a mop of tight gray curls, oversized glasses, and a defiant glint in her eye. On the outside, she looks like a grandmother in waiting, dolled up in her favorite polyester pantsuit, but in fact, she’s a foul‑mouth anarchist who doesn’t take shit…from anyone.”

Right off the bat, we get this idea that she’s not your typical grandmother type.

Brent: Yeah, I immediately identified with her rebellious attitude. That anarchist spirit of hers. It serves the story well, too, because there’s always conflict being generated with a character who says what’s on their minds and doesn’t care what anyone else thinks.

When you see her in interviews, she’s just got such a vibrant and iconic personality, you can’t recreate it. The way that she engages with the world, she’s a real fighter. I love that.

Maybe there’s a part of me that wants to be more like her because I’m naturally an introverted writer. I would love to be so fearless. I have a lot of respect for someone who goes out into the world and says what they think and stands by their words.

Scott: How much research did you do?

Brent: For this project, I read five to ten books and dozens and dozens of articles. I read Mary Jane’s cannabis cookbook, which was a great read. And I also watched all the videos I could find on her. I think that my academic background helps a lot in this respect. I’m used to reading large volumes of material.

And with more research, the more you have to draw on. For example, there’s one scene in the script that wasn’t mentioned anywhere except in an obscure source I found. So, if I didn’t scour the available resources, then I wouldn’t have been able to include this incredibly harrowing part of Jonathan’s story.

Scott: One fact about Mary Jane’s life is the death of her daughter, 18‑year‑old daughter, tragic car crash. You have that going on, but you have got a choice. How am I going to reveal that? Where am I going to put that?

You have that pretty much up top. It’s like we get to see the daughter. She’s going out on a prom date with the guy. By page seven, she has died. What was your thinking on basically starting the script with that incident?

Brent: That’s a good point because you can either start with her normal life, revealing her daughter’s death through exposition, or you can show it. I opted for the latter, narrowing down her normal world to only a couple of pages. In that way, the opening functions as a self-contained sequence that’s visceral and shows how and why Mary Jane developed her flaw.

Scott: You mentioned Pixar. I’m a huge Pixar fan. I know Mary Coleman who used to be the head of story there for many years. She told me about the development of Finding Nemo, where Andrew Stanton did not want to start the movie with the tragedy.

They even went through a couple of different iterations of these real‑time reels where they had it placed later, like a flashback, until people kept saying to him, “No, you’ve got to start it up front because that explains why Marlin is this rather obnoxious, overbearing parent.”

Similarly, I think by starting with this tragedy, you learn a lot about this character. Obviously, you elicit a lot of sympathy for her.

Brent: You did an interview with Mary Coleman on DePaul’s YouTube channel, right?

Scott: Yep.

Brent: Yeah. I watched that. It was great. [laughs]

Scott: After her daughter’s death, Mary Jane returns to San Francisco. She meets this character you mentioned, Dennis Peron. This is how he’s introduced in the script:

“This is Dennis Peron, 35, a Vietnam vet and self‑described gay hippie outlaw who follows in the footsteps of his close friend Harvey Milk. In other words, a political firecracker.”

Can you give us more of an introduction to him?

Brent: When I think about Dennis Peron, I think about dialogue. Lots of dialogue. Dennis is a helpful character to have in a script because he was just an explosive guy who talks a mile a minute. So, whenever he’s in a scene, he steals it. That’s why he was such a great activist, too.

For Dennis, he had this unyielding desire to change the cannabis laws in the United States. His whole life was about that, you know what I mean? Without him, none of the legislative aspects of the script would have been there. And it was Mary Jane’s public image mixed with Dennis Peron’s strategic activism — similar to Harvey Milk’s political acumen — that changed the system.

Scott: That’s absolutely true, but on a personal level, the relationship between the two of them, it really struck me that maybe you’ll see what your reaction is, is like a Mentor figure. There are many, many times, not just on a political acumen, but on a personal level. Like he’s the guy who says to her, it’s a sort of call to adventure.

“You ever make the Alice B. Toklas way with pot? These are the brownies that you make.”

He’s the one who suggests to her, “Why don’t you make these weed brownies?” Then on several points along the way, there are moments where he says to her, “These are your children,” that kind of thing. Like, “You can’t leave them.” Would you think that as a mentor figure?

Brent: Oh, for sure, definitely. Not only is he central to the inciting incident, but he is also vital in the beginning of the third act as the Mentor, telling Mary Jane: “This is what you got to do. Don’t let the demons win basically, but overcome them and come with me and we’ll change the law for all of these young men, and for Jonathan too.”

Yeah, he’s a Mentor character and really important to the story. And it’s true to life. They really did meet outside of a cafe, and Dennis took her under his wing and thrust her into the political space.

Scott: It’s interesting because if you take the word activist, sort of political activist, but now you look at her psychological journey. At the beginning of the story, she’s really inactive. I mean, she is not moving along where she needs to be.

You even had a moment where she’s watching this group of people, Dennis Peron and these other activists. She says, “In the face of the threat, the fearlessness of the activists is mesmerizing, risking their own freedom for their cause.”

She resists, she continually resists and says, “I don’t want to be a public figure. I don’t want to get into politics.” She says, “No, I’m afraid I don’t do politics, Dennis.”

There is that resistance thing going on. It’s not an easy journey for her to become who she eventually becomes.

Brent: But that’s who she was all along, you know? It was her daughter’s death that made her suppress who she really is — which was an activist to the core. That’s the connection between activism and her character flaw. When Dennis tries to pull her back into politics, it’s painful because it reminds her of the relationship she had with her daughter.

Scott: Here’s another movie reference, a strange one for you, but that’s Rick Blaine in Casablanca. He fought in the Spanish Civil War on the side of the loyalists. He was an idealist.

He had it inside him, but he had to rediscover it, which is really the essence of the Protagonist’s journey. It’s already there. In the case of Mary Jane, she buried it, and now it needs to be coming back out.

So there’s the journey of the brownies. That’s interesting because it’s got its own subplot.

It starts off she just makes brownies. Then she’s going to make brownies with weed for money‑making because she’s poor. Then eventually she’s going to jump into doing these medical marijuana, which she gives away. It’s an interesting subplot with the brownies.

Brent: The relationship she has with baking is something that ends up visually showing her progress as a character — particularly at the midpoint. It shows that she goes from purely wanting to make money off her brownies to giving them away for free. That shift is what initiates the third act and coming to terms with her daughter’s death. Baking ended up being a visual representation of her inner psychology in a way.

Scott: It’s just so interesting how the real life events. I know you massage them from a historical standpoint, but they really do reflect this psychological change in her. This other character, this triad characters in terms of influences on her life, you’ve got Dennis, who’s like this Mentor figure. Then there’s this character, Jonathan West, who you introduce on page 24:

“A cherub‑faced boy from the Midwest with a mess of blonde curls and puppy dog eyes, wounded and abandoned by everyone who was supposed to love him. He’s now both stubbornly guarded and deeply vulnerable.”

In my character archetype lexicon, he’s an Attractor figure because Jonathan’s the one she’s the most emotionally connected with.

Maybe you could talk a bit about this Jonathan character. I know you did a little bit of shifting in terms of the historical thing, but that relationship in the story, how that plays out in terms of Mary Jane’s psychological growth.

Brent: Jonathan is the character that I took the most liberty with in terms of shaping his story because he’s not a public figure. He was Dennis Peron’s partner, but there’s not that much in the historical record about him. So, I had to fictionalize a great deal about his life.

I wanted Jonathan’s relationship with Mary Jane to symbolize the relationship she had with each of the dying kids she met. Over the course of the story, the way she brings Jonathan into her life is representative of hundreds of other kids.

She always called them that, you know?

Scott: Kids.

Brent: My kids. These are “my kids,” she would say. Jonathan West’s character represents the relationship she had with all of her kids, accepting them into her life and taking care of them as her own — after losing her only child.

Scott: He even says for the end of his own life, because he does end up dying of AIDS. He even says something like, “You’re the mom that I always wanted or needed or…”

Brent: There’s so many of those stories. Stories that I’ve heard in my personal life with my own family and friends — queer people who have been abandoned by their families. It’s heartbreaking.

In San Francisco at that time — you find this in Milk too — queer people ended up finding surrogate families. That’s how they survived. Jonathan West’s character shows that I hope — the very real and tragic reality of what these young people went through.

Scott: Also, very, very personal level, one‑on‑one, doesn’t he fill a void that was created when her daughter’s death?

Brent: Yeah. Jonathan’s arrival is the last thing Mary Jane wants, which is having to take care of another kid. But, through the story, she finally accepts him. She adopts him as her own. And that gives her a chance to reconcile the grief she’s been holding in for her daughter.

Scott: That’s another Pixar movie. That’s when Carl Fredricksen loses Ellie in Up. He doesn’t want anything to do with people. Then Russell shows up. Eventually, there’s that. It’s wonderful how these narrative dynamics show up in movie after movie.

I love the part where around 48, now she’s got all these bakers around and they’re making all these brownies. I’m like, it reminds me, of course, of Breaking Bad, which I thought…I don’t know if you ever thought of that, it’s such a great TV series. She’s the criminal mastermind.

She’s just doing criminal activities, but it’s all for altruistic thing. Did you ever make that connection at all?

Brent: No, I didn’t make that connection actually, but if somebody directs it in such a way, I would be very pleased. That show is excellent. There’s a comedic element to it as well. Mary Jane does have this Walter White angle to her, you’re right. She was making money, and she was happy making money, and she wasn’t shy about that fact in interviews. And then that switched after she went to jail for the first time and realized there was a greater purpose in store for her.

Scott: It’s like Fate intervened. She had to do community service and then she got involved with the group. Was that actual facts in her life story?

Brent: Yeah. The Shanti Project — where she did much of her community service — is still an organization that’s operating today. And it’s interesting because you can watch their old training videos from the early 80s on YouTube. I’ve watched hours and hours of them. So, when you see Mary Jane’s training in the script, it is very much true to life.

It was through those organizations and charities that Mary Jane came to know so many AIDS patients. The Shanti Project was a support group for cancer patients and different types of palliative care, but when the AIDS epidemic started to spread, it focused more and more on treating AIDS patients.

Scott: You know, it’s intriguing how, there’s that Jung quote. He says, “When an inner situation is not made conscious, it happens outside as fate.” You look at the story of Mary Jane as you depicted in the script, you get to see Fate at work so often. She gets busted. She gets five hundred hours of community service.

This introduces her to the Shanti group. That introduces her to these people who have cancer. Now, she can relate to that because she’s been using pot for her own maladies, physical ailments. Then that also introduces her to what they call gay cancer, the AIDS epidemic. That is really where she’s pulled into this persona that she becomes.

Again, it’s all these events unfolding, like the journey she takes is the journey she needs to take. Does that resonate with you?

Brent: Yeah, for sure. That quote is great. I find that resonates in my own life too. If I ever hold a belief too strongly, for example, I always find that the universe has some way of showing me the opposite. I find that fascinating. I first read Jung in my early twenties, and his work continues to be a source of inspiration.

Scott: I wanted to talk to you just like a technical thing right here, just take a break from all this psychological talk. I’m always telling students, when you write montages, it’s so hard because on screen they look great, but when you write them, it’s like, people tend to breeze over them.

You have a lot of montages and you do it in a very interesting way, which is almost like these little chapter headings. “How to do 500 hours of community service in 60 days.” “How to remember to bake weed brownies.” “How to care for a loved one diagnosed with AIDS”

Was that a thing that you had a way of organizing time helping with the time transitions? What was the thought process that you came up with this idea about the montages?

Brent: Yeah, you’re right, montages are definitely difficult to read. So, I did want to come up with some way to make them more palatable for the reader. I found that naming them with a specific title that encapsulates the entire montage helps, especially to get the point across quickly.

And, yeah, the most difficult part of writing this script was condensing time. When I was halfway through the script, I almost gave up on it. It was just so hard to condense 20 years into one single narrative and retain the tension, the arcs, and the cohesiveness that’s needed. The montages really helped with that.

Scott: You know, I thought it was very effective. I love the way that you capitalize it. I mean, underlined it, if I remember correctly, too. It’s like, “Hey, reader. Get this point.”

There are several of these moments, two big ones, right in the middle of the story and then right at the end of Act Two where she’s ready to pack it in. Then you have these intersections.

Then that last one with Dennis Peron, you’re talking about this Mentor figure. He says, “Let me get this straight. You want to retire at the very moment when the kids here need you most.” He even says, “You can’t run away from what you are.” That’s just like Carl Jung.”

You really stuck to your metaphorical guns here in that it’s a struggle for her. She doesn’t jump into this. It’s like she really, really resists several points along the way. I admire that because it would have been so easy to just have her like, “Oh yeah. I’m going to be the champion of this whole thing.”

I’m guessing that just was more reflective of her personality? Was it her journey? Was that something that you made as a conscious choice as a writer, that resistance?

Brent: I think both. Part of her personality is being rebellious like I mentioned in her character intro. She’s not going to follow orders from anyone. And the other part is the experience of losing her daughter. The magnitude of something like that happening is so terrible that she would be very resistant to opening up to the world again.

For me, and I think a lot of people, even little tragedies can make us hesitant to go out and engage with the world. Losing a child at that particular age would be so difficult, and I wanted to show the immense impact it had on her.

Scott: She wanted to avoid putting herself in a situation where she might feel that pain again. Then again, fate put her in a situation where she’s like, “My kids,” and seeing them one by one.

Let me ask you a question because there’s a lot of death in the script. Both some of it is like played out on screen, but a lot of it’s intimated in the fact that this AIDS epidemic was happening in San Francisco. Was it hard for you to write this script because of that?

Brent: No, I wouldn’t say it was hard because I’m drawn to tragedy and the darkness of life. I mean, on my wall right here, I have a print of Manet’s Le Suicidé. Yeah, I think about death a lot and what it means.

In storytelling, I think we should be presented with deep philosophical questions like, “What do our lives mean? What’s our purpose here?” And as painful as it can be to think about, death shows us why life matters.

Scott: What’s the status of the script?

Brent: The script is currently being packaged with a production company. The producers I’m working with are truly wonderful. So, I’m hoping that Brownie Mary’s story will reach the screen soon.

Scott: The Nicholl. What was that whole experience like?

Brent: It’s very, very surreal. There was a winner in 1999 named Annmarie Morais, who went to the same university as I did, and I remember looking up to her and the great work she did and continues to do after winning. So, the Nicholl has been my North Star for many years.

I’m sure this must be your experience with your students too. The Nicholl is this dream that you strive for, and to actually open up a Zoom session and see Eric Heisserer… it’s surreal.

And it’s difficult to talk about, really, because with moments like this — moments that you don’t think will ever come true — it’s hard to accept when they do. Let’s just say I’m still in the process of integrating the Nicholl win into my overall narrative.

Scott: Well, congratulations. You certainly deserved it with that script.

Here’s a few craft questions because people like to see how other writers work. How do you come up with story ideas?

Brent: For me, coming up with a great concept or discovering a great story is the hardest part of screenwriting. It takes a lot of time, and it’s almost an alchemical process. Idea generation is magic. In a way, it seems like ideas choose you rather than the alternative. For that reason, I like to think of great story ideas as gifts from the universe.

Scott: Are you one of those writers that needs to have at least some understanding of the story’s themes before you start writing? Or is that something you discover along the way? Or just generally, what are your thoughts about theme and its importance in the writing process?

Brent: Theme is everything for me. Theme is the spine of the story, it’s the protagonist’s arc, it shapes all of the supporting characters. I can’t begin without a strong thematic arc in mind.

Scott: One last question for you. What is the single most important piece of advice you could offer to someone who is an aspiring screenwriter?

Brent: Following Werner Herzog’s advice: read, read, read. For me, I improved most noticeably when I deliberately set out to read hundreds of professional screenplays. I learned so much from the pages of Eric Roth, Steven Zaillian, John Logan… Reading an Eric Roth script is the equivalent of an aspiring composer listening to Bach — the arcs he constructs, the intricacy of his plots, the depth of his themes. In my view, there is nothing more important than standing on the shoulders of giants.

Brent is repped by Range Media Partners.

Twitter / X: @Brent__Delaney

For my interviews with every Nicholl Fellowships in Screenwriting winner since 2012, go here.