First, this is my 100th post, so woohoo! Get the party poppers, hats, and cake and do a little dance.
Okay, now that's out of the way, I want to discuss NBC cutting original scripted programming at 10pm and replacing it with 5 days of JAY LENO! This has caused an uproar within the creative community because it means 5 less hours of programming for writers, directors, and producers. Instead, the less expensive tonight show will take it's place, much like the news on the CW and FOX.
I for one, agree with Steven Bochco's assessment of the situation. He believes that network drama is awful for the most part. As my mother would say, if you can't play nice, you don't deserve the toys. What I mean is, if showrunners can't put good shows on television, why should a network put on their half-assed dramas? They have a perfectly marketable commodity in Jay Leno, who is being pushed out of his slot, and would likely find a home at a rival network. So, instead of giving a golden goose to the competition, they keep it in house, cut down their programming, and bring in a rather inexpensive show to take it's place. After all, NBC is used to pull an 8 share, is down to a 3 share this season and needs to make drastic changes. 10 hours of programming is still a lot of hours to fill. Just ask CW and FOX.
I really do prefer the cable model. Most networks only program original programming 1-3 days a week, showing re-runs the rest of the week. The shows are good, fresh, and draw 5 shares, higher than gossip girl, for a new show like Leverage. While it's not as high as an NBC show, everyone needs to realize how television now works, and adapt to it. I would never consciously produce a show for networks. I would be more than happy to land on the Sundance channel with a quirky Slings and Arrows type show.
Now, as a wannabe tv producer, it kind of screws me over, but that is what adaptation is all about. We as producers now need to look towards foreign markets, online, direct to video distribution, and other outlets. Does it suck for jobs? Yes. Is it at an awful time in our economy? Yes. As Bochco said, good shows will always find an audience. Of course, Cupid, Arrested Development, Pushing Daisies, Freaks and Geeks, and so on down the line, would take exception to that. And yes, some of this is on the networks for putting on Cashmere Mafia, Lipstick Jungle, Valentine, and Easy Money, but if you are an aspiring producer, you should blame the executive producers who are putting on such awful shows in the first place. If they don't find an audience, what do you expect a network to do? Jay is a proven commodity...Hell, I'll gladly watch. In fact, I'm looking forward to it. Survival of the fittest, what are you willing to do to survive?
Showing posts with label tv writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tv writing. Show all posts
Friday, December 12, 2008
I hate research
Unfortunately, I'm good at it. That doesn't make me like it any more. But, since I have some expected time off, and I'm sans scripts to write, it's been two weeks of research: btwn NATPE, a new script research (right now I'm leaning to a shakespeare adaptation...like every other human on earth), and English language market research (Australia, Britain, Canada...sorry, Belize) it's been busy couple weeks. And I wanted to give you a few tidbits about what I've gleaned. I should mention, my research was only so complete because finding information about shows in other countries is rough, and watching those shows on youtube is sometimes impossible. So, if you live in these countries and want to add to the research, I'd be happy to update the findings.
Other English language countries aren't big fans of legal shows.
Outside of Billable Hours in Canada, I didn't find many successful legal shows anywhere in the English speaking world. And, since the name of our game is ability to source shows to multiple countries, developing a legal show is not advisable in the current climate.
Everyone loves crime/police shows.
For as much as I had trouble finding legal shows, crime shows were EVERYWHERE. However, unlike America which has "dramedy" cop shows like Monk and Psych, almost all, if not all, of foreign police dramas are straight drama, no comedy. It's a bummer, and there may be a niche to fill, but the good news is that crime dramas are alive and well anywhere. Of course, we all know Hustle IS a dramedy show about a group of con-men...however, not a police station, CoW show, and definitely not a show that I have seen in either Canada or Australia.
The "dialect" barrier is not as pronounced as one would assume.
Outside of a few british shows that utilized some cockney expressions, every show I researched used the same general dialect as we do in the states. Now, that doesn't mean you should make a show about a surfer dude, that just won't translate. But, if you are planning on marketing a show to multiple countries, and you use standard english, not slang, you should be able to market your show to a wide range of english speaking countries.
Though it goes against common sense, almost every sitcom is single camera.
One would assume that since multi-camera sitcoms are the most inexpensive shows to produce, a researcher would see them in places like Australia and Canada. However, the opposite is true. In fact, through my research I only saw a handful of multi-camera comedies, most of which were re-runs on BBC. This particular fact was the biggest surprise to me.
British shows is crazy!
If I'm going to create a show straight for a specific country, it's going to be Britain. Not only do they have a crazy show that's shot solely from the character's POV, but they also have a sitcom about a group of housewives who are in two rival gangs. Of all the countries I found, the most zany, fun, and overall creative shows were on British TV.
The next post, I'll put together some of my favorite specific shows from each country. Now, back to the grind!
Other English language countries aren't big fans of legal shows.
Outside of Billable Hours in Canada, I didn't find many successful legal shows anywhere in the English speaking world. And, since the name of our game is ability to source shows to multiple countries, developing a legal show is not advisable in the current climate.
Everyone loves crime/police shows.
For as much as I had trouble finding legal shows, crime shows were EVERYWHERE. However, unlike America which has "dramedy" cop shows like Monk and Psych, almost all, if not all, of foreign police dramas are straight drama, no comedy. It's a bummer, and there may be a niche to fill, but the good news is that crime dramas are alive and well anywhere. Of course, we all know Hustle IS a dramedy show about a group of con-men...however, not a police station, CoW show, and definitely not a show that I have seen in either Canada or Australia.
The "dialect" barrier is not as pronounced as one would assume.
Outside of a few british shows that utilized some cockney expressions, every show I researched used the same general dialect as we do in the states. Now, that doesn't mean you should make a show about a surfer dude, that just won't translate. But, if you are planning on marketing a show to multiple countries, and you use standard english, not slang, you should be able to market your show to a wide range of english speaking countries.
Though it goes against common sense, almost every sitcom is single camera.
One would assume that since multi-camera sitcoms are the most inexpensive shows to produce, a researcher would see them in places like Australia and Canada. However, the opposite is true. In fact, through my research I only saw a handful of multi-camera comedies, most of which were re-runs on BBC. This particular fact was the biggest surprise to me.
British shows is crazy!
If I'm going to create a show straight for a specific country, it's going to be Britain. Not only do they have a crazy show that's shot solely from the character's POV, but they also have a sitcom about a group of housewives who are in two rival gangs. Of all the countries I found, the most zany, fun, and overall creative shows were on British TV.
The next post, I'll put together some of my favorite specific shows from each country. Now, back to the grind!
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
John Rogers
***IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED LEVERAGE, THERE ARE SPOILERS AHEAD!!!***
I love you, and Kung Fu monkey is one of my favorites, AND leverage is a quality show shot on the Red, which I respect. I qualify those statements to say this.
Leverage is a poor man's Hustle. Hustle is a British show that aired on AMC for four seasons dealing with a group of "scrupulous" thieves who steal from degenerate human beings. Except instead of giving it back, they keep it to fund their operations. It's one of my favorite shows of all time, canceled before it's time. (*correction: Hustle will air a fifth season on AMC starting in January)
Here is my major concern. There's no real conflict except for the A story. If you look at shows that work about do-gooders, they always have a crux. In A Team, the team was always being chased, fearing for their lives...not that BA feared anything. In Hustle, the fear was not having enough money to continue. In Burn Notice, the fear is not being able to solve the case of who burned him.
However, there is not that conflict in Leverage. In the first episode, the "team" gets a windfall of money, enough to retire on. However, in the end, they decide helping the good guys was too much to fun to pass up on. They all want Nathan, Timothy Hutton, to lead them into helping the good guys.
They no longer have to worry about being caught, or needing money, or any of those things that drive other shows. Their initial conflict about who set them up in the pilot was resolved by the end of the pilot.
While it is easy to say the A story is compelling enough to watch, which it is, there is no urgency in the group for a bigger purpose. And, for me, that makes it a watered down Hustle. On a side note, Jaime Murray, we hardly knew ye on Valentine. I wanted to watch it just for you, but I couldn't do it.
As for John Rogers, I read the blog, I know what you've done, and I respect the hell out of it. As far as a show goes, I'll keep watching.
I love you, and Kung Fu monkey is one of my favorites, AND leverage is a quality show shot on the Red, which I respect. I qualify those statements to say this.
Leverage is a poor man's Hustle. Hustle is a British show that aired on AMC for four seasons dealing with a group of "scrupulous" thieves who steal from degenerate human beings. Except instead of giving it back, they keep it to fund their operations. It's one of my favorite shows of all time, canceled before it's time. (*correction: Hustle will air a fifth season on AMC starting in January)
Here is my major concern. There's no real conflict except for the A story. If you look at shows that work about do-gooders, they always have a crux. In A Team, the team was always being chased, fearing for their lives...not that BA feared anything. In Hustle, the fear was not having enough money to continue. In Burn Notice, the fear is not being able to solve the case of who burned him.
However, there is not that conflict in Leverage. In the first episode, the "team" gets a windfall of money, enough to retire on. However, in the end, they decide helping the good guys was too much to fun to pass up on. They all want Nathan, Timothy Hutton, to lead them into helping the good guys.
They no longer have to worry about being caught, or needing money, or any of those things that drive other shows. Their initial conflict about who set them up in the pilot was resolved by the end of the pilot.
While it is easy to say the A story is compelling enough to watch, which it is, there is no urgency in the group for a bigger purpose. And, for me, that makes it a watered down Hustle. On a side note, Jaime Murray, we hardly knew ye on Valentine. I wanted to watch it just for you, but I couldn't do it.
As for John Rogers, I read the blog, I know what you've done, and I respect the hell out of it. As far as a show goes, I'll keep watching.
Monday, November 24, 2008
When a script just doesn't work...
As you know if you've read my blog, I like to get right into a script, barreling through if I like an idea until it's done, a nice, neat garbage draft.
However, every once and a while, during a re-write, I find that the idea doesn't work, like at all. I'll give you the logline of a spec I'm working on:
"After her father commits suicide, a young girl decides to kill herself, and sets off along a journey to do all of the things she wants to do before she dies".
Now, here's the issue. I love the main character, I love to B story, and I love to scenes. However, I can't wrap my brain about how anyone would find the story palatable, or identify with the main character. And, after so many weeks of thinking about it, I've decided it's time to kill my entire baby. While it kills me in a way, it has to be done. And, I just wanted to send it out into the ether that if you've had to do the same, I feel your pain. So, how did I come up with that conclusion? I want take a moment to discuss some things that may or may not be necessary to think about when killing an idea/script.
1-Does the STRUCTURE make sense?
Many times, character, even dialog, are great in a script, but the actual structure that drives the story doesn't work at ALL. For instance, you have a suicidal girl who is cracking jokes as she attempts different ways to kill himself, but she is not truly searching for anything. Or your B story is about a guy who's parents are dug up and sent home with him, but he doesn't actively seek out anything, your structure is wack and needs to be re-examined.
ANSWER: No. not at all, it is impossible to identify with the main protagonist, and equally impossible to identify with any of the other characters.
2- is it worth taking the script and doing a page 1 rewrite?
When you think of your story, and you decide you need to restructure the story from the beginning, is it worth it? Mainly, is your script marketable in the first place? Have you sunk enough time in to make it necessary to start again from the beginning? Do you have another idea that is better or equally good that you could adapt your current script?
ANSWER: No. the script must be gutted to the point that it is unrecognizable, and a new skeleton must be added to make the story work.
3- How badly do you want to write this movie?
Luckily for myself, I write a lot of scripts, and this was my "labor of love". So, while I loved the script, I don't NEED to make it. It was my kooky script, just for fun. If this is your masterwork, I would suggest you work on it more.
ANSWER: While I like it, I don't love it, and I don't need to have more of it.
So, my short answer is, as my business partner mentioned, to shelve it, and see if maybe in the next few years I can make something of it. Now, I need a new project to work on, any ideas?
However, every once and a while, during a re-write, I find that the idea doesn't work, like at all. I'll give you the logline of a spec I'm working on:
"After her father commits suicide, a young girl decides to kill herself, and sets off along a journey to do all of the things she wants to do before she dies".
Now, here's the issue. I love the main character, I love to B story, and I love to scenes. However, I can't wrap my brain about how anyone would find the story palatable, or identify with the main character. And, after so many weeks of thinking about it, I've decided it's time to kill my entire baby. While it kills me in a way, it has to be done. And, I just wanted to send it out into the ether that if you've had to do the same, I feel your pain. So, how did I come up with that conclusion? I want take a moment to discuss some things that may or may not be necessary to think about when killing an idea/script.
1-Does the STRUCTURE make sense?
Many times, character, even dialog, are great in a script, but the actual structure that drives the story doesn't work at ALL. For instance, you have a suicidal girl who is cracking jokes as she attempts different ways to kill himself, but she is not truly searching for anything. Or your B story is about a guy who's parents are dug up and sent home with him, but he doesn't actively seek out anything, your structure is wack and needs to be re-examined.
ANSWER: No. not at all, it is impossible to identify with the main protagonist, and equally impossible to identify with any of the other characters.
2- is it worth taking the script and doing a page 1 rewrite?
When you think of your story, and you decide you need to restructure the story from the beginning, is it worth it? Mainly, is your script marketable in the first place? Have you sunk enough time in to make it necessary to start again from the beginning? Do you have another idea that is better or equally good that you could adapt your current script?
ANSWER: No. the script must be gutted to the point that it is unrecognizable, and a new skeleton must be added to make the story work.
3- How badly do you want to write this movie?
Luckily for myself, I write a lot of scripts, and this was my "labor of love". So, while I loved the script, I don't NEED to make it. It was my kooky script, just for fun. If this is your masterwork, I would suggest you work on it more.
ANSWER: While I like it, I don't love it, and I don't need to have more of it.
So, my short answer is, as my business partner mentioned, to shelve it, and see if maybe in the next few years I can make something of it. Now, I need a new project to work on, any ideas?
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Sending out bad scripts...
Once you are read by a company, for the most part, they will give your script on two different criteria. First, let me tell you that if you don't know what coverage is, go to www.scriptcoverage.com and you will be able to see basically the format of what coverage looks like. Disregard the synopsis and the development comments, and look at second grid at the pop of the page. Each script and reader is given a pass, consider, or recommend.
1- Script
They will give a pass, consider, recommend to the script. A script getting passed at a company means very little, except that that specific company doesn't think that script would be a good fit for their company. Possibly you sent a good quality romantic comedy script to a horror company or a slasher flick to an arthouse producer. Many times even if a script is amazing, a producer can't use it, even if they enjoy it. The real important grade they give you is-
2-Writer
The reader will also give a pass, consider, recommend to you, the writer. This is incredibly important because if you get a PASS, they will NOT read you again. Basically, the bad script burns a future bridge.
So, if you send out a great script to 50 companies and it doesn't sell, but all the companies thought it was well-written, you can submit other material to the company. But, if you send out a terrible script, you will be shooting yourself in the foot. Which is why it's incredibly important to VET your scripts with friends, writer's groups, mentors, proteges, and everyone who can give you accurate opinions on your scripts, before you send it out to people. Because whether someone buys your script of not, if they think you're a good writer, the door becomes a little easier to kick in the next time.
1- Script
They will give a pass, consider, recommend to the script. A script getting passed at a company means very little, except that that specific company doesn't think that script would be a good fit for their company. Possibly you sent a good quality romantic comedy script to a horror company or a slasher flick to an arthouse producer. Many times even if a script is amazing, a producer can't use it, even if they enjoy it. The real important grade they give you is-
2-Writer
The reader will also give a pass, consider, recommend to you, the writer. This is incredibly important because if you get a PASS, they will NOT read you again. Basically, the bad script burns a future bridge.
So, if you send out a great script to 50 companies and it doesn't sell, but all the companies thought it was well-written, you can submit other material to the company. But, if you send out a terrible script, you will be shooting yourself in the foot. Which is why it's incredibly important to VET your scripts with friends, writer's groups, mentors, proteges, and everyone who can give you accurate opinions on your scripts, before you send it out to people. Because whether someone buys your script of not, if they think you're a good writer, the door becomes a little easier to kick in the next time.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
The other crap
Because I'm not just a writer, or director, or director of development, but also run my company, I am often called upon to do OTHER CRAP besides being a creative. I hate the other crap, but it allows me to be more marketable to my business partners and the outside world.
And it got me to thinking about all the junk that needs to be done OUTSIDE of being creative and writing a script/directing a project in order to be successful. So I decided to run down a few for you, since I've once again neglected you for so long.
Pre/post-writing
This is all of the materials that are required to get your script ready to be shown to people. It includes summaries, treatments, and loglines. I can't tell you how many writers I run in to that have a script and don't have the pitch material to get it read. Most of the time, there is a structure to getting a story read.
1-A producer wants to hear a logline. If the logline is compelling, go to step 2, if it's not, the story dies here. This is currently happening with a story i wrote at the beginning of the year. Because it's not "high concept", can't be pitched in 1 sentence, people don't want to read it. In the meantime, my high concept work gets read all the time.
2-Then they want to see a summary/treatment. This is a 1 page document in the case of a summary, or a 3-5 page document for a treatment, that gives the details on structure, plot twists, and how the story plays out. If the story is compelling and up the producer's alley, they will read your script. Doesn't mean they'll like it. In fact, most of the time the execution is terrible, but they are reading it. Scripts on the shelf don't get sold!
Pitch Material
In this ever expanding world of converging media, it's often required, or recommended, to get together other pitch material. This can be a comic book, concept art, or other information that will show the visual style of the show/movie. Why? Because producers are dumb...j/k...but they are very busy, and read tons of scripts a week, and if they can't visualize your noir story, it's never gonna get made.
The Business/Legal Stuff
Thank god for my business partner being a lawyer. Otherwise I would pull my hair out every day. THIS is the stuff I really hate, and the thing that is most important. No investor will give you dime one without this material, even if the script is great. This is the business plan, budget, schedule, cast list, LOIs, PPMs, distributor information, etc. All of the materials that make the package exciting for investors. For a creative, this is a nightmare because it's breaking down all of your scenes and putting a numeric value on them.
However, as a creative, it's also a very important skill to have, because most movies are made either below 20 million, or over 80 million. There are movies in the gooey middle, but the most successful movies fall in those ranges. And, as a baby writer, you'll be writing, or should be writing for the former. And if you know the costs of that 120 call pile-up, you will be able to justify whether it is necessary.
The bottom line is, you are a creative, but you are ALSO a business. You are selling yourself, and these are the materials, outside of the business stuff if you're not a producer as well, that will sell you to a producer, and get your script bought, if not made.
So, before you go wide with a script, make sure that you have all the material to back it up, and when someone asks you about it, you can pitch like the wind and get people interested.
And it got me to thinking about all the junk that needs to be done OUTSIDE of being creative and writing a script/directing a project in order to be successful. So I decided to run down a few for you, since I've once again neglected you for so long.
Pre/post-writing
This is all of the materials that are required to get your script ready to be shown to people. It includes summaries, treatments, and loglines. I can't tell you how many writers I run in to that have a script and don't have the pitch material to get it read. Most of the time, there is a structure to getting a story read.
1-A producer wants to hear a logline. If the logline is compelling, go to step 2, if it's not, the story dies here. This is currently happening with a story i wrote at the beginning of the year. Because it's not "high concept", can't be pitched in 1 sentence, people don't want to read it. In the meantime, my high concept work gets read all the time.
2-Then they want to see a summary/treatment. This is a 1 page document in the case of a summary, or a 3-5 page document for a treatment, that gives the details on structure, plot twists, and how the story plays out. If the story is compelling and up the producer's alley, they will read your script. Doesn't mean they'll like it. In fact, most of the time the execution is terrible, but they are reading it. Scripts on the shelf don't get sold!
Pitch Material
In this ever expanding world of converging media, it's often required, or recommended, to get together other pitch material. This can be a comic book, concept art, or other information that will show the visual style of the show/movie. Why? Because producers are dumb...j/k...but they are very busy, and read tons of scripts a week, and if they can't visualize your noir story, it's never gonna get made.
The Business/Legal Stuff
Thank god for my business partner being a lawyer. Otherwise I would pull my hair out every day. THIS is the stuff I really hate, and the thing that is most important. No investor will give you dime one without this material, even if the script is great. This is the business plan, budget, schedule, cast list, LOIs, PPMs, distributor information, etc. All of the materials that make the package exciting for investors. For a creative, this is a nightmare because it's breaking down all of your scenes and putting a numeric value on them.
However, as a creative, it's also a very important skill to have, because most movies are made either below 20 million, or over 80 million. There are movies in the gooey middle, but the most successful movies fall in those ranges. And, as a baby writer, you'll be writing, or should be writing for the former. And if you know the costs of that 120 call pile-up, you will be able to justify whether it is necessary.
The bottom line is, you are a creative, but you are ALSO a business. You are selling yourself, and these are the materials, outside of the business stuff if you're not a producer as well, that will sell you to a producer, and get your script bought, if not made.
So, before you go wide with a script, make sure that you have all the material to back it up, and when someone asks you about it, you can pitch like the wind and get people interested.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Rewriting, ganked from bang2write
Because all of the Grinders out there have been engrossed in a rewrite debate all week, and because I happened to come across this blog posting from one of my favorite bloggers, Lucy Vee, I decided to repost it for all your enjoyment. Read it here.
Approaching Rewrites
from Write Here, Write Now by Lucy
For the lovely H who asked last week for my thoughts on rewrites. If you have a query for the blog, leave a comment or send me an email and I'll get to it as soon as I can.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing to remember with your spec scripts is: it's a work in progress. It's never finished. You may do three billion drafts of a spec before it gets an option, but chances are you'll end up doing a billion more AFTER the option. I have never heard of a writer optioning a script and a producer or director making it the way it is (if it isn't a collaboration, that is).
Even if your spec ends up languishing on your desktop, chances are you will go back to it at some point in your lifetime. I had a spec I thought completely, hopelessly dead; I hadn't so much as thought about it in years (except in "Aaah, that was so crap, how sweet" kind of way) until someone phoned me up and said "I need a pitch for something to do with space pirates." I said (somewhat foolishly I might add), "Oh, I have one of those." Then freaked out when I remembered how crap my original draft was. Luckily they only wanted a one page pitch, not an actual draft, so I was able to think about how I might approach the crap execution I did all those years ago now I'm a little more experienced. So I redid the premise. And lo and behold, it works. As a pitch, anyway!
But how do you approach a redraft once you've got that all-important, actual first-first, words-on-paper draft?
Well, as in all things scriptwriting-related, it's entirely personal. I know writers who write a first draft and then workshop it with actors before attempting a second draft. Others print out said first-first draft, put in a drawer, then come back and hack at it with a red pen. Some stare at their drafts on a PC screen like madmen and ring people up to complain about how shit their work is and how they're going to give up screenwriting. I know writers who send their first-first drafts to readers and friends in the first instance; some only allow their agents to look at their stuff when it's in a bit of a state (as all first-first drafts are). Others do a combo of all of this.
If I was giving general advice on approaching a redraft, the first thing I would look at in a second draft is structure and plot. I've said before that dialogue is the last thing I look at, but even character comes after structure and plot for me. Why? Because characters can always be re-aligned around plot in my eyes, but a good plot can't be drawn OUT of a character. I read too many scripts that have interesting characters that don't do anything much to think plotting is subordinate.
It's easy to get sidetracked by the likes of character and dialogue when you really should be looking at how your story works as a whole; otherwise it's like you're moving around the tiles in one of those annoying puzzles where you have to make a picture, yet one tile is always out of sync. By investing in plot and structure in the second draft, you can really work on your characters' arcs and make us care about them in the third. However a plotless or badly structured script can mean messing around with the incidental scenes and moments, hitting your head against a brick wall in my experience.
Way I see it, the first-first draft is a throwaway draft. You might feel a sense of achievement for getting the thing finished, but don't let that euphoria fool you and make you believe for one second this draft is anywhere near finished. It isn't. Yes there will be some good stuff in there - stuff that might even make it into the final version of the first draft you send out. But nine times out of ten, you can do better. Scrub that: you MUST do better. There will be incoherent chunks, woolly characterisation, on-the-nose dialogue. There will plot opportunities wasted; there will be moments that can be realigned, leaner, cooler.
In short: even if your first-first draft is good, it's not as good as it CAN be. And writers that come through Bang2write generally get this. What they don't appear to always get is that drafts AFTER the first-first draft won't be perfect either. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard something along the lines of:
"Thanks for your notes, I agree with your points... It's a shame I still haven't written a shootable draft".
A shootable draft?? There's no such thing. Even when your drafts ARE shot, there's a good chance you will see things you *should have* written, even if people tell you they love your work. What's more, with filmmaking being a collaborative effort, you may not agree with a director's choices or a producer's demands in a rewrite - yet you will have to do it. It's the way that is, hence the back-handed compliment I've heard writers sometimes give each other: "Hey, congratulations on getting a prodco to fuck up your script!"
So if you're striving for perfection in your rewrite second time around (or even four, five, six times around and more!), you're setting yourself up for disappointment. You won't get perfection. Your reader won't come back to you and say, "Hey, this is fine now, send it out", they'll hopefully say something along the lines of: "You've worked out [these issues], now you need to concentrate on [these issues]." This is a GOOD thing, it's a sign you're making progress, not a failure - because your second first draft will be what it is: a slightly better first-first draft.
But there is one other thing when considering rewrites: don't be afraid of returning to page one. It's not a sign of failure or even weakness and you can still use your original draft(s) as a foundation for the new script. When I wrote Thy Will Be Done, I wrote nine drafts of my first draft and three of them (a third!) went back to page one. Each time it was needed and each time it got stronger as a result. Now I have a script in my portfolio that I am confident with and that I know is good - even when people have told me they didn't like it. I know it's story preference, rather than craft. And that counts for so much.
How do you approach rewriting?
Approaching Rewrites
from Write Here, Write Now by Lucy
For the lovely H who asked last week for my thoughts on rewrites. If you have a query for the blog, leave a comment or send me an email and I'll get to it as soon as I can.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing to remember with your spec scripts is: it's a work in progress. It's never finished. You may do three billion drafts of a spec before it gets an option, but chances are you'll end up doing a billion more AFTER the option. I have never heard of a writer optioning a script and a producer or director making it the way it is (if it isn't a collaboration, that is).
Even if your spec ends up languishing on your desktop, chances are you will go back to it at some point in your lifetime. I had a spec I thought completely, hopelessly dead; I hadn't so much as thought about it in years (except in "Aaah, that was so crap, how sweet" kind of way) until someone phoned me up and said "I need a pitch for something to do with space pirates." I said (somewhat foolishly I might add), "Oh, I have one of those." Then freaked out when I remembered how crap my original draft was. Luckily they only wanted a one page pitch, not an actual draft, so I was able to think about how I might approach the crap execution I did all those years ago now I'm a little more experienced. So I redid the premise. And lo and behold, it works. As a pitch, anyway!
But how do you approach a redraft once you've got that all-important, actual first-first, words-on-paper draft?
Well, as in all things scriptwriting-related, it's entirely personal. I know writers who write a first draft and then workshop it with actors before attempting a second draft. Others print out said first-first draft, put in a drawer, then come back and hack at it with a red pen. Some stare at their drafts on a PC screen like madmen and ring people up to complain about how shit their work is and how they're going to give up screenwriting. I know writers who send their first-first drafts to readers and friends in the first instance; some only allow their agents to look at their stuff when it's in a bit of a state (as all first-first drafts are). Others do a combo of all of this.
If I was giving general advice on approaching a redraft, the first thing I would look at in a second draft is structure and plot. I've said before that dialogue is the last thing I look at, but even character comes after structure and plot for me. Why? Because characters can always be re-aligned around plot in my eyes, but a good plot can't be drawn OUT of a character. I read too many scripts that have interesting characters that don't do anything much to think plotting is subordinate.
It's easy to get sidetracked by the likes of character and dialogue when you really should be looking at how your story works as a whole; otherwise it's like you're moving around the tiles in one of those annoying puzzles where you have to make a picture, yet one tile is always out of sync. By investing in plot and structure in the second draft, you can really work on your characters' arcs and make us care about them in the third. However a plotless or badly structured script can mean messing around with the incidental scenes and moments, hitting your head against a brick wall in my experience.
Way I see it, the first-first draft is a throwaway draft. You might feel a sense of achievement for getting the thing finished, but don't let that euphoria fool you and make you believe for one second this draft is anywhere near finished. It isn't. Yes there will be some good stuff in there - stuff that might even make it into the final version of the first draft you send out. But nine times out of ten, you can do better. Scrub that: you MUST do better. There will be incoherent chunks, woolly characterisation, on-the-nose dialogue. There will plot opportunities wasted; there will be moments that can be realigned, leaner, cooler.
In short: even if your first-first draft is good, it's not as good as it CAN be. And writers that come through Bang2write generally get this. What they don't appear to always get is that drafts AFTER the first-first draft won't be perfect either. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard something along the lines of:
"Thanks for your notes, I agree with your points... It's a shame I still haven't written a shootable draft".
A shootable draft?? There's no such thing. Even when your drafts ARE shot, there's a good chance you will see things you *should have* written, even if people tell you they love your work. What's more, with filmmaking being a collaborative effort, you may not agree with a director's choices or a producer's demands in a rewrite - yet you will have to do it. It's the way that is, hence the back-handed compliment I've heard writers sometimes give each other: "Hey, congratulations on getting a prodco to fuck up your script!"
So if you're striving for perfection in your rewrite second time around (or even four, five, six times around and more!), you're setting yourself up for disappointment. You won't get perfection. Your reader won't come back to you and say, "Hey, this is fine now, send it out", they'll hopefully say something along the lines of: "You've worked out [these issues], now you need to concentrate on [these issues]." This is a GOOD thing, it's a sign you're making progress, not a failure - because your second first draft will be what it is: a slightly better first-first draft.
But there is one other thing when considering rewrites: don't be afraid of returning to page one. It's not a sign of failure or even weakness and you can still use your original draft(s) as a foundation for the new script. When I wrote Thy Will Be Done, I wrote nine drafts of my first draft and three of them (a third!) went back to page one. Each time it was needed and each time it got stronger as a result. Now I have a script in my portfolio that I am confident with and that I know is good - even when people have told me they didn't like it. I know it's story preference, rather than craft. And that counts for so much.
How do you approach rewriting?
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Another word about deadlines
As we at the Grind, by which I mean me at the Grind, often do, I'd like to clarify the previous blog entry, as I have been getting a couple of questions about it.
While I think that imposing a deadline can be a very good thing for a first draft, I do NOT recommend imposing deadlines for final drafts, unless you've found that it works for you.
I like to work in a world where I will do 1-2 drafts in a day for x number of days until the project is done. Then, I will vet that script with a select group of people whose opinions I trust. Then, I will do the same thing, over and over. For every x number of drafts I do, I will ask for an opinion, sometimes from the same person, sometimes from another person. For me, I know that usually by the 10th draft, a script is solid enough to stand on it's own and after 20 drafts I've cleared out all the bugs down to the smallest typos. But, that doesn't work for everyone, or possibly anyone else.
It's not always a good idea to give a time limit for a final draft because yes, it does, or could, lower what you would consider your best work. Only after mulling things over, stewing on them, and kicking them around in your brain will you be able to see if there is a clear reason for what you are doing. On the other hand, professional writers work on deadlines constantly, and if might be good to get in the habit of learning a skill like that, if it works for you.
An exercise I like to do is AFTER writing a first draft of a script, step away from it for a month and start a new project, then, come back to in 2 weeks-1 month later. After that amount of time, you'll be able to have a new perspective on your script. Then, take your time molding and crafting your story, your characters, and your dialogue. Whenever I do one of my "cycles", I try to step away from the script for a couple of days until I get notes so I can see the script with a clear head. I recommend this to everyone, because having good friend to tell you what sucks or what doesn't in your script is invaluable. Not your mother, either. They love everything you do, even the horse manure.
The only deadline that should be imposed is if an outside force (i.e. contest, fellowship, or, god willing, client) put an outside deadline on you. But then again, that's how my mind work. It's all about what works for you to create the best product in the end. And even after it's a finished product, who knows in a year you might think of a brilliant piece you want to add, and I encourage that too, if it works for you.
P.S.-Part of the joy of writing comes in finding what methodology works for you. If you're a chronic procrastinator, or work really well on a deadline, consider setting a deadline up...who knows, it might work for you.
While I think that imposing a deadline can be a very good thing for a first draft, I do NOT recommend imposing deadlines for final drafts, unless you've found that it works for you.
I like to work in a world where I will do 1-2 drafts in a day for x number of days until the project is done. Then, I will vet that script with a select group of people whose opinions I trust. Then, I will do the same thing, over and over. For every x number of drafts I do, I will ask for an opinion, sometimes from the same person, sometimes from another person. For me, I know that usually by the 10th draft, a script is solid enough to stand on it's own and after 20 drafts I've cleared out all the bugs down to the smallest typos. But, that doesn't work for everyone, or possibly anyone else.
It's not always a good idea to give a time limit for a final draft because yes, it does, or could, lower what you would consider your best work. Only after mulling things over, stewing on them, and kicking them around in your brain will you be able to see if there is a clear reason for what you are doing. On the other hand, professional writers work on deadlines constantly, and if might be good to get in the habit of learning a skill like that, if it works for you.
An exercise I like to do is AFTER writing a first draft of a script, step away from it for a month and start a new project, then, come back to in 2 weeks-1 month later. After that amount of time, you'll be able to have a new perspective on your script. Then, take your time molding and crafting your story, your characters, and your dialogue. Whenever I do one of my "cycles", I try to step away from the script for a couple of days until I get notes so I can see the script with a clear head. I recommend this to everyone, because having good friend to tell you what sucks or what doesn't in your script is invaluable. Not your mother, either. They love everything you do, even the horse manure.
The only deadline that should be imposed is if an outside force (i.e. contest, fellowship, or, god willing, client) put an outside deadline on you. But then again, that's how my mind work. It's all about what works for you to create the best product in the end. And even after it's a finished product, who knows in a year you might think of a brilliant piece you want to add, and I encourage that too, if it works for you.
P.S.-Part of the joy of writing comes in finding what methodology works for you. If you're a chronic procrastinator, or work really well on a deadline, consider setting a deadline up...who knows, it might work for you.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Imposing deadlines...
I read an interesting post today at Raving Dave's blog about the pitfalls of using deadlines.
While I agree with the issues, I disagree that it is necessarily a bad thing as mentioned here:
I’ve seen it happen so often: A looming deadline encourages you to move the goal posts, lower the bar, relax your standards. The closer the deadline approaches, the more crap you’re willing to see through your fingers, despite your intuition quietly telling you not to.
IMHO, there is absolutely nothing wrong with lowering your standards on a first draft. A FIRST DRAFT, and nothing else. I'm under the impression that Dave is talking about a deadline to finish a script in a final form, in which case I would completely agree, but it would totally ruin my post. So, I'm going to speak to using deadlines as first draft.
Imposing a deadline for a first draft is not only a good idea, but sometimes a necessary evil to put words on the page. I'm a huge fan of garbage drafts, and think that if you're thinking too much about your first draft, you're going to lose momentum. If I didn't have specific deadlines for first drafts, I would NEVER get ANY writing done.
If a writer is too self-conscious about a first draft, it's going to cause them to sit on their laurels and try to construct the perfect story. And that's not a good thing, especially for a new writer. As a new writer, you should be WRITING, because that's the only way you're going to become a better WRITER. I've never known a writer who has written a good first script, or third, or fifth. However, the things they learned from those scripts helped them become a better writer, and eventually a great writer.
I just talked to a good friend of mine on facebook this morning. The conversation follows, the names have been changed to protect the newbile.
XXX
Teach me the art of writing a screen play
Me
start by reading about 1000 screenplays and analyzing them.
XXX
hahah ANAL-yzing
Me
then, buy final draft, then read about 10 screenwriting books.
then buy the hollywood standard so you can learn all the formating.
then write 10 screenplays.
XXX
sweet
XXX
the more i think about it - michael bay should be directing my movie idea
Me
seriously though, it's a lot about formatting, understanding structure, dialogue, and how to make a movie look good on the page.
The issue is that this specific writer thinks that he will be a great writer the first time out, that michael bay will be interested in his movie, and that he will immediately be a success, and that's just not true.
Different experts have different opinions, everywhere from "You'll sell a script when you've written 1 million words" to "Once you can stack you're work 18 inches, you'll sell a script" to "Writing ten scripts" and everything in between. But the key is that, PEOPLE DON'T SELL THEIR FIRST SCRIPT, OR THEIR SECOND, OR THEIR THIRD (caveat, I'm sure it's happened, but it's rare).
So, instead of trying to craft the perfect script the first time out, just get it out there on the page, look at it, and analyze your own work just like you analyze other scripts. Then do it again, and again, and again. And one day it will click, and with each script it will get better, but it's silly NOT to set a deadline, FOR A FIRST DRAFT, because you're trying to craft the perfect story. The most important thing to being a good writer is to WRITE. And if this doesn't work for you, figure out the best way to WRITE. After the draft is on the page, then you can re-write til your heart's desire.
While I agree with the issues, I disagree that it is necessarily a bad thing as mentioned here:
I’ve seen it happen so often: A looming deadline encourages you to move the goal posts, lower the bar, relax your standards. The closer the deadline approaches, the more crap you’re willing to see through your fingers, despite your intuition quietly telling you not to.
IMHO, there is absolutely nothing wrong with lowering your standards on a first draft. A FIRST DRAFT, and nothing else. I'm under the impression that Dave is talking about a deadline to finish a script in a final form, in which case I would completely agree, but it would totally ruin my post. So, I'm going to speak to using deadlines as first draft.
Imposing a deadline for a first draft is not only a good idea, but sometimes a necessary evil to put words on the page. I'm a huge fan of garbage drafts, and think that if you're thinking too much about your first draft, you're going to lose momentum. If I didn't have specific deadlines for first drafts, I would NEVER get ANY writing done.
If a writer is too self-conscious about a first draft, it's going to cause them to sit on their laurels and try to construct the perfect story. And that's not a good thing, especially for a new writer. As a new writer, you should be WRITING, because that's the only way you're going to become a better WRITER. I've never known a writer who has written a good first script, or third, or fifth. However, the things they learned from those scripts helped them become a better writer, and eventually a great writer.
I just talked to a good friend of mine on facebook this morning. The conversation follows, the names have been changed to protect the newbile.
XXX
Teach me the art of writing a screen play
Me
start by reading about 1000 screenplays and analyzing them.
XXX
hahah ANAL-yzing
Me
then, buy final draft, then read about 10 screenwriting books.
then buy the hollywood standard so you can learn all the formating.
then write 10 screenplays.
XXX
sweet
XXX
the more i think about it - michael bay should be directing my movie idea
Me
seriously though, it's a lot about formatting, understanding structure, dialogue, and how to make a movie look good on the page.
The issue is that this specific writer thinks that he will be a great writer the first time out, that michael bay will be interested in his movie, and that he will immediately be a success, and that's just not true.
Different experts have different opinions, everywhere from "You'll sell a script when you've written 1 million words" to "Once you can stack you're work 18 inches, you'll sell a script" to "Writing ten scripts" and everything in between. But the key is that, PEOPLE DON'T SELL THEIR FIRST SCRIPT, OR THEIR SECOND, OR THEIR THIRD (caveat, I'm sure it's happened, but it's rare).
So, instead of trying to craft the perfect script the first time out, just get it out there on the page, look at it, and analyze your own work just like you analyze other scripts. Then do it again, and again, and again. And one day it will click, and with each script it will get better, but it's silly NOT to set a deadline, FOR A FIRST DRAFT, because you're trying to craft the perfect story. The most important thing to being a good writer is to WRITE. And if this doesn't work for you, figure out the best way to WRITE. After the draft is on the page, then you can re-write til your heart's desire.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Tailoring your pitch...
...to a network is perfectly demonstrated by two television shows currently on TV. These shows are amazing examples of how two networks can develop the same premise in two very different ways.
The shows:
USA's Psych and CBS's The Mentalist.
What is the premise: An man with a gift for noticing every detail of the world pretends to be a psychic and works with the police department to solve crimes.
However, that is where the similarities end. The development of the shows couldn't be more different. First, let's examine the shows' summaries directly from their website.
The Mentalist:
THE MENTALIST stars Golden Globe Award nominee Simon Baker as Patrick Jane, an independent consultant with the California Bureau of Investigation (CBI), who has a remarkable track record for solving serious crimes by using his razor sharp skills of observation. Within the Bureau, Jane is notorious for his blatant lack of protocol and his semi-celebrity past as a psychic medium, whose paranormal abilities he now admits he feigned. Jane's role in cracking a series of tough high-profile cases is greatly valued by his fellow agents. However, no-nonsense Senior Agent Teresa Lisbon openly resists having Jane in her unit and alternates between reluctantly acknowledging Jane's usefulness and blasting him for his theatrics, narcissism and dangerous lack of boundaries. Lisbon's team includes agents Kimball Cho, Wayne Rigsby and rookie member Grace Van Pelt, who all think Jane's a loose cannon but admire his charm and knack for clearing cases.
Psych:
Raised in Santa Barbara by a family of cops, Shawn possesses uncanny powers of observation honed by his police officer father, Henry, who drilled young Shawn to note even the smallest of details from his surroundings as a way of grooming him for his inevitable career in the family business. Unfortunately, when a rift develops between father and son, Shawn finds himself taking a series of random jobs instead of becoming the detective he was groomed to be.
However, for the fun of it, Shawn makes a habit of calling in tips to the police about cases he reads about or sees on television, and when one of his tips appears too close to the truth, the police are convinced that Shawn is an accomplice and arrest him.
Using his charm and well-tuned talent, Shawn convinces the cops that he's actually a psychic, and although highly skeptical of his explanation, they hire him to help solve tough cases. With the reluctant assistance of his best friend Gus, Shawn uses his skills of observation and charismatic personality to become the detective he was trained to be, opening his own PI agency – Psych – and solving cases for an ever-suspicious, but grudgingly impressed, police force.
As you can see, there are incredibly similarities in just the summaries of the show. However, while The Mentalist is a serious drama, Psych is a lighthearted comedy. In Psych the general lighting is bright and colorful, in The Mentalist it's dark and brooding. In the Mentalist, the main character's family is murdered, in Psych the worst that happens to Shawn's family is they get annoyed at his antics. Even the commercials show The Mentalist as a dark, brooding, and haunted man while the Psych commercials have Shawn and Guy goofing around with each other. Except for the premise, the SHOW couldn't look, feel, or sound more different.
So, what does this tell us about Television in general? Well it's something that we should all be aware, a show that works for one network may not work at another network. If you have a light hearted show, it would work better on USA than CBS. However, it also tells us something more. And that is how different channels will develop the exact same show. USA is known as the home for quirky, lighthearted characters (MONK, BURN NOTICE, IN PLAIN SIGHT) while CBS is known for serious drama (CSI, NCIS, THE UNIT).
As this also demonstrates, a show CAN be pitched to different networks with success. However, it must be massaged and geared towards the network. Any good production company with a pitch meeting at a network will do their homework to know how to pitch their show to NBC, FOX, HBO, or Comedy Central. Each of those networks could love the idea for a show, but the show will end up VERY different depending on where it lands.
It's not about changing the focus of the story, but it is about tone, structure, and pacing.
P.S.- This same theory works for movies at different studios. Different studios produce different projects, and if you're pitching a movie, make sure you know where you're pitching and what they're interested in.
The shows:
USA's Psych and CBS's The Mentalist.
What is the premise: An man with a gift for noticing every detail of the world pretends to be a psychic and works with the police department to solve crimes.
However, that is where the similarities end. The development of the shows couldn't be more different. First, let's examine the shows' summaries directly from their website.
The Mentalist: THE MENTALIST stars Golden Globe Award nominee Simon Baker as Patrick Jane, an independent consultant with the California Bureau of Investigation (CBI), who has a remarkable track record for solving serious crimes by using his razor sharp skills of observation. Within the Bureau, Jane is notorious for his blatant lack of protocol and his semi-celebrity past as a psychic medium, whose paranormal abilities he now admits he feigned. Jane's role in cracking a series of tough high-profile cases is greatly valued by his fellow agents. However, no-nonsense Senior Agent Teresa Lisbon openly resists having Jane in her unit and alternates between reluctantly acknowledging Jane's usefulness and blasting him for his theatrics, narcissism and dangerous lack of boundaries. Lisbon's team includes agents Kimball Cho, Wayne Rigsby and rookie member Grace Van Pelt, who all think Jane's a loose cannon but admire his charm and knack for clearing cases.
Psych: Raised in Santa Barbara by a family of cops, Shawn possesses uncanny powers of observation honed by his police officer father, Henry, who drilled young Shawn to note even the smallest of details from his surroundings as a way of grooming him for his inevitable career in the family business. Unfortunately, when a rift develops between father and son, Shawn finds himself taking a series of random jobs instead of becoming the detective he was groomed to be.
However, for the fun of it, Shawn makes a habit of calling in tips to the police about cases he reads about or sees on television, and when one of his tips appears too close to the truth, the police are convinced that Shawn is an accomplice and arrest him.
Using his charm and well-tuned talent, Shawn convinces the cops that he's actually a psychic, and although highly skeptical of his explanation, they hire him to help solve tough cases. With the reluctant assistance of his best friend Gus, Shawn uses his skills of observation and charismatic personality to become the detective he was trained to be, opening his own PI agency – Psych – and solving cases for an ever-suspicious, but grudgingly impressed, police force.
As you can see, there are incredibly similarities in just the summaries of the show. However, while The Mentalist is a serious drama, Psych is a lighthearted comedy. In Psych the general lighting is bright and colorful, in The Mentalist it's dark and brooding. In the Mentalist, the main character's family is murdered, in Psych the worst that happens to Shawn's family is they get annoyed at his antics. Even the commercials show The Mentalist as a dark, brooding, and haunted man while the Psych commercials have Shawn and Guy goofing around with each other. Except for the premise, the SHOW couldn't look, feel, or sound more different.
So, what does this tell us about Television in general? Well it's something that we should all be aware, a show that works for one network may not work at another network. If you have a light hearted show, it would work better on USA than CBS. However, it also tells us something more. And that is how different channels will develop the exact same show. USA is known as the home for quirky, lighthearted characters (MONK, BURN NOTICE, IN PLAIN SIGHT) while CBS is known for serious drama (CSI, NCIS, THE UNIT).
As this also demonstrates, a show CAN be pitched to different networks with success. However, it must be massaged and geared towards the network. Any good production company with a pitch meeting at a network will do their homework to know how to pitch their show to NBC, FOX, HBO, or Comedy Central. Each of those networks could love the idea for a show, but the show will end up VERY different depending on where it lands.
It's not about changing the focus of the story, but it is about tone, structure, and pacing.
P.S.- This same theory works for movies at different studios. Different studios produce different projects, and if you're pitching a movie, make sure you know where you're pitching and what they're interested in.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
10 scripts...
To add on to my previous post, the old adage is that it will take 10 years or 10 scripts to get a sale. Which means, theoretically, you have 8 scripts which will be terrible. Now, hopefully one of those terrible scripts will be in your genre, but if not, it still gives you 2 scripts to get the sale.
My timetable is roughly as follows:
1-3 scripts - shite. Don't show them to people unless you are really secure with yourself.
4-6 scripts - average. Now, you've taken the good things you do and integrated structure into it.
7-8 scripts - good. You're coming into your own as a writer. You have a genre and a voice, and you know what you want to do.
9-10 scripts - sellable. Hopefully, you've mastered the little things, like action cues and formatting that kept your script from being sold before.
Congratulations, now you're a writer. get ready for a life of rejection and under-appreciation.
So, you see. there's plenty of time to write a whole lot of junk, to see if you like writing for that genre, and abandon it when you decide you don't like it, if you decide you don't like it. Remember, it's a marathon, not a sprint.
My timetable is roughly as follows:
1-3 scripts - shite. Don't show them to people unless you are really secure with yourself.
4-6 scripts - average. Now, you've taken the good things you do and integrated structure into it.
7-8 scripts - good. You're coming into your own as a writer. You have a genre and a voice, and you know what you want to do.
9-10 scripts - sellable. Hopefully, you've mastered the little things, like action cues and formatting that kept your script from being sold before.
Congratulations, now you're a writer. get ready for a life of rejection and under-appreciation.
So, you see. there's plenty of time to write a whole lot of junk, to see if you like writing for that genre, and abandon it when you decide you don't like it, if you decide you don't like it. Remember, it's a marathon, not a sprint.
Specializing...
I'm going to make this quick, probably.
I read a post on the Rouge Wave today and one of the tips she gives is for writers to specialize in a genre. This is something that is so important to a writer, because you want to be "typecast" as the go-to guy in a specific genre. This goes for writers, directors, producers, etc.
For instance, if Eli Roth's next movie was a period piece romcom, you would be very confused. The same if Martin Scorsese came out with American Pie. It's because you know them to be in a certain genre. An audience can say, Scorsese did that movie, and I like his movies, so I'll like this one as well. In fact, audiences become rather angry if they go to a movie that isn't what they expected, because they feel doped.
But, I want to make a word of warning. Make sure you are relatively certain that:
a- You can write scripts that are sellable. (If your movies are esoteric David Lynch movies, the audience is smaller than Ben Stiller movies).
and
b- Make sure you will be happy writing for this genre for a long time, your career actually.
I will leave with one final idea. Just because you write one script in one genre, doesn't mean that you HAVE to write another script in that genre. When you are a baby writer, it's fun to explore ALL the possibilities. So, if you don't know what "fits" yet, write a horror, write a comedy, write a drama, or a period piece, or a kid's movie. I actually learned after writing a kid's pilot that I really love to write kid's sleuthy detective movies/tv.
It's sort of like college, some people go in knowing exactly what they want to do, others are gen ed for a while. Once they find something that suits them, then they declare. However, you should always feel free to abandon these projects after a garbage or first draft. Who knows, it's possible in 5-10 years you'll pull that draft out because someone is looking for a Polish immigrant script set in post WWII Denmark.
Personally, write(get it) now, I'm working on a broad spectrum of scripts from a crime drama, to a romcom, to a snarky independent, just because I want to see what fits FOR ME. I'm writing a TV pilot, a comic book, and five movies. I'm doing this because my main genre, independent, quirky movies doesn't pay very well and I am looking to see if there is a sub-genre or other genre that fits me better.
Once you find that genre, stick with it. Keep doing specs in that genre. I have a friend who writes really sick, twisted stuff. But she has 5 scripts right now and they're making the rounds and are being well received. When an agent looks your way, they will want to see 2-3 samples of work in a specific genre to make you sellable as a writer. It's much harder to sell a jack-of-all-trades writer than one that specializes in something.
I read a post on the Rouge Wave today and one of the tips she gives is for writers to specialize in a genre. This is something that is so important to a writer, because you want to be "typecast" as the go-to guy in a specific genre. This goes for writers, directors, producers, etc.
For instance, if Eli Roth's next movie was a period piece romcom, you would be very confused. The same if Martin Scorsese came out with American Pie. It's because you know them to be in a certain genre. An audience can say, Scorsese did that movie, and I like his movies, so I'll like this one as well. In fact, audiences become rather angry if they go to a movie that isn't what they expected, because they feel doped.
But, I want to make a word of warning. Make sure you are relatively certain that:
a- You can write scripts that are sellable. (If your movies are esoteric David Lynch movies, the audience is smaller than Ben Stiller movies).
and
b- Make sure you will be happy writing for this genre for a long time, your career actually.
I will leave with one final idea. Just because you write one script in one genre, doesn't mean that you HAVE to write another script in that genre. When you are a baby writer, it's fun to explore ALL the possibilities. So, if you don't know what "fits" yet, write a horror, write a comedy, write a drama, or a period piece, or a kid's movie. I actually learned after writing a kid's pilot that I really love to write kid's sleuthy detective movies/tv.
It's sort of like college, some people go in knowing exactly what they want to do, others are gen ed for a while. Once they find something that suits them, then they declare. However, you should always feel free to abandon these projects after a garbage or first draft. Who knows, it's possible in 5-10 years you'll pull that draft out because someone is looking for a Polish immigrant script set in post WWII Denmark.
Personally, write(get it) now, I'm working on a broad spectrum of scripts from a crime drama, to a romcom, to a snarky independent, just because I want to see what fits FOR ME. I'm writing a TV pilot, a comic book, and five movies. I'm doing this because my main genre, independent, quirky movies doesn't pay very well and I am looking to see if there is a sub-genre or other genre that fits me better.
Once you find that genre, stick with it. Keep doing specs in that genre. I have a friend who writes really sick, twisted stuff. But she has 5 scripts right now and they're making the rounds and are being well received. When an agent looks your way, they will want to see 2-3 samples of work in a specific genre to make you sellable as a writer. It's much harder to sell a jack-of-all-trades writer than one that specializes in something.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Stand alone vs. serial episodes
Clients always inspire the best blog posts.
So, I have a new client, paperwork pending, that is creating a web serial after years of film and plays. the idea is solid, but I'm teaching her how to write for TV from the ground up...she's never even watched 30 Rock for goodness sakes.
Anyway, yesterday I went to view her read-though and we got to talking about the difference between TV series. Basically, there are two types of television series-- Stand alone and Serial. The difference is based on how each EPISODE operates, not whether the series is continual or a one-off.
Standalone
(Seinfeld, Everybody Loves Raymond, Simpsons, Family Guy, etc)
In these series, every episode is contained into itself. You could watch any episode of the Simpsons and not need to know anything about the shows previous. The characters never change, even to the point of being the same age perpetually. However, it's not just animation. In a show like Seinfeld, the character always end up at the same place they started at the beginning of the episode. Yes, they may get new jobs, or have a new boyfriend, but the characters do not develop and evolve from episode to episode emotionally.
These shows work because a conflict is introduced that cause the characters to react, grow, and change throughout each episode, but that change is not carried over into the arch of the series. Watch an episode from season 2 and season 9 of Seinfeld. It's the same people with the same issues, who have not grown in the slightest in the past seasons.
Serial
(Brothers and Sisters, West Wing, any SOAP EVER)
This works in the opposite manner of a stand alone episode. Each episode builds on the previous one. The characters change, develop, and interact with the world in a different way over the course of the season, and the arch of the show. For example, The women in Desperate Housewives look at the world much differently now that she did in episode one. When the character develops , the show changes into something new. The story comes from that change as much as the conflicts in each episode.
Now, I should mention that standalones are not necessarily comedies and serials are not necessarily dramas. For example, Scrubs is a Serial comedy and Law and Order is a Stand-alone drama.
The important thing to take away from this is that in serials the character's development is carried over from episode to episode, and in stand alone the characters start and end as the same person, even if they have emotional epiphanies in the episode.
(My classic example is the Seinfeld episode where Jerry learns to have feelings. He starts off like the classic Jerry jerk. Then, he is taught how to feel by his then girlfriend, proposes to Elaine, makes George tell him all the darkest parts of himself, and finally in the end George "scares" him straight. He winds up exactly where he was before.)
So you see, while there may be personal or professional growth for characters, there is never any emotional growth.
When dealing with your show, you MUST know whether it is a standalone or a serial.
So, I have a new client, paperwork pending, that is creating a web serial after years of film and plays. the idea is solid, but I'm teaching her how to write for TV from the ground up...she's never even watched 30 Rock for goodness sakes.
Anyway, yesterday I went to view her read-though and we got to talking about the difference between TV series. Basically, there are two types of television series-- Stand alone and Serial. The difference is based on how each EPISODE operates, not whether the series is continual or a one-off.
Standalone
(Seinfeld, Everybody Loves Raymond, Simpsons, Family Guy, etc)
In these series, every episode is contained into itself. You could watch any episode of the Simpsons and not need to know anything about the shows previous. The characters never change, even to the point of being the same age perpetually. However, it's not just animation. In a show like Seinfeld, the character always end up at the same place they started at the beginning of the episode. Yes, they may get new jobs, or have a new boyfriend, but the characters do not develop and evolve from episode to episode emotionally.
These shows work because a conflict is introduced that cause the characters to react, grow, and change throughout each episode, but that change is not carried over into the arch of the series. Watch an episode from season 2 and season 9 of Seinfeld. It's the same people with the same issues, who have not grown in the slightest in the past seasons.
Serial
(Brothers and Sisters, West Wing, any SOAP EVER)
This works in the opposite manner of a stand alone episode. Each episode builds on the previous one. The characters change, develop, and interact with the world in a different way over the course of the season, and the arch of the show. For example, The women in Desperate Housewives look at the world much differently now that she did in episode one. When the character develops , the show changes into something new. The story comes from that change as much as the conflicts in each episode. Now, I should mention that standalones are not necessarily comedies and serials are not necessarily dramas. For example, Scrubs is a Serial comedy and Law and Order is a Stand-alone drama.
The important thing to take away from this is that in serials the character's development is carried over from episode to episode, and in stand alone the characters start and end as the same person, even if they have emotional epiphanies in the episode.
(My classic example is the Seinfeld episode where Jerry learns to have feelings. He starts off like the classic Jerry jerk. Then, he is taught how to feel by his then girlfriend, proposes to Elaine, makes George tell him all the darkest parts of himself, and finally in the end George "scares" him straight. He winds up exactly where he was before.) So you see, while there may be personal or professional growth for characters, there is never any emotional growth.
When dealing with your show, you MUST know whether it is a standalone or a serial.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Garbage Draft
So, I've been knocking around a lot of ideas lately, and have a bunch in a cue to write. This is along with a lot of projects I am developing including 3 web series, 1 short film, and two features.
But, while these films stew and get ready, I'm intent on writing down GARBAGE DRAFTS of everything I have in my head. These include:
5 features
1 tv pilot
1 comic book pilot (are they called pilots in comics?)
In addition, I'm determined NOT to have any new ideas until after I do these projects, unless, of course, a paying gig comes up. Then these drafts go by the wayside.
So, what is a garbage draft? It's a first draft you know is going to be a piece of junk. It's the draft you write to have something finished. So you can look back at it and say, yes I like a few of these ideas, but I hate most of them. It's the draft you write when your stuck. It allows for the dialog to be weak, or the structure to fall apart a bit, or any of those elements that a writer gets stuck on to fly out of your head. And, for me, it's a great way to fight off writer's block.
And I'm in good Company; Hemingway's "Garbage Draft" Method. Hemingway used to say, "The only thing the first draft has to be is done." - Pulled from here.
Here's why...
For me, when I write from an outline, or a treatment, I get bogged down with everything needing to be precise and perfect on the first try. When it's not, it makes me stop, think, reevaluate, and start again. It slows down the process and often stops it completely. The worst thing, for me, that could happen to a writer is for him to go back and rewrite a draft after he's already written it and before he is done.
Writer's block usually occurs, for me, when I reach an impasse point in the script. I will invariably think the script sucks, and want to abandon it. I go off to do other things, putting off the script I know will be lousy.
However, when I write a garbage draft, it gives me carte blanc to suck. In fact, that I KNOW it's not going to be cohesive allows me the freedom to keep writing through blocks. I don't have to wonder how things will connect because at the end of the day, I know it's going to be ripped apart.
So, why do I write this way? Because writing is a lonely, creative process. It's very easy to stop writing for days because you are blocked. Because it's so lonely, there is no one to motivate you to write again, but yourself. For me, the only way I can motivate myself to write is either:
-Have a deadline I HAVE to meet.
-Have a story I LOVE.
-Be able to change the story midstream without having to revise previously.
The third path is the one that has worked best for me in recent times. Whenever I make a notable change to the story, a character, or even a scene, I make a note, and keep plowing through. So, when I get done I know where the story has changed and can go back and adjust accordingly.
Now, does this mean you shouldn't outline? No. If it works for you, do it. However, sometimes it behooves ME to have the ability to wander off the outline, especially when I get writer's block.
I read a blog post recently saying that if you can't stick to an outline you should write a better outline and that it's the fault of the writer for not having a better treatment. However, for me, that doesn't always work, especially when working on spec.
I've yet to write a script from an outline that wasn't dreadful on a first pass. And, I haven't written a script without an outline that hasn't been dreadful on the first pass. Don't worry, the scripts all eventually developed into brilliant projects, but that occurred after several drafts.
So, if you are stuck, this may be a method that can help you get through it. Or, if you have a writer's group that is hounding you for more material, or a group of close friends who you can give your script to for notes, this could help give you the freedom to explore. Once you break through a writer's block, the sky's the limit.
But, while these films stew and get ready, I'm intent on writing down GARBAGE DRAFTS of everything I have in my head. These include:5 features
1 tv pilot
1 comic book pilot (are they called pilots in comics?)
In addition, I'm determined NOT to have any new ideas until after I do these projects, unless, of course, a paying gig comes up. Then these drafts go by the wayside.
So, what is a garbage draft? It's a first draft you know is going to be a piece of junk. It's the draft you write to have something finished. So you can look back at it and say, yes I like a few of these ideas, but I hate most of them. It's the draft you write when your stuck. It allows for the dialog to be weak, or the structure to fall apart a bit, or any of those elements that a writer gets stuck on to fly out of your head. And, for me, it's a great way to fight off writer's block.
And I'm in good Company; Hemingway's "Garbage Draft" Method. Hemingway used to say, "The only thing the first draft has to be is done." - Pulled from here.
Here's why...
For me, when I write from an outline, or a treatment, I get bogged down with everything needing to be precise and perfect on the first try. When it's not, it makes me stop, think, reevaluate, and start again. It slows down the process and often stops it completely. The worst thing, for me, that could happen to a writer is for him to go back and rewrite a draft after he's already written it and before he is done.
Writer's block usually occurs, for me, when I reach an impasse point in the script. I will invariably think the script sucks, and want to abandon it. I go off to do other things, putting off the script I know will be lousy.
However, when I write a garbage draft, it gives me carte blanc to suck. In fact, that I KNOW it's not going to be cohesive allows me the freedom to keep writing through blocks. I don't have to wonder how things will connect because at the end of the day, I know it's going to be ripped apart.
So, why do I write this way? Because writing is a lonely, creative process. It's very easy to stop writing for days because you are blocked. Because it's so lonely, there is no one to motivate you to write again, but yourself. For me, the only way I can motivate myself to write is either:
-Have a deadline I HAVE to meet.
-Have a story I LOVE.
-Be able to change the story midstream without having to revise previously.
The third path is the one that has worked best for me in recent times. Whenever I make a notable change to the story, a character, or even a scene, I make a note, and keep plowing through. So, when I get done I know where the story has changed and can go back and adjust accordingly.
Now, does this mean you shouldn't outline? No. If it works for you, do it. However, sometimes it behooves ME to have the ability to wander off the outline, especially when I get writer's block.
I read a blog post recently saying that if you can't stick to an outline you should write a better outline and that it's the fault of the writer for not having a better treatment. However, for me, that doesn't always work, especially when working on spec.
I've yet to write a script from an outline that wasn't dreadful on a first pass. And, I haven't written a script without an outline that hasn't been dreadful on the first pass. Don't worry, the scripts all eventually developed into brilliant projects, but that occurred after several drafts.
So, if you are stuck, this may be a method that can help you get through it. Or, if you have a writer's group that is hounding you for more material, or a group of close friends who you can give your script to for notes, this could help give you the freedom to explore. Once you break through a writer's block, the sky's the limit.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Conception vs. Execution
I was playing a puzzle game last night, and I kept getting stuck on one problem. I understood the mechanics on how to get the problem solved, and had a brilliant way to solve it, but I just could execute the moves to make the solution work. And it got me thinking about the difference between having an excellent concept and being able to EXECUTE it.
See, a lot of people have great concepts for scripts. They write great synopses, cover letters, treatments, and queries. They get a producer interested in the idea, and that person requests the project. But, when the producer gets the project, it's poorly executed. Terribly executed, actually. Anything from the dialog being bad, the structure being poor, to the complete lack of formatting.
This is why there are throngs of irritated, antsy, and bitter development executives and readers in this town. Because almost everything they request is shite. The statistic I like to throw around is 9 out of ten scripts I'm going to know in the first ten pages is a pass. Of those 10, at least 5 and usually more like 8 others fall apart in the second or third act. Which leaves 2-5 out of 100 scripts that MAY be useful to me. Of those 2-5 many have budgets that are out of my range, or genres I'm not looking for. So, if I'm lucky MAYBE 1 in 100 scripts are worth going forward on. In the past three years, I have only recommended 3 scripts, none of which ended up getting a contract due to various reasons. And I've read in the ballpark of 500-1000 scripts. That is NOT a good average.
People ask me all the time why I'm passing on their project when I was excited initially to see it. Almost 100% of the time its because the project is executed poorly.
See, there is are two major factor in dealing with a writer. The first is that they have a great script. But the more important factor is that they can handle a relationship with the producer. And, if someone can't execute a script, they certainly can't handle executing competent re-writes. And if they can't do competent re-writes I have to find a writer who can execute them. So, why don't I just hire that other writer to begin with? It'll cost me less, in the long run.
As far as developing a career in the entertainment business, it's important to show you can EXECUTE a concept as well as you can IMAGINE a concept. If Steven Spielberg shot Raiders of the Lost Ark on a Handycam, he can have the best script in the world but the execution would not work. On the other hand, if he shot a terrible script for $100 million dollars, the shots, acting, and direction may be brilliant, but the terrible script would lead to terrible execution.
So, it's important to DELIVER on the concept you are pitching. Yes, you can spend $30k on the one-sheet, design, trailer, epk, etc to get the investor excited, but if the script is executed poorly they will look at the script and pass. Of course, if Angelina Jolie says yes to your movie...you could greenlight Everybody Poops, the Action film written by Little Timmy.
Which is just like solving a puzzle in a video game. If you know how to solve the puzzle, but can't make the little men do the tasks that are required to solve it, you'll be stuck on the same level for an hour. But, don't cry for me. I finally got through it.
See, a lot of people have great concepts for scripts. They write great synopses, cover letters, treatments, and queries. They get a producer interested in the idea, and that person requests the project. But, when the producer gets the project, it's poorly executed. Terribly executed, actually. Anything from the dialog being bad, the structure being poor, to the complete lack of formatting.
This is why there are throngs of irritated, antsy, and bitter development executives and readers in this town. Because almost everything they request is shite. The statistic I like to throw around is 9 out of ten scripts I'm going to know in the first ten pages is a pass. Of those 10, at least 5 and usually more like 8 others fall apart in the second or third act. Which leaves 2-5 out of 100 scripts that MAY be useful to me. Of those 2-5 many have budgets that are out of my range, or genres I'm not looking for. So, if I'm lucky MAYBE 1 in 100 scripts are worth going forward on. In the past three years, I have only recommended 3 scripts, none of which ended up getting a contract due to various reasons. And I've read in the ballpark of 500-1000 scripts. That is NOT a good average.
People ask me all the time why I'm passing on their project when I was excited initially to see it. Almost 100% of the time its because the project is executed poorly.
See, there is are two major factor in dealing with a writer. The first is that they have a great script. But the more important factor is that they can handle a relationship with the producer. And, if someone can't execute a script, they certainly can't handle executing competent re-writes. And if they can't do competent re-writes I have to find a writer who can execute them. So, why don't I just hire that other writer to begin with? It'll cost me less, in the long run.
As far as developing a career in the entertainment business, it's important to show you can EXECUTE a concept as well as you can IMAGINE a concept. If Steven Spielberg shot Raiders of the Lost Ark on a Handycam, he can have the best script in the world but the execution would not work. On the other hand, if he shot a terrible script for $100 million dollars, the shots, acting, and direction may be brilliant, but the terrible script would lead to terrible execution.
So, it's important to DELIVER on the concept you are pitching. Yes, you can spend $30k on the one-sheet, design, trailer, epk, etc to get the investor excited, but if the script is executed poorly they will look at the script and pass. Of course, if Angelina Jolie says yes to your movie...you could greenlight Everybody Poops, the Action film written by Little Timmy.
Which is just like solving a puzzle in a video game. If you know how to solve the puzzle, but can't make the little men do the tasks that are required to solve it, you'll be stuck on the same level for an hour. But, don't cry for me. I finally got through it.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Football...
...is back, in the states. And as a tribute I want to give you a metaphor about writing a screenplay.
To set it up, a football drive consists of a series of plays that are all designed with the end goal of scoring a touchdown. However, in that there are many smaller battles to score first downs. Every four downs, the offense has the opportunity to move the ball ten yards. If they make it ten yards, they have another set of downs, and thus another chance to score. This is truly what sets football above and beyond a sport like soccer. In soccer, the goal is to drive the ball down the field in one play and score. The conflict comes in the end of the game with the final score.
So, what makes football so much more dramatic than soccer on a minute by minute basis? IMHO, it's the drives. See, if football was set up to have to score a touchdown on 4 plays, much of the conflict would be gone.
Instead, we are riveted to EVERY ten yards. Every play could get another set of downs, every down could be an interception, every down could be a touchdown. Which is what keeps us coming back.
And now, to tie it back to filmmaking...think of your script as a scoring drive. If you scored on a hail mary pass on the first play, yes it would be interesting for a moment, but the true drama comes from the conflict and after the initial exhilaration is gone, the audience asks WHAT NEXT. The drama comes from every mistake, every failure, that leads to the players lining up and running it again. Football players are truly dramatic figures, great heroes, because they constantly fail, but they get up and find a way to do it again.
So, you see, with the GOAL in mind of a touchdown, your characters need to focus on the drive, getting the next play a little further down the gridiron. And, when they get sacked for a loss, have them pick themselves off and get back in the huddle.
God, I LOVE football. Anyone else?
To set it up, a football drive consists of a series of plays that are all designed with the end goal of scoring a touchdown. However, in that there are many smaller battles to score first downs. Every four downs, the offense has the opportunity to move the ball ten yards. If they make it ten yards, they have another set of downs, and thus another chance to score. This is truly what sets football above and beyond a sport like soccer. In soccer, the goal is to drive the ball down the field in one play and score. The conflict comes in the end of the game with the final score.
So, what makes football so much more dramatic than soccer on a minute by minute basis? IMHO, it's the drives. See, if football was set up to have to score a touchdown on 4 plays, much of the conflict would be gone.
Instead, we are riveted to EVERY ten yards. Every play could get another set of downs, every down could be an interception, every down could be a touchdown. Which is what keeps us coming back.
And now, to tie it back to filmmaking...think of your script as a scoring drive. If you scored on a hail mary pass on the first play, yes it would be interesting for a moment, but the true drama comes from the conflict and after the initial exhilaration is gone, the audience asks WHAT NEXT. The drama comes from every mistake, every failure, that leads to the players lining up and running it again. Football players are truly dramatic figures, great heroes, because they constantly fail, but they get up and find a way to do it again.
So, you see, with the GOAL in mind of a touchdown, your characters need to focus on the drive, getting the next play a little further down the gridiron. And, when they get sacked for a loss, have them pick themselves off and get back in the huddle.
God, I LOVE football. Anyone else?
Synopses
So, over the past two days I've had an abnormal amount of synopsis which did not follow the standards of what a synopsis should look like. This got me to thinking, and if these people are so wayward in their definitions of a synopsis, maybe some of my readers have the same problem.
So, what is a synopsis. A synopsis:
4. Definite the characters in the story
3. Give a backbone to the script
2. Tell the story
1. Make the audience WANT to read the whole script.
1. Make the audience WANT to read the whole script.
Basically, what you are trying to do is make the reader buy into the idea of the world you have constructed. If you have a script, this is basically the one page definition of your story. Hit all the high points, taking out all of the other stuff. Outside of your logline, it is the most simplified version of your story. After reading a synopsis the reader should WANT to read further.
2. Tell the story
Some questions the synopsis should answer are:
-Who are the main characters? (Capitalized the first time they are introduced, always with a description)
-What do they want?
-How are they impeded from getting that goal?
-What is the inciting incidents of the story?
-What are the conflicts of the story?
-What are the BEATS of the story? (The critical points that introduce another internal or external conflict, the points that move the story along.)
These are some questions that need NOT be answered:
-What is the backstory of the characters? (a little bit is okay, a sprinkle, not a dallup)
-What are the clinical definitions of terms and why are the important to the story?
-What is the five page backstory of the fictional setting of this story?
-How will this carry into further episodes? (for a TV series)
-Why this story is important?
Any important information relating to further defining the character should be answered in a COVER LETTER or a PRODUCTION BIBLE, of THE SCRIPT.
The only thing the synopsis should do is to TELL THE STORY. It is a one page hand-out of the STORY of the movie/show/book. It should be NARRATIVE, not EXPLANATORY. Let me FEEL the story, because that's how I know if I want to read more.
3. Give the backbone of the script
How is my script different from the other 100 million scripts out there. The example I've been using recently is:
Halo 3, Gears of War, Doom are all the same game. They are about an elite military unit that has to kill aliens. There is nothing new about the story. Video games have been made about it for 20 years, and will be made about them for the next 20. However, what was DIFFERENT about the games was the story behind the game. How THIS military unit differed from THAT military unit. How THESE aliens were different from THOSE aliens.
To give you a different example from film, pick out three RomComs from your DVDs and tell me how they are different from each other. Each is about a guy who falls for a girl or a girl who falls for a guy. The only thing that makes any of them different is the story. It's about two people falling for each other, but HOW is yours different from mine. That is what a synopsis, logline, and treatment do for your project. What makes your script DIFFERENT. Because otherwise, it's the same.
So, a synopsis has to give why this script is different, and specifically what moments, beats, in the script make it different. A logline is meant to give a gist of a story for an elevator pitch. However, a synopsis has to lay out in broad terms how the story will be executed towards a logical conclusion.
4. Define the characters of the story
To a lesser extend, the reader needs to connect with the characters, to understand their motivation and want to follow them on this journey. If the characters are not believable, their motivation not compelling, no one will be able to follow their journey, much less want to invest in their character.
So, there it is. Make sure it's one page...it's not a treatment, tighten it up, and make it sing. Remember, it's about the STORY, not the BACK-STORY.
So, what is a synopsis. A synopsis:
4. Definite the characters in the story
3. Give a backbone to the script
2. Tell the story
1. Make the audience WANT to read the whole script.
1. Make the audience WANT to read the whole script.
Basically, what you are trying to do is make the reader buy into the idea of the world you have constructed. If you have a script, this is basically the one page definition of your story. Hit all the high points, taking out all of the other stuff. Outside of your logline, it is the most simplified version of your story. After reading a synopsis the reader should WANT to read further.
2. Tell the story
Some questions the synopsis should answer are:
-Who are the main characters? (Capitalized the first time they are introduced, always with a description)
-What do they want?
-How are they impeded from getting that goal?
-What is the inciting incidents of the story?
-What are the conflicts of the story?
-What are the BEATS of the story? (The critical points that introduce another internal or external conflict, the points that move the story along.)
These are some questions that need NOT be answered:
-What is the backstory of the characters? (a little bit is okay, a sprinkle, not a dallup)
-What are the clinical definitions of terms and why are the important to the story?
-What is the five page backstory of the fictional setting of this story?
-How will this carry into further episodes? (for a TV series)
-Why this story is important?
Any important information relating to further defining the character should be answered in a COVER LETTER or a PRODUCTION BIBLE, of THE SCRIPT.
The only thing the synopsis should do is to TELL THE STORY. It is a one page hand-out of the STORY of the movie/show/book. It should be NARRATIVE, not EXPLANATORY. Let me FEEL the story, because that's how I know if I want to read more.
3. Give the backbone of the script
How is my script different from the other 100 million scripts out there. The example I've been using recently is:
Halo 3, Gears of War, Doom are all the same game. They are about an elite military unit that has to kill aliens. There is nothing new about the story. Video games have been made about it for 20 years, and will be made about them for the next 20. However, what was DIFFERENT about the games was the story behind the game. How THIS military unit differed from THAT military unit. How THESE aliens were different from THOSE aliens.
To give you a different example from film, pick out three RomComs from your DVDs and tell me how they are different from each other. Each is about a guy who falls for a girl or a girl who falls for a guy. The only thing that makes any of them different is the story. It's about two people falling for each other, but HOW is yours different from mine. That is what a synopsis, logline, and treatment do for your project. What makes your script DIFFERENT. Because otherwise, it's the same.
So, a synopsis has to give why this script is different, and specifically what moments, beats, in the script make it different. A logline is meant to give a gist of a story for an elevator pitch. However, a synopsis has to lay out in broad terms how the story will be executed towards a logical conclusion.
4. Define the characters of the story
To a lesser extend, the reader needs to connect with the characters, to understand their motivation and want to follow them on this journey. If the characters are not believable, their motivation not compelling, no one will be able to follow their journey, much less want to invest in their character.
So, there it is. Make sure it's one page...it's not a treatment, tighten it up, and make it sing. Remember, it's about the STORY, not the BACK-STORY.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Finding a writer...
Good afternoon Russell,
What would you suggest as a first approach for enlisting the services of a writer for a movie concept that I have? My story now resides on audio-tape and written notes with a creative writer in Nashville. She created the synopsis. But we need someone to take us to the next level.
There are three important questions that need to be asked when you are looking for a writer. They are:
1- Can the writer write?
2- Does he write for your genre?
3- Do you like the writer and feel he can finish the script you commission him to write?
1-This sounds obvious, but it is very important to make sure you get writing samples from the people you would want to write your script. Don't make a choice with your heart because you like someone. It's a long, arduous process to write a script.
2-While the writer may be an excellent writer, you like him, and their script is great for a specific genre, it doesn't mean that he can write for your genre. Most, if not all, successful writers are excellent at writing for their genre. Writers want to get put on a "list" or be type-cast into a genre. Basically, when someone asks for a list of the best writers for X genre, they're name will be on that list. If they are good at everything, they never get on any list...which means they never get paid.
An example, Quintin Tarrentino doesn't write romcoms, and Paul Guay doesn't write psychological horror. It's almost like having an engineering degree, you can be electrical, mechanical, nuclear, robotics, etc. While there are many similarities, there are enough differences that you wouldn't want a electrical engineer working on your nuclear reactor.
This is, of course, a hyperbole. But, if you want a horror writer, you should find a horror writer, not a romcom writer. Not only will they know the mechanics of the writing horror, but they will be more into writing the script, and most likely produce a better script. Now, you can sometimes find a really good writer who is looking to flip genres, and they can work out. However, I would recommend that if you look for someone like this, you make sure he has substantial credits first. If you go this way, you may be able to get a really good deal on a great writer.
It is important also to understand that IMDB credits don't mean anything with writing. There are writers who have written 20 scripts on assignment, and very successful, and may have 3 produced scripts.
3-While it's not a requirement to like the person who's gonna write your script, you want to be sure he's going to come out with YOUR vision, not his. Many writers can write excellent scripts on spec, but find it hard to write on commission because it's fulfilling someone else's vision. So, its important to make sure the person you are hiring can fulfill your vision, and incorporate the points that you want. Basically, that he is a collaborator.
Now, on the flip side, you DO NOT want to hire someone who is a doormat. The person you hire should have an opinion that can change the script for the better. A good writer will make your vision better than you thought it could.
What you DON'T want is someone who will take your ideas, tell you he'll follow them, and then turn out a whole different script. I call this the BILLY WALSH. This is opposed to the Joe Eszterhas, which will take your script, do what he wants, return something usable, but it will still be your idea.
Writing is usually roughly a 6 week process to first draft, then you will have to give notes, wait for a rewrite, give more notes, rewrite, notes, polish. So, if you don't have someone that can do the job, you could be wasting 6 months of time. Most writers will give you a price based on 2 re-writes and a polish. They will give you a date you can expect the draft, and deliver on that date. It is RARE to find someone who will allow you in on the process, showing you pages, etc. However, if you are working with a young writer I would demand in the contract to see pages on a regular basis to make sure the writer is fulfilling your vision, and writing well.
If you can find someone nice, it's always better not to work with ASSHOLES. They just add gray hairs. The only thing that adds grays faster is Incompetent Nice Guy Yes Men.
Good Luck.
What would you suggest as a first approach for enlisting the services of a writer for a movie concept that I have? My story now resides on audio-tape and written notes with a creative writer in Nashville. She created the synopsis. But we need someone to take us to the next level.
There are three important questions that need to be asked when you are looking for a writer. They are:
1- Can the writer write?
2- Does he write for your genre?
3- Do you like the writer and feel he can finish the script you commission him to write?
1-This sounds obvious, but it is very important to make sure you get writing samples from the people you would want to write your script. Don't make a choice with your heart because you like someone. It's a long, arduous process to write a script.
2-While the writer may be an excellent writer, you like him, and their script is great for a specific genre, it doesn't mean that he can write for your genre. Most, if not all, successful writers are excellent at writing for their genre. Writers want to get put on a "list" or be type-cast into a genre. Basically, when someone asks for a list of the best writers for X genre, they're name will be on that list. If they are good at everything, they never get on any list...which means they never get paid.
An example, Quintin Tarrentino doesn't write romcoms, and Paul Guay doesn't write psychological horror. It's almost like having an engineering degree, you can be electrical, mechanical, nuclear, robotics, etc. While there are many similarities, there are enough differences that you wouldn't want a electrical engineer working on your nuclear reactor.
This is, of course, a hyperbole. But, if you want a horror writer, you should find a horror writer, not a romcom writer. Not only will they know the mechanics of the writing horror, but they will be more into writing the script, and most likely produce a better script. Now, you can sometimes find a really good writer who is looking to flip genres, and they can work out. However, I would recommend that if you look for someone like this, you make sure he has substantial credits first. If you go this way, you may be able to get a really good deal on a great writer.
It is important also to understand that IMDB credits don't mean anything with writing. There are writers who have written 20 scripts on assignment, and very successful, and may have 3 produced scripts.
3-While it's not a requirement to like the person who's gonna write your script, you want to be sure he's going to come out with YOUR vision, not his. Many writers can write excellent scripts on spec, but find it hard to write on commission because it's fulfilling someone else's vision. So, its important to make sure the person you are hiring can fulfill your vision, and incorporate the points that you want. Basically, that he is a collaborator.
Now, on the flip side, you DO NOT want to hire someone who is a doormat. The person you hire should have an opinion that can change the script for the better. A good writer will make your vision better than you thought it could.
What you DON'T want is someone who will take your ideas, tell you he'll follow them, and then turn out a whole different script. I call this the BILLY WALSH. This is opposed to the Joe Eszterhas, which will take your script, do what he wants, return something usable, but it will still be your idea.
Writing is usually roughly a 6 week process to first draft, then you will have to give notes, wait for a rewrite, give more notes, rewrite, notes, polish. So, if you don't have someone that can do the job, you could be wasting 6 months of time. Most writers will give you a price based on 2 re-writes and a polish. They will give you a date you can expect the draft, and deliver on that date. It is RARE to find someone who will allow you in on the process, showing you pages, etc. However, if you are working with a young writer I would demand in the contract to see pages on a regular basis to make sure the writer is fulfilling your vision, and writing well.
If you can find someone nice, it's always better not to work with ASSHOLES. They just add gray hairs. The only thing that adds grays faster is Incompetent Nice Guy Yes Men.
Good Luck.
Friday, August 22, 2008
For those of you...
...who would rather have a more traditional example as to the structure of a screenplay, or any story. Here.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Push your main characters off the road...
be a bully.
Imagine for a moment, you and your protagonist are walking down a road, let's call the road your screenplay. As you walk down the path, you give him one good nudge to get him startled. This pushes him off the path and takes him a minute to recover. You feel bad, so for the rest of the path you may want to nudge him/her, make him trip a little, maybe laugh at him, but because you are such good friends you don't want to cause serious bodily harm to your protagonist, until the END of the path, when you give him one more push to get him to the end.
This is how most people write screenplays. Yes, their main characters go through some issues, and they have some laughs, or cries along the way. But they are never truly challenged in a meaningful way, and they do not have high conflict throughout the script. For the most part, a protagonist is challenged with a MAIN CONFLICT, through an inciting incident.
It is not enough to have a main conflict that a character strives for throughout the movie. A script must also have lots of hiccups along the way. Not just hiccups, life changing events from which the characters must recover. This will lead, undoubtedly, to the next life changing event that will mold the characters more. However, in each event, the character find strength, and more importantly the audience latches on for more time, the suspense builds, and the hero is humanized.
Since I just read a column about Die Hard, I'll use that as an example. In Die Hard, the main conflict was stopping the terrorists and rescuing the hostages. The inciting incident happened when the terrorists took over. This is the SHOVE your character gets off the path. John McClain must NOW save his wife, rescue the hostages, and stop the terrorists.
But, what if he spent the whole movie pursuant to that goal, without any other conflict building? What if his entire plan was to stop the terrorists at the top of the building, and he faced hardly any conflict until the last ten pages. He made a bomb, or stole a gun, or some little things, but his STAKES were not high enough to cause him to be in imminent danger? Crappy movie, right? Who would watch it?
To go back to my analogy, which will now make sense, Jeb Stuart constantly PUSHED John off the path. Whenever he was back on the path, he was shoved harder, and harder, and harder, until finally, at the end, he was victorious...until Die Hard 2: Die Harder.
Now, aside from being fun to be a bully, and it being exciting to put people in weird and almost inescapable situations, causing conflict is how we define character. If it had been easy for McClain to succeed, we would learn nothing about him. If we pushed him and he stopped, we would know him as a quitter. However, by giving him increasingly more difficult tasks and seeing that he not only doesn't quit, but he also doesn't die AND, to top it off, he wins in the end, tells a lot about him as a person and as a character.
CHARACTERS are not defined by success, they are defined by the ability to fail, brush themselves off, and try again.
So, BE a BULLY. Push your characters off that path as often as possible. This isn't just action movies, but all movies. ROMCOMS, SLAPSTICKS, etc. They all have the same thing in common. A heroic character that is pushed to his limits, and somehow succeeds through seemingly impossible odds. Part of the FUN of a screenplay is to push your characters to the limits. If Bob is successful, make him homeless, how does he fight back to succeed? Through a hairbrained scheme that doesn't make any sense, of from a series of trials and errors which make him stronger for the ride. Because, after all, when you get to the end of the path, and your character hasn't given up, doesn't the victory seem all the sweeter?
Imagine for a moment, you and your protagonist are walking down a road, let's call the road your screenplay. As you walk down the path, you give him one good nudge to get him startled. This pushes him off the path and takes him a minute to recover. You feel bad, so for the rest of the path you may want to nudge him/her, make him trip a little, maybe laugh at him, but because you are such good friends you don't want to cause serious bodily harm to your protagonist, until the END of the path, when you give him one more push to get him to the end.
This is how most people write screenplays. Yes, their main characters go through some issues, and they have some laughs, or cries along the way. But they are never truly challenged in a meaningful way, and they do not have high conflict throughout the script. For the most part, a protagonist is challenged with a MAIN CONFLICT, through an inciting incident.
It is not enough to have a main conflict that a character strives for throughout the movie. A script must also have lots of hiccups along the way. Not just hiccups, life changing events from which the characters must recover. This will lead, undoubtedly, to the next life changing event that will mold the characters more. However, in each event, the character find strength, and more importantly the audience latches on for more time, the suspense builds, and the hero is humanized.
Since I just read a column about Die Hard, I'll use that as an example. In Die Hard, the main conflict was stopping the terrorists and rescuing the hostages. The inciting incident happened when the terrorists took over. This is the SHOVE your character gets off the path. John McClain must NOW save his wife, rescue the hostages, and stop the terrorists.
But, what if he spent the whole movie pursuant to that goal, without any other conflict building? What if his entire plan was to stop the terrorists at the top of the building, and he faced hardly any conflict until the last ten pages. He made a bomb, or stole a gun, or some little things, but his STAKES were not high enough to cause him to be in imminent danger? Crappy movie, right? Who would watch it?
To go back to my analogy, which will now make sense, Jeb Stuart constantly PUSHED John off the path. Whenever he was back on the path, he was shoved harder, and harder, and harder, until finally, at the end, he was victorious...until Die Hard 2: Die Harder.
Now, aside from being fun to be a bully, and it being exciting to put people in weird and almost inescapable situations, causing conflict is how we define character. If it had been easy for McClain to succeed, we would learn nothing about him. If we pushed him and he stopped, we would know him as a quitter. However, by giving him increasingly more difficult tasks and seeing that he not only doesn't quit, but he also doesn't die AND, to top it off, he wins in the end, tells a lot about him as a person and as a character.
CHARACTERS are not defined by success, they are defined by the ability to fail, brush themselves off, and try again.
So, BE a BULLY. Push your characters off that path as often as possible. This isn't just action movies, but all movies. ROMCOMS, SLAPSTICKS, etc. They all have the same thing in common. A heroic character that is pushed to his limits, and somehow succeeds through seemingly impossible odds. Part of the FUN of a screenplay is to push your characters to the limits. If Bob is successful, make him homeless, how does he fight back to succeed? Through a hairbrained scheme that doesn't make any sense, of from a series of trials and errors which make him stronger for the ride. Because, after all, when you get to the end of the path, and your character hasn't given up, doesn't the victory seem all the sweeter?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
