(SPOILERS: The Abyss, Inherent Vice)
Pace is important in movies, so it should be no surprise that it’s important in screenplays. One of the major goals of a screenplay is to give a sense of the experience of watching the final film. But it can be tough to match the pace of film with words on a page. A bit of action that might take two seconds on screen might require many words to convey, even when it’s done well. An image can convey so much information – thus the phrase “a picture is worth 1000 words.” In screenplays, we don’t get 1000 words to describe a frame.
This means we have to be very efficient in our writing. We have to pick which details we choose to describe carefully, and we have to deliver those details with as few words as possible. In the polishing stage of the script, a good writer will go through every line and cut anything that isn’t absolutely necessary.
When writing description, pick highly specific, evocative, representative details. So rather than writing:
INT. GROCERY STORE - DAY
Sam enters the grocery store. There are three cash registers, though only one is occupied. The store is small, with a dozen cluttered aisles. The canned goods are stacked several feet high on top of the shelves. The fruit is piled in pyramids. Refrigerators for dairy products and drinks line the outside walls. Fluorescent light casts a sickly glow over everything. Everything is dusty. There are cobwebs in the corners.
Write something more like:
INT. GROCERY STORE - DAY
Sam enters, eying the precarious towers of dusty soup cans and rice boxes leaning over the dim and dingy aisles.
Assuming nothing else from the former description is necessary to the story, this single sentence captures the flavor of the store without slowing the screenplay.
For dialogue, police yourself for the niceties that make up real speech but can bog down dramatic scenes. Avoid greetings, introductions, farewells and small talk. Often it is possible to simply cut into the scene later, just before the actual conflict starts, or even in the midst of the conflict.
Most of our concern with pace in screenwriting is about speeding things up, keeping the story moving. But there are times when you want to slow things down. Sometimes you want to draw the action out to build anticipation.
For example, it is common to slow the pace in suspense scenes. Suspense is about building tension in the audience. The “building” aspect is important. You can’t take your reader from relaxed to tense in a few sentences. Think about how horror movies do this – the long takes of a character entering a darkened basement, creeping ever so slowly forward. The writer wants to capture that feeling on the page.
One of my favorite suspense scenes is from The Abyss (written by James Cameron). Two characters are trapped in a disabled mini-sub with a leak. But the scene doesn’t start with the characters in a panic, worried about how they’ll survive. Instead, they think the problem’s solvable and begin talking about other things. Then slowly, as the water rises and help doesn’t come, they begin to get concerned. They try to find a way to fix the leak, but are stymied. Now the water is up to their chests. Tension is at its height – for both the characters and the audience. But only because the scene has taken its time to let that tension build.
There are other situations where you might want to purposefully build anticipation. There’s a scene in Inherent Vice (screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson) that is incredibly erotic. But it doesn’t throw graphic, acrobatic, shocking sex at the audience. Instead, it controls pace to build sexual tension.
In the scene, Shasta is visiting Doc (her ex-boyfriend and the main character). She enters the room naked, startling Doc. Then she sits near him on the couch and describes, in a long monologue, why she became the mistress of a wealthy and powerful developer, and how being in that position was a turn on. As she’s talking, she slowly works a foot up Doc’s leg, until it reaches his crotch at the very end of her story. She lies across his lap, and finally Doc can take it no more – he must have her. The eroticism of the scene comes from that long, slow build of anticipation for Doc and for the audience.
Of course, you can’t do this with every scene or your story will feel like it’s plodding along at a snail’s pace. You have to pick and choose when you slow things down. And you don’t want to slow a scene down with boring, mundane dialogue or business. Shasta’s monologue in Inherent Vice is interesting and revealing and sets the tone of sensuality for the scene. The discussion on the mini-sub in The Abyss is about important story issues and what’s at stake for the characters.
Though a screenplay is not a final product – it’s a blueprint for the movie, which is the final product – it is still important for the screenwriter to be aware of how the words play on the page. Not only do you want to set the tone, you also often have to convince someone to make the film! That means a good reading experience that captures the feeling of watching the movie.
You can affect the pace and the perception of pace in the way you write your action and description. Consider these two versions of a hypothetical scene:
Version 1:
INT. HALLWAY – NIGHT
Sam descends the wooden stairs – CREAK, CREAK – arriving in a long hallway. A single bare light bulb flickers on the ceiling. At the far end is a door, smudged with handprints.
Sam studies that door. Readjusts his grip on his gun.
He creeps down the hall, eyes on the door. Feeling his way along, trying not to make a sound.
Sweat drips into his eyes. He pauses, wipes it away with the back of his hand.
He hears a CREAK – spins back toward the stairs. Nothing there. His imagination?
Sam turns back, refocuses on that door. Resumes moving toward it. Quiet. Cautious. Ready.
He reaches the door. Grips the knob. Steels himself.
He eases the door open...
On the other side is Mandy, tied to a chair, gagged, mascara streaks running down her cheeks.
And behind her is Joan… with a pistol pressed against Mandy’s temple.
Version 2:
INT. HALLWAY – NIGHT
Sam descends the stairs, reaches a hallway. At the far end, a door, smudged with handprints. A single bulb flickers.
Sam stalks toward the door, gun ready. Wipes sweat from his eyes.
He yanks the door open–
And finds Mandy – tied to a chair. Joan behind her–
With a gun pressed to Mandy’s temple.
Which is better? It depends on what the purpose of the scene is. The first builds tension, the second is more active and exciting. The second is also shorter and will occupy less of the total length of the screenplay. The point is, you have the power to control the pace of the scene with your writing style. Use it.
Friday, January 16, 2015
Friday, January 9, 2015
10 Best Written Movies of 2014
It’s time for my list of the ten best written movies of 2014! This year feels like a bit of a down year. There were plenty of fine movies, but nothing that really seems like it’s going to become a classic. It was not hard to come up with ten well-written movies, but it was difficult to order them. In other words, the distance between #1 and #10 was not great.
Keep in mind, this is a list of the best written movies, not necessarily the best movies or my favorite movies. Sometimes a film with a mediocre script will achieve greatness through the contributions of other artists. For example, Whiplash, though it made my list at #10 for the writing, was probably higher over all because of the amazing performance of J.K. Simons and the excellent music. And I probably enjoyed Lucy more than some of these movies on the list, though there were some script problems that kept it out of the top 10.
My usual disclaimers apply: I see a lot of movies, but I haven’t seen everything. I haven’t yet seen Birdman, though I’m anxious to correct that oversight. I also haven’t yet watched American Sniper, which was nominated for a Writers Guild Award so there’s a fair chance it has a good screenplay. I may in the future discover other movies from 2014 that would bump some of my selections off the list.
Also, some movies age better than others, and because many of these are awards season movies, I’ve seen most of them pretty recently. My opinions could cool over time (though looking back at last year’s selections, they all held up pretty well.) And though I’m happy to hear your opinions in the comments, this is my list. If you don’t like it, you’re welcome to make your own!
So without further ado, the 10 Best Written Movies of 2014:
1. The Theory of Everything (screenplay by Anthony McCarten) – This was an excellent, moving screenplay about a compelling subject that was tricky for several reasons: we know what happens, it would be easy to wallow in the tragedy of Hawking’s disease, and it would have been easy to lose the audience with the complexity of Hawking’s scientific ideas. The screenplay avoided all these traps. Neither character was overly idealized, I was caught up in the emotion and challenges of the relationship, and Hawking’s brilliance was portrayed in a way that made it accessible without reducing his ideas.
2. The Grand Budapest Hotel (story by Wes Anderson & Hugo Guiness, screenplay by Wes Anderson) – I am not really a fan of Wes Anderson’s writing, but he nailed it here. His characters, as always, were original and indelible. But unlike most of his movies, this one also has a solid plot and real stakes. And the emotions were complex, the happy mixing with the sad in a way that ends up being truly profound – while at the same time ample humor and romance make the film very entertaining to watch.
3. Of Horses and Men (written by Benedikt Erlingsson) – You probably haven’t seen this movie. It’s from Iceland and I only saw it because it was in the LA Film Festival. Arguably it’s not even a 2014 movie – it was released in 2013 in Iceland and hasn’t yet been commercially released in the U.S. But I want to include it because it’s a wonderful movie, full of charm and rich drama, which gives us an insight into a very specific community. It also achieves most of its storytelling visually, with little dialogue. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t tightly scripted. It’s just that this script makes masterful use of the visual aspects of film.
4. The Imitation Game (screenplay by Graham Moore) – This is an excellent story and the writer does a great job drawing these characters and, like with Theory of Everything, dramatizing what is largely a mental process. Kudos, too, for not softening Turing’s rough edges yet making us care about him. The stakes here are huge, both on a personal and global level, and several scenes pack powerful emotional punches. It is only marred by a few clichéd moments.
5. Nightcrawler (written by Dan Gilroy) – This screenplay impresses on many levels. The characters are original and have distinctive voices. The plot is tense with several fantastic twists. And it explores cultural themes in a powerful way without being heavy handed.
6. Edge of Tomorrow (screenplay by Christopher McQuarrie and Jez Butterworth & John-Henry Butterworth) – Though it’s hard not to think of it as a science fiction Groundhog Day, this is really an excellent movie. It’s tight and taught, and has rich, dimensional, flawed characters. At the beginning of the story Tom Cruise’s character is a coward and Emily Blunt’s character is mean and heartless. And both change believably due to the events of the story. This and the brisk, clever storytelling leavened with just enough humor elevate it way above the average summer blockbuster – and makes it all the more tragic that it didn’t do well at the box office.
7. The Lego Movie (story by Dan Hageman & Kevin Hageman and Phil Lord & Christopher Miller, screenplay by Phil Lord & Christopher Miller) – Pure fun. This is a great example of making the most out of a movie designed to entertain. It felt fresh and original, contained just enough emotional heft, and was thoroughly enjoyable. Oh, and it was very funny.
8. Inherent Vice (screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson) – I’ll admit I couldn’t follow the mystery, but that doesn’t really matter. This feels like Chinatown mixed with The Big Sleep and then filtered through Quentin Tarantino and the seventies hippie culture. The world of the story and the characters are fascinating and richly drawn. Dialogue is snappy and poetic if not exactly realistic. The plot is twisty and suspenseful. And it happens to contain one of the most erotic scenes ever put on film.
9. Guardians of the Galaxy (written by James Gunn and Nicole Perlman) – Some people think big summer popcorn movies don’t require skilled scripting, but writing these things is incredibly challenging (just compare this movie to the ponderous Amazing Spider-Man 2). Guardians is fun, fast paced, charming and heartfelt – everything you could want out of a movie like this.
10. Whiplash (written by Damien Chazelle) – This is an intense, well-observed movie with two great characters and lots to say about excellence and mentorship. The scenes and dialogue crackle with tension. And it brings us into a fascinating world most of us are unlikely to be familiar with.
(Edited to Add:)
10B. A Most Violent Year (written by J.C. Chandor) – I had forgotten about this one when I made this list, so I'm adding it in a tie for tenth place. (As I said, the distinction between the 10 films - now 11 – is slim.) This is an excellent thriller set in a very grounded world with regular people. The characters are three dimensional, and it's interesting how the story explores the dangers and temptations of violence as a way to solve problems. It is set in 1981, and oddly it feels like it could have been made then. It may not be exactly groundbreaking, but J.C. Chandor is quickly becoming one of our best screenwriters.
There were also some honorable mentions, candidates I considered for this list: Big Hero 6, Snowpiercer, Lucy, and X-Men Days of Future Past all had writing worth noting for one reason or another. (I also thought my former student Rebecca Cremona did an excellent job with Simshar, though I’ll recuse myself from that one since I helped her develop it!)
Normally I also include a worst written movie of the year here, but I can’t really think of one I want to single out. Not that I liked everything I saw in 2014, but I try to reserve this slot for a movie with a truly misguided screenplay that could have been easily fixed, a film that makes you wonder how they ever green lit it. B-movies with low ambitions don’t really count, nor do merely pedestrian screenplays. And there were plenty of ambitious but flawed screenplays (Gone Girl, Interstellar, Foxcatcher), but it feels wrong to harp on someone who took a big swing and missed their target.
So that’s it for 2014… I’m looking forward to more great writing in 2015!
Keep in mind, this is a list of the best written movies, not necessarily the best movies or my favorite movies. Sometimes a film with a mediocre script will achieve greatness through the contributions of other artists. For example, Whiplash, though it made my list at #10 for the writing, was probably higher over all because of the amazing performance of J.K. Simons and the excellent music. And I probably enjoyed Lucy more than some of these movies on the list, though there were some script problems that kept it out of the top 10.
My usual disclaimers apply: I see a lot of movies, but I haven’t seen everything. I haven’t yet seen Birdman, though I’m anxious to correct that oversight. I also haven’t yet watched American Sniper, which was nominated for a Writers Guild Award so there’s a fair chance it has a good screenplay. I may in the future discover other movies from 2014 that would bump some of my selections off the list.
Also, some movies age better than others, and because many of these are awards season movies, I’ve seen most of them pretty recently. My opinions could cool over time (though looking back at last year’s selections, they all held up pretty well.) And though I’m happy to hear your opinions in the comments, this is my list. If you don’t like it, you’re welcome to make your own!
So without further ado, the 10 Best Written Movies of 2014:
1. The Theory of Everything (screenplay by Anthony McCarten) – This was an excellent, moving screenplay about a compelling subject that was tricky for several reasons: we know what happens, it would be easy to wallow in the tragedy of Hawking’s disease, and it would have been easy to lose the audience with the complexity of Hawking’s scientific ideas. The screenplay avoided all these traps. Neither character was overly idealized, I was caught up in the emotion and challenges of the relationship, and Hawking’s brilliance was portrayed in a way that made it accessible without reducing his ideas.
2. The Grand Budapest Hotel (story by Wes Anderson & Hugo Guiness, screenplay by Wes Anderson) – I am not really a fan of Wes Anderson’s writing, but he nailed it here. His characters, as always, were original and indelible. But unlike most of his movies, this one also has a solid plot and real stakes. And the emotions were complex, the happy mixing with the sad in a way that ends up being truly profound – while at the same time ample humor and romance make the film very entertaining to watch.
3. Of Horses and Men (written by Benedikt Erlingsson) – You probably haven’t seen this movie. It’s from Iceland and I only saw it because it was in the LA Film Festival. Arguably it’s not even a 2014 movie – it was released in 2013 in Iceland and hasn’t yet been commercially released in the U.S. But I want to include it because it’s a wonderful movie, full of charm and rich drama, which gives us an insight into a very specific community. It also achieves most of its storytelling visually, with little dialogue. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t tightly scripted. It’s just that this script makes masterful use of the visual aspects of film.
4. The Imitation Game (screenplay by Graham Moore) – This is an excellent story and the writer does a great job drawing these characters and, like with Theory of Everything, dramatizing what is largely a mental process. Kudos, too, for not softening Turing’s rough edges yet making us care about him. The stakes here are huge, both on a personal and global level, and several scenes pack powerful emotional punches. It is only marred by a few clichéd moments.
5. Nightcrawler (written by Dan Gilroy) – This screenplay impresses on many levels. The characters are original and have distinctive voices. The plot is tense with several fantastic twists. And it explores cultural themes in a powerful way without being heavy handed.
6. Edge of Tomorrow (screenplay by Christopher McQuarrie and Jez Butterworth & John-Henry Butterworth) – Though it’s hard not to think of it as a science fiction Groundhog Day, this is really an excellent movie. It’s tight and taught, and has rich, dimensional, flawed characters. At the beginning of the story Tom Cruise’s character is a coward and Emily Blunt’s character is mean and heartless. And both change believably due to the events of the story. This and the brisk, clever storytelling leavened with just enough humor elevate it way above the average summer blockbuster – and makes it all the more tragic that it didn’t do well at the box office.
7. The Lego Movie (story by Dan Hageman & Kevin Hageman and Phil Lord & Christopher Miller, screenplay by Phil Lord & Christopher Miller) – Pure fun. This is a great example of making the most out of a movie designed to entertain. It felt fresh and original, contained just enough emotional heft, and was thoroughly enjoyable. Oh, and it was very funny.
8. Inherent Vice (screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson) – I’ll admit I couldn’t follow the mystery, but that doesn’t really matter. This feels like Chinatown mixed with The Big Sleep and then filtered through Quentin Tarantino and the seventies hippie culture. The world of the story and the characters are fascinating and richly drawn. Dialogue is snappy and poetic if not exactly realistic. The plot is twisty and suspenseful. And it happens to contain one of the most erotic scenes ever put on film.
9. Guardians of the Galaxy (written by James Gunn and Nicole Perlman) – Some people think big summer popcorn movies don’t require skilled scripting, but writing these things is incredibly challenging (just compare this movie to the ponderous Amazing Spider-Man 2). Guardians is fun, fast paced, charming and heartfelt – everything you could want out of a movie like this.
10. Whiplash (written by Damien Chazelle) – This is an intense, well-observed movie with two great characters and lots to say about excellence and mentorship. The scenes and dialogue crackle with tension. And it brings us into a fascinating world most of us are unlikely to be familiar with.
(Edited to Add:)
10B. A Most Violent Year (written by J.C. Chandor) – I had forgotten about this one when I made this list, so I'm adding it in a tie for tenth place. (As I said, the distinction between the 10 films - now 11 – is slim.) This is an excellent thriller set in a very grounded world with regular people. The characters are three dimensional, and it's interesting how the story explores the dangers and temptations of violence as a way to solve problems. It is set in 1981, and oddly it feels like it could have been made then. It may not be exactly groundbreaking, but J.C. Chandor is quickly becoming one of our best screenwriters.
There were also some honorable mentions, candidates I considered for this list: Big Hero 6, Snowpiercer, Lucy, and X-Men Days of Future Past all had writing worth noting for one reason or another. (I also thought my former student Rebecca Cremona did an excellent job with Simshar, though I’ll recuse myself from that one since I helped her develop it!)
Normally I also include a worst written movie of the year here, but I can’t really think of one I want to single out. Not that I liked everything I saw in 2014, but I try to reserve this slot for a movie with a truly misguided screenplay that could have been easily fixed, a film that makes you wonder how they ever green lit it. B-movies with low ambitions don’t really count, nor do merely pedestrian screenplays. And there were plenty of ambitious but flawed screenplays (Gone Girl, Interstellar, Foxcatcher), but it feels wrong to harp on someone who took a big swing and missed their target.
So that’s it for 2014… I’m looking forward to more great writing in 2015!
Friday, January 2, 2015
2014 vs. 1984 At the Movies
Happy New Year! Next week (probably) I will do my list of the Ten Best Written Movies of 2014. (I’m still catching up on my viewing). This week, I’d like to take a look at the movies released in 2014 in comparison to the movies released thirty years ago in 1984. 1984 has been mentioned a lot lately because it is considered one of the best years for genre movies in history, though that’s not what I’m really focusing on.
It would be easy to point to declining attendance and box office (when adjusted for inflation) over the last thirty years, but also perhaps misleading. The business has changed too much since then – in 1984 there was no internet or original cable programming, no HDTV, and international box office was a fraction of domestic – for a simple numerical comparison to tell us much. Analyzing the changes could easily be several blog posts, and it’s not really what I’m interested in today. Rather, I’d like to compare the two years in terms of how the types of movies studios produce has changed, and what that could mean for screenwriters.
There were, of course, hundreds of movies released in both years. To keep things manageable, I’ll look at the top 25 movies in each year. I’ll stipulate that this sample size risks being skewed by outliers, but I think it should give us some useful points of discussion. Here are the lists, drawn from boxofficemojo.com, with a few notations that I’ll explain in a moment.
2014
1984
I first divided the lists into the source of the idea for the film – original stories, adaptations, sequels, etc. In some cases, I had to make a judgment call. For example, you could argue Purple Rain is based on Prince's album, but I considered it original. And I decided Malificent is based on Sleeping Beauty, though you could make a case that it should be considered a new story. I tried to note the decision I made next to movies where that decision may be questionable. I also categorized sequels that were based on underlying material (such as The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1) simply as sequels, figuring at this point they rely more on the first movie than the source material. Though I did break out sequels to reboots just because I found that interesting. The results are:
2014
1984
I also analyzed genres. I made a couple of decisions to simplify things – I chose to lump thrillers in with action/adventure, though Romancing the Stone is not really the same genre as City Heat. I also lumped science fiction and comic book movies together. And I categorized musical dramas like Purple Rain and Footloose as drama, though there were enough teen oriented music and dance themed films in 1984 they might qualify for their own category. Here are the results:
2014
What does all of this mean for screenwriters? I would conclude that it is going to be hard to interest a studio in an original idea. That poses a challenge if you’re trying to write a spec script and don’t have the resources to option a bestselling book or comic book. One possible solution is to try to find public domain characters to base your work on – Dracula or Santa Claus, for example.
Another thing to think about is that most specs these days might better be considered writing samples. So when you’re weighing your ideas, you might consider whether the anticipated spec will properly demonstrate your ability to adapt the kind of material studios are making.
And of course it looks like writing in the science fiction genre makes more sense than writing comedy or drama.
We could, of course, also just bemoan the lack of original movies and limited variety these days. (I do that a lot.) But that won’t help us very much when it comes to making a living. If you want to be a professional screenwriter, you have to pay attention to market trends.
Of course, considering how bad 2014 was at the box office (down 5.2% from 2013), maybe we should also anticipate a change in course for the studios. One can dream, after all…
Further reading: Here’s an interesting article from Variety about the bad 2014 box office and what may be behind it, plus a clue as to how studios are planning to combat it.
It would be easy to point to declining attendance and box office (when adjusted for inflation) over the last thirty years, but also perhaps misleading. The business has changed too much since then – in 1984 there was no internet or original cable programming, no HDTV, and international box office was a fraction of domestic – for a simple numerical comparison to tell us much. Analyzing the changes could easily be several blog posts, and it’s not really what I’m interested in today. Rather, I’d like to compare the two years in terms of how the types of movies studios produce has changed, and what that could mean for screenwriters.
There were, of course, hundreds of movies released in both years. To keep things manageable, I’ll look at the top 25 movies in each year. I’ll stipulate that this sample size risks being skewed by outliers, but I think it should give us some useful points of discussion. Here are the lists, drawn from boxofficemojo.com, with a few notations that I’ll explain in a moment.
2014
- Guardians of the Galaxy
- The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1
- Captain America: The Winter Soldier
- The LEGO Movie (original)
- Transformers: Age of Extinction
- Maleficent (based on)
- X-Men: Days of Future Past
- Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
- The Amazing Spider-Man 2
- Godzilla
- Big Hero 6
- 22 Jump Street (sequel to reboot)
- Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
- Interstellar
- How to Train Your Dragon 2
- The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies
- Gone Girl
- Divergent
- Neighbors
- Ride Along
- Rio 2
- Lucy
- The Fault in our Stars
- Mr. Peabody & Sherman (based on)
- 300: Rise of an Empire
1984
- Beverly Hills Cop
- Ghostbusters (sci-fi)
- Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
- Gremlins (sci-fi)
- The Karate Kid
- Police Academy (action comedy)
- Footloose
- Romancing the Stone
- Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
- Splash
- Purple Rain
- Amadeus
- Tightrope
- The Natural
- Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan (reboot)
- Revenge of the Nerds
- 2010
- Breakin’
- Bachelor Party
- Red Dawn
- The Terminator
- City Heat
- All of Me (romantic comedy)
- Places in the Heart
- The Killing Fields
I first divided the lists into the source of the idea for the film – original stories, adaptations, sequels, etc. In some cases, I had to make a judgment call. For example, you could argue Purple Rain is based on Prince's album, but I considered it original. And I decided Malificent is based on Sleeping Beauty, though you could make a case that it should be considered a new story. I tried to note the decision I made next to movies where that decision may be questionable. I also categorized sequels that were based on underlying material (such as The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1) simply as sequels, figuring at this point they rely more on the first movie than the source material. Though I did break out sequels to reboots just because I found that interesting. The results are:
2014
- Originals: 6
- Based on: 5
- Sequels: 9
- Reboots: 2
- Sequels to Reboots: 3
1984
- Originals: 18
- Based on: 3
- Sequels: 3
- Reboots: 1
- Sequels to Reboots: 0
I also analyzed genres. I made a couple of decisions to simplify things – I chose to lump thrillers in with action/adventure, though Romancing the Stone is not really the same genre as City Heat. I also lumped science fiction and comic book movies together. And I categorized musical dramas like Purple Rain and Footloose as drama, though there were enough teen oriented music and dance themed films in 1984 they might qualify for their own category. Here are the results:
2014
- Action/Adventure/Thriller: 0
- Sci-fi/Comic Book: 12
- Fantasy: 3
- Broad Comedy: 1
- Romantic Comedy: 0
- Drama: 2
- Animated Family: 5
- Action-Comedy: 2
- Action/Adventure/Thriller: 6
- Sci-fi/Comic Book: 5
- Fantasy: 0
- Broad Comedy: 2
- Romantic Comedy: 2
- Drama: 8
- Animated Family: 0
- Action-Comedy: 2
What does all of this mean for screenwriters? I would conclude that it is going to be hard to interest a studio in an original idea. That poses a challenge if you’re trying to write a spec script and don’t have the resources to option a bestselling book or comic book. One possible solution is to try to find public domain characters to base your work on – Dracula or Santa Claus, for example.
Another thing to think about is that most specs these days might better be considered writing samples. So when you’re weighing your ideas, you might consider whether the anticipated spec will properly demonstrate your ability to adapt the kind of material studios are making.
And of course it looks like writing in the science fiction genre makes more sense than writing comedy or drama.
We could, of course, also just bemoan the lack of original movies and limited variety these days. (I do that a lot.) But that won’t help us very much when it comes to making a living. If you want to be a professional screenwriter, you have to pay attention to market trends.
Of course, considering how bad 2014 was at the box office (down 5.2% from 2013), maybe we should also anticipate a change in course for the studios. One can dream, after all…
Further reading: Here’s an interesting article from Variety about the bad 2014 box office and what may be behind it, plus a clue as to how studios are planning to combat it.
Friday, December 26, 2014
Interview with Simshar Writer/Director Rebecca Cremona
Shortly after I started teaching at Art Center College, a young woman from Malta named Rebecca Cremona developed a screenplay in my Screenwriting 1 class called Simshar. She went on to direct the film and this year it was Malta's official selection for the foreign film Academy Award. It's a terrific, moving tale about a maritime disaster against the backdrop of debate over immigration issues in Europe, and how the "little guy" is often caught up in political issues beyond his or her control. Rebecca kindly agreed to answer a few questions about the writing and making of Simshar for my blog.
Q: Simshar is based on a true story. It’s obviously dramatic, but what in particular drew you to this material?
Rebecca Cremona: I am very interested in how large political issues actually influence mundane life, so this fundamental link, which is intrinsic to the story, taps into a dimension I believe is very relevant in life. The story is also a manifestation of tension between tradition and change/progress - and in an increasingly globalized world and hailing from a very particular island, I find this theme too to be of great interest.
Q: What were some of the challenges of adapting a true story and how did you deal with them?
RC: There were many challenges but I would say the three main ones were: being respectful to characters based on real people who have been through extreme circumstances while simultaneously ensuring they are well rounded characters with flaws and all; sometimes fact is stranger than fiction and is just not believable, also sometimes amazing facts do not serve your story, character or themes and discipline is difficult but necessary; last but not least, when dealing with complex situations in little known parts of the world, a balance of giving enough context and not bogging down the story with too many details or too much exposition is essential.
Q: You’re credited as co-writer with David Grech. Tell me about that working relationship.
RC:Writing is such a personal, almost intimate process, so such collaborations are very delicate and can only be successful if people are on the same wavelength. After I had been writing for a couple of years I showed the screenplay to David and his feedback was so pertinent and really towards where I wanted to take the story, so we started a process where we would meet and discuss for hours and then after that I would revisit the script.
Q: This is an ambitious film for a first time feature director – you have refugee camps, a helicopter, multiple boats, a large cast including children, and of course it’s notoriously difficult to shoot on water. Did you have to make changes to the screenplay for practical or budgetary reasons?
RC: We tried very hard not to let those factors affect the story. However, as you say, it was very ambitious and, although together with the help of the team, the Maltese community and the expertise of our line producer we really maximized our resources almost beyond belief, there were times we had to compromise. For the longest time the opening scene was completely different and I wish we were able to keep it as it was intended originally as I feel it was much more effective. I think learning what and how to compromise is a big part of filmmaking, especially independent filmmaking.
Q: I love the complex thematic elements related to the refugees and how you manage to really justify everyone’s point of view and show how so many people are caught in no-win situations. Also, you aren’t heavy handed, letting the story drive the movie and using the immigration issues as a backdrop. How tough was it to keep that balance?
RC: I am so glad you felt that way. We put a lot of effort into that - lots of research not only in terms of reading up about the various issues and incidents but also by means of meeting the various groups of people - fishermen, refugees, soldiers...keeping the people in mind and prioritizing them over the issues was a good guiding principle to avoid being heavy handed.
Q: What did you learn about screenwriting from the experience of directing? Will you approach your next screenplay differently at all?
RC: Because of the emotional intensity and sometimes even the community specific jargon (for instance that of the fishing community) we sometimes derived the actual dialogue from selects drawn from a series of improvisations in rehearsals led by outlines dictated by the script. I'm particularly happy with those scenes and would love to work more along those lines in the future. Of course it depends on what the style of the story is and what access one has to the actors and prep time available...
Q: How has the awards season experience been?
RC: Incredible. Although we didn't make it to the shortlist it was wonderful to screen the film to the academy members and to be considered serious contenders together with some legendary filmmakers and really amazing films. Moreover, it was great to put Malta on the map as it was the first time the country participated. It also led to me getting representation with Management 360 which I am very excited about. So all in all a fantastic first time and I hope there will be others.
Q: What’s next for you?
RC: I have another story I am particularly passionate about and am working on the script for together with an American writer. I certainly don't discount working on films based on other people's scripts whilst the development for that is underway though. And although I am drawn to my country and the wonderful cultural specificity there, I believe that good stories are everywhere and I am happy to go where they are.
Thanks Rebecca! And for my readers, you can find out more about Simshar on the film's Facebook page and by following it on Twitter.
Q: Simshar is based on a true story. It’s obviously dramatic, but what in particular drew you to this material?
Rebecca Cremona: I am very interested in how large political issues actually influence mundane life, so this fundamental link, which is intrinsic to the story, taps into a dimension I believe is very relevant in life. The story is also a manifestation of tension between tradition and change/progress - and in an increasingly globalized world and hailing from a very particular island, I find this theme too to be of great interest.
Q: What were some of the challenges of adapting a true story and how did you deal with them?
RC: There were many challenges but I would say the three main ones were: being respectful to characters based on real people who have been through extreme circumstances while simultaneously ensuring they are well rounded characters with flaws and all; sometimes fact is stranger than fiction and is just not believable, also sometimes amazing facts do not serve your story, character or themes and discipline is difficult but necessary; last but not least, when dealing with complex situations in little known parts of the world, a balance of giving enough context and not bogging down the story with too many details or too much exposition is essential.
Q: You’re credited as co-writer with David Grech. Tell me about that working relationship.
RC:Writing is such a personal, almost intimate process, so such collaborations are very delicate and can only be successful if people are on the same wavelength. After I had been writing for a couple of years I showed the screenplay to David and his feedback was so pertinent and really towards where I wanted to take the story, so we started a process where we would meet and discuss for hours and then after that I would revisit the script.
Q: This is an ambitious film for a first time feature director – you have refugee camps, a helicopter, multiple boats, a large cast including children, and of course it’s notoriously difficult to shoot on water. Did you have to make changes to the screenplay for practical or budgetary reasons?
RC: We tried very hard not to let those factors affect the story. However, as you say, it was very ambitious and, although together with the help of the team, the Maltese community and the expertise of our line producer we really maximized our resources almost beyond belief, there were times we had to compromise. For the longest time the opening scene was completely different and I wish we were able to keep it as it was intended originally as I feel it was much more effective. I think learning what and how to compromise is a big part of filmmaking, especially independent filmmaking.
Q: I love the complex thematic elements related to the refugees and how you manage to really justify everyone’s point of view and show how so many people are caught in no-win situations. Also, you aren’t heavy handed, letting the story drive the movie and using the immigration issues as a backdrop. How tough was it to keep that balance?
RC: I am so glad you felt that way. We put a lot of effort into that - lots of research not only in terms of reading up about the various issues and incidents but also by means of meeting the various groups of people - fishermen, refugees, soldiers...keeping the people in mind and prioritizing them over the issues was a good guiding principle to avoid being heavy handed.
Q: What did you learn about screenwriting from the experience of directing? Will you approach your next screenplay differently at all?
RC: Because of the emotional intensity and sometimes even the community specific jargon (for instance that of the fishing community) we sometimes derived the actual dialogue from selects drawn from a series of improvisations in rehearsals led by outlines dictated by the script. I'm particularly happy with those scenes and would love to work more along those lines in the future. Of course it depends on what the style of the story is and what access one has to the actors and prep time available...
Q: How has the awards season experience been?
RC: Incredible. Although we didn't make it to the shortlist it was wonderful to screen the film to the academy members and to be considered serious contenders together with some legendary filmmakers and really amazing films. Moreover, it was great to put Malta on the map as it was the first time the country participated. It also led to me getting representation with Management 360 which I am very excited about. So all in all a fantastic first time and I hope there will be others.
Q: What’s next for you?
RC: I have another story I am particularly passionate about and am working on the script for together with an American writer. I certainly don't discount working on films based on other people's scripts whilst the development for that is underway though. And although I am drawn to my country and the wonderful cultural specificity there, I believe that good stories are everywhere and I am happy to go where they are.
Thanks Rebecca! And for my readers, you can find out more about Simshar on the film's Facebook page and by following it on Twitter.
Friday, December 19, 2014
8 Truths for Building a Screenwriting Career
News flash: it’s very hard to break in to the screenwriting business.
It’s equally hard to stay in it. There are many more talented people
who want to write movies and television than will get the chance. The
difficulty level can lead to mindsets that harm your chances of success.
Here are eight truths that will help you avoid mental traps:
1. There is no “wall” between you and the industry, no secret password to break in.
For new writers it can seem like Hollywood is surrounded by a big wall, and they need to find some secret door to get past it. This can lead them to stalk industry insiders, or to try embarrassing gimmicks to get attention, or to fall prey to promises of, “if you just buy my product or seminar, you will be able to break in.” But in fact Hollywood is always on the lookout for fantastic new writers. Yes, you have to network. Yes, contests and pitch fests can help get you noticed. Yes, it will take time, determination, and a lot of rejection. But most people fail not because they lack access but because their material really is not yet as great as they think it is or because they don’t put in the required effort. So focus on creating better material and then getting it read, and stop looking for the “secret” way into the business.
2. It is always hard.
Two stories: After Sweet Home Alabama came out I was looking for a new agent via my manager. We were having difficulty getting agents to even read my new spec. I said to my manager, “Wow, I thought this would get easier.” She replied, “Oh no. It’s never easy. Get that out of your head.”
Second story: I got to have dinner with David Seidler (writer of The King’s Speech) at a WGA event. I asked him if winning the Oscar changed anything. He told me a story about going to a meeting (after the Oscar) where he thought he was being offered a writing job. It turned out he was competing against five other writers for the gig – four of whom also had Oscars. He said, “All that changes is you move to a higher level of competition.”
3. You need luck, but it will do you no good if you are not prepared.
Ask any writer how they broke into the business and their story will inevitably contain a moment where they got very lucky. It can make you think success is random. But here’s the thing – everyone who makes the effort gets those lucky breaks. And if you stick with it, you will continue to get even more breaks. The writers who succeed are those who are prepared when the opportunity comes – prepared with good material and professional work habits.
4. Stop blaming outside forces for your lack of success. Even if it’s true, it won’t help you.
You hear a lot about ageism, sexism, racism, etc. in the business. Statistics back up the claim that it is harder for non-white, non-male, non-young writers to succeed. But if this applies to you, you can’t use it as an excuse. Whining won’t change things. And it can be a trap – I’ve seen writers refuse to accept that their material needs work because they blame outside forces for their failure. As a result, they never improve. If the playing field is tilted against you, you really have only two choices: give up or work harder. (The same applies if you have dyslexia, a family to support, or any other reason you blame for your failures other than the quality of your material.) The reality is that it’s hard for everyone, even young white males.
5. It is a business. If you want to be a pro, you have to learn the business side.
If you want to write screenplays as a hobby, you can write whatever you want and not bother to learn about the business. But unless you are independently wealthy, your screenplays will then be doomed to remain unmade. If you want to earn a living at writing, and you want studios or independent financiers to pay for production of your movies, you need to take the business side seriously. You have to follow the trades, network, learn to pitch, learn to incorporate studio notes, etc.
6. Nobody owes you. You have to earn it.
Nobody cares how badly you want to be a screenwriter. They only care how good your material is and how professional you are. Fortunately, passion can help you become a better writer. But only if you don’t feel entitled to a career. Focus on proving that you deserve a career. Be humble, work hard, and be willing to learn.
7. Being selfish holds you back. Being nice, generous, and cooperative opens doors.
Ask not what your industry contacts can do for you, ask what you can do for them. You will need help to start and maintain a career in Hollywood. People like to help people that they like. So remember the golden rule and treat people as you would like to be treated.
8. Watch your back.
Despite the above, be aware that there are many people who will try to take advantage of you, including some straight up con men that prey on desperation. Don’t let that make you overly cynical or suspicious – that will hurt you as well. But do your homework on people. Make sure they’re who they say they are. And seek legal advice when dealing with contract issues. Don’t be afraid to say no if something feels creepy or unfair. It can be better for your career long term to turn down the wrong offer.
Keep these truths in mind as you climb that difficult mountain that we call a career in screenwriting.
1. There is no “wall” between you and the industry, no secret password to break in.
For new writers it can seem like Hollywood is surrounded by a big wall, and they need to find some secret door to get past it. This can lead them to stalk industry insiders, or to try embarrassing gimmicks to get attention, or to fall prey to promises of, “if you just buy my product or seminar, you will be able to break in.” But in fact Hollywood is always on the lookout for fantastic new writers. Yes, you have to network. Yes, contests and pitch fests can help get you noticed. Yes, it will take time, determination, and a lot of rejection. But most people fail not because they lack access but because their material really is not yet as great as they think it is or because they don’t put in the required effort. So focus on creating better material and then getting it read, and stop looking for the “secret” way into the business.
2. It is always hard.
Two stories: After Sweet Home Alabama came out I was looking for a new agent via my manager. We were having difficulty getting agents to even read my new spec. I said to my manager, “Wow, I thought this would get easier.” She replied, “Oh no. It’s never easy. Get that out of your head.”
Second story: I got to have dinner with David Seidler (writer of The King’s Speech) at a WGA event. I asked him if winning the Oscar changed anything. He told me a story about going to a meeting (after the Oscar) where he thought he was being offered a writing job. It turned out he was competing against five other writers for the gig – four of whom also had Oscars. He said, “All that changes is you move to a higher level of competition.”
3. You need luck, but it will do you no good if you are not prepared.
Ask any writer how they broke into the business and their story will inevitably contain a moment where they got very lucky. It can make you think success is random. But here’s the thing – everyone who makes the effort gets those lucky breaks. And if you stick with it, you will continue to get even more breaks. The writers who succeed are those who are prepared when the opportunity comes – prepared with good material and professional work habits.
4. Stop blaming outside forces for your lack of success. Even if it’s true, it won’t help you.
You hear a lot about ageism, sexism, racism, etc. in the business. Statistics back up the claim that it is harder for non-white, non-male, non-young writers to succeed. But if this applies to you, you can’t use it as an excuse. Whining won’t change things. And it can be a trap – I’ve seen writers refuse to accept that their material needs work because they blame outside forces for their failure. As a result, they never improve. If the playing field is tilted against you, you really have only two choices: give up or work harder. (The same applies if you have dyslexia, a family to support, or any other reason you blame for your failures other than the quality of your material.) The reality is that it’s hard for everyone, even young white males.
5. It is a business. If you want to be a pro, you have to learn the business side.
If you want to write screenplays as a hobby, you can write whatever you want and not bother to learn about the business. But unless you are independently wealthy, your screenplays will then be doomed to remain unmade. If you want to earn a living at writing, and you want studios or independent financiers to pay for production of your movies, you need to take the business side seriously. You have to follow the trades, network, learn to pitch, learn to incorporate studio notes, etc.
6. Nobody owes you. You have to earn it.
Nobody cares how badly you want to be a screenwriter. They only care how good your material is and how professional you are. Fortunately, passion can help you become a better writer. But only if you don’t feel entitled to a career. Focus on proving that you deserve a career. Be humble, work hard, and be willing to learn.
7. Being selfish holds you back. Being nice, generous, and cooperative opens doors.
Ask not what your industry contacts can do for you, ask what you can do for them. You will need help to start and maintain a career in Hollywood. People like to help people that they like. So remember the golden rule and treat people as you would like to be treated.
8. Watch your back.
Despite the above, be aware that there are many people who will try to take advantage of you, including some straight up con men that prey on desperation. Don’t let that make you overly cynical or suspicious – that will hurt you as well. But do your homework on people. Make sure they’re who they say they are. And seek legal advice when dealing with contract issues. Don’t be afraid to say no if something feels creepy or unfair. It can be better for your career long term to turn down the wrong offer.
Keep these truths in mind as you climb that difficult mountain that we call a career in screenwriting.
Friday, December 12, 2014
Mailbag: How Much Do Screenwriters Make?
Today I’m going to address a couple of questions that have been asked by blog readers.
Marilyn Thomas asked about the financials of a normal script sale (as opposed to a huge million dollar type of sale).
This is a tough question because there really isn’t such a thing as a “normal” script sale, especially these days. For the purposes of this question, we’ll assume it’s a WGA covered deal (an independent, non-union deal could be for as little as nothing up front in return for a vague back-end payment). We’ll also assume we’re talking about a studio film (i.e. high budget), and that we’re talking about a straight up spec sale.
You can look at the schedule of WGA minimum payments on the Guild website - it can be a little hard to follow, as it covers multiple time periods and budget levels. Currently the minimum (scale) for an original high budget spec sale is $93,257. Often your agent will be able to negotiate scale+10% for a new writer. To make the math easy, we’ll round off to $100,000
Typically, studios don’t purchase the script outright, they option the script (giving them the exclusive right to purchase the script for one year - if they don't you get it back and keep the option payment). A 10% option for one year with a renewal for an additional 10% is fairly standard. That means your option payment would be $10,000.
Of that, you’ll pay 10% ($1,000) to your agent, 10% ($1,000) to your manager, and 5% ($500) to your attorney, assuming you have all three. The Guild dues are 1.5% ($150). That means your revenue will be $7,500. Your tax rate will depend on a lot of other factors about your income, but let’s say it’s 25%. Fortunately the above commissions and dues are deductable, so taking 25% off $7,500, you’re left with $5,625 for the one year option.
If the studio exercises the option and purchases the script, they pay the difference between the option and the purchase price. That’s $90,000 more to you – minus $9000 to your agent, $9000 to your manager, $4500 to your attorney and $1350 to the WGA. That leaves you with $66,150, which, after taxes, comes to $49,612.50. There will probably be a few other expenses from that as well, such as for an accountant to handle your taxes.
Of course there’s lots of variables in there. Your option could be for more or less. The total price could be higher if there’s competition among buyers. But the market for specs is very weak right now. Bidding wars are rare and often producers don’t feel the need to option material because they aren’t afraid of someone else stealing it away from them, or else they option it for a token payment. Also, ideally you want to include a rewrite in your deal, which would add a minimum of $33,916 to the deal but comes with other issues.
Still, that should give you an idea of how a deal might look for a new writer working with a studio. The most important thing is to get experienced people to advise and represent you. You especially want a good entertainment attorney.
Now on to the second question:
David Bishop asked, “The usual wisdom says you should write within your wheel house to build a cohesive career. … You've blogged how Sweet Home Alabama was an outlier for you, and that created challenges when it took off. Could you talk about how overcome that challenge, or about what happened next?”
Today we refer to this as your “brand.” Successful screenwriters are typically associated with one type of film – a certain genre, and maybe budget level or style. There are big career advantages to this. You’ll build relationships with producers and execs who like that type of film. You’ll get called upon when they need someone with the skill set you’ve established. And it will be easier to keep track of the market and your competition.
One big advantage to being a screenwriter is you can change your brand simply by writing spec work of a different type. If you’re a horror writer and you decide you want to write broad comedy, just write a broad comedy spec and voila – now you’re a broad comedy writer.
However, you lose much of the clout from what you did before. Most of the producers and executives with whom you’ve built relationships writing horror won’t be interested in making a broad comedy. The few who are might read yours but they’ll be skeptical of your abilities since they only know your skills at horror. And broad comedy producers will not know you or your writing. You’ll be building your network again almost from scratch.
Furthermore, your agent or manager may not be interested in representing you for broad comedy (you should definitely discuss it with them before changing your brand). So you may have to seek out new representation. And since agents and managers generally want to see multiple scripts from a prospective client, that means you’ll need to write more than one broad comedy spec to prove your abilities - and your commitment to the new direction.
Essentially, shifting brands means starting over again almost as though you were a newbie.
After Sweet Home Alabama set records for a September opening, I got known as a romantic comedy writer with particular skills in writing female characters. It opened a lot of doors to me. I could get pitch meetings just about anywhere – as long as I was pitching romantic comedy. Most of my assignment work has been in that genre – just this year I got a gig to rewrite a romantic comedy.
But what I've always wanted to write is science fiction and adventure movies. Sweet Home Alabama was an unusual spec for me, something I did in school somewhat on a whim before I really thought about things like branding. I don’t regret it. I like being paid to write! But I decided a couple years after the movie came out that I wanted to do different things and set about changing my brand. So I wrote a new action-adventure spec. My manager at the time was very supportive, but my agents weren't. So when I finished the spec I started looking for a new agent. To my shock, about a third would not even read the action-adventure spec. "If he does a romantic comedy, we'll look at it," they'd tell my manager.
Fortunately, the agent I did sign with, Lew Weitzman, was very supportive of the new direction. With his help, I was able to do some new things. Unfortunately Lew passed away a bit over a year ago. My current manager understands what I want to do now… but he still frequently encourages me to reconsider romantic comedy. It’s just easier for him to sell me that way.
What I really need is for one of my newer scripts to get turned into a big hit movie. But that's easier said than done.
Marilyn Thomas asked about the financials of a normal script sale (as opposed to a huge million dollar type of sale).
This is a tough question because there really isn’t such a thing as a “normal” script sale, especially these days. For the purposes of this question, we’ll assume it’s a WGA covered deal (an independent, non-union deal could be for as little as nothing up front in return for a vague back-end payment). We’ll also assume we’re talking about a studio film (i.e. high budget), and that we’re talking about a straight up spec sale.
You can look at the schedule of WGA minimum payments on the Guild website - it can be a little hard to follow, as it covers multiple time periods and budget levels. Currently the minimum (scale) for an original high budget spec sale is $93,257. Often your agent will be able to negotiate scale+10% for a new writer. To make the math easy, we’ll round off to $100,000
Typically, studios don’t purchase the script outright, they option the script (giving them the exclusive right to purchase the script for one year - if they don't you get it back and keep the option payment). A 10% option for one year with a renewal for an additional 10% is fairly standard. That means your option payment would be $10,000.
Of that, you’ll pay 10% ($1,000) to your agent, 10% ($1,000) to your manager, and 5% ($500) to your attorney, assuming you have all three. The Guild dues are 1.5% ($150). That means your revenue will be $7,500. Your tax rate will depend on a lot of other factors about your income, but let’s say it’s 25%. Fortunately the above commissions and dues are deductable, so taking 25% off $7,500, you’re left with $5,625 for the one year option.
If the studio exercises the option and purchases the script, they pay the difference between the option and the purchase price. That’s $90,000 more to you – minus $9000 to your agent, $9000 to your manager, $4500 to your attorney and $1350 to the WGA. That leaves you with $66,150, which, after taxes, comes to $49,612.50. There will probably be a few other expenses from that as well, such as for an accountant to handle your taxes.
Of course there’s lots of variables in there. Your option could be for more or less. The total price could be higher if there’s competition among buyers. But the market for specs is very weak right now. Bidding wars are rare and often producers don’t feel the need to option material because they aren’t afraid of someone else stealing it away from them, or else they option it for a token payment. Also, ideally you want to include a rewrite in your deal, which would add a minimum of $33,916 to the deal but comes with other issues.
Still, that should give you an idea of how a deal might look for a new writer working with a studio. The most important thing is to get experienced people to advise and represent you. You especially want a good entertainment attorney.
Now on to the second question:
David Bishop asked, “The usual wisdom says you should write within your wheel house to build a cohesive career. … You've blogged how Sweet Home Alabama was an outlier for you, and that created challenges when it took off. Could you talk about how overcome that challenge, or about what happened next?”
Today we refer to this as your “brand.” Successful screenwriters are typically associated with one type of film – a certain genre, and maybe budget level or style. There are big career advantages to this. You’ll build relationships with producers and execs who like that type of film. You’ll get called upon when they need someone with the skill set you’ve established. And it will be easier to keep track of the market and your competition.
One big advantage to being a screenwriter is you can change your brand simply by writing spec work of a different type. If you’re a horror writer and you decide you want to write broad comedy, just write a broad comedy spec and voila – now you’re a broad comedy writer.
However, you lose much of the clout from what you did before. Most of the producers and executives with whom you’ve built relationships writing horror won’t be interested in making a broad comedy. The few who are might read yours but they’ll be skeptical of your abilities since they only know your skills at horror. And broad comedy producers will not know you or your writing. You’ll be building your network again almost from scratch.
Furthermore, your agent or manager may not be interested in representing you for broad comedy (you should definitely discuss it with them before changing your brand). So you may have to seek out new representation. And since agents and managers generally want to see multiple scripts from a prospective client, that means you’ll need to write more than one broad comedy spec to prove your abilities - and your commitment to the new direction.
Essentially, shifting brands means starting over again almost as though you were a newbie.
After Sweet Home Alabama set records for a September opening, I got known as a romantic comedy writer with particular skills in writing female characters. It opened a lot of doors to me. I could get pitch meetings just about anywhere – as long as I was pitching romantic comedy. Most of my assignment work has been in that genre – just this year I got a gig to rewrite a romantic comedy.
But what I've always wanted to write is science fiction and adventure movies. Sweet Home Alabama was an unusual spec for me, something I did in school somewhat on a whim before I really thought about things like branding. I don’t regret it. I like being paid to write! But I decided a couple years after the movie came out that I wanted to do different things and set about changing my brand. So I wrote a new action-adventure spec. My manager at the time was very supportive, but my agents weren't. So when I finished the spec I started looking for a new agent. To my shock, about a third would not even read the action-adventure spec. "If he does a romantic comedy, we'll look at it," they'd tell my manager.
Fortunately, the agent I did sign with, Lew Weitzman, was very supportive of the new direction. With his help, I was able to do some new things. Unfortunately Lew passed away a bit over a year ago. My current manager understands what I want to do now… but he still frequently encourages me to reconsider romantic comedy. It’s just easier for him to sell me that way.
What I really need is for one of my newer scripts to get turned into a big hit movie. But that's easier said than done.
Thursday, December 4, 2014
How Original Is Your Idea?
Reader D Brian Weller recently asked me, “How can a writer know an idea hasn’t been done before?”
Of course this is of great concern to screenwriters. But the short answer is, you can’t, really. In fact, with tens of thousands of people out there writing spec screenplays, there’s a pretty good chance at least a few of them are working on very similar ideas to yours right now. Every movie that comes out inevitably gets sued by two or three people who are convinced the producers stole their script. The writers always lose those lawsuits. Always.*
I’m not saying nobody ever steals an idea in Hollywood, but in the vast, vast, vast majority of these cases, a writer simply couldn’t accept that someone else had the same idea as them. I guarantee you, no matter how original you think your idea is, at least three other screenwriters are working on something similar.
It can, of course, be pretty depressing than to be a few weeks away from finishing a spec only to read about a sale in the trades of a script with the exact same idea. Unfortunately it happens.
That said, you do need to make an effort to make sure there wasn’t a movie already made on your idea. There’s no quick way to discover this. However, you should be watching everything you can in the genre you’re writing. If you’re writing science fiction, you should be watching every science fiction movie that comes out and working your way through the catalog of science fiction movies on DVD. If you’re writing horror, you should be seeing everything horror you can. Also reading books and comic books and seeing plays in your genre. (This is one often unmentioned reasons to work in a single genre… switching around requires you to do considerably more homework and research.) I would also recommend using a source like Done Deal Pro to keep track of what has sold recently.
There have been so many movies made (and books published and plays performed, etc.) that there really are no original ideas anymore, at least not good ones. But the originality of an idea is a little overrated. You don’t want to have a logline that immediately brings to mind another movie, of course, but it’s really the development and execution of the idea that counts.
Sometimes it’s a matter of identifying what’s original in your own idea. The Hangover (written by Jon Lucas & Scott Moore) is about a bachelor party gone bad, an idea that was also the basis of Bachelor Party (story by Bob Israel, screenplay by Bob & Neal Israel and Pat Proft). If you presented The Hangover as:
A raunchy comedy about a bachelor party that goes horribly awry.
It will sound derivative. What’s original is the search for the groom aspect. That’s the new element. So a better log line for The Hangover would be:
A raunchy comedy about five friends who go to Vegas for a bachelor party and lose the groom. The four groomsmen must retrace their steps and find the groom in time for the wedding.
You’ll notice that it’s the specific details that make the idea seem original. This may seem obvious when analyzing an existing high concept film, but I see many writers who don’t take the time to identify the core details that are crucial to the originality of their concept. They either make a generic log line (such as the first one above), or they overload their log line with non-core detail. But identifying the core, specific, original details of your idea will help ensure you develop your script to emphasize these elements. Spend time on this before you start writing!
Often good movies come from adding a twist to a common or even cliché idea. Alien (story by Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, screenplay by Dan O’Bannon) took the monster movie and set it in space. Frequently the best way to ad a fresh spin is through the main character. Bridesmaids (written by Kristen Wiig & Annie Mumolo) did the bachelor party comedy seen in movies like Bachelor Party and The Hangover, but made the main characters women. Suddenly a tired idea was fresh. Attack the Block (written by Joe Cornish) is about an alien invasion – something we’ve seen a million times – but the heroes are street thugs. How original!
In 1981, Dragonslayer (written by Hal Barwood & Matthew Robbins) made a cliché story idea of a hero rescuing a princess from a dragon fresh by making the hero the wizard’s inexperienced apprentice rather than the wizard himself. Twenty years later Shrek (screenplay by Ted Elliott & Terry Rossio and Joe Stillman and Roger S.H. Schulman) told the same story but made the hero a grumpy ogre, a traditional villain in most fairy tails.
Die Hard (screenplay by Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souza) did both a twist on the genre and an unexpected main character. At the time, action movies were globe-trotting adventures with heavily armed, indestructible, superheroic main characters. Die Hard contained the action in a single location and gave us a hero that was unarmed, overmatched and bled when he was hurt.
But the bigger point is that Alien, Bridesmaids, Atack the Block, Dragonslayer, Shrek and Die Hard succeeded because they were good, at least in terms of what they were attempting to do. A good idea poorly executed will do nothing. So do your research, identify the original core details of your idea, and, most importantly, write well!
(If you’re interested in more on this topic, see this post on The Value of an Idea)
*You may be thinking of the Art Buchwald Coming to America lawsuit. He actually won breach-of-contract, not copyright infringement. He had a contract with Paramount that if they made a movie based on the idea, he would be compensated. Or maybe you’re thinking about The Matrix case. That’s a myth based on an inaccurate newspaper article. See: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/matrix.asp
Of course this is of great concern to screenwriters. But the short answer is, you can’t, really. In fact, with tens of thousands of people out there writing spec screenplays, there’s a pretty good chance at least a few of them are working on very similar ideas to yours right now. Every movie that comes out inevitably gets sued by two or three people who are convinced the producers stole their script. The writers always lose those lawsuits. Always.*
I’m not saying nobody ever steals an idea in Hollywood, but in the vast, vast, vast majority of these cases, a writer simply couldn’t accept that someone else had the same idea as them. I guarantee you, no matter how original you think your idea is, at least three other screenwriters are working on something similar.
It can, of course, be pretty depressing than to be a few weeks away from finishing a spec only to read about a sale in the trades of a script with the exact same idea. Unfortunately it happens.
That said, you do need to make an effort to make sure there wasn’t a movie already made on your idea. There’s no quick way to discover this. However, you should be watching everything you can in the genre you’re writing. If you’re writing science fiction, you should be watching every science fiction movie that comes out and working your way through the catalog of science fiction movies on DVD. If you’re writing horror, you should be seeing everything horror you can. Also reading books and comic books and seeing plays in your genre. (This is one often unmentioned reasons to work in a single genre… switching around requires you to do considerably more homework and research.) I would also recommend using a source like Done Deal Pro to keep track of what has sold recently.
There have been so many movies made (and books published and plays performed, etc.) that there really are no original ideas anymore, at least not good ones. But the originality of an idea is a little overrated. You don’t want to have a logline that immediately brings to mind another movie, of course, but it’s really the development and execution of the idea that counts.
Sometimes it’s a matter of identifying what’s original in your own idea. The Hangover (written by Jon Lucas & Scott Moore) is about a bachelor party gone bad, an idea that was also the basis of Bachelor Party (story by Bob Israel, screenplay by Bob & Neal Israel and Pat Proft). If you presented The Hangover as:
A raunchy comedy about a bachelor party that goes horribly awry.
It will sound derivative. What’s original is the search for the groom aspect. That’s the new element. So a better log line for The Hangover would be:
A raunchy comedy about five friends who go to Vegas for a bachelor party and lose the groom. The four groomsmen must retrace their steps and find the groom in time for the wedding.
You’ll notice that it’s the specific details that make the idea seem original. This may seem obvious when analyzing an existing high concept film, but I see many writers who don’t take the time to identify the core details that are crucial to the originality of their concept. They either make a generic log line (such as the first one above), or they overload their log line with non-core detail. But identifying the core, specific, original details of your idea will help ensure you develop your script to emphasize these elements. Spend time on this before you start writing!
Often good movies come from adding a twist to a common or even cliché idea. Alien (story by Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett, screenplay by Dan O’Bannon) took the monster movie and set it in space. Frequently the best way to ad a fresh spin is through the main character. Bridesmaids (written by Kristen Wiig & Annie Mumolo) did the bachelor party comedy seen in movies like Bachelor Party and The Hangover, but made the main characters women. Suddenly a tired idea was fresh. Attack the Block (written by Joe Cornish) is about an alien invasion – something we’ve seen a million times – but the heroes are street thugs. How original!
In 1981, Dragonslayer (written by Hal Barwood & Matthew Robbins) made a cliché story idea of a hero rescuing a princess from a dragon fresh by making the hero the wizard’s inexperienced apprentice rather than the wizard himself. Twenty years later Shrek (screenplay by Ted Elliott & Terry Rossio and Joe Stillman and Roger S.H. Schulman) told the same story but made the hero a grumpy ogre, a traditional villain in most fairy tails.
Die Hard (screenplay by Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souza) did both a twist on the genre and an unexpected main character. At the time, action movies were globe-trotting adventures with heavily armed, indestructible, superheroic main characters. Die Hard contained the action in a single location and gave us a hero that was unarmed, overmatched and bled when he was hurt.
But the bigger point is that Alien, Bridesmaids, Atack the Block, Dragonslayer, Shrek and Die Hard succeeded because they were good, at least in terms of what they were attempting to do. A good idea poorly executed will do nothing. So do your research, identify the original core details of your idea, and, most importantly, write well!
(If you’re interested in more on this topic, see this post on The Value of an Idea)
*You may be thinking of the Art Buchwald Coming to America lawsuit. He actually won breach-of-contract, not copyright infringement. He had a contract with Paramount that if they made a movie based on the idea, he would be compensated. Or maybe you’re thinking about The Matrix case. That’s a myth based on an inaccurate newspaper article. See: http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/matrix.asp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
