|
Question about descriptive mechanics: I'm writing a scene where a character is watching The Breakfast Club on TV. Except I'm currently referring to it as "an '80s teen movie" because I'm under the impression that writing about a character watching a specific movie or listening to a specific song is a surefire way to get ignored. However, I'm trying to reveal a big part of this character's emotional dilemma through the act of watching this movie. I'll write it out here using the specifics I'm afraid to go into. quote:INT. AUDREY'S LIVING ROOM - LATE NIGHT This is part of a larger sequence that serves two purposes for defining Audrey as a character: 1.) To establish a circumstantial connection to the other main character, a goony layabout. (It's a love story, and yes, I'm fully aware that I may be starting off from a really bad place - that's a whole other can of worms that I'm trying not to think about until I'm ready to have the script critiqued.) 2.) To establish a fear of not being able to connect with others. Whether or not I'm on my way to meeting those goals is up to you, and I'm willing to hear opinions either way. My chief concern right now is that once I start speaking in vague terms, I have trouble feeling like I'm getting the point of this scene across. To me, the scene I refer to in The Breakfast Club represents honesty between strangers, and I'm trying to show a character who longs for the ability to do that. Once I make it "an '80s teen movie", then I feel like I have to explain, in detail, the content of what she's watching in order to give readers a sense of what Audrey's reacting to. This pads out the scene (this is my second draft, the first clocked in at 153 pages; I'm shooting for 120 and will hate myself if it gets any thicker than 130), and it'll feel like an even more blatant expression of what's going through Audrey's head. (Another good question: should I be showing more and telling less to begin with?) I don't know, I'm probably being ridiculous. Could I get away with referring to The Breakfast Club in this situation? Hell, am I under the wrong impression about referring to pre-existing movies and songs to begin with? And if not...well, I don't know how much you guys can help without writing the drat scene for me (to be clear, I don't want that to happen), but should I just change strategies entirely?
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2011 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:41 |
|
|
Either way, it makes perfect sense. Thank you!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 02:38
|
|
|
TheYellowFog posted:While it's good not to get too esoteric with references, cutting references out because someone might not follow them doesn't have to be the answer. If he shows a pivotal scene from the breakfast club then even people who haven't seen it will probably understand the point he is trying to make. You didn't have to see Joan of Arc to know that in Vivre Sa Vie there was a connection between the two. A more recent example is 500 days of summer; even if you haven't seen the graduate you can tell the connection between what they watch in the theatre (a nervous and unsure couple) and how it is meant to comment on Summer and Tom's relationship. Well, that's the million dollar question -- whether or not the reference does the job without feeling too esoteric -- but without context (and since I already told you what I was going for), I guess I'll just have to run with it and see how the critiques come back. Follow your gut, right? I'm just worried that my gut has poo poo for brains.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 16:49
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:I would move away from it. I'll try to take that to heart, but I wouldn't say that I'm cannibalizing on such a large scale, as if this movie is about how The Breakfast Club makes certain people feel lonely. I'm -- pardon me, I'm about to sound like the biggest loving blowhard -- attempting to use an established image and the mood it evokes to contrast with a character's state of mind and reveal a part of her inner struggle. That being said, I agree that it's not the most elegant way to do it. It's tricky, though; I'm reluctant to go too deep into it, but Audrey's kind of a dark character, and I thought that giving her a love of 80s teen movies and pop music was an interesting way to shade (key word: SHADE) her. At the same time, I'm fully aware that there are pitfalls to having a pop culture junkie for a character. The best defense I know of is to not let that love define her. That's easy enough, there are plenty of other aspects of her personality and her history that do a better job of it. As for the two or three times where I'll want to bring it up, though...whether or not that's still too much, I'll have to leave that to the people who are going to read this for me once I finish this draft.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 19:59
|
|
|
MixMasterGriff posted:This bothers me too. When I first started filmmaking/writing, all my movies were refrences. They were all spoofs or parodies or just plain rip-offs. But I learnt what I was doing, and eventually I could do my own thing. No worries. I saw an indie movie called Film Geek a few years ago...actually, I saw about two minutes of that movie before I decided that I wanted to turn it off, find the director, rubber band together all the copies of Clerks. that I was sure he owned, and beat the crap out of him with that brick. Of course, this is probably NeuroticErotica's cue to reveal that he knows that guy and he's actually kind of cool.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 20:22
|
|
|
MixMasterGriff posted:Kevin Smith is a dick, unfortunately. I was actually referring to the guy that directed Film Geek, but this wouldn't be the first time I heard of the dickery of Kevin Smith. But yeah, color me surprised about 50. (Sorry about the derail, guys!)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 20:47
|
|
|
MixMasterGriff posted:Sorry! It's a nice loving addition to that wall, that's for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 21:20
|
|
|
MixMasterGriff posted:I almost want to start a screenplay about some kind of historical serial-killer, but I'm afraid if I do it right after watching Zodiac I'll be too heavily influenced. I'm sorry that this isn't an answer, but this just happened to me with Drive. As much as I love that movie...gently caress that movie for doing "Dangerous individual in love" better than anyone has done or ever will do. At least you got company. It's pretty hacky company, but it's company. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:It's pretty incredible how stubborn some writers can be about this one. I can't decide if it's because they secretly want to direct, or they just aren't good enough to imply their direction with language grounded in the world of the story. As someone who's very, very prone to including musical cues (but is trying to cut back on it)...yes, it's because I want to direct. Or at least, I want to greedily control the way the script is read and I feel that adding specific music cues is a good way to do that. Again, though, I'm trying to knock that crap off. If it's a script I'm looking to direct myself, sure, I'll add cues for myself and for friends, and maybe make a version of the script without the cues to show around to financiers/actors/etc, give them a little more confidence that they can take me seriously. But for something that I'm trying to sell, no cues, period. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Sep 27, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2011 21:15
|
|
|
Basic, stupid question presented in longform. When a character gets two consecutive blocks of dialogue, do I always have to put "(CONT'D)" next to the second character slug? Right now I have it so that if a character isn't reacting to anything in the middle of his dialogue, I use a (CONT'D), like so: quote:Patrick’s on his cell phone, reading from a script on his computer screen. However, if a character is reacting to something out loud, or has otherwise moved on to an entirely new thought, I don't use the slug: quote:CHIRP-CHIRP-CHIRP! Audrey stops herself from plopping on the couch. I think it works, but I get the creeping suspicion that I'm being retarded. Can you guys confirm?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2011 05:04
|
|
|
fallingdownjoe posted:This might be wrong, but I've used it for a while as a rule of thumb and never had it brought up as a problem. Good enough for me. Thanks for the feedback!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2011 16:41
|
|
|
Griff M. posted:I just can't wrap my head around that. Like, at some point they realize that's wrong, right? Deep down, I think they already do, but they can't be bothered to learn the rules that they're breaking, so they put up this arrogant facade and write these meandering pieces of poo poo under the guise of being a fresh, different voice. They're not just rebels without a cause, they're rebels who pretend to have a cause.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2011 22:22
|
|
|
Sporadic posted:I spent the weekend cleaning up my first draft. I think I have most of the issues worked out. Everything in present tense. Reworked and tightened up some of the dialog, For what little it's worth, my advice is to put it in a drawer for a month and work on something else. Give it another look for yourself with fresh eyes, make notes, do your rewrite, and then ask for beta-reads. It's what I'm comfortable with as long as I'm working on spec; I want to make sure I take my stuff as far as I can on my own before I show it to people. To me, it's a matter of making the best possible first impression, and I've always felt that scripts that looked good to me after I finished, don't look so good after a month. You may disagree (as disingenuous as it may come off); you may already feel that you've taken it as far as can go on your own. That's fine, I just wanted to offer an alternate approach.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2011 05:48
|
|
|
Sporadic posted:Can somebody recommend me a good book or in-depth article on story structure? A friend of mine that I'm working on a screenplay with wanted to use a five-act structure, and he sent me a few articles to clue me in. One of them was this blog post from a guy who calls himself FILM CRITIC HULK: http://filmcrithulk.wordpress.com/2011/07/07/hulk-presents-the-myth-of-3-act-structure/ I don't know how you'll respond to the gimmick (which involves typing in all caps), but I personally laughed my rear end off at a couple of parts and learned a lot, too. If you want a drier, simpler description of the five act structure, here you go. Also, though I haven't finished it, I enjoyed what I've read of The Sequence Approach.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2011 04:58
|
|
|
The_Doctor posted:In a example of fatal hopefulness, I'm writing a Community spec. The plot wrote itself. Sadly, the jokes do not. Oh, you could do worse. For instance, a Wonder Woman pilot script I occasionally pick at, more as a dare to myself than a legit portfolio addition.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2011 16:35
|
|
|
Griff M. posted:Here's a dumb thing that's been plaguing me, and I need you guys to help me snap out of it. To be honest, I'm still really naive (a bit deluded, even) and you're a lot more seasoned than I am, so I don't know if this will help. But what I tell myself is that if I ever sell a script and they turn it into something horrible, I'll still have friends and family who were entertained by what I originally wrote. Now, how to deal with having your name attached to a terrible movie that you were maybe 7% responsible for? I'm not even going to pretend I can help with that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2012 19:04
|
|
|
Captain Geech posted:Okay. After going through this whole thread, I think I've worked up the courage to ask if anyone would like to read a screenplay I wrote last spring. It's feature length, so just a bit over 120 pages (it's too long, I know). It's my attempt at a Western set in high school, but I admittedly am having some trouble finding exactly the right tone for it. Feedback would be incredibly appreciated, as it's my first feature-length script. I don't know how much help I'll be, but I'm actually kind of curious about this. Shoot it over to REDACTED - Script recieved -- .PDF format if possible. Seriously, though, there's every chance that I'll take a while to get to it, or that all I'll be able to respond with is "awesome!" So if someone wants to offer their take as well, don't be afraid to step up. (Also, let me know when it's sent because I suspect this might get snagged in my spam filter.) DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Feb 3, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2012 16:08
|
|
|
Captain Geech posted:I'm always eager to get more feedback! Screenplay sent, so you can edit out your email. Thanks! If nothing else, it's a good sign that you've got an interesting concept on your hands.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2012 21:45
|
|
|
Captain Geech posted:Yeah, I've noticed that. Everyone I've spoken to about it perks up when I say "High School Western." The trick, of course, is to make sure the story itself is good, so that I'm not just resorting to a gimmick. Oh, man, the fact that you get my avatar at all is just going to make this harder. I'm only about 39 pages in, but I'm losing interest fast. Your main problem -- and yeah, take it with a grain of salt until I finish the script and find if there's anything that redeems it -- is that there is little, if any, dramatic thrust to the election story. What I wrote on page 30: quote:Okay, the problem I have with this: Student government never meant poo poo in my high school aside from looking good on college applications, so you have no shorthand to convey the gravity of the election, at least to me. You're trying to tie it to saving the Drama department, but a.) I don't see why the Drama department's worth saving other than the fact that a nice girl seems to love it a lot and the football program sucks, and b.) I don't get the sense that David's going to be able to save it even if he's elected; that decision seems to rest on administration's upper levels, which Rickman has in hand. (By the way? Rickman seems to be your main adult antagonist, even if he's in Trevor's pocket somewhat. Please, for the love of God, do not name him after one of the greatest villain actors of all time. You wouldn't name your main protagonist "Bruce Wallace" unless you were writing a sci-fi themed softcore porno, would you? Same deal here. Well, okay, "Principal Rickman" is not nearly as groan-worthy as "Bruce Wallace", plus you can realistically claim it was unintentional; it's not like he talks with a European accent and has a strange fixation on "detonators." But still,  )I need a reason to care about this election right off the bat, maybe even a reason to believe a victory for David truly will make the school better. Instead, I feel like you're just treading water. The way I see it, if David wins and is able to make things better, it's going to feel silly. If he loses, or wins but learns that he can't save the drama club in his new seat of power, then you basically just wasted a lot of my time. Maybe there's a third (fourth) outcome that I'm not seeing, but the other likely possibilities are just too blinding. Aside from that, a school election doesn't feel "westerny". When I think of a western, two ideas come to mind: first, there's the vision of heroes in white hats putting boots to black-hatted asses (The Magnificent Seven, Tombstone), or there's the morally compromised "no laws means no clear heroes" vision (The Searchers, Unforgiven). This seems to be a gateway to neither so far; once your characters start talking about running David for office, I start feeling a pull toward political satire territory, particularly when Aaron enters the picture. I know, I know, I haven't given this a fair chance yet and I promise that I will; I may even be able to advise you on how you could involve your reader a bit more once I do. But from where I sit at page 39, if I was just casually reading this I'd put it down at this point. Something else you might want to take note of: Dialogue. It's not atrociously bad, but it kind of just...sits. The banter between Aaron and Erica is decent, and while Kurt is almost intolerably obnoxious (as you probably intended), at least he has a character. David and Vicki are more like ciphers, and all the jocks save for Riley seem to run together. Now dialogue's a bit of an art, and either you have a flair for it or you don't. But what helps you write good dialogue is having good characters. The characters you have are flat: they need some shading, something that helps them pop off the page and capture the reader's attention. It's nothing to be ashamed of, a lot of writers have this problem, myself included. All of this is much easier said than done. But experiment a bit with the jocks. Maybe one guy talks with a lisp. Maybe another is more inclined to use $5 words. Start coming up with little quirks and differences that you can write into each character; maybe even ask yourself WHY these quirks exist, which will allow you to come up with profiles and backstories that can help dimensionalize your character. Like anything, you don't want to overdo it, but a little can go a VERY long way. In fact, the fun you have writing those in can radiate through the script and onto the reader. When shading the jocks, you should start with Taylor. The shading you give him needs to communicate to your reader why he's QB, why he's the leader of the pack, what sets him apart from everyone else. Do a good enough job, you might get a sense of who he'll want/tolerate in his inner circle, and you'll be able to shade his flunkies from there. Finally, while we're on the subject of characters, let's talk about character introductions. Now, for all I know, this might not be a set-in-stone rule. Somebody might come along and say, "No, no, ignore him, you're fine," in which case I'll have learned something new and important. But going on what I DO know...well, I should probably use examples. Here's your introduction to Erica Park: quote:The two students are interrupted by the arrival of ERICA PARK (15), a loudly-dressed, bubblegum-chewing punk princess, who skateboards up to them. Perfect. In one line, I get a sense of who this person is, and it can be conveyed on the screen just as quickly as I read that sentence. On the other hand, this is how you introduce Vicki Hernandez: quote:As he sorts through his things, he sees a girl standing nearby, handing out fliers to passing students. Dressed eccentrically with a black beret and a colorful scarf, VICKI HERNANDEZ (16) is an actress extraordinaire and the school’s star drama student. She’s a beautiful young woman, with classic Hollywood features. But her fiery attitude quickly lets you know this is one chick you don’t want mad at you. In the one shot that introduces her, we're not going to know that she's a talented actress, or that she has a fiery attitude. Stuff like that should come out naturally, as we read on (or at least, so I believe). We meet her as she's handing out flyers for the drama club, and she seems enthusiastic about it. Bang, I now know she's really passionate about acting. And I know she's got a fiery attitude by the way she does nothing when Riley slaps the flyers out of her hands...except I don't, because that doesn't track at all with what you're telling me in her introduction, an added danger to breaking the rule of "show, don't tell". (And for what it's worth, it could add some dimension to the school if you show that there are some people who won't take poo poo from the jocks. David doesn't have to be special by being the only one who's willing to stand up to them. In this world, if somebody stands up to the jocks, they either get the poo poo kicked out of them or they get ignored. David stands up to the jocks, he gets one of them sent to the Principal's Office. That's all you need to set him apart.) I know I'm being harsh -- and really, unfair -- to the point where you probably see this as me breaking your balls a bit. Honest to God, though, I think you've got a solid notion here, and the mystery you've set up is intriguing (even if you're a bit heavy-handed with it). If I'm being hard on you, it's because I really want this to be awesome, and I want to believe that you can get it there. I promise, I'll finish this over the weekend and give you a more complete breakdown. I just felt a strong urge to let you know where I was at. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Feb 4, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2012 06:12
|
|
|
fallingdownjoe posted:If I was you, I'd take a bit of time and watch a whole bundle of Westerns, and pick out exactly what you think makes them good, those ideas which made you want to write a High School Western in the first place. The corrupt mayor, the beautiful damsel who runs the bar, the mysterious, silent man who walks into the whole shebang. And then I'd figure out who, in a high school, these characters best match up to. The Western is a genre ripe with classic characters, and it'll require less writing than you'd think to put them into a high school and get a good story from it. I think you tried to push your election story too hard. And let me re-iterate: this is a bad draft, but you're on to something huge here. Even putting aside the "High School Western" hook, your opening establishes a world where bullies have free reign over their school, even the teachers and administrators are wrapped around their fingers. It's a very, very tough concept to ground, but it's also an awesome one. Look, we're living in a world where bullying is a problem; maybe it hasn't grown over the years, but our awareness has certainly escalated. The worst part of it isn't necessarily hearing about the pain these kids are enduring, but the fact that teachers and administrators don't do anything about it. Either they're clueless as to what a big deal it is, or they know but the punishments they're allowed to dole out (be it through internal procedure or external political pressure) are ineffective deterrents. Consider all that, and from a certain angle, High School starts looking a hell of a lot like the Wild West; the strongest and/or wealthiest make the rules and the official law can't really do anything about it. I suspect this is what people are sparking to in your pitch -- at least subconsciously -- and in my opinion, that's what you need to write to. As I may have alluded to before, I think that's the problem with hanging everything on an election: David's trying to win power by the book when the problem is pretty much with the book itself. And as a reformed bully, who spent his Montana years flouting the book and mostly getting away with it, he should know as much. In fact, something interesting you might want to consider: David's learned, the hard way, that if you're a bully and people start standing up to you, you can either back down and lose face, or you can break someone's jaw and get into serious trouble. Either way, your days are numbered. Taylor's not the type to back down when he's being challenged...but David has to figure that there's no way he's going to get his jaw broken. I don't know what you can do with that, but I feel like there's something there. Another thing: I don't think it's necessarily important to the story that all the bullies be jocks. Yeah, sure, Taylor's rise to power involves blackmailing Rickman into keeping the football program open, but let's be real: America's got a weight problem, and there's serious weight behind initiatives like Play60 to keep our kids from the goony fate that I'm/we're currently doomed to. In that sort of political climate, no way athletics get cut unless under grave circumstances, and even then, football's going to be the very last one out the door. So yeah, I think you can broaden the scope a bit to include non-jocks. If you want to keep to the western theme, make money the common factor. Like I said, it's a running theme in westerns; in lawless lands, people with guns or the money to buy people with guns make all the laws. But the point is, bullying isn't just a jock thing, and by labeling all the bullies as jocks, you come off a bit vindictive. I think if you gather together some assholes of various castes and give that collection a unique name for the rest of the students to refer to them as, it'll come off a lot deeper and more interesting, plus it'll help solve your problem of all your antagonists running together. (And you'll be surprised at what would work. I'll tell you an embarrassing anecdote about myself. When I was a senior I stood about 6 feet, 200lbs, and I used to get bullied by a little 5'2" prick of a sophomore. Honestly, it wasn't as bad as most of the stories you'll hear. It was all mental, mostly a lot of name calling and paper balls being flung my way in shop class, usually when I had to concentrate on not cutting off my thumb with a jigsaw. I tended to lean on the teachers to help me out, but that never helped. What did eventually help was when I snapped and put the little shrimp in a double armlock one day, making him scream like a bitch in front of the entire shop class. Not only did I get off scott free, it took him a whole month to get back his nerve to torment me. They really do come in all sizes and potencies.) There's seriously a lot of potential in this, and I'd be thrilled to see you get back on this horse and ride the hell out of it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2012 20:10
|
|
|
Captain Geech posted:On that note, the only reason I use "jocks" as the bad guys is because I'm trying for a callback to the classic high school clichés and because it saves me time in establishing them as villains. I'm not trying to be vindictive at all regarding real life (I like sports and I was never picked on in school), but I can definitely see why you'd think that. While I'm not 100% sold that I need to change this in particular, I'm going to think very hard about it and see if I can find a better way to do it. A solid argument. As a callback, I'm not sure it entirely works. It has to strike a chord of nostalgia in order to wring some enjoyment out of it, and even if you did, you have to imagine that not everyone in your young audience is going to have that sort of pop culture experience. I like money because it's just as quick a shorthand to explain the brand of douchebaggery you're looking for in your villains, plus as I've said, people with lots of money -- corrupt cattle barons, for instance -- are consistent antagonists in westerns. There is a drawback: you have to explain what these rich kids are doing in a public school. I think setting the script in a charter school can help solve this problem. It can still struggle with funding for extracurricular activities, and there may even be less public pressure to keep athletics around. That said, if you're dead set on just using jocks as your bad guys, I'd dial the fear of them back a bit. Here's the exchange that soured me on them: quote:David leans towards the STUDENT sitting next to him. I mean exchanges like that just come off as downright lame, almost like a parody of a movie instead of an actual movie. Captain Geech posted:I am aware that I use too much dialogue! I'm a Sorkin fan, so I do try to emulate him a little too much. The difference is that his is actually, you know, good, and mine's... well... anyway, I'll definitely work on trimming it down. You know, I pegged you for a Sorkin fan; you've got Vicki rehearsing A Few Good Men in one scene and you named your political genius character Aaron. You've got my sympathy; I too go apeshit over Sorkin's work and I am way too talky in my scripts as well. When you look at your script, just ask yourself how a silent version of each scene would play. That should help you figure out what NEEDS to be communicated verbally, as well as what you can get across through body language and glances. Then just find the most economical version of what needs to be said out loud. Brevity, soul of wit, etc. Captain Geech posted:It's never easy to go back to a screenplay that's just been massacred, but I appreciate your feedback and your encouragement! Thanks to you both! Absolutely, and for what it's worth, there were a couple of bright spots I should communicate. Your treatment of Rickman's a bit heavy-handed but I like the conflicted nature of his character. The "silent version" test should help refine him into a stronger, more entertaining character. And it may just be me, but I think Rob's got the potential to be a great side character. Non-bullying jock who runs a pro wrestling club? That POPS to me. The comic potential is great in small doses; you had the right idea by introducing it the way you did, feinting with the thought of actual wrestling and then hitting us with the reveal. (I actually think you can delay the reveal for longer and get some more comedy out of it, though it seems you chose to drop it when you did so David could hook them up with the Drama club and get Rob firmly on his side.) Stuff like that makes me think you can turn this around into something worthwhile. You're right, it's never easy seeing your work get laid into like that and I applaud you for taking it so graciously. Just remember: I'm not laying into some talentless douchebag who doesn't know his rear end in a top hat from his elbow, let alone a good story from a bad one. I'm seeing the work of a guy who seems to have good instincts and just needs some guidance to help focus and refine his work. Chin up! You're gonna get this right, I can feel it! DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Feb 6, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2012 22:09
|
|
|
I'm about to admit something that might make me the target of serious derision. Four years of film school, and I have no idea what writers use index cards for. I'm sure it was covered, but it must've went in one ear and out the other. Obviously it's a way to organize ideas, but the actual mechanics of it escape me. What am I organizing? How does it help? I can probably Google an answer, but I guess I'd rather hear it from you guys, even if it means possibly getting laughed out of the thread.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
Fire Safety Doug posted:Why would it be? Well, my screenplay doesn't have much in the way of B-plot, it's a very focused narrative (albeit introspective; perhaps overly so, I'll have to see when I start looking for critiques). My hangups tend to happen when I find that actions aren't tracking with character (though the one that's killing me right now is definitely an "okay, now what" situation). This means back to the drawing board to either find a new way, or come up with some backstory that'll explain the old way, and see if there's anything I can add that'll help lay the ground. As you can imagine, this leads to a lot of tweaking and an inability to gain momentum on the back end, and though I can't tell how it looks on the front end...well, building on a shaky foundation rarely ever ends well. I need to learn how to plan better, which is what led me to ask about index cards.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2012 23:36
|
|
|
Any opinions on Blake Snyder's "Save the Cat!" method of story structure? I was thinking of picking the program up at some point, but I want to get a sense of what faults it might have (if any). EDIT: Just as important, how well does this work if you're writing TV pilots? DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 21:48 on Mar 25, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2012 21:45
|
|
|
Fire Safety Doug posted:One of my teachers (who works in a production company) also complained that every other spec script today follows it so slavishly that each story beat is exactly on the page where Snyder put it. That's what I'm worried about; that I'll get too hung up on the rules. I'm very rule-oriented, and I can easily see myself cranking out a generic-feeling script because I follow the structure too slavishly. I wasn't really thinking of the books but the software -- I'm looking for something that can help me organize my thoughts and build strong outlines. The spec I'm working on now, I dove right into the scripting stage with a very loose outline in my head and surprise surprise, every time I try to fill in a plot hole I run into, I end up creating another one. EDIT: And yeah, I know produced product can often be very different from what's on the page, but Blank Check is no way to assure anyone outside the industry that you know what you're talking about. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 03:23 on Mar 26, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
Captain Geech posted:Just to add, I find it has a lot of useful tricks (learning about "The Board" was worth the price of purchase), but the guy is all about formulaic stories. His taste in movies and his story ideas will make you want to set the book on fire. Like I said, it's more a matter of finding software to help organize my ideas. Throwing poo poo in random Word documents and notebooks just isn't cutting it anymore. I did some digging and Movie Outline 3.1 looks solid (even though I prefer writing in a five-act structure and this seems locked into three), but the Windows 95-era GUI gives me pause, especially when they're asking me to fork over $200. Still, ugly as it looks, I like how it has ways to help me organize and develop my characters, and can help me keep track of how my script looks in a whole bunch of different ways. By the way, how's YOUR script coming? I know your last draft took a beating from me but as I've said before, I really think you're on to something, and I'd love to see you crack it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2012 07:40
|
|
|
Sporadic posted:Why not use the panels system in Final Draft 8? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aI6XrGG4Eew (If you don't have it yet, it's only $178 on Amazon) Yeah, I never quite learned how to use the panels system and I started toying with it a bit after I realized I didn't have $200 to spend. I think what bothers me is that I'm not quite sure how (or even if) I can just work on the outline without having to write the script as I go along. That said, Scrivener looks loving great and I'm definitely picking it up this week, thank you!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2012 14:46
|
|
|
Griff M. posted:This spec is my catharsis. It's a kids show and each episode has a moral lesson at the end. My lesson? "If you keep jumping from project to project without finishing any of them, you're not learning or improving and are only hurting yourself." Also known as "The creative process of Griff for the last three years." It's kind of comforting to know that even when you've got your foot in the door you struggle with the same poo poo I do. Thanks for keeping us up to speed. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2012 15:53
|
|
|
We Bought a Zoo has a good chunk devoted to it as well if you can handle Cameron Crowe's sentimental tendencies.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2012 15:48
|
|
|
T-Bone posted:Warrior and Quiz Show have some great father-son fuckery. Oh, God, how could I forget Warrior? What a fantastic movie! I've had this idea in the back of my head for a while, and it's got me curious. Say I wanted to write a sort of musical, akin to The Commitments; how would I transition into or script the musical/performance aspects of the story? Do I have to script the lyrics as dialogue (I'd be using non-original songs, but I'm not quite planning to put this one up for sale anyway)? Anything I should know about that?
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2012 22:40
|
|
|
Fire Safety Doug posted:Depends what it's for, but let's say you get asked for a one-page treatment for a feature length screenplay. You should write it so that the reader gets an idea about your whole movie within that one page (and one page only, if that's what you were asked for). I'm gonna try this, thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2012 18:11
|
|
|
Mordecai Sanchez posted:That's not my question. I'm asking which is the correct option/element, if there even is one, when writing the one line of text starting and ending each act in a teleplay, such as "END OF ACT I" You're on FInal Draft 8, right? The elements you SHOULD be looking for are "New Act," "End of Act," and "Teaser/Act One."
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
I want to share a story about the hardest and fastest rule of screenwriting and writing in general: Finish what you start. So much easier said than done, isn't it? So much doubt and neurosis to wrestle with, so many ways to procrastinate. You're told over and over again to just keep writing, just keep plugging away, because that's the only way you'll be a better writer. They tell you to make outlines and index cards to avoid blocks, but mostly they tell you to just write. And sometimes, or even most times, you can't. Because something about what you're doing doesn't work. Maybe you don't know why, or in a different kind of hell, maybe you DO know why but you don't know how to fix the problem. That was my situation. I've been working on this screenplay for eighteen months. That's right: for almost two years this bitch has tortured me. When I write, I have the film playing in my head, and when I run up into a potential plot hole or problem, the film breaks, and I stop work to resolve it because that inner critic of mine won't shut the gently caress up and let me finish the goddamned fight. In this case the inner critic kept coming back to one core issue: My base concept was great, my characters were awesome, but the motivations driving each character's actions were convoluted to all hell, leading to long stretches of dialogue that had to explain "Okay, here's why X is doing this, and Y responds this way because of Z." I didn't know how to salvage this. Mostly I avoided the problem by going to the movies, listening to music, watching TV, playing video games, bullshitting with other goons, and anything that wasn't work-related, hoping that I'd have some sort of "Eureka!" moment and be able to start wailing on my keyboard again. When I was actively working on my story problem, I would write all sorts of backstory notes and outlines to try and make sense of my character's actions and decisions, and maybe find a simpler motivation for her that wouldn't need as much exposition. I'd make small gains as a result; half a page here, a few lines there. Mostly though there was a lot of rejiggering (a mortal sin, I know, mostly I was killing time and trying to scratch that itch to write), as well as solving lesser problems by creating new ones, all of them a result of this seemingly systemic failure of over-convolution. I can't tell you how I managed to put all that aside and go back on the attack, inner critic be damned. Well, I can, but it wouldn't be anything of use. Basically, when you spend two years playing certain scenes and beats of the story out in your head, when you spend all that time listening to music that reaches highs and evokes feelings that you know drat well your story could hit, when you've got friends and family who support you and genuinely look forward to anything you have to show them and you just feel embarrassed that this awesome story you have doesn't exist on paper, well, you get angry. Eventually you get angry enough and you force your way through. In my case I figured "Okay, I'll finish this, get it registered, show it around, and it won't be great or even good, but I'm friends with people who know what they're talking about and they can help me get it there." I crack my knuckles, and I go to it, writing, agonizing, forcing square pegs into round holes. I'm up to what I'm hoping are the last 30 pages of the script, I've got one of my characters delivering a monologue, and out of nowhere he drops the simplified motivation that I've been goddamn looking for this whole time. Like it LITERALLY just gets typed without my realizing it. I saw it on the screen, jumped out of my seat and did the Snoopy dance for a solid minute. Unable to suffer inconsistency, I go back for one final round of retrofits, for better or worse. I only end up shaving off about a page and a half. When I send out my work for critique I'm sure I'll get a lot of notes about the amount of expositional dialogue in this thing. Still, everything feels as breezy as it should, and I'm really proud of what I'm writing again. Mind you, I'm still not done. But I feel like the light's finally at the end of the tunnel and I'm confident I'll have this fucker wrapped up by tomorrow. Finish what you start, guys. It may not solve all your problems (and few people will recommend you solve them the way I did), but you never know; the answer may just be waiting for you to type it out.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2013 05:47
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:I know this one well. Oh, that's what I did with my first draft; I'm on my third now, although technically you can call it draft 2.5 because I got 60 pages into my second draft, realized it wasn't working, detonated it, and started again. (It was that whole process, start to finish, that took me about 18 months, although 6 months for this current draft isn't much better.) Right now I feel like any changes I make runs the risk of accidentally hobbling myself, so rather than tell myself "this thing sucks," it's time for other people to tell me "this thing sucks" so I have a clearer picture of where to take draft 4. EDIT: Of course this runs counter to me being a tinkering jackass with the whole "convoluted backstory" situation, but at least the exposition problem is something I can live with for now. Partly because this is a recurring problem in my work and I want to learn how much of it my readers don't think they need to know or otherwise find clumsy, and partly because, well, guilty as charged, "gently caress it, I'm almost finished." DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 14:45 on May 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 7, 2013 14:36
|
|
|
Silver Newt posted:On my own script, I've just finished the third draft - I'd like to make it leaner if I can so any comments would be appreciated. I don't know when or if I'll get to it but I like the logline enough to put it in my bin.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
screenwritersblues posted:Hey screenwriting goons, maybe you can help me. I'm working on a different script and I like to put my loglines on top of the character page before I start writing out my treatments by hand. I've read, and have practiced, approximately gently caress-all on this subject, so take this with some salt. I feel like a logline should tell me right off the bat that there's a story to be told; at best this feels like an anecdote. You have characters, you have a goal, but you have no conflict aside from a vague "He tries to make the relationship work." I mean, you've just described 90% of all twee indie romances; the girl being deaf is a neat twist, but like Victor Vermis said, there's not enough emphasis on that (or not enough, period). If I had to take a crack at it? (I can't read your mind so it's likely way off base, but I'm going to mask it anyway so you can remain untainted.) A media-savvy ad executive turns his life upside down courting a deaf woman. It's still a little vague but at least you get a better sense of conflict and change.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
Mike Works posted:I have a question for you guys. I'm writing an R comedy feature (aiming for 90 - 100 pages) and I'm curious where you guys would aim to put these events. Here are a few bullet points: Is there a reason why we need to see him move? Your story's about an North American expatriate who gets involved with a complicated woman. Why is his reason for moving pertinent to the reader/audience? I'm not saying it isn't, mind, I'm just saying that it's something you should probably ask yourself before you decide to include it. The less setup you have to include, the faster you get to your hook. quote:As for your question Division... Not my question, but good advice for both myself and screenwritersblues anyway. quote:I think there's a better logline out there for your script. Explain it to us: how does her being deaf (seemingly) impact his job as an ad executive? Right now you could make him a construction worker or a vice president and I don't see how her being deaf would impact his job position any differently. Yeah, definitely listen to this man. I'm glad you think so highly of the logline I came up with, but you can and should do better. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Jul 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2013 05:20
|
|
|
I don't have a source, so feel free to call bullshit. Just to append to the "how to present dialogue in a different language" discussion, I remember John August mentioning his graphic design background in a podcast, and how that influenced him to bend or break the occasional stylistic rule in order to capture a certain mood -- including changing up fonts. I had one scene in the entire script where my main character starts speaking fluent Mandarin Chinese to her boyfriend's shock. I used the romanized translations, put them in italics, left them untranslated to the reader, and just to add to that extra kick of "wait, what?" I set the font of the dialogue to Helvetica or Arial -- something that stood out without necessarily showing off. It looked like this:  If you like this, there's a few things to keep in mind: 1.) None of the friends I showed this to seemed overly distracted by it, but they didn't necessarily point it out either, so I'm assuming the reaction was "whatever," which works for me. However, my friends are not industry professionals. I have no idea how this would play if a reader got his/her hands on it; if you find yourself in a similar situation, you should be absolutely sure this is the way you want to go before locking it in. 2.) I literally just ran phrases through Google Translate, hoping it was at least passable. 3.) Even if they were, certain phonetic inflections are apparently not supported by Final Draft 8, so the Mandarin Chinese you see in the above example is FURTHER butchered from a computer translation. So there are drawbacks and unforseen consequences to this choice, particularly if you're a perfectionist, your character speaks fluent Chinese, and you don't know anyone who does in real life.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
I'll take a PM, sure.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 19:41 |
|
|
Haymaker_Betty posted:Ugh, I know, right? I cringed there, too If you do decide to take a crack at it? Your best bet would be to just focus on the human element. Don't try to be cool, don't overdo it on the slang, and don't try to push "professional gaming" as "the next big thing." What matters is that it's a thing, right? There are million dollar tournaments for DotA and League of Legends. They even did a loving piece about it on Real Sports. We can cringe, but it's real, and there's a very vibrant, active community around it. The question isn't necessarily, "Is there a way to do this that isn't nearly as stupid as The Wizard?" It's "Do I have anything to say about this?" And if you do. If you say it through a strong plot / universe / whatever, maybe the reader will buy into the concept, maybe they'll think it's stupid. Say it through strong characters, and there's a lot less to argue against. EDIT: I feel compelled to list examples. Consider Reggie Dunlop and the Hanson Brothers in Slap Shot. Paul Crewe in The Longest Yard. Ricky Vaughn in Major League, how you felt like you wanted to punch the air when "Wild Thing" kicked up during the last game, and when Roger Dorn, knowing full well that Vaughn had hosed his wife last night, simply told him to "Strike that MOTHERFUCKER out." If you didn't get giddy during that scene, I can point you to at least five people who did. Conversely, try to name three characters in any video-game focused movie without checking IMDb. It's an obvious lesson but it bears repeating: Character is King. If you go for this, do it because you think you can plug some interesting characters into it. DivisionPost fucked around with this message at 08:34 on Jan 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2014 08:18
|
|
he's kind of an old dude, and my mom's friend pretty much only remembers Pong, so they're like, "Oi, those young whippersnappers love the vidya games" and all I kept thinking was, "Yes, but every single video game-related movie has been horrible..."