|
Here's a dumb thing that's been plaguing me, and I need you guys to help me snap out of it. I have an idea for an action-comedy film, a lot like Ghostbusters in writing style and tone. I'd like to write it and see it get made, but have this huge internal fear that someone will buy it and turn it into "Epic Movie," and by that I mean a lovely dumb film that everyone hates. Rewrites happen in this industry, and I accept that, but I'm just stricken by the idea of writing brilliance and then having it turned into something absolutely awful. Any kind words to help conquer this?
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
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
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted: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. Yeah, that's the killer part for me. If it was a terrible movie, I would just cash my check and move on, but the fact I would forever be BRANDED with that terribleness? That's what's scaring me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 19:13
|
|
|
If you want artistic integrity and control, write any other medium. Plays, novels, sonnets, music, graffiti, all of them are art. Screenplays are not art. They are a BLUEPRINT for art. They tell designers, directors, actors, editors and crew how to create art. If you're worried to be connected with poo poo, do what Stanley Lieber did and create a penname. But don't be afraid to write just because someone MAY make it lovely. They could also make it great. Excelsior! (Personally working on both an archer spec and a twist on the old serial killer format, as well as two minor web series.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 19:31
|
|
|
Griff M. posted:I have from now until late June to conceive, prepare, and write my first feature screenplay to get credit for this class. Good luck! Griff M. posted:Rewrites happen in this industry, and I accept that, but I'm just stricken by the idea of writing brilliance and then having it turned into something absolutely awful. Watch Tales From The Script and take solace in the fact that, even if you hit the lottery of selling it, it will most likely die in preproduction. Or like the scriptwriters say throughout the interviews "if you want complete creative control of your work, go write a play" 
Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Feb 1, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 20:25
|
|
|
Sporadic posted:Watch Tales Of The Script and take solace in the fact that, even if you hit the lottery of selling it, it will most likely die in preproduction. Or like the scriptwriters say throughout the interviews "if you want complete creative control of your work, go write a play" Hah, thank you. I'm feeling a lot better now. Time to write!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 20:30
|
|
|
Jalumibnkrayal posted:Whats your pitch for this movie? Does it follow a central character as they face obstacles and overcome them? Is it a mockumentary? I just...don't even know what you're going for here. Yes, it follows a central character. Here's a rough summary: The story is about a man, let's just call him Bob, who goes from a mild mannered average American to being an extreme right winger after 9/11. After years and years of being fed hatred of democrats from the likes of Fox News and Limbaugh and the like, the election of Obama puts him over the edge and he feels its his patriotic duty to do what he feels the Founding Fathers would have wanted him to do: assassinate the President. The only thing stopping him is his 20 something year old democrat daughter. From the way I wrote that summary it sounds grimmer than it actually is. It's done in the style of most parody movies like Airplane, Robin Hood: Men in Tights, etc. It has a central plot, but the movie's scattered throughout with satire on both political parties, the news media, etc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 02:47
|
|
|
Sounds like a goon project.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 02:49
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Sounds like a goon project. A good one?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 06:54
|
|
|
Griff M. posted:Yeah, that's the killer part for me. If it was a terrible movie, I would just cash my check and move on, but the fact I would forever be BRANDED with that terribleness? That's what's scaring me. Everybody who matters knows how things get turned around, and in arbitration you'd definitely have at least one rewriter added to the credits block. At the end of the day? You got paid. People respect that no matter what.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 07:00
|
|
|
Mr Interweb posted:Yes, it follows a central character. Here's a rough summary: How did you think you were going to write this in such a way that didn't name specific political parties and people? Could you do it in such a way that someone who might be offended if you name "Republicans" won't be offended if you call them something else?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
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. Attempt at a Log Line: A mysterious new student runs for school president in an attempt to rescue the school from the tyrannical jocks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 07:38
|
|
|
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:Attempt at a Log Line: A mysterious new student runs for school president in an attempt to rescue the school from the tyrannical jocks. The word jocks is giving me flashbacks to my Freshman year screenwriting class and a genre-mixing high school movie reminds me of how much I hated Brick. I am morbidly curious... EMAIL REMOVED, got screenplay York_M_Chan fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Feb 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
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'm not that big of a western fan but I'll give it a read. [email removed - script received] I'll try to read it this weekend. Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Feb 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 19:00
|
|
|
Screenplay sent, so y'all can edit out your email addresses. Thanks, guys! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 20:50
|
|
|
I'm also quite curious about the screenplay, and I'll have some free time early next week, so if you want anyone else then I can be reached at EMAIL REDACTED .
fallingdownjoe fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Feb 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 21:03
|
|
|
Sporadic posted:I'd suggest getting it on paper first before you go back to change things. Keeping forward momentum is key to completing something. Ignoring the little voice in your head that wants to go backwards or move onto a new idea/project. If it is a good idea, it will still be there after you finish. Golden Bee posted:Finish it. Otherwise you'll get to the ending and not know what to do. Drafts inspire iteratively; you don't know what'll happen til you try to make it happen. Thanks guys. I'm going to keep at it and finish the first draft. After that, I will take Golden Bee's advice and probably do a 1.5 of the script with the new idea and then keep going.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 21:16
|
|
|
I'm always eager to get more feedback! Screenplay sent, so you can edit out your email. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:If nothing else, it's a good sign that you've got an interesting concept on your hands. 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. I love your avatar, by the way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2012 02:17
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
As someone who's studied westerns excessively, elections mean BIG WASHINGTON CORRUPTION. Lawmen selling guns for gold, or civil war generals consolidating their armies. Since the wild west is a place of near absolute freedom, elections are a signifier that the east arrived yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2012 08:53
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:Good stuff. I appreciate you dropping some knowledge on me! Nothing you've said really rings false to me, so I've got a lot to think about and go over (and over and over). Don't feel obliged to read the rest if you don't want to. If you feel like putting it down at page 40, I've clearly failed in my endeavour to entertain! Actually, the one thing I was kind of "but but but" about is Principle Rickman's name, because you're the first person who caught on to it (although if I were to actually cast the role, I'd probably use James Spader, to be honest). I expect you're right about it being too on the nose, though. Thanks for all the advice thus far! Honestly, the fact that you and others are willing to offer your time to read scripts and give critiques like this is really amazing. Captain Geech fucked around with this message at 09:24 on Feb 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2012 09:18
|
|
|
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. Okay, so I found myself with some free time sooner than I thought I would, so I sat down and read your script. Unfortunately by not even halfway I was only reading it because I said I would: I was struggling to know why I should care about these characters and their little problems. And that was it, really. Without any connection to the characters, all their problems did seem little, and that's not conducive to wanting to read further. I want to make it absolutely clear right off the top that you're not a bad writer by any stretch of the imagination: there were a number of moments that I was very impressed. DivisionPost has already picked up the description of Erica, which was perfect, but you have a habit of writing descriptions which we really should be seeing on screen. I think the biggest problem you have is that it doesn't live up to the billing. I was interested in reading it largely because of the idea of it being a Western set in a high school, whereas really it was a high school election drama; I didn't pick up on the Western much at all. And one of the sources of this was David himself, who didn't do anything to seem like the great heroes of the Westerns, the mysterious strangers who come into town and get wrapped up in the problem. Instead, you have David saunter into town and promptly act like everyone else. I think I wrote "be mysterious" about five times on my little notepad, and he really wasn't. This came to a head when he suddenly about-faces and gets involved in the election, going so far as to give a speech. I haven't gone back to check if I missed something, but it felt very abrupt and not particularly something that a Western hero would do. Part of this problem fell at Vicki's feet. Again, as DivisionPost pointed out, her description when we first meet her doesn't really chime with the character. We're told that we should think she's great, but I struggled to actually tie that in with her character as seen on the page. I certainly didn't understand why David would like her over all the other girls he agrees to helps, other than the base instinct of 'she's purdy'. I also didn't care about the drama program, and I didn't see why David would. I don't know what I can say about the jocks, but that's because I don't know what I'd ever say about them. The whole way through, they were just there, one-note baddies who didn't do anything particularly interesting. Taylor, particularly, could have been any of them. As DivisionPost has said, he really needs a tic of some sort, anything to make him stand out and give him a bit of colour. Once more, this is where you miss out on the Western side of things. The baddies in Westerns tend to go for the extremes; kidnapping and stealing and generally causing interesting problems. I'm not going to spoil what happens on page 100, but I'm afraid to say that I rolled my eyes. If you're going to have this sort of character and twist, it really does need to be more foreshadowed. It didn't chime at all with the character of Rickman that had been built up, and in any case that character's arc didn't really seem to get wrapped up. He just... carried on, with no hint of what might happen to him. When his 'problem' had such a major impact on the course of the ending, it would have been nice to have some kind of resolution for him. The other note I made regarding the ending had to do with Vicki. It was: "I don't care." It was obvious that she and David would end up together as she was trying to fill that trope, but I just didn't care about her. She had such a minor role that it didn't feel like David had achieved anything by winning her. Regarding the dialogue: there was far too much of it. Certainly for David, who I personally was hoping to be the Man With No Name who doesn't say very much, but also just for everyone else. If you decide to rewrite this, there's a lot of dialogue you can cut. This script would be seriously improved just by picking out some of the more on-the-nose bits of dialogue. Minor point: 'Cuntsoaker'? Up until that point I was seeing this as going for the 13-17 market, but... maybe not. It seemed very out-of-place when the film I was comparing this to up until then was '10 Things I Hate About You'. I'd look at that film and compare it to your script: what that film gets right is taking the Shakespearean ideas and dropping them into high school scenarios that are easily understandable. I, for one, have no experience with this level of high school politics, so I was struggling from the off. Proms, however, have become something almost universally understandable. So overall, I'm afraid I wasn't a major fan. Serious flagging by halfway, caused by uncertainty on what character's motivations were. On the whole it didn't know what it wanted to be; I'd been hoping for a Western, but hadn't got one, and one of the main reasons was that it didn't hit most of the tropes which make that genre so iconic. You threw too much at the page and it ended up a bit of a mess. Sorry. 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. I feel really mean, but I do hope this helps. When you write your next script (or even re-draft this) I'll be very interested in seeing where you go with it. I just don't think this is the best you can do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2012 12:47
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
fallingdownjoe posted:I feel really mean, but I do hope this helps. When you write your next script (or even re-draft this) I'll be very interested in seeing where you go with it. I just don't think this is the best you can do. DivisionPost posted: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. I won't lie. It's never easy to read stuff like that. But nothing you guys are saying rings false, so I'm very grateful that you both spent the time to read it and give me feedback. I'm just going to respond to a couple things. I think the biggest problem is that neither of you ended up caring all that much about the struggles the characters are going through, and that's a pretty huge failure on my part. It's not like the situation itself is a problem. A school is being relentless tormented by bullies! That's pretty important! Unfortunately, it seems like I did a bad job of presenting situations that reflected that reality in a gripping way. Clearly I need to think hard about that. Your critiques on Vicki are both spot-on. The ultimate problem is that she's boring. I kinda knew that going in, and the fact that you both picked up on it shows just how obvious it is. The "cuntsoaker" line will probably change. I'm just waiting until I think of something better. I like the idea of making the jocks more distinct from one another, particularly in the way they speak. 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. 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. The fact that you both thought the Western bit was, uh, "inconsistant" to say the least, is very telling. It is a screenplay in transition. It started off just as a typical high school film about a school election that is (apparently) still in the process of transforming into a Western. I think I need to take a step back and look at the story as a whole and reconstruct the whole thing from the ground up. It'll be hard, because it's a story I've been tinkering with off and on for years, so I'm too attached to some of the characters and some of the events. 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!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
My friend & I have written a script for a short film that's hopefully going to be work-shopped in March (at a sort of page to stage workshop run by local film producers) & I was hoping for some feedback from here so we can prepare ourselves & perhaps make quick changes to it before the night. The story is about a guy who is an extra on the set of his own life until one day he decides to do something about it and starts reaching out for the opportunities to become the leading man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2012 00:25
|
|
|
The best advice I have is don't make movies about movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
Don't listen to Neuro. Listen to me, when I say there's a glut of navel gazing. "Episodes", "Extras", and "Community"/30 Rock (or any other meta sitcom) are going to eat your lunch. Then again, Disney and Nick seem to have entire afternoons dedicated to Rock Star/Rock Band/Rocker shows, so who knows?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2012 03:26
|
|
|
Sorry, I should have mentioned it's a short film that we intend to submit to the UK festival circuit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2012 13:01
|
|
|
BisonDollah posted:Sorry, I should have mentioned it's a short film that we intend to submit to the UK festival circuit. I'll look at it, if you're still looking for people. EMAIL REDACTED fallingdownjoe fucked around with this message at 10:45 on Feb 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2012 20:46
|
|
|
So, BisonDollah, I've had a look at your script. It's not a bad idea, but if you're going to have it made you're going to need to figure out exactly what you're going to want to do with the piece. I'm sorry, this might read as harsh, but if you're going to make something then you'd be ly I like the idea of starting with Jerry, who is the hero that Charlie will never be , but if you're essentially having all the minor characters as their own little vignettes, each one also needs to work as part of an imaginary larger picture. Jerry doesn't. If he's supposed to be part of a comic Hangover-esque story, then the jokes he tells need to be structured as jokes. For instance - code:For a short film, you've got too much dialogue, and for a film where Charlie is aware that he's a minor character, it's missing an opportunity to be more knowing than it is. You've got to have every word count. A great example of this is in the Victorian Romance/park scene, where the lovers spend too much time talking about something which doesn't move the story along. In their story it's information both characters would already be aware of, whilst in ours, it doesn't do anything to push the story along. I think you could do more with that scene, in less time, by making them more aware of Charlie's possible place in their story. It'd really help towards setting up Charlie's realisation of his position in the universe. I really liked Big Jim's Training Montage, by the way. It cemented the idea in my head that this would work better as a comedy, rather than the mixed bag you've currently got. The scene is a lot more clever and knowing than the scenes with the spies and the lovers, and the humour works well. The greasy spoon scene seems to be your attempt at Tarantino-style dialogue, but goes on for far too long to do much more than slow the pace. Also, I guess that it doesn't matter too much since you'll be shooting it yourself, but "[Charlie] has decided that he’s going to go dig up that money & become rich, if he can’t be the leading man then he’s at least going to live somewhere warm" isn't going to show up on screen. While you might want that to show up in the actor's face, unless you get someone who's sold their soul to the devil you're going to need to write it with marker pen. Your ending is also not as strong as it could be. You've set up a really nice possibility for Charlie to take his rightful place as a supporting character for a hero (possibly his housemate Jerry) but you end it by settling for a whole heap of words. It sounds mean, but I can't emphasise enough how much you need to show, not tell. Film is a visual medium. If you want to write a book, write a book. You've got a good idea, but it's buried under far too many words. Again, I'm sorry this is harsh, but I figured that if you're going to spend time making it you need to hear honest criticism of the piece. You're not bad, you mainly need to have a look at the piece and work out what you want it to be, and what it will look like when it's on screen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
DivisionPost posted:I'm about to admit something that might make me the target of serious derision. You write the essence of each scene on a card, possibly using color-coded ones to mark which character/plotline/plot point/etc. it's about and then arrange the cards chronologically to see the big picture of your screenplay. You'll quickly spot any gaps or imbalances in the structure, such as an undernourished B-plot or an endless row of INT scenes, depending on how you do it. I use an Excel spreadsheet instead of cards.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
I don't know if it's a horrible admission, but I don't really use index cards at all. If I'm bouncing ideas around I tend to use about three or four open word processor files and put the information in there, adding and taking away as and where required. I move around quite a lot, so it means that I don't have to worry about bringing index cards with me wherever I go, and because I use the documents all the time, I can burrow into them to find the information I need quickly and efficiently. Occasionally I'll get stuck and want to look at something visually, but after printing out specific documents and adding notes onto the pages by hand, I'll drop it all back into the documents. The one time I used index cards I wrote plot points and lines of dialogue onto them, then stuck them all onto a blank wall in my bedroom, from the start of the film at the top, to the end at the bottom. It meant that I could see the whole film at once and how the plots intertwined. Throughout the process I ended up getting a lot better at visualising the whole thing in my head (and the white tack I used destroyed the paint too. Whoops) so I've not felt a great urge to do that again. I'm interested in learning how other people use index cards too, as well as how other people manage the ideas going around their heads.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
fallingdownjoe posted:I don't know if it's a horrible admission, but I don't really use index cards at all. Why would it be? If you get the results you want without using them, they're by no means necessary. I will say, though, that they can potentially be very helpful. It took me a good while to get the Excel index for my current screenplay sorted out, but it eliminated 90 % of the "what the hell happens next?"/"should I switch to the B-plot now?" moments that can bog down the writing process itself when you're flying by the seat of your pants.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2012 22:11
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 13:33 |
|
|
Man screenwriting class is at once the most depressing and encouraging thing ever. Depressing in that 90% of the scripts (and their proprietors) are completely and utterly irredeemable, and I have an entire semester to figure out new and exciting ways to sugarcoat notes about them. But also encouraging, because - hey the immediate competition kind of sucks. But, gently caress, I'm always wondering if these poor sacks of poo poo just don't put in the effort, or if this is really the best they can come up with. I go to one of the better film schools in the US, and it's stunning to me that they would ever admit such lazy/untalented writers. I think a big part of it is that they don't read. And by read, I mean anything, scripts/books/whatever. I don't believe you can write screenplays by just watching movies, but I have a feeling that's what most of these students are trying to do. It's like they get Final Draft and watch Inception and just go at it. I don't know what I'd do as a professor. It seems that with truly bad writers my profs just kind of try and stick to macro poo poo like three act structure and continuity, but what these kids desperately need is to focus completely on style. I don't care if you've got the best god drat idea in the world, if you have no voice, or craftsmanship, you're hosed. T-Bone fucked around with this message at 08:19 on Feb 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2012 07:58
|
|
