|
I often have playlists which I listen to while writing a screenplay, but I've yet to actually put one of those pieces in the screenplay itself as a direction: often they're too on the nose in any case. The closest I've ever come is when I wrote about a young girl dying tragically, and the effect it has on those left behind. My mother of all people suggested this piece of music: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85ytCrJ_ygI and ever since then I can't imagine the scene without it as background. It helps that the whole sequence is without dialogue, meaning that any music to be played in the scene has to be particularly strong. Pop just wouldn't fit.
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2011 15:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 07:54 |
|
|
DivisionPost posted:Basic, stupid question presented in longform. For the first one, I'd question why the description for the logos for the detective agency isn't in the first block of descriptive text. As it isn't a moment of great reveal, there shouldn't be a problem with leaving when to reveal them up to the director. As such, I can't see a problem with the whole thing then being: quote:Patrick’s on his cell phone, reading from a script on his computer screen. In the background of the computer screen are This would get rid of any need for breaking up the monologue in the first place. As for the second, I would personally use (CONT'D) as an automatic response in any situation where a single character's dialogue is broken by any action. I'd do that mainly just for the actors, so that when they're marking off their copy of the script for which lines are theirs don't automatically go to each second line of dialogue; the (CONT'D) is something they can keep looking out for to make sure they don't miss one of their own lines if they're doing it in a rush. 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.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2011 10:59
|
|
|
Angora posted:What are some great spec scripts by first time writers that were purchased? I'd like to see what they do right. As far as I'm aware, Little Miss Sunshine was a spec script. Michael Arndt wrote the first draft in a stupidly short length of time, then spent about a year rewriting it again and again. It won the Best Original Screenplay Oscar, so he must have done something right with it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 17:26
|
|
|
Finishing a screenplay is a skill in itself, so don't worry too much that you're struggling right now. What's good to remember is that the first draft you write is pretty much always going to look terrible when you look back on it. Sure, there might be things you'll keep, but once you've done a couple of drafts you'll hate the first one. As for realising an idea is stupid: good! I run on the assumption that 90% of my ideas are stupid: it's finding the small percentage which are good, and then teasing out the most interesting story from that idea which is the real skill. Once you've done that then you're likely to meet Golden Bee's "am I excited" test.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 11:48
|
|
|
I've got a meeting with a producer on Wednesday to talk about a film I've written, and was recommended to take along some two-pagers to give him and talk about once we're done with the main screenplay. Has anyone got any advice on what sort of things these need to include? I'm lucky enough to be working on a few projects I can use for this, but I'm unsure on what to put in them specifically. I've made sure to include the basic premise and style of the pieces, who they would be targeted at, and including very general outlines of the story, as well as what sort of questions would be asked and answered by the pieces. Does anyone with experience of this know if that's the sort of thing I should be going for?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2011 16:56
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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 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
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:If you read this thread, not even all of US have what it takes to be compelling, so the average first-time writers are going to lag behind -that-. Is anyone good the first thing they write? I looked back at my first script last month to adapt it into a play, and I shudder to think that I passed that piece of poo poo round all my friends and family asking them to read it. The best thing I got, though, was some seriously harsh criticism; it's one of the main things someone needs if they're ever going to rise above that original mediocrity. The main thing they need is practice, criticism, and the opportunity to see how other people write.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 07:54 |
|
|
York_M_Chan posted:I still feel that way about the first drafts of my current work. Oh, absolutely. I accept it and just use it as part of the process: the first draft will always suck, so might as well just get it down fast, as long as the very basic structure and idea is there. After that? That's when the real writing starts.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 18:08
|
|