Questions to ponder about why you're doing this...

[TonyRob]

I've been perusing some of the various screenwriting message boards recently (well, really, just Done Deal and Wordplay) and have noticed something that, to me, is alarming. Well, let me back up a bit...

This trend has been around since I started visiting Done Deal and probably long before that (so, really, it doesn't fit the strict definition of "trend") and has always perplexed me, but for some reason it's just now driven me to start a thread about it...

I'm talking about people asking anonymous posters on an internet message board, people they don't know at all, for what amounts to "creative permission". Certified Instigator's response in another thread (about the structure of a ghost story) perfectly sums up what I'm talking about (kudos, CI).

Why on earth would you place BIG creative decisions about your spec script -- everything from story and theme issues to whether or not you should write it at all (jesus, what's THAT all about?!) -- in the hands of strangers who may or may not know what they're talking about and are most definitely not paying you a cent for your work?

Why would you ask questions like, "Must my protagonist be likeable?"?

How many movies have you seen? You've never seen a film with an unlikeable protagnist? Why would you ask that? You know the answer is "No, he/she doesn't have to be" if you've watched enough movies (or, hell, even if you haven't).

Or, perhaps, you're asking if your protagonist has to be likeable (just as one example) in a spec script you're trying to use to break into the business. Okay, fair enough. (I still think the answer is "No, he/she doesn't" btw, but I don't want to get into a whole thing about that.) But that brings up another question; perhaps THE question from which all of these others come from, and which is the true subject of this thread:

Why are you writing screenplays to begin with? Where is the impetus to do so coming from?

Is it coming from a deep, abiding, often painful love of film? Is it coming from a desire to "actualize" the movies you've been playing in your own head for months and years on end? To see your vision up on the silver screen?

Is it coming from a place of economic concern? Is it an ego thing? A "canoodling women" thing? A spiritual exercise?

Is screenwriting a hobby? A vocation? An obsession? Catharsis/therapy?

If you found out (for example) that you, as an aspiring screenwriter, absolutely could not sell a spec script with an unlikeable protagonist to a major studio, what would you do? Would you write another script... one with a likeable protagonist (perhaps hoping that if you sold that, you would be "in" and then could sell your personal project)? Would you rewrite your script so that it had a likeable protagonist, thus altering your entire creative vision?

Or, would you get out there and try to make the thing yourself?

Again, why are you doing this? What do you get out of it? What do you hope to get out of it?

[TonyRob]

Btw, when I talk about asking message board members for creative permission, I'm not talking about spitballing with and bouncing ideas off of other writers whom you know and whose opinions you respect (in, say, a writer's group), and who are generally supportive of your creative vision.

I'm talking about asking strangers what you should write because they supposedly "know better" than you.

Just wanted to clarify. That is all.

[Architeuthis Dux]

Okay, I'll bite . . .

I find my current job unrewarding (I teach way too many English classes at a community college). If I stay at this job, I will move incrementally forward for the next eighteen years. The only way to really move up on the food chain would be to go into administration, which I have no talent for whatever, or go to another college, which will be the same old same old in a new setting.

I like movies, and I love to write. I write anyway; it keeps me sane. The lure of the sold screenplay calls to me like a tall glass of lemonade to a Death Valley prospector; so if I'm going to be writing anyway, why write for nothing? Why write only for myself? What on earth should keep me from giving the screenwriting career endeavor my best attempt?

Screenplays are easy to write. Good screenplays, on the other hand, are extremely difficult to write. But so what? I've discovered that life is a lot of work anyway. If I let myself slide into decrepitude wondering if, maybe, if I had worked a little harder, used my noodle a little more, I might have gotten paid to write movies, I will never forgive myself.


Now, about this protagonist thing. I can't think of a single successful movie (i.e. a movie I liked) where I genuinely disliked the protagonist. I can think of movies where the protagonist was a rogue and a scoundrel, who behaved in indefensible ways, but all of them had something on which to hang my sympathy, something which made me care what happened and want to see them succeed, something that made me cheer when they did or feel their pain when they didn't. If a protagonist has no admirable character traits, if he doesn't have some kind of integrity or some kind of redeeming quality, then I can't see how a movie about that protagonist can possibly succeed.

[TonyRob]

So then, you would never ask the question, "Should my protagonist be likeable?". That's what I'm getting at.

Someone who loves and wants to write films like Happiness, In The Company Of Men, Raging Bull, The Minus Man (though, I think he WAS likeable in a sick, odd sort of way), Funny Games, Man Bites Dog, American Psycho, etc. asking that question is what strikes me as so odd.


Good response, btw. I dig your honesty.

[Architeuthis Dux]

Haven't seen all of the films in your example, but I have seen Raging Bull, and it's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

Maybe it is not difficult to distinguish Jake La Motta from St. Francis of Assissi, but he did have several admirable qualities, qualities that made the audience like and care about him.

For example, he was incredibly tough. Even when Sugar Ray Robinson was beating him to a bloody pulp (close-up slow-mo: boxing glove in face, head flying sideways, stream of blood sailing away), he refused to lie down. He couldn't win, but he refused to take the easy way out of the fight. Others: The way he struggled with his own inner demons. The pain he felt at his wife's infidelity. All of that made audiences say, "You show 'em, Jake! You don't take a dive for nobody!" Okay, so he didn't have too much upstairs, and he made a few bad decisions, but how could you not sympathize with him most of the time and admire him part of the time? I thought he was enormously sympathetic.

[kitnerboy]

hmmmmmmmmm

I would hazard a guess that 90% of the "creative" questions posted here about likeable characters, happy endings, voiceovers, and other matters of form and syntax are not posed so that a prospective writer could become better at the craft, but to get a quick big money spec sale.

Don't get me wrong, money is a great motivator, no one would go to work without it, but the amounts that are earned, combined with the seeming ease of market entry (to the uninitiated) cause this.

I just had a producer tell me that my protagonist was unlikable, (i prefer to call him an anti-hero, but what do I know?) but rather than change my character, I'll change producers.

There is a value to posting on a message board, even though you can't guage the credibility of the other posters.

Common sense and wisdom are self-evident in the good replies, and even the bad ones have a value if they cause me to look at something in a differnt way, or generate an idea I might never have had.

[Late4ttime]

Nice topic- I have been thinking about a similar observation, which I hope will add to your discussion. There are numerous posts on this board and others asking about story, characters, rules, formatting, etc. from people that want to learn. What I don’t understand is why people ask questions like your example: "Should my protagonist be likeable?”

The creative process is yours to own- you can create whatever environment, for whatever characters, and do whatever you want to them. It's your creation- if you want your protag to be 9ft tall, have pink hair, and walk around on his/her hands then do it. There are no boundaries for your story- it can be 5 pages long- it may be 300 pages long it is completely up to you.

Now I'm not advocating that stories written outside certain parameters will sell but the time I have spent visiting this website has taught me what I think is most important- write whatever story you want, just make sure it is correctly formatted and written VERY VERY well.

Just my 2 cents

[Writer1]

I think one of the reasons that questions are asked of strangers...is to validate us as writers. Even if our ideas suck, there are people on the boards(other writers) who will praise and argue with our position. So even if what they say is contrary to our own beliefs...it allows us to feel like a creative exchange is occuring.

Validation doesn't mean that someone thinks you are a GOOD writer...it just means they think of you as a writer. Not sure if I explained this correctly...my brain is muddled in quicksand this morning.

[Salazkin]

left blank

[TonyRob]

Did you even read my post? Where was I "complaining"?

I'm trying to get people to think about what they're asking and why they're asking it.

[sc111]

I post pages and logs on DD because it helps. Sure, some of the feedback is so-so, while other comments and suggestions are worth their weight in gold (yet it's free).

And I enjoy reading other tyro writers' pages because it helps me see different styles, voices, approach to stories, etc.

Questions such as the 'likeable protag' query aren't the kind I ask because I suspect, given group dynamics, half will respond 'yes,' the other half, 'no.'

As for your other question, I've fallen in love with the screenwriting craft and as a result, given up novel writing.

Is money a factor? Yes and no. I know the first time I was paid for a piece of writing it felt incredible. But, since I write for a living, the thrill has worn off. Sure, anyone would love to make 6-plus figures on their story but that isn't my primary goal.

I love to write. It's something I do. Overall, it's taking daydreaming to the next level and getting it down on paper. I've always been a daydreamer.

:)

[TonyRob]

Also, I did specify that I was talking about the BIG creative questions and people basically asking permission to write what they want to write. (Or the weird twist where they seem to want to be told that they shouldn't write what they want to write.)

[Salazkin]

left blank

[William Haskins]

the quest for validation runs through the bloodstream of human nature, and manifests in different ways in different endeavors. in no other vocation, however, must one be as keenly aware of consensus while at the same time mentally and morally prepared to reject it, as in the arts.

[ThunderChikin]

Why would you ask questions like, "Must my protagonist be likeable?"? I suppose for the same reason you asked:Again, why are you doing this? What do you get out of it? What do you hope to get out of it? Validation, baby.

[TonyRob]

Salazkin -

Cool.

To further clarify, I'm not talking about/to someone who asks: "How do you approach expressing theme via visual motifs that are organic to your story and characters?"

I'm talking more about questions like: "The theme of my script is a variation on 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'. Is this too negative for a spec script? Can I get away with it or should I put a more positive spin on my story?", to which I would always answer, "Hey, it's your spec. Why are you writing it? Answer that and you have your answer."

But it appears as if some think that this is not a satisfactory answer. Like they want to be told what to write about and how (and even why). It's just weird to me.

[Geevie]

I can't answer for anyone else, I can only answer for me. Here's my take on it.

A long time ago when I was a struggling novelist I was told that my ideas were more visual and suited to the screen. Quite honestly the idea scared me to death. I didn't know if I could handle it, or was up to the task. I have had self esteem issues that suggested that I could never write that next multimillion dollar movie, so why try? I was coming from an all or nothing place.

Fast forward to me deciding it was time for me to just feel the fear and do it anyway, and I write my first script. I was new, and the only thing I knew is that I filled up about 110 pages worth of story. I had only read one book to tell me how to do it and my first few readers (friends and family, God love em) all told me it was great. I found DD in my search for an agent (cuz, you know, that first script was gold), and that's when I learned I didn't know half as much as I thought I did.

I scoured these boards and found out this screenwriting business was a lot more complicated than I suspected. It hit me right in my confidence, so, with my self esteem shaken, I wanted someone, anyone to validate I hadn't wasted my time. Am I doing this right? Did I do good? Are my ideas valid? I'm not a total screwup, right?

This board is filled with new writers who had no classroom to teach them how to do this, they just jumped in blind and did it. And sadly this board is full of contradictory information. The first tool people use in learning how to write a script is reading produced scripts, but other struggling screenwriters tell them that you can't write like that. There are special rules for the newbie writer and his virgin spec. Style is constantly being mistaken for rules, and it's no wonder that we've slapped down new writers so much that they are asking us the creative questions you refer to in your post. They're looking for someone to say, "It's okay for you to trust your instincts."

Maybe all writers need to go through this growth phase where they learn what they can and can't do, what works and what doesn't, based on trial and error. Maybe they have to forge through and "break the rules" only to learn that some "rules" are there for a reason. Call it screenwriting puberty.

If you're meant to do this, if it's in your blood like an incurable disease, you'll find your way. I finally got to a point where I can get a consider on a first draft written in 7 days, just trusting in myself and my ability. I still ask questions, I still bounce my insecurities against the wall to see if they stick. I think we all do - writers always seek the approval for their babies and validation for their ideas. That's just the nature of the beast.

And so are the growth questions like the ones you mentioned in your post. Just comes with the territory as we grow as artists.

[UnrealSpec]

Maybe all writers need to go through this growth phase where they learn what they can and can't do, what works and what doesn't, based on trial and error. Maybe they have to forge through and "break the rules" only to learn that some "rules" are there for a reason. Call it screenwriting puberty.

I definitely think this is something that all beginning writers need to go through -- and will -- if they are serious about improving their craft.

However, like you said, a lot of these writers don't have any resources outside the internet/internet message boards to help them, so this is their only "school of hard knocks" or "baptism by fire" as it were.

And while many new writers may fool themselves into thinking this (message boards) are enough... It really isn't.

I say this not as a put-down, flame or statement of arrogance.

I thought this exact same thing when I was starting out. The exact same thing.

It wasn't until I had an actual, real-life mentor who showed me how much I DIDN'T know about the craft of screenwriting and who also, more importantly, was willing to work with me because HE saw the potential in that first script I wrote... Which says something in itself because as we know, most of our first works are TERRIBLE... But he saw the "spark", "light" or whatever you want to call it and decided to help me and see where it went because like most writers, he has a love and PASSION for the art of writing (screenwriting) in general.

I think writers need real life mentors whom they can specifically ask questions and advice to on a more intimate, one-on-one level where they aren't trying to filter out all the competing and conflicting information (that is often wrong) that you see on various message boards and "how-to" books.

Not necessarily formally trained (screen)writing teachers or professors, but just experienced, credible writers who are willing to share their advice and experience.

Again, I also realize that depending on a new writer's particular set of circumstances (geography; income level; resources available) that what I just said ISN'T a realistic option...

But I think this IS a vital step in the learning process and that is being able to communicate -- in person -- With another writer, preferably, a more experienced writer who doesn't have any vested interest in the newbie (other than helping them) and who will tell them where they are strong and where they are weak and give them honest, non-conflicting feedback that will truly HELP them improve their craft if they are willing to put in the time and learn it.

[JennieT80]

If you have to ask permission, the answer is NO.

Can my character?-NO
Can the protag?-NO
Does it have to?-NO
Can a writer?-NO
NO! NO! NO!

Now do you still want to do this, or do it your own way?

[sc111]

Ah, this thread takes me back to college when, as a creative writing major, I was required to take Poetry Workshop I & II.

I entered PW-I writing l-o-n-g free verse poetry. Professor said, "Write shorter poems!" So I distilled my poetry to the barest of bare verse and all was well, until . . .

the next semester, in PW-II. I enter calss, confident in my short-poem writing skills after the last semester. Confident that my last Professor was right, short poems were the only way to go.

But when the Professor of PW-II takes a look at my work, he wrinkles his nose and barks, "Write longer poems! Poems that go on for pages and pages."

Hmmm. I had a hunch and followed it all the way to the college library where I pulled the pubished poetry of both these teachers.

No surprise - - the first one write short poems, the second one wrote long poems, so the moral of the story is that the subtext of most critics comments is: "Don't write like you!
Write like me! "

:)

[refriedwhiskey]

Your subsequent replies make it clear I misread the intent.
So did his very first post. :D

I understood Tony's point from the start and saw no reason for anyone to be offended. I think his questions are valid.

People who ask total strangers "Can I write this?" or "Is it okay to do this?" or "Should I write X or Y?" -- well, they just don't seem to have the nerve or conviction a writer needs to even complete a decent story, let alone make a career out of it.

If you don't have a story you're so driven to tell that you don't care about anybody's opinions of whether or not you should do it, then why are you writing at all? And if you're not sufficiently confident in your story and your ability to tell it that you don't care if some stranger says "that's just not done," how can you expect it to impress somebody who reads hundreds or thousands of scripts a year?

If you find yourself tempted to ask relative strangers a question as huge and basic as "Can I do this?" or "Should I write X or Y?" -- even if the real reason you're asking is simply that you need the validation of seeing someone say it's okay -- I think you should stop and ask an even bigger question of yourself: "Should I even be trying to write?"

[Pen Dragon]

What Refried said

[Geevie]

Nerves can be grown.

Trust me, I know. :)

[Wolfy262]

No one is born knowing how to do anything.

We learn through trial and error, as well as asking questions of those who might know the answers.

It's all part of the learning curve.

[refriedwhiskey]

I think you're missing the point, Wolf. I'm not sure how you could miss it, since I believe it was very clear in Tony's first post, and he made it even clearer in subsequent posts. But we're not talking about people who say "how do I do this?"

Of course that's valid and part of the learning process. We're talking about people who say "Is it okay if I tell this kind of story?" or "Should I tell X type of story, or Y type of story?"

Completely different.

[Wolfy262]

I didn't miss the point. Perhaps I'm more forgiving than you.

There is no such thing as a dumb question the first time you ask it.

[captain bligh]

wow, i really disagree with that.

some questions are just a whole lotta dumb, and some people are just a whole stack of stupid. everyone is not created equal, and that's life.

[pconsidine]

Addressing Tony's questions –

I write screenplays because it is the only way to combine all the things that I have been over the course of my life in one creative pursuit: writer, painter, musician, film crew and critic. Not other medium incorporates so much variety in such a succint package. Frankly, that's all that matters. I'm less interested in making a career out of it than I am in enjoying the process.

As far as why people look for validation of their ideas, I think that's been covered. In fact, I had brought up the same thing in a long-ago post that has since dropped off the boards. The sum of that post was that most of the "stupid" questions that people ask on writing message boards (and that extends to all of them, really) are there because it's far easier to talk about number of brads or weight of paper than it is to really talk about the meat of screenwriting: plot, character, tone and emotional connection. We could talk around and around the Important Questions for years on end and still never get anywhere. Many people know that in advance and so don't even bring them up.

My 2¢.

[TonyRob]

I wouldn't necessarily call the questions in this case "dumb" (and again, I'm specifically referring to questions where the poster is asking for permission to write a certain type of story with a certain spin). I would just say that the person asking said questions needs to take a look at WHY they're asking them. Perhaps validation really IS the reason the majority of the time. Or, perhaps, Geevie is also right, and most times it's a case of too much conflicting information and advice on the internet. Hell, a lot of conflicting advice comes from the pros - try reading some of Martell's or Deus' posts about what types of things you should be writing and then flip to some of Taotropics' posts about the same subject, right after. If you're a new screenwriter and not already secure in your own writing, I have a feeling your head will explode. Who to trust? Who's the "better" pro? Whose career path would you most want to follow? It's really crazy.


This is one reason I think it's a mistake for a new screenwriter to look to an internet message board to teach him/her how to write screenplays. But what's the alternative when you're out in the middle of nowhere? I don't know. If your writing shows promise and you have some talent, you could try querying working screenwriters whose stuff you admire and ask if they'd like to mentor you. I don't know.

What I do know is you've got to trust the types of things you want to write; the types of things you want to see as movies with your name on them, someday; the way you want to approach telling the story (flashback structure, for instance) if you think that's the best way to tell the story; the themes you want to explore; the characters you want to bring to life, etc., etc.

If you love movies and you love writing, you have to trust that.

Or, at least, I do.

JMO.

[Writer1]

-----------------------------------------------------------
the quest for validation runs through the bloodstream of human nature, and manifests in different ways in different endeavors. in no other vocation, however, must one be as keenly aware of consensus while at the same time mentally and morally prepared to reject it, as in the arts.
------------------------------------------------------------

A nice quote from William Haskins

[UncleMilton]

I think it's funny when people ask, "Should I write the idea that I love, or the one I don't like but think is commercial?" Come on. You can't think your way into spec sell. If you're writing something you don't love, it'll show through on every page.

[The Fellow Traveller]

David Mamet has an article in the UK paper The Guardian today that touches on this a little bit. I don't know if it's reprinted from another publication you might already have seen, but here's the link:

film.guardian.co.uk/mamet...39,00.html (http://film.guardian.co.uk/mamet/story/0,12830,1210839,00.html)

[bottomlesscup]

I don't think it's that funny when an inexperienced writer asks a serious question about how best to break into the industry.

[TonyRob]

I don't think it's funny either. Not at all.

And what answer would satisfy said inexperienced writer? What if he/she got two lengthy, well-thought-out answers by professionals, and they contradicted one another? And I mean "night and day" contradicted. It happens here. A lot.

Not to pick on you, bottomlesscup, but a few days ago, you asked about whether or not you should write something "safe", rather than what you normally write. What would prompt you to ask that? What would make you think that anybody you'd want to work with is looking for "safe"? Or would be looking for something that you don't normally write? Why wouldn't you instead do some research on agents, filmmakers and screenwriters who worked with the type of material you write and try to see if you can get in touch with them?

How do you think you're going to "break in" to the industry? What are your goals for when you do? Short-term and long-term? Do you think it's going to get easier after you do, to sell the stuff you like to write? Do you want to be sought after for your writing ability and voice? Do you just want that big spec sale you read about in the trades on occasion (there were many, many more about seven years ago)?

I'm not asking this stuff to be mean-spirited or put you on the spot. I'm really wondering how you approach this, on a day-to-day basis.

I'll give you a hint about my approach:

I write the types of movies I love to watch. Those that I really, REALLY love to watch. I mean, I love all sorts of movies, but there are a few movies that knock me out. And some genres that I can't get enough of. That's what I go for, but in my own way. I write movies that I someday want to see on screen. Movies that I keep playing over and over in my head. I don't think about "the market" or making my work more "reader friendly". From what I can remember, nobody ever recommended that I do that. Ever.

I write what interests me. What gets me excited. What makes me laugh. Sometimes, often, maybe always, I bare my soul in my work. Occasionally, I'll bare my ass. I have an odd sense of humor, and it shows up on the page. I would never squelch any of that in the name of "trying to make a sale". I don't think I have to. Nobody whose opinion I've ever trusted has told me I should.

Do I ever have doubts about this approach or about my own writing? Of course. I'm human. But in the end I keep coming back to it because I know it's the right course. I know the best bet is to listen to the voice inside of me, rather than all of the contradictory voices outside of me. Of course, sometimes the voices inside contradict one another, but I digress...

But yeah. That's my take.

/shrug

[refriedwhiskey]

No, there's nothing funny about that, bottomless. But that's not what we're talking about here.

[dclary]

Tony, this burst of logic and lucidity from you is totally out of hand and uncalled for.

Don't let it happen again.

[bottomlesscup]

I know you aren’t picking on me or making fun of me. Your sincerity was clear.

I was asking for advice, that’s all. Not permission. I take everything I see here with a critical mind. Not critical of the poster, but critical of what they say. I threw a question - a valid one, I think – out to the group to see what they thought. Then I listened to the responses that resonated with me. It doesn’t mean I’m going to follow their advice to the letter, it just means I wanted to know what other people think.

I live 2000 miles from LA. I’ve never been in a “meeting” and I don’t know anyone who has, except for people on this board. I don’t know what gets you in the door. I don’t know what to expect when I get in the door. I think this message board was designed for people to share answers to these questions. Bad answers and good answers. It’s up to the reader to know the difference.

As for “safe” movies, I don’t think my question was as naïve as you make it out to be. Certainly, certain genres and stories are easier to sell. A look at the TV Guide or the multiplex can show you that. Certainly, people get paid every day to write movies they don’t love.

Conventional wisdom, from every source I can find, seems to be that Hollywood likes “safe.” They try to copy past successes. They stick with what they know. Wouldn’t that mean a challenging, expensive spec is not likely to get sold? I don’t know. That’s why I’m asking.

With regards to my aspirations and plans in the film world, here it is, in full honesty:

I know that I’m a writer. Always have been and always will be. Regardless of what my occupation may be, I’ll continue to write. Writing yields me certain emotional dividends I can’t seem to find elsewhere. Even when I don’t show the finished work to anyone, I love writing.

However, I’m a furniture mover. Before that, I was a cook. I work long, hard hours in a rough, demeaning business. I hate it.

At some point in my life, I’d like to get paid to do what I love. That means writing. So, I’m trying to form a good, solid plan for breaking into the industry and getting paid for my words and ideas, instead of my back.

I understand writer’s concerns about art vs. commerce and I believe them. But I also know that I can write what I love in my free time. I’ve been doing it for years now. I’m more concerned about what I’m doing during the day. I’d rather write anything than move couches, even if it’s not my dream project.

I fully understand that breaking in may take a lifetime. That’s okay with me. I’m not looking for a get-rich-quick scheme. I don’t need to be a marquee writer. I just want to be able to spend my life doing what I love.

I’m trying to reach that goal in the smartest way possible and I was asking for some advice on how to do that.

[TonyRob]

Very cool, bottomlesscup. I appreciate your response.

Dclary -

It won't happen again. :p

[Architeuthis Dux]

There are two reasons two write:

1) To express yourself

2) To get others to listen to you.

If you write primarily to express yourself, then go at it however you like and the devil take whoever reads you or ignores you. If they like your writing, fine. If they don't, it's no skin off your behind.

If, however, you write to get others to listen to you (which includes such incentives as getting paid and having your stuff produced), then you have entered into a contest of wills. You must craft your message in such a way that it will be received as intended. You may even have to alter the message so that it will be received at all.

At what point will the changes you have to make be too much, so that it is no longer your message? How hard are you willing to work to craft it so that it will be received? Only you have the answer to these.

Ask yourself why you are writing.

And be prepared to adjust your expectations accordingly.

[randesq]

I think it's a validation question. I don't know why anyone cares or why it matters that 'blanket' browsers on a message board care about your intent? I guess it depends on what you deem as 'advice that matters' and what your scope and timeframe are. Too many think what's said on here is important enough to respond to every pinch to their skin. The only thing that matters is that you develop a method that works for you and it fits into your timeframe... who cares about some windbag beating their chest. Why spend time defending your vantage point to some no name in another zip code.

Write for whatever reason that compels you and find no fault in the recipe of others. Be judged by your own goals, not the perception of others goals for you. And stop caring about other people's hype.

[Joe Desmond]

I think, for me, I don't write like with the "big picture" in mind. I just wanna write a cool, fun movie. And I mean a damn good one that's riveting and engrossing.

And once you realize that you wanna do that - you have practical matters. A good opening. That has payoffs. But the most important thing, to me, is a the second act - it's so important to a good movie. I can imagine a good beginning, and a good ending - but I think the second act is where a screenplay makes its money. Terry Rossio - a real pro - said he can get by in the second act on craft, but the ending is tougher - I'm not like that (tho I wish I could write like him). I usually have the beginning and ending in mind when I get the idea for a movie.

But I need a second act. And a good one. I need my protag in trouble - and I need a setting, and a villain that says - HOLY CRAP. I really think that what makes great movies is the second act, but what sells them is beginnings and endings. I think I can write decent beginnings and endings, but I need to work on my second act skills. I write about this as a purely practical matter, as I'm fiddling over two second acts at the moment. It's particularly the second half of the second half that can fail -

anyhoo, the thing is, for me writing screenplays is not some magical vocation, in a way. It's quite mechanical, it needs a certain objective determination - there's an idea, but then you need to make it a movie. And you always are thinking: is this a movie?

[unwell36]

I feel ya bottomless...from another writer, who hates the paying job, and is 2000 miles away from the action. Hell I have to explain to most people I meet what a screenplay is.

On the issue of writing, I think some questions are asked to gain a level of validation from peers, some are asked becuase the writer really has no clue, and some are merely just to take part in the Done Deal club.

I would like to say I was/am a Done Deal child. Until this year I did not post a lot, but I have always lurked in the shadows, taking notes...yes I said taking notes. In doing this I have grown (I think) as a writer, it did not create my voice, but aided in helping me to bring that voice out in proper form.
I still don't get the three hole, but only two brad thing.

I believe strongly that if you have passion for what you are writing it will show. That is not to say, that a writer couldn't write just for sale...I just know I would have to have some sort interest in story, or I couldn't do it.

just my 2c

[Boobsie Malone]

I honestly have no idea what a good idea is. I'm taking a class right now, and was shitscared to tell them my idea. I hate pitching, and I think it boils down to the fear that my ideas aren't very good.

So, I pitched my idea to the class very very badly. They asked a whole lotta questions, and finally we were able to discern what the base idea was.

I was certain that I couldn't pitch it well because it was a bad idea. After class a girl came up to me and said "Hey, I'm really sorry, but I kind of hate you." I was a little taken aback. She clarified, "Your idea is fabulous and I hate that I didn't think of it first." I got a couple of emails from people in the class, later in the week, where they told me they thought my idea was great. They were still thinking about it days later.

Wow. Validation. On one of my ideas. I was over the moon.

That's the only reason I can come up with on why people would ask such questions. Validation feels fabulous.

Now, granted, that was a class setting, and I would never post something like what you're asking on a message board. Somehow, validation from complete strangers doesn't appeal.

To what you didn't ask, I've posted pages on DD to get ideas on if my stuff was working. Coincidentally, some of the best advice I got from TonyRob.

[TonyRob]

:) :) :o :) :)

[Vigorish9]

the challenge. the everyday struggle between you and something complicated. the idea that you can create characters from nothing and make them do and say what ever the hell it is you want to say.

the main problem with people is that they have no ability to get outside of who they are; people who can't think in layers, who don't understand the idea behind motives of characters who are not neccesarily you.

writing is independence from the mundane. writing is a jail that you don't want to be releashed from.

i write because other people should at least experience what it is like to think like me. it's the selfish part of all of us and we should all just come to grips with that fact.

vig

[bbarlen]

This is one reason why I think it's a mistake for a new screenwriter to look to an internet message board to teach him/her how to write screenplays. But what's the alternative when you're out in the middle of nowhere? I don't know. If your writing shows promise and you have some talent, you could try querying working screenwriters whose stuff you admire and ask if they'd like to mentor you. I don't know.

TonyRob,

I agree that it's a mistake for new writers to look to message boards to teach them... The alternative is reading books on writing, which I think would help a lot of people who make the "dumb" posts that are being talked about in this thread. There's a ton of information available in books that people just don't take advantage of.

What seems to be happening is that someone decides "I think I'll write screenplays", so they stumble upon an online forum like Done Deal. I think this forum is quite valuable, and I've learned a lot from it, but what I've learned here is much different than the things I've learned reading books about writing. If you're out in the middle of nowhere, you'd be much better off buying and reading ten books on writing / screenwriting and taking a few cracks at it yourself. It's a lot easier to click around online than it is to read a whole book, let alone write a screenplay.

I think it mostly comes from the people who don't want to be filmmakers, and see this like some sort of lottery. "Will my script sell?" kind of seems like a silly question to me, since if you want to make money, it's probably the wrong thing. Of course people make money at writing, but it's crazy to think that you can just randomly pick a highly skilled profession (ANY trade) and instantly be at the same level as the top people who are selling scripts for a million bucks. It's people who don't want to put in the work, which is reading about the craft, and practising it. To me, it seems like books are the only viable substitute to personal instruction or film school. Just like writing scripts is the only way to get better, no matter how many books you read or Robert McKee seminars you go to.

Bob

[TonyRob]

Good post, Bob. I happen to agree with just about everything you said (especially this: "but it's crazy to think that you can just randomly pick a highly skilled profession (ANY trade) and instantly be at the same level as the top people who are selling scripts for a million bucks." LOVE THAT!).

Contrary to what some may believe, I'm actually not opposed to studying books on the craft of screenwriting, as long as that studying is augmented by reading a ton of screenplays and watching every movie you can. Also, make sure you pick a WIDE variety of books, and not just books on screenwriting, but also ones on film theory, filmmaking (directing, cinematography, editing, hell even scoring), acting, film history, film criticism, interviews with filmmakers, etc. You want to become as much of an expert on film as you can. You want to immerse yourself in film. (And reading all of these books and screenplays and watching all of these movies should not be a chore.)

Also, upon some reflection, I don't think my mentor idea is such a bad one. Getting the perspective of a working screenwriter who sees promise in your writing, who will tell you things the books won't (or, sometimes don't know about) would be invaluable. Add that to your study program, and shooting some of your own short films, and you have what would pretty much approach a film school education.

JMHO.

Good stuff, guys.

[Dr Hemmingstone]

In general the making of a moving picture is almost identical to the making of a large structure (building), think about it for a minute and you will find these have more in common with each other than not, and all of the considerations are the same, such as cost, artistic input, fills need for the masses, elevates, etc... Now considering a blue print for a space is like a script for a picture would you build a hospital on a design by someone who lacks the education (formal or otherwise), the experience, passion, or breadth of the medium in general, yeah no, the answer is no, hell no! A new writer has about as much luck of authoring an original oscar worthy film as one does selling their blue prints for a thirty story condo/retail building in downtown Manhattan. The difference is that most people assume that making a picture is easy and that any moron can do it if only they try, but ask them to design a museum and reality quickly sets in.
These two artistic mediums are the most expensive endeavors art can reach, yet one is considered childsplay (pictures) the other serious study. The truth is that these two mediums are pretty much the same with regard to how much they cost, and no one likes to throw money into the hands of a newbie convinced of their own special place in the world of art.
So why write screenplays? It had better be for the right reasons because failure, rejection, etc... are part of the deal, and to put ones eggs in such an enormous pit of self denial pretty much explains the current state of affairs in Hollywood today.

Oh, and I write because pictures have always been a large part of my life, and at some points in it all of it. Some of my most profound moments have been a direct result of walking into a film, much like the first time I looked out from the top of the empire state building, inspiring, hard to put into words, but we try.

[kojled]

tonyrob

i write because i must. i'm compelled to do so. i wouldn't want to make any amount of money doing any other job


zilla

[bbarlen]

TonyRob, I agree completely with your post. It's not enough to just read books on screenwriting, you need to study screenplays, movies, plays, books on directing, biographies, interviews, technical journals - everything you can get your hands on! You should be a fanatic, someone who is obsessed with the art of movies and loves learning about all aspects of it.

Finding a mentor seems like a good idea, once you've started to learn on your own. It seems like there's still a wealth of information out there for people with no access to professionals for the time being, due to their location or any other number of factors. I don't want to sound like I'm some sort of crazed librarian telling kids to give a hoot and read a book, but so many people try to cull together all their information from the Internet, which is just wrong. Using the Internet as your only source of research is generally a bad idea... I'm not saying that you should believe or agree with everything that you read in books, but they seem like an under-used resource.

That's why I love the screenwriter interviews in Scenario magazine. In a lot of cases the interviewer is more familliar with the writer's body of work than I am, which allows them to ask better questions than I would have come up with, even if I was actually speaking to the writer. It's a shame that they aren't publishing any longer, since I consider that to be a fantastic resource for anyone who wants to learn more about screenwriting. Reading the script, then seeing the movie, then reading a great interview with the screenwriter is a much thorough approach to filmmaking than I ever received at film school!

Finally, I have to say that I have no idea why anyone would try to break into the film industry if they didn't have a deep-rooted love of film... yet it seems to happen all the time. It seems offensive to me that someone who knows very little about movies would try to write a screenplay, considering it's the backbone of any production. It's very much like the blueprint example given by Dr. Hemmingstone. The script is the resource that tells every single person who works on the movie how to do their job... You might want to know something about movies before you start to tell other people how to make them!

Of course, who knows how serious people on message boards or the Internet really are, which brings it all back to the original question you posed in the very first post. Who are these people exactly? I'm always skeptical when I read about someone who says "I wrote 5 scripts last year, and I'm working on my 6th for this year." Maybe they actually did write eleven scripts in two years, but what does that mean? Are they all first drafts? Are they any good? I find it hard to believe that these eleven scripts were all re-written mulitple times, especially when the person isn't a professional writer! Where are they finding the time for this prolific output? It's not difficult to crank out 120 pages of junk that's pasted into screenplay format. I have nothing against people who are truly able to work at that level, but unless you're Ron Bass with his "team" of researchers / co-writers, it's damn near impossible. The bottom line is that there's no substitute for hard work, in studying or in writing.

[WritePro]

Tony, I feel ya. But the answers you got from some posters give credence to why people ask these question.

William Haskins (always such a thinking young man)
the quest for validation runs through the bloodstream of human nature, and manifests in different ways in different endeavors. in no other vocation, however, must one be as keenly aware of consensus while at the same time mentally and morally prepared to reject it, as in the arts.

Geevie
This board is filled with new writers who had no classroom to teach them how to do this, they just jumped in blind and did it. And sadly this board is full of contradictory information. The first tool people use in learning how to write a script is reading produced scripts, but other struggling screenwriters tell them that you can't write like that. There are special rules for the newbie writer and his virgin spec. Style is constantly being mistaken for rules, and it's no wonder that we've slapped down new writers so much that they are asking us the creative questions you refer to in your post. They're looking for someone to say, "It's okay for you to trust your instincts."

Maybe all writers need to go through this growth phase where they learn what they can and can't do, what works and what doesn't, based on trial and error. Maybe they have to forge through and "break the rules" only to learn that some "rules" are there for a reason. Call it screenwriting puberty.

If you're meant to do this, if it's in your blood like an incurable disease, you'll find your way. I finally got to a point where I can get a consider on a first draft written in 7 days, just trusting in myself and my ability. I still ask questions, I still bounce my insecurities against the wall to see if they stick. I think we all do - writers always seek the approval for their babies and validation for their ideas. That's just the nature of the beast.

Unreal Spec
I definitely think this is something that all beginning writers need to go through -- and will -- if they are serious about improving their craft.

However, like you said, a lot of these writers don't have any resources outside the internet/internet message boards to help them, so this is their only "school of hard knocks" or "baptism by fire" as it were.

And while many new writers may fool themselves into thinking this (message boards) are enough... It really isn't.

I say this not as a put-down, flame or statement of arrogance.

I thought this exact same thing when I was starting out. The exact same thing.

It wasn't until I had an actual, real-life mentor who showed me how much I DIDN'T know about the craft of screenwriting and who also, more importantly, was willing to work with me because HE saw the potential in that first script I wrote... Which says something in itself because as we know, most of our first works are TERRIBLE... But he saw the "spark", "light" or whatever you want to call it and decided to help me and see where it went because like most writers, he has a love and PASSION for the art of writing (screenwriting) in general."


Tony, I took these example to illustrate an answer to your question. We need this! You know as writers we are the most insecure people on the planet. Always wondering if we’ve got it right. Does our material jump off the page? Does it inspire or move you to emotion?

We all want validation and since it is a common denominator that many do not have other resources to help them along this journey, at least here, or at other screenwriting boards they can get a “feel” as to whether they’re hitting or shooting in the dark.

It helped me to come here. I found out all sorts of things when I started to get serious about this craft. Now, I don’t know if I’m any better, but I do know that my stories hold up as screenplays. Good screenplays? That’s still debateable, but these boards give me at least a sounding board for my ideas and have given much inspiration for new ones. So Tony, to answer your question specifically.

We ask because we want to know others opinions of how our material is being received.

For me, it allows me to know whether to keep going with an idea or rework it into something better.

And Tony, there are a million screenwriting boards other than the two you mentioned. Some good, some stupid and all helpful in some way.

Good thread my man!

[writerly]

myabe it's newbie stuff, vailidation, or just simple -- procrastination.

my question to you is: why does it bug you so much?

Is it because you feel the quality of the posters/boards is ...what? I don't want to put words in your posts, but if I read between the lines you seem to think the boards are rather 'amaturish'... well, welcome to screenwriting on the net! However, there are many paid writers around as well.

No one wants to advocate approaching screenwriting like getting an MBA, but -- on the other hand -- a very good, well-known prof once said to our class that "every single reason you have for doing this -- whatever it is -- they are all valid."

[nickj]

You can't compare screenwriting to other professions where any intelligent person can learn enough to make a living. Compare it to pro sports. Everyone can learn to play, but only a very few can make a living. Learning won't replace talent, no matter how much you want it.

A lack of monetary reward doesn't stop billions of people from playing sports. Plenty of other rewards. Same for writing.

[bottomlesscup]

This will sound defensive, but, frankly, I feel obliged to defend myself. My post has been called “amateurish” and even dumb. I don’t think it was either.

I asked whether a screenwriter would do better to write commercial, “safe” specs or to write their own, personal, less marketable scripts. I think that’s a valid and important question. Unless you are a hobbyist, this is a business as much as an art form. We are writing things we want to sell. It seems wise to me to consider the market when doing so.

People discuss paper weight and brad count endlessly on this site. Why? Because they want to appear professional when submitting scripts. If these are important issues, how can genre and story not be? Certainly any producer of note would consider story more important than what stock the cover is.

Respondents in both this thread and my own seemed to consider the question irrelevant, even naïve. "Obviously, you write what you want." Despite the replies, I don’t believe that this is a foregone conclusion. If Hollywood isn’t looking for “safe,” why do we see so many familiar stories? So many remakes?

Hollywood sticks to what works. That doesn’t seem to be a controversial opinion. Why does one become a fool when one tries to consider this in choice of specs?

This thread seems to treat the question as one that only people trying to get rich with a big sale would ask, but I don’t think it is. Aren’t most people on this site trying to make it as professional screenwriters? I’m not trying to criticize those who considered the question amateur, but aren’t most of them amateurs? Are there amateur-amateurs and professional-amateurs?

What’s wrong with looking at screenwriting more as a career than an art form? Aren’t movies more commerce than art? You can call me a soulless hack, but that’s avoiding the question.

I already write for the love of it, I want to write for a living, too. What’s wrong with that?

[UnrealSpec]

To add to what I posted previously on this thread already...

People ask these questions because they WANT and NEED to feel safe.

For a lot of them -- no matter what age, race, gender -- They are getting into this whole "screenwriting thang" for a number of reasons (some good; some not so good), but the main thing that most of them have in common is...

FEAR.

They are afraid they are going to do something wrong and "not make it".

We've been taught as a society (depending on where you live; I'm talking U.S.) that anyone can do anything they put their heart, mind and soul into... Especially, the arts... But as someone already pointed out, the real determing factor in all of this is TALENT.

Some have it. Some don't. But ALL want it...

And asking questions like these (and I mean the ones you speak of; not this particular one in question) is, in their minds, what brings them closer to having some kind of talent... Or at least being able to dissect what they percieve talent is into something they can master and hopefully REPRODUCE.

Well... It just doesn't work like that... To some degree.

Also, the other underyling fear that they share is that they really DON'T or HAVEN'T have/had that much experience and don't have anything really to fall back on in order to compete with all of the pre-pros, pros and others who are not just start-from-scratch amateurs.

When I say experience I mean life experience, experience commanding the English language (native or not), conveying a real sense of voice, emotion, etc. on the printed page, yaddah, yaddah, yaddah.

Most of these writers are easily identifiable with questions like, "Can you write a script with an unlikeable character as the main character?" because anyone who has lived enough life knows that this is a NO to begin with.

Who in there right mind -- In real life OR in a story -- Wants to spend time with someone they CAN'T stand who has NO redeeming qualities whatsoever?

That's a no brainer.

These writers are also the ones who crank out the "grizzled, burnt-out hitman" or "burt-out-divorced-cop" crime noir movies (ala Tarantino) because not only is it safe... It DOESN'T require them to have actually lived life enough to create REAL characters.

Also, a lot of these same writers are younger ones as well (by definition) who are trying to write as if they've lived 50 years on this planet when they are only 18 or 19. It just does not work that way AND you can tell when they substitute cliches and stereotypes (things we've seen before) in their stories in place of REAL insight or originality.

(There are also older writers who do the same; Age is still a factor is my point in the truly good writers (mid-20s and beyond) and you can tell).

Again... FEAR of failure, FEAR of not having "what it takes" (aka Talent) and FEAR of just not being able to do something you think you have the chops/talent/need/desire/heart/whatever for is the main reaosn, I think, you get a lot of these "dumb" questions being asked.

I know this sounds really harsh... But I don't know how else to say it beause ultimately, in situations like this, no one really knows anything (as it relates to this biz) because you will get two, three maybe even four contradicting pieces of advice... So, where does that leave the new writer then?

Still "afraid" in the strictest since which limits their learning and thereby their growth in their craft. It's a vicious Catch22, but I don't see how one can really "stop it" (if there is even a "solution") given the dynamics of how it is set up (newbie; afraid; question; advice; contradicting advice; newbie confusion; newbie fear; question, etc).

[Taotropics310]

I usually jump in, fangs bared in forum questions like this. I always rant about the futility of chasing the market; of tailoring one's creative identity to suit some imaginary "marketplace", some imaginary "Hollywood suits" that will be pleased and satisfied by your output. I have argued that the whole concept is backwards - that writers are paid to lead executives not the other way around. We are paid to be original, because originality is the soup we're selling.

Yet I empathize deeply with bottomlesscup's very fair statement that he hates his day job and wants very much to be paid to write. And in that context, why is it a bad idea to not try to find out more about the "market" so he can be successful in that goal?

The paradoxical answer is that becoming a professional involves creating a mindset where you don't give a @#%$ whether or not anyone "approves" of what inspires you creatively. A very irritating notion to a pre-professional. "I want to succeed. I love writing and want to make money at it. How do I succeed? What should I write? What genre is most popular? What logline/title will get a studio executive's attention so they will give me money? What is the formula for "success" (as defined by being given a check in exchange for a screenplay)?"

The pros on this board mostly go to the PREMISE OF THESE QUESTIONS as the source of the problems. And it has to do with why you want to be a writer. If your answer is "I don't want to be a writer unless I can be a professional writer" then my response is: you are not now nor will you ever be a writer. I'm not trying to be hurtful or dismissive. It's just the truth. You cannot become great at something - ANYTHING - without the kind of infectious, permanent enthusiasm for the endeavour that persists even in the face of failure and a life of poverty. If you could accept substitute success any other high paying profession - then again, you aren't a writer and you won't be successful pursuing it professionally.

The hardest thing to accept is that the Becoming Great at What You Do part is a precondition to lasting financial success in the "business" of writing. I tell people again and again - the smartest people from the best schools from all over the world come to Los Angeles to try to make it in the movie business. It is harder to break in long term as a screenwriter than it is to get into Johns Hopkins Medical or Harvard Law School, and equal in difficulty to becoming a multi-year player in the NFL or Major League Baseball. It's almost as hard as becoming a congressman or an NBA player.

Yet who in the world has the naivete or chutzpah to announce that they'd prefer to leave their day job to be an NBA player? That they love basketball and have been told by their friends they have talent and do you know anyone that can get me into a tryout camp? Well what good does the tryout camp do if you haven't been playing balll for years and have an inborne, intuitive knack for the game and the kind of incredible chops and conditioning that come from daily practice?

This is what galls me. Why should success in screenwriting come more easily than in these other fields that are often less competitive? Because there is the illusion that there are no dues that need to be paid to make it as a writer, because those dues are less immediately visible than in these other pursuits. We know the steps required to become a Top Gun in the Marine Corps, or a congressman, or an NBA player. We know they involve planning, usually from an early age. We know they require commitment, usually from an early age. We know they require education (whether years on the playground or years in law school).

It is the SAME for screenwriters. There are no shortcuts. Tarantino and the Coens and Spielberg and PT Anderson all either went to film school or self taught themselves in so rigorous and unusual a way that they knew more about filmmaking, narrative, screenwriting, dramatic theory, editing, cinematography etc. at 16 years old then anyone on this board knows today. It's just harder to quantify, and there are fewer signposts on the way. They were not immersed in film and writing primarily because they wanted an INTERESTING JOB. They were immersed because they were SEIZED WITH ENTHUSIASM. They would have paid other people for the privilege of making movies. The last thing on their minds was what/whether they would be paid for it. Their interest was in the process itself, the game itself. The financial or professional success was an afterthought. "how do i become great" was the primary focus.


It's my own personal litmus test for a pre-professional. Are they more interested in their story, in rewriting, in the techniques of their most beloved genres, in the state of movies in general, in the lives and beliefs of other writers and directors? Or are they more interested in who sold what in Variety and which seminar to take and will I give their script to my agent? All of us are somewhere on the continuum. The success stories that I know of are far more on the former side of the continuum.

more later

[bottomlesscup]

Excellent post, Tao. It was a sobering thing to read upon getting up at 4:30 to go to my aforementioned day job. I've got a response cooking, but the steamwhistle blows and it will have to wait.

[UnrealSpec]

Good post, Tao...

BUT what you are doing is exactly what you claim is the problem:

You are saying that you must want to do this beyond getting paid (in the face of absolute failure and rejection) as that is what truly sets a dedicated writer aside from all the wannabes who are in this for the "wrong" reasons (just in it to get paid)...

But you are also, honestly, not acknowledging that this is one of THE most complex, subjective and sometimes mind boggling industries on the face of the Earth to where one MUST be thinking about some of the more commercial aspects if they truly want to be a professional working IN this particular business...

And it's only getting MORE COMPLICATED and commercial with all of the changes going on (social; technological; etc.) and I think considering this IS just as important as being creative and not giving a damn about what some exec wants or what others say will sell or not.

I do.

Call me a pragmatic, but to just say "throw caution to the wind" and rely on your "passion" for writing/film making is NOT enough in my opinion these days.

You said it yourself.

You've got tons of film school grads coming to HW every year who supposedly have a degree and background that sets them apart from everyone else in terms of their "passion" for making films... And yet only a handful of them make it and go on to be long term, viable forces in the biz (you didn't say that, but we know this statistic to be true).

These people have (had) the same passion and "fire" -- even more so -- As the ones whom you describe as the so-called "true" filmmakers/writers who wanted to be in this business... But why did (do) most of them fail?

Chutzpah, gall, passion, fire, gut-instinct, etc. can only get you so far.

Instinct, and I am sorry to say, even genuine talent can only get you so far if you don't have the connections and just plain good old LUCK on your side in a lot of cases.

I know you said it is different for everyone (their level of commitment and where they fall on the "reasons for doing it" spectrum)...

But most of us with respect to creative, artistic and other intangible goals aside... WANT TO BE PAID to do this for a living and want this to be a long term career if possible.

That IS one motivating factor and to completely ignore it is, in my opinion, not realistic and almost foolish on you or anyone else's part.

Why does wanting to be paid to do what we love all of a sudden make aspiring creative types "bad" or not as passionate as all the struggling artists out there who will never be paid even though they have the talent, gall et al. to do so?

Is it because writing and film making are considered "arts" and therefore, MUST be in opposition with the establishment and money men?

I don't get this.

And to me, I see this as a MAJOR cop-out and excuse as to why a lot of aspiring writers and film makers just will not bite the bullet and learn WHY they aren't getting any real response from agents, producers, etc... Because if they took the time to really look at their work, chances are, 90% it is NOT up to PROFESSIONAL LEVEL STANDARDS...

Yet, because it is "the arts" this rule isn't supposed to apply????

I am just baffled by this.

It is the same thing for any profession, sport, etc. where one is paid to perform.

If a kid can't dribble the ball down court, past the defensive line and make three point shots... Why SHOULD any pro team hire that kid and pay him/her millions of dollars a year?

It isn't so much balancing what we want to write with what is commercial -- And I agree, a writers number one strength IS his or her creativity and THEY are the ones whom should be dictating market trends (if there is such a thing)...

But this is another problem that I brought up in a separate thread a while back:

Mainstream Hollywood really ISN'T that creative -- BY CHOICE -- And when something truly creative comes along, they are often scared by it because they don't know if it is commercially viable, hence, 90% of the time, the writer's truly creative efforts are passed over in favor of a more familiar and cliched effort by an equally capable writer (and I'm talking about pre-pros breaking in; not pro level so much).

This sounds like I am making excuses now... But I'm really not.

The issue I am addressing and the issue you are addressing are two completely different things -- And my issue can actually be worked around in various ways if you really think about it.

The thing you are asserting or addressing is that only a certain few with so-called "inherent ability" can and should make it over others who don't fit into that same mold and again, I think that is dangerous for you (in general) to make such a statement because while not everyone can be Spielberg or Francis Coppola...

Spielberg, Coppola and their colleagues all share something with those of us whom will never make and to just arbitrarily say that talent, gall et al. is what will get you there over concerns of the film industry as a business is just wrong in my book as it is a combination of factors that go into why certain people are a success and why others fail.

[Boobsie Malone]

"It's my own personal litmus test for a pre-professional. Are they more interested in their story, in rewriting, in the techniques of their most beloved genres, in the state of movies in general, in the lives and beliefs of other writers and directors? Or are they more interested in who sold what in Variety and which seminar to take and will I give their script to my agent?" -- Tao

I think it's poosible to embody both of these types of writers. The two have to somehow meld.

Writing a script is an art.

I am by no means a professional. But I write. And write. And write. I take courses at UCLA. I read as many scripts as I possibly can, to see how people have crafted a story, how they've set it up, how they conclude it. How they interweave a and b stories throughout. I discuss storylines with people I respect, always trying to learn how to craft my scripts a little better. I have tiers of readers from spell-checkers to story people. I'm always trying to learn to be a better writer.

Screenwriting is a business.

I also go to a lot of wga seminars. I read Hollywood Reporter and Variety. I like seeing what projects different writers are working on which shows different writers are moving on to. Whose shows are being renewed. Whose have been cancelled. I read about all the pilots out there. Who's doing what. Who's been hired on what. I keep in touch with those writers I respect. And don't hesitate to ask for business advice from those who have been on the inside for a while.

I would think a writer should be able to write extremely well (which takes practice), but that a screenwriter has to both have business savvy and the ability to write well.

Of course, this is just the opinion of one who's only on the periphery...

[Vigorish9]

this is a great topic. another nut shell for ya. if you don't sacrafice to become a screenwriter you will never become one. that's just how it is.

if you're not reading more than boobsie, vig, dues, tonyrob, bligh, writeman turnaround, revision, sc11, ham etc, and on and on, you're not making it.

we're fighting it out against each other and the tao's, leo's, martells, and people we don't even know.

I do more than any of you fukkers in my minds eye, and the only thing i can hang my hat on at the end of the day is that i'm going to make it. i'm going to make it because instead of going out to that club, doing god knows what - with god knows who. i'm tweaking my ancillary character from albania who has a cadence about him i haven't yet nailed, but when i do this mother ****ker will be the zen of all secondary characters.

for instance i have 85 scripts within five feet of me at this very moment, 21 grans house of sand and fog, big fish, cold mountain, last sam, dark blue, sea biscuit, lotr, red dragon, fraility, rosemarys baby, vertigo, ameerican psycho, sixth sense, mytic river, love serenade, the beautiful and the damned, the woings of the dove, all about eve, four weddings, silence of the lambs, nashiville, full monty, spanish prisioner, midnigh cowboy, the sweet thereafter, one crash, three accidents, training day, the wild bunch, boiler room, etc.. .. from scenario magazine.

i read twenty of these already. the only person you gotta look in the mirror when you aren't a success is yourself and the common thread with most everybody i've ever met, people have a sense of entitlement. that is horseshaite.

vig

[Unca Leo]

I'm not even sure this thread is about the same thing as when it began, but here goes.

There's something I've said to people when they've brought up the issues along the lines of what is being discussed here: You can have a sale, or you can have a career. The former does not guarantee the latter.

What that means to me, and from my own personal experience, is that 'making it' in this business is as much a function of mindset as it is talent. If you approach this business thinking of a 'sale' as the ticket to breaking in, I'm not sure you have what it takes to make it in the long run. If you approach it asking yourself if what you are putting on the page is something that will impact people so they remember you, not the material, then you may have what it takes.

Your words matter, but only for a transitory moment while they are being digested. What lasts is people's belief that you can summon whatever magic you posess for the next project.

[Ravenlocks01]

Writing your heart or writing what moves you or however one wants to put it... I don't think that means writing a rambling, unstructured script where nothing much happens to a bunch of one-dimensional characters whom we couldn't care less about. That may be cathartic, yes, but it belongs in the desk drawer.

If one's ultimate goal is to make oneself heard, then that means writing something that will interest not only you but also the people you want to hear you. I see absolutely no reason why one can't be passionately interested in what H'wood chooses to call a high-concept premise, and by that I mean one with a hook, with dramatic irony, one that makes other people go, "Wow, I've gotta read that when you finish" or "Wow, I wish I'd thought of that" or even "Wow, I'm sooo stealing that!" As far as I'm concerned, high concept is just the industry's way of saying "interesting to other people."

Of course, I'm not a pro, so take that however you will. But I do think the creative vs. commercial debate can be misleading. If you have something to say, you can say it in a way that will interest other people as well as yourself, and if you do, then with a modicum of luck and perseverance you will get noticed and may eventually get paid for it.

[greyghost]

I'm not entitled to success as a screenwriter but I am entitled to be true to my own heart.

Since we're all here for a limited engagement, I'd say money is not the only determinant for our creative work.

When I see the demeaning dismissal of those who write from the heart as "hobbyists" instead of "real professionals," I have to laugh.

Many of the most lasting works mankind has ever created were born of personal passion without regard to payoff.

Yes, those of us who don't write purely to chase the market for a quick payoff are not in the same league as many journeyman Hollywood screenwriters....

Thank God!

[unwell36]

Well said, greyghost. :)

[Taotropics310]

thank you greyghost for saying in one sentence what I was trying to say in about nine paragraphs.

[TonyRob]

Weird. I always think of a hobbyist(/tourist) as someone who tries to chase the big spec sale and a "real professional" as someone who writes from the heart.

[dclary]

For me. "real professional" is the one who actually gets paid for this @#%$.

[TonyRob]

Eventually, yes.

[Hamboogul]

Initially, I wanted to be the next Matt and Ben. But during the process of becoming a more serious writer, I wanted to tell stories about my characters who have become my children, my friends, my whatever.

Unlike most others here, I have also made a huge financial investment to pursue this ($60K for a token MFA degree from a reputable film program). So I can't be all noble and say that this is a passionate pursuit regardless of money. I want to make it as a writer because I enjoy writing. But I also want to make it as a successful writer because I want to take care of myself and my family.

[Geevie]

I guess I don't understand the debate of writing from your heart and writing for a sale, because I think its entirely possible to do both.

I want to write movies. That means the stories that excite me enough to sit down and write fade in are the movies I'd pay $8 to see and then $20 to own. My theory is that you are your own first audience so you have to entertain yourself first. I don't think this is a selfish outlook - I think if you don't throw your heart into what you write it will show on every single page you churn out.

Some of us have more commercial taste than others, but there is an audience for every type of movie. So to thine own self be true. Work on writing a great story and the sale will take care of itself.

Yes, I want to make money at this. Why? Because that way I won't have to worry about doing a 9-5 which will take me away from what I really want to do, and that's write full time. Would I like to make a lot of money doing this? Well, duh. It's tough to have caviar taste on a Hamburger Helper budget. :b

But that doesn't mean I went into this chasing money. I went into this chasing stories and that's where I continue to thrive. If the money comes, it will be incidental to the sheer joy I get from the creative process.

I can't think of anything else I'd rather do. Ever.

[SebsWrtrDad]

I don't know why, but parts of this thread kinda leaves a bad taste in my mouth -- it feels like some people telling the beginners here 'you can't ask questions we think are dumb'. Maybe not a totally accurate perception, I'll admit, but it's how a lot of it reads.

Geevie
You absolutely can do both. Don't let anyone here or anywhere else tell you different. YOu can write with passion and commercially. Is anyone here really debating that though? I think some people are just pointing out that a lot of people (in general) seem to think there is a magic formula to a sale. And there isn't.

TonyRob
Since you asked (I think):
I write because I love to write - it's as simple as that. Reality is, I may never sell anything, though I believe I will and that's a goal of mine, in the hopes that I can write for a living and support my family, or at least help with the bills. As someone else stated, what more could you ask for than to be paid to do what you love and yearn to do?

But sale or not - I'll always write.

:D

[sc111]

Hmmm. It seems like the phrase, 'writing from the heart,' has become code for: NON-commercial script. I don't think that's accurate. Many 'written from the heart' films have become
commercially successful.

Also, the idea that one can 'chase the market' is inaccurate
because (1) the market, in any business arena, doesn't usually know exactly what it wants until it SEES it and (2) any film optioned today will probably not be in the can for another two-plus years (or more) and by then the 'market' has a new mindset.

A good example, The Unforgiven - - the script was turned down at first because, according to HW execs, the "market" (i.e. we, the unwashed film-going masses) didn't like westerns anymore. But Clint Eastwood made it anyway and, surprise, the market liked it. Suddenly studios made westerns again.

As a result, a more accurate phrase for the spec writer would be: 'Chase the producers and studio execs,' because they are your first 'market' when writing an original screenply, no? And sometimes, heck, let's say often, these guys can't accurately predict what what the end-user market (filmgoer) wants any more than we can.

So we're back to square one and I say write all scripts from the heart. If you're a good writer, you can write a high-concept script with a commercial hook from your heart, too.

And you should. Because, what if your non-commercial script landed you an assignment that had a commercial hook? What then-- would you schlock it together because it wasn't a highly personal story? No. You would do your best, from the heart. Because you would want more assignments.

:)

[CT in ATL]

I couldn't disagree with you more. Okay, yeah, writing "the big spec sale" appears to be a lotto mentality. But I don't think you're an ameteur because you'd like to see your imagined people and plots made into a film...vs. gaining a writing assignment for a producer's vision - or worse: re-writing your fellow scribes, who did nothing to deserve that.

What a funny business we knowingly venture into, where the writer isn't sole authority on the world she created - she is routinely removed from her own project because the powers-that-be have decided she "isn't right for" her own project. In theatre, they have to check with the playwright before changing lines. Book authors are free to dismiss banal editing notes (not always, and maybe not first-timers, but you're the sole author listed and don't need a guild to determine writing credits) - and you don't have other people mucking up your work. Newspaper and magazine columnists and article writers have a lot more carte blanche. So why would we do this, you ask?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$

I don't think it's a sign of an amateur to want to be paid a hell of a lot of money for your first sale, especially if we are so disrespected within the industry. If I optioned a spec script (or was given a writing assignment), then and only then could I afford to move to the West Coast. None of the other above careers would pay me enough to move to where their "action" and my new career is. None of them.

That's only part of it, for me, anyway. I don't "think up" dialogue...I see it, hear it. When I'm really cooking, I merely take dictation from my characters in any given scene. And, ultimately, I'd like to direct my work. My "fantasy Hollywood career" has me - not re-writing my friends; not pitching all over town, begging for any assignment - but, rather, writing and selling maybe one spec every couple of years or so and being permitted to direct it. So to me, spec work isn't just about the money to continue my career, but it's also about writing and making the kind of movies I'd like to. (I do realize that more than likely, that won't be it. But the $ I make re-writing and writing other people's visions would likely afford a much better living than I would make on any of the other writing scenarios.)

Finally, for every example of a hugely successful screenwriter/director who went to film school and studied for *years-and-years* to perfect his/her craft, there might be nearly as many individuals who wrote scripts on a lark, because they just decided to try it and became...successful. With multiple movies made of their work! Or maybe they self-taught themselves screenwriting and wrote one spec that, through connections, it sold. It happens. No, it's not the norm. But it happens.

Some of you have hit on why writers write - the passion, the "need" to write, even if you don't get paid for it.

I would just rather write for a living than the other "living" jobs I tend to have, which aren't pleasurable. And, honestly, novel writing might be as much - or more fun - as screenwriting. But not nearly as lucrative. And it wouldn't allow me to direct my own work. So my dream's two-pronged.

Basically, I just bristle at the notion that wanting to sell a spec and make exceptional money long-term (not short term, one $1 million sale) would prohibit someone from having the talent and the fortitude to make it, simply because they have financial goals in mind.

And these questions? I asked a rather "dumb" one a couple days ago about when to CAP. I've got all the books, believe me. I read and re-read them. But things change and certain things go into and out of style rapidly. I learned about an extra space that's now appearing "in vogue" currently from posts right here. So, if nothing else, until some brand new screenwriting book comes out, this is the place to ask things.

[bottomlesscup]

For the record, these are the answers I was looking for when I posted my original question. Maybe it wasn't such a dumb question after all...

[TonyRob]

You see how I got your back, bottomlesscup? You see? :D

[sc111]

Bottomless,

It wasn't a dumb question. And you may ask it again because you may get a response like I did from a manager on my 'from the heart' script last year:

"Good writing. But send me something more commercial."

So I did, just last week. And I wrote it from the heart, I even put a short scene from my own marriage counseling experience in it (because it was funny). Hey, how more personal can you get? (Gee, I hope my ex-husband doesn't get miffed).

And the log for this script has had the most requests from blind queries. Because it's more commercial than my last one. That's the reality of this business.

So I figure maybe I can get some heat on the commercial one and then I can say, 'How about this other one? It's not as commercial but . . . ' Who knows, right?

I stick with my previous post - - you can have a high-concept hook in your script and still write it well, with layers of texture and good character development.

"Commercial" means it sells well and it's profitable for the investors. My Big Fat Greek Wedding sold a lot of tickets yet it wasn't high-concept.

"Commercial" also means that maybe you skew the lead characters to catch the interest of A-list actors.

There's no shame in doing this. Let's face it, even the Sistine Chapel was a commercial gig for Michelangelo. And no one ever accused him of being less than a purist or a sell-out.

But I guarantee you the Pope, who was paying him mucho lire, still added his bit, 'Hey, Michelangelo! More blue, over there.'

What I think Tony was originally talking about is asking permission from website posters to write what you want to write. Or, asking 'cart-before-the-horse' questions like 'How much can I get on an option,' before finishing even one script.

Write well, the other details will sort themselves out.

:)

[Cyfress]

IMO, 'writing from the heart' does not make you a good writer. Somewhere right now, some hack is sitting down to a bad script that he/she thinks is great because it's 'from the heart'. Of course the great writers wrote from their hearts, and they're great communicators, you see what they see. They knew how to establish, build, and conflict a story. Seasoned Craftsman.

Not many can do this well for a reason, and it's not for their lack of heart.

[Geevie]

Craftmanship is a given. Those who "write from the heart" care enough about their stories to do it properly.

Those that burn to write, especially for a living, are constantly learning, honing and developing their skill, sculpting their talent and pressing ahead. That includes asking questions.

They love what they do, they live for their creation and continually throw every ounce of themselves into what they do.

To me this is what defines a writer from one who writes.

You can have someone create a script by formula, hitting all the beats, meeting the criteria and STILL wind up with cardboard cut out crap.

Leave the heart in, people. No matter what it is you write.

[sc111]

CT/ATL, RE: your post.

The reason why the screenwriter (unlike the novelist) is NOT, as you wrote: "the sole authority on the world she created" is because . . .

the final "World" of the film is created by the director, actors,
cinematographer, art director, set designers, stylists, costume designers, lighting pros and so on and so on.

A film is a collaborative effort and, even before those folks listed above get involved, you also have to collaborate with the creative execs, the producers, studio execs, and even your agent and manager will add their two cents.

A screenwriter has to be a team player- - this doesn't mean you roll over and play dead. But it does mean that you have to see the value in all the other players' talents as you expect them to see the value in your talents.

Example: I posted a logline, only 35 words, and the poster we call CE (who is a pro at a major talent agency) immediately spotted possible problems with my plot. It was amazing. He intuited the pitfalls of my story and suggested how to avoid them. All on 35 words. For me to disregard his talent for what he does because I am 'the sole authority on the world I created' is just plain silly. For me to disregard the feedback I get from other screenwriters for the same 'sole authority' reason is also silly.

Again, I don't say roll over and play dead, defend the core integrity of your story, but if other people have an idea on how you can make that story a more compelling, sellable film, I say listen carefully.

I don't know. Maybe my background as a ad agency copywriter has predisposed me to a collaborative mindset. But all this navel-gazing commentary about artistic integrity seems a bit too much.

As a copywriter, I pimp out my writing skills. It's a fact. Any artist or writer who offers their talent for a commercial endeavor is pimping out their talent. Including screenwriters.

And I tell you, when I get a big fat check after pimping out my concepts and writing to help a commercial client MAKE MONEY, I feel A-Ok.

But it's always a collaborative effort.

When I develop a concept for a print ad, TV or radio spot, sure, I have a distinct 'vision' of how it should look or sound. However, I have to work with an art director who also has ideas on how the ad should look on the page. And I work with the video pros who shoot and edit a TV spot and have their own set of talents. And then I work with the actors who have their own ideas on how a line of dialog could be delivered. And you know what? The end product is always a more vivid, compelling version of what I originally conceived when I sat down to write BECAUSE the collaborative efforts of all these talented people enhanced it.

Sure, I shout a resounding 'No!' to an art director who tells me to change a headline because he wants to make the photo bigger. And he shouts back and we argue, then we both compromise a bit. That's the process. And it's fun. Even better, I get the check. There's nothing better than getting paid for doing something you enjoy doing even when no one is paying you.

And I hope, I hope, I hope, I get the opportunity to do it in the film industry, too.

If creative collaboration makes you uncomfortable, then maybe the somewhat more solitary nature of novel writing is the way to go.

I'll get off my soapbox, now.

:)

[CT in ATL]

I agree with everything you said. Did I imply that I don't think filmmaking is a collaborative process? Ideally, it is and I applaud that...would like to be a big part of that.

But the only problem is that too many screenwriters are outsted from their own projects way too early in the process. THAT is what sucks. To direct and/or produce what I write is the only way I can see to be permitted into the collaboration that is A Film. Unfortunately, most working screenwriters are re-written and removed entirely from a film, so they never get the chance to collaborate.

I've mentioned this here before - directors are not replaced mid-movie, nor are producers. Why writers before the thing even gets off the ground? Of all the things the WGA negotiates, I think it is this treatment of writers that needs to be addressed. I wonder if it's come up and either writers just accept it's the nature of the beast or the guild is powerless to change the system.

But in any event, we agree about "pimping" out our talents and being paid well for them. I think writing is an art, but screenwriting is a skill.

[KWVillen]

The reason why the screenwriter (unlike the novelist) is NOT, as you wrote: "the sole authority on the world she created" is because . . .

Another writer is going to rewrite your writing anyway, write?

KW

[TonyRob]

CT -

I think there's a HUGE difference between chasing a big spec sale and wanting to be paid well for your writing (including your specs); between chasing a big spec sale and wanting to see your vision on the screen/wanting respect as a screenwriter/wanting to be a part of the creative process throughout the production/etc. .

The former is what I was calling a hobbyist/tourist mentality. The latter is definitely what I would call a professional mentality.

The difference lies in how you approach writing your specs.

[nickj]

I think your distinctions are wrong, Tony. Most hobbists, should they luck into getting a script produced, would love to be involved in the filmmaking process, and get all that respect nonsense as well -- a pipe dream to be sure, but that's what makes it a hobby.

What makes a screenwriter a professional is not an artistic drive but a business drive -- a professional is willing to pimp, push, shmooze, whatever it takes to get a writing gig.

[TonyRob]

Maybe it's my use of the term "hobbyist" that's throwing people off. In the context of this thread, I'm using it as if it were synonymous with the term "tourist". I am not, however, the first person on DD to define a "hobbyist" screenwriter as someone who chases the spec sale and nothing more. Someone did it in another thread (in a positive way, too), and I was taking my cue from them. They were defining a hobbyist as someone who doesn't have the time to pursue screenwriting professionally/as a career, who doesn't have the time to spend endless hours perfecting their craft and who would rather "follow the rules" in order to supposedly assure themselves a shorter road to a big spec sale.

Since most others don't define hobbyist that way, however, I hereby withdraw the term "hobbyist" and replace it with "tourist".

[CT in ATL]

Again, Tony, chasing the spec sale or any and all spec sales? I think that is where we're getting hung up.

To make just one - and only one - spec sale for, say $1 million is what I'd call "The" spec sale. One sale. For one big payoff so you can sit back and do nothing for the rest of your life, living off your one big paycheck (hopefully, invested). You're right, that's a hobbyist/tourist.

But do you see people on this board talking about doing that? I don't.

I see people trying to sell multiple spec scripts (maybe one at a time) and using the spec sale as a viable method of getting work, just like a re-write assignment or a first-time writing of something.

[SebsWrtrDad]

I think TonyRob is talking about people who approach writing with an 'wouldn't it be a kick if I made a million bucks with a script' attitude. More along the lines of someone just wishing to win a lotto - rather than looking to write as a career, or even build a career.

At least that's my read on it.....:D

[Vigorish9]

people always want validation. if the world consists of 99% moron and 1% sharpie, then it is a fore gone conclusion that the 99% are going to ask for validation from the 1%.

considering i'm in that 1% i'd like to ask god how my work is progressing. so tao, how am i doing?
vig

[writerly]

if all you people want to be screenwriters, you need to learn to be concise.
cut
down
the
description.
geesh!
those are some long posts!
okay, that's just the wine talking, sorry.
what was this thread about?

[Taotropics310]

What we are seeing here is indisuptable proof that a sizable majority of Pre-Pros still stick doggedly to the "day trader" mentality when it comes to pursuing vocation as a screenwriter.

The beliefs can be summarized as follows:

-An expensive spec sale is as likely to come from a hobbyist, someone who wrote a screenplay on a "lark" without much thought or training as it is to come from someone who has spent all that boring time actually learning how to write. So why bother learning to write? I'm as likely to to pick the right stock as the next guy.

-one must split one's time and attention equally between writing and "schmoozing" or "marketing" in order to get jobs. Most pros have their careers as a result of a connection they had, the ability to network,
the parties they went to. Hollywood is all about who you know. Talent and craftsmanship are helpful and important, but decidedly secondary to "getting access".

-The primary reason for writing screenplays is to make a large amount of money. Since that is the primary goal, the presumed shortcut is to cater to the buyer's stated or presumed desire for a certain kind of material. If you "write from your heart" it will be indulgent or boring, and studios don't want that. The studio is the arbiter of what is quality, because what is quality is whatever is sold for a lot of money. Therefore - write with your left brain - choose like an accountant from a familiar list of recent, pre-validated ideas and deliver "craftsmanship". The studios know what they want, so the goal is to try to read their minds, ask them, look at other things that have sold, and try to duplicate this "winning formula" in the conception and execution of your product.

Let's look closely at these fallacies and let me further defend what I call the "Magic Script" concept.

Okay, well no one keeps empirical data on this kind of thing. it's just conjecture. Let's look at a couple facts.

-The WGA contains about 11,000 members. 75 percent of those members are unemployed at any given time. It is estimated that no more than 150-200 individuals earned more than 500,000 last year as screenwriters. There are 50,000 screenplays registered with the WGA every year. How many first time six figure sales were listed in Variety thus far this year? My guess is less than ten. Ten of the 25,000 (first six months) sold for six figures. Perhaps three of the ten sellers will ever have a second sale and ensuing careers. Almost every other sale out there is made by established writers - screenwriters that have been hired multiple times for jobs, have been produced, are very successful novelists or non-fiction authors, or otherwise accomplished and established, proven WRITERS.

What distinguishes the ten from the other 25000? Does anyone out there really believe that it's "connections"? Do you know how many WGA members I know that are connected, know lots of executives and producers and still can't get hired? That some of the most distinguished and extraordinary playwrights, household names in university drama proograms, Pulitzer and Tony winners, can't get hired onto a sitcom staff (often because they've lost their "window of heat" and are determined to not be viable for whatever reason)? Established celebrity actors, directors, musicians that want to set up their writing projects that can't get them set up? The best and the brightest from the best schools who have easy alumni access when they move to L.A. to agents, producers and executives that can't get staffed on a show? The problem is that for whatever reason, the people above don't have the Magic Script.

Access is NOT THE ISSUE. If you live in Los Angeles, you have enough access. If you know two people in the business, you have enough access. Jon Lesher told me the story of how he found Harmony Korine. Harmony sent the script for "Kids" unsolicited to UTA. Not even addressed to anyone, just "UTA". The slush pile in Lesher's office was going to be tossed as usual. He was in on a Saturday for some reason and he sat in the chair on the other side of his office. He doesn't EVER REMEMBER having done this before - but he randomly selected a script or two from the slush pile and glanced at the first couple pages. One of the scripts was "Kids". He called Harmony and signed him.

The notion that getting The Big Read is the main stumbling block to success is, with respect, the most outrageous and most prevalent misconception on this board. Guys, I have gotten hundreds and hundreds of Big Reads on pre-validated work coming into studios and stars highly recommended with big producers, actors etc. already attached - and do you know what happens most of the time?

THEY PASS.

It's real simple - the work is read by the star or the studio and they say no. No reason. No drama. Just no. Because they see every major script written in Hollywood first. Every, every, every damn thing. My script is sandwiched between Zaillian's, Scott Frank's, Charlie kaufman's, and David Benioff's latest and they all want this studio or star as badly as I do. And one of those scripts is probably more enticing than mine. Or maybe they all get passed on. Russell Crowe only says yes twice a year. He probably reads a hundred or more scripts.

This has been my experience of the Big Read.

EXCEPT

on a couple special scripts I have, that I put every drop of blood and sweat and talent and love that I have into - that I know in my heart are as good as anything else out there. These are my Magic Scripts. Represent only 2 of the 13 or so screenplays I've written. And many of the others I've written are very, very good - just not Magic. The reaction is pretty much always the same. The Magic Scripts still get passed on by big players for different reasons (One 25 million dollar star said he would have done it five years earlier in his career), but always generate something positive for me everywhere they are read. They have made my entire career. They created all my talent, studio and producer relationships. They got me all my jobs. And the extreme positive responses those scripts generated started from the first moment I finished them (naturally after multiple drafts with intense critical feedback on each one). I could have thrown either of those two scripts on the street and gotten an agent or manager from someone picking them up. Just as I could have been set up at a luncheon with Spielberg, Eisner, Rupert Murdoch, Julia Roberts, Tom Hanks and Joe Roth with them each having read one of my other eleven scripts with close and generous care - and had nothing meaningful come of it.

The Big Read is fetishized because it is difficult to get and seems to be "just one step away" to The Big Yes or The Big Sale. It is not, in fact. You are just as far away from the Big Sale before the Big Read If you have a Magic Script you will know beforehand if the sale is coming. You will know as soon as you start getting reads. Because the reaction will be uniformly electric. Every high level pro on this board has had this same experience. it's the Script That Can Do No Wrong. And then it's like owning a small start-up that suddenly makes a deal with Microsoft. You don't have to do ANYTHING. You just randomly hear days later "oh by the way, CAA is going crazy, there's pushing Billy Bob Thornton and Philip Noyce, but we're saying no...we need to see what else develops". You watch the "marketing" process just go off around you as a separate organic, insane event that you aren't even a a part of anymore. And it can happen whether you have an agent or not. The guy that wrote "Boondock Saints" owned a bar and chatted with some customer about his script and showed him his handwritten pages. Happened to be an assistant at Miramax. A week later Harvey Weinstein was sitting across from him offering to buy his bar if he would sell him the rights to the movie. His pages were Magic.

The Magic Script phenomenon, by the way, is not confined to my preferred genres. "Groundhog Day" was a Magic Script. So was "Die Hard". "Sixth Sense". "Alexander". "the Last Samurai". Horror, super high concept comedy, action, science fiction - genre doesn't matter, because the Magic supersedes the genre. It also supersedes what the studio thinks they want. It could be a Western, and westerns could be dead - but the Magic Script could suddenly put you first on the list to adapt a cop movie for Michael Mann. Or the studio could just say "@#%$ it, let's make this western, it's too good not to make."

Let me say this clearly: of course there are many magnificent, beautifully written, universally recognized HIGH CONCEPT scripts. There are just more BADLY WRITTEN high concept scripts IMO then there are badly written scripts where a writer is making an honest effort to find their voice, because even if their script is indulgent or solipsistic, at least it isn't generic and chasing the market. The first writer has a slightly better chance than the second. Because the Magic Script must be original. Originality is the prime ingredient. It becomes much tougher to find the potion if you are imitating someone. I believe in genre films, I believe in Big Idea films (I loved Bruce Almighty), and they are more desirable to studios. But trying to force one is to tempt all of our desire to pander to the market - which is a recipe for disaster the likely refuge of those who want a shortcut. So the rule of thumb is go for anything that you love. If you're first in line to see "The Ring" then horror is absolutely the genre you should be writing in. But be smart. Be the Zen Master of your genre. Don't try to learn five instruments at the same time and expect to get session work. Become the expert at one. The one you love the most. So when I say "follow your heart" - to dclary (shudder) that means write something genre-similar to Phantom Menacce or Lord of the Rings - even though i would not ever write something like that.

I would prefer each of you chase that experience instead of the occasional low price concept sale of an average script because it is worth the work and worth waiting for. Ask Ry. Or your other favorite pro here. Ask two acquaintances of mine who schmoozed and bullshitted and lucked their way into a 250000 dollar mediocre high concept "spec monkey" sale. Two years later their money was spent and they never worked again and they went back to their day jobs. OUCH.

The Magic Script means more than a living, it means a career. It means more than a development deal it means getting movies made. It's harder - but isn't anything really great worth working hard for? I have a private opinion of the kind of traits possessed by people I know who have had the Magic Script experience.

People who I know (maybe 15) that have had this experience are probably:

-very smart and very well educated and well read, either in a noted BFA or Masters program (NYU, USC, UCLA etc.) or by an extreme self-taught regimen that deeply involves reading fiction and drama and being conversant and knowledgable about dramatic theory

-usually one of the funnier or more charismatic people at any party they are at.

-have an EXTREMELY refined sense of popular culture, are movie junkies, music junkies, politics junkies, insatiable readers of current events, and/or have their pulse on the zeitgeist. Tarantino is an example of this type.

-are intensely passionate about movies. That means they see a lot of them. That means they have seen many rare, foreign, B-movie, off-the beaten path movies. Often they have specialty areas of interest like horror novels, comic books, French New Wave, etc. They have strong opinions about what they like and what they don't like. They get red and sputter when they argue about movies they love or don't love.

-they simply don't talk that much or think that much about their careers. They have the quiet confidence that the career will follow the passion. they simply assume they will be writing or making movies or TV if they aren't already. They enjoy dishing and gossiping about the business and people in it, but this is a decidedly secondary topic to their Heroin Topic: art, movies, pop culture, politics, the world they live in, the culture they inhabit.

Most importantly:

THEY WERE LIKE THIS BEFORE THEY SOLD A GODDAM THING. They were like that when they were as pre-professional as you can get. And they didn't get that rattled when they transitioned into having careers. The things you have to metabolize, learn and get interested in are too involving to leave much brain space for mechanized marketing. Spend the time filling the well, become more well rounded, reading, learning, feeding your inner life, your interests, your special voice.

Scott Frank once said to me: "When I'm at a seminar, and someone comes up to me and says 'please read a script I have a western, a romance, a sci-fi and a drama and they're all good. which genre do you like best?" I know to excuse myself. When someone comes up to me and says "Scott, I've been working on this same thirty pages for about five years and it isn't right yet. Could you take a look at them?" - then I get interested".

Scott was indirectly referring to the Magic Script syndrome. He saw the second person was serious enough and committed enough that maybe his thirty pages was the anguished beginning of a Magic Script. He saw the first person didn't take their mastery of genre seriously, and was more a sincere but mechanized marketer and glory hunter than a true artist or writer.

Be a writer. Write a Magic Script and prosper.

[Mike Samonek]

Bravo, Mr. Wheeler.

Very, very well said.

[Unca Leo]

Tao, I agree with almost all of what you said, but I must question your use of the term 'solipsistic'.

[yzzbvx]

tao, in the time you wrote that, you could have written another magic screenplay.

:lol

[noh1]

THAT was grand, Tao.

[TonyRob]

That POST was Magic, bro. Seriously. You are an inspiration. Thank you.

[Salazkin]

Thanks for the advice, Tao. Spoken like a true storyteller -- no dogma, no breast-beating, no polemics -- just straightforward examples and observations of someone who's clearly been there.

[le kilt]

great stuff, tao.

[freebaser14]

Thank you Tao!

[Late4ttime]

Thank you Tao for the inspiration to strive for greatness.

[Pandoraisme]

Consider this a standing ovation, Tao. Thank you for the inspiration to remain true to my goals as a writer. :)

[Writer1]

A wonderful post, Tao...there's much we can all learn from what you've written.

One thing I'd like to comment on...

So the rule of thumb is go for anything that you love. If you're first in line to see "The Ring" then horror is absolutely the genre you should be writing in. But be smart. Be the Zen Master of your genre. Don't try to learn five instruments at the same time and expect to get session work. Become the expert at one. The one you love the most.

Of the 8 scripts I've completed, 5 are comedies, 1 drama, 1 horror, and the latest is historical fiction. Comedy is my prefered genre...but in the other 3 scripts, comic elements are always present.

The historical fiction(Passage to Fortune...1st 6 pages posted on the site...shameless plug for a read...smiles) is, I believe, my strongest work to date. Sure, I consider myself a comedy writer, but because of the nature of the business, I felt it was in my interests to develop other types of material.

A prodco called saying they loved a comedy script...then asked if I'd written a horror script? I had, so I sent it to them. They said it was entertaining, but not for them...and could I send them whatever I've written...it didn't matter to them what genre. They wanted to see our "range".

My point is...the nature of this business, as I understand it, is that most writers will never see an original spec purchased or produced...and that MOST of the work is on assignments.

That being the case, although comedy is my preferred flavor, isn't it best for unproduced writers to try different genres in an attempt to discover their "true" voice and to make themselves more available for different types of projects?

[v i o l e n t c a s e s]

i think he already answered your question in his post, writer1.

[SebsWrtrDad]

While I don't ride herd on quite everything tao said - I'm still absorbing it anyway --

Well spoken and written. It's something to think about.

:D

[Taotropics310]

Writer1-

If you've written seven scripts and identify yourself as a comedy writer, I'd strongly encourage you to narrow your focus and become a comedy expert. The Zen master of comedy. And not only that, but a certain flavor of comedy that reflects the tone, characters, backdrops and situations that you find most enjoyable to watch and write.

You will find that at the entry levels of the business, minor league managers and producers will say stupid things like they "want someone with range" or "do you have a horror? we want horror". This is just because they are fishing for product, anything they can throw at the wall. I understand the temptation to get fooled into thinking: "I must need to have a broad range of genre scripts so that I can keep my foot in this door that has opened".

This is not an accurate perception. Now, I'm not going to sit here and tell you not to write in any genre that appeals to you at any given time. We all like to stretch once in a while. But the development of your voice and your career (which are really one and the same) will ultimately depend on finding one genre and digging your teeth into it, learning its corners and niches and feeling that you can compete with the best writers of that genre. If you feel that is comedy - then push yourself to narrow your focus.

Because you will find that at the Big 5 agencies, the way writers are sold is by their specialty. A studio will say "let's put a list together for this historical drama" and the agencies will pitch them specialists - writers known for this kind of work. It is type-casting, just like with actors, and that is the way writers get assignment work. So each agency will pitch their "historical drama" guys: John Logan, Doug Wright, David Franzoni (sp?), Steven Zaillian etc.

Lose immediately the notion that you need to bring "diversity" to the table. For the serious players, diversity is synonymous with the inability to "cast" you to a specific project. If you have written a comedy and a horror, you will not come to mind when the executive is putting her horror list together. If you have written two extremely strong high concept comedies that both "sound like you" and have a distinctive voice, you could make it onto the high concept comedy list.

Don't let these low level jokers determine your decisions about the films you want to write. Being the best at one thing is the most important goal right now.

[Taotropics310]

btw- round of applause to TonyRob, who always seems to start the most provocative and interesting threads...

...only ones I wind up posting on, usually.

[Writer1]

Thanks for the thoughtful response, Tao.

[SebsWrtrDad]

I was thinking back to a conversation I had with some other writers about breaking into the biz. The analogy we ended up using was baseball:

Generally, a player is a specific kind of hitter. He may be a fast guy who leads off the order with a lot of singles and bunts. He may be the heavy hitter in the middle, swining for Hr's and driving in runs. He may be at the end of the order - a gritty hitter who can foul off a lot of balls and tire out the pitcher.

And a hitter can change how he hits - a shortstop who is known for singles might bulk up and start hitting homers -- but generally you don't go from a speedy leadoff hitter to barry Bonds.

You do one thing well and that's what gets you your spot in the batting order in the first place. Consistency. You can change up later, but you need to establish yourself first.

Which is a long-winded way of saying I think I agree with what Tao is saying more than originally thought. I don't like being forced into a box - but the thing is, once I thought about it, it's better to put your best foot forward, no? Especially if you are naturally drawn to a particular genre. The question becomes then -- what if you aren't? What would your advice be Tao to someone who didn't seem to be drawn to one genre or area? I don't feel that way -- I know where my 'wheelhouse' is -- but I am curious as to what you all think.....

[LostDogma]

Tao,

I believe your post on page 5 was an excellent post and this is an excellent thread and inspiring. Very cool!

LD


But like IUjin mentioned - 60-80 pages to go :eek ...

[bottomlesscup]

TonyRob, I think your original post on this thread asked why a new writer would ask "important" questions to stangers on a messageboard. My answer: Because sometimes you get back posts like that one from Tao.

You see how I got your back, bottomlesscup? You see?

Indeed, sir. Indeed.

[alipali]

Tao, you're talking to me. Thanks.

[sc111]

Tao - -

Well, now that you've defined your terms, re 'Write from your heart,' I agree with you. Thanks for the post, enlightening as usual.

:)

[filmcarver]

Tao

If you ever are struggling to write a commencement speech you are invited to give, you might refer back to this very well spoken bit of truth about the truly passionate artist.

It made me think of a piece I saw about Steven Soderbergh on one of the "Directors" shorts....his passion for getting to the next day, the next project, the next vision, getting things the way they needed to be, was really a reminder of what makes an artist who he or she is...

Peace

[johanh]

Reading Tao´s applauded post actually created a mental scene of a huge messiah, benevolently lecturing, and dishing out the keys.. to the knuckleheads that all of a sudden scamper around like ants after sugar. Regretfully, most will forget, not understand, or subconsiously deny the value of given advice.

[Vigorish9]

i think tao should thankyou for your post joh, cause that was beautiful.

vig

[Mike Samonek]

I'd like to thank Vig for suggesting Tao thank Johnah.

[Taotropics310]

good grief siddown you're embarrassing me...

i have had multiple generous mentors in my writing life and I have not been able to follow their excellent advice to the letter by any stretch...

it's satisfying to give payback to them by giving information that some on this board will then pass on to others down the line.

and i'm afraid boog has the messiah thing all scoped out for himself.

[Revisionist]

Tao...

Excellent post. Like Writer I've dabbled in several genres and in doing so found what I liked best to write. Action thrillers. I didn't even realize that what I liked best to WATCH was genre specific until I wrote my way through six of the eight scripts I've drafted. Finding this out focused the beam of concentration in a whole new way so that I now drown myself in psychology books, scripts, movies, anything I can find that even remotely may help capture the genre in a new way. Or in an old way with a new twist...

Reading your post hit close to home and reinforced the idea that writing what you enjoy, and what you know (or can immerse yourself in and learn), is the most important aspect of success. Knowledge may be key in a lot of ways but the passion a person has for writing a certain TYPE of movie and making it their genre. Specific to them. Not the other way around... Is the only way I could think of to actually break through the wall and get taken seriously as a writer.

Maybe it was the only way I could take myself seriously too. Either way, thanks for the post. It should be cut, pasted and stuck to the top of this forum. Every forum.

I'm starting to think that a Tao's FAQ section should be added to the site so those who don't get the opportunity to read your wisdom and experiences in the "bizz" could have a chance to read all of your posts.

So they don't forget them. Because I've yet to find one that isn't pure gold, man.