Question for the pro screenwriters and industry pros

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Thanks Jami. That's my point.

    Again Deux, we're actually in agreement. In all these cases, writers slowly worked their way up the ladder to the point that any idea they present has some credibility. Alan Ball had no feature credits and felt that American Beauty was not at all commercial but his agent told him to write it because he seemed passionate about it. The agent then marketed if very shewdly, giving Jenks and Cohen a very short window to buy it before it went out wide. (Not sure which of them was allegedly having a mid-life crisis)

    re: the Matrix, it was still a hard sell. The W. bros has done a very small movie (Bound) which is hardly the kind of thing that leads studio to fork over major cash. They did a 300 page storyboard to try to explain the concept and many execs just didn't get it.

    re: Malkovich, Kaufman did take the risk and it paid off. Had he done a "concept film" would it have had an easier time getting made? Who knows.

    The point I (and I think Tao) are trying to make is that the very concept of a great concept is somewhat of a myth. Good writing gets you noticed. People seem to be able to agree on what's good writing. It's much harder to get agreement on what is a commercial concept.

    Comment


    • #47
      I think the myth of the good concept is a myth

      I agree with you and Henry James that there are only two kinds of stories, good ones and bad ones and only the reader can decide which a story is.

      I believe it is possible to create a good story that when told to another person they say "that sounds interesting, I'd like to read it and I think other people would like it too". I also believe it is possible to create a story that when told to another person they say "that doesn't sound original, I don't want to read it and I don't think other people would like it".

      In general, a pro writes for the audience, bringing passion and creativity to their stories, with the goal of having as many people in the first category as possible.

      In general, a newbie writes for themselves, bringing either passion or creativity but rarely both in equal measure, with t he goal or satisfying themselves.

      I'm not saying a Pro is always successful, but they try. They use their god given ability to understand what appeals to people and their highly developed sense of the market to inform their story choices.

      A newbie has no concern for an audience's sensibilities beyond their own and have no interest in allowing any understanding of the market to inform their story choices.

      In general, pros create stories that appeal to a wide range of people which in turn makes them more likely to be bought and produced.

      In general, a newbie creates stories that appeal to themselves and a small group of like minded people which in turn makes them less likely to be bought and produced.

      There are always exceptions. IMHO if Allan Ball had not been a very successful writer with a very well connected agent, there is no way he would have ever sold it as a spec.

      As story tellers I think it's imperative that we have a highly developed sense of what interests out audience. Shakespeare didn't transcribe historical events, he seized upon ideas that were already interesting to the public and then changed them to make them more interesting. Not only is it possible to know what is and isn't a commercial idea, it is an absolute essential tool for any aspiring pro to have.

      You know good writing when you read it. You know a good idea when you hear it. If you don't have a good idea, chances are people will never bother to read the script to see if the writing is good or not. Even if the writing is good, the fact that the idea isn't won't help it become a good story, only a well told bad one.

      Comment


      • #48
        It's all about the idea.

        But not the 'high concept' idea, or the 'commercial' idea.

        It's about the 'compelling' idea. Shoot for compelling. Something compelling to you.

        A point to illustrate this. Most pro writers work on as many assignments as they do originals, often more. These are ideas that are presented to you (adaptations, remakes, internally generated ideas, etc...). They already are considered commercial enough for a studio to pony up the money to hire you to write them.

        But do you WANT to write them? Would you take ANY job that comes along, that is offered to you, or would you choose that project that is compelling to you?

        Original idea or assignment, why work on something that doesn't light a fire in you?

        That's the way I approach any project.

        Comment


        • #49
          A few people mentioned the "voice" as being the differentiator. I think the voice is the most overrated and unquantifiable measure of one's writing.

          Comment


          • #50
            Consider The Source

            Deus already beat me to it - most of these were made because the source material was popular or they were based on true stories. Steve probably should have put THE ROOKIE and ERIN BROCKOVICH on the list, too... also true stories.

            But MALKOVICH proved *not* to be commercial, as did ADAPTATION and HUMAN NATURE. Too weird. Kaufman's scripts have all been flops with the audience.

            There's a better way to pitch MATRIX that makes it the pick of the litter - because it's the big idea fantasy idea that matches all of the others on that top 20 list.

            And I think AMERICAN BEAUTY - an oft-told tale - is really about a guy who chucks resonsibility and lives his life as a 17 year old again. If he *actually* became 17 years old again it could be on that top 50 list (kind of a PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED)... but instead it's more like SAVE THE TIGER.

            The thing that puts GHOST on the top 50 is that it's not about a banker who discovers his best friend is laundering money for the mob... it's about a DEAD banker (yada-yada). It's that extra bit of creativity and imagination. To get back to the main question - I think that extra bit of creativity and imagination at the idea stage is what makes a difference.

            There's an article on commercial writing in the July issue of Script Magazine by John Hill that goes much further than I would ever go. He explains how he and his pupil, waitress Diane Thomas, analyzed the market way back when and realized the key to success was to write an action-adventure in a foreign land about a 37 year old male protagonist and a 34 year old female protagonist. That was the type of script that was selling at the time. Each wrote a script, each sold their script. The results were ROMANCING THE STONE and QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER. Both were the type of films people wanted to see - and were made. Hill began analyzing the market after hearing Marc Norman discuss his breakthrough in the biz... and I've heard Norman tell the same story.

            I think when anyone says "No one knows what's commercial" either they are only speaking for themselves or it's a matter of semantics.

            They may mean you can't chase specific trends - because those trends are usually over before you can finish a script. But you can write a script that is a *movie* rather than a small story that only you and a handful of people care about. *I* don't think you can chase trends - but I do think you can use your creativity and imagination to come up with a MORE INTERESTING STORY than some other story. That you can look at 10 story ideas and pick the "most commercial" of them. If *you* can't do that, that doesn't mean that others can not.

            Great ideas can be poorly executed.
            Great scripts can be butchered on their way to the screen.
            But neither of those discounts that great ideas *exist*. That there are some oideas that will be of more interest to an audience than other ideas.

            - Bill

            Comment


            • #51
              well said Leo. Compelling is better than commercial, though one often creates the other.

              A pro writes what is compelling to himself and others. If it's an assignment it's already been deemed compelling by TPTB.

              A newbie tends to write what is compelling only to himself.

              Comment


              • #52
                Deus,

                I think you are bastardizing Unca Leo's comments. He didn't imply that pros write what's compelling to themselves and others. Nor did he write that newbies write what's compelling only to themselves.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Well now we're in total disagreement Deux. I think newbies are more likely to try to write what they think will appeal to the market because they don't trust their own gut and their own instincts as writers. Pros are more likely to write something that compells them, as Unca Leo points out.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I agree with you and Henry James that there are only two kinds of stories, good ones and bad ones and only the reader can decide which a story is.
                    for me, the prob w/ this that it gives all the power to the reader. it implies that what's embraced by the public is inherently 'good'. I think that's easily disprovable by the number of shitty movies that aren't so good or well-made or enduring. there's such an element of subjectivity in art that the only thing you can trust ultimately is your gut. [note: speaking strictly about specs, not assignments]. if it appeals to you and you can write the @#%$ out of it, then do it.

                    and ham, I think perhaps voice is overrated because it's unquantifiable.

                    shutting up now

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I agree Ham--it's not a phrase I like because it is unquantifiable, but it's in common usage amongst screenwriters. I brought it up just to try and dispel some of the speciousness surrounding the phrase as it's a consistent element that surfaces to the top when talking about writing.

                      Ultimately, it depends on the definition. My definition is that it's a world-view particular to the individual. I think it ties in with what Tao said about being true to your instincts and not diluting them for the sake of what's supposedly 'hot' in the marketplace or emulating what's gone before.

                      In a nutshell: be original.

                      So as far as that goes, applying voice to the material is a differentiator between pros and pre-pros.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        The Power Of Story Compels You!

                        Yes - you've gotta care about the story. That's a *given*. But a pro finds a story that compels them that is also going to be compelling to a mass audience. It's finding the story idea that is BOTH that's the hard part. One or the other won't work. You either risk being self-indulgent or doing heartless hackwork.

                        But if a writer's gut says write a story about a house painter who can't pay his mortgage and argues with his wife all day - that's just as bad as the writer who decides to write DIE HARD in a one storey building because he thinks it will sell. You've got a brain and a heart - use BOTH.

                        - Bill

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: The Power Of Story Compels You!

                          Ham, I never said that Leo was implying anything. I simply plugged in the term compelling where I had used commercial because it accuratley expressed what I was trying to communicate.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: The Power Of Story Compels You!

                            Yes Meat, what a person decides is good is what defines if the story is good or not. If the public decides a movie is good, regardless of what the writer or we think, then it is good and HW will try to make other movies the public decides is good. It's not our job nor is it the job of HW to tell people what is or isn't good. If people want to pay to see it -- it's good. It's a very simple supply and demand equation. You can look at the historical trends and determine what stories and elements are consistently in high demand and use that to inform your understanding of what is and isn't a compelling or commercial story for the public.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Nice work folks.

                              SEVEN THINGS IF I HAD ONLY KNOWN (Iâ€TMM TELLING YOU NOW)

                              1. READ SCRIPTS TO MOVIES YOU HAVENâ€TMT SEEN.

                              This is by far the number one piece of advice offered by
                              pro writers in my circle, and they report, it is the most
                              ignored. Why? I guess people feel if you can see a
                              movie, why read the script. And format can be learned
                              from a book or any single script, right?

                              Sigh.

                              The value of reading screenplays is that one gets the
                              feel of the rhythm and release of pacing, a muscular
                              grasp on what is evocative storytelling, and diligent
                              readers develop an instinct for what works on the page.
                              Retyping one or two scripts will sharpen your
                              comprehension. Read at least 30 within a six month
                              period and you will not regret it.

                              2. MOVEMENT

                              Something, someone, some force has to be moving
                              during as many scenes as possible. Avoid diners,
                              restaurants, and other table talk.

                              3. DONâ€TMT SAVE YOUR BEST IDEAS

                              Write the most intriguing idea you have NOW. Your
                              producing and/or directorial career wonâ€TMt wait.

                              4. IF YOU CAN WRITE COMEDY, DO IT

                              Most scribes neglect comedy even if they have a fertile
                              sense of humor. Comedy is like a second class citizen
                              in the world of aspiring writers who'd rather spend their
                              time writing â€important†material or spinning ainâ€TMt-it-cool
                              potboilers. Comedy continually offers the most avenues
                              of entrées into the business. Too bad most of them are
                              never tried.

                              5. COMEDY IS WIT, NOT SPIT

                              Slapstick, pratfalls, spit takes and all other physical
                              comedy does not come off the page very well. Most
                              comedies thrive on wit and whimsy at the spec script
                              stage.

                              6. ROOT EVERYTHING IN REALITY

                              As soon as a reader reads something false in your script,
                              they are taken out of the story. The suspension of
                              disbelief is ruined (Stephen King once described a
                              Payday nut bar as a chocolate roll!). i.e. if a supernatural
                              twist is introduced in the first act, the remainder of the
                              story must be hyperrealistic and any additional unreal
                              elements must reference the original conceit and add
                              nothing more.

                              7. AN UNSOLD SAMPLE SCRIPT IS WORTHLESS

                              Maybe in the hey day of the 1990's an unsold, but well
                              written, script could land one an assignment blowing
                              the dust off of a studio property, but in the 21st
                              century, the market is as stingy as ever. Even sold
                              writers have trouble landing the increasingly rare
                              open assignments.

                              Rx

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: The Power Of Story Compels You!

                                what a person decides is good is what defines if the story is good or not. If the public decides a movie is good, regardless of what the writer or we think, then it is good and HW will try to make other movies the public decides is good. It's not our job nor is it the job of HW to tell people what is or isn't good.
                                deus - that's patently ridiculous. I suspect you know that. It's good if the general public says it is? come on. extrapolating we can then assume that 'temptation island' is "good" television, that john grisham novels are "good", that burger king is "good" food, Is "kangaroo jack" a "good" movie because it was number one for one weekend? jesus, tell me you don't really think that. Your master is not the general public. Your master is you.

                                edited to say: I'm not implying that commercialism be damned and "i'm writing whatever I want" only that I give less credence to popular opinion than to my intuition as to what's 'commercial'.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X