The Screenwrting awakening

Screenwriting sucks! It's so frickin hard and everyone in the world has a screenplay and everyone wants to stomp on you and make you feel like sh!t because your screenplay sucks. I'm glad I write for TV

Thanks NickFun. Because I know so little about Screenwriting I thought maybe it was just me.

There are about 10 people in the class and I have the distinct impression none of us are on the same page. I am not blaming the instructor. I should have taken the time to do more research on the topic of Screenwriting before I did other than just scanning the sites on the Internet which probably would have been more than sufficient if I had paid more attention.

I just cannot write ANYTHING unless it is my idea and my heart is in it. That is one of the main reasons if not thee reason I never attempted to make money at it. I probably don't write well enough to begin with which is no big deal since it is my hobby and I enjoy it. So to simply come up with a story to use as a vehicle to study the basic points of Screenwriting just is not going to work well if at all. I will simply be wallowing in my own bull crap and hating it unless I come up with a story that I feel is worth writing. It has to be a drama too, you know with protagonist, antagonist stuff. No funny wholesome stories or comedy.

I enjoy listening to the instructor though so I am getting my money's worth. He is interesting and I have the impression he is semi-retired but still keeps an active hand in the game. One of the first things he emphasized was that Screenwriting is not an easy game and if you are lucky enough to sell something the end product may turn out to be altogther different when it comes out from when it went in.

I think writing for television probably is not that much different is it? I mean you must have an awful lot of competition as well as lots of testy people to deal with don't you? I know you write a great deal of dialogue right? Formats?

No this thing is becoming futile. I am not going to do any more with it. I was making myself nervous typing all these "FADE INs" and "FADE OUTs" with only a few lines of dialogue in each scene. I watched "Gentlemen's Agreement" which is a fine movie. There are some very short scenes in that movie, any movie for that matter. I just never paid attention. I am now very conscious of the length of scenes and dialogue. Hard to believe Moss Hart did this little business here; FADE IN, FADE OUT.

I'm just going to print out "Brave Dave Hooker" in the synopsis. I also did the "You're telling your friend" part by breaking the story into short sequences or blocks consisting of a paragraph or two that runs from start to finish where the ghost helicopter pilot leads brave Dave off into eternity. I'll print that out.

Lastly I will print out my awful effort at creating the script itself in it's own terrible format. I wrote several short scenes at the beginning until I saw just how absolutely awful the damn thing was becoming. I'll say: "This is what I have so far Mr. Povel, what do you think?"

I just typed "screenwriting sucks" in google and found this board>thread. Your post made me laugh out loud - I literally just signed up to post a reply.

It's so f**king true - screenwriting is hard, unlike you however I *hate* action (most the time), I write dialogue. Apparently this is bad.

Another thing, and I've maybe just realized this, "the truth": I ******* HATE screenwriting *but* I love, love, love movies - which is why I want to create my own. I'm not pretending anymore.

Screenwriting is hard and I hate it. But I doubt I'll ever stop writing for hours a day now - damn it for taking away so much of my movie-watching time. There's nothing I hate more infact. Pure hate...

Another thing, you probably know by now, screenwriting can't be taught, you just have to write. It can be coached, sure, but not taught, just like any art.

From now on I honestly don't care what I or anyone else think's about my absolutely crap screenplay's, all fourty-*******-five of them, I'm just going for it. Random chance. Almost definitely won't ever get "there". Piece of **** screenplays **** them. **** them up the ******* ass. lol.

"Lastly I will print out my awful effort at creating the script itself in it's own terrible format. I wrote several short scenes at the beginning until I saw just how absolutely awful the damn thing was becoming. I'll say: "This is what I have so far Mr. Povel, what do you think?" LOL.

Tom, London, England.

Last night was the final three hours of our course. There were 8 of us there. Two or three seem interested enough to pursue this further. I got more than I expected from the course. I enjoy movies more now than I did before but I plan on keeping a distance from script writing. Just not my cup of tea and I consider myself fortunate to have discovered this early on. I love to write but this is too much, entirely too time consuming. It just keeps lending itself to change, always changing things, rewriting, rewriting. Not for me. I am 68 and I am not going to spend the rest of my life with THIS STUFF!

If I ever just happen to write something good enough that is coincidental to my personal writing enjoyment, worthy of film rather than just reading why scriptwriters can do their thing. No, it is just not enough fun, entirely too frustrating, thankless, no fun at all. Screw it.

lol, well I'm 20, I still really want to write a good movie/film, it's just that the process is so dire.

I definitely want to pursue it further, I would have probably given up by now if I wasn't going to, then again it's never too late to give something up. But I really don't want to. I really want to make a good movie. It's not just about having a screenplay that sells and/or is made into a film either, I want it to be good, but wouldn't know how to write one to save my life, literally. I get the impression most of us don't.

To be honest I've never really done a rewrite: I'd just be re-writing utter crap, so I tell myself "move on to the next one".

EDIT: Sometimes I think the weaker people should band together to fight the current screenwriting masters, but then they all seemed to have done it mostly on their own. If not entirely.

EDIT#2: I'm just kind of figuring out (again) that you don't leave the first page till it's perfect, then twenty pages later realize it was terrible, then write it again...realize the next page is also dire, rewrite repeat...see that the first page was terrible, go back...

Don't let anyone discourage you from pursuing your goal. This is nothing more than a hobby with me. I enjoy taking college courses from time to time just for enrichment and this was one of them. It was freewheeling, no prerequisites, no grade, no structure. $65 for six weeks, 2-? hours every Thursday night at our local community college.

The man that taught the course makes a good living in the trade. Not a star but steadily employed in all branches of the trade including scriptwriting, acting and most of the technical aspects of film making. A solid professional that did not embellish anything. He wasn't at all temperamental. He read everyone's work aloud making constructive criticism as he read. Many of his comments were simple, obvious advice I just never thought of but could readily see they were good ideas.

There was nothing put out ahead of time about what was to be offered in the class. I went in cold and with the exception of one man I assume this was the case with the others.

This one man had cut pictures out of magazines to represent ALL of the people in his script. He said he constantly referred to the pictures when he was writing the dialogue and it helped him. he also had created a map of the city where his story was taking place. He was writing a police action film. Even he did not have a script completed by the end of the course and this was quite understandable to me. You just cannot do something like that in six short weeks. Perhaps professionals can but not a novice. No way.

The instructor said he could not emphasize "rewrite" enough. Dialogue is a big challenge. It helps to have a good command of the English language and it's usage. Unlike lines in a play the ones in the script are fewer and have to convey the message clearly. Nothing natural about this for me as I enjoy letting my mind go where it may in narrative.

Format. Do you use any special software for format? He discouraged us from spending a lot of money on it and recommended some that sold for about $30 or so. Basic. He said that software can tend to force the novice in the wrong direction. Nevertheless the script must be in format (and there is more than one) when it is submitted for serious reading and consideration as you must know. Software considerations are the least.

Rewriting, smooth, forward moving transition between scenes and proper dialogue. Everything must fit, all characters must have a purpose that promotes the direction of the story.

All a lot of work to get all of the together and have it work. Have it so interesting the script reader won't be able to put it down.

He sound's like a good teacher - so far I've seen that the best advice is simple advice: - www.JohnAugust.com for an example of professional, quality "simple" advice.

It's great to hear that he actually get's work in the industry too. It's just encouraging.

It's funny, because up until now I've been writing literally 80-120 pages of script a week, but have mostly been just giving up and moving on, not finishing (I used to plan, don't for now.) It's hard, I should take my time like I am now. Maybe this thread (you) reminded me I should. I'm not sure. But thank's (if you did )

Also, something that Josh Friedman (War of the World's scriptwriter) said about him having to complete an entire script in three weeks; how ridiculous that was...infact the hilarious story is here. He is a truely great storyteller (like John August): http://hucksblog.blogspot.com/ (it's the one where he mentions the female Chinese actor + young music video producer.) Edit: Plus he said something about doing 25 draft's on his first script (not the first he'd ever done) which he actually got sold.

"it helps to have a good command of the English language" see, I don't - which is why I'm seriously considering English Language classes at a college/uni.

I love films, I don't read (another thing I'm told and think I should do more - but then I won't be able to watch as many movies!), so dialogue is how I mainly think. I think I think more in terms of a filmmaker rather than soley as a writer.

I use sophocles, it's "free" to use, but if you want to print the script out you have to pay (not per print out) :
http://www.sophocles.net/ [I still haven't bought it. Nothing worth printing out ]

"All a lot of work to get all of the together and have it work. Have it so interesting the script reader won't be able to put it down."

I'm still trying to find out how to do that.

EDIT: I'm sorry, but I just re-read the thread and this: "where the ghost helicopter pilot leads brave Dave off into eternity." made me rofl, especially since I knew the sentences which followed in that post of your's.
EDIT#2: Oh, that was actually from a film???

Thank you for posting the links. Having a good command of the English language is always nice but in screenwriting in particular. The instructor mentioned the need to resort to the thesaurus. Because dialogue is honed to really say something as clearly and as shortly as possible while maintainaining quality. The choice of a single word in many instances is very important i.e. a multitude of people constitutes an entirely differnent image than a group of people; decrepid-sloppy or voluptuous-pretty etc.

I don't read nearly as much as I used to. Because movies are now my main, current interest I have been watching more of them and consciously, sub-consciously apply analysis based on the little knowledge I gained from the course. There really are only 5-10 different stories that may be told in drama as the instructor stated. What makes stories seem so different is the treatment given to the characters. I can now also see how the script is roughly divided into three acts. The use of flashbacks, turning points are all pretty much common stock to the trade. My God sub-plots, many of those can be the beginning of great stories in themselves!

Well anyway I am not writing for the time being. I think later on I'll go down to the video store. They are always selling used movies 5/$20 or 3/$10 depending. The last group I bought included "Bloom" which is a screen version of James Joyce's "Ulysses." Talk about a convoluted movie!

NOTE: If anyone reading has anything to add about screenwriting/scriptwriting techniques, how screenwriting is hard/scriptwriting is hard, and how or if it can really be taught, if techniques really help, Mckee etc etc then please add to the discussion / debate (keep it polite/respectful please.) Any input would be appreciated.

"decrepid-sloppy or voluptuous-pretty etc."

Yep see, whilst I know of these word's (I know what they mean, even if I didn't I'd use the dictionary - not sure if I've ever used a thesaurus(!) ) there's no way I'd actually come up with them in writing. My Eng Lang level is just too low.

I don't really like applying rules to writing at the moment, I mean every story is different, so how can there only be 5-10? I never really understand thing's like this, or I do but just don't agree with them. Even a remake is different - remembering that the script it's self is made up of action and dialogue, lines and lines of it, put together to form a story. But you're talking about specifically in drama, still I don't really see how that can be...

"Treatment given to the characters"? Again, I'm lost. I think because it's an art scripts can be made in any way you want, with or without using techniques (i.e. with me atm I just start hammering out dialogue and action even though all the screenwriting guru's will kill you for doing so.)

Also I think the "three act" thing is just universal, meaning it doesn't matter how a story is, you can always divide it into three acts. You could come up with a 9.5 act structure if you really thought it through properly enough. Plus I don't find it really helps in writing at all. Knowing it or not doesn't make much of a difference imo...

". My God sub-plots, many of those can be the beginning of great stories in themselves!" That's true - and there's just so many way's to find stories. ATM I use *nothing*, I just come up with them from the top of my head.

Some will try to have you believe that scriptwriting is almost as much science as it is art, that it can be taught - I disagree, 99% art imo. We simply just don't know enough about it to be able to define exactly how it should be, or how to teach it. *But* screenwriting teacher's need something to teach in their classes so they need a "structure". Really they're just inspirational coaches who specialize in coaching screenwriting IMO (I'm not saying that doesn't help, it probably does.)

http://www.imdb.com/find?q=bloom;s=all

There's 6 versions of "bloom" here, I'll assume it's the 2003 one (2004 version is a short)?

btw if you don't know www.imdb.com, know it

PS. I really like talking about screenwriting related issue's, like if knowing structure is really necessary, even if you do know it do you really use it? Does it help *at all*? etc. etc. As I'm still a beginner I want to be sure about if I'm right or wrong...

I have to disagree with you somewhat Blad. Most of screenwriting is technique.

You have to write it in a format that can be easily read and understood by those that will produce it. It isn't just about writing a good story. The screenwriter also has to envision how the finished product will look. There is no reason you can't hammer it out in sections but you have to assemble it eventually into a coherent form.

One of the other requirements of screenwriting is the ability to do rewrites. The director may decide at 7pm that he needs 10 pages of script rewritten for the shooting that starts at 7am the next morning. No amount of "art" will get that job done.

When a script goes into production it becomes a collaboration. Different people will have different demands of how they want the script changed. As the screenwriter you have to be able to communicate with those people. That is where training and technique come in. The training doesn't have to be formal classes. It could just be working in some capacity in the industry to find that common language.

Ultimately as a screenwriter you are at the mercy of whoever produces your script. There are reasons why every so often a writer will demand their name be removed from a movie. The better prepared you are, the more likely you can retain some control.

No, I don't think it's because your language level is too low. Drama lends itself to degree and I believe the more you write the more you become aware of the subtle and even not so subtle differences in snyonymous words. Some choices for words are better than others which reminds me. The thesaurus I now have is Roget's published in 1933 (time for me to move into modern times with a new one.) Thesaurus means treasure house.

I can empathize with you about rules in writing. Outside of required courses in school I never have taken any writing courses for much the same reason I never liked having the meaning of prose or poetry explained to me by instructors. It just tends to spoil things and where writing is concerned I believe it is essential to learn the basics but beyond that? You're on your own.

A good thing to bear in mind is that some things in scriptwriting that appear to be screwy to a novice are serious business in the trade. One question was raised as to why the characters in the story were not listed at the front of the script. Well the answer was "It just isn't done, we don't do it that way and if you submitted your work to a professional reader like that he might assume you didn't know what the hell you were doing and not even bother to read your work."

The 5-10 stories? I don't know, I'll just take the instructor's word for it because I can see how the treatment of characters can change the viewers perspective while the basic story remains unchanged. What comes to mind is the movie "Cape Fear." The one made a couple of years ago is quite different from the one made over 50 years earlier mainly due to the way the villain was portrayed. Robert Mitchum was a gangster and a thug. Robert DeNiro was a downright evil person in every sense. There was also a sort of constant environment of sleaze in the later movie which was all but absent in the earlier one. All of the "good guys" were made to be much more sharp, edgy, not-so-all-American as in the earlier movie. Even the innocent. Same story though.

Maybe when you are hammering out the dialogue you inadverdently get into the other areas of the task such as acting and directing without realizing it? Instructor warned about that. Also redundency in dialogue. There doesn't seem to be a very wide area that is happy medium. You cannot be redundent yet the dialogue must not omit anything that detracts from description.

I am glad there is a concept of "Three Acts" because this is a good control factor or at least a guide to where things are supposed to be in a script (depending on whether or not you chose to follow the convention of the instructor) Too me developing something like this in thirds is better than ninths. That's just my idea about. The first time the instructor talked about this it sounded entirely too mechanical, too restrictive but I no longer think it is.

Art or scientific? Writing the story is an art for most people. If you write a story and then script it you have done a lot of work. That is the way I personaly would approach screewriting. Either that way or adapting some one else's work. I cannot for the life of me imagine anyone sitting down and scripting a story from his head. I am sure people do this every day but I would not do it. If you were to specialize in adaptations, scripting someone elses work which is what most employed screenwriters do I would consider that not art nor scientific but rather a highly developed skill. Remember I am a true novice and I have never written a script. My guess is you have entirely different ideas about this than I do.

Reflecting on this a bit. I mentioned the course I took was not highly structured. The instructor mainly dealt with the mechanics of script, the dos and don'ts he spent no time at all discussing the content of the stories other than to ask about the characters purpose in the story. Generally most of the others wrote entirely too much; I was constructively criticized for not having smoother transitions between scenes. Too abrupt, transitions not smooth enough. Instructor did not emphasize any "science" but he was more inclined towards the mechanics of screenwriting rather than it's artistic aspects.

The version of "Bloom" that I have is 2003, directed by Sean Walsh.

When you say "structure" what exactly do you mean? I think the less structure there is in writing the more enjoyable it is for me. I think everyone establishes there own personal structures even though it may not be apparent to themselves. Read enough of some one's writings and you can actually get to know them fairly well or at least you know by their writing who they are.

But if you are talking about structure as in format for screenwriting, there is absolutely no getting around that. This was made clear to us by the instructor. You may have a better way of presenting a script but hundreds, thousands of people in the trade are used to seeing things "their way" and you simply must play the game from the beginning.

parados, ok I understand, but I mean more as you're writing the initial script, I'm at a beginner-level and production is at best a long way off...I'm talking about the process to get the initial script done. Also, if most script writing is technique, then why doesn't everyone who goes on, for example, an MFA course become a top-level, professional, produced script writer? Or somebody who writes for 5-10+ year's but never manages to "make it"? It's because of indivisual artist style, imo. Not as in genetic, just as in hard work and chance, happening to just come up with the right combination of idea's that will please a producer...

"You're on your own. " At the moment I'd agree with that.

I agree that it has to be in the correct format - the software does that for you, mostly. Anything else you need to do format wise can be taught to you quickly imo....

"too restrictive but I no longer think it is. " I still don't see why the third act structure isn't restrictive, I don't really understand how to use it tbh.

"scripting someone elses work which is what most employed screenwriters do " - Yes, this is true. Most films are now derived from novels. I say I've done scipt's, but I've never truley finished one - rushed first drafts (RUSHED, very rushed), but only now am I taking my time on this first draft, trying to get it right. You could probably, easily, write better than I could - you're likely just educated better (a lot better) than I am.

Most scriptwriters have degree's, then after e.g. their Eng Lit/Lan degree they'll do a few year's in screenwriting, maybe getting a degree/MFA in that too. I'm at (I believe) a high school level when it comes to language. (GCSE-level) I've improved since then because of me practising screenplay's, but not by much.

"Structure": Hmmm I'm looking for an accurate explanation, can't find one. Just look it up in any screenwriting book. It's how you "structure" your story, plan it out. What's going to be in it. You can plan it in beats, paragraphs, then write the actual script. Somebody else could explain it properly...

I'm not talking about format. Sophocles does that for me

I am not sure that you need a better grasp of language to write movies. A big part of what you are writing is dialogue which means it needs to be the way people actually talk. If you are writing outside your own experience then yes you do need to understand what you are writing about. But if you are writing about your own experience or people you are familiar with then you have all the language tools you need. You only need to listen to the way people speak and put those speech patterns on the page.

In movies, like in theater, you want to avoid exposition. You don't need to write 3 pages of beautiful prose using the perfect words found in a thesaurus when describing the countryside. That will all be covered in one 5 second shot. Unless the point of the scene is a character describing what happened to them, avoid exposition. (For a great movie that is entirely exposition see "My Dinner with Andre". In that movie the conflict comes in the interaction.)

My background is theater. The concepts used in theater apply directly to movies which is why script writing has co-opted the terms of theater and literature in general. The third act is where the final conflict and denouement takes place, the protagonist has to face the final challenge and there has to be a resolution. The first act sets up the story, the second act complicates it, the third act resolves it.

When trying to find a way to explain this better I found this good explanation.
The Myth of Three Act Structure(Go read the rest. It tells you to ignore it since it is a communication convention.)

The main point is you need a beginning, a middle and an end. A movie certainly doesn't require 3 acts of equal lengths because you don't have intermissions in between them.

As for selling a script, it comes down to who you know. There was a story recently about a woman and mother that sold a script about their life story because she moderated a discussion with Carrie Fisher online.

Very, very helpful.

But when I say I need to improve my language skill's, I mean this, as an example:
"The old woman carries her manuscript haltingly down a subway hall." - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind script.

"haltingly" and "manuscript" just aren't in my vocabulary, I would never think to use them. They're simple word's, yes, but I'd just never use them. I tend to reuse very basic word's again and agiain - this lead's to boring descriptions.

Sometimes in dialogue you do need to use "fancy"(for me), descriptive word's, you might need to, yet I wouldn't know how to use them if I needed them. I think maybe I need a better understanding imo based on my current writing...

I just think I should have a great understanding of the English langauge so I can use it in my writing to it's full extent.

I'm told I need to read more (I'm the only (amateur) screenwriter in the world who doesn't read book's.)

Thank's for the book recommendation.

"There was a story recently about a woman and mother that sold a script about their life story because she moderated a discussion with Carrie Fisher online. " That's quite incredible. But the script should be good. It doesn't have to be though (crap movies with bad scripts are proof of this.)

"If you are writing outside your own experience then yes you do need to understand what you are writing about." In a way I ONLY write outside my own experiences. I mean there's element's in there, but I'm from London, live in London and I write about people in America. Knowledge gained from watching movies only....

There's Enligsh writer/Director's who set movies in American. Christopher Nolan for example...? EDIT: He did actually base the film on a short story though...

I am not sure that you need a better grasp of language to write movies. A big part of what you are writing is dialogue which means it needs to be the way people actually talk. If you are writing outside your own experience then yes you do need to understand what you are writing about. But if you are writing about your own experience or people you are familiar with then you have all the language tools you need. You only need to listen to the way people speak and put those speech patterns on the page. (Posted by Prados)

Thank you for mentioning this Prado. It is one of those obvious things that I was not aware of. Big difference in writing dialogue for characters you know vice ones you don't. Simply thinking how they probably talk isn't good enough.

This fact alone might even have a bearing on the kind of story I might chose to write.

Check out one script by Spike Lee at http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Bamboozled.html

NickFun, no offense please. I acknolwledge you write for television as you said and you certainly must know what you are doing.

As a student myself, one of the points emphasized in our course was that as a script writer your work must interest the reader from the start and be of such strong interest to him or her, they don't decide to put it down after only a few seconds read.

I suspect Spike Lee was not concerned about selling this script to begin with. Maybe he wrote it for himself and produced it. I don't know. I just don't find it very interesting at all. If I had several scripts to read and I had never heard of Spike Lee I would have discarded his work within the first few seconds as I would not have known what he was talking about.

The thing with me at the moment is that I'm trying to figure out if I should take additional English langauge / lit courses. So far the answer has been "no". I know that others have, but often they didn't know they wanted to become screenwriters before getting whichever qualification/degree.

I think I can use the fact that I know I want to become a screenwriter to my advantage - only taking the necessary courses, reading the necessary books etc....

I think that Spike Lee script (and the movie) are quite good. Not excellent but good. It's no where near his best.