Thursday, Mar. 11
Bruce McKenna on The PacificExecutive Producer/Writer Bruce McKenna speaks about the writing process on the new HBO miniseries “The Pacific” which starts this Sunday night. He covers the benefits of writing a series over a single 2-hour feature, making a slight jab at the classic father/son storyline which has been repeated sooo many times over the past decade. Basically describing a Steadfast Son and a Change Father (the father experiencing the greatest emotional change). He points out too that the reason you have to boil it down to a single “arc” or “archetype” is that you really don’t have much time to do too much more.
But what is really interesting (and hopeful for me, at least) is that he promises that this WWII series will not cover the same tired ground. I don’t know, but for me, watching the trailers so far, it really seems like it’s going to be the same ‘ol storming the beach, soldier falling in water, gunshots penetrating the icy surface, and shot after shot of war-weary faces. McKenna says that The Pacific will take an intimate look at the psychological effects of the war and perhaps even dive into “negative” characters and explore their darker side. Spielberg himself, apparently, even requested that there be “no blinking” and that they depict the amoral depths these soldiers had to experience.
Here’s hoping Sunday pays off.
- The Math Behind Story Structure
The ever-brilliant Melanie Anne Phillips elaborates on the math behind the Dramatica theory of story. Essential to any understanding of the theory is the concept that the story mind represents an internal model of our outside world. Externally, we have Mass, Energy, Space and Time. Internally we have Knowledge, Thought, Ability, and Desire. Mass equals Knowledge, Thought equals Energy and so on.
Knowledge bends our thoughts in new trajectories because of what we know, just as Mass in Space bends energy (such as light waves) along the vectors of its gravity….It take a lot of thought to make a little knowledge, just as a little bit of knowledge can generate an awful lot of thought. Now… isn’t this interesting… That relationship between Knowledge and Thought is the same as the relationship between Mass and Energy in Einstein’s equation: It takes a lot of energy to make a little mass but a little mass can generate an awful lot of energy.
This is something that must be read several times before it can be fully comprehended. Additionally, it’s important to note the great effort she makes in explaining that while on the surface these mathematical equations may seem stifling or antecedent to the magic of story, deep down the theory is elegant enough to take into consideration all manners of creative expression.
- Finding the Magic in Your Story
Scott recalls a post from his archives regarding the conflict between structure and heart:
Don’t get me wrong. Format is important. Style is important. Structure is important. As I noted above, it’s a good idea to learn fundamental screenwriting principles. But it’s not like by mastering screenplay format, style, and structure, you will necessarily write a great script. In other words…Screenwriting is not about widgets. In order to write a great script, you have to find the magic.
Totally, totally agree. In my comment, I tried to explain my understanding of how both heart and structure co-exist:
I’m totally obsessed with story structure and story theory, but I could not agree with you more. Worrying about the exact number of scenes or hitting all “fifteen” beats is so backwards to the writing process in my opinion that I think it stifles or at least hinders a great many voices. This, of course, coming from someone who considers the Dramatica theory of story extremely beneficial to writers. Structure is not breaking successful movies down into their similar plot points. Rather, it is a holistic look at the story as one meaningful “whole.” That “whole” must come from the heart, otherwise it truly will be a “hole”.
And if you think otherwise, you’re an a-hole, LOL.
- StoryTweets
StoryFanatic has its own Twitter feed now.
The impetus for this came from the growing realization that most of the “news” and/or site updates that I’m personally interested in have been coming more and more from my Twitter stream rather than my RSS subscriptions. That, in addition to the sad fact that most people don’t get RSS (at least most writer-ly types), yet completely understand “following” someone on Twitter made the transition a no-brainer.
Starting yesterday, any article, link, series, and movie review that is published here will also appear in the aforementioned Twitter account. If you want to be kept up-to-date on everything that goes on around here, and you prefer Tweetie over Fever then start following.
Please note that I will not turn this into a obnoxious link spam account where I set up keywords to dump all “screenwriting” and “screenplay” news. At the most there will be maybe eight items in a single day, depending on whether or not there really is anything worth linking to as far as the world of story goes.
And for those still interested in RSS, those feeds will still be served.
Wednesday, Mar. 10
- Bigelow’s Acceptance Speech
Hurt Locker won best picture. I was hoping the director, James Cameron’s ex-wife, would hoist trophy and say “I’M THE QUEEN OF THE WORLD!”
(via David Press)
- James Cameron on Writing Avatar
We get it. Yes, you’re clever for pointing out that it’s just Dances with Wolves in space. Now click through and listen to an interview with James Cameron at the Writers Guild.
- Stories Lacking Transformation
One of the articles discussed the poor quality of Australian screenplays, which tend to lack character transformation. According to the author, the central character’s personal journey and ultimate change is what makes the audience relate to the film. I don’t totally agree.
And you’re right. The idea that a screenplay or story is broken if the Main Character doesn’t change simply represents the mindset of the uninformed. Characters need to grow as the acts turn, but that does NOT have to result in a complete transformational change. Need proof? Watch the video.
- Happy to Be a Mole
[A great movie] is a collaboration, a collaboration between handsome, gifted people and sickly little mole people.
Robert Downey Jr. on the Oscars (memory jogged by Cynthia Closkey)
- The Key to Character is Vulnerability
Snark the Reader, another script reader who blogs about what they read, offers up some good thoughts on why his most recent read was a success:
The main character is open and vulnerable because something close to him, or something he values, is always in jeopardy. It MATTERS to him. This is such a gift! It keeps the story pushing forward to the climax because he’s got to figure out problems, and one problem begets five related ones. We’re never bored.
Reading through the first couple of pages on Snark’s site, it becomes clear that what is missing the most from the scripts he or she is unlucky to read is the absence of a well-defined Main Character throughline. When you’re not engaged emotionally, as in say Avatar or the animated 9, the problem can always be traced to the lack of or broken development of this key throughline.
Tuesday, Mar. 9
- Lose Your Faith In Great Movies
The 11th Best Picture Nomination of 2009. Make sure you don’t have one of these scenes in your current story. Or maybe make sure if you want it sold.
Monday, Mar. 8
- Download The Hurt Locker (PDF)
Might be time to check it out.
- Get to Work on Your Screenplay
Usually after watching the Oscars I feel depressed. I feel as i will never be as good or as bright as the people getting the little statues. So why bother? Why write? Why save all my money to do an other short? Why dream of directing a feature? Tonight was different. I guess I am too old to be jealous of others. Maybe I can see through the veneer that we call greatness and see hard work and dedication. So I am working tonight on my script. I am not going to try to make it perfect but i will try to make it 100% me. That is all anyone can and should do.
Time to work now.
- The Morning After
How to think when you’ve written something that’s already in production:
So to every screenwriter whose hopes and dreams have been dashed on the rocks of Hollywood - or a Christopher Guest movie – I salute you on post Oscar ceremony morn. ‘Tis better to have typed 120 pages and lost than to have never typed 120 pages at all.
- Best Story of 2009 Out This Week
The best story of last year, Up In The Air is now out on Blu-ray and DVD (Amazon Associate links, click through and I’ll get a kickback). Precious is too, but that seems more like a rental than a purchase to own.
I’ve gone back and forth on what kind of ending the authors of the film were going for, but my understanding now is that my original analysis was correct. I won’t blow the surprise if you haven’t seen it yet, but if you’re interested you can read my review of Up in the Air.
Friday, Feb. 26
- Developing Your Characters
Melanie provides some jumpstart to your creative writing efforts with a look at breaking free from what the characters you usually write—namely, middle aged frustrated writers who share your gender. In this article she gives some much needed consideration towards the characteristics of the players in your story.
In summary then, the age in which you establish your worldview will determine how you perceive current events for the rest of your life. When creating characters of any particular age, you would do well to consider the cultural landscape that was prevalent when each character was indoctrinated.
- August on Alice
Screenwriter John August elaborates on his own personal saga with Alice in Wonderland and gives an insight towards the struggles even an established screenwriter can have getting their work on screen.
This adaption of Alice was the closest of any of mine to becoming real. I love what I wrote, so it’s disappointing and frustrating that it won’t end up on screen. But that reality is a big part of any working screenwriter’s life. Much more important than this half-written movie was maintaining relationships with studios and filmmakers I hope to keep working with for the next few decades.
- Explaining the Difference between Main Character and Protagonist
Protagonist and Main Character are two separate terms that describe two very different concepts of story. Often they are mistaken for the same thing. The reason to split them apart is because it is more accurate to do so. The explanation is provided in this choice link.
You’ve probably noticed that we’ve used common terms such as Protagonist, Main Character, and Central Character in very specific ways. In actual practice, most authors bandy these terms about more or less interchangeably. There’s nothing wrong with that, but for structural purposes it’s not very precise. That’s why you’ll see Dramatica being something of a stickler in its use of terms and their definitions: it’s the only way to be clear.
- Shading the Arc of the Main Character
Regardless of whether your Main Character changes or not, how does he or she get there? Does your character simply flip a switch at the end of the story? Or does he or she grapple with and grieve over the issue right up to the moment of truth?
Melanie reveals that Change or Steadfast does not have to be an either/or/black/white binary decision. There are an unlimited number of ways an author can shade this concept of Main Character. As long as, in the end, the audience can determine which of the principal characters changes and which remains steadfast, the story will still make sense. How the story gets there is where the art comes in.
Thursday, Feb. 25
- What is a Dilemma
It is important to differentiate between solvable and unsolvable problems. The solvable problem is, simply, a problem, whereas an unsolvable problem is called a Dilemma. In stories, as in life, we cannot tell at the beginning whether a problem is solvable or not because we cannot know the future. Only by going through the process of problem solving can we discover if the problem can be solved at all.
This perfectly describes the simple purpose behind storytelling.
- Building an Audience for your Work
Publishers, it seems, are only interested in your stories if they come with a built-in audience. This is probably the same line of thinking that leads to executives to be more interested in sequels and comic books than original spec scripts. But perhaps there is a way to build up an audience for your project before you even attempt to look for a publisher/reader.
“These days, you need to deliver not just the manuscript but the audience,” says Mr. Levine. “More and more, the mantra in publishing is ‘Ask not what your publisher can do for you, ask what you can do for your publisher.’”
(via Unk)
- A Simple Definition for Mental Sex
Melanie explains, in very simple terms, the primary difference between the way a “male” mind works and a “female” mind works. Dramatica refers to this as Mental Sex and is an important concept to understand when trying to structure a complete story. The Mental Sex of your Main Character (regardless of gender) will determine the order things happen in your story.
One sees easily the arrangement of things, and works to figure out how things are going (paths). That’s seeing logic and figuring the emotions. The other sees emotions clearly, which give meaning, but need to work to see what the mechanism is. Again, its only an influence, and training can counteract it, though not eliminate it.
Wednesday, Feb. 24
- Script Reader Tweets Their Impressions
Hilarious attempt by a script reader to “tweet” their experience while reading a less-than-stellar script:
I offer you a glimpse of my hell: “CAPTAIN JONES, ealry thrities.” This must have been written on a version of Word without spell check.
- Discovering Your Brand?
Not sure what I think of this. While I understand it’s good business, the creative side of me thinks it is complete horseshit and that you should write what comes naturally. Let the rest of the world figure out what box you fit in.
After you learn how to write a dynamite screenplay, you need to distinguish yourself by establishing your unique “brand.” By brand, we mean: How do you as a screenwriter stand out from a huge pool of screenwriters so that a producer says “you’re the one that I want”? Are you going to be the screenwriter who instantly comes to mind when a producer needs a comedy writer or a horror writer?
- Writing Changes You
Regardless of how it all turns out. Author Anne Enright elaborates on her list of Ten Rules for Writing Fiction:
Remember, if you sit at your desk for 15 or 20 years, every day, not counting weekends, it changes you. It just does. It may not improve your temper, but it fixes something else. It makes you more free.
I still write on Saturdays. Sundays I take off though. Her first rule, though, is what stood out to me:
The first 12 years are the worst.
Tuesday, Feb. 23
- The Definition of a Dilemma
It is important to differentiate between solvable and unsolvable problems. The solvable problem is, simply, a problem, whereas an unsolvable problem is called a Dilemma. In stories, as in life, we cannot tell at the beginning whether a problem is solvable or not because we cannot know the future. Only by going through the process of problem solving can we discover if the problem can be solved at all.
A wonderful perspective on what is really going on in well crafted stories.
- Reading Your Way Towards Better Writing
OK, sorry, this is my third link in a row from Scott’s site, but this just made me laugh out loud (you know, LOL):
If every wannabe screenwriter had to read Anna Karenina and watched Andrei Rublev as a prereq, I can guarantee you that my job would’ve been more fun. So stop reading Blake Synder and start reading Tolstoy. You’ll learn more, become a better writer, and lead a richer life.
It’s a quote from a post on 6 These about Spec Scripts that is well worth the time reading. As is Anna Karenina.
- Unplug to Create
Writer Jonathan Franzen on the distraction of the Internet:
It’s doubtful that anyone with an internet connection at his workplace is writing good fiction.
Having dropped off of Facebook, Twitter, et. al. for the past two months I can tell you that this is absolutely positively true. I’ve been actively pursuing my own writing projects and can’t for the life of me imagine how someone can do it professionally, full-time, without turning these things off. I have this kind of thought that the reason a lot of movies these days are not that good is because everyone is so distracted by all these micro-blogging services. They can’t maintain a thought long enough to craft a meaningful scene. There is just no way you can concentrate long enough and focus your attention on the craft of writing if you are being interrupted all the time. The quality is just not that good.
I keep coming back because there is a WEALTH of information out there. But when it comes to actually sitting down and writing, that stuff has to go off.
(via GoIntoTheStory)
- The “Contained Thriller”
Scott Myers takes an interesting look at a relatively “hot” genre for spec scripts these days - the contained thriller. Like the man-in-a-box thriller, Buried, Killer supplies movie execs with another with another potential high-grossing/low-budget thriller IF the story is even that good.
I have no idea about this latest sale, but while Buried was very well written it still lacked the kind of argument a complete story makes. It was a tale, albeit an exciting one, but one that is quickly forgotten as soon as the curtains close.
The problem with these contained thrillers is that they often leave out the Impact Character and any kind of significant relationship the Main Character would have with them. As such, they have to invent some reason or plot device that forces them into change at the end. It feels false, often manipulative, and ultimately not very meaningful. I still think it can be done, you just have to make sure you have that alternative viewpoint on the world impacting the Main Character’s personal justifications. There has to be some emotional reason for them to grow.
Thursday, Feb. 11
- The Only Archetypes You Need to Know
Protagonist portrays our initiative, Antagonist our reticence to change. Reason is our intellect, Emotion our passion. Skeptic is our self-doubt, Sidekick our self-confidence. Finally, Guardian represents our conscience and the Contagonist is temptation.
So simple, yet so elegant.
- Planning It All Out
Paul Schrader (Taxi Driver, Raging Bull) discusses his process:
I know exactly where I’m going beforehand. I know to the half page if I’m on or off target. I draw up charts before I do a script. I endlessly chart and re-chart a movie. Before I sit down to write, I have all the scenes listed, what happens in each scene, how many pages I anticipate each scene will take…
The rest of this excellent thought for the day can be read over at Go Into The Story. Personally I’ve always felt that if you’re writing for a purpose other than self-knowledge (like say, oh, I don’t know, a screenplay or something) than it follows that you should have some outline that organizes the things you want to say.
- The Way That Stories End Matters
Though talking about colonoscopies, Daniel Kahneman, in his recent TED talk, explains the difference an ending can have towards a story’s meaning:
Your remembering self is a “story teller. What we keep from our experiences is a story.” To illustrate, Kahneman showed pain-over-time charts of two colonoscopy patients who reported the intensity of the pain they were experiencing each minute during a colonoscopy. One patient experienced severe pain for 10 minutes. The other experienced the same level of pain for 10 minutes, followed by gradually decreasing pain for an addition 10 minutes. When each patient was later asked to recall the experience, the first patient said his experience was more painful, even though he experienced less pain than the second patient. “The way that stories end matter.” The first patient’s pain was at its peak at the very end, so it made for a worse story.
Of course, screw up a story’s ending and it’ll feel to the audience as if you have shoved something up their backside.
Wednesday, Feb. 10
- Interview with Screenwriter Ben Ripley
A couple months ago I said to read Source Code. Now go read the interview with the writer of this awesome spec, Ben Ripley and his advice for aspiring screenwriters:
I would tell him to keep faith, that it’s all going to be okay. I would tell him that the reason I’m a screenwriter today is that I believed in my talent and made the sustained sacrifices to become one. I eschewed other career paths. I worked day jobs to support myself. I wrote on weekends when maybe I would have had more fun at the beach. I started and finished scripts and then started new ones that were better. I kept at it. There are no shortcuts. The dues-paying process can be bewildering and lonely, but its job is to separate out the professionals from the merely curious, and when it’s over, you’re oddly thankful for having asked a lot of yourself.
Don’t know about everyone else, but it sure is comforting to hear that it took him several drafts over a couple of years to craft this kick-ass sci-fi story. VERY inspirational interview.
- Writing With Passion
John August gives a fascinating insight into his writing process on the film Big Fish:
Sitting in front of a full-length mirror, I brought myself to tears. Then I started writing Will’s dialogue. I looped over and over until I got a piece of it finished, then started on the next section. It was three solid days of crying, but it was cathartic and productive. These were fake tears, in the sense that I wasn’t actually guiding my Southern father through his last moments on Earth. But they were true in the context of writing the story. I was creating in myself the experience I was hoping to create in the reader.
Might be worth a try.
Tuesday, Feb. 9
- New Site for Dramatica Co-Creator
Melanie is back (has been since the beginning of the year it seems) with a brand new website devoted to all things Dramatica, Dramaticapedia. As you can probably guess, the site appears to be an effort to match the breadth of Wikipedia with a focus on the most accurate model of story there is out there today.
At first glance, this article on Ability, seems to offer some new contemplation towards why Main Characters do the things they do:
Ability is not what you can do. It is what you are “able” to do. What’s the difference? What you “can” do is essentially your ability limited by your desire. Ability describes the maximum potential that might be accomplished. But people are limited by what they should do, what they feel obligated to do, and what they want to do. If you take all that into consideration, what’s left is what a person actually “can” do.
Expect to see the site linked here quite often over the next coming year.
Monday, Feb. 8
- Different Points of View
Chris Huntley describes the difference between Dramatica’s concept of “point-of-view” and the generally accepted novelist’s version:
The “point of view” used in telling a story, or what I like to call the writer’s voice, let’s the writer describe the four throughlines as if they were from different perspectives, but are not limited to the views available to those perspectives.
I’ve never really had a problem differentiating between the two but I know sometimes people are stubborn in their preconceived notions about writing.
Thursday, Feb. 4
- Cameron Brilliant Writer of Genre
Truby expresses his respect for Avatar:
In all the visual splendor of James Cameron’s Avatar, it’s easy to overlook the script. In fact, the Avatar screenplay has come in for the same abuse Cameron’s Titanic script earned. You’ve heard the complaints: the story is a Pocahontas rip-off. The bad guys are just evil villains. The dialogue is stilted. In short, great visuals, bad screenwriting.
The critics aren’t so much wrong as irrelevant.
He goes on to explain how the film is a combo of the “eco-myth” and the “disaster” genre and how Cameron is a “brilliant writer of pop culture.” Expect to see several new specs that purport the love of trees and all things nature within the next year.
- Watterson Speaks
One of my all-time favorite storytellers interviewed fifteen years later:
I just tried to write honestly, and I tried to make this little world fun to look at, so people would take the time to read it. That was the full extent of my concern. You mix a bunch of ingredients, and once in a great while, chemistry happens. I can’t explain why the strip caught on the way it did, and I don’t think I could ever duplicate it. A lot of things have to go right all at once.
- No Love for ScriptShadow
Two months later and the dogpile continues:
A script in active development is not a blueprint for a movie, it is an archeological footprint of the development process itself. It reflects a writers reaction to producers, her input from her agent but not her manager, his notes that get the lead actor attached, the draft that costs $30 million more than any studio would spend, the version that attracts foreign sales agents. A draft is just a draft, a living creature caught in a freeze frame. Every time we send one out we think of a million things that could be different. They aren’t meant to tell the story the way a movie is meant to tell a story. Not even close.
For the record, I like ScriptShadow for no other reason than it constantly amazes me what people consider to be “good” screenplays.
Tuesday, Feb. 2
- Managing Your Creativity
Kal Bishop, a management consultant based in the UK offers up some encouragement for writers struggling with their next “great idea”:
Rather than wait for the “big idea,” the chances of hitting on the “big idea” increase when writers engage in not so dynamic projects, develop their competencies, identify and solve problems in a regular and sustained way. We know this to be true because screenwriters tend to come up with their best ideas WHILST they are working on a project.
- The Screenwriting Revolution
Mystery Man pontificates on the need for a screenwriting revolution, calling for a rejection of structure and gurus. While I agree that McKee’s version of storytelling can come off a bit stifling, there are many other concepts of story out there that are actually quite beneficial, challenging writers to be even more creative and even more experimental. Discounting all gurus because “they’re not writing stories” seems to be a strategy primed for failure. One should be open to all learning regardless of the source.
- Spec Scripts and Length
Found this great piece on the new thinking towards spec script lengths (as first mentioned yesterday). David Trottier on the changes over the past two decades:
Throughout the 1990s, there has been a movement towards “lean and clean” screenwriting: Shorter screenplays, shorter paragraphs, shorter speeches, more white space, and the omission of technical instructions. It should come as no surprise that this gradual evolution continues to refine spec style.
Really great info in this one. Short and sweet. Like I guess your spec is supposed to be.
Monday, Feb. 1
- New Look at Screenplay Length
Scott Myers takes a look at the current state of spec script page lengths. For the longest time I’ve always heard 120 was the target, with act breaks happening at 30, 60 and 90. Now it seems that less of a good thing is an even better thing. Dramas sit around 105 while comedies are down to 100! Wonder if Twitter, et. al. had anything to do with this switch. Good news is, my current project was well over 110. Bad news is, I’ve got a lot of editing to do now.
Tuesday, Jan. 19
- Controversy Surrounding The Best Movie of 2009: Up In The Air
2010 starts out with a bang!
My favorite story from last year has some kind of controversy attached to it. Up In The Air, directed and written by Jason Reitman, ALSO seems to have been written by Sheldon Turner. Apparently Sheldon had been working on his own adaptation of Walter Kirn’s novel for several years when Reitman discovered the book in an independent book shop. They share writing credit, but as far as I knew, Reitman had written the whole thing himself (at least that was my impression).
I was completely shocked that Avatar beat what I consider to be the best film of 2009 at the Golden Globes, but was even more shocked to find out that there might be more behind the story than I had originally thought.
Articles
