We are engaging in something that is usually not covered in screenwriting courses, screenwriting classes or even professional screenwriting workshops.  I’ve written on this subject previously but I’d like to go into it with more depth now.

You had the wisdom to reach out to someone who really understands screenplays.  They weren’t just giving you feedback regarding your typos or weak dialogue, they actually understood exactly what you were going for and now they’ve given you notes on how to take your work to a whole new level.

Do you immediately rush in and do the notes?  I don’t think so.  First you should mull over exactly what that professional was commenting on.  You see how much deeper you can take your characters, how you missed opportunities to enrich the theme even more and you now see how there are structural problems that need addressing.

Okay, take a deep breath and start to write a new outline.  Don’t just rush in where fools tend to go.  No, you want to really think about this for awhile and lay out your game plan in terms of how you’re going to fix the problems you’re having.

So you re-outline the story.  You will see now that the new draft you’re going to do will be a whole new screenplay.  It will have the same characters and the same basic storyline but it will be a new creation.  That’s good.  That’s very good, because a screenplay should evolve.

It’s been written that there are 3 films: there’s the film written by the screenwriter(s), there’s the film that’s shot by the director and there’s the film that ends up on the screen after the editing process.

Well, we can say the same thing about your creation.  There’s the film you’ve written on your first draft, and there’s subsequent films after you’ve done each rewrite.  They’re all different.  Some are substantially different and some are only different in small but key ways.

Allow your screenplay to change.  I get writers at times who cling on ferociously to what they’ve already done and are reluctant to hear ideas on how their screenplay can improve.  That tells me the writer is insecure, insecure about his or her talent.

Because if you have confidence in yourself, you want to hear ideas on how to make your screenplay better, you don’t have to cling to what you’ve already done.  It can always be better – it can get better with each draft and it will get better when you attach your screenplay to a great producer or director and they give you more notes to improve your screenplay.

Don’t fight change!  Embrace it.  And that doesn’t mean if you get a note that doesn’t really work, you also must have the confidence to reject it.  You will know instinctively what notes are good and which ones aren’t.  Go with your gut on this.

Then when you’ve re-outlined the screenplay and see clearly the new film you’re about to create, then you start the rewrite.  And more things will change.  And that’s good, too.

We’ll talk more about rewrites in the weeks to come.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

As I explained in my last post, the most common mistake writers make is that they send out their scripts too early.  They don’t get the proper feedback.

And what is the proper feedback – getting someone who is a real professional, hopefully someone who’s had films made and knows what it takes to get a script to the point where it’s ready to go out.

I’m not a big fan of most readers but I’m also very big on getting great notes so you can do the rewrites required to make your screenplay as good as it can possibly be.

So let’s start with this.  How do you know the feedback you’re getting is really excellent and will make your script considerably better?  Or is it just one person’s opinion – are these notes going to make your script different but not necessarily better?

This is how I know I’m getting great notes.  When I calmly listen to the notes and/or read them my eyes light up and I can instantly see the value of what’s being communicated.

In other words, I can’t wait to do the rewrite; because I know it’s going to make the work deeper and richer.  I can immediately sense that this reader or professional really does get what I’m going for and is going to make my movie that much better, not make his movie better.

What do I mean by that?  Some readers or industry professionals don’t really get your film and want you to write their film instead.

I remember John Sayles (Lone Star, Matewan, Eight Men Out) making this point in an interview.  He didn’t want to do another rewrite because the studio notes weren’t truly addressed to what he was doing. Those kind of notes make a script different, but they’re not going to really make it appreciably more emotional or have more depth and thus more marketable.

Those aren’t good notes.  We want someone who really gets screenplays and what makes them work.  They aren’t so concerned with each little minor thing they come across, like weak dialogue here or there, but they’re going for the jugular.  What is this film really about?  What is the real gold they writer is digging here?  How can we make the heart of this film more powerful?  The characters more complex?  The emotional moments more poignant?

Let’s think about this in the coming weeks.  Ask me if you’re interested in getting a private consultation for your screenplay.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

Recently, I’ve gotten on a tangent about marketing, rather than the techniques to improve your screenwriting skills.  I want to stay on this path a little bit longer.

Despite what I posted about the ineffectiveness of most readers, the biggest mistake I see all screenwriters make when they first attempt to market their scripts – the beginners more so than the pros – they send out their material before it’s ready.

It’s easy to see why this occurs.  We’re all jazzed when we finish our scripts.  I just completed my first novel with my writing partner and I’m very excited about.  This is the way it should be.

But that doesn’t mean I’m ready to present it to the world yet.  This passion and enthusiasm should be tempered by good sense.  First I need to see what I’ve missed.  Although we’ve been workshopping this project for months now, getting feedback from other writers – I now want to get professional feedback from someone who knows nothing about the project.

In my last post about my skepticism about most readers, if I don’t use readers then how do I get this feedback?  Well, actually there are one or two professionals I do like when it comes to coverage.  So I don’t say all readers are terrible.  I’m just very careful about who I want to give me feedback.

When I was first starting out as a writer, I’d get my girlfriend(s) at the time to read what I was writing.  And of course she would just respond: “It’s wonderful, honey.”  So that didn’t help much.  Then I found other writers who I respected to give me a read or producers who I had met or their development people.

What isn’t communicating?  Are there any characters that aren’t grabbing the reader’s attention?  Any characters I can dispense with altogether?  Any plot problems?  Any areas that are slowing the story down?  Awkward narrative?  On-the-nose dialogue?  Missed opportunities to make the reader care more about emotional moments?

At this point you have to be tough with yourself.  You have to get some distance on your material so you can be as objective as possible.  And you want to find those gifted and experienced individuals who are trained to give professional feedback.  Not just someone you pulled out of a hat or advertised themselves on the internet.

If you get really good feedback and make your screenplay or novel 25% better, do you think you’ll have a better chance of selling it?  Of course you will.  That 25% may be the crucial difference between a pass and a recommend.  And if the producer sees the professionalism of your writing, he or she will be much more willing to work with you to make the project even better.

We’ll talk more about this subject in the weeks to come.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

My take on readers is very cynical.  The reason for this is that most readers are frustrated screenwriters themselves, they’ve never had a film made and even worse, they’re right out of film school.

Film school taught them how to be scholarly and critical but didn’t teach them a darn thing about getting their films made or anything really about the film business.

The typical reader who does coverage for a film studio or production company or film contest is not being rewarded to find those films that have a good chance of getting made.  They’re being paid to be as nitpicky as possible and to show how clever they are in the jibes they take at the writers they’re judging.

That’s not what you want when you’re looking for an objective take on your screenplay.  You want someone who actually knows what it takes to get a screenplay into good enough shape to be bought or optioned for production.  You want someone whose gotten films made or at least has been through the process as a producer or production assistant.

I had a reader once as one of my students and over two years of doing coverage for big production companies he passed on two or three films that actually got made.  I asked him if he was fired or reprimanded for this.  Not at all, he told me.  One of the scripts was “Elf,” which eventually starred Will Ferrell.  He passed on Elf and there was no blowback from his bosses?  How could this be?

Because it’s always safe for a reader to pass, it’s when he recommends something that he’s in some danger.  Then his bosses want to read the script and if they don’t think it’s good they blame him.  How could he possibly like this crap?  So most readers pass on everything.

The right person to do coverage for you is not only smart enough to find clever solutions to the problems you’re having but is excited about finding projects that actually are commercial and have a chance of getting made.

Almost anyone can sense when something is wrong in a screenplay.  But it’s the creative individual that can come up with the right ideas in fixing those problems.  They need to be creative themselves, not nitpicky critics.

I’m amazed that even development people, your directors of development and creative heads at most companies don’t have a clue about how to fix the problems in a screenplay.  They can point out areas that aren’t working but the true talent comes in brainstorming to fix those problems.

And that’s not to say you don’t need professional feedback before you send a script out.  The biggest mistake most screenwriters make is that they attempt to market screenplays before they’re ready.

So go to people who have gotten films made themselves, who are creative in their approach, who have professional credits and actually have a stake in finding the next Elf.  I’ve found a few of them over the years.  If you’re interested, get in touch and I’ll let you know who I’d recommend.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

Once again, these are not the normal topics you will be exposed to in screenwriting courses, screenwriting classes or most screenwriting workshops.  That’s why these posts were created, to provide information you wouldn’t find from most books or classes.

My latest foray into creating a brand – and that is what you’re doing in effect when you create a following for your story and concept – is to explore the idea of self publishing on Amazon, Barnes and Noble and on Apple.

Each one of these companies have ereaders:  Kindle for Amazon, the Nook for Barnes and Noble and the Ipad for Apple.  In addition to this, many people download books on their phones and will read them when they’re at a café, or have a moment between meetings, etc.

This is the future, my friends.  Last year, more books were downloaded on Amazon than paper books.  One of five people last year in the U.S. read an ebook.  I know there are still lots of hold-outs who love the heft of a book, the feel and smell of a book, but that is not the future of publishing.  Even college course books are now being downloaded by students.

We need to take advantage of this trend and consider whether our screenplay project would make a good ebook.  As I mentioned last week, the buyers don’t really know what’s commercial.  They’re lawyers now and business people, not filmmakers or creative people.  All they know is that they have a package – here’s a screenplay with a director attached, a star attached possibly, and a producer they trust.

But even more attractive to them is the fact that this project already is branded.  That is, it’s already performed well as a graphic novel, a comic book, a published novel, or an ebook.  It proves to them people have already shown interest in the concept.  Sometimes it doesn’t have to be a big audience either.  But there is a following, and these readers love the story and characters.

So that shows the buyers it’s marketable.

Like I said, not all screenplay projects will translate well as an ebook.  But genre material does exceptionally well – romance, paranormal romance, science fiction, fantasy.  These are great genres for ebooks.

Do you have a project that would make a great ebook?  Have you ever thought about writing it as a book?  Even though you’ve never written prose, it doesn’t mean that you can’t.

The screenwriters I’ve talked to who’ve gone this route universally have loved the process.  It allows them to go much deeper into their characters.  It’s given them more control over their projects as now they’re the sellers, they can create the buzz and the interest – it makes them feel more self determined, not just at the mercy of those faceless buyers out there.

I know when one of my close friends and colleagues came to me with this idea I was initially very hesitant as I didn’t know anything about writing books.  But then I saw the light and realized all the advantages of being proactive like this.  Let’s give this more thought in the weeks to come.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

You probably haven’t really had much guidance in this area in your screenwriting courses, screenwriting classes or screenwriting workshops you’ve attended.

This current environment we’re in is exceptionally competitive and we need to figure out ways to make our projects rise above the crowd.

How do we do that?  Well, there are many strategies.  We need to promote our screenplays.  We can do that by entering screenwriting competitions, promoting our projects on inktip.com and virtualpitchfest.com

We obviously need to work long and hard on our loglines and on our one page synopsis so buyers will see the core story and the marketability of what we’re doing.  If they read a great one page of our project it gives them confidence the writing of the screenplay is also professional.

We hit up all our contacts, our friends in the industry, anyone who has relationships with industry pros and see if we can’t share those contacts.  We might also go to pitch fests like the ones given by Fade In and The Great American PitchFest, giving us an opportunity to pitch our projects to producers and agents.

We have to do all this if we don’t have an agent or manager, whose job it is to market our material.

But there are also other ways to get the attention of the buyers.  Michael Blake who wrote “Dancing With Wolves” was friends with Kevin Costner, who read his screenplay.  He liked it but advised Michael to write it as a novel as it would make it easier to sell.

Even at that time, a western with Indians was not considered commercial.  So Blake did that and it was sold to the studio as they had a book with a following which gave them confidence the movie would have a following as well.

As we all know, many films are based on books or graphic novels.  The reason for this is simple.  The studio heads don’t have a clue what is commercial.  But if a screenplay is based on a pre-existing work which has an audience, this gives them confidence the film will also be successful.

“The Invention of Hugo Cabret” is a perfect example.  The film “Hugo” was based on this book, which became very popular.  It was actually more of a graphic novel with many illustrations amidst the prose.

Now with ebooks on Amazon, Barnes and Noble and Apple, you don’t need a publisher to get your book published.  You can self publish for a very small investment.  John Locke (“How I sold a million books on Amazon”) and Amanda Hocking have had tremendous success doing this.  We will talk about this strategy in the weeks to come.  It’s something my writing partner, Dale Pitman, and I are exploring ourselves for one of our screenplays.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

The one thing we haven’t factored into our discussion of the film is that this is an adaptation of a beloved novel, really more of a graphic novel as it has many, many illustrations.  There is a large devoted audience that loves this book and the story, both young people and old.  And that is one of the reasons this movie is getting made, because it’s already got an audience.  It’s branded in effect.

We will talk about branding your project in the near future!!!

But back to Hugo.  Will the fact that this screenplay is based on a popular book effect the writing of the screenplay?  Of course it will as the filmmakers don’t want to turn off all the fans that already love the novel.  They would clearly be hesitant to significantly change story points in the book as this would anger the book’s fan base.

So what do the filmmakers do?  They try and stay as faithful to the book as possible.

And therefore, even though the story has some major flaws in terms of creating deep emotional moments between the characters, the filmmakers are leery of changing the major story points, because this will anger the book’s fan base, who will all certainly make sure to come see the movie.

So, this is a quandary for the intelligent producer, director, studio heads.  If they are intelligent enough to see the flaws, should they fix them and thus alienate the book’s fans?  Probably not is their reasoning.  If the book was so popular, then despite the story problems, the audience loved the book nevertheless.  So why create a firestorm of controversy?  Why not go with what has already worked?

Let me know your thinking about this.

Next week we’ll talk more about creating those deep emotional moments I keep talking about.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

As a part of this analysis, I thought you’d all be interested to hear what Brian Selznick thought of the film adaptation of his book, “The Invention of Hugo Cabret.” This article appeared last month in The Writers Guild Magazine.

As you will see, Brian was extremely happy with the work John Logan did, the screenwriter of the film:

“Sometimes, from what I hear, authors are unhappy with the film adaptation of their books.  Sometimes authors feel that the decisions made to their original stories obscure their vision and leave them feeling alienated and unhappy.  That’s what I hear anyway.

As for me, let’s just say John Logan asked me to write the preface to his beautiful screenplay adaptation of my book, The Invention of Hugo Cabret.  I jumped at the chance.

I had the great pleasure of reading John Logan’s screenplay from the very first draft.  Right away, he had come up with a new ending that expanded on and completed one of the central scenes in my story, a conversation between the two main characters, Hugo and Isabelle, about what their purpose in   life might be.  That’s when I knew the screenplay was going to be brilliant.  John kept the dialogue spare.  I love the fact that there are no spoken words for the first several minutes of the movie.  The world of the Parisian train station station, Hugo’s world, unfolds visually, just like it does in my book.”

So as you can see, Brian Selznick had no problem with this adaptation.  There is one scene that bothered and that’s what I’d like to point out in this post.  He continues:

“Sometimes, though, I admit I just couldn’t understand the changes.  For instance, in my original book, Hugo keeps the fact that he lives in the walls of the train station as a closely guarded secret.  After he meets Isabelle, who wants to know where he lives, he goes out of his way to hide the answer from her.  Isabelle manages to track Hugo down, wrestle him to the floor, and force him to explain what’s going on.  It’s a rough, uncomfortable scene, and it unfolds over many pages.  In the screenplay, however, Isabelle simply says, “Hugo, where do you live?” while the two characters are standing on a bridge.  Hugo points towards the train station and says, “There.”

What? I thought.  That’s it!

I was really disappointed by this scene as written on the page.  But I happened to be on the set in London when Scorsese filmed it with Asa Butterfield and Chloe Grace Morentz.  The kids were standing on a fake bridge in front of a green screen that would eventually become the River Seine.  I watched Asa and Chloe perform this moment together.  Chloe gently asked the question, “Hugo… where do you live?” and Asa paused.  You could see him making a thousand decisions in his mind, deciding whether or not to trust her.

John had actually provided these directions in the script, which at first I’d overlooked:  “He stops.  Looks at her.  Should he tell her?  Should he trust her?  Yes.”  Slowly Asa lifted his arm and pointed behind him.  “There,” he said quietly.  Tears came to my eyes as he pointed toward the train station.  It was so simple and yet so moving.  And it was perfect for the screen, just as John knew it would be.”

Whatever weaknesses we have found in the basic building blocks of this story, you see here the inherent difference between film and prose.  What might take pages and pages to describe in a book, can be captured with a look or a brief interchange on screen.

The more succinct we are in writing with pictures, telling a story visually, the more powerful it will be on screen when translated by the director and the actors.

We will discuss more important lessons about screenwriting, using Hugo as our model.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

If you remember from your screenwriting courses, screenwriting classes or even screenwriting workshops, much was said about dialogue and character development, but probably little was said about the very nuts and bolts of what made a script work.

Hugo is such a wonderful film to analyze because of its flaws.  It leads me to discuss exactly what great art is.  It isn’t technical greatness.  In other words, craft is not what makes great art.  Great art requires just enough craft to communicate the deep emotional feelings of your characters.

The writers with the greatest craft, James Joyce comes to mind, is not for me the greatest writer.  Charles Dickens, a much more popular writer, for me, is a greater novelist. Joyce had great abilities when it came to crafting prose, but it was Dickens who moved us.

Who will be read more in the next 100 years?  Will it be Joyce or Dickens?  I think Dickens wins hands down.  He had exceptional craft but it was not his craft that will live on for centuries to come.  It’s his characters – Oliver Twist, David Copperfield, Mrs. Haversham, and Macawber and all those wonderful characters who move us so deeply.

So take heart you writers who worry so much about your talent.  It is not the most talented writers who prosper.  It is those writers who have the relentless determination to prosper and who can delve deeply into their characters and move us emotionally.

It takes just enough talent to achieve those ends.  Martin Scorsese and John Logan, the director and writer of Hugo, both have enormous talents.  And yet because they ignored what truly creates emotional resonance with an audience, failed in their quest to make us care.

When I read this screenplay, I had a hard time getting through it through from beginning to end.  I admired the writing, I loved the style, but I was not truly gripped by the story.  I wasn’t compelled to keep turning those pages. This is the mark of a great screenplay.  You have to keep turning the pages to see what is going to happen to the characters.

A great example is the climax of Hugo.  The young boy rushes back to the train station to show Georges the Automaton.  There’s all this action and suspense but what are the stakes involved if Hugo doesn’t succeed?  What are the consequences in his failure.  There are none really.  Georges won’t see the Automaton and Hugo won’t be able to show it to him.  Those are not significant enough stakes.

In your screenplays, make sure there are real tangible consequences to success or failure.  Make us care deeply about the stakes of the story.  If you do that, you will make us feel deeply and that is what true art is really all about.

We’ll talk more about creating deep emotional moments in your stories in the weeks to come.

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this:

Now we are exploring the problems with this story and analyzing why it doesn’t effect us more emotionally than it does.

I wish in more screenwriting courses, screenwriting classes in college and elsewhere and even in most screenwriting workshops, more instructors would zero in on these kind of fundamental concerns – the very building blocks of what makes a great screenplay.

The basic problem in Hugo is the stakes of the story.  These stakes that you build into your screenplay is what makes an audience bond with your characters.  The stakes have to be significant – they can’t just be intellectual puzzles like the mystery plot in Hugo.

And because the stakes aren’t high and nothing is directly effecting Hugo and why he has to solve the mystery of Georges (the toy store owner), we are left admiring the film but not becoming deeply engrossed in it.

The Screenwriter John Logan tries to raise the stakes by having the Station Master (played admirably by Sasha Baron Cohen) lurking around and almost capturing Hugo as a vagrant. When Hugo is being chased he drops a screwdriver and is almost discovered.

All this attempts to prop up what is a fundamental flaw – what will happen to Hugo if he doesn’t solve the mystery of the toy store owner.  Will he die?  Will his life be destroyed in some way?  Will his whole life fall apart?

Compare this to another kid’s film:  E.T. Elliott, the young protagonist has found an adorable new friend, E.T., who desperately needs to go back to his home planet.  Scientists get closer and closer to where E.T. now lives. Finally at the end of Act 2 they find him and prevent E.T. from going home. What really drives the stakes here – E.T. is getting sicker. He has to get home! Elliott has to help him or his little friend will die.

This is what Steven Spielberg understands so well. This is really what makes a film work on an emotional level. In Jaws, ET, Indiana Jones, Schindler’s List … The heart of the movie has real stakes.  If the protagonists don’t achieve their goals terrible things will happen.  That’s why we care when we’re watching these films. I don’t think Scorsese gets this in the same way that Spielberg does.

We’ll discuss this area of high emotional stakes in the weeks to come.  It is the make/break point of a successful screenplay!

Until then – KEEP WRITING!

Share this: