[Quick Summary: As three sisters juggle how to care for their dying father, old resentments and memories resurface.]
This script was ok, but not my favorite.
However, I did like the scene below. It shows us that Eve is already the responsible, steady, middle child at age 16, all in one scene:
ex. "INT. LIVING ROOM - WESTWOOD HOUSE - CONTINUOUS
Lou, his back to her, is pouring Scotch.
He turns and looks at his daughter. A sheepish smile.
LOU: Hey. I'm all you've got.
He sinks down on the couch, glass in hand and, while still sitting up, passes out.
HOLD ON THE ROOM a beat...
Eve looks at him. She walks over and takes the glass out of his hand and puts it on the table.
She picks up his feet and moves them onto the couch. He is now half-sitting, half-lying, in a very awkward position.
A beat while Eve evaluates whether she has doe all she can. Then, slowly and quietly, she backs out of the room.
ROLL CREDITS
END CREDITS"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I could tell a lot about who Eve was and her maturity level, from her actions in just one scene.
Hanging Up (2000)(draft dated 4/29/97)
by Nora Ephron and Delia Ephron
Based on the novel by Delia Ephron
Monday, December 31, 2018
Sunday, December 23, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Altered States (1980) - Dialogue + Rhythm = Building to a Specific Emotion
[Quick Summary: In his search for the Ultimate Truth, a scientist becomes obsessed with a little known drug that brings his altered state of consciousness into reality.]
I had difficulty getting my mind around this script. The story is odd:
- The ambivalent scientist agrees to marry another scientist, who loves him.
- She accepts that he's not sure what love is. He says it's the only way to keep her.
- Seven years and two kids later, they divorce.
- She still loves him, but he sees his life as a sham.
- He leaves her and the kids to search for Self.
- He finds a Mexican hallucinogen that regresses his mind.
- He travels through time and space to his past human origins.
- He takes the hallucinogen home for research and unleashes results so scary that his colleagues and ex-wife try to intervene.
However, my interest in these characters did not diminish despite other distractions.*
Why? I think it's because Paddy Chayefsky knew how to wield words to build clear emotions. In the scene below, he used dialogue + rhythm = feels like bursting out.
A few suggestions as you read:
- Don't be afraid of the length and dense black print.
- Try skimming for content. Focus on HOW he says the words, not WHAT.
- Notice that each paragraph is actually one thought.
- Notice the rhythm is fast, unfettered.
- Each thought (one per paragraph) are verbose BIG ideas + Fast rhythm = Three Big Ideas squashed together in a small space makes it feel like an explosion.
Prior to the scene below:
- Jessup, the protagonist, has just announced to his friend Rosenberg that he is divorcing Emily.
- Jessup then suggests all his friends go to dinner with him and Emily.
ex. "INT. DOM'S RESTAURANT
...If we can make anything out of all this esoteric jabber, it will be Jessup's discourse to Sylvia Rosenberg, sitting at his right. Jessup, who is having a lot more wine than he usually does, is loaded and talking loudly -
JESSUP (to Sylvia Rosenberg): -- As a matter of act, the year I spent in India was disappointing. No matter how you slice it, yoga is still a state-specific technology operating in the service of a n a priori belief system, not much different from other trance-inducing techniques. Of course, the breathing exercises are effective as hell. The breathing becomes an entity in itself, an actual state of consciousness in its own right, so that your body breathing becomes the embodiment of your breath. But it's still a renunciatory technique to achieve a predetermined trance state, what the zen people call an isness, a very pure narcissism, Freud's oceanic feeling. What dignifies the yogic practices is that the belief system itself is not truly religious. There is no Buddhist god per se. It is the Self, the individual Mind, that contains immortality and ultimate truth -
EMILY (interrupting her own colloquy to shout from her end of the table): What the hell's not religious about that? You've simply replaced God with the Original Self!
JESSUP (shouts back): Yes, but we've localized it! At least, we know where the Self is! It's in our own minds! (he stands, not too sturdily) It's a form of human energy! Our atoms are six billion years old! We've got six billion years of memory in our minds! Hell, our hydrogen atoms are even older! (he has begun to weave a bit in and out of his place at the table) Memory is energy! It doesn't disappear! It's still in there! (he wheels to Rosenberg, ignoring the nervous interest he is causing at neighboring tables) There's a physiological pathway to our earlier consciousnesses! There has to be! And I'm telling you it's in the goddamned limbic system! -
PARRISH (roaring happily): Jessup, you are a whacko!
JESSUP: What's whacko about it, Mason? I'm a man in search of his true self. How archtypically American can you get? Everybody's looking for their true selves. We're all trying to fulfill ourselves, understand ourselves, get in touch with ourselves, face the reality of ourselves, explore ourselves, expand ourselves. Ever since we dispensed with God, we've got nothing but ourselves to explain this meaningless horror of life. Well, I think that true self, the original self, that first self is a real, mensurate, quantifiable thing, tangible and incarnate, and I'm going to find the fucker -"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I was impressed that Jessup's emotional life was so strong that I stayed interested, despite the copious scientific gobblety-gook.
Altered States (1980)(undated 1978 draft)
by Paddy Chayefsky
Based on his novel.
* ex. Length (141 pgs.), dense narrative, long scientific exposition, etc.
I had difficulty getting my mind around this script. The story is odd:
- The ambivalent scientist agrees to marry another scientist, who loves him.
- She accepts that he's not sure what love is. He says it's the only way to keep her.
- Seven years and two kids later, they divorce.
- She still loves him, but he sees his life as a sham.
- He leaves her and the kids to search for Self.
- He finds a Mexican hallucinogen that regresses his mind.
- He travels through time and space to his past human origins.
- He takes the hallucinogen home for research and unleashes results so scary that his colleagues and ex-wife try to intervene.
However, my interest in these characters did not diminish despite other distractions.*
Why? I think it's because Paddy Chayefsky knew how to wield words to build clear emotions. In the scene below, he used dialogue + rhythm = feels like bursting out.
A few suggestions as you read:
- Don't be afraid of the length and dense black print.
- Try skimming for content. Focus on HOW he says the words, not WHAT.
- Notice that each paragraph is actually one thought.
- Notice the rhythm is fast, unfettered.
- Each thought (one per paragraph) are verbose BIG ideas + Fast rhythm = Three Big Ideas squashed together in a small space makes it feel like an explosion.
Prior to the scene below:
- Jessup, the protagonist, has just announced to his friend Rosenberg that he is divorcing Emily.
- Jessup then suggests all his friends go to dinner with him and Emily.
ex. "INT. DOM'S RESTAURANT
...If we can make anything out of all this esoteric jabber, it will be Jessup's discourse to Sylvia Rosenberg, sitting at his right. Jessup, who is having a lot more wine than he usually does, is loaded and talking loudly -
JESSUP (to Sylvia Rosenberg): -- As a matter of act, the year I spent in India was disappointing. No matter how you slice it, yoga is still a state-specific technology operating in the service of a n a priori belief system, not much different from other trance-inducing techniques. Of course, the breathing exercises are effective as hell. The breathing becomes an entity in itself, an actual state of consciousness in its own right, so that your body breathing becomes the embodiment of your breath. But it's still a renunciatory technique to achieve a predetermined trance state, what the zen people call an isness, a very pure narcissism, Freud's oceanic feeling. What dignifies the yogic practices is that the belief system itself is not truly religious. There is no Buddhist god per se. It is the Self, the individual Mind, that contains immortality and ultimate truth -
EMILY (interrupting her own colloquy to shout from her end of the table): What the hell's not religious about that? You've simply replaced God with the Original Self!
JESSUP (shouts back): Yes, but we've localized it! At least, we know where the Self is! It's in our own minds! (he stands, not too sturdily) It's a form of human energy! Our atoms are six billion years old! We've got six billion years of memory in our minds! Hell, our hydrogen atoms are even older! (he has begun to weave a bit in and out of his place at the table) Memory is energy! It doesn't disappear! It's still in there! (he wheels to Rosenberg, ignoring the nervous interest he is causing at neighboring tables) There's a physiological pathway to our earlier consciousnesses! There has to be! And I'm telling you it's in the goddamned limbic system! -
PARRISH (roaring happily): Jessup, you are a whacko!
JESSUP: What's whacko about it, Mason? I'm a man in search of his true self. How archtypically American can you get? Everybody's looking for their true selves. We're all trying to fulfill ourselves, understand ourselves, get in touch with ourselves, face the reality of ourselves, explore ourselves, expand ourselves. Ever since we dispensed with God, we've got nothing but ourselves to explain this meaningless horror of life. Well, I think that true self, the original self, that first self is a real, mensurate, quantifiable thing, tangible and incarnate, and I'm going to find the fucker -"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I was impressed that Jessup's emotional life was so strong that I stayed interested, despite the copious scientific gobblety-gook.
Altered States (1980)(undated 1978 draft)
by Paddy Chayefsky
Based on his novel.
* ex. Length (141 pgs.), dense narrative, long scientific exposition, etc.
Monday, December 17, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Rainmaker (1997) - How to Show a Character Revealing Knowledge
[Quick Summary: While studying to take the bar exam, Rudy takes on a case of a dying leukemia patient whose insurance company refused to pay for treatment.]
What is the most interesting way to show a character revealing knowledge, especially when he/she knows something that the audience does not?
I found a few clues in this script:
1) The character does not need to explain everything. It leaves some mystery!
2) Allow for the audience to make the leap of logic (but don't require huge leaps of logic that no one can follow).
Notice below:
1) In the first scene, Rudy has an idea who is wiretapping his phone, but he does not tell us. Instead, there is a cut to a conversation with Rudy and Deck.
2) This leap is easy to follow: Rudy thinks he knows who the wiretapper is --> Rudy and Deck lay a trap for the wiretapper.
ex. INT. CLUB AMBER - DAY
Rudy, Deck and Butch are seated in a corner booth, having drinks and looking at the performers.
BUTCH: The bugging device is manufactured in Czechoslovakia, medium grade in quality, and feeds a transmitter located somewhere close by. It wasn't planted by cops or feds.
DECK: Someone else is listening.
Rudy is stunned.
BUTCH: Who else would it be?
RUDY: I've got an idea. Go to a pay phone...
DISSOLVE TO:
EXT. PAY PHONE - DAY
Deck is at an outdoor pay phone.
DECK (on phone): Just checking in. you need anything from downtown?
INT. RUDY'S OFFICE - DAY
Rudy is on the phone, talking to Deck. He's sewing a button on his jacket.
RUDY: Nah. Oh, guess who wants to settle now?
DECK (O.S.): Who?
RUDY: Dot Black.
DECK (O.S.)(incredulous and phony): Dot Black?
RUDY: Yeah, I stopped by this morning to check on her, took her a fruitcake. She said she just doesn't have the willpower to suffer through the trial, wants to settle right now.
DECK (O.S.): How much?
RUDY: Said she'd take a hundred and seventy five...
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This is a much more creative way of showing what Rudy knows ("I think I know who it is" ---> lay trap) rather than boring exposition.
Rainmaker (1997)(1st draft, dated 7/11/96)
by Francis Ford Coppola
Adapted from the novel by John Grisham
What is the most interesting way to show a character revealing knowledge, especially when he/she knows something that the audience does not?
I found a few clues in this script:
1) The character does not need to explain everything. It leaves some mystery!
2) Allow for the audience to make the leap of logic (but don't require huge leaps of logic that no one can follow).
Notice below:
1) In the first scene, Rudy has an idea who is wiretapping his phone, but he does not tell us. Instead, there is a cut to a conversation with Rudy and Deck.
2) This leap is easy to follow: Rudy thinks he knows who the wiretapper is --> Rudy and Deck lay a trap for the wiretapper.
ex. INT. CLUB AMBER - DAY
Rudy, Deck and Butch are seated in a corner booth, having drinks and looking at the performers.
BUTCH: The bugging device is manufactured in Czechoslovakia, medium grade in quality, and feeds a transmitter located somewhere close by. It wasn't planted by cops or feds.
DECK: Someone else is listening.
Rudy is stunned.
BUTCH: Who else would it be?
RUDY: I've got an idea. Go to a pay phone...
DISSOLVE TO:
EXT. PAY PHONE - DAY
Deck is at an outdoor pay phone.
DECK (on phone): Just checking in. you need anything from downtown?
INT. RUDY'S OFFICE - DAY
Rudy is on the phone, talking to Deck. He's sewing a button on his jacket.
RUDY: Nah. Oh, guess who wants to settle now?
DECK (O.S.): Who?
RUDY: Dot Black.
DECK (O.S.)(incredulous and phony): Dot Black?
RUDY: Yeah, I stopped by this morning to check on her, took her a fruitcake. She said she just doesn't have the willpower to suffer through the trial, wants to settle right now.
DECK (O.S.): How much?
RUDY: Said she'd take a hundred and seventy five...
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This is a much more creative way of showing what Rudy knows ("I think I know who it is" ---> lay trap) rather than boring exposition.
Rainmaker (1997)(1st draft, dated 7/11/96)
by Francis Ford Coppola
Adapted from the novel by John Grisham
Monday, December 10, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: A Simple Twist of Fate (1994) - Updating a Novel; How Do We Know a Character is Changing?
[Quick Summary: After a 1 y.o. girl stumbles into his house, a lonely, gold hoarding, furniture builder raises her as his own child, until her real father show up years later.]
TWO THOUGHTS:
1) UPDATING A NOVEL. This is an excellent update of a 1861 novel. It is humorous. It is sets up and pays off beautifully. The characters are well defined.
However, something was missing for me. Perhaps Rogert Ebert knew why:
This script was helpful in reminding me that we need:
a) To show WHY a character is changing
b) Then to show the character MAKING DIFFERENT DECISIONS than before.
Before the scenes below:
- Michael lost a wife (to infidelity) and a child (he thought was his but it wasn't).
- He now builds custom wood furniture. He cashes in his checks for gold coins.
- He is now fostering Mathilda, a 1 y.o. orphan.
-------------------------------------------------
Scene #1: Why Michael changes. Notice the emotional connections.
ex. "INT. MICHAEL'S WORKSHOP - DAY
Michael is hard at work building a playpen. The child, wearing overly-large safety goggles, watches him. Michael concentrates on his work, and hears something uttered from the child.
MICHAEL (off-handed): What?
MATHILDA: Dad-dy.
He looks at Mathilda and she stares at him giggling. The full importance of what has happened hits him.
--------------------------------------------------
Scene #2: Michael makes a different decision than a previous visit.
ex. INT. MRS. SIMON'S ANTIQUES - DAY
Michael cashes a check at the antique store, but this time, instead of getting gold, he loads up on things a baby might enjoy.
MRS. SIMON: Hope you don't mind me saying it, but it's been a while since you bought something for someone else.
Michael looks at the baby rattle in his hand and recognizes the truth, but responds with a joke:
MICHAEL (straight-faced): This is for me.
He stoically shakes the rattle."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: First, take the time to lay out WHY the character is changing --> Then show the character MAKING A DIFFERENT DECISION.
A Simple Twist of Fate (1994)(drafted dated 8/2/93)
by Steve Martin
Adapted from the novel "Silas Marner," by George Eliot
TWO THOUGHTS:
1) UPDATING A NOVEL. This is an excellent update of a 1861 novel. It is humorous. It is sets up and pays off beautifully. The characters are well defined.
However, something was missing for me. Perhaps Rogert Ebert knew why:
The point is, though, that they are Victorians, living in the last century among fears and mores we no longer possess. When you take a Victorian story and plop it down in the 20th century, as "A Simple Twist of Fate" does, you get a strange interruption of the rhythm - as if the characters are dancing to unheard music. They do things that are inexplicable unless you realize they're living according to the codes and cliches of the last century....Try as I might, I just couldn't accept this Victorian story in modern dress....2) HOW DO WE KNOW A CHARACTER IS CHANGING? This question haunts me. How does one show the process of change??
This script was helpful in reminding me that we need:
a) To show WHY a character is changing
b) Then to show the character MAKING DIFFERENT DECISIONS than before.
Before the scenes below:
- Michael lost a wife (to infidelity) and a child (he thought was his but it wasn't).
- He now builds custom wood furniture. He cashes in his checks for gold coins.
- He is now fostering Mathilda, a 1 y.o. orphan.
-------------------------------------------------
Scene #1: Why Michael changes. Notice the emotional connections.
ex. "INT. MICHAEL'S WORKSHOP - DAY
Michael is hard at work building a playpen. The child, wearing overly-large safety goggles, watches him. Michael concentrates on his work, and hears something uttered from the child.
MICHAEL (off-handed): What?
MATHILDA: Dad-dy.
He looks at Mathilda and she stares at him giggling. The full importance of what has happened hits him.
--------------------------------------------------
Scene #2: Michael makes a different decision than a previous visit.
ex. INT. MRS. SIMON'S ANTIQUES - DAY
Michael cashes a check at the antique store, but this time, instead of getting gold, he loads up on things a baby might enjoy.
MRS. SIMON: Hope you don't mind me saying it, but it's been a while since you bought something for someone else.
Michael looks at the baby rattle in his hand and recognizes the truth, but responds with a joke:
MICHAEL (straight-faced): This is for me.
He stoically shakes the rattle."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: First, take the time to lay out WHY the character is changing --> Then show the character MAKING A DIFFERENT DECISION.
A Simple Twist of Fate (1994)(drafted dated 8/2/93)
by Steve Martin
Adapted from the novel "Silas Marner," by George Eliot
Monday, December 3, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Year of the Dragon (1985) - Showing Respect, With Irony
[Quick Summary: A blunt, newly promoted police captain vows to clear Chinatown of the Asian mafia who is importing heroin.]
TWO RANDOM THOUGHTS:
1) A VERY BLUNT SCRIPT. Stan is a good, but unpopular, cop, who bulldozes anything blocking his mission to wipe out the Asian mafia.
He takes life like a linebacker - hit, move on, hit, move on. He feels things, but there is little contemplation. He is blunt, with little finesse.
This script mimics this: It is mostly action - hit, move on, hit, move on. It is also lonely and sad. Everyone else suffers the consequences of Stan's workaholism.
2) SHOWING RESPECT. There have been many criticisms about this film.
However, I liked one scene in particular because:
- It gives us a rare moment to breathe.
- It simultaneously is credible for this culture (showing respect for one's elders) AND shows irony.
Previous to the scene below:
- Uncle Yung was the mafia leader. Tai was hungry to be leader.
- Uncle Yung's restaurant was just ransacked by thugs.
- Uncle Yung does not know that Tai secretly hired these thugs.
- At the mafia meeting, Tai unseated Uncle Yung.
Notice how Tai is "smoothing Uncle's exit" with a show of respect, yet it is still ironic (we know Tai is responsible, but Yung does not):
ex. "INT. SHANGHAI PALACE - DAY
A half dozen PLASTERERS fill in bullet holes on the wall. Yung is having a cup of tea. two dozen workmen -- PAINTERS, ELECTRICIANS, GLAZIERS are at work already putting the restaurant back in shape.
Joey Tai is sitting with Harry Yung.
A WAITER pours tea for them. Yung's dark-spectacled wife circles in the background.
They sip tea. Pause.
TAI: When will you be able to reopen for business?
YUNG: There is much to do as you can see.
TAI: Yes. It was gracious of you to serve me tea. (stands up) I must go.
Yung stands. The ceremony is brief and private. Tai hands over a red envelop, fat as a small pillow and full of money, with both hands. Yung does not open it.
But gives a sign it has been accepted. If there is pain there is no sign of it on his face. Nothing shows. The transition of power in Chinatown is complete.
As Tai walk out of the restaurant, Yung's wife joins him. Looking at Joey Tai, she mutters in Chinese, which we subtitle.
YUNG'S WIFE: In the presence of your enemy, hide your broken arms in your sleeve."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It's ok to hide facts from the characters, but not the audience. I think this is why the irony works here.
Year of the Dragon (1985)(final draft, 9/4/84)
by Oliver Stone and Michael Cimino
Based on the novel by Robert Daley
TWO RANDOM THOUGHTS:
1) A VERY BLUNT SCRIPT. Stan is a good, but unpopular, cop, who bulldozes anything blocking his mission to wipe out the Asian mafia.
He takes life like a linebacker - hit, move on, hit, move on. He feels things, but there is little contemplation. He is blunt, with little finesse.
This script mimics this: It is mostly action - hit, move on, hit, move on. It is also lonely and sad. Everyone else suffers the consequences of Stan's workaholism.
2) SHOWING RESPECT. There have been many criticisms about this film.
However, I liked one scene in particular because:
- It gives us a rare moment to breathe.
- It simultaneously is credible for this culture (showing respect for one's elders) AND shows irony.
Previous to the scene below:
- Uncle Yung was the mafia leader. Tai was hungry to be leader.
- Uncle Yung's restaurant was just ransacked by thugs.
- Uncle Yung does not know that Tai secretly hired these thugs.
- At the mafia meeting, Tai unseated Uncle Yung.
Notice how Tai is "smoothing Uncle's exit" with a show of respect, yet it is still ironic (we know Tai is responsible, but Yung does not):
ex. "INT. SHANGHAI PALACE - DAY
A half dozen PLASTERERS fill in bullet holes on the wall. Yung is having a cup of tea. two dozen workmen -- PAINTERS, ELECTRICIANS, GLAZIERS are at work already putting the restaurant back in shape.
Joey Tai is sitting with Harry Yung.
A WAITER pours tea for them. Yung's dark-spectacled wife circles in the background.
They sip tea. Pause.
TAI: When will you be able to reopen for business?
YUNG: There is much to do as you can see.
TAI: Yes. It was gracious of you to serve me tea. (stands up) I must go.
Yung stands. The ceremony is brief and private. Tai hands over a red envelop, fat as a small pillow and full of money, with both hands. Yung does not open it.
But gives a sign it has been accepted. If there is pain there is no sign of it on his face. Nothing shows. The transition of power in Chinatown is complete.
As Tai walk out of the restaurant, Yung's wife joins him. Looking at Joey Tai, she mutters in Chinese, which we subtitle.
YUNG'S WIFE: In the presence of your enemy, hide your broken arms in your sleeve."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It's ok to hide facts from the characters, but not the audience. I think this is why the irony works here.
Year of the Dragon (1985)(final draft, 9/4/84)
by Oliver Stone and Michael Cimino
Based on the novel by Robert Daley
Monday, November 26, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Ishtar (1987) - Laying Out the Why of the "Point of No Return"
[Quick Summary: When two wanna be songwriters get a gig in Ishtar, they stumble into a conspiracy, and become unwitting targets of the C.I.A. and locals.]
TWO THOUGHTS:
a) Funny or Not? I admire Elaine May, so I really wanted this script to be funny.
My conclusion: There were many comic moments, but I did not laugh much.
b) Point of No Return (PNR) = A turning point, or fork in the road, in which a character makes a decision and cannot go back to his previous life.
So WHY would a character venture into the unknown vs. safety?
In this script, I particularly like how May lays out WHY the protagonists decide to go to Morocco:
- Chuck and Lyle must decide whether to take the cheap paying gig in Morocco. [Need to make a decision.]
- In flashback, they relive how they met and what solidified their friendship. [Their belief in each other, they have what it takes.]
- Back to the present, they decide to go to Morocco. [PNR: We'll take the gig.]
The scene below is the flashback. Chuck has threatened to jump off the apartment ledge because he does not think he has talent or a future in songwriting:
ex. "EXT. THE CROWD BELOW
As Lyle's figure comes out on the ledge, the crowd gasps.
ANGLE - CHUCK
He stands pressed against the building, staring straight ahead as Lyle slowly makes his way toward him.
LYLE (calling): Hold on! Hold on, Hawk, I'm coming.
CHUCK: Don't come any closer. And don't call me Hawk.
Far below Two Firemen begin spreading a net.
CHUCK (closing his eyes): I told you not to tell anyone.
LYLE (as he moves steadily closer): I know you did. But I was afraid I wouldn't get here in time. Don't be mad at me, Chuck.
A VOICE CALLS (from the window): Chuck! This is Rabbi Peirce...
CHUCK: Oh, my God! Rabbi Peirce is here!
Lyle reaches Chuck. The two men stand spread-eagled against the building.
LYLE: Gimme your hand, Chuck. (Chuck does not move) Come on. I know how bad you feel, but there are people in the world worse off than you. Poor people, sick people... (after a moment) People who don't have anyone to go out on a ledge for them.
There is a long pause, then Chuck reaches slowly over and takes Lyle's hand. Together, hand in hand, they start toward the window, two small figures, 15 floors above the ground.
CHUCK: Lyle? (a stone falls out of the facing) Are you disappointed in me? I mean, now that you know I'm not the kind of guy you thought I was.
LYLE: You are the kind of guy I thought you were, Chuck. (he kicks gently at a pigeon)
CHUCK: No, I'm not. I lived with my parents until I was 32. I've dribbled my life away...
LYLE: Hey, it takes a lot of nerve not to have anything at your age. Most guys would be ashamed. but you've got the guts to say fuck it...because you'd rather have nothing than settle for less.
CHUCK (after a moment): I never looked at it that way. (he steps over the pigeon) Maybe...maybe I am the kind of guy you thought I was.
The scene wavers and returns to the present."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The script must lay out a character's motives and desires before the PNR.
Here, the flashback shows how Chuck and Lyle fought to become songwriters (motive, desire) --> Of course they would take a cheap paying gig.
Otherwise Lyle would have to return to selling ice cream and pretzels.
Ishtar (1987)(blue draft, 10/11/87)
by Elaine May
TWO THOUGHTS:
a) Funny or Not? I admire Elaine May, so I really wanted this script to be funny.
My conclusion: There were many comic moments, but I did not laugh much.
b) Point of No Return (PNR) = A turning point, or fork in the road, in which a character makes a decision and cannot go back to his previous life.
So WHY would a character venture into the unknown vs. safety?
In this script, I particularly like how May lays out WHY the protagonists decide to go to Morocco:
- Chuck and Lyle must decide whether to take the cheap paying gig in Morocco. [Need to make a decision.]
- In flashback, they relive how they met and what solidified their friendship. [Their belief in each other, they have what it takes.]
- Back to the present, they decide to go to Morocco. [PNR: We'll take the gig.]
The scene below is the flashback. Chuck has threatened to jump off the apartment ledge because he does not think he has talent or a future in songwriting:
ex. "EXT. THE CROWD BELOW
As Lyle's figure comes out on the ledge, the crowd gasps.
ANGLE - CHUCK
He stands pressed against the building, staring straight ahead as Lyle slowly makes his way toward him.
LYLE (calling): Hold on! Hold on, Hawk, I'm coming.
CHUCK: Don't come any closer. And don't call me Hawk.
Far below Two Firemen begin spreading a net.
CHUCK (closing his eyes): I told you not to tell anyone.
LYLE (as he moves steadily closer): I know you did. But I was afraid I wouldn't get here in time. Don't be mad at me, Chuck.
A VOICE CALLS (from the window): Chuck! This is Rabbi Peirce...
CHUCK: Oh, my God! Rabbi Peirce is here!
Lyle reaches Chuck. The two men stand spread-eagled against the building.
LYLE: Gimme your hand, Chuck. (Chuck does not move) Come on. I know how bad you feel, but there are people in the world worse off than you. Poor people, sick people... (after a moment) People who don't have anyone to go out on a ledge for them.
There is a long pause, then Chuck reaches slowly over and takes Lyle's hand. Together, hand in hand, they start toward the window, two small figures, 15 floors above the ground.
CHUCK: Lyle? (a stone falls out of the facing) Are you disappointed in me? I mean, now that you know I'm not the kind of guy you thought I was.
LYLE: You are the kind of guy I thought you were, Chuck. (he kicks gently at a pigeon)
CHUCK: No, I'm not. I lived with my parents until I was 32. I've dribbled my life away...
LYLE: Hey, it takes a lot of nerve not to have anything at your age. Most guys would be ashamed. but you've got the guts to say fuck it...because you'd rather have nothing than settle for less.
CHUCK (after a moment): I never looked at it that way. (he steps over the pigeon) Maybe...maybe I am the kind of guy you thought I was.
The scene wavers and returns to the present."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The script must lay out a character's motives and desires before the PNR.
Here, the flashback shows how Chuck and Lyle fought to become songwriters (motive, desire) --> Of course they would take a cheap paying gig.
Otherwise Lyle would have to return to selling ice cream and pretzels.
Ishtar (1987)(blue draft, 10/11/87)
by Elaine May
Monday, November 19, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Laura (1944) - Building Tension & Suspense Through Characters' Actions
[Quick Summary: A detective falls in love with the murder victim that he's investigating.]
THREE RANDOM THOUGHTS:
1) Wow, what a great read! Fast, suspenseful, twists, and a surprise ending.
2) This is a first for me: This script has three V.O. narrators, who each speak for about 1/3 of the film, and it did not bug me.
3) I thought the writers did an excellent job of building tension and suspense, especially through the characters' actions. What does that look like?
Simply put, the characters did not act as I thought they would. Their behavior is inconsistent. Or they lie when I expect truth. Or they tell the truth and it's weak.
---> As a result, I found myself paying closer attention. What are they doing? Why?
---> This led to me feeling the tension rise. How will this resolve? I need to know!
Let's look at an example. In the scene below:
- Shelby was Laura's fiancee. He is too eager to spill the beans.
- Waldo was the guy she left for Shelby. He is suspicious of everyone.
- Mark is the detective. He is uncomfortable falling for a dead victim.
- The three men are now revisiting the scene of the crime, Laura's apartment. Shelby thinks he knows where Laura kept the key to her country house.
ex. "INT. BEDROOM - FULL SHOT
Shelby is at the bureau as Mark and Waldo enter. Mark sits down, leaning back on the bed, and takes the puzzle from his pocket. He concentrates on it. Shelby suddenly reacts and pulls out a key. [Why is the detective playing with a puzzle NOW?]
SHELBY: I knew I'd seen it around...Here it is...!
He tosses it on the bed beside Mark who pulls his notebook out of his pocket, glances at it, and goes righton with his puzzle. [This is an unexpected reaction. I would've pounced on the key.]
MARK: That's funny. I got a list of the things in that drawer. The key wasn't in there when the place was gone over... [This is a seasoned detective who is tough to impress.]
Shelby looks embarrassed. [He knows that he's been caught.]
WALDO: Then it's made a recent reappearance? [Waldo rubs it in.]
Mark doesn't look up. [No reaction = This is unexpected.]
MARK (quietly to Shelby): You put it in there, didn't you?
SHELBY: Well...I... didn't want to hand it to you while...Waldo was present.
WALDO: Why? I do not habitually collect old keys. [Clever retort.]
SHELBY (still to Mark): I didn't want him to know I had it. It doesn't concern him... [A confession that will spike Waldo's fury.]
FULL SHOT - ANOTHER ANGLE
Mark just leans back, balancing the puzzle, as Shelby and Waldo turn toward each other like fighting cocks. [Note how the writers use conflicting motives of Shelby vs.Waldo to ratchet up the tension first with words, then behavior.]
WALDO (complacently): Everything about Laura concerns me -- perhaps more than you. [Mild dismissal.]
SHELBY (cuttingly): really? But she happened to decide to marry me. [Stronger dismissal.]
WALDO (bristling): That may have been a fatal decision! [Accusation.]
SHELBY (with quiet anger): For your own good, Waldo, I'm warning you to stop implying that I had anything to do with Laura's death. [Warning shot.]
WALDO: All right, I'll stop implying. I'll make a direct statement. [He calls Shelby out.]
Shelby lunges grimly at Waldo, but Mark simply puts up his leg barring the way. [Words escalate into a physical act.]
MARK (to Waldo): Guys with glass jaws shouldn't lead with their beards, Mr. Lydecker.
MED. FULL SHOT - TOWARD MARK
Waldo glares at Mark, furious at his inattention.
WALDO (raging): Will you please stop fooling with that ridiculous puzzle!! [Frustration gushes out.]
MARK (calmly): No. It keeps me calm... (significantly) And sometimes it makes other people lose their tempers --and say things they wouldn't ordinarily say. [This is the climax of the scene. Now it all makes sense.]
Waldo controls himself. Mark now puts the puzzle away and starts getting up off the bed. He picks up the key and pockets it.
MARK: Maybe we better get going now."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: When someone acts as I do not expect, it makes me more curious. ex. Mark was so casual about clues and deliberately did not rise to the bait.
Laura (1944)(final draft, 11/29/43, with revisions (12/21/43))
by Jay Dratler and Ring Lardner, Jr.*
Based on the novel by Vera Caspary
*On IMDB, the screenplay is credited to Jay Dratler and Samuel Hoffenstein and Betty Reinhardt. Ring Lardner, Jr., was uncredited, probably due to him being blacklisted during the HUAC era.
THREE RANDOM THOUGHTS:
1) Wow, what a great read! Fast, suspenseful, twists, and a surprise ending.
2) This is a first for me: This script has three V.O. narrators, who each speak for about 1/3 of the film, and it did not bug me.
3) I thought the writers did an excellent job of building tension and suspense, especially through the characters' actions. What does that look like?
Simply put, the characters did not act as I thought they would. Their behavior is inconsistent. Or they lie when I expect truth. Or they tell the truth and it's weak.
---> As a result, I found myself paying closer attention. What are they doing? Why?
---> This led to me feeling the tension rise. How will this resolve? I need to know!
Let's look at an example. In the scene below:
- Shelby was Laura's fiancee. He is too eager to spill the beans.
- Waldo was the guy she left for Shelby. He is suspicious of everyone.
- Mark is the detective. He is uncomfortable falling for a dead victim.
- The three men are now revisiting the scene of the crime, Laura's apartment. Shelby thinks he knows where Laura kept the key to her country house.
ex. "INT. BEDROOM - FULL SHOT
Shelby is at the bureau as Mark and Waldo enter. Mark sits down, leaning back on the bed, and takes the puzzle from his pocket. He concentrates on it. Shelby suddenly reacts and pulls out a key. [Why is the detective playing with a puzzle NOW?]
SHELBY: I knew I'd seen it around...Here it is...!
He tosses it on the bed beside Mark who pulls his notebook out of his pocket, glances at it, and goes righton with his puzzle. [This is an unexpected reaction. I would've pounced on the key.]
MARK: That's funny. I got a list of the things in that drawer. The key wasn't in there when the place was gone over... [This is a seasoned detective who is tough to impress.]
Shelby looks embarrassed. [He knows that he's been caught.]
WALDO: Then it's made a recent reappearance? [Waldo rubs it in.]
Mark doesn't look up. [No reaction = This is unexpected.]
MARK (quietly to Shelby): You put it in there, didn't you?
SHELBY: Well...I... didn't want to hand it to you while...Waldo was present.
WALDO: Why? I do not habitually collect old keys. [Clever retort.]
SHELBY (still to Mark): I didn't want him to know I had it. It doesn't concern him... [A confession that will spike Waldo's fury.]
FULL SHOT - ANOTHER ANGLE
Mark just leans back, balancing the puzzle, as Shelby and Waldo turn toward each other like fighting cocks. [Note how the writers use conflicting motives of Shelby vs.Waldo to ratchet up the tension first with words, then behavior.]
WALDO (complacently): Everything about Laura concerns me -- perhaps more than you. [Mild dismissal.]
SHELBY (cuttingly): really? But she happened to decide to marry me. [Stronger dismissal.]
WALDO (bristling): That may have been a fatal decision! [Accusation.]
SHELBY (with quiet anger): For your own good, Waldo, I'm warning you to stop implying that I had anything to do with Laura's death. [Warning shot.]
WALDO: All right, I'll stop implying. I'll make a direct statement. [He calls Shelby out.]
Shelby lunges grimly at Waldo, but Mark simply puts up his leg barring the way. [Words escalate into a physical act.]
MARK (to Waldo): Guys with glass jaws shouldn't lead with their beards, Mr. Lydecker.
MED. FULL SHOT - TOWARD MARK
Waldo glares at Mark, furious at his inattention.
WALDO (raging): Will you please stop fooling with that ridiculous puzzle!! [Frustration gushes out.]
MARK (calmly): No. It keeps me calm... (significantly) And sometimes it makes other people lose their tempers --and say things they wouldn't ordinarily say. [This is the climax of the scene. Now it all makes sense.]
Waldo controls himself. Mark now puts the puzzle away and starts getting up off the bed. He picks up the key and pockets it.
MARK: Maybe we better get going now."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: When someone acts as I do not expect, it makes me more curious. ex. Mark was so casual about clues and deliberately did not rise to the bait.
Laura (1944)(final draft, 11/29/43, with revisions (12/21/43))
by Jay Dratler and Ring Lardner, Jr.*
Based on the novel by Vera Caspary
*On IMDB, the screenplay is credited to Jay Dratler and Samuel Hoffenstein and Betty Reinhardt. Ring Lardner, Jr., was uncredited, probably due to him being blacklisted during the HUAC era.
Monday, November 12, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Young Frankenstein (1974) - A Lesson in Physical Gags & Page Length
[Quick Summary: In Transylvania, American Dr. Frederick Frankenstein attempts to follow his grandfather's notes on how to reanimate a body.]
I've noticed that I'm often too paranoid about script length.
This pressure results in heavy handed, lead filled writing. NOT enjoyable to read.
This script reminds me that comedy is a give and take, and needs to be free to spin, backtrack, meander, etc. Physical gags especially need plenty of room on the page.
The physical gag scene below is about 2 1/4 pgs.
Also, note that it is a big story point as well (Monster can be controlled by sedatives).
ex. "INT. LABORATORY
...Igor nervously takes out a cigarette from his pocket and strikes a match, and:
MONSTER: MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM! [A-ha! The Monster is afraid of fire!]
FREDDY (to the Monster): What is it? What's the matter??
The Monster grabs Freddy's throat.
FREDDY: Quick, give him the --
The Monster squeezes. Freddy can't make a sound. Monster relaxes his hands for a split second.
FREDDY: Quick, give him the --
The Monster tightens his hands, Freddy can't make a sound.
IGOR: WHAT? GIVE HIM THE WHAT?
Freddy points desperately to the Monster's arm. [The hijinks begin.]
IGOR: Arm! Give him the Arm!
Freddy shakes his head "no." He pushes his thumb against his two forefingers -- miming the giving of an injection. [To keep things clear, the writers let the reader in on the punchline. I liked that they kept the characters, but not the reader, guessing.]
IGOR: Give him a cigarette?!
Freddy shakes his head "no" and holds up three fingers. [I like these charades b/c they use visuals vs. language.]
IGOR: Three syllables!
Freddy nods "yes." He holds up one finger.
IGOR: First syllable.
Freddy cups his hand to his ear.
IGOR: Sounds like...
Freddy points to his head.
INGA: Head!
Freddy nods "yes."
INGA: Sounds like 'head.' Said??
Freddy nods "yes," jubilantly.
INGA AND IGOR: Said!
Freddy holds up two fingers.
INGA: Second syllable!
Freddy mimes "tiny" with his fingers.
INGA: Little word!
Freddy nods "yes."
INGA: The?
Freddy shakes his head "no."
IGOR: A?
Freddy touches his nose.
IGOR: 'On the nose.' Said -- a -- ...
INGA: Said -- a...
IGOR: DIRTY WORD! He said a dirty word!?
Freddy shakes his head "no" and cups his hand to his ear.
INGA AND IGOR: Sounds like...
Freddy mimes "give."
INGA: GIVE?
Freddy nods "yes" furiously.
IGOR: SAID -- A -- GIVE!?? Give him a 'said-a-give!'
Freddy shakes his head "no."
INGA: 'TIVE!' SEDATIVE!
Freddy weakly points to his nose.
IGOR: On the nosey.
Inga runs to the table and gets the hypodermic. Then runs back and jams it into the Monster's tush.
The Monster's eyes FREEZE. Then he looks at each of them... his hands still clutching Freddy's neck. Then he COLLAPSES like a giant tree."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I give myself permission to mute the "page length" radar. Form (page length) over function (funny on the page) is pressure that I don't need.
Young Frankenstein (1974)(4th draft, 2/7/74)
by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks
I've noticed that I'm often too paranoid about script length.
This pressure results in heavy handed, lead filled writing. NOT enjoyable to read.
This script reminds me that comedy is a give and take, and needs to be free to spin, backtrack, meander, etc. Physical gags especially need plenty of room on the page.
The physical gag scene below is about 2 1/4 pgs.
Also, note that it is a big story point as well (Monster can be controlled by sedatives).
ex. "INT. LABORATORY
...Igor nervously takes out a cigarette from his pocket and strikes a match, and:
MONSTER: MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM! [A-ha! The Monster is afraid of fire!]
FREDDY (to the Monster): What is it? What's the matter??
The Monster grabs Freddy's throat.
FREDDY: Quick, give him the --
The Monster squeezes. Freddy can't make a sound. Monster relaxes his hands for a split second.
FREDDY: Quick, give him the --
The Monster tightens his hands, Freddy can't make a sound.
IGOR: WHAT? GIVE HIM THE WHAT?
Freddy points desperately to the Monster's arm. [The hijinks begin.]
IGOR: Arm! Give him the Arm!
Freddy shakes his head "no." He pushes his thumb against his two forefingers -- miming the giving of an injection. [To keep things clear, the writers let the reader in on the punchline. I liked that they kept the characters, but not the reader, guessing.]
IGOR: Give him a cigarette?!
Freddy shakes his head "no" and holds up three fingers. [I like these charades b/c they use visuals vs. language.]
IGOR: Three syllables!
Freddy nods "yes." He holds up one finger.
IGOR: First syllable.
Freddy cups his hand to his ear.
IGOR: Sounds like...
Freddy points to his head.
INGA: Head!
Freddy nods "yes."
INGA: Sounds like 'head.' Said??
Freddy nods "yes," jubilantly.
INGA AND IGOR: Said!
Freddy holds up two fingers.
INGA: Second syllable!
Freddy mimes "tiny" with his fingers.
INGA: Little word!
Freddy nods "yes."
INGA: The?
Freddy shakes his head "no."
IGOR: A?
Freddy touches his nose.
IGOR: 'On the nose.' Said -- a -- ...
INGA: Said -- a...
IGOR: DIRTY WORD! He said a dirty word!?
Freddy shakes his head "no" and cups his hand to his ear.
INGA AND IGOR: Sounds like...
Freddy mimes "give."
INGA: GIVE?
Freddy nods "yes" furiously.
IGOR: SAID -- A -- GIVE!?? Give him a 'said-a-give!'
Freddy shakes his head "no."
INGA: 'TIVE!' SEDATIVE!
Freddy weakly points to his nose.
IGOR: On the nosey.
Inga runs to the table and gets the hypodermic. Then runs back and jams it into the Monster's tush.
The Monster's eyes FREEZE. Then he looks at each of them... his hands still clutching Freddy's neck. Then he COLLAPSES like a giant tree."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I give myself permission to mute the "page length" radar. Form (page length) over function (funny on the page) is pressure that I don't need.
Young Frankenstein (1974)(4th draft, 2/7/74)
by Gene Wilder and Mel Brooks
Monday, November 5, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Big Red One (1980) - The Added Value of First Hand Experience
[Quick Summary: A sergeant of the 1st squad and his four men struggle to survive ground battle in WWII.]
I didn't particularly like this script, as it has all the things I dislike: It is episodic, has no overall story, has short bursts of peace, then friendly fire, etc.
It's closer to real life, more an anthology than a narrative film.
However, I think all this is intentional and I admire the attempt.
Writer and director Samuel Fuller was a soldier in WWII and wanted to portray it as it really is - episodic, no overall story, etc., without the typical Hollywood gloss.
I thought Fuller's first hand experience was particularly evident in how real the characters seemed to act and react to the chaos of war.
In the scene below:
- Sergeant and his men have killed the Germans who plowed their tank into a Sicilian's home.
- Vinci realizes it is his grandmother's home and thinks she is under the tank.
- The 'war souvenir' detail could only be told by someone who had been there.
ex. "TANK IN HOME
...VINCI (screaming): Nonna! Nonna! Nonna!
He dashes between tank and wall of house, kicking aside smashed furniture, throwing things that are in his path, searching for his grandmother. Crying and screaming like a madman, he collapses against the tank and his body jerks with sobs as the horror of what happened smashes him in the gut.
VINCI: Nonna!...Nonna!
His body jerks with sobs.
AN OLD LADY'S VOICE (in Italian - gentle): Are you American?
The Lieutenant, Sergeant and Griffith turn.
AN OLD ITALIAN LADY
Tiny, white-haired protruding from under black shawl, in typical black peasant dress, black shoes, advances apologetically. She looks like a saint. She continues in Italian.
OLD LADY: I have come for my crucifix, please.
She moves past them as CAMERA ANGLES TO Vinci on floor sobbing against the tank. She timidly approaches him, sees the crucifix in his hand - and then the photograph.
OLD LADY (kindly): I know soldiers like war souvenirs but please do not take that photograph.
She edges closer, starts to pull photo from his hand. He jerks it away, lifts his tear-splashed anguished face.
OLD LADY: Please, it is my photograph.
VINCI (in Italian): Your photograph?
OLD LADY: Ah, you speak Italian! It is of my son and his wife. They live in America. Why are you weeping, my son?
It is too much for him. He pulls her down, burying his head against her and his body shakes.
VINCI (sobbing): Nonna! Nonna! I am Antonio Vinci!
She breaks into cold sweat, crosses herself and begins to sob as she covers her grandson with kisses."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I'm not sure anyone else could have written and made this film. It has a rawness of authenticity. Anyone else would be only approximating.
The Big Red One (1980)(3/20/58 draft)
by Samuel Fuller
I didn't particularly like this script, as it has all the things I dislike: It is episodic, has no overall story, has short bursts of peace, then friendly fire, etc.
It's closer to real life, more an anthology than a narrative film.
However, I think all this is intentional and I admire the attempt.
Writer and director Samuel Fuller was a soldier in WWII and wanted to portray it as it really is - episodic, no overall story, etc., without the typical Hollywood gloss.
I thought Fuller's first hand experience was particularly evident in how real the characters seemed to act and react to the chaos of war.
In the scene below:
- Sergeant and his men have killed the Germans who plowed their tank into a Sicilian's home.
- Vinci realizes it is his grandmother's home and thinks she is under the tank.
- The 'war souvenir' detail could only be told by someone who had been there.
ex. "TANK IN HOME
...VINCI (screaming): Nonna! Nonna! Nonna!
He dashes between tank and wall of house, kicking aside smashed furniture, throwing things that are in his path, searching for his grandmother. Crying and screaming like a madman, he collapses against the tank and his body jerks with sobs as the horror of what happened smashes him in the gut.
VINCI: Nonna!...Nonna!
His body jerks with sobs.
AN OLD LADY'S VOICE (in Italian - gentle): Are you American?
The Lieutenant, Sergeant and Griffith turn.
AN OLD ITALIAN LADY
Tiny, white-haired protruding from under black shawl, in typical black peasant dress, black shoes, advances apologetically. She looks like a saint. She continues in Italian.
OLD LADY: I have come for my crucifix, please.
She moves past them as CAMERA ANGLES TO Vinci on floor sobbing against the tank. She timidly approaches him, sees the crucifix in his hand - and then the photograph.
OLD LADY (kindly): I know soldiers like war souvenirs but please do not take that photograph.
She edges closer, starts to pull photo from his hand. He jerks it away, lifts his tear-splashed anguished face.
OLD LADY: Please, it is my photograph.
VINCI (in Italian): Your photograph?
OLD LADY: Ah, you speak Italian! It is of my son and his wife. They live in America. Why are you weeping, my son?
It is too much for him. He pulls her down, burying his head against her and his body shakes.
VINCI (sobbing): Nonna! Nonna! I am Antonio Vinci!
She breaks into cold sweat, crosses herself and begins to sob as she covers her grandson with kisses."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I'm not sure anyone else could have written and made this film. It has a rawness of authenticity. Anyone else would be only approximating.
The Big Red One (1980)(3/20/58 draft)
by Samuel Fuller
Monday, October 29, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973) - Why Can an OK Script Still Be a Good/Great Film?
[Quick Summary: A struggling, small time gun runner tries to trade evidence for a decrease in his upcoming prison time, but is unaware of other wheels in motion.]
Q: Why can an ok script still be a good or great film?
A: I think it lies in the bones, i.e., structure of a script.
Q: How do I get it? Is there a checklist or book I can read?
A: Do you want the shortcut or the long version?
Q: The shortcut! Where's the shortcut??
A: Trick question. There are NO SHORTCUTS. You have to study scripts, i.e., learn to take it apart in order to learn to build one. Dissecting and rebuilding take TIME.
Q: ...How much time? How many scripts?
A: Longer than you think. More than you want to read.*
Q: Give me a hint. What does a script with "good bones" look like?
A: One clue is that the script delivers what it promises,** and HOW it does it.***
For example here, Eddie Coyle is a small fish who is struggling to make it day to day. He is returning to prison soon for driving a truck of stolen goods.
Note how the scene below sets up Eddie's motive ---> Every decision he makes for the rest of the film turns on this motive.
ex. "INT. EDDIE'S HOUSE - DAY
...Eddie goes into the kitchen where his wife, SHEILA, is drying dishes. Eddie washes his hands and dries them on a door towel during the following dialogue.
EDDIE: You didn't say anything to the kids, did you?
SHEILA: About what?
EDDIE: About that trouble there.
SHEILA: No, why would I? (turning) Why?
EDDIE: Well, they were a little funny toward me this morning, I thought.
[He gets something to eat from the refrigerator.]
SHEILA: You're imagining it, Eddie. What do you want for breakfast?
EDDIE: Nothing. I got to go somewhere, meet someone.
SHEILA: All right.
EDDIE: My lawyer, the goddamned harp. He's got oatmeal for brains. If I had time, I'd have someone write up papers for me. Incompetence of counsel, you know. Wouldn't let me take the stand there. I know a feller could do that but he's in the basket.
Sheila turns away from him; she's heard this before.
SHEILA: My mother said she'd move in, take care of the kids while I work.
EDDIE: Work? What the hell are you talking about?
SHEILA: You don't want us to go on welfare, do you?
EDDIE: Look, Sheila.
He gets up, crosses to the sink, puts his arms around her.
EDDIE: Now listen, I'm going to be all right in New Hampshire there. This feller I'm seeing today, he can square it. And then we're getting out of here. (turns her around) Have I ever lied to you? Have I?
SHEILA (he has, but:): I'm not complaining.
Eddie moves over to his wife. She looks around at him. He knows she understands him so well. Caught again."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Even if I am not particularly fond of this script, I can respect it because the structure is rather sound.
The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973)(8/28/72 draft)
by Paul Monash
From the novel by George V. Higgins
*This screenwriting thing isn't for sissies. I wanted to believe that I'd learn fast and be the exception to the rule. I did not and I was not.
**This is not merely a setup-payoff of plot points.
***Do not be surprised at how much digging this will require to understand. The better the writer, the more seamless it seems.
Q: Why can an ok script still be a good or great film?
A: I think it lies in the bones, i.e., structure of a script.
Q: How do I get it? Is there a checklist or book I can read?
A: Do you want the shortcut or the long version?
Q: The shortcut! Where's the shortcut??
A: Trick question. There are NO SHORTCUTS. You have to study scripts, i.e., learn to take it apart in order to learn to build one. Dissecting and rebuilding take TIME.
Q: ...How much time? How many scripts?
A: Longer than you think. More than you want to read.*
Q: Give me a hint. What does a script with "good bones" look like?
A: One clue is that the script delivers what it promises,** and HOW it does it.***
For example here, Eddie Coyle is a small fish who is struggling to make it day to day. He is returning to prison soon for driving a truck of stolen goods.
Note how the scene below sets up Eddie's motive ---> Every decision he makes for the rest of the film turns on this motive.
ex. "INT. EDDIE'S HOUSE - DAY
...Eddie goes into the kitchen where his wife, SHEILA, is drying dishes. Eddie washes his hands and dries them on a door towel during the following dialogue.
EDDIE: You didn't say anything to the kids, did you?
SHEILA: About what?
EDDIE: About that trouble there.
SHEILA: No, why would I? (turning) Why?
EDDIE: Well, they were a little funny toward me this morning, I thought.
[He gets something to eat from the refrigerator.]
SHEILA: You're imagining it, Eddie. What do you want for breakfast?
EDDIE: Nothing. I got to go somewhere, meet someone.
SHEILA: All right.
EDDIE: My lawyer, the goddamned harp. He's got oatmeal for brains. If I had time, I'd have someone write up papers for me. Incompetence of counsel, you know. Wouldn't let me take the stand there. I know a feller could do that but he's in the basket.
Sheila turns away from him; she's heard this before.
SHEILA: My mother said she'd move in, take care of the kids while I work.
EDDIE: Work? What the hell are you talking about?
SHEILA: You don't want us to go on welfare, do you?
EDDIE: Look, Sheila.
He gets up, crosses to the sink, puts his arms around her.
EDDIE: Now listen, I'm going to be all right in New Hampshire there. This feller I'm seeing today, he can square it. And then we're getting out of here. (turns her around) Have I ever lied to you? Have I?
SHEILA (he has, but:): I'm not complaining.
Eddie moves over to his wife. She looks around at him. He knows she understands him so well. Caught again."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Even if I am not particularly fond of this script, I can respect it because the structure is rather sound.
The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973)(8/28/72 draft)
by Paul Monash
From the novel by George V. Higgins
*This screenwriting thing isn't for sissies. I wanted to believe that I'd learn fast and be the exception to the rule. I did not and I was not.
**This is not merely a setup-payoff of plot points.
***Do not be surprised at how much digging this will require to understand. The better the writer, the more seamless it seems.
Monday, October 22, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Cop Land (1997) - A Bold Bitchy Move; 3-D; Subtext; Tension
[Quick Summary: A sheriff uncovers a dicey coverup in his small New Jersey town, where many NYC cops live.]
I know that this is a story about Freddy, a browbeaten NJ sheriff, who stands up against the citizens of his small town who are staging a big coverup.
(These are not ordinary citizens, but also are corrupt NYC cops.)
But I'd like to focus on a minor character, Rose Donlan, and her bold bitchy move.
Why?
1 - Rose is a good example of a three dimensional character.*
2 - The scene shows us the mundane things that Freddy faces every day vs. the exciting life that Freddy imagines big city NYC cops have. This is a recurring theme.
3 - The subtext is great. ex. Even the trash silently says something to the recipient.
4 - There's tension. Freddy doesn't want to upset the ringleader's wife.
The scene below is a little complex, so let me clarify a few things:
- Freddy's high school crush, Liz, told him that someone has been dumping trash bags in her yard for weeks. He looked in the bags and found the Donlan address.
- Liz is married to Joey, a NYC cop.
- Rose is married to Ray Donlan, the ringleader cop who runs Freddy and the town.
ex. "EXT. DONLAN HOUSE - 31 DALLAS DRIVE - LATE AFTERNOON
The mailbox says: Donlan.
FREDDY STANDS AT THE DOOR OF THE SPLIT LEVEL HOUSE, the soiled phone bill in hand. before him, A BUSTY MIDDLE AGED WOMAN, ROSE DONLAN (46). Hand on hip, she sucks a cigarette. [Questioning potential trash dumper is as exciting as it gets for Freddy.]
ROSE: What if I said I don't know where it came from?
FREDDY: I'd take your word for it, Rose. Um. Is Ray home? [Politics. Ugh.]
ROSE: Taking care of our little visitor. [3-D: She drops information that is important later. There are other things going on besides this trash issue.]
Freddy plays with the envelope in his fingers, letting this cryptic remark hang in the air. Rose stares at the envelope. [Tension & Subtext: She knows he knows.]
ROSE: I get my garbage picked up every Tuesday. [Subtext: I'm innocent.]
FREDDY: Alright. Thanks for your time. [He doesn't even fight it.]
He walks back to the car.
ROSE: You tell Joey to come here and talk to me about it if he thinks I've got no right. [3-D: She can't help herself. She has to tell someone that she's mad at Joey.]
Freddy turns around.
FREDDY: Rose. I want to believe you when you tell me something.
ROSE: Oh you do, do you?
FREDDY: Did you dump these bags or not?
ROSE: This is not a law problem - if you catch my drift. You tell Joey Randone that if he doesn't like my garbage he should stop soiling my sheets. [Subtext: She essentially admits her guilt!]
Rose is miraculously nonchalant - her eyes riveted boldly on Freddy; relishing his discomfort.
FREDDY: Rose, you can't just dump garbage on other people's property. [This is the unglamorous side of the job.]
ROSE: But that glamour boy - he can throw away a woman just like she was garbage and that's okay - is that what you're saying? [Subtext: She admits to more of a relationship than we knew.]
A pause. The phone rings. They stand there.
ROSE: Are you gonna tell Ray about this? [Tension rises.]
Freddy shakes his head. Rose takes a drag of her cigarette. The phone still ringing. She spins around, slamming the door." [Freddy got information, but no satisfaction.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The use of Rose's trash bags was a super-creative way to send a "drop dead" message. Also, we got to see what Freddy is up against.
Cop Land (1997)(shooting script w/revisions, 8/30/96)
by James Mangold
*Three dimensional = My definition is that the character seems to have a real life beyond what we see. He/she is not just there to fill in gaps for the main character.
I know that this is a story about Freddy, a browbeaten NJ sheriff, who stands up against the citizens of his small town who are staging a big coverup.
(These are not ordinary citizens, but also are corrupt NYC cops.)
But I'd like to focus on a minor character, Rose Donlan, and her bold bitchy move.
Why?
1 - Rose is a good example of a three dimensional character.*
2 - The scene shows us the mundane things that Freddy faces every day vs. the exciting life that Freddy imagines big city NYC cops have. This is a recurring theme.
3 - The subtext is great. ex. Even the trash silently says something to the recipient.
4 - There's tension. Freddy doesn't want to upset the ringleader's wife.
The scene below is a little complex, so let me clarify a few things:
- Freddy's high school crush, Liz, told him that someone has been dumping trash bags in her yard for weeks. He looked in the bags and found the Donlan address.
- Liz is married to Joey, a NYC cop.
- Rose is married to Ray Donlan, the ringleader cop who runs Freddy and the town.
ex. "EXT. DONLAN HOUSE - 31 DALLAS DRIVE - LATE AFTERNOON
The mailbox says: Donlan.
FREDDY STANDS AT THE DOOR OF THE SPLIT LEVEL HOUSE, the soiled phone bill in hand. before him, A BUSTY MIDDLE AGED WOMAN, ROSE DONLAN (46). Hand on hip, she sucks a cigarette. [Questioning potential trash dumper is as exciting as it gets for Freddy.]
ROSE: What if I said I don't know where it came from?
FREDDY: I'd take your word for it, Rose. Um. Is Ray home? [Politics. Ugh.]
ROSE: Taking care of our little visitor. [3-D: She drops information that is important later. There are other things going on besides this trash issue.]
Freddy plays with the envelope in his fingers, letting this cryptic remark hang in the air. Rose stares at the envelope. [Tension & Subtext: She knows he knows.]
ROSE: I get my garbage picked up every Tuesday. [Subtext: I'm innocent.]
FREDDY: Alright. Thanks for your time. [He doesn't even fight it.]
He walks back to the car.
ROSE: You tell Joey to come here and talk to me about it if he thinks I've got no right. [3-D: She can't help herself. She has to tell someone that she's mad at Joey.]
Freddy turns around.
FREDDY: Rose. I want to believe you when you tell me something.
ROSE: Oh you do, do you?
FREDDY: Did you dump these bags or not?
ROSE: This is not a law problem - if you catch my drift. You tell Joey Randone that if he doesn't like my garbage he should stop soiling my sheets. [Subtext: She essentially admits her guilt!]
Rose is miraculously nonchalant - her eyes riveted boldly on Freddy; relishing his discomfort.
FREDDY: Rose, you can't just dump garbage on other people's property. [This is the unglamorous side of the job.]
ROSE: But that glamour boy - he can throw away a woman just like she was garbage and that's okay - is that what you're saying? [Subtext: She admits to more of a relationship than we knew.]
A pause. The phone rings. They stand there.
ROSE: Are you gonna tell Ray about this? [Tension rises.]
Freddy shakes his head. Rose takes a drag of her cigarette. The phone still ringing. She spins around, slamming the door." [Freddy got information, but no satisfaction.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The use of Rose's trash bags was a super-creative way to send a "drop dead" message. Also, we got to see what Freddy is up against.
Cop Land (1997)(shooting script w/revisions, 8/30/96)
by James Mangold
*Three dimensional = My definition is that the character seems to have a real life beyond what we see. He/she is not just there to fill in gaps for the main character.
Monday, October 15, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Living Out Loud (1998) - Creating the Bittersweet Goodbye Moment
[Quick Summary: A lonely, divorced nurse and the lonely, divorced elevator man meet at a difficult time, but want different things in a relationship.]
****WARNING: ENDING SPOILERS AHEAD****
How do you create a satisfying ending when the couple does not end up together?
I think it is the quality of the setup and payoff.
SETUP
In this story, Pat starts to fall in love with Judith and wants to spend time together.
She is frank with him: I don't know if this is a good idea and I don't want to hurt you.
He is equally up front: Anything could happen. I'm ok with that, if you are.
As time passes, their dreams are coming true: Judith is now in pediatric nursing. Pat will be flying to Italy to start a business importing olive oil.
The only question left is their relationship. Unfortunately, they want different things.
PAYOFF
The scene below is near the end of Act 3.
Pat is flying to Italy for the first time and wants Judith to go. She puts him off.
Then she talks about her single, available friend Donna.
Notice how this is the bittersweet goodbye that neither of them saw coming.
ex. "INT. RESTAURANT - NIGHT
...As Judith looks through her bag for the number, we can see Pat registering very clearly what she is doing. The look of someone who saw it coming - but is nevertheless stung by the pain. Judith hands him a piece of paper.
PAT: Thanks.
Judith sees his face. They exchange a look and know what they are doing.
PAT: It bothered you didn't it? What I did? What I was?
JUDITH: No...Not at all... Pat...I..I can never thank you enough.
PAT (trying to understand): It's because you got alot ahead of you, right? Alot of things you have to do?
JUDITH: That's just it, I don't know what's ahead of me. But I...I don't think I'll be able to see it, if...if I have someone standing in front of me.
Pat considers this and nods. Then jokes;
PAT: What if I stand behind you?
Judith laughs, gratefully...Pat smiles...
PAT: No...really. It's OK..I..I always knew this...was... (fighting breaking down) I always knew...deep down..I just forgot, you know..I'm like..one episode in your life. You're the kind of woman that has many in a lifetime. That's why you stand out. I got a little greedy, that's all. As usual, ha..I wanted to make it a long one..And I don't say that to make you feel bad or anything. I just want you to know I understand. No one's to blame...
Judith nods gratefully, tears forming. Pat tries to smiles.
PAT: You have beautiful things ahead of you. See, I always thought that - when I'd look at you. I was just waiting for you to catch on.
Judith leans her head into the nape of his neck and kisses him, resting their for a moment. Pat dies inside but;
PAT: It's gonna be terrific. You wait and see. You wait and see..
He holds her. He wishes they could stay like that forever. Then,
PAT: Look, I..uh...I'm gonna go, OK? I...
Judith lifts her head. She suddenly doesn't want him to go. But knows it would be wrong to say so. She nods.
PAT: Why don't I..uh..give you a call when you get back..when I get back from uh..Italy and uh..ya know..catch up..OK?
JUDITH: Yeah. Well, when Liz and I get our place I'll call Philly with the number so that when you get back from Italy..ya know..
Pat smiles. He knows neither will call the other. But he's grateful for the life. He leans in and kisses her cheek. He rises and exits. Judith sits alone."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The setup begins when Judith essentially asks Pat, "Do you want to jump into a relationship? It could hurt."
They payoff was bittersweet: It was bitter because it did hurt, but it was sweet because the journey was worth it.
Living Out Loud (1998)(originally titled "The Kiss"; 9/4/96 interim draft)
by Richard LaGravenese
****WARNING: ENDING SPOILERS AHEAD****
How do you create a satisfying ending when the couple does not end up together?
I think it is the quality of the setup and payoff.
SETUP
In this story, Pat starts to fall in love with Judith and wants to spend time together.
She is frank with him: I don't know if this is a good idea and I don't want to hurt you.
He is equally up front: Anything could happen. I'm ok with that, if you are.
As time passes, their dreams are coming true: Judith is now in pediatric nursing. Pat will be flying to Italy to start a business importing olive oil.
The only question left is their relationship. Unfortunately, they want different things.
PAYOFF
The scene below is near the end of Act 3.
Pat is flying to Italy for the first time and wants Judith to go. She puts him off.
Then she talks about her single, available friend Donna.
Notice how this is the bittersweet goodbye that neither of them saw coming.
ex. "INT. RESTAURANT - NIGHT
...As Judith looks through her bag for the number, we can see Pat registering very clearly what she is doing. The look of someone who saw it coming - but is nevertheless stung by the pain. Judith hands him a piece of paper.
PAT: Thanks.
Judith sees his face. They exchange a look and know what they are doing.
PAT: It bothered you didn't it? What I did? What I was?
JUDITH: No...Not at all... Pat...I..I can never thank you enough.
PAT (trying to understand): It's because you got alot ahead of you, right? Alot of things you have to do?
JUDITH: That's just it, I don't know what's ahead of me. But I...I don't think I'll be able to see it, if...if I have someone standing in front of me.
Pat considers this and nods. Then jokes;
PAT: What if I stand behind you?
Judith laughs, gratefully...Pat smiles...
PAT: No...really. It's OK..I..I always knew this...was... (fighting breaking down) I always knew...deep down..I just forgot, you know..I'm like..one episode in your life. You're the kind of woman that has many in a lifetime. That's why you stand out. I got a little greedy, that's all. As usual, ha..I wanted to make it a long one..And I don't say that to make you feel bad or anything. I just want you to know I understand. No one's to blame...
Judith nods gratefully, tears forming. Pat tries to smiles.
PAT: You have beautiful things ahead of you. See, I always thought that - when I'd look at you. I was just waiting for you to catch on.
Judith leans her head into the nape of his neck and kisses him, resting their for a moment. Pat dies inside but;
PAT: It's gonna be terrific. You wait and see. You wait and see..
He holds her. He wishes they could stay like that forever. Then,
PAT: Look, I..uh...I'm gonna go, OK? I...
Judith lifts her head. She suddenly doesn't want him to go. But knows it would be wrong to say so. She nods.
PAT: Why don't I..uh..give you a call when you get back..when I get back from uh..Italy and uh..ya know..catch up..OK?
JUDITH: Yeah. Well, when Liz and I get our place I'll call Philly with the number so that when you get back from Italy..ya know..
Pat smiles. He knows neither will call the other. But he's grateful for the life. He leans in and kisses her cheek. He rises and exits. Judith sits alone."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The setup begins when Judith essentially asks Pat, "Do you want to jump into a relationship? It could hurt."
They payoff was bittersweet: It was bitter because it did hurt, but it was sweet because the journey was worth it.
Living Out Loud (1998)(originally titled "The Kiss"; 9/4/96 interim draft)
by Richard LaGravenese
Monday, October 8, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The General's Daughter (1999) - A Moment of Emotional Risk
[Quick Summary: A detective for the military CID investigates the obscene, very public death of a respected female captain, who is also the general's daughter.]
CON: I have a few issues with this script.
PRO: However, on the page, it is an excellent visceral read.
What makes this a compelling thriller to read, despite its flaws?
One thing that struck me was the protagonist (Brenner) was constantly putting himself in physical, emotional, and career jeopardy to find the truth. He took risks.
I liked the example below because it does several things:
- White takes a surprisingly fun, and emotional, risk.
- It's a great "meet cute" scene that slides in a lot of information about her.
- Because he met her in person, it explains White's personal motive to find her killer.
In the scene below:
- White is doing a horrible job at fixing his flat tire.
- Ann Campbell, the soon-to-be-victim, stops to help. She is an army Captain.
ex. "EXT. FORT MACCULLUM - DAY
...it's a few minutes later -- she's finishing up. Her movements fast and skilled.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: So how long have you taught at mechanic's school?
LT. WHITE: I work at the Armory -- just been there a few weeks. And you never let up, do you?
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL (head shake): This is just heaven -- y'see, in the Army, all the capital G Guys say we can't keep up, we're too weak.
LT. WHITE: Obviously, you don't believe that.
ANN CAMPBELL. CLOSE UP. She looks at White a moment. Then --
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Physically, there may be a point, but mentally, we're much tougher. For example, I would never betray you -- (looks at White now) -- but if I slept with you, if I told you how wonderful and strong you were, hell, you'd betray anyone.
WHITE, considering this.
LT. WHITE: I hope that's a proposition, Captain.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Just theory, Lieutenant.
LT. WHITE: LT. WHITE: Damn.
She stands, brushes herself off.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: That should do it. (starts off) Luck to you.
LT. WHITE: You probably run Mechanic's school.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Psyops.
He doesn't get it.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Psychological Operations. I teach there.
LT. WHITE: What do you teach?
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL (getting into her car): Mostly, we fuck with people's minds.
And she flashes her wonderful smile, waves, drives off.
White stands looking after her.
LT. WHITE (softly): Thanks..."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This scene made a fictional world a little more real to me.
I'd rather see a moment of humor or emotional risk, i.e., relationship stuff, more than a constant stream of plot -- plot -- plot -- plot, which is boring and not real.
The General's Daughter (1999)(11/19/97 draft)
by Christopher Bertolini and William Goldman
Based on the novel by Nelson DeMille
CON: I have a few issues with this script.
PRO: However, on the page, it is an excellent visceral read.
What makes this a compelling thriller to read, despite its flaws?
One thing that struck me was the protagonist (Brenner) was constantly putting himself in physical, emotional, and career jeopardy to find the truth. He took risks.
I liked the example below because it does several things:
- White takes a surprisingly fun, and emotional, risk.
- It's a great "meet cute" scene that slides in a lot of information about her.
- Because he met her in person, it explains White's personal motive to find her killer.
In the scene below:
- White is doing a horrible job at fixing his flat tire.
- Ann Campbell, the soon-to-be-victim, stops to help. She is an army Captain.
ex. "EXT. FORT MACCULLUM - DAY
...it's a few minutes later -- she's finishing up. Her movements fast and skilled.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: So how long have you taught at mechanic's school?
LT. WHITE: I work at the Armory -- just been there a few weeks. And you never let up, do you?
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL (head shake): This is just heaven -- y'see, in the Army, all the capital G Guys say we can't keep up, we're too weak.
LT. WHITE: Obviously, you don't believe that.
ANN CAMPBELL. CLOSE UP. She looks at White a moment. Then --
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Physically, there may be a point, but mentally, we're much tougher. For example, I would never betray you -- (looks at White now) -- but if I slept with you, if I told you how wonderful and strong you were, hell, you'd betray anyone.
WHITE, considering this.
LT. WHITE: I hope that's a proposition, Captain.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Just theory, Lieutenant.
LT. WHITE: LT. WHITE: Damn.
She stands, brushes herself off.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: That should do it. (starts off) Luck to you.
LT. WHITE: You probably run Mechanic's school.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Psyops.
He doesn't get it.
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL: Psychological Operations. I teach there.
LT. WHITE: What do you teach?
CAPTAIN CAMPBELL (getting into her car): Mostly, we fuck with people's minds.
And she flashes her wonderful smile, waves, drives off.
White stands looking after her.
LT. WHITE (softly): Thanks..."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This scene made a fictional world a little more real to me.
I'd rather see a moment of humor or emotional risk, i.e., relationship stuff, more than a constant stream of plot -- plot -- plot -- plot, which is boring and not real.
The General's Daughter (1999)(11/19/97 draft)
by Christopher Bertolini and William Goldman
Based on the novel by Nelson DeMille
Monday, October 1, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Ghost & the Darkness (1996) - Musing on a Change from an Earlier Draft
[Quick Summary: In 1898, Tsavo, Africa, two man-eating lions prey on an encampment of bridge workers.]
I usually do not read earlier drafts, but make the occasional exception, ex. whenever I can get my hands on early William Goldman scripts.
Here, I was curious about how much was changed from the earlier to the later draft.
Answer? Not much.
I did wish they had kept a minor thing: the personal conflict between the protagonist (Patterson) and the experienced hunter (Redbeard).
In the final draft, the two men first meet in Tsavo. It was ok, but predictable.
In the earlier draft, they have prior history that is still unsettled. Conflict and tension!
I understand why they didn't keep it, but I thought it made the characters more 3-D.
Here's the scene from the earlier draft:
ex. "REDBEARD'S TENT. Night. He is finished unpacking -- there's not a lot to do, the man travels light. He takes several thick books out of a sack, places them in a pile on the table by his cot. No sound. REDBEARD is facing away from the tent opening.
REDBEARD: I have no secrets, come in.
PATTERSON moves into the opening. He looks at the cot.
PATTERSON: You used to sleep on the floor.
REDBEARD: I used to have more hair.
PATTERSON: Don't you think you went a bit far, calling me "Patton"?
REDBEARD: I was giving you the lead -- Beaumont said you didn't want me here. I wasn't sure you wanted to acknowledge me.
PATTERSON: I don't much -- but you are, so now we have to deal with that reality.
REDBEARD: It shouldn't be so hard. We both want the same thing.
PATTERSON: And what is that?
REDBEARD: Why, the lions, of course.
PATTERSON: I want more, I want you to fail.
REDBEARD: After all these years nothing has changed -- was what I did that terrible? (PATTERSON simply stares at the other man. Finally, REDBEARD turns away) It was. I know it was. Of course it was."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Life is messy. The scene above reflects it well. I wonder if the powers-that-be preferred a neater, less messy version?
The Ghost & the Darkness (1996)(undated; possibly shooting draft)
The Ghost & the Darkness (1996)(3rd draft, Jan., 1994)
by William Goldman
I usually do not read earlier drafts, but make the occasional exception, ex. whenever I can get my hands on early William Goldman scripts.
Here, I was curious about how much was changed from the earlier to the later draft.
Answer? Not much.
I did wish they had kept a minor thing: the personal conflict between the protagonist (Patterson) and the experienced hunter (Redbeard).
In the final draft, the two men first meet in Tsavo. It was ok, but predictable.
In the earlier draft, they have prior history that is still unsettled. Conflict and tension!
I understand why they didn't keep it, but I thought it made the characters more 3-D.
Here's the scene from the earlier draft:
ex. "REDBEARD'S TENT. Night. He is finished unpacking -- there's not a lot to do, the man travels light. He takes several thick books out of a sack, places them in a pile on the table by his cot. No sound. REDBEARD is facing away from the tent opening.
REDBEARD: I have no secrets, come in.
PATTERSON moves into the opening. He looks at the cot.
PATTERSON: You used to sleep on the floor.
REDBEARD: I used to have more hair.
PATTERSON: Don't you think you went a bit far, calling me "Patton"?
REDBEARD: I was giving you the lead -- Beaumont said you didn't want me here. I wasn't sure you wanted to acknowledge me.
PATTERSON: I don't much -- but you are, so now we have to deal with that reality.
REDBEARD: It shouldn't be so hard. We both want the same thing.
PATTERSON: And what is that?
REDBEARD: Why, the lions, of course.
PATTERSON: I want more, I want you to fail.
REDBEARD: After all these years nothing has changed -- was what I did that terrible? (PATTERSON simply stares at the other man. Finally, REDBEARD turns away) It was. I know it was. Of course it was."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Life is messy. The scene above reflects it well. I wonder if the powers-that-be preferred a neater, less messy version?
The Ghost & the Darkness (1996)(undated; possibly shooting draft)
The Ghost & the Darkness (1996)(3rd draft, Jan., 1994)
by William Goldman
Monday, September 24, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Chamber (1996) - Transitions = Preparing the Reader's Emotions
[Quick Summary: A new lawyer takes on a last minute death row appeal of a Klansman who killed two kids with a building bomb...and is also the attorney's estranged grandfather.]
Why do Goldman's scripts read like greased lightening?
One reason is that he takes the time (but not too much) to transition the reader's emotions for an upcoming curve ball, surprise, crisis, etc.*
I am always on the lookout for good transitions, as I find them particularly tricky.
In the example below, notice how we're being prepared for a pivotal moment:
- Scene A: We see Adam get upset over news. [Something is up.]
- Scene B: We see that he's nervous, agitated. [This news must mean a lot to him.]
- Scene C: He asks for a case that has upset him and is very personal. [Why?]
ex. "INT. ADAM'S OFFICE - CHICAGO - DAY
It's small, befitting an associate less than a year out of Law School. he breezes to the desk, flips on his computer, puts down the documents and coffee, places his briefcase on the credenza behind him, opens it, takes out some papers and file folders, places them on his desk. . . takes a look a the screen, clicks his mouse on something. . . then turns his back to the computer, takes off his jacket, hangs it on a hook, sits at his desk, opens the documents, takes a sip of coffee. . . takes another glance at the screen . . . and stops cold.
He gives the screen his full attention. There is something on it that drains the blood from his face. Finally he turns away with the look of one who knows the day he had dreaded has come.
He looks at the speaker button on his phone. Thinks. Hits it.
SECRETARY (O.S.): It wasn't de-caf, was it? I could get you some tea --
ADAM: I need to see Goodman. Now.
He clicks off.
INT. KRAVITZ & BANE - HALLWAY - DAY
A long hallway from Adam's office to the more senior offices. Adam emerges from his office and tries to control his nervousness as he walks the long walk.
INT. MR. GOODMAN'S OFFICE - DAY
E. GARNER GOODMAN has done one amazing thing in his life: he has been a practicing lawyer for forty years and has yet to do anything illegal. He is all tidy and neat. His office, on the other hand, is a zoo. Bookcases sag from the strain, the floor is a minefield of piles of legal briefs.
GOODMAN: Have you lost your mind?
He is talking to Adam who is seated in a chair. Adam repeats:
ADAM: No. I am very serious. I want the Cayhall case...."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I had never really considered how important those on-ramps are before an emotional turn. It makes a big difference in the reading experience.
The Chamber (1996)(shooting draft dated 4/16/96)
by William Goldman and Phil Alden Robinson and James Foley
Based on the novel by John Grisham
*FYI: Transitions are not just moving a character to a different location.
In writer's lingo, "transitions" are a broad umbrella of things that help prepare the reader for a switch in emotional state.
For example:
- Setting up scene A so that scene B is a payoff (structure)
- Seeding a conflict in scene A so that it explodes in scene B (conflict)
Why do Goldman's scripts read like greased lightening?
One reason is that he takes the time (but not too much) to transition the reader's emotions for an upcoming curve ball, surprise, crisis, etc.*
I am always on the lookout for good transitions, as I find them particularly tricky.
In the example below, notice how we're being prepared for a pivotal moment:
- Scene A: We see Adam get upset over news. [Something is up.]
- Scene B: We see that he's nervous, agitated. [This news must mean a lot to him.]
- Scene C: He asks for a case that has upset him and is very personal. [Why?]
ex. "INT. ADAM'S OFFICE - CHICAGO - DAY
It's small, befitting an associate less than a year out of Law School. he breezes to the desk, flips on his computer, puts down the documents and coffee, places his briefcase on the credenza behind him, opens it, takes out some papers and file folders, places them on his desk. . . takes a look a the screen, clicks his mouse on something. . . then turns his back to the computer, takes off his jacket, hangs it on a hook, sits at his desk, opens the documents, takes a sip of coffee. . . takes another glance at the screen . . . and stops cold.
He gives the screen his full attention. There is something on it that drains the blood from his face. Finally he turns away with the look of one who knows the day he had dreaded has come.
He looks at the speaker button on his phone. Thinks. Hits it.
SECRETARY (O.S.): It wasn't de-caf, was it? I could get you some tea --
ADAM: I need to see Goodman. Now.
He clicks off.
INT. KRAVITZ & BANE - HALLWAY - DAY
A long hallway from Adam's office to the more senior offices. Adam emerges from his office and tries to control his nervousness as he walks the long walk.
INT. MR. GOODMAN'S OFFICE - DAY
E. GARNER GOODMAN has done one amazing thing in his life: he has been a practicing lawyer for forty years and has yet to do anything illegal. He is all tidy and neat. His office, on the other hand, is a zoo. Bookcases sag from the strain, the floor is a minefield of piles of legal briefs.
GOODMAN: Have you lost your mind?
He is talking to Adam who is seated in a chair. Adam repeats:
ADAM: No. I am very serious. I want the Cayhall case...."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I had never really considered how important those on-ramps are before an emotional turn. It makes a big difference in the reading experience.
The Chamber (1996)(shooting draft dated 4/16/96)
by William Goldman and Phil Alden Robinson and James Foley
Based on the novel by John Grisham
*FYI: Transitions are not just moving a character to a different location.
In writer's lingo, "transitions" are a broad umbrella of things that help prepare the reader for a switch in emotional state.
For example:
- Setting up scene A so that scene B is a payoff (structure)
- Seeding a conflict in scene A so that it explodes in scene B (conflict)
Monday, September 17, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Fierce Creatures (1997) - Exaggeration is Helpful for Satire
[Quick Summary: After a corporation buys a zoo and tries to corporatize it, the keepers rebel.]
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: The second half of the script was a little strained.
WHAT I DID LIKE: The first half was much more solid, especially the use of exaggeration to emphasize the irony of a situation.
In the scene below, Octopus, Inc. has bought a zoo and wants to increase profits.
Its executive, Rollo, has decreed that only Fierce Animals will draw crowds and will be allowed to stay.
Note the use of exaggeration and contrast, which makes us laugh.
ex. "EXT. COATIMUNDI ENCLOSURE AND ENVIRONS. DAY
ROLLO stands arguing with SYDNEY, PIP, DEREK, HUGH and others. SYDNEY is inside the enclosure, holding a chair, which he occasionally uses, lion-tamer style.
ROLLO: Fierce??! That coatimundi...
He indiciates a Coatimundi, which is watching in a friendly manner. [A lion-tamer chair for a 2 foot, 8 lb. animal?!]
SYDNEY: It's a wild animal, sir. It's not domesticated.
ROLLO: Neither's a house fly and I wouldn't call that savage.
SYDNEY: You take a liberty with him and he'll give you a nasty nip. [Trying to make him sound ferocious.]
ROLLO: A safety pin could give me a nasty nip Lotterby. I'll tell you what's fierce: fierce is taking your whole hand off.
KEEPERS: Whole hand!?! No! Impossible! No!! [Aghast reactions are funny.]
ROLLO: (Walking away) Lotterby, could I have a word with you over here please
HUGH: It is all right if it wrenches the hand off?? [More exaggeration to make the animal sound fierce.]
ROLLO: Oh yes.
HUGH: Phew.
SYDNEY: (Showing a scar) That's what a coati did to me. Look! [Big exaggeration compared to the likely small scar.]
ROLLO: I'm surprised you lived. Now...
ROLLO and SYDNEY have arrived at some cages. SYDNEY looks at them, winces, and then puts on a very positive, cheerful polite act.
ROLLO: ...These are your meerkats, correct?
SYDNEY: Er...yes sir.
ROLLO: (Pointing) On the new plaque here it says ... they're known as the 'Piranhas of the Desert'? Is that right? [Good exaggerated visual.]
SYDNEY: Yes sir, they can strip a human carcass in three minutes. [Blood thirsty description!]
ROLLO: (Pulling out a book) My encyclopedia says they're easy to tame and are often kept as pets. (He shows SYDNEY the page) See? [I like the contrast of 'tame' vs. 'piranha'.]
SYDNEY: Well, you haven't been attacked by one sir.
ROLLO: Nobody's been attacked by one, Lotterby (He moves on) Or if they have, they didn't notice... [He calls Sydney on the unlikely possibility of an attack.]
SYDNEY: They've got diabolical temperaments, sir..." [I give credit to Sydney for his commitment to his mission.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I laughed because the keepers created such an exaggerated fiction compared to the modest reality. It was just simply ridiculous.
Fierce Creatures (1997)(9th draft, 4/4/95; originally titled Strictly Confidential)
by John Cleese and Iain Johnstone
WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: The second half of the script was a little strained.
WHAT I DID LIKE: The first half was much more solid, especially the use of exaggeration to emphasize the irony of a situation.
In the scene below, Octopus, Inc. has bought a zoo and wants to increase profits.
Its executive, Rollo, has decreed that only Fierce Animals will draw crowds and will be allowed to stay.
Note the use of exaggeration and contrast, which makes us laugh.
ex. "EXT. COATIMUNDI ENCLOSURE AND ENVIRONS. DAY
ROLLO stands arguing with SYDNEY, PIP, DEREK, HUGH and others. SYDNEY is inside the enclosure, holding a chair, which he occasionally uses, lion-tamer style.
ROLLO: Fierce??! That coatimundi...
He indiciates a Coatimundi, which is watching in a friendly manner. [A lion-tamer chair for a 2 foot, 8 lb. animal?!]
SYDNEY: It's a wild animal, sir. It's not domesticated.
ROLLO: Neither's a house fly and I wouldn't call that savage.
SYDNEY: You take a liberty with him and he'll give you a nasty nip. [Trying to make him sound ferocious.]
ROLLO: A safety pin could give me a nasty nip Lotterby. I'll tell you what's fierce: fierce is taking your whole hand off.
KEEPERS: Whole hand!?! No! Impossible! No!! [Aghast reactions are funny.]
ROLLO: (Walking away) Lotterby, could I have a word with you over here please
HUGH: It is all right if it wrenches the hand off?? [More exaggeration to make the animal sound fierce.]
ROLLO: Oh yes.
HUGH: Phew.
SYDNEY: (Showing a scar) That's what a coati did to me. Look! [Big exaggeration compared to the likely small scar.]
ROLLO: I'm surprised you lived. Now...
ROLLO and SYDNEY have arrived at some cages. SYDNEY looks at them, winces, and then puts on a very positive, cheerful polite act.
ROLLO: ...These are your meerkats, correct?
SYDNEY: Er...yes sir.
ROLLO: (Pointing) On the new plaque here it says ... they're known as the 'Piranhas of the Desert'? Is that right? [Good exaggerated visual.]
SYDNEY: Yes sir, they can strip a human carcass in three minutes. [Blood thirsty description!]
ROLLO: (Pulling out a book) My encyclopedia says they're easy to tame and are often kept as pets. (He shows SYDNEY the page) See? [I like the contrast of 'tame' vs. 'piranha'.]
SYDNEY: Well, you haven't been attacked by one sir.
ROLLO: Nobody's been attacked by one, Lotterby (He moves on) Or if they have, they didn't notice... [He calls Sydney on the unlikely possibility of an attack.]
SYDNEY: They've got diabolical temperaments, sir..." [I give credit to Sydney for his commitment to his mission.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I laughed because the keepers created such an exaggerated fiction compared to the modest reality. It was just simply ridiculous.
Fierce Creatures (1997)(9th draft, 4/4/95; originally titled Strictly Confidential)
by John Cleese and Iain Johnstone
Monday, September 10, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: American Buffalo (1996) - The Mamet Voice; Unusual Dialogue Format
[Quick Summary: After Don, a junk shop owner with a shady side business, agrees to steal a valuable buffalo nickel with Teach, his protegee Bob brings bad news.]
Some Mamet plays translate to film, but this one does not for me.
I think it is still worth a read. Here are a few thoughts why:
1) The distinctive Mamet voice
- Like many Mamet original scripts,* this one follows a winding path. It takes a little while before we know what the story is, but I like how it winds out and then back.
- The dialogue has a staccato tempo that meanders too, i.e., like real conversations.
- It is more interested in the space between two people than plot (sorry, plot junkies).
2) The unusual use of parentheses in dialogue
This is the first time that I've seen the frequent use of parentheses like this.
There's no further instruction or description on what the parentheses mean, so I assume the dialogue is meant to be spoken in a low or soft voice.
Also, I noticed that as I saw more parentheses, they became a visual cue = "low voice" = automatically caused me to read between the lines a little more.
In the scene below, Teach tries to persuade Don not to bring young Bob on board. Notice how much is unspoken yet understood between the two old comrades.
ex. "INT. JUNK SHOP - DAY
...Don crosses to his desk.
TEACH: It's hard to make up the rules about this stuff.
DON: (You'll be in there under lots of pressure.)
TEACH: (Not so much.)
DON: (Come on, a little, anyway.)
TEACH: (That's only natural.)
DON: (Yeah.)
TEACH: (It wouldn't be unnatural I wasn't tense. A guy who isn't tense, I don't want him on my side.)
DON: (No.)
TEACH: (You know why?)
DON: (Yeah.)
TEACH: (Okay, then.) It's good to talk this stuff out.
DON: Yeah."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I'm not sure that I'd recommend frequent use of parentheses, but it works here. It's nice to see something that I had not seen before.
American Buffalo (1996)(shooting script w/revisions, dated May-June, 1995)
by David Mamet
Adaptation from his play
*By "original," I mean scripts based on his original work or his plays. I do not mean adaptations that he has written for others.
Some Mamet plays translate to film, but this one does not for me.
I think it is still worth a read. Here are a few thoughts why:
1) The distinctive Mamet voice
- Like many Mamet original scripts,* this one follows a winding path. It takes a little while before we know what the story is, but I like how it winds out and then back.
- The dialogue has a staccato tempo that meanders too, i.e., like real conversations.
- It is more interested in the space between two people than plot (sorry, plot junkies).
2) The unusual use of parentheses in dialogue
This is the first time that I've seen the frequent use of parentheses like this.
There's no further instruction or description on what the parentheses mean, so I assume the dialogue is meant to be spoken in a low or soft voice.
Also, I noticed that as I saw more parentheses, they became a visual cue = "low voice" = automatically caused me to read between the lines a little more.
In the scene below, Teach tries to persuade Don not to bring young Bob on board. Notice how much is unspoken yet understood between the two old comrades.
ex. "INT. JUNK SHOP - DAY
...Don crosses to his desk.
TEACH: It's hard to make up the rules about this stuff.
DON: (You'll be in there under lots of pressure.)
TEACH: (Not so much.)
DON: (Come on, a little, anyway.)
TEACH: (That's only natural.)
DON: (Yeah.)
TEACH: (It wouldn't be unnatural I wasn't tense. A guy who isn't tense, I don't want him on my side.)
DON: (No.)
TEACH: (You know why?)
DON: (Yeah.)
TEACH: (Okay, then.) It's good to talk this stuff out.
DON: Yeah."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I'm not sure that I'd recommend frequent use of parentheses, but it works here. It's nice to see something that I had not seen before.
American Buffalo (1996)(shooting script w/revisions, dated May-June, 1995)
by David Mamet
Adaptation from his play
*By "original," I mean scripts based on his original work or his plays. I do not mean adaptations that he has written for others.
Monday, September 3, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Mother (1996) - Irony; Very Small Things; Entrenched
[Quick Summary: As an experiment, John, a twice divorced 40 y.o. man moves back in with his mother Beatrice to find out what is the root of his problems with women.]
Why is this script funny?
Because it made me chuckle a lot? Yes.
Because it was clever and multi-layered? Yes.
But mostly, I think it was the way it skewered family dynamics that are so, so familiar. These characters are entrenched in their positions over very small things.
ex. "INT. SAFEWAY MARKET - DAY
...They stop at the jellies. There's Smucker's, Welch's, and all the standard brands. Then there's one luxury brand for $10.95. It's wrapped up in tissue paper and has a ribbon on it. John takes that. Beatrice almost has a heart attack.
BEATRICE: Oh, don't buy that.
JOHN: Why?
BEATRICE: Because that's a waste of money. You can get a whole jar here for $2.50. Why do you want to spend $10.95? [Arguing about...jelly = Very small things.]
JOHN: Cause this looks like good jelly and thank God we can afford it. Let's experience this together.
BEATRICE: I don't want this experience. You're fooled by these names and all that fancy wrapping. [She's convinced he's being taken.]
JOHN: I'm not fooled by anything. This is not what the experiment's about. It's not about being fooled. It's about splurging. See, I realized something. I think you treat yourself very cheaply, and I think that therefore you have instilled that into me. [He's convinced that she's seeing things narrowly.]
BEATRICE: Honey, I don't treat myself cheaply at all. I lived through a Depression. You didn't.
JOHN: Things aren't so great right now.
BEATRICE: Well it's not like it was in the thirties. You don't have to wait in line to buy bread.
John looks to his left. There's a huge line over by the bakery. The camera sees it. No one says anything. [Irony!]"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked how the script poked fun at familiar situations using irony, very small things, and deep commitment to one's position.
Mother (1996)(final draft, June 1995)
by Albert Brooks and Monica Johnson
Why is this script funny?
Because it made me chuckle a lot? Yes.
Because it was clever and multi-layered? Yes.
But mostly, I think it was the way it skewered family dynamics that are so, so familiar. These characters are entrenched in their positions over very small things.
ex. "INT. SAFEWAY MARKET - DAY
...They stop at the jellies. There's Smucker's, Welch's, and all the standard brands. Then there's one luxury brand for $10.95. It's wrapped up in tissue paper and has a ribbon on it. John takes that. Beatrice almost has a heart attack.
BEATRICE: Oh, don't buy that.
JOHN: Why?
BEATRICE: Because that's a waste of money. You can get a whole jar here for $2.50. Why do you want to spend $10.95? [Arguing about...jelly = Very small things.]
JOHN: Cause this looks like good jelly and thank God we can afford it. Let's experience this together.
BEATRICE: I don't want this experience. You're fooled by these names and all that fancy wrapping. [She's convinced he's being taken.]
JOHN: I'm not fooled by anything. This is not what the experiment's about. It's not about being fooled. It's about splurging. See, I realized something. I think you treat yourself very cheaply, and I think that therefore you have instilled that into me. [He's convinced that she's seeing things narrowly.]
BEATRICE: Honey, I don't treat myself cheaply at all. I lived through a Depression. You didn't.
JOHN: Things aren't so great right now.
BEATRICE: Well it's not like it was in the thirties. You don't have to wait in line to buy bread.
John looks to his left. There's a huge line over by the bakery. The camera sees it. No one says anything. [Irony!]"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked how the script poked fun at familiar situations using irony, very small things, and deep commitment to one's position.
Mother (1996)(final draft, June 1995)
by Albert Brooks and Monica Johnson
Monday, August 27, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Wedding Singer (1998) - The Unfulfilled Desire
[Quick Summary: The wedding singer, who is engaged to the wrong woman, and a waitress, who is engaged to the wrong guy, fall in love.]
I have issues with this script, but it's ok.
I was pretty impressed, however, by how fast we get a hint of the protagonist's unfilled desire (interior conflict to come)* - by page 3!
In the scene below:
- Robbie, the wedding singer, can't wait to get married (unfulfilled desire).
- He thinks his life is all smooth sailing.
- He has just wrested the microphone from the Best Man and saved his client's wedding reception.
ex. "Robbie raises his glass and everyone in the thankful crowd follows suit in a smattering sort of way. The tension is broken.
Many look at Robbie hopefully, many still disturbed. The bride is ashen, unable to look at her husband, who sits by her side sweating.
ROBBIE (continued): C'mon everybody, we've all done crazy things. I had dreams of being a rock star and I was living what I thought was a rock'n'roll lifestyle. 'Til I met a girl who made me realize what's really important in life. And I'm marrying her next week. [Uh-oh.]
The crowd applauds. Robbie acknowledges it.
ROBBIE (continued): The point is, when you're in love, the emptiness is gone and there's no reason to do stupid things. Cause you got something to live for - each other. And the way I've seen these two look into each others' eyes all day long, I can tell they're gonna live for each other the rest of their lives. Cheers! [He's a romantic. We sense that he's soon to be disappointed.]
The entire room fills with the warmth generated by Robbie's love inspiring speech."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked how we got to Robbie's current status quo quickly, with a light comedic touch, and set us up for where we'll be going.
The Wedding Singer (1998)
by Tim Herlihy (rewrite by Carrie Fisher, 11/8/96)
*This is known as Step 1: The Chemical Equation (Setup): "A scene or sequence identifying the exterior and/or interior conflict (i.e., unfulfilled desire), the "what's wrong with this picture" implied in the protagonist's (and/or the antagonist's) current status quo."
I have issues with this script, but it's ok.
I was pretty impressed, however, by how fast we get a hint of the protagonist's unfilled desire (interior conflict to come)* - by page 3!
In the scene below:
- Robbie, the wedding singer, can't wait to get married (unfulfilled desire).
- He thinks his life is all smooth sailing.
- He has just wrested the microphone from the Best Man and saved his client's wedding reception.
ex. "Robbie raises his glass and everyone in the thankful crowd follows suit in a smattering sort of way. The tension is broken.
Many look at Robbie hopefully, many still disturbed. The bride is ashen, unable to look at her husband, who sits by her side sweating.
ROBBIE (continued): C'mon everybody, we've all done crazy things. I had dreams of being a rock star and I was living what I thought was a rock'n'roll lifestyle. 'Til I met a girl who made me realize what's really important in life. And I'm marrying her next week. [Uh-oh.]
The crowd applauds. Robbie acknowledges it.
ROBBIE (continued): The point is, when you're in love, the emptiness is gone and there's no reason to do stupid things. Cause you got something to live for - each other. And the way I've seen these two look into each others' eyes all day long, I can tell they're gonna live for each other the rest of their lives. Cheers! [He's a romantic. We sense that he's soon to be disappointed.]
The entire room fills with the warmth generated by Robbie's love inspiring speech."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I liked how we got to Robbie's current status quo quickly, with a light comedic touch, and set us up for where we'll be going.
The Wedding Singer (1998)
by Tim Herlihy (rewrite by Carrie Fisher, 11/8/96)
*This is known as Step 1: The Chemical Equation (Setup): "A scene or sequence identifying the exterior and/or interior conflict (i.e., unfulfilled desire), the "what's wrong with this picture" implied in the protagonist's (and/or the antagonist's) current status quo."
Monday, August 20, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: 9 to 5 (1980) - Farce is a Skillfully Exploited Situation
[Quick Summary: Three very different female co-workers bond over some wild, crazy adventures outwitting their sexist, lying, egotistical boss.]
Two lessons from this script:
1) How a Script Can Hinge on the Right Casting. Even with a good script, Dolly Parton added that "extra" vibrancy. So if you can get Dolly Parton, get Dolly Parton.
2) Why Do We Laugh at Farce? Let's start with the definition:
This script had several great examples, including the scene below.
Prior to this scece, Violet has accidentally put rat poison in the boss' coffee.
--> The boss hit his head, became unconscious, and spilt the coffee.
--> He is rushed to the E.R., woke up, and walked out.
--> Meanwhile, another unconscious man is wheeled in.
--> The police are waiting to hear about man #2.
Watch how we laugh the misunderstanding in the situation:
ex. "INT. EMERGENCY WARD - NIGHT
...A Medic that brought in the man on the gurney exits the emergency room. The Detective stops him for a moment.
DETECTIVE: The guy they just brought in on the gurney; how is he?
MEDIC #1: Not so good.
DETECTIVE: When can I speak to the Doctor?
MEDIC #1: He knows you're here. [This line signals to Violet that "everyone knows what she did." The reality is that no one does yet.]
The Medic walks on down the hall.
VIOLET: Oh, my God. They found out about it already.
JUDY: Don't panic. Don't panic.
The Doctor comes out and the Detective speaks to him.
DETECTIVE: How is he, Doc?
DOCTOR: He's dead.
Violet receives the news with a shock. Doralee and Judy are equally horrified.
VIOLET: Oh, my God. [She thinks the boss is dead, but ironically he's not.]
DETECTIVE: Can you tell what caused it?
DOCTOR: Not without an autopsy, but I'm fairly certain it was some kind of poison.
VIOLET: Ohhh... [She thinks she's to blame, but she's not.]
Violet feels suddenly faint and Judy and Doralee rush to help her. The Doctor leads the Detective and the Policeman into his office down the hall while Judy and Doralee help a distraught Violet to a seat in the waiting room."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Farce is about the situation more than the character development.
9 to 5 (1980)(final draft, 12/12/79)
by Colin Higgins
Story by Patricia Resnick
Two lessons from this script:
1) How a Script Can Hinge on the Right Casting. Even with a good script, Dolly Parton added that "extra" vibrancy. So if you can get Dolly Parton, get Dolly Parton.
2) Why Do We Laugh at Farce? Let's start with the definition:
Farce (n.) = A light, humorous play in which the plot depends upon a skillfully exploited situation rather than upon the development of character. (my emphasis)This is a new idea to me that farce is more about the situation than the character.
This script had several great examples, including the scene below.
Prior to this scece, Violet has accidentally put rat poison in the boss' coffee.
--> The boss hit his head, became unconscious, and spilt the coffee.
--> He is rushed to the E.R., woke up, and walked out.
--> Meanwhile, another unconscious man is wheeled in.
--> The police are waiting to hear about man #2.
Watch how we laugh the misunderstanding in the situation:
ex. "INT. EMERGENCY WARD - NIGHT
...A Medic that brought in the man on the gurney exits the emergency room. The Detective stops him for a moment.
DETECTIVE: The guy they just brought in on the gurney; how is he?
MEDIC #1: Not so good.
DETECTIVE: When can I speak to the Doctor?
MEDIC #1: He knows you're here. [This line signals to Violet that "everyone knows what she did." The reality is that no one does yet.]
The Medic walks on down the hall.
VIOLET: Oh, my God. They found out about it already.
JUDY: Don't panic. Don't panic.
The Doctor comes out and the Detective speaks to him.
DETECTIVE: How is he, Doc?
DOCTOR: He's dead.
Violet receives the news with a shock. Doralee and Judy are equally horrified.
VIOLET: Oh, my God. [She thinks the boss is dead, but ironically he's not.]
DETECTIVE: Can you tell what caused it?
DOCTOR: Not without an autopsy, but I'm fairly certain it was some kind of poison.
VIOLET: Ohhh... [She thinks she's to blame, but she's not.]
Violet feels suddenly faint and Judy and Doralee rush to help her. The Doctor leads the Detective and the Policeman into his office down the hall while Judy and Doralee help a distraught Violet to a seat in the waiting room."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Farce is about the situation more than the character development.
9 to 5 (1980)(final draft, 12/12/79)
by Colin Higgins
Story by Patricia Resnick
Monday, August 13, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Pelican Brief (1993) - A Good Example of Suspense
[Quick Summary: After two Supreme Court justices are murdered, a Tulane Law School student proposes a possible conspiracy, and ends up running for her life.]
I'm not sure that I liked this script (or maybe it was the story?)
However, I did like the following suspense scene where Darby is on the run.
She has arranged to meet with Verheek, someone she has never met before.
She has no idea, but we know that this guy is an imposter.
ex. "EXT. BOARDWALK - DAY
The boardwalk is crowded; a line has formed beside the Bayou Queen, a paddle wheeler. They stop at the end of the line.
HE: Are we getting on this boat?
DARBY: Yes. I've got a car a mile upriver at a park where we'll stop in thirty minutes.
The line is moving now.
CLOSE SHOT - HIM
CAMERA follows his hand as he touches the trouse pocket that contains the gun. He reaches into the pocket and pulls out a handkerchief.
CAMERA pans up with him as he brings it to his nose. There is a tiny flash of metal against the base of his skull just below the red baseball cap.
CLOSE SHOT DARBY'S HAND HOLDING HIS AS HIS HAND FALLS AWAY FROM HERS.
CLOSE SHOT DARBY as she whirls around.
DARBY'S P.O.V. of HIM falling to the ground.
CLOSE SHOT OF WHITE HANDKERCHIEF still clutched in his hand as it hits the ground. It turns bloos red.
VERY CLOSE SHOT - DARBY'S EYES AND MOUTH FILLING THE SCREEN WITH HER SCREAM...She whirls around in horror.
CAMERA whirls around to her P.O.V.
A man is running away. He disappears in a crowd.
WOMAN (V.O.): He's got a gun.
CAMERA whirls back again, following the sound of the woman's voice. SHe is standing next to Darby.
CAMERA slams down to her P.O.V.
The man she thinks is Verheek is on all fours with a small pistol in his right hand. Blood streams from his chin and puddles under his face. He lunges to the edge of the boardwalk. The gun drops into the water. He collapses on his stomach with his head hanging over and dripping into the river."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think it's her reaction shots that makes the shock resonate so strongly with us.
Pelican Brief (1993)(1st draft, 2/10/93)
by Alan J. Pakula
Adapted from the novel by John Grisham
I'm not sure that I liked this script (or maybe it was the story?)
However, I did like the following suspense scene where Darby is on the run.
She has arranged to meet with Verheek, someone she has never met before.
She has no idea, but we know that this guy is an imposter.
ex. "EXT. BOARDWALK - DAY
The boardwalk is crowded; a line has formed beside the Bayou Queen, a paddle wheeler. They stop at the end of the line.
HE: Are we getting on this boat?
DARBY: Yes. I've got a car a mile upriver at a park where we'll stop in thirty minutes.
The line is moving now.
CLOSE SHOT - HIM
CAMERA follows his hand as he touches the trouse pocket that contains the gun. He reaches into the pocket and pulls out a handkerchief.
CAMERA pans up with him as he brings it to his nose. There is a tiny flash of metal against the base of his skull just below the red baseball cap.
CLOSE SHOT DARBY'S HAND HOLDING HIS AS HIS HAND FALLS AWAY FROM HERS.
CLOSE SHOT DARBY as she whirls around.
DARBY'S P.O.V. of HIM falling to the ground.
CLOSE SHOT OF WHITE HANDKERCHIEF still clutched in his hand as it hits the ground. It turns bloos red.
VERY CLOSE SHOT - DARBY'S EYES AND MOUTH FILLING THE SCREEN WITH HER SCREAM...She whirls around in horror.
CAMERA whirls around to her P.O.V.
A man is running away. He disappears in a crowd.
WOMAN (V.O.): He's got a gun.
CAMERA whirls back again, following the sound of the woman's voice. SHe is standing next to Darby.
CAMERA slams down to her P.O.V.
The man she thinks is Verheek is on all fours with a small pistol in his right hand. Blood streams from his chin and puddles under his face. He lunges to the edge of the boardwalk. The gun drops into the water. He collapses on his stomach with his head hanging over and dripping into the river."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think it's her reaction shots that makes the shock resonate so strongly with us.
Pelican Brief (1993)(1st draft, 2/10/93)
by Alan J. Pakula
Adapted from the novel by John Grisham
Monday, August 6, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: St. Elmo's Fire (1985) - The Comedic "3 Beats"
[Quick Summary: Three months out of college, seven college friends enter their Freshman Year of Life with all its expectations, secrets, and messiness.]
MY TWO CENTS:
1) Would I buy this script today? YES, in a heart beat.
Why?
- It's a witty, fun, sharp, timeless drama + comedy.
- It's rare to have so much great comedy in a drama.
- It is a true ensemble cast for 7 young actors, with great arcs and conflict.
- It's cheap (no CGI, car chases, etc.)
2) The Comedic "3 Beats." I was impressed by the number of "3 beats" in this script.*
Usually, the 3 beats are close together:
ex. "INT. GEORGETOWN MEDICAL CENTER - AUGUST NIGHT
...Wendy is looking over Jules' Date who hovers in the distance.
WENDY: Is that your date? [BEAT 1]
The naked man wanders past them. [BEAT 2]
JULES: No that's my date! [BEAT 3]
As usual, Jules has managed to make Wendy laugh, just as the Cops approach her."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes, the 3 beats were looser and further apart:
ex. "INT. LADIES ROOM
Jules is applying eyeshadow to Wendy's bruised eye.
WENDY: He got drunk cause he lost his job. [Set the argument.]
JULES: Again? You didn't give him any money did you...?
WENDY: A little.
JULES: I thought you were going to take definite steps to change everything in your life that is not working. [BEAT 1]
WENDY: That doesn't leave much left. [BEAT 2]
JULES: Wendy this is all too destructive.
WENDY: Life in the fat lane. [BEAT 3]
JULES: You're not fat.
WENDY: I am fat. And no diet works. The only way to loose [sic] weight is by amputation. [BEAT 1]
JULES: You have to amputate Billy the Kid. [BEAT 2]
WENDY: I can't. [BEAT 3] [BEAT 1]
JULES: I don't get it. [BEAT 2]
WENDY: Me either." [BEAT 3]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think these "3 beat" comedy bits allowed this drama to skewer a little deeper, a little closer to the bone, than straight drama alone could.
St. Elmo's Fire (1985)(3/13/84 draft)
by Joel Schumacher and Carl Kurlander
* "3 beats"= The rhythm and/or repetition of "three" things. I'm not sure who discovered it, but it always seems to make people laugh.
MY TWO CENTS:
1) Would I buy this script today? YES, in a heart beat.
Why?
- It's a witty, fun, sharp, timeless drama + comedy.
- It's rare to have so much great comedy in a drama.
- It is a true ensemble cast for 7 young actors, with great arcs and conflict.
- It's cheap (no CGI, car chases, etc.)
2) The Comedic "3 Beats." I was impressed by the number of "3 beats" in this script.*
Usually, the 3 beats are close together:
ex. "INT. GEORGETOWN MEDICAL CENTER - AUGUST NIGHT
...Wendy is looking over Jules' Date who hovers in the distance.
WENDY: Is that your date? [BEAT 1]
The naked man wanders past them. [BEAT 2]
JULES: No that's my date! [BEAT 3]
As usual, Jules has managed to make Wendy laugh, just as the Cops approach her."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes, the 3 beats were looser and further apart:
ex. "INT. LADIES ROOM
Jules is applying eyeshadow to Wendy's bruised eye.
WENDY: He got drunk cause he lost his job. [Set the argument.]
JULES: Again? You didn't give him any money did you...?
WENDY: A little.
JULES: I thought you were going to take definite steps to change everything in your life that is not working. [BEAT 1]
WENDY: That doesn't leave much left. [BEAT 2]
JULES: Wendy this is all too destructive.
WENDY: Life in the fat lane. [BEAT 3]
JULES: You're not fat.
WENDY: I am fat. And no diet works. The only way to loose [sic] weight is by amputation. [BEAT 1]
JULES: You have to amputate Billy the Kid. [BEAT 2]
WENDY: I can't. [BEAT 3] [BEAT 1]
JULES: I don't get it. [BEAT 2]
WENDY: Me either." [BEAT 3]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think these "3 beat" comedy bits allowed this drama to skewer a little deeper, a little closer to the bone, than straight drama alone could.
St. Elmo's Fire (1985)(3/13/84 draft)
by Joel Schumacher and Carl Kurlander
* "3 beats"= The rhythm and/or repetition of "three" things. I'm not sure who discovered it, but it always seems to make people laugh.
Monday, July 30, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: 12 Angry Men (1957) - The Invisible Structure of a Talky Script
[Quick Summary: Twelve NYC jurors debate the fate of a young man accused of killing his father.]
Q: Why is dialogue so tricky, especially for new writers?
A: I think it's because they try to make dialogue carry things that it is not meant to.
Q: "Telling" the plot instead of "showing," right?
A: Yes.
Q: What about 12 Angry Men? It's a very, very, very talky script where the jurors "tell" the defendant's story.
A: Yes, but that is not what the story is really about.
Q: What do you mean?
A: It's really about the jurors' beliefs and attitudes. It's not about what they say, but how they say it, when they say it, and how they persuade or defend.
Q: How did the writer do that?
A: Structure! Here, the juxtaposition of dialogue revealed more than the words did.
Notice in the scene below:
ex. "#6: I don't know. I started to be convinced, uh...you know, very early in the case. Well, I was looking for the motive. That's very important. If there's no motive where's the case? So anyway, that testimony from those people across the hall from the kid's apartment, that was very powerful. Didn't they say something about an argument between the father and the boy around seven o'clock that night? I mean, I can be wrong.
MEDIUM SHOT #11, #10, #9, #8 FROM ACROSS THE TABLE
#11: It was eight o'clock. Not seven.
#8: That's right. Eight o'clock. They heard an argument, but they coulen't hear what it was about. Then they heard the father hit the boy twice, and finally they saw the boy walk angrily out of the hosue. What does that prove?
CLOSE UP #6
Any time he is working on his own ideas he feels himself on unsteady ground, and is ready to back down. He does so now.
#6: Well it doesn't exactly prove anything. It's just part of the picture. I didn't say it proved anything.
MEDIUM SHOT CENTERING ON #'S 6, 7, 8
#8: You said it revealed a motive for this killing. The prosecuting attorney said the same thing. Well I don't think it's a very strong motive. This boy has been hit so many times in his life that violence is practically a normal state of affairs for him. I can't see two slaps in the face provoking him into committing murder. [#8 discredits #6]
MEDIUM SHOT #4
#4 (Quietly): It may have been two too many. Everyone has a breaking point.
CLOSE UP #8
Looking across at #4, and realizing instantly that this will probably be his most powerful adversary. #4 is the man of logic, and a man without emotional attachment to this case." [#8 recognizes opponent]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Juxtaposing Character A's dialogue against Character B's can reveal more unspoken things (ex. strategy, attitudes) than their words could.
12 Angry Men (1957)
Story and screenplay by Reginald Rose
Q: Why is dialogue so tricky, especially for new writers?
A: I think it's because they try to make dialogue carry things that it is not meant to.
Q: "Telling" the plot instead of "showing," right?
A: Yes.
Q: What about 12 Angry Men? It's a very, very, very talky script where the jurors "tell" the defendant's story.
A: Yes, but that is not what the story is really about.
Q: What do you mean?
A: It's really about the jurors' beliefs and attitudes. It's not about what they say, but how they say it, when they say it, and how they persuade or defend.
Q: How did the writer do that?
A: Structure! Here, the juxtaposition of dialogue revealed more than the words did.
Notice in the scene below:
- #8 (our hero) argues with juror #6 --> It reveals #6's faulty reasoning
- #4's comment reveals his beliefs --> #8 identifies an opponent
ex. "#6: I don't know. I started to be convinced, uh...you know, very early in the case. Well, I was looking for the motive. That's very important. If there's no motive where's the case? So anyway, that testimony from those people across the hall from the kid's apartment, that was very powerful. Didn't they say something about an argument between the father and the boy around seven o'clock that night? I mean, I can be wrong.
MEDIUM SHOT #11, #10, #9, #8 FROM ACROSS THE TABLE
#11: It was eight o'clock. Not seven.
#8: That's right. Eight o'clock. They heard an argument, but they coulen't hear what it was about. Then they heard the father hit the boy twice, and finally they saw the boy walk angrily out of the hosue. What does that prove?
CLOSE UP #6
Any time he is working on his own ideas he feels himself on unsteady ground, and is ready to back down. He does so now.
#6: Well it doesn't exactly prove anything. It's just part of the picture. I didn't say it proved anything.
MEDIUM SHOT CENTERING ON #'S 6, 7, 8
#8: You said it revealed a motive for this killing. The prosecuting attorney said the same thing. Well I don't think it's a very strong motive. This boy has been hit so many times in his life that violence is practically a normal state of affairs for him. I can't see two slaps in the face provoking him into committing murder. [#8 discredits #6]
MEDIUM SHOT #4
#4 (Quietly): It may have been two too many. Everyone has a breaking point.
CLOSE UP #8
Looking across at #4, and realizing instantly that this will probably be his most powerful adversary. #4 is the man of logic, and a man without emotional attachment to this case." [#8 recognizes opponent]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Juxtaposing Character A's dialogue against Character B's can reveal more unspoken things (ex. strategy, attitudes) than their words could.
12 Angry Men (1957)
Story and screenplay by Reginald Rose
Monday, July 23, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Reds (1981) - Characters Matter to Us; Politics as Backdrop
[Quick Summary: This is the very complicated, push-pull marriage of communist activist Jack Reed and writer Louise Bryant (late 1910s).]
Once again, film critic Roger Ebert nails my feelings for this script:
Why? Because "[t]he heart of the film is in the relationship between Reed and Bryant," which spits and crackles.*
I worried about Louise, who was no push over, yet wasn't taken seriously as a writer.
I was exasperated with Jack, a political animal who 'never wants to be where he's at.'
Could these two lovers make it work? Or was it doomed?
In the scene below, notice how politics is only in the backdrop.
The real conflict is a universal one: How do Louise and Jack take care of (or don't take care of) one another against the demands of career and politics?
ex. "INT. CROTON HOUSE - THE KITCHEN - JACK
...LOUISE'S VOICE: Jack?
JACK: Stay out! Stay out! Stay out!
INSIDE THE DINING ROOM Louise sits at the table on which is a birthday cake. She counts the candles suspiciously.
INSIDE THE KITCHEN the turkey, now wrapped in a towel, lies on the sink as Jack drops a mound of diced vegetables into a pan of boiling grease. The grease erupts with a gust of smoke and a loud sizzling sound.
INSIDE THE DINING ROOM, Louise sits gripping the arms of her chair, watching the smoke flow out from around the kitchen door and calls brightly.
LOUISE: I had an offer today to lecture in St. Louis and San Francisco, but I turned them down. I don't want to go any further away from here than New Jersey. (there is no answer) Jack?
JACK: Stay out! Stay out!
...He returns with an entire platter of little burnt things and puts them in front of Louise.
JACK: I put a turkey in the oven so we have a while.
LOUISE: Mmmm.
JACK: Eat up, there're plenty more where those came from.
The phone rings. He sits looking at it, then walks over and picks it up.
JACK: Hello (he listens) Tonight? Oh, shit. (he listens) Hold on. (to Louise, his hand over the phone) The organizer they found in Rochester has to go back tonight and I have to meet with him. I'll only be an hour. I'm sorry, honey.
LOUISE: No, no. If you think it's important.
JACK (into phone): I'll be there in twenty minutes. (he hangs up)
Louise slumps as he prepares to leave."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Characters matter.
"A film about the politics in the Bolshevik Revolution? I'll pass." vs. "A film about mismatched lovers against the backdrop of the Bolshevik Revolution? Yes, please."
Reds (1981)
by Warren Beatty and Trevor Griffiths
*Thanks to uncredited work by writer/director Elaine May.
Once again, film critic Roger Ebert nails my feelings for this script:
The whole movie finally comes down to the fact that the characters matter to us. Beatty may be fascinated by the ins and outs of American left-wing politics sixty years ago, but he is not so idealistic as to believe an American mass audience can be inspired to care as deeply. So he gives us people. (underline mine)Another story about politics? NO THANK YOU. But this story was different.
Why? Because "[t]he heart of the film is in the relationship between Reed and Bryant," which spits and crackles.*
I worried about Louise, who was no push over, yet wasn't taken seriously as a writer.
I was exasperated with Jack, a political animal who 'never wants to be where he's at.'
Could these two lovers make it work? Or was it doomed?
In the scene below, notice how politics is only in the backdrop.
The real conflict is a universal one: How do Louise and Jack take care of (or don't take care of) one another against the demands of career and politics?
ex. "INT. CROTON HOUSE - THE KITCHEN - JACK
...LOUISE'S VOICE: Jack?
JACK: Stay out! Stay out! Stay out!
INSIDE THE DINING ROOM Louise sits at the table on which is a birthday cake. She counts the candles suspiciously.
INSIDE THE KITCHEN the turkey, now wrapped in a towel, lies on the sink as Jack drops a mound of diced vegetables into a pan of boiling grease. The grease erupts with a gust of smoke and a loud sizzling sound.
INSIDE THE DINING ROOM, Louise sits gripping the arms of her chair, watching the smoke flow out from around the kitchen door and calls brightly.
LOUISE: I had an offer today to lecture in St. Louis and San Francisco, but I turned them down. I don't want to go any further away from here than New Jersey. (there is no answer) Jack?
JACK: Stay out! Stay out!
...He returns with an entire platter of little burnt things and puts them in front of Louise.
JACK: I put a turkey in the oven so we have a while.
LOUISE: Mmmm.
JACK: Eat up, there're plenty more where those came from.
The phone rings. He sits looking at it, then walks over and picks it up.
JACK: Hello (he listens) Tonight? Oh, shit. (he listens) Hold on. (to Louise, his hand over the phone) The organizer they found in Rochester has to go back tonight and I have to meet with him. I'll only be an hour. I'm sorry, honey.
LOUISE: No, no. If you think it's important.
JACK (into phone): I'll be there in twenty minutes. (he hangs up)
Louise slumps as he prepares to leave."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Characters matter.
"A film about the politics in the Bolshevik Revolution? I'll pass." vs. "A film about mismatched lovers against the backdrop of the Bolshevik Revolution? Yes, please."
Reds (1981)
by Warren Beatty and Trevor Griffiths
*Thanks to uncredited work by writer/director Elaine May.
Monday, July 16, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: Predator (1987) - Protecting Your Story; One Good Change
[Quick Summary: After 3 presidential cabinet members go missing in the jungle, a military team goes to rescue them, only to be hunted by a mysterious predator.]
TWO THOUGHTS:
1) PROTECTING YOUR STORY. All screenwriters accept that a script will change because of budget, location, etc.
But how do you protect your STORY from destructive changes? Solid story structure.
ex. The essential structure of Predator does not change much, despite 8+ drafts. All the important beats from the early version (PDF1) are present in the final (PDF2).
2) ONE SMART CHANGE. In the early draft, the whole team never really see the Hunter. In production polish (PDF2), they do spot him at the beginning of Act 3.
This was a very smart change because: a) The protagonists know their enemy is not human; b) The antagonist, who was nearly invisible, now has even higher stakes.
ex. "EXT. THE TEAM - DAY
The limb CRASHES down from the trees, Schaefer, Dillon, Billy and Mac diving for safety. But Ramirez, following the Hunter's leap, SEES too late the pendular movement of the severed limb and is struck a THUDDING blow in the ribs, which lifts him off his feet, hurling him backwards like a rag doll, his shirt torn open, exposing a BLOODY WOUND.
An [sic] Anna runs to Ramiez's side the others, still stunned, look upward, frozen in shock SEEING: THE HUNTER, clinging to a side of a tree, flushed bright crimson.
Dillis [sic] is dumbfounded, like the others, rooted to the ground staring upward.
DILLON: What in God's name...?
The Hunter utters an unearthly SNARL and HISS from his open mouth as an instant later his camouflage resumes and he vanishes from sight...a rapid, furtive movement through the trees."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Good structure is not 100% guarantee that your story will survive production, but at least you will have a fighting chance.
"You can make a bad film from a good script, but you can't make a good film from a bad script." - Anonymous
Predator (1987)(early draft, 7/17/85; final draft, 4/7/86)
by James Thomas and John Thomas
TWO THOUGHTS:
1) PROTECTING YOUR STORY. All screenwriters accept that a script will change because of budget, location, etc.
But how do you protect your STORY from destructive changes? Solid story structure.
ex. The essential structure of Predator does not change much, despite 8+ drafts. All the important beats from the early version (PDF1) are present in the final (PDF2).
2) ONE SMART CHANGE. In the early draft, the whole team never really see the Hunter. In production polish (PDF2), they do spot him at the beginning of Act 3.
This was a very smart change because: a) The protagonists know their enemy is not human; b) The antagonist, who was nearly invisible, now has even higher stakes.
ex. "EXT. THE TEAM - DAY
The limb CRASHES down from the trees, Schaefer, Dillon, Billy and Mac diving for safety. But Ramirez, following the Hunter's leap, SEES too late the pendular movement of the severed limb and is struck a THUDDING blow in the ribs, which lifts him off his feet, hurling him backwards like a rag doll, his shirt torn open, exposing a BLOODY WOUND.
An [sic] Anna runs to Ramiez's side the others, still stunned, look upward, frozen in shock SEEING: THE HUNTER, clinging to a side of a tree, flushed bright crimson.
Dillis [sic] is dumbfounded, like the others, rooted to the ground staring upward.
DILLON: What in God's name...?
The Hunter utters an unearthly SNARL and HISS from his open mouth as an instant later his camouflage resumes and he vanishes from sight...a rapid, furtive movement through the trees."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Good structure is not 100% guarantee that your story will survive production, but at least you will have a fighting chance.
"You can make a bad film from a good script, but you can't make a good film from a bad script." - Anonymous
Predator (1987)(early draft, 7/17/85; final draft, 4/7/86)
by James Thomas and John Thomas
Monday, July 9, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Stunt Man (1980) - Strengthening a Good Turning Point/Reveal
[Quick Summary: After he barely escapes arresting officers, Cameron stumbles onto a film shoot, where he is hired to be a stunt man.]
I got a headache after reading this script. I felt frustrated and manipulated.
Roger Ebert explains why much better than I can:
In this scene, Cameron (protagonist) and Henry (assistant cameraman) talk about Eli Cross (director). Cameron thinks only Eli knows Cameron's secret.
ex. "INT. HOTEL BAR - LATE NIGHT
...CAMERON: Ya quittin'?
HENRY: Fuckin' A. Gettin' out tonight. But not without splittin' a Schlitz with the one guy, 'cept me, who wouldn't take shit from that screwball.
As the BARTENDER is taking away the empties, Henry puts his finger down on a DIME.
HENRY (cont'd): Change is for you, except that. That's a very special dime. (holds it up for Cameron to see) Know what this is? Ask me!
CAMERON: It's a dime...am I close?
HENRY: It's Eli Cross' ass. People think 'cause you're easygoin' they can walk all over you. Bull-shit...I'm blowin' the whistle with this dime in that phone...killin' a man and hiding it from the police...are you kiddin'...? Who is he think he is? [Oh no! Does Henry know Cameron's secret too?]
Cameron pales, knowing that drunken Henry's desire for revenge can expose him to the police. He grabs the dime from Henry's fingers and drops it into a PEANUT VENDING MACHINE. [Cameron jumps to the logical conclusion, i.e., He thinks it's me.]
HENRY: What the hell you doin'?
They have reached the HOTEL DOORWAY. By now, Henry is convinced Cameron means business. He stops.
HENRY: Do whatever you wanna do, but I better do it with ya! You'll need help 'cause that goddamn looney is dangerous.
CAMERON (blustering): Not to me, he ain't. I'm going to the cops. You gotta earn your living in pictures, but I don't give a shit. He can't hurt me.
HENRY: Don't be too sure. Damned psycho nearly strangled me! Don't believe me? Wanna see marks...?(tears open shirt collar to show bruises) ...Lucky to be alive!
CAMERON (confused): Henry, what are you talking about? I watched that whole thing today, he didn't even touch you.
HENRY: Not today. When Burt went into the water. (Cameron is wide-eyed) [Wow! Henry was talking about Eli's secret, not Cameron's secret. This is a great reveal and reversal of our expectations.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It really helps that Cameron jumps to the most logical conclusion first ("Henry thinks I'm the killer").
It makes the reveal stronger (Henry is talking about Eli) and the reverses our expectations.
The Stunt Man (1980)(final shooting draft)
by Lawrence B. Marcus
Adaptation by Richard Rush
Based on the novel by Paul Brodeur
I got a headache after reading this script. I felt frustrated and manipulated.
Roger Ebert explains why much better than I can:
Railsback begins to suspect that O'Toole really wants to kill him, either in the service of cinematic art or for some sadistic private purpose. And that is essentially the situation the film repeats, over and over, scene after scene, all the way to the end.
That's what bothered me. I caught on right away (it didn't take much deep thought) that the method of the movie was to deceive and mislead me. Because the ability to do that is completely within the director's ability-because I can know only what he chooses to tell me-I found the movie's approach more frustrating than challenging.Did I like anything? I did like the turning point/reveal below.
In this scene, Cameron (protagonist) and Henry (assistant cameraman) talk about Eli Cross (director). Cameron thinks only Eli knows Cameron's secret.
ex. "INT. HOTEL BAR - LATE NIGHT
...CAMERON: Ya quittin'?
HENRY: Fuckin' A. Gettin' out tonight. But not without splittin' a Schlitz with the one guy, 'cept me, who wouldn't take shit from that screwball.
As the BARTENDER is taking away the empties, Henry puts his finger down on a DIME.
HENRY (cont'd): Change is for you, except that. That's a very special dime. (holds it up for Cameron to see) Know what this is? Ask me!
CAMERON: It's a dime...am I close?
HENRY: It's Eli Cross' ass. People think 'cause you're easygoin' they can walk all over you. Bull-shit...I'm blowin' the whistle with this dime in that phone...killin' a man and hiding it from the police...are you kiddin'...? Who is he think he is? [Oh no! Does Henry know Cameron's secret too?]
Cameron pales, knowing that drunken Henry's desire for revenge can expose him to the police. He grabs the dime from Henry's fingers and drops it into a PEANUT VENDING MACHINE. [Cameron jumps to the logical conclusion, i.e., He thinks it's me.]
HENRY: What the hell you doin'?
They have reached the HOTEL DOORWAY. By now, Henry is convinced Cameron means business. He stops.
HENRY: Do whatever you wanna do, but I better do it with ya! You'll need help 'cause that goddamn looney is dangerous.
CAMERON (blustering): Not to me, he ain't. I'm going to the cops. You gotta earn your living in pictures, but I don't give a shit. He can't hurt me.
HENRY: Don't be too sure. Damned psycho nearly strangled me! Don't believe me? Wanna see marks...?(tears open shirt collar to show bruises) ...Lucky to be alive!
CAMERON (confused): Henry, what are you talking about? I watched that whole thing today, he didn't even touch you.
HENRY: Not today. When Burt went into the water. (Cameron is wide-eyed) [Wow! Henry was talking about Eli's secret, not Cameron's secret. This is a great reveal and reversal of our expectations.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It really helps that Cameron jumps to the most logical conclusion first ("Henry thinks I'm the killer").
It makes the reveal stronger (Henry is talking about Eli) and the reverses our expectations.
The Stunt Man (1980)(final shooting draft)
by Lawrence B. Marcus
Adaptation by Richard Rush
Based on the novel by Paul Brodeur
Monday, July 2, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Thin Red Line (1998) - A Malick Script is Different Than Others
[Quick Summary: American soldiers arrive in Guadacanal to fight the Japanese.]
>>FYI: CONFUSING SCRIPT AHEAD. FOR ADVANCED WRITERS ONLY.<<
MY THREE THOUGHTS:
1) THE SCRIPT. A screenplay is often described as a blueprint, a map, or a plan.
Its purpose is to outline what the final product, i.e., the film, will look like.
On the range from 10 (set-in-stone; very planned) to 1 (loose recipe; least planned), this Terrence Malick script is around a -3 (a sketch; will be discarded).
This will not be surprising if you know Malick's work.
However, I, who knew very little, found it irritating.
2) THE PROCESS. Malick has been described as a "screen poet," "intuitive," "spontaneous," a "truth seeker" rather than a film director.
I think he is more interested in process than the end product:
First, Malick scripts are an entirely separate category in my mind. I'm not surprised that they might be discarded during shooting. But the story too? That unsettles me.
Second, the scenes from this script that stuck with me were the simple ones.
In the scene below, Tella is a soldier shot in the chest and gut.:
ex. "Slipping one arm under the Italian's knees and the other under his shoulders, he lifts.
TELLA: Aaa-eeeee! Put me down! Put me down! You're breaking me in two! Put me down! You'll kill me! You son of a bitch! You fucker! You bastard! I told you to leave me alone! You shiteater! Stay away from me!
Turning his head away and closing his eyes, he begins his desperate, wailing, piercing scream agin. Five yards above them on the slope a line of machine gun BULLETS slowly stitches itself across from left to right. With sudden, desperate inspiration, Welsh leaps across the prostrate Tella and begins rummaging in the dead Medic's belt pouches.
WELSH: Here! Tella! Take these! Tella!
Tella stops screaming and opens his eyes. Welsh tosses him two morphine syrettes he has found and begins to attack another pouch.
TELLA: More! More! Gimme more! More!
Welsh tosses him a double handful he has found in the other pouch and then turns to run. But something stops him. Crouched like a sprinter at the gun, he turns his head and looks at Tella one more time. Tella, already unscrewing the cap from one of the syrettes, is looking at him feelingly, his eyes wide and white.
TELLA: Goodbye! Goodbye, Welsh!
WELSH: Goodbye, kid.
It is all he can think of to say. For that matter, it is all he has time to say, because he is already off and running. Bullets WHIR by his head. He runs and runs and then he falls headlong over the little crest and just lies there, half-dead from exhaustion.
STEIN: Sergeant, I saw the whole thing through the glasses. I want you to know I'm mentioning you in Orders tomorrow. I'm recommending you for the Silver Star. I can only say --
WELSH: Captain, if you say one word to thank me, I will punch you square in the nose. Right here. If you ever so much as mention me in your fucking Orders, I will resign my rating two minutes after, and leave you to run this pore, busted-up outfit by yourself. If I go to jail. So fucking help me."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: In the Malick process, the script's typical purpose is thrown out the window. This is both freeing, but also confusing, if you don't know what is going on.
The Thin Red Line (1998)(2nd draft, 10/3/96)
by Terrence Malick
Based on the novel by James Jones
>>FYI: CONFUSING SCRIPT AHEAD. FOR ADVANCED WRITERS ONLY.<<
MY THREE THOUGHTS:
1) THE SCRIPT. A screenplay is often described as a blueprint, a map, or a plan.
Its purpose is to outline what the final product, i.e., the film, will look like.
On the range from 10 (set-in-stone; very planned) to 1 (loose recipe; least planned), this Terrence Malick script is around a -3 (a sketch; will be discarded).
This will not be surprising if you know Malick's work.
However, I, who knew very little, found it irritating.
2) THE PROCESS. Malick has been described as a "screen poet," "intuitive," "spontaneous," a "truth seeker" rather than a film director.
I think he is more interested in process than the end product:
And we sat there for five or ten minutes while he got different angles of this bird flying through the sky, you know, but that’s how, it was like the script didn’t really matter to him, the story didn’t matter, although we shot the script and we shot the story, the movie didn’t really resemble the script by the time he finished editing it. ... [I]t seemed like he was gathering moments, just taking them with him and then he’d get back and say “Let’s turn this into a movie.” —Actor John C. Reilly on The Thin Red Line3) THE SCRIPT AGAIN. So what did I learn?
First, Malick scripts are an entirely separate category in my mind. I'm not surprised that they might be discarded during shooting. But the story too? That unsettles me.
Second, the scenes from this script that stuck with me were the simple ones.
In the scene below, Tella is a soldier shot in the chest and gut.:
ex. "Slipping one arm under the Italian's knees and the other under his shoulders, he lifts.
TELLA: Aaa-eeeee! Put me down! Put me down! You're breaking me in two! Put me down! You'll kill me! You son of a bitch! You fucker! You bastard! I told you to leave me alone! You shiteater! Stay away from me!
Turning his head away and closing his eyes, he begins his desperate, wailing, piercing scream agin. Five yards above them on the slope a line of machine gun BULLETS slowly stitches itself across from left to right. With sudden, desperate inspiration, Welsh leaps across the prostrate Tella and begins rummaging in the dead Medic's belt pouches.
WELSH: Here! Tella! Take these! Tella!
Tella stops screaming and opens his eyes. Welsh tosses him two morphine syrettes he has found and begins to attack another pouch.
TELLA: More! More! Gimme more! More!
Welsh tosses him a double handful he has found in the other pouch and then turns to run. But something stops him. Crouched like a sprinter at the gun, he turns his head and looks at Tella one more time. Tella, already unscrewing the cap from one of the syrettes, is looking at him feelingly, his eyes wide and white.
TELLA: Goodbye! Goodbye, Welsh!
WELSH: Goodbye, kid.
It is all he can think of to say. For that matter, it is all he has time to say, because he is already off and running. Bullets WHIR by his head. He runs and runs and then he falls headlong over the little crest and just lies there, half-dead from exhaustion.
STEIN: Sergeant, I saw the whole thing through the glasses. I want you to know I'm mentioning you in Orders tomorrow. I'm recommending you for the Silver Star. I can only say --
WELSH: Captain, if you say one word to thank me, I will punch you square in the nose. Right here. If you ever so much as mention me in your fucking Orders, I will resign my rating two minutes after, and leave you to run this pore, busted-up outfit by yourself. If I go to jail. So fucking help me."
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: In the Malick process, the script's typical purpose is thrown out the window. This is both freeing, but also confusing, if you don't know what is going on.
The Thin Red Line (1998)(2nd draft, 10/3/96)
by Terrence Malick
Based on the novel by James Jones
Monday, June 25, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: After Hours (1985) - Satire Needs Good Pacing & Tension
[Quick Summary: After meeting an intriguing woman at 2 a.m., Paul, a bored computer processor, has a bad, bad, bad, horrible night.]
This is one weird script. Ebert calls this the "tensest comedy" and a satire.
I get "comedy" but "satire"?
In this story, Paul meets a stranger, Marcy, at 2 a.m. in New York. She invites him to her friend's apartment, and he encounters stranger and stranger situations.
Oh, I see! They're trying to satirize is what it feels like to live in a big city, i.e., the dealing with the unexpected.
But how to pull it off?
a) Satire = Exaggeration. The writer gave Paul merciless, unrelenting waves of the unexpected. This is funny for some reason.
b) Pacing & Tension. However, it was crucial to have strong pacing and tension to harness the waves. Otherwise, it's just random scenes leading nowhere.
In the scene below, note:
- The pacing races along until Kiki's reveal, i.e., the a-ha! moment.
- Paul is quite tense &/or relieved, based on wrong facts.
- The overall effect is feeling discombobulated. These people are not real, are they?
- It's a funny scene...Is it because of the situation? Or how people respond to tension?
ex. "EXT. SPRING ST.
PAUL begins heading int he direction of the bar, when, crossing a street, he sees, to the south, two FIGURES, one carrying a TV set and the other that life-size sculpture from KIKI'S loft. The FIGURES stop behind a van parked on the street. PAUL runs toward them.
PAUL: Hey! [This scene establishes Paul's expectations: Robbers stole an acquaintance's sculpture. Paul is offended.]
Hearing this, both FIGURES drop what they're carrying. They quickly climb into the van and drive off, speeding by PAUL who soon reaches the TV, the tube broken, and the sculpture. He straddles the latter behind him, piggy-back style, and carries it toward Broome St. [Paul has rescued Kiki's stolen property & is relieved.]
CUT TO:
EXT. LOFT BUILDING.
PAUL presses KIKI's buzzer, then looks up at the fourth floor window. KIKI pops her head out, but she is gagged and, apparently, bound. Her head disappears, then pops out again with her keys dangling from her mouth. She lets them fall. [Paul sees Kiki is bound & assumes it was before the robbery. He is tense again.]
INT. LOFT BUILDING.
PAUL rounds a landing with difficulty, the statue an awkward burden. [This is ironic that he wouldn't put down the statue. This is unexpected & funny.]
CUT TO:
INT. KIKI'S LOFT.
PAUL enters. KIKI is huddled in a corner, tied up. PAUL moves over to her and removes her gag.
KIKI: Paul...
PAUL: Kiki...
KIKI: It's raining!
PAUL: No, it isn't.
PAUL begins to untie her.
PAUL: How'd they get in?
KIKI: How'd who get in?
PAUL: The burglars.
KIKI: What burglars?
PAUL stops untying her, confused. [Pacing: It's been fast, fast, now slows.]
PAUL: The guys I just saw with your sculpture...and a TV set. [Paul states his beliefs.]
KIKI slowly breaks into a grin.
KIKI: Neil and Pepe?..I just sold them my television. What are you doing with my sculpture? [Reveal: Kiki's property was not stolen. Paul's beliefs are upended.]
At that moment HORST enters, dressed in black leather clothing, with spurred boots and spiked bracelets. [Pacing: A new character is introduced, adding to the mayhem.]
KIKI (to PAUL): I'm sorry, but you can't stay the night. Not after the way you walked out on Marcy. Regular ladykiller, aren't ya? [Twist: Kiki is acting as if being bound is normal. This is odd to a normal guy like Paul.]
HORST: This the guy? (to PAUL) I'm Horst. [Twist: Horst is acting as if Kiki being bound is normal too. This is doubly odd for Paul.]
PAUL: Paul. Could you...? (indicates sculpture still on his back)" [Comedy: It's funny that Paul is carrying the sculpture all this time.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It took me awhile to see the satire. I am impressed that as weird as it was to read, it was simply grounded, i.e., This guy just wants to go home.
After Hours (1985)(4th draft, dated 6/6/84)
by Joseph Minion
This is one weird script. Ebert calls this the "tensest comedy" and a satire.
I get "comedy" but "satire"?
In this story, Paul meets a stranger, Marcy, at 2 a.m. in New York. She invites him to her friend's apartment, and he encounters stranger and stranger situations.
Oh, I see! They're trying to satirize is what it feels like to live in a big city, i.e., the dealing with the unexpected.
But how to pull it off?
a) Satire = Exaggeration. The writer gave Paul merciless, unrelenting waves of the unexpected. This is funny for some reason.
b) Pacing & Tension. However, it was crucial to have strong pacing and tension to harness the waves. Otherwise, it's just random scenes leading nowhere.
In the scene below, note:
- The pacing races along until Kiki's reveal, i.e., the a-ha! moment.
- Paul is quite tense &/or relieved, based on wrong facts.
- The overall effect is feeling discombobulated. These people are not real, are they?
- It's a funny scene...Is it because of the situation? Or how people respond to tension?
ex. "EXT. SPRING ST.
PAUL begins heading int he direction of the bar, when, crossing a street, he sees, to the south, two FIGURES, one carrying a TV set and the other that life-size sculpture from KIKI'S loft. The FIGURES stop behind a van parked on the street. PAUL runs toward them.
PAUL: Hey! [This scene establishes Paul's expectations: Robbers stole an acquaintance's sculpture. Paul is offended.]
Hearing this, both FIGURES drop what they're carrying. They quickly climb into the van and drive off, speeding by PAUL who soon reaches the TV, the tube broken, and the sculpture. He straddles the latter behind him, piggy-back style, and carries it toward Broome St. [Paul has rescued Kiki's stolen property & is relieved.]
CUT TO:
EXT. LOFT BUILDING.
PAUL presses KIKI's buzzer, then looks up at the fourth floor window. KIKI pops her head out, but she is gagged and, apparently, bound. Her head disappears, then pops out again with her keys dangling from her mouth. She lets them fall. [Paul sees Kiki is bound & assumes it was before the robbery. He is tense again.]
INT. LOFT BUILDING.
PAUL rounds a landing with difficulty, the statue an awkward burden. [This is ironic that he wouldn't put down the statue. This is unexpected & funny.]
CUT TO:
INT. KIKI'S LOFT.
PAUL enters. KIKI is huddled in a corner, tied up. PAUL moves over to her and removes her gag.
KIKI: Paul...
PAUL: Kiki...
KIKI: It's raining!
PAUL: No, it isn't.
PAUL begins to untie her.
PAUL: How'd they get in?
KIKI: How'd who get in?
PAUL: The burglars.
KIKI: What burglars?
PAUL stops untying her, confused. [Pacing: It's been fast, fast, now slows.]
PAUL: The guys I just saw with your sculpture...and a TV set. [Paul states his beliefs.]
KIKI slowly breaks into a grin.
KIKI: Neil and Pepe?..I just sold them my television. What are you doing with my sculpture? [Reveal: Kiki's property was not stolen. Paul's beliefs are upended.]
At that moment HORST enters, dressed in black leather clothing, with spurred boots and spiked bracelets. [Pacing: A new character is introduced, adding to the mayhem.]
KIKI (to PAUL): I'm sorry, but you can't stay the night. Not after the way you walked out on Marcy. Regular ladykiller, aren't ya? [Twist: Kiki is acting as if being bound is normal. This is odd to a normal guy like Paul.]
HORST: This the guy? (to PAUL) I'm Horst. [Twist: Horst is acting as if Kiki being bound is normal too. This is doubly odd for Paul.]
PAUL: Paul. Could you...? (indicates sculpture still on his back)" [Comedy: It's funny that Paul is carrying the sculpture all this time.]
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: It took me awhile to see the satire. I am impressed that as weird as it was to read, it was simply grounded, i.e., This guy just wants to go home.
After Hours (1985)(4th draft, dated 6/6/84)
by Joseph Minion
Monday, June 18, 2018
TODAY'S NUGGET: The Wind and The Lion (1975) - How To Read a Script With Distracting Formatting
[Quick Summary: When an American woman and her children are kidnapped by the last of the Barbary pirates, Teddy Roosevelt sends a rescue team in a political move.]
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know.
You've skimmed down to the example below and said, "How does a writer get away with that? Scripts today don't look like that! Why should I read that?"
First, today's script was written by the director.
Second, it was probably the best he could do to convey what he was trying to convey.
Third, reading challenging scripts make you a better writer.
Fourth, ugly scripts are bought as often as pretty ones.*
HOW TO READ A SCRIPT WITH DISTRACTING/UGLY FORMATTING:
- Ignore the formatting as best you can.
- Ignore the denseness of the black print.
- Focus on what the writer is trying to convey (mood, emotion, etc.) Did it work?
- Focus on why the scene worked as it was intended, despite the formatting.
In the example below, notice:
- Eden is being seduced by the desert.
- Each sentence is part of the puzzle, a layer upon layer.
- The arc of the scene is from surprise --> enjoying --> startled at the seduction.
- Did you see her surprise coming?
ex. "THE PALACE OF RAISULI - NIGHT
...Eden put her foot into the water with great trepidation. She looked around again to see if anyone was watching and once more took in the extreme aloneness of the place. It was timeless, as if it had been waiting forever for her to be here now. She stepped back out and loosened her silk Berber robes at the belt, let them cascade down her shoulders and fall silently at her feet. She now stood naked, the moonlight reflecting softly on her skin and the breeze gently cooling her. Above her the vast expanse of the moon and stars, around her the cliffs and flower drenched walls. The sound of the Berber men singing carried from distant tents on the sweet smelling dry wind. She slipped smoothly into the warm scented waters and watched the reflection of the moon sparkle on their surface. The world seemed to ripple like the surface of the water starting from deep within her and pulsating out in ever widening circles over everything she had ever known or been. She gave herself up to the desert, the cliffs and the sound of the Berbers singing. And a part of her soul slipped easily away on the wind and brushed over the mountains. And she knew it was gone. She sat up.
EDEN: I can't let this go on. I must escape, God willing. I must escape!"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Be bold on the page. Don't limit yourself, even if you need paragraphs to get your ideas across.
The Wind and the Lion (1975)(undated draft)
Written & directed by John Milius
*Scripts are not rejected solely based on formatting, contrary to popular myth. The determining factor is whether the execution of ideas is effective (is it moving? inspiring? scary? romantic?)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know.
You've skimmed down to the example below and said, "How does a writer get away with that? Scripts today don't look like that! Why should I read that?"
First, today's script was written by the director.
Second, it was probably the best he could do to convey what he was trying to convey.
Third, reading challenging scripts make you a better writer.
Fourth, ugly scripts are bought as often as pretty ones.*
HOW TO READ A SCRIPT WITH DISTRACTING/UGLY FORMATTING:
- Ignore the formatting as best you can.
- Ignore the denseness of the black print.
- Focus on what the writer is trying to convey (mood, emotion, etc.) Did it work?
- Focus on why the scene worked as it was intended, despite the formatting.
In the example below, notice:
- Eden is being seduced by the desert.
- Each sentence is part of the puzzle, a layer upon layer.
- The arc of the scene is from surprise --> enjoying --> startled at the seduction.
- Did you see her surprise coming?
ex. "THE PALACE OF RAISULI - NIGHT
...Eden put her foot into the water with great trepidation. She looked around again to see if anyone was watching and once more took in the extreme aloneness of the place. It was timeless, as if it had been waiting forever for her to be here now. She stepped back out and loosened her silk Berber robes at the belt, let them cascade down her shoulders and fall silently at her feet. She now stood naked, the moonlight reflecting softly on her skin and the breeze gently cooling her. Above her the vast expanse of the moon and stars, around her the cliffs and flower drenched walls. The sound of the Berber men singing carried from distant tents on the sweet smelling dry wind. She slipped smoothly into the warm scented waters and watched the reflection of the moon sparkle on their surface. The world seemed to ripple like the surface of the water starting from deep within her and pulsating out in ever widening circles over everything she had ever known or been. She gave herself up to the desert, the cliffs and the sound of the Berbers singing. And a part of her soul slipped easily away on the wind and brushed over the mountains. And she knew it was gone. She sat up.
EDEN: I can't let this go on. I must escape, God willing. I must escape!"
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Be bold on the page. Don't limit yourself, even if you need paragraphs to get your ideas across.
The Wind and the Lion (1975)(undated draft)
Written & directed by John Milius
*Scripts are not rejected solely based on formatting, contrary to popular myth. The determining factor is whether the execution of ideas is effective (is it moving? inspiring? scary? romantic?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)