TODAY'S NUGGET: Time Bandits (1981) - How Gilliam Turned Script into Storyboard Sketches

[Quick Summary: A young boy travels time with six thieving time bandits.]

I confess this is all I knew about Terry Gilliam:

- He was part of Monty Python.
- He has been working on a Don Quixote film since 1998.
- I heard that he could really draw.

I finally saw those drawing skills when I read this script in book form.*

Gilliam's sketches pepper the script. 

They're worth studying to see how to translate words into pictures.

ex. In one scene, Napoleon is the only audience member at a Punch and Judy show.

Backstage, the puppeteer is wounded, but carries on.

These are the 3 sketches that follow:

First, the nervous manager and the puppeteer:

 Move in closer on the dying puppeteer:

 Punch and Judy from Napoleon's POV:

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: The script was focused, clear (distillation #1).

This allowed Gilliam to reduce whole scenes into sketches (distillation #2).

Time Bandits (1981)
by Terry Gilliam & Michael Palin of Monty Python

* It is now out-of-print, but used copies are available.

2015 OSCARS: Whiplash (2014) - The First Ten (um, First THREE) Pages

[Quick Summary: A college jazz drummer's best & worst enemy is his teacher Fletcher.]

Wow.
Wow.
Wow.

I guzzled this script like ice water in the desert.

It is EX-HIL-ER-A-TING.

It's got RHYTHM, PASSION, ENERGY!

It's my favorite Oscar nominated script this year.

I recommend reading the first ten pages...actually, the first THREE.

The first three pages told me everything:
- I knew exactly what this story is about (student vs. teacher).
- I got a sense these characters are carrying baggage.
- I felt the inner and outer conflict.
- I saw where Andrew's journey was going.
- Most importantly, the tempo starts at a simmer, so I knew it would start boiling fairly soon.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This story relies on rhythm and tempo to convey feelings.

The writer was so smart to establish it early and keep focused on it.

Whiplash (2014)
by Damien Chazelle

2015 OSCARS: The Theory of Everything (2014) - I Fell For Romance & Subtlety

[Quick Summary: The unconventional love story of Stephen and Jane Hawking.]

This is one of the most romantic scripts I've read in ages.

I think the key is subtlety, which "is an old-fashioned concept," said writer Anthony McCarten.

It was used so well here.

It makes small moments so much sweeter than any grand gesture.

ex. "The BARMAN takes STEPHEN's POUND and glances at the NAPKIN.

BARMAN: I'd commit that number to memory if I were you.

STEPHEN smiles - then glances at the mirror-backed bar. Reflected - a WOMAN who looks like JANE. Is he imagining this?

TIGHT ON: STEPHEN's face: we see JANE's reflection appear and disappear in the glass of his glasses as she crosses the room.

The BARMAN's voice is distant...

BARMAN: Here you go...

STEPHEN snaps out of it - stares at the BARMAN holding out CHANGE - a smile DAWNING.

BARMAN: Sir? Are you okay?

STEPHEN: Uh, my napkin just walked in."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Romance is seen best in those small, subtle connections.

The Theory of Everything (2014)
by Anthony McCarten
Based on the book, "Traveling to Infinity: My Life with Stephen", by Jane Hawking

2015 OSCARS: Inherent Vice (2014) - In Order to Have A "Stoned and Surreal" Tone...

[Quick Summary: A 1970s p.i. investigates the disappearance of an ex-girlfriend's married lover.]

THREE THOUGHTS:

1) The best piece of advice for reading this script:

The less you try to figure out Anderson's rambling, mesmerising mystery, the better.

I found this helpful, as I agree that:

Pynchon works to the principle that the less a reader is able to grasp, the better.

--------------------------------------------------------------
2) BEST THING ABOUT THIS SCRIPT: Its "stoned and surreal" tone.

The story sometimes did and did not make sense, all at once.

ex.  "DOC: You're emotionally involved? With a boat?

SAUNCHO: Not just a boat, Doc. Something much more...."

WORST THING ABOUT THIS SCRIPT: Its "stoned and surreal" tone."

It was often hard to follow, i.e., tangents, multiple characters, plots, etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------
3)  This tone walks such a fine line between ludicrous and operatic.

Why does it work? 

I think it's because the anchor story is grounded and simple.

Every scene goes back to GUY LOOKS FOR GIRL.

ex. Even when the situations are outlandish, far fetched, or psychedelic:
- When Doc is disguised as a reporter...
- When he takes the odd dentist back to his Bel Air mansion...
- When he enters a hippie enclave...
- When he confronts squirrely FBI agents...

Doc is always trying to track down Shasta, the ex-girlfriend he loves.

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: You can go as far or high or broad as you want, as long as there's a solid anchor for the story.

Inherent Vice (2014)
by Paul Thomas Anderson
Based on the novel by Thomas Pynchon

2015 OSCARS: The Imitation Game (2014) - A Revealing Abruptness

[Quick Summary: Alan Turing during WWII.]

Abruptness* for no reason is a useless gimmick.

The reader will feel manipulated (and, in my case, angry at the page).

However, if the trait reveals subtext, it is pure gold.

Here, notice how it shows Turing's inability to read others:

ex. "INT. BLETCHLEY PARK - COMMANDER DENNISTON'S OFFICE - LATER

A few minutes later, Alan sits alone in a cluttered office. He stares ahead blankly at the empty chair behind the desk. Waits.

COMMANDER DENNISTON (O.S.): -What are you doing here?

Alan turns with a start.

ALAN TURING: The girl told me to wait -

COMMANDER DENNISTON: In my office? She tell you to help yourself to a cup of tea while you were here?

ALAN TURING: No. She didn't.

COMMANDER DENNISTON: She didn't tell you what a joke is then either, I gather.

ALAN TURING: Was she supposed to?

COMMANDER DENNISTON: For Christ's sake - who are you?

ALAN TURING: Alan Turing....

COMMANDER DENNISTON: ...King's College, Cambridge. Says here you were a bit of a prodigy in the maths department.

ALAN TURING: I'm not sure I can evaluate that, Mr...?

COMMANDER DENNISTON: How old are you, Mr. Turing?

ALAN TURING: 27.

COMMANDER DENNISTON: How old were you when you became a fellow at Cambridge?

ALAN TURING: 24.

COMMANDER DENNISTON: And how old were you when you published this paper here, that has a title I can barely understand, which apparently got you this fellowship?

ALAN TURING: 23.

COMMANDER DENNISTON: And you don't think that qualifies you as a certified prodigy?

ANA TURING: Rather depends on how old my peers were when they did comparable work, doesn't it?

COMMANDER DENNISTON: And how old were they?

ALAN TURING: Newton discovered the binomial theorem at 22. Einstein published four papers that changed the world at 26. As far as I can tell I've barely made par.

COMMANDER DENNISTON: You're serious, aren't you?

ALAN TURING: Would you prefer I make a joke?

COMMANDER DENNISTON: Not sure you know what those are."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Use socially unacceptable traits to show subtext.

(Don't just use it to manufacture a surface conflict.) 

The Imitation Game (2014)
by Graham Moore
Based on "Alan Turing: The Enigma", by Andrew Hodges

* Or any character trait, for that matter.

2015 OSCARS: American Sniper (2014) - Clarity is So Important

[Quick Summary: The journey of US sniper Chris Kyle to Iraq and back home.]

I...I..I have no words for this script.

It's not your typical war story.  (I was surprised. It's a character study).

It is emotionally costly. (I was unprepared).

It takes you to the front lines of responsibility. (I was floored).

I was interested to hear that both Steven Spielberg and Clint Eastwood worked on this project.

They gave the writer one overarching note: Clarity.*

I saw it everywhere, even in the small scene below.

Notice the clear intent to convey what the brotherhood feels like:

ex. "INT. HUMVEE #2 - TWO DAYS LATER

Chris looks to Marc Lee, eyes closed in prayer. When he opens them he sees Chris looking. The rig sways.

MARC LEE: I went to seminary school before I joined the Navy. Came close to being a preacher.

CHRIS: Why didn't you?

MARC LEE: I love to gamble, man. Love those dice.

Their laughter is liberating. It bonds them.

CHRIS: My kind of preacher.

MORE LAUGHTER. A PHONE RINGS. Chris digs out a SAT PHONE.

MARC LEE: It's like that now, huh?

CHRIS: You haven't heard? I'm The Legend. (laughs at self; into phone) Hey babe --

TAYA (O.S.) You were right, doctor says it's a boy.

CHRIS: It's a boy!

MARC LEE: Hell yeah. Congratu--

WHAAP! Windshield spiders."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: Even with complicated shooting scenes, I could always follow what was at stake.

That's good clear writing.

American Sniper (2014)
by Jason Hall
Based on the book by Christ Kyle with Scott McEwen & Jim DeFelice

*The writer further explains:"[C]larity of purpose, clarity of intention, clarity of emotion. What are they saying? What's the feeling? What are you trying to get out? What are you trying to say?"

2015 OSCARS: Nightcrawler (2014) - Writing a "Visual" Script

[Quick Summary: A news feed vulture hustles for nightly video footage in L.A.]

Dear New Writer,

I don't say this lightly: 

- This script will screw with your head.
- You'll only get ONE chance to read it for the first time. 
- Please DO NOT ruin this gem by reading it before you're ready.*

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Hardened Seasoned Writers,

This is a high caliber, character driven script.

It is a confident script, and rules are broken left and right:

- There is no protagonist arc. (Gilroy is "sick of arcs.")
- It's deliberately non-conformist. (No sluglines, different size fonts.)

However, it stands out to me because it is a good example of the highly coveted, highly elusive "visual" script.**

Notice how the writing directs your eye to details that make up a whole picture:

ex.  "LOU

goes to the body in the car...props it into view...drapes it over the steering wheel...runs to the brush...drags the second body by the leg onto the road...positions a lifeless arm...stepping back and

LOU'S POV THROUGH CAMCORDER

as he focuses on a shot of both bodies in the foreground...red RECORD light on...fire starting...entangled cars becoming a bonfire as

FIRETRUCKS and POLICE

start arriving and"

The craft here worth studying is:
- How the writer moves your eye;
- How the visuals flow together (Lou stages the bodies --> What he see in the camcorder --> Firetrucks arrive);
- What the pictures together add up to (Lou is messing with a crime scene)

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I think a "visual" script means the script has good building blocks that add together easily.

What we see in Scene 1 + Scene 2 --> naturally leads us to Scene 3.

Nightcrawler (2014)
by Dan Gilroy

*Ready = Have already read at least 20+ scripts (40+ is better)
** Everyone wants a "visual script," but no one knows how to define it.

BOOKS TO READ: Hope for Film (2014)

You NEED to read this book!

Ted Hope uses true stories from his vast indie experience to explain different "virtues" that you'll need to work in show business (patience, joyfulness, etc.)

Please, please, do NOT miss Commitment (Chapter 4).

Hope explains what producers really face in a jaw dropping, behind-the-scenes account of his time on The Savages (2007).

I have not stopped talking about it for three days.

Hope for Film
by Ted Hope

2015 OSCARS: The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) - Showing Character Through Dialogue

[Quick Summary: A concierge goes on the run after inheriting a priceless painting.]

This script is dense.

It made me tense.

But look beyond...

And see multi-tasking spawned:

ex. "A second criss-crossing group of people new engage M. Gustave. This time: a very old washroom attendant carrying a monkey-wrench, the head waiter wearing an apron and waving a menu, and a woman of a certain age in a beautifully-embroidered dress with a small dachshund cradled in her arms.

WASHROOM ATTENDANT: Now it's exploded.

M. GUSTAVE: (sweetly to the dachshund) Good morning, Cicero.
(coldly to the washroom attendant) Call the goddamn plumber.

HOTEL GUEST NO. 2: (flirtatious) This afternoon, M. Gustave?

HEAD WAITER: (angrily) What in the hell is this?

M. GUSTAVE: (equally flirtatious) Without fail, Frau Liebling.
(sharply to the head waiter) Not now!"

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: This dialogue shows (not tells) us M. Gustave's habit of multi-tasking (constantly engaged, juggling several things).

The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)
by Wes Anderson
Story by Wes Anderson & Hugo Guinness

2015 OSCARS: Foxcatcher (2014) - Enhancing the "Creepy" Factor

[Quick Summary: Two wrestling brothers are hired by a millionaire to create an Olympic wrestling team.]

This was a great script, but a tough emotional read.

It is so honest, yet creepy, which suits this tale of desperation.

Here are two things I noted:

CREEPY FACTOR #1: NEGATIVE ENERGY

I read this about a common motivation in Gene Hackman's acting:

Hackman drew on that sort of negative energy — the unshakable feeling that he wasn’t good enough to warrant consideration — as motivation for much of his life, perhaps starting with the moment in the street when he watched his father walk out on him.

From p.1, this script also has that "not good enough" tone.

Mark hangs on to past victories. *Not good enough.*

If he doesn't win, he's a failure. *Not good enough.*

CREEPY FACTOR #2: INVADING PERSONAL SPACE

Another effective technique is to show physically what is going on mentally:

ex. "Du Pont walks over. Mark can barely look at him. Du Pont stops close to Mark.

Mark looks to Dave to save him from this. Dave's clearly caught in the middle.

Mark looks down, closes his eyes as if in pain. Du Pont moves close to Dave, speaking to him so Mark can hear -

DU PONT: If you and I can't get him there, no one can. We're in this together.

After a long moment, du Pont moves off the mat. He starts to stretch nearby. As Dave tr to get Mark back to work, du Pont starts to JOG around the perimeter of the gym. Mark's trying to keep it together, but it's clearly driving him insane."

WHAT I'VE LEARNED: "Creepy" feels claustrophobic and cornered.

Foxcatcher (2014)
by E. Max Frye & Dan Futterman