John August

Archives for 2004

Why agents send out terrible scripts

Film Industry, QandA

I am interning for a well-known producer and one of my duties is to read incoming spec scripts and write coverage on them. Everything we read is submitted through agents – yet I am still shocked with how bad almost every script is. What I have trouble understanding is how agents believe these scripts are worthy of being sent out to major production companies. Do agents submit anything their clients write, or do they ever tell clients that they need to work on something a little longer before they’ll send it out?

–Benjamin
Los Angeles

As you’re learning, just because a writer has an agent doesn’t mean she has talent.

To the 99% of readers out there who want an agent, this must come as salt on the wound, but it’s true: really bad writers have agents. They write terrible scripts that people like Benjamin have to read.

Agents aren’t always the best judge of quality, frankly. After all, they aren’t the ones who have to work with writers on endless drafts. They aren’t editors, or critics. Their job is to keep their clients employed. The only way to do that is to get people to hire them, which necessitates having people read their work.

Of course, if a script is terrible, you’re not doing the writer any favors by forcing it out upon the town. But since the agent is neither critic nor editor, he doesn’t have much of a choice. He can politely suggest that the script might need more work in some places, but if the writer wants the script to go out, it’s the agent’s job to send it.

If you’re getting anything out of your internship, Benjamin, I hope it’s an appreciation for just how rare and wonderful good writing is. As you’re seeing, the Hollywood system isn’t designed to shut people out. It’s just that there’s so much crap to wade through, you have to limit how much you let get through the front door.

The challenge of writing good dialogue

QandA, Words on the page

I think my biggest writing challenge is creating good dialog that helps define and develop my characters.  How do you approach writing dialog and what methods have you found to be effective to help develop a character’s voice?  Do you read your dialog with someone else, or do you prefer to work it through by yourself?  Do you have specific actors in mind when you write dialog?  How much is changed or influenced during the production process?

–Doug
Orange, CA

Doug wrote “dialog” instead of “dialogue,” which prompted me to look up what the real difference is between these words. It turns out they’re equally valid, though the short version makes me bristle for some reason. I guess I associate it with HyperCard “dialog boxes,” rather than things actual people say.

However you spell it, dialogue is what most people think of when you say screenwriting. It’s certainly the most apparent of all screenwriting attributes; bad dialogue is always noticed.

To me, movie dialogue is what real people would say if they could take a few seconds to think between lines. It’s faster, more direct, with much less filler than normal speech.

There’s actually quite a range to what counts as good movie dialogue. The quippy and clever banter in a romantic comedy would sound terrible in Lord of the Rings, while that movie’s stoic speechifying would be deadly in a modern drama. What matters is that there’s a consistency within the movie. In more than one recent film, I could tell when one screenwriter wrote some lines, and another the rest. It bumps.

The most important thing to keep in mind when writing any dialogue is that someone has to say it. Just because a line looks great on paper, that doesn’t mean it will work in an actor’s mouth. So it’s important to speak it aloud, both as you’re reading it and afterwards. As a rule, I won’t write any line of dialogue without speaking it several times to make sure it flows. Even as I’m typing this answer, I’m talking under my breath to listen for the rhythm of the sentence.

If I know which actor is playing a given role, I certainly tailor the dialogue to suit his strengths — at least as I perceive them. For instance, I did a few days work on [The Rundown](http://imdb.com/title/tt0327850/) specifically so I could write things for Christopher Walken to say. A lot of times, you worry about going over-the-top, but with Christopher Walken, there is no top. It’s quite liberating.

You have to expect that some dialogue will change during production. Almost always, the line the actor comes up with will be worse than the one you wrote. But the end result is better than having an actor trying to say a line he really doesn’t feel or understand.

Seeing a rough cut of your film

Directors, QandA

If a screenwriter gets a film produced, will he or she get to see a rough cut of the film at its earliest stage?

–Geoff
Nova Scotia

That mostly depends on the writer’s relationship with the director and producer(s). If the screenwriter has been an active collaborator throughout the process, then definitely. If the relationship hasn’t been as close, it’s more likely the writer won’t see the first few rough cuts of the film.

And that’s a mistake. The writer should absolutely be included in the editing process. While the rest of the team has been bogged down in weeks or months of production hell, the writer generally has fresh eyes to all of the material shot. He’s not sick of the actors, the locations, and the scenes which took all night to shoot. Instead, he remembers the movie everyone was trying to make six months ago.

By WGA policy, any writer who works on a given film is supposed to have the opportunity to screen a cut of the film early enough in the editing process that any notes or suggestions he may have can be incorporated. For a long time, this rule was never enforced. Over the past few years, however, the studios have gotten better about making sure these screenings happen — although they often occur too late to be productive. For instance, I’ve sat in writer screenings where the film was already color-timed. No matter what I wanted to suggest, the movie was already locked.

Recently, there’s been a push to invite the writer to the first test-screening, assuming the screening happens in the Los Angeles area. It’s certainly a good idea, since huge decisions are often made based on the results of these screenings, and the screenwriter may be needed to implement them.

The movies I’m proudest of are the ones in which I was able to take a significant role in post-production, whether that was sitting down next to the Avid or talking through specifics with the director. I don’t always get everything changed the way I’d like, but I do feel the films are better for the input.

Off to Phoenix

News

Tomorrow, I’m giving a short talk at the Art Institute of Phoenix. I talk to a lot of classes, so that’s not unusual. But a couple of things are making me feel strangely corporate. For instance:

1. I’m just flying in for the day.
2. I’m flying out of Burbank, rather than LAX.
3. I’m giving a PowerPoint presentation.

Just give me a flip-chart and some product samples, and I could be working for IBM. Shudder.

UPDATE: The talk went well, and the people were friendly. It was hot, but nearly as hot as everyone would have me think. It’s funny how locals always want to talk about their weather like it’s epic, when really it’s just pretty damn warm.