McGuffin by Hitchcock from isaac niemand on Vimeo.
Any way you spell them, they’re a screenwriting staple. (via [Movie City Indie](http://www.mcnblogs.com/mcindie/archives/2010/06/animating_hitch.html))
All of the other reindeer
A few months ago, I discussed how [Every Villain is a Hero](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/every-villain-is-a-hero) — very few bad guys perceive themselves as bad guys, so you need to think of their motivation in heroic terms.
I just finished playing the Descent into Darkness scenario for Battle for Wesnoth, ((Wesnoth is an old open-source game now available for iPad.)) which provides a surprisingly good example of this lesson.
The story follows Malin Keshar, a young mage trying to save his village from orcs. Desperate, he uses a little necromancy in a pinch, which gets him banished from his homeland. As the twelve chapters unfold, bad decisions snowball until the story reaches a satisfyingly bleak conclusion.
Reading up on the scenario afterwards, I came upon this description of Malin’s dilemma, a trope called [All of the Other Reindeer](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AllOfTheOtherReindeer):
> A character is surrounded by people who constantly put him or her down, usually because of some trait that is integral to them being a hero or villain. It seems the only responses one can make to this are the extremes: “put up with it silently” or “let them die/kill them all.”
> If a hero, the character will constantly show their virtue by putting up with it and saving their tormentors’ lives again and again. Said tormentors will be grateful for about five seconds (that is, until the end of the episode), and then start it up again.
> If a villain, they’ll inevitably explode and slaughter their tormentors, to the barely disguised envy of the audience. Oh, the hero will stop them eventually, but not before most of those who wronged the villain are taken out.
That’s a great roadmap for one kind of villain backstory.
And if you haven’t spent an afternoon [clicking through TV Tropes](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Tropes), it’s well worth the time suck.
Should a screenwriter pay for notes?
What weight do you give professional reading services? You know, the dudes that read your script, mark it up, make suggestions, tweak it, and send it back? Do you recommend anyone or company in particular?
— Chance
Other than my assistants, I’ve never paid anyone to read my scripts. All the notes I’ve gotten have come from friends and colleagues, many of them producers or screenwriters.
Reciprocity is a big part of relationship-building. When I was starting out, I would give hours of notes to friends, working through several drafts with them. In turn, they would read my scripts. I got my first agent through one such screenwriter friend who was interning for a producer at Columbia.
I was fortunate in that essentially all of my LA friends were from film school, and many of them were really smart. But you actually only need one or two smart people. One set of brilliant notes is more helpful than a dozen mediocre ones.
If you can’t find that one great note-giver amid your circle, it’s possible that you’d benefit from paying someone. I don’t have any names to recommend, but if I were in your place, I’d look for a few things:
1. A sample set of notes. I wouldn’t pay anyone who didn’t write clearly and logically.
2. A face-to-face meeting. Good feedback ends up being a conversation. In addition to written notes, I’d want an hour to talk through the issues and options.
3. No producers/managers. I want insightful feedback, not connections. Some producers and managers can give great notes, but I shouldn’t be paying them upfront to do it.
4. Someone who can say ‘not for me.’ Every person has genres that simply don’t click. Before taking my money, a reader should ask what my script is about, and respectfully decline if it’s outside of her domain.
I’m certain there are good paid readers out there. A few will probably leave comments. So let me stress, *I’m not recommending or endorsing any of them.* Caveat scriptor.
Why must we have board-game movies?
So, I understand the merits of re-making movies from the past, or making old TV shows into features. I also get it from a studios perspective inasmuch as it’s a known property that has a fanbase, or has made a profit in the past.
But when I see studios making adaptations of toys like “Magic 8 Ball” or “Battleship” or “Stretch Armstrong” it really bums out the aspiring writer in me. It makes me think Hollywood doesn’t want my original idea. Can you talk me down from the ledge?
— Logan
Los Angeles
Logan, I’m right there on the ledge with you. But when you look down past your shoelaces, you realize that it’s not rocks and crashing waves below. The ledge we’re standing on is about eight feet high. At the bottom is concrete.
Jump wrong, and it’s going to be painful. Jump carefully, and you’ll be fine.
Yes, I rolled my eyes when the “Battleship” movie was announced. But I’ll happily see a modern naval war movie, and if it has to be named after a Milton Bradley property, so be it. A hidden upside to writing a movie based on just a title is that the screenwriter has huge latitude, unlike a book or TV adaptation.
Pendulums swing. It was dumb to make a movie out of a theme park ride before Pirates of the Caribbean. This trend towards making movies out of properties with no inherent narrative will eventually end. (A big success from an original like Inception might help.) In the meantime, let’s root for the best versions of these projects.
Good movies are a blessing, regardless of the source.