Go

If someone offered you a lot of money to do a sequel to GO,
would you do it? Do you think a screenwriter has to take big money projects
whenever they come
along, just to survive in the business?

–L.M. Dix

First off, no one is going to offer me a lot of money to write a sequel to
GO, because barring a bizarre change of circumstances, there will never be
a sequel. While the movie was moderately successful given its small budget,
it was never the kind of breakout hit that merits a roman numeral after the
title.

Which is kind of a shame, because I had a sequel plotted out in my head while
we were still in production on the first one. It involved the Fourth of July,
Mexican fireworks, head trauma and Muppets. For a brief time after our debut
at Sundance, I was convinced I would be writing it. But alas no.

As for your second question, no. A screenwriter doesn’t have to take big money
projects to survive, any more than an actor has to take multi-million dollar
roles. It’s all about the choices you make for your career and your quality
of life.

Screenwriters can work three ways. The first is when you write "on spec." That’s
when you sit down and write a script all on your own, without any guarantee
of being paid by anyone. While that doesn’t make for much economic stability,
you have complete artistic freedom, because you answer only to yourself. GO
was written on spec.

The second way a writer can work is "on assignment." That’s where
a producer or a studio pays you a certain amount of money to write a script,
generally based upon a property they own, be it another script, a novel or
a TV series. CHARLIE’S ANGELS was written on assignment.

The third way for a writer to work is "on weekly." Usually, this
only occurs when a movie is coming close to production, and the writer is hired
to make smaller changes. The writer is paid every week, rather than every draft,
and is working mostly as a craftsman, fixing problems rather than reshaping
the story. It’s analogous to being a highly paid temp. Everyone’s nice to you,
but they know you’re going away soon, and don’t become very attached. I worked
on weekly for MINORITY REPORT.

To make a broad generalization, prominent screenwriters can make more more
working on weekly than on assignment or on spec. That’s because if a movie
is close enough to production to merit a writer working week-by-week, the studio
is often willing to pay a higher rate.

But working on a weekly basis is exhausting and ultimately a little unfulfilling,
because you don’t have a strong relationship with any of the scripts you work
on. That’s why a writer will often turn down a project despite the paycheck
attached.

How long did it take to write GO? How long does it take to
write a finished script? Do you work at an office day in, day out, or is it
different?

–Floris

GO took about two years to write, but it was an unusual case in that I wrote
it as a short film, then let it sit around for a long time before I did the
full version. My active work time on the script was probably about four months,
which is not a bad estimate for most of the things I’ve worked on.

Some things have had to go faster out of necessity. I wrote the first draft
of CHARLIE’S ANGELS in three weeks, because that was all the time I had available
between commitments. (I later went back and did another two months of work
on it, right before production.)

Currently, I work out of an office in my home. I have an assistant who works
from 9 to 6, which is what I consider my "working" hours, but truthfully
my life is more like college. Sometimes you can screw around during the day,
and sometimes you have to pull all-nighters to get work done.

While listening to Doug Liman and Steven Mirrione’s
commentary track on the GO DVD,
they went through numerous scenes that weren’t in your original screenplay,
but rather scenes they had you write in production.
I was wondering what percentage of a film would you say is original material,
and what percentage is threaded during the filming process? Have you ever had
to rewrite a scene you loved with something you felt was lesser for the purpose?

–Brian

This is yet another example of why writers should always be on the commentary
track.

What’s unusual about GO is how little did change from the first script to
the final movie. It’s pretty easy to see what scenes were
new and old by looking at the deleted scenes on the DVD. We went back and reshot
several parts, including
the "branching-off" scene at the supermarket and the finale in Gaines’
apartment. On paper, I much prefer the Gaines’ apartment sequence as
originally scripted. I thought it was smarter and much more in keeping with
the spirit of the movie.
Unfortunately, it just didn’t turn out very well when we filmed it, which is
why we went back and did the simpler version that’s in the movie now.

The other
changes made during filming mostly involved production issues, such as
the names of the hotels we were using, or legal clearance problems. (For
example, Confederated Products was originally American Products, but we
couldn’t get permission to use that name.)