John August

Film Industry

Can my script be as short as Somewhere?

Film Industry, QandA, Words on the page

questionmarkA few months ago, I downloaded the PDF version of Sofia Coppola’s “Somewhere” screenplay from the Focus Features website. When I saw that it was only a 44 page download, I had assumed that it was either a teaser or a short version of the script.

An hour later after reading it, and then going to the theater, I had realized that the 44-pager that I had downloaded was indeed the real thing. Even now, after owning the DVD, I’m amazed that she managed to turn a 43-44 page script into a 97 min movie.

As a screenwriter, with no aspirations of getting behind the camera, how hard is it, or would it be to sell a spec script, that could possibly be a 100-110 min movie, but only a 65-70 page script? Understanding that execution is key, is it even possible to get your screenplay looked at, with it being so short?

— Craig
DC

answer iconNo one would take you seriously.

With Somewhere, Sofia Coppola had already made three well-received and languorously-paced features. So a producer or studio can read her very short script with the expectation that (a) not very much will happen, and (b) what does happen will take a while. So 44 pages feels less crazy than it otherwise would.

Coppola has her style and her fans. I’m one of them. But without her credits, there’s no way that the Somewhere script would make sense in a spec situation. You have to understand her as a filmmaker when reading it.

Almost all feature scripts are over 100 pages. ((Animation is often shorter; Corpse Bride is 67 pages.)) The only live-action screenplay I ever turned in that was shorter was the rewrite of a yet-unproduced fable with giant set pieces. It was 91 pages, but if/when it gets made, I think it will still be a nearly two-hour movie. Describing those set pieces in the script took a lot less page length than the corresponding time in the movie. (e.g. Gone with the Wind: “Atlanta burns.”)

The podcast with me in it

Film Industry, Web series

I’m the guest on the [most recent installment](http://newmediacracy.com/2011/04/episode-26-the-one-with-john-august.html) of the New Mediacracy podcast, discussing The Remnants, this blog, and the shifting role of the screenwriter.

You can hear it at [their site](http://newmediacracy.com/2011/04/episode-26-the-one-with-john-august.html), or download the mp3 [here](http://newmediacracy.com/audio/new-mediacracy-20110409.mp3).

There’s a fair amount of housekeeping at the start of the show, so you may choose to skip to about three minutes in, where I begin the John August genesis story. And if you’ve already heard that — unlike politicians, mine never changes — skip to 14:30, where we start talking about new media.

The whole thing runs a little over an hour. If you find moments you want to highlight for other readers, feel free to flag them in the comments. For example, at 11:45, I explain why I am invisible to Oliver Stone.

Thanks to Zadi Diaz, Chris McCaleb, and Steve Woolf for a great discussion.

Revenge of the snarky script-reader

Film Industry, QandA

questionmarkFor the last few years I have been using a coverage guy (along with my trusted readers) to give me perspective on my screenplays before I send them to my manager. I found this particular reader’s notes to be lucid and constructive, close to what an average reader would say about the project. Worth the price.

Recently I became Facebook friends with him. I looked on his Facebook page and found it filled with snarky comments about scripts he has read or is in the process of reading for coverage. Some of the more mild comments were about ironic spelling mistakes. But some of his comments were on very thematic elements and specific in nature. He described entire scenes and visuals from scripts, along with the titles.

I emailed him and told him I had a real problem with him commenting on scripts that he does coverage for. He replied that he has never commented on my projects and that I sent him, that only comments on things that are “totally ridiculous.”

I said it’s not about me personally, I just don’t think you should be making these comments when someone pays you for a confidential opinion on a script. He then posted on his Facebook page something to the effect of SORRY I HAVE TO TONE DOWN THE COMMENTS AS A WRITER IS GETTING PISSY ABOUT THEM. Never one to back down away from a debate, I fired back my point of view: he shouldn’t post specific things from the scripts he is paid to cover.

He deleted all of my comments then deleted me as a friend, thus eliminating the entire debate from public view. He has since, in a private email, told me he never comments on a script that is sent by a writer directly to him. I told him that that didn’t matter if it was Joe from Idaho’s first script or Steven Spielberg looking for perspective on a project, that you were entering into a contract with that writer/submitter to keep things confidential.

Do you think this coverage guy was out of line? What level of privacy do you expect from people who cover your scripts?

— TJ
Los Angeles

answer iconHe’s unprofessional. It will bite him in the ass eventually. No further action is required on your part.

But I am a little sympathetic. I wrote a lot of coverage during my first few years in Los Angeles. Sometimes, the only way I could get through 120 terrible pages was imagining what I’d get to write about it.

This was all basically pre-internet, so my snark was limited to the comments section of coverage. Had Facebook existed, I hope I would have been smart enough to keep it off there. But I’m keenly aware that I’m not a 20-something, and my expectations of privacy and professionalism don’t line up with the current generation’s. I’m not even sure [who I should be](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2011/all-yourselves-belong-to-us) on Facebook.

A famous friend of mine now keeps a stack of non-disclosure agreements on the table in his foyer. When a plumber comes to fix a leak, he has to sign the NDA.

Yes, it seems ridiculous. But I think it’s indicative of how a culture of oversharing has undervalued trust and discretion.

Don’t send him everything

Film Industry, QandA

questionmarkA friend showed a few of my scripts to an agent friend of hers, including one written with a partner. I spoke with the agent on the phone; he’s seems very excited about the co-written script, and lukewarm on the others. He wants to meet with the both of us, but before that meeting, he asked me to send him “absolutely everything [you’ve] ever written.”

I’m sure he doesn’t mean it literally; I’m not going to send him my fifth grade book report. But I’ve already sent him my top-tier stuff. (Obviously; when my friend said she could send my scripts, I sent my absolute best work.) I’m not sure why exactly he’s asking to read “everything.” Is he hoping there might be other good scripts? Does he want to see if I had good ideas that were poorly executed (definitely true)? Does he want to see short films?

It’s such a weird request, and I wasn’t prepared for what to give him.

— Matt Price
Los Angeles, CA

answer iconHe may be asking for more material because he’s worried you only have one script in you. Agents want clients who write. A lot. A big stack of scripts shows you have a work ethic.

But your first instinct is correct: you’re much better off showing him a few great things than a lot of mediocre ones.

An exception might be non-screenplay writing; if you have a great play or funny short story, put it in the pile. A lot of aspiring screenwriters are terrible writers who’ve seen a lot of movies. Showing actual facility with words might distinguish you.

Once you’ve sent him your best stuff, you’re done. You may have older writing in the trunk that was pretty good when you wrote it — it may have been the best thing you’d ever written back then — but it’s not who you are now.

I’ve buried the script that got me an agent. It’s not terrible or embarrassing, but I’ve gotten a lot better since 1994.