• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: 3 page challenge

Scriptnotes, Ep. 38: 20 Questions with John and Craig — Transcript

May 24, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/20-questions-with-john-and-craig).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. How are you, Craig?

**Craig:** Fantastic, John. Lovely day today here in Southern California, at least where I am in Southern California.

**John:** Ah, location is everything. You are ensconced there in highly defensible La Cañada Flintridge area.

**Craig:** Well right now I’m in Pasadena, but yes, when I go home then I go to the highly defensible La Cañada Flintridge area where, as I pointed out to somebody just a day ago, I can flee into the mountains and disappear within minutes.

**John:** It’s a perfect choice for you there.

**Craig:** Perfect.

**John:** One of the plan ahead things we didn’t actually do for this podcast is figure out how we’re going to answer all the questions that came in. Because they kept coming in, but then I was in New York and I wasn’t really checking questions, and then we started talking about other things. And so, so many questions have backed up.

**Craig:** How many questions are we talking about?

**John:** A lot. So we’ll see how many we can get through today.

**Craig:** Can you make sure that at least one of them makes me angry? [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] I can guarantee it.

**Craig:** Oh, I’m so excited!

**John:** Woo-hoo! We’ll start with some easy follow-up ones. Micah has a follow-up question. “In episode 36 John talked about timers and how they fit into his workflow.” He says, “I’ve recently found timed writing in breaks to be quite helpful, and I’m experimenting with 10, 15, 20, 25 minute intervals, like the Pomodoro Technique,” which I’d never heard of, but I’ll link to it. It’s basically just setting a timer.

“I know it comes down to more of a personal preference kind of thing, but could you give us a breakdown on your typical work/break intervals? What’s your sweet spot?”

I have found that 20 minutes is about my sweet spot. So I’ll sit for 20 minutes, I know I can get through 20 minutes. If I’m doing really well I’ll sometimes just keep on writing, but 20 minutes is the minimum I’ll try to do. Like 10 minutes, I’m not really getting started on anything. 20 minutes I’ve at least gotten something done I find.

**Craig:** How structured of you.

**John:** Ah, I’m not always that structured, but it’s good. And Jane Espenson, whose name we often cite on this podcast, she has a thing called a Writing Sprint, which is like a 30-minute writing sprint. She’ll announce it on Twitter, like, “I’m doing a 30-minite writing sprint, everyone come join me; 30 minutes, no interruptions, just get stuff done.” And if that works for you, that’s great. That’s really the same idea.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s more my thing. I just sort of finally just go nuts.

**John:** Here’s a question that’s really tailored to Craig Mazin. David asks…

**Craig:** I hope this is the one that makes me angry. [laughs]

**John:** No, it’s gonna make you delighted. David asks, “What’s the best way to break up with my manager?”

**Craig:** [laughs] I love this question!

**John:** “Should I wait until I have a new one first, or just do it? I understand Mr. Mazin is an expert in this field. I’d love some advice, and a new manager.”

**Craig:** I don’t know if I’m an expert in the field. I have often spoken of my joy of firing people. So, if you have an agent, and this person does not indicate, then you don’t need another manager at all, frankly. But if you like having a manager then, no; just fire your manager and then if you want another manager have your agent help you sit down and audition some new ones.

If you don’t have an agent and you only have a manager, then I guess I would probably then say, okay, let’s talk to your attorney. Because if your attorney works in the business, they also deal with managers all the time. And maybe they could sort of at least suss out that there might be some interest in you as a client.

But, I guess my larger point is this: if you want to fire your manager, you should fire your manager. Because having a bad manager that you want to fire isn’t doing you any good. It’s doing you less good than not having a manager, frankly, in my opinion. So, fire away. Fire at will.

**John:** I agree. See, they’re not controversial at all. I think he should fire his manager.

**Craig:** Yeah. Fire. Fire. Fire!

**John:** Zach asks, “When writing out of order,” this is really I guess more for me, “when writing out of order, how do you organize your saved files? Do you just save them as brief scene descriptions and throw them all in a folder? Is there some more organized technique to it?”

I just throw them in a folder with a very simple name. So, usually if I’m writing stuff out of order, it’s early in the process. So, rather than working in one big file I’m just writing individual scenes. I’m usually hand-writing those and Stuart, or my assistant at the time, is typing them up. I will name what that scene is. And so it will say Bank Robbery. And so at the top of every page I just write Bank Robbery and Stuart knows to save that file as Bank Robbery. And it just sits in a folder.

I will avoid pasting all of those individual little files together for as long as I can stand to, so I don’t try to edit the whole thing for a long time — I build up a critical mass. And eventually I’ll go through, and it’s actually a really joyous day to put all those little pieces together and see what’s there like, ah, there’s my new script.

**Craig:** [sings] Oh happy day.

**John:** Sunshine happy days.

**Craig:** [sings] Oh happy day. I just love the idea that it was joy. That you’re putting your files together and it’s like Christmas for you and there I am like a jerk with one file.

**John:** Just one file.

**Craig:** One file. The whole time.

**John:** It’s kind of sad. The one thing I will say is that recently I had to go back through and look for my handwritten versions of things, and one of the nice things as technology has progressed is I used to handwrite these things and fax them to my assistant. And like there wasn’t — there was like a paper copy of the fax, but it wasn’t especially useful. And I would keep them in my notebooks, but I was like, “Why am I keeping this?”

Now, because I’m either taking photos of it and sending it through, or I would be faxing it to a sort of online account, there’s like a digital copy of all those handwritten things. So if I need to refer back to something, or in this case there’s a book that’s gonna show sort of my writing process on something, and I can show, “Oh, these are my handwritten scribbled pages for this movie from years ago.”

**Craig:** Everything is saved.

**John:** Everything is saved.

**Craig:** Everything. We live in a world now where nothing is ever lost.

**John:** Question for Craig Mazin, I think. “Quick serious question: Why join the WGA? This is not a joke question. I’ve recently joined” — this is Tom who’s writing this — “I’ve recently joined the WGA, or actually was forced to join after selling a feature script.”

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** Yes. “And don’t get me wrong, it’s nice to have a band of writers watching out for one another. In general, writers are the world’s biggest pussies when it comes to defending themselves.”

**Craig:** Mm, yeah, that’s right.

**John:** Yeah. “But my question is much more basic than that. What’s in it for me? The welcome packet I got from them was a piece of hilarious corporate nonsense put together by lawyers. Literally the cover letter said something to the effect of, ‘We can’t keep you from unjoining the WGA, but just so you know if you withdraw from us you can’t ever join again. Ever.’ That was the welcome letter from a group of people who write for a living.

“My point is that, A) the WGA does a terrible job at expressing in clear language why I should want to be a member of their club, and B) does a terrible job of creating my sense of esprit de corps. So, could you and Craig talk about what being a member of the WGA does for the individual writer? I get what it does for the collective, but unclear what it does for the individual.”

**Craig:** Oh boy. Well, first of all, I sympathize with this person because we think of ourselves as living in a free country, and we think of ourselves as being in control of certain things. And even if things get super bad you can always pull a rip cord and bail out. If you work at a job and you hate it, you can quit. And if you don’t like the town you live in, you can move to another town.

The Writers Guild isn’t like that. [laughs] The Writers Guild is a very — and unions in general — are the strange carved-out exception where in fact, presuming you live in California or other non-right to work states as they’re called, closed shop states, you have to join the union. You have no choice.

What they’re talking about when they say you can withdraw is something called financial core. And very quickly basically a court ruled at some point or another that even in closed shop states a worker can essentially withdraw from the union and be only forced to pay the amount of dues that are used for the “financial core of the union’s activity,” which all unions basically extrapolate out to be about 95% of what your normal dues rate is.

So, if you go “financial core” and withdraw, here’s what you get: a 5% discount on your dues; you’re not allowed to vote on anything anymore, but you still have to work under the contract of the union. It is the worst exit door ever. [laughs] It’s not really an exit at all. In short, you’re in the union. So, the first answer to your question is: everything I’m about to tell you is irrelevant because you have no choice.

Now, I will tell you all of the things that are irrelevant. What’s good about being in the union? When you say I understand that there’s something good for the collective, but what’s good for the individual, ultimately they are one in the same when it comes to a union. The whole point is that the collective gets you things that you could not have gotten on your own. There are certain things in place that you would not get on your own. Those are very specifically: minimum salary for your work, credit protection for your work, residuals for your work, healthcare for your employment, and pension for your employment. Those are the big ones.

And, frankly, there’s little else the union can and will do for you. All those things that I just mentioned they already did for you, and people struck for those things so that you could have them which is nice. And essentially on a moving forward basis, the union’s job is to make sure that they don’t take those things away. That’s it. That’s the big deal.

There is not much else to it. There’s not much else to say. Look, I would much rather be in a club that I had a choice to be in, and if I had a choice, if I were given the choice, I would still stay in the Writers Guild because I believe that I am a direct beneficiary of the strength of the collective, as ridiculous and stupid as the collective occasionally is. But I would that it be a choice, sure. What can I say?

**John:** Let’s talk for a second about that letter, because I don’t see the actual letter in front of me, but he’s describing this letter being really off-putting. And I would say it’s a common experience or has been a common experience that, well, you’re suddenly kind of forced to join this thing and you don’t really know what it is that you’re joining. And you might say, “Great, I’m in the WGA — I don’t know what that actually means.”

Ian Deitchman who’s a friend and colleague of ours has been trying to get the WGA to do a better job with new member training and basically saying, “Hey, you’re now in the WGA. This is what it means. Come to a workshop that will actually be helpful to you so you know what’s in your contract, what some best practices are.”

They’re putting together groups — I’m mentoring one of these groups; I think you’re mention one of these groups, too — of the new writers who can come to you for advice on the stuff that’s coming up in daily life as a working writer. I think they’re trying to do better, but if this letter that came with your packet was awful, then that’s not better.

**Craig:** Yeah. The problem is that the Writers Guild as a union with a federal charter is beholden to quite a phonebook of legislation and regulation. And one of the regulations involves this financial core thing where basically the company side of things when they lobby the government, and this is all run by the government, they say, “Look, when people join these unions, these unions aren’t telling them that they actually have a choice between joining the union or becoming a ‘financial core non-member.'”

Why would the companies have an interest in you being a non-member even if you’re still beholden to the contract? Because I left off one other, I guess you could call it a benefit — if there’s a strike and you are a financial core withdrawn non-member, you can keep working. And they love that; obviously the companies love that idea.

So, the companies sort of said from a legal point of view, “Listen, when any union pulls somebody in and says you must join the union now, you must pay these fees, and you must pay dues,” and blah, blah, blah, the union is also required to let them know that there is this other option. So, unions tend to do that in the most dissuasive, creepy way possible, you know. “Oh, and we also have fish for dinner. It’s pretty stinky fish. And we also must tell you that fish with a certain odor can cause paralysis or death, but it is your option if you so desire.”

So, that’s why you get that awful, awful letter. Frankly, they should really just be really honest about it say, “Look, we’re forced by the government to tell you this.” But, you know, lawyers.

**John:** Lawyers. It feels like the WGA needs to do a better job with like a giant box of chocolates saying, “Hey congratulations, you’re in the WGA,” And then maybe a little bit further down the packet is like, “…by the way, here’s the required disclosure.”

**Craig:** Yeah. Well, you know, John, the WGA is — and I really do believe that in the face of zero competition no sort of energy or positivity can ever survive. There’s something about having a monopoly that just kills the human spirit.

There is no other Writers Guild. This is the only one you can join. They have no competition. You can’t go anywhere else. Even if you leave you can’t go anywhere else. And I think that the institution suffers like all monopolies from a kind of shrugging, “Uh-ha, well, you know, there’s really no incentive for us to do better.”

**John:** Are there any unions or guilds that actually have competition?

**Craig:** No. The union jurisdiction is carved out, it’s essentially when you get your charter, you get your jurisdiction assigned by the federal government which recognizes that you are now a certified bargaining entity for a particular jurisdiction. So, that’s why, for instance, when we went after the editors for reality TV, when we tried to bring editors into the Writers Guild it was doomed from the start, because IATSE has editors. That’s it. So game over.

I don’t know what we were doing.

**John:** Yeah. So, to clarify, a person can be a member of multiple unions, but only for different facets of their career?

**Craig:** That’s exactly right.

**John:** So I can be a member of the DGA and a member of the WGA, but that’s because one’s directors and one’s writers.

**Craig:** That’s right. So if you write and direct a film, you’re writing will be covered by the WGA; your directing will be covered by the DGA. If you act in the film than you’re covered by SAG. But, no other union covers screenwriting for television or film that I know of. We’re the only one. And we will be the only one for these companies.

**John:** A question from Lance, also kind of pitched toward you. “In the Done Deal forum, Craig posted,” and we’ll put a link to the actual post. “In the Done Deal forum, Craig posted the following in response to the usual intense debates on whether aspiring screenwriters should follow the so-called guru’s advice and lingo such ‘inciting incident,’ ‘plot point 2,’ ‘all is lost,’ etc.”

Craig apparently said, “‘You don’t think every single piece of crap I get sent to rewrite has ‘plot point 2’ in it? You don’t think they all have a ‘low point’ and a ‘refusal of the call’ and a hundred other tropes? These things are tools, not solutions. I will tell you this: if you talk about screenwriting to producers, actors, directors or executives the way some of you talk about it in here, you will get laughed out of the room.’

“This made me itch to a fly on the wall in those meetings. I was wondering if Craig and you could talk about the real lingo pros use in story meetings as opposed to the lingo that would get us slapped out of the room.”

**Craig:** Ah, we don’t use lingo. [laughs] There’s the answer. Forget the lingo. I mean, good God, it’s like my son is on a tournament baseball team, and the 10-year-old boys are so into the uniforms and the numbers and stuff. And I get it, but there’s a certain juvenile aspect to the trappings of stuff. Who cares what the lingo is? It doesn’t matter. If you’ve written a terrific script, if you have a great insight into a character or a moment in a story, or a theme, or the way something should develop, or just a simple idea for how to do a better car chase, that will come through. That’s what matters.

Not nonsense about pinch points and page act blah-blah-blah. I don’t use lingo. I don’t think I ever use lingo. Do you use it?

**John:** I don’t use it. I was thinking back through what I would actually say in a meeting if I’m pitching something or talking about changes to something. I will say Act 1 or Act 2.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** Everyone sort of does talk that way. Everyone talks about movies having three acts. It really means beginning, middle and end.

**Craig:** Right

**John:** You’re saying something happens at the end of Act 2, people understand that that means near the end and they may have some sense of it’s at the worst point in the movie, the most difficult thing for the hero. But I wouldn’t say “inciting incident.”

**Craig:** Never. [laughs] Ever.

**John:** I wouldn’t say ‘second act climax.’ You would never say that.

**Craig:** God, good lord, no. And look, Act 1, Act 2, Act 3 is so common, it’s almost a lay person — I mean, everybody knows about that roughly.

**John:** You can say ‘set piece.’ Set piece meaning like a big action sequence, a big showcase moment in your story.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t even use that anymore. Sometimes I’ll just say sequence.

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** To be honest with you, and to be honest with the person asking the question — and I’m glad, I mean, I agree with everything I said on Done Deal, [laughs] so it’s good I stand by that.

**John:** It’s good that you agree with yourself.

**Craig:** I stand by that 100%. The lingo is being peddled to you by charlatans who have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. To cover up their complete absence of expertise and insight, and experience in screenwriting, they invent lingo, lingo which appears to make them knowledgeable. The whole point of lingo is to shorthand things, right? Or, I suppose, to exclude other people and make them feel that they don’t belong. So, in this case, they’re using it in a kind of exclusionary way like, “Look, if you speak all these ridiculous words you’ll be in some secret club.”

No you won’t. You won’t. And the fact of the matter is I don’t want to speak in shorthand to anybody in a room. I’ll speak in shorthand about production, that’s different. When I talk to an AD, we’re talking in lingo because that world does require shorthand; a lot of details are going on and you’ve got to move quickly, and a lot of specific things.

But when I’m describing a story, the whole point is this: I’m telling a story for an audience, not for a bunch of lingo heads right? So I want to tell the story to the person who might buy the story like they’re in the audience. So no lingo. Da-da!

**John:** Done.

**Craig:** Done. I got a little angry there.

**John:** I was excited that you got a little bit angry there. I was hoping.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Lena from Moscow asks — we have a lot of international questions. I really just want to bring up the fact that we have a listener in Moscow.

**Craig:** Hello Lena.

**John:** Hello Lena.

**Craig:** [Russian accent] Hello.

**John:** [Russian accent] Hello.

**Craig:** Hello.

**John:** “I’m writing news stories for the largest news agency in the country, but it turns out journalism is not for me. I’m currently writing a spec for an animated feature film. Even if I manage all the problems with working visas and stuff, there will still be a major problem holding me back. The problem is that English is not my mother tongue.

“Granted, it’s no easy task for me to write in English, even though I love this language more than Russian. I’ve been studying English since early childhood and thanks to my teachers I don’t speak with this awful Russian accent.”

**Craig:** Oh, bummer. I love that accent.

**John:** “But it’s still not easy, and I can make mistakes and have issues with word choice. Do I even have a chance as a screenwriter? Or will I always be an outsider looking in?”

**Craig:** In animation I would actually say you’re okay because animation is so story-centric. It’s so about story. And so many people work on animated movies, so even if you wrote a scene and the English wasn’t quite there, or specific lines weren’t quite there, the whole point of the animation process is that story artists take those things and then expand them and use their own voices to retell the dialogue and to re-pitch it.

If it were live action I would say this would be a huge issue. For animation I think it will be a challenge, but it’s not a killer. I think the guy who does Rio, I don’t think English is his first language.

**John:** I was thinking Guillermo Arriaga, I think, is native Spanish speaking, but he writes in English and writes great in English. I think it’s totally doable. And I didn’t really clean up much of what she wrote in reading this aloud. She had one mistake in this thing and she had good vernacular.

I think she has a pretty good shot at being able to write in English if she needs to. That said, she may also want to partner up with a native speaker who is also a good writer and together they could do something great.

**Craig:** Yeah. But you know, I think she’s lined up in the perfect area which is animation, because it really is less about the specificity of any given word. It’s so much about story there, so I think she’ll be fine.

**John:** She’ll be great.

Ryan asks, “Recently my writing partner and I decided to showcase our adaptation skills by finding a short story that was published. We optioned it and adapted it into a short film that we both feel will be an excellent showcase of our talents not only as writers but as directors as well. However, we disagree on what avenue to take this for releasing it.

“My partner thinks we should break it up episodically and release it on Funny or Die, since it’s free and has a strong audience. I think we may lose some value by breaking the story into parts and want to submit it for festivals. What do you guys think?”

**Craig:** God, is it any good?

**John:** That’s a great question.

**Craig:** You know, I mean if it’s really… — You have to be honest with yourselves and show it to people, not your family, show it to people that are mean. And if they love it and you think that it’s going to work as a piece in a really coherent way at festivals, which is no easy task, probably I would say go the festival route, if it were good. What do you think?

**John:** I agree. If it’s good and it holds together best as one thing, it’s not even huge, it’s a short film. If it holds together best as one piece, keep it as one piece. And get as much traction as you can with short-film festivals. If they don’t bite, then break it into smaller pieces and let people see what you’ve been able to do.

But in the time it took you to write this question into us you probably could have submitted it to a bunch of festivals through Without a Box, or the online places that let you submit films to things. So, see if people bite. If they don’t bite, put it up yourself.

**Craig:** I mean, look, giving it away for free never goes away as an option. So, you know — I mean, look, don’t waste your time chasing rainbows, but if you think you’ve got a real shot at… — I mean, obviously the whole point, like you said, was to be noticed as filmmakers, so give it a shot.

**John:** Mark from Santa Monica asks, “Do you have advice on juggling writing jobs? I have a few different assignments at the moment, all under contract. Can you talk about how you and Craig handle dividing your time, managing different producer’s expectations for delivery times? Any advice would be useful.”

First off, I mean, most of the people listening are like, “Okay, great. So you have a couple paid jobs simultaneously.”

**Craig:** I know, they hate those guys.

**John:** Glorious problems.

**Craig:** And he’s under contract.

**John:** Under contract.

**Craig:** Yeah!

**John:** So, first off, congratulations. You’re writing, and more than one person wants you to work on their stuff simultaneously. That’s great. I have found that it’s basically impossible to write two first drafts at a time. I can write one first draft and do a little clean-up on another project at the same time, but I can’t create two brand new things at the same time. I’m gonna either finish one and start on the second one.

And so some of your job as a screenwriter is figuring out how you’re going to stall people well enough and long enough so they can feel like you are doing the work when you’re kind of really working on the other project. Sometimes you can just be honest. Sometimes you have to be a little less than 100% honest about what’s on your screen as they call you.

But you can do it. Be careful what you promise. And don’t try to over-promise and then get stuck with a bunch of things you can’t finish. Or the panic that Craig talked about last week, that fear that I’m going to be caught having to scramble to get something turned in that won’t be my best work.

**Craig:** Yeah. That is the real danger here. And, yes, congratulations. Good for you. And now it’s important if you’re exhibiting the kind of work that’s going to get you multiple offers and people are even going to say to you things like, “We don’t care, we know. You can work on this one in the evening,” or whatever, just be aware that there is a cost to being a pig. And you will end up losing in the long run. I do believe.

First of all, great answer from John, and I agreed with all of it, particularly the part that says, look, you can’t be in the same phase of two different things at once. That’s a disaster. Like John, I have been in the situation where I was sort of outlining one thing and rewriting another, because you can shift; it’s two different muscles you’re working on. Okay, so you can do batting practice and then you can throw bullpen. But, if you over-promise and you start playing games it will burn you every single time. I really do believe that.

Personally, I don’t lie to anybody about that stuff ever. I take deadlines very seriously. And I’m incredibly honest about what’s going on and when I can deliver things. Down to the week. I mean, I’ll say, “Okay, well I think I can have this done by October 1 if we get going.”

And then they say, “Well we just need another week before we hear from so and so.” If that week goes by, now I just want to point out, “Now it’s gonna be October 7.” “Really?” ” Yes. Really.” That’s how I work it out. So, I’m very honest and I’m incredibly above board about everything like that. I don’t necessarily need to tell them because I’m working on something else at the same time. But what I do need to be honest about is when they’re getting the work. And I find if I give myself enough time to do the work properly, and I get it to them when I say, no one cares frankly. I could be working on 1,000 things at once; if the work is good and it’s on time, no one cares.

But you will not be able to do good work, and you will not be on time if you get piggish. So, don’t do it.

**John:** Yeah, the whole idea of “Oh, you could write this at night,” is an elaborate fantasy. Yes, you could write that screenplay at night if you were working at a sandwich shop, because then you wouldn’t have spent your whole day writing pages. But the idea that you are going to be able to write in addition to all the other writing that you’re doing is just not possible. It’s like, well, you’ve been working six hours a day, so maybe you can work ten hours a day. Well, you actually can’t write more than that.

I know writers who have been working on a TV show and then someone will say, “Oh, and why don’t you also write a pilot for staffing for next season?” And that becomes incredibly difficult because you’re trying to write all the stuff you actually have to do for your job, and then write a completely different thing on your own. Sometimes you’re squeezing that in on weekends, but you’re not going to squeeze it in at the end of the day. It just isn’t going to happen.

**Craig:** Absolutely true. And you also have to be aware of the fact that the people who are hiring you are kind of babyish themselves about this. They want what they want. So they’ve decided they want you to do it. You, for whatever reason — hopefully it’s because of your talent — have solved their problem of fear over their project. “This guy is gonna make it better. And my boss wants this guy, and so I’ve gotta get this guy.” They will tell you whatever you need to hear to say yes. If you’re like, “I don’t know, I’m busy,” they’ll come at you pretty hard.

Brother, the day you take the gig and they mail a check, that all goes away. That understanding, all that stuff is gone. Now, they want their pages. And they will turn on a dime on you on that stuff. So, just be careful.

**John:** Bucky asks, “I’m moving to LA later this year with my wife and two-year-old son to pursue a career in Hollywood.”

**Craig:** Ah! [laughs]

**John:** Ah-ha. Competition. “Looking for advice on moving to an area that is safe, has good schools, and is conducive to working in the industry. Your thoughts?”

**Craig:** That’s a good question. I mean, look, my reaction always is: okay, here’s a man with a wife and child and he’s moving to Los Angeles to pursue a career in screenwriting, and the immediate thing I think of is, “Oh, no,” because he’s not going to make it. And then what happens to his wife and his kid. And I’m scared. Now I’m scared for him. And I get scared for everybody who wants to do this, especially when people are relying on them.

I mean, I suppose I’m being sexist about this. Perhaps his wife is CEO of something so it’s not a problem.

But even that was sexist that the wife had to be a CEO to be successful. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah, she could just be a provider.

**Craig:** Right, she could just be middle management at an advertising company. Okay, so that was that reaction. Hopefully you have some sort of cushion and you’re taking care of your child.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** I think for, he’s looking for affordable, right? Safe, affordable…

**John:** Safe, affordable, good schools. He actually didn’t say affordable, so maybe he’s rich.

**Craig:** Well, okay, look, rich places are rich places, so that’s that. But assuming he means affordable, I think Sherman Oaks isn’t a bad bet. Studio City isn’t a bad bet, right?

**John:** Yeah. I would question schools. I mean, if he’s looking for public schools, those aren’t going to be the best choices in the world.

**Craig:** Public schools. Well, for elementary it’s not bad. Sherman Oaks has that Carpenter which is a pretty good elementary school.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I mean, look, La Cañada where I live has great public schools. You can send your kids from kindergarten to 12th grade. They have excellent schools all the way through. Great little neighborhood. And you can actually find some affordable houses there now after the great collapse of 2007. So I always have to suggest La Cañada. It’s a great neighborhood.

**John:** Yeah. But you might as well be in Botswana; you’re really far away there.

**Craig:** You’re really not. Now, that’s where John has this classic Los Angeles bigotry.

**John:** I’ll fully accept it.

**Craig:** Bigotry. Because here’s the truth: if John has to get to Warner Bros. it takes him longer than it takes me. If John has to get to Universal, it takes him longer than it takes me. If he has to get to Disney it takes him longer than it takes me.

**John:** How about Fox?

**Craig:** Okay, if he has to get to Fox I grant you it’s a slog for him and a nightmare for me. But here’s the truth: at the end the reward is that you’re at Fox, so really who’s the winner? [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** That’s smart — antagonize the entire studio. [laughs] That’s really not healthy for your career. All right, the real winner… — and nobody likes going to Sony. The real winner — because it’s so far away — for John the real winner is Paramount because he could walk to Paramount, but for me it’s 22 minutes. And you know if I say 22 I’ve timed it. So, the truth is I’m actually quite close. It’s a great place to live. And I’d like to think that geniuses like John Hancock and Scott Frank know what they’re doing.

**John:** When I was hiring my director of digital things, it ended up being Ryan Nelson, he was moving from Columbia, Missouri and needed to find a place to live in Los Angeles. And so I put up on the blog asking for suggestions for where should Ryan live. And so I sort of described his life situation and which neighborhood should he pick. And people had really good suggestions.

And it’s so interesting that they were picking cool neighborhoods because he was coming from a place in life where like a cool neighborhood was important. And this person has a wife and a two-year-old son, and your decision process is vastly different because you’re not looking for a cool neighborhood.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** So that’s why Culver City could be great. Palms, which is so incredibly boring, might be fine, because Palms is right by Sony. It’s really cheap because they over-built apartments. That might be fine. They opened the blue line, the express rail down through there. So, there’s lots of places that are sort of mid city that could be fine.

And if you’re in Palms you’re pretty close to almost everything.

**Craig:** Not really. No, see…

**John:** I think you are. Because honestly if you take Venice you get to — except for the Valley.

**Craig:** Well, but except for the Valley, except for three movie studios.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Uh-huh.

**John:** Okay. I see the flaw in my logic.

**Craig:** And you’re not close to Paramount either.

**John:** But you’re not that bad to Paramount. Because I’m essentially at Paramount. It’s easy for me to get down to Sony.

**Craig:** From your place to Sony is what, 30 minutes?

**John:** Oh, 15.

**Craig:** 15? Really?

**John:** It’s super quick.

**Craig:** You just get on Venice and go crazy?

**John:** Yeah. It’s fast.

**Craig:** I know, Venice is pretty great.

**John:** I’ve actually run from my house down to Sony.

**Craig:** Out of fear? [laughs]

**John:** No, I was running from Sony. That’s a whole different situation. [laughs]

Our next question. Blaze from Poland asks — Poland! We have a listener in Poland.

**Craig:** Hello, Poland!

**John:** “When you see a finished movie, does it actually look like what you imagined when you put the words on a blank page? Or do you want to stand up and scream, ‘Wait, this is not what a dreamed up?'”

**Craig:** Neither. [laughs] I mean, it never looks like it did in your head because, let’s be honest, our minds do not properly represent physical space or time. They compress them. It’s very elastic. Your dreams are pretty good indications of that where you just are moving around and there’s these little cycads and things that occur. And, of course, let’s not forget somebody else is shooting it, and also they have to find real places that might not look like these things.

Sometimes it gets kind of close, but I think you need to get accustomed right now, sir or madam, to the notion that, no, it will never look like your daydream. And if you are so inclined to stand up and scream at that eventuality, this is not for you. It’s not gonna go well for you.

**John:** Yeah, unless you’re directing your movie it’s never going to look quite like you expect. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, the first third of it where it’s just Charlie Bucket’s house is so much like what I imagined it would be. And I was so delighted. And getting into the factory is great. But then once you really see Willy Wonka, it was a completely different thing than what I sort of had in my head. Like, I knew it was Johnny, but they just made really different choices from what Willy Wonka would look like. And I love it, but it’s just very, very different.

A related thing is I wrote the lyrics to Twice the Love which is the song that Siamese twins sing in Big Fish. And so that whole sequence is kind of close to what I imagined it to be. There’s like the ventriloquist dummy and there’s other stuff like that. But I knew that once Danny Elfman signed on to do the music for the movie, he was going to look at my lyrics and then he was just going to ignore the melody that I had sort of planned out for it.

And so it was such a weird experience listening to the song because it’s the words I had, it’s just a completely different melody, and that’s a good analogy for what the experience of watching your movie is. It’s like it is what you created, but it’s also very different than what you created, and you just have to accept that.

**Craig:** I think that one of the things that makes good directors good directors is that they have enough of an imagination, a visual imagination, whether they wrote the script or not to imagine it in their own minds. So they see the movie or see the scene in their heads. Then they get what’s real, so they’re in a place. They pick a place that would look great. And then they start to work with that. So they don’t push a dream on top of what they have; they take what they have and they make it great, inspired by their imagination of things.

Sort of think of it as this — a classic mistake of people to try and say, “Let’s just shoehorn what we wanted to do into what we got.” Bad idea. Use what you got.

**John:** A related example just occurred to me. So Frankenweenie is a stop-motion animation movie. And as I was writing it I knew it was stop-motion animation. I’d done that before. I knew what the world was like. I know that we talked about doing it back and white. And so in my head I saw it black and white, but I really did see it basically live action.

And it was sort of like a foreground/background thing, where like I would see it animated and I would see it live action. And I basically had to write it like it was live action so characters wouldn’t seem overly puppety. But now that I see it in trailers and stuff, everyone can see it, it is puppets doing it all, and it very much has that sort of handmade feel to things.

And so it doesn’t look like the movie in my head in a perfectly fine and good way. I just couldn’t write little stop-motion puppets in my head. I had to write it like real people and let the clever animators figure out how to translate my real people to what the puppet equivalents are.

**Craig:** Yeah. This whole “it’s not what I dreamt of” is tough.

**John:** Andy from New York asks, “I graduated from college two years ago, and since then I’ve spent the last two years working for a startup Internet company. But I really want to be a screenwriter, specifically for television, and I came to the realization that I can’t do what I want in New York City. So I’ve quit my decent paying job and I’m giving up an amazing apartment to live in Los Angeles without a job or even a place to live yet.”

**Craig:** Gah!

**John:** “I have friends and family there. And I do have a few connections to the industry. But I’m 23 years old and I have nothing holding me back really, so I figure why not. Am I doing the right thing?”

**Craig:** Oh, well yeah…

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** …there you go. You’re 23. You have nothing holding you back. No one is relying on you to eat or survive. Yes, you’re doing the right thing.

**John:** He’s in exactly the perfect situation for why you should quit everything and move to Los Angeles.

**Craig:** Exactly. That’s pretty much the narrow slice of circumstances in which we can happily say, “Yes, congratulations; we’re not at all scared for you.”

**John:** He has a follow-up question. He says, “I love reading in pilot scripts, and something that has always stuck out to me is how race is mentioned in scripts. I’m an African-American male, and a lot of times minority characters have their race mentioned, but if their race isn’t mentioned, white is the assumed default. Occasionally there are times where race-neutral scripts surprise me, when certain characters aren’t Caucasian when they’re cast, but still, this is an issue that has always somewhat bothered me.”

**Craig:** Yeah. I think about it actually quite a bit when I’m writing. And I try when I’m… — If I’m writing a script for actors who are white, I don’t mention it, I don’t call out the race. And if I’m writing a script for actors who are black, I don’t call out the race. But if I don’t know who the actor is, I’ll say white, black, Asian, whatever I want. I don’t just default and say, “Okay, if I don’t mention it, it must mean white.”

And I know people do that and the reason is racism. [laughs] And I don’t mean virulent racism. It’s not like guys take their robes off after a tough day of cross burning and start typing up screenplays and giggle while they don’t refer to people’s race and go “Ah-ha!” It’s just sort of a passive… — look, I’m white, and people around me white, and obviously I mean white guy, I’m thinking a white guy. And a black character is like a specialty move for me, you know what I mean? At least that’s my feeling about it.

**John:** I wrote about this on the blog in relation to the Ronna character in Go in that Sarah Polley ended up playing. In the early drafts of the script, and when we first went out for casting, the description in the script was “18, black, and bleeding.” And so there’s no other reference made to her ethnicity in the script throughout the rest of the thing. But I’d envisioned a black actress playing this.

And so we went out to black actresses, and then we also sort of widened our search to actresses of every ethnicity. And we ended up casting the whitest actress in the world, Sarah Polley, who is wonderful. But when people read the early draft and they wrote in and said, “Hey, why did you change that?” It was important to me when I wrote it. And then as I actually saw people reading the script and everything sort of came together, it became much less important to me. And so I was like it’s not a crucial story point that she be African-American and we moved on.

Overall in scripts, I don’t tend to literally type out somebody’s ethnicity. I’ll often give characters a name that will strongly suggest that somebody is a certain ethnicity. So I will pick an Asian name for somebody with the assumption that we will find an Asian actor that will make sense for that. I’ll pick a Latino name because, why not?

And some of that is with the goal of having a more diverse representation in the movie. Some of it is the goal so that things are clearer for the reader, because if everyone is named Smith and Jones and Thompson, you’re going to get all those names confused. If somebody is named Gutierrez and Chang and something else…

**Craig:** Lipstein.

**John:** Lipstein. You’re much less likely to confuse and conflate those characters.

**Craig:** Yeah. Part of what we’re doing is sort of sending secret messages to the — not so secret messages to the casting people because then they call and they say, “Well what is this person supposed to be?” And casting people are meat markety. They don’t care about anyone’s sensibilities. It’s like, “Okay, do we go get black people, do we go get Chinese people? Do you want Chinese or do you mean Asian? Do you mean Vietnamese or Chinese?” They’re very much they’re shopping for people. And so they need to know the specifics.

Sometimes what I find myself doing for white characters is not calling out white, but calling out a nationality because white is actually the most generic and sort of uninformative term. Because, you could be talking about southern Italians or Swedes who look dramatically different form each other. And so…

**John:** And more importantly might have different cultural things that they would have.

**Craig:** Different cultural things. Different accents. Exactly. Whereas, and for me when I’m writing a black character it’s almost always an African-American character. I suppose if I were writing a drama or something that actually had African scenes that would be a different deal. But to me American white is, unless you’re talking about a real southerner, you know. I don’t know. I don’t really even get into dialectical stuff too much with American white. I just more like nationality stuff.

But, look, if the questions is is this partly because writers sort of get a little lazy about race? Absolutely. I think so.

**John:** I think you’re right.

Adrienne asks, and this is a question I’m completely paraphrasing because it was long, so I’m just going to boil it down to what I want. First question. Is it okay to refer to actors when pitching? Second question — how about when actually writing the script?

So, having a short and honest question I will give my short answer. Can you refer to actors while you’re giving a pitch? Yes. And that’s sometimes really, really helpful.

A lot of times, you’re starting a pitch, you’ll often talk about the world and then you’ll talk about the characters. You might talk about your hero and it’s “sort of a Matt Damon type.” And that’s okay to say that. That’s helpful for them. Give a couple examples for who the actor could kind of be. Or a lot of times you’ll describe and they’ll sort of come back to, “So is it like a Matt Damon?” It’s like, yes, it’s like a Matt Damon. And that’s okay, and that’s really helpful when you’re in the room.

Never say that in the script. You never want to put an actor’s name in the script, unless it’s like some really funny reference to some actor who’s dead or something. There might be a reason why it’s useful, but you’re never going to refer to an actor in the script because then any actor who is reading the script, or anyone who’s reading the script gets just paranoid about that actor’s name being in there.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly. I agree with your first answer. First answer is yes. When it comes to writing names in scripts, the only time I’ve ever done it — in fact, it was recently for our script for Hangover Part III, really because it’s for the studio only. It’s like, look, here’s a part that we would actually love a certain person for. And since you don’t know about this person, we want you to know that this is the kind of person we’re thinking about. But that’s almost like an internal thing. That’s not like you’re selling a script. And that will come out when it goes out to other people.

So, yeah, I agree with you on both counts. Yes/no is the answer.

**John:** And sort of answering two questions at once, I would often — several times in the past — I have written Octavia in for a character when I wanted Octavia Spencer to be cast. Because it was an easy way to make sure like, oh, they will think of casting an African-American in this part and they will cast Octavia Spencer because her name is Octavia and she’s exactly right for the part.

**Craig:** That’s a sneaky way of doing it.

**John:** It’s sneaky, yeah.

Luke, from Melbourne, Australia asks, “How did the two of you meet and then later decide to collaborate on this podcast?” It’s a history lesson. And I honestly don’t know the answer to some of this. I’m trying to think when I first met you.

**Craig:** Well, I know we first spoke on the phone because I was starting a blog.

**John:** That’s right.

**Craig:** And we had the same agent at the time. And I called him up and said, “I want to talk to John August about this blog stuff.” And you were nice enough to talk to me. And so that was in 2005, I think.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And then how did we start the podcast? This is a great story. See, what happened was John sent me an email and said, “Hey, would you like to do a podcast?” and I wrote back and I said, “Yes.” [laughs] There’s not much beyond that, I don’t think.

**John:** I think my decision on sort of why I approached Craig is you had had a very good blog that you had let sort of go fallow, and you had sort of gotten bored with it, but you had a lot of good things to say about the industry and screenwriting. And I had been on panels with you, and I’m like, oh, you’re well-spoken, you know what you’re talking about. So I figured you would be a good collaborator.

**Craig:** And I take umbrage very quickly.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** I get angry.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I love being angry.

**John:** Yeah. It’s fun to be angry. Strong emotions. Make you feel alive.

**Craig:** It makes you feel alive. Exactly.

**John:** April in Ohio. Her name is April, it’s not the month. April in Ohio. “Financially I can’t take the traditional route of trying to become a writer for TV/film by moving to Los Angeles and getting a low level job in the industry. I’m a 30-year-old mother of one working full-time while barely making ends meet. I’m finally taking the initiative to go after my dreams. I wrote a TV pilot, a spec of The Walking Dead, and am currently working on a feature script. My goal is to have at least five scripts by the end of the year to help build my portfolio.

“Would it be best for me to enter a screenwriting contest, enter writing programs to get my work noticed? My main concern with the writing programs,” probably referring to, like, the Warner’s writing program, “is that the majority of them are unpaid and the ones that are need you to have some kind of connection to the industry already.”

**Craig:** Well, look, April — here’s the bad news: the bad news is that you have the opposite circumstance from the gentleman that we said, “Yay, go; go move! You’re 23. Nobody cares about you.” You’re feeding a one-year-old. You have already the most important job there is. So, your options are limited. And I must tell you that even in success you will be in a state of crisis in screenwriting because there is no steady check in screenwriting. Success is not something that goes on and off like a switch.

It is a dimmer that waxes and wanes, and for some people burns brightly for six months and then does not return again. It is a dangerous path. It is a dangerous path; even if it works it will be a dangerous path. So, that’s the first thing I want you to understand.

That said, there’s nothing wrong with entering your material into contests. There’s nothing wrong with you sending it to people. There’s nothing wrong with putting it on the Internet and having people read it. Do all those things. Just be aware that this is one of those be careful what you wish for things. Because the worst possible circumstance would be that you’re just good enough to get out of town and go somewhere for five or six months with your child, but not good enough to actually make it on a permanent basis. That would be tragic.

And I have to tell you something else, not to be too depressing about it — that’s the majority of outcome for people who do get a break is that it’s not really a break. It’s like a little blip and then they’re gone. So, be careful. Make sure you put that kid first, okay? But don’t let me kill your dream. I’m not here to do that, I’m just here to protect you.

**John:** I would say I admire her work ethic, that she’s gotten stuff started, she’s gotten stuff done. She has a plan for how much she wants to get achieved. That’s great.

I wish that she was writing in to say, “I wrote a novel.” I wrote something else that’s more achievable from Ohio and that doesn’t rely on being in Los Angeles to do. Because I can picture her as, “Hey, I want to be J. K. Rowling,” and I’d say, you know what, you could very well be J.K. Rowling. And you could do all this because novelists live in every city across the country, everywhere around the world. You could do that from your home, and keep your normal job, and do this extra stuff. And there’s a clear path for success in it.

I know people who have done that kind of thing. I don’t know the people who’ve done what you’re describing, and that’s tough because I know a lot of screenwriters. I don’t know anyone who’s been able to do it that way. So, it’s not to say you couldn’t be the first, but it’s certainly a tough road ahead of you.

So, entering screenwriting contests? Sure. Writing programs? Sure. But your concerns are well-founded.

**Craig:** Yeah, I mean John’s point, April, about novels is that there is actual success possible. And it is binary. Either you’re novel is a hit or it’s not. But it’s not like that with screenwriting. With screenwriting it’s fly out, hang out, take a meeting. Three months go by. “Great, we’re going to give you a job, but it’s week-to-week, and it’s not for that much money, but if we like you there will be more.” Okay, now you’ve been out here six months. “Oh, you know what? The show got cancelled.” “We don’t like you.” “Somebody else came in.” “Da-da-da, go back home.”

And go back home to what? Maybe that other job you had is… You know, there’s so many ways to get burned. I just, I don’t know, I get so nervous when I hear about people with very young kids jumping into this stuff.

**John:** I’m going to segue to another question here because it’s very much on the same lines. Tucker asks, “I make good money writing movie advertising. I’ve been doing it for a long time. I’ve written screenplays on the side for decades and I’ve always imagined I’d make the jump one day to full-time screenwriter. Recently one of my scripts hit and suddenly I was getting a lot of attention. I got a manager, had major agencies fighting over me. The day I had been working toward had arrived.

“Then I started having meetings. And more meetings. Came up with awesome stories for assignments I didn’t get. Then I find out what you get paid my level to do assignments and how long you work for nothing to get them, and it doesn’t add up. I don’t think ‘becoming a full-time screenwriter’ is a good career path for anyone anymore. Writing on spec makes sense, but doing that studio dance doesn’t make sense. They made it a loser’s game, suitable only for recent grads who live cheap.”

**Craig:** Man, I hope that there are some people at studios who listen to our podcast because I really — I want them to rewind and listen back. This is not some guy off the turnip truck with dreams of Hollywood. This is a working professional who works in marketing, who obviously works either at a big vendor or at a studio who’s been doing it for a long time, who knows all about it, and who put in his time and wrote a screenplay that you liked, that a lot of people liked, and he’s looking back at what you’ve given him in return and saying, “That’s not a job.”

Writing lines on posters is a job, but screenwriting isn’t a job anymore. I really want these guys who run the studios to think about what this guy just said, because it’s true. They are killing this as a career because of the way they go about hiring people, and the way they go about limiting development. So I’m getting on my Norma Rae soapbox once more and I’m saying, “Come on! Think about where this business will be ten years from now when the folks who came in the ’90s, under the system which used to develop stuff with, oh my god, two-step deals. When those people retire and all you’ve got are 23 year olds who have lots of energy but very little or no experience, and nobody in the middle, and nobody at the higher end, where will you be? Who’s going to write your movies?”

It’s killing me. Killing me. I mean, I wish I could say to this guy, “No, no, no,” but I can’t. And by the way, that’s what I did. I did what he did. The only difference between me and this guy is the year. I was writing movie advertising in 1995. And then I made the jump and there was a career to have. And now he makes the jump and he looks around and he goes, “What’s going on here?” Totally get it. It’s bumming me out.

**John:** Yeah.

Kenneth from Salt Lake City asks, “If you’re writing your own sitcom,” this is actually more a TV question, maybe I’ll answer this. “If you’re writing your own sitcom that really has no choice but to begin with a premise pilot,” a premise pilot meaning you’re setting up the world, you’re setting up the characters, and it’s classically, like, Laverne and Shirley become roommates. “Does it make sense to instead write a future episode of the show to use as your sample and try to sell it to networks?”

No. Most TV staffing these days, they’re not really looking for spec episodes of currently running series. Classically it was always like you write a funny spec Seinfeld and that’s what gets you staffed. That’s not really what showrunners are reading anymore. They’re reading original stuff. So, they want to read your pilot for something. So you write a pilot, an episode of a sitcom. And naturally a lot of pilots are going to end up being kind of premisey because you have to establish why this situation exists.

So, Kenneth’s question is, “Should I not write the premise version of it and just pretend like I’m writing six episodes into it” No. Because people have no idea what you’re doing. So, you’re going to inherently have some premisey stuff in a lot of these kind of pilots because you’re setting up a whole world and you’re setting up the basic nature of how things work.

That said, it can’t be so premisey, it can’t be just like Laverne and Shirley meet and decide to move into the apartment together. They don’t get the basic idea of what a normal show of this would be and who the characters are, and that you have enough different plotlines and different voices in there that people can see the range of what you can write.

**Craig:** Yeah. I like that answer.

**John:** Thank you.

**Craig:** You’re welcome.

**John:** And by the way, we know everybody who’s writing TV these days.

**Craig:** I know. Well we know everybody.

**John:** We do know everybody, but surprisingly a bunch of our feature people are now TV people and they’re killing it.

**Craig:** Because of us. I really do feel like we’re the hub, and from us emanates all success.

**John:** Yeah. That solipsism of everything starting from us and radiating outwards?

**Craig:** Well, the fact that I even included you in “we” is a really nice gesture on my part. Because as we all know, you’re not real.

**John:** No. I’m just a filter that you apply in GarageBand to make the second voice.

**Craig:** You in fact are. [laughs] That’s right.

**John:** We’re going to plow through because I want to clear out these questions.

**Craig:** Plow man, let’s go. Let’s do this. This is going to be a huge — this is a mega episode.

**John:** Mega. So many, an hour’s worth of questions.

**Craig:** Woo!

**John:** Michael in Seattle asks, “I recently finished my first spec script. I used Movie Magic 6 to write it,” so this is a Craig Mazin question because you love Movie Magic.

**Craig:** I do.

**John:** “I like Movie Magic and would continue using it, but I found a problem. The studio wanted me to submit as a Final Draft file. So I converted from Movie Magic 6 to Final Draft 8, and what was a 119-page script is now 127 pages. What should I do?”

**Craig:** Mm-hmm. Okay. So, this can happen. And I wish I could blame everything on Final Draft, but I think it’s just the function of the fact that you’re moving from one thing to another. Check all of your margins in Movie Magic and then adjust the margins in Final Draft to mirror those closely. You will probably get very close to the same page count.

The other issue is the font, because Movie Magic has their Courier font, and Final Draft has their Courier font. And while theoretically they should all be the same, it doesn’t seem like they are. So, first thing first, check all the margins of all the elements. That means the document top and bottom margins and then the width margins for all of your character, dialogue, action lines, slug lines. Copy them over and make sure they’re the same numbers in Final Draft.

That should get you close. And if you’re still off by a whole big butt load, then you can cheat a little bit on the top and bottom margins. I mean, the point is you wrote a, whatever, 116-page script, or 111-page script, that’s legal. Make your script 111. Don’t do that thing where you squish the dialogue together though; I hate that.

**John:** That’s terrible. I would say if it looked okay as a PDF, you’re probably fine. So do what Craig did, and you weren’t cheating, it’s just some stuff just comes out differently.

One of my great frustrations, being the company that makes — we make FDX Reader which is the rival Final Draft reader for the iPad because the Final Draft one didn’t exist when we made it. When they launched the new, official Final Draft reader they said it keeps your real page numbers correct. And I was like, well, page numbers are this really arbitrary thing. And somehow Final Draft decided, like, “Well our page numbers are the correct page numbers.” No, they’re really not. There’s not one magic formula.

Well, there’s one magic formula for Final Draft that they use to figure out how they’re going to do page numbers, but that’s not the end all/be all/only way the page numbers could be figured out. So, it’s not that it’s correct in Final Draft and it’s wrong in Movie Magic, it’s just a difference.

**Craig:** It’s just different, exactly.

**John:** Paul in West Virginia writes, “I’m working an historical epic screenplay, something akin to Braveheart, so I’m already compressing 15 years worth of material into three hours, combining people, composite characters, whole events, etc. I think the back story is crucial for the story. If I include the scenes covering the back story, my protagonists don’t even show up until page 30.”

**Craig:** [laughs]

**John:** “If I just have her show up in the beginning and have another character just talk her through the back story, I can get to a long scene of exposition dialogue and violate the whole show-don’t-tell concept. Is there a happy medium?”

Yeah. Write a different script. Or write a different story from that world. You cannot have your lead character show up on page 30.

**Craig:** I mean, the only thing that comes close in my mind is Star Wars because…

**John:** Yeah. Luke shows up later.

**Craig:** Luke shows up really late. I mean, they stick with the robots for so long once they land — I’m sorry, the droids — once they land in the desert. There’s a great opening scene that’s sort of a classic prologue where the villain shows up, breaks the neck of some hapless guy to demonstrate that he’s evil, captures a princess to set the terrible events in motion, and then leaves. Then the droids land in the desert and they walk around for awhile, and then they get captured. And then you meet Luke.

But my guess is it’s still earlier than page 30.

**John:** It’s a lot earlier than that.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, come on.

**John:** It’s not gonna happen.

**Craig:** Have you ever been in a theater, sir, and about half an hour into the movie the hero showed up? What was going on for the first half an hour? Who were we identifying with? No. No. Stop.

**John:** Glad we’re helping him so much. We’re just saying, no, don’t.

**Craig:** [laughs] No, you can’t make it. Stay home. Don’t do this. It’s not a job.

**John:** Carmen asks, “Suppose you read an idea online, not a news article that sparks an idea, but someone is actually saying in a completely public forum, ‘I had this idea for a script.’ There’s no plot to the idea, no characters, etc, just a concept. Is there any shame in taking the concept and running with the plot that popped into your head after you read this person’s blatant putting-it-out-there of their idea? Would you ask that person for their permission?”

**Craig:** Well, I mean, she actually did use the proper word there which is “shame.” I mean, it’s not illegal. Ideas aren’t property. There’s a little bit of shame, yeah, I mean, I wouldn’t do it. I just have a little — this is going to be a shock to people who have seen my movies, but I have a little too much pride. The thought of taking somebody else’s idea because I can see a good idea and then running with it, when it’s not something that’s being given to me or offered to me just seems creepy. I wouldn’t do it.

**John:** This is a question of how specific is the idea. Because they’re saying the plot isn’t there, but just the idea is there. So if it’s like “it’s a witch who opens a bakery,” well, maybe that’s okay? I don’t know. If it’s about a witch, yeah, make a movie about a witch. Great, that’s fine. That’s not an idea. That’s just a general worldview concept.

The more specific the idea is, the more shame you should feel trying to get in there.

**Craig:** Even if it’s sort of big and generic like if somebody said, “Look, I’m trying to figure something out. I have a question because I’m writing this science fiction movie and my idea is that I’m doing Titanic in space. So it’s this huge, big thing that can go at light speed, but it’s marooned and slowly sinking towards a black hole. And there’s a love story, so I’m doing…” which actually now that I say it isn’t a bad idea for a movie. [laughs]

**John:** I think Titanic in space is generic enough that you shouldn’t feel too much shame in that.

**Craig:** I don’t know. I mean, somebody now is going to do Titanic in space which is bumming me out, so I should come up with a title now.

Um…Spacetanic.

**John:** For my own personal life, I will say that there was a movie concept that I had for awhile and then I saw that Warner put something into development that was kind of like it. And I was really angry about it for a sec, and then I realized, you know what, everything that guy is doing with that idea — it was a science-fiction kind of idea, not like the Dyson sphere but that kind of idea — well, there’s room in the world for more than one of those and I’m not going to feel too guilty about doing my own. So.

**Craig:** You know what, I think you’re an adult, I assume, the person who’s writing the question. You tell me. If you feel shame, don’t do anything that embarrasses you.

**John:** Yeah. But also I don’t want to put too much credence in the idea of like, oh, I had that idea for a movie. It’s like, well, an idea is nothing. If you didn’t have a plot, a story, characters, you didn’t have a movie. You just had…

**Craig:** You had a nothing.

**John:** Yeah. You had an idea for a poster.

Craig, we’ve come to the time for One Cool Thing if you have one cool thing.

**Craig:** You know what? My One Cool Thing is to end this, because this is over an hour. Did you realize this?

**John:** It’s a solid hour.

**Craig:** I’m gonna propose that we save our cool things for next time.

**John:** We’ll save it for next time.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Craig, we answered a lot of questions. I think we did a lot of good today, I hope.

**Craig:** Crushed a lot of dreams. Broke a lot of spirits.

**John:** That’s also part of the… — It’s the whole omelets/breaking eggs, that whole analogy would apply here.

**Craig:** Our podcast motto is “It’s a Good Day to Die.”

**John:** Craig?

**Craig:** John.

**John:** Thank you. Have a good week.

**Craig:** You too, man. Bye.

Scriptnotes, Ep. 37: Let’s talk about dialogue — Transcript

May 18, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/dialogue).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Scriptnotes. This is a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. How are you, Craig?

**Craig:** Feeling good, buddy, how about you?

**John:** Good. What did you write today?

**Craig:** Nothing. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] I wrote a lot today.

**Craig:** Oh, well, screw you.

**John:** Well good for me. There are many days I don’t get stuff written, so I’m happy today. But I was writing action, and action is just so not fun most times. I actually tweeted about it last night because I tweeted something like, “I think about writing action sequences the same way a tailor must approach doing button holes.”

**Craig:** I saw that. Yup.

**John:** Because, you know, you absolutely need them, and it’s such fine detailed work, and no one is ever going to notice it.

**Craig:** Yeah, because the action itself on the screen is obviously so much more impactful than what you see on the page. And when you write it on the page it really does feel like technical writing, like writing an instruction manual or something.

I remember talking about this with Richard LaGravenese who is a spectacular screenwriter, and he and I both bonded over our shared hatred and boredom of writing out action.

**John:** Yeah. And you can’t really skip it. I mean, it’s crucial to provide a sense of what the reader is going to see if this were a movie. I mean, I always treat writing a screenplay as I’m sitting in the theater watching a movie up on the big screen, so I’m writing what I’m seeing, or writing what the experience is of watching the movie. And that includes action, so you have to get that in there; the challenge is to make that interesting for the reader in a way that they just don’t want to kill themselves, or that they’re going to skip over it, because that’s the temptation that they are going to be like, “Okay, this paragraph is too long, I’m going to skip over it and just read the next bit of dialogue; this makes my eyes feel happy.”

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s a chore.

**John:** And there are times where you can summarize a bit, where you can just give a taste of… — Sometimes if there’s like a football game you can get a sense of after a few plays we’re up by three, and you are getting sort of a lyrical sense of what is happening there, and it’s going to be left to the filmmakers to sort of show what that is. But there are also times where you need to be fairly specific because there’s comedy that’s happening because of what’s going on there. There are distinct moments in that action and you really do have to script them and choreograph them.

And that’s what I had to do for this. This was a sports thing, but there was comedy that needed to happen during it. And so it needed to be specific enough, and that’s where it just gets to be tough.

**Craig:** Yeah. And then eventually if the movie goes into production you will have to sit there… — And I remember sitting with Todd Phillips and the second unit director for The Hangover Part II. And sort of laying out exactly how the car chase would work. Every single bullet fired, because everybody has to know. Everybody needs to know, “Okay, where does the bullet hit, because we’re going to need a car that has a bullet hole, and da-da-da.”

And then you’re sitting after that meeting literally doing technical writing. I like to say this to screenwriters when they complain about how we have no power: Everybody is staring at it like it’s the Bible at that point. Every single word becomes incredibly informative.

**John:** What you were saying about that moment in The Hangover, I know exactly the sequence you’re describing. It becomes so important because there’s a change in state of the set that you’re in, which I guess is a car, so that joke can only happen at a certain time because you can’t take a moment from earlier in the scene later because you’ve changed the nature of the car. So you can’t move stuff around once you’re in there.

Versus a lot of times, if it’s just two people in a normal car that’s driving, you can change any of the lines around. Characters can adlib and do a whole bunch of different stuff because the car is staying exactly the same the whole time. If something is changing physically in the scene so that you can’t go back and forward in time, you’re locked in. And that can be really tough.

**Craig:** Right. And you have to choreograph it. And you are choreographing it just for the point of view of the production. Any kind of action becomes a very highly choreographed thing, to avoid accidents, and to avoid — and sadly there was an accident on that movie. That had nothing to do with our writing or anything. But, you are trying to make sure that everything is choreographed down to the slightest little movement.

And, so, yeah, when you’re talking about something that in a movie when you watch you think is a little nothing, like they shoot out the rear windshield — that’s a big deal. Because you’re right; every shot after that needs a missing windshield. So it just becomes, it’s a grind. I find writing action to be a grind for sure.

**John:** I was describing to somebody else that is working on a musical right now: Musicals are a lot like action movies in that every few minutes there’s a song being song rather than a big action set piece happening. And, working on several movie musicals, yes, everything has to be sort of carefully planned, but you have some flexibility, you can move stuff around.

Working on the stage show, it’s been really interesting that every day the script would change because we literally had moved one lyric in front of one line, or some character’s entrance was just a little bit later. And you had to accommodate all that stuff because it wasn’t just the script or the dancing, or the speaking; it was also the music department. Everything had to fit together in a way that was very, very tough.

And so you wanted to create as much room for the moment, for the acting, and for the possibility. But you’re on rails; you basically had to stay on this track or it wasn’t going to work.

**Craig:** In production, I honestly feel production of all kinds is so awful. I’ve never been on a movie where I didn’t look around at least once and think, “There’s got to be a better way.”

And I understand why directors, particularly very successful directors who reach a certain age and have done a certain amount of movies suddenly say, “You know what? Let’s just do this mo-cap then, you know. Let’s make Tintin on a green stage.” Because, it just takes away so much of the misery of production. It’s a very arduous task.

**John:** We should tell everybody that you’re on set for — our friends Derek Haas and Michael Brandt just had their show picked up, Chicago Fire.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And so you’re doing a little production rewrite there for them, helping them out, getting a few jokes in there.

**Craig:** Yeah. Chicago Fire is going to be the funniest show on TV. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] It’s an NBC show.

Change in topics, this is a very exciting week because this is the week of Upfronts. So this is where all of the…

**Craig:** Exciting for you. [laughs]

**John:** Exciting for people who care about TV. Not exciting at all for Craig Mazin. This is where all the networks decide which shows are going to be on the fall season, and which shows are not coming back, and which ones they’re most excited about, which ones they’re nervous about, which ones they’re gonna stick in mid-season and cross their fingers and pray.

So we have several friends who have shows being picked up which is fantastic.

**Craig:** Yeah. A lot of them.

**John:** And we have friends whose shows didn’t get picked up and we’re sad for them. But what I’ve said before on the podcast is the amazing, wonderful thing about TV is that not getting your show picked up isn’t really considered a failure because most shows aren’t supposed to get picked up. Most pilots aren’t supposed to get picked up. So it’s not a big mark against you.

**Craig:** Right. If you got to pilot you have succeeded in some big way.

**John:** Yeah. I think I told you about this off-air last week, but I cheated on you. You know that?

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** I went and did another podcast. I recorded an episode of Jay Mohr’s podcast, Jay Mohr who I knew from Go, who I hadn’t seen for like 20 years or something so it was great to catch up. And so as I was driving over to Jay Mohr’s house to do his podcast, and he does one of those old school podcasts where they people actually look at each other…

**Craig:** Weird.

**John:** …unlike our podcast where I haven’t seen you in months.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Which is a blessing.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s beautiful. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] So one of the things in our mutual contract was that we couldn’t see each other.

**Craig:** Never see each other. Yeah. It was one of my demands.

**John:** So, as I was driving over to Jay’s house I listened to an episode of his show because I figured, you know that’s probably good preparation to listen to one episode of the guy’s show before you’re on his show. And so his guest that week was Ralph Garman who is a very, very funny radio personality on KROQ. He’s on the Kevin and Bean show. You don’t listen to the radio either, do you?

**Craig:** Actually I used to listen to whatever those — Kevin and Bean in the morning. And Ralph does the Hollywood…

**John:** He does the Hollywood Showbiz.

**Craig:** Yeah, I know. He’s a funny guy.

**John:** He’s a very funny guy. So, both he and Jay are impressionists; they do a lot of impersonations. So they got talking about that and it was really fascinating to hear people talk about their craft, and especially when they can do things that I can’t do at all.

And so Ralph Garman was talking about this one other guy he had met who could do a dead-on Jason Lee impression.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** And so Jason Lee, who’s the guy on My Name is Earl, he was in the Chipmunks movies, and Ralph was saying like he had no idea how to even begin a Jason Lee impression. His quote, I think, was, “I wouldn’t even know where to hang my hat on that,” which is that when you are doing an impersonation there has to be something that you can start and you can build out from.

So, if you are doing a Christopher Walken thing you have this weird phrasing and sort of how he falls back into it. With an Al Pacino you sort of have his physicality that becomes sort of his voice. And like how do you do a Jason Lee impersonation?

And it is amazing when you see somebody doing an impression or impersonation that you’ve never even considered before. Like I remember when Jay Pharoah joined Saturday Night Live, Jay Pharoah does this brilliant Denzel Washington.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** He also does Will Smith and Jay-Z. But particularly the Denzel Washington, it’s like you never even thought there could be a Denzel Washington impression, and he just nails it. And there’s not always comedy to back it up, but it’s just uncanny that he’s able to do this Denzel Washington.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think his thing is like he went in on the “my man,” like that’s his thing, you know?

**John:** Mm-hmm. He found something very specific and he sort of built out from that thing. And there is a difference between sort of voice acting; there’s people who can double and what we think about impressions or impersonations is really kind of a caricature. It’s like they are taking that one thing and blowing it out to this crazy distortion.

I mean, Ralph Garman describes it as like when you go to visit the Santa Monica pier and there’s those guys who will draw cartoon caricatures of you. And so they will pick like one thing on your face and make your head huge, and then give you a skateboard for some reason. That’s what a lot of that comedy is. But you have to find that one little thing.

And their conversation about finding a character’s voice, finding an actor’s voice for an impression got me thinking about what a character’s voice is. And so I thought we might start talking about that.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** Because to me, the mark of good writing is never really about structure, or where the beats are falling. I can tell if it’s a good writer or a bad writer mostly by whether they can handle a character’s voice. If they can convince me that the characters I’m reading on the page are distinct, and alive, and unique. I would happily read many scripts that are kind of a mess story wise, but you can tell someone’s a good writer because their characters have a voice.

**Craig:** Right. You can suggest ways to improve story structure. And you can always come up with ideas for interesting scenes. But what you can’t do is tell somebody to write characters convincingly. Either they can do it or they can’t.

**John:** Yeah. So this isn’t going to be a how-to-give-your-characters-a-voice thing, because I think it is one of those inherent skills; like you sort of have it or you don’t. You can work on it, and you can sort of notice when things are missing and apply yourself again. And, there are sometimes where… — There is a project that has been sitting on a shelf for awhile that a friend and I are going to take another look at. And looking through it again I realized that the biggest problem here is that our hero could sort of be anybody. We made him such an everyman that he kind of is every man. And because of that you don’t really care about him.

And so I thought of four questions, sort of four tests, to see whether character’s voices are working. So here are my four tests and maybe you can think of some more.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** First test — could you take the dialogue from one character in the script and have another character say it?

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s a common complaint that you’ll hear from producers or executives that the character voice is not unique, that the characters all sound the same. And that’s a common error — I don’t even say a common rookie error. I think people misuse the term rookie error. It’s really a common stinky writer error, because rookies who are good writers I think automatically know to not do this. And that they write the characters as them, so they’re speaking through cardboard cutouts. They’re speaking through policeman. They’re speaking through Lady on Street.

**John:** Or worse, they’re just talking as “cop.” They’re talking like a cop. And they’re not talking like a specific human being; they’re talking like, “this is what a cop would say.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Well, that’s actually not especially helpful for your movie because this is not supposed to be any cop; it’s supposed to be a specific cop with a back story, and a name, and a role in your specific movie. And so if you’re making someone the generic version of that, that’s going to be a problem.

You already hit on my next thing which is is a character speaking for himself or is he speaking for the writer.

**Craig:** A-ha, I read your mind.

**John:** You did read my mind. And so that is the thing. Are you speaking really through your own voice? And some screenwriters are very, very funny. And so they have very funny voices themselves. But if every character in the movie has their same funny voice, that’s not going to be an especially successful outcome.

It may be an amusing read, but I doubt that the final product is going to be the best it could be.

**Craig:** Some people will say that there’re highly stylized writers who do a little bit of that, and I actually disagree. Like some people say, “Well in Mamet everybody sounds so hype literate and in Tarantino everybody sounds so deliberate, and quirky, and fascinated with pop culture, and thoughtful.” But the truth is, if you watch those movies you realize that he actually is crafting — yes, he has a style; yes, both of those brilliant writers have unique styles, but they do shade them for the different characters.

Sorkin is another one who… — It’s interesting. There’s a group of writers who have a very distinct style that exists through the movie. And yet the characters are distinct. That’s pretty advanced stuff to me.

**John:** Yeah. Diablo Cody often gets that knock. And she gets that knock off of her first movie, but then if you see Young Adult, those characters aren’t talking the same way.

**Craig:** I agree.

**John:** Those characters are very specific and very unique.

**Craig:** That’s a good example.

**John:** Sort of a corollary to that, maybe I should break it out to its own point — is the character saying what he wants to say, or what the movie needs him to say? And that is is the character expressing his or her own feeling in the moment, or is he expressing what needs to happen next so that we can get on to the next thing? And that’s the subtle line that the screenwriter works is that screenwriting is always about what’s next. And you as a screenwriter have to be in control of the scene and make sure that this scene is existing so that we can get to the next story point.

At the same time, you can really feel it when a character is just giving exposition or setting up the ball so another character can spike it. And those are not good things to have happen.

**Craig:** No. You don’t want to set up straw dummies. And you don’t’ want to put things in their mouth because the screenwriter needed people to hear it. And frankly, I think of all those things as great opportunities. We all run into moments where we need the audience to learn information, or we need another character to learn information. So then it’s a great opportunity to sort of sit there and think, “Well how can I do this in a crafty way? How can I do this in a surprising way?”

Sometimes the answer is to be completely contradictory and to have people say the opposite of what they think and then be clear through the writing that you’re using subtext or you’re relying on performance.

I mean, the other thing is bad characters, and maybe I’m cheating ahead again, bad characters tend to speak like they’re on radio. And their dialogue ignores the fact that their faces will speak louder than any words coming out of their mouth. Was that number four?

**John:** No, no. That’s good. Not radio. So I’m going to add Not Radio Voices.

**Craig:** No radio plays.

**John:** In situations, I don’t want to get too off track talking about exposition, but in situations where you need to have the audience understand something, or you need to make it clear that a character has been caught up with another character, like the characters split up and now they’re back together and you need to make sure the audience understands that they all have the same information. Characters in real life cut each other off a lot, and they are often ahead of each other. So there may be opportunities to literally have one character stop the other and tell what they already know so that we don’t have to sort of walk through all of those conversations again.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, there’s all sorts of ways to kind of recap. Simple rule of thumb is if the audience hears it once, don’t make them hear it twice. So, if you need to catch somebody up on what that bank robbery was like, and it was a crazy bank robbery, then the scene begins with the person who has been listening staring at the other person. They’re both silent. And then the person who was listening says, “Wow. That was insane.” “I know. You don’t have to tell me.”

The only important matter is that they they’re reacting to what they just heard, but certainly you don’t want to repeat anything ever.

**John:** Wherever possible, characters should speak in order to communicate their inner emotion and not to communicate just information.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** This is what I would throw out. What would a joke sound like from that character? And this is actually from… — Jane Espenson was on a recent edition of the Nerdist Writers Panel; Jane Espenson, who is a TV writer who has done a lot of stuff and had a blog.

**Craig:** And a lovely woman.

**John:** And a lovely woman. During the strike our three blogs came together and we all picketed at Warner Bros. Lovely woman. And so smart about comedy, and especially TV. She was on the Nerdist Writers Panel talking about Once Upon A Time, which is what she’s writing on right now. And she’s talking about having the Snow White character tell a joke, and that it was tough because it’s not a very particularly funny character, but you needed to find specific moments that she could be funny. And in finding what kind of joke can she tell is where you really get a sense of like, “Okay, I know who this person is.”

And so even if you’re not writing a comedy, I think it’s worthwhile thinking about how can that character be funny. Because almost everybody is funny in some way, or at least tries to be funny in some way, so what is the nature of their humor? What is the nature of their comedy? And when you know that, then you will also have a sense of how they are going to respond in stressful situations. How they’re going to respond in sad situations. It gives you an insight into them.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I also like to think about power. I always think in terms of the power dynamic between any two or three characters or four, whatever you have in your scene. Who holds the gun? And how does that change the way they talk to the other person? Obviously the gun in this instance could be anything. It could be anything from information, to an actual gun, to “you’re in love with me, and I’m not in love with you.”

And then is there a way to change who holds the gun in the middle of the scene? And allow the character’s voice to adapt to what we would normally adapt to. I mean, think of how many times in life we have had conversations where we thought we were unassailable at the beginning and by the end we were getting our lunches handed to us? No, our lunches eaten, and our hats handed to us. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** And so use that. Scenes are all to me, they are all about variation, and they’re all about growth. So, allow the voices to respond to the dynamics of the moment.

**John:** Agreed. My last test, and we’ll think of some more after this — can you picture a given actor in the role? Or at least preclude certain actors from the role because it doesn’t feel like they would say those things?

And so my example here is Angelina Jolie. So let’s say you’re writing a woman’s role and she’s funny. It’s not going to be Angelina Jolie.

**Craig:** Yeah. Probably not.

**John:** Probably not. Angelina Jolie has done at least comedy I know, but you don’t think of Angelina Jolie as being funny.

**Craig:** Well, I mean, it depends. I guess, like Mr. & Mrs. Smith, I thought she was very funny, but it was…

**John:** But it’s not telling a joke funny.

**Craig:** No, it was sort of clipped and wry which is…

**John:** Perfect.

**Craig:** She has a great arched brow, so to me like, it’s funny — when you think about doing impressions, I guess in my head I’m always doing impressions of actors as I’m writing for them. And so I think, okay, what’s that thing where I would go, okay, I can see her sort of arching her brow. And I always think of Angelina Jolie as somebody that has power. So, she can be confident and cut you down with one or two words.

I mean, in writing ID Theft for Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy, I kept thinking about how Melissa was sort of, you know, she’s somebody who would ramble and Jason is somebody who would be very short. And it was an interesting thing because it goes counter to the normal thing which is the rambler is the weak one and the short talking person, the terse person is the strong one.

But in this case it’s the opposite. You have the terse person who is weak, interestingly, and the rambler is strong. And that was actually fun; that was a fun dynamic to play around with because it felt, it just made those scenes more interesting to me. And if you’re not thinking in those terms of how language, the quantity, the quality, the size of the words, how many pauses, the speed; I mean, language is music and you should be musical about it, I think.

**John:** The project I’m writing right now, one of the reasons I had struggled with it a bit is I was writing it with one very specific actor in mind, who is great and funny, but is a tough fit for what this story kind of needs. And so once I got past that that it has to be this, and I started thinking of the broader picture, I landed on the other actors — oh, that’s inherently funny; him in that premise is inherently funny.

Now, ultimately, will we cast either of these actors? Who knows? But it helped me figure out the voice because I could hear what it would sound like if this actor were saying it, and I could shape the lines so that it would be very, very funny coming from that person.

It doesn’t mean that that’s the only actor who can ever play it. Famously, Will Smith was not the original choice for Men in Black. And it’s hard to imagine that it was supposed to be Matthew Perry, but it was supposed to be Matthew Perry. So don’t think you have to be locked into a specific cast. But if you can’t think of someone who should play the role, that’s also probably a problem.

**Craig:** Yeah. Those things are sort of proof of concept, you know. If it’s funny with two particular actors, then at least you know it can be funny. If you can’t think of any two actors that it could be funny in combination, then screw it. It ain’t gonna work, for sure.

**John:** Any more on voice? We have a couple questions here.

**Craig:** Eh, let’s go to questions.

**John:** Let’s go to questions. James from Oregon. His question, I think, is about recycling, which, recycling is good. “My question regards ownership of your work during development. If I understand it correctly, once you sell a script to the studio they own it. Now say you have written a unique character or a specific funny gag and it is not used in the final film. Are you free to use that same gag or character in a new script? Or, does the studio own every word of every draft, and could they prevent you from incorporating that unused idea is another script?”

**Craig:** Yes and yes, kind of. I mean, for sure they own it. They are the copyright authors of that. You cannot use it in other scripts legally. In practice, however, we all will occasionally do this sort of thing where it’s like, “Look, you didn’t use it, you’re never gonna use it, I’m gonna steal it and stick it in this other thing because I wrote it really. And it has value to you.”

But you’ve got to be really careful about it, ’cause technically it is verboten.

**John:** Yeah. I had a couple thoughts here. First off, this is talking about the movie shot and they didn’t use it, and so that’s a very specific situation. So, like, that script that you wrote is never going to get made again because that already shot. Sometimes there’s things that just linger in development forever. Like I have this Shazam! project that, who knows if it’s ever going to happen over at Warner Bros. So, I would never feel safe taking anything out of that because, who knows, they could dust it off and shoot it.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** But if something has already shot and you know that they didn’t use it, technically they own it. But are they going to come after you for doing something that was in there? Like for the first Charlie’s Angels there was a, I think I may have mentioned this on the podcast before; there was a sequence where the Angels had to, in the script, in there’s a sequence where the Angels had to rescue somebody, and it was on top of a mountain.

And they end up in a van going down a bobsled run. And it was actually a really fun sequence. And Amy Pascal came in on like a Friday at 5pm and says, “We’re cutting $5 million out of this movie. And we’re not leaving the room until we do it.” And so she picks up the script and she rips out those five pages. They’re gone.

And so that bobsled sequence I sort of felt like was fair game. And so if another alpine action movie came up in some case, I would feel pretty good using that same kind of beat again.

**Craig:** Maybe now, but… — The only thing to be aware of is sequels because they will occasionally go back and want to re-mine the stuff that was there from the first thing. if the movie comes out and it’s a bomb, which wasn’t the case in Charlie’s Angels, I think you’re pretty much on safe ground. But if it’s a hit, you’ve got to be careful.

**John:** But we were also talking about how dialogue is sort of musical, and I think a lesson that I’ve learned from people who write musicals is that you always think like, “Oh, we cut that song out of that show.” And so I asked, “Well the song is great, why don’t you use it in a different show?” And the truth is, songs are kind of written for certain shows. It’s kind of tough to sort of take all the ideas that were in there and really apply them to this new show.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And the same happens with most stuff that’s in your movie. We were talking about voices just a second ago. If a character has a very specific joke, and that joke works in his voice, it’s unlikely that it’s going to work as well in whatever thing you’re trying to shoehorn it into.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s probably right.

**John:** There’s a script I wrote that actually I still own completely. And I considered going back through and like pulling out some of the action sequences I love in it for this other project, and the more I think about it the less likely I am to really do that, because it’s not… — Those worked really well in that movie because it was that movie. They’re not going to work at all in this one.

**Craig:** It was for that movie. Yeah. Look, you wrote one good scene, or one good line, or one good sequence before, you can do it again. Yeah. It’s better in general to be — I can’t think of any instances where I actually did lift something from an abandoned project.

**John:** Two things that came to mind, just as we were talking right now. When I was writing the novelization of Natural Born Killers a zillion years ago — it was one of the first paid things I ever did. I literally had three weeks to write an entire book. And I was also in the middle of finals in grad school, and I was working a full time job. It was a very crazy time.

And at a certain point I was like, “I just need more stuff.” And so I ended up going through my hard drive and going through like old short stories I’d written and other little things, and I found these moments that were interesting, and I did just sort of pull them in and use them. And it felt like — it was like I was making quilt out of all the little scraps I had.

And that’s okay. They’re yours. That’s fine. But you are not going to…

**Craig:** Not for something you care about.

**John:** Yeah. I did — it worked really well in the book because that book was so pastiche-y anyway. Here’s the other point I was going to make. Sometimes I will have something that I have always wanted to use, and I’ll be on a weekly. And this is nothing I used in any other project; it was something I had half developed for myself. I’ll totally use it in that weekly because I know, you know what, they are gonna probably shoot this. This idea I’ve had in my head can actually be shot and be used, and then I can stop thinking about it.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s cool. I like that.

**John:** William asks, “When writing action where a group of characters are involved, do you need to list them all in each new scene? If not, how else could this be handled?”

That’s a reasonable question. A little rookie, but not too bad.

**Craig:** I’m not quite sure. What do you mean in each new scene?

**John:** So what he’s talking about, let’s talk about The Hangover. In the second Hangover you were cutting back and forth between two groups. And do you need to remind the reader who’s in which group when we cut back to them?

**Craig:** Yeah, but there’s sort of short hand ways to do it. You don’t want to keep saying, “Phil, Allen, and Stu are still in the car.” We assume — there are certain things we presume if we’re going back and forth. I do know that Todd and I are often, we often do sort of say, “Okay, we’ve started a new scene, the guys say, ‘All right, let’s get in the car. We’ve gotta go to this place.’ And then the next shot is them in the car. Do we need to say Phil, Stu, and Allen are in the car? We actually do. We just lay out who’s driving, who’s sitting in the front seat, who’s sitting in the back.”

But in a sequence, so a group of scenes that are connected by action as opposed to location, like a car chase, running through a casino, or moving through different rooms of a house, it’s okay to sort of elide over that, or shorthand things with “the guys” or “the policemen” or whatever kind of group name you can come up with.

It’s really all about just making sure that it’s clear for the reader without it being boring and repetitive.

**John:** The thing I’m working on right now, the action sequence that I was talking about, it’s a sports thing. And so I do need to be clear about which players are actually playing at that time, because there are some characters who are back on the bench. Bu there’s also times where I can just refer to “the team” and it’s helpful just to refer to the team. And if a character needs to do something that’s distinct, I see them talking, so I know that they’re there at the moment.

But that will come up sometimes as a conversation during preproduction is they will check to make sure that who exactly is in this scene. And as the writer, that’s part of your job is to make sure that they really do have everybody in that scene who needs to be in that scene.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I think it’s okay to leave out certain bits of information like that for the reader of the script, as long as you know. Because eventually somebody is going to ask you, and I do feel like it’s a wonderful thing to be able to immediately say to that person, “Here’s who’s playing, here’s who’s on the bench.”

Years ago I wrote a blog piece called You Can’t Just Walk Into a Building, which Josh Olson disagreed with — imagine that.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Dope. Anyway. In that piece I basically said, “Look, you can say your characters walk into a building in a script, and that’s fine, but down the line somebody may very well ask you what kind of building exactly are you talking about here? Are we talking skyscraper, this, that, whatever?” You should know. You should know your settings. You should have a sense of all of these things in your mind at the very least, because they will ask you.

On every movie I’ve ever done, I have sat down and been asked these questions by either the AD, the director, the costume people. Everybody. It’s amazing how many people actually do directly ask the screenwriter these questions. So know the answers.

**John:** Know the answers.

Luke from Poland asks, “I follow Derek Haas’s Popcorn Fiction site,” which is great, so we’ll provide a link for that, “which is all kinds of awesome. And I know that both of you wrote short stories for Derek’s site. Therefore writing prose is not completely alien to you. So I was wondering, have you ever considered writing a novel?”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** “Is there a John August or Craig Mazin novel on the horizon?”

**Craig:** Those are two different questions. [laughs] Yes, and no. Yes I have. I have an idea for a novel. It’s really sad, and dark, and depressing, which I love. And I even have a couple of chapters of it. But I’m so fastidious about it. It’s funny, when we were talking last week about writer’s block and how you just have to keep moving. I don’t have writer’s block, but I am overly fastidious because I feel like, look, this is it. You write these sentences and they exist forever in that state, never to be amended.

So, I’m rather fastidious about it, and it’s very slow going. But I do kind of love it. I don’t know, maybe one day I’ll finish it and publish it. I don’t beat myself up over it.

**John:** How much is written?

**Craig:** I have two chapters, and they’re sizable chapters. But, I mean it’s probably one-fifteenth of what it should be, if that.

**John:** I have considered writing a novel. And it’s one of those things that loosely on the horizon, so I will talk to my agent or my lawyer about it once a year or so. And the thing I would want to write, it’s very much sort of in my wheelhouse. You could say, “Oh, what would John August write well?” John August — I adapt a lot of kid and young adult things and it would be one of those kind of projects.

So I’ve definitely considered it. I just know the amount of time it would take would pull me away from other things, and so it’s not my highest priority right now.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s where I’m at.

**John:** But, I would love to do it. And I love books, and I love writing, and I love the sense of completion and finality that you have in a book that’s wonderful. And world building, is that so much of the time I am writing these screenplays and I’m creating the world, and creating the characters in the world, but it’s only for a very specific small purpose. And I like that when you write a novel or write a series of novels you can really expand and expound and create stuff beyond the borders of just a two-hour movie. And that’s an amazing thing.

**Craig:** Yeah. And also there’s an ability to express an inner world in a novel, to really go into the kind of hard to articulate consciousness that we all think we understand, which you cannot do in movies. Movies are entirely about what you see in here.

**John:** Yeah. The toolbox is much bigger in novels. And you can spend five pages on the feeling of the sheets, and you maybe shouldn’t do that, but you can. And there are amazing opportunities in novels that are great.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m a big Conrad fan. I’ve always been a big fan of his. And I always loved how impressionistic his style was, that he would sort of describe things to you in a way where almost he as the author didn’t quite see them clearly until maybe a scene later when it suddenly became clear what had happened. And that’s something, again, that you can do as a novelist. You can be impressionistic. You can have people misunderstand what they see, but in movies it’s very difficult. If someone gets stabbed…

There’s a wonderful moment in Heart of Darkness where they’re on the boat, and one of the natives who are, I guess, part of the crew of the boat. I think in the novel it’s something like, “He grasps in his hands what appears to be a cane, and then falls down.” And then only afterwards do you realize, no, a spear was thrown from the banks of the river, and pierced him through the chest and killed him. But in that moment it was like Conrad was as confused as all of us about what was going on. Can’t do that in a movie. Spear through the chest is a spear through the chest.

**John:** Yeah. In a movie you would have to pay that off within about 10 seconds, or else we would have forgotten what happened there.

**Craig:** It’s also hard to even just pretend that it’s anything other than what it is. Because we can’t — the lens is objective. It is not clouded by anxiety, or tension, or squinting.

**John:** When you write prose, we may have talked about this before, I’ve enjoyed writing stuff for Derek’s site, and it was one of the first times I have written prose in quite a few years was writing those two short stories, Snake People and The Variant which you can both find on Amazon. I found dialogue to be really frustrating. I got better at it as I would sort of go through it, but like the first day or two of trying to write those short stories, it killed me writing when characters had to speak.

Because I find that the form of dialogue in American novels incredibly frustrating the way we do the comma, open quotes, I speak a line, closed quotes, and the “he said”s. It’s really weird. Because when you read it, here’s what the difference is, I think: In screenwriting every word counts except for, of course, the character cues above dialogue. Those are ignored, you never say those. But everywhere it otherwise counts.

In books the “he said”s are supposed to be invisible, like they are supposed to not really exist. And I just find our way of writing really artificial.

**Craig:** Well, it is. And it definitely took a little bit of adjustment, but on the other hand when I would read it back I realized that they were invisible to me as well. And also I noticed that, well, a couple things. One, it definitely drives your interest in dialogue down which I think is kind of a good thing, because I don’t really like dialogue heavy books.

And it also, I noticed that if you had kind of established if there was sort of a back and forth conversation, it was legal to leave out the “he said”s/”she said”s if there was a run.

**John:** Exactly. As long as the rhythm was established, like your characters were all trading lines, then you can go through quite a bit without having to do that.

So, Craig, do you have One Cool Thing this week?

**Craig:** I do have One Cool Thing this week.

**John:** Why don’t you go first.

**Craig:** My One Cool Thing this week is 1Password. I don’t know if you use 1Password.

**John:** I use 1Password. I like 1Password.

**Craig:** It’s the greatest thing ever. So, 1Password, it’s software that you can freely purchase for money, so it’s not free, online. Available for both Mac and PC.

**John:** And iOS.

**Craig:** And iOS, that’s correct. And 1Password is kind of brilliant. So, we all have a thousand accounts for a thousand different things and we tend to use one password or maybe two passwords because we can only memorize a certain amount of passwords. And those passwords tend to be fairly low security. Go ahead — there’s sites where you can test the security of your own password, and most people fail pretty miserably.

And then of course there are some websites that demand that you use a capital, and lower case. Some ask for a number. I mean, as we said in Hangover 1, my password used to be just “bologna,” but now they make you add numbers. [laughs]

So, hundreds of these passwords, and many of them are duplicates and many of them are unsecure. So, what 1Password does brilliantly is it says “No, no. Come up with one really secure password that’s a bunch of numbers and uppercases/lowercases, whatever you want to do, and we’ll help you come up with it. That’s the one you memorize.

“Then, when you go to a website, we’ll come up with a password for you that will be a huge gobbledygook 14 string combination of nonsense that no one could possibly remember, including you — you won’t have to.

“Then, if you go to that website and you want to get in, you just click on the 1Password icon which there is an extension for Safari, Chrome, and Explorer. Type in your master password, it then plugs in the password for that site and you are unlocked.” And it is spectacular. And, you don’t even need — you might think, “Well, what if I’m not at home on my computer that has all that stuff?” No problem, because if you have a Dropbox account, a free Dropbox account, you can use a web-based version of 1Password through Dropbox.

It’s spectacular. You should all get it. It’s the greatest thing ever.

**John:** See, I’ve had less success with it than you have. And so I have had situations where, especially the plug-ins weren’t working quite right. The browser plug-ins weren’t working quite right.

**Craig:** Really?

**John:** So then it would fill in the wrong thing. I may need to sort of reinstall and redo some stuff. What I have found it very useful for though is overall control of passwords, especially the things you kind of forgot about from a long time ago. And so my general password philosophy is I have a schema for sort of how passwords work that every password for every site is different, but if I stare at a site I can probably figure out what my password for it is.

Now, that may not be the most secure, because somebody else could figure out what my schema is, but I think it’s going to be challenging for them to figure out what my schema is.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t even like to wait or even do that much thinking about it. I just like knowing that I’ve got one thing. I don’t know my email password, for instance. I have no idea what it is. But I know 1Password.

**John:** Ah, that’s faith. You have a lot of faith in that 1Password.

**Craig:** Well, yeah. But the point is I am no more faith in that than I am in any password. I mean, you’re hoping that the password…

**John:** No, but you’re putting a lot of faith in that 1Password, the application, is not going to completely self-destruct.

**Craig:** Well, you can if you’re really wigged out about it use the 1Password app to print out all of them and stick them in a safe somewhere.

**John:** That’s a good idea.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** I do find myself using 1Password for credit card information. And so my American Express card, I used to have it memorized for a long time, and then of course someone stole it at a certain point, and we had to get a new number, and I don’t remember my new number. So I just go to 1Password and have that plug it in.

**Craig:** Exactly. And it works out o 80% of the time. There are some sites where just the way they set up their fields, 1Password can’t figure out what the hell they are talking about. But usually it will be able to fill in your number, your security code, your expiration date, etc.

**John:** On the topic of passwords, an application that you probably don’t have to use, and you should thank god you don’t have to use, I’m just gonna bitch for one second about iTunes Connect. So, if you’re selling apps in the app store, Apple has an app for iOS called iTunes Connect which will let you know how many copies you’ve sold. So like we have Bronson Watermarker there, and FDX Reader; those are the two apps that we’re selling today.

And so we can see how many did we sell today. It asks you for your password every single time you launch it. And you can’t actually change anything. It’s not like a thing where someone could grab your phone and steal your money or anything. No, it just tells you how many you have sold. And the fact that it asks you for your password every time is infuriating. And there’s no good way to get around it so you have to type it in.

And, of course, you don’t want to have an easy password for it, so you have to have a difficult password that you are trying to type in and the dots are hiding what you’re typing.

**Craig:** Well, if the point is that there’s really no secure information on it, why not just do 123412341234?

**John:** That’s the problem, is that the password to get into it is your real master password for iTunes Connect.

**Craig:** Oh, that’s super annoying.

**John:** So it has to be your real solid fear of god password because there’s tens of thousands of dollars at stake there.

**Craig:** That’s annoying, yeah. Annoying. Well, I guess that’s why they do it.

**John:** So, my one cool thing is a guaranteed time waster. So, probably the worst thing I should ever share with screenwriters. But it’s an amazing game that I’ve been playing the whole week. I’ve been playing far too much the whole week called Ski Safari, which is not a great title by any means.

So here’s the thing in Ski Safari. You are this little guy who’s skiing down a hill…

**Craig:** Well first tell us what platform it’s on.

**John:** Oh, it’s for iPad.

**Craig:** Got it.

**John:** And so the good thing about it being for iPad is that you can’t play it on your phone, so that you’re not wasting all your time on your phone with it. And also because it’s on iPad I don’t need to play it at my computer, which is good. So, it’s not one of those things.

I’ve also set myself a rule that I will only play it while standing up because as writers we sit down way too much. So I can stand at the counter and play this. And when I get tired of standing I should just sit down. So, it’s an incredibly simple game. It’s very much like Tiny Wings if you have played Tiny Wings, and it’s an Endless Runner. So, basically you’re leaping, you’re sliding, you’re leaping, you’re sliding. But the character design and sort of the world of it is really, really nicely done. It’s incredibly smartly thought out and it feels to me like a perfect pop song. Like you know Kelly Clarkson’s Since U Been Gone…

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** …is an amazing perfect pop song, this is sort of an amazing iOS game. It feels like it does exactly what it should be doing right at this moment and just knocks it out of the park.

**Craig:** I’m going to download it. Is it S-K-I Safari?

**John:** It is.

**Craig:** I’m gonna download it tonight.

**John:** Yeah. It’s cheap. And it’s one of those things where, I think it’s $0.99, everyone who plays it will love it and will become addicted to it, I suspect. And then at some point the game designers will probably make some little change, and everyone will be up in arms about how they ruined the game, and demand their money back, their $0.99, after they played it for probably 100 hours.

**Craig:** Or maybe Zynga jerks will just copy it.

**John:** The Zynga jerks — I’m sure the Zynga people already have their photocopiers ready.

**Craig:** Are the Zynga people just the worst?

**John:** Yeah. I don’t know. They might be.

**Craig:** I think they might be. I just feel like they really are bad.

**John:** I didn’t really begrudge them for Farmville, because like, oh, great, you found a new kind of crack. Okay. Or Mafia Wars. You and I played Mafia Wars way back in the day, didn’t we?

**Craig:** Yeah. They’ve stolen, I mean, I feel like there’s 100 lawsuits against these guys.

**John:** So here’s what pushed me over the edge, is that there’s this kind of cute little iPad game called Tiny Tower where you are running this little tower and you’re building new floors, and you’re running the elevator to get people to places.

And then I saw the Zynga knock-off, which was exactly the same. I mean, completely 100% the same thing. And that’s not cool.

**Craig:** I hate it. No, it’s not cool. I mean, everybody likes to go after EA because EA… — The big crime of Electronic Arts in the gaming community is that they tend to swallow up independent game publishers or raid independent game publishers of their staff, their key personnel. And so they have a general depressing effect on game innovation and the indie game scene.

And I get that. But on the other hand, everybody’s an adult. If you own an independent game company and you feel like selling it to EA, that’s your choice. And if you work at an independent game company and you feel like going to work for EA, that’s your choice, too.

But Zynga, it seems like they’re ripping these other people off, to me, as a lay person when I read these things. And that’s kind of gross.

**John:** Yeah. That shouldn’t happen.

**Craig:** That’s One Bad Thing.

**John:** One Bad Thing.

**Craig:** One Uncool Thing. Zynga.

**John:** Zynga. Craig!

**Craig:** John!

**John:** Thank you for another fun podcast.

**Craig:** Oh, and John.

**John:** Oh, there’s more.

**Craig:** One last little addendum. I just wanted to say congratulations to you and all of my gay, lesbian, transgendered friends, because the President of the United States for the first time ever in our history has come out in support of same sex marriage, and I think that’s fantastic.

**John:** I think that is really fantastic.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s a good deal.

**John:** Yeah. I was happy it happened.

**Craig:** Yeah, me too.

**John:** Yay!

**Craig:** Me too.

**John:** All right, so I’ll pick appropriately triumphant end music.

**Craig:** Yeah, something good! But not, like no I Will Survive. No Gloria Gaynor.

**John:** No, it will be some good other anthem.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** My thinking cap is already running. And, in fact, it’s already playing under our talking right now.

**Craig:** Is it It’s Raining Men? [laughs] ‘Cause no Weather Girls will do. I can’t take it.

**John:** Thank you, Craig. Have a great week.

**Craig:** Thank you, too, John. Bye-bye.

Scriptnotes, Ep. 32: Amazon’s new deal for writers — Transcript

April 12, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/amazons-new-deal-for-writers).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And you are listening to Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting, and things that are interesting to screenwriters. How are you, Craig?

**Craig:** I’m fine. How are you?

**John:** I’m good. I’m back. I’m back from four weeks in New York.

**Craig:** I love it. I can tell just from the tone of your voice.

**John:** Yes. I’m actually very tired, but I’m heavily caffeinated at the moment, so I will probably talk faster than usual.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** But I’m happy to back. I’m happy to be back in my bed. And this is a thing about being 40 years old, is I used to be able to kind of sleep anywhere. Like the first three years I lived in Los Angeles I didn’t have a mattress, I just had like two of those egg crate foam things on the floor of my apartment.

**Craig:** As did I.

**John:** Because I was broke. And, like, why spend money on a bed? But now that I am 40 years old, I have a really good bed. I have one of those Tempur-Pedic mattresses that is amazing and sort of absorbs all energy.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So for the four weeks I was in New York I just had the crappy bed that was in the apartment that I rented. You could feel the springs and all that. And I’m like, I could suffer through it. But then when you stop suffering through it and you get back to your real bed, it’s so good.

**Craig:** Yeah. I just got back from a week away with my family, and returning to your own bed is such a good feeling. What is not such a good feeling is you repeatedly pointing out that you are 40 years old knowing fully well that yesterday I turned 41. I know what you are up to.

**John:** But I’m actually 41.

**Craig:** Oh, ha-ha!

**John:** So I would be in my forties. I’m older than you. You are the younger person on this podcast.

**Craig:** When is your birthday?

**John:** August 4.

**Craig:** Oh, I got you by three months. Four months. Oh…the youth flowing through my body.

**John:** You actually have me by like nine months though if you just turned 41. I turned 41 before.

**Craig:** Oh, so you are going to turn 42. You are right. Better.

**John:** You are making feel better with each word you say.

**Craig:** I have you by eight months. Oh…

**John:** Yeah, you are the youngin’.

**Craig:** What’s it like being as old as you are?

**John:** Let me tell you, the aches and the pains…

**Craig:** Oh, yeah.

**John:** …you know, honestly, for the very first… — For like the last week or something I started to notice that I will at some point probably need reading glasses because I felt myself literally holding something a little bit further away.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** What it was, my daughter had like a little — it’s not a hang-nail, but it is that little piece of skin right around the edge of your finger nail that you just have to pull off with your finger nail, that little tag or whatever. And so she held it up to me and it was too close; I had to hold it back away. And, like, ooh, what is that?

**Craig:** My wife has to do that. She wears reading glasses now or holds things away from her face. I, as of yet, have not had that problem. But it is coming.

**John:** It’s coming.

**Craig:** You know what that is caused by, correct?

**John:** It is actually muscular changes.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Yeah, so it is not really the lenses in your eye. You can’t do a Lasik for that specifically.

**Craig:** It’s called Presbyopia. And Presby, the root, the same root of Presbyterian. And there are muscles in your eye that focus your eye on close things; and those muscles eventually get weak and tired as they have in your incredibly old eyeball. And as they get slack [laughs] and begin their inexorable slide towards non-function and death, old people like you have to wear reading glasses for close up reading. I’m so sorry.

**John:** No, it’s fine. I’ve actually come to accept the fact that this will have to happen. And I remember going on a meeting with Pete Berg. Pete Berg and I flew to New York City to meet with Will Smith — Will Smith of all people — about this movie that he ended up doing. And it was fine. But Pete Berg had like three sets of reading glasses hanging from his tee-shirt because he kept losing them and then picking them back up again.

It’s like, well, I don’t want to be that crazy person with a bunch of reading glasses. So, I’ve also noticed this really geeky trend of glasses that actually clip together, that snap together. They are magnetic and they snap together in front of your nose. So they sort of just dangle from a cord and you can snap them in front of your face.

**Craig:** I fully expect you to engage in that level of geekiness. No question.

**John:** [laughs] No question. No question at all.

**Craig:** No question.

**John:** I thought we would start with a couple of questions.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** A writer writes in, “I’m writing my first spec. Think of Swingers meets Entourage,” oh, stop being Swingers meets Entourage, but okay, “located in LA. Would it be wise to include actual restaurants in the slug line, i.e. Rainbow Bar and Grill, or just something like Interior Restaurant — Day and then describe the restaurant’s features with a sentence? Keep in mind this is my first spec,” blah, blah, blah.

I flagged this question because it is about specificity. And if you are doing something that is very specific to a locale and to a group of people, if you were writing the next Swingers I think you should absolutely pick what the real locations are going to be in your script.

That may not be that you are actually going to end up shooting there, but if that specific location is important to you, use that specific location in your script.

**Craig:** Yeah, of course. I mean, this is the time when there are no clearances; there are no location fees or concerns. You can write anything you want. And there is absolutely nothing irresponsible about calling out specific locations if for no other reason than it conveys your intention to the reader.

**John:** Yes. And so the reader may not be familiar with that specific detail, so it is good to give a line of color to show what that location is like. Give us a sense of what that place is. It should be short — don’t over-describe your locations. But give us a sense of what that place is. Use the real name. Use the real everything you can so that it is meaningful to you and it is meaningful to your characters.

**Craig:** Even if people will never know what it is because it is sort of arcane to everyone, sometimes including those things helps convey a sense that you know what you are talking about. It makes the reader comfortable.

I remember when we were writing The Hangover sequel; obviously a lot of it took place in Bangkok. And we called out specific places all the time as if the reader would know just because it helped get you in the mindset of you were in a real place. So you should absolutely do that.

**John:** Now I have made it sort of my daily vow to talk about Lena Dunham’s Girls every day until the premiere of Girls. Girls is a new TV show on HBO that Lena Dunham wrote, and directed, and created. And it’s great.

And so I saw the first three episodes. HBO did a premiere in New York while I was there. And specificity is one of the main reasons why it is so good. It is so very specifically these characters at this point in their lives living in exactly this neighborhood. And its universality comes from the fact that everyone in this world is living a very specific, finely painted, detailed life.

And you believe the characters really are talking about the things that are interesting to them. So, specificity is…

**Craig:** I’m glad you pointed out that was a TV show because I had no idea what you were talking about. [laughs]

**John:** Wait, you really do not know? I feel like there has been a huge media saturation on this show.

**Craig:** What?

**John:** So there is outdoor… — Also, Craig Mazin, by the way, doesn’t watch TV or see movies. Apparently he actually closes his eyes so he can’t see outdoor ads. He can’t see…

**Craig:** I like reading books.

**John:** Oh yeah. But I feel like HBO has found a way to probably interject it into books, because they are doing a full on hard push on this show.

**Craig:** I did not even realize that this was…

**John:** Do you even know who Lena Dunham is?

**Craig:** No. [laughs] Who is that?

**John:** Wow, it’s so fascinating. So, Lena Dunham is a writer-director. Her second feature was this movie called Tiny Furniture which won awards at South by Southwest. I met with her, I loved her. Judd Apatow met with her, he loved her. He took the initiative to say, “Let’s make a show.” And so they pitched a show to HBO. They shot a great show, ten episodes. It airs, I think, next week some time. It starts April 15th I think.

**Craig:** And is it funny?

**John:** It’s really funny.

**Craig:** I like funny.

**John:** It’s like Louis C.K. or Larry David, but it is a 25-year-old young woman who has written, directed, and stars in the show. And so you meet her and you talk with her, and you are like, “Wow, you are the nicest person. I can’t believe you have survived being so incredibly busy and doing all of these things.”

**Craig:** Well, I will watch it, and I will look forward to us giggling over the fact that I had no idea who this person was.

**John:** Yeah. You have the HBO Go, so you can watch it even though you don’t watch normal TV because you do have an iPad. So you will be able to watch it.

**Craig:** I do watch Game of Thrones.

**John:** Yeah, look, who could not watch Game of Thrones?

**Craig:** And I watch Major League Baseball.

**John:** Yeah. That’s fine.

**Craig:** And that’s about it. [laughs] Yeah.

**John:** Our second question, “I recently listened to the Nerdist Writer’s Panel,” which is another podcast, which is actually quite good, so we will put a link to it because it is really good.

**Craig:** I’m sorry, what was it called?

**John:** The Nerdist Writer’s Panel.

**Craig:** Nerd-est?

**John:** Nerdist.

**Craig:** Shouldn’t it be Nerdiest?

**John:** Nope. Nope. Just Nerdist.

**Craig:** But that’s wrong.

**John:** Well, it’s not. It’s like racist but Nerdist.

**Craig:** Oh, I see. So they have an ism, like nerdism, and they are nerdists.

**John:** Yeah, exactly.

**Craig:** I thought it was Nerdest, but it is Nerdist.

**John:** Actually rather than going for racist, I should have gone for nudist. But Nerdist. The Nerdist Writer’s Panel.

**Craig:** Got it.

**John:** And so it is a good podcast. And they bring in different writers, TV writers, screenwriters, and they talk about the writing that they are doing. It is sort of like how we always talk about how we are going to have guests on, but we never actually have guests on. They do.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So, “On this podcast, Matt Nix was a guest.” So, first off, you basically need to discount anything Matt Nix says, because you and I both know that you can’t trust Matt Nix at all.

**Craig:** You can’t trust him as far as you can throw him.

**John:** What a horrible human being.

**Craig:** Bad man.

**John:** Oh, it’s actually, no — we should specify he is actually a very good guy. And he is the writer of Burn Notice, the creator of Burn Notice. And lovely, and he is involved in the WGA, and we love him to death.

**Craig:** And he lives up here by me in Pasadena, and that automatically gets you a pass as far as I’m concerned.

**John:** Well pretty much all working screenwriters and TV writers have to live either in Hancock Park where I live, or over in the La Cañada Flintridge area by you. That’s a rule.

**Craig:** I insist on it.

**John:** “Matt Nix talked about his career in features before he started working in television and shared his frustrations about not getting anything made despite working steadily for eight years. I was wondering whether you were ever tempted to go into the TV world. Obviously you can also work in television development and never get on the air, but at least sometimes you get to shoot a pilot and actually see your work materialize into something. And there is the possibility of working on staff on already existing shows. Is there any particular reason why you never worked in television? Is it something that you can see yourself trying at any point in your career?”

**Craig:** Well you did work in television.

**John:** That’s right. This is Luke from Poland. So, Luke from Poland, it is a well-written question about the American TV industry from somebody in Poland, which I love.

But I did work in TV. I have done three different TV shows. The first thing I did was called D.C., which was the same year that Go came out. And it was about five young people living and working in Washington, D.C. It was basically Felicity-after-college. And it was a disaster. It was a pretty good pilot I wrote, and okay pilot that we shot, and just a really bad series that I got fired from.

I did a TV pilot for ABC called Alaska, which you can also read on my blog. I have a library section; you can read the pilot for that, which turned out pretty well, which was a crime show set in Alaska back when no one was making things in Alaska. And I developed a show with Jordan Mechner called Ops which was about a private military corporation for Fox. And it was going to be way too expensive to shoot. And I just thank god every day that we didn’t try to shoot it.

So I think TV is great. And, so Craig, you have never developed anything for TV have you?

**Craig:** No.

**John:** So here is the thing about feature writers writing for TV is that it is so tempting and appealing because you actually shoot something. Like not every pilot gets shot, but a lot of pilots get shot. And if you are a decent feature writer who gets recruited to write a show for somebody, there is a decent chance you are going to shoot something. It’s going to be quick; like everything in feature land just takes forever.

At least in TV you kind of fail quickly. [laughs] You will write a script and you will turn it in, and they will call you like two hours later saying, “Nope, it’s not for us.” It’s like, “Oh, oh, oh, okay. There. Done.” And then you are done.

**Craig:** Good.

**John:** So I know feature writers who sort of consider it like a trip to the ATM, because you don’t get paid a lot of money for it, but you get paid quickly, and it is something, and it is meaningful.

The challenge, and I think the frustration, and the surprise that a lot of feature writers find is that if — God help you if they say yes and they like it, because then your life is just overwhelmingly consumed by making this TV show.

So, David Benioff, who was really a feature writer before this, now doing Game of Thrones, and good luck with doing anything other than Game of Thrones for awhile, David Benioff.

**Craig:** As was Dan Weiss, his partner on that show. Yeah. I have avoided television for two reasons. One, that reason, and two, what I have heard about TV is that there is this lie that they tell us all that the writer is king in television and the writer is in charge. That is sort of true. Certainly writers are creatively more dominant in television than directors.

However, what they don’t tell you, and what many of my feature friends who have dabbled in TV bemoan is that the amount of intrusion and mishegas you get from the studio network is mindboggling.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** Every single thing. They are over your shoulder, criticizing, second guessing, nay-saying, everything. You can’t cast a guy saying, “Here’s your coffee, sir,” without them demanding 14 auditions and then saying, “We like this one.” Who cares?! What?

And just the thought of that grind. And I guess on top of all of it, to be honest, it is such a different kind of storytelling, and the kind of storytelling I like to do is self-contained. I like tell stories where somebody goes from one place to another and finishes. And I don’t like telling serialized stories per se, even in sequels.

You know, I like them to have a beginning, a middle, and an absolute end. And that’s that. So, it is not for me for lots of reasons. I think I would just get too bored, frankly.

**John:** Oh, to me it’s not boring. It’s the overwhelming churn of it. When you are writing a feature you are writing something, and you hand it in, and you get a little bit of time while they are reading it. In TV land, you turn in a script, and literally an hour later they are calling you with notes. You never get that downtime that you have come to kind of crave a little bit in feature land.

Like in feature land, like three weeks pass and you haven’t heard anything, and you are going crazy. But there must be some happy medium in between there. The other big challenge of TV, of course, is let’s say you are a writer and a director in feature land. You are either writing your script, or you are shooting your script, or you are editing your movie, or figuring out the marketing stuff you are doing, one of these jobs at a time.

In TV land you are doing all of it simultaneously. So, you are in a room breaking the entire season, figuring out what the episodes are for the entire season. You are trying to write a script. You are reading another script that is about to shoot. You are shooting a script. You are dealing with the wardrobe for that thing that is coming up. You are editing an episode you have already shot, and you are dealing with the network on the marketing stuff.

And so any one of those jobs could be a full-time thing. I remember talking to Damon Lindelof at the height of Lost, and literally like after dinner would be the time that he actually would be able to go up and start writing. Because the whole day was spent running a TV show.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** The running and the management; it’s a huge deal. But, there are some amazing things about that. And you are able to create these worlds that are unlike anything you have ever seen. And I really like TV. I would be doing a TV show right now; honestly I would be pitching a TV show if the musical hadn’t sort of sucked up every bit of time.

**Craig:** I think at this point I am starting now, even though I am so much younger than you are…

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** …I’m still old enough where I am starting to realize that I’m pretty deep into this journey and I suspect that I will continue writing features until a day comes when I am just kind of done, and want to stop in general and find something else to do with my life, and it won’t be TV.

**John:** So, Craig, are you going to direct more movies? Or are you going to mostly be writing?

**Craig:** That is something I am thinking about. I think that between now and when my kids –my youngest kid is seven, my older son is ten. So, my daughter is going to be gone in ten years, presumably college.

**John:** She won’t be taken away by aliens. She will be somewhere; she just won’t be under your roof.

**Craig:** Well, I don’t know. She might be. [laughs] We don’t know.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** But I think it safe to say in ten years, in one way or another, she will be gone. And then I will have quite a bit of a different kind of day, and a different sort of obligation to my family. And at that point, and quite a bit more experience under my belt, and at that point I might consider directing. I don’t know. I’m not sure.

But right now I have to say I am very happy screenwriting. I’m happier screenwriting now than I have ever been since I started. And, so might as well ride that. But, yes, I think about it. I think that it something I will return to. Cue the gnashing and wailing of critics.

**John:** [laughs] Honestly, part of the reason why I have been careful and selective about directing projects, in addition to the musical sort of wrecking in my life, is the overwhelming time commitment it takes to actually be in production, and the fact that you are not going to see your kid for a couple of months while you are shooting a movie. And that’s a big deal.

And this last week while I was in New York, I was able to bring my daughter to visit the rehearsal for just an hour or two while we were doing stuff. And she wasn’t going to be able to see the whole show, because is it too overwhelming of a show for her to see emotionally, but I wanted her to see that it is really hard work. I didn’t want her to sort of get the experience of, “Oh, suddenly everything is lovely. It’s like Glee. And suddenly everything is happening and no one had to do a lot of work.”

She saw us like running a scene 15 times trying to figure out how to make a joke be funny. And she saw us dancing. And she saw how we are trying to correct this one little tiny moment in the choreography. And that was more meaningful to me, not for her to see the finished product, but this is what your father is doing that is taking him away for three weeks, trying to get that joke to be funny.

**Craig:** Yeah. Daddy’s got a real job. Yeah. That’s a great experience. Even though I will — I often will travel with the movies that I write, the distance apart is a different kind of distance when you are directing because I can… — For instance, for the next Hangover movie, I go with the movie. I go with Todd. I’m there every day.

So, I might be away for weeks at a time from my kids. But when the day is done and I go back to the hotel room, I get on Skype and I talk with them, and I’m relaxed. It’s different.

When you are the director you are never relaxed. And you don’t have free time. And every waking moment you are being devoured by the enormity of your responsibility. And, so it is a different kind of away. It’s a bad thing.

**John:** Yeah. This last month I was in New York. I cannot imagine, I could not have survived it if it weren’t for Skype, if I couldn’t video chat home, I wouldn’t have been able to make it through there. I would have just been a mess.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Let’s go to our next question. A reader writes, I think actually Kevin writes, “I recently decided to start a new screenplay, and when describing the plot to a friend of mine he responded, ‘Oh, it sounds a lot like [movie title redacted].’ I immediately looked up the plot synopsis of that other title and saw there were some obvious similarities. I rented the movie, and thankfully that film and my yet to be written screenplay were actually very different. But let’s say both plot were actually similar. Intellectually I know that everything is down to execution, but I probably wouldn’t have the confidence to continue. Have either of you given up on a spec idea because it was too similar to another screenplay or movie?”

**Craig:** Well, you know, in a case like that where the movie actually exists, in a weird way you are in a better spot. Because you watch it, and if you decide, “No, my screenplay, even if it is the same basic idea is such a wildly different execution,” you will not be… — No one is going to sit there and go, “Oh my god, you just rewrote blankety blank.”

No, they are going to read your script and go, “Oh, it’s a lot like that movie so-and-so, but here is how it is different, or here is how the tone is different.” I mean, the example I always famously turn to — well, it’s not famous that I turn to it. It is a famous example that I turn to is Rain Man and Midnight Run.

**John:** Oh sure.

**Craig:** Almost the same movie about sort of a straight-laced guy who has to road trip across the country with a weird sort of self-obsessive nerd who refuses to fly because he is frightened. And two completely different movies; it’s just not an issue.

Now, if somebody says, “Oh, that sounds like something I have in development over at so-and-so,” now you have got a problem.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And then the problem is movie studios really — it’s already a gamble to pay a $1 for a screenplay, much less $1 million. And so if they feel like they are going to get beaten to the punch by a similarly themed…they are more concerned about marketplace confusion and marketing than they are about anything else.

That said, every now and then you get two movies about a guy and a girl who are best friends who also sleep with each other.

**John:** Yeah. And it works out okay.

**Craig:** Yeah. It works out okay. There is Dante’s Peak and Volcano. There is A Bug’s Life and Antz.

**John:** And most famously there is Armageddon and Deep Impact. And so Kevin’s question was have I ever stopped doing something because there is something similar. Yes, I had this whole plan out for an asteroid hitting the earth movie. And basically you know the asteroid is coming and you have to make decisions about what is going to happen. And they announced Armageddon and Deep Impact. I was like, “Oh, okay.” Well, that’s a case where it is probably not a good idea for me to write that movie. And that’s okay.

**Craig:** Yeah. You might be able to beat one movie in development, but not two. [laughs]

**John:** And I always look at that as “now I don’t have to write that movie,” because someone else wrote that movie. That’s great. Freedom to do something else. It’s like a snow day. It’s like a creative snow day. “Yup, I don’t have to do that anymore. I can do something else instead.”

**Craig:** Plus, a little pat on the back that your instincts were correct.

**John:** Agreed. “And I have commercial instincts. Hoorah!”

**Craig:** Yeah. Great. Let me come up with another one.

**John:** Speaking of commercial instincts, let’s talk about the actual news of this last week, which is Amazon Studios changed basically everything. It was like, “Oh, we are making some changes.” No. “Basically we are completely changing our entire business model.”

**Craig:** Yeah. They were very clever about it. They were sort of like, “Oh, we are going to make a few changes.” And they did it that way because really what they did was they went from being an awful, awful place to a very good place. And to announce it that way would have been to admit that they used to be an awful, awful place. But now they are a good place.

And here’s what happened…

**John:** So we really should give some back story, because we can’t assume that everyone knows what Amazon Studios was.

**Craig:** Back story us.

**John:** Okay, so the back story is Amazon Studios is from Amazon… — What do you even call Amazon right now? They are an internet retailer, I guess?

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Fine. They also make Kindle’s and other things.

**Craig:** Yeah. They are an e-tailer.

**John:** Perhaps you have heard of Amazon. [laughs]

**Craig:** [laughs] Yeah. I don’t think we need that much back story, John.

**John:** But we do need back story on the studio’s part of it. So, Amazon launched this initiative called Amazon Studios which was an attempt to do an end run around the sort of classical studio development, and let anybody in America or the world submit their screenplays to the site, and other users, other readers could read the screenplays, give notes on the screenplays, could rewrite the screenplays if they chose to, and Amazon would sift through this and take the most highly rated, and reviewed, and best liked screenplays and developed them further. Give awards to those people.

They would shoot little test movies from those things. And when they announced this, this was November 2010, I had had some conversations with some of the folks about it ahead of time, but I really based my reaction on what they announced. And I thought it was a really horrible idea for a couple of reasons.

The simplest reason is why would you want to, creatively as a person, why would you want to submit yourself to this process where anyone on the internet, any person who reads your script anywhere could rewrite your script and do whatever they wanted to do with it? And that didn’t make any sense.

And then you blogged at the same time — remember back when Craig used to blog?

**Craig:** Remember that?

**John:** Craig blogged, and we will find a link to that old blog post…

**Craig:** Amazon remembers. [laughs]

**John:** …about just the really bad financial and legal concerns.

**Craig:** Yeah. You had sort of thrown this great right hook that basically said this whole thing is kind of creatively corrupt. The whole point of screenwriting is that there is an authorial voice that is relating some kind of vision on a page, and this thing is sort of blowing that all to shreds.

And then I came in with a left hook and said, oh, and also, this is a sweatshop, basically that was not only end running the union and everything that the union brings us like minimums, and pension, and healthcare, and credits, and residuals, but was even more punitive than that. I mean, they were essentially kind of getting everything and being able to use it and resell it. They literally could… — You could write something, submit it; 15 people could rewrite it and then they could put it in a book and sell it, and you wouldn’t even get a dime. I mean, the whole thing was insane.

**John:** And if I remember the right terms, I think it was like 18 months they owned stuff. Like basically once you submitted it, they had over 18 months.

**Craig:** Yeah. They had it for 18 months. And I think they had an option to get it again. And there were no… — It was really bad.

If you link to the post I wrote people will be able to sort of sift though how bad it was. And what you and I did not know at the time, but what I have now learned to be true is that the enormous, many multi-billion corporation known as Amazon read your post, and read my post, and freaked out. [laughs] They were super angry. And apparently called around and called the Writers Guild complaining.

And the Writers Guild, to its credit, and to Executive Director David Young’s credit, entered into a dialogue with them that was predicated essentially on, “No, we think that you should adhere to these basic union rules. That is what this is all about.”

And I am very excited to say, even though it is not breaking news. This was reported a few days ago, but Amazon quietly and calmly has become a WGA signatory. So, if you submit your scripts to them, first of all you now have a lovely option of saying, “Actually, I’m submitting my script to you and I don’t want anyone to be able to touch it.” In fact, you have an option that says, “I don’t even want anybody to be able to read it. I just want you to read it, Amazon.”

Amazon is now saying if we purchase this literary material, that is to say exercise the option, or if we hire you to do any writing, we do so under the full MBA. So you get credit protections, and you get residuals, and pension, and health. And all of that great stuff.

It’s a huge, huge thing. And I have to say, here is why I think it is… — Well, let me back up for a second. First of all, I have to congratulate the Writers Guild and David Young. Spectacular job. And I think it is important for us to say that there is a path to success with organizing that doesn’t involve striking. One of the things that I heard all the time during the strike from very prominent screenwriter was, “The Writers Guild has never gotten a single thing without a strike.” And that is just not true. And there is a way to do this, especially now, and it does involve influential voices, such as yours John…

**John:** And yours, Craig.

**Craig:** Well thank you. Pointing out some very embarrassing things. And I remember when I joined the board, it was actually a year into my term when Patric Verrone came into office with a bunch of his guys. They were big on this whole idea of corporate campaigning. And the notion of corporate campaigning is to embarrass companies for things that are sort of away from the field of play that you are on.

So, if you want to get them to give you reality television, you embarrass them for, I don’t know, investing in toxic chemical companies or something like that. That doesn’t really work. It’s all a bunch of bunko. What does work is your thing is bad. The thing that involves me is bad and here is why, because that is what you know and you can make an excellent case. And that is exactly what happened here. And I have to congratulate Amazon frankly for putting big boy pants on and acting gentlemanly, and recognizing that writers, professional writers, deserve to be treated with this basic minimum amount of respect.

So, that was terrific. And I think that Amazon has gone from something that I sort of viewed as this toxic repository that was abusing writers, to an excellent new option for professional screenwriters. I don’t know if Amazon and their model will ever be successful. What I do know is this: the companies for whom we work primarily, the big studios, can no longer point to Amazon and say, “Well look, we have to compete with those guys, so we have to somehow roll this contract back.” That is now off the table.

In that regard, this is a big step. It also means that if Google or Facebook or anybody else like that should try and get into this space, there is now precedent for the Writers Guild to say, “Great. Do this deal. Just like Amazon.”

**John:** So let’s talk about whether this is a good idea for the individual aspiring screenwriter. Because the original Amazon deal I thought was a bad deal for pretty much everybody, except for Amazon. If you were maybe that screenwriter who had the script that was sitting in the trunk that had never gotten any traction, maybe you submitted it to Amazon and just saw if it stuck.

Now, I don’t think it would be anyone’s first choice to go to, but if you have a script that maybe has won some contests, or got some notice in contests but hasn’t gotten you an agent, but is probably a pretty good script, it might make sense to try this process. The new terms — I think it is like a 45-day exclusivity of an option period. Amazon, if they like something, can extend it for additional time. They can pay you like $10,000 to extend it for additional time. It is not a bad deal…

A lot of times with the original deal, writers would leave comments on my original post and say, “Well, it’s a choice between this or nothing, so I am going to take this.” Well, it was worse than nothing there. Now this really is sort of an alternative to getting nothing out of your script. It is a chance to get someone to actually read it and pay attention to it, and maybe want to try to buy it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, first of all, let me address this “it was better than nothing” argument, because I got that on my blog, too, at the time. And it incenses me.

Here is why that is stupid: you are either going to be a professional screenwriter or you are not. If you are not, then it doesn’t matter because you are not going to be a professional screenwriter. It doesn’t matter if it is better than nothing; you are not going to win nothing either. You stink.

If, however, you are going to be a professional screenwriter, all you have done is weakened your own hand and weakened the hand of everybody else around you. You have begun the process of termiting through the lumber that supports the floor upon which we all sit. And down the line you will suffer. No question. Either you act like a professional who belongs in the professional game, or don’t. That is, to me, such bedrock principle. That is why I am grateful for all the people who came before me who didn’t just think about themselves at the time, but thought about writers to come. And that is why writers in their 20s should not be reluctant to make sacrifices for writers in their 30s, because they will be writers in their 30s, and so on and so forth.

It’s just a terrible argument. In the question of how writers should now view Amazon, I think they should view it as a very legitimate employer. Look, the choice of is it your first choice, I mean, I think that everybody sort of recognizes that studios that make and distribute films directly are probably still the premiere choice, because they make and distribute films. And that is a very powerful thing. If I sell a screenplay to Universal I know that they don’t have to go find a distributor; they are a distributor.

However, there are a ton of companies out there that are in the same boat as Amazon as far as I’m concerned. And if you have material that is not attracting the eyes of the gatekeepers, but you think has a chance of attracting the popular eye, well I have to say Amazon is a great choice now because one thing that I know about the gatekeepers is that they are particularly bad at determining their own value set for what good is. All they really do, in the majority, is chase what they think people want.

If people tell them what they want, chase over. And your material will get purchased. And it will eventually find its way to a studio. And at that point you are off and running.

So, I think Amazon has gone from a red flag to a perfectly legitimate, perfectly respectable avenue now for screenwriters to seek their first professional opportunity.

**John:** Yup. I have some ongoing concerns with how they are presenting this new version of themselves, which is their open writing assignments. So, an open writing assignment classically is a project that is at a studio where they are looking for a writer to come in. So, it could be a piece of property that they purchased, like they bought a book and now it is an open writing assignment. It could be a remake they are making. Or it could be a script that they have worked on and now they feel like they need to bring another writer in to do some new work.

One of the things they are pitching with this new version of Amazon Studios is, “And we have two open writing assignments. We have,” I think, “it’s Twelve Princesses and I Think My Facebook Friend is Dead and we are going to be looking for writers for those two things.” That feels a little weird to me. And it feels like every script should have new writers come in and do some work on it.

And it is entirely possible that they have worked with those original writers, and they feel like they have come to a point where they can’t go forward on the project now. But that’s, I don’t know; saying that publicly feels really weird.

**Craig:** Well, but is it…it’s the public part that is bothering, because that is all that studios do.

**John:** It is. But, I mean it’s an internal thing. It’s never announced in the world that another screenwriter is coming in to rewrite this thing.

**Craig:** You think it’s embarrassing to the writer? Is that what you’re saying?

**John:** It’s a little bit embarrassing to the writer, and even though it is the way reality often works, publicizing it like that, you should be trying to get one of these two slots to rewrite these big projects feels really weird. They are saying, like, “These are the best two things we have. And we are bringing in new writers to rewrite them.” That feels a little bit weird.

**Craig:** Well, it is weird, but it is the exact same weirdness that goes on at studios. I mean, they sort of say, “Look, this is a script that we believed in so much we spent $1 million to buy it, and then we spent $2 million more for really big shot writers to rewrite it. And now we are saying we love it so much we want a new writer to work on it.”

**John:** And you just hit on exactly why I was chaffing about it, because when you have that big show — “These are our best two things and we are bringing in someone new to work on it” — you bring in your heavy hitters. I’m the kind of person you bring in to do that work that you feel like you need to do to take it to its final level.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You are not saying, like, “Some writer in America could be the right person to do it, some writer who has never sold a screenplay before.” You are not going to the brand new person to rewrite that thing to put it into production. That is just not how stuff works.

**Craig:** That’s right. But here is what is interesting: Amazon is going to learn just the way everybody else that first starts in this business learns. There is a learning curve for them as well. And I think that they have a certain hope that there is more talent out there than has yet to be discovered by the traditional method.

But they are going to sort of American Idol, like find Kelly Clarkson, and it is going to be great. And it might. But, I suspect it won’t.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And I know that people don’t like it when I say these things, because they think I’m a snob, and they think that I am a talentless jerk anyway, so how dare I. But as talentless as I am [laughs], I think that Amazon at some point may come to say, “Look, we have a property here that Warner Brothers is actually interested in making. We have gotten as far as we can with the methods we have been employing. Maybe we should think about actually coming up with a different method, or, maybe not.” That’s their choice. But as far as I’m concerned from the business end of it, they are at least doing it honorably. They are now fulfilling the basic minimum requirements that an employer must fulfill.

**John:** And here is why I wish them every success, and this is honest, is they have a tremendous amount of money. And there are a lot of other technology companies that have a tremendous amount of money. And if Amazon has success making some movies, and making money off of some movies, I hope that will loosen the purse strings of some of these other giant companies — the Facebook’s, who just spent $1 billion to buy Instagram today, to make some movies.

**Craig:** Absolutely.

**John:** Because more money in the system really helps the whole film industry. And it especially helps screenwriters who are essentially the research and development of the film industry.

Right now, a lot of the tensions we are facing are really economic tensions. There is just not enough money in the system right now to pay for as much development as we would like there to be. And I think that would greatly benefit our film industry. And two years from now there could be some real payoff. Even if Amazon hasn’t made much out of this, the fact that they are trying to do this will get other people inspired to do it.

**Craig:** No question. No question whatsoever. It surprises me that it has taken tech companies this long to sort of fallow the lead of Pixar. Pixar was this tiny little company that was making hardware, and decided to make movies to advertise their hardware, and have become a true giant, and a true studio, as big and as powerful as any. And while we say that Disney “owns” them, you can make the argument that Pixar in a weird way owns Disney. They are merged. They are one in the same, but they are enormous.

And there is no reason that these other guys couldn’t arrive at that place. What Amazon, the philosophical decision Amazon has made is to not find a genius like Lasseter and Andrew Stanton, and Peter Docter, and Joe Ranft, and so on, but rather to open it up to the vox populi and see if there are some diamonds in the rough.

I am an elitist. I tend to feel like you have to find really, really brilliant to guide these things, but again, they may arrive there. You are absolutely right: it is a great thing. And certainly for us, to have another legitimate big deep-pocketed MBA signatory — we haven’t had one of those… — You have to understand. You know this. And I’m betting most of our listeners do, too. Fox, Columbia, Universal, Disney, Paramount, Warner Brothers. Those are the big ones, right? I’m not missing any?

**John:** You got them all.

**Craig:** Okay. Those have been the primary deep moneyed employers of screenwriters since the beginning of movies.

**John:** I actually ran a post on this that Horace Deidu had done this great chart that showed basically the top six studios have always been the top six studios.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And there have been some mergers along the way, but basically you can go back to the ’20s, and it is essentially the same companies.

**Craig:** That’s right. But today there is a seventh company that is signatory to the Writers Guild that has an enormous amount of money, frankly, more than some of the studios. And that is huge news for us if it turns the way I hope it does.

I hope that Amazon eventually realizes that there is more profit developing screenplays with, I guess I would say there is more profit targeting great screenwriters than there is sort of panning for gold in a kind of fun marketing type of way.

**John:** My very first instinct with Amazon when they talked about doing a new kind of deal, and making a studio, is that you have tremendous amount of money and you also have tremendous amount of reach with everyone who comes to Amazon every day. So, you know so much about the people who are buying your products. You can target things to them.

And Facebook could do it better than anybody else could. Can you imagine Facebook running a studio? It would be nuts.

**Craig:** Well, it would be. Part of the interesting thing about it is I think each of these places has their own DNA. And they want to impose their DNA on the development process. So, some of that means Amazon’s way of saying, “Everyone can be a screenwriter, and it’s open to all, and we are throwing the doors open,” and maybe Facebook wants to make it all about social connections and people reading and liking and so forth.

But the truth is none of that crap has anything to do with developing a good screenplay. Developing a good screenplay happens when a good writer with a good idea works with a good producer, the way a novelist works with an editor, all in concert to fill the vision of a studio that is focused on making good movies of a sort. That doesn’t change.

So, what I hope happens is that Facebook and Google and Amazon jump into this, at some point realize that the way that they run their normal businesses really doesn’t have anything to do with this, but what does have to do with this is all of their money. And that they can make a ton of money doing this.

And then once they have some kind of brand that means something in the movie space the way that Pixar means something, that becomes extraordinarily powerful for them. And, the more competition that we have, you know, so if six major employers become nine major employers, this is a very good thing for us.

**John:** Agreed. Yeah. Even the small consolidations that have happened over the last few years, like we lost New Line as a separate company. It hurt. And it is one less buyer for a spec script, but it is also one less set of development projects that are out there. If New Line was developing 30 projects, well, those are 30 writers who can be employed. And when that goes away, a lot goes away.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** The other reason to be hopeful, if Amazon is spending some money here, even if it is a company that doesn’t have the intention of really getting deeply into development, or trying to be their own brand, it may just take some of that digital money and push it back towards our system. And so the same way that Disney used to make movies by, they would have these investment packages where basically you could buy into a share of — I forget what it was called. I will have to look it up.

But for awhile they would basically build a slate of movies and you would invest into a slate of movies. That kind of stuff can happen and getting more money into the system helps.

**Craig:** Yeah, like a big Kickstarter for a $200 million movie.

**John:** $200 million Kickstarter is what we need.

**Craig:** Yeah. Or a Kiva Loan. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah. Absolutely. [laughs] Micro-lending. Macro-lending. Something.

**Craig:** So it was good news. Good news.

**John:** It’s all good news. And it is great to be back in Los Angeles and at my proper podcasting setup. I have been on my little 13-inch MacBook Air for the last four weeks. And honest to god it is a terrific computer, I love it to death, but I don’t feel at home until I am in front of my big monitor with my weird keyboard and my actual microphone. So it is nice to be back.

**Craig:** I know how that is. I, too, am a creature of habit.

**John:** Well, creature, thank you again for a lovely podcast.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**John:** Have a great week. And we will talk soon.

**Craig:** See you later.

**John:** Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

Scriptnotes, Ep. 28, How to cut pages — Transcript

March 16, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/how-to-cut-pages-2).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And you are listening to Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Things that are interesting to people who are interested in what screenwriters are talking about, I guess.

**Craig:** Things that are interesting to people who are interested in the things that interest screenwriters.

**John:** Yeah. It’s one of those nesting things; it can keep going on and on and on…

**Craig:** Right. My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** Hello, Craig Mazin.

Craig Mazin, I heard your name mentioned this week because you gave a presentation at the WGA for members that was very well received. What was that about?

**Craig:** That’s great to hear. I did. It is the second time I have done it now. It is basically a seminar on how to survive and thrive during development, and to a lesser extent, during production. And this is something that you simply will not find anywhere. There is no book that can tell you how to do this because all of the people who write books are writing them for people who aren’t in development.

But people who want to be in development, and also, of course, as I have pointed out many, many times, most people writing books have never been in development because they are not really screenwriters. So this was a very focused sort of seminar for people who have to deal with the misery of writing a script, getting notes from multiple sources, navigating those notes, and somehow surviving the process. And doing well during it.

And so it is a little bit of therapy. It is a little bit of psychology. It is a little bit of strategy. And, yeah, it is the second time I have done it and people seem to dig it.

**John:** What is challenging about development is that there are things that are actually part of your contract. You have a writing period. You should be able to turn things in at the end of your writing period. They need to pay you. You have your order to commence. There are some technical things that should be there.

But there are also standard business practices, and there is all the psychology of how to really figure out when to get them to pay you for another step. So I assume you got into that kind of stuff?

**Craig:** Not really. Actually, no.

**John:** Oh.

**Craig:** I sort of stayed away from the business arrangements. I mean, there was a little bit of a sidebar on how to handle the producer draft or the so-called “free rewrite.” Most of what I talked about really was how to behave. How to behave in such a way and how to manage your own behavior in such a way as to maximize your chance of protecting your intention from the beginning, the first day you are hired, to the premiere.

How can you survive this, not lose your mind, not get fired, and protect what matters to you in the movie. So, it was really all about that, and not so much about the gears.

Although, you know, what we are talking about is the Writers Guild does something called the Television Showrunners Training Program, which was actually a get that we received in negotiations from the companies where they basically pay for it. It is not much to them, but it was kind of a smart thing for them to do because basically writers end up running shows, and the better they know how to run a show, theoretically, the better it will be for the companies.

And it is such a specific skill set. It goes far beyond writing, of course. You become, really, management — writer management, I guess. And that has been a very successful program. And since 2004, when I was first on the board, I have been kind of clamoring for an equal thing for screenwriters, not because we would ever become management — we rarely do — but just because I feel like there is a lot that most screenwriters simply don’t know.

And those of us who have been doing this for 15 to 20 years have picked up quite a bit. So, finally, they are talking about it now. And this would be part of it. And then certainly there would be other topics, like if I could design a screenwriters training program today it would be first how to survive and thrive during development.

I guess actually even before that: pitching. How to pitch. Then how to survive and thrive during development. How to work with a director. How to behave, and survive, and thrive during production. And the fifth topic probably would be how to best manage your relationship with your representation.

But I am also open to ideas. If you think there are other big topics that would make sense in a training program, tell me.

**John:** Definitely. I was just meeting with my new WGA mentees. I got assigned a group of four new members who I am going to be meeting with regularly to help them get started in their careers. And they are all tremendously gifted writers, so they don’t need any help on that front.

But, they are asking questions that are really kind of fundamental to that first part of your career which is, “I am being sent out on a thousand meetings. I don’t know which ones to sort of take seriously. I don’t know how seriously to approach that idea that the producer sort of brings up in the room that I am kind of interested in, but I don’t know if it is a real project or not a real project. How do I apportion my time between writing the stuff that I want to write for myself and pursuing these projects that may never become a real project, for which there may be six other writers also pursuing this topic? How do you figure all of that out?”

And that is the kind of stuff I hope the screenwriting training program would cover.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, the trick with some of those topics is that they are so circumstance-dependent that it is hard to kind of codify a best practice, because it really depends. It depends on the kind of work you do. It depends on, frankly, how much money you require. Are you somebody that can kind of go for a year or two before selling something? Or do you have a family and a mortgage?

So there are a lot of different circumstances, but sometimes the best way to sort of codify that is to just give people the instruction set for how to even discuss that with their representation.

**John:** Absolutely. You are not going to provide them the answer, but you are going to give them the smart questions to be asking, so they can ask themselves the question about what is important to them. At what point are they going to be willing to jump out of competition for something that may or may not become real?

**Craig:** You know, John, I think you just might be instructing that segment of the screenwriting training program.

**John:** Perhaps I will.

**Craig:** Yes. Perhaps you will. And by perhaps we mean “you will.”

**John:** I will definitely be instructing.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** It’s tough. So today I wanted to talk some more crafty kind of things if we could?

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Last week, you and I both got offers to run major studios, which was really flattering, but I really want to go back to our screenwriting roots and talk about the words on the page and those drafts that you have to turn in that become part of development.

And today I want to talk about cutting pages, which so much of your work as a screenwriter is to try to generate pages — to write those three, or five, or seven, or ten pages in that day, and build up to a whole script. And then, eventually, you have to start cutting it down because your script is too long. And I guess we should talk about what is too long. What is a good benchmark?

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** For feature screenwriters, 120 pages is often thrown about as like the upper limit to how long a screenplay should be. That is an invented figure. That figure basically probably came from most movies are about two hours long. Most scripts kind of average out to about a minute of paper to a minute of screen time, so the script should be about 120 pages.

It is really arbitrary, and yet it has become kind of codified as that is the upper limit. To the point where if you turn in a script that was 122 pages, your first note will always be, “You need to cut a little bit here.”

**Craig:** Well, it goes even further than that. I know that Warner Brothers, and possibly Universal, puts that in your contract. They have the right to refuse delivery of a script that is over 120 pages. And I think part of it is that even though… — It’s a funny thing; this is how you can tell a writer from a non-writer: non-writers tend to under-deliver on pages.

Those were the kids in class who turned in book reports and the teacher said, “You need three more paragraphs.” Writers are the ones who write way too much. There’s never enough pages for them. And every screenwriter I know is constantly in a panic that they are on page 50 and they have 200 more pages to go. Because they have so much they want to say, and so much they want to do in the story, and studios have been burned before by these really long drafts that ultimately are unwieldy and unproduceable, and unbudgetable.

And you would think that they could just simply go, “Well, look, obviously these 40 pages need to go.” But, they don’t know how to do that. And frankly, if the writer did, they wouldn’t have turned in that draft.

So, 120 pages is pretty hard and fast. If you are doing an epic, a historical epic, or something like Lord of the Rings, where you know that the movie is really ambitious, you just have to all agree beforehand that the draft will be longer than the average draft.

**John:** Yeah. We should state the obvious that it is not a hard and fast rule that 120 pages equals a 2 hour movie. Go was 126 pages and it is well under 2 hours.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Big Fish was the same situation. So, it is a mistaken assumption. It is a bad benchmark, but it is still what people expect. And if a producer has two scripts to read, and they were printed out, back in the days when everything was printed out, if there are two scripts to read they will flip through the end. They will read the 111-page script before they read the 120-page script every time.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s right. And your point is well taken. Go is a perfect example because there is a certain caffeination, or it is speedified, you know, the movie is on speed. And, similarly, with kind of rat-a-tat comedies — spoofs are sort of notorious. I mean, I would get into these wars with Bob Weinstein where he would insist that the script had to be 105 pages.

And I would say, “Just so you know, our script is timed at nearly 30 seconds a page. You are just simply not going to have enough movie.” And we never did. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** We were also like pad… — Because it is so fast. And there is a great story recently from The Social Network, because Sorkin writes very — the dialogue is designed to be delivered at an insane pace. And he turned the script in and everybody was kind of freaking out. And he recorded that great opening sequence with Mark Zuckerberg being dumped by his girlfriend.

He recorded it the way, at the pace he thought it should be, and supposedly — this sounds true to me — Fincher basically timed everything per Sorkin. And on the day, he would sit there and his script supervisor had a stopwatch, and if they didn’t hit it, they did it again. [laughs] It had to be at that pace.

So, the one minute per page rule is something that, some standard needs to be there, but… — Like I said, if you know that it is supposed to go faster, just make sure everybody knows beforehand.

**John:** Yeah. The same also applies for TV. We should say that TV actually has much more stringent guidelines because shows are a half hour, or they are an hour long. And you can’t be long. You can’t run long. There is no arbitrariness there.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So you are going to have to hit your act breaks. You are going to have to hit your end times on those things. So, a lot of times you really do need to cut to match your amount of time that you have. When Melissa was working on Gilmore Girls, she said their scripts were hugely long. That is because, again, it is that rat-a-tat tempo, blasting through stuff.

**Craig:** Right. I would imagine 30 Rock scripts are probably quite long.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** I mean, they are going at this nuts-o pace. But I could also see like CSI scripts not being able to go long because there is a lot of silence, and looking around, and studying for clues.

**John:** Yeah. And then there is Family Guy, which often will have Peter staring at the camera for about 30 seconds.

**Craig:** Right. [laughs] Exactly.

**John:** So regardless, at some point you are going to be in situations where you are going to have to cut pages. So let’s talk about the situations that you might want to have to cut pages. And sometimes it is really simple. Sometimes you want to just cut a page or two.

Let’s just talk cosmetic cutting, where you aren’t really trying to change the story, you aren’t trying to change what is really happening, you are just trying to make your script look shorter.

**Craig:** Okay. So we are not talking about nibbling at content really?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** All right. Well, some simple things that I always do is I look for those gerunds that don’t need to be there. So, “He is looking through the file,” should be, “he looks through the file.” You are looking for those action descriptions that have one little word sticking off to save a line.

Sometimes you have action broken up and you think, “Yeah, I could probably pull it up and make that a paragraph.” I don’t like going more than three lines really, or four max, for an action paragraph. But if I have, like, three in a row that are just single lines, and they are not super important that they be like that, I pull them up.

Actually, I have to say: Movie Magic has a fantastic little add-on thing that scans your script and basically says, “If you could shorten this word by five letters, then your script would be pulled up by one-eighth of a page.” It is very cool. And so you can kind of go through and look for those targeted ones that actually start saving you page length.

**John:** Yeah. What you start to recognize is, because feature scripts are 120 pages, very small changes will ripple through and create huge differences because of how paragraphs are breaking up, because of dialogue that is breaking across pages. So, literally changing… — cutting one paragraph on page 20 might make your whole script a page shorter.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** And so looking for those is good. I would caution against some of the really obvious things that people attempt to do, like these screenwriters attempt to do. Don’t try to change the margins because they will know if you tried to change the margins.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Don’t try to change the font size. Don’t try to change the line spacing.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Final Draft will let you do the tight spacing…

**Craig:** Uh, don’t do it.

**John:** Don’t do it.

**Craig:** Look, the first thing I do when I get a script to rewrite is I put it through my format which is a very standard AD-approved format. And so I get a 119-page script, I put it through my format. I immediately call everybody and say, “Just so you know, this is 138 pages. So there is more going on here than we realize. Don’t be surprised when things start disappearing.”

Because, you know, they — “they” meaning producers and studio executives — are just as childish as we are when it comes to page count. Prior to the green light coming on, everybody is shoving as much in as possible, and page count is sort of a fantasy. The second the green light goes on, it is a panic. And pages become absolutely critical. Because the way…

For screenwriters that haven’t been through production, they have to understand. The way the schedule is laid out, it is in eighths of pages. And every day is two and three-eighths of a page, something like that. And every eighth of a page matters. And every additional day of shooting is six figures.

So, it really becomes very… — It is just an academic grind to start removing stuff and winnowing away to what is absolutely necessary to put on screen. And what is tough is, of course, once it goes into editorial even more of that will be cut. The director that knows exactly what is going to be on screen before he shoots it is the greatest director in the world. And he doesn’t exist. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah, that’s a good point you are making there. You could be cutting this at a script stage and actually do it gracefully, or you have to cut it in the editing room and it be probably much less graceful. So for the logic and sake of your story, if there are changes you can make on the script to make it more like what you think the final movie is going to be, it is worth it to try to do that.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So I have two cosmetic things before we get into the actual cutting the meat issues. The first is CUT TO’s, TRANSITIONS TO. At the end of every scene, some writers use those, like every scene ends with a CUT TO.

**Craig:** Really? Wow.

**John:** Yeah. And some writers still use those. And, you don’t have to.

**Craig:** That’s crazy. No. I mean, use them for impact.

**John:** But don’t use them every time.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So there you have saved a tremendous amount of money.

**Craig:** That’s huge.

**John:** I would also say look for orphans. And orphans are those little bits and fragments of lines that are taking up a whole line of your page but actually aren’t doing anything meaningful.

So, sometimes you can rewrite a sentence to get rid of that orphan and bump everything up a line.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Other times, the only time I will occasionally cheat a margin is in a dialogue block.

**Craig:** Totally.

**John:** And I will bump the right edge of a dialogue block just a few characters over to pull an orphan up.

**Craig:** Absolutely.

**John:** And no one will ever see that.

**Craig:** And, by the way, it is legal, and here’s why: That word doesn’t add time to the day. You see savvy, and this where… — You know, it’s funny, I’m going through it now on this script that is shooting at Universal. Sometimes people who aren’t savvy about what takes time on a given day will obsess over page length. ADs know. Directors know. But, others may not. And they may say, “Look, is there a way for you…we can cut the scene down if you got rid of this line of dialogue.”

That will not cut the day down at all. What takes time is setups. How many angles there are. If I am shooting two people talking in a restaurant at a table, frankly, I could double the page count and it really won’t add that much to the day.

**John:** Exactly. But if you were to add, the scene would be the same number of pages, but you added another person to that table, you have doubled the amount of shooting you have to do.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** You have to shoot all the angles to cover that.

**Craig:** And sometimes you will get suggestions where, and this is where production experience is so important, and why I urge screenwriters to go to sets and sit there and watch how they do it, as boring as it may be, because you are able to see, say, “Listen, your suggestion is to take these five lines of dialogue that are an exchange between these two people at the table and just cut them and replace them with just one waiter walking over and saying, ‘Are you guys okay?'”

That literally makes it longer. And sometimes they just don’t get it.

**John:** They don’t. Because they are not going through that and they don’t see what that is. But you are right, the AD will always see what that is.

**Craig:** Totally.

**John:** The other thing which is frustrating is when they are trying to cut stuff that is important. Like, it is kind of reader setup. As you are first introducing a character, you are first introducing one of your major heroes or one of your major villains, you may throw two or three lines at that character’s scene description lines to really setup who that person is.

That is not screen time. That is just to help the reader who is trapped with only seeing stuff on the page to understand what that person is going to be like in the movie. That is not shooting time. So…

**Craig:** Don’t obsess over that, right?

**John:** Yeah, don’t obsess over that. And if you have to cut something just for cosmetics…but that is the reason why you have it.

**Craig:** It’s free. It’s free page. And a nice rebuttal to that is to sort of say, “Not only does it not cost us time on the day. Not only do those three lines budget out to zero dollars, but in casting it is going to be enormously important.”

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** So, as long as you have some sort of practical reason for them other than, “Because my words are so precious,” then they will be cool. You can’t just say, “Well, because it is just cool. I really liked the way the words lined up there.” “Well, great. You are not writing a novel, buddy. We have to cut pages.”

**John:** So let’s say we actually have to cut some meat. You have that script that is 138 pages. You are going to have to cut some serious things. What are easy targets for cuts?

**Craig:** Well, I don’t know if there is any category that is specifically easy. I think that you have to look for… — First of all, if you really want to cut a script, you have got to ask yourself if there are any sequences that can come out. Start big, frankly.

It is a rare script that can meet a schedule when it is currently budgeted at over schedule or over dollars that can comply and conform to what they have through little tiny cuts across the whole thing. So, big question first: Is there a sequence we can just do without?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And sometimes a fresh pair of eyes is helpful with that. Because, remember, while you are a good writer, and you have written everything with intention and purpose, many of those scenes were written before the whole script was written. In fact, all of them except the last one. So, you should be able to recontextualize some things, too.

Now you have the whole thing in front of you. Maybe one of those sequences can go.

**John:** The smaller things I sometimes try to take a look at, especially if I am being sent something for a rewrite. I will always target any scene in which a character recaps something that the audience has seen.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** That’s wasted time. There is no reason for that to happen. And surprisingly it still happens a lot in TV, and I don’t know why. I guess, you are coming back from an act breaking, you need to sort of remind people what happened. But, yikes, it always feels very frustrating.

**Craig:** I agree.

**John:** If that conversation has to happen, come to the very end of that conversation and just let the audience know that that character now is up to speed.

**Craig:** Exactly. Exactly. There is a logic thing.

**John:** Yeah. But take out the dialogue that actually does it.

**Craig:** Correct. You could just open up with one character just staring at the person who has told them this story off-screen, and that character just goes, “Wow, really? Yup. Okay.” [laughs]

**John:** Or a meaningful follow-up question that actually pushes the scene forward.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, but a recap is dreadful. Yeah.

**John:** Try to get out of scenes… — Classic advice for screenwriting in general, but try to come into scenes later, try to get out of scenes earlier. And so don’t let characters walk through doors, either to enter a scene or to exit a scene. And sometimes just trimming those will create some space, but will also speed up the pace of things and not make things feel so long.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And I would also say to look at your setups. And this is a place where you and I may disagree a little bit, but you have said that you tend to write long first acts, and really have a lot of setup of character. I tend to have less of that. And just because in my experience a lot of times you will shoot that meaningful thing that sort of introduces the character, and then when you actually put the thing together, you go like, “I didn’t need to catch that last moment. I could catch them at this moment and follow along.”

**Craig:** You know, I think it is a little genre dependent. I tend to like shorter first acts in action movies, thrillers, even in dramas, I think. Comedies, I like a longer first act because I feel like that is the broccoli that you have to eat to enjoy all of the comedy of the second and third act.

And, I will also say that you will eventually, once you get into the editing room, decide where and how you need to kind of compress it down a little bit. And there is a magic that occurs in production where things jump out. And you realize the actor has packed an enormous amount of information in simply a look. And so things can start coming out that way.

But you don’t know that until you see the performance. So, frankly, where I like to compress things is the third act. I feel like every movie I have ever been to, with rare exception, by the time I get to an hour and 30 in my seat I’m kind of like, “Let’s finish this. Let’s wrap it up.”

So, long, drawn out climaxes are not a bad place to take a look.

**John:** I think the third act problem also comes because of the way that we write screenplays in general. We have all of this energy and drive as we are writing through the first act. And the second act we are dealing with all of the complications we have created. And by the third act we are just exhausted and we are sort of slogging through it.

So that is the process of writing the script the first time. And some of that lethargy, and some of that exhaustion sort of creeps in, just sort of stays with the script I should say, throughout its process. So, you are really tight when you are writing your first act, because you went through it a lot of times, and you have really figured out the best way to do it.

And that third act, you are like, “Well, all of this stuff has to happen. We will make it all happen.” And, writing your third act with the same vigor as the first act will often shorten it down a lot.

**Craig:** That is a great point. And there is a point under that point which again goes to — it sort of identifies who writers are. Non-writers when they get tired write less, and writers when they get tired write more. They just get long and they lose that kind of parallel construction and concision. And if you feel it happening, just take the day off. Take the day off and come back to it.

**John:** Yeah. It is also worth asking the question: Which threads do I really need to wrap up, and which threads are important? And are there ways I can wrap up multiple threads in one moment together? So rather than having to cut between all of the different characters and subplots I have set up, is there a way to bring those together in a way that is going to feel more rewarding?

Sometimes it is helpful to think about, if I had to watch this sequence with the sound turned off would I be able to understand kind of where everybody ends up at the end? And if it relies on a lot of dialogue to wrap things up, that is not probably your ideal situation.

**Craig:** That’s right. As much as I loved all of the Harry Potter books, the one criticism I have of J.K. Rowling is that she tended to talk her way through every climax.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And I understood to a point, because they were all mysteries. They were all basically elaborate Scooby Doo episodes, so the whodunit and why needed long talks. But you could see how great of a job Kloves did to not do that in the movies. He deserves a huge tip of the hat for visualizing those climaxes and letting the performances…

And frankly, we also forget when we are writing that there is this other voice. We know that we have what we have written. And we know that there are camera angles. And we know that there are actors for sure. But don’t forget score. Score sometimes is the best way to think about how to save pages. Because great score against an actor’s face is writing.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** And if you know what your intention is for that moment, it is amazing what you can get away with.

**John:** Yeah. It’s hard to reference the score in screenplays. I will do it sometimes. I have done things like, “As music swells we descend upon…” giving that sense of an operatic moment, or some sort of big transition. Getting a sense that this is a Lawrence of Arabia moment here can buy you that.

But the challenge is that readers, and producers, and everyone who is going to be taking a look at your script are used to going through it so fast that you have to really signal to them that, “Really we are doing this in a shot. So don’t skim it.”

**Craig:** I don’t think I have ever once referred to score on the page itself. But in my mind, if I know that that is what is going on, sometimes I will take a little bit of extra space for the action lines, break them up a little bit more, nice short sentences, and maybe underline the one that matters.

And then that sort of implies that this is one of those moments. It is just one of those ways of thinking intentionally as opposed to spelling it all out. But I honestly feel that nine times out of ten, when your script is really long it is because there is some sequence in there that just doesn’t need to be there, or could be combined with something else in a fun way.

**John:** Yeah. The other good test, which I talked about at lunch with my mentees yesterday, was you sort of take each little piece of your script out, and you hold it up to the light and say, “Is this my movie? Does this feel like my movie? Does this have to be in my movie?” And if there is a sequence that doesn’t sort of meet that criteria you have to really look at whether it belongs back in your movie, or whether something else is going to be better in its place.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And sometimes the best way to cut pages is to cut a lot of pages and write a better, shorter thing that can take its place.

**Craig:** Yeah. Every writer is familiar with the concept of killing your babies. So, we are sort of taught very early on, “Don’t get precious about those things that you love. You have to cut them.” But I actually found… Dennis Palumbo, who is a screenwriter-turned-therapist, had a more elegant explanation of why it was hard. And his explanation also allowed me to understand why — or rather made it easier for me to cut those things.

His point was it is not like… — Killing your baby sort of implies that you have written something beautiful and wonderful, but it just has to go because of some sort of circumstance. His point was: actually let’s think about why we call them our babies. Because the truth is a lot of times the things that we write that we don’t think of as our babies are fantastic.

And then there are these things that we do think of as our babies, and people are like, “I just don’t get it.” And his point was: it is your baby because the writing of that line was significant to you. That was a kind of a line that you admire, and you did it. Or, that was a kind of a thing that you have struggled with a lot and you feel like you finally grew as a writer by writing that line.

None of that is relevant to the audience’s experience.

**John:** I agree.

**Craig:** So, give yourself a huge pat on the back for whatever you accomplished with that line, but if it needs to be cut, cut it.

**John:** Yeah. You are talking about sort of sunk costs. So, either you want to hold onto it because it was so hard to write, or you want to hold onto it because you felt so great about having written it. And those are completely valid for why you feel that way, and no one else can know that, until they see the director’s commentary, or the writer’s commentary…

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** …and you can say, “That’s the best line in the whole thing.” And then you sound incredibly conceited.

**Craig:** And what’s more, once you realize that that is why you care so much about that line, cutting it doesn’t take away the victory. You still have the victory. You just realized that was important for me. So I will put that on an index card and paste it to the wall, and I feel really good about that. But nobody else is going to… — It is not a gift for anyone else, so let’s not impose it upon them.

**John:** Yeah. It does become easier to cut things once you have written a lot more. So in those early scripts it was just torture to cut like three lines because, “Oh, but I love these three lines.” But then you have written 20,000 lines and you are like, “Oh, fine.”

**Craig:** It’s the “There’s more where that comes from syndrome.” I mean, you and I in a distant podcast talked about how many individual drafts we produced. I assume at this point we will eventually hit 100 at least. And at that point you become a little less concerned.

It’s the difference between hitting your first home run and hitting your 530th. It is just not that big of a deal.

**John:** So, one last piece of advice I would offer is that as you approach as section with your script where you are going to be cutting a lot of things, go into it with a plan. Know what you are going to cut. Cut on paper first if that makes sense to you, if it is helpful for you. But definitely go in with a plan because otherwise you are going to go through your script and just start moving commas.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You have to really go in with, like, “This is the focus of what I am trying to do here.” So, if it is to write new sequences, delete the sequences that are going out and write the new things. If you are doing a major overhaul and a lot of stuff is moving around, open up a new file and just copy and paste in the stuff that stays. But don’t try to work in that original file.

And that can be freeing, too, because you are not surrounded by all of the stuff that was there.

**Craig:** Absolutely. You and I obviously approach very differently at the start. You write longhand initially. I compose on the computer. But we both finish the same way. Print it out. Do not make that first pass on your computer because there is something about physically looking at the page that makes it so much easier to cut.

And I also find it very helpful to just read it. Out loud. Read the script out loud. You will suddenly realize in the middle of a particular line that you are bored.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And that the scene is long and boring. And that there is a shorter way to get to this. Perform it for yourself. You can record it and play it back if you want. But reading it out loud, reading it with a friend — you don’t need a whole megillah of actors showing up at your house, or friends sitting around in chairs reading all the parts. Just read it with two of you. Just go through each scene. A huge help.

**John:** Well, Craig, this was a good conversation.

**Craig:** It was fantastic. I mean, you know what we should have done: we should have recorded this and then put it on the internet because it was such a useful —

**John:** Oh my god, that is so great. Because others could benefit from our conversation about our working practices.

**Craig:** Right. I don’t know why we don’t do that?

**John:** I don’t know why everyone doesn’t do that.

**Craig:** No. I know why everybody doesn’t do that. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** There are a lot of people that should not do that.

**John:** Craig, I meant to ask you. Are you listening to any other podcasts?

**Craig:** No.

**John:** No. You don’t watch any TV.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You don’t listen to podcasts.

**Craig:** No, but I’m a…

**John:** Basically, you do some writing. You kind of father your children. And you play Skyrim.

**Craig:** I totally father my children. And a lot of baseball practices and games.

**John:** Oh yeah, yeah.

**Craig:** And I am waiting for Skyrim DLC. So while I am waiting for Skyrim DLC, I am now 58% of the way through Arkham City — which is spectacular, by the way.

**John:** I heard that is great, too.

**Craig:** Oh my god, it’s so good. It’s so good.

**John:** So the DLC for Skyrim is like new missions? Or are they new things, new monsters? New what?

**Craig:** No. Bethesda has a pretty longstanding tradition with all of their titles to do quest line DLCs. Some of them are very short. But most of them are rather long. Their idea is, like, you buy it for — I don’t know — maybe ten bucks or something, or $15, and we will give you another 20 hours of game play.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** So, with Skyrim, I don’t think they are anywhere near there yet, but all of the initial press seems to indicate that they are going bigger. That they kind of want…

And they did that for Fallout, too. I mean, almost like getting new games.

**John:** Yeah. I had to stop. So, I was playing Skyrim, and then eventually I had a hard time with like the marriage quest. It was like, “Oh, I’m going to get married.” And so I went through all of that, and I sort of got through all the steps, and I had a hard time finding the guy in the city who I needed to get the amulet from.

And so I finally got… — It just ended up being a lot of hassle and a lot of work. And so then I finally got married and it was like, “Yeah, now I’m bored.”

**Craig:** Oh, I killed my wife.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Yeah. You know what, here’s the thing.

**John:** That sounds better.

**Craig:** [laughs] In Skyrim you can get married. And the way you get married is you put on this particular amulet and you walk around. And if you have done nice things for people, and you have achieved enough, they will say, “Hey, I see you are wearing the amulet. Are you interested in hooking up?”

**John:** The Amulet of Mara.

**Craig:** Correct. The Amulet of Mara. And then you say, “Yeah, let’s get married,” which seems like an atrocious way to actually approach marriage in Skyrim, although they are very progressive — men can marry men, women can marry women. I don’t think you can marry animals. Regardless, my wife who is super hot, she was this warrior, and she was really badass. That’s why I married her, you know? She was really tough.

And then the second I married her she just went into my house, stayed there, and made food. And she just kept saying, “Hi, oh hello, love.” And I’m like, “Eh, you are not…” — Bait and switch, you know?

And so I chopped her head off.

**John:** Yeah, that’s not good. Can you marry again after you have committed wife-icide?

**Craig:** I just don’t want to now. Once I see…I think it is uxoricide. Is it uxoricide? I believe U-X-O-R-icide.

**John:** Well, I have Google up, so I am going to type it in right now.

**Craig:** Yeah. Let’s see if I got that one right.

**John:** Latin, murder of one’s wife.

**Craig:** Beautiful. No reason for my wife to be concerned whatsoever that I know that word.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** But uxoricide, no. Once you commit uxoricide you really shouldn’t marry again. You have a problem.

**John:** Yeah, that’s true.

**Craig:** Your problem is that you solve your marital issues with beheadings. So…

**John:** [laughs] With violence, yeah.

**Craig:** I mean, also I just feel like the domestication… — I mean, did that happen with the guy you married? Did he just become, like, a weenie?

**John:** Yeah. He became kind of a weenie. And he was sort of a pity marriage anyway. It was the guy…

**Craig:** [laughs] Which one?

**John:** Angrenor Once-Honored.

**Craig:** Oh, that guy? Really? Alright. I mean, I know something about you, John.

**John:** He had sort of a wounded Daniel Craig quality that I found sort of endearing, but then he became kind of a sop. But I married him, and then like five minutes later I stopped playing the game completely.

**Craig:** Yeah. Well marriage just killed it for you. I married Aela the Huntress. I mean, she was so cool. And then she just stopped being a huntress. She became Aela the Boring.

**John:** So she wouldn’t go out on a quest with you?

**Craig:** Well, she would, but the point is I can get anybody to go on a quest with me. I wanted her to be cool. And I wanted it to be exciting. And I didn’t want her to lose her personality just because I married her, but she just sat there and she would say, “Oh, honey, I made you a home-cooked meal.” “What?! Your head is coming off!”

**John:** Now, could she carry more as a wife? Or does she still have the same sort of burden requirements?

**Craig:** No. Same crap. And then they open a store and they give you money. But if you have played the game long enough, you don’t need that $100. It is like, “Get out of here with this. I’m rich! Look at my house. What’s wrong with you?! Why did I marry you? I hate you!” [laughs]

**John:** You should be able to marry a dragon.

**Craig:** Well, I mean, that’s kind of cool. At least then, you know, the sex would be interesting. Eh, Angrenor, really? That guy?

**John:** Yeah. I’m not saying it was the best choice. But I just sort of made the decision, and I felt bad for him. And apparently, because I was looking up sort of who was marriageable, and apparently at a certain point in the game he dies. Like if you don’t marry him, he will just die.

**Craig:** Oh, well that’s a great reason to not marry him. You shouldn’t have married him then and just let him die. I don’t remember that guy specifically.

**John:** He is the guy who didn’t just take an arrow to the knee like all the other guards. He was actually deeply wounded in some battle.

**Craig:** Oh, I remember that guy. Yeah, enough with him. I can’t believe you married that guy. By the way, it’s interesting that you and I both portray a certain amount of racism because neither one of us married like a lizard person.

**John:** Or the cat people.

**Craig:** Or the cat people. Well the cat people basically are thieves. I don’t trust them. I don’t trust them. I’m racist against cat people. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Yeah, totally racist against cat people. Lizard people I am okay with.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** They are just basically drug addicts. [laughs]

**John:** So at this point we are falling into the “and things that screenwriters might be interested in.” But it’s good. And so you are not going to marry anyone in Arkham Asylum or Arkham City or whatever that is called.

**Craig:** You can’t. Batman doesn’t marry people. Batman is a tragic figure. Frankly, I don’t even know if Batman has a penis. I mean, Batman is so…

There is a little bit of a romance, like a hint of a romance between Batman and the daughter of Ra’s al Ghul. Which by the way, in the movie, it was Ra’s al Ghul. And apparently, I always feel like the videogame people are that many more clicks to the right on the nerdometer, so I think the right — they say it’s Ray-shal-ghoul.

**John:** Ra’s al Ghul.

**Craig:** Whatevs. Anyway, it is a great game. It is really cool. You should play it. Just do it.

**John:** I will never play it.

**Craig:** Oh, because you have to watch another episode of Glee?

**John:** [laughs] Exactly. But Glee is actually a thing I can watch with my family, for example.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You used to watch American Idol, though. Are you watching American Idol?

**Craig:** No. I finally… — Well, you know what? After Simon left, I gave it a shot. I just couldn’t get into what had happened to it. I mean, Randy was always the worst judge anyway.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** The worst. Jennifer Lopez is fine. Steven Tyler is bizarre. But really what I couldn’t get into was the fact that what had been so awesome about that show — that it was the first show to tell the truth ever in the history of television. That was gone. It was back to being fake praise and nonsense.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And that was a bummer.

**John:** But now that I am watching it with a six-year-old daughter I am happy to have no Simon on the screen. We don’t really even watch the judges part of it, but we do see the girls sing. And so you see like, “Oh my god, she really likes the Justin Bieber-looking guy.” Yeah. That happens early. It is hard-coded in the brain. It’s like the same way that you like puppies. A little kid with blond hair that looks like Justin Bieber. Just like him.

**Craig:** Justin Bieber really is the perfect… — I guess the idea is that girls at that age, anywhere from 6 to 12, what they are attracted to is boys that are girls.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And boys, I guess, aren’t really attracted to girls, or boys. They just want to shoot stuff. [laughs] That’s the way it goes in my family.

**John:** Yeah. But then once they start getting attracted to girls, they sort of leap up towards women. And not girls their own age.

**Craig:** Well, I don’t know, because my son I have to say, he is in fifth grade. And every night we have the same discussion about this girl he likes. Every. Single. Night. And she is in his grade. And it’s adorable. It is just every night he says, “I just don’t know if she even knows I exist.” [laughs] Every night. And I just comfort him every night.

**John:** Aw.

**Craig:** Yeah, it’s cute.

**John:** Parenting advice from Craig Mazin and John August.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Craig, thank you very much for another great podcast.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

**John:** Talk to you soon.

**Craig:** You got it. Bye.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (75)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (489)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (238)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.