• 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, Episode 529: The Journey, The Destination, and Movie Lego, Transcript

January 19, 2022 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found here.

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

Craig Mazin:
My name is Craig Mazin.

John August:
And this is Episode 529 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show, how do screenwriters balance the needs of the scene versus the needs of the story? The two are of course interlinked but in practice are often at odds. We’ll wrestle with how and when to prioritize one over the other.

John August:
Then it’s another round of the Three-Page Challenge where we look at scenes submitted by our listeners and offer our honest feedback. And in our bonus segment, for premium members, what do you do when you get bored with what you’re writing? Is that a sign to bail or buckle down?

Craig Mazin:
We’re going to give excellent advice and terrific feedback. And overall, provide tremendous value to our listeners.

John August:
Right. Provide tremendous value to both our free listeners and our premium members who we love a little bit more.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. I just feel like you we’re a value proposition.

John August:
100 %.

Craig Mazin:
I’ve been watching Succession. So, I have all these nerdy business phrases in my head. I think sometimes they’re just making stuff up.

John August:
Sometimes, they probably are. But someone said all those things.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. Someone said it somewhere.

John August:
Someone said that I don’t love you but I love you.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, I didn’t know what that meant. I got to be honest with you. Sometimes, they are legitimately over my head.

John August:
I love succession. And so, we’re going to talk just a little bit on about Succession. I love Succession. But I do feel like that which the intimacy in the tabletop and the next slide dialog will be like, “What the hell did you just say to me? Why would you say that? That was the worst thing you could possibly do.” And yet somehow, they continue on with their lives.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, it is really interesting that they haven’t all just left. I think normally, especially if you can just be bought out of a company, why would you stay?

John August:
Why would you stay?

Craig Mazin:
If you’re any of them?

John August:
So, were of course having a conversation on Friday before Sunday, the finale. So, for all we know, everything’s changed.

Craig Mazin:
Do you all love each other now?

John August:
Yeah, so my theory going into it, which I can spoil now, is that I think that Tom was wearing a wire through a lot of this season. And that will hopefully be revealed on Sunday’s episode, but it might not. I may have ruined it for other people.

Craig Mazin:
If that is revealed, then I assume the government will have to figure out what I love you but I don’t love you.

John August:
That’s what it is.

Craig Mazin:
I said it backwards. I don’t love you but I love you. Which one was it?

Megana Rao:
I don’t love you but I do love you.

John August:
Okay. Well, now that just clarified.

Craig Mazin:
What?

John August:
Yeah. Regardless of interest.

Craig Mazin:
I know the difference between I’m not in love, I love you but I’m not in love with you. Is that what they mean?

John August:
That’s how I feel about you, Craig. I’m not in love with you. But I do love you as a friend.

Craig Mazin:
Sure. I don’t know. It’s a little weak. I don’t like the way you said it.

John August:
So, we can have this banter because we are three feet away from each other. For the first time, you’re no longer in Calgary for a brief period of time.

Craig Mazin:
Yep. Little hiatus over here.

John August:
Yeah. So, we’re here back in our Hancock Park abode. Let’s talk through some news. This is news. Craig, can you tell me what an open writing assignment is?

Craig Mazin:
Of course. An open writing assignment is a job that the studios have. They need a writer to write something. It’s often a rewrite. But sometimes, it’s a first draft of some property that they already own.

John August:
Or it could be something like how would this be a movie if there was an article they bought, that becomes-

Craig Mazin:
That becomes an article. And so, they go to the agencies and they say, this is… and each agency has an agent that covers that studio. And they say to that agent, “We have an open writing assignment. This is the job. This is the producer. And we’re looking roughly for this thing.” And then, the chum is in the water and everybody starts going for it.

John August:
Absolutely. And so, in some cases, they may be going out to certain writers, and I say like, oh, we’re out to this writer, this agency, and we’re waiting to hear back this writer. Or, it could be like, this is the thing we’re looking for. Who do you got for us? And the agents reach out to clients and say like, “Is this a thing you’d be interested in pursuing?”

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. When they have an open writing assignment, it usually means they aren’t pursuing anyone in particular. They’re looking for people to come in and impress them.

John August:
When an assignment is out there, there are emails exchanged back and forth, or phone calls. And this last week, the WGA introduced this thing called the Project Page, which is a one sheeter that essentially collects all that information about a future project in one handy document. It’s shaking it in front of him. So, we’ll put a link to this in the show notes. But it’s just a simple PDF you download.

John August:
The idea behind it is that the Product Page is for the producer, executive, to give those critical details about where the IP rights have been secured, who else has written on the project, if there’s talent attached, who are the producers, and hopefully, at some point, get to a place where you can say, “Can you send me the Project Page?” And that’s the summary of where the project is at this moment in time. Will they fill this out? We’ll see.

Craig Mazin:
Because you might as well have a big box on here that says, “Are you lying?” The question are the underlying rights secured. They just lie about that all the time.

John August:
They will. And so, I had a conversation with some agents about this, this past week. And all of them want this to happen and also feel like it may be hard to get the producers and studios to agree to do it. And yet, I think it’s very useful for writers and maybe we could talk through what’s on the sheet because I don’t think you should be considering taking a job unless you could answer these questions. So, in some ways, I want to have this by the computer to actually check all these boxes, like do I know this information? Because so many times I’ve actually had to call my agents, email my agents to get clarification on like, “Wait, tell me who the producers are because I have a feeling I know who one of the producers are and I will never work with that person again in my life.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, it is a good checklist for stuff that would be nice to know as long as you understand that you might not… let me revise that, that you will be lied to at least to some extent. So, for instance, when it says, how long has the project been in development, they’re going to lie. The names of the previous writers, they’re going to lie. This is a rewrite, number of previous writers, that’ll be a lie. Can you briefly describe the project’s development history? This is a fresh project. We’re looking for an exciting new voice, lie. So, they’re just going to do all that because it’s Hollywood. But the part that I think is helpful is at least putting them on notice that you’re asking the question. Once an agent starts to ask, then the problem for the studio is, if they lie to that agent, and then another agent comes along, and they hear a different thing, then they have an agency problem. So, it’s a good conversation to have. This is maybe the most useful version of this is one that you put in front of your agent and say, it sure would be good if you could tell me the answer to these questions.

John August:
That’s what I really think we should be our first and lowest goal is basically say like, before you come to me with this project, I want to be able to know these answers because I want to know the IP rights are not all secured. Great, but what’s happening here, like is it really based on thing? You and I have a common friend. I don’t think she’s ever shared this story publicly. But she wrote something that she thought was an original that ended up being based on something and wasn’t, so she got to arbitration that she found out like, “Oh, this was actually based on a book.”

Craig Mazin:
Which they will do.

John August:
They will do that. And so, this will not preclude that. But at least you have some conversation. At some point, they said it was not based on something else.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. Once you get hired, they do have to list all the assigned material to you. So, at that point, you should know, it should be in your contract. But certainly, if they don’t have the underlying IP locked up, then not only is there risk for you, but also they’re using you to get the IP.

John August:
Let’s also talk about why this is important for any writer considering one of these projects. Because if you are going to go after this thing, that could be not just hours, but days or weeks of your time putting together a pitch, figuring out like is this worth your time to pursue. In many cases, you won’t know if you didn’t have the answers to these questions.

Craig Mazin:
Correct. Also, any open writing assignment is usually fraught with a lot of risk. The reason it’s an open writing assignment is the same reason that there’s stuff in the sale bin. It means that it’s not particularly high on the studio’s priority list. It may be something that a producer is pushing really hard that the studio isn’t particularly interested in, but, sure, make 100 people jump through hoops to bide some time before we convince you. We’re not going to ever do this.

Craig Mazin:
There’s all problems with open writing assignments. They are somewhat dangerous. They’re like junk bonds. Junk bonds can make you a ton of money as many criminals have proven. But there’s a lot of risk.

John August:
Transformers was an open writing assignment at one point. And they came to me with it, like I don’t get transformers, not for me. But it was for somebody and became a huge property. But there have been so many things that across the transom. It’s like, I don’t know.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, the worst version of this, and this is fairly common is they’ll come to you. And they’ll say, “Yes, this is an opening writing assignment. It’s from, let’s pick a studio, Universal, and the producer is, “Let’s just call her Vanessa. And Vanessa has this property that she’s talking to the estate about. And we’re putting a pitch together. The studio is super into this and is a priority for them. And what she’s really doing is laundering things, right? The people who own the rights to the thing, which may be useless, or like, “We’re not going to give you the rights unless we see what the movie would be.”

Craig Mazin:
So, they’re going to you, and they’re saying, “Yeah, we can’t give you the job unless you show us what the movie is.” And then, they’re just looking across, share that stuff. And somehow they get money. But it’s all they’re just lying crosswise to everybody.

John August:
But I’m pretty sure his job though is just like dream about a movie that could possibly exist and convince folks that you’re building stuff out of smoke, and that’s their job, too.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. I don’t want to imply that that is completely morally treacherous. It has resulted in good things. But a lot of times, open writing assignments are a bit, they’re vaporware. And you just have to be aware of that that they can go away.

John August:
I think if I’d had this checklist earlier in my career, there are things that are just like, oh, hell, no, I’m not walking down that road, because I wouldn’t have pursued it. So, if it avoids somehow for some people, it’s a good thing to have them.

Craig Mazin:
When you’re young and you don’t have children, what else do you do? Seems like a pretty good use of your time. Practice your skills.

John August:
And I think you should practice your skills to the degree that you’re not actually stopping writing original stuff for yourself. And that’s, I think that’s the trap that people fall into this. They’re only pursuing open writing assignments and they’re not actually doing new stuff because they have nothing to show for a year of their writing time.

Craig Mazin:
There’s only one writer that’s ever going to get any internal credit from the studio. And that’s the writer that gets this thing, the green light. Everybody else is just somebody that they had to fire along the way. So, odds are that this won’t work out great. So, there’s glum. It’s almost Christmas time. I should probably pep up a little bit. We are out of spooky season, correct?

John August:
Yeah we’re in the holiday spirit. Megana who’s here with us, talk to us about how you’re feeling post-spooky season, like we’re still in cozy season. So, is it still a good time of year for you?

Megana Rao:
It’s still a good time of year. It’s a little too dark for my taste.

John August:
Yeah. My one cool thing is about this darkness. When I asked Siri what time the sunset was and she said 4:45, that’s not okay. A sunset-

Craig Mazin:
Do you guys have a little problem with the sunset down here in Los Angeles?

John August:
Oh, yeah, we do.

Craig Mazin:
Because I wake up in the darkness. And then, I go to lunch in the darkness. And then, I go to bed in the darkness In Calgary.

John August:
Yeah, you picked that place.

Craig Mazin:
It was selected for us for a number of reasons. I love Calgary. But my goodness, the first thing that happened when we got there in May was we realized that at 5:00 a.m., the laser blast of the sun was going to hit your eyeballs through anything. It penetrates through wood, concrete. And, man, now it’s dark. Oh, wow. Is it dark?

John August:
Yeah. People moved to Los Angeles. And I think they don’t… because it’s warmer. They seem like it won’t get dark in some way. But it feels like it gets extra dark here.

Megana Rao:
Yeah, because it’s extra bright during the day.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. No, it does not get extra bright no. It’s actually fairly moderate when it comes to that thing.

John August:
The main thing I want to talk through today is this idea of scenes versus the whole movie, scenes versus the story and the journey versus the destination. And I think one of the things that’s so fundamental that’s easy to overlook. And we’ve talked about this in various ways over the course of the 10 years of the show. But writers are both creating stories and scenes. And if the scenes are like the individual pieces of Lego, the story is what you build with all those Legos assembled.

John August:
But we experience books and movies linearly. So, they are assembled in front of us or watching them be assembled. And the pieces themselves are constructed. They’re little movies themselves are built of these smaller moments, bits of dialogue, visuals, conflict. And so, the tension is that we’re trying to create the most interesting little Lego blocks that are full and joyful to look at and are fantastic. But that will ultimately fit together to build that, the unit we’re trying to build. And sometimes, those are not compatible goals is that we are trying to… both have every moment be spectacular and brilliant and insightful and rewarding and have the whole experience fit together and be what we’re set out to make. And those are real tensions. And you experience it in the movies where you’re experiencing I’m sure the same writing a show right now.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. No, that’s always a challenge. And it’s why I do like to outline early on because it’s the one time where you can engage in very simple scene work like just describing what a scene will be, where is it, and what’s the point, and then look at all of it together. Because what happens when you do all this work is you begin to realize that scenes are always in the context of what came before and what’s coming after. And those things change what that scene feels like to you all the time. You’re guessing how that will work. But it doesn’t always work the way you think. And there are certain things that you… especially once you get into editing, you realize that seems so important. And now, it’s like, yeah, just get rid of it.

John August:
Yeah. I think it’s both a craft of making sure the individual later blocks those scenes, those moments as bits are the best possible versions. But also, do we even need that Lego block? Or, no, it’ll all fit together better. And these hold them stronger without that, that extraneous piece is actually breaking the flow of what you had originally intended.

Craig Mazin:
It’s so hard because you wonder, Am I giving something away that I should hold on to? Is this one of those stories, where if only I’d kept that thing there? And then, you also think, Oh, wait. Am I being precious about this? And does it not matter? You’re making these value judgments all the time. It’s very frustrating. But it does drive home the need for transitions. I do think that as you’re crafting your Lego piece, if you know how it fits with the one before it and the one after it, better chance that it sticks around.

John August:
So, let’s talk about planning versus pantsing. Whether you are carefully outlining and figuring out what the whole story is. So then, as you zoom in on this scene, this scene is to accomplish this thing. This is where I need to get into and this is what needs to achieve at the end. And I’ve done that on movies. There’s also been other movies where I have pants it as it’s grown organically out of like, this is what the scene feels like. This is where the energy of the scene is taking us to the next thing. And sometimes, that works, and you don’t know if it’s going to work. So, it’s probably a riskier way to start. It’s that organic, just like what wants to happen next. But some really good movies have come out of that process.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, certainly. I try and do a bit of a hybrid thing, which I think a lot of people do. I’d like to know, just I like to know what the scene is before I write it. I think some people just start typing and then see where it goes from there, which is a bit like auto writing like using Ouija board. For me, I like to know what I’m supposed to be writing. I like to know what the beginning, middle, and end is of the whole story, of the scene.

Craig Mazin:
But then, once I’m in it, a little bit of auto writing is good for you. You get surprised by things. It’s fun to be surprised. And certainly, I have had moments where something just happens. And it’s the best part of the scene because it even got me. If it can get me, right, then it’s definitely going to get other people I think.

John August:
That’s when writing is working well. We have good writing and somehow, magically, it feels like both these individual pieces and the whole thing, we’re always in unison. They were always going to support each other. But when we experience bad writing, sometimes it really is that tension where like the writing is bad because it was trying to fit this outline, like this outline probably looks really good and you can still smell the whiteboard markers. They were like locked into this thing. And characters are doing stuff that may not feel organic, that the story is moving in ways that don’t feel like the scenes themselves are rewarding. The scenes aren’t funny. They don’t have texture. They don’t have specificity. They’re not unique moments. They’re just functional. They’re just the basic Lego bricks that are going to hold the thing together But they’re not interesting. And we’ve also seen bad writing, which is like, yeah, moment by moment, these things are interesting but it doesn’t go anywhere. And we all have these frustrations of things that just feel like they’re constantly in a loop because these characters are saying brilliant things and yet we’re not actually achieving our goals.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, there is definitely value in occasional wastes of time, all of its precious real estate. But I’m thinking there’s a rambling bit in Shrek, where Shrek goes on about an onion, or the two of them are talking about the onion. It’s just a shaggy dog thing. Everybody remembers it. And it’s an utter waste of time, particularly in an animated film as CG animated film.

John August:
Is watching money burn, yeah.

Craig Mazin:
That conversation cost many millions of dollars. And maybe people would have been like you don’t… you can get away with saying one quick thing there. Or showing it. Show, don’t tell every dumb rule there is. But there is a value in occasionally wasting time because it is a human thing. A little bit like singers who have beautiful pitch. If they wobble a little bit on a note, keep it because that’s how everybody knows it was an auto tune.

John August:
That says a lot.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. So, I think that it’s good to do that. The trouble is when that’s all people have. And then, you just get one of four… I mean, Megana reads how many of these… They’re still doing for Tarantino up there, right? They’re still just blah blah blah blah blah blah. Yeah, those aren’t so much scenes as indulgences, which if you are a particular writer and filmmaker can be delicious. But for the rest of us, not particularly.

John August:
Well, there’s the struggle of the screenwriter who’s working on their script. And, okay, I’ve got the idea for the movie. This is how all the scenes are going to fit together. I’m writing a scene. I’m working on this. But then, there’s the whole second level of like, Okay, now, you’ve turned this in, and now you have developed, you have notes. And you have people who are trying to optimize this. And one of the ways they’ll try to optimize this is like, can’t we just do this shorter? Can we get out of the scene faster? And sometimes that instinct is correct. You and I both experienced, they’ve just squeezed all the life and joy and then that just becomes a plot machine. You’ve lost the things in those scenes to actually make those scenes worthwhile. You’ve tried to cut a scene so short, the scene barely starts, and you should just get rid of the scene. And that’s the frustration is recognizing you could have this master plan, you can have these beautiful scenes. And then, stuff will happen. And you have to find a way to make it work without those things. It’s like you’re building a bridge, and they said, “Oh, no, you have 30% less steel than you expected.” Work with it.

Craig Mazin:
Well, that’s pretty much always because I don’t think anyone’s ever gotten the budget they needed. So, even money-wise, this ends up happening, and that’ll impact you as well as the notes. There’s also this thing where you have to be accountable to your own notes because we just talked about sometimes surprises. So, you’ve planned something out, and then you surprise yourself. And then, you go, “Whoa, hold on a second. This now has ramifications for many things. I have to be accountable to those. I can’t just get stuck here.” And then, all of those subsequent scenes need to be considered in the Gestalt. That’s right, I said Gestalt.

John August:
And we’re that kind of podcast. [crosstalk]

Craig Mazin:
We say those things. Everything. I feel like we talk about almost one topic in so many different ways. And that is about balancing competing interests. And in storytelling, you just have to balance the whole with the parts, because the individual parts of the ones that people love, in the moment, but they will only remember the whole after.

John August:
Yeah, they will remember some certain little moments of that little highlights during that thing, but then they’ll have an experience like, did I like the entire thing? Or did I not like the entire thing? And then, that’s the frustration. And I think our shared frustrations also that in teaching screenwriting, there’s such an emphasis on structure, which is the whole, which is basically this roadmap of like how it’s all going to fit together, and not nearly enough emphasis on the actual writing moment to moment. How do we keep all these balls in the air? How do we keep this moment feeling alive and excited? How to make the most fascinating Lego pieces? It’s just about like, here’s how you click the Lego pieces together to build this dinosaur.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, it’s like we make a mosaic. So, we have to have an image that we’re shooting for with all of our little tiles. But each tile has to be really cool. That’s annoying. The Romans just had the blue in the way. And it was fun. And they made a whale. And it was great. But not us. So, to me, the great majority of the work we do is actually inside of the scenes. But the most inspired work we probably do is about the whole, is understanding what is the story that people would care about, why, what tone is it, and roughly, what is the shape of it?

John August:
And that shape is really the journey. So, the other metaphor be the destination versus the journey, like you started here, you got there. But really, the experience of the movie is how you got from point A to point B and what route you took. If it’s a road trip, it’s like the fastest way to drive from LA to New York is not going to be the most interesting way to drive from LA to New York, is not going to be the most rewarding way to drive. But you’re going to have to make decisions about what the choices and compromises you’re going to make, like you can’t see all of America. You’ll have short amount of time. You’ll have a certain amount of gas or electric charge. You’re going to have to make some optimizations. And that’s the choices you’re making as a screenwriter.

Craig Mazin:
And as you go, you have to look and see how it’s going. And sometimes your beautiful route has just too man rivers in a row. And then, you have to change it. You have to be very relaxed in a weird way when you’re doing it, although I find myself very tense. Well, to me, it’s like a tense relaxed. I guess there’s the balance. Again, you just need to be able to pivot all the time in response to what’s happening.

John August:
Yeah, I’m working on two projects now. One of which is the scene work. And one of which is the big macros, or what is the shape of this whole thing want to be? And it’s exciting to have those two opportunities. But even in trying to figure out the whole shape of it, I need to zoom in on certain moments. I feel like, is this even going to be rewarding in those individual moments? I’m imagining myself a few months down the road, am I going to enjoy writing those scenes or not? And that’s a thing you’re always asking yourself.

Craig Mazin:
And eventually become accountable to the world. So much thought and energy is required. And then, people can just go, “Sucks.”

John August:
So, on the show, we often do a Three-Page Challenge, which is where we look at the first three pages of scenes that people have sent in. We’ve given our honest feedback. And I think that some of that’s in response to the pressure of ordinary screenwriting books and such talking about the structure as a whole thing. So, we zoom in on this really tight… We’ll focus on just three pages, like what’s happening on those pages. But maybe we should look for a way to actually talk about the shape of stories overall. I don’t know if we want to read treatments or longer things. But I felt like-

Craig Mazin:
I can answer that question.

John August:
You don’t want to read them at all.

Craig Mazin:
No.

John August:
No.

Craig Mazin:
No.

John August:
Or we could look at, I guess, when we do our deep dives on existing movies, we have a sense of the shape of the whole thing.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And ultimately, there is not much interest for me, at least in talking about story in the abstract. Whereas doing scene work is lovely. It’s very detailed. When you’re in production, it’s the work of the day. You’re doing scene work and you can talk about all little things. For overall stories, the truth of the matter is if somebody told me the overall story for karate kid, I probably would shrug and go, “That just feels like so rocky” but like little rocky with karate, I guess. And then, you see the movie and you experience all those scenes, and they’re wonderful. And they collect up too much more than what it sounds like. So, I think we are probably doing this right. I think, in fact, it is one of the problems with… Well, there are a number of problems with screenwriting schools, not the least of which is just listen to this podcast. Honestly.

John August:
I do get frustrated when people ask like, “Oh, can you give us some advice on scriptwriting?” I’m like, “Yes, I have a weekly podcast you can listen to. There’s 500 episodes.”

Craig Mazin:
Dude. When people are like, “I just want to take you out to lunch and pick your brain, you don’t have to.

John August:
No. I’ve done it.

Craig Mazin:
It’s picked.

John August:
It’s been scraped clean. There’s nothing left on the inside on the scale.

Craig Mazin:
We are literally. Why would anyone ask us for screenwriting advice at this point?

John August:
No, they shouldn’t.

Craig Mazin:
No.

John August:
No, but they do. They write down the questions. Sometimes, we answer them.

Craig Mazin:
They do.

John August:
So, let’s get started on our Three-Page Challenge. We’ll start with Firebird. Now, if you want to read along with us, these PDFs are linked in the show notes. You can stop now and look at the PDF and get your sense of it before we discuss what we’re reading on the page. But Megana will give us a summary of what it is we’re about to read.

Megana Rao:
Great. So, Firebird by Benjamin Blattberg. The voice of father narrates an animated Russian folktale about a woodcutter who strays from the safe path when he uses his axe to free a trapped crow. As soon as the woodcutter realizes he stepped off the path, the crow opens its mouth, unleashing explosions. We then cut to Stalingrad in November 1942 where 12-year-old Mila steers out of her apartment at burning buildings and bombings. Her Aunt Anya urges Mila to pack and collect her parents’ jewelry, money, and food to help her escape from Stalingrad. Mila refuses saying her Papa told her not to. Anya slaps her across the face and keeps packing. Mila brings a book a fairy tales with an inscription from her father.

John August:
All right. So, that’s where we’re at the end of these first three pages. There’s things I want to talk about in this but I was intrigued. I basically got the setup. I got the situation. I was intrigued to read the next thing. It did feel JoJo Rabbit to me just because that was the most recent movie that I saw that had a similar situation happening. But there’s a lot of stuff here that I thought can work. The animated opening can work, the tie in with a fairytale book. It felt tragic and whimsical at times. These are good combinations. What was your first instinct on this?

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, that was really well done. And in the sense of scene work, regardless of how it might unfold, I thought that there was so much here worth recommending to people who are wondering roughly how should these things feel and flow. It looks great on the page. Lovely, broken up. I was-

John August:
It’s Courier Prime, so it’s already off to a good start.

Craig Mazin:
He’s just a suck up is what he is. But where got me was, I’m following along. I love Russian folklore. So, I’m looking along here and I got a little confused when the woodcutter chops at roots and branches laughing as he frees the crow. The crow flies to his shoulder and they laugh together. I thought, well, that’s very odd.

John August:
I didn’t know whether I was confused or whether it hadn’t been clear on the page. What was your instinct?

Craig Mazin:
I think it was just tonally bizarre, but that’s okay. Because then, something is coming closer. The crow opens its mouth. But what comes out is the sound of next line, all caps, explosions. Next line, lowercase, far off, coming closer. That’s actually quite horrifying. And then, we are immediately into reality and we realize we’re with a child. She is in the middle of World War II. Her city is being bombed. Her aunt, there’s a slightly clumsy introduction to the fact that she’s the aunt, where she refers specifically to her brother, Mila’s father, she just, my brother was too soft on you. That was-

John August:
Well, also, Mila says, “I’m not leaving Aunt Anya.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, we generally don’t do stuff like that. But we’ll figure it out. Eventually, there’ll be a reason to… you don’t need to shove it in right there. I don’t think you can let that develop later. And the conversation between Anya and Mila is pretty good because it’s real. This feels normal.

John August:
It feels heightened and rushed in the way that there’s an urgency to it, which is great. And they’re cutting off lines, things trail off when they need to trail off. They dash dash, cut off, when people are cutting each other off. We can improve a little bit here on the bottom half of page two. We run into a situation where between every line of dialogue, there’s a line of scene description. It’s a little staccatoAnd so, you could get some better flow by figuring out when to break that up and when not to break it up, which of those things that go to parenthetical, but that’s a small criticism.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. For instance, where did your father hide money? Mila looks at her blankly, effing hell, where that could just be in parentheses, no response. So, we can absolutely do a little bit of squishing down here. But I could see the space. I could hear it. There was a point of view. I understood that I was with Mila. Certainly, the general concept that her father had left to this book and the book was important that the father had imparted her with a love of fairytales and the fairy tales in theory would help her survive some of this. All that felt there and good. And so, yeah, I think Benjamin Blattberg can do this.

John August:
Yeah, I agree. You talk about, so that we’re from Mila’s point of view. And I think that’s crucial. And one of the ways in which we’re seeing it right in Mila’s point of view is when we get to this apartment from the next room, we hear drawers being opened and slammed. Mila just fetches with the buttons and follows code so long and heard that it’s him sweeps the floor. That tells us because we’re starting from her point of view. We’re literally only with her and we’re sitting out here and off camera sounds. We know that she’s the one to follow. If we’d seen the aunt first, it would have been the aunt’s story.

Craig Mazin:
Completely, and great use of sound. We talked about transitions. This is full of them. And we’re using all the palette that we are provided, directing on the page, thank God. And also, just like the… things happen with that too much of a Mila being made of them like Anya slaps Mila, that’s a sentence. That’s a perfectly good sentence. Subject, verb, object, done. Great.

John August:
Cool. So, let’s go on to our next Three-Page Challenge. This is The Drawing by Todd William Knack.

Megana Rao:
Ten-year-old Luke draws a mysterious woman on a piece of paper in his bedroom. It’s Gabrielle Lawson, 38, with a power ponytail, calls to him yelling that it’s time to go. Gabrielle speaks with Officer Raymond Carter in the front doorway. The officer shows her the stakes he’s put in the yard and explains the boundaries of the perimeter. Gabrielle asks Luke where his backpack is, but he doesn’t answer. We learned that Luke doesn’t speak. Twenty-four-year-old Scarlet enters carrying Luke’s backpack. She drops it by her feet where we see her ankle monitor and realize that the new perimeter is for her house arrest.

John August:
Craig, start us off here. This is again, we have a story of a young kid. You have a parent authority figure. We have some mystery about what’s going on. How did this work for you?

Craig Mazin:
I spent most of these pages utterly confused.

John August:
Yeah. I was confused too.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, about what was going on. First of all, there’s the view of an oncoming train and then we reveal it’s actually just a toy train, but that’s a reality shift. And it’s so short. I’m not sure what we’re getting from it exactly other than it’s somewhat clever, but there’s not enough of it to make it feel like it’s a thing.

Craig Mazin:
Formatting notes, a ton of capitalized words here in this one paragraph where we see the things in the room. Weirdly, there’s Edward Gorey posters. Edward Gorey is not capitalized, but posters is. Most of the stuff, you don’t need to capitalize like art supplies.

John August:
It’s uppercasing and that doesn’t need to happen.

Craig Mazin:
Right. And then, we meet this kid and he’s scribbling a picture of a shadowy figure and then we hear a woman off-screen, “Luke time to go.” Who is that woman?

John August:
The woman is theoretically Gabrielle, but it’s weird that we don’t identify her here.

Craig Mazin:
But also, if she’s yelling to him, she’s also talking to a police officer at the same time. Interior front doorway, that’s not a location. You could be by the front door. You could be foyer. The police officer, here’s the description, crop dark hair in perfect unison with his short beard. Okay.

John August:
How are things in unison?

Craig Mazin:
Well tidy, I guess, weathered. Never told a joke. But if he did, it would be quality.

John August:
I don’t know how to play that.

Craig Mazin:
What is that?

John August:
I can’t do that. It’s not a playable thing.

Craig Mazin:
If you’ve never told a joke, how could it be quality?

John August:
So, Ashley Nicole Black, when she was on the show she was talking about, she’s also an actor, and she talks about when she’s going out for a role she reads the character description there and she gets frustrated when it’s just like, that’s not a thing I can actually do or play.

Craig Mazin:
No one can do that. But even if you could, you couldn’t because it’s contradictory. Never told a joke, but if he did, it would be quality. That’s like never drove, but if he did, he would nail it. But no, because you’ve never… what?

John August:
Yeah. So, never told a joke period. I get that. That’s a playable thing.

Craig Mazin:
Yes. So, the sticks in the yard, again, not really sure why they need to be there exactly. But that’s fine. And then, Luke shows up and she says in the pantry, honey, but wasn’t she just calling him telling him to go?

John August:
That’s what I’m confused about too.

Craig Mazin:
So, if she’s telling to go, but was it maybe, was it Scarlet that was saying time to go? I don’t think so. Because Gabrielle eventually says, “Ready? Where’s your backpack? So, Gabrielle yells, “Time to go.” We don’t identify her by name. And then, she does not seem to have any sense that it’s time to go. Still not a word, huh? Just more drawings. No. No.

John August:
You’re setting up too much that this is the fundamental thing. That’s strange about this character. We don’t know how long he’s been involved in their life, which seems strange to. So, let’s talk about the stakes because the literal stakes have been put in the ground by Officer Carter. They’re already in by the time it started. If you were putting the stakes in, that would be intriguing to me. What is he doing that? And then, I was like, “Oh, the fact that it’s about her house arrest and the perimeter, then we’re in the middle of something that’s great.” But they’re just standing having a conversation about a thing that’s already happened. I don’t know the context of it.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And it’s putting a lot of pressure on this reveal. She’s under house arrest. But there’s probably a more interesting, casual way to drop that in there. I do struggle when characters have this openness with each other. Someone says, still not talking. Yeah, no, just drawing. Typically, a parent of a child who has any struggles will be far less forthcoming than that. Still not talking, huh? No.

John August:
Let’s also talk about point of view. So, in the last thing we were looking at, it was clear that we own the little girl’s point of view. I’m not sure who’s…. We’re not in the boy’s point of view.

Craig Mazin:
We’re no one’s point of view. So, I don’t know whose scenes belong to. If I were directing the scene between Officer Carter and Gabrielle, I’m not sure what they want. They don’t seem to want anything actually. This is a problem. So, in scenes, typically, people are trying to achieve something. Is he hitting on her? He’s not doing a particularly convincing job of it. Does she want something from him? Does she want him to leave? She doesn’t seem like she does, nor does she want him to stay. Everyone’s mild.

John August:
Yeah. And mild is usually not a good sign for a first scene.

Craig Mazin:
No.

John August:
So, let’s go back to our earlier conversation about the Lego pieces. And it’s like it’s entirely possible that Lego piecewise that this is actually building up, stacking up something interesting in the fact that they’re under house arrest, the stakes are going to be useful down the road, but the actual scene work that we’re seeing, the Lego pieces that we’re looking at, they’re confusing, and that’s not helping us.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, even if this exists just to set up that there’s somebody under house arrest and there’s a kid and he’s drawing a weird picture. And maybe there’s some, who knows what’s with the picture. The problem here is the conversation between the cop and this woman. The two of them don’t seem to have any reason to be talking to each other. It’s almost like we’re watching aimless small talk, which you tend to avoid like on planes and in lines.

John August:
So, we actually have a logline for this one. So, we now ask for a logline. So, here’s the logline for the whole thing, which I do believe this Lego thing. After mysterious and tragic incident, artist Scarlet finds herself on house arrest at our strange aunt and silent 10-year-old cousin’s big empty house. Soon she begins to experience supernatural events, all of which she suspects is linked to her cousin’s artwork.

Craig Mazin:
Sure. And you get a supernaturally vibe from the description of the artwork itself.

John August:
But I don’t feel like she’s the central character of the story. It’s showing on the three pages you’ve given us.

Craig Mazin:
No. No, this would be… There’s the answer. This should be from her point of view. She’s the hero. Everything that’s happening here is boring. So, if she’s watching all this and she’s watching a cop describe the perimeter and her looking at it-

John August:
That’s interesting.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, that would be interesting, yeah, perspective. I would feel like she would have feelings about that. She’s trapped. So, that’s a good thing. And she’s trapped and then she turns and there’s that little kid staring at her. That would be scary and weird. There’s a lot of ways to go. But the key is her. And we get nothing from her except this very bit at the end, which is like-

John August:
Her description is-

Craig Mazin:
Cold and distant but without angst.

John August:
I don’t know how to play that either. I could play cold and distant without angst.

Craig Mazin:
Well, angst is incompatible with cold and distant, right? So, I don’t know what the word but is doing. So, I just think cold and distant would be enough. And then, he adds detached, which I think was covered by cold and distant. And she’s-

John August:
But also, cold and distant is a hard thing to stick on your central character. That’s the hard first thing to give us a character who is the one we’re going to actually be following through the course of the story.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. I think it’s also something that is the thing you can get from the execution of the character in the scene with the kid. So, if the kid walks in there and he’s like, “Hey, can I… and she just says one word answer or doesn’t answer at all, but just looks away, that’s cold and distant. Better to do that probably.

John August:
Yeah. And use that character description line to give us some visual, some specificity about who this character is versus anybody else who could be in this movie.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. Last thing, Todd, I would say just on when you’re on mild patrol. On page three, Officer Carter chuckles and tips his hat and then at the end of the page, Scarlet chuckles. Chuckling is just for like grandpa. Yeah-

John August:
As Megana laughs.

Craig Mazin:
And then, you like to chuckle. That doesn’t count as chuckling. That was a proper laugh. I was thinking of chuckling as like [demonstrates chuckling].

Megana Rao:
I see. I see.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. Usually, your ruffle a little. Your grandson’s hair because he took him fishing and he said something funny and you go. Chuckling is mild.

John August:
Yeah, it’s very mild. All right, let’s get on to Perdition by Terry Rietta. We’ll get a summary from Megana.

Megana Rao:
We’re in Cullman, Alabama in the 1830s. Thirteen-year-old Duncan narrates the pastoral setting as he comes upon, strangled 16-year-old Eily’s body by the creek. His father, Loren tells him to go get Pastor Haig. As Duncan runs to the pastor’s house, he flashes back through memories with Eily. Loren and Pastor Haig discuss next steps as they look at the body.

Megana Rao:
The sheriff is too far away to reach that day, so they take the corpse to Eily’s home where her mother Eustace falls to pieces at the site of her daughter’s dead body.

John August:
Alright. So, yet again, we have young people and dark things happening around them. There were moments here that I like. I liked the idea of finding a body in an older time. We have a sense of what a modern day kid finding a body is. But I liked that it was awkward. And there wasn’t a natural thing to do. There wasn’t police to call. I liked all of that. And yet what I was actually seeing on the page didn’t feel like the best version of this scene in the sequence to me, and there are a lot of small things on there I want to talk about in terms of showing vernacular dialogue, showing accent, showing regionalisms in a way that is suggestive, but not annoying to read, and sometimes just got a little annoying to read in terms of the “gittins” and the “aint’s and the “gahs.”

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And I don’t know, Megana, if these are all linked together by little fantasy moments perhaps because this is the third one in a row now, where there’s a slight fantasy aspect to it because he sees himself playing with the girl when they were younger, and she was choked to death, which I found confusing.

John August:
I am confused too. And I don’t know how…. So we’re talking about on page two as he’s running. He sees these things as like, I don’t know that as a viewer. I would get that he was seeing an earlier version of this. And also, it’s weird how the, a teenager, a young person that’s imagining a younger version of himself. That doesn’t happen.

Craig Mazin:
It doesn’t happen. And generally, people aren’t looking at themselves in memories. They can see other people in memories perhaps, but happy memories just seemed like we were hit with a pretty tonally shocking thing. And then, on top of that, we were hit with this gimmick. And then, writing over all that is voiceover.

Craig Mazin:
So, we have three competing interests. And I’m not sure where I’m supposed to look and feel, but I can tell you what I wanted. To me, what’s really cool is this, a peppercorn snail, and I don’t know what a peppercorn snail is [crosstalk]. But I loved it, a peppercorn snail.

John August:
Daddy, I want a peppercorn snail.

Craig Mazin:
I want it now. A peppercorn snail crawls up her porcelain shoulder, revealing deep purple bruises around the girl’s neck. I didn’t love it was her and then the girl’s because it sounded like two different people. But what I loved was that there was a snail on a person, and that’s how we find out they’re dead. And that’s really cool and weird. And I wanted basically the kid to shut up. Now, I don’t have anything against voiceover. Sometimes it’s brilliant. In this case, it’s turning everything rather corny.

John August:
It is. So, let’s read through the voiceover here. So, it’s labeled as Duncan’s voiceover. I’m confused whether this is Duncan, the 13-year-old kid or an adult. And as I read this aloud, I think you’ll be confused with me. “Cullen, Alabama, was a pretty place anytime of day. Old oaks leaning down, big moss feathered slabs of stone, soft grass will take the print of your foot and hold it. In the spring, the bubbles don’t seem to rise but rather hang like a string of beads. And Eily Jurdan looked the part of it just lying there like a girl in a tale.

John August:
Now, in a book, great. I love that. I actually think that’s good writing. And I really do enjoy it. I don’t believe a teenager can say that. So, it has to be an older version.

Craig Mazin:
It says a boy, 13, speaks with a soft southern accent.

John August:
Yeah. So, I guess that’s him talking but it doesn’t track for me.

Craig Mazin:
It doesn’t sound like what anyone would say to anyone. It does sound book-like. It is an omniscient narrator description of things. But if I were describing my town to you and I started talking like this, you would walk away. There’s something wrong with me. Soft grass, it’ll…

John August:
I’m going to start doing that.

Craig Mazin:
Take the print on your foot and hold, you’d be like, “What? What are you talk… what? Just where are you from?” Staten Island. I think that it’s a bit purple in terms of its prose, which again, in a novel can work. But coming out of someone’s mouth will sound corny. And on top of that, a 13-year-old boy who talks like this should be studied in a lab because it’s just too much.

John August:
A very specific on the page note here. So, in that block of dialogue I just read, this voiceover, and Eily in parenthesis, it says rhymes with highly. I like that we have that clarification here. But I was so tempted to read the parenthetical aloud. So, maybe put it in brackets, put it above this if you need to. I didn’t mind knowing how to pronounce it. We also run into problems with Eily on page three. We’re in this open cart and Duncan is in the back. Duncan sits with Eily holding her head in his lap and I had to think like, “Wait, is she dead?” So, I think Eily’s body is really what we needed to have here.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah.

John August:
On page three is also where we see, the first line is, outta get the sheriff. It should be an oughtta to get sheriff. That oughtta is spelled differently. Half days ride to Huntsville and it’s getting dark. Animals will get at err if we just leave her out. You don’t need the errs in that situation. I think at a certain point you have to stop dropping on all the “g”s. We get a sense of what the sound is supposed to be. But it gets to be frustrating to read that all the time.

Craig Mazin:
Yes, you don’t need it. And the actors will generally do that. If you give this to them, you run the risk of really getting a lot of-

John August:
But things like animals will get her if we just leave her out. The animals’ll, I like that.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. The animals will get at her. You can say that too. It’s just the err. It does seem a little much… I get immediately confused on page one. First of all, he’s describing things as if they were in the past. But he’s there looking at them in the present. So, I don’t understand quite how that functions.

John August:
I don’t know when we are in time.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And then, Loren is this guy who is staring at her. Now we’re going to presume that unless Duncan sounds like a boy boy, that’s who it is because that’s who’s staring at this girl. And it’s the first person we see. Loren it says blends into the setting, granite face, stoic and sporting blood on his pants. Okay, a couple of things. That does not going to blend into the setting, too. You don’t really spurt blood on your pants, blood-stained pants. But when I see a dead body and then I see a guy next to it with blood-stained pants, my mind goes to weird places.

John August:
Pretty natural connection. They’re somehow connected that there’s blood on that. Yes.

Craig Mazin:
And yet after reading it over a few because I get very disturbed. And then, he said, “Oh, a few freshly caught rabbits dangle from his belt.” Okay.

John August:
Maybe start with rabbits.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, maybe start with the rabbits because right now, oh, bloody pants. Nobody wants that.

John August:
Page one. Afternoon sun kisses the foothills of the Appalachians, dangerously purple but okay, I’ll allow it. Next slide, hills, pastures, pines, and hardwoods. You said foothills in the previous sentence. I don’t think you need to say hills twice.

Craig Mazin:
Yes, I agree. And when we go into this next section, there’s the promise of Eustace. Before we get to Eustace, there’s a preacher. Duncan has been told to run to get the preacher. And Duncan says, is she dot dot dot? And obviously she is. She’s dead. Clearly. He’s 13. He’s not nine, right, or eight. He should know that she’s definitely dead. She’s not breathing. She’s pretty dead-looking. Regardless. And because it’s always this fake-ish. He finally gets to the preacher’s house. He pounds on the old oak door, a weathered… this is second weathered. The other script had a weathered.

John August:
Everyone’s weathered.

Craig Mazin:
Everyone’s weathers. Kindly man opens it. A cross around his neck and round spectacles on the end of his nose. A bit central casting there for the old person. This is preacher Haig. The preacher’s face falls at the sight of Duncan standing there, tear-stained and out of breath. What happened? Duncan throws himself in the preacher’s arms. Well, this is a whole different type of movie now. What? So, I think maybe he meant collapses into.

John August:
Yeah. Yeah. I’m not buying that either. I’m not buying that moment. I don’t mind buying that as an out. So, what happened is a good exit line in general.

Craig Mazin:
You don’t need what happened. How about just uh-oh, right? He reacts to this kid standing there. And then, the two of them are chit-chatting. And then, they get to Eustace who I assume is his mom.

John August:
Eustace is a man. Eustace looks past the preacher and sees his little girl. So, last thing I want to talk about is there’s a dedication page. So, after the title page before the real script, definition of the word perdition in Christian theology, a state of eternal punishment and damnation into which a sinful and unpenitent person passes after death. Great. I’ll take it like, yeah, I’m fine with that. And that’s a good use of that dedication page.

Craig Mazin:
I did not like that perdition was printed out in syllables.

John August:
I’m going to allow it because I could see people pronouncing it strangely or getting tripped up on it. If it weren’t for the Road to Perdition, the Sam Mendes movie I wouldn’t know.

Craig Mazin:
You wouldn’t know about perdition. So, I think Terry, less novelistic here probably less than general seems like you’ve got a great eye for visuals. You can really see this place and I can see it with you. You probably are over describing in spots. When I say probably, I mean definitely. And given that you have such a good eye for visuals, don’t clutter it quite so much with extra stuff.

John August:
I will be fascinated to see the version of this that basically has no dialogue which is all just visuals telling the story and then fill out the scenes you need to. Here’s a logline, 1830s Alabama, after discovering that a small town’s golden girl has been strangled by in a creek and her friend Isaac, a boy 18 with down syndrome has run off with a stolen horse.

Craig Mazin:
What?

John August:
It’s a confusing logline. A posse is organized by the girl’s wealthy father to bring back the boy to account for the crime they think he committed.

Craig Mazin:
I see.

John August:
So, it sounds like there’s a posse going after the presumed killer of this girl.

Craig Mazin:
Sure. And that’s fine, but that’s not what this is giving me.

John August:
No, it’s not.

Craig Mazin:
And it feels a little bit, Terry, like you’re forcing To Kill A Mockingbird on us here. It just feels To Kill A Mockingbird-ish. It’s that vibe. And that’s that vibe. And honestly, it’s an old fashioned vibe.

John August:
Yeah, to strangle a sparrow.

Craig Mazin:
It’s a great book but it’s an old book. We honor the things that come before but then the fact that they get popularized and then recycled and redone a bunch, you got to move past that and I think this feels a little too Pepperidge Farm remembers.

Megana Rao:
Can I ask you a question?

Craig Mazin:
Sure, of course.

Megana Rao:
On page two where Duncan’s sprinting and as he passes the field, he sees himself much younger with Eily playing in the high grass .Say Terry did want to keep that, would you recommend doing another logline or like a flashback? Would that help?

John August:
Yes, I would recommend keeping our kid out of it and just seeing the younger version of the girl. I have a hard time imagining how that’s going to help tell the story. I don’t think it works with the Lego piece but I don’t think it’s going to actually help him and the entire thing is trying to construct is to have flashback moments.

Craig Mazin:
That’s also the wrong time for this information. I just saw her dead. Give me a moment or two. Let me learn a little bit about… let me at least hear what supposedly the deals with her before you start showing me things that are maybe private things like her kissing some guy behind the barn. At a church, he sees Eily kissing a man behind a barn. Maybe there’s a barn near the church, usually aren’t.

John August:
No, shouldn’t be.

Craig Mazin:
No. Regardless. It’s too soon. Oh, I see. He’s running by the church. And then, he sees Eily kissing a man behind a barn. Now, how would you do that?

John August:
I don’t know how you do that.

Craig Mazin:
I don’t know how you do it.

John August:
So, we’re having a hard time visualizing what we’re actually going to see on screen. And that’s a real problem, especially on page 10.

Craig Mazin:
Plus, why is he thinking of this at all right now. He’s got a job to do, which is to get to the preacher.

John August:
Do your job. Get to the preacher.

Craig Mazin:
Throw himself in the preacher’s arms.

Megana Rao:
Okay, second question. So, in the last script and maybe in this one, it feels like a thing that you guys are bumping up against is the fake reveal, like false suspense. So, do you think in this script, like with that line is she dot dot dot, if they just said is she dead, that would have been better?

Craig Mazin:
Yes. Yes, that actually would have been better because then you would have had an opportunity for the other character to look at him like, what do you think, idiot? And then, that kid could hang his head because that was a stupid question. It gives you an opportunity for humans to interact.

John August:
Yeah. And the “is she…” doesn’t… it’s false. Doesn’t feel real. You could say almost anything else would make more sense in that moment. She’s dead, right? Or what do we do? I really don’t have anything. It’s probably better than like the is she because we’re just assuming she’s dead.

Craig Mazin:
Is she?

John August:
Yeah.

Craig Mazin:
Yes.

John August:
Is it time for the next sample? Let’s take a look at Helen Sedwick’s pages for Ten Million.

Megana Rao:
We open on the San Francisco Bay and close in on an upscale home at Dawn where Patti Wendecker rushes down in her bathrobe to greet a SWAT team of FBI agents pounding at her door. Patti reminisces about the old days in voiceover as we watch federal agents restrain her and storm her home. Patti’s teenage daughters Abby and Monica are escorted downstairs where they’re seated next to Patti. Patti insists the agents have made a mistake until they dragon her husband, Sam, 45, an attorney, whom the agents caught trying to escape in the backyard. Sam apologizes before he’s escorted away. The dFBI asked Patti if she has any firearms in the house.

John August:
Great. I like these pages. And I like the situation that was being created here. I’m going to have a lot of very specific notes about things I think could be improved. But meeting this character in this situation, I think feels interesting and right and appropriate. I was a little confused about the time period and start. For some reason, I assume it’s modern day, but it feels like could also be ’80s or ’90s. So, I was a little curious about that. But I was with it moment by moment, which I think is a good sign for these pages. Craig, what was your first instinct on this?

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. There is a good reveal here, which I liked. Because she sold me on the fact that they were in the wrong house. And then, turns out they’re not in the wrong house. And that’s interesting. However, there’s a little bit of a thing that happens here early, which lost me a touch and that is Patti in voiceover says, and this is what we hear first as she’s coming downstairs. “If you ask me, the FBI should let you finish your first cup of coffee and run a brush through your hair before they pound on your door with warrants, rifles, and bulletproof vests.” Pound pound pound.

Craig Mazin:
Then she opens the door, shakes her head in disgust. “I told them right off you’ve got the wrong house. By noon, FBI idiots would be trending on TikTok.” Now, a couple things, one, shaking your head in disgust. Nobody shakes their head in disgust at the FBI unless they’re like a mob wife and this is the 12th time. This is new. This is weird. Second, by noon, FBI idiots would be trending on TikTok. That makes it sound like that’s exactly what happened. But it isn’t what happened. And also, I don’t see them say you’ve got the… I don’t see her say you’ve got the wrong house. They slam her to the floor. She says sometimes, “I miss those days” in voiceover which I was okay. So, something is interesting.

Craig Mazin:
But I was already nervous that I was disconnecting from a normal human reaction to a situation. And I got particularly nervous when the daughters were taken. And towards the end, the agent says to Patti and her girls… and how old are the girls?

John August:
They are 16 and 14.

Craig Mazin:
Sixteen and 14. Monica is 14. And Daddy has already been dragged off by the FBI and apologizes. Something’s gone terribly wrong. The agents say to Patti and her girls, “Now, don’t move.” And Monica says, “What? And missed all the fun?” Excuse me?

Craig Mazin:
You’re 14-year-old mouthing off to the FBI that just apparently justifiably dragged your dad out. And you guys are all on the floor and tied up. No. So, tone was a problem for me. But the layout of things was really interesting. It was a cool scene to start with.

John August:
Yeah, I agree. So, I think let’s talk about the daughters because this is about what we hear. Girls scream, Patti’s daughters Abby, 16, and Monica, 14, stumble down the stairs, their hands bound behind them and a behemoth in a black helmet on their tails. Patti tries to stand but with their hands tied behind her, she topples over. The behemoth sits the girls beside Patti and tips her back up.

John August:
So, I love Patti trying to stand up. I love the daughters coming down. I don’t know if I believe that they had their hands behind them. Maybe they do. Maybe not.

Craig Mazin:
No.

John August:
I don’t see it. They’re juveniles. But then, being freaked out is great. But I’m only seeing them as this collective unit. I don’t know anything specific about who they are because they’re not going to be the same girl. And so, give us some visual that distinguishes this. So, who they are, what are they wearing? Are they still in their pajamas? Well, just what’s happening here? Because these are supposed to be important characters I’m taking and I am just getting names for them.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And they screamed, and they are tied up. And yet they’re sassing the FBI. It just didn’t seem to make sense. This is more where the scene ends. But there is a fairly chunky description at the end of this about what’s on the walls.

John August:
Let’s about that because I think there’s actually some good stuff there. And maybe it is the right time to wait and hold back where we can sit for a second where we can actually see some of the stuff. The way that their home reflects affluence, but not true wealth, a wall of glass facing the San Francisco Bay, other walls are lined with shelves holding a chaotic assortment of art and mementos, handmade pottery, Mexican alebrijes, bolga baskets, most of which has been tossed to the floor.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, they were tossing stuff earlier. I think it probably would have been better to integrate that into the action. So, it didn’t feel like we stopped things just to get a little cataloging.

John August:
Let’s talk about the difference between how Patti is responding in her voiceover and what she’s doing in real life. Because that’s some of the tension that I think you hit on it at the start. She’s not actually saying, “I told them right off, you’ve got the wrong house. She’s not saying those things. And maybe it’s okay that her reporting of what actually happened is different than what we’re seeing, but maybe it needs to be more dramatically different that she actually didn’t really is freaked out and crying.

Craig Mazin:
Which she’s not because she’s having it both ways. It’s like, you guys don’t belong here. You have the wrong house. None of that should be happening, which normally, first of all, why is she… when she opens the door, she’s not surprised. So, I’m confused by what her context for them is.

John August:
If this felt like a home invasion almost from the start, which is probably what it would feel like, then her natural reaction to that is probably going to be interesting and compelling. And I can imagine there’s a version of this voiceover that is a good counterpoint to it. But I think to reveal the husband can be done better, because right now the husband’s coming in, for whatever reason. It’s morning, but he’s already dressed in a suit. I don’t understand where he was.

Craig Mazin:
And he was in the backyard. Right? That’s where they caught him, in the backyard.

John August:
Yeah. He’s trying to get out.

Craig Mazin:
Right. But how did he even know to get out like… Anyway, there’s a lot of logical issues here. Patti is incredibly not forthcoming with these agents. And I’m not sure why. Everything that she’s describing here sounds like she’s a mob wife, like she is…. So her husband is a criminal. And she knows it. But she’s getting sassy with the feds. This feels Carmela-like a little bit. But that’s not what she’s saying in the voiceover, really.

John August:
I’m going to cheat and look at the logline. Because we don’t look at the loglines before we do this. The logline is a woman’s safe suburban life has shattered when the FBI raids her home and arrest her husband, a high price attorney, for stock fraud. So, it’s not a mafia situation.

Craig Mazin:
Then this is not correct. Just tonally speaking. Helen, you’ve got a really interesting situation here. But what you’ve done is you’ve shoehorned in an attitude that doesn’t necessarily comport with even if Patti is just that person who’s got that cold ice water in her veins. Her freaking daughters couldn’t be like that. And plus, if your mom and your two daughters have been tied up and thrown downstairs by the FBI, you’re going to be emotional. She’s just very-

John August:
Yeah, so I’m going to take this moment to, again, talk about how amazing Lorene Scafaria’s Hustlers is, but one of the things that Hustlers did so well is the characters comport themselves when they’re being interviewed in formal situations. And they present the story of what happened in a very different way than what we actually see in them happening. And so, I would be fascinated if the voiceover that we’re getting in that character that should present yourself at the end, we’re going to learn through how she became that thing. And it doesn’t match up with the character seen at the start. That can be really-

Craig Mazin:
That could be really interesting. Unreliable narrator being proven right in front of us.

John August:
Yeah. All right. So, as always, we want to thank our four writers who sent in their Three-Page Challenges. But also, everyone who sent us a Three-Page Challenge. Megana will read through how many for this session.

Megana Rao:
A bunch, yeah.

John August:
A bunch, a bunch. So, thank you, everyone who sent them in.

Craig Mazin:
Five.

John August:
If you have pages you would like us to look at on the show, you can go to johnaugust.com/threepage, all spelled out. And you’ll see a forum, which you can fill out the information and click to attach your script. And it goes into a magic mailbox that maybe we can look at and pick things for our next Three-Page Challenge. But, again, thank you, everyone who sent that stuff in.

John August:
Now, it’s gotten dark as we record it and it is time for one cool things. My one cool thing is this cool little thing that I got this last week that I found very helpful. Craig, can you describe what this is?

Craig Mazin:
Oh, this is one of these things. So, this is a flexible strip that you can snap onto your arm. And it lights up. That’s cool.

John August:
Yeah, so it’s like a slap wrist.

Craig Mazin:
Slap wrist bracelet.

John August:
This bracelet thing, but it has an LED inside of it. So, it reflects but also it glows. And so, if you’re running at night or walking your dog, I find it actually really helpful because cars can see you. It can be set to just be a steady light or it can blink and so people can see you because I just find that this time of year, both as a driver and as pedestrian or a runner, it just becomes a little bit dicey because you don’t know that people can actually see you. So, I recommend this. This is cheap. I’ll put a link to it on Amazon. This is the Nite Ize SlapLit, SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
Sorry. SlapLit.

John August:
SlapLit, LED Slap Wrap.

Craig Mazin:
SlapLit.

John August:
Yeah, there’s other ones that-

Craig Mazin:
Oh, SlapLit.

John August:
SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
I thought it was Slap Let.

John August:
SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
Like a Slap Let like a bracelet.

John August:
SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
So, SlapLit.

John August:
So, I would just recommend this if you’re going to be outside walking in a place where a car can hit you.

Craig Mazin:
How much does that cost?

John August:
It’s really cheap.

Craig Mazin:
I’m looking up right now. The SlapLit is currently going on Amazon for $10.59.

John August:
So, to not be hit by a car, I think it’s money well spent.

Craig Mazin:
My one cool thing is slightly more expensive than this.

John August:
All right, tell us.

Craig Mazin:
If you’re in the market for a new computer. And we are writers, it is our instrument. I don’t necessarily recommend this for everyone, of course. It’s a bit of a budget buster. However, in the sense of the technological aspect, the new MacBook Pro 16 with the Apple, this one has the Apple M1 Max, is spectacular. It said return to a chunkier MacBook Pro, which I actually like. I never needed it to be the MacBook Air. I never needed it to be slender. It’s a little heavier. They got rid of the glowy bar that was a wonderful gimmick that literally nobody wanted or liked. The screen is brilliant. But my God, the speed on this thing is remarkable. And the fan doesn’t run. It also uses way less energy so the battery lasts way longer. It’s just everything you would hope for has been put in here. I was telling Megana that the thing that I use that’s the most processor-intensive is when we play Dungeons and Dragons.

John August:
And so, last night when you’re playing you were using on this machine and your ability to hang on an app, which is much, much faster.

Craig Mazin:
Oh my god. And so, did it read faster-

John August:
Oh, yes. Faster, yeah.

Craig Mazin:
Because normally it would be like wuuuuuuuuh, and now it’s like poink, which is awesome. And my side, because I’m the DM, my side is always going to be the hardest one to run because it’s seeing everything. So, it’s rendering everything all at once all the time. And it’s also showing me all of your lines of sight. So, it’s basically doing five or six times the work that your computer’s doing. Plus we’re running Zoom. It’s great. So, just a huge thumbs up on these suckers. My favorite computer.

John August:
On my home office here, I have an iMac which is my main one. But of course, the MacBooks are much faster than my iMac is at this point, which is frustrating. Megana and I both have the M1 MacBook Air, which have been great. They’ve been super-fast and reliable. Again, you don’t appreciate how nice it is to not have your fan run for anything but the battery lasts forever. It’s smart and good. It’s good.

John August:
That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It’s edited by added by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Ryan Gerberding. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask @johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send the longer questions. For short questions on Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I’m @johnaugust. We have t-shirts and they’re great as well as hoodies, too. You can find my Cotton Bureau. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes @johnaugest.com. That’s also where you find the Three-Page Challenges that we talked about today. You can find transcripts and can sign up for our weekly newsletter called Inneresting, which has lots of links to things about writing. You can sign up to become a premium member at Scriptsnotes.net, where you get all the back episodes and bonus segments. And starting this week, you can also listen to us on Spotify.

John August:
So, if you’re a premium member and want to listen to it through the Spotify app, there are instructions for that. We emailed it to you but you could probably figure it out. It’s not that hard. But if you’re confused, we’ve sent you an email. So, search your email history because we sent you screenshots on how to sign up in Spotify, if you want to listen to the premium feed in your Spotify. Craig, Megana, thank you so much.

Megana Rao:
Thank you.

Craig Mazin:
Thank you.

John August:
All right. For this bonus segment, this is a question we got from Kyle in New York City.

Megana Rao:
I’m an amateur screenwriter who started writing during the pandemic.

John August:
We don’t believe the word amateur screenwriter.

Megana Rao:
I’m represented but hope to eventually get to the point of being paid for my work. I’ve encountered an issue where I can write really well when I’m excited about a project. But I tend to get bored easily. And once something bores me, it’s nearly impossible for me to find the energy to keep hacking at it. I could be wrong since I’m new to the craft. But I imagine one of the traits that separates amateurs from professionals is the ability to keep going even if you’re not feeling what you’re writing. We can’t all be on 100% of the time.

Megana Rao:
Do you have any mental tools or tricks you’d recommend for getting back to a place of energy around a project to make sure you give it its due diligence? What do you do when you need to finish a project but are sick of it?

John August:
Kyle, I have to embrace you. You’re the only person who’s ever felt this way. Literally from the moment I start a project to the moment I finished project, I fall more in love with it. I start out really liking it. And I realized, no, I’m deeply, deeply in love with it. This is the best thing I’ve ever written. And I cannot wait to get to it every morning.

Craig Mazin:
Do you have more sex with your spouse now than you did when you first met?

John August:
100%.

Craig Mazin:
Through the roof.

John August:
It’s crazy.

Craig Mazin:
There’s not enough time in the day and it gets worse year after year.

John August:
So, it’s the right equivalent, where I just can’t get my hands off the keyboard. I’m so eager to get back to this project and just keep writing it. I have hypergraphia is really what it is, is that compulsion to write is really this one idea that is just so good. And really everything I’ve ever touched, it’s been that experience.

Craig Mazin:
Well, Kyle. So, look, good and bad news. The good news is, yep, you’re like us. You’re like human beings. I don’t know if there’s necessarily anything you can do to get back to that original feeling of excitement. Nor should you need to or want to. Because the original feeling of excitement is a fresh romantic vibe. It means your brain is buzzing because something new has collided into it. The work that we do is to execute carefully and steadily. And that is sometimes rather boring. It’s certainly rigorous. But you’re not going to get that excitement. It’s gone, it’s over. And it will never come back. And like I said last week from beloved Polish poet, even success feels like failure. So, really, this is a goal-oriented process. It is a process process and that you need to learn how to sustain yourself through the process, which is not particularly exciting. But you must be driving toward the goal of finishing.

Craig Mazin:
The difference between professionals and amateurs is not that we have the “ability to keep going even if we’re not feeling what we’re writing.” The difference is we’re paid. That’s literally the difference between professionals and amateurs. And it turns out that when you are paid and there are lawyers and contracts, you don’t have the option. You have to do it. And this is actually quite valuable.

John August:
There have been times on projects where I’ve just been so frustrated that actually I calculated. This is early in my career when I wasn’t making much money, but I was like, I’m going to calculate how much I am being paid per page. And that’ll get me through this day’s work.

Craig Mazin:
But there’s also times where I thought, what would happen if I just gave the money back, every writers had that moment. And lately, sometimes I’ll just think to myself, if I’m in an elevator in a tall building, I’ll just turn to… if I’m with Jacq or Bo and I’ll just say, “Well, if the elevator just plummets, I won’t have to write these episodes,” just get out of some writing, which should be nice. This is the deal.

Craig Mazin:
But then, you have moments where you do well. And you will not have those moments until they have happened. They do not happen before they happen. So, you have to do the work to make them happen without having them happen.

John August:
So, Kyle’s experiencing intrinsic validation, where he was loving the product, he’s loving doing this because of the excitement about the idea and it was all internally generated. And eventually, it just faded away. And he’s waiting for that moment where there’ll be external forces that will tell him like, “No, no, it’s good. It’s exciting. You’ve done a good job. “And that hasn’t kicked in yet. That’s the reality of being a new person at this.

John August:
The other thing I will say is that as you have more experience and no one’s an amateur screenwriter. You’re a newer screenwriter. You don’t have the experience to be able to tell like, “Oh, is this a crush, or is this a possible relationship”, when it comes to a project idea. And so, sometimes you have a crush, like, “Oh my god, I’m so excited about this.”

John August:
But Craig and I, you and I both have enough experience to know this is a crush that will pass and I can see what the problem is going to be. And I will fall out of love with this versus there’s some ideas because you’re like, “Oh, that’s a genuinely good idea that I can build a relationship with this project.” This is a thing that can actually sustain and build.

John August:
And so, the choice of whether to buckle down or bail, we can make a different calculation because we know how this all goes and we know where this is. But we can only do that because we’ve been in other writing relationships with other projects that know how we react, how projects react. We just know how it all works.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And I think Kyle probably like most people, his relationship with movies and television is he sees finished products. He doesn’t have a finished product. And even worse, he has to dive into every little grain of this thing over and over and over and over again. It becomes mind-numbing. I can be maddening. And wait until you get into the editing bay. And then, you’re really going over and over and over and over.

Craig Mazin:
It’s just the nature of the gig. It’s very foreign to everyone. I think nobody experiences this for the first time it goes, “Is this process been my whole life?” It’s grueling.

John August:
Let’s go back to a word he says. I get bored easily. So, let’s talk about boredom. And so, boredom is it happens when it’s no longer new. It’s no longer exciting. It’s no longer fresh. But also, it’s because you don’t know what to do. It’s not intriguing, or the problems in front of you are not interesting, solvable problems, are actually just difficult problems you have to grind on and get through them.

John August:
And so, I would say try to look for ways to make that day’s work less boring. Make some challenges for yourself. How can you approach this scene, this Lego piece, and make this the most interesting Lego piece it can possibly be? And once you tackle that, then you get on the next one, the next one eventually. You might fall back in love with it because you see something in this that you didn’t even see when you were first crushing on it.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. Megana, do you have any tricks for yourself when you’re feeling bored or unmotivated?

Megana Rao:
I usually have a playlist associated with a project and sometimes listening to that helps, or getting external feedback can help me, I don’t know, relive excitement about certain parts of it. Okay, I have a question for you guys. So, in talking about having a crush on a project versus a long-term relationship. So, I was recently working on a project where I felt like I was banging my head against the wall for so long. And it just felt like endless and I should just walk away from it. Because I’m never going to figure out these problems.

Megana Rao:
All of a sudden, it felt like the wall broke open and there was sunlight, and I could see my way out. I’m just confused how I make that differentiation. Do I trust that that’s going to happen always because it happened this time?

John August:
I don’t think you can necessarily trust. There’s been projects like that for years. Where I just got to a certain point I just couldn’t quite crack what that was, or that there’s something that I knew was not working quite right. And it just was wrong. And so, even though we have experience with these writing relationships, we can’t know how it’s all going to go or work and how it’s going to really be on the page.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah, again, balance. You just wait and hope. But there is a difference, I think between a project where you are stuck but you wish you had the answer, and a project where you stuck because you don’t care what the answer is. And if you’re in that space-

John August:
You can stop writing.

Craig Mazin:
… it’s over.

John August:
Yeah. So, I think the only case you made for finishing that project is if you’re pretty close and you just think you need to have the experience of having finished the things, that makes sense.

Craig Mazin:
Which is-

John August:
Something.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. There is a resilience that’s required, obviously, to do all of this. But I think if it gets hard, don’t confuse hard with bored. Don’t confuse I think I’m maybe not good enough to do this with bored. Boredom is an all-purpose term for dissatisfaction. But you have to interrogate a little bit why you’re dissatisfied with this. And here’s the tricky part for people who are starting out, a lot of their ideas are bad.

Craig Mazin:
And a lot of times, even if the idea is good, their method of executing is bad. So, they should stop because it’s bad. But then, if you don’t finish, you don’t get better. So, balance.

John August:
Yeah. You got to work through it. There’s a case we made for finishing those things. The other thing I’ll remind people is that a lot of times, newer screenwriters were always really good at school, for example. They’re always really good writers. And everyone’s like, “Oh, you’re a good writer.” And so, they approach this thing. And they have the sense of like, “I know what good writing is. People tell me I’m a good writer.”

John August:
And then, something that’s been comparatively easy for them versus other people, they’re in the middle of it like, “Crap, it’s really hard to write. This is actually exhausting. I don’t know what I’m doing. Maybe I’m just bad. Or maybe it’s this project.” And you’re just not used to struggling.

John August:
And sometimes, what you’re saying is bored, it’s actually you’re just struggling and it’s new and it’s uncomfortable and you’re not used to be uncomfortable writing. But that’s what writing is.

Craig Mazin:
And our culture encourages everybody to be a jerk. So, everybody grows up. If you’re interested in film, if you’re interested in TV, perversely, you are encouraged by culture and like-minded people to crap all over everything all the time. So, you become rather convinced that it is easy, because look at all the garbage. This is what Ted Elliott has always called crap-plus-one, your job, you think is to just write one better than all the crap out there.

Craig Mazin:
But the truth is, with the rarest of exceptions, if you are a new writer, you are actually not good enough to write the crap. That’s how bad you are. And that’s how hard it is. It’s so much harder than they think. So, when they get into it, there is a cognitive dissonance between this thing that’s supposed to be so simple and how hard it is.

Craig Mazin:
And I think maybe the brain convinces you that you’re just bored. Because the only other explanation is, you’re not good enough. But you’re not until you are. And unfortunately, you’re never good enough, because you’re just as good as you could be on that day. You try and get better. And then, it’s over.

John August:
I’m thinking about Megana and Megana’s metaphor for you and your writing group has a chance of accountability. And so, where you have to do stuff and that might be actually a humble thing for Kyle to find at some group of people who he can be accountable for. So, he’s actually getting some work done. And he also recognized like everyone is struggling at the same time in the same ways. And he can get a sense of how it all fits. And if you could find the right group that might get him on board.

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. And you can always pick somebody that if you vibe with that person and say, “Look, we’re going to spend two hours. For one hour, I’m going to talk to you about my problems about this script. And then, for the other hour, you’re going to talk about your problems with the script.” And the only ground rule is that nobody can say, yeah, I thought of that but. Or, yeah, I tried that but. Because that’s just annoying to everybody. Just pretend you didn’t talk it through. Talk everything through.

Craig Mazin:
Sometimes just talking makes it clear. If you write alone, you can go deep into your own weird mind and get totally lost and you can confuse feelings with facts.

Megana Rao:
One more pitch for writers’ group. There have been times where I’ve gotten so bogged down in the weeds and really unexcited about a project but the people in my writers’ group who have seen it since the inception have reminded me what excited me about it and that can be really helpful.

Craig Mazin:
Yes, something was there. You had something that made you do all of this. Certainly, Kyle, if you are writing by the seat of your pants and you feel you have a tendency to get bored, I would strongly recommend plotting the whole thing out first. It’s hard to get bored when you know exactly what you’re supposed to write that day,

John August:
Yeah, if you had a good outline and then you could really approach how to make this piece the most awesome scene it could possibly be and not going to waste the work, that might help him.

Craig Mazin:
Precisely.

Links:

  • WGA Introduces Project Page check out the pdf here.
  • Follow along with our Three Page Challenges: Firebird by Benjamin Blattberg, The Drawing by Todd William Knack, Perdition by Terry Rietta, Ten Million by Helen Sedwick
  • Nite Ize SlapLit LED Slap Wrap
  • The New 16 inch MacBook Pro
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!
  • Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription or treat yourself to a premium subscription! You can now listen to Scriptnotes Premium on Spotify!
  • Craig Mazin on Twitter
  • John August on Twitter
  • John on Instagram
  • Outro by Ryan Gerberding (send us yours!)
  • Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

Scriptnotes, Episode 526: Just One Question, Transcript

December 15, 2021 Transcribed

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2021/just-one-question).

**John August:** Hello and welcome. My name is John August and this is Episode 526 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Craig is stuck on a mountain in Canada this week, so I’ve convinced several previous Scriptnotes guests to come on the show with the promise that I’d ask each of them a single question. First I’ll be talking with Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi about moving their show from Canada to California. Then I’ll check in with Aline who is busy directing her first movie. And I’ll chat with Stephen Follows who has never actually been a guest on the show, but we’ve mentioned a bunch of times. He’s that data scientist who helped us look at the one page per minute rule of thumb and tracking down movies you can’t find anywhere. I asked Stephen to make his best pitch for going to college and film school in particular. So obviously this episode that Craig is not around to argue with him about.

Now for premium members stick around at the end where Stephen and I will discuss how to best answer the question of whether screenplay competitions are ever worth it. Stephen challenges the premise of the question but also helps apply some scientific rigor to the investigation.

Now, before we get to any of that there’s some news to get through first. So I’m joined by the master of Google sheets, baker of delicious desserts, co-founder of #PayUpHollywood, Liz Hsiao Lan Alper. Liz, welcome.

**Liz Hsiao Lan Alper:** Hi. Thanks John. Thank you so much for having me back.

**John:** Oh, thank you for being on this first and most crucial part of the news wrap up thing, because it’s so awkward when it’s just me talking through this.

**Liz:** I completely understand. I do that just by myself where I’m just talking to myself doing news wrap ups. It’s just always awkward.

**John:** It is. Now we are going to talk about some important things but nothing can be more important than what you’re baking at this moment. Because you have brought amazing desserts to my house before. What are you looking forward to baking this holiday season?

**Liz:** So honestly I’ve been perfecting – I think you saw this on Twitter – but I’ve been perfecting Arnold Palmer pie. This is my pride and joy. So it’s a lemon pie that also has an unsweetened iced tea gelee on top. So it’s a very half and half pie. And when you take a bite it’s supposed to remind you of the summertime. I’ve been perfecting this recipe for a few months now and we’re getting very, very close. I think I might have to drop something off at your house pretty soon.

**John:** I’m excited now. I can imagine this is a big pie, but I could also imagine it as sort of single serving kind of like ramekin kind of things. Like how are you doing this?

**Liz:** So before it was going to be just a single eight-inch pie and now I’m realizing it’s almost better to do the individual pies. So, if you get a muffin tin, if you use the muffin tin you fill up each muffin tin with a little bit of the graham cracker crumb, a little bit of the condensed milk/lemon mixture, and then just a little bit of the gelee. It makes it so that you actually have something that you can hold in your hand as you’re walking. And you don’t have to worry about it falling apart. So it’s an on-the-go pie.

**John:** That sounds amazing. Now, that’s the fun part of this, but let’s get to the actual work of this episode which is that you have a new survey going out and we want to hear about this. So this is a survey for support staff?

**Liz:** Yes. So this is the #PayUpHollywood third annual support staff survey. This is the third time that we’ve been putting out a survey strictly for entertainment staff, but this is the first time that we’re actually expanding the reach to not just people in New York, Albuquerque, other American cities where entertainment support staffers are based, but we’re also looking beyond American borders into Canada, into Mexico, into the UK, and specifically trying to get a sense of what it’s like in the entertainment business outside there.

And then we’re also going to be tracking how over the last three years pay has increased, how abuses may have been eradicated in the workplace, or any other loopholes that might have come out of the pandemic. We as writers, we’ve been seeing an uptick in different problems that came out of the pandemic we hadn’t experienced before. The same is going to be the same for support staff. And so we’re trying to make sure that we’re getting a good wide group of not just writer assistants and script coordinators and desk assistants, but also that we’re reaching out to the people who work in production and work in reality television and work in commercials so we can see where the trends are happening just across the board.

**John:** Now people might be listening to this wondering am I the kind of person who needs to be filling out this form for Liz and getting her the data she needs. So we’re going to put a link in the show notes that has a link to the Google form which is sort of the introductory form that really lists these are the kinds of jobs that you’re looking for. These are the kind of people in these positions. So if you have a question about whether you’re the right person to be filling this out click the link and you’ll see whether you actually are a good fit for what we need to know.

**Liz:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** Cool. Now some of the world of assistants and support staff has changed a bit with the adoption of this new IATSE deal. So let’s talk a bit about that because one of the things we were always looking at when we looked at assistant pay in Hollywood was that there are some of these jobs which are union jobs. So script coordinators and writer’s room assistants can be union jobs. And they actually got a pay increase in this last round of negotiations.

**Liz:** Yeah. They actually received a massive pay increase. And I know that there were many members who were hoping for more simply because the wages for script coordinators and writer’s assistants has not kept in line with the cost of living for at least the last decade. So I think there was a lot of hope that there would be one massive leap that would bring all of the pay in alignment with what current times actually require.

What they’re going to be making nowadays is $23.50 an hour. That’s the absolute minimum. I know a lot of studios like to call that scale. It’s not scale. It’s just the absolute lowest that you can pay a union assistant to be on the show. And it absolutely should be going up after you factor in experience, responsibilities, the workload that that particular assistant is going to be carrying. But the nice thing is it does mean that anyone who is entering into an entry level position, anyone who maybe hasn’t been a writer’s assistant before, hasn’t been a script coordinator before, can now be assured that they’re going to be making something that’s much closer to a living wage than the $15/$16 an hour that they were making previously.

So, it’s a huge step. It’s a huge step. And it’s a great first step into making sure that three years from now when there’s another round of negotiations that those assistants are getting even closer to what a living wage would be considered, which I believe for a lot of them it was anywhere between $27 and $32 an hour. So $23.50 is much closer to $32 than $16 is, is the way that I look at it.

**John:** The point that you brought up earlier on the show is that the actual hourly rate is an important factor, but how many hours you’re guaranteed to work in a week is in some cases an even bigger factor. And so if some of these people were working under 60-hour guarantees, that’s great. But if they get cut back to 40 hours that’s not enough take home pay to be survivable in Los Angeles.

**Liz:** No, you’re absolutely right about that. If you are working for $16 for 60-hour weeks you would actually be making more than what you would be if you were working for 40 hours at $23.50. So the biggest thing that any of us, you, me, Craig, any writers or any employers who are really trying to make sure that writer’s assistants and script coordinators are taking home a living wage, it’s making sure that we can guarantee them 60 hours or as close to 60 hours a week as humanly possible, because I believe the studios now are going to try and cut everybody back down to 40. I’m sure that there’s going to be a freeze on any sort of overtime which is a little ridiculous only because we know how intensive those jobs are. I can’t imagine a script coordinator getting everything done in 40 hours a week.

But that is something that you can’t negotiate in the MBA. So they do need to make sure that for us, our part in it, is going to be making sure that they’re making the hours and IATSE is going to be sure that they’re making the hourly wage. So, between the two of us hopefully we can get people paid what they’re worth.

**John:** Now this pay increase was only the small part of a much bigger IATSE deal which was signed and approved this last week. So this was a membership vote. The membership vote was closer than we’re sort of ever used to on a WGA level. There’s a complicated Electoral College kind of system by which the IATSE approves its contracts because locals have to vote and there’s whole things. But the popular vote in some cases was against this deal. Overall when all the delegates are counted the deal passed. But tighter than you would expect, and especially for something that did seem to make significant progress but didn’t make as much progress as a lot of members hoped.

**Liz:** You have to figure that what happened on the set of Rust and the fact that there was a big uprising and acknowledgment that sets often become unsafe and are demanding so much of set members that it becomes almost deadly in certain situations. And because proposals to fix that weren’t actually on the table to begin with, that’s kind of one of the things that can’t get added later on. That doesn’t mean that they’re not wrong. And it doesn’t mean that they don’t need to be fixed. But I do understand why it became so close because I think there were a lot of people that were really hoping to make some change in the way that we approach work hours and set work hours and how we treat people not as though they’re disposable but as though they’re living, breathing human beings who need reasonable rest in order to function doing their jobs.

And so it’s hard. And John I’m interested to hear what you think, but I think for me one of the bright spots that I have been seeing is how many people are now actively trying to get more involved in the union because they’re realizing that this is a way to eradicate some of the abuses that they’ve been going through and they don’t need to accept it as just this is the way that it’s always been, they’re seeing that well now that we’re demonstrating the power that our union has we can actually use this power to further our betterment for all of the members.

**John:** Absolutely. I think it’s the recognition that the union is the members and the members are the union. And you looked at the #IAStories Instagram account that sort of really galvanized a lot of the support, particularly about working hours, and it’s the recognition that those people they’re not just a force you gin up every three years to get people excited and get some progress made on the contract. Once they’re revved up and riled up they’re going to be asking for accountability and some changes. And so I would not be surprised to see if we see some internal struggles within IA and some bigger developments happening because you have a bunch of suddenly engaged people who recognize that they did have power all this time.

**Liz:** Yeah. I think that’s great. I think hopefully for all of us, too, who aren’t IA members but who supported the IA efforts we’ll be back there in three years supporting them just like we did now. And so I think that’s going to be really important to remember come the next negotiations is that no matter what when it comes to worker safety that matters to everybody. That matters to everybody and we should show our support no matter how we can.

**John:** Now IATSE wasn’t the only big vote in Hollywood this last week. WGA members have voted to approve a new end credit for feature films, one that will show up in online databases like IMDb as well. Beginning in 2022 we’ll start seeing the credit additional literary material which will list all screenwriters who worked on a film who did not receive traditional writing credit like screenplay by or written by.

This was an actual referendum that had huge procedural things to go through and there were question and answer sessions. There were pro and con statements. It was a contentious debate, a contentious idea. Craig and I are completely vehemently disagreeing on every aspect of it, except that we both agreed that we thought this was probably pass and we were both correct. It passed by 72% of members voting yes on this.

Now, Liz, you are on the board so you got an early look at this. Was this surprising to you?

**Liz:** You know, it wasn’t surprising. I think for me especially being on the board I was very, very hopeful that this was going to help a lot of people that aren’t getting the credit that they need, especially because I am so involved in a lot of the diversity inclusion and equity efforts in the guild. And I have a lot of friends who are underrepresented groups, either writers of color, LGBTQ+ writers, who were all having their experience used to make certain films more authentic without ever receiving the credits or ever receiving any sort of help in their own careers as someone who writes these sorts of stories. So that if you were looking to tell a story about a Chinese American transplant here in the United States instead of going to let’s say the white male writer who had written a beautiful movie about that you go to the Chinese writer who used their own lived experience to make that movie more authentic.

So for me what I was really hoping for and I think what we are going to see is that we’re going to see a lot of midlevel and lower level screenwriters or people who are just breaking in who really needed that extra leg up and that acknowledgment that their work is crucial to the films that we see nowadays. I think that we’re going to see that their careers are going to start to blossom. I hope that’s what it is.

I like to speak positively because I don’t think that speaking negatively and just believing in the worst case scenario is ever truly helpful. I completely understand, I’ve heard from a lot of screenwriters who have doubts and who have questions and who aren’t sure if this is the best solution, but I also think that this is so much better than waiting around and doing nothing and letting more and more people fall through the cracks and letting their work go unacknowledged. So I’m thrilled.

**John:** Yeah. So I was on the committee that put up this whole proposal and wrote the explainer documents, so I’m obviously in favor of it. But I think you bring up two really crucial points here. One is that this is the difference between a writing credit and an employment credit. And right now in features the only things we used to have were writing credits. And so a screenplay by or written by, story by, that was it. And if you didn’t get one of those credits as a writer on a film there was no record that you ever worked on that film at all.

And so those credits just sort of disappear. And you had no way to sort of prove that you had actually been employed in the Hollywood system. Unlike in a TV writer situation where you get a writing credit for the episodes of television that you write, but you also get an employment credit showing that you were a staff writer, a story editor, a co-producer. There’s a whole way that you could prove that you actually worked. I think a thing that has changed over the last 20 years is that we’ve become much more aware of the fact that if you don’t have any employment credits you can’t sort of show that you work it’s very hard to sustain a career.

And you’re bringing up the diversity inclusion aspect of it, a thing that has also changed is that it used to be that those last writers on a project, the ones who were just coming in to do certain surgical work on things were the big guns, the folks who coming in to do a comedy pass, and it was maybe kind of OK that they weren’t listed there because they were getting paid a lot of money. What’s changed over the last couple of years is that oftentimes that last writer is someone who is coming in to do some work on authenticity and cultural specificity and it seems especially weird that they are not being acknowledged at all. And they sort of structurally could not be acknowledged by the way that our credits work. Because they’re never going to achieve the thresholds that they would need to hit in order to see their name on that movie.

So, like you I’m hopeful that this will bring about a positive change for those writers and sort of for all writers. And I’m mindful that there’s going to be people who are worried that directors are going to start asking for this credit or other producers are going to start asking for it, or actors will. I think the safeguards and the guard rails are there to sort of protect that from happening, but also if people did write on the movie, the wrote on the movie, and having their name show up at the end crawl of things I don’t think is going to be the worst outcome.

**Liz:** No. And I think, I mean, honestly I was just at the movies last week for The Eternals. And there was a group there who I didn’t realize this at the time, but I think this is what happened, but one of their friends worked in special effects. And the moment that their name came up in the middle of that huge crawl towards the end, like this group just exploded into cheers. And it was me and my friend and we’re cheering for them, too. And it was just such a proud moment. And I just remember looking at that, being like man it’s going to be so nice – it’s going to be so nice for the writers that I know who have been working on certain films for less than $1,500 a day to basically use their own lived experience to make someone else’s project feel authentic and breathe authentic. And to be able to have that moment of pride where you’re in the theater and you see your name and you can kind of acknowledge to everybody that, yes, I was part of something great.

It’s a good feeling. It’s a really nice feeling. So I wanted to bring that up because it was kind of a beautiful moment that just made me remember why it’s magical sometimes to be working in this industry.

**John:** Aw. And Liz it’s always magical to get to chat with you about our industry and our films and delicious desserts.

**Liz:** Yes, thank you so much for having me.

**John:** And can you come back at the end of the show to talk through a One Cool Thing?

**Liz:** Yeah, I’ll hang around.

**John:** Cool. Back in Episode 505 Craig and I talked with Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi about the challenge of producing the first season of their show, The Mysterious Benedict Society, which filmed entirely in Vancouver while they were in pandemic lockdown here in Los Angeles. The show got a second season, no surprise, but what was surprising is that the show is moving from Canada to California. So my one question for Matt and Phil is how the hell did that happen?

Matt and Phil, why is your show moving? How did that work?

**Matt Manfredi:** Well there are a couple reasons. One of which is there’s this tax credit specifically for shows moving back to LA after a first season. Perhaps after a second season. But moving back to LA. So it’s always appealing for us to shoot in LA and the thing about the story of season one, the setting for season two is not in the same location necessarily. So it kind of fit what we wanted to do story wise – it gave us an ability to move.

**John:** So was it always part of the plan? Or when did the possibility of moving to California come up?

**Phil Hay:** It came up, it wasn’t always part of the plan. It came up as a possibility right when we got renewed officially. As often happens there was a big run up period where we were kind of renewed but we needed to get all the ducks in order and actually get that. So in that period it came up as an idea that the studio thought was possible because of this, and again because of this tax credit which is kind of doing exactly what it’s supposed to do. So we kind of did a parallel plan, one for Vancouver and one for Los Angeles.

It became financially feasible once we got that tax credit. And for many reasons we were excited to do it. I mean, we absolutely loved shooting in Vancouver and loved the crew there and everything about it. In this case the opportunity also for the cast who in many cases had to not be with part of their family to move up to Vancouver and things, there’s an opportunity – most of them are LA based – to kind of bring everybody home which I think was a really powerful lure, you know.

And then I think we also, I don’t know, personally Matt and I are – and we’ve talked about this before – we’re very kind of passionate about California film and about filming here. And in the case of our movies, you know, Destroyer and The Invitation, they’re about Los Angeles so that’s kind of natural. But The Mysterious Benedict Society is not. It’s different. And this is just a desire to shoot here for all the reasons of jobs and pouring kind of back into our local economy, our local thing.

**Matt:** And I’ll say that one thing that made it a little easier for us, because we loved our crew in Vancouver, and if they were all available and ready to go it would have made it a more difficult decision because the look of the show is specific and they pulled it off during the pandemic and it was incredible. They were so great. But because of our short order and the time it took to renew the season our crew, the stages, our line producer weren’t going to be available. So it kind of made the decision a little less emotionally fraught.

**John:** Now a question for the two of you, what did you personally have to do in order to get this California tax credit? Were you tracking up to Sacramento with a slide show and tap dancing? Were you writing anything? What were you doing?

**Phil Hay:** Matt and I have a PAC, it’s a very small, it’s like 15 lobbyists, and the rest of the staff. No, we didn’t personally have to do anything like that. I think, you know, us in conjunction with Todd and Darren our partners, and in conjunction with 20th, the studio, and Disney+ the network, everybody just got excited about that idea and then it becomes very fairly decided that what the rubric is for deciding who gets this credit is very directly tied to jobs and wages. And the more you can show that and also filming out of the zone, for example, like filming in unlikely places and bringing work there within California. These are all things that go into deciding who gets it. So, the studio is responsible for creating that whole application and looking at the budget and highlighting how we can do it in order to meet all their requirements.

**John:** Now while I was reading up about this tax credit I saw a statistic which I thought was good and interesting which is that Film LA announced that film and TV production is 22.1% above the pre-pandemic average in Los Angeles. So, filming really is happening a lot here and in town. There was always this worry that after the pandemic shut down stuff wouldn’t come back up to speed here in California. That it would all move to Atlanta, it would all move to New Mexico, and there’s still plenty of shooting happening here in town.

**Matt:** Yeah, definitely. I think there’s a tremendous amount of shooting happening everywhere. Vancouver is booked solid as well. But I think in LA I think there’s probably other factors. I mean, I think that also, you know, frankly the vaccine situation is one that people think a lot about, about traveling to places where the vaccines are not as widely distributed versus Los Angeles. I think that’s actually a factor for a lot of productions. And I think it’s exciting for us to see – like, you know, as people who came out here as you did a long time ago to do this, I think a lot about cinematographers we know and the production designers we know and the costume designers we know who are kind of vagabonds by necessity. That they put down roots and have families in Los Angeles but spend so much time traveling elsewhere to make films and television that I just think it’s a really positive thing to have people consistently hopefully be able to be home for long stretches of time doing shows and movies, one after the other, in California.

**John:** Do you have a sense of when you start shooting?

**Phil:** January 24.

**John:** Fantastic. Guys, can I get you to come back at the end of the show to share some One Cool Things?

**Matt:** Always.

**Phil:** Yeah.

**John:** Aline Brosh McKenna, how are you?

**Aline Brosh McKenna:** I’m great. Thank you.

**John:** Now you are currently in production on a movie titled Your Place or Mine. It stars Reese Witherspoon, Ashton Kutcher. It is produced by so many talented people included a Scriptnotes friend, Jason Bateman. So my one question for you is what is it like directing a feature after having produced a television show?

**Aline:** Well, it’s interesting because I have never directed before when I wasn’t running a show. And so I only really know how to direct while – I mean, in the past I’ve had to direct while I was still writing, still doing cuts, still going to mixes. And in the case of the Crazy Ex finale also pitching in on a live finale. So, you know, I’ve almost always been doing ten things that were not directing while directing.

So this has actually been kind of luxurious to focus on the one piece of material where the script was done. And I’ve been lucky in that the script was pretty done. I did a few rewrites kind of leading into it and then I did that budget rewrite that you always have to do to kind of dial in the budgetary restrictions. But I’ve really been able to focus on this one piece. And the thing about being a showrunner is you can peace out whenever you need to. So it’s like if you’re on set and they’re doing the thing, you go in and you check in and you’re like you guys are cool here, you got it, I’m going to go to crafty and get a Mounds bar.

But directing you’re there, so you’re physically there for every second. You’re physically on set in a chair. So, you have this more singular focus when you’re directing and showrunning is a lot more jobs that you’re doing at the same time but you’re able to be flexible with them. So showrunning was oddly a better mom job because even though I was working way, way more I think hours wise as a showrunner I put in way more hours, but I could do them like I would do the room, leave at 6, go home, see my kids, and then at night go over scripts, look at cuts, talk to Rachel, you know, do other tasks that I could as a showrunner – my main time commitment was the room, but the other work I could do, you know, go to post when it suited me, or look at cuts.

But directing is physically you are contiguous with your project every minute of every second. So I’ve enjoyed the singular focus. And then the other thing I will say that might be of interest to people is that when I started the directing process there were moments where I was approaching it as a showrunner in terms of like wanting to be dealing with logistics. And I was trying to kind of get into it on logistical things that there were lots of other people around who could help me. As you said we have several really great producers and a great line producer and a great AD. And so I kind of had to learn to keep my focus on the artistic stuff and not get into the logistical weeds as much as I would as a showrunner.

**John:** Can we talk about the sort of on the set, because watching you do Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, like watching you on the set of that show, you have to achieve a certain number of pages per day or the show just won’t get shot, it won’t get done. And features have pages per day as well, but the count is going to be lower. There’s not the expectation of going through so much. What was that adjustment like for you? And learning how, OK, we don’t have to move on so quickly. Was that a change for you?

**Aline:** Well the most luxurious things for me was all the time I got to spend with our DP, Florian Ballhaus, who I had been wanting to work with for 15 years since he did Devil Wears Prada. And on a TV show you barely, barely get time with the DP. I mean, our DPs were generous enough with me that I was able to do a little bit of prep with them on the TV show. But on the movie I spent weeks and weeks with Florian going through and figuring it out and figuring out how we were going to approach it visually and doing storyboards. And that is extremely luxurious.

And then as you said, you know, TV we went pretty much twice, I would say 2.5 to 3 times as fast. So, I’m sort of blown away by things like we have playback all the time and that seems like a real simple thing, but we didn’t really have the budget to have playback all the time on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend. We only had playback on the days we were doing musical numbers.

**John:** So let’s describe that for our audience. So this is basically you can look at the take that you just shot and see like, oh, did we get everything we needed in that take, correct? That was a luxury for you.

**Aline:** Yeah. And so you can say like did the actor put his beer down here or there. And then if you don’t have playback you’re like well I think someone saw it. You know? But with playback you can just see and match a lot better. So, there are a lot of things about the movie schedule that feel luxurious to me and they’re mostly around being able to get more interesting, more diverse types of coverage of scenes and really being able to conceive the coverage in a bigger way. And as I said I’m not doing ten other things so we’re focusing on those two or three pages in a different way than TV is really.

I mean, there were moments on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend where we would show up like Miracle of Birth, which I directed that episode, we showed up, did that musical number, which is quite complicated with children dancing, people going through a vagina like opening, and it was pretty complicated. We did that for four hours and then we went and shot the rest of the day. And on a movie that would be your whole day, if not two days. And obviously if you’re making an indie or you’re making something where you have a very short schedule then it’s similar, but this is a studio feature where we just have more time and really the luxury of really spending time with your collaborators in a very long prep process where you prep this one specific piece of material as opposed to a TV show is sort of like a flowing river, a network TV show I shall say, a flowing river where you’re really just trying to make sure that your boat stays upright, your baling out water, and you’re getting everything going in this giant flow of all these other things that are going on.

So it’s a little bit more micro surgery and I love that. So, you know, I focus on sleeping, which is something I couldn’t really do when I was running the show. When I was running the show I was pretty much working and often people were shooting while I was working at night and I would have trouble sleeping until I got the text that said we wrapped. And then, you know, first thing in the morning you’re going. And the movie has been much more regularly structured because I’m not working on all these other ten – I’m not looking at cuts. I’m not going from set to a mix. I’m really just focused on this one thing.

So what I have been focused on is sleeping. So if I’m not on set or preparing, I’m asleep.

**John:** Or you’re answering my one question on Scriptnotes. So thank you for coming back to let us know. How much longer do you have in production?

**Aline:** Not too long. A couple more weeks. Yeah, I mean, it’s been an enormous privilege. You know, when you’re a writer you live in the hypothetical. As I’ve said on the show before like the document production business is not why you come to Hollywood. You come because you want to make things. And I feel tremendously privileged. Any time I’m in a car driving to a set, any kind of set that’s shooting stuff that I wrote, it’s an enormous privilege. And it’s the thing as a writer you work so hard to get to. So, I’m really trying to savor it and not take it for granted.

**John:** Aline, thanks so much.

**Aline:** You’re welcome.

**John:** All right. So I’m sitting across from Stephen Follows who is a British filmmaker and data scientist. Are those the right combination of things?

**Stephen Follows:** Yeah. I don’t think I have qualifications in anything. But I do a lot of film data research and I’m a filmmaker by trade.

**John:** Now I first found you on Twitter or online because we were talking about the movies you can’t find online anymore, so movies that you used to be able to find at Blockbuster and just for whatever reason you cannot get them anyplace. Can you remind listeners what you were able to discover about that?

**Stephen:** Yeah. I mean, I’ll be honest, I’m not going to quote numbers off the top of my head, but definitely it was really interesting when we think about the kinds of films that make it through all of the different gatekeepers to be available to the public. And, you know, there are films that are taken off the circuit I guess for political reasons. My understanding as an outsider is that Dogma was one of those films where there was a deal done to take it out of circulation.

But there are many films that just sort of fall out of circulation. They fall between whether it’s bankruptcies, or people can’t be bothered to do it, or they forget. There’s a lot of messiness in the supply chain.

**John:** Absolutely. And so in the days when we had Blockbuster or when Netflix was really shipping DVDs around DVDs still existed so you could always have a copy of that movie, but as we moved to a completely streaming world some movies you just can’t get because there could be music rights that are complicating it or just the underlying rights to who owns this film can be hard to sort out. The problem is not a supply chain thing. Really it’s a legal rights thing. Basically you need a bunch of paralegals to sort out all this stuff and it’s not profitable for anyone to do it.

**Stephen:** Well exactly. And so yeah you’ve absolutely got legal reasons. You’ve also got technical reasons in the sense that you’ve got to scan some of these films. And you’ve got to find the good master print. You’ve got to scan it. And that whether it’s profitable or not just might not be worth the effort. And then any restoration work or I mean I’ve seen a few DVDs, I won’t name any names, but you watch them and they clearly scanned from a very old print. And it’s just like this is trash. But no one is going to bother going back to the original if they can find it in the right vault. And so I think we forget that as we go through all these different formats. I think you can tell how old you are by how many formats you remember shooting on.

And I think as DVDs everyone thought well we’ll scan them at SD because that will be all we’ll need. Oh, now we need them in HD. Oh, no, we only do 4K content. And fortunately we’ve skipped the fact that we’re only in 2D. Fortunately 3D hasn’t become a requirement. But there is that. Every time we upscale and we improve we also lose a load of things that just aren’t worth taking along the journey. It’s like every time you move houses you leave a load of things you don’t really care about and then years later you look back and go where’s that award I won or whatever.

**John:** All right. I want to talk with Stephen Follows about his film education in London versus what he perceives to be film education here in Los Angeles, because you are the first I think London-educated film person we’ve had on this podcast. So talk to us about when you first started studying film.

**Stephen:** So I went to film school as a university student 20 years ago. And I did a degree in film production. To give you a sense of the timing we did some stuff on celluloid, you know, Super-16, and some stuff digitally. And I had a friend, Chris, who was on a digital film course which was called Time Based New Media. So it was that era where everyone didn’t know what film was and didn’t know what film wasn’t.

But, yeah, I did a three-year degree at an arts college. And so what it meant was that most of my friends and people who were around me in other courses were doing costume, jewelry, fine arts. It was very arts-based. Whereas I think here in the states it’s a business, isn’t it? Even if you’re an artist you’re an artist within a business. And I think being in London, being in an arts college, I mean, we didn’t have any lectures on business at all. And by design perhaps. And I may be self-selecting because I went to an arts college, so this is no criticism of them necessarily, although it wouldn’t have hurt to have a couple in three years.

**John:** What strikes me as strange at an arts college is that I think of the arts as being things that you can kind of do by yourself. Obviously there’s dramatic arts which require teamwork and everyone coming together, but things like painting is a solo art. And filmmaking though is inherently a really collaborative art. It’s about getting a big team together and sort of sharing a vision and doing all that stuff.

And so were you, the celluloid stuff you were shooting or the video stuff you were shooting, was that as teams or was it solo projects?

**Stephen:** It was a mix of it. So there would be the occasional celluloid project or essay, but the vast majority would be for a semester you were put together in a team and you’d take different roles. And you were going out and making a short film on a brief, essentially. That’s what it was. And there were other lectures around there, around editing. And you take special lessons. But fundamentally the thing you cared most about was the short that you were making each semester.

**John:** And how much of that focus on that short was on the writing versus the production of it?

**Stephen:** I mean, it’s tricky because they did care about the writing, but to be honest the production is so much more complicated. It’s bigger, it’s longer, almost so you can’t do it till you’ve done the writing. I don’t want to say they dismiss the writing, but it definitely was you need to get over that first step and you’re quite keen to get over that first step. But I mean I have been involved in other schools since then. I’m the Chairman of the Central Film School. I’ve taught a lot at the Met Film School and a few others. And what’s interesting is that they all have different approaches. But the ones that are most interesting to me, just interesting, I don’t even know if I can validate it either way, is that you have a screenwriting program and you have a filmmaking program. And sometimes they also have acting programs or sister colleges or whatever.

And that’s really interesting because it means that the writers are really spending a whole – they have a client to start with, which is a nice relationship to get used to. It’s not a nice relationship, but it’s a nice thing to get used to. But also they can actually put time into it. It’s not just the first thing you have to tick off the list of making a short. It’s their project. And so I don’t know whether that produces better films, whether it produces more arguments, whether it works. But it’s closer to the industry and probably I think as a writer doing them a better journey because they’re just writing. Writing is hard. It’s a fulltime job. It’s a full thing, as you know. You don’t need it to be one step before you then go off and shoot it. It should be its own thing.

**John:** Now Craig is notoriously anti film school. And so what is the best defense of film schools or argument for film schools for a person who is out of high school or out of the lower grades to learn about film? What is a good argument for film school?

**Stephen:** Well it’s funny. I wouldn’t even say I’m pro film school per se in the same, you know, I’m not pro Chinese food. You know, like it depends what is the right place to be, the right time, and so for some people it’s exactly the right thing to do. And for others it’s entirely the wrong thing to do.

I’d say it’s almost never the shortest path if you know where you’re going. It’s going to be more expensive. It’s going to be more time-consuming. And we all know that what you need to do is go and work in the film industry. Like that’s kind of it, right? Especially the moment we’re in right now, nobody is unemployed who wants to be employed in the production side of film. Wages are going through the roof. Streamers – I mean, I don’t know how long this will last, but certainly no one is unemployed. You know, we have the opposite problem of working too many hours or whatever.

So, if you know where you’re going the shortest path is very rarely via film school. The main argument for film school is an argument that you’ll hear a lot within general education which is that you don’t know what you want to do. It’s that magic quasi period between being an adult and a child. It’s by having a purpose but not a job. And you’ve got restrictions but you’re safe. And so discovering yourself in [postural] care. Like I learned a lot about who I am at university and who I shouldn’t be. I learned a lot about what it was to be an artist and to bumble around and have no purpose in what you’re up to but still the opportunity to do things.

The idea of jumping out of high school into being a runner sounds pretty harsh and I wouldn’t be surprised if they went very well through the industry but then got to 30 and went who am I, what do I want to do, how I have ended up in visual effects. You know, not that there’s anything wrong with that, but you end up specializing incredibly hard. Whereas at film school you hold the boom one day, you write the script the next, and then you’re doing music. There’s a lot to be said for the discovery of personhood and identity and you as an artist. I don’t know what else compares to that.

**John:** Yeah. I think my best argument for film school is that it puts you in a cohort of people who are trying to learn about the same thing you’re trying to learn about and you graduate from that film school with a bunch of people who are at your same level. And that people always assume that they need to meet people who are further up the ladder, who are going to help them out, but really it’s your peers that are your biggest resource that you get out of film school. And those are the folks who are going to be crewing on your films. You’re going to be reading their scripts. And you’re all going to kind of grow in the industry together, especially if you’re in a growth period which this feels like.

**Stephen:** Yeah. I mean, I still remember the very first day of film school and I still have a strong emotional positive connection to it, because no one knew anyone else. Everyone was super awkward. It’s the first day. But I went from being one of two guys in my high school that were the film guys to everyone being the film guys. Everyone saw the same films as me. Everyone saw the same references. It normalized my thing. But it also then instantly said well what are you going to do with it. Because, OK, you don’t get points for saying you’ve seen that film. Are you going to go make one? Well actually we’ll come and make one with you. Oh, OK.

It bumped everything up a level like you said with peers who were in the same place as you. And those people I met, I mean, so as an anecdote when I was a kid growing up I’m really into comedy and I’d see all of these BBC comedians all working with each other and I kept thinking how do you break into that circle. And then after film school I realized you don’t break into that circle. You build your own circle. And you build a circle when no one cares. And you work hard and you see who works hard. Who steals money from you, who doesn’t? Who has got good ideas, who doesn’t? Who is a nice human being? And then as you all start to progress you’ve got a circle that’s stronger and stronger and then when you’re actually in the industry and you’re looking for someone to rely on that you understand, that you respect, of course it’s that person. It’s not someone you haven’t seen before.

So those circles are very hard to break into, but they’re very easy to form because they just take time. And you’re in the trenches before it matters. So I would say that the biggest argument for film school is about space. And time and focus. And arguably in the world today, especially now, but also generally when do you get to try something and fail? Who is going to give you the chance to be a boom operator? I’ve worked a Nagra machine. I’m never going to do it again. But I have a huge amount of respect for sound because I’ve had to do it once and I remember how bad I did it. And I’d never do that in the industry. And I think if everyone in the industry has gone down a single department track their entire life that can’t be as good as if everyone has had a go at everything else early on and failed and succeeded and found their joy.

So, yeah, I would say it’s never shortest the path but it might be the one you need to let things grow.

**John:** Great. Stephen Follows, do you have a One Cool Thing?

**Stephen:** I do. This is something I read a while ago and when I’ve subsequently looked for it I’ve had to dig around a bit because I think it was originally on the Village Voice and the original link isn’t there. But I’m absolutely certain that we can find it and link to it in the podcast. There is an article entitled No I Will Not Read Your Script. And it is fantastic. It is everything you’ve been thinking when someone says, “Oh, can you just read my script.” And then two days later they go, “I’ve rewritten it. Can you have a read of it again?” And you start to boil. And you know you want to help people but you get to a point where you’re like, no, I will not read your script. And it’s explaining the process of reading, but also about people ask quite glibly for people to read their script and actually it’s quite a big ask. And it’s OK to do and it’s OK to read scripts, but it’s sort of, I don’t know, it’s a good articulation of all of that pain and blood boiling you get if you just open yourself up to read everyone’s script.

So, let me ask you, John. How much time do you read people’s scripts when they say will you read my script?

**John:** I will read a script if it is truly of a friend who is doing it for the first time and I feel like might have a shot at it. I’ll always read a script for somebody who I think actually I suspect has a good, funny voice. And so there have been people who I see on Twitter and they seem to actually have a good sense of how words fit together in ways that work well. Or if I’ve read them in another way I will do so.

I’m not rushing out there to read my dry cleaner’s script because it’s just exhausting. And we all know why it’s exhausting because they’re generally bad. And you’re asking a huge time commitment. You’re asking for a good hour/90 minutes at a time and the painful possible discussion afterwards about sort of what you actually thought of this.

**Stephen:** Yeah. I mean, I always ask people a couple of questions when they say can you read my script. I’m always like OK what stage are you at? What do you at need? You can ask them quite directly do they need validation or are they actually wanting notes. Mostly they want validation. But also you say, look, I tend to be quite brutal with notes. It tends to not work out well. You know, you try and put them off. And the ones that actually really say, “No, I need that. I need that. Please be honest,” you kind of go, OK, well you know.

I had a friend Ben Aston recently who is writing a film for Netflix. And he took notes so well it was so impressive that it sort of restored my faith in giving notes. Because he was just – it was painful for him because notes always are, but he was so open to them. He cherished them and he basically cherished me giving the notes to him. And I was so inspired by that I wanted to go and read four more other scripts, which I’m sure would then put me back on the loop elsewhere.

**John:** Cool. Liz Alper, do you have a One Cool Thing to share with us?

**Liz:** I do. I am really into shrubs right now. I’ve been getting more and more into shrubs. And it’s not the shrubbery.

**John:** Not topiary?

**Liz:** Not a topiary. So shrub is a vinegar based drink that you usually mix with soda water or you can use it for the basis of a non-alcoholic cocktail. And as someone who is actually physically incapable of consuming alcohol because I don’t possess the enzyme that can break alcohol down, for me it’s been a really, really fun drink to have and feel like I’m having something special at the end of the day.

So right now I actually went to a little sale for a restaurant that I love called Phenakite. It’s the chef who does a wonderful restaurant called Porridge and Puffs. And she’s really into pickling and she’s really into vinegars. And she made a yuzu pear shrub and a hibiscus rose shrub that I’m a little obsessed with right now. And it’s a great alternative to soda because I drink Diet Coke like it’s water, like I’m in the middle of the desert and I haven’t seen an oasis for nigh two months. And so having this kind of different drink that’s a little healthier for me, it’s cleaner, it’s got those good gut bacteria that’s going to help you digest things well. It’s something that I can’t recommend highly enough. And especially if you’re a little bit more adventurous and you’re looking for something that really is very low in sugar but has so much flavor to it, try it out.

You can make your own. You can look some up. There are lots of recipes out there now. It’s a great alternative to an alcoholic beverage. It’s a great alternative to soda. It’s just a really great way to keep hydrated while also having a good time.

**John:** I also fully hear you about the need for a nighttime beverage versus a daytime beverage. Because I think your body and your brain want somebody say like, OK, the day is over and now we’re just going to watch TV and not think about things.

**Liz:** Exactly.

**John:** And so that traditionally has been a glass of wine for me, but increasingly I’ve been going to herbal teas that I wouldn’t drink during the day but I will drink at night. It creates that nice split of like, you know, this is a nighttime thing. I can start winding down.

**Liz:** You would actually really enjoy this then. IKEA of all places has an amazing pine needle lemon tea. And that is my go to right before bed, have a cup. And my brain immediately is like, OK, it’s sleepy time now. We’ve had our pine needles. It’s time to go to bed.

**John:** Liz, thank you so much for this. This is perfect. Phil Hay, Matt Manfredi, do you have One Cool Things to share with us?

**Phil:** I sure do, John. I, and this is a little bit of home cooking, but I think you’ll all figure me. There’s a television show called Yellowjackets that Karyn Kusama, my wife, and Matt and my partner in our company directed the pilot of. It’s created by Ashley and Bart Nickerson. And it’s just fantastic. I can say that freely as someone who is only a fan and did not work in any way on the show. So, check it out. It’s on Showtime. It is wild and weird and crazy and really glad that it is on television.

**John:** So Yellowjackets on Showtime. And Matt are you plus one on that? Do you have your own recommendation?

**Matt:** I’m going to plus one that hard. Because I am a big supporter of Karyn Kusama, obviously. So I’m going to plug that. But I will say I was holed up awaiting the results of a PCR test before flying home. And so I was by myself unexpectedly for a few days, just watching a lot of TV. And I will say that the first sketch of the new season of I Think You Should Leave got me laughing like nothing in a while. So I highly recommend just taking three minutes out of your life and getting a big laugh.

**John:** Now I’m trying to remember, the first sketch of this new season, is that the hot dog and the sleeve?

**Matt:** That is.

**John:** It’s just terrific. It’s brilliant.

**Matt:** The whole show is good. But that particularly was just a highlight of mine.

**Phil:** I will plus one that sight unseen. Because it sounds great.

**John:** Gentlemen, thank you both very, very much.

**Phil:** Thank you.

**Matt:** Thank you.

**John:** Aline Brosh McKenna, do you have a One Cool Thing for us?

**Aline:** I do. Do you know about Goldbelly?

**John:** I don’t. Tell me about Goldbelly.

**Aline:** Oh my god. So Goldbelly is a website and you go and you can order delicious things from all over the country. So, pizza, biscuits, pies, and cakes, and bagels. And they source it from mostly small businesses all over the country. It gets to you super-fast. It’s stored in a way – they give you really clear instructions on how to store it, freeze it, thaw it, whatever. And I started using it during the pandemic because we couldn’t travel and it just was like fun to get, you know, pizza from Chicago and biscuits from a soul food place, and whatever. So BBQ we ordered.

So I started getting stuff from all over the country just so we could feel like we were getting some adventure at home. And now for Thanksgiving I don’t have a lot of time to prepare for Thanksgiving so I hit it hard with pies, the cakes, the sides. You know, you can really order from some great places and support some small businesses. Goldbelly.com. And there’s an app also. But it’s a good service.

**John:** Excellent. Thank you.

**Aline:** Yummy.

**John:** All right. And finally my One Cool Thing is a website called Series Heat, it’s sort of web app, by Jim Vallandingham. What you can do is you enter in the title of a TV series you like, like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and it shows you the IMDb ratings for each episode of that show. And what’s kind of fun about it is it organizes it into a grid so you can see like, oh, this is when people liked the show, this is when people did not like certain episodes, or there might be an arc of the show. Around the office we’ve been playing it as a game where we will do it for a show and then take a screenshot without the title of the show and have people try to figure out what show we’re talking about.

So useful to the degree that any ratings are useful. Also it shows you the shape of a show in terms of like when there were short seasons, when there were long seasons. You can tell when the writers’ strikes happened. So it’s called Series Heat and there will be a link for that in the show notes.

And that was our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao, as always, and edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Henry Adler. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter, Craig is sometimes @clmazin. I am always @johnaugust.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you find the transcripts and sign up for our weekly-ish newsletter called Inneresting which has lots of links to things about writing.

You can sign up to become a premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you get all the back episodes and bonus segments. And don’t forget to order your Scriptnotes sweatshirt, your hoodie, your t-shirts. Most of them can still probably ship by Christmas but there’s no guarantee at this point. But still you want something for the holidays. Thanks and I’ll talk to you soon.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** So back here with Stephen Follows. Now having you hear in 2021, a question we put out to our listeners on the podcast is are screenplay competitions ever worth it. And so there are the big name competitions like Nicholls Fellowship and Austin is a bigger one. And then there’s a bunch of scammy ones that we’ve always sort of railed against that are sort of we kind of know are worth very, very little.

But you as a data scientist, the person who sort of would look into this question normally, how would you approach the question of whether screenplay competitions are ever worthwhile for the entrants?

**Stephen:** Well, I’d start by objecting to the question, but that’s usually just for fun. Is it ever worth it implies that, you know, there is an implication there. And it might well be the result of all these kind of areas. There are a bunch of scammers and there will be a bunch of great examples that can help people. And our job is to disentangle which are which. But also overall what’s the average. You know, these outliers skew everything in the film industry.

**John:** So let’s pretend your Nate Silver. Maybe the phrase, the question of like what value do screenplay competitions provide, if there is a value.

**Stephen:** Well let’s start by saying who we are. You know, if we’re somebody who is already established in the industry then the benefit might be quite marginal. If we’re somebody who lives very, very far, this is not for the actual competition, it’s just the concept of a competition. So if we’re someone who lives in a very far distant place geographically, or just from the center of the industry, then the theory of a competition is great, in theory, because you have a level playing field. People are only reading your text on the script. And so any disability, anything that you have that’s holding you back from barriers in the industry won’t come to the fore.

So we have to move to, OK, so in theory they could work, but in practice do they? Well, we have to think about who is picking up these films that the other end. Are the people who actually are important gatekeepers who can pick up new films or spec scripts, are they looking to these competitions? And so there is a little bit of fashion. If everyone thinks something is cool it is cool. If everyone stops thinking it’s cool it’s not cool. But it was.

And so part of the question for this if you were starting to do the data analysis you’d start saying, OK, well what’s the goal of the people entering, which is to get purchased or optioned. Who is optioning them? OK, go and talk to them and do the analysis of what do you think of competitions, what do you think of these competitions.

And if everyone thought that they’re a waste of time, well then by definition they are if they’re the only people purchasing. But I think we have to think about with all these things there are multiple benefits in theory. So for example a lottery ticket. If you only do the math on the lottery ticket apparently if a lottery draw is on the Saturday night you should buy the ticket on Saturday afternoon, because before that you’re more likely to die than to win the lottery. And so it’s utility theory.

But I’d argue that actually you should buy it Sunday first thing in the morning because then you get a whole week of believing you might win, right? The utility there is not the million dollars, it’s the dreaming of being a millionaire. So with these competitions you could argue that there’s a soft benefit in the sense that it gives you a deadline, it gives you a structure, it gives you a support base, it gives you a dream. And it might give you feedback and it might give you a journey. So those things are hold to quantify. But if we thought that they were worth it to the screenwriter’s journey we’d have to find ways of quantifying them.

But I guess all of this stuff is talking around the edges of the core question which is is it worth the money. Can they deliver on the promise? And I’d say without having run hard data on all of them, no, the vast majority of them are not delivering value for the vast, vast majority of people entering. Because they can’t possibly. You look at the numbers. That’s the thing about these. They’re not multi-level marketing. They’re not pyramid schemes. But when you look at multi-level marketing you only have to look at the math to know that they can’t deliver. And with these competitions look at the number of people entering and the number of people who could meaningfully get an outcome that would change their lives. You have to argue that – I mean, you could argue that will somebody benefit from this competition? Yes. Will I benefit in this competition? Almost certainly not.

You know, I have looked in the past. I’ve done research on quite a few scripts and quite a few competitions and I’ve never been able to directly address the benefit or not of these competitions because what you have to start from is a quite complicated place. You have to say what would the journey have otherwise been. Because in theory if these competitions are perfect they’re won by incredible writers. And the industry is actually quite good at discovering – it’s messy but it’s actually quite good at discovering talent, I think. It’s not efficient but it’s good.

So therefore the competition is just a way of getting there quicker and also you have to think about well what are they actually getting? They get the award, they get the pleasure, they get the attention. But I don’t know how many of them are doing deals.

**John:** Yeah. So let’s try to distinguish between the hard benefits and the soft benefits. So the soft benefits shouldn’t be overlooked, so I’m glad you brought them up. Because that sense of like giving you a deadline, giving you a purpose, giving you a sense of some hope, those can all be soft benefits. I’d argue they can also be sort of soft detriments where you’re putting too much faith and too much hope into this one thing which will probably not pay off. And it may be distracting you from the actual real achievable things you could do which is to write another script, to like actually find ways to put it in the hands of someone who could do something with it. And that false hope can I think be its own detriment which I think these often can sell false hopes.

**Stephen:** Oh, absolutely, and there’s no doubt that they do, even if they’re intending not to. Even if you have the best competition in the world, by definition people are going to think they have a chance when they don’t, some people.

I think what’s really tricky about this is that when you look at the, I don’t know what it is, hundreds of thousands of people coming into the industry every year. The vast majority of them will fail if your metric is purely whether they get to the end goal or not. But whether that makes you wrong to encourage them to carry on, you know, I talk a lot with drama teachers in the UK and the ethics of them telling every actor they have a chance when the odds are absolutely saying they won’t, you know, is false hope false hope or is it hope and then it turns out not to have been what you wanted but it’s still part of your journey? That’s almost philosophical.

So if it’s not a scam, as in like there is a competition. They have got industry people involved. And if the people entering know the odds, then I’m very agnostic about it. I don’t really care, as in I don’t mind. But the question is always are they actually describing what it is. Do the people entering have a clear sense of their chances and what’s going to happen?

**John:** All right. So let’s try to narrow the question down to the hard benefits of what you get out of this and the value proposition for we’ll just say the Nicholl Fellowship is the premier screenplay competition because it’s the one most people have heard of and it’s the one I can think of working writers who have won that who seem to have benefited from it, or at least they won it and now they’re still having careers.

So what would be the criteria we’re looking at here? So would we be looking at who were the winners for the past ten years, or quarterfinalists for the past ten years and then tracking to see whether they are WGA members? Whether they are continuing to work? Because you’re the person who is often finding ways to pull data out of IMDb or do some hard rigorous analysis. So what would you do to see whether somebody is successful? What are the things you would look for as markers of success?

**Stephen:** That’s a great question. And I think that it’s the first step of all research that I do. It’s usually quite a disappointing first step which is to what level am I going to give up. What level am I going to have an easy answer? Because the real answer is you need to have a different universe where the only difference is they didn’t enter the competition. And we can’t have that. And we also need to make shortcuts like WGA membership is success. And of course it is correlated, but it’s not one to one. And so you’re right. We have to decide the level to which that we can accurately get the data and that it reflects our true question.

So we have to first by saying what is our true question. Is our question about them as a writer, the act of writing and crafting? Is it about the utility of them earning money, getting an agent, getting out there in the world? What is the promise of a competition? So I guess I’d ask you, John. What do you think is the meta promise of these competitions? Is it about writing or is it about being a writer?

**John:** I think it’s about being a writer. And so I think it’s about you win one of these competitions or you place high in one of these competitions and it gets you started in the process of being a professional screenwriter who is employed and employable as a writer, not just on this one project that you sold, but on future projects. And that it should never be about sort of this one script that won the award. It should be about sort of all the work that you’re doing and hopefully decades of a career.

**Stephen:** OK. That’s good. That’s a good focus and an easier one for us to tell. It reminds me of a study that, you know, there’s long been a conversation about whether certain schools that are selective whether they actually just find good students or whether they make good students. And there was a study I remember around Stuyvesant High School in New York which is public but filtered. And they tried to work out to what degrees are they finding good students or making good students. And they looked at the students who just made it in and the ones that just didn’t. So in theory they’re a very close cohort.

And my understanding, apologies if I’m wrong from remembering it from a few years ago, was that they found that there was very little life difference between those two people, meaning the school didn’t have a meaningful difference in the things we’re measuring. There still might have been quality of life or whatever.

So, perhaps one of the things to do would be to think about how did the outcomes differ from people who make it through to the quarters, the semis, the finals. That might be interesting and see whether there’s a big drop off. We might be measuring talent, again, but I’m making up the numbers, but if you have 5,000 people entering the competition, the final 16 and the final 1 should be very, very similar in quality on a curve, right? So you’d hope that if you’re saying winning the competition is everything, then you’d hope to see those people having disproportionately large outcomes compared to the people just below them.

But I think because this industry is all about people. It’s all about the stories you tell and the stories that people believe, I think it’s not really going to come down purely to quantitative data. It will come down to qualitative data. And I think you need to find a really good subset of people who are exactly the people who would buy scripts, would try and pick up a writer. Right at that inflection point and they use competitions and then start talking to them about what they think of the competitions.

**John:** That’s definitely been one of our plans is to really talk to the people who would theoretically be using these competitions as a gatekeeping function to see whether they are actually reaching out to the winners and quarterfinalists and semifinalists and see whether that is a metric that is helpful and useful for them and as a filtering process. Because unlike a sports competition or even an academic program where you can see what the grades were and that stuff, there’s not objective quality on like this is a great script, this is a poorly written script.

And even the fact that these screenplays are going through readers who probably have some rubric for how they’re doing things, it’s not the same readers reading all of these things. I know I was a reader for a year at Tri-Star and I liked some things and I didn’t like some things. And some of that was just taste. It’s hard to figure out whether there could be any real objective measure of success in this one script and then success going down the road.

So, I do think talking to both the agents, managers, producers who would be looking at this stuff and meeting with these writers, but also talking with the folks who placed well in the Nicholls and comparing them with a sampling of the folks who didn’t place well in the Nicholls and sort of what the outcomes are.

**Stephen:** And also you can talk to people who are finalists and winners and say how did your life change. Because I think the analogy that I can connect to is when you have a short film that does very well at awards, or you have a golden year where you’re doing quite well, what’s really interesting is that that year very clearly starts at the first awards and very, very clearly ends when someone else wins that award 12 months later. And I’ve warned about it and I went through that journey with a few shorts. And it’s so interesting because it is like hot and cold. It’s just on and off. And that actually proves that there is an effect. Any writer that you speak to who has done very well in awards you kind of want to know how steep that inflection point was. How much do they suddenly get calls when they go through to a certain stage? And to what degree did it actually cool down afterwards? Because the flatter the curve, the less the competition made a difference, the steeper, the more it was like well Monday it was announced, Monday afternoon my phone kept ringing. That’s a good sign. Correlation right?

I think also there is a separate piece of work you can do where if you look at, this might be more sociology than data science, but try and look at all the promises, all of the claims that are being made by each of the competitions and then boil them down to the underlying human desire there. What is this? Is this validation? Is this improvement of your writing talent? Is this connections? And then the onus is on the competitions to prove that they do this.

I mean, it’s a free market. They don’t have to prove anything. But if they want to say that this works you should be able to say, well, it seems to me that the main sell, the main thing that you put out there and that people talk about is that you do X, Y, Z. Say you get me an agent or whatever. OK, well show me the data for that. And they don’t have to. But I would have thought they’d want to. And you’ll find very quickly some of them will be incredibly open, very happy to talk to you. They’re very proud of their record. Others won’t talk to you. And I kind of think well that’s not data-data. That’s data we use in the same way if you’re meeting someone new and you ask them about their personal life or what they’re up to and they’re incredibly closed and sketchy, you draw conclusions right?

So, I wouldn’t expect any of these guys to be pleading the fifth. And I would be worried if they were. It’s kind of on them, I think. I don’t think it’s on you to take them down or prove them. I think it’s on them to back up what they’re directly or indirectly claiming. And I think the best ones would be delighted to do that and have that for them. And I think many of them would love to be sitting in this chair talking to you about it. And the ones that won’t, I mean, maybe there’s your answer. You just release blank podcast where you just give them the questions and wait a minute or so and then carry on with the next question like in a police interview.

**John:** Let’s wrap this up by bringing it back to the first case that you made which is that for many aspiring screenwriters competitions are a means of access. A means of access to someone who doesn’t live in this town, doesn’t have any other connections to this industry or might have disability or something else in their life that prevents them from doing the traditional ways into this industry. And I get that screenplay competitions feel like a point of access. I think what we’re trying to measure in this study is really whether equity of access leads to sort of equity of outcome. And basically it’s one thing to say this provides access to all these people, but if it’s access that doesn’t actually lead anywhere then it’s actually not truly access.

**Stephen:** Yeah. I mean, certainly we all know in all sectors of the film industry it’s very easy to sell a dream. It’s very easy to go to someone who doesn’t know about film investment and say look at the Blair Witch Project. Look at Paranormal Activity. Look at how much my film is costing. You do the math. And whilst that may not be in any way a lie, it’s definitely a lie through omission, it’s definitely amoral. And that’s an extreme case that we both know happens quite a lot. But that’s an extreme case.

It’s the same thing here. It’s the stuff between the lines that we need to sort of codify. We need to say, OK, you’re saying agents will read this, but what you’re really saying is people will sign you. And what you’re really saying is when they sign you you’ll get hired. And what we’re really saying is you’ll get hired to make real things. OK, so that’s your eventual promise. Let’s take away all the interim stamps and get to the final why and then measure that. And I think that we can do that with a lot of decoding.

I mean, it might be an interesting exercise to sit there, maybe even on the podcast, and read through the press releases or the statements from these kind of thing and then just start putting them in a small number of boxes. And doing it openly and honestly. Because the claims are not wrong. You can make any claim you want. It’s only if you back it up that it becomes stupid or not. So start by just assessing the claims, putting them in to different categories, seeing how they differ. Because I think the other thing you might be doing subconsciously is grouping them all together. And I’m sure if I grouped all screenwriters together you wouldn’t come out well. We are not the average of the people we’re around.

But also I think then if you did say, look, it turns out that 95% of them just aren’t delivering, or making false promises, then it would be a much stronger credible claim. And I suspect it would be closer to that then you’d be pleasantly surprised. But, you know, and then you have to think about what harm you’re doing. Like you said, false hope is horrific. But hope is essential. And the outcome at the end can’t really – maybe – I mean, what’s the difference between hope and false hope? I don’t know.

**John:** I think what we’re both talking about, making sure people have the information about what they’re really getting into and that they’re not receiving hope for false hope. And that that’s important.

**Stephen:** They’re not being misled.

**John:** Misled.

**Stephen:** And through omission or outwardly, I don’t care. I couldn’t care less. It’s the same thing. You know what you’re doing. And if you’re doing it ethically, as in you’re saying, no, this is the competition. If you believe in yourself so much that you think you’re bound to win, well that’s OK. But if I’m telling you you’re so good that you’re going to win, whatever, then it’s a problem.

**John:** Stephen, thank you for this.

**Stephen:** My pleasure.

Links:

* [PayUpHollywood Survey](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeJwPx8-eACD3b2-GMfkue6kGKdSiudlFa3wAX4oRMTaTg-fA/viewform)
* [WGA Members Approve Change In Movie Credits To Better Reflect All Writers’ Contributions](https://deadline.com/2021/11/wga-members-approve-change-movie-credits-1234874148/)
* [Hollywood crew union narrowly ratifies its contracts with studios.](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/15/business/media/iatse-contract-ratification.html)
* [‘Promised Land’ & ‘Mysterious Benedict Society’ Score Tax Credits For Moving To California](https://deadline.com/2021/10/promised-land-mysterious-benedict-society-california-tax-credits-move-1234861736/)
* [I Will Not Read Your F*%!ing Script](https://www.villagevoice.com/2009/09/09/i-will-not-read-your-fucking-script/)
* [Shrubs Drink Recipe](https://www.foodnetwork.com/videos/altons-cocktail-time-shrubs-0186744) and Liz’s favorite [Ikea Pine Needle Tea](https://www.ikea.com/es/en/p/egentid-green-tea-lemon-pine-utz-certified-organic-60415544/)
* [Yellow Jackets](https://www.sho.com/yellowjackets)
* [I Think You Should Leave](https://www.netflix.com/title/80986854)
* [Goldbelly](https://www.goldbelly.com/) Food Delivery
* [Series Heat](https://vallandingham.me/seriesheat/?utm_source=densediscovery&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter-issue-164#/?color=3&id=tt0411008)
* [Liz Hsiao Lan Alper](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3225554/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/LizAlps)
* [Matt Manfredi](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0542062/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/MattRManfredi)
* [Phil Hay](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0006534/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/PhilHay_)
* [Aline Brosh McKenna]() on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/alinebmckenna)
* [Stephen Follows](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1637486/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/stephenfollows) and his [website](https://stephenfollows.com/)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/)
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Henry Adler ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by [Megana Rao](https://twitter.com/MeganaRao) and edited by [Matthew Chilelli](https://twitter.com/machelli).

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/526standard.mp3).

Scriptnotes Episode 527 – Diehard, Transcript

December 15, 2021 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2021/die-hard-extended-edition).

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

**Craig Mazin:** My name is Craig Mazin, ho-ho-ho.

**John:** And this is a special episode of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

On this very special episode we are going to be looking at the 1988 film Die Hard, how it works on a story level. We’re going to focus on what screenwriters can learn from it and some of the mistaken lessons people have tried to learn from it. This is not going to be a detailed look at the history of the film or its place in cinematic canons, because we’re not that interested in that kind of stuff, are we?

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t really care. I just want to know what about this works so well. You and I both started in the early ‘90s. And in the early ‘90s there were a few movies that you were lectured about over and over. And Die Hard was definitely one of them.

**John:** So, Craig, what is your first exposure to Die Hard? Do you remember seeing it the first time? What was it for you?

**Craig:** Yes I do. I was a perfect age for it. I was 17 years old. I saw it in the movie theaters. I don’t remember when it came out.

**John:** Summer of 1988.

**Craig:** Yeah, so it was a Christmas movie in Summer. Summer of 1988 I was 17. What a great time. And I remember thinking it was a blast. I mean, it was fun, and you got the sense that you had shown up for a dumb movie and gotten something that wasn’t dumb at all.

**John:** Yeah. So weirdly I don’t remember seeing Die Hard the first time, but I do remember the first exposure I ever had to Die Hard as a concept which was summer of 1988. I was over at my friend Ethan Diamond’s house. His older brother, Andrew, came back from seeing Die Hard in the theaters. And we were standing in Ethan’s kitchen and Andrew said like, “I saw the future of movies and it is Die Hard.”

**Craig:** That’s kind of crazy. I mean, I remember thinking that when I saw The Matrix. I don’t know if I thought that when I saw Die Hard. In fact, I remember thinking this is just a really good version of for instance I think around that time I remember going to see Commando in the theaters with Arnold Schwarzenegger who gets weirdly name-checked in Die Hard. And I thought like, oh my god, this is like the best version of Commando ever. Yeah.

**John:** So we just did a special live show and Kevin Feige actually mentioned Die Hard as being the first time he saw a “normal” movie that he really liked, so a thing that didn’t involve super heroes, or fantasy, or elves, or gnomes, or dwarves. It was just a really great action movie. And so I think it has had an influence on even things beyond the normal action movies. And I think you can’t look at a lot of modern action movies without having some sense of what Die Hard did.

**Craig:** I agree. Die Hard gave us a sense of action pacing that I don’t think we were used to. And it also had a very odd modernity. Now, when we look at it we’re going to look at it also through the lens of its time. It is one of the most Reagan era movies possible.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** But the fact that it said we’re not going to be in space. We’re not going to be out in the open field. We’re not going to be doing car chases, running around. We’re going to dump all the things we normally do in a big cops and robbers movie and we’re just going to stick it inside a building and let the confined space and the weird specifics of that building work to our benefit. That was pretty revolutionary.

**John:** I would also say the comedy that’s consistent throughout the movie, and characters who show up very late but are given very specific character comedy bits, has had an influence on sort of how we think about all these kind of movies. There’s that sense that you kind of don’t make an action movie without some sense of what the comedy is going to be owes a debt to Die Hard.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, you could say that all Ryan Reynolds movies should pay a little bit of money to Die Hard every time they happen, because Ryan Reynolds’ character is kind of the best evolution of the wise-cracking tough guy. So he’s in great shape, he can run, he can shoot, he can kill if he needs to. When it is time to punch and get serious he can. When he needs to be heartfelt and care about a person and a relationship he can. But a lot of the times while he’s doing it he’s just tossing out these sardonic one liners. And Bruce Willis kind of invented that.

**John:** I think so.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So today on the episode I want to talk through a couple different areas. We should talk about characters. How we set up characters. How we know who is who. The characters have arcs. They’re shallow but they’re there. And I want to talk through arcs. How you find the beats in those arcs, the motivation behind characters. And how we signal to the audience what the characters want, both in the very near term and long term. Sort of what their overall goals are. This is a great movie in talking about hero weakness and villain strength, because the relationship between hero and villain is very different in this movie than we might expect.

And it’s also a great example of something we want to show to other action stars about like this is how you can be an action star and not be perfect in every moment. And it’s his weakness that I think makes the John McClane character so endearing to the audience.

**Craig:** Absolutely. He repeatedly shows fear, which I think we generally like. Maybe some actors don’t understand that. But we in the audience really, really appreciate it.

**John:** Now, rewatching this movie for this segment I was really impressed by sort of how well-structured and plotted it is. It is a jeopardy machine. And we have come to expect that out of movies, but I was surprised that there were very few scenes where you say like, oh, you could cut that scene and it wouldn’t have any impact. Everything that is there is there and very necessary. And it is setting up and paying off stuff constantly. So as we go through the movie from top to bottom we’ll try to point out situations where they are setting this up really well and they are going to pay it off and they have a whole plan. I feel like if you were to put this movie up on the whiteboard you would see like, OK, this is a really tight film just on an outline level.

**Craig:** No question. It does a brilliant job of setting things up and paying them off. And I’d actually forgotten how some of these little tiny things – I mean, the movie begins with one of the strangest conversations ever. And that conversation actually becomes incredibly important.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** It has repercussions throughout the film. You just don’t realize it then. But it kind of works. It’s pretty remarkable in that regard. They’re really good at that.

**John:** We won’t get a chance to single out every joke, but what we were saying about the comedy of the movie and the specificity of the characters is really important. These aren’t just types of characters going through roles. They are very specifically drawn, which is nice.

But, Craig, you did in your How to Write a Movie podcast, you talked about theme and central dramatic question. And my rewatching of this I didn’t feel like that was a primary unifying element behind how Die Hard holds itself together. Did you in rewatching it do you feel like there’s a central dramatic question it’s trying to ask and answer?

**Craig:** Barely.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Barely. And it turns on the relationship and it’s very simply encapsulated by the beginning and end of John McClane’s interaction with his wife, or maybe ex-wife, separated wife Holly. He comes to visit her, but they’ve been separated. And he essentially says in so many words, “I’m more important than you are.” And by the end he understands, no, actually we together are more important than just me. My needs don’t matter. I want to be a good husband to you. Very simple. Very, very, very simple.

But, essential. If you don’t have it, it really just is a guy running around a building and you don’t care.

**John:** Yep. And I think that’s a lesson that was mislearned by a bunch of people who tried to be Die Hard in a blank is that they didn’t do that work of what is the emotional journey he’s trying to go through.

**Craig:** Yeah. I remember at the time somebody made the joke that they were going in and pitching Die Hard in a building. It was really funny. So we had a spade of Die Hard – Die Hard did Die Hard on a plane, and Die Hard in an airport. There was a Die Hard in an everything. And Die Hard in a spaceship. And it got really, really frustrating.

Well, I mean, look, the gender politics are incredibly regressive. I mean, we have to talk about for a second how brilliantly this movie encapsulates the Reagan era. So very briefly you have a story about a woman who dares to have her own career. And her husband doesn’t want to follow her to Los Angeles because he’s a New York cop. And bizarrely has a backlog of cases? That’s not how policing works. He can just go ahead and be a cop in LA if he wants to. He can join that police department, I’m sure.

So this is the root of their marriage problems. She has dropped his name and is using her own. At the end, the way he saves her ultimately is by getting rid of this token of her success, which is the Rolex watch.

**John:** The Rolex watch.

**Craig:** She earned because she’s really good at her job. That has to go. And also she takes his name again because she must resume being his property, fully more. And this is really where I love Die Hard for being so Reagan era and honestly Trumpian in this regard, too. The ethos of the movie is that the people in charge of stuff like the bureaucrats in charge of law enforcement and the FBI, they don’t know anything. They’re stupid and incompetent. The media elites are terrible, unethical liars who don’t care about anything. The only people that can save you in the end – oh, and Europeans are trash.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** The only people who can save you in the end are just good old American men.

**John:** Working class men.

**Craig:** Working class men who are constantly rolling their eyes at the stupidity of those pencil neck “experts.” The insanity of the way that these police go about their job, not the police man we’re rooting for, but the police in charge. So like we’re procedure junkies now. We were not in 1988. So we watch this movie and we’re like, huh, I guess that’s how the police might. So there’s a cop car that’s been riddled with bullets, and a body also riddled with bullets has fallen out of a building onto the cop car. But the deputy chief of police is like, meh, I’m sure it’s nothing. OK, I buy it. No.

**John:** No. All right, but let’s talk about the gender politics for one second before we get into this, because looking at Bruce Willis’s character arc which is shallow but it is there, McClane does say, “Tell my wife I’ve been a jerk. I should have been more supportive.” He does have that epiphany as it comes through it. So I would say that they’ve drawn that relationship in a way that is meaningful within the course of the movie as presented. And I did like that it didn’t go out of its way to punish Holly’s character for being successful and being ambitious. They try to acknowledge that she should be able to do these things. The movie as a whole, everything gets destroyed, but I didn’t feel like they were trying to single her out.

And even though she is the woman who is being rescued, it didn’t have the very classic rescue princess tropes. She didn’t feel helpless through a lot of it. She was never screaming or panicked.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** She was incredibly competent.

**Craig:** But in the end they damseled her.

**John:** They did damsel her.

**Craig:** And it’s definitely a movie about a man rescuing a woman. She’s perfect. She has no flaws.

**John:** True.

**Craig:** Except for her weird insistence on being successful. [laughs] And a good mom. The Rolex thing is sort of startling. And the fact that at the end she’s like, “I am – no, my name is Holly McClane.” Look, it was 1988. I mean, she actually was a terrific character up until the kind of inevitable damseling. But I love the scene, and we’ll get to it, where she confronts Hans Gruber just in terms of you put me in charge. It was very well done. And Bonnie Bedelia.

**John:** Great.

**Craig:** A spectacular job. And this is a great place for us to stop and mention the writers that we’re talking about.

**John:** Yeah. So let’s talk about the background of all of this. This is a 1988 movie released by Fox. Directed by John McTiernan. Screenplay by Jeb Stuart and Steven de Souza. We’ll put a link in the show notes to the PDFs we have of it. Also we’ll have it up in Weekend Read. The script that we’re going to be talking about is a pretty close approximation of what the final movie is. So as we’re talking through this today we’re going to be talking in terms of like minutes in the movie, but the screenplay actually matches up pretty closely. The script I looked at was 127 pages and that feels about right to what the movie is.

**Craig:** It’s about a two-hour, ten-minute movie or so.

**John:** It’s based on a book by Roderick Thorp called Nothing Lasts Forever. I have not read the book, but I have read up some background on the book and I was surprised to see that the book actually has a lot more of the movie Die Hard in it than I would have guessed. Some of the stuff that’s in the 1979 book, so a retired NYC police detective, Joe Leland, is visiting the 40-story office tower headquarters of the Klaxon Oil Corporation, that changed, on Christmas Eve, where his daughter, Stephani Gennaro works. While he’s waiting for his daughter’s Christmas party to end a group of German Autumn terrorists take over the skyscraper, led by the brutal Anton Gruber.

**Craig:** Their gang name is Autumn-Era? So cool.

**John:** Joe had known about Gruber through a counterterrorism he attended years before. Barefoot, Leland slips away and manages to remain undetected in the giant office complex. Aided only by Los Angeles police sergeant Al Powell and armed only with his police issue pistol Leland fights off the terrorists one-by-one in an attempt to save 74 hostages and grandchildren. So that’s a Wikipedia summary, but there’s a lot of Die Hard in that summary. And so some of the things that are apparently in the book is McClane going through the air ducts, which is also a big pet peeve of mine.

**Craig:** Yep.

**John:** The C-4 bomb down the elevator shaft. Jumping off the exploding roof with a fire hose attached to his waist and then shooting through a window to gain reentry, which still feels like such a movie moment, but apparently was in the book. Taping his gun to his back in the climax. The book was apparently inspired by The Towering Inferno, which is obviously a clear prior to all of this.

Interesting piece of trivia. So Frank Sinatra starred in the first book in this series called The Detective and so he was offered the role of John McClane, but he would have been 70 when this–

**Craig:** I would love to see that.

**John:** It would be amazing.

**Craig:** Hey Hans–

**John:** You can really see him going through all the physical activity.

**Craig:** Absolutely. Well, I mean, the fact that the character of John McClane is running around. He’s a smoker. Looks like he’s, you know, getting close to 40. He’s a smoker. And he has incredible cardiovascular fitness.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** By the way, this is back when you could smoke in a car, smoke in an airport, and you could bring a gun on a plane.

**John:** A gun on a plane.

**Craig:** Gun on a plane. Yeah, no big deal.

**John:** All right. Let’s talk about the movie. Let’s start at the top and we’ll be going through it. From the very start we need to setup John McClane. We need to know that he’s a cop. That he’s from NYC. That his wife works here now. We need to establish that he’s still interested in women, so we see him making eyes at another woman on a plane.

**Craig:** Classic. Yeah, so his character is family man, trying to get his wife back, but still, you know, he’s hot-blooded American. And he makes eyes with the, well, they were stewardesses then. It was 1988. But before all of that he has the weirdest exchange with this guy.

**John:** Tell me about it.

**Craig:** So like normally speaking you don’t want to start a movie with a long conversation about nonsense with a day player. But that’s exactly what Die Hard does. It begins with John McClane having a conversation on the plane with his seatmate. John McClane is clearly scared to fly. It’s a great opening shot. He’s white-knuckling, literally. And the guy next to him is like, uh, you’re not a good flyer. And he says something that literally makes no sense. It’s a non-sequitur. He goes from “You’re not a good flyer” to “I’ve figured out how to – what you do when you land.” Which doesn’t make any sense. “To get accustomed after you travel you take your shoes and your socks off and you walk around on the carpet in your bare feet and you make little fists with your feet.”

And I’m thinking what cocaine-fueled nonsense is this? But it makes sense later.

**John:** It is incredibly useful later on. And I feel like as the movie starts you’re kind of free to do anything. So you can put in that nonsense business at the very top of the movie because no one has any expectation about what’s supposed to happen.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** So you can just do it. Yes, it is sort of nonsense-y, but it totally works. And of course it’s setting up that he’s going to be barefoot through a lot of the movie. And so his barefoot-ness becomes a huge crucial plot point.

**Craig:** A huge crucial plot point.

**John:** All right. So we’ve established that John McClane is arriving in Los Angeles. Now we need to setup his not quite ex-wife, Holly. We need to see her at her office. We need to establish that they have kids. The kids are with the nanny.

**Craig:** All right. Let’s talk about race in this movie for a second. Let’s get the tough stuff out of the way. This movie has some very strange racial stuff going on, not surprising for 1988. Holly has a housekeeper/nanny. She is meant to be Latin-American of some kind. She is Latina. Her accent is bizarre. I get the feeling that that actor may not actually have had that accent. Also, they did a thing that movies used to do with people like that. Characters who were from another country would insist on speaking back – they can understand English clearly. So Holly speaks to her in English. And the nanny answers back in half-English/half-Spanish pointlessly. Like for instance she’ll use the word Si instead of Yes. Just pointlessly as if to say, see, I’m from another country, but I’m nice.

It’s bizarre.

**John:** But let’s talk about why that character exists. It’s because they want to establish that they have kids, but the kids are not going to be in the movie. Until they kind of very late in the story are in the movie. But that they’re not going to be a crucial factor in this. They’re not in jeopardy.

**Craig:** Correct. And if that character and those kids never came back again it would feel a bit cheap, like fake stakes. But they do interestingly enough in kind of a key scene later. So, again, the screenwriters here are doing an excellent job of making sure that they’re setting up pins. And I like it when movies setup pins and I don’t understand that they’re pins. I just think that they’re things. And then later I go, ooh, OK. I get it. I get it now.

**John:** So once we’ve established that Holly and John McClane have kids, that they’re with the nanny, we meet Argyle, who is to me a very problematic character in this story.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** He was a good idea who has like three or four beats. None of the beats where Argyle is by himself work especially well. This initial scene where he’s sort of welcoming John McClane to Los Angeles is probably the best of his beats.

**Craig:** I mean, it’s the only one really where he gets to be kind of vaguely human. I mean, look, Argyle is a regressive racial stereotype. And that’s not any offense to the actor playing him. That guy did his job, right. He was paid to do a job. He was an actor. And this is reality. This is why Robert Townsend made Hollywood Shuffle. I mean, this was the deal back then.

But it is kind of this kind of over smiley stereotype. And in fact when John McClane realizes that Argyle, even the name alone feels regressive, when Argyle is going to be his chauffeur he looks at him like, uh, really. They sent me a black guy as a driver? You feel like he’s a racist in that moment. Like all right I’ll give you a chance, kid. I mean, it’s weird. It’s weird. Argyle’s insistence on being super friendly to John McClane is weird. It doesn’t…ugh.

**John:** Yeah. So I think of all the subplots this is a subplot you could entirely take out and the movie would survive well. Because Argyle does nothing especially important throughout the rest of it.

So John McClane could take a taxi to the building and the same conversation could have been happening with the taxi driver.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, honestly Argyle weirdly seems like he’s there to close one of the strangest plot loops ever, which is the two black guys in the movie have to like – one black guy has to knock the other one out. You can only defeat a black man with another black man. It’s the weirdest – it’s 1988. It’s, oof. Yeah. Not great in that regard.

**John:** So here’s a moment that I really enjoyed as I watched it again was that once John McClane gets to the iconic–

**Craig:** Nakatomi Building.

**John:** Nakatomi Plaza Tower. So if you are coming to Los Angeles you will see the Nakatomi Plaza Tower because it is still kind of by itself. It is at the edge of the Fox Studio lot. If you’re parking there you will often park in this parking structure where Argyle parks.

**Craig:** It is not actually the Nakatomi Building. It is the Fox Building.

**John:** It is the Fox Building. And it is nearly as empty now as it was during the time of this because everyone has moved out of Fox.

**Craig:** I have never been in that building.

**John:** Oh I’ve been there.

**Craig:** Who is in that building?

**John:** Well, different stuff is in there at different times. And it’s not entirely Fox stuff that’s in there. I think it was business affairs-y kinds of things would be in the Fox Building.

**Craig:** Business affairs-y kind of things.

**John:** Yeah. So he arrives at this building and in singing in he has to use a computer screen which felt like very impressive for sort of the time.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And it’s just there to establish that his wife is not using his last name. And that is both a character moment but it becomes a very crucial plot moment because it’s why Gruber does not recognize that Holly is McClane’s wife.

**Craig:** And this is something this movie does really well over and over and over. It’s not content with a very simple linear I’m going to show you a thing because it means one thing. They’re really good at multi-purpose use of things. And we love that as an audience. When we think we know why something is in a movie and then the audience says, oh no, no, no, no, there’s another reason why. It gets us very excited.

**John:** And so that front desk will also become a recurring set because they will be putting in their own fake person at that front desk who Al will be interfacing with. So that becomes useful later on.

**Craig:** At this point in the movie I think we’ve met Hart Bochner playing Harry Ellis.

**John:** We have met Hart Bochner. So this is another like only in the ‘80s kind of character we could find.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** So Hart Bochner as an actor, great, whatever, loving it. But like as a character I would say a smart choice to make somebody that you actually hate more than the terrorists, who you really want to see die.

**Craig:** Yeah, he was an incredibly broad comic character. I mean, someone said we want you to play – so again, 1988 politics. America was obsessed with Yuppies. So children, gather around. A Yuppie was a young, urban professional. Back in those days people were angry that there were people who were young, urban professionals. They hated them. They hated them for things like eating quiche. Quiche is delicious.

**John:** Delicious.

**Craig:** It’s eggs and cheese. If you have scrambled eggs and cheese, then you’re a perfectly fine He-Man trucker. If you eat cheese, then you’re no good. You’re Yuppie scum. And so they said to Hart Bochner we want you to play the scummiest, skeeviest Yuppie ever. And he probably showed them a version of it and they said, no, bigger. And then he’s like, OK. And then they were like, no, bigger. Snort coke. Say bubby. Be a total jerk. Bigger. Bigger!

And he did it. He hit the mark.

**John:** That’s what an actor does.

**Craig:** Listen, he followed his direction. Hat’s off. It’s not his fault.

**John:** So when he ultimately meets his fate we’re not that sad.

**Craig:** No. But I don’t remember necessarily feeling like thrilled either, because he just didn’t seem like a human being.

**John:** That is true.

**Craig:** He seemed so ridiculous. Whereas Bill Atherton, who made a wonderful career in the ‘80s of playing dickheads – “Yes, it’s true, this man has no dick” – from Ghostbusters. He’s playing the exact same character from Ghostbusters. A vicious prick. And he manages to seem real.

**John:** Yeah. A fine line. All right, so John McClane reaches the party. So to me it feels a little bit weird that you go to the party and not go to see your kids, but anyway he goes to the party.

**Craig:** I know.

**John:** But I buy it. At the start of this movie where I’m just learning the rules I bought that he’s going there first. And I do like that he’s seeing his wife. And it also feels like they might be getting – things might be going OK. And then they fall into their old patterns. And I thought those scenes were well handled.

**Craig:** I mean, there really is a scene. I mean, they have a scene. So he’s in her office which is more like a hotel room than an office. It just makes no sense.

**John:** Well, an executive bathroom.

**Craig:** Right. But then she says she’s really envious of Hart Bochner’s executive bathroom, which makes no sense because she’s technically his boss. I don’t understand any of it. And also she has a bathroom. It looks really nice. By the way, this is one of those movies that is simply impossible in the age of cell phones. But let’s put that aside.

They have one scene. And in that once scene you get the sense that she still loves him, which is important for us in the audience to know. That there’s hope. And then he has to be a dick about it because of the name thing. And when she marches out of there angry – oh, and I should say he’s washing up and in doing so he has removed his shirt to have his wife beater tee underneath. Did that cause any feelings for you as a young man?

**John:** Oh yeah. I think there’s a whole conversation to be had about sort of the wardrobe, but really Bruce Willis’s body which is sort of a central thing that changes so much over the course of the movie. He keeps stripping down to less, and less, and less.

**Craig:** But I didn’t remember that – in my mind I think he just flew out to Los Angeles in his wife beater tee-shirt. I forgot that he was wearing clothes and he just happened to have taken them off when things go down. So that’s such a – as a kid watching it I must have just thought, OK, he’s running around. Now I watch it and go, oh my god, there must have been so many meetings. And Bruce Willis was like, no, this is the one.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** This one makes me look great.

**John:** And also if you look at sort of the wardrobe department and also makeup, having to figure out like how dirty he is at every moment.

**Craig:** Continuity. Good lord.

**John:** The continuity of that would be so tough. Because his tee-shirt goes through at least 17 shades of brown and gray.

**Craig:** I mean, I’ll say this much at least. For a movie that costs, I think it was like $25 million which was quite a bit back then, it couldn’t have been all blown on his wardrobe. You can get 1,000 of those tee-shirts to have 1,000 different stages of distress and you’ll be fine.

**John:** Yep. He arrives at the party. A guy kisses him. He freaks out about that.

**Craig:** He goes, “California.” But what he’s really is like, “Gay.” I mean, the whole thing, it’s so clear he’s just like, “New York is straight and California is gay. Argh.” Yeah.

**John:** And then suddenly we are in plot. We’re in a heist plot. And so this is 20 minutes in. We have the first hero shot of Rickman. We’ve taken out the security guard. And we’re starting to establish this misdirect that they are some kind of idealistic terrorists and quickly we’ll learn that they are just actually thieves.

**Craig:** No in today’s era because of our – in a weird way Die Hard is one of the movies that starts to accelerate first acts. Because the first act is rather short here. If you want to call it acts. I mean, one of the nice things about watching Die Hard is you never feel an act ever. It just sort of proceeds. Today people might say to you, “We need to start with these terrorists doing something terrible so we know who they are before we meet our guy.” No. This is a much better way. And in so many ways this movie is special and works because of an actor that we were introduced to, the late, great Alan Rickman, who seems like he has parachuted in from an entirely other genre.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** He’s like a Bond villain almost. He’s brilliant. He’s so well spoken. And fascinating. And small in his behaviors. And we’d never had villains like that. Traditionally in these movies we have psychos or we have steroid freaks.

**John:** Yeah. And so if he were the Bond villain then we would have a James Bond opposite him. So to have like an ordinary guy opposite him is fascinating. The other thing I think works so well about Alan Rickman’s character is from his perspective he’s Danny Ocean and this is Ocean’s 11.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And so, yes, he’s willing to kill some people to do it, but like killing people and doing evil is not his goal at all. His goal is the $640 million of bearers bonds. He has a plan for how he’s going to do that. And he is methodical. He has assembled a team. You could have a whole other movie which is just about him putting the script together and planning this heist.

**Craig:** Yeah. And what’s really interesting about his whole the villain is the hero of his own movie essence is that while we have a very simple motivation which we need, we’re certainly clear about what he wants. He makes it clear to Takagi, “Who said we were terrorists?” So that’s the first big twist. Like, oh, they’re not terrorists, they’re thieves, which was great. But later you also learn that he was a terrorist. He was part of a terrorist movement. And they kicked him out theoretically because he actually was just more interested in being a thief. That’s a fascinating guy.

I’m not as interested in zealots as I am in calculating people who are just one millimeter away from the reality of what our hero is like. A man of purpose, as it were.

**John:** So thinking about him as the Danny Ocean of this movie, he has a plan and a timeline and they lay out the timeline very clearly. So, it’s going to take two hours to break this code, then 2.5 hours to break through these different locks. So, you know, we very explicitly put out the exposition of this is what’s going to need to happen. You’re giving the audience a road map for these are the things that are going to have to happen for this to progress so we know that, OK, the movie cannot be over until all these things have happened.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s perfect. Of all the mechanisms to provide an audience with a sense of structure. When we talk about structure we’re saying something is holding all of this up. There’s a spine. And to say here’s this big ass vault and it has seven locks. And it’s going to take me a few hours to get through one through six. But I’ve already told you I don’t know how to get through seven. And Alan Rickman says, “Don’t worry, I’ll handle number seven.” We know that there is a countdown of locks. Literally a number. And we can watch them as they go. It’s not a ticking clock at the end. The whole thing has a clock to it and that’s gorgeous.

**John:** Yeah. Once they start shooting up the party and once things start going down, John McClane has escaped from there. He’s running through the hallways. He’s going up the stairs. And he starts to do what I think is appropriate. What is the best thing for me to do right now? And he doesn’t just charge in to try to save everybody. He’s like I need to get help and he works on trying to get help, which is a good, natural response, and not a movie hero response, but is actually what a real person would try to do. How do I get somebody to show up here?

**Craig:** Right. And there’s a line that Jeb Stuart and Steven de Souza have in here. He is present but hiding when he sees Mr. Takagi murdered by Alan Rickman. And he runs away. They hear him. They chase after him. But they don’t see him. He escapes. And when we see him next he is by himself and he is saying, “Why didn’t you do something, you idiot?” And then he goes, “Because you would have been as dead as he is.” So in his mind he’s talking it through so that we know – and this is important – you can feel the note on this. So is he a coward? No, he’s not a coward. He literally says out loud, “I’m not a coward. I’m smart.”

**John:** His plan is to contact the police and get police out there and get this handled. He tries to do it and this is the first of many classic examples of just like he has a plan and it falls apart because of this obstacle, things he couldn’t anticipate.

The police just don’t take him seriously.

**Craig:** Right. This is the beginning of incompetent police work. But before we get to the police we have another relationship that we learn about, for a very fleeting moment, but it is perfectly efficient. It is the relationship between Karl and his brother. These are two German brothers, although one of them is a Russian in real life. A ballet dancer at that. And they are both criminals, obviously as part of this gang. Karl seems to be a bit of a hot head. His brother is a bit more methodical and careful. And that’s all we know. That’s all we need to know. Because what’s going to happen is Karl’s brother will be the first terrorist that dies, not because McClane murders him, importantly because they fight. He doesn’t murder him. They fight and they fall down the stairs and Karl’s brother breaks his neck.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Smart choice. And now we know that Karl, hot head that he is, has become essentially the nemesis here, which is really smart. Hans Gruber is the brain. He’s the real villain. But Karl is like nature. And you can’t stop Karl. Wonderful. We do have gratuitous nudity as well, very classic 1980s. Classic.

**John:** Yes. Hard to fit into a modern movie than before.

**Craig:** Wouldn’t do it.

**John:** We’re fast forwarding through the movie as we look at this. One of the things I will say is that I was impressed by the photography overall in Die Hard. A thing you definitely notice about 1980 that was hard to do is big wide night shots. We just didn’t have the technology to make those look great. And so there are moments where the helicopter gunships are coming and it’s OK as long as they’re in the city space. But there’s just not enough light to sort of light the city of Los Angeles. And some of the big nighttime shots are really dark.

**Craig:** Yeah. They do a great job here. They also use so many different environments in this building. You feel like they devoured this building and used every possible piece. You have cinderblock environments. You have construction areas. And they even set up the fact that the building is not complete. Takagi says, “It’s still a work in progress.” And you can see that. So that’s explained.

You’re in elevator shafts. You’re in ducts. You’re in these beautiful offices. You’re in an atrium. They really do use everything, every part of this building. And then that great roof. I never – and I still don’t – understand exactly how a building like this is put together. It seems like it has been put together for the purposes of a movie. There’s all these cool railings and grills and fans and things. But it never crosses the line into what I would call Michael Bay-ville where everything seems art directed. It doesn’t. It actually seems real even though it’s not.

**John:** In terms of talking about the physical spaces, watching this again I noticed that there’s a pinup poster on one wall. And we come back to it a second time. He notices it the first time and he comes back to it again. And it’s a very useful way of reestablishing, OK, we’re back on that same floor. Because things would otherwise be very confusing.

**Craig:** Again, using gratuitous nudity.

**John:** But it helps you remember that you’ve seen that thing before and we’re back in that same place.

**Craig:** I remembered it.

**John:** Otherwise rooms could look the same.

**Craig:** No, exactly. And this was another way that they could answer these questions. And these are the kinds of questions that you and I get all the time. I remember when I turned the first script in for the first Chernobyl. One of the questions was, “How are we going to tell all these people apart? We don’t know the actors. We don’t know their names. And they’re all wearing the exact same thing.” And we were like I guess we’re going to have to cast carefully. But the truth is these are the things you’ve got to worry about.

**John:** You do.

**Craig:** I could see in Die Hard like how are we going to know what floor we’re on. Well, most of the times you don’t. But some of the times – there was a computer room. That was its own thing.

**John:** I had no sense of where that computer room was in the building. It does not matter at all.

**Craig:** Doesn’t matter.

**John:** I know the lobby is on the ground floor. I know the party is up high. The reason why we needed that pinup is because the fact that we’ve been there before means he has a knowledge of how to get out of that floor, which is very important.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** All right. So finally he gets up to the roof. He uses the radio. He calls the police. They don’t believe him. But ultimately they say, “OK, we’ll send a car to do a drive by.”

**Craig:** It’s insane. So in this world the Los Angeles police department their special thing that they monitor, they’re all in some kind of weird Death Star environment. It’s this dark room with blinking lights. And they don’t believe anybody who calls them about anything.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** There’s even gunshots in the radio. They don’t care. And John McClane bizarrely – oh, well, he doesn’t identify himself as a police officer in part because he knows that they’re listening. And then you get this other relationship in the movie which frankly for me as a kid was the relationship I felt, more than his relationship with Holly.

**John:** Well let’s talk about Al Powell. So Al Powell is the guy who shows up. When we first meet Al Powell he is buying Twinkies at a convenient store. It’s not an amazing scene. It establishes him as an ordinary Joe. Again, a working class man.

**Craig:** You know–

**John:** He’s not eating the fancy pastries. He’s eating Twinkies.

**Craig:** If you watch this movie one thing you will notice is that everything that happens that’s funny happens when Alan Rickman is doing it, or when Bruce Willis is doing it. If those guys aren’t in the scene and funny things are happening they are not funny.

**John:** They’re meant to be funny, but they don’t really work.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t think John McTiernan was necessarily the funniest director. So, your choice there is he’s an overweight cop and he’s buying Twinkies, but he has him buying like 12? Who can eat 12 Twinkie boxes?

**John:** They’re talking about his wife being pregnant. It didn’t make sense.

**Craig:** None of it works. None of it works. Similarly when Hart Bochner is giving his whole, “Hey, bubby, I’m going to…” Doesn’t work. It’s just not funny. Rickman is funny and Willis is funny. But, Al Powell is instantly likeable.

**John:** That’s what you needed.

**Craig:** He is a sweetheart. He lets the 7-11 guy kind of push him around even, you know. And he’s smart, clearly. And we’re immediately on his side. We feel good about this. We’re just a little worried that maybe he doesn’t fit the action hero vibe. So if this is the only friend that our action hero has, what does that mean for our story?

**John:** The other crucial thing about the Al Powell/John McClane relationship is that McClane can’t be honest with him about certain things because other people are listening in.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So it’s that challenge of how you establish a relationship with somebody you don’t know and who cannot be fully honest with you. And so that starts the whole cowboy discussion. And call me Roy. All the stuff that they’re doing, they can talk about some things, but there’s a limit to it. And that’s a great obstacle to put in front of your characters.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, Al Powell literally says to his awful boss, who was the awful teacher from Breakfast Club, “I think he’s a cop, because I basically have a hunch.” Meaning we’re talking guy talk to each other. Like we’re men. We’re having a man conversation. Again, you pencil neck twerps would never understand. But that is the bond they have. They’re two regular guys.

And that eventually will blossom into something really meaningful when they have this kind of – one of the more famous “my brother fell into a lake” stories in any movie ever. Which is the story of what happened to Al Powell.

**John:** Yeah. So when we get to one hour, one minute into the film we introduce a brand new obstacle, brand new character, which is the news reporter who wants the scoop. And so this conversation that has been happening on the radio, they get word of it. They get word that there’s an incident happening at this tower. The news reporter is obsessed with getting the scoop and getting there. It’s late to establish new characters, but one of the things I love about this movie is that this movie is not afraid to introduce new characters late and just create new problems and new obstacles. So this is a character who has a three or four beat arc and it mostly works.

**Craig:** It mostly works. Look, one of the beautiful things about casting is sometimes that solves your screenwriting problem. If you cast William Atherton in 1988 and you put him in that suit and that tie you know he’s a problem. He’s a jerk who cares only about himself. He’s going to be arrogant. And he’s going to screw things up in a way that makes the audience go, “No, you idiot!” That’s what he does. You don’t need a lot of explanation.

But all these pins have been lined up. We know that this marriage is in trouble. We know that Holly knows that John’s running around the building because only John can make people that upset.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** We know that Karl is a hot head who now has a reason to hate John McClane irrationally. We know that Hans Gruber is a cold, calculating man. We know that there’s a guy out there who understands what’s going on but he himself is limited. He seems scared and timid. All these things are all set up and the pins will fall.

**John:** Yes. And consider the studio note saying like, “Oh, can we set up the news reporter earlier?” The answer is no. Because if we set up the news reporter earlier we would expect to have an arc or more important stuff and you would need to be checking in with that character again. And we’d really have the same problem that we have with Argyle in the limo which is like there’s not enough for him to do, and so we have to sort of keep checking in and giving him BS stuff to sort of remind you that he exists.

**Craig:** Yeah. It would be cut. You don’t need – I’m sure that they looked at Ghostbusters and said, yeah, they didn’t need to set up the EPA guy either. Just being him in. Announce that he’s EPA and have him start being a dick.

**John:** That’s all you need.

**Craig:** That’s all you need.

**John:** All right. So then we get to another big action sequence. Send in the tank. Which is the first idea – send in the car which is really this tank which is going to charge up. It’s the first time we see that – this is also very 1980s. Very sort of like bring in the military, like bring in the big power stuff. And we also see that the bad guys have [unintelligible] grenades and they were prepared for this.

**Craig:** Just like John McClane warned them. But because they are elitists, probably globalists, they don’t care. They are too self-assured. And through one of the strangest exercises of chain and command ever they make one of the dumbest possible decisions that no police department – I mean, police must have been so frustrated watching these things back then. But regardless, it goes poorly for them.

And this is important because what the movie continually reinforces for us is that the only way this is going to be fixed is by one guy in that building. Not only is the cavalry not going to help. They’re going to make things worse over and over and over. And they’re going to make things worse in a beautiful way.

When the cops finally do arrive Hans Gruber says to his men, “OK, calm down, it’s a little earlier than we thought. But it was inevitable. It was going to happen no matter what. And in some ways it needed to happen.” Well that’s an interesting bit. And I definitely didn’t pick up on that as a kid as being somehow foreshadowing in any way, shape, or form. But you got the sense that that wasn’t normal. Like this guy really is in remarkable control.

One more screenwriting note that I love. John McClane makes his presence known to the terrorists by after he kills Karl’s brother he duct tapes him to a chair. He writes, “Now I have a machine gun, Ho-Ho-Ho,” on his shirt, which is the greatest thing of all time.

**John:** Writes it on a [crosstalk].

**Craig:** And he sends him down the elevator. Alan Rickman is explaining to the hostages that there’s nothing they can do. They have thought of everything. Nothing has been left to chance. And then the elevator door opens and there’s one of their guys murdered. It’s really funny. And it makes us appreciate the whole thing. That little bit of kind of counterpoint was I thought really well done. And again Alan Rickman makes it funny.

**John:** Yes. All right. So the tank did not go well. Basically we see the police fail again and again, because they are not doing what John McClane would have them do. John McClane has limited ability to influence what they can do and he doesn’t want to reveal who he actually is.

**Craig:** Obstacles.

**John:** Yes. These are obstacles. These are all good things. Now, Ellis, who is another person we know is going to be a problem, because we set him up from the start that–

**Craig:** He loves cocaine and he wants to sleep with Holly.

**John:** And he wants to intervene. He wants to prove that he’s the person who can solve the situation. He goes in to negotiate.

**Craig:** More great Alan Rickman stuff. Because Hart Bochner is like, “You know, the way I see it you guys are…” And Alan Rickman just goes, “Amazing. You figured it all out.” He’s just so great. He’s so funny. And as that’s happening you’re like, oh man, Hart Bochner. You’re going to die. I can’t even get excited about you dying. You’re so definitely going to die.

**John:** But what surprised me watching this again is I assumed that the Ellis character was going to give up Holly. And instead he tries to play this thing that they’re old friends. And for a moment you’re like, oh, you’re not as dumb as I thought you were. This could work out. And you have little moments of hope. And then it doesn’t go well and McClane says like don’t believe this guy.

**Craig:** He’s trying to save him. And this is a classic hero moment. Great thing for screenwriters to do. When your hero attempts – is such a good person, despite the many killings that they are doing, that they’re even trying to help somebody that’s trying to betray and hurt them.

**John:** Yes. Ellis does not survive this discussion.

**Craig:** Nope.

**John:** Nope. And a good escalation. After Ellis has been killed, Rickman takes the radio, holds it out to the crowd so that McClane can hear everyone screaming. Making it clear to McClane and to the police outside this has ratchet up a notch.

**Craig:** And now you get the sense that Hans Gruber is punching back. Also incredibly important. So one of the things that I talked about in How to Make a Movie is when your character is kind of doing well, you have to punish them for it. Because you need to feel that what they eventually have to do has to be really hard. You just don’t want to give them too many wins. You want to make it hurt as much as you can. So in the theory that you’re an angry god punishing your hero, Die Hard does a great job.

**John:** Absolutely. Rickman asks for some prisoner releases. He wants these terrorists released from prison. Again, it’s a misdirection. And at this point we fully know that it’s not real. But it starts things scrambling. And it’s also going to be a way to involve the FBI because it goes beyond what the local police could do. And we realize that Gruber actually wanted a certain plan to be put into place.

**Craig:** It’s a great plot twist. The FBI is even stupider than the Los Angeles Police Department, which again – note, again, when Rickman or Willis are not on screen the jokes are not great jokes. The whole like we’re two FBI agents with the same names, it just–

**John:** Actually I kind of liked that.

**Craig:** It’s fine, but it’s not ha-ha funny.

**John:** Here’s what it was. I liked that they showed up and they were given some line and some bit of business to let me know – some sense that they did exist before they walked onto that screen.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** There’s also a moment in the helicopter where they say, you know, “It reminds me of Saigon.” I was in Junior High. There is a tension there before this all happens.

**Craig:** Sure. Yeah. It’s just broad.

**John:** It’s broad.

**Craig:** It’s broad. I mean, that’s the thing. When you look at what – I mean, Alan Rickman, who I didn’t know Alan Rickman before Die Hard. He walks over and he looks at that shirt and he says in his accent, which is barely German-tinged, but mostly just Alan Rickman, “Now I have a machine gun.” And they were so smart to smush up the shirt so he has to push it down. “Ho-Ho-Ho.” It’s so great. He’s so funny. Ah, the best. I miss him.

**John:** So an hour and 28 in. We go back to the newsroom and this is a scene that no one remembers, but they have an expert on terrorism there who has written a book about terrorism. And they’re interviewing him and they say like Helsinki, and then he goes Sweden, no Finland, just to show that they’re buffoons.

**Craig:** Experts are stupid and bad. And only the average Joe on the street can solve a problem.

**John:** Looking at this I was trying to decide why it stayed in the movie and I think it’s actually just to provide a little space between some other beats. I feel like this scene could be dropped, but you look at what’s before and after they needed just a tiny breath and this little scene with this terrorism guy gives you a tiny breath. And reminds you that the news people are going to be in this movie.

**Craig:** Yeah. It does. It may also be the result of personal ax-grinding. I mean, sometimes when things stay in movies it’s because somebody goes, “Yeah.” Like maybe Joel Silver was like, “Yeah, screw you experts. I love it. It’s staying in.” You never know with these things.

**John:** Now, one hour, 31 minutes into the film a surprising moment happens which is a face-to-face meeting between Gruber and McClane, which is completely unexpected and it’s not set up. It’s suddenly just happening. Gruber is for some reason looking at the detonators that are on the ceiling. We don’t know what they’re there for. Is it a bit of a stretch that he’s doing this himself? Sure. But most of his men are dead, so OK. But it’s one of the sort of signature moments that happens in this film which is that you have the two characters together. They don’t know who each other is. And we see that Gruber is really smart in the moment and is playing himself as a hostage who escaped.

**Craig:** It is one of the best things I’ve ever seen in a movie because until it happens you don’t even realize it was possible. You’re so surprised by it. It’s not like you’re sitting around going, you know, they haven’t seen each other’s faces. He doesn’t know what Hans Gruber looks like. What if he runs into Hans Gruber? Will he know? Because they’re in a building. I mean, Nakatomi Corporation apparently is a business corporation that does business. We don’t know what they do.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** But they’re all in suits and ties. And so is Hans Gruber.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** In fact, he makes a point of saying that he’s dressed like them. That he has suits just like Mr. Takagi. Ah, it’s gorgeous. When that happens it is so shocking, it is so delightful, and it’s also terrifying. Because your hero that you root for has never been more vulnerable. The movie actually becomes a horror film at that point. And it is awesome.

**John:** So let’s talk about who has access to what information, because that becomes a crucial thing throughout all of Die Hard is that as the audience we tend to have more information than any of the characters do. We’re largely omniscient. We get to see everyone’s point of view. So, we know a lot of things that McClane doesn’t know. We know things that Gruber doesn’t know. That’s all really helpful.

In this one small tiny moment the delicious agony is that we know that McClane is in great danger and McClane does not know that he’s in great danger. And we are terrified that something bad is going to happen to him. And the movie has to make the decision about are we going to show to the audience that McClane has caught on or not. And I bet they went back and forth 100 times over that.

**Craig:** It also does this incredible service to the ending, because what you don’t want is for them to come face-to-face at the end and go, oh, that’s what you look like. And now let us have our final. This creates an additional level of relationship between the two of them. There is a formidability to this back and forth. And if you are looking at Die Hard as a celebration of the common man against the snobby thinkers of the world, the so-called smart people, this is what you would do. This is where the common man may take a step back because that smart guy is plotting and scheming the way that smart people do. They can manipulate. They can fool you. But in the end you’ll beat them with your heart and muscle.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** But it’s a great moment. And I think that there’s a moment where he realizes that Hans Gruber is not–

**John:** Watching it again, it doesn’t telegraph itself too big or too loud that he really is ahead of him. It’s not until you actually hear the click-click that the gun is empty that you realize that McClane was onto him or at least was suspicious.

**Craig:** Right. There’s apparently a scene that was cut, or a moment that was cut where, a bunch of moments, where every time McClane would kill one of these guys, when he first kills Karl’s brother he–

**John:** Takes off the watch.

**Craig:** Yeah. He checks his shirt and goes, OK, they’re dressed in fancy Euro clothes. But, yes, he looks at the watch and apparently he was supposed to look, and there’s footage of him, looking at all their watches. Because they all sync their watches in a scene that was also cut. So when he notices Hans Gruber’s watch that’s when he apparently in the cut version, the cut scene, that’s when he actually put it all together on screen.

**John:** Following this moment is another iconic Shoot the Glass.

**Craig:** Shoot the Glass.

**John:** Basically there’s a lot of automatic weapon fire happening. Somehow desks are able to withstand a tremendous amount of bullets.

**Craig:** Yep. [Unintelligible] armor.

**John:** But by shooting at the glass he sees that McClane is barefoot. We’ve established that Gruber knows that McClane is barefoot and he tells them shoot at that glass because it will hurt him.

**Craig:** One of the best and strangest moments in film history. A German man says to another German man, “Shoot the glass,” in German. And the other German man just looks at him like, what?

**John:** [Speaks in German].

**Craig:** And he repeats it in English and that’s what the German guy understands. Shoot the glass. It is so odd. I have been laughing about this since 1988. But I love it. What can I say?

**John:** So if this wasn’t bad enough, at one hour and 38 minutes the news reporters have discovered John McClane’s home address. And so we know that’s a thing that’s going to happen.

**Craig:** Oh, William Atherton. So this accelerates the ending. So this is what’s pouring fuel on the ending. And now we know that there’s a real ticking clock. So we have the ticking clock of the vault being opened. But the ticking clock for John McClane isn’t enough like we’ll kill you. The real ticking clock is we know who you are, so we know who Holly is, so now she’s in jeopardy.

**John:** Yep. She’s in individual jeopardy.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** As he’s picking glass out of his feet we have this scene which I think you referred to earlier on which is the Al scene of “I shot a kid.” Talk to me about that.

**Craig:** Correct. So we sometimes talk about this about “my brother drowned” scene. A character will tell a sob story about their past. It usually involves somebody dying that they couldn’t save but wanted to. And in this case it’s a variation of that. Al Powell shot a kid and it was a mistake. It was justified. They craft the story very carefully so that you understand he wasn’t like some hot head jerk cop. He really did think his life was in danger. He just was wrong. And he’s been beating himself up over it ever since. And therefore can’t get back on the horse. He’s not suitable really to be a real cop because as we know from these movies real cops shoot people.

**John:** They do.

**Craig:** That’s what they do. They’re constantly plugging people and they don’t hesitate. So that’s his damage is that he actually feels bad about murdering someone, which is amazing. But, it is the kind of hetero male bonding that was allowable in 1988.

**John:** Absolutely. I think it’s an important moment. It gives Bruce Willis something to do other than just pick the glass out of his feet. Bruce Willis is doing a great job of acting the pain of that. And it’s a gruesome moment. But if he hadn’t had a conversation during that time you would never have been able to stay in that scene as long as you did.

**Craig:** This is the last break you get. And it’s important to give people a break. Actually it prepares them. Because what’s going to happen from this point forward is a relentless race to an explosive end, and then another explosive end. It’s going to be exciting. They need a breather. And they need some context. And they need to feel something, especially because this is going to set up the ending for Al Powell.

**John:** So once the news report happens Gruber realizes that Holly is McClane’s wife. A great line I loved here, she says that, “He’s a common thief.” “I’m an exceptional thief. And since I’m moving up to kidnapping you should be more polite.”

**Craig:** Right. And the way he says these things is just so great.

**John:** And the FBI of course is going to accelerate things in stupid, dumb ways. So first off they want to cut the power. That was always part of the plan because the electromagnetic locks–

**Craig:** He says in the beginning, their hacker safe cracker says, “The problem with the seven is it’s an electromagnetic lock. And the power cannot be turned off locally. It has to be the whole grid.”

**John:** Does that make any sense? No. But it doesn’t have to.

**Craig:** Doesn’t have to. Makes no sense. But Hans Gruber, he knows that the FBI as a matter of protocol will shut the power off on the grid. Which again, OK, fine, not sure about that either. And he says something that has been rattling around in my brain for all these many 32 years. And that is, “You ask for a miracle, I give you the F. B. I.” And now musically, there’s been little hints of Ode to Joy throughout this whole thing, and weirdly usually presented with Hans Gruber in a kind of weird creepy style. And now the full Ode to Joy begins. And, again, this is a smart again.

**John:** Yeah. Again, this is the Ocean’s 11 part of it. He’s Danny Ocean. He had a secret special plan. This is also around the time where a van backs out of this truck, or an ambulance backs out of the truck which is meant to be their getaway thing.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** It doesn’t really pay off right. And in reading about that it looks like there was a different thing that sort of got cut and moved about that. But we’re seeing their whole plan and it does look like their plan is going to work out properly.

**Craig:** Precisely. And you want that. You want to believe that they have many more tricks up their sleeves. You want to feel like your hero is behind the eight ball here because the only way they’re going to succeed, the only way that John McClane is going to save his wife and defeat Hans Gruber and these kidnappers and save all these hostages is by doing something we can’t foresee. Something that is going to require him to do things he didn’t even know he could do.

**John:** Yep. Including defeat the giant Russian guy in a fist fight.

**Craig:** Correct. And that is something that we’ve been waiting for the whole movie. We’ve been waiting for this beast, this uncontrollable irrational beast that even Hans Gruber can’t control to face off with John McClane because, well, he feels like death is coming for you. He’s huge and he’s angry. But, you know, the good guy always wins.

**John:** The good guy is going to win.

**Craig:** Yeah, yeah. He chokes him with a chain.

**John:** With a chain. So by being smarter and more wily he’s going to beat him. Because he’s not going to beat him through–

**Craig:** You can’t punch that guy out.

**John:** So the plan was to blow up the roof when the helicopters land because it will create such chaos. It won’t be clear who lived and who died. The roof does blow up. John McClane does jump off the building with the hose. It really is an amazing–

**Craig:** It’s awesome.

**John:** Amazing idea. Amazing moment. Really well shot. It works great.

**Craig:** It’s great.

**John:** And I loved that the second beat of like shooting through the window, getting in, and getting dragged back out by the weight of things. Just remembering that gravity exists. Terrific.

**Craig:** The physics of it are great. It was beautifully directed. I mean, John McTiernan did an incredible job there. Yeah, no, love it.

**John:** Cool. Finally, we get the final showdown. So Holly is now a full damsel hostage. We have Gruber and one guy who is still left alive.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** And we get to the moment of John McClane only has two bullets. There’s no way he’s going to be able to make this thing happen. We don’t know exactly what he’s going to do, but we see him looking at some wrapping people and such.

**Craig:** Because it’s a Christmas movie.

**John:** Because it’s a Christmas movie. It’s fundamentally a Christmas movie. He ends up when told to drop his weapon he drops his weapon. Of course he has the gun taped to his back.

**Craig:** His police gun.

**John:** His police gun. His real gun.

**Craig:** The only gun you really need as a cop.

**John:** Absolutely. Because only terrorists use–

**Craig:** Only terrorists. That stuff, it’s like poison. No, a man uses a gun that fits in his hand.

**John:** And then with two amazing perfect shots, because he’s apparently an amazing shot.

**Craig:** Of course.

**John:** Even though no one tends to get hit by actual bullets in this movie, he is able to hit two people in precisely a single shot.

**Craig:** Storm Trooper rules at work.

**John:** Absolutely. Gruber goes through the window, still holding on to Holly.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** The watch has to be removed.

**Craig:** The watch needs to be removed because honestly, you know, she needs to come back home. It’s regressive. But regardless at least it was set up. And Hans Gruber falls to his death with this great look on his face of like how did this happen. Like this is not how this is supposed to end. He seemed so confused.

I also like the fact that honestly, so 1988 green screen was still kind of, you know, it had been used for about a decade or more, but it was still a little funky. And I kind of like that it’s funky. It made things special back then. Now I just feel like, oh yeah, it looks so real that it’s fake.

**John:** So the legend is that they actually dropped Rickman before they said they were going to drop him and that’s why he has that expression that he has. They said we’ll drop you on three and they dropped him on two.

**Craig:** Oh, I like that. That’s cool. I mean, he definitely looks scared.

**John:** He does look scared. Let’s do the Lindsay Doran, making sure that we’re talking about what the real victory is in the movie versus the fake victory. Because Alan Rickman’s death is not the victory of the movie. The victory of the movie is getting back with Holly. And it is walking out of the building with the wife. You’re both wearing your first responder jackets over your ruined clothes.

**Craig:** As you should in these movies. You always have to wear a blanket or a jacket because saving the world makes you cold. We know this for a fact. But in the end there are two relationships we care about. John McClane and Holly. And John McClane and Al Powell. And both of those relationships are how this movie ends. That’s how a movie should end. Karl rises from the near dead–

**John:** Classic Fatal Attraction. You have to.

**Craig:** Classic Fatal Attraction. But who kills him? Al Powell, who has regained the courage to murder people. [laughs] I assume he gets a promotion because of that.

**John:** Absolutely. It’s like a Christmas Carol in a very messed up way.

**Craig:** I can kill people. [laughs]

**John:** The miracle of Christmas.

**Craig:** Yes, Merry Christmas everyone.

**John:** Oh, and then Argyle drives them home.

**Craig:** And then Argyle.

**John:** And gets the last line of the movie.

**Craig:** What is the last line of the movie?

**John:** Last line of the movie is, “If this is their idea of Christmas, I got to be there for New Year’s.”

**Craig:** Well there you go. There’s your sequel setup. That also feels like Joel Silver.

**John:** It does. And so watching the movie I was like, oh my god, like the last line of Go is almost the same line.

**Craig:** What is it?

**John:** I had no idea. “So, what are we doing for New Year’s?”

**Craig:** It’s also the last line of Chernobyl. [laughs]

**John:** It’s a great last line. It makes sense. To me the going home with Argyle in the limo, fine, whatever.

**Craig:** It’s full circle.

**John:** It’s full circle. It is full circle.

**Craig:** They’re together. They’ve solved all their problems. And they’ll never have another problem again. Now, of course, Bruce Willis does have many more problems. There’s been a Die Hard 2, 3, 4, possibly 5?

**John:** I think there’s only four.

**Craig:** Four. One of the problems, sequels are really, really, really hard. And one of the problems is that the movie that happens in 1988 is of its time. As the years go on this guy isn’t really of his time. So, you know, it was harder and harder. I mean, I didn’t mind the sequels. Just, you know, this was special.

**John:** Well, also coincidences can happen once. And so–

**Craig:** It’s a little Murder She Wrote. Like maybe you’re the terrorist.

**John:** Yeah, maybe you’re the problem.

**Craig:** Maybe just stay home.

**John:** So let’s wrap this up by talking about what lessons we should be taking from Die Hard and which lessons we should not be taking from Die Hard. My lessons are that it is important to really be thinking about who is the central character in this story and not it’s this genre in a blank. And sort of like don’t just create the environment. You actually have to create who is the fascinating character in this environment who you want to follow through it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I would say that the big screenwriting lesson that I draw from Die Hard is if you want something to happen that solves a problem in a cool way in your script, that’s great, now go back and set it up. And don’t set it up in a way that’s obvious. Set it up in a way that will make the eventual emergence of this thing surprising and fun. Gives the audience a sense that there was an intelligence working behind the scenes that they weren’t aware of.

**John:** Yeah. The bad versions of this movie that I’ve seen since then, they do things in the setup that feel like, oh god, that’s so clearly a setup that’s going to payoff later on. And so when you can hide the setup that is so smart. So like the computer system with Holly’s name. That is a hide the setup kind of thing. And that’s what works.

**Craig:** Correct. One of the great terrible setups of all time is in a movie I love. Real Genius. I love Real Genius. William Atherton is in Real Genius.

**John:** Again.

**Craig:** Playing a dick. And early on in the movie he says to Val Kilmer, “I hate the smell of popcorn.” [laughs] Val Kilmer is eating popcorn. He goes, “What is that? I hate that smell. I hate the smell of popcorn. It’s disgusting.” Which is weird. And then at the end of the movie the big comeuppance is that they fill his house with popcorn. It’s just – when you see it you’re like there’s literally no reason for this to be here except to set something up later. So, yeah, don’t be obvious with the setups. They’re really good about this. And I also think there’s no wasted energy in this movie. Everything feels like it’s needed and necessary. And every scene propels to the next one.

**John:** Which is very crucial. Craig, thank you for this deep dive Die Hard. Merry Christmas.

**Craig:** Merry Christmas, John. And you know what?

**John:** What?

**Craig:** If this is your idea of Christmas, I can’t wait to see what you do on New Year’s.

**John:** Thanks.

**John August:** So in the episode you just listened to Craig and I deliberately only talked about the movie we see on screen and not the process to get there or the legacy of the film. But now let’s do that with our very special guest, Steven E. de Souza. He’s a writer whose credits range from The Six Million Dollar Man to 48 Hours to The Flintstones, but we of course want to talk to him about his script for Die Hard which he shares credit on with Jeb Stuart. Welcome Steven.

**Steven E. de Souza:** Thank you. I’m glad to be here.

**John:** It’s absolutely a delight to have you here. So we loved this movie and it was actually one at the top of our list of movies we wanted to do a deep dive on because it was just so influential to both me and to Craig. And I think it sort of changed the way we think about big popcorn movies and how we get into characters. It’s such a character-focused action movie. So, when you first were approached with Die Hard what was the status of the script, of the project? It already had a director on? McTiernan was already attached?

**Steven:** McTiernan was already attached. My connection to Joel and Larry was actually on a TV pilot. I did two other pilots prior to meeting them for Paramount. And then I did a pilot called The Renegades, which again was a page one rewrite which was done in a mad race against the cameras. They had a script that was in disarray but they were so hot at that time and Aaron Spelling was involved in that that ABC had bought/committed to going on the air without even reading the pilot script. They’d only seen a three page synopsis. So they said we don’t dare sent them this pilot script which makes no sense. So I started writing it literally ahead of the cameras. And the actors would say why do I hate this guy. And I’d say you’ll find out maybe next week. I don’t know yet.

So now we were in a similar situation where they had had a mad scramble to cast the movie which was very famous. I think some of your audience may know that they had offered to Sinatra first.

**John:** Yes.

**Steven:** And then every big star in Hollywood turned it down. All for the same reason. You’ve got to remember at this time the heroes were all these steroid ripped muscular giants and people read the script and there’s no action for the first 20 pages. And then the entire first act if we’re going to break it down in acts, you know, Bruce is trying to get help. And I knew we were in trouble at the premiere. This was the first movie, I had already done a couple pictures prior to this, but this was the first film that I took my kids to see because I thought they were old enough to handle an R-rated movie, right.

So when Bruce Willis looks out the door and sees them all coming in and then he looks at his sad little pistol and runs upstairs my son grabs my arm and says, “Dad, the hero is chicken shit.” And I said where’d you learn that language? Not from my movies because you haven’t seen them.

**John:** Let’s talk about John McLane’s character here because we’ll put a link in the show notes to this sort of feminist look at Die Hard which is arguing that one of the great things about Die Hard is that the character is more like Ellen Ripley in Aliens in that like he actually is just being smart and clever and he actually knows his limitations which is kind of new for this type of movie.

**Steven:** Exactly. And that is why some of the more obvious choices, Stallone and Schwarzenegger, they all turned it down because in the climate of the time it just didn’t – he seemed kind of a pussy, you know, basically. So, I read the piece, by the way, the link about the feminist approach and I don’t think that was in my mind, but the idea was that he was overmatched and he was an underdog and that the only tool he had was the weapon which we used in clever ways, you know, using it to climb and to fall and so forth.

We were very conscious at the time what was going on politically in the country which was there was this tremendous fear of foreign ownership. The Japanese were buying things up. Meanwhile the joke is of course the largest ownership of America at that time and to this day is Dutch. But, you know, people don’t get worked up about those slippery Dutch. I can hear those wooden shoes sneaking up on me right now. And there’s a reason they call it Dutch treat. For that reason we pushed the heroes’ character into a complete blue collar direction and made them all snotty Eurotrash.

In the original book the character is a sophisticated college graduate, and expert on terrorism who had in fact been an officer in WWII who had met Gruber’s father when his father was a prisoner at Spandau Prison when he was a child. So he was a much more sophisticated character than we ended up doing with Bruce.

When I came on there already was a script and Jeb had done some very important things in breaking the back of the book. Number one in the book, spoiler alert, the character is 65 years old. He’s a retired cop which means Sinatra could have played him. And he’s visiting his daughter who, spoiler alert, does fall out the window and die and is complicit in the company’s crimes. And it was completely political. They were doing some crooked thing in the third world and were wiping out villages to build a bridge or something like that.

And he also did another very important thing. When the book was written CB radio was all the rage, which is now a completely forgotten thing. And the only person that he was able to communicate with outside was a gypsy cab driver who had the dominant role in communication. At a later point the cop came in, Sargent Al Powell, but he was a minor character. So Jeb combined the Al Powell and the gypsy cab driver. As he tells the story he had a fight with – he had the assignment, he was trying to figure out what to do besides making the lead younger, and he had an argument with his wife. And almost had an accident on the road. And, see, life is so short, I could have died and it would have left my wife – so that took him in that direction.

**John:** So some of the big changes you’re describing from the Roderick Thorp novel is taking the daughter character and making up the wife character. Making their relationship and their tension be a central thematic thread. The Al Powell and the radio communication with a person he’s never met as a crucial link there. And in Jeb’s script was Hans Gruber a genuine terrorist, or was it a heist?

**Steven:** He was genuinely a terrorist. It was McTiernan who said like that’s boring. What could we do that’s different? And Jeb is a terrific writer but I would say if you compare his work to mine he doesn’t have the sense of humor that I do. I have humor and a lot of comedy. I push it as far as I can go, because you can always take it out in post but you can’t put it in. So I would say if there’s funny moments in the film they are largely from me. And also another contribution I think that makes the movie work, what happened was Jeb had turned a script in and as Jeb tells it Joel Silver called him in and said you did a great job but we’re moving really fast now and I’m bringing in a guy that works ahead of the camera and we love your script and we don’t have time for meetings. He’s going to jump right into it.

And I’m friendly with Jeb. We’ve gotten along since then. So I immediately realized it was an adventure process movie, that it’s like [unintelligible] or The Asphalt Jungle is really what it is. And I gave all my thoughts to that version of a movie. And therefore I invented the idea of the safe with the safe with the seven seals. It was not in the movie, it was not in Jeb’s script.

Jeb’s script carried over the idea from the book that they were ripping the building apart trying to find the evidence of their crimes. So, by inventing the seven locks it created kind of a pace for the audience to follow. And more importantly as ridiculous as it seems as I’m starting to think about the adventure process film the obligatory scenes, the term that people use all the time in these weekend courses which is usually nonsense. Often the obligatory scene is not in the movie. The obligatory scene in this movie happened in Germany like three months earlier when they planned the heist. But for the movie to work even though it makes no sense in hindsight he didn’t tell everybody the plan. They keep coming in, what’s going on, the FBI is here. He says, “That’s what I’m counting on.” And what kind of criminal mastermind doesn’t fill in his troops, you know?

So this created a great situation which again I take inspiration from Hitchcock in that you start to root for the bad buy because you sort of don’t want any of the authorities’ attempts to stop him to work because you’re dying to know what is he up to.

**John:** Yup.

**Steven:** So by the fact that the villains keep saying, “Well what’s happening next?” And he says, “Trust me. It’s coming along.” You’re secretly rooting for him. And that’s one of the reasons, of course, his performance is great. It was Rickman’s first movie.

**John:** Now talk to me about the set pieces and the degree to which plot needed to accommodate the desire for certain set pieces. So I think about the anti-aircraft, anti-tank guns and the helicopter explosion and they’re blowing up the tank down there. Those feel like set piece choices. And then you had to layer in like, oh, that it’s believable that these characters traveled with these things or had anticipated this problem.

**Steven:** Yes, the idea that they were like overwhelmingly armed and anticipated anything and were ready for the typical even at that time police overkill fit into that. And also, again, we say that he had been formerly a terrorist who had been thrown out for not being terroristic enough. Another thing I would say that I bring to it, and again if you look at my body of work I guess one thing I always do is whenever it’s possible, even when it’s anachronistically like in The Flintstones, I use media to provide exposition. I always say, you know, if this was happening what would really go on? Somebody would notice.

So the newscast and the television are so prominent and the reporter who was a minor character in Jeb’s script, one of the reasons that he became more important and one of the reasons the movie is very rich, as you know the famous problem of casting the movie and went on so long that Willis was cast last minute and he was not free of his television show.

**John:** Wow.

**Steven:** He was filming his television show. And he had I think almost three weeks of filming left on the television show while we were filming. So after I think the fourth day of filming McTiernan called me in and said listen we’re killing this guy, he’s filming the TV show all day, we’re filming practical nights now. I can see the wear and tear. Can you invent more stuff for the rest of the cast?

And so this is one of the reasons that we cut away to so many other things and it made the movie richer. And John McTiernan was very kind to me. There’s a coffee table book of Die Hard. In the preface John says, “Steven de Souza gave me a Fellini movie,” which is very kind. But he said expand the universe of these characters.

One of the first scenes I wrote under this new direction was the scene where Holly confronts Hans.

**John:** That was another question I had for you. At what point did you know that your POV would be so wide? Because we think of it being John McClane’s movie and that he should be the central character, but really the movie is free to cut away to almost any character at any point. And the movie has a POV that’s not limited to his perspective. The journalist is a great example of that, too.

We’re halfway through the movie and suddenly the FBI agents were introduced very, very late and we see things that only they know. Would that have happened if you’d had all of the Bruce Willis time that you would have wanted?

**Steven:** It would have happened to a degree because I’ve done a number of adaptations over time, based on books and things. And in the book you are entirely in the hero’s head. You only know what he sees and he observes. It starts several days before Christmas, in fact. So that does not work. If you eliminated all the things he’s thinking, and there’s long pages where he reminisces about he could have been a better father to his daughter. There’s a sequence where he thinks about WWII and he was a pilot and then he was in Spandau. So I said, OK, this is coming out. Now I have a 15-minute movie. What is left?

So I was doing that anyway, but John gave me the informateur to like go – there was even more material with the housekeeper where she’s reading the children a bedtime story and then she hears the television from the other room. And what was that? Did they say something about Daddy? So there were other things that went on a little more. There was much more business about cutting the power off. That they had to go through bureaucratic hoops to get the power cut for the building.

Like I said, the idea of having this god’s eye view of everything and letting the audience know things that would build suspense on both sides was a deliberate choice to make up for the problem of the book.

**John:** Now, you said you were writing ahead of production. But talk to us about what writing was like in 1987 in terms of writing ahead of stuff. Because were you literally typing pages? What was the process to make changes because we’re so used to our current system of things?

**Steven:** Well, by this time I had a working relationship with Joel and Larry that was very trustworthy. You have to remember that having come up through television and when they met me and I already had producing credits in television, I had a greater level of trust than writers often got at that time, or to this day. Writers are sometimes not even welcome on the set. God forbid they talk to the actor. The actor says, “What do you think my childhood was like?” And I said, “Oh, I think you probably were claustrophobic.” And the director goes, “Why is he crying in the elevator scene?” Could he talk to the writer?

So I know set etiquette. So I was on the set quite a bit and I was often writing and then going to the set and going back and forth. One of the first things I had was the shooting schedule. And I was literally rewriting the movie according to the shooting schedule. I was given a blueprint of the building that was color-coded for what we really had sets up and what was really the building which I had capped on my wall to keep track of the geography.

I also walked the building with the stunt team, looking for things that we could incorporate and really use. So for example the dolly that they fight and they roll across the dolly, that dolly was there. Let’s fall on that dolly. The chains in the ceiling. The chains were really there. I always feel that you should use the location. Too often the fights in the movies, the fistfights in movies are the same fight you would have had in a republic western, like 60 years ago. It’s 70 years ago. You know, hitting with chairs, crashing into mirrors. Whereas the fight in an office building, you know, someone should get their fingers sliced off with the paper cutter.

I was on the set all day and I go home and it’s like two o’clock in the morning. I walk in and the phone rings. Joel Silver, “You got to get back here right away.” What is it? He says, “The morons used real ducts. It’s taken Bruce like a month to crawl through the duct. You’ve got to come down and give me some business.” So almost all those lines in the duct–

**John:** Oh…

**Steven:** I was on the set, on location, and Bruce had a walkie-talkie, and I was just making up dialogue and we recorded probably 15 different lines and some of them were in the movie. The two most famous examples of the advantage of being on the set and being involved in the process all the way through. One of the things that bothered us all through the movie was that Bruce and Alan never met until the end of the movie. And Joel Silver, as he likes to say, he says, “These movies we make, they’re hate movies. They’re like love stories. In a love story the boy has a cute-meet with the girl, they have a couple of dates, and then they get married. In our movie, Steve, they have a cute-meet, they have a couple of dates where they almost kill each other, and one kills the other. And we’re not dating. We’ve got to have the date.”

So, the problem is that he’s got a dozen guys with him and Bruce is outnumbered. So one day on the set in the afternoon there was a break and craft services were coming around with sandwiches. And someone said to Alan Rickman, apropos of nothing, “Alan, a lot of the UK actors do an American accent. Do you do an American accent?” And Alan said, “Well, I don’t do an American accent per se, but I do like a California one.”

So everybody laughed and I said oh my god, oh my god. That’s it. And I ran and I got Joel and I came back and I said Alan do that again. He says what. What you just did. He says, “I don’t do an American accent. I do like a California one.” And I said, Joel, and Joel said, “Oh, oh my god, I get it.” And he went and got Larry Gordon. Same thing. As soon as Alan opened his mouth Larry went, “Oh yeah.”

And then we got McTiernan. And McTiernan is kind of a very dour Scot and he plans meticulously. He began as a writer in the AFI program, not as a director. So he goes, “Uh, I don’t know. No, no, we saw him kill Takagi.” So I said have you filmed that scene yet? And he turns to I guess the second AD and he says, “When do you shoot?” He says we shoot that tomorrow. I said well then can’t we shoot that scene and he doesn’t see his face?”

So now we all went over to the other sound stage where that set was built and John goes around with his hands up, you know, and he goes, “OK, if I take that big table and we move it ten feet and turn it 45 degrees it has a giant let, a solid – instead of four legs on a long table there’s like a solid wall.” The crew starts to move it, he goes, “No, no, wait, wait. I’ve got to see the scene first.”

So then they went to whatever the nearest office building was to that sound stage, whether that was like accounting or whatever. The first office they walked in, get out of here, give your desk to this guy. And I sat down and there had been a scene earlier where Theo got killed there. Theo was not the safe-cracking expert in that previous draft because that idea of the seven things came in later. So Theo who was one of the only Americans on the crew, he was able to briefly fool Bruce because he was an American.

So I needed Theo to be alive anyway, and I was going to not kill him anyway and kill somebody else. But now I said, OK, that became the scene where he meets Alan Rickman who fools him by his demeanor and changing his voice and everything. And of course I think you know the reason that Bruce – I had all these people come up to me and go, “Oh, because the gun weighs less than the bullets,” you know, an explanation of how – or his instincts are so great. And personally I prefer like Sherlock Holmes to decide rather than lucky guess. But as you know with the wrist watches this is all related to another 11th hour thing.

In the original script when they did meet we had a longer monologue from Rickman. “Ah, Mr. McClane, to meet your acquaintance.” “Ah, so you’re Hans, hey? Why’d you blow up the building Hans?” And he went into a longer explanation, escaping the chaos and stuff like that. So as we’re getting to the end of the movie and now that they’ve met, like we didn’t need this long monologue that got mocked in The Incredibles, right, and the explanation seemed thin.

So I had done a TV movie of The Spirit, Will Eisner’s The Spirit, several years before at Paramount where it was kind of cartoony and the villainess was so evil she was going to blow up a children’s hospital and escape using chaos while pretending to be first responders. So I said nobody saw that. It was before it was on home video, so let’s do that. This was literally a week before the movie wrapped. And to show you how late this idea came in, if you watch the movie again “ambulance” is misspelled on the side of the ambulance. And there was no time to correct it.

**John:** That’s great. So it does sound like throughout this whole process if you, or the writer, had not been as integral to the whole shooting process, the production process, it would not have been Die Hard. It would not have been the Die Hard movie that we’re used to. Because it was like a fresco where you’re painting on wet cement.

**Steven:** Exactly. Yes.

**John:** You’re seeing what’s there. So, again, it’s a great argument for what we always say on the show is that writers have to be involved in every step of the process. It’s not just you made a set of plans once and the plans were followed exactly. You have to respond to what you’re actually seeing in front of you.

**Steven:** Also, although it was in the script that they were having conflict, one of the very important scenes where Bruce and Bonnie argue, I went off with them and we improvised for about an hour and an half. They improvised the scene and I recorded it and then I retrofitted the improv that they had worked up into the script. And that’s why that scene is kind of like I think very authentic and heart felt. And then again that would not have happened had I not been on the set.

**John:** Great.

**Steven:** Another thing I would say in regard to this is when it came together and Bruce was signed they said he wants to meet you, but listen, he has been very upset and his people have gotten back to us that they want this script locked. It’s driving him crazy on that TV show. Pink, yellow, green pages. So if he gives you a couple things, notes, but do not tell him that you are doing – just tell him you’re just rewriting the physical production and you’re not going to change his dialogue at all unless he has a problem with a couple of lines.

Bruce is like six years younger than me. Same age as my younger brother. We grew up about 30 miles apart. So as we were feeling each other out we start talking about our childhood and all the TV shows we watched. We watched the same children shows, including Roy Rogers and stuff like that. So after a little bit he said, “You know, I think that I’d love to get more humor in this stuff. I feel comfortable with humor.” I said so you don’t mind changes? He says, “Oh, no, hell, make this as funny as you can.”

Had I taken my marching orders, don’t even mention rewriting to the actor, again I’m not recommending to all your writers to ignore the producer, but in this case it was very fortuitous that people were flexible and could punt. And were willing to roll up their sleeves and jump in. And in a way it felt very much like – it was a modest for the era. It was not a big budget movie for the time. But I found that sometimes either the pressure of time or a smaller budget gives you much more creative freedom. Because in normal circumstances there’s always mid management people who want to give you notes.

So for example back in the day before the digital era you’re showing your first cut to like the producer, but not the main producer, and the producer says, “Listen, the hooker with the heart of god is the witness of the crime. Do you have a close up of her when she talks to the cop?” And the editor says, yeah, we do. And the guy says, and you know he’s thinking, I could ask you to put the close up but now this is work print. It’s going to delay the movie for 48 hours. He doesn’t say it.

But now they know it’s digital, they can do it right away. They give you the note. But when the movie is hurtling down the railroad tracks everybody is afraid to bring up anything that might slow it down. So as I said a panicked production or a more modestly budgeted movie. I did a movie that is one of my best reviewed movies, nobody has seen, but it’s on Amazon now called Possessed which is the true story behind The Exorcist with Timothy Dalton. And the budget of that movie was so modest and I was coming to it off these big hits, they let me do whatever I want. It was fantastic.

And again the same kind of experience where we were not under pressure opened up opportunities. Timothy Dalton came to me at one point as we were wrapping the movie and said, “Listen, I want to talk to you about the last scene of the movie.” And I’m going, OK, here it comes, because I worked with too many Hollywood actors.” And so I said what is it? He says, “I was thinking this would be better if my character said nothing.” So this is not something you normally hear from Hollywood actors. But again knowing that there was enough flexibility he could hit me with something like that at the last minute.

So I recommend to your writers that if you have a choice, work on a picture that is hurtling down the railroad tracks, or a picture that has a fairly modest budget, and you’ll have more creative freedom.

**John:** Let’s wrap up by talking about the legacy of Die Hard. Because I’m curious at what point, because you said your kid thought that the hero is chicken shit, but ultimately I’m sure loved the film because people love the film. And it got a huge reaction when it first came out. At what point did you realize that this was going to be its own mini genre. That there was going to be Die Hard in a dot-dot-dot as a sort of subgenre of action film?

**Steven:** Well our original intention, of course we all knew that Roderick Thorp had been inspired by seeing The Towering Inferno. So in our mind we were going to do the three disaster movies. We were going to do The Towering Inferno, the next was Airport, and the third was going to be Poseidon Adventure.

So we did Airport the second time, which was a totally unrelated script that got reinvented as a Die Hard script. And we were going to do and had a plan even for the cruise ship version, but then Under Siege and Speed 2.

**John:** Cruise Control, yeah.

**Steven:** So that was off the table. But very quickly we realized right away that Under Siege was Die Hard on a boat. And so on. But again they made the mistake, or they decided that instead of being an ordinary guy he was a super ordinary guy. Then we had Air Force One, Die Hard on a plane. And when it became really out of hand, now this is a true story that I told a number of times to journalists, and none of them in interviews like this they always thought I was making it up. But I told Bruce the story and then Bruce did an interview in Vanity Fair on Die Hard 4 where he told my story and now people believe the story.

**John:** Of course, yes.

**Steven:** Of course, because he told it.

But I got a call from a producer who saw the Timothy Dalton movie, which is now playing on Amazon, called Possessed, and he said, “I was watching this movie, I got caught up, and I saw the credits that you wrote and directed this. And you directed a couple of Academy Award-winning actors and that’s not your wheelhouse, a horror movie. I’ve got a picture that’s right up your alley and now that I know you can direct you have carte blanche to rewrite it and you can direct the movie.”

And I said what is it? He said, “It’s Die Hard in a building.”

**John:** Ha! Yes.

**Steven:** He sent the script over and it was terrible. It was a complete beat-for-beat copy of Die Hard except with a female protagonist, otherwise like a clone. So I passed.

**John:** No. So my question for you Steven is do you have a sense of why we’re not making “Die Hard in a” very much anymore? Because Skyscraper very much is a Die Hard kind of movie. But there haven’t been a lot of those recently. I don’t see that as a genre that’s happening in the 2020s. And I’m sort of curious if you had any sense of why because it feels like it kind of should still work. That we have a clear central protagonist who has to protagonate over the course of it against overwhelming odds in a confined space.

**Steven:** I think, and it sounds crazy, but I think now they just seem too small scale. I mean, in the conversation for this movie we kept escalating how much money was in the bearer bonds.

**John:** That’s right.

**Steven:** Well that’s chump change. $100 million, that’s chump change, you know.

**John:** Because you’re not saving the world, so what’s the point?

**Steven:** Exactly. Exactly. If you’re not saving the world. And too many movies now the climax is just, you know, 20 minutes of CGI. This movie almost everything is practical. There’s no CGI in that movie at all.

**John:** This was an absolute delight. Thank you so much for coming on to talk to us about Die Hard.

**Steven:** I’m delighted to do it. I’m delighted to finally meet you. I’m a big fan.

**John:** Steven, thank you so much. Have a great weekend.

**Steven:** All right, you too. Bye-bye.

**John:** Bye.

Links:

* Read the DIE HARD script on [Weekend Read](https://quoteunquoteapps.com/weekendread/) or [online here](https://www.scriptslug.com/assets/scripts/die-hard-1988.pdf).
* [Feminist Analysis of Die Hard](https://anotherangrywoman.com/2016/12/18/making-fists-with-your-toes-towards-a-feminist-analysis-of-die-hard/)
* [Movies That Made Us](https://www.netflix.com/title/80990849) on Netflix, check out the Die Hard episode on S1!
* Sign up for [premium here](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/).
* [Steven E. de Souza](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0211823/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/stevenedesouza)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Andy Roninson ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by [Megana Rao](https://twitter.com/MeganaRao) and edited by [Matthew Chilelli](https://twitter.com/machelli).

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/527standard.mp3).

The Journey, the Destination, and Movie Lego

Episode - 529

Go to Archive

December 14, 2021 Scriptnotes, Transcribed

John and Craig examine how writers balance the needs of each scene while keeping the entire story in mind. Then it’s another a round of the Three Page Challenge, where we look at scenes submitted by our listeners. We offer advice for gimmicky reveals, honest character reactions, and consistent POV.

Also this week: open writing assignments, and a checklist of what writers need to know before pursuing one.

In our bonus segment for premium members, what to do when you get bored with what you’re writing. Is that a sign to bail or buckle down?

Links:

* [WGA Introduces Project Page](https://www.wga.org/members/employment-resources/wgaw-project-page) check out the [pdf here.](https://www.wga.org/uploadedfiles/members/employment_resources/project_page.pdf)
* Follow along with our Three Page Challenges: [Firebird by Benjamin Blattberg](https://johnaugust.com/index.php?gf-download=2021%2F10%2FFirebird_Blattberg.pdf&form-id=1&field-id=4&hash=556a9ba8ce27120b3c1bc15354f2475bb9653a4390ca621d0313ab308900f6d7), [The Drawing by Todd William Knack](https://johnaugust.com/index.php?gf-download=2021%2F12%2FTHE_DRAWING_THREE_PAGE_TODD_KNAAK.pdf&form-id=1&field-id=4&hash=0fbb734235ffa2d759d7216cf09e4e7efb43e4b7704ce05acac5793d98fde112), [Perdition by Terry Rietta](https://johnaugust.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/NEWperdition-3-page-challenge.pdf), [Ten Million by Helen Sedwick](https://johnaugust.com/index.php?gf-download=2021%2F10%2FSedwick.Ten-Million.First-Three-Pages.10242021.pdf&form-id=1&field-id=4&hash=fba5fbccc4a5c81f9ed4bf3d075884e6b3544c52008ef870d4b4cf762f39213a)
* [Nite Ize SlapLit LED Slap Wrap](https://amzn.to/3oGhd4e)
* [The New 16 inch MacBook Pro](https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/?afid=p238%7CslVe23VBZ-dc_mtid_1870765e38482_pcrid_567634252511_pgrid_101595807247_&cid=aos-us-kwgo-mac–slid—product-)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/) You can now listen to Scriptnotes Premium on Spotify!
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Ryan Gerberding ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by [Megana Rao](https://twitter.com/MeganaRao) and edited by [Matthew Chilelli](https://twitter.com/machelli).

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/529standard.mp3).

**UPDATE 1-19-21** The transcript for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2022/scriptnotes-episode-529-the-journey-the-destination-and-movie-lego-transcript).

« 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.