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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: book rights

Scriptnotes, Episode 531: Scene to Scene, Transcript

February 2, 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’s Craig Mazin.

John August: This is Episode 531 of Scriptnotes. It’s a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the show we’re looking at how you move from scene to scene. That’s right, transitions. It’s a clip show where we listen back to past John and past Craig as they offer their advice, which for all we know, is better than our current advice, because we were younger then, and fresher.

Craig Mazin: So much younger than today.

John August: Now we actually got an email in from a listener recently saying like, “Oh, I went back and listened to your early episodes, expecting it to be different, that John and Craig would’ve grown and changed a lot.” She said, “No, actually, you know what? It was the same. Your microphones weren’t as good, but it was the same show,” which I was heartened by.

Craig Mazin: Yes, I think it might’ve been a man.

John August: Oh. It could’ve been either one.

Craig Mazin: I think based on that name I think it’s a guy, but either way, I wanted to say to that fellow that no, of course we weren’t great at that then, and we have gotten better. Maybe it’s just that we found something where we weren’t accountable to anybody at all. Sometimes the key is that if you have something where you’re completely free within it to do whatever you want, how you want to do it, without any accountability whatsoever, and no expectation or ambition or anything, then there is a purity to it, and people who are going to like that purity are going to like it. If you dig Scriptnotes Episode 500, yeah, you’ll probably like 1 through 10. If you hate Episode 500, I guarantee you’ll hate 1 through 10. We’ve said a lot.

Don’t get fooled by the way things look on the other side of stuff. Here, hopefully you just listen to me talk about how ashamed I am all the time and how I feel bad about myself, and I try and work on that really, really hard. Don’t compare yourself to anybody. Basically in your letter you said, “To be honest, I was hoping that you guys weren’t as good at the beginning. It would’ve given me hope to get better myself at my stuff.” You have plenty of hope. You’re doing a hard thing. You’re trying to do a hard thing. You’re going to move at the speed you move.

John August: Yeah, and I always also say at the beginning we were new to podcasting, but we weren’t necessarily new to screenwriting and offering advice to screenwriters. That was a not a new thing for us to do. It was just sticking a mic in front of us was the new aspect of it.

Let’s travel back in time and look at transitions. These are three conversations we’ve had over the years. We’re going to start with Episode 446: Back To Basics, where we talk about the origin of screenwriting, opening scenes, what a scene is, what it means, and the difference between formatting and transition versus the psychology of what a transition actually does, like how you’re moving from scene to scene versus the actual words you’re using.

In 493 on our Opening Scenes conversation, we talk about how you begin a screenplay, the process for thinking about opening scenes, the rules and expectations. We talk about Chernobyl some. It feels like a lot of what we’re talking about in this is really relevant to transitions, basically how are we going to get the story started and how are we going to get the audience moving with us into the plot.

Finally, we’re going to go back to Episode 89, which is probably, wow, eight years ago?

Craig Mazin: Peesh.

John August: Yeah. We’re looking at technical approaches to different types of transitions, so literally what are the words on a page that is signaling to the reader that this is how we are going to be moving from this scene to that scene. Literally it’s the right-hand margin stuff we’ll get into in that last
segment.

Three segments here. We’ll also put a link in the show notes to some blog posts where we talk about transitions. If you’re a Premium member stick around, because when we come back at the end, we are going to be discussing how to get out of a conversation, so it’s really the transition between I am talking with you right now and I don’t want to be talking with you any longer. We’ll be discussing how to end conversations, both in person and online.

Now let me make a transition out of this opening segment into our three pre-recorded bits. Craig, can you help me out with this transition?

Craig Mazin: No.

John August: Perfect.

All right. This is a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters, and so I thought we might actually take this time in Episode 446 to define screenwriting and what screenwriting actually is, because I don’t know if we’ve actually talked about it in actually that much depth, weirdly, over the course of this, because Craig, you did your solo episode about how to write a screenplay. That was really fundamentally 101 the things about writing a screenplay, but I wanted to do some backstory about the origin of screenwriting and how screenwriting began to what it’s become now and what those transitions were.

I have three things I want to keep in mind as we talk about what a screenwriter does and what screenwriting is, and maybe tease them apart a little bit, because I think especially newer people who are approaching screenwriting, which we have a bunch of new people listening, just because they watched Ryan Reynolds and Phoebe Waller-Bridge last week, really talk about what the screenwriter does and what screenwriting is about.

Craig Mazin: I hope that my understanding of it is correct. I’ll be very embarrassed if I’m wrong.

John August: I think you will probably be very, very correct. Let’s talk about the origin of screenwriting, because screenwriting as an art form is only about a century old, because movies are only about a century old. When the first motion picture cameras were aimed at things and it went beyond just photographing a train coming into a station, to actually trying to tell a story with a camera, at some point people recognized, oh, you know what, it would help if we wrote down the plan for what we’re going to do before we actually shot this stuff. Those initial things that would become screenplays were just a list of shots, or a plan for how you’re going to do the things. When we talk about screenwriting being like architecture, that’s what we’re getting to is that sense of like it’s a plan for the thing you’re going to make. It is a blueprint for what the ultimate finished product is going to be, which is the finished film, the thing that a person is going to watch, which is not the literary document or not the paper document that we’re starting off with. Craig, I don’t know if you’ve seen any of those first screenplays, but they don’t closely resemble what we do now.

Craig Mazin: No. I think that when people say a screenplay is a blueprint, I always get a little fussy about it, but in this aspect of it, that’s exactly what it is. Part of a screenplay, a screenplay is many, many things at once, one of the things a screenplay is and has always been, going back to those first ones, is essentially a business plan. It is an outline of where you need to be and how long you need to be there and what needs to be seen. There’s not a lot of art to it. It really is more of an organizational thing, and the modern counterpart to it I guess would just be sometimes a director will come in and make a little shot list for the day. That is appropriate to blueprint.

John August: Yeah, or agenda. It’s basically these are the steps. This is how we’re going to do it. Because it’s written on eight and a half by 11 paper and it’s done with words rather than a flowchart, it feels somewhat literary. The words you pick matter a little bit, but not a tremendous amount. It’s basically as long as you’re going to be able to communicate what your intention is to the other people who need to see this document, that’s all that really matters.

Craig Mazin: That tradition carries through to this day when a screenplay still uses interior, exterior. Every scene must give you blueprint information that is not literary information. There is nothing literary about exterior, house, day, rain, or whatever you say there. The literary part comes in this other stuff that started to emerge as our craft of filmmaking and writing evolved.

John August: Now, that evolution, I’m not enough of a student of the history of cinema to tell you exactly when the screenplay became more what we talk about today, but often you’ll hear Casablanca referenced as a turning point between this list of shots to something that’s more like a modern screenplay in the sense of it’s a document that you can read, and in reading this document, you get a sense of what the actual film is supposed to feel like. It’s not just the pure blueprint. It’s more like this gives you a sense of where you are, what’s going on. It gives you a preview of what the film is actually going to look and feel like, versus just a straightforward list of these are the things you’re seeing.

Craig Mazin: This is not necessarily historically … You can’t call me a professor here, by any stretch of the imagination, but my understanding when I look at the early stuff is that it was the American movie business that was very blueprint-y and shot list-y. There is a pretty famous … You’ve probably seen the silent film A Trip to the Moon.

John August: Oh yes, yeah.

Craig Mazin: Yes, remember where the moon gets shot in the eye.

John August: The Brothers Lumière.

Craig Mazin: Exactly. George Méliès. Méliès? Méliès? Méliès? If you look at the script for that, it actually feels quite modern. There is a literary aspect to it. It’s more descriptive. I think in Europe probably there was a little bit more of a literary aspect to this much earlier than there was in the United States, but eventually by the time you get to films like Casablanca you’re fully in the swing of a literary screenplay that is combining two things at once, a non-literary production plan and art.

John August: Now, in both the literary form and in the blueprint-y construction plan form, the fundamental unit that you come back to is the scene. Even novels have scenes, that sense of there is a moment in space and time when generally characters are saying something or doing something. It’s one carved out moment of a place and a time where things are happening. That idea of a scene you see in both the really clinical early versions of screenplays and you see them in modern screenplays. That sense of like this is a chunk of time in which these things are happening.

I want to suss out three different kinds of things we mean by scene. First is that moment of space and time where characters are doing a thing. That’s scene version A. Scene version B is the writing of that scene. By the writing I mean this is what the characters are saying and doing. It’s where we’re coming into that moment. It’s how we’re getting out of that moment. It is the words we’re using to describe the world in which the characters are happening, the actions they’re taking, basically everything we call scene description, which you compare to stage plays, which is the other natural version of this, the scene description in stage plays tends to be incredibly minimalist. It’s much more robust in screenplays, because you are trying to really visually describe this world in which the characters are inhabiting. That’s an important transition. That’s version B is really the writing.

The third version of a scene I want to distinguish between is all the formatting stuff. All the basically the grammar of screenplays that we use that make them, the conventions that make it easier for people who read a lot of screenplays to understand what’s actually happening. The same way that commas and periods become invisible to a reader, people who are used to reading screenplays, they don’t even see INT and EXT and DAYS. Your brain just skips over those things and is able to concentrate on the meat of those. All that other information is there, but it’s invisible to a person who is used to reading them. Being able to understand those conventions and use them properly really does affect how a person perceives a screenplay. That formatting, that syntax choices and all that stuff, is really a different thing I would say than the words you’re using to describe stuff. It’s really grammar versus the actual creative act of writing.

Craig Mazin: Yeah, and that grammar is eventually going to be analyzed by a grammar specialist known as the First AD, who along with the production managers, are going to be taking those scene headings and asking, “Okay, are these scene headings accurate to what we think we’re going to be actually doing in terms of the locations we found? How can we group them together? We need to make a timeline, night, day.” All those things have huge production implications. None of them have to do specifically with art. You’re guessing at what you think the ultimate grammar will be, but then you make adjustments once you get into production. Individual first ADs will have different ways of adjusting that grammar.

You’re right that for most people reading it, those things serve weirdly as just paragraph breaks. They’re paragraph breaks, which are incredibly helpful. It’s one of the reasons why my formatting preference is to put two lines before a new scene, because the scene, the EXTERIOR or the INTERIOR, is serving as a break in the visual flow of the reading, so I make it one, because I agree with you. I think that that’s really what it’s doing. If you took out all the interiors and exteriors and just mentioned those things in action lines, the script would become a book and it would be harder to read.

John August: Yeah. In thinking about scenes in three different waves, so there’s the visualization, the imagination of what’s happening with those characters in space and time, that is a thing that a screenwriter does, but it’s also the kind of thing a director does. It’s a thing that other creative people can do. It’s a thing an author does, is envision people in a place and a time doing a thing or saying a thing. Directors often do that scene version A a lot. They’re really imagining what that scene is like. They’re thinking about it through their own specialties. They’re imagining it’s like, “Okay, so I’m envisioning this scene, this moment happening,” and then they’re thinking, “Okay, where would I put the camera? What are the opportunities I have here? How would I use my tool set to make this happen best? What am I going to tell the cinematographer about what I’m looking at? What am I going to tell the editor about how I imagine this being paced? What are the costumes? What are all the things that I will need to be able to describe to other people about this moment?” That’s a version of crafting the scene.

The screenwriter has to do all that stuff, but then take a second level abstraction, thinking, “Okay, having thought through all that stuff, what are the words I’m going to use to describe what’s most important about this moment? Because I could describe everything, but that would be exhausting, and it would actually hurt the process of being able to understand what’s important. How am I’m going to synthesize that down to the most important things for people to understand if they’re reading this scene about what it’s going to feel like, what’s important, what they need to focus on?”

Most of what Craig and I really are talking about on the podcast is this second level, is the B version of that scene, which is how do we find the best way to describe and tell the reader what they would be seeing if they were seated in a theater watching this on a screen, how are we going to convey that experience, what it feels like to be watching that moment on the big screen. That’s mostly what we talk about on this podcast.

Craig Mazin: Yeah. There’s a weird kind of psychological game we’re playing with scene work, in the way that Walter Murch wrote this book about editing, I think it’s called In the Blink of an Eye, where he says we’re cutting in the pattern of people’s blinks, that we blink in normal moments. We’re kind of predictable this way. We have a rhythm. We’re editing slightly on that basis. Editing feels like music. It’s all about timing. You just know, there, cut there, that’s the spot.
It’s kind of the same thing with scenes. What you’re doing is feeling a psychological impact and then there’s a blink, a story blink, that just needs to happen. We have reached a point where something should happen and the story should blink and reset, and in a different place or a different time or with a different person, a different perspective. That to me is where the scene begins and ends.

Inside of the scene, we may have additional slug lines or scene headers, because we’re giving that blueprint information, that nonliterary blueprint information, to our production friends. For the purpose of being artistic and literary, the scene is the psychological unit. I don’t know how else to describe it other than something blinks and the story moves.

John August: Here’s an example. Imagine you could take a real life thing that’s happening. We’re in a room. There are people talking. Imagine we’re at a cocktail party. There’s a cocktail party happening. It’s maybe six people in this room. There’s discussions happening. We could invite three screenwriters in and have them see all of this, and then each of them goes off and writes their own version of this scene. There would be three very different scenes, because those screenwriters would be choosing to focus on different things.

Even though we all encountered the same moment, we’re writing different scenes, because we are choosing to focus on different things and we want to direct the reader’s attention to different moments. It’s what snippets of conversations we’re using. It is who we’re choosing to focus on. The same way the director is choosing where to put the camera, we are choosing where to put the reader’s attention. That is mostly what we talk about on this podcast is how as a writer you make the decisions about what you’re going to emphasize and what you’re going to ignore about a moment that is happening in front of us as an audience.

Craig Mazin: It’s one of the reasons I stress transitions so much. We have a podcast we’ve done about transitions. I can’t remember offhand the number, but we’ll put it in the show notes. Transitions help the audience demarcate the blink, the beginning and end of the scene, because inside of scenes, once you get away from the page and you’re just watching a television show or a movie, there is the montage effect, which is essentially, in the old sense of the word, not the, “We’re doing a montage,” but rather when you show something and then you cut to something else, we understand that time is continuing even though we have moved the camera and cut. These things are constantly happening. So how do you know when one thing begins and one thing ends? Since it’s all cut cut cut cut cut, why does one cut signal the beginning of something, and why does one cut signal the end, and why do others feel like they’re just part of a continuity? Transitions. They let you know when the scene has begun, and they let you know when it’s over.

John August: Absolutely. That’s a great segue to really this third version of what I’m describing. It’s this scene which is all of the formatting and the standard conventions and grammar that we’ve come to expect out of screenplays. It’s different from the transition that Craig is talking about, because Craig is really talking psychologically what are we trying to do by ending the scene there and getting to the next scene. That will also have a reflection in literally the words and how we’re formatting that moment to get us from one scene to the next scene. All the stuff that your screenwriting software does for you, that is the technical details that makes screenplays look so strange and different.

As I was reading through all these entries for the Three Page Challenge, picking them for the episode we’re recording tomorrow, I was struck by many of our listeners really get it, they know exactly what they’re doing, but some of them are actually still struggling with that third kind of scene writing, which is basically understanding how standard screenplay conventions are so helpful in letting the reader understand what’s important in this moment. Some of them are still struggling with that stuff. That’s the kind of thing I think you can actually teach and be taught. The best way to do it is to read a ton of screenplays and see just how it is, just so it becomes really natural. You read a bunch, you write a bunch to try to match up to that thing, but you will very quickly get a sense of how screenplays are formatted and how to make that feel effortless, make it feel like it’s not in your way but it’s actually helping you. What’s much harder for us to try to teach you is that second part, that part of how to very naturally convey what a moment feels like. I want to make sure we keep that distinction clear, because being able to type “cut to” and understand how to get down a page is a different thing than being able to really shape what a scene is going to feel like for the reader.

Craig Mazin: Yeah. Literally anyone can put something into a screenplay format. It’s never been easier. saying “cut to” and then “exterior such-and-such” will make something look like a scene has ended and a new scene has begun on the page, but it actually will not translate whatsoever to the actual viewing experience. The only thing that you have in your arsenal to demarcate that for the viewer is creativity. A sense of rhythm. A sense of conclusion. A sense of propulsion. A sense of surprise. Contrast. All the things that we talk about when we think of transitions that have nothing to do with formatting, because alas, there is no sign flashing in the movie or on your television set that says, “New scene has begun.” This is the craft part. Man, if I were teaching a screenwriting class at USC or UCLA or one of those places, I think honestly I would just begin with that. I would just begin with please let’s just talk about the art of letting people know something has begun and something has ended.

John August: Yeah, because “cut to” is not when a scene ends. The scene ends when the scene is ending. So often you feel like, okay, that scene is over, but there’s a couple more lines. When you actually film that you’re going to realize you don’t need this extra. You recognize that that moment is over and therefore the scene should be over. It’s a hard thing to learn until you’ve gone through it.

Craig Mazin: That is where the talent and instinct is. Obviously experience helps as you go on, as it does with everything, but there is an innate sense that something has concluded. Even for those of us who have been doing this for a while and we’re professionals, we will often make a mistake of going a little bit too far or not far enough, and then somebody will come and say, “I feel like maybe the scene ended here.” The key is that when somebody says that, you can look at it and go, “No, it hasn’t, and here’s why,” or, “Yeah, you’re right. That’s where it ended.” There is a sense.

John August: Having written the Arlo Finch books, one of the great advantages to traditional literary fiction is that if you’re lucky, you have a publisher, and that publisher provides an editor, who is going through that work and doing some of this actual checking with you. Whereas I might send Craig a script and he can say like, “Oh, I think your scene really ended here,” the editor’s job is much more clinical, saying, “Okay, now I’m … ” She’s actually cutting some stuff, saying, “No, you’re done here.” Sometimes you’ll get to a line editor or a copy editor who is going through and actually fixing your mistakes.

Screenwriters generally don’t have anybody like that, so we are responsible for doing all of that ourselves. I do sometimes wonder if sometimes there are people who are really pretty good at that stage A of writing a scene and stage B of writing a scene, but are really kind of terrible at stage three, that stage C of writing a scene and doing the actual making it work right as a screenplay kind of thing, would just be so helped out by having someone who could just go through and make it read better, make it read more conventionally on the page, so that we can really see what the intention is, versus being hung up on the strange mistakes they’re making.

Craig Mazin: I was a guest for a webinar, a Zoominar. A Zoominar through Princeton University. I did it yesterday. They open it up to members of that community. I don’t know, there was 100 people or something like that watching, which is kind of fun to see all the little Zoom faces. Someone asked a question and it essentially went to this, which was, when you look at how screenplays work as opposed to a novel, there are so many other things that you have to be thinking about. In a novel you’re just thinking about what people are saying and doing and thinking. In a screenplay you’re managing all this other stuff, like time and the camera and the visual space and how it will be structured and when things move from one place to another. Unfortunately, that’s true. If you want to be a good screenwriter, you’re going to have to be a little bit of a Swiss Army knife. It’s very hard to be a good screenwriter but only be good at one thing.

Every now and then you’ll hear somebody say, “Oh, we’re bringing them in, but they’re doing a character pass.” I’m like, what the hell does that mean? What’s the difference between character and story? They’re exactly the same thing to me. They’re interwoven. I don’t know how to separate these things. Or sometimes they’ll say, “We’re bringing somebody in to do a comedy pass.” Okay, so is that just like somebody’s going to stop in the middle of the movie and do some standup? The comedy has to come out of who they are and what the situations are. We have to do all of it at the same time, which is why it’s so hard. It’s really, really hard. There are, I don’t know, 4,000 times as many successful novelists as there are screenwriters.

John August: That is true. What I will say though about the Princeton question is the things that student was asking about, like, oh, you have to do all these other things, those become really automatic and much simpler with experience, so you stop having to worry about them so much. The same way like once you really learn how to use a semicolon, you can just use a semicolon. A lot of the detritus and the weird things about our modern screenplay format, once you get used to it, you stop thinking about it, it becomes less of an obstacle. I’m never, as a screenwriter, frustrated by like, “Oh, I don’t know how I’m going to do this in a screenplay format.” It just becomes really straightforward after a time.

Craig Mazin: It does take time, but eventually … It’s like touch typing. I don’t think about where the W is. My finger just goes there.

John August: What we can do is talk about really specific crafty things, which I feel like you and I are much better in our element to discuss. This actually comes from a question that Martin in Sandringham, Australia wrote in to ask. “I’m curious about the process to decide on the beginning point of your screenplays. Have you noticed a pattern of thinking that you tend to follow when choosing that first line of the script to be in the story, or is it purely driven by the unique nature of the story that you’re telling?”

Craig, it occurs to me that often we do a Three Page Challenge, and we’re looking at the first three pages of a script, so we’re really looking at these opening scenes, and yet because we’re only looking at that scene, we don’t really have a sense of what that scene is doing for the telling of the rest of the movie. We’re really just focused on what is the experience reading these scenes, what are the words on the page, but not what is that scene doing to establish the bigger picture of the movie. I thought today we’d spend some time really looking at opening scenes and our process as we go into thinking about an opening scene for a movie, or writing one.

Craig Mazin: It’s a great question, Martin. It I think has changed over time stylistically, which is no surprise. When we were kids and we saw movies from 30 years earlier, meaning the ’50s, the opening scenes seemed a lot different than the opening scenes we were used to. We’re sitting at home watching a VHS tape of Raiders of the Lost Ark, and we see how that opening goes. Then maybe dad shows us a movie from 1955 and it’s much slower and more expository in a flat sort of way. Perhaps there’s jaunty music happening or sweeping violins. These days as time has gone on it seems like opening scenes more and more are about a strange kind of disorientation, a giving to you of a puzzle that the implied contract is this will all make sense. I think of maybe the most influential opening sequence or scene in recent television history was the opening sequence of Breaking Bad, which was designed specifically to be what the hell is going on? What is that? Why are there pants there? Why is there an RV? What is happening? Why are there bullet holes? Then the puzzle gets solved.

John August: I like that you’re bringing up the change from earlier movies to present day movies in how openings work, because I think you could make the same observation about how teasers and trailers for movies from a previous time worked versus how they work now. You look at those old trailers and you’re like, “Oh my god, this is just so boring. This is not selling me on the movie at all.” In many ways we now look for these opening scenes and opening sequences to really be like a trailer for the movie you’re about to see. They’re really setting stuff up and getting you excited to watch this movie you’re about to watch and to reward you for like, thank you for sitting down in your seat and giving me your attention, because this is what’s going to happen.

Let’s maybe start by talking about what are the story elements that need to happen in these opening scenes or opening sequences, they don’t have to happen, but tend to happen in these opening sequences. What are we trying to do story-wise, plot-wise, or character-wise in these scenes?

Craig Mazin: You have choices. You don’t actually have to do anything. Sometimes the opening is just about meeting a person. You are accentuating the lack of story. They’re happy. They’re carefree. Everything’s fine. I agree with you. More and more there is a kind of trailerification of the opening of a movie or a television show. There is the indication of a thing, and it’s often a thing that the characters don’t even see, or if they do see it, they’re looking at it from a different time, this is later, or this is earlier, whatever it is, but there is an indication of something, that there is a crack in reality that needs to be healed somehow.

John August: Yeah. From a story perspective you’re generally meeting characters. If you’re not meeting your central character, you’re meeting another character who is important or a character who represents an important part of the story. In that opening scene you might be meeting a character who ends up dying at the end of that scene or sequence, but it’s setting up an important thing about what’s going to happen in the course of your story, the course of your movie. You’re hopefully learning about the tone of this piece and what it feels like to be watching this movie, the setting of this world, how the movie kind of works, and some of the rules of this world. If you’re in a fantasy universe, is there magic, how does gravity work, what are the edges of what this kind of movie can be, because in that opening scene you want to have a sense of like this is the general kind of movie that we’re watching, so that you can benefit from all the expectations that an audience brings into that, because of the genre, because of the type of movie that you’re setting up.

Craig Mazin: Yeah. I think about openings that have always stuck with me as being confusing and challenging, which I’ve always loved. I often look at the very curious opening to Blade Runner, which was not the original opening that they had planned, but it’s the opening they ended up with. Neither of the characters in that scene are main characters. There is an unknown investigator, and there is a replicant who we don’t know is a replicant. He’s not the important one. He’s not the head villain. He’s a henchman, essentially. You have no idea what the hell is going on. There’s one man in a very strange device that might be futuristic or antique, asking strange questions of this guy and seemingly zeroing in on something important. Then the man, feeling somewhat trapped by the series of very abstract questions, kills the investigator.

What happens there is a challenge to you to try and keep up, and a promise that it will make sense later. In addition, I know that this world looks a certain way. I know people are going to dress a certain way. I also know that it is going to expect some things of me. It’s good if the first scene gives the audience a difficulty level. It doesn’t have to be high difficulty. Sometimes your first scene says this is going to be an easy play. Let people know what the difficulty is with that first scene.

John August: As you’re talking about that, I’m now recalling that scene. It works really well and it’s setting up that this is a mystery story, that there’s going to be questions of identity and existential issues here. Even though you don’t know that it’s necessarily a science-fiction world it’s a pretty grounded science-fiction, if it is a science-fiction world, so all these things are really important.
Now Craig, an experience I’ve had sometimes reading a friend’s script or someone I’m working with’s script is that I will really enjoy the movie that they’ve written, but I’ll come back and say, “This is not your first scene. You have written a first scene that does not actually match your movie and does not actually help your movie.” It’s a weird thing to run into, but I often find that some scripts I really like, they just don’t start right, they start on the wrong beat, or as you dig deeper, you find that the writer wrote that scene first, but then they kind of wrote a different movie, and they need to write a new first scene that actually helps set up the movie they actually really wrote. Is that a common experience you’ve had?

Craig Mazin: I’ve noticed this. I think sometimes it’s hard to hit that mark, because nothing else has been written yet, so it’s your first swing. Sometimes the first scene suffers from a sense of, oh, you’ve been thinking about this as a short film for about seven years and you finally got the nerve worked up to finish it, but the problem is this thing feels like it’s a seven-year-long thoughtful short film, and then the rest of it is just a movie. Sometimes it’s the opposite. Sometimes there’s a sense that the opening is fine, but it is not special. The opening is our chance to be brave. I think that we have two moments in movies, or in any particular episode of television, where the audience will forgive us a lot. It’s at the very beginning and it’s at the very end. In the middle you’ve got to stay in between the lines on the road, but in the beginning and the end you get to have fun.

John August: Let’s talk about why you have that special relationship with the audience at the start, because they’ve deliberately sat down to watch the thing that you’ve created. If they’re going into a movie theater to watch it there, they’ve put forth a lot of effort. They bought a ticket. They’ve driven themselves to that theater. They’re going to probably watch your whole movie, whether they love it or they don’t love it. In those first minutes, they really, really, really want to love what you’re giving them. Their guards are down. In TV they could flip away more easily, so there’s some issues there, but their expectations are very malleable at that start. You really can take them anywhere. You get a lot of things for free. They come in with a bit of trust. If you can honor that trust and honor that expectation and get them to keep trusting you, they’re going to go on your story. If you don’t set that hook well, they may just wander off and they may never really fully engage with the story you’re trying to tell.

Craig Mazin: Yeah. They’re hungry at the beginning. They’re hungry. Don’t just immediately shove all the food down their throat. You can have some fun here. You know that they want to feel that anticipation. When you go to a concert and there’s the opening act, and then they’re done and they leave, and then the PA system is playing just songs and you’re waiting, and then the lights go down. It’s not like the lights go down and then the band comes out, “Here we are! Let’s go!” and then they immediately start a song. There’s usually some sort of wah.

They get you ready. That can go on for a while, because everybody knows, oh my god it’s happening. Let it be happening, don’t let it just happen, if that makes sense.

John August: Yeah. Let’s talk about some of our own writing and our own opening scenes and what our experience was for this. I’m going back, thinking back to Chernobyl. Chernobyl, if I recall correctly, opens with an old woman and a cow.

Craig Mazin: That is how Episode Four or Three opens.

John August: That’s right. It was later on. It’s not the very first image of it. What is the first image of the first episode?

Craig Mazin: The first image of the first episode is a couch with an afghan type thing of a deer, and we hear a man talking. We actually hear his voice before we ever see anything.

John August: Yeah. We don’t realize at the time it’s going to be a Stuart Special, that we are setting up a thing, the past, and that we’re going to be jumping back and forth. I think the reason why I was remembering that cow scene is that it’s an example of we don’t have context for who these characters are, why what’s happening is happening. Are these characters going to be important? No, not really. You were just setting up the question of that episode and that world and what kind of story this episode is going to be. I thought it just worked really well.

Craig Mazin: Thank you. Every episode needs its own beginning. I’m pretty sure that’s beginning of Episode Four. It’s sad that it’s all mushing together now. That was designed to be a bit confusing, because we don’t know what exactly this guy is doing there, and we’re not sure what his orders are, and we definitely aren’t sure what her deal is, and we don’t know he’s just standing there, and so this goes on. Then at the end of it we know. We know a lot. That is a standalone intro, which we didn’t do much of, and generally I don’t. Sometimes it’s okay to make this opening its own thing that announces something about the world, and then we catch up to the people that we know and care about. We think, oh, do they know that they’re in a world where that other thing is happening? Certainly one way to go.

John August: Completely analogous situation is the opening of the Charlie’s Angels movie. Of course, again, you’re establishing a place and a time and a world, except that it’s in a very candy-colored … We’re in a plane and we see all these characters. We see LL Cool J is the first recognizable star that we see. There’s clearly some sort of heist thing happening. It’s only as the sequence plays on that we realize, oh, the Angels were actually part of this the entire time and this is this elaborate sequence to get this guy, this terrorist off this plane before he does something dastardly. That sequence was important to establish the tone and feeling of this movie and what the rules are of this movie and the heightened gravity-optional nature of this movie and what it’s going to feel like to watch this movie. Nothing that actually happens in that becomes important for the plot. It’s just introducing you to who the Angels are in a very general sense, the fact that they could go into slow motion at any point if it’s glamorous, and just how it feels. It was one of the only sequences that made it all the way through from very early, before I came onboard to the movie, through to the end, because it just felt like a good, goofy, fun start to this franchise.

Craig Mazin: With a punchline. I always feel like your openings need punchlines. It’s weird to say, okay, the punchline of the opening of the first episode of Chernobyl is a man hangs himself, but that’s the punchline in the sense of there’s a surprise end. Similarly, the old woman and the cow, you’re pretty sure that soldier is going to shoot her and he doesn’t shoot her. He shoots the cow. Punchline. You need to land something surprising. If you can, then the additional benefit you get from your opening is you’re putting the audience on alert that you are one step ahead of them so far. This is a good thing. Now they’re leaning in. They’re trying to see what comes next, but also they are aware that you’re not just going to feed them straight up stuff, which is good.

John August: The most difficult opening sequence I ever did was Big Fish. I’m trying to establish so many things. I’m establishing two different worlds, a real world and a story world, that there are two protagonists, and that both of them have storytelling power. Getting through those first eight pages of Big Fish and setting up the storytelling dynamic of Big Fish was really, really tough, yet crucial. That was the case where if I didn’t have that opening sequence, the movie just couldn’t have worked, because you wouldn’t know what to follow and what to pay attention to.

Craig Mazin: This is kind of high anxiety time. I like that you care. I think sometimes when I read these scripts, and we’ve said I think the word precious real estate about, or phrase, a thousand times, you need to nail it. You’ve got to make that opening fascinating so that the audience says, “I will keep watching.” If it’s just kind of meh, then you could’ve done anything there. The moment you have an opening, you have limited what can come next. There’s a narrow possibility for what comes next.

John August: You build a funnel.

Craig Mazin: You make a funnel, a logical funnel, but not in the beginning. In the beginning there’s no funnel. You can do anything. If you don’t do anything interesting I don’t see why people would think, “This will get better.” It won’t.

John August: No. Weirdly, it is probably the scene or sequence that as writers we spend the most time looking at, just because by nature we’re going to end up rereading it and tweaking it a zillion times. I do wonder if sometimes, let’s just talk process here, at what point do you figure out that opening scene versus figuring out everything else in your story? Sometimes I think the best approach would be to figure out where your story overall wants to go before you write that opening scene, because so often you can be trapped in that opening scene and love that opening scene, but it’s not actually doing the best job possible establishing the rest of the things you want to do in your story.

Craig Mazin: 100%. If you do know what your end is, it would be lovely if you had that in mind when you wrote your beginning. Certainly I did when I did Chernobyl, because it works like Pink Floyd’s The Wall album. It begins with, I think it’s maybe David Gilmore saying, “Where we came in,” and then the song starts and then that album happens, and at the very end you hear him say, “Isn’t this where?” You go, “Ah, aha!” in a very Pink Floyd cool way. I see what you did there, Pink Floyd. I like that. I like the sense that you catch up and you complete the circle. It doesn’t have to be temporal like that. It can just be commentary. It can be somebody’s face ending in a similar position to how it began.

Here’s an example. Social Network. Opening scene, fantastic, and down to nothing but dialogue and performance, two people sitting and talking. That’s it. Excellently written and excellently performed and excellently shot. At the very, very end of the movie, he goes back to looking at that girl’s profile on Facebook. She is not mentioned or referred to at any other time. It’s just the beginning and then the end, and you go, “Oh man, this guy.” That’s how you can think about these things. The beginning is the end. The end is the beginning. Know them both. It will help you define that opening scene much, much more sharply.

John August: Cool. Now as we look at Three Page Challenges going forward, let’s also try to remember to ask that question in terms of like what movie do we think this opening scene is setting up, because that’s really a fundamental question. We’ve talked so much about how those first three pages, that first opening scene is so crucial to getting people to read more of your script, but let’s also be thinking about what movie we think it’s actually establishing because we have strong expectations off the start of that. Just a note for ourselves. We will start, try to think about how those opening scenes are setting our expectation for the rest of the movie that we’re not reading.

Let’s talk about transitions, because it’s an important part of screenwriting that we really haven’t touched on so much over our 88 episodes.

Craig Mazin: One thing that we should probably say right off the bat is that there are people out there in the screenwriting advice world who spread this nonsense that writers shouldn’t direct on the page, “Don’t tell the director what to do.” Oh, please! We’re not selling screenplays to directors. Directors aren’t hiring us to write. We’re writing screenplays for people to read, so that they can see a movie. Part of our intention when we write screenplays is to show what the movie should look like. The director doesn’t have to do what you say on the page, but you know what? I find that they tend to appreciate that you’ve written with transitions in mind, because it’s really important to them. Frankly, if you don’t write with transitions in mind, some directors aren’t going to notice and they’re just going to shoot what you wrote and then it won’t connect. Transitions are a super important part of moving from one scene to the next so you don’t feel like you’re just dragging your feet through a swamp of story, but rather being propelled forward through it.

John August: Let’s clarify some terms. There’s two things we mean when we talk about transitions. One is literally just the all uppercase on the right hand margin of the page, CUT TO or TRANSITION TO or FADE TO or CROSS-FADE TO. That is the element of transition. That is a physical thing that exists in the syntax of screenwriting. We’re only half talking about that. That’s a way of indicating that you are moving to something new. Most modern screenplays don’t use CUT TOs after every scene. That’s a thing that you were originally taught to do. You can tell first-time screenwriters because they will always use a CUT TO. In most cases you won’t really use a CUT TO. In personal life, I only use CUT TO if I have to really show that it’s a hard cut from something to another thing, to really show that I’m breaking time and space to go to this next thing. Usually you won’t do that. Usually what you’ll do is … You want a scene to flow into the next scene. That’s really what I think we should talk about today is how do you get that feeling of we’re in this scene, and now we’re moving into the next scene, and there’s a reason why we left that scene at this moment, why we’re coming into this scene at this moment.

Craig Mazin: Yeah. This is a very nuts and bolts craft thing. They’re techniques. I wrote down a few techniques, which I’ll run through, and you tell me what you think.

John August: Great.

Craig Mazin: The first and the easiest one is size. A size transition is to go from a very tight shot to a super wide shot, or to go from a very wide shot to a super close shot. Sometimes you can even be in a medium shot where two people are talking, and then the next thing you see is a close-up of a watch, and then we’re into a scene where somebody is checking the time. Just using the juxtaposition of size in and of itself helps feel like things are happening and they’re connected in their own way.

John August: Let’s talk about what that actually looks like on the page, because you’re not describing every shot in a movie, obviously. If you were in a dialogue situation where it was two characters talking, and they’d been talking for awhile, the assumption is that you are going to get into some fairly close coverage there. If it’s just it’s about those two people, then if your next shot is described as a giant panorama of something something something, that is a big size transition. Similarly, if you were to cut to the close-up of the watch, or some fine little detailed thing, then we’d see, okay, that’s a huge size transition. Even if you’re not describing what that shot was on the outside, we have a sense of relative scales there. You don’t have to necessarily draw our attention to it, because we’ll notice that something different has happened.

Craig Mazin: It will help your reader see your movie instead of read it. It’s just real simple things like that. Another simple one is music or sound. There’s nothing wrong with calling out a piece of music. It doesn’t have to even be a specific song. You may just say, okay, like we’re looking at two cops and they’re in the break room, they’re chitchatting, and then over the sound of hip-hop we are, and now we’re South Central LA, rolling down Crenshaw, just to help the reader understand there’s a connection here. Similarly, you can use sounds. Two people are talking quietly about what needs to happen, and the next thing we hear is a siren. By the way, you can pre-lap that audio, or you can have it just be a hard cut. Something that jolts us. In a weird way, the funny thing about transitions is they’re almost anti-transitional at times, because the point is you want people to understand I’m in a new place at a new time. If it all just flows together like mush, it’s almost too transitional.

John August: Absolutely. There are times where we want that really smooth, legato flow from one thing to the next thing, and there’s times where you want big, giant, abrupt things, like that cliché flashbulb, to tell us we are at a new place at a new time, and there’s brand new information going to be coming your way.

Craig Mazin: Exactly. One cool thing you can do, I wouldn’t overdo it, but it’s fun here and there, is what I call a misdirect transition. A guy says, “They’ll never see us coming,” or whatever, and he’s got a gun. We go to a close-up, bullets going into the gun. Pull back to reveal, interior, it’s another character loading a gun.

John August: Exactly.

Craig Mazin: Little tricks, basically.

John August: Yeah. Again, that’s a thing where if you did that three times in a movie, you’d be golden. If you did that 10 times in a movie, we would want to strangle you.

Craig Mazin: Probably, unless it was just like everything was so clever and it’s like a, I don’t know, a Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels kind of movie or something.

John August: Yeah. I was going to say the Asian action films might do that more often. Yeah, if that’s your style, then it’s going to work, but otherwise it’s going to probably feel too much. A similar related thing is Archer does these amazing transitions from scene to scene where a character will, they’ll pre-lap the character. They will pull a line of dialogue up above the cut, that seems to be about the scene that you’re in, but it’s actually about a completely different moment that’s happening on the other side of the scene. It’s very clever how they do it. That’s a way of misdirecting you comedically from what you thought you were talking about to something completely different.

Craig Mazin: Exactly. Exactly. I suppose the most conventional transition is the pre-lapped audio. Two people say, “That didn’t go very well.” The next shot is a courthouse. Over the courthouse we see, “Everyone please come to order.” It’s the most standard TV-ish thing, but it helps you move at least inside and outside in ways that are not so clunky. Another tricky dialogue method is the question-and-answer transition.

John August: Exactly.

Craig Mazin: Where someone will say, “Someone isn’t telling us the truth,” and the next shot is a woman smiling. It doesn’t even have to be a dialogue answer, in other words, but just that the transition itself is giving us information.

John August: That’s very much a TV procedural kind of thing. That’s a thing you would see in Law & Order where the, “We need to find a witness who can,” and then the next shot is going to be the witness who can do that, or like, “This is the question we need to have answered.” You ask a question on one side of the cut and you come to a possible answer on the other side of the cut.

Craig Mazin: Right. “Does anyone know where Luke is?” Cut. A guy on a boat, drunk.

John August: In a very general sense, what you’re trying to do as you end a scene is you’re trying to put the reader’s head, and really the viewer’s head, in a place where they have a certain image in their head, and so when you come to the far side of that cut, that is changed or that is addressed in some meaningful way. Thematic cuts are another common way of doing this. A classic is Lawrence of Arabia, the match that transitions to the sunset. That is a fire. There’s fire on both sides of the cut. You’re thinking fire, and then you see this giant image of a fiery sun. That is a natural transition. Sometimes you’ll do that with imagery. Sometimes you’ll do that with a word that matches. Sometimes you’ll do it with a question that seems to be answered on the far side. Those are natural ways to get people across the bridge there.

Craig Mazin: Yeah. The ones we’ve gone through here are very rudimentary. They’re generic, because we’re discussing them in generic terms. Find your own and find ones that are meaningful to you and your story, but really do make sure as you’re writing that you’re not just bone-on-bone here, that there’s something that helps move us through, little tiny things. It makes an enormous difference. It really, really does. Frankly, it puts you in greater control over the movie that will eventually exist.

John August: I would agree. Another thing I would stress is that you probably want to save your powder a bit, and use those big transitional moments for big transitional moments. Don’t paint a big, giant landscape of something if it’s not an important moment that we’re going to something new. Don’t always give us those big transitions. Some things should be straight, simple cuts, where we’re just getting from one thing to the next, so that when we do the bigger thing, we as the reader will notice, okay, something big and different has changed here.

When you’re reading through scripts, after awhile … The first couple scripts you read, you probably read every word, because it’s all a new form to you, but after you’ve read like 30 scripts, you recognize that you stop actually reading the INT/EXT lines basically. They just skip past you. You can sometimes jump back to them if you’re curious, but you’re really just looking for the flow of things, and so most times you’re just jumping over that. You don’t really know or care where you are. Even though we tell people to be very specific in those things and give us those details, a lot of times people aren’t going to read those. They’re just going to read the first line of action that happens after the scene header, if you’re lucky. Save those bigger moments for the bigger moments that you really need that reader to stop and slow down and pay attention to the fact that we are in a new place, a new time, this is a new section of the movie.

Craig Mazin: Well said. Well said.

John August: Great.

All right, we are back in the present, which in our case is 2021, but by the time you’re listening to this it’s 2022. It’s time for our One Cool Things.

Craig forgot to do a One Cool Thing. He forgot to have a One Cool Thing, so he’s hopping on a phone call while Megana and I are going to do our One Cool Things.

My One Cool Thing is the Texas sharpshooter fallacy. I love me a good fallacy. I think I’d heard of this fallacy, but never had it described to me before. Basically it’s why, when you have a whole bunch of data and you are looking for patterns in the data, you can find things that really aren’t there. The actual description of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy is like, “Oh wow, look, this person hits the bullseye every time.” If you’re shooting at a barn, basically if you shoot first and then paint the target afterwards, you’re going to find patterns there that aren’t really there. I just really like that as an idea.

It reminded me of, this is something that Megana knows what I’m talking about, but I’m going to be a little vague here, I went in to pitch a project at a studio or a streamer, and they said, “Oh, we decided looking at the data we no longer do that genre of project, because it’s not successful.” I’m 100% convinced it’s really a Texas sharpshooter fallacy, that basically they looked at all their data and said, “Oh, this thing doesn’t work for us,” but I think they’re really after the fact trying to find a pattern for a couple failures that really don’t make sense.

Megana Rao: Just so I’m clear, because I haven’t heard of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy, so it’s that you paint the target after you already have …

John August: Yeah, basically you’ve taken all the shots. Basically you have all the data there, and then you are trying to paint the target after the fact. You’re basically picking a small subset of the data to describe what the bigger thing is, and you’re saying, “Oh, this is the finding, the conclusion we’ve had,” but you didn’t actually have a hypothesis, a thesis going into it, so you weren’t really looking for anything. You noticed something and said, “This must be significant.” It’s a problem whenever you have a large big batch of data, it’s very likely that you’re going to some subset of the data that indicates a certain thing, but if you weren’t actually systematically looking for that thing, it’s not probably a valid result.

Megana Rao: It’s how you guys talk about screenwriting structure, screenwriting books.

John August: Oh yeah, absolutely, because if you’re looking at all these things and you’re trying to say, “These are the patterns that are in there,” it’s like, are they really the patterns that are in there or are you basically just deciding that’s a thing you’re going to look for, describe being in there, but that was never the intention, that was never the actual goal behind it. When this studio or streamer says, “Oh, this genre does not perform well for us,” it’s like, okay, did you go through and systematically say, “Okay, let’s take a look at all of the examples of this genre we’ve ever done,” and then seeing how they performed, or you’re just saying, “Of the five biggest disappointments of movies we’ve made in the last couple years, were they in the genre?” You’re being choosy with what data you’re letting in and letting out of that criteria.

Megana Rao: Very cool.

John August: Now since Craig doesn’t have a One Cool Thing, Megana, can you pinch hit for him?

Megana Rao: Yes. In our last bonus segment where we talked about New Years Resolutions, I talked about data privacy and data rights and trying to be more digitally hygienic. My One Cool Thing is this movie Ron’s Gone Wrong, which is delightful and funny and has a lot of themes about data privacy that I think are accessible and rendered in a family-fun way.

John August: Cool. I saw that mostly [inaudible 00:57:26] bus board advertisements. I never actually saw a trailer for it. When I actually looked at the trailer for it, it looks delightful and definitely worth checking out. Now I see it’s on all the … I got a screener for it, so I know that they’re going for the typical awards for it.

Megana Rao: Yeah. It felt really fresh. Zach Galifianakis voices the robot, and he has this really flat affect that is so funny. I was just watching it by myself and chortling, laughing, chuckling. It’s a fun movie.

John August: Cool. Ron’s Gone Wrong.

Megana Rao: Yep, Ron’s Gone Wrong. I think it’s on Disney Plus and some other places too.

John August: Fantastic. That was our show. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao, with one segment produced by Stuart Friedel, edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Craig Mazin: Of course.

John August: Our outro’s 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’m always @johnaugust. We have T-shirts and hoodies and they’re great. You can find them at Cotton Bureau. You can find the show notes for the episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts and sign up for our weekly-ish newsletter called Interesting, which has lots of links to things about writing. You can sign up to become a Premium member at scriptnotes.net. You’ll get all the back episodes and bonus segments, like the one we’re about to record on getting out of a conversation. Craig and Megana, thank you so much.

Craig Mazin: Thank you guys.

Megana Rao: Thank you.

John August: All right, Craig, thinking back to times when you were at a party with actual people around you … Actually that last time I think I saw you in a party situation was at a fundraiser for Mark Kelly, who was running at that time for Senate in Arizona. That was a party filled with people I knew and some people I was just getting to know, but it was a lot of small conversations, and I needed to get into and out of those conversations. Is that an experience you recall from that night?

Craig Mazin: Sure. That’s a pretty common thing. You’re at a party and you start talking to people, and then sometimes it gets boring or it gets awkward or you run out of things to say. I try the best I can to not think about who else I should be talking to. I try as best I can to be as present as possible for the person I’m talking to, no matter who they are, because the notion of, “Oh I should be talking to that person,” or, “That person would be more fun to talk to,” oftentimes turns into utter disappointment anyway. My general rule is if I’m enjoying a conversation with somebody, whether it’s the most important person at the party or a waiter, I’m going to keep talking to them because it’s rare enough to enjoy a conversation.

If things are going a bit boring or slow or sluggish and it seems like the other person doesn’t feel the same, or maybe does, either way, that’s a great time to just simply say, “You know what? I’m going to go grab myself a drink, but I’ll be back around,” or I’ll say, “I’m going to run to the restroom,” or I’ll say, “I just got to go find my wife.” That’s always a good thing if your spouse, partner is there, or I’ll somebody and be like, “Oh my gosh, I promised that person I would catch up with them. I do have to, but this was so much fun talking to you.” I’ll say something like that. Of all the things I have shame on, and there are so many, that’s not one of them, and I try not to calculate how to have conversations at parties.

John August: I would say I’ve gotten much better at this over the years and I’ve done all the techniques that you described, and certainly having someone that you can use an excuse to go on to the next thing is great. The other technique is the handoff, which is basically someone who’s passed, who you’ve already had a conversation with or you know, you can say, “Oh hey, have you met Bill?” Then you introduce the two of them and then you can make your exit out of there. That can be a very useful way out of it. I will say this, honestly doing a lot of the WGA stuff where I’d be in these rooms where I’d have to have 50 conversations over the course of an evening, I got much better at basically being very present in a conversation and giving 100% full attention. It was clear I’d addressed that issue. I could just really make a clean exit, like, “It was great talking with you. Thanks for coming out,” and move on to the next thing. That’s more of a work function than a social function. It feels honest that I’m not looking for an excuse and basically saying, “This was great. I value our conversation. Now I’m taking two steps over this direction.”

Megana Rao: Are you guys sure that you want to be giving away all of your secrets for-

Craig Mazin: It’s not really a secret. I’ll tell people. I’m just like, “Yeah.” Look, it’s not like if I say I have to go to the bathroom at a party, I don’t want people to think, “Oh, he hates me now.” Sometimes I really have to pee. If they don’t see me go, if I don’t leave and go to the … By the way, when I say I have to go to the bathroom, I always go. I don’t not go. That would be horrible.

John August: Yeah, even if it’s just to shut the door and check his phone for a few minutes, he will go to the bathroom.

Craig Mazin: By the way, I’ll do that sometimes anyway. When I’m at a party, at some point I’ll hit a little bit of an overload. I’ll go to the restroom, close the door. It’s like when I’m on a plane. Sometimes I’ll do that, just to be alone. Just for one lovely minute I’m alone. It’s so nice. I try and be as honest as I can. When there are situations like when we would do live shows, after the show is over, there’d be a lineup of people that want to talk to us. They all have comments or questions, or sometimes they want a selfie or whatever it is. We’ll do those things, and I have no problem at some point saying, “I want to answer some of their questions too, but thank you for coming up. I really appreciate it,” so that I can just say the truth, which is I have a limited amount of time and I have to talk to these people too. The same thing would happen if I were on a panel at the Writers Guild, which occasionally I have done. Same deal. Afterwards you talk to people. At large parties, honestly I have no problem, if I get cornered by somebody and they’re awesome, I’ll talk to them all night. I don’t care. All night. I do not care. I have no FOMO when it comes to party conversations. 99% of them are just air.
What about you, Megana? It sounds like you don’t want to give away your secrets, but how do you handle let’s just say the mixing, the mixing around?

Megana Rao: Yeah, I think the same bathroom, drink technique. What I’m more curious to hear about is, I don’t want to shame anyone else or give away too many details, but the situation if you’re at a dinner party or a place where you’re more fixed, and the conversation is just unbearably boring, like you’re hearing about somebody’s pandemic hobbies that are just … I’m sorry, I don’t want to hear about anybody making sourdough starter. I don’t care. I have no interest in it. How do I transition out of that conversation where I can’t easily move around?

John August: It’s tough when you’re locked in place and you didn’t actually have a choice or you just made a wrong choice about who you sat down next to. It’s always tough, because you don’t know if it’s the kind of situation where there’s going to be one conversation for the table or if it’s going to be like there’s a conversation on your left and a conversation on your right, and if you turn to your left, then you’re shutting out the person on your right. It’s tough. I find myself trying to ask a question that will just get us off the horrible track, if possible.

Craig Mazin: Some people are nothing but horrible track generators. It doesn’t matter what you say to them. They will ruin everything with their monotonous, banal point of view, their rambling stories that go nowhere. This is why if there’s something where I’m fixed in position, a dinner party for example, I need to know that I know enough people there where I can’t get stuck alone with somebody that’s not doing it for me. Ideally there’s somebody I know will sit next to me. You have to protect yourself going into those situations. If you are single, you still need a friend. That friend can be somebody that you’re interested in. It can be somebody that’s just friend friend. It doesn’t matter. You need somebody you can anchor yourself to, who can help you and rescue you. Also if I get invited to a dinner party and I get stuck next to a super boring person, that goes into my ledger, and I’m not going back there ever again. Life is too short.

By the way, I will also just leave. I’ll leave. I don’t care. I’ll leave, because here’s the thing, everybody’s got limited time. I’m not saying because we’re all busy. I’m saying we’re going to die. Sitting next to boring people all night while other people are having fun five feet away from you, it’s brutal. No, I’ll just fucking go. I don’t care, because if I go home, I can do all sorts of things that are wonderful. I have video games and puzzles and television that I can catch up on. You know I’m really down to it if I’m doing that. I don’t have to stay there. Why? You know what? Shame on the party host, the dinner party host, for putting anyone at that table that that’s boring. The only time that I honestly get stuck is if sometimes if Melissa says in advance to me, “You need to do the following thing.” I’ll say, “Okay,” but she’ll be there, so I’ll be fine.

John August: Many dinner parties will separate spouses so that you have-

Craig Mazin: Nope. I don’t do that. I don’t do it. By the way, everyone knows. I’m sort of famous in my little town for not showing up, for leaving early, for going, “I don’t do crap like that,” because I don’t want to. I don’t want to. I don’t like small talk. I like big talk. I like to really get into it with people. I don’t just bland-

John August: Two things that I really respect about my husband is first off he’s the only person I’ve seen who can in real life click the ignore button, where someone is trying to engage with him, and I see this floating ignore button, he’s hitting that button, it’s like, “You don’t exist to me.” I love that he’s able to do that. The other thing is he’s very honest about, “We don’t want to go to your dinner for this charity we support. We will write a check. We’re delighted to write you a check. I have no interest in actually going to the event.” Where I can happily go to the political fundraisers all the time, he’s just like, “No, I don’t want to do it. I’m not going to do it.” I respect that. He is the Craig Mazin of our relationship on that whole-

Craig Mazin: By the way, they don’t want you at the dinner anyway. They just want your money. If you give them money and don’t show up to the dinner, you’ve given them extra money, the money that they would’ve had to spend to feed you. No one cares. I’ve been a host of multiple political fundraisers that I did not show up to.

John August: Yeah. There was one at your house, which was great, but it did feel like a rare exception for us to be at your house to do this thing.

Craig Mazin: Definitely, yeah. That was Beto O’Rourke. That was way, way early in his run, so early that indeed he was showing up to the likes of my house. It was smallish, but it was nice and we had fun people there. It was an interesting conversation. That was that. As things have gotten bigger and larger and so on and so forth, I just … God bless Billy Ray, our colleague Billy Ray, that does a lot of fundraising and is always collaring me for that stuff. Sometimes I’ll end up with my name on the hosting … By the way, so-

John August: You’re not going.

Craig Mazin: No. People, if you ever get an invitation to a political fundraiser and it lists a bunch of hosts, that doesn’t mean that they’re all sitting there figuring out who’s going to cook what. It means they all gave a certain amount of money. That’s what that means. That’s all it means.

John August: All right. Let’s transition to talking about not in-person gatherings, but text threads and text messages and that stuff, and how you end a text conversation, because I’ve found myself sometimes where we’ve been texting back and forth for half an hour, and sometimes it can be awkward, it’s like who’s going to end the conversation? My default move is the tap back, which is basically the thumbs up, the whatever, saying that’s it and it’s mentioned, and this conversation is done here. Is that what everyone else is doing? Megana, what are you doing when a text conversation has run its course and you need to make it clear that I’m not going to be answering your next text?

Megana Rao: I feel like either that or sometimes, “Hey, I’m about to hop in the shower, but I’ll answer when I’m back out.” I think the cadence with millennials is a little bit different. It’s fine if somebody doesn’t respond to my text for days or hours. I don’t know, it just doesn’t bother me and it’s fine if the conversation fades.

John August: Being left on read doesn’t kill you?

Megana Rao: If it’s just a friend, a close friend that I’m texting or a friend that I’m catching up with, no.

Craig Mazin: Maybe I’m a millennial, because I feel like that’s the whole point of text is … Mostly. Sometimes I will think, “Oh, I feel like I’ve run out of things to say here,” but I don’t want to send some sort of formal, “It was lovely chatting.” Then I’ll think, “Will they be upset?” Then I remember, no, no one gives a shit, because if I send you a text in a conversation, and the thing doesn’t ping back, I’m not upset. I’m relieved. It’s over. We can all move on.

Megana Rao: It’s almost more awkward if … The example that I even gave before is not something that I do. It’s something that some friends will do to me. It’s more awkward if you acknowledge that the conversation is ending.

Craig Mazin: Yeah, like can’t we just be cas and just talk to each other and not have to worry about that? Text to me, sometimes for fun, what I will do is I’ll just go, “Byee.”

John August: Yeah, I’ve gotten a byee.

Craig Mazin: I love byeeee. That’s fun. I like to do that. Basically every text conversation I have at some point will devolve into GIFs and then it’s over.

John August: Yeah. Fair choices.

Megana Rao: I do feel that I have acquired a very specific skill of knowing exactly when John is done talking, in person, via email, or via text.

John August: My sentences do get shorter. It goes down from three sentences to one sentence to two words and then the conversation’s done. Even in emails I do find it sometimes there’s a bounce back and forth, and I thank you, you thank me, and then it’s all resolved, because in text it’s not quite a conversation, it’s not quite an email conversation, it’s just this weird middle ground and you don’t quite know whether you’re done talking. Megana, do you find it happens in Slack? I don’t as much, but what are you finding?

Megana Rao: You and I aren’t casually texting that much. I only text you when I really need your attention. We casually Slack sometimes. That’s the same thing where-

Craig Mazin: Sounds gross.

Megana Rao: I’m in communication with John all the time, so I don’t really think of us having a cadence there, because I’m talking to you at all times of the day.

John August: Basically.

Craig Mazin: I feel like even though Bo and I are together every day, I probably text with her more than talk. We text all the time. Oh yeah. We’re besties. We’re texties. We’re like beep beep beep beep beep GIF lol. Yeah, we’re two 12-year-old girls. It’s wonderful.

John August: The advantage of texting or Slack or whatever is that you can also scroll back and get to that thing. If I said something to Megana in person, she’d have to remember it, but if I text it to her, then it’s there for her to be able to look back at and confirm.

Megana Rao: I do remember everything you say, but yes, I hear your point.

John August: You consult with everyone else about, “What did John actually mean when he said that thing?” Now if you don’t mind, I got to go to the bathroom. It’s been great talking with you both.

Craig Mazin: Byee.

John August: Byee.

Megana Rao: Bye.

Links:

  • Blog post on Transitions
  • Scriptnotes Episode, 446: Back to Basics at 03:57 of this episode
  • Scriptnotes Episode, 493: Opening Scenes at 26:06 of this episode
  • Scriptnotes Episode, 89: Writing Effective Transitions at 44:12 of this episode
  • A Trip to the Moon the 1902 Science Fiction Film by Georges Méliès
  • The Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
  • Ron’s Gone Wrong
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!
  • Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription or treat yourself to a premium subscription!
  • Craig Mazin on Twitter
  • John August on Twitter
  • John on Instagram
  • Outro by Henry Adler (send us yours!)
  • Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao, (with a segment produced by Stuart Friedel!) and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

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 525: The Story This Was Based On, Transcript

December 1, 2021 HWTBAM, Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2021/the-story-this-was-based-on).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 525 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show it’s another round of How Would This Be a Movie where we take a look at stories in the news and figure out how to transform them into quality filmed entertainment. This week we’re joined by a journalist who wrote one of our previous contenders to learn what it’s like having your work optioned by Hollywood.

**Craig:** I’m sure it’s great.

**John:** It’s the best experience in the world. It’s the dream.

**Craig:** It’s Hollywood.

**John:** We’ll also look at how you shape and tell true stories and answer some related listener questions. And in our bonus segment for premium members with studios owning publishers and the Writers Guild representing both screenwriters and journalists, what are the remaining distinctions between writing for Hollywood and writing for news media. We’ll dig into that.

**Craig:** I have thoughts.

**John:** Craig, most importantly, what are your thoughts on the brand new Scriptnotes hoodies? For the first time in 10 years we have Scriptnotes hoodies. Click that link. Take a look and tell us what you think of these hoodies.

**Craig:** Click that link. Smash that like button. I think it’s great. And I want one. And I’m just sort of like torn. I feel like I think I’m a large. You know what?

**John:** I got the large.

**Craig:** Yeah. Large feels right. Extra-large feels too roomy.

**John:** Yeah, the tent.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly. I don’t want to walk in tent. So, John, can I have a large?

**John:** You can have a large. We can actually order you a large. We’ll order that for you.

**Craig:** Give me a large. Now.

**John:** We’ll get you a large. But if you would like a large, if you’re a listener who would like a large or any size of these sweatshirts you have until November 18 at 5pm which is when they’re closing orders for this first – and you probably will not be able to get a hoodie by Christmas unless you order by November 18, 2021. So, get them now.

**Craig:** And this has passed the Stuart softness test?

**John:** It has. Absolutely. And so we’re looking for the right copy, and so Stuart’s sense of softness is how we always build the t-shirts. But Stuart Friedel has not been the producer of Scriptnotes for so long that newer listeners might not even know that Stuart had a prudential gift for figuring out the softest fabrics. And so instead we went to the Megana Rao test which is like could you wear this while cupping a giant mug of hot chocolate in your hands and would this be that comfy.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And we believe that these are that comfy.

**Craig:** So Baby Yoda would wear this while sipping soup?

**John:** It is a Baby Yoda-approved level of comfort.

**Craig:** Got it. Well, this is good, because Stuart I guess has just very sensitive skin. Because he was really into the softness thing. But he’s so right.

**John:** Our Scriptnotes t-shirts are remarkably soft. I don’t want to wear anything else.

**Craig:** They’re so good that I ordered a bunch of non-Scriptnotes, just blank t-shirts from – what is it called?

**John:** Cotton Bureau.

**Craig:** Cotton Bureau. Because it’s the tri-blend. Tri-blend. So this is the same thing, right? It’s made of Stuart’s shirt material?

**John:** This is the hoodie equivalent of the tri-blend. So I can’t promise that it’s the exact same thing because that would be too thin probably for this hoodie.

**Craig:** Of course. But that softness level I think is really important. Megana, your reputation is on the line. No pressure.

**John:** No pressure. All right. Let’s do some follow up. First off, last week we were talking about bringing in experts to be consultants on things. And we were talking specifically about military experts. Max wrote in to point out that there’s actually an organization called Veterans in Media and Entertainment which does exactly that. So, it’s a charitable organization that supports US military veterans. If you have a military subject they can find you an expert on it. So, we’ll put a link in the show notes to that. It’s vmeconnect.org.

**Craig:** Great. And they are a 501(c)(3) charitable organization. I love seeing it. Anytime we can promote one of these groups, please we will. And what do I mean by group. I mean any organization that is willing to share their expertise with writers gratis. We’re not looking for people who are accepting money. But if it’s a charitable organization of course like a 501(c)(3) then donations are always a possibility. But if there’s a group out there that is willing to just pick up the phone or answer an email to help screenwriters be accurate then we will spread the word.

**John:** We love it. Now some of the most anticipated follow up.

**Craig:** Drum roll.

**John:** Probably in the history of the show. We all remember who Oops was hopefully. So Oops was a writer who was working on a film and she had kind of fallen in love with, had a little crush on, a producer on the film and she wrote in asking for our advice on what do you do because you don’t want to mess up this situation. And you and I talked about it. Aline came on to talk about it. We now have follow up from Oops on what actually happened. Megana Rao, you are the voice of Oops on this podcast so if you can please give us the update from what Oops wrote in this week.

**Megana Rao:** All right. So Oops says, “I’m pleased to let you all know that I’m now Miss Oops Plus One. I have this weird millennial resistance to saying something like he’s my boyfriend, but yeah, it’s all kind of worked out. Yay for love. I’d love nothing more than to share expertly screen written blow by blows with the audience, but it’s funny how now I’m suddenly mentally concerned with his privacy. Anyway, I wanted to thank you guys and Aline and those who wrote in for such sage advice. I think back on those few weeks routinely and laugh. It was all rather silly and fun and I’m just so glad that I was cautious, thought about it a lot, and ultimately trusted my gut because she was right. Yours, Not Yet Planning the Scriptnotes Wedding but Never Ruling it Out, Oops.”

**Craig:** Oh, I am just beside myself with joy here. Because I don’t know if you remember I was definitely the guy pushing down pretty hard on the gas pedal. We are all aware that mixing romance and work these days is tricky. And I like the fact that Oops thought it through. She was really careful and it seems like her now boyfriend, because he is your boyfriend, I don’t care what you say Oops, her boyfriend was also careful. He was also thinking about it. And lo and behold we’re here to tell you that two responsible, rational, careful people can meet at work and fall in love. And become boyfriend/girlfriend. And I love it.

So, I’m happy. I think we needed a story like this. We needed to know that there was still room for healthy love in our business.

**John:** Congratulations to Oops. And congratulations to Oops’ boyfriend and her plus one.

**Craig:** Megana, are you happy?

**Megana:** I am very happy for Oops. I think they kept it a secret. I had to edit some of this out because of her concern for his privacy. But they kept it a secret for most of production and then right after production were official. But it seems like most of the crew knew the whole time.

**Craig:** Obviously. Everybody knows everything on a crew. Being with them now, I have been working with a crew now for months. And I think we all know like what we have for breakfast in the morning before we get to work. Everybody knows everything.

**John:** Yeah. To me the tell is always not that people are starting to talk to each other but they suddenly stop talking to each other. It’s like, ah, yeah, you’re trying not to let us all know what’s happened there.

**Megana:** That’s what she said, too. The night after they had that conversation they just stopped talking to each other completely at work.

**Craig:** Of course. And then everybody within 14 seconds was like, mmm, mm-hmm.

**John:** We all saw the chemistry. Now there’s not communication. Yeah.

**Craig:** OK, it happened. What else is going on out there, John? Anymore follow up?

**John:** Oh, Craig, the other big piece of follow up that you’re so looking forward to is MoviePass is back.

**Craig:** Yes!

**John:** So excited. So we’ll put a link in the show notes to this article about MoviePass co-founder Stacy Spikes was granted ownership of the company and basically he was able to buy it out of bankruptcy. Maybe it was $250,000. Maybe it was less than that that he was able to buy it.

**Craig:** You can’t get a tear-down two bedroom in Los Angeles County for that amount of money. And this is what MoviePass was apparently worth.

**John:** Yeah. So I’m excited for this new chapter. It’s really a thing I thought was dead and gone.

**Craig:** It is.

**John:** But of course it’s not.

**Craig:** It’s dead and gone.

**John:** Something will rise from the ashes of it. I just feel like with our Scriptnotes hoodie money we could have bought MoviePass. And I’ll never forgive myself for—

**Craig:** Sorry. You could have bought it because I don’t get that money, John. Megana, I need you – Megana, listen to me. I need information. You’re going to have to start showing me the books. Something is going on here.

**John:** Mm. Yeah.

**Craig:** Look how quiet Megana got.

**Megana:** I’m just funneling all of that money to myself.

**Craig:** Of course you are.

**Megana:** That’s the truth of it.

**Craig:** D’oh!

**John:** Now, the other exciting bit of news I saw in this article is that Mark Wahlberg’s production company, Unrealistic Ideas, is currently developing a documentary on the rise and fall of MoviePass based on this reporting. So in many ways it is a How Would This Be a Movie situation which is the perfect segue to our main topic today which is How Would This Be a Movie. So, people who are familiar with this podcast is every couple of weeks we take a look through stories in the news, stories from history, and figure out how we can transform them into quality filmed entertainment. We saw How Would This Be a Movie but more likely a limited series. And we discuss what’s in that story, who the characters could be, what kind of movie or TV show it could be, the tone.

We just try to do what writers do, which is take stuff that’s thrown our way and figure out how to transform it. But this week we have a very special guest because Zeke Faux is on the show. Zeke, can you tell us who you are?

**Zeke Faux:** My name is Zeke Faux. I’m an investigative reporter for Bloomberg Business Week. And a few years ago I wrote a story that I called The Phantom Debt Vigilante that you so nicely highlighted on a previous version of this segment.

**John:** So this was back in Episode 339 we talked about it. And we loved the story that you wrote and we also thought like, oh, there’s good potential here for a movie. But can you talk us through the short version of like who the central character was in the story that you wrote and what it was about?

**Zeke:** So, the story opens with this salesman, Andrew Therrien, normal guy. He’s just sitting around at home when he gets a call from a debt collector. This surprises him because he doesn’t owe any money. And he sort of gets into it with the debt collector. And the debt collector threatens his wife. And this just sets Andrew off and he goes out on a mission to figure out who this debt collector was, why they called him, and he actually uncovers this massive nationwide conspiracy, tracks down the bad guy at the center of it. And in the end brings him to justice.

So he’s one of the favorite people I’ve ever met through work. It was so exciting when I heard this story. And I couldn’t believe it myself. And each time I would check something out and find out that it was actually true I was like, whoa. So, yeah, that’s the guy.

**John:** So, you heard about this story, you pursued it, you wrote up the story. And at what point did it start attracting attention of Hollywood people? Because we talked about it on the show but I think, correct me if I’m wrong, before we even mentioned it people had sort of scoped it out. Correct?

**Zeke:** Yeah. I think that it had been optioned by the time you talked about it. I’ve been through this a few times and basically if you write a story that’s exciting and has a character and a plot it’s not so unusual that you’ll start getting emails from producers or these sort of scout type people asking if the rights to the story are available.

In this case I got a lot of emails right away, like probably the day that it came out. And then more on the following weeks.

**John:** So talk to us about these emails. Because these are coming from producers or scouts or other folks. What are they specifically asking for? Are they saying like would you consider selling the rights to this? Can you tell us what else there is here? Is there a movie? What are those emails actually asking for?

**Zeke:** Well, this is some good info for any magazine writer colleagues. I realized that a lot of these emails are from almost like interns who are just wanting to confirm that the rights might be available before they tell their boss about this cool story that they read. So the first time I got one of these emails is from a different story and I was ready to pick up my tux for the Oscars. But then I realized that this was just some intern who hadn’t even like told his boss about it yet and just wanted to make sure that this was a story that one could buy the rights for.

So, yeah, they’re usually pretty vague and just asking if I’m the person to talk to, or if I have an agent or something like that.

**John:** Great. Was this your first story that actually got optioned?

**Zeke:** No, I’ve had a few before this one. And generally I hand people off to my agent pretty quickly because it’s hard for me to know who is for real. And then they will help narrow down who might actually be worth considering and talking to. And I’ve never had one that was some crazy bidding war that everyone in town wanted to buy, so it’s often just comes down to a couple people and then we pick based on who seems most credible or honestly who has an interesting take on the story.

**Craig:** If I may be so bold, what kind of money are we talking about here? You don’t have to give me an exact dollar figure, but range wise? What’s a typical sort of option fee for these things?

**Zeke:** It’s a good question. I mean, a lot of people will try to option things for as little as nothing, which is obviously not that appealing.

**Craig:** Nothing sucks.

**Zeke:** I’ve done some research on this since I’ve started getting involved in it and talking to other writers and so I think that at the low end would be around $5,000 and then the high end for articles, I mean, I’ve heard of ones that go into six figures but I think that’s really unusual.

**Craig:** So talking roughly between $5,000 and maybe $75,000? Something in that zone?

**Zeke:** Yes. And that’s for the option, which they have to pay upfront. And then the purchase price is higher.

**John:** So let’s talk about what they’re actually buying, because in this case you had a relationship with Andrew Therrien and had done all this reporting, but some of that stuff is just public fact. Someone could take the idea of a guy who sort of goes after a debt collector. They don’t need your article to do that. So what are they actually buying when they option the rights to that story?

**Zeke:** It’s actually a question that I’ve thought about myself. And a producer explained it to me once. And he said that back in the day he used to go to these meetings with almost like a sandwich board and he’d be pitching people on some idea that he had for this amazing true story that should be a movie and flipping through the pages. And he said that if he was going to buy an article it was basically just so that they would have something to talk about and some sort of source material that could sort of get the project going.

**Craig:** Yeah. It seems to me a lot of times like producers will buy these things to create some air of exclusivity or, I don’t know what you would call it, legitimacy. But as we’ve discussed here legally speaking if you write an article, and I’m sure this has happened to you, some jerk like me can read it and just use it. Anything that’s in the article is usable. It’s out there in the world. It’s the stuff behind it – if we wanted to write a story about the gentleman that you’ve investigated what we are buying I suppose from you that is of value beyond the story you wrote is all of your notes, all of the additional stuff that didn’t get into the story. Because that’s still yours.

But my understanding is if you publish it in Bloomberg Business Week and I read it I can pretty much use whatever you wrote there because it’s public record.

**Zeke:** Right. I mean, my stories are true so you’re not—

**Craig:** Exactly.

**Zeke:** These things really happened.

**Craig:** I like that you have to say that. My stories are true, by the way.

**Zeke:** So, this is another way I think about it. I mean, I don’t know how much would you get paid to write a screenplay, like probably quite a lot of money.

**Craig:** Yes.

**Zeke:** So wouldn’t it be pretty cheap to not option the story?

**Craig:** Yes.

**Zeke:** It’s so cheap you might as well just do it if you’re going to hire a good screenwriter to write the screenplay.

**Craig:** Yes. If you are a producer you’re absolutely right. And it may be that – everything is a competition. So you write a great article. And there are going to be four producers, hopefully, competing to get the rights to that article. And then that producer is going to make that article an object of competition for a bunch of writers. Or, the other way around is there’s a writer and five people are trying – I’ve had this experience and John I’m sure you have, too – where I’ve had more than one producer call me to ask me to write the blah-blah story and it’s the same story.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** In one case, oh, you know what it was? It was Game Stop?

**John:** I got Game Stop.

**Craig:** I got Game Stop by two different producers who had each optioned or outright bought two different articles.

**Zeke:** I actually had someone ask me if I could write something about it so that they could option it.

**Craig:** Right. I mean, so I think what we’re getting at here is that you are doing real work out there and screenwriters are doing real work out here. And in between are producers that just–

**John:** Or studio execs who are just like Ah!

**Craig:** Making stuff up.

**John:** Now, Zeke, a question for you. In the case of the article we’re talking about it so focused on Andrew’s story. Were they also optioning his life rights or were they just taking your story?

**Zeke:** My policy on that is that if someone wants to do something with life rights that’s their business. I don’t want to be in business with the subject of my stories.

**Craig:** Right. You’re not brokering their life rights.

**Zeke:** Yes. So that’s something that everybody has to consider on their own.

**John:** Right.

**Craig:** Makes total sense.

**John:** Now let’s talk about your relationship with the screenwriter on this project, because you’re saying that the person you ended up going with was a producer and they had a screenwriter involved. Did you have any direct interactions with that screenwriter?

**Zeke:** This was pretty standard. Usually you have a call or two with the screenwriter at the beginning and it’s pretty fun. I like to tell them, you know, I always have a lot of outtakes to talk about. And we’ll give them any extra materials that they want. But then after that I usually don’t hear from them.

**Craig:** Right.

**Zeke:** But I understand that because you need time to develop your own take on the story and having somebody else who has a very specific take on it could be kind of distracting.

**Craig:** Well there’s probably not a lot of good news that could come out of subsequent conversations because when you’re adapting something of course you are altering it to some extent. And if you are calling the journalist who wrote the article odds are you’re not calling them to tell them how faithful you’ve been. And so this is normal and also I assume as a fully-fledged professional adult you’re aware that once you sign these things away all sorts of stuff might happen.

**Zeke:** Yeah. And I’ll just say I love writing magazine stories. I want the story to be perfect and so fun to read on the page. And I want it to inspire people who read it. And if it also inspires some screenwriter who wants to go do something that’s awesome. But I don’t really care what they do with it.

**Craig:** Because what you wrote still exists.

**John:** Exactly.

**Craig:** And always shall.

**John:** Yeah. We always talk about when an author sells the rights to a book to make into a movie that book still sits on the shelf. And no matter what I do in the adaptation that book will always be there. And so that was your vision of a thing and this is someone else’s vision of a thing. What is the current status of this project now? Is that going to be moving forward? Is the option still happening? What’s going on with this movie right now?

**Zeke:** That’s a great question and the answer sort of illustrates my place on the totem pole in the moviemaking process. I actually do not know what’s going on.

**John:** All right. So Zeke while we have you hear we’d love your input on this segment that we do called How Would This Be a Movie where we talk through stories in the news and figure out how they can be movies. And you will have an insight because you’ve been the journalist reporting these stories.

**Zeke:** So I accidentally happened on what I feel like is a weird trick to get producers in your magazine story.

**John:** I’m so excited by this.

**Craig:** I want to hear this weird trick.

**Zeke:** In an earlier story the subject of the story said something to me that became the first quote in the story. And he said, “Remember the movie American Hustle. It’s kind of like that with way more dirt and twists.” I just put that in because it was funny. It’s a funny thing to say. But then I was having these meetings with producers and they would say to me totally straight-faced, “You know, it really reminded me of American Hustle.” So I thought to myself if it’s at all relevant maybe mention the name of a movie in your story.

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**Zeke:** That will sort of set their movie alert. So for a couple of years if I found a good spot and it seemed relevant, I mean, I don’t want to compromise a story, but I would mention the name of a movie. So, I had another one about this sort of triple agent informant in the drug wars and I said that he was kind of Narcos Forrest Gump. And this guy called me up, for real, he’d won an Oscar. And he was like, “Narcos meets Forrest Gump. Narcos/Forrest Gump. I’m coming out to New York to take you out to lunch.” And I was like, great.

So we went out to lunch and he just kept saying Narcos Forrest Gump. And so much that I wasn’t even sure if he had read the whole article because that was near the top.

**Craig:** He hasn’t.

**Zeke:** The lunch sort of petered out because we were running out of ways to talk about Narcos Forrest Gump.

**Craig:** That’s amazing.

**John:** Amazing.

**Craig:** Amazing.

**Zeke:** Yeah. Just mention the name of a movie. That’s my tip for magazine writers.

**Craig:** I think what Zeke is really putting his finger on here is how stupid so many producers are. I mean, they don’t read. They have a staff of people that tell them things. They do hinge on something and they forget who told it to them so quickly that they think they thought it. And, Zeke, I will tell you that just because a producer has an Oscar doesn’t mean that they’re not stupid. Because if something wins Best Picture then the producer gets the Oscar, but a lot of producers really are just stupid.

I clearly don’t want to work in Hollywood anymore. By the way, that’s becoming super obvious.

**John:** Yeah. We’ve known that for a time.

**Craig:** But some producers are amazing. And if you produce something I did I’m sure I’m talking about you when I say amazing. But everybody else, stupid.

**John:** Stupid.

**Craig:** Stupid.

**John:** All right. Let’s get into these movies and figure out which producers will hang on one idea in this and forget what they actually read or saw.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** There’s five of them and two of them have interactive elements too which I think is really fun, or they are like cartoons/animations. I love this.

**Craig:** I love these. Yes. Fun.

**John:** It’s not all reading. You can actually sort of look at things.

**Craig:** Thank god.

**John:** So we’ll start with this story by Andy Hoffman and Benedikt Kammel. This was from Bloomberg and is Bloomberg the same as Bloomberg Business Week? Zeke, help me out.

**Zeke:** Bloomberg is the parent company and this story was actually in Bloomberg Business Week’s annual heist issue which all you screenwriters should keep an eye out for because it’s full of cool stories.

**John:** And what’s great about this one is it is a comic. And so it’s telling the story of this Swiss trader is trying to buy copper for a Chinese buyer. He finds some in Turkey. So they load this copper into a shipping container and then overnight people break into the shipping containers, swap out that copper with painted rocks, seal it back up and ship it off to wherever it’s going, to China someplace. They did this seven more times and for a total of $36 million worth of painted rocks. And it looks like it’s probably an inside job. There’s 16 people charged at the time of this writing.

Craig, start us off. Is there a movie here?

**Craig:** No. No there is not. What there is is a great scene. This feels like one of those things that would open a great ‘70s heist movie where you’re introducing characters and you’re showing how scammy they are and how either clever or not clever they are or how clever but unlucky they are. It’s such an audacious move and it’s got a great reveal which is a bunch of guys are loading copper in and on the other side the crate arrives and like a magic trick even though you’ve been watching it the whole time when the thing opens it’s a bunch of rocks.

By the way, this is a real question. If you’re going to take copper out and shove a bunch of rocks in and then reseal the container why are you painting the rocks copper? Who is that going to fool? It didn’t fool anybody for even one second. So why even bother painting the rocks?

**John:** My guess is that when they first open, because it’s sort of slag copper, it’s not good copper, when you first open it and just do a quick visual inspection you might not realize that it’s not copper. And so give you an extra day’s time before they actually load it.

Obviously they need the weight because they need it to feel full.

**Craig:** I get the rock part. But, yeah, it seems more like a scene and a character introducer. There’s no way to make a series or even movie about this because it’s just one thing and I don’t find it particularly interesting. There’s no comment or reflection of the human condition. It’s just theft.

**John:** So, Zeke, help us out. Because I feel like there is more to the story here, because this was deliberately a very small slice of it. But it didn’t get into the characters. It didn’t get into what the actual organization was behind this. Can you anticipate if you were to do the reporting what kinds of people and schemes behind the scenes might you figure out?

**Zeke:** I mean, ideally the people behind this might be in jail and pleaded guilty and be willing to tell you the whole thing that happened. I mean, personally I don’t get that excited this as an inside job because I want it to be some sort of really sneaky operation. Maybe if these were low level workers and they were somehow getting revenge on their terrible boss then it could be fun.

**John:** I hear you there. Because I also get frustrated because at least with the information we have right now they’re obviously going to get caught. There’s sort of no way you could not get caught. And so it’s a trick you can play once and if you try to play it seven times they’re going to figure out where the switch happened.

If the heist had happened at sea where they’re actually switching the containers there there’s a more interesting way to get to it. But I agree with both of you that I think it’s a scene, it’s a moment, in a completely different story and doesn’t really help us out here.

All right, let’s get to the one that Craig was excited about last night as we were talking about. The Secret History of Sushi.

**Craig:** Love this.

**John:** This is New York Times story by Daniel Fromson with illustrations by Igor Bastidas. Craig, can you talk us through what this is about?

**Craig:** This is magic. This is – every now and then you read a story that kind of blows your mind because it’s about something that was in front of your face for most of your life and you had no idea what was really behind it. So, apparently the history of sushi, and we can sort of skip the part where it’s how sushi developed in Japan and get to the part that’s sort of mind-blowing. So there was a cult that John anybody our age is familiar with or older, I don’t know if the millennials are quite as familiar with it. But the Reverend Sun Myung Moon was a kind of a Korean Christian Messianic culty figure who came to the United States I believe in the ‘70s. And was infamous for these mass marriages that he would oversee.

**John:** The mass weddings. Yeah.

**Craig:** But early on when he was still kind of small time in New York many of his adherents were Japanese which in and of itself is a bit odd. And he had this idea that in order to help fund the church that they should start bringing sushi to the United States. And in order to bring sushi to the United States he tapped this group of five or six or seven of his adherents and scattered them across the United States. And all of them were working in service of this corporation called True World Seafood. And True World is a reference to some nonsense that Reverend Moon believes in, I don’t know, some crap about whatever the world becoming something else. Doesn’t matter.

Point being they did it. These guys created the largest fresh seafood distributor in the United States and in Canada I believe and in some other places. And they did in fact create the sushi movement. I mean, it surfed along with a kind of Japan-ophilia thing that happened in the ‘80s, but they still to this day are the largest supplier of seafood to sushi restaurants. When you go and you eat sushi in the US or Canada you are eating fish that was very likely purchased initially and distributed and resold by a company that is intertwined with Reverend Moon’s Unification Church. And that is crazy. And how these guys did it and then the ensuing fallout when Moon died and the inevitable infighting happened within his family and then the lawsuits and the corporations.

It’s insane. And I loved it.

**John:** I loved it, too. And I think there is a movie here or a series. But to me it’s the question of like where do you put the boundaries of it. When do you start and when do you stop? And I don’t think you get into the later end stuff. I don’t think you get to the modern stuff. I think you just get to this crazy, impossible dream of like, OK, you’re going to go to Alaska and you’re going to go to Denver and start selling sushi in Denver and just really random people assigned to places and they just made it work. And there’s a comedy to that that I think is actually fun and exciting. But also problematic because this church was not without its own faults.

I think there’s a thing to be made here. Zeke, as you look at this article what jumps out to you? What are the threads that are interesting to you? And what’s the movie hook that you put in there so that some producer buys it and talks to you about it at lunch?

**Zeke:** I loved the presentation. Like as a magazine person it just looked amazing. And it’s pretty unusual to see one – I haven’t seen something like this before.

I think they did a really good job of connecting it to sushi. Like that made me more interested as a reader. If you just said, hey, this strange religious leader has a big fish company, I mean, that would be an OK story but presenting it as the secret history of sushi I think is what sells it as a story and to someone like you.

**John:** Agreed. Now, Craig, how do you make this? Do you make this – is it a movie? Is it a series? Where are your edges on the story?

**Craig:** Definitely a series. So, it’s not even a question of narrative application anymore. It used to be solely a question of narrative application. But now you have to also ask the question is anybody going to actually put it in a theater. Or even just show it streaming as a movie. In our minds now we have becomes really limited about what we see when we talk about movies. And this story does not have the explosive elements required to confine it to 90 minutes or two hours. So you need something really big and none of that is here.

This is absolutely some kind of limited series, but I would say a short one. I don’t think this needs five episodes or ten episodes. It needs maybe three. Personally, if I were putting my money into this I would actually be going down the documentary root. I think that’s the way to do this. The fictionalization of it is not as interesting to me as the facts in and of themselves. So I would probably go with a short documentary series on this.

**John:** Yeah. The reason why I think I want to see this as a fictional series is that I could just picture the moments where in the time period where you’re trying to introduce sushi into these places and just sort of like the confused stares you’re getting out of like, oh, we want to sell you some raw fish, and just trying to get people to eat this fish and just the absurdity of like, OK, I don’t know anything about what I’m doing but the church says I’m supposed to be doing this so I’m going to figure this out. I think those moments are so good.

I agree with you that it’s a series because it doesn’t want to fit nicely into 90 minutes. And there’s just going to be so many characters and so many situations. And you’re going to probably cover a number of years which just all works better as a series.

So, Zeke, I’m still going to press on if this were your story what would be the hook you’d want to put in there to make sure that a producer says oh yeah I get what this is?

**Zeke:** I was joking about that before, because I feel like – I’d like to think I’m above that now. But even as a writer I might have considered trying to develop some of the individual characters more. Like zooming in on, like you said, one of these particular people who is off in some weird place trying to introduce raw fish. I think that would be an interesting thread for the story. And probably would be interesting for somebody like you, too.

**John:** And actually one of the maybe challenges of this presentation, because people should click through the link because it’s really beautifully done.

**Craig:** Beautifully.

**John:** It’s all illustrated with animations that go through it. But because of that there aren’t the photos you might expect. And in addition to not really talking very much about the individual people without photos to sort of anchor like oh that is this guy, I could not tell you right now who most of the characters were in this piece. Because I was just focused on this is the sweep of the story. And it didn’t give me a lot of anchoring into who the people were who got sent off to these different places.

So a good counter example of this is our next story. This is a New Yorker story about migrant laborers who clean up after disasters. It’s Sarah Stillman writing this. And this is full of very detailed specific people whose faces we can see. These are folks who some of them are documented, some of them are undocumented. They’re mostly from Texas and Florida. But when there’s a disaster in the US there are these companies who subcontract with other companies who send workers in to sort of do the cleanup. So after huge storms, after natural disasters, these are the people who show up and do all that work. As Stillman’s story is documentary they obviously say like, oh, we’ll follow Covid-19 protocols. They’re not at all. Everyone is getting Covid. It’s terrible. Safety protocols aren’t there.

It also focuses on a man named Sacket Soni who is an organizer who is basically trying to protect these people and get them housed and fed and deal with wage theft. Craig, we’ll start with you. What did you see in terms of a potential story either for a movie or for a series out of this?

**Craig:** Doesn’t feel like one. There’s fascinating information here and there’s important here. It does feel like the kind of thing that if I were running a traditional news magazine format on television I would want to do this story for television in that format. A 60 Minutes kind of format. Because it’s important for people to know this and to see this.

However, there is not yet a kind of Cesar Chavez story that is completed. They are organizing and so we should see what happens with this. But overall what we’re seeing here is a pretty head on bit of journalism and I don’t think that this is the kind of story that adapts well to fictionalization in any format.

**John:** Zeke, as you’re looking at this do you agree? And if do agree are there things about this story that could be highlighter emphasized that would make it more of a Hollywood story?

**Zeke:** Interesting that you didn’t think it had potential for an adaptation, Craig, because I actually found it very cinematic when I was reading it. I just loved all of these amazing details like that she wore these gold hoop earrings that helped her feel elegant while she was doing this cleanup work. Or the sort of ironic signs she was always seeing.

That said, I agree that you don’t have the Erin Brockovich type plot yet. And then just to me it would seem odd to say based on a true story but then fictionalize some sort of more dramatic plot onto it. And then I was thinking if you don’t do that, if it doesn’t have a strong plot it might feel kind of similar to Nomadland.

**John:** I was thinking about Chloe Zhao the whole time through because I just felt like everything was happening sort of at sunsets and in beautiful disastrous places. And sort of the real life hardworking people who are actually doing the stuff and not getting paid properly for it felt like that sort of aesthetic.

**Zeke:** I’d be interested. It’s too bad we couldn’t ask the writer of this, because I am wondering how – I mean, obviously they’ve seen Nomadland and I’m sure they didn’t want it to seem too similar. It must have been actually challenging to try and write something that was really dramatic but then also in some ways similar to an Oscar-winning movie that came out recently.

**Craig:** Well, these stories sometimes give you – now I’ll speak like a purely exploitative fictionalist. When you read a story like this what you get is an interesting job for a character to have or characters to have in a movie that is about something else which is their life, their relationship with their children, or their spouse, or their significant other, or a romance. Some kind of life change.

So if in a movie we’re talking about a woman who has just gotten divorced and is restarting her life and this is the job she gets and this is where she meets somebody, that’s interesting. But the actual content of what’s happening here in terms of the way these people are being exploited and the economic ins and outs of this particular industry, that in and of itself is not a narrative that I think I would want to adapt the way for instance, you know, a narrative was created out of the whistleblower and the tobacco industry. It’s not quite that. It doesn’t have that circular narrative movement that we’re hoping for.

**John:** Now the other project I was thinking of was this Netflix series Maid which is Molly Smith Metzler writing about – taking a woman in a very specific situation and using that as the backdrop to tell a specific family story which I think Craig is what you were getting to. This is a huge canvas but you can decide to do the Erin Brockovich story about this issue or The Big Short. This is about this issue. Or you can have that be the arena in which you’re telling a much smaller story which might be the way to go through here.

And in that case I don’t know that you option this article because this article provides a big canvas but it doesn’t actually provide the distinct story points. Because you might choose to pick the woman who is featured here, Bellaliz Gonzalez, who is from Venezuela. As a central person you might choose to pick Sacket Soni who is this organizer. But you probably wouldn’t. You could just create your own character who is in that same situation and that’s your story.

**Craig:** Yup.

**Zeke:** It just reminds me of another article to film adaptation, American Honey.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Zeke:** Shia LaBeouf movie about the kids selling magazines. Which is actually based on this amazing New York Times article from 2007 that was more of like an expose about how young people are getting exploited on magazine crews. And then when the movie, which I do think they had optioned that story, when that came out it was just like sort of inspired by it but totally different.

**John:** I think for what we’re describing we’re not sure if we would ever want to option this article. But I guess you could option this article, as you said at the start of this, you might option this article as a producer just to clear the field and to declare this story space. But you’re not getting a specific story you can tell.

Here’s a very specific story. Next up we have an article by Sarah McDermott writing for BBC about Pauline Dakin’s childhood in Canada in the 1970s. It was full of secrets, disruption, and unpleasant surprising. She wasn’t allowed to talk about her family life with anyone. And it wasn’t until she was 23 that she was told why.

So basically at 23 she learns that her family is on the run from the mafia and that the mafia is after them and they have to always be constantly careful. And at a certain point all of us as readers say like or your family is not telling you the truth and they’re all operating under some sort of delusion which appears to be the case.

Again, this is a very specific story that you could choose to tell. So we could talk about optioning this story or this as a kind of story. Zeke, help us out here. Think through as a journalist how do you start to tell this story? If you were to write this article where would you begin and what are the hooks for you?

**Zeke:** So this article actually would be – not that I can pitch a news story about some random events of someone’s lives that don’t really have any newsworthiness. But it actually would be a good starting place for the kind of story that I like to write because it’s missing all of the specifics and you could really dig in and try and create – like I want to start with some sort of really dramatic scene which I would find by interviewing the person and talking through all of this and finding out what parts of the story really seemed like most exciting to me.

The version that I was reading was just sort of the barebones outline of what happened, which would be great as a starting place to really dig in and get all the details, interview other people and see their perspective. Because oftentimes the main character doesn’t really have a good sense of how they behaved themselves. You have to talk with other people who saw the events.

**John:** Craig, what is your take on this story?

**Craig:** I love it. It’s terrific. I don’t know if I need the story. Meaning I don’t know if I want – the value of this I don’t think is that it really happened. I think this is just a great to use as inspiration to write a story about a kid and their parents and this life they’re living and the fear that they’re all under and to present it as real and then for this person to slowly realize none of it is real. This is very Shyamalanic. And that in fact something far more weird is happening.

And then the question of who is telling the truth and who is lying and if they’re lying why becomes really florid. And all of the value is about the relationship between a child and a parent. And that stuff requires fictionalization and dramatization to the point that I think this is just a great springboard. I would not want to write a movie where there is a character named Pauline Dakin and her mother, Ruth, and her stepfather, Stan. I would want to just take the inspiration from this. Because it’s a fascinating notion. And I would want to do some research into this concept of delusional disorder.

So it’s very inspiring and a wonderful story that Sarah McDermott has uncovered here. And it will be, oh it will certainly be optioned. No question about that. But personally I think the value is just in the suggestion.

**John:** I think back to Gillian Flynn’s book Gone Girl which was telling the story of oh did this husband kill his wife. And there were true life things that she could ingest into that, but she was telling a fictional story. And she didn’t need to use any of the real life things to do it and she could tell a much better story by not being bound to what really happened. So unlike a true crime novel she’s able to use all the stuff and build her own thing out of it.

And I guess I agree with you here. But I also very much hear what Zeke is saying is that there probably are really compelling moments and scenes and bits here that you could flesh out. That you could create an article that was even more Hollywood compelling given this basic framework.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** All right. Our last story here is about Silibill N’ Brains. If you’re not familiar with Silibill N’ Brains they were a ‘90s hip hop duo that burst onto the scene. Let’s take a listen to a clip.

[Clip plays]

All right. So these are two California rappers. Very much in an Eminem style obviously. Fun. Great. MTV is loving them. They’re sort of rising up in music videos. And then it comes out that they’re actually two Scottish guys who just put on California accents and were just basically trying to ape all of their favorite rappers. And it all fell apart and it sort of got exposed in a Milli Vanilli sort of way.

Craig, is there a movie here?

**Craig:** No. I mean, it’s interesting but it feels very familiar to me. The idea of people being illegitimate and inauthentic and hiding that to get some sort of fame. And then it all comes crashing down. This is just very tired. And this is two levels of inauthenticity because it was already questionable when white people in the ‘90s started jumping on the hip hop bandwagon and trying to do that Vanilla Ice style. And then these guys were from Scotland which is even further away. And they weren’t even faking being black. They were faking being white.

**John:** They were faking being white in California which I think is great.

**Craig:** Yeah. But the point is I just don’t care. They weren’t famous enough. Nobody died. There was no shootings, explosions. The stakes were low. I struggle to care about this story. Maybe if they had been more famous. I don’t know, maybe that would make it even worse. Look, if there hasn’t been a Milli Vanilli movie, has there been?

**John:** I don’t think there’s been one.

**Craig:** Yeah. If there hasn’t been one of those I don’t see why we would get to this one. I think the Milli Vanilli is the canary in the coal mine. If we don’t want to make a movie about that I don’t know why we would want to make a movie about Silibill N’ Brains.

**John:** Now, Zeke, there’s three articles here we’ll link to. So we’re linking to an article by Tom Seymour for Vice, by Sam for DDW, and there’s also a documentary called The Great Hip Hop Hoax by Jeanie Finley. So this is areas that have been explored. Do you see a movie or a series coming out of this?

**Zeke:** I really didn’t like this idea at all until I listened to the song. I mean, it’s just so horrible that it’s kind of amazing that this ever fooled anyone. So, maybe it would be best as a documentary. And I was trying to think of some way to make this kind of relevant. Basically I come down on no, but I think one thing that’s a little interesting is why was everyone so eager to believe. And I think it’s because they wanted white rappers. They wanted some next Eminem. And so I feel like there’s kind of a racist element to it that could make it kind of interesting to explore, but still not that interesting.

**John:** Yeah. I think there’s a Lonely Island movie here where you can just – you find the right two kids who have the right charisma and you can just play with all these themes and use their songs but write other great parody songs. So do you need this exact story? Maybe not. And I guess they already made Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping or whatever. So maybe it’s kind of already been done.

**Craig:** By geniuses.

**John:** They’re geniuses. And so I feel like the right people could approach this and make something great. But it’s not a slam dunk by any stretch. It’s very execution dependent.

All right, let’s do a recap of our stories here and figure out which of these might actually become movies. Zeke, if you had to pick between our five here which is the movie. Which gets optioned?

**Zeke:** You were very down on it but I actually think that the story about the migrant workers is the one that people would go for.

**John:** All right. Craig, of these five which is the movie?

**Craig:** Sushi.

**John:** Sushi. I am going to go with sushi as well. I think sushi is the one that – it’s not a movie, it’s probably a limited series, but I think that’s the one that most happens. But I’m excited for all of these. And I want to thank all of our listeners because I put out on Twitter a call for suggestions and most of these came from their suggestions.

Here’s the ones we didn’t cover just so you can—

**Craig:** And you’re telling us about them?

**John:** Yes. Ivy Getty’s Wedding was amazing. But, no, we don’t care.

**Craig:** We don’t care.

**John:** The 1902 eruption of Mount Pelée on Martinique. Great.

**Craig:** I’ve already done a thing blowing up. I can’t do it again.

**John:** The billionaire space race. We’re in the middle of it, so no.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** The Havana Syndrome. We don’t know what’s really happening, so no. Chinese dancing grandmas.

**Craig:** Adorable.

**John:** Kind of interesting.

**Craig:** Hysterical. Not a movie. But I like that people are throwing bags of pee on them. It’s an amazing story.

**John:** Biker getting breast milk.

**Craig:** What?

**John:** So it’s these biker gangs who formed a shuttle service to bring breast milk to mothers who need breast milk.

**Craig:** Such a great band name.

**John:** Yeah. The plot to dig up Lincoln’s body was actually a great story. It just came a little too late, so we’ll keep that for the next one.

**Craig:** Because he died a long time ago.

**John:** Yeah. So basically people are trying to dig up his body and hold it for ransom.

**Craig:** What? Oh boy.

**John:** You’ll love it. It’s terrific. The IVF mix-up leaves an LA couple giving birth to another family’s baby. Yeah. The bio of Ruth Fertel who created Ruth’s Chris Steak House. It’s fascinating. So she’s good. The great emu war which is about the plot to eradicate emu, sort of like cut back on emus in Australia. They’re already making a movie so it’s too late.

**Craig:** Too late.

**John:** And Stagecoach Mary who was a groundbreaking black postal carrier in the old days, olden days. She seems great. There’s a biopic maybe to be made there but it didn’t make it in time for this one. So, good suggestions everybody.

**Craig:** Thank you folks.

**John:** Now, Zeke as we transition out of this I want to talk to you about point of view in a magazine piece because in this article we first talked about that you wrote clearly we’re on the POV of this guy who is investigating these scams. But as a journalist when do you know who the person is that you’re going to be focused on and going to hang the story around? Does that come pretty early or only as you sit down to really start writing it?

**Zeke:** I always like to have a really exciting story with a point of view. So I might find a space that I find is interesting. Like in that case I’d been looking into debt collection for quite a long time. Maybe I’d even written some straight news stories. And then when I meet someone who is a great character I get really excited and I think about how can I use everything that I’ve learned about this shady debt collection industry to inform a story that would be more compelling to read because it centers on a character.

**John:** And do you ever feel guilty thinking about people as characters? Or is that just the nature of the work you’re doing?

**Zeke:** Absolutely. I mean, it’s incredibly important to me that the story is true. It’s a tricky thing because when you tell the truth about someone they might not even recognize it. So I can’t be overly concerned with how the subject will react to the story, but I also want it to read like if someone who knows the subject reads it I want it to read true. And I can’t take any liberties at all with the timing of events or the characters.

You have a lot of constraints as a writer of true stories that you wouldn’t if you were writing a screenplay. And in this case it was kind of interesting. The subject really took exception to the fact that I called him stocky which I did think was an insulting adjective.

**Craig:** I’m stocky. I think it’s very nice.

**Zeke:** Yeah, I mean he’s a big perfectly good-looking guy. I mean, not even that big. I don’t think stocky means that big. Anyway, of all the things that’s what he didn’t really like, but we still joke about it so I guess he got over it.

**John:** This last week I was talking on a Zoom call with two writers who were working with the Inevitable Foundation which is a foundation that helps disabled writers past middle career up into becoming showrunners. And one of them was working on a project that was centered around this civil rights figure. And someone who was kind of always behind the scenes but actually had a really compelling life story.

And she was running into a problem where she had all this research and all these facts about this character but didn’t feel like she sort of knew who the person was or what the person’s voice was. And I was trying to encourage her to really channel her inner Aaron Sorkin and just make a choice and just run with it. And it strikes me as such a different thing for what I’m telling a screenwriter to do versus what you as a journalist has to tell another journalist to do. You can’t put words in a person’s mouth whereas she has to put words in a person’s mouth and has to actually have the confidence to just create a voice for this person who no longer exists.

**Zeke:** Yeah. I mean, I would find that really hard. And the amazing thing about this story, a lot of my stories don’t even have much dialogue. In this story the guy had taped everything. And when I heard these tapes I honestly wanted to cry. The dialogue was so amazing. I just couldn’t believe that this guy actually – I mean, he actually said things that are as good as what you guys would make up. So that was a very unique situation, but ideally I can put myself in a place where I can observe someone actually doing stuff and hear how they actually relate to other people. That’s a little more authentic than just interviewing them and hearing what they say to me.

**John:** Yup. All right. Let’s get to our listener questions because we have two that are very much on topic here. Megana, do you want to start us off?

**Megana:** So Chase from London writes, “I’m currently developing a script based on a pretty famous historical trial. The story has been adapted a few times in different mediums, most famously with a golden era legal drama. But I believe a retelling would have a completely different weight and meaning if written for a modern audience. My question is whether I should watch and read every previous adaptation of this story in my research. Is it helpful or harmful to see how other writers dramatized certain events? Are there copyright complications to look out for when drawing upon the same courtroom transcripts for dialogue?”

**John:** I don’t think you should look at all the other adaptations because you will start judging what you’re doing based on what they were doing and it will become a trap and you shouldn’t do it. Craig, what’s your thought?

**Craig:** If it’s been adapted a lot I think you have to at least – you don’t want to study those things because I agree with John. But what you don’t want to do is just mistakenly replicate a bunch of stuff because then you’re going to hear about it when you send your script around. Everyone is going to say well yeah it’s not that you ripped them off, it just doesn’t seem different enough. We already have that movie. What do we need this movie for?

In terms of drawing on the same courtroom transcripts for dialogue, no, those are facts. Those are a published public record and anyone can use that freely. The problem is if someone else has used it freely you’re a little bit stuck. Just because you can doesn’t mean you’re not going to seem like somebody who is a Johnny Come Lately.

You’re in a tough spot here. And I guess the way I would turn it around to you, Chase, is to say why are you developing a script based on a pretty famous historical trial that has been adapted a few times in different mediums, most famously with a golden era legal drama? I know you say a retelling would have a completely different weight and meaning if written for a modern audience, but maybe that’s not enough? You just don’t want to seem like you’re delivering something that feels warmed over.

Writing for a modern audience, I’m not sure what that means exactly. If it’s just a question of language and such then I’m concerned. If you’re talking about retelling that story from a very different perspective then you might be onto something, in which case I don’t think you have to worry so much. But if you’re doing something straight on that’s been done a bunch it’s going to be an issue.

**John:** Zeke, if you’re writing something in an area or about a story topic do you read other writers writing on that topic? Or is that in bad form? Tell me about the research you’re doing and reading other writers.

**Zeke:** I feel like it’s my duty to read everything that I possibly can. But I understand why you might not want to. It’s hard to avoid feeling influenced if you’re – I mean, I would prefer not to write a story about something that somebody else has already written a great magazine story about because it is challenging to set aside their take and write your own original one.

**John:** All right. We’re running short on time so we’re going to cap it at one question here. And it’s time for our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is called Friendsgiving by Miry’s List. So Miry’s List is a great charity that works with immigrant families, refugee families that come to the states, mostly to Los Angeles, and helps them get set up in apartments with furniture and food and toys for their kids, and books and such.

I was first introduced to them by Rachel Bloom. They are fantastic. So I’ve been supporting them for the past couple years. Their Friendsgiving campaign is especially important this year because they have a bunch of new Afghan families that have come to Los Angeles and need some support. So, I’ll have a link in the show notes for that, but it’s Friendsgiving by Miry’s List.

Craig, what do you got for us this week?

**Craig:** So my One Cool Thing this week is Once Cool Person named Jasmila Žbani?. She is currently directing an episode of The Last of Us for our production and she’s terrific. She is a Bosnian filmmaker and I became aware of her through the last feature film she made which is called Quo Vadis, Aida? And that was nominated for Best Foreign Film in the last round of Oscars. It’s a wonderful movie, heartbreaking movie about the terrible events in Srebrenica. The terrible war that tore Sarajevo apart and just a brutal conflict between Serbs and Bosnians.

I just like drawing people’s attention to it because I think normally if somebody says, oh, there’s a Bosnian movie and it’s about war you might go, meh, I don’t. But what’s so brilliant about Quo Vadis, Aida is that it focuses on a woman who has a fascinating job. She is a translator who is the go-between between these Bosnian refugees seeking shelter in a UN compound and the Dutch soldiers who are in charge of the UN peacekeeping compound and of course everybody then uses English as the lingua franca. And so I guess it’s lingua anglica. And that woman’s story is an incredible way to work in and out of this brutal story.

Jasmila is just a terrific filmmaker and a wonderful person. I am having such a great time with her. So I thought I would spread the news about her and her movie as my One Cool Thing.

Oh, and I do have one other cool thing. It’s my new nickname for me and Megana. Because I was thinking about it. We had talked about Ben Affleck and Ana de Armas. And somebody pointed out obviously how did we miss BenAna.

**Megana:** BenAna.

**Craig:** BenAna is just like how did we miss it. It’s just right there. And then I was like what happens when Megana and I start dating. And obviously we’d be Craigana. So, I’m just super excited. Craigana is the new thing. #Craigana. And the story of our romance and how it begins in winter and ends when fall arrives, obviously. It’s just such a great story.

**Megana:** Because I just become unbearable during the fall? Yeah.

**Craig:** What happens is everything is going OK and then you message Spooky Season in August and that starts to get me really worried, and then it just gets worse and worse. And so by the time Thanksgiving arrives it’s over.

**John:** Zeke, save us. If you have a refugee related One Cool Thing then that would be fantastic and it would check all the boxes. But tell us, do you have a One Cool Thing for us this week?

**Zeke:** Mine is actually kind of nerdy. It’s productivity software. Or, I shouldn’t call it that but it’s called Roam Research.

**John:** I love Roam Research. We can geek out about Roam Research.

**Craig:** Oh. Oh good.

**Zeke:** It’s kind of intimidating. It looks like something that’s almost for like computer programmers, but once you learn to use it I feel like when I open it it’s like I’m opening my favorite paper notebook and I just feel really free to write down whatever. If you don’t know it, it just opens up to a page with a date at the top and you start writing stuff down. And you can tag it with whatever tags you want. You end up creating your own personal Wikipedia that’s really easily searchable. Because at any given time I’m researching so many different topics it’s really hard to keep them straight. And this makes it super easy.

I’m starting to work on my first book which is a really intimidating organizational challenge and there’s just so many different threads to keep in the air and so many different things to research. But I feel like I feel weird giving this free ad for this software but I feel like I can do it now by using this. And that I won’t lose track of all the 18 different things that I have to research.

**John:** I think it’s great as well. So I’ve been using that. And it’s like Workflowy but with much looser organization, sort of like a very freeform taxonomy. It’s really smart. People should give it a shot.

**Craig:** There’s this incredibly elegant version of what you guys are talking about called paper. You just write stuff down on it.

**John:** Yeah, but you can’t search paper.

**Craig:** Yeah, you can. With your eyeballs. [laughs]

**John:** That is our show. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Ryan Gerber. 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. Zeke, where can people find you?

**Zeke:** I’m @zekefaux.

**John:** We called you Zeke Faux the first time on the show.

**Craig:** Which is the coolest name.

**John:** But then we fixed it.

**Craig:** I’m bummed out that you’re not Zeke Fox.

**Zeke:** I’ll forgive you because you are so nice otherwise.

**John:** 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.

We have t-shirts and now hoodies. They’re great. You can get them at Cotton Bureau. Remember to order your hoodie right now or else they won’t get there in time for Christmas. You can sign up to become a premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you get all the back episodes and bonus segments like the one we’re about to record talking about magazine versus feature writing. And the differences between them.

Zeke Faux, thank you so much for coming on.

**Craig:** Thanks Zeke.

**Zeke:** Thanks John. Thanks Craig.

**John:** Thanks Craigana.

**Craig:** Craigana.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** All right. So our bonus segment for this week we have studios that now own publishers. We have the WGA now represents both writers for film and TV but also for magazine and print journalism. Let’s talk about the remaining differences between what screenwriters do and what other journalists do. Craig, start us off.

**Craig:** Well, I mean, two different jobs. [laughs] It’s two completely jobs.

**John:** But weirdly related jobs. Like Zeke was just talking through as he’s crafting one of his pieces he is thinking about what are the hooks, what are the things. So maybe that’s distinguishing the business jobs, but it feels like how you put together a successful magazine piece is not that dissimilar to how you’re putting together a good screenplay because you’re looking for what is the reader going to take out of this, how are you building scenes, how are you building characters. All that stuff is similar, right?

**Craig:** Yeah. It is. I think the structure and mechanisms of writing a narrative piece whether it is a fictional narrative piece or a journalistically narrative piece are similar, of course. The big difference is intention. We are intending in the Hollywood business, and screenwriting, to entertain. And entertain is not a frivolous word. It means to interest, to engage. And I think the intention for journalism is perhaps to entertain and maybe that’s what the ad salesmen want more than anything, but it feels to me that if you’re going to be a journalist surely your ultimate intention is to inform. And that means you have an accountability to fact and truth whereas we do not.

We merely have an accountability to the audience and to entertainment. So those are two massively different intentions. And to me that is the shining bright line between these two jobs.

**John:** I’m going to confess something. Tell me about how you get a job writing a piece like the one we were discussing? Are you pitching that to your editor? Are you pitching it to multiple pieces? Are you getting assigned things? Talk to us about how something like the article we’ve been discussing came about.

**Zeke:** So I work fulltime for Bloomberg News which is the owner of Bloomberg Business Week. And I’ve spent ten years working there and sort of developed a specialty on the shady side of the financial industry. So, I generate ideas and then bring them to editors to see what they think of them, if they think it would be a good story, if they think there’s some worthwhile issue to expose.

And like you were saying of course we want people to read the stories, so they can’t be boring, but at the heart of it we need to think that there’s something – this is going to teach people something about the world that they really want to know. And in the case of the Andrew story this fake debt is a real problem that could be written about in a different way, but I think that by telling the story in this narrative way you can really get people’s attention and you can spur people to action.

Like even if our interest is in telling the truth and exposing wrongdoing and being informative we still need to be entertaining, otherwise no one is going to find out whatever it is you – no one is going to read to the end and find out whatever it is you want them to learn.

You had asked how you get the job and when I started at Bloomberg I wasn’t writing these long narrative pieces, but over the years of working with editors I started pitching longer and longer ideas and now often when I have an idea I think about how to do it in this way and I’ll pitch it to Business Week as a feature story.

**John:** And when you’re pitching that you’re saying it’s going to be about this many words? And how much information do you have about the story when you start? Because do you have kind of all the facts and it’s really a matter of writing it? Or is it I’m going to need to do three weeks of research and fly to these places to make this happen?

**Zeke:** It can really happen either way. You might be really at the beginning and just say there’s this area I want to explore, what do you think. Or you might have already learned much of the story and now you’re proposing is this going to be something that would be good for the magazine.

**John:** Great. So let’s talk about you going to talk with a possible subject of your story. So when you’re first sitting down with Andy how do you build trust with him about I’m the person who can actually tell the story well? What are those initial meetings like and how are you communicating because, yes, you’re trying to tell the truth and his story but you’re also trying to get him to tell you the truth and his story. So what are those conversations like?

**Zeke:** Yeah, it’s always really interesting. And so when I meet someone I might start talking with them off the record where I say like we can just talk but I’m not going to print this. Then I might say, hey, this is like a really compelling story that you’ve just told. It could really help a lot of people to learn this. Phantom debt is a real problem. I’d love to interview you and really do justice to this story and write it. But you’d have to agree to it and you’d have to sit down and talk with me on the record for many hours.

I’ll also say and you know if you agree to this this isn’t your story. I’m going to write the story based on what really happened, based on my research from all kinds of sources. Whatever I can dig up from court records, from interviewing other people, and what I end up saying might not be exactly the way that they see it. And I like to have that conversation before they agree to have the interview because I think it’s fair to the subject of the story because they can start to – I don’t want them to start to think that this is their story and that they are the ones who are going to control the end product.

**John:** So one last bit to wrap up on because a thing we all as writers have to deal with is actually getting stuff written. So, can you talk to us about the actual writing process? I’m going to achieve this minimum of words per day? What is the writing process like for you? And how do you sort of get stuff written?

**Zeke:** Well I see you on Twitter saying like it’s time to write, let’s get going.

**Craig:** You don’t have to do that.

**Zeke:** And I probably should adapt that procedure. But I mean there comes a time when I feel like I’ve turned over every rock I can think of, I’ve interviewed every single person. And I’m ready to sit down and try and write this story. Because I feel like I wouldn’t want to start writing it too early because I don’t want to become really set on my perspective before I know what happened. I have to create an outline so I can figure out all the interesting details that I heard that I really want to work into the story. Where do they fit? I can’t keep all these different true details in my head at once. I have them all written down in different places. It’s almost like an organizational task to figure out all the different things that happened. Where do they fit in the chronological order of what happened? What are the most interesting parts that I want to make sure that I get in there?

But it can be a real challenge to sort of transition from the researching to the writing because I really enjoy the researching part of it, too. It’s really fun to always be calling sources and trying to find out even more details about when Andrew called Joel to confront him or something like that. But at some point I have to kind of stop and just switch from researching to writing.

**John:** And that is an experience that everyone listening to this podcast has been through. Which is like planning is great, and at some point you actually have to get it done.

Thank you for getting it done on this article and for joining on this podcast. It was so much fun having you here to talk with about your stories and sort of the story behind these stories. So thank you.

**Craig:** Thanks

**Megana:** Thank you.

**Zeke:** Thanks a lot.

Links:

Links:

* [Scriptnotes Hoodies](https://cottonbureau.com/products/scriptnotes-tri-blend-zip-hoodie#/12684369/sweatshirt-unisex-zip-up-hoodie-solid-black-tri-blend-xs) order by November 18 in time for the Holidays!
* [Veterans in Media and Entertainment](https://vmeconnect.org/)
* [Movie Pass is Back!](https://www.businessinsider.com/moviepass-cofounder-stacy-spikes-buys-back-company-and-plans-relaunch-2021-11)
* [339 – Mostly Terrible People](https://johnaugust.com/2018/mostly-terrible-people) sign up for the full episode at Scriptnotes.net
* [Zeke Faux](https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/AP5w7epl1Xo/zeke-faux) and on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/ZekeFaux)!
* [How Thieves Stole $40 Million of Copper by Spray-Painting Rocks](https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2021-painted-rocks-copper-heist/?cmpid=BBD062921_MKT) By Andy Hoffman and Benedikt Kammel
* [Secret History of Sushi](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/11/05/magazine/sushi-us.html) by Daniel Fromson with illustrations by Igor Bastidas for the NYT
* [The Migrant Laborers Who Clean Up after Disasters](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/11/08/the-migrant-workers-who-follow-climate-disasters) by Sarah Stillman for the New Yorker
* [‘The story of a weird world I was warned never to tell’](https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-42951788) by Sarah McDermott for the BBC
* Silibill N’ Brains: [Meet the Two Scottish Rappers Who Conned the World](https://www.vice.com/en/article/rknaa6/meet-the-two-scottish-rappers-who-conned-the-world) by Tom Seymour for Vice and [Fake It Till You Make It: The Great Hip Hop Hoax](https://www.dontdiewondering.com/fake-it-till-you-make-it-the-great-hip-hop-hoax/) by Samuel on DDW Magazine
* [Inevitable Foundation](https://inevitable.foundation/)
* [Friendsgiving Miry’s List](https://give.miryslist.org/campaign/2021-friendsgiving-with-mirys-list/c373800)
* [Jasmila Žbanić](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasmila_%C5%BDbani%C4%87), [Quo Vadis, Aida?](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8633462/) and [#Craigana](https://images.app.goo.gl/5K3sehZMad1pVjWSA)
* [Roam Research](https://roamresearch.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 Ryan Gerber ([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/525standard.mp3).

« 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 (74)
  • 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 (237)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.