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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: courier

Scriptnotes, Episode 715: The Book Launch, Live!, Transcript

December 10, 2025 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found here.

John August: Hey, this is John. Standard warning for people who are in the car with their kids, there’s some swearing in this episode.

[music]
[applause]

Craig Mazin: Look at this beautiful crowd.

John: It’s lovely.

Craig: Beautiful.

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

Craig: My name is Craig Mazin.

John: This is Scriptnotes, a podcast and now a book about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Craig: Yes.

[applause]

John: For folks listening at home, we are at Dynasty Typewriter in Los Angeles. It is our book launch party. Craig, how are you feeling?

Craig: I feel very grateful because I believe everyone here is here because they bought a book.

John: They got a book.

Craig: Thank you.

John: This is the most books you’ll ever see in one place for Scriptnotes. Everyone has an orange book in their hands.

Craig: Yes. Cut to 400 years from now-

John: Absolutely.

Craig: -and our book is The Constitution of the New Country.

[laughter]

John: It’s the new Bible.

Craig: Yes. It’s Little Red Book.

John: Little Red Book.

Craig: Yes.

John: We have an amazing show for you today. We have Julia Turner here. She’s going to interrogate us about the Scriptnotes book.

Craig: Yes.

John: We’re also going to talk about Craig’s favorite topic, which is criticism.

Craig: Yes, I love it.

John: Love it.

Craig: Love it.

[laughter]

Craig: Can’t wait to talk with her about that.

John: Ashley Nicole Black will help us make a meal of leftovers.

[applause]

John: We’ll have audience questions. Craig, just this morning, you worked out a whole new game.

Craig: Yes. I love a little Christmas quiz. It’s a brief one. We’ll do it in between Julia and Ashley Nicole, I think. Just a little trivia quiz. I believe we’re going to need three contestants.

John: We’re going to need three contestants. You are already contestants. You just don’t know it yet. If you have a book in your hands, open it to where we signed it. If you have a star on that page, you are a contestant. Raise your hand if you have one of the starred books.

Craig: There’s a starred book.

John: There’s one. We have one.

Craig: Oh, there’s two.

John: There’s two. First, Craig, let’s have a seat.

Craig: Great.

John: The Scriptnotes book is finally out in bookstores. As people are hearing this episode, they will have gotten their preorders. They’ll be able to buy it at their local bookstore. We often talk on the podcast about starting a new project, but we don’t often talk about finishing, and just being done with a thing, and saying goodbye to a thing, because the Scriptnotes book is now done, it’s out.

Craig: It’s out.

John: We’re finished.

Craig: Yes.

John: Talk to us about how you feel about finishing a project, finishing a movie, saying goodbye to something.

Craig: It’s always sad. I get sad. We throw the term postpartum around, which I think is a bit insulting to people that actually go through postpartum depression. That’s a very serious thing. There is a postscriptum depression. There’s a thing that happens when it’s over because it’s been in your mind for so long, and when it’s done, and I mean done done, not necessarily like, “Oh, we’re on our third revision,” or something, you do feel like you’ve sent your kid off, and now it belongs to everyone. You just have to let it go, and it’s not yours anymore.

John: Yes. With movies, once you go to a premiere and it’s like, “Oh, it’s so exciting.” You’re seeing all this stuff. You’re doing press. Then at a certain point, it’s just its opening weekend, and it’s there. It’s no longer your movie, it’s the world’s movie. Their reaction to it is what’s going to keep it going or not going. I’ve had a bit of this experience with the three Arlo Finch books because I had the launch of the first one, great, but there was always a second one, and then the third one, and eventually, like, “Oh, wow, I’m no longer the person writing Arlo Finch books.”

It’s a weird thing to be done with it. It’s nice that it’s actually physically a book, that it’s actually a thing that sits on a shelf. So often we talk about scripts we write, and they get pretty fantastic, but if they don’t, all that energy, all that effort is just trapped in 12 Point Courier.

Craig: Yes. In a way, I think psychologically, I prefer that. There’s a world where the best outcome is you write a script, you perfect it, and then you encase it in Lucite,-

[laughter]

Craig: -and it is never read by anyone.

John: No.

Craig: It will never be tainted by their dirty eyes.

[laughter]

Craig: I love that, but the postscriptum that I’m really fearing is when I eventually get to the end of The Last of Us because we’re talking about years and years at that point. Now it’s like, “Hey, that’s a chunk of your life, and that’s going to be interesting.” I will either be terribly, terribly sad or wonderfully, wonderfully happy.

[laughter]

Craig: I’m rooting for the second, almost certainly the first.

John: A question people ask, like, “Oh, do you go back and read your Arlo Finch books?” Like, “Oh, God, no, I’m not going to read that.” People ask, “Do you watch your movies?” The answer is I really don’t. Unless I’m doing a special event for something, I don’t go back and watch old movies. I can understand why people would think you would because, “Oh, aren’t you so proud of it?” It’s not like your kid is going out to college or something.

[laughter]

John: It’s just like, “No, it’s there. It’s for other people. It’s not for me anymore.”

Craig: I can now watch clips online that occasionally go viral for the weirdest reasons from Scary Movie 3 and Scary Movie 4.

[laughter]

Craig: We’re talking about whatever, 20 years. A couple of decades go by. Yes, I’m watching it like anyone else now. It’s gone. I can do that. I’m going to have to wait about 20 years per thing, and then I feel, yes, I could look at that.

John: The Scriptnotes book isn’t quite cold yet. Because it’s so awkward for us to talk about a book, we thought we’d bring on somebody incredibly smart to ask us questions about that. Our first guest is a longtime co-host of Slate’s Culture Gabfest. She’s also a senior fellow at the USC Annenberg Center. She’s also plotting some new media thing we’re not supposed to talk about.

Craig: Yes. Apparently, she’s got a scheme.

John: She’s got a scheme.

Craig: -to launch some sort of new digital journalism thing. It’s going to be based here in LA.

John: There was a Vanity Fair article about it, though.

Craig: I think a squib.

John: A squib.

Craig: A squib in Vanity Fair. I’m curious. We asked her backstage what it was called, and she said, “Fuck you, I’m not telling you.”

John: Yes.

[laughter]

John: Which I think is a brave title.

Craig: Amazing title.

John: I think it’s really good.

[laughter]

John: I’m going to have dinner for that.

Craig: Very catchy.

John: Welcome back to the program, Julia Turner.

[applause]

Julia Turner: Hello.

Craig: Hello.

John: Julia Turner.

Julia: Hi.

John: Oh.

Julia: Hello, everyone.

John: Hi. Before we fully hand over the reins to you, people may remember you because you hosted a conversation with us for our 10th anniversary of the Scriptnotes Podcast, which is excerpted in the appendix of the book. This is very meta to have you back here to talk about us.

Julia: Very full circle. I’m going to ask you mostly about that appendix.

[laughter]

Julia: How’d I do? Can we just stipulate that I’m the official journalist of Scriptnotes, I’m your official interrogator?

Craig: I have no problem with that.

Julia: All right.

John: 100% endorsed.

Craig: Your competition is literally no one else.

[laughter]

Julia: It would have been really embarrassing if you said no-

Craig: Yes, it would have been rough. [laughs]

Julia: -you need to think about it. [laughs]

Craig: Yes. Oh. Yes, we’ll take that under management. All right, official journalist of Scriptnotes, lay it on us.

John: We cede our control to you.

Julia: Okay. Let’s see where I can take this. I have listened to your show for more than a decade. I have spent so many hours in both of your company, mostly nodding in agreement, marveling at your stage wisdom, deeply amused, occasionally shaking my fist at you.

Craig: That’s me, right?

[laughter]

Julia: Both of you.

Craig: Okay.

Julia: More you. We’ll get to the part that I shake-

Craig: Yay.

Julia: -my fist at later. I have also heard you say many, many, many times that script-writing books are a crock and no one should buy or read them.

Craig: Correct.

[laughter]

Craig: I am consistent with that.

Julia: How did we get here? [chuckles] What made you want to write this book?

John: Yes, let’s talk about that.

[laughter]

John: Craig, have we changed our opinion on books about how to be a screenwriter?

Craig: No. I have not changed my opinion at all because, as far as I can tell, the only book that exists about how to write screenplays or write for movies and television that is written by two people or a person that has repeatedly done that job for decades is this orange book. It is unique. I don’t know of any other book like that. Most of the books are by people that did it once, or never did it, or were more analysts. I don’t think of this as inconsistent with my belief that screenwriting books are a crock. I think this book is a refutation of other screenwriting [chuckles] books.

Julia: [laughs]

Craig: I hope that people do find it useful. That said, if they don’t, then we’ve just added one more pile of the crock.

Julia: [laughs]

John: Another thing I’ll say is that the subtitle in the book is A Book About Screenwriting and Things That Are Interesting to Screenwriters. It’s a book about screenwriting. It’s not a how-to-write-a-screenplay book. It’s about the craft and profession of screenwriting. It was a chance for us to share everything we talked about on the show, but also for the 25 interviews with other screenwriters in there talking about how they do their work. That, to me, felt like a valuable addition to the literature on screenwriting.

Julia: Yes. There’s a lot of expertise besides just the two of yours in there, but there’s a lot of the two of yours as well. I’m curious, when you first came up with the idea to do this book, were there particular moments from the show that you remembered that you thought, “That has to go in? I don’t care what else is in, but we’ve got to make sure this part is in there.”

John: Craig has a standalone episode called How to Write a Movie, which is such a pretentious title for an episode.

Julia: [chuckles]

Craig: Oh.

John: It’s him giving his lecture on what writing a movie is like to him. It’s so specific to his point of view that it became pretty clear that’s just a chapter in and of itself. Literally, it’s the text of that episode. Very lightly edited, it becomes that one chapter. To me, it was talking through pushing back against the idea of what structure is, and that structure is something you impose upon a story. The structure is really instead something natural that evolves out of story. The structure is characters doing things.

Those conversations we kept coming back to about specificity, about pitching, about notes, and trying to make sure that the book was full of the kinds of things we talked about on the episode, but most of the chapters are not the one episode we did about that topic.

Craig: Right. I think that as, honestly, John and our excellent team did the vast majority of curation here, there’s, I think, a really good job of gleaning out those very practical moments from the podcast over the years where we’re like, “Okay, here’s something just about transitions from scene to scene. Here’s what conflict, different kinds of–” those things are very useful to people, I think, particularly useful to people who are good enough to be screenwriters.

Ultimately, you’re writing a book for people that are interested in screenwriting and screenwriters from a objective point of view, or who want to be and will be. It hopefully would help them along, but I also love the choices of the interviews with the guests that we’ve had over the years because it’s quite a startling group of people when you look at it in the aggregate.

Julia: When you guys read the early drafts, I think you’ve spoken about this, Craig, that one of the joys of podcasting is you can just talk and talk and talk, and it’s not quite the same as writing something down. It doesn’t have quite the same weight. You can be more exploratory. You can be more conversational. Also, at least in my experience as a long-time podcaster, sometimes you just forget what you said. You’re talking into the ether.

Craig: I forgot what we said when we got out here.

Julia: [laughs]

Craig: Yes, you remember nothing.

Julia: Was there anything that surprised you when the corpus of your work was brought back to you with the help of your assistants? Were there any things that you had said or that each other had said that you were like, “What the hell? I don’t believe that at all.”?

Craig: No, I don’t think there was anything where I was like, “Oh, no, John,-

Julia: [chuckles]

Craig: -I never said this about the Holocaust.” It was nothing like that.

[laughter]

Craig: It was amazing to go through it and read it and think, “These guys sound pretty good.”

Julia: [laughs]

Craig: It’s impossible to remember those moments. There’s so many of them. We’ve done a game where Matthew reads us quotes of things we’ve said. I think we did it at Austin, and he’s like, “Which one said it?” We don’t know.

John: [chuckles]

Craig: It’s how many years?

John: Yes, about 15 years.

Craig: 15 years of talking.

John: One of the real decisions we had to make with the book was, clearly, it’s not going to just be the transcripts, but are John and Craig going to speak with individual voices in it, or is it going to be one collective voice? We tried it with some breaking into John says a thing and Craig says a thing. It just did not work at all. We had to go through and strip all that out and make it just one consistent us voice throughout it.

What was good about it is that even though Craig and I will disagree some on the show, mostly it’s a conversation, and mostly we’re rowing in the same direction. There’s a lot of times where it’s a paraphrase of something Craig said or I said, but it makes sense as one’s collective voice in the book. It was challenging to make it read right, but it wasn’t challenging to make all the opinions fit together the right way because,-

Craig: We tend to agree.

John: -yes, 90% of things about the process of writing, we agree on.

Julia: It is interesting because it does feel new. As someone who’s listened to all these episodes, it’s fun to encounter this synthesized voice. I’m curious. I’ve heard you say that before, that the back and forth didn’t work. What didn’t work? What was bad about it?

John: It was jarring to get halfway through a page, and then Craig says a thing, and then John says a thing, and then we’re back. Whose voice are we in when we’re back? It just felt really, really strange, and so it didn’t work. It was nice visually on the page to break stuff up, but it never worked quite right. We had to either do a lot of it or do none of it. We just took it all out.

Craig: It’s also transcript-y and we provide transcripts. In a way, you’d feel like you just are selling me the transcripts.

John: The only section in the book that’s still transcripts is the section with you at the end.

Craig: Oh, yes.

John: It’s the appendix.

Craig: And the index.

John: Then, when we did the interview chapters with our guests, we basically cut ourselves out of it, so it was just their words and did that light passage. It feels like it’s just them talking. Occasionally, you might see me or Craig pop in there to pull a point out, but it’s not really that feel.

Julia: Do you guys think that if you had read this book at the beginning of your careers, it would have changed how you approached anything, saved you from any mistakes or follies?

Craig: Absolutely.

Julia: Which ones? How so?

[laughter]

Craig: This is all I had when I started. Really, the answer is all of it because all I had was a line graph from Sid Field that was 30 pages, first act, 60 pages, second act, 30 pages, and then midpoint. What the fuck good is that? I remember sitting there. There’s 21-year-old Craig sitting there, wherever, on a park bench, making lines for these ideas I had. It’s useless. I didn’t have anything like, “Okay, let’s talk about dialogue, let’s talk about conflict, let’s talk about scene work, let’s talk about transitions, let’s talk about structure as a function of relationship, dramatic argument,” any of that. All of that just had to be instinctive and then learned. I do think it would have helped me dramatically.

John: Craig and I both came up as solo screenwriters, essentially. Craig had a writing partner for a while, but essentially, we were just doing all the work by ourselves. We weren’t in a TV writer’s room where we had other people to bounce ideas off of and see, “Oh, this person tried this thing, this didn’t work. How do we make this?” We didn’t have that back and forth to see how it feels to grow a story.

We just had these bad books to start with, and screenplays to read, but there weren’t as many available screenplays for us to read. It was harder to get up to speed. Hopefully, this gets people up to speed and makes people think, “Oh, okay. Now I get what it would be like to be a screenwriter.” Hopefully, a lot of them will say, “I don’t want to be one,” and then they can move on to something else.

Craig: Perfectly fine.

John: Absolutely fine. If it scares you away–

Craig: That’s actually an incredible outcome.

John: It’s a gift.

Craig: Saved you a lot of time and misery, and you can proceed forth to cure cancer, which is what you’re supposed to do.

John: [laughs]

Craig: If you are only interested as a student of film, then I just think it’s interesting without being practical.

Julia: Speaking of all the people who should not become screenwriters and go cure cancer, I’d be curious to hear you guys talk about the moment that we’re at in Hollywood right now. I feel like the vibe in this town,-

[laughter]

Julia: It’s a little like, “Are we Detroit?”

John: Yes.

[laughter]

Julia: Is this going to still happen?

Craig: Detroit’s doing better, I think, currently.

Julia: Detroit has a long and beautiful trajectory. I spent a lot of great time in Detroit, but I think you know what I mean.

Craig: Yes.

Julia: I’d be curious to hear you guys– I have this, too, in journalism. Sometimes young people come to me and say, “Oh, how do I become a journalist?” I wonder, is the only responsible answer to give them run for the hills?

I’d be curious to hear you guys both talk about how the industry feels to you right now as compared with your previous decades working, and what it means to publish a book that’s inviting people into this trade at a moment like this.

Craig: What an insinuation.

[laughter]

John: We were very mindful of the fact that this book, we want it to feel eternal. Even though it’s capturing this moment, it’s not really so specific about the US film and TV industry as it stands right now. That it should hopefully feel like if you’re writing scripted entertainment, if you’re writing narrative with characters who are doing things, this should still apply. A lot of these lessons would apply for theater and for other kinds of writing.

I do think that we’re probably at a transition point where this next generation that’s rising up is going to make a new, different thing that is as different from the existing film and television as what the ’70s were in terms of how they upended our film culture, just because the gatekeepers are not letting them make the things in their system, so they’re going to make stuff outside of their system.

That new generation will find a new way to do stuff. Hopefully, some of the stuff that we’re talking about here in terms of thinking about how characters are driving the story, thinking about how theme emerges from conflict, those should hopefully be universal ideas that will continue.

Craig: Goes back to the Greeks. So far, so good for that. Yes, Hollywood has its ups and downs, and it also has chaos, and it has always been hard to break in as a writer. If it is twice as hard now, you’ve gone from a 0.02 chance to a 0.01 chance, it doesn’t impact you. I guess this is the message that I would give to people is don’t be disheartened by the chaos of Hollywood. No one knows who will own Warner Brothers next year. No one. It’s madness out there. Also, continue to make an enormous amount of television, they continue to spend a lot of money on content, billions of dollars every year. The chaos of them is theirs.

We don’t run Hollywood. We don’t own it. Not my problem. My problem is to do the thing that people like us have been doing forever for audiences, which is to entertain them. That’s what we do. The people who run this business, whether they are hair on fire, falling down, selling to each other, falling apart, and yet the audience will still need to watch stuff and to experience things. I guess the answer is it doesn’t matter. As long as people want to continue to watch things, then the people who write them are fine. It’s the people sitting in the boardrooms that, “Hmm, that must be fun these days.”

Julia: I think one broader question out of that that I also would love to hear you guys on is, why should people be screenwriters? Why should people do this thing that people have been doing since the Greeks, and probably before?

Craig: Don’t think should is the right. The problem is you need to. People who end up doing what we do do it because they have to do it. It’s a compulsion. It can’t possibly be a choice. If you have to choose every time, you’re actually going to choose no every time in a row because it’s hard at all phases. I don’t know why people become stand-up comedians, but clearly they must be compelled to do it because it is brutal. Brutal. That’s the best answer I can give.

John: I’d say that there’s–

[laughter]

Craig: You’re trying to figure out why you do this?

John: I’m trying to think why I should try it.

Craig: Quit.

[laughter]

John: I’m allowed to stop?

Craig: [laughs]

John: I think there’s a compelling– Craig and I often talk about how we were the kids who just sat around in our rooms and just imagined things all the time. I get paid just to imagine stuff and write those words down. That happens. It’s exciting that that’s my job, just to imagine whole worlds of things. There’s always going to be folks who are skilled at writing, who are skilled at sitting down and creating something new that wasn’t there before.

What’s different about screenwriting is that you’re doing it as the first step in a plan that is going to involve hundreds of other people to make a thing. The mechanics behind that will probably change, and they have changed a lot over the years, but I think that’s still a very universal idea. I think if you’re a listener to the show or someone who’s reading the book who says, “Yes, I want to do that thing because I have that drive,” there’s still going to be a way to do that no matter what happens in this crazy structure we have.

Julia: I have a question for you about AI.

Craig: Sure.

Julia: This book does not encompass AI. Makes sense.

Craig: Written by AI.

[laughter]

John: It was not written by AI.

[laughter]

John: Wait. I was very mindful as we were finishing up this book, like, “Oh, shit, a year from now, could an AI take all of our transcripts and generate something that’s–”

Craig: A year from now? Oh, that shit’s happened already. That boat sailed, yes.

Julia: Yes. I was going to ask, actually, if you had AI alongside your assistants scrape the corpus and see what it thought was important.

Craig: No.

John: Really, the scraping of the transcripts happened three years ago. If it were happening now, of course, you would throw it all into Gemini or something and say, “When did John and Craig talk about this topic?” It could pull up all those references. Instead, it was Drew and Chris and our amazing interns just googling our transcripts to find out when we talk about those things.

Julia: You guys, I think of you both as being technophiles and tech curious, not being Luddites, not being avoidant. Also, I feel like I’ve observed you both, even Robot John, being repulsed by some of what AI is bringing us. I feel like in my own life, I’ve seen, I don’t know, two different paths. I feel like there are people in my life who are like, “I’m never going to try it. I’m not using it.” Then I feel like the people who start to play with it. “What feels right? What’s the right way to play with it? What’s the wrong way?”

I’m curious, if this book is the staple of screenwriting schools that you hope, I assume it will be, and you’ve got to re-release it in four or five years with a second edition, what would the chapter about AI say? Are you guys AI curious, AI loathsome?

John: I don’t think a second edition would ever have an AI chapter because it would be automatically out of date. There’s no way to keep up to that level.

Craig: That’s just an apology to our AI masters.

John: Absolutely.

[laughter]

John: Will an AI ingest this book? Absolutely. It already has ingested this book, I’m sure, because the e-book will be out there someplace. You’ll ask questions. It’ll have some of our answers in there mixed into it. That’s also just culture. It’s just everything does get recycled and repurposed and put back at you. It doesn’t happen at the speed that we’re used to with it now.

Craig: I just find it gross. I don’t turn away from AI because I’m a technophobe. I love technology. I just find it to be crap. I think it’s crap technology. I think it’s boring. When I look at what people will show me that AI has done, I find it boring and flat and dead. That’s not surprising because it’s entirely built on the bits and pieces we’ve put out there, or in the case of language, just language. Not the stuff that language emerges out of, just the language.

I think I’ve shied away from it because it’s like, “Okay, I’m a carpenter. I like working with my hands and building something that’s beautiful,” and own the road, there’s a factory that just goes stamp, stamp, stamp, smash, smash, IKEA table, and that’s fine. There’s nothing wrong with IKEA tables. God knows I’ve attempted to build so many of them.

[laughter]

Craig: My prior fear about AI, which is that it was just going to swamp our humanity and take over everything, new fear about AI is that it sucks, and our economy is about to take a huge dump because it has been built around the idea that it doesn’t, except I think it does. We’re going to find out, everyone.

[laughter]

Craig: Either way, we’re fucked.

John: Coming back to you,-

[laughter]

John: -the word we say way too often on the show is specificity, and specificity as in how is something unique to the writer’s own experience. That’s a thing that an AI just is never going to have. AI doesn’t have a point of view on anything because it doesn’t have any internal logic. It’s never in a space. It’s never in a body. It’s never that stuff. That’s why Craig and I were talking about doing a New York Times editorial and stuff, and we decided against it.

The thesis would have been screenwriting will survive AI, if anything. It survives AI because our job, weirdly, is to imagine a place, put ourselves in it, describe what we’re seeing, what it feels like, what’s actually driving, to be inside those characters, and that’s a uniquely human experience. Will there be AI-generated screenplays? Of course. Will there be good art made out of this? I don’t think so. I do feel some safety just because of the things that these systems are designed to do. I wanted to turn back a little bit towards you. Now, I do want to have a little discussion about cultural conversation and criticism.

Julia: Who will say in the future if the art is good? Segue man?

John: Absolutely. Oh my God, she stole the segue from me.

[laughter]

Craig: Dude, listen to the show.

John: Absolutely, as critics, on Slate Cultural Gapfest, which everyone should listen to. It’s phenomenal. By the way, Scriptnotes is completely ripped off from the Slate formula where they have–

Craig: We are?

John: Yes.

Craig: Oh, I gave you so much credit for this.

Julia: [laughs]

John: They have endorsements. We have One Cool Thing. The idea.

Craig: Oh my God. We stole it all?

John: Yes.

[laughter]

John: It’s really very similar.

Craig: The credits work the same.

John: The setup of what we’re going to talk about on the episode.

Craig: My innocence.

[laughter]

John: The fact that we have some structure and it’s all not just one rambling conversation, that comes from Slate.

Craig: Thank you, Slate.

Julia: Slate invented it. No one else had ever done it before.

John: Every week, though, you have three topics. You’re picking what things in culture you want to talk about. Is it harder now? In the age of this infinitely generated artificial stuff, has it changed?

Julia: I don’t think we are yet beset by actual AI content. The content, the art that we’re talking about, the movies, the television shows, is written by humans for humans. I feel like one of the things that is a perverse possible upside of the rise of AI is that it forces us to really think about and understand what it is to be human, and what the point [chuckles] of it is, and what’s amazing about it, and to seek out and value the best part of it.

That’s what I love about art. I feel like most art is grappling with the question on some level of what is it like to be human, and some aspect of that, and some subset of that. The opportunity to consume it every week and talk about it with smart critics and try to understand what it means, and whether it’s good, and if so, why, and if not, why not, it feels like a real privilege and really fun.

John: Craig, you classically are not such a fan of-

Craig: Criticism.

John: -criticism. Talk to me about when Julia says that they’re grappling with, is this good? Is it resonating? What does it mean?

Craig: It means they’re figuring out if they like it or not. Who cares?

John: Isn’t there some meaning in how this fits into the larger picture of the art form?

Craig: Yes, there is. What you said that made my heart sing was, in a world where there’s a bunch of AI crap, maybe it’s going to make us appreciate the fact that all these things that are made by humans, there are things about it that are good or striving for something. It’s essentially looking for the positive impulse. I think a lot of times people presume that the only impulse behind certain things would be make money. People are like, “Cash grab.”

Somebody, the writer, almost certainly was really trying, even when other people were like, “Hey, we’re offering you a job, and you got to pay your bills.” That person tried to do something good. I think following that is a wonderful thing. My issue with criticism really does come down to the notion that some people have a privileged opinion. Really, it just means if you like something or not. If you do, you do.

I like watching critics fight with each other because I’m like, “There. There it is. There. They don’t agree.” In short, what is the purpose of it? Now, the purpose may be to find people that if you articulate a point that I agree with, that’s fun. Especially if I don’t like something, it’s disturbingly fun to watch somebody else beat up someone you hate, but it certainly doesn’t help the artists, I know that much. It has created a culture where everyone is now Roger Ebert. Everyone is looking for that fun thing to put on Letterboxd, and usually it’s a dunk. I don’t think that’s good for us.

Julia: Okay, wait.

Craig: Sure.

Julia: I have been having this argument with you at home by myself for a decade, Craig.

[laughter]

Craig: Here’s your chance.

Julia: I have to say, I really value your opinion so much. I’m embarrassed to admit it, but I used to take homeopathic medicine when I thought I was getting a cold, and I don’t anymore-

Craig: Yes.

Julia: -because of how laceratingly, how viscerally, how trouncingly you demolished the idiocy of homeopathy.

Craig: I am okay with criticism now.

[laughter]

Craig: Honestly, that’s a huge win for me.

Julia: Generally, I find you so persuasive and right. Then, on this, I find you so wrong. Obviously, I have a stake in it because I am a critic, or at least I play one on a podcast. I think the thing that strikes me about your take on it is that you seem much more focused on the verdict.

Craig: Yes.

Julia: The idea that the point of criticism is a verdict, good, bad, up, down. To me, the point of criticism and the value of it, both as a practitioner and as a reader and follower of criticism, is the dialogue, is the conversation, the interpretation, the search for meaning. I think criticism is important because art is important. It would be weird if there was Congress and no one covered it, or said what was happening, or said if it was good, or bad, or surprising, or new, or breaking a norm.

Craig: We have too much of that, I think, as well.

Julia: [chuckles]

Craig: I understand what you’re saying, and you’re right, I do focus on the verdict, but the reason I do that– First of all, there are critics who are smart and thoughtful, and you are one of them, whether I agree with you or not.

Julia: Have you ever listened to my podcast?

Craig: Not your podcast.

[laughter]

Julia: You just presume it because I seem like I’m going to be in conversations. That’s fine.

Craig: I’m a little bit of a transcript reader.

Julia: [laughs]

Craig: The listening takes too long. I can read so fast. There are critics that I respect in terms of their analysis and stuff because I think they’re really thoughtful, whether I agree with them or not. Walter Cha, for instance, has written things about movies I’ve done where I’m like, “That’s amazing,” and he loves it, and also, “That’s amazing,” and he hates it.” That’s an interesting thing.

The reason I focus on the verdict is because that’s what the rest of the world focuses on. I think critics can say to themselves, “Oh, it’s all about everything right up to thumbs up, thumbs down,” but no one else is really listening. They’re going for thumb up, thumb down, and then they’re combining that into a huge tomato.

[laughter]

Craig: That’s the only thing anyone looks at. That’s what’s happened.

Julia: You are judging criticism by the worst commercial output of it and not what the critic is doing, which is engaging with the work.

Craig: That’s how gun manufacturers talk a little bit.

[laughter]

Craig: No, I’m serious.

[laughter]

Julia: God damn it.

Craig: You can’t ignore how the product is used.

[laughter]

Julia: It’s interesting, though. We are living in a world with less and less criticism. Alan Sepinwall isn’t at Rolling Stone anymore. There will be fewer paid television critics reviewing season three than season two, and season two than season one.

Craig: I’ll miss Alan, whether he liked season one better than he liked season two.

Julia: He’s a great critic.

Craig: He’s a thoughtful guy. I read all of that because I was interested in his–

John: Wait, Craig, you read it?

Craig: Yes. There are a couple of people I read. I’m very specific about it. There isn’t less criticism. There’s less paid criticism. The critic industry almost orchestrated its own demise by propagating and popularizing the verdict. Now everyone’s a critic.

Julia: That’s just opinions. That’s not criticism.

Craig: Oh, well, tell that to all the people that are opinionating.

Julia: Don’t pay attention to them. I have no desire to be a screenwriter, thank God.

[laughter]

Julia: If I were making art in the way that you guys make art, the good critics would be important to me. I feel like not following them or reading them would be like making a phone call and having no one pick up on the other end of the line, which is not to devalue the experience of the audience, which is they’re moved by your thing, and they take the ride of your thing, and they have feelings about your thing. What the good critic does is assess why it moved you and how it did that.

Craig: Or why they hate it, and why it’s stupid, and why it shouldn’t have been made.

Julia: You’re just not reading the right critics. It’s so beautiful.

Craig: That’s not beautiful, I assure you.

[laughter]

Craig: The experience of reading, sometimes it is so personal, and so mean, and such an exercise, and, “Hey, let’s just be a dick.” It really is. I understand that you practice a different sort.

Julia: Or advocate for, at least. I wouldn’t put myself up with the truly great critics of our age.

Craig: Some of what we call the truly great critics of our age, I can do a nice tight 40 on why Pauline Kael’s most overrated voice in cinema history and should have never been listened to by anyone.

[laughter]

Julia: [unintelligible 00:35:51] 40 minutes of the show.

Craig: [crosstalk] That’s the tightest 40 minutes I could do.

[laughter]

John: My natural instinct is to be the peacemaker who makes everyone happy at the end, but I’m not going to do that now because I’ve learned in this book that conflict is good.

[laughter]

John: I thought we don’t have to.

[applause]

Craig: So good.

John: Yes, we don’t need to resolve this thing-

Craig: Damn, this is good.

John: -because this is an open, ongoing fight between love-

Craig: [unintelligible 00:36:14]

John: -and is a perfect time to segue to something that Craig likes much more than rallying on critics, which is a game.

Craig: A game.

John: Craig has a game.

Craig: I have a game.

[applause]

John: We have at least two people out there who have starred books. Raise the house lights if we can. Did the third person find their star?

Craig: Yes. Great.

John: We’ll have the three people with stars come up these stairs.

Craig: Come on up these stairs here or those stairs there-
John: Is there a stair there? Yes, any stairs.

Craig: -and join us on stage.

John: [unintelligible 00:36:39] over here. Drew has a stool.

Craig: Ah. [crosstalk]

John: Hello. What’s your name?

Kayla: I’m Kayla.

John: Hi, Kayla. Hi.

Kayla: Hi.

John: Kayla, take a step by the stool. Hi, Kayla. And?

Valeska: Valeska.

John: Valeska. Valeska, very nice to meet you and hi. Sita. Oh my gosh, we have an amazing– All right.

Craig: Right.

John: Craig, you guys are going to be gathered around this one stool.

Craig: Gather around the stool.

John: This stool.

Craig: You’re going to want to be close to that bell.

John: If you have the answer, you are going to hit that bell.

Craig: Let me ask you a question, guys. How are we with Christmas movies? Okay.

[laughter]

John: As a reminder to our audience, don’t shout out the answer if you know it. Craig will tell you the answer at the end.

Craig: Yes. If you guys don’t have it, we can open it up to the audience. It’s no big deal. I’m just going to read. There are five quotes from Christmas movies. Each quote is from a real Christmas movie. It is exact. They’re a little odd in their own way. They’ll go from not so odd to odder and odder. If you know the name of the movie that this quote is from, you hit the ding dong. All right? Do you want to practice?

[bell dings]

Craig: So gentle.

[laughter]
[bell dings]

Craig: Even gentler.

John: Yes, absolutely.

[laughter]

John: You can hit it hard. Don’t worry about it.

Craig: Yes. Find the inner winner, the person that wants to take the other two down.

[laughter]

Craig: First quote from a movie. “Though I’ve grown old, the bell still rings for me as it does for all who truly believe.”

[bell dings]

Kayla: Polar Express.

Craig: That is correct.

John: Nicely done.

Craig: Way to go.

[applause]

Craig: We won’t have an 0 for 5 situation. This is great.

John: They got it.

Craig: Here we go. Next one. “If this is their idea of Christmas, I got to be here for New Year’s.” We’ve got some people who know out there.

John: I’m going to give you a hint. This was the subject of a Deep Dive episode.

Participant: 500 episodes. [chuckles]

John: [chuckles] Absolutely.

Craig: Fair point.

John: It’s in the book as well.

Craig: I’m going to turn to the audience.

John: It’s in the book.

Craig: You want to guess one? Then I’m going to go to the audience.

[bell dings]

Valeska: Die Hard.

John: Yes.

Craig: Yes, Die Hard.

[applause]

John: One and one.

Craig: This one’s really weird. “Maybe I didn’t do such a wonderful thing after all.”

[bell dings]

Kayla: It’s a Wonderful Life.

Craig: No.

John: Ah, [unintelligible 00:38:52].

[laughter]

Craig: No.

[laughter]

Craig: No. It’s a hard one. “Maybe I didn’t do such a wonderful thing after all.”

[bell dings]

Valeska: The Grinch.

Craig: No.

Kayla: Nightmare Before Christmas.

Craig: No. Now we’re just saying titles.

John: Yes.

[laughter]

Craig: I’m going to turn it over to the audience.

Participant: Miracle on 34th.

Craig: That is correct. Miracle on 34th Street.

[applause]

John: We’re still tied one and one.

Craig: Yes. I love this one. Ready? “Come here, little one. Papa wants to see you.”

[laughter]
[bell dings]

Kayla: Elf.

Craig: Yes, it is Elf. Last one. Longest one. My favorite one. Many of you are going to know it. Don’t say it. “Next to me in the blackness lay my oiled blue steel beauty, the greatest Christmas gift I had ever received–“ I’m registering that. You can ring it, and I’ll finish it. Yes.

Valeska: Christmas Story.

Craig: It is Christmas Story.

John: Christmas Story.

Craig: “Gradually, I drifted off to sleep, pranging ducks on the wing and getting off spectacular hip shots. Hip shots-“

John: “Hip shots.”

Craig: -are the last two words of Christmas Story. Now–

John: We’re going to tie two and two, so we’re going to do a tiebreaker.

Craig: Okay. Well, the tiebreaker question is, what interesting fact unites all of these quotes? They all share one thing in common. It’s not that they’re in Christmas movies. Yes?

Audience Member: The writer’s Jewish?

[laughter]

Craig: It’s a good guess. It’s a callback, and I like that a lot. That’s a very good guess. I wasn’t going to do that two years in a row. That said, probably yes. No, I don’t believe the writers were all Jewish.

John: Did you have a guess?

Audience Member: Were they all men?

Craig: Oh, hey. Maybe, but that’s not what I was looking for. We’ll go past white, male, Jew. No, something about their connection to the movies themselves, the context within the movies themselves. They’re all doing something similar in their movie. Yes?

Audience Member: They’re all said by the protagonists?

Craig: No.

John: Oh, I think I know the answer.

Craig: Okay, don’t say it. I’m going to give you three one last chance. One last chance. Yes.

Audience Member: The last lines?

Craig: The last lines of the movies. Each one of those was the last line of their movie. You know what? Good job, you guys. I think they did great. John, tell them what they won.

[laughter]

John: All right. Often when you’re putting out a book, you are creating extra merch for the book. For the Scriptnotes book, we have Scriptnotes stickers, but the stickers were there on the table as you came in. I have done three books before this. I did Arlo Finch merch, which I still have sitting on a shelf. You guys get Arlo Finch merch. As the winner, you get to pick your pick of these three things. Tell me what you get.

Craig: I got to tell you, you can’t miss on these. Each one of them, life-changing. First, we have an Arlo Finch neckerchief. Yes. Everyone’s Christmas dream. An Arlo Finch towel. By the way, I wish people could see their faces. They are either crying with joy or deep disappointment. Finally, an Arlo Finch water bottle because you can never have too many big, dumb water bottles.

John: Which would you like?

Audience Member: I’ll do the water bottle.

Craig: Yes, there you go. Congrats.

Audience Member: I want the towel.

Craig: Hey, that’s good news. You got the neckerchief, the one you wanted. Thank you, guys. Thank you for playing. I was really surprised by the writers were all Jewish, and I don’t know why. I should have seen that coming. All weird last lines. Maybe I didn’t do such a wonderful thing after all as the last line of Miracle on 34th Street. It is the subject of debate to this day. You’ll see a lot of threads on Reddit. Why does he say this? What does this mean?

John: What does it mean?

Craig: I don’t know.

John: I thought they were all voiceovers. They’re not voiceovers?

Craig: No, they are not all voiceovers. Our next guest I’m so excited for, she’s a writer, comedian, performer whose credits include Ted Lasso, A Black Lady Sketch Show, Bad Monkey, and Shrinking. Welcome back to the program, Ashley Nicole Black.

[applause]

Craig: Hey. I hope you enjoyed watching Julia and I beat the fuck out of each other for about 10 minutes there.

Ashley Nicole Black: It literally took everything in me not to run out on stage and join the fight.

Julia: On which side?

John: Whose side did you fight on?

Ashley: Mostly Craig’s.

Craig: Oh, wow. All right. I’m so happy about that, but I would have been okay if you had gone– I mean, I like fighting.

John: Ashley, we’re in the Thanksgiving weekend. This episode will come out later on, but this is the Thanksgiving weekend, and often there are people gathering together, but there are discussions, debates around the dinner table. It can get a little bit heated. It’s not uncommon to have some heated words there.

Craig: Thanksgiving drama.

John: Did you have a good Thanksgiving, most crucially?

Ashley: I had a great Thanksgiving. I’m from here, so my whole family’s here. It’s really the best. I lived in Chicago and New York for a long time, then I would see my family once a year. It’s such a treat to be like, I can just see them whenever I want. Me and my uncle can get tacos. It’s pretty cool.

Craig: I love that you love your family, and you became a writer even though you–

Ashley: Well, my family is Black, and I do think that it’s a different thing. I think there is the stereotype of a writer as like, I was so sad and my parents didn’t talk to me. I just wrote in my room. I think Black people are just like, yes, I had cool shit to say. I wrote it down.

[laughter]

Ashley: Our problems are external for the most part.

John: Ashley’s book is going to be so much better than ours. It’s like, you have funny shit to say, write it down. It’s a simple book. She sold it.

Craig: I’m just terrified at how accurately you summed up my childhood with that mean voice.

Ashley: I work with a lot of writers.

Craig: You were tortured. Uh-huh. Well, all right. Congrats.
John: Ashley, you have your own chapter in the book. Thank you again for coming on the show. We are now a chapter in the book where we talk through your stuff. When you first came on the show, I remember dropping off with Mike at your apartment. Meeting your great dog, Gordy. Now you have a house. You’re a homeowner yourself. You’ve kept chugging along, series after series.

I’d love to talk to you about being that middle-of-your-career writer because so often we have the writers who are just starting out. You are consistently working on show after show. What is your life like? As you’re on a show, do you always know what the next thing is? What is it like?

Ashley: It’s so weird because when you’re young– and I was cute. I was so cute.

Craig: You were so cute?

Ashley: I was so cute.

Craig: You were cuter?

Ashley: You’re on set, and you’re a baby producer, and you’re like, oh, my God. This wallpaper, it’s not right. Oh, my God. The showrunner’s going to kill me. Do you mind changing it? They’re like, “Oh, you’re so cute. We’ll change it.” Then you get to a certain point, and you just have to be like, so this doesn’t work, and it does need to change.

I can’t blame it on anyone else because I’m a VP, and no one would believe that my boss was going to kill me at this point in my life. It’s just such a weird thing to be like, I have the answer to the question, and I am going to have to say it. People don’t like it when that happens to women, but I have to say it. It’s just such a weird position to be in.

Craig: The boss.

Ashley: But not, right?

Craig: Right. Sort of the boss.

Ashley: Yes. Sometimes you’re in meetings, and you’re like, oh, it should look like this. Then, “Oh, well, we’ll see what Bill says.” It’s like, I said it.

Craig: We don’t need Bill.

Ashley: I did it.

John: Since we’re coming out of Thanksgiving, we’ve been answering a lot of questions for the book, and we have a lot of leftovers. I thought that because we’re in leftoverville, you could help us answer some questions that came from our Reddit AMA and from other times where people were asking us questions online. Your answers are just better than ours.

Ashley: Do I answer as if I were a woman, correct?

John: No, we want your real answer here.

Craig: Wait, that’s an option? Kind of.

John: This is a question from Jeff A. When was there a time that has held you back from writing, from sitting in a script, going to a meeting? How did you get over or not get over that fear?

Ashley: Wait, say that again?

John: What was a time that a fear held you back? And what worked for you?

Ashley: I would say not a meeting or writing, but as an actor. A lot of times you come onto set. We were talking about Vince. The first scene that I shot on Bad Monkey, I literally had flown, arrived, put my things in a hotel room. Then we shot that scene at two o’clock in the morning, and it’s me and Vince.

You’re a very low-level actor who hasn’t slept in 48 hours, and you’ve never been on this set before. You’ve never met any of these people. The first thing you have to do is try to be funny next to Vince Vaughn. I would love to meet the sociopath who’s not fearful in that moment. I think the way you get past it is just to act as if it’s already happened.

A weird thing about being an actor is you can get fired at any time. It’s not like, oh, I got the job. I deserve to be here. No, you can get yanked literally at any point. It’s like, “Your manager’s on the phone.” Oh, did she want to congratulate me? “No.” You just have to go in and be like, we are in this scene together in this moment, so I’m going to act as if we are both top-level actors, and this is what’s supposed to happen.

I will say the great thing is that most of the really crazy high-level actors I’ve worked with will do the same thing. Just be like, “Yes, we’re supposed to be in this scene together. Let’s go.” You just do that until you get past that initial moment, and then do it.

John: That’s great advice for anybody going into a room to pitch, or you feel like you’re not supposed to be in this place. This is beyond where you’re supposed to be at. You just say, no, of course I’m supposed to be here. This is exactly what I’m supposed to be doing.

Ashley: Yes, I am here.

John: You are here, so change the fucking wallpaper because I’m in charge.

Ashley: Wallpaper was the worst example. It was the hardest thing to change.

Craig: It really is hard. Yes.

Ashley: He’ll say curtains.

Craig: Easier.

John: Haley Huang had a question. What is your favorite genre to watch, and what is your favorite genre to write? I’m curious if they match up for you or not.

Ashley: No, my favorite genre to write is comedy, hands down. I really got into this to make people laugh. I’m really curious about how drama writers work because what is the point of a scene if not to get a laugh? I will say that I watch a lot of drama and crime, and I probably watch a lot more of that than comedy.

Craig: I think I’m probably the flip. I like writing drama because it means I don’t have to worry about the punchline, the button, any of that misery. Did it. Don’t want to do it anymore. Watching comedy to me is– that’s what’s fun.

John: I love watching comedy. We’ll do our third rewatch of 30 Rock, and it’s just so amazing, but I just could never do that. I just don’t have the stamina or the brain that creates that level of joke density. I just can’t do it.

Craig: Kind of why we enjoy it, right?

John: It feels like magic.

Craig: Probably is why all the Oscars should go to comedies.

Ashley: Also, by the way, no one does. In a room of 10 people who are creating that joke density, no one person does that.

John: Again, I feel like I should be able to do it. I feel like Tina Fey could do that. I’m, of course, comparing myself to a team of experts who spent years doing it. Noah L. asks, when you were first learning how to screenwrite– Screenwrite as a verb is just weird. No, don’t like it.

Craig: Do not like it.

John: Who were the writers you looked up to and whose voices really inspired you? Ashley, any screenwriters inspire you as you were coming up?

Ashley: Yes, Shonda Rhimes, for sure. I think Grey’s Anatomy came out when I was in college, and it was the first show that looked like the world that I lived in. When I was younger, Kevin Williamson, I loved Scream and Dawson’s Creek, and those just highly verbal, Aaron Sorkin, very writerly writers, and I still have the issue of overwriting to this day, thanks to my love of those writers.

John: Craig, did you have any screenwriters you looked up to?

Craig: I definitely remember seeing Ocean’s Eleven and saying, okay, I need to know who this Ted Griffin guy is. I remember seeing Out of Sight and thinking, I need to know who this Scott Frank guy is. I read the script for Jerry Maguire, and Cameron Crowe blew my mind, even more so than he had already blown my mind prior with Fast Times, and then also Sorkin. I think a lot of people giggle a little bit because he’s so prolific, and because there’s that super cut of him reusing dialogue and stuff, but it’s great dialogue.

Ashley: Our legs went all the way up to here.

Craig: Yes, exactly, but it’s great dialogue, and he’s written– that whole A Few Good Men thing, I just– Oh, my God. Yes, so good.

Ashley: I think it’s also– maybe because you said A Few Good Men, it’s very theatrical in the sense that as someone who started as an actor, I like it when characters are trying to get a response from the other one. It’s so weird to me in comedies where the actors don’t laugh at the jokes. In real life, like I’m in a room here with you, I would like to make you laugh, and you know that that’s my goal. It’s weird to pretend that characters aren’t trying to get something from each other.

I feel like Aaron Sorkin’s characters are always directly pursuing tactics in a way that–

Craig: The whole opening of Social Network, just watching that ping-pong. Apparently, I think it’s true that scene was, I don’t know, 14 pages long. Fincher was like, “Aaron, I can’t open a movie with 14 minutes of two people talking.” Sorkin was like, “No, it’s four minutes. You’re reading it too slow.”

[laughter]

Craig: Fincher was like, “Okay, record it for me at the pace you want it to be.” He did, and Fincher, apparently on the day, was with the script supervisor, like, “Are we on pace?” Then when you watch it back, the clip is insane. Oh, so good.

John: In answering this question, I would say there’s always movies I admired, and eventually at some point I realized, oh, people wrote those movies. I didn’t know that people had wrote those movies.

Craig: They screen wrote them.

[laughter]

John: Once you actually start reading screenplays, which are so much more available now. I remember reading Quentin Tarantino’s script for Natural Born Killers and going to the last page and like, holy shit, and going back to page one and re-reading it again. You realize like, oh, that’s what you can actually do on the page.

Reading James Cameron’s script for Aliens. It’s like, oh, that’s what a movie looks like when it’s in courier. It was just so revelatory. That thing, I think, is so much better now is that because of the internet, you can just read all the scripts, and you need to read the scripts and not just watch the movies. Let’s do one more little side dish of a question here. What do you got, Craig?

Craig: This is a multi-parter from Clara A. “I’m an extremely long-time listener who, by happenstance, has found herself in a weekly writing group with local sweetie Megana Rao for the past couple of years.”

John: Megana’s the best.

Craig: “My question, what is your favorite thing about Megana?”

John: She’s not even here to defend herself. She’d be so embarrassed.

Craig: “Alternatively, Craig, do you still love millennials?” I don’t remember professing that.

John: Yes, I think you’ve said it on certain transcripts.

Craig: I do. Well, let’s talk about it. I’ll do another question because I don’t know if you have a favorite thing about Megana. That seems unfair.

Ashley: I feel like she’s got great hair.

Craig: She does have great hair.

John: Great. Absolutely true. Yes, we’re incredibly thankful for Megana, but it’s a very specific–

Craig: Yes, the kindest and most positive person around. Just such a great person. Yes, I still love millennials. I like zillennials. I think that’s my groove. There you go.

John: We got a few of those.

Craig: If you’re 28, 29, 30, 31, that’s a good crew. Nitzen has a good question.

John: Nitzen has a good question. Do you want to try Nitzen’s?

Craig: Yes, sure.

John: Nitzen asks, “As a beginner, is a credit for a bad movie better than no credit at all? What if that movie involves problematic people? Ashley, what’s your opinion on this? Julia, I’m going to open this to you as well. Do you think it’s better to have no credits or a bad credit?”

Ashley: I’m curious what you guys will say. I really don’t know. I think I would lean towards it’s better to have a bad credit because the people who care about credits are the other people who work in the industry, and people who work in the industry know that the way the movie turned out is not the writer’s fault, particularly when it’s an early career writer.
I think having had the credit and the experience is a good thing. No one’s looking at that going, “Oh, he must be a terrible writer because the movie turned out bad.”

John: Absolutely correct. Julia, do you think about credits? As you’re talking about something on, say, [unintelligible 00:56:32] are you always mindful of the things they’ve written around it or are you just looking at that one piece of work, generally?

Julia: Well, a professional critic with some expertise would look at what the person has made in the past and think about how this fits into the history of their career and the genre and the actors. There’s different levels of comprehensiveness in that. Yes, I don’t think you would look at an early credit and be like, and thus everything they make from there on must also be bad. You take the work on its own terms, but I think the rest of the surrounding history is context.

Craig: What about this idea, what if the movie involves problematic people? That doesn’t seem like something that I would– It feels like writers really don’t get– We get blamed for things in reviews that weren’t our fault all the time. Of course. These actors did the best they could with a bad script. I’m like, oh my God. No, they didn’t.

It doesn’t feel instinctively like when you see movies that come out and there’s hints of some problematic people involved, does it taint the whole thing or–

Julia: We’re going to do art from the artist, the whole thing, right now?

Craig: Sure.

Julia: Yes, I don’t know. Yes, I think problematic is a word that can do a lot and go a lot of directions there for this question, but yes, I think you take the work as the work.

Craig: The work as the work.

Julia: I think also people know that writers don’t get to choose who’s in the movie. It’s really interesting because we do get blamed for things that we didn’t do or don’t have any control over, and then we also don’t get credit for the things that we do.

Craig: Unerringly.

Julia: The number of people asking a director, when did you guys decide when the character would do this in this episode? It’s like, he wasn’t hired yet. What are you talking about? We never met that guy when we made that choice.

Craig: There’s a whole booklet that tells him what to do. It is amazing.

John: He followed the instructions well.

Craig: Yes.

John: All right. Those are some questions that were leftovers. Thank you so much for helping us out with the leftovers. It is time for our one cool thing. All right. Julia Turner, do you have one cool thing to share with us? I will say this is completely stolen from the Slate Culture Gabfest because they do their endorsements.

Julia: I do and I’m going to say it on this show instead of on my show. Okay. I hosted Thanksgiving this week. I had some beloved family over. We made some pies. They brought some cakes because there were also some Thanksgiving week birthdays. One of the cakes they brought was the Tom Cruise coconut cake.

Craig: How does everyone know what this is?

Julia You don’t know about the cake? Has anybody here eaten?

Ashley: I’ve tasted it.

John: I remember hearing about this, but I don’t know what–

Craig: I feel so alone right now.

Julia: My knowledge of this comes from Matt Belloni, who to your point about specificity, he has such a good eye for the detail that makes you feel like he was inside a room that you weren’t. Although he’s very clear that he also is not on the list of people to whom Tom Cruise sends a particular white chocolate coconut bundt cake for Christmas every year. Has anybody in this room actually from Tom Cruise received this cake?

Craig: Yes, there’s not going to be a big chance of that.

John: For [unintelligible 00:59:53] it’s just in case.

Julia: I’ve gone down to Rabbit Hole. They send it to the whole staff of–

Craig: I think they’re still raising more lights like I know there’s one person. No, weirdly none of us got the–

Ashley: Tom Cruise repels in.

Julia: I’d heard about this. I never tried the cake. It’s from a bakery called Dones in Woodland Hills. Apparently, legend has it– This anecdote does not meet my journalistic standards of rigor. It comes from a light Google. According to a light Google, apparently, at one point, Katie Holmes and Diane Keaton proposed a contest where they would each present Tom Cruise with a cake, and then he would pick which one he liked better.
Diane Keaton brought him this cake from Dones in Woodland Hills, and he chose Diane Keaton’s cake. Now he sends it to everybody for Christmas, and you can get it on Goldbelly. Ashley Nicole, you’ve had it. What do you think of it?

Ashley: It’s really good. It was so good. Everybody says it is, and you’re like, oh, yes, well, you got a cake from Tom Cruise. No, it actually is really good.

Julia: Also, white chocolate is a big no-no for me. You tell me white chocolate is in something, and I’m like, forget it, I’m not a bunch.

Craig: You liked it.

Julia: This cake is delicious.

Craig: Wait. It’s not called Tom Cruise Coconut Cake, I assume.

Julia: It is called White Chocolate Coconut Bundt Cake, and you can either go get it at Dones in Woodland Hills, or you can order it on Goldbelly. It’s excellent. We were talking about things with problematic auspices, but I just can’t lie, this cake was excellent.

John: D&D next week, we’re having the– yes, absolutely.

Craig: Yes, I got to get on this right away.

John: I’m a big believer in, you’re making a feast, you’re cooking all the entrees, the sides, buy dessert. Desserts are delicious.

Craig: Oh, yes. No one’s upset with you when you show up with dessert.

John: You’re not going to be able to top that pie.

Craig: Melissa just texted me. Thank you, Melissa. We have gotten one of those cakes.

Julia: Oh, from Tom Cruise?

Melissa: I don’t know if it was from Tom, but it was from Dones.

John: All right. We have live updates. Craig’s wife, Melissa, is here. She reports that that cake was actually eaten in the Mason household.

Craig: Did I like it?

Melissa: It was delicious.

Craig: Of course it was. Well, that’s a little insight into how my life goes. I’m like, “I’m alone.” And I’m the only one here that ate it.

John: Yes. Ashley Nicole Black, do you have a one cool thing to share with us?

Ashley: Yes. I may have shared this on the pod before, but I’m on a board of a charity called Letters to Santa. It is Christmas time. Every year, we raise a bunch of money and we buy kids their Christmas presents, but we also give grants of substantial amounts of money to their families. We also did letters to Altadena after the fires. Our idea is that the solution to poverty is money, so we just give people money.

Craig: That’s interesting.

John: We’re going to send some money to the charity. Yes.

Ashley: You can go to letterscharity.org and just donate money if you want to do that. Then closer to Christmas time, I will be posting wishlists of the kids. There’s nothing more pleasurable than having a glass of wine and buying a kid you’ve never met a bike. It’s the absolute best. Follow me, I’ll be posting those wish lists, and you can buy kids their presents if you want.

Craig: You’re a good person.

John: That’s a good person.

Ashley: It’s the one thing.

Craig: It’s a big thing though.

Ashley: Then I’m just walking through the streets, sticking out my foot, and tripping people.

John: Ashley and Nicole Black, we should all follow you on Instagram, which is where I follow you, and because we both follow the same person on Instagram, I can see when you’ve liked a post. We need to talk about Simon Sits.

Ashley: Oh, my gosh.

John: We’re both going to start crying now.

Ashley: I cry every morning now.

John: This is a woman who basically fosters dogs and has the most charming stories, but then she adopts them away. You’re like, but what’s going to happen?

Ashley: Oh, no. Then I follow those dogs. I now follow those dogs in all their new homes. Everybody’s doing great.

John: Everyone’s doing great. Simon himself has a disorder, but it’s hopefully going to be okay. Craig, what do you have for a wonderful thing?

Craig: I’m going to go with a little nerdery.

John: I love it.

Craig: This fall/winter, as I often do, I am working with some friends to solve Puzzle Boat, I think it’s Puzzle Boat 12, which is put out through Panda Magazine. If you love very hard puzzles, go subscribe. One of the puzzles referenced something called Day of the Tentacle. There we go, dork. Okay. You’re my kind of nerd. I actually was not familiar with it because when I was growing up, I didn’t have a PC. I just had Macs. There were a world of games that were just PC only, the pixely games that I missed out on. One of them was called Day of the Tentacle. It was published by Lucas Arts, sort of by the same team that was famous for Monkey Island and so forth.

Well, turns out you can play Day of the Tentacle now on everything, including your iPad. Writers Tim Schafer, Dave Grossman, Ron Gilbert, Gary Winick. It is adorable. It’s a lovely concept that involves you three different friends who are sent into three different time periods, who can send stuff back and forth to each other through their little time thing. It’s dork funny, nerd funny, which I love. It actually looks really good. I think they updated the graphics for the iOS version. If you’re looking for something, I don’t know, probably costs like $6 or something like that, and you like that kind of point and click classic ’90s adventure, check out Day of the Tentacle.

[applause]

John: My one cool thing is actually the very back page of the Scriptnotes book that you all have in your hands right now, which is the thank you page. So often you read through a book and there’s the thank yous at the end and you’re like, I don’t know who these people are. I don’t know what they did. We try to be very specific about who these people were and the work they did that made the Scriptnotes book possible.

That, of course, starts with our incredible producers over the years who not only made the show happen, but also got our transcripts together, which without the transcripts there was never going to be a book. The whole team at Crown was fantastic from buying the book in the first place, but getting it through all the stages of production and getting it into your hands.
Jody Reimer, who sold the book for us, is incredible. We had just amazing people the whole time through. Including our audience the whole time through. If we didn’t have people who were writing in every week and providing questions for us to answer, letting us know that it was actually worthwhile for us to be doing this for 15 years, there wouldn’t be a book either. That’s why I think the final thank you is really to our whole audience for making Scriptnotes possible.

Craig: Without you, we’re nothing.

John: Thank you very much.

Craig: Thank you.

John: That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Drew Marquardt. Drew Marquardt, thank you very much. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli, who also did our intro or our outro this week. Thank you to Raven up in the booth, Mary, Dax, Brenna, Dan, and everyone at Dynasty Typewriter. Thank you, Pamela Christlieb, Patty Lombard, and everyone at Chevalier’s Books, our official bookseller for this event.

Chevalier’s Books is on Larchmont, and we signed some extra books. If you’re listening to this podcast at home and you’re like, man, I wish I had a signed book, they have some there at the large font location of Chevalier’s Books. Thank you to Matt Inman, Mary Motes, everyone at Crown Publishing for making tonight possible. Thank you to Julia Turner and Ashley Nicole Black.

[applause]

John: Who out here is a Scriptnotes premium subscriber? Any premium subscribers? A little over a hand. Thank you so very much. You can sign up to become one at scriptnotes.net. Thank you all very much for coming out this afternoon for our live show. Thank you.

Craig: Thanks, folks. Have a great Sunday.

[Bonus Segment]

John: We have an audience full of people who may have some questions here. We’re going to bring down a little microphone or raise some house lights, and I’ll answer a couple questions from our listeners now. If you want to ask a question, let’s have you line up in this isle here.

Ashley: These people got up fast. These questions are burning.

John: Hello. Can you tell us your name and what your question is?

Jonathan: Hi, my name is Jonathan. My question is, if you’re working on a script that overall is serious in tone, say like a grounded action thriller, but you have an opportunity to inject some humor into a scene, how do you use your internal barometer to know when you’re keeping it engaging and realistic versus when it’s overall messing up the tone of the overall project?

John: It’s a great time to also bring up the observation that we don’t make comedies anymore, but all the movies are funny. Everything has to be funny, but we just don’t actually make comedies anymore. The Marvel movies are full of comedy, but they’re not supposed to be comedies. Craig, what’s your instinct when you have, there’s an opportunity for a comedy moment, but it’s not the overall nature of the–

Craig: Ideally, if it’s the sort of thing that someone’s going to say something that’s funny, you want that person, that actual character to be witty enough or naive enough or proud enough or whatever their specific characteristic is to actually say that thing. The worst situation is what I just call quipping, where people are just constantly quipping at each other, and nobody believes that.

Things that emerge naturally that make you laugh, that’s a good sign. If you’re manufacturing it and there’s some sweat coming down your head because you’re trying to figure out how to engineer the plumbing, probably not a good situation.

John: Our next question.

Santiago: Thank you. My name is Santiago. I teach filmmaking to high school students. Going back to what you guys were saying about AI, I’m sorry, everyone. I guess part of my job is to introduce these students as they’re learning how, from script writing all the way to editing and the full production, how to involve technology and everything in their work and I just wanted to know if you had any thoughts on that because as it changes, it’s definitely something I’ve been thinking about.

John: Santiago, thank you for the question. Thank you for teaching. Teaching is great. You obviously have students who want to learn about film and filmmaking, and the technologies will keep changing. I think there’s that uncomfortable line between where you’re using the tool that helps you do the thing, like an online editing software, that’s not cheating.
If it’s generating scenes or cutting scenes for you, that feels like, oh, are you really learning how something works? That’s the uncomfortable thing.

Craig: You know how we had to learn how to add and multiply, then they gave us calculators? If you just start with the calculator, you are missing some fundamental education. Maybe, considering I’m sure that Santiago, your students are very interested in using these things, to use them in a way where you can talk about after they used it, what pleased them? How did this thing deliver what they hoped it would, and how did it fail to deliver what they hoped it would?

What could they do that would, in their hearts, be better than what this thing did, so that you can put it in some context?

Ashley: I would say no. I taught for a long time before I started doing this. For me, one of the jobs as a teacher is to create space to be uncomfortable because learning is so uncomfortable. Writing a bad script is so uncomfortable. Wanting to do good acting and then watching the tape back and finding out you’re trash is so uncomfortable, but that’s part of the learning process.

You can’t become a better writer until you’ve written a lot of bad scripts and you’ve sat in the discomfort of the distance between the movie you see in your mind and the movie you’re currently able to create. If the idea of AI is that it’s going to close that distance, then where is the learning if you’re not sitting in that space?

[applause]

Ashley: The feeling of like, oh, I can perfectly picture this moment in my mind. I have to figure out how to write it properly, I have to figure out how to describe it to all the department heads properly, I have to figure out how to make it work on the bodies of the actors who are their own individual people. Gosh, I wish I could just push a button and get the scene out of my brain.

That’s the work. The work is all of that communication. I would err on the side of–

John: What Ashley said is exactly right. Hopefully, you’re teaching your students how to write a scene, which is what she’s describing, and not a prompt. It is so hard, it’s uncomfortable when you’re having conversations, but the things that we’re talking about in the book and in this podcast are about, well, who is in it? What is the conflict? What are they trying to do? Those things are not AI-able things.

Those things are great discussions to have and then figure out what tools you need to actually use to generate anything out of that. The scene is still the crux of everything.

Ashley: There’s also the discoveries of the process. We’re shooting a scene, and two of the actors went to walk out the door at the same time and bumped into each other. It was so funny. Then it just informed the annoyance these characters have with each other. It’s like a moment that you discover that changes the scene because you’re doing the process of doing it.

John: A question.

Katie: Hi. My name is Katie and because things have been too peaceful, I have a question about critique and film criticism. I wanted to know your thoughts on the difference or the line between criticism and analysis. If film criticism brings out, maybe evokes more personal feelings than other genres like books or just anything else that involves empathy and projecting yourself onto the script.

I was wondering if there were any parameters that could help maybe delineate where those lines between analysis and critique comes into play, just like journalism and yellow journalism. Is there a way that we could delineate between opinion and critique or analysis?

John: Great. Thank you, Katie. Some of what you’re asking there is my instinct was, oh, I need to try to make peace and sort this all out and define, oh, no, you really have more overlap and agreement between things. I’m going to see if I can do a little of this. Analysis, someone who’s taking, oh, let’s look at the films of the ‘90s and what the patterns are that emerged from that.

Who were the filmmakers and where things go to versus a thumbs up or thumbs down on this movie. Craig, I think you feel– is that analysis worthwhile potentially?

Craig: Certainly. I’m curious to hear what you think about this because in my mind, under your question, I wonder if there’s this sub-question of how do we delineate what you guys do, which is what I would call thoughtful, qualified analysis/critique versus other people who just saw a movie, hated it [onomatopoeia].

Julia: The sound effects are very crucial, I think, there. I think all good criticism is analysis, contains analysis and interpretation and judgment. To be making art today and have the possibility that Wesley Morris at the New York Times might look at it and think about it, he is such an extraordinary critic and you should listen to his new podcast, Cannonball, which is excellent.

It seems much more fun to make art with that potential wise, deep, empathetic, generous, knowledgeable, interpretive audience in mind. To me, all good criticism contains analysis and soul. I think maybe Craig’s just reading the wrong stuff. I think thumbs up-thumbs down, here we are in the Coliseum, everybody go kill that guy, that’s not criticism to me.

Craig: Literally, the most famous film critics did that. Literally.

Julia: Okay, but when we go see– Yes, that was the schtick for their show to get an audience, but if you go back and read all of Ebert’s old reviews, we can argue about Pauline Kael later, I’m not a particular Kael stan, but when we go see stuff at the Arrow or the New Beverly, to go back and read the contemporary reviews, often from Ebert himself because he wrote about everything, it’s so fun.

It’s fun because sometimes he’s really brilliant and smart. Sometimes he doesn’t seem to have gotten it and it isn’t that useful. Nobody bats 1,000 and you get a sense of how it landed at the moment. It’s also a record of how the stuff was received. That criticism of the past is valuable to me and so is the criticism of today.

John: Thank you for your question.

Ashley: Thank you.

John: I’ll take one last question here. What is your question?
O’Neill: Hi, my name’s O’Neill. I have ADHD, not the fun kind, but the kind that’s very debilitating. My mind moves a million miles per second, but I write very slowly. I’m about a page a day-er. My question for you is how should I manage all of these thoughts when my physical typing limitations are so slow?

Craig: Okay, we have something for you and it’s called learning how to type. Now, that in and of itself may be an arduous task, particularly if you have a debility or a neurological disorder, but learning how to type will speed you up dramatically because I also think fast and I type fast. I think if I could not type, it would be a real problem for me.

I feel the pain. Learning how to type is worth it. There are a gazillion ways to do it online. It will be uncomfortable. The learning will be uncomfortable.

Ashley: Oh, no. You get a Mavis Beacon who says she taught me good.

Craig: By the way, you know that she doesn’t exist, right?

Ashley: I know. They don’t teach kids to type anymore.

Craig: No. There is no Mavis Beacon. They invented Mavis Beacon.

Ashley: Oh, I know.

Craig: I didn’t know that. I believed in Mavis Beacon forever and then he told me and I was like, oh my God, and what else are you going to take away from me?

Ashley: Will you guys make the Mavis Beacon movie?

Craig: There’s no Mavis Beacon.

Ashley: There’s a documentary.

John: Crucial IP that’s being underserved.

Craig: See, by the way, whatever works for you, it will be annoying and frustrating. Give yourself because it’s magic. When it finally starts happening, you can’t believe it. It’s magic and it will make a huge difference for you.

John: I fully endorse the typing of it all. We did a Reddit AMA yesterday and we were answering a ton of questions. Craig was typing as fast as he could, but I could answer faster because I was dictating. The dictation software has gotten really good right now. It’s worth trying it. Again, it’s uncomfortable at the start because you feel like I’m talking to myself and Drew’s hearing me talk to my computer a lot.

For things like emails and stuff like that, it’s much faster. I can’t use it for real screenwriting, but for getting all that shit out of your head and onto a screen, it’s really good. It’s good for generating material, but also just silencing some of that noise could also be really helpful for you.

Craig: Which do you use?

John: The one I’m using right now is called Aqua Notes. It’s Aqua Voice.

Craig: They’re listening to our voice. They know.

John: I’ve been trying to Google it myself.

Ashley: That’s a level of fandom that is frankly a little scary.

Craig: Also dissapointing like Aqua.

John: I think it’s worth– in addition to typing, because I think typing is really important software to help just get stuff out of your head. It’s going to be really helpful as well.

Ashley: I would say also, do you outline? For me, because I have ADHD also, I do so much writing before I start writing. All that stuff that’s in my head, I just write it all down in a Notes app, anywhere, just to get it out of my head and then outline. Then it’s like you’re just getting more and more specific up to the point of actually writing the script.

Then I think also it’s working with your brain the way it works. Sometimes I write the punchline before the setup. I was in a writer’s room once where I was up on the screen. They were like, “Did you just write the punchline first?” I was like, yes, that’s how my brain works, so I have to get it out in time.

I think instead of feeling like you have to start at the beginning of the first scene and work your way through the script, write what you know, write the punchline, write the last line of the scene if that’s what you have, and feel free to go back and fill in.

John: Thank you so much.

Craig: Thank you.

John: Thank you for the great questions.

Links:

  • Get your copy of the Scriptnotes book!
  • Julia Turner
  • Ashley Nicole Black on Instagram
  • Arlo Finch series
  • Slate Culture Gabfest
  • Episode 516 – 10 Year Anniversary
  • Dynasty Typewriter
  • Bad Monkey
  • The Tom Cruise coconut cake from Doan’s Bakery
  • Letters to Santa
  • @simonsits on Instagram
  • Day of the Tentacle
  • Chevalier’s Books
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!
  • Check out the Inneresting Newsletter
  • Become a Scriptnotes Premium member, or gift a subscription (now with fewer emails!)
  • Subscribe to Scriptnotes on YouTube
  • Scriptnotes on Instagram
  • John August on Bluesky and Instagram
  • Outro by Mathew Chilelli (send us yours!)
  • Scriptnotes is produced by Drew Marquardt and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

Scriptnotes, Episode 714: Three Page Challenge Live in Austin 2025, Transcript

December 10, 2025 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: You’re listening to Scriptnotes. It’s a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Craig, today’s episode is a flashback to when we were at the Austin Film Festival this year in 2025. We did another Three Page Challenge. This was at the church in Austin. It was a great crowd and we had just a really great time doing it. We love doing a Three Page Challenge where we can have those participants come up on stage with us and talk through what they were doing.

Craig: Yes, it was great. They did a great job. Anybody who agrees to do this is very brave. Anybody who agrees to do this live in front of a lot of people under the watchful eyes of Jesus is particularly brave. Thumbs up to these three. They were very courageous and I hope that we help them as we try.

John: As always, if you want to read along with these samples, you can pause this and we’ll have links in the show notes to the PDF. You can read those PDFs before we get into it. Before you do that, Craig, today, the day this episode drops, the Scriptnotes book is out in the world in physical form, in hardcover.

Craig: Oh my God, this is it.

John: It is. Apparently, Australia is not till January 4th, but the rest of the world gets it today. The audiobook, we had Graham Rowat on recently to talk through, narrate an audiobook. Please, if you have the book and it comes to you, post on Instagram, post on TikTok, tag Scriptnotes Podcast and we will repost you. We will hype you up. I will hype you up. If you do so, we can also send you the bonus chapter that we sent to all the pre-orders. If you haven’t gotten that yet, Drew can send that to you, because I’m just so excited that the book is finally out there in the world.

Craig: Yes. I got to say, if you waited, I get it. Now you got to actually start thinking about Christmas gifts for your stupid friends. This is a great Christmas gift for your stupid friends.

John: 100%.

Craig: You should go to a party and everyone should give each other this big orange book. It just smells like Christmas. I love it.

John: Also, if you have parents who can never figure out what to get you, just get yourself the Scriptnotes book and bill them. It’s $33.

Craig: Exactly. They’ll be thrilled that it’s under $5,000. They’ll be so happy.

John: Exactly. Absolutely. With all the tuition you’ve saved them, it makes it absolutely completely worthwhile.

Craig: Bingo.

John: Enjoy this trip back to the Austin Film Festival and our live Three Page Challenge. For our premium listeners, stick around because we will have some bonus questions from that session where we answered questions from the audience that were actually really good. We had good questions overall at Austin. Enjoy.

[music]

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

Craig: My name is Craig Mazin.

John: This is a Three Page Challenge for Scriptnotes. For folks who are not aware, every once in a while, we ask our listeners if they would like to send in the first three pages of their screenplay, of their pilot, and we will talk about it on the air. It’s a very brave thing for people to do because we’re honest with our criticism. We’re not harsh, but we’re very honest.

Craig: I’m a little harsh.

John: You’re a little harsh. Drew, who’s our producer, diligently reads through all the entries and picks ones that he thinks will be good to talk about on the air. Sometimes they’re the best, but sometimes they’re the things with the most interesting stuff to talk about.

That’s really an example of what we have here today because we asked, specifically, people who were going to be coming to AFF if we could look at the first three pages of their script. A bunch of people sent through their samples, which is really nice. What’s great about doing it here at Austin is that we can then bring the person up and actually talk to them about the script they wrote.

Craig: Which forces us to be even more concerned about being harsh, and yet, I will do it.

John: We’ll try to be honest. You can find these samples, PDFs, at johnaugust.com. It’s the first blog post you’re going to see there. You can open these up, and so you can read along with us as we’re looking at these samples. Some of what we’re talking about is literally how it’s laid out on the page, so some stuff is– We’re going to be talking story and character and everything else, but it’s also what it looks like, what it feels like. Craig, talk to me about the Three Page Challenge, because the idea of three pages came from stuff you were doing.

Craig: Yes. There was a theory that I had, that you could probably tell if a script was going to be theoretically good or absolutely never good from reading three pages. The truth is, you learn a lot in three pages. There are fundamental things that we see people do well, and there are fundamental things that we see people not doing well.

If the three pages aren’t working in and of themselves, it doesn’t mean that it’s not fixable. Everything’s fixable, and we’re all working and constantly revising and doing things and getting better. This focus that we put on these is the way it works in the business. This is a good colonoscopy.

John: The first three pages are really the first impression. As we’ve had guests on the show who are showrunners who are looking to staff a room or producers or agents or managers, we talk to them about, “You get a script, how far are you reading into it?” Some will say, “Oh, the first 10 pages,” but a lot of people will say the first three or four pages. You get a sense of, does this person have a voice that’s interesting and I want to keep following? They’re looking for an excuse to set the script down. If those first three pages give them that excuse, they might set the script down.

Craig: They’ll take it.

John: They’ll take it.

Craig: It’s been really interesting over the years to see how some of these do grab you. It’s like there’s this thing that happens where your eyeballs– Sometimes words are sticky. Your eyeballs stick on them and it’s good. Then sometimes the pages are slippery and your eyes just– Part of the question is, why do these things happen?

John: I’m also contractually obligated to tell you that we’ve been doing the show for 14 years. We’ve come to the Austin Film Festival for 11 years. It’s the first year we’re here to hype up our book. We have a book coming out December 2nd.

The Scriptnotes book is basically a collection, a compendium of everything we’ve talked about over the course of 11 years about screenwriting, intercut with chapters from many of the amazing guests we’ve had on the show. Show of hands, who in this room has already pre-ordered the book? That’s a good number. Thank you very much for that.

Craig: Thank you, guys.

John: Last night at the live show, I was strongly urging people to pre-order the book. Craig, do you remember the reasons why people need to pre-order the book rather than just getting it on December 2nd?

Craig: As I recall, what you said is that pre-orders are how bookstores know whether or not they should stock the book, whether libraries know whether they should have the book available for lending, and also in theory, it’s how bestseller lists are put together. You aim much higher than I do.

John: The reality is that bestseller lists are based on first week sales, but all the pre-orders are counted as the first week sales. If we can get a big number for that, it’s fantastic. Our publisher at Crown sent an email saying, “A month out, it’s looking good.” As we all know, good is–

Craig: Yes. As the people who wrote these will find out, good is not great.

John: No, good is not great. If you’re enjoying the Scriptnotes Podcast, if you’re enjoying what we’re doing today, and you want to pre-order the book, we would much appreciate it because it’s going to be a good resource for you all the times. We have a podcast you can listen to every week, but this is a podcast in book form, which is good and useful. Let us tackle our first Three Page Challenge.

Craig: Let’s dig in.

John: Our first Three Page Challenge is called Ancient Grains. It is by–

Craig: Michael Warnecke.

John: Michael Warnecke. Great. We have a synopsis here. “In a barn, on a barren field with starving animals, a group of drunk teens accidentally knock over a space heater, burning down a barn and killing all the animals inside. We then cut to those same teens standing before the town in the village center being reprimanded by a man named Faucher for using ‘ancient machines.’

As punishment, he sentences the teens to being blinded. As they force the teens to drink a poison, Ruth marches forward and begs Faucher not to blind both of her sons, as she’ll have no one left to work the farm. Faucher agrees and forces Ruth to choose which of her children will be blinded. When she finally does, her other son cries in anguish as he’s forced to drink the poison. Ruth bitterly thanks Faucher and the weeping parents gather their blinded children.” That’s what happens at the first three pages here. Craig, talk to us about this. This is some sort of post-apocalyptic situation. It seems like we’re in the future-

Craig: It could be.

John: -but there’s old technologies.

Craig: It could be. It could be some super culty, hyper Amish sort of thing. A lot of times we’ll get into the granularity of how people have actually written this out, but I want to start with a big logic question. In this scenario, teens are partying in a barn and they’ve got the space heater. Side note, I didn’t feel cold, so the space heater didn’t feel super motivated. We want to make sure if a space heater is important, show that it’s cold outside.

Then they get caught because they burned the thing down and they get blinded. It seems like they’re all very aware, because it surely has happened before, that the punishment for using new machinery is getting blinded. They seem really fine as they’re using the space heater. If the punishment for using a space heater is getting blinded, I’d probably just put a coat on.

The thing is, what do they need to use? How can we show that it is something that they absolutely needed to use to get to something they really wanted, knowing what the risk was, and then they get caught? That feels stronger to me.

John: I’m excited to have Michael here because so often we’re doing this on the podcast, and we really don’t have a good sense of what the whole script is or what this is leading to. We can ask Michael when he comes up, why starting here? What is it about this scenario that is the best way to get into what his story is?

We don’t have a clear sense about the story. We’re seeing a mother having to make a terrible choice between her two sons at the end of the three pages. We as the reader don’t know, is Ruth really an important character? Is this high official an important character that’s going to be coming back? It feels like we’re establishing the feel of the world, but I don’t have a good sense of quite what the movie is yet. I’m glad to be able to talk to Michael about this.

Craig: The idea that you’re going to go down the line of these teenagers, and each one of them has to drink the stuff knowing full well that it’ll make them blind. Again, slight logic point. Not sure how you can instantly go blind from drinking something, but let’s just say you can. That’s terrifying if I weren’t asking a lot of questions.

One thing to consider is that this scene maybe happens too soon. If you are in a community and you know what the rules are right up front, and you also see that, weirdly, a couple of people are blind, more than you would imagine would be blind in a small group, and that’s an interesting– that’s curious. Then these kids get together and say, “We’re going to do this and break the rules.” Now I’m invested because I understand the rules. Then I see, oh, the punishment is they made these kids blind.

What happens here is there’s a lot of stuff that happens really fast. Then on top of it, we have Sophie’s Choice occurring. It’s always tricky when you have Sophie’s Choice because Sophie’s Choice did Sophie’s Choice. When a mother has to choose between two kids, it can feel a little bit familiar in that regard. This may be a case where what we often prescribe, which is get into it faster, we might want to delay this and get into it slower.

John: I would agree, too. Let’s focus in on how we’re encountering what is here on the page and talk about what’s working on the page and what we need to amplify or rearrange to make this work a little bit better. I think my biggest macro concern of what I was actually seeing on the page is things felt vague.

In this second block where we’re in this ramshackle barn, there’s a group of teens, but they’re not differentiated. There’s seven of them, but I don’t know what’s the split of male and female. Who are they? What are they like? Ultimately, two of these kids are going to become important because they’re Ruth’s sons, but they’re not distinguished in this first scene. We’re not following them separately or better.

It’s described as they are doing typical teenage things. Well, you got to be specific here. We need to see what exactly they’re doing and how the space heater fits into all of this. The fact that we don’t have any dialogue, we don’t have any specific actions for them, we don’t have a sense of– There’s probably not music playing if there’s nothing else, but what is actually happening in here feels important. Right now, it just reads as being very vague.

The people in here, they’re not even uppercase to let us know that they’re someone we need to follow. They don’t have names. This is a real challenge. That’s coming off of an establishing shot, which is just showing us that it is bleak and barren fields, even the weeds seem to struggle. We have scrawny cows poking at the dirt for food, and then we’re moving into dusk. We’re getting a lot of vague setup that’s not being very specific to where we’re encountering this story.

Craig: A lot of things happen very quickly. Normally, efficiency is terrific, but sometimes it can come with a cost. Here, I think we do have a cost because we see that the world is barren. There isn’t much food. There’s a pasture that’s blighted. The cows are skinny. When you see skinny cows, it’s trouble.

John: Bad stuff.

Craig: Then we hear laughter, and we meet all these kids who don’t seem to realize that they’re living in a world without food and people that can blind them. There’s this confusion that immediately happens. Then John’s absolutely right. For instance, the heater tips over and a burlap bag catches fire. No one notices. Now, this is exciting. Fire is exciting to shoot on film. What happens here is that little flicker spreads to surround hay and blossoms. Someone grabs a stable blanket, like a horse blanket.

John: Who is someone? Someone is not a great term for this.

Craig: Someone grabs a blanket, tosses it onto the flames, but it’s already too late. What was everybody else doing? Is there panic? Is there fear? Does somebody freeze? Is somebody trying to be a hero? Fire. Do you know how many meetings you have to have if you’re going to have fire? Oh my God. It’s got to be worth it. You’ve got to figure out exactly where everyone is relative to it. I think here it just feels a little abrupt.

John: We’re coming off the barn is going to burn down. This is at dusk. Then we’re cutting to village center, day. We’re not cutting to, or there’s not a transition to. This is a big change in where we were versus where we’re going to.
For the reader, that’s where you put a transition line in there. It could be literally transition to, colon, or cut to, just to get a sense of, this was the big panorama we were seeing of the barn burning. Probably smash cut to the village the next day or however many days later, and we’re up on this stage where this Faucher is going through, “This is the process that’s going to happen to these teens.” I guess they’re all culpable equally. That’s a thing that is also worthy to be addressed.

Craig: I guess because they were all benefiting from the heater. We do talk a lot about transitions and how to use our medium visually to get from one scene to the next. Here’s something that you generally want to avoid. We go from this visual, “The startled teens watch in horror as fire engulfs the barn.” That’s dusk.

Then the next thing is day. The next day, “These teens now stand in a row.” That’s a hard thing to cut from. From those teens to those teens, it’s going to be a bit jarring.
If you went from those teens to close up of a jug of liquid and we hear sniffling and we hear the creek and somebody breathing and then we reveal these kids are now on their knees or something, then there’s a reveal. You want to always think in terms of big to small, alive to object, loud to quiet. Contrasts are what help us get between places.

John: Make that cut. As we come to this stage where Faucher’s going to give his speech, we hear that members of the community, many of whom are weeping, are gathered there. Members of the community, I don’t know how many. Is it five people? Is it 50 people? I don’t have a sense of the scale. Because this is all new to us, we really want to know how large is this group. It’s going to feel very different if it’s 100 people or if it’s five people.

Next, we’re going to meet Ruth, who is the mother of two of these boys. Again, we don’t know these boys specifically. We don’t know what they’re like. We don’t know which one’s older, which one’s younger. It feels like they should have names. Most crucially, Ruth is going to be doing a lot of talking here and we don’t get anything about her. We do get an age. We get 36, but we don’t have a sense of what kind of woman she is.

Craig: Wardrobe, hair, makeup. What is she wearing? Is she dirty? Do they have makeup? Is she tired? Hair, because honestly, it’s a huge thing. What is their hair like? Bedraggled, dirty?

John: All we’re going to know about her is that she’s a member of this community and she’s the boys’ mother, but because we don’t know anything about the boys, we don’t know anything about Ruth specifically, it’s really tough.

I guess a question we’ll ask Michael when he gets up here is, how important is it that we have all the other seven teens there also? Right now, they’re extras. They’re featured extras who are going to be drinking this poison and reacting, but it’s really about these two boys. If they are the instigators, they should be the ones who are taking the punishment there.

Craig: One thing that happens here is these other kids are getting blinded and mom, Ruth, is just worried about her two kids. I think the other people in the community might be like, “Hey, Ruth, did you not notice that Dylan just got turned blind? That’s my kid. What about my kid?”

They’re in a village center. Describe the village. What is in the village? We do not know anything. There is no further description of the village beyond the fact that there’s an elevated wood platform where these kids are standing, waiting to be blinded.

John: As we wrap up this analysis here, I do like the idea of quickly getting to a Sophie’s Choice. It is a Sophie’s Choice, but if I knew who these two boys were and the– Our first exposure to Ruth is this mother having to make this choice. That’s really compelling if I already got a better sense of what this world is like and who she is in it. I think we could probably get to here in not many more pages than this, but we’re just very rushed to get to where we are right now.

Craig: Setup. Some good logic questions. Let’s ask ourselves, truly, how would this go? If you were a kid living in this town and you knew what the deal is, what would lead you to violate the rules, et cetera?

John: Because Michael’s actually here, we can ask him these questions. Michael, please come on up.

Craig: Come on up.

[applause]

Nice to meet you.

John: Thank you so much for sending in your pages. It’s really great to have you here to be able to talk to.

Michael: Good for another 10 years then.

Craig: Yes, exactly. You don’t have to do that again for another 10 years.

John: Michael, we’re only reading three pages, but have you written the whole thing? What’s actually happening in this world?

Michael: Yes, sure. I’ve completed a first draft. I’m in the process of doing a rewrite right now. I chose to open the script with introducing the antagonist and try to establish the rules of this world where they have very harsh rules, where human life isn’t valued the same way, and the punishment’s very high. The only person that’s really important long-term is Faucher. The others are more just stand-ins for the rules of this world.

Craig: Okay. Now we have a perspective question. We like to talk about, whose perspective is this scene from? If he is the important one, there’s also a world where this begins with, we meet a guy, and he’s standing there looking at the ruins of a barn, and he finds what caused it, a heater, and who was here and who was it.

Then he goes, and then he metes out justice. We would go, “Oh, God, this guy that we were identifying with is a nightmare,” because the perspective here feels like it’s mom. Depending on who is important, we have to think about how we want to go in and whose shoulder is the camera over, if that makes sense.

John: That’s so helpful to know that this is meant to introduce him as the villain antagonist at the very start, because a lot of the choices you’re making make so much more sense knowing that now. The reason why the teens are non-descript and we don’t care and individualize them is because they are not the focus. The challenge is, reading through these pages, it looked like the camera was aimed at them rather than Faucher who is the person we really want to be exploring here. Craig’s suggestion is a good way to do it where we’re really encountering this world and entering this world from his point of view and him dealing with the aftermath of this rather than the setup of this.

Craig: Character. I would love to know, does this guy enjoy this? Does he like pouring this liquid down their throats? Is he a sadist?

Michael: No. He has a perspective that’s been informed by his own life where someone very close to him died because of exposure to an old technology that ended up killing his daughter. I don’t get into it a lot in the story because I don’t want to go off on the rails on this direction. There’s a religious order that’s developed where technology is banned and they have a hold of the power structure.

Craig: Got it. In a circumstance like that, what I want to see is humanity first. This is a man whose grief has damaged him and he is trying to keep people safe. He’s trying to keep them from dying. When he administers this, people beat their children out of rage. People also hit their children out of this measured, “This is going to hurt me more than it’s going to hurt you.”

I personally never hit my kids. You don’t need to. You just have to have a very stern voice. That said, I would love to see what he’s feeling. If he is a father and somebody that had a child and he’s doing this to children, does this hurt his soul to do, and he’s just that– He has to? These are the questions that I have about him as a person. Villains who are human are always more interesting.

John: A question we asked about weather and cold and this kind of stuff, where is this set for you? If you were to shoot this tomorrow, where would this be set?

Michael: The idea is that this takes place maybe 400 or 500 years in the future in rural Wisconsin.

John: That feels right. Again, the dusting of snow or something else like that might also help us there get a sense of the specificity of this place, because right now it’s just reading as post-apocalyptic anywhere. Grounding in a place could really help us out.

Craig: A little something about the apocalypse. One thing that you get to do, it’s fun when you’re doing something apocalyptic, is show what’s left over that has been grown over, abandoned, things that used to be valuable to us that mean nothing now.

Wisconsin, a lot of farms, tons of farms. Maybe in 400, 500 years, most of them have fallen apart, burnt down, whatever. Then I want to see that. I also want to see, in the distance, there’s a mobile sign. There was something.

John: A water tower.

Craig: The world has not been scraped clean. It just stopped. When things stop, nobody really goes around cleaning it up. Vehicles, planes, all that good stuff. Think about the opportunities that you have there.

John: Michael, thank you so much for sending this in.

Michael: Thank you, sir. Thank you very much.

Craig: Thank you. That wasn’t too bad. I think it wasn’t too bad. He’s probably like, “Jesus.” All right, sorry, I’m going to church.

John: Lightning bolts come down. The next script we’re going to be talking about is High North by Teddy Johnson. Teddy, raise your hand if you’re out here.

Craig: There, Teddy.

John: Thank you very much for sending this through. Here is what’s happening in these three pages. “A black cargo ship drifts in the ice of the Arctic Circle. A Coast Guard ship attempts to make contact with the cargo ship, but when there’s no answer, Captain Alamos and three other officers board the dark and seemingly empty cargo ship.

Inside, they find dozens of dead bodies, all frostbitten black and decomposing. One shackled corpse holding a stuffed polar bear startles the men when it springs to life and screams at them, while begging them not to take us back, before an officer knocks him out with a flashlight. When he does, hundreds more corpses are discovered. The next sequence begins with a montage of news footage on unrest over skyrocketing energy costs.” That’s where we are at the bottom of three pages.

Craig: Okay. I love a good scary thing set in an Arctic area.

John: I love the Arctic setting. I’ll say cover page looks great. The only thing I would ask for is a date. A date on a cover page is just a thing you look for and to see how recent it is. Everything else here, flawless and great.

Craig: You can always lie about the date.

John: Yes, just make it more recent. Craig, talk to us about your exposure here. Really, we should talk about what kind of scene this is, because it’s very classically a setup. It’s a cold open.

Craig: This is a good, old-fashioned cold open. The job really is, how do I do this scene in a way that hasn’t been done before? I’m not sure this gets to that. It is somewhat following the formula, but it does the formula fairly well. A couple of things that stopped me as I was going through, there’s lots of good visuals here.

John: There are.

Craig: Sometimes people are talking when they wouldn’t normally talk. I think there’s just a lot of extra dialogue we don’t need. It’s scarier when it’s quieter. Generally, when people work together, they don’t need to talk unless it’s important, especially in a situation like this, which is pretty grim.

They get into this room and there’s this big reveal, which is the big reveal. Dead bodies, dozen or so, men all ages, ethnicities, floor awash in a GRAYISH SLURRY. Now, GRAYISH SLURRY is capitalized. It’s the Arctic. Everything’s frozen.

John: Yes, so why is it not frozen?

Craig: Why is it a slurry?

John: That may be important.

Craig: It might be, but then I want to know more about the GRAYISH SLURRY. I want them to note that there’s a– Nobody seems to care about the liquid that’s not frozen. If it is frozen, I still want them to– if it’s important to me, it should be important to them. They’re looking around.

John: Yes, agreed.

Craig: Then a guy trips over a corpse, which is actually awesome. I love that.

John: We should say that you hear a thump before this and our attention turns to it.

Craig: So we get a little jump scare.

John: Love it.

Craig: Great. Then the captain looks at him and goes, “We good?” The guy says, “Yes, fine.” Then he looks at something else and goes, “What the hell is this?” If one of your underlings trips over a corpse and you turn back and you see that, you’re just glaring, and he’s like– it’s undermining the vibe you want to get.

I got pretty confused. I’m curious to see what you thought about this. When they get to a teenager and he’s gripping a polar bear in his fist and they’re all like, “Hmm,” and Captain Alamos says, “Call the medic. Though I doubt we’ll–” as if to say, “Maybe this kid’s alive,” and then, ah, the kid’s alive.

John: Part of your reason for your confusion is, he’s identified as a teen, but then the dialogue is for shackled man, and so I was thinking, “Wait, is this the same person?” I’m looking for teen in the dialogue.

Craig: Yes. It seemed to me, jump scare wise, we all know it’s coming, but I think that they would just be like, “Wow, this is sad. We’re going to have to report this.” Mundane sort of stuff. One of them touches the polar bear and then the guy– Again, the dialogue felt a little bit, I don’t know, low stakes kind of talking, as if you weren’t in a room full of frozen bodies. That’s totally really what I want to see if we can achieve here, but the scenario was fun.

John: Yes. You’re reading through the three pages and you get what this setup is. I understood why I saw that, that it was setting this thing up, and then as we get to the news footage, I was like, “Okay, this is all going to be related. I can see how these two things can plausibly fit together.”

Let’s talk about the very opening here. Right now, we’re starting with Super, 157 miles north of the Arctic Circle, “A black cargo ship drifts amid cracked tapestry of ice,” but then in the next block, it’s unusual, flat, no bridge, no flag and listing on its side. That belongs up with the description of the ship in that first section. Right now, it’s after Captain Alamos, so you think it’s part of his description, because it’s really what he’s seeing. What I’m saying is, I have no idea if Captain Alamos is a man or is a woman. I have no idea what the age is.

Craig: True.

John: This is probably a disposable character, but give us something to anchor our–

Craig: Casting people have to cast somebody. They’re like, “Help.”

John: “Help us. Help us,” desperately. That’s why giving him or her a first name and just some sense of what kind of person this is, is a godsend. It helps everybody in production, but also just a reader to form some image in our head. Is it a Sam Neill that I’m looking at?

Craig: Also, USS Healy, what kind of boat is that?

John: I don’t know.

Craig: We don’t know.

John: These are things we’ll want to know, so we get a sense of what kind of space we’re in for this. We’re going from the big ship onto a small craft, navigating the ice-strewn waters. Tell us how this feels. Give me a line to put me in this space because I don’t know how cold this is. I don’t know what this is actually really like.

Craig: I don’t know how close are we to them. Is it a motorized boat? Are we looking at the outrigger? Are we looking at an oar? Are we looking at this guy’s face shivering? I want to feel all that because it’s such an evocative idea, this boat clacking its way through these chunks of ice that are floating in water. I think you’re absolutely right, by the way, to get the description of the boat together, and then I would actually put the Super after that.

John: I would agree.

Craig: Let us look at some stuff, wonder where we are, and then you give us 157 miles north of the Arctic Circle.

John: On page two, things are just feeling a little too empty. It’s a little bit of a stock scene. We can fill in some details ourselves, but give us a little bit more about what the inside of the ship feels like. What does it sound like, if the boat is listing? You’ve said that it’s sloping. That’s a great detail.

It’s the whole thing. Is it canted so you’re having to walk up slopes? That could be cool. Do you hear it creaking? Is ice banging against it? All these things are suspenseful and will create the mood you probably are looking for here.

The officer trips on a corpse. That is a guy who is singled out and he needs to be uppercased because he’s going to be saying a line or– This needs to be singled out as a person who is useful. Tell us something about him or her so we get some sense of what the dynamic is.

Craig: This is a choice. The shackled man/teen yells in French. Now, if the idea is that the people he’s speaking French to don’t speak French and it doesn’t seem like they do, they seem like Americans, it might be better to just put this in French so that we understand that they don’t understand. You’re not going to be subtitling it because it’s more like he’s alive is the point and later we’ll find out what he said.

John: Either choice could work. You could subtitle it, but if it is subtitled, then I’d say put it in subtitle so we know what the intention is behind that.

Craig: It’s hard to subtitle a jump scare moment. It’s really hard. It feels like what’s scary is that this guy is suddenly alive and he’s curiously speaking French and he’s holding a polar bear, all good mysteries, so might as well just keep them mysterious.

John: Yes, keep them mysterious, but we don’t have to leave it as mystery because we have Teddy right here. Teddy, come on up and let’s talk about this. Teddy, tell us about this script. Is the whole thing written? Is it just these three pages? What have you written of this?

Teddy: This has been through a few drafts. It’s all written. The main reason I thought I’d toss this into the mix here was because this opening is brand new and it was based on notes I got from a random blacklist reviewer and also a friend of mine who occasionally reads my stuff.

They both had a similar note about the previous opening, which was actually just the news montage thing. Then later on, 10, 11 pages in, they mentioned this ghost ship that’s disappeared in the Arctic. They were like, “That seems cool. Why don’t you play with that?” I played with that and that’s what you’re looking at.

John: Great.

Craig: That’s good advice. I think the opening with the ghost ship almost always works. 50% of the time, or is it 100% of the time?

John: Of the characters we meet in this opening, are any of them important? This is just setting up the world, correct?

Teddy: This is all set up. We never see any of these people– That’s not technically true, but they’re not– None of these people are the antagonists or protagonists. That all comes on page four.

John: Are we guessing the tone right, that this a– To me, this feels like a scary world-threatening thing is happening. Is that correct?

Teddy: The vibe here, I think the idea is this is a dated comp, but like Three Days of the Condor, paranoid government conspiracy thriller. That’s what we’re aiming at. I realized that the ghost ship jump scare thing might seem a little bit too much.

John: From a horror movie?

Teddy: Yes. It’s not a horror movie. Like I said, I know that’s a dated comp, but that’s the vibe we’re looking for.

Craig: I can see that completely. Yes, this feels like the sort of thing that Tony Scott would have done an incredible job with.

John: Exactly, yes.

Craig: Yes, rest in peace.

John: As you were sitting in the audience and we’re talking through your pages–

Craig: How much did you hate it?

John: How much, like, “Oh my God, I’m so angry.” Did they make sense? Were we misreading things you were intending to do?

Teddy: No, you keyed in on, I would say, three or four things that I’ve also gone back and forth on. For example, the kid versus the shackled man. We’re obviously going to discover, why is there a ghost ship with a bunch of people shackled in the middle of the Arctic Circle? That’s the big mystery we’re going to resolve.

I don’t know why I changed– I went back and forth on the person who wakes up and does the jump scare thing. Why is it a boy? There’s a reason why there’s all these different ages of men in this ship and all different ethnicities. I think that was a place where I was just going fast.

Again, it was the second time I wrote this opening. I think I got caught off on the consistency there. Also, this is a personal thing, but I just try to write very spare. I see why you would want to describe Captain Alamos, give it an adjective, something. Also, I just want to move fast through the first thing.

John: I want to underline, I really liked that it was moving quickly. There were times where I felt like you could have even moved a little more quickly. They’re circling the boat and there’s a ladder bolted to the side. I don’t even need the ladder bolt on the side as long as I see them climbing off the ladder on to the deck. You could probably do some things even a little bit faster than that because as an audience and as readers, we have a sense of what you’re doing and that this is compelling quickly and we want to get on that boat.

Craig: I think you did a really good job. This should be spare. It doesn’t take many words to go, “She’s 40, weathered, tired, cold.” That’s it. It’s barely anything. It just helps us fill it in because honestly, in my head, he turned into like– you know the boat guy from Tintin with the beard and the corn? That’s what he was in my head. He literally was Captain whatever his name was.

Speaker: Captain Haddock.

Craig: Yes, Captain Haddock, which is not what you wanted.

Teddy: No, that’s not the vibe.

Craig: Speaking of consistency, tell us about this GRAYISH SLURRY.

Teddy: Again, I have gone back and forth on, do we draw more attention to that or not? What that GRAYISH SLURRY is is hyper relevant to the ultimate story. Again, one of the things that I’m trying to do over the course of the script is just build an incredible sense of mystery that builds a huge reveal. I didn’t want to go into that too much because at this point–

Craig: This is all it says, “Floor awash in a GRAYISH SLURRY.” No one comments on it, which means no one’s looking at it, which means the camera’s– If he walks in and we hear squish and he looks down and he’s confused because in this room of ice and everything, there’s this stuff that isn’t solid, that is weird and melted, and then he moves on, I’m like, “Okay, well, that’s relevant.” Otherwise, it’s just going to be a GRAYISH SLURRY no one will notice.

Teddy: Yes. Sorry. No, I live in fear of more than two lines of description and narrative.

Craig: Do not. They’re to give you a Kathryn Bigelow script where it’s 12 lines in a row.

John: Absolutely. A thing we often talk about in Three Page Challenges is how things feel on the page. It’s how much white space there is on the page. I’ll say in these pages, it’s very spare and the paragraphs are short. It invites you to read down the page and actually read every word on the page. You can break things up a little bit more. The extra few words or sentences we’re asking in a few places, I really don’t think will slow your read, and will just anchor people, make them feel like, “Oh, I’m glad I read that because I understand this moment, this beat, this visual better.”

Craig: Yes. Three lines is– you can start worrying after three. Two is a little severe.

Teddy: I appreciate the permission.

Craig: I’m rolling with that. Permission granted.

John: Teddy, you’ve written a couple drafts of this script. How many other scripts have you written?

Teddy: This is the third or fourth feature script I’ve written.

John: Has it gotten easier or harder with each script?

Teddy: I don’t know that it ever gets easier. I think I just am more comfortable with just messing stuff up and iterating and trying and just going. You go a little bit faster because you know– That’s all. I wouldn’t say it’s easier. You just fail faster.

John: That’s a crucial thing Teddy has learned. Nicely done.

Craig: Just describe my career.

John: Teddy, thank you very much for doing this. Thank you.

Craig: Thank you, Teddy.

John: All right.

Craig: Zeroing in on number three.

John: Number three. All right. Number three is Tall Poppies by Becca Hurd. “A woman named Teddi sits at a pub in Sydney, Australia during a rowdy Australian football game. She buys a pub-branded T-shirt and, pretending to be an employee, tells a group of customers they need one of their cars moved. The customers are too wrapped up in the football game, so she offers to move the car for them. Teddi takes the man’s keys and drives off and away.

We are then acquainted with the oceanside town of Edith Beach where Zoe, in her early 30s, Indian Australian, and muscular, surfs with her dog, Rosie, on the front of her surfboard. We then see Zoe working at her food truck. That’s what we’ve accomplished in three pages of Tall Poppies.

Craig: Fun cover page.

John: A fun cover page. Let’s hold on to show the audience because they may not be able to see it on their smartphone.

Craig: I’m not sure they’re going to be able to see that either.

John: It has a nice typeface for Tall Poppies, which is good and so distinctive. There’s a gun shooting a flower. It says, “Pilot, written by Becca Hurd.” It’s good for us to know that this is a pilot, not a feature. It has her email address, which is perfect. It has the date. I love everything on this cover page.

Craig: No, it’s grabby. Also, the other stuff is like, “Oh, it has to be all courier.” No, it doesn’t. We don’t care. Nobody cares. I really enjoyed this. What I particularly enjoyed was that I was confused until I got it, which was great. Now, there are a couple of things that, early, probably was not good confusion. Interior, The Waddle Seat Hotel, Sydney night.

Now, when I think of the interior of a hotel, I don’t think of a rowdy bar full of sports watchers. Here is, having just come back from Sydney, Australia, hotel means bar, and it’s confusing in Sydney, but it’s actually true. Everything is. This would be a problem because we’re not in Sydney, so you’re going to have to do a little bit of tailoring there just for Americans, so that they don’t-

John: Honestly, if we scratch out the word hotel, the Waddle Seat, we would get it as a bar.

Craig: We would get it. Here she is, small, unassuming, and she’s alone, which is terrific. The first thing we see is that she’s not really there. We’re looking at a woman with her eyes closed, and we’re hearing beautiful violin. Then as we pull out, we realize she’s in this bedlam, and she’s in her own head. This is very evocative, and I can do it. If I had to direct this, I could direct it. I know what to do. That’s super helpful. I love the way the sound comes in.

I have really one question. I honestly have one question, and that is, her plan relies on something that I’m not sure is a reliable thing, even much, because she’s like, “Hey, can you move your car?” I think a lot of people would be like, “Okay.” It’s a little bit of a stretch to think, hey, they’re going to give me their keys and let me move the car for them.

John: I bought it. I feel like she, Teddy, was making, it was a reach, but also felt like I was impressed by her, and then she pulled it off. I bought it the course of this movie. There’s refrigerated logic like, wait, would you actually do that? It worked for me in the moment really well.

One thing, I liked how this all started on the page. This all reads really well. There’s a good variation of paragraph sizes. One thing I would ask, though, here’s how we’re starting. We’re in close on Teddy, eyes closed. All we hear is beautiful violin. As we zoom out, we see that she sits at a pub high top. Two paragraphs later, we’re seeing Teddy is small, I’m assuming she wears a cast on her left hand. That’s information that goes back up in that top part, so we can see that, because it’s not new information when we’re seeing that there.

Then as we’re, you’re saying, zooming out, it’s really pulling out or whatever you want to say here. Teddy’s not given an age. I’d love an age, tell us an age. Tell an age, that she’s small and I’m assuming-

Craig: I mean, even bloke with a mullet gets an age.

John: Yes, see?

Craig: All we hear is beautiful violin. Yes, beautiful violin music or beautiful classical violin music. Something that’s telling us specifically what it is that we’re hearing, because I really like everything that’s happening here. I just want it to be a little brighter here.

The other thing I did notice is that we’re doing her pronoun a lot with actually not using her name. Look at the cases where you’re saying she, and see if there’s some places where you want to put Teddy back in there, so it’s just top of our mind who this is that we’re talking about. I believed most of the guys with the football game. I believed the sports bar space, the main guy we’re talking to, his name is Mase, M-A-S-E. I was wondering whether if we’re going to meet him again, we might meet him again, but I didn’t know at the moment whether it was important or not.

This is more of a question for you because we can’t ask you, because he’s given sort of individual thing rather than just being placeholder person. He’s given an actual character name.

Craig: If there was any way for us to see her making a choice as to which person to prey upon, now she’s sort of going for a car first, I think, instead of a person. That also is a little tricky because if she’s like, “Hey, who has this?” and somebody who’s just not that drunk is like, “I do.” Now what do you do? There’s just still a little bit of, I just want to think through the con artist logic because con artists, I’m not suggesting she’s, but somebody who’s committing con artistry, they’re always in control. They always are one step ahead. They’re the magicians who have the backup plan in case you pick the wrong card. I just want to get that feeling.

Then, when we shift away, good news is I wanted to stay with her, so that’s always good, but we get to this other place, then it’s connected through with her drive, and we meet an entirely different person who has a dog on her surfboard. This was adorable. We meet this cool person. She’s got a dog on her surfboard, she’s surfing. This is cool. A little bit earlier, an old man pulls his lazy dog along the sidewalk. That’s two dogs right in a row, and I want to keep my dog special. Then, after we see her surfing with her dog, she’s in the counter of her food truck. That was a little bit of a gear grind for me.

John: It was a gear grind for me, too. Part of it is that we see Teddy driving away. This is night as she’s driving away, and then we’re coming to dusk. There’s not a transition put here between these two things, but I think our natural assumption is we’re going to keep following Teddy, and we’re going to see Teddy the next day. Instead, we’re meeting a whole new character doing a whole new thing, which can absolutely work, but it was just a weird vibe for me. I couldn’t tell who I was supposed to be following. I keep expecting, Teddy has to meet this new character, Rosie, very soon.

Craig: I’m sure she will.

John: She will. It’s only three pages.

Craig: They may already know each other.

John: You like the dog on the surfboard. The dog on the surfboard felt a little dizzy for me.

Craig: I guess my question is, and we’ll find out, can dogs do that?

John: I’m sure dogs do that.

Craig: Because if a dog can do it-

John: That’s just a sore, I think. I think it really do it.

Craig: – then you can do it. If they can do it, then it’ll look like it’s doing it. You’re going to have to find a dog that can actually do it. I think maybe all we really needed here was to see her getting out of the water. He’s going, and she’s dragging your surfboard. The next thing we see is a food truck, and she’s walking up and unlocking it. Then, the next thing is, and so we go, okay, that’s her job, she goes there.

John: That’s her thing. It’s her truck.

Craig: Yes.

John: The last thing I want us to talk about is, at the end of the bar sequence, The Waddell Seat, the last line she says is, “I’ll sort you boys some free ones when I get back.” I wanted to cut that line, and then you pay it off where later on, it’s like, she gives some free ones. Okay, if you want to hold on that line, great. It does work, but if you could cut that line and find a different way for this guy, Mace, to be asking, like, “Hey, this girl has my keys. Where’s the blonde girl with my keys?” Like, “Which blonde girl?” would be another way to do it. Because I think you have a better out of that first scene without that extra line.

Craig: Yes, it’s a little bit tricky because we know that she won. I guess the thing is, do we even care about this drunk guy finding out that he got swindled? He got swindled. Unless he matters.

John: He may matter.

Craig: That’s the thing. He may matter, we don’t know.

John: Becca, could you please come up?

Craig: Come on.

[applause]

All right, tell us about Tall Poppies. What have we got here?

Becca: This is sort of an Australian nod to Thelma and Louise, but gayer.

[laughter]

Craig: Good. Why not? Gayer.

Becca: It’s two women who don’t currently know each other. They meet each other in the pilot. Then incidentally, they kill a man together. He’s a bikeym he’s in a bikey gang. They end up going on the run together. They have bikeys after them. They both are running from their past, so their past is chasing them as well. They start to fall in love with each other as they fall into a heroin empire.

[laughter]

Craig: Oh, and it’s poppies.

John: That’s Tall Poppy.

Craig: Poppies.

Becca: It’s Tall Poppy, yes.

Craig: Tall poppy syndrome.

John: For folks who don’t know Tall Poppy Syndrome is a down-under situation where they cut you down if you get too big. If you get too successful, they cut you down. Rebel Wilson was on, and we were talking about Tall Poppy Syndrome.

Craig: Tall poppy.

John: This is all really fun. Tonally, when I said that the dog on the surfboard felt Disney to it, is it comedic? What is the thing you’re going for? Is it cute?

Becca: My tonal comp would be Killing Eve. It’s a 60-minute crime drama, but there’s some comedy in there.

Craig: Now that I know what’s going on, when you have a movie, and there are some great ones, it’s funny. For whatever reason, the first thing that came to mind after you described the Thelma and Louise and all the rest of it was White Men Can’t Jump, where you meet two people. One of them hasn’t dealt with the other one yet, but they’re going to. Then, there’s the joining of con artists, just people on the run, falling in love, bromances, or romances.

When you do meet that second person, so much of what that scene has to be is, this is a different person than that person because you want the contrast. You want to go from somebody impeccably neat to somebody who’s a slob. It doesn’t have to be that broad, but your choice of what to do next does have to feel like, oh, these two people, I would like to see what happens if they get stuck together for a bit, if that makes sense.

John: The woman she’s going on the run with, ultimately, is this other–

Craig: Zoe.

Becca: Yes.

John: We don’t have an extra page to get to know her better, but tell us more about her and what their interaction is. Because last night on Scriveners Live, we were talking about relationships. Different characters need different things out of a relationship. What is the nature of their relationship?

Becca: Zoe is actually Laws. This is an alias. She comes from a criminal family. They are the biggest legal growers of poppies in Australia. Australia actually does grow a lot of poppies, but they also have an underground heroin industry as well. She’s trying to get away from her family, so she’s changed her name and is just in this beach town, nomadic life, surfing. Teddy is running away from an abusive relationship.

Craig: Now, here’s what I get. Teddy has no problem doing something that’s criminal. She’s actually rather good at it. It’s not a violent thing, so we love her for it. Now, Zoe is running from a criminal past. What I kind of want in some way or another is to meet somebody who is very definitely not breaking the law. Because she knows that she would get in trouble. She doesn’t want to get back on a radar. How you imply that, there’s a thousand ways. I don’t know if you agree with this, but the surfing itself only tells us that she surfs and that her dog is awesome. It’s not telling me any little tiny thing about her that may make me go, oh, these two might not like each other, or these two might be, we were talking about planes, trains, and automobiles, Steve Martin and John Candy, an odd couple of some sort.

You’re good. You’re a good writer. You laid these out great. You could see it. You could hear it. I love the way you sound. There were transitions. The good news is you can do it. This is what we do when we can do it. Just do it.

John: Becca, question for you. Is Mace going to come back?

Becca: He’s not.

John: He’s not going to come back. You understand the note that it feels like he’s a more important character than he is because he’s given a name and because he’s given a recall scene. Giving him a generic descriptor would probably help.

Becca: My one question, actually, for that is because I have another character refer to him like, “Oy, Mace, she’s talking to you.” Do you have to use the name?

Craig: You kind of don’t. In a situation like this, what you can do is you can say, mullet bloke, and then whatever. What is that?

John: Moustache.

Craig: Undercut bloke. Just two different haircuts. The fact that one of them says the other one’s name doesn’t really matter. This is great. It was just cinematic. I was watching it and it was having fun, so really good.

John: Becca, I was talking to you at the opening night party. We did this here, but you actually had a script that was also here in competition?

Becca: Yes, and I found out today that it won.

John: Congratulations.

[applause]

Craig: I saw that happen. She’s not lying. I was there.

John: What was that script? That’s not this script that we read. It’s a different thing.

Becca: That is not the script. No, that’s a feature called The Other Side of 25. It’s about a young stand-up comic in Chicago who becomes the surrogate for her older sister.

Craig: I’m not surprised. You can do this. Keep doing it. It’s going well. Congratulations. I was happy to see you win, and I was happy to see you here with these three pages.

Becca: Great.

John: Becca, thank you so much.

Becca: Thank you so much. Thank you.

John: We have a little boilerplate here. The Scriptnotes, all of Scriptnotes, is produced by Drew Marquardt, who’s here. Drew is the person who reads all these three-page challenges. Drew Marquardt, you’re the best. This show will also be edited by Matthew Chilleli, who’s our incredible editor. We want to thank Emily Locke and everyone here at Austin Film Festival. This has been a fantastic festival this year. Thank you to our room sponsors, all our volunteers, incredible.

Who here in this room is a Scriptnotes premium subscriber? Oh, we’ve got some hands here.

Craig: Oh, thank you, guys.

John: Every week, we do an episode for everyone in the whole wide world. We also do a bonus segment for our premium members. Thank you for the premium members, because they keep the lights on. A final check, who in this room has ordered the Scriptnotes book? [chuckles] All right. I need to sell those books. Thank you so much.

Craig: Thank you, guys.

[Bonus Segment]

John: Let’s try to get three or four questions. If people have questions about the kinds of things we talked about on the page here today, we can also ask general Script Note-y kind of answers of questions. If you have a question, raise your hand. I’ll call on you, and I’ll repeat the question. Right here.

Member of Audience 1: You were talking a little bit about how many lines, there’s too many lines. You’re talking about transitions. You’re talking about dressing the characters and things like that. I guess my question is, I know what scene heading is and things like that, but how do I know that my script looks right?

John: I think the thing that we come back to again and again on the Script Notes is that we will keep reading long paragraphs if it feels like it’s worth our time. If we’re engaged and those words are pulling us through, we’ll do it. Sometimes you turn a page, and it’s like a dense block of text, and you’re like, oh, God, I have to commit to this long paragraph. That’s why small paragraphs, short paragraphs, three lines, four lines, two lines, are great. Breaking them up, it feels so good because it invites you to come down the page.

The best advice I can really give you is you need to read a bunch of screenplays, a bunch of produced screenplays to see what they actually look like on the page. We make a weekend read, which every week we have a whole bunch of really good published scripts that we put up in there. Read those.
What other general advice would we offer?

Craig: Like anything else, you get better at it as you do it. You get a sense for these things as you approach your mythical 10,000 hours and so forth. Right off the bat, you probably don’t know until you do. Some people will get there quicker than others. That’s just the way it goes with everything.

Guitar, painting, writing screenplays, there’s certain innate stuff. Give yourself a break and make sure that you understand you’re going to grow and get there. It’s not possible for you to have the same innate sense of how a page should feel, and where you should slow, and where you should speed compared to people that have been doing it for 30 years. Give yourself time to grow.

John: The other thing, over time, you’ll internalize rules, but also just a sense of how things feel on the page, and you’ll develop a voice that is uniquely your voice. Craig and I were talking last night, there’s things, I think this was backstage, there are scripts that we wrote, and it’s like 10 years later you read it, it’s like, I know I wrote this, I don’t remember a damn thing about it, but it feels like me. Ultimately, your stuff will feel like you because you just make certain choices, you just do certain things on the page, and that only comes with just doing a lot of work.

It’s sitting down in the chair every day and writing, and writing a lot. It’s, yes, you’re going to go back through and refine and revise, but also you’re going to write new things, so you can get the sense of, what does it feel like when I write action? What does it feel like when I’m writing an intense dialogue scene? Those are the experiences that get the words feeling better on the page.

Another question I see right there. All right, I’m repeating here. Here with some students, what three things we really want to see in those first three pages, Craig?

Craig: The first is inspiration, creativity. I always think of the first five pages, but three, it doesn’t matter, are absolutely precious. You can do anything there because you are, as we’re in church, as the prime mover, began everything. That is the moment where you set it all in motion, and the moment you set it in motion, your choices begin to narrow, narrow until you reach the end when the thing that had to happen happens. Those first three pages, show creativity, surprise me.

You know. You’ve all seen movies, you’ve all seen TV shows. What have I not seen that I can then use in service of something that is somewhat conventional, that is a story that then connects to all of us? Inspiration slash creativity, give me somebody that I know I’m supposed to be identifying with, even if it turns out to be the bad guy and I have to change, that’s fine, but give me somebody that I’m connected to and make sure that something happens. One thing, doesn’t have to be the inciting incident, but it’s got to be something that helps me learn about the world, the characters, a relationship, something.

John: In those first three pages, I want to know what world I’m in. The setting, sure, but what kind of movie am I in? That’s the sense of, it’s the tone, it’s the feeling of. I want to feel that I’m watching a movie or watching a TV show, and that means I should hopefully forget that I’m reading something. I should feel like I’m seeing it, I’m feeling myself in it. Those are crucial things. That I’m with an actual person because we have to know who those people are. It doesn’t have to be our hero necessarily. Sometimes you start with somebody else, but that there’s anchored, interesting people that I’m curious about because what it comes down to is we could set down the script at any time, but if I’m curious, I’m going to keep reading the rest.

The thing we often talk about on Three Page Challenge is, was I curious to read page four? That’s ultimately what it is. Can you just keep pulling me along into the story? Great question. Thank you.

Another question out there. Somebody, I want to know something. Right here in front.

Member of Audience 2: Since you’re talking about character descriptions and even just being really quick with them, do you have any words of advice for or against if you use a really popular actor as a way to get me to the description, or do you think it’s not a good idea?

John: If you refer to a popular person, yes or no. Craig, what’s your instinct there?

Craig: You can. I’ve never done it. It’s probably best to say sort of like or ish. You don’t want to go, it’s Brad Pitt. If you don’t have Brad Pitt, stop reading. I do think it’s a little bit of a cheat. It feels a little bit sloppy. Rather than building a human for me, you’re asking me to just put the human I already know into that. You’re robbing me of a chance to build my Captain Haddock in my head.

John: I would agree with you. One of the real challenges is if you’re aiming for Brad Pitt or Denzel Washington, the minute you say that, every other actor is going to be like, “I don’t want to take Denzel Washington’s leftovers.” I don’t think I’ve ever done it, but if you have a character who models themselves after some famous person, that might be a way to do it, like sees herself as Taylor Swift. That could be a way to do it, but it’s unlikely to be the thing.

Just figure out what is it about the actual actor or person or personality that you can find words to describe that evokes that feeling is the best way to do it.

Another question right here.

Their question is, in dramas, you obviously want to establish something that’s gripping right in those first three pages, the opening setup. What is the equivalent thing we’re looking for in a comedy?

Craig: Funny.

[laughter]

John: We got to laugh.

Craig: There’s also tone. For comedies, we all have a general sense in our head of the different kinds. I want to know which kind I’m in, and I want something funny to happen, and I want it to involve the person that I am going to care about or get to know. That’s really it. In comedies, we often think about, rather than the first three pages, we think about what’s the opening bit.

I watched the opening of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective the other day. I don’t know why, I just did. The entire opening, it’s all under credits. It’s an open credit sequence. He is pretending to be a UPS package deliverer, and he’s got a package and it says fragile, and he is kicking it down the street. He’s throwing it against walls. He’s walking like Jim Carrey does, and eventually gets to this guy’s door and smashes it a few times. You get a sense like, okay, this is the bit. I’m learning about what kind of comedy this is and who I’m supposed to be identifying with.

It’s pretty comedic. You get to actually be somewhat formulaic. Unfortunately, you have to also be funny, so it’s such a problem.

John: In a comedy, you have to land something in those first pages, and really, you need a setup and a laugh that really nails it and that lets us know what kind of comedy this is. In your description of that, I get the tone of what that comedy is, and that’s going to be our expectation for everything after that. It needs to really establish, these are the kinds of jokes we’re going to see in this, but not those kinds of jokes, and that’s a tough thing to do.

There are a lot of really, really funny people in the world and really funny writers, but they have different lanes, and they couldn’t write the same thing. Nora Ephron is not writing Ace Ventura. I love her to death, but she would not have written Ace Ventura.

Craig: I wouldn’t say I love her to death, I mean, she is dead.

John: I know. I can still love her. I love her deeply.

Craig: You continue to love her as she is.

John: Absolutely. I love her after death. She’s great. A question over there.

[laughter]

Great. Let me restate this. She says she’s a very visual person, and she can see everything in the scene, but she’s having a hard time sometimes translating everything she’s seeing down to, these are the words that are going to create the same vision for the reader, and that’s our job.

Craig: That’s the job.

John: That’s the hardest thing about it.

Craig: That’s the job. Now, the good news is you can see it. A lot of people can’t. You can. That’s a huge advantage. Now, be a camera. Rather than just thinking about it all at once, be a camera and think about what the slices that you’re looking at. How close are you, how far are you, and why? In short, be a director. Think about where the camera should be, and think about what you want the Member of Audience to see and feel in that moment, or smell or hear. Then, you might start to be able to relay to us something that helps us recreate it as you want us to see it. It’s very important.

If I’m describing this room, and I know everything in it, I still need to go, I’m going to start on, actually, it says, “Pure as a pearl and as perfect.” If I start on those words, that’s intentional, that means something, and then I cut to somebody who’s eating a tuna sandwich and spilling it on their lap back there, not at all pure as a pearl and perfect, and I understand why. Then, I can see, oh, behind that person, there’s this huge room, and there’s the vault.

You begin to think the order, how you reveal it, what, why, all those good questions. The fact that you can see it is great. Now you just have to actually weirdly decide how to show us less.

John: My answer is probably a little bit different. I’ve written a bunch of screenplays, but I’ve also written books. The great thing about writing a novel is that you are in a space, and you can talk about anything. You can move through time within a paragraph, characters can smell things, you can get inside characters’ heads. In both cases, writing a chapter of a book or writing a scene for a movie, I’m landing myself in their space and I’m seeing what’s around you. At the same time, I’m now in a movie, sitting back, and I’m putting myself in a movie theater watching this thing.

That’s what Craig is saying about being a camera. It’s like, what I’m actually seeing on screen at a time, and that is probably where you need to focus next is, if I was watching this sitting in a theater, what would I be seeing on screen? What things would be coming to me? Because the camera is attention, and where is it directing the reader’s attention, which will ultimately become the camera.

Craig: I think that’s a great final question. Thank you. Thank you all.

Links:

  • Follow along with our Three Page Challenge Selections! ANCIENT GRAINS by Michael Warnecke, HIGH NORTH by Teddy Johnson, TALL POPPIES by Becca Hurd
  • Austin Film Festival
  • The Scriptnotes Book is here!
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!
  • Check out the Inneresting Newsletter
  • Become a Scriptnotes Premium member, or gift a subscription (now with fewer emails!)
  • Subscribe to Scriptnotes on YouTube
  • Scriptnotes on Instagram
  • John August on Bluesky and Instagram
  • Outro by Mathew Chilelli (send us yours!)
  • Scriptnotes is produced by Drew Marquardt and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

Scriptnotes, Episode 681: The Waiting Game, Transcript

April 2, 2025 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: You’re listening to Episode 681 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the show, what do you do when the answer isn’t yes or no, but an extended and interminable maybe? We’ll discuss strategies for coping and navigating periods of frustrating ambiguity as you’re trying to push projects forward.

Then it’s a new round of the Three Page Challenge, where we take a look at pages our listeners have sent in and offer our honest feedback. In our bonus segment for premium members, how to know when a movie or TV show has had reshoots or significant re-tinkering. Craig and I will spill the secrets that will help us notice that things have changed there.

Craig: Let’s ruin it for everyone.

John: Absolutely. That’s why I put it in the bonus segment. If you don’t want to be spoiled, you can just skip the bonus segment.

Craig: We’re going to spoil everything.

John: The tricks, the tips, the everything. First, we have some follow-up. Drew, help us out.

Drew Marquardt: Sure. Elizabeth writes, “Can you please ask Craig to stop joking that nobody in Post reads the script, supervisor’s notes? My notes are nearly always utilized by the editor and Post team, and the role of script supervisor has been dismissed, disrespected, and marginalized for far too long by directors and producers.”

Craig: Okay, Elizabeth, this feels like manufactured outrage. I’m literally expressing an opinion in support of script supervisors and the way that their work is overlooked, and your reaction is to say, “Stop dismissing us.” Here’s the reality. You’re not in the editing rooms. I am. I’m telling you, after 30 years, it is extraordinarily rare for the editors or the Post team to refer to the notes. Take my word for it. It’s extraordinarily rare. If you’re frustrated by that, imagine how frustrated I am about that.

I’m not saying it never happens. Clearly, you had a nice experience where it happened at some point, but Elizabeth, hear me out. I’m on your side. That’s why I’m saying this. I want editors, especially up-and-coming editors who listen to our show, to read the effing notes.

John: Yes. You have sung the praises of the script supervisor on The Last of Us so many times.

Craig: So many times.

John: Apparently, it’s fantastic, which is great.

Craig: Chris Roofs.

John: Great. I will say that even if those notes are not being used for the editorial process, I suspect there have been times where you needed to refer back to those notes because you’re doing inserts, pickup shots, you’re reshooting some things, you need to figure out like, what was it that we were doing here?

Craig: That’s a separate thing. In the crazy list of things that the script supervisor is responsible for, it’s the Swiss army knife of crew members. Keeping track of inserts that we owe is one of them. That is a separate list that is generated and shared with the post-production supervisor and the producer and the editors so that everybody’s on top of that. The ADs, most importantly, to make sure that they’re scheduled.

John: More follow-up. This one is from AI Guinea Pig.

Craig: Is this a real person or an AI guinea pig? This is a real person, okay.

John: This is a real person. Drew, it’s a long story, but I think it’s an interesting story because it feels like, oh, this is the bellwether of things that could come.

Craig: Oh, boy.

Drew: “In 2023, I had a script make the annual blacklist. The script led to the proverbial water bottle tour and eventually an option offer. The offer came from a producer with many produced credits on movies and shows over the last two decades. As my reps and I asked around, we also learned that he had a good reputation, both as a person and as someone with a knack for getting things done. What’s more, his pitch was compelling. He claimed to have access to financing, didn’t hurt that there was money on the table with the option agreement. I was going to become a paid screenwriter.

My lawyer negotiated the option agreement. I signed it. The check cleared and we were off. The producer and I had our kickoff call, and this is how he opened. ‘So, how much have you played around with AI?’

The producer, as it turns out, was intending to launch a new AI studio with my script as one of the headliners of its slate. After no mention of AI during our initial conversations or negotiations, I was now being told my project was going to be made using generative AI. What’s more, I came to realize that the producer’s so-called access to financing was not access to financing for traditional film production. It was for this technology specifically.

I tried to give the producer the benefit of the doubt. I expressed my many ethical and creative concerns around AI production. I asked if there was still a possibility of traditional production with a real live cast and a real live crew. The producer paid lip service to this idea, but once the announcement of the AI studio went public, it was clear to me that it was only ever that. I quickly got on the phone with my reps and my lawyer and asked out of the option agreement. I would gladly send the money back if it meant keeping my script and my soul intact. Surprisingly, the producer did not push back. It’s probably not a coincidence that the other movies in the announcement slate are all from unproduced screenwriters.

What’s the lesson? We now live in a world where we can’t take traditional paths to production for granted. We need to ask a prospective partner’s feelings about AI and even bar it contractually if we can. Yes, this producer kept their intentions hidden, but there was also nothing in their filmography or reputation that gave soulless AI tech bro vibes. Next time, I will definitely be asking.”

Craig: Wow.

John: Wow. A whole journey there. Usually, people are writing in for advice. In this case, the person is giving advice, but I thought it was good to keep all the context in there because this is a real thing that writers will be facing. You and I may not face it directly, but I think a lot of our listeners could be encountering this where, in a general case, you enter into an agreement thinking that you’re making one kind of movie, like a live-action movie with actors, but you find out, oh, it’s animation or it’s generative AI where there’s no people behind it.

Craig: I’m guessing this wasn’t a WGA agreement.

John: There’s nothing prohibiting that, no.

Craig: Oh, it’s just that it prohibits AI as literary material for the purposes of credit. The good news here is this was an option. Therefore, copyright had not yet been transferred, sold. There was no work-for-hire agreement in place. You didn’t even have to give the money back. You could just let the option lapse.

John: The producer could have exercised the option and he would have lost it.

Craig: They don’t have the money. I’m just going to say flat out, they don’t have it, but true. Hopefully, the money wasn’t a lot for the option. I guess it’s exciting when you get money for an option. It’s not so great when you have to give it back or you need to give it back. In this case, brilliant maneuver to get out of this mess.

Let’s talk a little bit, John, for a moment about, there’s a phrase that popped out here, and that is there was nothing in his résumé or past credits that would indicate AI tech bro. Probably there was. We need to think about producers in a different way than we think about writers and directors and actors. Because no matter what the quality is, if you get a writing credit, you wrote, directing, you directed, acting, you acted.

There are 12,000 flavors of producer. There are so many different kinds of producers, including producers that routinely do nothing that the producers themselves had to invent a fake guild, of which I am a member. I love that they call it a guild. It’s not.

John: It’s an association.

Craig: It’s a trade association to self-regulate which producers actually warrant the best picture award. One thing is to look at the credits. If, in movies, you see a lot of executive producer credits, well, that’s different than producer. In television, if you see a lot of producer credits as opposed to executive producers, the other way around, that’s also possibly a red flag that what this person is, and there’s no shame in it, is somebody that puts projects together but isn’t necessarily making them. And those people over time, like water, find the path of least resistance to escape and head towards money. In this case, it sounds like this guy thinks it’s AI.

John: It’s entirely possible that this producer who has a lot of credits rarely has that PGA after their name, which would indicate that they really did produce the movie. Let’s assume maybe for the sake of argument that they did produce those movies, and they’re at a place right now where they’re finding it very hard to make movies. Some tech people show up saying, “Hey, we have this generative AI technology to create the video basically on demand, and so we can film things without a studio, without people, without anything else.”

I could imagine them going to a person who has some respectable credits, who actually knows how to make some movies, and convincing him to do this. That’s also possible that it is a legit person who’s just at a certain point in their career realizing, “Okay, this is the thing I do next.”

Craig: That’s another tricky one. When you are coming up, and you’re trying to get your first thing out there, you sometimes meet people on your way up that are on their way down.

John: Very true.

Craig: Everybody’s in the middle of the ladder. Figuring out who’s on their way down can be very difficult to do, and producers are extraordinarily good at convincing you that they’re amazing. That’s part of their job. It’s part of their skillset.

In this case, what is so startling to me is that this producer thought they were going to get away with it by not saying anything until after the deal was signed. I’m going to go with idiot on that one. Great warning here. Let’s just get this out to all the lawyers around town. This should be standard now in option agreements that this material will not be used to assist in AI. It will not be a springboard for AI. There will be no AI development of this. I think that clause now needs to just be in there.

John: Let’s talk about the difference between generative AI as a technology versus animation or motion capture or other things which are different ways to do stuff. You had a good initial meeting with this producer and he was talking about a vision for the movie but apparently was describing a false vision for the movie or was being so vague about what it was he was trying to do that it’s frustrating.

Listen, would I fault Guinea Pig for making a deal with this producer that was going to try to use this AI thing? For a feature film, I think yes. I think that’s a bad look. If it was for a short film where they’re going to hire you on to do this little experiment, that’s a choice you make whether you’re going to do it or not do it.

Craig: It’s their original material. It just feels like if you’re going to go through the misery of creating something original, why then hand it off to robots to do what they do? The whole point is that you’re trying with your first thing to explain to everybody that you have value. If you immediately let them feed it into AI, you’re saying, “I don’t.” A very wise choice here. I think everybody should be looking out for this.

Also, I sure wish we could just say who these people were. We don’t happen to know who this producer is. This is the kind of person I’d love to bring on the show and just say, “Okay, let’s talk.” Not to beat them about the head and shoulders, but just to say what is going on here exactly and get under the hood of this.

John: I do wonder how this conversation will age 10 years from now. Because there’s the boundaries between what is using generative AI to do visual effects versus to film a thing and to replace the crew. Those are the first principles I think we keep coming back to, is that are you making this choice so you can avoid hiring the people whose job normally would be to do things? This does feel like that situation to me.

Craig: There are situations, I feel, where AI is replacing what I would call rote work. If the job is to take this peg and put it in this hole 4,000 times a day, well, automation has done that. That’s been around forever. That’s not AI. That’s just industrial automation. When the robots came, people in the auto industry were very concerned. Repetitive rote tasks are ultimately going to go to machinery. Words? No.

John: Words and the idea of putting together a crew to film something or a crew to animate a thing, to make those fundamental choices, that’s really what we’re pushing back against. You and I both discussed, if we are using AI tools to clean up audio in the way that we would normally have used other digital tools, I don’t see that as a crisis.

Craig: No, that is using a calculator instead of an abacus. I’m okay with that. I think with things like animation, it’s quite likely that we will progress to a place where an artist is creating the first frame of a two-second shot and the last frame, and then there is some interpolation, and then choices are made. Which one of these interpolations do I want? It will make things go faster. That’s sort of inevitable. But the key choices, I think, need to stay with us, or else we will end up with a whole lot of what the kids online call AI slop, which is a wonderful phrase.

John: I’ll try to find a link to this to talk about it. There’s a study that showed that you have people looking at a bunch of poems, and some of the poems are the actual real classic poems, and some are in the style of these things. People inevitably prefer things that are in the style of the things that are in AI. It’s just like taste is a weird thing. There’s a reason why people sometimes want the slop.

Craig: Oh, yes. Well, we know. We play D&D every week. As is tradition, I try as best I can to provide Cool Ranch Doritos at every session. When they came up with the Cool Ranch powder in the laboratory–

John: The geniuses.

Craig: Geniuses. That is synthetic, and that is short-circuiting a lot of work that our brain normally has to do to get that rewarded. When we were kids, you would get banana-flavored taffy. It’s an ester. It’s a chemical, and it certainly doesn’t taste like banana. It tastes like something else. It goes right into happy center in your brain way faster than a fricking banana would.

John: Oh, yes.

Craig: AI is artificial flavoring, and it is chemicals. Yes, it can do those things. At some point, somebody does still have to make new stuff.

John: I continue to believe that as we move into this next decade, and more synthetic entertainment becomes online, I do think there will be a gravitation towards some live, in-person things, artistic plays that are staged in front of you. You feel like, “Oh, this is actually really happening. I’m not being fed a thing. This is a real moment.”

Craig: Absolutely, yes. Spontaneity and connection will not go away.

John: Agreed. All right, let’s get to our first topic today, which is something that I realized this past week was a thing I felt a lot at the start of my career. It never really went away. It just changed a little bit. I want to describe early in my career, and I’m sure you’ll recognize what this feels like.

I remember waiting for word back from an agent who was reading my script at CAA. I would come back from work every day and look at my answering machine, which was actually a physical box answering machine, to see if there was a blinking light, if there was a message from this producer, whether this agent at CAA had read it and hopefully liked it.

I’m waiting for like a month every day looking for that thing. There’s just a constant waiting. Early in my career as well, my scripts were being sent out and I was waiting to hear back from stuff.

Then this last month or two, and I’m being a little bit vague on some of these projects, but these are the kinds of things I was encountering, which was on one project waiting for the big boss to sign off on making my deal because it’s a lot of money. There’s a lot of speculation around town that this person may not be in that job anymore. Oh, well, does he actually have the power to sign off? Do you even want him to sign off? Do you want to wait for the next person? Because if he goes, then it becomes a project under the old regime.

Craig: Sure. I like the race between pay me and get fired, which will win– That’s exciting.

John: Another example of waiting is waiting for notes on a draft because the director is off busy shooting another movie. Waiting to take out a project because the rights holders have another franchise that they’re currently out shopping and they don’t want to confuse the market. Waiting for the company boss before taking out a different pitch because their attention is divided. I just want to talk about waiting. The frustration of a screenwriter is that you’re generating work, but you’re also waiting for results and for other people to do stuff.

Craig: It’s incredibly frustrating. Having now been on both sides of that ball, I can say that the waiting is worse. The making people wait is a constant churning guilt. But at some point, there is your limit for attention and your ability to focus on things because there’s a lot. The people who are making these decisions typically have too many decisions to make, too much stuff to read, and then the waiting happens.

Also, in our business, crises tend to occupy everyone’s time all the time. If you’re not a crisis, you just fall back to secondary position. We have to make peace with this horrible feeling, what Melissa calls sitting in your discomfort. We have to sit in our discomfort, which is awful. It is the most brutal indication that we are not in control of anything at all.

John: Let’s talk about control because I think one of the real gifts we have as writers is unlike actors and other people who make movies, we do have the agency to just go off and do other stuff. We’re not waiting for someone to give us permission to do our trade, a director needs to be hired on to do a thing. An actor needs to be hired on to perform in a role. We can just do new stuff. Obviously, the simplest advice is, well, go off and write the next thing and don’t spend too many brain cycles worrying about that other thing.

I don’t want to let us off completely there because I do think there is a responsibility for checking in and reminding people and finding ways to check in without being so annoying that they hate you. Most times, they won’t, but you are sometimes creating a bit of guilt so they actually do pay attention.

There’s a balance between how often you should do it and how often your reps should do it. I think one of the things I’ve learned over the years is how to stagger it so that the reps check one week and I check the next week.

Craig: Sure. Little pro tip for reps out there, and I’m sure they all do this. One of the things that happens with people whose attention is very divided is that they will swivel towards the potential for a loss as opposed to looking for the potential for a win. If a rep calls and says, “Hey, just reminding you. My client wrote this great script, you really should read it. That’s the potential for a win.” They’re like, “Oh, I’ll get to it.” “Hey, the script that we sent you, we would really like for you to be this person’s agent or this producer. Heads up, a couple other people now are on top of it and we’re getting a lot of incoming calls. Just doing you the courtesy of letting there’s heat now.” Oh, I might lose something? Oh, here we go.”

A little bit of a psychology there. It is much harder to do as the writer than it is, and this is why reps are useful. One of the reasons, I would say.

John: Agreed. Sometimes that ticking clock that you’re putting on there is John’s not going to be available anymore. Basically, you need him to do this next draft. We’re past the reading period and now it’s time to go on to the next thing. We should describe a reading period.

Craig: Sure.

John: In our episode where we talked about your contract, for each step in your deal, so writing a first draft, for example, there’s a certain number amount of time for you to deliver that first draft. You turn it in and then it starts a reading period. Reading period’s often four weeks. Could be longer, but it’s negotiated. It’s written down in your contract. They will ignore that. Expect that to be the minimum amount of time it will take them to read this and get you back to notes.

It’s useful that it’s in your contract because then if they come back to you after that time and say like, “Hey, we need to start this next thing.” They pass the reading period. You’ve got some negotiating room to say like, “He’s actually doing this next thing first because we missed this.” It’s also an invitation for your reps to call when that reading period is about to be over and say, “Hey, just so we know, this is the thing.” Occasionally, I’ve even been able to get people to commence me on the next step, even though they really haven’t given me notes because–

Craig: What happens is there’s a point where whatever the optional is for the next step, that number, that pre-negotiated number, only applies for a certain amount of time. If they missed that time, and this happened to me earlier in my career, where they blew past it, didn’t realize it, then they greenlit the movie. Then they said, “Okay, it’s time for you to do your optional polish.” We were like, “What optional polish?” Now it’s greenlit. We have a gun to your heads. I ended up getting paid more for that polish than I did for the first draft because they blew through it and they screwed up.

Patience is one of those things that is highly recommended, only because we aren’t in control and we don’t know where the ball is going to bounce. We think that we are responsible to force the issue. The answer, whether it’s I like this, I don’t like this, I want you to be my client, I want to make this or I don’t, is actually fairly unpredictable. The factors that lead to that decision are far beyond simply the writing.

If you wait three more days, something crazy can happen and now everybody wants to do it. You wait three more days, something horrible might happen and nobody wants to do it. Your specific movie about this one person and this one, “Tom Cruise just signed on to do the same story somewhere else, you’re done.” There’s no way of knowing. I think distressingly, Zen is called for here. Don’t be passive, don’t give up, but also be aware that whatever you do, maybe you can impart about 10% of spin on the ball and the rest of it is up to fate.

John: The other thing I want to make sure listeners hear out of this is sometimes that the waiting, the maybe, the we’ll see, is actually just a soft pass. No one wants to say no, and they can’t say yes. They say maybe, but really it’s no. Sometimes when you’re not hearing back from people, it really is that they passed, they’ve moved on, they’re not thinking about it anymore, but they just don’t actually want to officially say no.

That’s why I’m always so grateful when people are very upfront about like, “This is what’s happening. Sorry, this is where we’re at.” There’ve been times where I’ve vehemently disagreed on the decision but totally respected the person for actually having the courage to say, “No, this is where it’s at.”

Craig: Exactly. Maybe without conditions is no. If it’s maybe, the following three things need to happen, but if they do, then yes, and you understand those three things? Okay, let’s see if those three things happen. Now, sometimes because people don’t like saying no, they’ll say maybe these three things have to happen. One of them is Jesus needs to come back. Okay, if you create an impossible condition, then it’s no also.

John: We’re waiting to see what the market’s like in a month or two months. It’s a no. It could potentially come into a yes, but it’s not likely to be a yes. You really should not pin any hopes on that.

Craig: Typically, when we’re dealing with large companies, the amount of money that we’re talking about here is not enough to rattle a stock price, nor is it an amount that gets shaken loose by the market. They have it or they just don’t want it. Because if you said, “Okay, we can wait for the market. Just FYI, Spielberg wants to do it over there. Let me know how the market is by tomorrow morning. Otherwise, we’re going to Spielberg.” They’ll buy it before you hang up the phone. As we often said, almost everything but money is no. That’s how it goes.

John: Certainly, something you brought up early on is we recognize that sometimes we are that person who is being ambiguous or is in the maybe situation. That’s why I try to be that person who gives a clear, quick answer on things. If somebody sends me a thing for a possible adaptation or whatever, “Is this of interest to you?” I will try to take a look at it that day and I’ll try to get a no as quickly as possible if it probably is a no. On a call, I will pass on something. They sent it to me and five minutes later, I’m emailing back, “Not for me, thanks.”

There are situations where I need to stew and ruminate on things or it’s a big book to read and it’s like I’m interested and it takes a while. I just try to make it clear that this is how much time it’s going to take me to do it, this is why I’m thinking about doing it and not hold up the gears because I’ve recognized over the years, sometimes I’ve been that person, just ambiguously sitting out there.

Craig: We also have an advantage to decision making, which is that we are the people that make stuff. We’re not really operating according to heat or market interest or any of that stuff. We’re just going by instinct. One of the things that you do have to do is accept that you may not want to do something that literally everybody else does want to do. You need to be okay with that.

I’m just thinking of– there was a book that is not yet published, but it’s in galleys and went around. It was a proposal and I understood the story behind it. I read the proposal and I thought, “Yes, this will probably be quite good in adaptation. I don’t want to be the one to adapt it.” Now, I need to make my peace with that because I’m pretty sure in about three days, I’m going to read that somebody incredible is doing it, which is exactly what happened. I was okay with that because I made my peace with it. I think it’s harder for the other side because they panic. There have been situations where people call back and they’re like, “Wait, did I say no? I meant yes.” No backsies.

John: No backsies, yes.

Craig: No backses.

John: That FOMO, getting over that fear of missing out.

Craig: FOMO.

John: That’s really what it is. I’ve also been in that situation. When I feel it, something that’s helpful for me is to get right back and say, “This is going to be such a great movie. I cannot wait to watch it. I’m not the person to do this. I’m sure you’re talking to X, Y, and Z. They’re going to kill it.”

Craig: It’s a very reassuring way to say, “It’s no, but it’s obvious you guys aren’t going to be left here with an unsold item. It’s going to sell. It’s going to sell to somebody great. Good news. You don’t have to worry about me being the person,” and always thank you so much for consideration because it’s true. It’s very lovely to be considered for anything. On the other side of things, I think for those of us who are stuck in limbo, waiting for things, creating a little FOMO, probably better than being thirsty.

John: Absolutely. Let’s wrap up this topic. Just getting back to what Melissa said is that making peace with the uncertainty, with the discomfort. I think sometimes just like recognizing it, labeling it, naming it. This is an open loop that I have no control over. It’s there. I see it. Now, we’re moving on and we’re doing other things. It was in that weird storm of uncertainty that I ended up writing Go. It was actually a very productive period because I was just waiting on other stuff. It’s like, I had the agency to do it and so just take advantage of what you can do as a writer, which a lot of other folks can’t.

Craig: If you can forget that you’re waiting, you win.

John: All right. Let’s get to the Three Page Challenge. For folks who are new to the podcast, every once in a while, we put out a call to our premium subscribers saying, “Hey, send us the first three pages of your screenplay, of your pilot. We will take a look at this on the air.” We put out a URL. It’s johnaugust.com/threepage, all spelled out. People fill out a little form. They say it’s okay for us to talk about this on the air. Everything we’re saying here is because people send us these things and ask for honest feedback. We are not being mean to anybody.

Craig: Have people been suggesting that we’re being mean?

John: I think some people get uncomfortable with our– This is like, “Oh, you’re ragging on them.”

Craig: They need to sit in their discomfort because we are actually so much nicer than what we have had to deal with.

John: The thing is, we’re actually saying stuff, whereas other people would just like, “Eh.”

Craig: If people are paying you, brutal.

John: Yes, that can be brutal.

Craig: Brutal.

John: Brutal. Now, Drew, help us out here because you put out the call for folks to send in these submissions. You sent out an email through the little system. Talk to us about what happened there.

Drew: Oh, yes. We got 250 submissions in less than 48 hours. It was amazing. It was really good work.

Craig: Sheesh.

Drew: My eyes are burning right now.

Craig: [laughs] You read all of them?

Drew: Basically, yes.

Craig: My God, 750 pages.

John: Now, so the filtering mechanism you’re using is we only want scripts that don’t have obvious typos that feels messy in a way that’s like, we’re going to have to talk about the mess on the page.

Drew: Typos are automatically out, and multiple submissions, I’ve caught those before too. I’ll start reading and be like, “Oh, this is the same thing. Okay, gone.”

John: Now, any other patterns you noticed in this tranche of scripts?

Drew: Yes. Actually, this one, I’ve been seeing several scripts where character age and gender are in message board formatting, if that’s the right way to put it.

John: Describe it.

Drew: F24, M30, or something like that, which is new. It sort of makes sense. [crosstalk]

John: As long as we understand what it is, as long as it didn’t stop me, I’d be fine with it. It also reminds me of an advice column like, “Me, female 35, and my partner, male 26 are doing a thing.” I get that.

Craig: F number, M number, sure.

John: Anything else you’ve noticed, Drew?

Drew: We had a few scripts with email and contact info directly under the author name. It was titled by this person, then it was sandwiched right up. I don’t know if people are doing that for the Three Page Challenge.

John: I feel like bottom left corner is a great place to put that. I like it better down there.

Craig: Sure.

John: It’s not the end of the world.

Craig: No. If I like the script, I don’t care where the email is.

John: All right. Let’s start off here with a sample called Scrambling by Tania Luna. Drew, if you could give us the synopsis for folks who are not reading along with us. If you are reading along with us, you might want to pause right now. In the show notes, you’ll find a link to the PDF. You can read the PDF and then hear what we said. For Drew, everybody else, give us the synopsis.

Drew: Veronica, 24, walks quickly through the financial district of New York City, staring at her GPS, totally lost. She asks a stranger for directions to Front Street, which all the pedestrians are happy to give her, but their directions become this confusing cacophony of words. We intercut this with moments from her childhood. Lost in her school hallways, she imagines rolling fog and shadows until a teacher finds her.

Back in present day, when Veronica ends up on Fulton Street rather than Front, she hails a cab, which takes her to her destination only a few seconds away. She enters the ONG building, where the guard asks her which suite number she’s going to, and she’s overwhelmed by the amount of words in front of her.

John: All right. Let’s start with the title page here. Scrambling is written in a jumble of fonts. I actually really like the look of it. It’s fun. Then it says written by, and then it says Lania Tuna, and then that’s stripped through, and it says Tania Luna underneath that. Fun. We’re giving a sense of what the underlying dilemma is here for this character. It’s all in Courier Prime, which is a delightful typeface. I’ve always noticed that. It all looks really good. We got the email address and the phone number in the bottom left corner. Nothing on the cover page that concerned me. I had more concerns as we started going into this. Craig, talk to us about what you’re seeing as you enter.

Craig: Let’s talk about some good things first. These pages look great.

John: They do.

Craig: The way things are spread out is the golden ideal of a blend of action and dialogue. There’s some nice white space throughout. It was very easy to read. I moved across it nicely. The sentences were all well put together. The first thing that jumped out was this description. They walk fast, but Veronica, all caps underlined. I’m fine with that. Sure, why not? Veronica, and then in parentheses, 24, mixed-race, is faster.

I’m not sure mixed race is enough because that’s a very generic way to describe somebody’s ethnicity. If you’re going to make a point that it’s mixed-race, shouldn’t we know what the mix is?

John: Yes. In the next paragraph, we’re hearing long, straight black hair, yellow backpack, bouncing as she walk, runs, but we’re not finding anything more about her. Giving us just age and–

Craig: Basically, it was like saying Veronica, 24, won’t tell you what she looks like, is faster. That’s what it felt like to me. Either don’t or do. The halfway seemed a bit odd.

Now, what happens here over these three pages appears to be the demonstration of somebody struggling with some kind of information-processing disability. The glimpse of her struggling with this as a kid was interesting, but possibly out of place in this frantic opening.

The biggest issue I have here, as far as these three-page challenges go, this is a fairly high-level one. That’s good news because I think that Tania Luna can write fairly well here, is that if you’re demonstrating that somebody has a specific processing disability, don’t show me them doing something that I think they would be able to do regardless. If you’re 23 years old and you know that you have some issues processing information, direction, street names, things like that, and you’re going for a job interview, you will prepare. You’re not going to be helpless. You’re not going to wake up that morning and go, “Oh, right, I forgot I have extreme dyslexia or extreme dysgraphia, or I cannot remember names or places, or I’m face-blind.”

You know these things. Would it not be more interesting to meet this person in a situation where they did feel self-assured because they had prepared, and then something happens that they weren’t expecting, and then we see the expression of this disability and what it means for this person.

John: Yes. I think my frustration with the three pages on the whole was that it was three pages of just getting somebody to an office in a way that didn’t feel like, I didn’t learn that much about Veronica over the course of these three pages. I didn’t know anything specific about what she was. I didn’t get a sense of what her issue was. It’s some sort of information processing issue that she was overwhelmed by this scenario, but I didn’t know much specific about her, and that started with not getting a clear visual of her at the start.

I want to talk about just the very first lines here. With the New York City Financial District, skyscrapers jetted out of concrete like shiny Lego towers made by a kid without much of an imagination. I don’t see that specifically.

Craig: It’s also unnecessary because we know–

John: We know what skyscrapers are.

Craig: Yes, we know what New York looks like.

John: Cabs honk as they whiz by, a few meter trees, leaves yellow, dot the sidewalk. Not helping me get so much. Here’s my concern, tourists. So many tourists wander with the locals, business suits, business shoes, business expressions. I don’t associate a lot of tourists with the Financial District, so I think highlighting that there are people in business suits doing Wall Street work and that Veronica is maybe not part of that is actually more useful to us than the confusing thing of the tourists in there because I don’t understand who Veronica is in relationship to people she’s walking around. The GPS on her phone, the GPS just feels– it makes me think, “Oh, are we in the ‘90s?”

Craig: Right. It’s an incredibly ambiguous concept. It’s a technology that underpins all the other things we have.

John: We refer to it as a separate thing anymore.

Craig: Is she using Google Maps? Is she using Waze? Is she using Apple Maps? GPS is like a Garmin device.

John: Absolutely. Call up the map on her phone, which is fine. Beyond that, I mostly get it. Cutting back to the elementary school was probably not the right choice for cutting back and forth in these first pages leads me to think that we’re going to do this all the time in the movie, and that’s not, my friend. I get a little bit nervous about jumping back to the grade school so much at the start.

Craig: If you do jump back to the grade school, I need to know that it’s her memory. Otherwise, it’s the movie doing it, in which case I’m just frustrated. I feel, in this case, like the movie just said, “Oh, now, here’s her as a kid,” not okay, on her face, panicked, sweaty. There’s this memory of her being panicked and sweaty in a hallway. You’re absolutely right, where we place her in the beginning, none of those things are in service of her character. They don’t create specific obstacles. It isn’t a question that we almost missed her because she wasn’t interesting, but then we realized that’s part of the issue. It wasn’t that she was moving faster than everybody or getting jostled. Why the street? Why the here? What’s going on? Why not just, boom, panicked, running?

John: I want to get back to the thing you said early on. I said a person with this situation, this information processing disorder, would have a strategy going into it. They’d have a plan for coping ahead. That might actually be a more interesting thing. If we’re going to cut away from the moments, it might be more interesting to see what her plan was for that day, and then watch it fall apart.

Craig: Yes, exactly. You sit there and you make a plan. If I’m watching a 23-year-old young woman at night in her apartment practicing the map, practicing the movements, I would be so curious as to why. Then when I see her the next day moving, and I’m like, “Oh, okay, so she has some issue. That’s why she prepared this.” Then, “Oh, Con Ed has closed the street off. You can’t go that way. Oh, no.” Then I’m connected to her panic because I’m experiencing it. I’m part of it because I’ve been prepared for it.

One thing to consider, and I don’t know if Tania has this processing disorder or not, but one thing I would suggest, Tania, is to think, okay, sometimes reality gets in the way of what we think would be dramatic. Don’t worry. Better to be realistic. Then say, well, then what are the pettier, the smaller, the more mundane obstacles that will be unique to this situation?

John: As you were talking, I was thinking about, let’s say she’s coming from uptown to the Financial District. She gets on a train and she assumes it’s local and it’s going to stop, but it turns out to be an express, and so she goes three stops too far. We’ve all been in a situation where we’re like, wait, you just saw the stop go past you. We can handle that. We have an expectation of how we can handle that, but if we then cut back to her planning for how many stops it’s going to be, and you realize like, “Oh, this is a much bigger deal to her than it would be to me,” we’re leaning in, we’re curious.

Craig: Yes. If we replace this character with a blind character, we would not accept an opening where this blind character is moving through the New York streets with their cane, completely unaware of where they are. You would prepare, but we would be very invested if, for instance, like what you just said happened, and you realize, “Oh, my preparation is useless now. Now what do I do?” That creates connection with the character. What we don’t have here is a rooting interest because we’re just watching. We’re not invested.

John: Agreed.

Craig: I will say the ability to put sentences together, to lay things out in a convincing way, read, it was smooth as silk, so it’s all promising.

John: Absolutely. We’re sure pitching a better version of what’s already been solved.

Craig: Which we usually don’t have the opportunity to do, so that’s a good sign.

John: It is, agreed. Drew, our writer also sent through the logline to explain what’s happening in the full script. Tell us what else is happening in Scrambling.

Drew: The logline is, a dyslexic woman with a wild imagination accidentally lands a high-stakes job and must scramble to prove she belongs in a cutthroat corporate world that wasn’t built for her to succeed.

Craig: Yes.

John: That’s right. It’s working girl. Great, love it.

Craig: Sure.

John: Let’s move on to our next script by Leah Newsome. This is Lump. Drew, help us out.

Drew: A desert town in the year 2140. Very pregnant Ingrid, early 30s, is being given a cervical exam by a doula in an old dingy motor home. The doula is feeling for something. She finds it, says no, and ends the exam. Ingrid hangs her head. On her way out, the doula encourages Ingrid to go to a hospital across the border as they’re cleaner. Ingrid is reluctant. Driving home, odd beeps and screeching comes over the radio. Ingrid accidentally swerves into oncoming traffic but avoids a crash. At home, Ingrid makes tea but panics when she drops some of the water on the floor. Sean enters, informing her that the water filter was jammed, and fence was cut.

John: All right, and so on the title page here it says, “Inspired by the mythical epic The King of Tars.” I’ve never heard of The King of Tars.

Craig: I’ve never heard of The King of Tars

John: I believe it exists.

Craig: It has to.

John: It makes me curious.

Craig: Yes.

John: Yes, and I also like that you’re saying the medieval epic because it’s like, nothing about this feels medieval. Great.

Craig: Yes, that’s inspiring.

John: Yes, if you’re just making it up just to pique our curiosity.

Craig: Brilliant.

John: Brilliant.

Craig: Actually, a genius movie.

John: Well played. All right, let me start us off here. We are starting off in this doula’s motorhome. I like the visuals that we’ve got here. I like sort of how we’re being set up. The super title over it says The Excised Lands 2140. I bristled a little bit at The Excised Lands. It just gave me that sort of fantasy sci-fi thing.

Craig: Slightly fanfic-ish name.

John: Yes, fanfic-ish. Yes, it does feel a little bit like that. This is a small thing. In the Courier Typeface, you use dash, dash. There’s no such thing as like a long em dash. Whatever Leah’s doing here to create those em dashes, those long dashes in the first paragraph and second paragraph, just a little bit weird. Just it bumped for me. I noticed it. Not a big thing.

What is a little bit bigger of a thing for me is fourth paragraph. She leans over Ingrid’s legs, finding the right angle. The last person who’s named was Ingrid. I didn’t realize it was the doula immediately. Just say doula. Just keep it. It’s that read to make sure that everything is unambiguous the first time you take a look at it. I was a little bit frustrated by the end of this first scene. Doula says, “Sorry.” I wanted more. I felt you were being ambiguous for no purpose. The doula would have said more there.

Craig: Yes, this is the reaction. The doula is doing a vaginal examination to check what? Dilation possibly to see if it’s time for the baby to be born. It’s a cervical exam. Cervical exam would imply, yes, that it is. We’re checking dilation, right? Then the doula feels for something difficult to find. The cervix is not difficult to find. Now I’m like, “Okay, well, what is difficult?”

John: Is something else happening in there?

Craig: Something else happening. Okay. We are in the future. Are we hoping for a two-headed baby? I don’t know. All I know is that the doula says, “No,” which is very casual. No, sorry. Ingrid drops her head onto the table defeated. It’s a bit like, I didn’t get the job. Not my baby’s dead. If your baby isn’t ready to be born, then that would be a different response. I had no idea what I was meant to feel there.

John: Yes. Here’s why it matters because we’ve established she’s very pregnant. We say that she’s very pregnant. We’re just seeing this exam or calling a cervical exam. Then the idea that she’s going to cross the border to do a doula makes me wonder, and not in the right way, is to wonder what’s going to happen next. I feel like if she’s close enough that she’s there for this exam, that the baby’s just about to come.

Craig: Let’s talk a little bit about the post-apocalypse, if I may.

John: Do you have any experience about that?

Craig: When you begin, it’s important to introduce changes slowly. The things that are contrasted to our life are important, but you don’t want to just pile on 12 of them at once.

John: No.

Craig: Because now nobody knows really what the rules are. Nobody knows quite what the connection is to the past. There’s so much going on here in this first scene that I don’t– They don’t have stirrups. She’s got to hold her own legs back. It’s in a motor home, but they do have rubber gloves or latex gloves. Then there’s an oil drum fire pit, which I have to say, I have a rule on The Last of Us.

John: No oil drum fire pits.

Craig: No oil drum fire pits. It is the most possible cliche thing to do in the apocalypse.

John: Where do we think– Was it Mad Max where we first established the post-apocalyptic oil drum fire pit?

Craig: I don’t know.

John: Because they used to actually exist. In the Great Depression, that was actually a way that people kept warm.

Craig: From oil drums? It was a metal thing.

John: It was a metal– [crosstalk]

Craig: When do you find– Oil drums exist. You’ll see oil drums in the second season of The Last of Us, but not for braziers. Isn’t it rare to just see oil drums with the top lopped off that you can fill with garbage and light on fire, and they’re always on the street corner? I think it’s because it’s just they’re easy to source for productions. They’re at a height that makes it interesting. Otherwise, people have to sit. I don’t know. Anyway, but here’s what I really don’t understand. There’s an oil drum fire pit and it’s 100 degrees out.

John: Yes.

Craig: What? What?

John: Yes. What is that? They’re playing a card game near the fire.

Craig: Why would they be near the fire sweating through their clothes when it’s 100 degrees? Now, that may be explained also, but then I want the script to tell me that’s weird. At least to acknowledge to me, I’m supposed to note that that’s strange. One thing I do think that would help this is if we took the excise land 2140, moved it down a bit.

John: I was about to say the same thing. If that’s, as she’s getting back to her truck and everything else, that’s when we’re saying that, great. Because then also it makes that first scene clean. It can be about the duelist medical examination. We’ll notice like, okay, is this just a– what’s happening here?

Craig: Generally, you want to put that title over the widest possible shot.

John: Agreed.

Craig: Where you get the full scope of the world and you go, “Oh yes,” that’s not just that I’m in this horrible junkyard or a terrible mobile park. Look at the horizon, look at the sun, look at the sky, look at whatever.

John: I want to make a proposal for the second scene. In the second scene, we’re outside the motor home and Ingrid is walking to her truck. She gets in her truck. I would propose that we start the scene a little bit later on, because right now we have an action line. Ingrid pulls her keys out of her pocket. That’s not an interesting line to give to itself. If she were to get into the truck at that point and the rest of the conversation is there, then we can end on the finally get the car to start the engine rumble into life. I would say just get us into that car sooner. It’s probably going to be your friend.

Craig: This is also a place where knowing where people are and how motion is functioning will help. Why is the doula following her? I didn’t even know the doula was following me until she started talking. Is she trying to keep up with Ingrid? Is she worried about Ingrid? What she’s saying here, I can’t tell what the intention is. Is she worried for Ingrid’s life? Is she just being just a know-it-all? I can’t tell because I don’t know how she’s moving with her.

John: Yes. If that first line from the doula is like, listen, you could probably make it in time if you left now. If she was following her and like that’s the first line, in the sense that she’s restating a thing she said before.

Craig: Also it says exterior doula’s motorhome day. The motorhome door slams behind Ingrid and the doula. That’s it.

John: Who slammed it?

Craig: Then they don’t seem to be walking. They’re just standing there. Is the truck right next to the motorhome? Where is everything? This is the classic Lindsey Durant question. Where are they standing? Are they moving? Where is the truck? Where are the women relative to the motorhome?

John: My instinct is they should be in motion as the scene starts.

Craig: It feels like they should be in motion because I would understand that the doula is worried about her. For the doula to be worried about her, I need to go back to the prior scene where Ingrid drops her head onto the table, defeated, then starts to get up. The doula goes, “Wait, wait, wait.” Cut to, boom. “Hold on, hold on.” Just because I don’t know why this next bit is happening. Just thinking about how people actually function. They don’t just do nothing and then suddenly appear together outside of the door. Find the intention.

John: Yes, agreed. As we get into Ingrid’s truck, she’s driving back. I was confused by the radio voice because the radio voice to me feels like, at first I thought, is it a dispatcher? No, it’s just convenient radio-

Craig: It’s the news.

John: -telling up the news.

Craig: It’s the news. I really struggle with this. Three arrested west of the former municipality of Phoenix.

John: Oh, come on.

Craig: If it is 2140, you’re not calling it the– That’s like us referring to New York as the former New Amsterdam today. We don’t do that, right? You could call it west of Phoenix territory or west of– Fallout would call it New Phoenix. That’s what they do. New Vegas. Why is there just this casual– If you have this casual news update, I feel like there’s way more civilization going on than we thought there would be.

John: With this last line, suspects were found with stolen rations on their persons. That feels police-y. That feels like police dispatcher. Finding the right level for that is interesting.

It sounds like, Leah, we’re really harping on a lot of stuff. I want to love this. I actually like the space of it. I love a pregnant woman in this space and trying to make a decision about what to do next. We’re about to get to Sean, who’s apparently the father of the kid. We’re about to meet him. That scene is better. We don’t know who Sean is. He’s not given any other uppercase name. I’m curious to keep reading based on what you’ve done so far.

Craig: Yes. I love a scene that begins with a cervical exam. If you start with a cervical exam, hats off, good for you. Audacious, bold. There is a lot of clunky, cliche, sci-fi stuff going on here that you have to be better than because you just don’t want to end up in a Wattpad world with this stuff, right?

Last thing is to just think about where everybody is, give the audience a chance to visualize things. It means say less and make the things you say matter more. We are interior cat house evening. What does the exterior look like? Where is it? I don’t know.

John: I don’t know what interior cat house means.

Craig: I don’t know either. Cat house could be whore house.

John: Yes.

Craig: Then it says her house. I don’t know what’s going on. Then, listen, Sean is saying a bunch of things that I suspect are intentionally confusing. The filter, what is it? The fence, don’t know. Something with the water. Not sure. All fine.

John: All fine. He’s entering in as if he’s just continuing a previous conversation, which makes sense for people who know each other well.

Craig: She knows something from the doula. She hasn’t told him. Am I looking at her face? Is she contemplating telling him? Is she worried about telling him?

John: I don’t know what she knows.

Craig: I don’t know either. All I know is that she doesn’t seem to be concerned about it here anymore either. I think all this is to say to Leah, “If there’s one word I could give you, Leah, as advice for this, it is to focus. Focus in on what you want me to see. Focus in on why it matters. Focus in on, visually, on your frame, the movement, all of it.”

John: Yes, watch the scenes.

Craig: Watch the scenes. These feel written. They don’t feel watched.

John: All right, Drew, can you help us out? What is the log line? What else is going to be happening in Lump?

Drew: Over a century into the water crisis, a couple moves to the former state of Arizona where they’re pulled into a violent and mystical cult of doulas following the birth of their Lumpchild.

Craig: Okay. My interest is piqued. I’ve never considered that there would be a cult of violent doulas. That’s hysterical. I don’t know what a Lumpchild is. Cool. A lot of questions.

John: A lot of questions. I would say I’m intrigued because the fact that the doulas are an important part of the whole story, I wasn’t getting that out of them.

Craig: Not at all.

John: I’m surprised that thing we saw in the first frame is actually a crucial part of the whole rest.

Craig: Because they showed us doula.

John: Doula, yes.

Craig: Not doulas.

John: There were other dusty old women out there, but–

Craig: They were playing cards by a fire in 100-degree heat. The thing that I think is missing from that log line that I’d love to hear is some brief reference to why doulas matter at all in this new world, or at least more than they did now, or why they would conglomerate into a violent cult in a world with terrible infertility problems. Yes. In a world where no new babies have been born. In a world where only 1 out of 1,000 children survive. Something to create relevance so that it’s not just– Because you could take the word doulas out and replace it with janitors, bubblegum manufacturers, girl scouts.

John: It doesn’t matter. The thing I was missing in that log line is Ingrid must make a choice. Basically, what is the decision that this central character has to make? Yes.

All right, let’s get to our third and final three-page challenge. This is The Dread Pirate Roberts, written by J. Bryan Dick. Drew, help us out.

Drew: “We’re dropped from space down towards earth, specifically the Carolina coast, and into the middle of a 17th-century naval battle between two ships, the Revenge, which is filled with pirates, and the Queen’s Pride, which is a Navy ship. The captain of the Queen’s Pride believes they’re winning, sends his steward, Wesley, 18, to go get his victory snuff. As he does, the Revenge turns and rams the Queen’s Pride, and pirates storm the ship. Too scared to do it himself, the captain gives Wesley a dagger to cut them free from the pirates’ grappling hooks. Wesley is quickly stopped by a pirate named Scars, who encourages him to jump into the ocean like the rest of the Navy sailors.

Wesley pretends to run away but grabs a rope and slingshots back and knocks out Scars to cut the rope. Soon, a pirate in all black soars over them all, swinging up to the crow’s nest triumphantly, and a knife is put to Wesley’s neck.”

John: Now, for listeners who are saying, “Hey, that sounds familiar,” we should say that underneath the title on the title page, it says, a pilot for the lost adventures of the black-masked scallywags from The Princess Bride, William Goldman’s timeless tale of true love. This is literally fan fiction.

Craig: Yes, and that’s fine.

John: Fine.

Craig: Are you allowed to sell this? No, not without permission. Are you allowed to write it as a sample? 100%. Absolutely, nothing wrong with that.

John: I actually applaud this choice, because if I needed to read a sample, and I sort of know what the source material is, can this guy write in this kind of a style? Can it? Sure, and I think, actually, J. Bryan Dick did a nice job here. I enjoyed reading these pages.

Craig: Yes, the challenge with this is the bar gets higher.

John: It does.

Craig: Because everybody’s aware that you’re cheating. You’re not creating new characters. You’re not creating a new world. You’re not creating a tone. You’re building off of something. Therefore, a little more expectation, because you haven’t had to cook at all yourself. In addition, when it’s something that’s derived from a beloved movie, like The Princess Bride, that, basically, everyone has seen in our business multiple times, you need to also nail it. It’s not enough to be good. It felt good, but I wasn’t delighted. It just sort of was a pretty typical naval battle.

Listen, you’re trying to write like William Goldman. What a target that you put on your back. It’s confident. It’s crackling. There was one moment where I thought, “Oh, there’s a missed opportunity, where the captain gets scared and sends Wesley.” That felt like it could have been a little bit more of a Goldmanesque turn from overconfident bravery to, oh, you there. I have a thought. It just felt so quick as to be almost arbitrary. Yes. It’s a naval battle. I will say, I appreciated that J. Bryan didn’t bury us in action description. The boats collide and side by side. Got it. Okay. I can do that math.

John: Absolutely. We were focused on characters during it, which was crucial. I did feel there was a missed opportunity with the captain who’s just captain. Give that captain a name that crackles. His first line is only okay. The first line is, these pickeroons will be food for the sea. Reload. Make this pass our last. There’s a better version of that first line. I like pickeroons, but like these pickeroons will feed the sea, man. Something about that could feel fun. Let us also know that this is a bit of a comedy, because I didn’t feel like we were quite getting to the joke. Even though the captain is not going to be a crucial character, he’s the first person who speaks, and that becomes important.

Craig: Yes. That’s the issue is everything has to be as good as The Princess Bride.

John: Reading this made me think back to Mindy Kaling when she was on the show. We were talking about when she’s staffing for shows, she gets frustrated by reading original pilots, and she’s like, “I really miss the day when you would read, specs of existing shows, because then you can see like, can this person write in somebody else’s voice?” That’s obviously what she needs to know. It’s this, can this person do somebody else’s thing?

I think what’s nice about this is, as a sample would be like, “Oh, this person is adaptable and can answer, can get a thing, which is really useful.” In a weird way, I suspect that this pilot script, which you can’t shoot. If it’s all at this quality and beyond this quality, will be useful because it shows the ability to match a style that’s not their own.

Craig: This would obviously hinge on the relationship between Wesley and the Dread Pirate Roberts. The promise of that story is enough to keep me going. One thing that’s important tonally is that The Princess Bride was framed as a tale where a grandfather is reading from a novel to his grandson. I think that that is baked in to the world of The Princess Bride. Even if you just want to start inside of it, which I think is reasonable, here’s what you can’t do.

On page three, Scars says, “What’ll it be, boy?” With that, young Wesley charges to the side of the ship. Scars reacts. That was too easy. Young Wesley doesn’t go overboard. He launches himself into a taut rope and slingshots back at Scars. Scars says, “Oh, shi–.” We don’t curse in The Princess Bride. Ever. That’s not a thing. We don’t do that. Understanding tone is massively important.

John: Absolutely. That oh, sh, could be a reaction from Scars. You can put that in italics after that. We wouldn’t say it.

Craig: We just wouldn’t. We would not say that.

John: We would not say that. That idea of do you, will J. Bryan Dick adopt that framing that this is a tale being told within this? Maybe. I can imagine at a certain point, I think something just stops. It’s like, but what happened next? Sure. Absolutely.

Craig: Yes. Promise of fun. Zippy pages to read. Not a ton of what I would call fresh invention here. Enough to make me wonder like, okay. I will say like the great idea here is to meet the Dread Pirate Roberts. Because we never met him. Yes. We met Wesley. He was not the first Dread Pirate Roberts. [crosstalk]

John: That’s fine. What’s also helpful about this is like, if you had to pick between 10 things to read and you saw this one, it’s like, oh, I know what this is going to be. There’s something comfortable about that.

Craig: Absolutely.

John: Drew, help us out. What else? The long line for the rest of this pilot.

Drew: Set in the Princess Bride world, the Dread Pirate Roberts TV series, follows the adventures of each person who donned the black mask to sail the high seas and command the Revenge.

John: Oh, well, that’s an interesting idea that it’s not just Wesley. It could also be like the history of.

Craig: Then why are we starting with Wesley?

John: What, that he was the last one?

Craig: Then we go backwards?

John: Maybe there’s a whole cadre of other folks who are still around and a lot.

Craig: I don’t want to watch that. I’ll tell you why. Because television shows, unless they are anthology shows like Black Mirror, where everything is a different story. It’s about connecting with the characters and relationships. I want to watch the Dread Pirate Roberts tutor this young lad, to whom he says at the end of every day, “Well done, probably kill you in the morning,” and then doesn’t. I want to see that father-son relationship happen. I don’t want to just keep meeting new Dread Pirate Robertses.

John: Yes, I do. I guess the version of this I want is basically Hacks, but it’s pirates.

Craig: Sure. Did you see Our Flag Means Death?

John: I did not get into Our Flag Means Death. But it’s in that same space, for sure.

Craig: It is in that same space, although definitely a different tone. What I loved is you got to meet this ship full of wackos and got under the hood of those wackos. It was appreciated if I kept going to different ships and different people.

John: I doubt that’s really what’s happening here. This reminds me of, because I was just editing the chapter on what kind of story this is. Basically, we’re talking through in this strip dance book chapter, I have this idea. Is it a movie idea? Is it a TV idea? There is a movie idea for the Dread Pirate Roberts, where it’s all contained within one thing. The TV show version of this is fun in the same way that Cheers is fun. Is that like you are following a group of people and sort of the adventures of the week.

Craig: They don’t change.

John: Exactly. They don’t change.

Craig: That’s the key. Every week we meet a new bartender in Cheers. That part, I do think it would be a wonderful, I presume that this would be a movie.

John: It feels like it should be a movie. Let’s talk about just the final, could you actually make this thing? You could if this were terrific. I don’t know who owns the rights. Is it Castle Rock? Who would own this?

Craig: Yes. It’s Castle Rock, but you would probably need– yes, you wouldn’t need permission from William Goldman. Unless you were, no, you might-

John: Because of the underlying book.

Craig: Because of the underlying book.

John: Yes. I suspect in buying the rights to the book.

Craig: They probably bought it all out in perpetuity across the universe for all time. Yes, you’re probably right. Then it would be Castle Rock. Not impossible, but you’d have to know there would be a tremendous outcry.

John: There would be. The standards would have to be really high.

Craig: This is meant for, hey, I’m a good writer. Not, hey, make this show.

John: Yes. I think it’s a good writing sample. We want to thank everybody who submitted, all 250 of you who submitted, especially these three writers for letting us talk about their work on the air. Drew, thank you again for burning your eyes out to read through all of 250 of these.

Craig: I don’t know how you did that.

John: It is time for our one cool things. My one cool thing is a show that’s actually in the same space. It’s a specific episode of a TV series called The Goes Wrong Show.

Craig, you may have seen on Broadway, there’s a show, The Play That Goes Wrong. There’s also a TV series, which the premise is that it’s a theater troupe that puts on a show for television each week. A director explains what the goal was and also tells what challenges they felt they encountered that week. Never mind, it’s going to go fine for this live TV thing. Of course, things go wrong at the premise.

The episode, if people are, if that’s at all appealing to you, the episode I recommend to folks is one called 90 Degrees. It’s a Tennessee Williams type play. The premise of the episode is that the set designers mistook 90 Degrees as instructions for how one set was supposed to be built.

Craig: Everything is turned.

John: Everything is turned. It’s turned 90 degrees. The cameras also turn 90 degrees for it. You have characters who are trying to sit around this table and they’re falling down, and gravity just works against them. It’s incredibly dumb, but also just delightful.

Craig: I love dumb.

John: It’s a thing you could also watch with your kids because it’s absurd and it’s completely safe.

Craig: Where would I find that?

John: I think we found it on Amazon Prime. I would just google and see what servers you can find it on.

Craig: Sure.

John: All right. What do you got for us?

Craig: My one cool thing is someone I met in Austin. We were down there for South by Southwest and myself and Neil Druckmann and the many of the cast of The Last of Us got to meet Cookie Monster.

John: Oh my God. Cookie Monster’s the best.

Craig: And Elmo. No offense to Elmo. Elmo’s great. Cookie Monster has been there, John, for our entire lives. It was so strange to meet a puppet as a 53-year-old and feel like you might cry because it’s like when you smell something from your childhood, it’s just this instant thing of getting back. Now, one thing I noticed about Cookie Monster that I did not expect is he’s enormous. Those puppets are huge. They’re so much bigger than you think they are. They’re so big.

It was pretty, it reminded me of how powerful Sesame Street is as a cultural institution. To the extent that these kinds of cultural institutions are being assaulted and undermined, it’s so distressing because it is just an absolute positive thing that has lasted. Every generation of children that comes along magically loves Cookie Monster. The color of the blue, just his blue made me so happy. I just want to thank Sesame Street and Cookie Monster for welcoming us into their studio. I still don’t know why, but they did. [laughter]

John: Craig, tell me, so I’ve never interacted with Muppets. Was it hard to maintain eye contact with the puppet and ignore the puppeteer?

Craig: No, because the puppeteer gets very low. There’s a camera that’s filming things and the puppeteer gets very low. In fact, there’s quite a bit of scrambling right before they roll, which is like, lower, no, see you, lower. That’s why the puppet is so big. Because it actually has to fill a lot of space below frame to make sure that the puppeteer is not in the frame.

John: That’s great. That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Drew Marquardt and edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our host for this week is by Nick Moore. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask at johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send questions like the ones we answered today. You’ll find transcripts at johnaugust.com along with a sign up for our weekly newsletter called Interesting, which has lots of links to things about writing.

We have t-shirts and hoodies and drinkware. You will find them at Cotton Bureau. You’ll find the show notes with links for all the things we talked about today in the email you get each week as a premium subscriber. Thank you again to all our premium subscribers. You make it possible for us to do this show each and every week. You can sign up to become one at scriptnotes.net where you get all those backup episodes and bonus segments like the one we are about to record on the secret things we noticed that let us know that something has been re-shot. Craig, thanks for a fun episode.

Craig: Thank you, John.

[Bonus Segment]

John: Craig, you are watching a movie, you’re watching a TV show, and your little radar is like, okay, there’s a recut here, something’s changed, something went off. What are some things that are tipping you off that things changed here?

Craig: The biggest indication is there is a rather long and explainy bit of dialogue that is not on camera. Someone is, the person who’s not on camera that’s talking to the person who is on camera says a long thing that explains a thing that they wouldn’t have normally said or needed to explain because he would have seen it, which is probably covering for the fact that that thing was essential to know for the plot, but the scene just wasn’t working and so they cut it.

John: Absolutely. We’ve both been in situations where in post, you are adding ADR lines, looping lines to take care of a little bridge or situation. ADR is used to fix little technical mistakes but also can be used to correct some narrative issues because a scene got dropped out because a scene where that information used to happen is no longer there. Watching the current season of Severance, and we’re recording this before the final episode, and I don’t really know any of the backstory on Severance, what happened this season.

Watching it, I did notice a few moments in these last few episodes where like, okay, something shifted here. One of those things, situations was a crucial word or term was used and we were not on the characters while they were saying it or we suddenly cut incredibly wide when a character says a certain phrase. It led me to believe like, okay, something shifted here. There was also a situation where one character had a confrontation, drove away to leave the show and then comes back and then leaves the show again. My suspicion is that the episode in which those were happening got shifted later on in the season and we were moving stuff around to accommodate that change.

Craig: That could absolutely be true. The interesting thing about the streaming world now is that episodes have variable lengths. It’s not necessarily the case that if you see a very short episode or a very long episode that things, may have, but sometimes when an episode is very short, it’s because there were some scenes, it’s rare to plan for an episode to be say 35 minutes if you’re an hour-long show. There may have been some things that got cut.

The other thing, let’s talk about an additive thing that is an indication. When a sequence occurs that is very self-contained and exciting, actiony, scary, sexy, one of these big, loud, noisy scenes that didn’t really feel like it needed to be there, didn’t change anything, suddenly sort of happened, didn’t impact stuff. That is oftentimes the result of a studio network going, this thing needs to be louder, sexier. I need a car chase, and so they just make one happen and shove it in. If you ever feel like something got shoved in, it’s probably because it got shoved in.

John: A thing I will notice is that you have key characters having a scene on a set with nobody else around them. It feels like a reshoot. It feels like we haven’t established anybody else in the world who could be in this thing, but we need to have this moment happen. Therefore, we’re putting them in this set. One of the recent Marvel movies, I did notice there were some sequences were like, “Wait, why are we here? What is this place that we’re in?” It’s a place that was not established. It’s a place that serves no other function, and yet we’re in this place for this one scene to happen. To me, it felt like six months later, they brought everybody back and shot this one thing.

Craig: If you see something like that that isn’t really set up and isn’t used again, either it was created for that, or there were five scenes in that thing. All of them except one guy. That’s another good point. Sometimes that can be an indication.

You’re right to suggest that sometimes it’s those scenes between two characters sitting somewhere that are additional photography, but sometimes those are the best scenes. Very famously, we had David Benioff and Dan Weiss on our show, and they talked about how in the first season of Game of Thrones, they just missed the target on how long the episode should be and needed to go back and put stuff in.

They were out of money, so they did the cheapest thing, which was write conversations between two people in a room that already exists, and lo and behold, those are some of the best scenes in season one because they’re good writers. They did a great job of creating scenes where you, what happened inside of there wasn’t just plot or filler, it helped inform the conflict and the character.

John: Yes, one of the issues with the way we make TV shows now, especially for series on streaming, is that we’ll often block shoot things. We could block shoot the entire eight episodes or 10 episodes of the season, but more likely we’re doing things in chunks and stuff moves around. I’ve talked with show owners who they need to do reshoots, and suddenly they have like four directors who are like all shooting the same week in the same space to do stuff. It gets to be really, really complicated. It’s not surprising that you didn’t go in intending the scene to work that way.

Clearly, that was what you could do with the situation you had. You have a character giving a piece of information that’s like, is not the most organic way to do a thing, but it’s who you had available at the moment to make this bridge fit.

Craig: Yes, there are all sorts of things that can go wrong. You either are on a show where you have the resources to accommodate those things. It was raining that day and we needed it to be sunny. We’re going to wait for it to be sunny and do it again. It was raining that day, we needed it to be sunny. They’re going to be in the rain, and we’re not going to really talk about it. The fact that the scene before and the scene after are on the same day are sunny, just going to happen. Things like that do happen. It is remarkable what people notice and don’t notice.

One of the things about all of these strange bumpy moments is that we’re very well attuned to them, but they wouldn’t happen so frequently if they didn’t work. They actually get away with it all the time.

John: The other thing I’ll notice about, something has changed here. A scene got dropped, something got wedged in there, endless days or nights, or it goes day to night, day to night in a way that’s not really possible. These two things could not be happening simultaneously, and that’s just a thing. No, the writers aren’t idiots. It’s just that something changed and something shifted, and this is sort of what we can do. This is where we’re at.

Craig: Yes, if something occurs that is jolting in a superficial way, it’s probably because there was something in between that got lost. If you have characters who are getting to know each other at work, and then the next scene is it’s the evening, and they’re at some sort of very swanky party, and the woman is dressed in this like rotten ballgown. The guy’s in a tux, and you’re like, where did you come from? Why is this totally occurring now in this way?

Something got lost here, and one thing that we always have to watch out for when we’re doing all of our work is that if the people who are paying for it are losing faith in it, or their faith is wobbly, they will generally resort to faster. Go faster. You don’t need that. It’s slowing us down, and they have such a lower sensitivity to things not making sense than we do. We’ll say, well, that literally will not make sense now. If we take that out, this will not make sense, and they don’t care a lot, and that’s a fight you have to have.

John: Because they are familiar with the bad version, and it’s like, let’s get rid of the bad stuff, and if we get rid of the bad stuff, it’s all really good. It’s like, no, it may just not make any sense.

Craig: In their defense, I have watched things before that I’ve enjoyed, where at some point I went, I don’t know, I don’t understand that. Anyway, okay, still, what happens next? You can get past some of those things.

Now, what’s interesting is when you have a show that is built heavily on intentional mystery/confusion puzzle boxing, like Severance, it can actually be very hard to tell. Did this happen because you’re screwing with my head? Did this happen because something went a bit awry in production? It’s hard to tell. I give Severance the benefit of the doubt that everything is intentional. There is that illusion of intentionality that no matter what we see on screen, it was exactly the way they wanted us to see it.

It could be, well, maybe that was a stylistic choice to have them say that line over this big, huge wide shot. It’s hard to tell sometimes, but it’s cumulative. You get one of those, okay, you let it go. Two, eh, you start getting four or five of those things, the boat’s going to sink.

John: Yes. Over the summer, I helped out on a show that was doing reshoots, and you’re trying to be surgical, and you’re trying to not break any of the good stuff, but there have been times where it’s like, okay, that’s actually a pretty good scene, but it just doesn’t make sense with where we are right now, and we’re going to have to take all that information and put it into a new scene where it actually is where things fit better, and that’s, the frustration is that sometimes you have to lose good stuff in order to make everything else fit together right.

Craig: I’m going to give you, I rarely do this, but I will give you a specific example from my own career. I worked on the second Snow White and the Huntsman movie, and what had happened was they had a script, well, I’d actually worked on a script, I think, and that had gotten the thing to a green light, and then someone came on to make the movie, and they rewrote the script completely, and got all the way, I think, to they were like a week away from shooting, and the studio said, “Wait, hold on, we don’t like this.”

They then came back to me and said, “You’ve got about two weeks, and here’s the deal. These sets have been built, and these people have been cast, and this stuff is occurring because we’ve already spent the money on the visual effects development, so that’s not changing, but we need to make this all make sense, and so then it became an exercise in, right: I’m going to get some blue index cards that are stuff I can’t change, and now I have all these white index cards, and I have to figure out how to lead into those blue cards and out of those blue cards and into the next blue cards in a way that is at least coherent, and then provides hopefully what the actors are looking for, the studio’s looking for, there’s a new filmmaker on board, what is that filmmaker looking for, and that was very difficult, and in the end, you don’t get a prize for solving the math problem. Basically, people didn’t like it very much because it was, you could tell, it was like something had gone wrong here.

John: Absolutely, so what you’re describing is very analogous to what I was describing in the sense of things hadn’t been shot, but they might as well have been shot because you were locked into certain sets, I was locked into certain scenes, which that already exists, we’re never giving that actor back, so we got to go get me into it now in a way and put that in a place where it actually makes sense.

Craig: It doesn’t matter how much you protest, it doesn’t matter how much you say, if you would just not have to have this in that, and they’re like, yes, but we do, so that’s what’s happening, and also, you can’t write anything that would require a new set build. We don’t have the money or the time. Those kinds of math problems are sometimes how movies happen.

John: Absolutely, and sometimes creative constraints can lead to great solutions, but in two weeks, they’re not going to likely get you the best solution.

Craig: Everybody’s thinking maybe this will be, because it’s happened, maybe this will be that chaotic thing that comes together and is brilliant, because it’s happened. Usually, the best you can hope for is coherent.

John: Let’s wrap this up by saying, these are things that we’re noticing when we’re watching other people’s projects, but there’s so many things we’re not noticing at all. The patches were so well done that even we couldn’t see it. It was like the hardwood floors, they somehow matched everything together. It’s like, wow, you did a great job, because I did not know there was that issue there at all.

Craig: Listen, the first episode of The Last of Us was the first two episodes of The Last of Us that were combined together with some stuff removed and some stuff that I redid, and just a lot of interesting, careful weaving to make it as seamless as– and to make it seem inevitable, like it was meant to be that way. Tricky.

John: Tricky, yes. When it works, it works.

Craig: When it works, it works. That’s great. Thank you.

Links:

  • Follow along with our Three Page Challenge Selections! SCRAMBLING by Tania Luna, LUMP by Leah Newsom, and THE DREAD PIRATE ROBERTS by J. Bryan Dick
  • The King of Tars
  • Sesame Street
  • The Goes Wrong Show on Prime
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!
  • Check out the Inneresting Newsletter
  • Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription or treat yourself to a premium subscription!
  • Craig Mazin on Instagram
  • John August on Bluesky, Threads, and Instagram
  • Outro by Nick Moore (send us yours!)
  • Scriptnotes is produced by Drew Marquardt and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

Scriptnotes, Episode 646: Industry Software, Transcript

July 15, 2024 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2024/industry-software).

**John August:** Hey, this is John. Heads up that today’s episode has just a little bit of swearing in it.

Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

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

**John:** This is Episode 646 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

There are many software products aimed at the film and television industry, and more in development. But why do the bad ones persist, and why is it so hard for the better ones to succeed? Today on the show, we’ll look at the challenges and opportunities around making things that don’t suck. Then it’s another round of the Three Page Challenge, where we look at pages submitted by our listeners and give our honest feedback. In our Bonus Segment for Premium Members, magic, who needs it?

**Craig:** Are we talking the card game or prestidigitation?

**John:** We’re talking about our D&D campaign at the moment. We’re 10 installments into a campaign without magic. Let’s discuss what’s worked and what’s not worked so well, what’s been surprising about that campaign.

**Craig:** Fairly niche topic, but honestly-

**John:** It is a niche topic, but that’s why it’s a Bonus Segment.

**Craig:** It’s a Bonus Segment, and really our Premium Members should be playing D&D. They’re premium, for god’s sake. They should pursue quality in their life.

**John:** I think in a more general sense though, it’s like, what happens when you don’t uphold some genre premises. Take anything. If you took a horror movie and dropped out some of the aspects of what we expect out of that genre. We just saw the movie Bodies Bodies Bodies, which is an example of that, because it looks like a one-at-a-time killer thriller thing, and yet it’s not really that.

**Craig:** I like that idea. If we had an action movie, like a cop action movie, but no one ever fired a gun. It’s an interesting exercise in self-limitation to inspire some creativity and change.

**John:** We often talk about that on the show, how constraints are the writer’s best friends and that when you have constraints, it forces you to work within that. A project that I was approached by the last couple weeks, one of the problems was that it was just a world. There was no other kind of constraints to it. The first thing I had to do is like, “What constraints am I putting on myself?” because otherwise this is just an amorphous blob.

**Craig:** Yeah, I remember talking to Scott Frank when he took the job to do the Wolverine movie. He said his condition was Wolverine has to be able to die, because otherwise, who gives a crap? Everyone was like, “But Wolverine doesn’t… ” He’s like, “Mm-hmm. So anyway, Wolverine has to die.”

**John:** In a Bonus Segment for Premium Members, we’ll talk about constraints and death, because death is a bigger factor when there’s no magic.

**Craig:** Massively so. That’s an exciting one. What do we have going on with news? Probably nothing.

**John:** There actually is some news here today, because-

**Craig:** What?

**John:** You and I are headed out of town.

**Craig:** Oh, my.

**John:** We are going to go to the Austin Film Festival, which we are often doing. We’re going this year. It’s October 24th through 31st. We are scheduled to attend. We’re gonna plan a live Scriptnotes show. We’ll probably do a Three Page Challenge. There’s talk of doing a 25th anniversary screening of Go.

**Craig:** Oh, that’s nice.

**John:** It should be fun. If you are inclined to go to Austin and are thinking about travel there, now might be a time to think about that.

**Craig:** We haven’t been there in a couple years. Is that right? Did we miss last time?

**John:** Yeah, probably two years.

**Craig:** Two, yeah.

**John:** Because I remember you didn’t go last year, and the year before that was the year you got really sick.

**Craig:** Oh my god. I got so sick. I think I got a stomach bug is what happened. No, let me revise that. I got a stomach bug. It happened. It was that 24-hour stay in bed clutching your stomach in pain after you’ve barfed your world out and then just try and drink a little Gatorade. It was miserable.

**John:** It was bad.

**Craig:** Yeah, so no one breathe on me.

**John:** A stomach bug is probably something you ate though, right?

**Craig:** Look, it may have been something I ate, but it felt like just that nasty gastritis.

**John:** We are so selling the Austin Film Festival. Come for the illness. It should be a good time. It’ll be Drew’s first time going.

**Craig:** Wow. Look, as long as your room has a toilet.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** It’s like those cruises where everyone gets norovirus. No, it’s not like that, I swear. I’ve been there many, many times. The only time I got sick. It’s actually quite fun. It’s raucous. Drew, you will be somewhat of a rockstar there.

**Drew Marquardt:** Weird.

**Craig:** It is a little weird. I gotta be honest with you. That part gets weird. People will be like, “Oh my god, it’s Drew. You sound just like… I imagined you looking different from your voice.” You get a lot of that.

**John:** Megana was a rockstar when she was there, but Megana’s always a rockstar.

**Drew:** Megana’s a rockstar though.

**Craig:** I’m not saying that you’re necessarily gonna captivate people the way Megana did.

**Drew:** I don’t have that charisma.

**Craig:** You know what? You got enough rizz. You got enough rizz.

**Drew:** I’ll take it.

**Craig:** Listen. People are gonna be talking.

**John:** We’ll put a link in the show notes to it, but Google Austin Film Festival and that’s all the information you need. Let’s do some follow-up.

Back in Episode 644, we talked about new federal reporting requirements for loan-out companies like Craig and I have and like what Scriptnotes is. That is for sure happening. But since that time, there was also a bit of a freak-out about, it looked like the California Employment Development Department was going to crack down on loan-outs in a bigger, more general sense. Cast and Crew, which is this big payroll company in Hollywood, sent out this alert right before Memorial Day, saying red alert, there could be huge changes coming here. It looks like that’s been backpedaled, but I thought we might spend a few moments talking about loan-outs, why they’re important, why a change to this would be a big, disrupting deal.

**Craig:** It’s hard to tell if Cast and Crew freaked out unnecessarily or if they freaked out necessarily. The fact is that loan-out corporations function essentially to protect Hollywood workers, duly artists, from being overtaxed, essentially. Some people could argue that loan-out corporations exist to keep artists below the line of fair taxation. There’s a fair debate to be had about it.

That said, literally every single writer, actor, director, producer that is, let’s just say, succeeding is working with a loan-out corporation. It is par for the course. California already has quite a high tax rate. We are taxed twice. You do actually get taxed as a corporation. Then you get taxed as an individual. It really exists because there are a lot of deductions that you can take as a corporation that you can’t take as an individual.

I have no doubt that once this letter went out, the unions and people that donate a lot of money to California politicians called those chips in and said no, don’t do that, and somebody then yelled at the EDD, who was probably some guy there who was like, “What is this all about? [Indiscernible 00:06:59].” Then he got like 15 texts in 12 minutes, like, “You’re gonna die.” It looks like the fight is over.

**John:** The fight is over. At least it’s been stalled or it’ll change a different way of approaching it. Listen. Loan-out corporations are a weird thing. It is strange to set up a system where you have companies that basically have one employee, or sometimes two with an assistant or something. It’s a weird way to do it, and yet the way that we work is just sort of weird.

I can both understand why regulatory agencies might say, “No, listen, these are employees. You should just treat them like employees,” and it’s also strange that above a certain earning threshold it makes more sense to go through a loan company rather than me being paid directly. It is kind of weird, and yet trying to change the system now would be so, I think, disastrous. You’d have to have a real, clear plan for how you were gonna do this.

**Craig:** Yeah, it would cost so much money that you might end up losing some people to neighboring states. It would be that crazy. The name “loan-out,” you might as well say it’s a fake corporation. You might as well use the word “fake.” Yes, it’s a weird bit of paperwork dancing, but it is, what, forever, right?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** How long have these things been going on? Long before we showed up. That’s for sure.

**John:** Oh, yeah. It’s easier for big companies to hire other big companies. For this job I’m just finishing up now, it was on a rewrite for something. It was complicated. But they chose to pay me through their payroll company rather than through just the normal way. It was a mess to do it that way. There’s reasons we do things the way we do things. It’s not just because we’re trying to save dollars. It’s because there’s a structure behind it. There’s a reason why you pay a company rather than paying an individual in some cases.

**Craig:** The system, as far as I can tell, will not be changing any time soon.

**John:** But some potentially good news for you, Craig, because we got some follow-up about your Space Cadet movie.

**Craig:** Oh, fantastic.

**John:** Drew, help us out.

**Drew:** Yeah, because you mentioned on Episode 644 that the Space Cadet title, Lucas was sitting on it for a long time. Jose Luis in Puerto Rico says that there is a Space Cadet movie coming out this year, July 4th, 2024. It’s written and directed by Liz Garcia and will be released on Amazon Prime.

**Craig:** I guess Lucas finally got off the title there. My thing was in 1997. That’s a year that Drew doesn’t even understand as a year. I think it’s fair to say that nearly, what is it, 27 years later, that yeah, Lucas probably let it go.

**John:** Which is fair and reasonable.

**Craig:** That’s fair.

**John:** Let’s get to our marquee topic this week. Over the past couple months, I’ve had some conversations with two different startup companies who are trying to make software for film and TV productions. Here’s the problem that both of these companies were trying to solve. On a film or TV production, you have all these different departments who need to work together and need to communicate with each other. You have the ADs, you have wardrobe, props, locations, transpo, VFX, everybody working on the same project, and they need information from each other. How do they get that information to each other? What is the central source of truth?

The sources of truth would be the script, obviously, and also the schedule, the breakdown, like, this is the schedule for how to plan to shoot this thing. But there’s no obvious established way to do that, so instead, a bunch of homespun solutions have come up. Some of them work for some places, don’t work for other places. But it’s not hard to imagine that there could be a better way of doing this.

If in the script we know that Scene 15 is taking place at a roller rink, how does each department weigh in on what they’re going to do? Craig, I ask you, on The Last of Us, what is that process? What is the process by which all departments can see what each other is doing?

**Craig:** You really touched on a sore spot here.

**John:** I’m not surprised. There is a problem here. That’s why.

**Craig:** There is a problem. Basically, the way is done is through, I’m now gonna editorialize, endless, repetitive meetings. Endless, repetitive meetings. I found myself in a meeting just the other day. I love my crew. The department heads work so hard. Our show is a massive aircraft carrier. It takes so much time and effort to do everything, and everything is happening all at once, all the time. But I was in a meeting, an endless, repetitive meeting, just last week that brought up a topic that had been already met upon multiple times in prep, which is a half year ago. I started to feel like I was getting punked, like how is this possible? The fact is that there is a certain amount of human, face-to-face interaction and questioning that needs to happen, and I don’t know if there even is a software solution for that.

Beyond that, we do what every production does. The script gets broken down into a schedule by ADs using whatever Movie Magic scheduler or whatever the hell they use.

**John:** Probably that.

**Craig:** Probably that.

**John:** Probably that very old program, yeah.

**Craig:** Which is annoying, because it puts on the schedule thing in a list, the things we shoot, and then at the bottom of that it’ll say what day it was. That’s stupid. It should be at the top of it. Then everything in terms of distribution goes through Scenechronize, which I believe is owned by aforementioned Entertainment Partners, which I believe also owns my least favorite writing software, Final Draft. You start to see a little bit of a monopolization problem here.

**John:** Remind us again, what do you use Scenechronize for?

**Craig:** Scenechronize is a platform that distributes documents to the crew-

**John:** That’s right.

**Craig:** … electronically. Scripts can only be viewed in super watermarked ways and cannot be downloaded unless you have certain privileges. If you’re a department head, they let you download it. It also releases all communications like call sheets, schedules, preliminaries, memos, everything like that.

**John:** Most of your crew is looking at the stuff that would’ve been printed paper. Instead, they’re getting it through Scenechronize. They’re seeing it on their laptops, on their phones, on their iPads, right?

**Craig:** That is correct. We don’t have any printed stuff, except in the morning we distributed printed sides for very few people, just the ADs, the actors, producers, directors.

**John:** The decision not to use paper for very much stuff, is that because it’s more efficient or because you’re worried about stuff leaking out?

**Craig:** Both. This is Canada, where when you go to throw your garbage out, there are 400 bins. They’re very green. They’re like, before you throw your garbage out, is it soft or hard plastic? Is it a pen? Is it colored blue? There’s so many. I think probably also it’s just about not burning through… Productions used to burn through forests of paper.

**John:** Paper like crazy.

**Craig:** Insane. There is that aspect. It’s certainly cheaper. There are security measures that we can use with that stuff. It’s a little frustrating, I think, for people, because they can’t really have a script and mark it up and all the rest, but it’s just a necessary evil.

**John:** We talked about scheduling. We talked about Scenechronize. What are the other pieces of software that you or members of your team are using regularly to get the show done, both during production and then in post?

**Craig:** I write on Fade In. Then once Allie, who is both my assistant and also our script coordinator, goes through and puts it through the Scenechronize machinery to distribute, she also converts it to a Final Draft file. Why is it converted to a Final Draft file? Because Chris Roufs, our script supervisor, uses a very specific program for his job that only imports in Final Draft, of course. You start to see the problem with the closed system and the proprietary formats. It just begets just this legacy system of misery.

**John:** We have that, and then for while you guys are shooting, what is the software you guys are looking at cuts on? I know you also have the ability to look at things if you’re on another set while one set is shooting. What’s that kind of stuff?

**Craig:** There are two platforms for that. For the distribution of dailies and cuts, we use PIX, which I also do not like.

**John:** Oh my god, I’ve had to do nothing but PIX the last five weeks. I think PIX’s main job is to sign you out as frequently as possible. I’ve been on Zooms where I’m just tapping the screen and wiggling 10 seconds back just so it won’t sign me out.

**Craig:** PIX will log you out if you blink. PIX will force you to change your password if you go to the bathroom. PIX also is poorly organized and difficult to use.

**John:** Oh god, their bins are really tough.

**Craig:** Horrible.

**John:** The equivalent of folders.

**Craig:** I do not like PIX. I don’t. In fact, when I say to the editor, “Okay, everything’s great here, I just need you to change this, this, and this. Can you just send me that little section?” I make them not send it to me on PIX, even though that violates everything. I apologize to Time Warner, Discovery, HBO, AOL. The other platform we use constantly is Box. Box is our digital file management system.

**John:** It’s very much like Dropbox, but it tends to be used in the industry more for various reasons.

**Craig:** There are a few of those. We used I think Frame.io in one season. Maybe for Chernobyl we used Frame, and for this we use Box. We have somebody whose job is to oversee and manage that entire system. We use that to distribute tests, images, proposals, illustrations, previses, all that. Then you can comment, and you can also annotate, draw on it and comment to that. It’s a better system.

But I will say it only functions for me because I don’t actually get any notifications from Box. They all go through a separate account that Allie manages. Then she can compile all the things that I need. Three times a day, I get an email from her with 12 Box links, describing what they are and what I need to respond to, because if you don’t have that, basically you’re getting an email every 12 seconds saying somebody commented, somebody thought, somebody did this.

**John:** Oh, god.

**Craig:** A nightmare. That’s what happened to me in Season 1. I didn’t stop looking at it. It was a real problem.

**John:** Let’s talk about email. You are still using email to communicate with certain people, or do you believe in Signal threads? Are you using Slack? What is the way you communicate with department heads?

**Craig:** With department heads, typically I’m speaking to them directly or commenting through Box. If I really, really, really need to get them ASAP, I text. We don’t have Slack. I think that’s probably a good thing. It’s a good thing for me.

Part of this discussion is who are you and what are you doing on the production. If you are in the middle of things, you need as much communication as possible. If you’re the showrunner, you need the most curated discussion as possible, because you will drown in questions and details with three minutes, and you’re trying to do other things and stay in big picture and work on shooting and all the rest of it.

We don’t have Slack, or at least I’m not aware of one. It’s just texts if I need to, or I call somebody. But more often than not, I just say to an AD, can you have somebody come over, and I’ll talk to them.

**John:** Then you also have the ability to look at what’s happening on set. If you have to step away, but you still need to see what is that shot that’s going up or the setup. What’s that that you’re using?

**Craig:** We use QTAKE, which again I believe is the industry standard. QTAKE works quite well. QTAKE is incredibly important. There’s the whole system that Amanda Trimble, our video playback operator, uses. I don’t know what she actually has loaded on her cart there, but it is some special system. There’s a special system that the DIT uses. That’s the guy that manages the information flow from the cameras, because of course it’s all digital. I also use Evercast to edit remotely with our editors.

**John:** A lot of specialized software that’s just for the industry, but also some things like Box, which are just off-the-shelf things that you guys are using because they’re there and they work.

We’ve talked a little bit about the screenwriting side of it, which most of our listeners are involved with screenwriting software. Obviously, Final Draft, or at least the FDX format, tends to be a thing that you go back to. I guess I can understand the FDX of it all, because it is at least an organized format. It is an XML format, so there’s some logic behind using that as a basis of things.

The challenge though is, if you’re passing around files for things, will the files get out of date? It would make much more sense if there was one continuously updated file that everyone was looking at the same file. That’s very hard to do.

There’s a service called Scripto, which Stephen Colbert’s company developed, which a lot of the late-night shows use, because they are all banging together to work on one script. It’s more like a Google doc, where everyone is working on one thing simultaneously, which makes sense for those kinds of shows. You would hope that in the future at some point there could be a centrally updated script that is the source that you don’t have to then redistribute scripts out to people.

**Craig:** We don’t have anything like that. We still operate under the old system of blue revision, pink revision, goldenrod revision, but it’s all done digitally.

**John:** Then there’s the programs that you and I are actually writing in. I’m writing in Highland. You’re writing in Fade In. Those are great single-computer systems. There are some things to try to do the onliney version of that. WriterDuet did that. Celtx did that. Arc Studio does that. There’s ways to do it. It can be overkill for the single writer, but it can be useful for team situations. It’s tough to say what the right solution is. Still, the script and the schedule are at the heart of what productions need. It’s not surprising that people are trying to figure out how do we organize all these things so all these different ways we do stuff can be centralized and make life happier for showrunners, for department heads, for ADs, for everybody else.

In most of these cases, I’ve been talking to folks who are ADs who naturally have this instinct to… They want information to go to places without being repeated and for people to be able to see what the plan is. They look so good on paper. I look at the slideshows and the little mock-ups. I’m like, “Yeah, that seems great.” But what you’re actually talking about doing is you actually have to build Slack, you have to build PIX, you have to build all these things that exist that are really difficult to do.

The problem is there’s not a big enough market for it. You’re not gonna be able to get somebody to pay enough to make it actually worth developing, and much worse, worth supporting, because the expectation of your users is that this has to have basically 100 percent uptime, because if PIX goes down or if QTAKE goes down, that is a crisis. You have to have this crazy expectation for your uptime.

**Craig:** Anything that is served like that has to be bulletproof. You’re absolutely right. It’s why the hammer costs $800 instead of $5, because there’s only 12 people buying the hammer. It is incredibly specialized. A lot of these things I imagine are quite expensive. I don’t know. Things that like Fade In or Highland, that’s marketable to millions of people who want to write things. But Scenechronize, it’s just the people making stuff that use Scenechronize. I don’t know what it costs, but probably a lot.

**John:** I think as we talk about both the problems and solutions, you’re gonna need to find some way to make recurring revenue from your existing customers, because you can’t just find the next customer and the next customer after that, because there’s a hard limit on the number of customers who could potentially use your software. You need to find ways to monetize each time. That means either you are charging per user, per production, per month. There has to be some way that you’re making that sustainable, because otherwise your company’s gonna go bankrupt.

That’s also the reason why it’s very hard to attract the initial kind of money it takes to build the product in the first place, because any investor will say, “I don’t think this is a survivable business. I don’t think you can actually make enough money here, so why would I invest in it?”

**Craig:** You could see a world where let’s say Disney, as large as they are, says, “We’re gonna create our own system.”

**John:** They are.

**Craig:** They are?

**John:** They are. Disney and Netflix both apparently have their own systems they’re developing. That makes sense because they’re doing so much production and they can top-down force people to use it.

**Craig:** You can force people to use it anyway. But what you are always dealing with is the fact that, A, you are at the mercy of those companies, who charge, I can only imagine, exorbitant yearly subscription fees that scale in terms of the size of your company, and B, you’re at the mercy of their features. The way they do it is how you have to do it. But the method of organizing things per production to customize it, there is no customization really like that.

The upside for a company like Disney, which is so big and makes so much stuff, is, yeah, we can completely control it, we can manage it, and we can make sure it is bulletproof and not be held hostage. The downside is people that come into your system now have to use that, which means they have to learn it, which means they have to deal with it. They’re used to using the other thing, and everybody gets very, very cranky. Either there will be a revolt or it will work and it will spread, meaning if Disney and Netflix, in their combined might, create a system like this, everyone’s gonna use it. It’s just gonna happen.

**John:** Agreed, agreed. Everyone’s gonna use it who can afford to use it. Indie films will develop alternate systems. Maybe that’s appropriate. Maybe they can do some different stuff and it would make sense for them on that smaller level. Here’s the subtlety on that. If Disney or Netflix says you have to use this, people will use it, but I also suspect department heads will still go back to their own native ways of doing things and then just have to duplicate the effort to use the other system. They’ll still find off-channel ways to do stuff. I was talking to a British AD who says for their productions, they have WhatsApp channels for each scene or something, which is just-

**Craig:** Oh my god. Oh my god.

**John:** … ongoing discussions about how stuff works.

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**John:** It’s like, oh god, that seems so-

**Craig:** That’s horrible.

**John:** Yeah, it’s awful.

**Craig:** That’s just awful.

**John:** This is a person who made a giant Amazon show, and that’s how they did it.

**Craig:** “That’s how I do it,” in quotes, you’ll hear a lot. Obviously, there’s very powerful calendaring software and scheduling software. But also, when I walk into certain offices, in our production offices, I’ll see people who have calendared their wall with post-its, because that’s how they do it, and it helps them. I’m like everybody else. I have a way of doing things that I’m comfortable with. You get set in your ways. By the way, side question for you, John.

**John:** Please.

**Craig:** This is a “set in your ways” question. In the old days when we would print scripts, people would have a script, and then you would make revisions. The revisions would change the way the page count would be, so instead of changing the page count, you would just make A and B pages so that the following pages didn’t change. People just had to open their huge binder, pull out pages 38 and 39, and replace them with 38A, 38B, 38C, and then a new 39. But we don’t print anything anymore, and we have scene numbers. My question is, why do we still do this with pdf?

**John:** Craig, we should absolutely not be doing this.

**Craig:** We shouldn’t be doing it.

**John:** It is ridiculous that we’re doing it. I’m sure one of the showrunners who’s listened to the show says, “No, we stopped doing that.” Let’s all do this, because it’s dumb. It’s ridiculous.

**Craig:** It’s stupid. It’s stupid, because what happens is, on the day, you get there to rehearse the scene and there’s a page with one effing line on it.

**John:** It’s crazy.

**Craig:** It’s just dumb. It’s too late for me now. I’m in too deep on this season, but next season I’m not doing it. I’m not locking pages. It doesn’t make sense. People refer to everything by scene number anyway. I am infamous for not knowing what scene numbers mean. Somebody from prosthetics will walk over to me and say, “Question about 533.” I’ll say, “I do not know what that is. You have to give me some context.” But they all have scene numbers that never change, ever. So why? Why?

**John:** Hey, Craig, instead of scene numbers, should we as the writers come up with the three-word name for that scene or that sequence that we all are gonna refer to that thing as?

**Craig:** If you think about it, the scene number really is the ultimate version of that. They really do all think in terms of scene numbers. I have the program make scene numbers and I never think about them again. But what happens is they’ll say, “Oh, it’s Jane and Vanessa are arguing in the library.” “Oh, okay, that’s what Scene 533 is. Got it, got it, got it. Okay, continue with the question.” It’s easy enough to do. But the page thing, honestly, it just occurred to me how stupid it is that we still do it.

**John:** It’s ridiculous that we’re still doing it. We shouldn’t be doing it. Hey, if you’re on a show that has given up locked pages, let us know. By the way, late-night has never had locked pages. I bet there’s other things that have never locked pages. I don’t know if – did multi-cam sitcoms lock pages? [Indiscernible 00:29:02] on that too. It feels like they should’ve.

**Craig:** I don’t know. All I know is that for movies we always had them and it made sense and I understood why, because you printed things. But now, it just doesn’t… Why?

**John:** Let’s wrap this up with some takeaways here. I think one of the real problems we’ve talked about is inertia. There is that first mover advantage. People are used to Final Draft. They’re used to Movie Magic scheduling. So when a better system comes along, like Highland or like – there’s a competing scheduling software out of Germany called Fuzzlecheck, which is a terrible name, but apparently, European productions use it and it’s a lot better and it’s all online.

**Craig:** You’re saying Germans made a great scheduling software?

**John:** That is a shocker. This apparently is great. It’s all online, which makes so much more sense that you’d have multiple users touch things rather than have one person on one computer doing the thing. But I think it’s struggling to break through into the U.S. because everyone is used to the standards. It’s hard to get people to adjust from what they’re used to doing, unless you’re forcing them to or show them this is 10 times better and then they’ll switch, which is the frustration.

**Craig:** It won’t happen from the bottom up. I think your Disney revelation here – it was a revelation to me – is how it happens. It happens from the top down when a bunch of people in a room say, “Attention, all. This is what we’re doing now.” Everyone’s gonna, “What?! No!”

**John:** If you think about it from Netflix’s point of view, Netflix is essentially a software company, and so it would make sense that they would have ways to do these things.

**Craig:** Absolutely. People will complain, gripe, moan, and then they will adjust. But it will never come from the bottom up, because making television shows and movies is chaos. It’s utter chaos. Anywhere you can find some kind of comforting repetition and security, you grab it and you hold onto it forever. You will have to pull it out of their hands and give them something new. They will freak out, but then they will adjust.

**John:** Last thing I’ll say, you have to be thinking about what is a sustainable business model for this app you’re thinking about making. The problem is not that you cannot imagine a better tool or even design a better tool. It’s that you cannot afford to make it and sustain it and to actually keep it up and running. When people get frustrated about per-month fees or per-user fees or all that stuff, it’s like, that’s because that’s how this company can stay in business.

**Craig:** You’re saying that they’re not in business to go out of business?

**John:** They’re not in business to go out of business. That’s the problem with the Final Draft. Because they sell it to you once, they’re like, “Crap, we ran out of screenwriters. Okay, we need to make a new version of Final Draft that adds a useless feature that no one needs, just so we can keep the lights on.”

**Craig:** That’s not great.

**John:** Not great. Not great. That’s how you end up with Final Draft.

**Craig:** That is how you end up with the tragedy of Final Draft.

**John:** Let’s go to something we can maybe help and fix. Let’s talk about some Three Page Challenges.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** For listeners who are new to the show, every once in a while we do a Three Page Challenge, where we invite our listeners to send in the first three pages of their pilot, of their feature. We look through them. We give our honest feedback. These are people who asked for our feedback. We are not picking random people off the street. We are trying to give constructive feedback on what they have sent through.

**Craig:** That would be so cruel.

**John:** What happens is we put out a call for submissions to the Three Page Challenge. People go to johnaugust.com/threepage. They read the little form. They submit their pages. Drew and our intern have to go through 100? How many generally come through?

**Drew:** A little over 100 this week.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** Go through a bunch of these to find three or four that seem like they’re good for our show. The criteria are they have to have no obvious spelling mistakes or grammar mistakes. We don’t want to be talking about those. We want to talk about what’s working on the page, what’s not working on the page, what can our listeners benefit from. They’re not picking necessarily the best entries, but the most interesting ones, the things we’ll have stuff to talk about.

We have three really good ones here to discuss. For our listeners who have their phones or their iPads handy, there are links in the show notes that you can read through these pages. Pause this, read through the pages, and join us as we discuss them. Drew, for folks who are not reading along with us, can you talk us through what happens in Planet B by Christopher James?

**Drew:** Sure. It’s 2055. In the White House Situation Room, President Keiko Pearl is briefed by her advisors on the discovery of a new Goldilocks planet able to sustain life. The head of the EPA cautions about the possibility of extraterrestrial life, but he’s laughed at. We then cut to a creature smashing through terrain, only to reveal that the creature is in fact a human toddler.

**John:** Craig Mazin, talk us through your initial reactions to Planet B.

**Craig:** We have what hat appears to be possibly a comedy. I think it’s a comedy.

**John:** I think it’s a comedy.

**Craig:** Science fiction comedy where Earth is in trouble, almost certainly because of climate change, and they have managed to find a mirror Earth that they can go settle.

This is a pretty common way to start these things. There are multiple problems that are inherent to this method of starting things. The way Christopher goes about it is he’s using a situation room in the White House to introduce people and concept and character. We have, I think, a bit of an over-stuffed three pages here, because it’s trying to do so much at once that it doesn’t feel like an actual scene with human beings. It feels more like a machined thing to teach us stuff about people.

We meet Sarita Arya, and we also meet Keiko Pearl, and we also meet Anne Reiss, and we also meet Brian Dale. Everyone, by the way, has some sort of race and wardrobe, hair, makeup, except for Anne Reiss, who is none of those. Does that mean she’s white? That’s a weird-

**John:** The default white problem, yeah.

**Craig:** Default white problem there. We also meet Bear “Grizz” Norris, and we meet Ryan Arya and Nowell Arya. In three pages, that’s too many people to meet. That’s too many. Everybody is a person. Everybody is a thing. Everybody has a thing, a vibe, whatever. We’re learning all of these things.

Here’s what I learned. I’m just gonna list the things that I’ve learned here. It’s Earth. It’s 2055 and Earth is in trouble. I learned that in the White House, Sarita Arya has a “steady demeanor and short, spiky hair.” I’ve also learned that Keiko Pearl, who’s Japanese American with “shoulder-length hair and youthful skin-”

**John:** She’s the President.

**Craig:** She’s the President. I’ve learned that Anne Reiss is a science advisor and is “always on defense.” I have learned that General Brian Dale is bald and from the Army and he is a stroke survivor and he uses a cane. I have also learned that Bear “Grizz” Norris is White. Oh, so he’s White. Okay, so Anne, she’s whatever. He is “shaggy haired and bearded.” I have also learned that Nowell Arya is biracial Indian/White and his father, Ryan, is Indian American and athletic. That’s all separate and apart from the plot stuff that I’m learning. It’s too much.

**John:** It’s a lot. I would say I think Christopher is doing almost the best job you could with this kind of shotgun intro problem. One of the reasons why I like this as an example is it shows how hard it is actually to do this.

I can envision a scene. Let’s say this is actually shot and there are recognizable actors maybe in some of these roles that help you distinguish who people are and remember them. But you’re trying to do so much. There’s so much table setting to do about that there is a second planet that has breathable air, who these people are, that it’s 2055, that it doesn’t feel real or legit in a way that even in a heightened comedy setting, which this is, is not going to work especially well.

I want to talk about just on the page. It’s in Courier Prime, which looks lovely. I think the breakups of scene description and dialogue, it all reads well. I’m not terrified to look through these pages. It’s pretty easy to get yourself through them. The use of underlines and single-word sentences, also really good. All these things work nicely.

I don’t mind the character descriptions. I think a lot of times I could visualize these characters better than in many samples because you’re giving me some details that I can actually click in my head. The problem is there was just too many of these things introduced back to back to back to back. Then I got confused and a little frustrated.

**Craig:** Everything has the same importance. Everyone has the same importance, because there are so many. Then there’s the tone itself. First of all, we go from the exterior of space, where we see Earth, and then we’re interior the Situation Room in the White House. The Situation Room in the White House is just a room. You might need to see the White House itself just so we know where we are. Then Sarita, who I assume is President Pearl’s chief of staff-

**John:** Chief of staff.

**Craig:** Yeah, it says chief of staff. Sorry, that was the other bit of information. See, it’s lost in the clutter. Everyone’s talking, and she whistles to make everyone stop talking. I didn’t believe that. I don’t think that’s how it works. They show this other planet, and then President Pearl immediately gets into an argument. “Why didn’t we know about this sooner? What took so long to find it?” I guess she’s just dumb. Is she dumb?

**John:** It feels like a question that is being asked for the audience rather than for herself.

**Craig:** Exactly. Then everybody else has a very… Anne Reiss, the scientist, is very sciencey. General Brian Dale, he’s very military-y. Then Buzz [sic] “Grizz” Norris is very EPA administrator-y. They are their jobs. That’s the roughest part of this.

**John:** I would like to propose a line that is banned from future scripts, which is, “In English, please.” General Dale says it. That feels just the tropey-est, clammiest line.

**Craig:** That’s a clam, especially because what Anne Reiss, 64, nothing else to know, says, “The atmosphere is 19.5 percent O-2.” General Dale, “In English, please.” He’s a general. He knows what oxygen is.

**John:** The actual question is, is that good, because I don’t know if 19.5 is good. I don’t know if that’s appropriate. Then her answer makes sense. It’s, “It means humans can breathe.”

**Craig:** If someone said, “So too much or not enough?” “It’s about right.” That’s fine. Christopher, I’m gonna pitch you a different way of doing this.

**John:** Tell us.

**Craig:** Christopher, what if the entirety of this scene – and you could go to interior, you don’t even need to know it’s the White House yet – is Sarita and President Pearl, and we don’t even know who they are. We don’t even know that President Keiko Pearl, “42, Japanese American, shoulder-length hair and youthful skin,” is the President. We just have two people talking over lunch, and one of them is explaining to the other one, “This is what’s happening.” What that scene is about is not about the information, but rather, their relationship.

There is some relationship here that is the central relationship of the movie. If that’s not the central relationship of the movie, find one and make that the beginning. But if it’s just two people talking and then President Pearl goes, “Okay, got it,” walks out of the room, walks into another room and finds this scrum all arguing, tells them all to shh, then they’re like, “Oh, the President’s here,” and she’s like, “This is it. This is what we’re doing,” I’ll go, “Oh, that was the President, and this is important.” But we have to focus this scene and put it within the context of a relationship, or we just won’t care.

**John:** I think our expectation of the first scene of the movie is that we’re gonna meet characters who are the fundamental most important people. Sometimes that can be defeated, where a bomb can go off and all these people could die. That could be a choice too. My expectation is that Keiko Pearl is probably the most important character. She’s the one we’re gonna follow. We don’t really quite know at the end of the scene whose point of view this scene is from. That is the frustration, if one of these characters is going to be the central character of the story.

I want to talk about, just as we wrap up here, the scene on Page 3 which is basically this monster is smashing things and it’s revealed to be a toddler. That will never work, because we’re seeing something. You’re not gonna be able to hold that premise, that joke for very long. You could have the bom-bom-bom music of something stomping around, but the minute we see his-

**Craig:** Legs.

**John:** … cute little shoes, his legs or something, it’s not gonna really work. You can describe it metaphorically, like, he’s like a monster smashing things, but only on the page could you get away with the, “Oh, there’s a terrible monster smashing things. Oh, surprise, it’s a child.” That’s not gonna be a surprise to people with eyeballs.

**Craig:** That is correct.

**John:** I love that we now have log lines for things. Drew, tell us the log line of what the actual full movie is.

**Drew:** “In 2055, climate change is irreversible and humans live on borrowed time. When Americans discover a nearby inhabitable planet, they must consider what’s worth giving up for a future as refugees in an alien society.”

**Craig:** Just about what I thought. It doesn’t mention what the tone is, but it does feel comedic.

**John:** I think so too. I’m guessing this is a feature and not a pilot. I think something would’ve said pilot on the title page.

**Craig:** Feels featurey.

**John:** Feels featurey. Cool. Let’s go on to The Long Haul. Again, if you’re gonna read along with us, why don’t you pause and read this. But if you’re not reading along, Drew, give us a summary.

**Drew:** The Long Haul by Becca Hurd. Emmy Baxter, 24, is irritated when an Australian stranger named Angus hijacks her karaoke performance at a Chicago pub. But despite her initial annoyance, their banter turns to flirtation.

**John:** I want to start with the title page here. This is The Long Haul. The O in “Long” is a heart. Below this is an image of the country of Australia and the country of U.S. with a line between them and a heart. It’s cute, sure. I kind of get what it’s about. It feels like a lot on this cover page. I would go with either the heart or the image there.

At the bottom it says, “Sydney, Australia, February 2024,” and it has her email address. The “February 2024” generally is over on the right-hand side where she put it, but things like her email address tend to be on the left-hand side. I don’t know why Sydney, Australia is there, other than maybe to tell us she’s Australian. But I don’t know that’s useful information for a title page.

**Craig:** I’ve never actually seen the location of where the script was written on the page there. I think you’re probably right. But I enjoy the graphic quite a bit. I agree with you, the issue with putting the heart in “Long” is that you have two hearts on the page.

There’s a very clever thing. “The Long Haul, Written by Becca Hurd.” The line between Australia and the United States is the old style, when you fly, a little dotted line happens, and the dotted line does a curlicue to become a heart in between. That actually is a beautiful summary of what this is gonna be about. It’s gonna be about a long-distance relationship between somebody who lives in the U.S. and somebody who lives in Australia and flying back and forth, I suppose. But that heart is diminished by the fact that there’s another heart in the word “Long.” Make that heart special, I think, by making the O just an O in “Long.”

**John:** Agreed. Once we get into Page 1 here, it starts with a discussion between Beth and Emmy. Emmy is our central character. Beth is her friend. They are awaiting their time to do karaoke. There’s some chitchat here, which is not great. There are some lines I would love to scratch out here.

Beth says, “Thought you were off the clock.” Emmy says, “Thought you were a vegetarian. But your mouth is full of Meat Loaf?” referring to this guy she’s making out with. Meat Loaf is not a great contemporary reference. I don’t think people are gonna get the joke that you’re referring to the singer Meat Loaf here.

There’s a better joke in the next line, which is, “Where’d you find him, an episode of Stranger Things?” Great, I get that as a joke. That is the better one. If you’re going to start with these two talking, I think that is your better way in.

More trimming here. “Somehow he’s not your worst. You’re too good for these guys, Beth.” If Emmy says, “He’s not your worst,” that tells us more and it’s more efficient.

**Craig:** But they’re sisters. Why are they talking to each other like they don’t know each other? If your sister is constantly making out/dating with guys that she’s better than, you’ve had this conversation before. It feels like we’re having it for the first time.

**John:** Agreed. For a sister, it feels like a stretch. There’s a semi-friend that you could actually have these things with. Craig, I want to talk to you about Emmy’s line near the bottom of the page, “When are they gonna play my song??” question mark question mark. I kind of like the question mark question mark. I kind of hear the delivery in the line with a double question mark. What’s your take on a double question mark?

**Craig:** I’ve never used it myself. But it feels like if a drunk person is asking a question. Then two question marks does definitely indicate drunken questioning.

**John:** That’s an overall note I had on Page 2 is how drunk are these people, because once we actually get to the standoff over the karaoke song, it feels like I need a clear sense of how drunk each of these people are to believe it or get a sense of a reality check on this moment that’s happening.

**Craig:** Let’s roll back to, for a moment, where even are we? The script tells us we’re interior Chicago pub. How do I know this is Chicago? It’s important, because apparently, this is gonna be a movie about an American and an Australian. I need to know where we are. Even if you just, again, give me nice exterior of Chicago-

**John:** That helps.

**Craig:** … it would help. The beginning, Emmy “is speedily typing on her phone.” Then her sister is gonna say, “Thought you were off the clock.” I’ve now got her character down to a post-it note. Works too hard. I don’t like that. Why is Emmy there? Why is she there? If she’s there to just speedily type on her phone, why is she at the karaoke club? Beth says, “Sometimes it’s okay to just have fun and not control every little detail. Wild concept for you, I know.” Post-it note character description. Why is Emmy there?

**John:** Craig, she’s there because she wants to sing karaoke, which is established in the very next line, “When are they gonna call me?”

**Craig:** But I don’t believe that, because she’s-

**John:** I don’t believe it either.

**Craig:** … “speedily typing on her phone.” If she comes to sing karaoke, she’s gonna have a drink or whatever and have fun. But I love the idea of somebody being impatient that her song isn’t coming. That tells me more about their character-

**John:** 100 percent.

**Craig:** … than this other stuff. Also, John, we just talked about the toddler. This is another toddler moment. This is good advice here, Becca. When you’re writing, I want you to see it actually happen in your brain. Here’s what happens. Emmy is “typing on her phone while her younger sister, Beth, sucks face with an ’80s-musician-looking-dickass. Beth takes a breath and glares at Emmy.” No, she doesn’t. She’s making out with a guy. What’s happening is she’s making out with a guy, then stops making out with him to stare at her sister and then criticize her sister.

**John:** Has never happened.

**Craig:** I don’t know about you, but when I’m making out with somebody, I’m making out with them. I’m not looking around to make comments. Emmy should interrupt Beth. That I’d believe.

**John:** Yeah, or the kiss breaks off and he goes off to hit the restroom or whatever, and then she can land her sniper comment there.

**Craig:** Yes, but there’s no reason for her to stop. She can’t do both things at once. Also, just a little bit of advice here, Becca. If you do want Emmy to make comments about Beth, she’s sitting there waiting for her song. The bartender or somebody is sitting next to her. The two of them are like, “What the fuck with those two?” “Yeah,” blah blah blah. Then we find out it’s her sister. There’s ways to also just reveal these relationships and who they are, because right now I don’t know that they’re sisters. There’s no way to know, other than that the script told me.

**John:** These are all real challenges. I do think if you’re gonna start with Beth making out with the rocker guy, we know the experiences of when you’re sitting there and someone’s making out right in front of you or right beside you. That is a playable moment. It’s like, “Oh, Jesus. Oh, this terrible person. Please,” willing this person to go away. That’s a thing that can also happen.

But I agree, we’re gonna need to quickly establish they’re sisters or something else there, because it’s gonna be weird if we’re a couple scenes into the movie and we don’t know that they’re sisters.

**Craig:** It is weird. It’s also a little dangerous to introduce a character who is anachronistic right off the bat, because people will just think this is in the ’80s or they won’t know what time it is, because we don’t know what year it is either. It’s in a karaoke bar. People are singing old songs from the ’90s. I think Torn is from the ’90s. We’re gonna be like, “What year is this?”

But then we get to the meat of it. Now, this is a meet-cute. It’s a good idea for a meet-cute, except there’s a logic problem. A meet-cute has to just be solid. We have to buy it. We don’t want to stop and go, “I can feel the screenwriter.”

**John:** “We requested the same song.”

**Craig:** “We requested the same song.” Then Emmy says – great point here – “He literally just said Emmy. Is your name Emmy?” Angus’s reasoning for going up there and taking the mic is, “She’s Australian.” I guess I’m Australian, which means I have the right to just sing the song? That doesn’t make any sense at all.

If his last name was Emory and then, “We have Emmy with Torn,” and he’s like, “No, he said Emory. My last name’s Emory,” and she’s like, “No, he said Emmy. That’s my first name. And we both requested the same song,” then I would be fine. I would be fine. But that’s not what happens here. I wasn’t buying this meet-cute premise.

**John:** There’s a way you can maybe set this up where the thing comes up for the next song and it shows the Natalie Imbruglia, Torn, and the emcee is fumbling a bit to find who it was, and they both go up there. Then you finally get the emcee, like, “Whose song is this?” It’s like, “Oh, it’s Emmy.” Then he refuses to stand down, because, “No, I should be singing this song. I am the Australian. This is part of my culture.” There’s a way you could do that. But I didn’t believe the setup. I agree with you.

**Craig:** I didn’t believe it, and I also really did not like this guy. When you have a meet-cute where two people are arguing, you want to be able to see both of their sides. At that point, you’re like, “Oh, they both pulled into the parking spot at the same time, and now they’re arguing because it was a tie.” But this is not a tie. He’s just a jerk-

**John:** It’s not a tie.

**Craig:** … for doing this.

**John:** He’s a jerk. Page 3, we get after their song. I thought the actual intercut of them trying to do the verses can work. I can picture that on the page. I got the sense of what was actually happening there. On Page 3 they’re talking afterwards. They have electric chemistry. I don’t understand, “I’m a 3 wing 2, because I-” “A what?” “A 3, which is an Achiever.” Do you know what that’s about?

**Craig:** I have zero idea what any of this is about.

**John:** Drew, do you know what that’s about?

**Drew:** I have no idea.

**John:** It’s okay for people to talk about things we don’t know, but we need to have a context of what kind of thing they are talking about. I didn’t get it. At a certain point you feel dumb and you start to resent that you don’t know what’s going on there.

**Craig:** Also don’t care. It’s wasted time, because I’m not learning anything. Emmy said, “You would say that. Because you’re a 4.” What? What does that mean? Anytime somebody makes fun of “neur,” that always… I do love “neur.” Neur neur neur.

**John:** Neur neur neur neur.

**Craig:** Neur neur neur.

**John:** I think we enjoyed the potential of the premise and this as a meet-cute, because as we have discussed on the show from nearly Episode 1, we enjoy rom-coms. We want that genre to thrive. It’s nice to see when movies can succeed in doing this. We want Becca to have the best chance possible to make a rom-com. Drew, tell us the log line that Becca submitted.

**Drew:** “Determined to win back her ex, an audacious American woman sneaks into Australia by telling the government that she is in a continuing and loving relationship with the man who just dumped her.”

**Craig:** Wait, what?

**John:** I assume it’s Angus.

**Craig:** Are those two different people?

**John:** We don’t know. We don’t know from this log line.

**Craig:** Say that log line again.

**Drew:** Sure. “Determined to win back her ex-”

**Craig:** Her ex.

**Drew:** “… an audacious American woman sneaks into Australia by telling the government that she is in a continuing and loving relationship with the man who just dumped her.”

**Craig:** Who would also be the ex.

**John:** I guess so.

**Craig:** How do you sneak into Australia?

**John:** I think the idea of sneaking into Australia for love feels kind of fun.

**Craig:** If you’re talking to the officials of Australia, you’re not sneaking into Australia. In order to stay in Australia… But you can go to Australia for six months.

**John:** I don’t think so, Craig. I think Australia is a locked-down place. No, Australia is basically North Korea, Craig. You have to go through checkpoints. It’s incredibly dangerous.

**Craig:** I don’t understand.

**John:** This is a girl who’d do anything for love, like the song.

**Craig:** Like Meat Loaf. Like Meat Loaf, which Meat Loaf, referenced twice in three pages. I don’t understand. I don’t understand the log line. But there’s something very charming about the idea of this meet-cute. I’ve not seen this meet-cute before, where two people believe they each have the karaoke song, they start to sing to each other, and some little bit of magic happens. That’s a very nice way of doing things. I can see that moment. That’s encouraging.

I would say at a minimum, Becca, we’re gonna want to clean that log line up so it’s nice and sharp and doesn’t raise questions. Log lines should only raise the question you want to raise, not the questions you don’t.

**John:** Agreed. Let’s wrap it up with The Right to Party by Lucas McCutchen.

**Drew:** Captain Albert, a British officer, raises a British flag over colonial Boston. On his way home, he steps purposefully on an American child’s doll that’s fallen in a puddle. At home, his 17-year-old son, Edmund, struggles with chores, due to an injured hand, while trying to appease his stern father. Their tense interaction culminates in Captain Albert shooting at Edmund’s breakfast, inadvertently killing a passerby. Edmund and his brash friend Henry leave for school, where they discuss the dead bystander and girls they have crushes on.

**John:** This is a big swing. What I got by the end of three pages, this is a teen boy comedy but just set in this Revolutionary time, which is actually, I think, an interesting premise. A lot of stuff got in the way of the interesting premise, but I’m eager to talk about it, because I did think it was a clever idea to, again, just smash up tropes and genres and do a teen Apatow-y kind of movie but in this time period. Unfortunately, on Page 1, I have no idea what time period I’m in.

Let me read the first couple lines here. “Exterior Boston Town Square – Dawn. Sleepy merchants and townsfolk slowly begin their morning routines. Stores display their pitiful wares. Flies buzz in circles above the fruit in their baskets.” Finally, on the fourth sentence, “A prisoner locked in stocks stirs.” Until that sentence, I didn’t know that we were in the past. Boston Town Square exists now. I thought we were just in modern-day Boston. This is a problem, because I didn’t know where we were, when we were.

**Craig:** Never before has something so desperately needed “Boston, 1775.” It absolutely needs that. This is a broad comedy. Broad comedy is very, very hard to do. Take it from me. Struggled and succeeded and failed multiple times in my career.

**John:** Craig, you’re a drama writer. What would you know about broad comedy?

**Craig:** I’m a drama writer because I gave up finally. One of the most important aspects of writing broad comedy is logic. It is more of a science than an art. It’s science. Everything is about logic. Everything.

We have this very broad Monty Python-esque moment where Captain Albert, who’s this incredibly over-the-top British dickhead, fires a gun at his own breakfast, not because he’s angry at the breakfast, but rather to check if the sights are good on the pistol. They’re not good on the pistol, and a woman dies, and no one cares about the woman. The kernel of that, great. Logic problems. One, why is he firing the pistol at his breakfast? If the pistol is aligned correctly, he will ruin his breakfast. That makes no sense.

**John:** He should shoot at something in the room.

**Craig:** He could shoot at something in the room. Secondly, if you’re aiming at your breakfast on a table, I don’t care how misaligned the sights are. The most misaligned they could be is you’re off by about eight inches. You cannot be off by seven feet and then go through a window and kill a woman passing by, which by the way, is very difficult to actually film, because you have to shoot in such a way that you can see both the woman outside through the window and the man as he shoots. If this were happening outside, no problem.

**John:** I can envision a scenario in which he’s shooting at a thing on the wall and then it goes out the window and kills the woman. Do you necessarily need to see the woman in that first shot, or could you hear the scream and then that’s funny?

**Craig:** What you want to do is not see the woman at all. You want him to shoot at something on the wall, it goes through a window, and then there’s a pause, and then you hear a man go, “My wife.”

**John:** “Millicent!”

**Craig:** Yeah, “Millicent, no!” That’s what you want, and then people to start crying. Then when you go outside, there’s the guy, and he’s like, “Oh, Millicent.”

**John:** There’s the payoff.

**Craig:** Millicent, as it turns out, was actually a pig. Whatever it is. There’s all sorts of ways to do this. But the concept of being so broad that a guy is gonna kill somebody and they don’t care about somebody being killed is funny. It’s just logic.

Now, the other issue is, in broad comedy we need somebody that we can identify with, especially when you have an uber-jerk like Captain Albert. He has two sons. The problem here is both sons seem just as callous as their father. Who do I like?

**John:** I think you’re supposed to like Edmund, but he’s trying to make his father happy. That’s the journey that the character needs to get past. I think that’s the goal is to have-

**Craig:** The problem is, when they walk by the small crowd around the dead woman and Henry goes, “Jeez… a bit dramatic.” Then he goes, “Your hand alright?” Edmund’s like, “Yeah, I’ll talk about my hand now. I’m not gonna have any comment about that lady whatsoever.” He doesn’t care that a woman died.

Then we’ve got a little bit of an anachronistic vibe, where there’s a cart driver who says, “Don’t hit my effing cart.” Edmund says, “Sorry. Have a nice day,” which does feel like Edmund is a bit of a nice kid. But are they afraid of the British? Are they not afraid of the British? Why is this guy yelling at them like that? Logic, logic, logic.

**John:** Logic, logic, logic.

**Craig:** That’s the key.

**John:** That’s a lot. The other thing I will say is that I was missing some uppercases that would’ve been really helpful. Generally in scripts, the first time you’re meeting a character, you’re uppercasing their name, or even if it’s just a person who’s gonna come back. I wanted those “dirty townsfolk” capitalized. I wanted “child” capitalized. We’re used to those things being uppercase the first time we’re seeing them, just to acknowledge that these are people who are gonna do something specific.

**Craig:** Yes, especially when you are creating very large bricks of action. There’s a seven-line paragraph and an eight-line paragraph. My whole thing is once I get past three lines, I start getting itchy. Seven is a lot.

**John:** It’s a lot.

**Craig:** Eight, people are just skimming.

**John:** Yeah, they are.

**Craig:** That paragraph is the gag paragraph, where he shoots. Oh, I see. He picks the plate up and “sets it on the window sill nearby.” He did do that. I totally missed that.

**John:** You didn’t read that because you skimmed.

**Craig:** Yeah, because I skimmed, because it was an eight-line brick. Then it said, “Edmund cocks his head.” You don’t want to use that. You don’t want to say “cocks his head” when there’s a pistol that can also be cocked.

He picks the food up, places it “on the window sill nearby.” Okay, so now that does make sense, except it doesn’t, because why is he using his plate to shoot at? It’s his breakfast. It’s very odd. It says, “Edmund is in shock as Albert returns and sets the gun in front of him.” Now I’m feeling like if he’s in shock, this has never happened before. But he doesn’t be in shock. He should be more like-

**John:** His father is this guy.

**Craig:** This happens all the time. If this is the first time, then I think Edmund would be vomiting. This happens all the time. Edmund should walk over to the window, look out, and just wince. There’s ways to do this.

By the way, I will say, Lucas, don’t feel bad right now. I’m serious. This is the hardest tone to get right. It is so difficult. If you Google, David Zucker has this lovely bunch of rules that he’s set forth for this kind of work, which are really compelling and useful. Just take a look at those. It’s so difficult to get right. If you don’t, then people just turn their heads. It’s incredible how technical and precise it must be. It looks like you actually did have that logic right, except that you didn’t, and also it was in too long of a paragraph.

**John:** Drew, tell us the log line.

**Drew:** “Two teenage best friends, an American colonist and the son of a British officer, set out to have the night of their lives before they’re drafted to opposite sides of the American Revolution.”

**Craig:** Such a great premise.

**John:** It’s a really good premise.

**Craig:** It’s a great premise. I don’t think these pages are setting that premise up.

**John:** I think we can do better, but I think it was a really good premise.

**Craig:** It’s a terrific premise.

**John:** Two episodes ago we had that service where you send off a sentence to describe what your script is about. If that was a sentence you sent in, they’d say, yeah, that’s a good premise. Love that.

**Craig:** That’s fun. That’s a fun premise. I really like that.

**John:** Let’s thank everybody who submitted their Three Page Challenges for us to discuss, especially these three entries. If you want to send in your pages for the next time, it is johnaugust.com/threepage, all spelled out. We’ll occasionally look through that pile and pick some new ones. Thank you, everyone who did that. It’s very nice of you to do so. It really does help others learn.

Craig, it’s time for our One Cool Things. What is your One Cool Thing?

**Craig:** My One Cool Thing is a director that I’m currently working with named Stephen Williams. He’s not the One Cool Thing. It’s actually an episode of Watchmen that he directed. I’m sure Watchmen was my One Cool Thing when it was on the air back in-

**John:** It’s a good show.

**Craig:** Was it 2020? I guess something like that.

**John:** 2019, because I remember the Wash-men, which was initially during the pandemic when you had to wash your hands.

**Craig:** Stephen is a terrific director. He directed an episode of Watchmen that’s still… It’s stuck with me to this very day. Written by Damon Lindelof, Cord Jefferson, and Dave Gibbons. Damon Lindelof obviously needs no introduction. Multi-Emmy award-winning Damon Lindelof. Cord Jefferson, Oscar award winner.

**John:** Oscar, right.

**Craig:** He’s an Academy Award winner now for American Fiction. We’ve got some pretty big names there working on this, and then directed by Stephen. It is origin story of a superhero in the world of Watchmen. It uses a character that was indicated in the original graphic novel, Hooded Justice, and turns it on its ear and tells a pretty profound story of the Black American experience in, I believe it’s the ’30s or ’40s. Just an outstanding episode of television, beautifully done, moving and subtle, and directed gorgeously.

If you haven’t seen Watchmen, can you just pop that one in and watch it? No, you cannot. You have to watch up to it. I think it might be the sixth episode. Yes, it is the sixth episode of the season. You’ll have to do some watching for that. But honestly, it’s worth it. It’s such a great season of TV. It stands alone. It is the only one that exists. It’s got some so-so actors in it, like Regina King and Jean Smart and Don Johnson. It’s so stacked.

**John:** Despite that, it triumphs.

**Craig:** It’s so stacked. What a stacked lineup, as the kids say. I had watched it again, just because I’m having such a lovely time working with Stephen. He’s just such a great guy.

**John:** Great. My One Cool Thing is a show that people can also watch. Ripley on Netflix. This is the Steve Zaillian adaptation of The Talented Mr. Ripley. The Talented Mr. Ripley, the movie, is one of my favorite movies, one of my top 10 movies. I absolutely love it. I was a little bit nervous watching this adaptation, because I didn’t want it to spoil my love for the original or be compared. I really like this adaptation. It’s just so different. Everywhere the movie went left, this goes right. I love that the main adversary in the series is stairs, basically. Poor Ripley is always confronted by stairs.

It’s also, I think, a really great lesson in what you can do with time, and when you have the time of a series, how you can expand these moments that in the movie would be 30 seconds. You can now spend 15 minutes on, like, how do you deal with this dead body. The comedy that Zaillian’s able to find out of that is just terrific. It’s not laugh-out-loud funny, and yet it’s still funny, just because it points out the absurdity of human bodies also, which is great.

It’s black and white. It’s gorgeous. Everyone talks about that. It’s all shot in Italy. Looks terrific. Great performances. Really strange casting that works. Just check out Ripley on Netflix if you get a chance.

**Craig:** I wish you’d get Steve Zaillian on the show.

**John:** We’ll get him on the show. I’m sure we can get him on the show.

**Craig:** He’s a lovely man. He is just a towering figure in our business of what we do. There aren’t many people who have demonstrated his kind of consistent excellence for so, so long. He was excellent out of the gate and stayed excellent. Just an incredible writer and one of the best of all time.

**John:** That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Drew Marquardt-

**Craig:** Nope.

**John:** … with help this week by Jonathan Wigdortz.

**Craig:** Uh-uh.

**John:** It is edited by Matthew Chilelli.

**Craig:** I don’t think so.

**John:** Our outro this week is by Eric Pearson. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send questions. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts and sign up for our weekly newsletter called Inneresting, which has lots of links to things about writing. We have T-shirts and hoodies. They’re great. You’ll find them at Cotton Bureau. 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 on magic and the lack thereof in our D&D campaign. Craig, it’s always magic talking with you and Drew.

**Craig:** It is not.

**John:** See you next week.

[Bonus Segment]

**John:** All right, Craig, so the brief for the new D&D campaign we’re playing. We should explain to listeners that for the last four years we were playing a campaign that you were DM’ing. We finally finished that. I was gonna take over the next campaign for our group. I pitched to the crew that, what if we did a Robin Hoody kind of thing where it was a little bit more stripped down. We ultimately said let’s do the really stripped down. We’re only gonna have Humans and Halflings and maybe some Elves, but none of the other fantastical races. We would have a campaign with no magic, where it’s really grounded and you can’t cast spells, or not magic items. Everyone stepped up, and that’s what we’ve been playing.

**Craig:** It’s been kind of a delight. In Dungeons and Dragons, there are these different classes. Some classes are almost, by definition, un-magical. Wizards of the Coast-

**John:** They’re the company who runs D&D, who owns D&D.

**Craig:** They’re pretty clever in that they even will allow variants of basically every class to have some magic. Very difficult with barbarians. But you can have a Rogue, or Arcane Trickster, I think it is, and learn some spells, because spells are very powerful. There’s a spell for every circumstance. People love magic. It’s Dungeons and Dragons. But one thing that is true is that at some point, spells become so powerful and pervasive that they can make the game a little unfun for focus characters who don’t cast spells. They just at some point feel like, okay, you guys will do all this awesome stuff.

**John:** I will hit it with my sword.

**Craig:** I’m gonna hit you with a club, and then everybody else gets to do something extraordinary. Then I’m gonna run in there and, I guess, hit someone else with a club. It’s easy to play, but you can start to feel, as the characters increase in level, sort of like, I guess, the way – what’s the archer in Avengers? What’s his name again?

**John:** Oh, Hawkeye, yeah. One trick, yeah.

**Craig:** You start to feel like Hawkeye. Like, “Okay, so you’re literally a god and you can shoot lasers out of hands, and I have a bow and arrow.” “And what are you gonna do?” “Shoot my bow and arrow again.” It’s nice that we are all basically in that boat, not only us, but also the bad guys.

**John:** Talking about classes, you and I had an interesting discussion where we were talking through what is actually gonna make sense. There are Fighters. There are Barbarians. There are Rogues. There are Monks, but only certain kinds of Monks, because some of the Monks get really, really magical, and so variants that don’t have magic. And Rangers, but Rangers without the magic stuff, because Rangers have a lot of spells they would otherwise cast. But it’s a world without Wizards or Sorcerers, Clerics and Druids. You think about in a Robin Hoody kind of situation, a Bard makes a lot of sense, except the Bards in 5th Edition D&D really are Spellcasters and it doesn’t make sense to do that. Even Paladins, who you think, oh, it’s a brave knight-

**Craig:** Spells.

**John:** Yeah, but with a lot of magic there.

**Craig:** A lot of necessary magic. The thing that makes a Paladin good is that they have their various smites to add damage to their hits. We don’t have any of that, and it’s kind of a joy. When you face a bunch of bad guys, there’s no crowd control spells. There’s a lot of spells in D&D where it’s like, “I’m gonna just put you all in darkness. I’m gonna put you all in something. I’m gonna fireball you.” That’s the thing. You run up against seven guys, one person in your party can kill all of them with one spell. It’s nice to – you have to think more. There’s more strategizing. There’s more planning. The combat feels a little… I don’t know, it’s a nice gritty D&D.

Typically, everyone’s drinking a potion, or you have a Cleric or a Druid or somebody else that has healing spells that can restore all of your aches and pains – rather, alleviate your aches and pains. Here, my character took a feat which I don’t even know why anyone would take in a campaign with magic, that allows you to use an underutilized mechanic of healing kits to heal people, like a doctor would. If you’re not playing a magic-free campaign, why would anyone take the Healer feat, ever?

**John:** I don’t think they would.

**Craig:** Never.

**John:** It’s been interesting to see the ripple of changes that happen through this. I think combat speed has been a lot faster, because inevitably what happens is, like, “Oh, it’s my turn. Am I gonna cast a spell? What spell am I gonna cast? Let me look up what that’s gonna do.” Here it’s like, “No, I’m going to shoot somebody. I’m going to slash somebody.” Yes, people may use their special martial abilities to some degree, but it’s just been a lot faster to get through stuff. It can take more rounds to knock down an opponent, but that’s been nice.

I would say on the DM side I’ve been struck by just how much damage you guys can do, because you have these Rogues who can, through various mechanics, get sneak attack, get advantage on things, and they can take down a creature really quickly. I’ve had to adjust the number of monsters I’m throwing at you, just because you guys can do so much damage and take them out so quickly.

**Craig:** One of my DM tricks is – there are a few DM tricks. Now I’m telling you how to hurt us more, which is fun. One is, if there’s a big bad in the party, give him more HP. If the party is just crushing, just give him more HP. Make him last another round or two.

The other one, and this is the most useful one when you really want to mess with your party and you feel like they’re cakewalking, is to give one of the main boss guys legendary actions, because now that is essentially like increasing the number of bad guys without throwing a bunch of weak-asses on the field, who often can’t do that much damage on their own and get mowed down anyway, because our party’s capable of killing a couple of guys, three guys a turn if they’re just scrubs.

**John:** A thing I hadn’t considered until we got into this section of the campaign is that you guys are now underground, and light is a real factor. Often in these campaigns you’ll have more characters who have dark vision because they are Elves or have the ability to see in darkness, but you guys don’t. People would generally have a light spell cast on something, so they have a coin or something is shedding light. Here you guys have torches, and you have to deal with the torches. You as an Archer can’t hold a torch and shoot an arrow. It’s been really interesting to see from that perspective how a lack of magic is impacting you guys.

**Craig:** Light management is fun. I like that. It’s a little scary. You can’t be as stealthy as you want to be. That was one of the things about a traditional campaign that you have to deal with as a DM is that probably everybody’s gonna be able to see in the dark and light no longer becomes a thing. The only time it becomes a thing is, okay, so typical dark vision, you can see 60 feet ahead of you. Sometimes you run into, like, Drow. They can see 120. Now you got a situation. That’s interesting. But making us deal with simple things like not being able to see, especially when we’ve now encountered some creatures that can see in the dark, very interesting.

**John:** So fun. As we said in the setup, it is interesting to apply constraints to things, because we’re all very experienced D&D players. To make something feel fresh, you need to put on some new rules, new challenges to people. Rather than adding stuff, sometimes subtracting stuff is a way to make something more interesting. Do I want to play only this no-magic way forever? Absolutely not. But I think it’s been interesting for this round to try that and see how it all works.

It’s also been challenging to – on the DM level, I’m enforcing that you guys don’t have spells or magic stuff. As I’m picking adversaries, a lot of times what’s baked into these scenarios, they are Spellcasters too. I have to find, okay, what is the equivalent of that spellcasting ability for those characters. In some cases I’ve given them grenades that can duplicate an effect, but in other cases I’ve given them things taken from the Battle Master feats or Battle Master-

**Craig:** Maneuvers?

**John:** … maneuvers, yes, or monk-y kind of things.

**Craig:** You mean monkish?

**John:** Yeah, or monk abilities, because that would be the equivalent in this world for the third level spell they would otherwise be able to cast.

**Craig:** You’re dealing with people who have been playing for a long, long time. We all know what we’re doing. We all know the rules pretty well. Some of us know the rules pretty well, and then others do not, but that’s fine. The point is we’ve been playing for a long time.

I was in one brief campaign that another guy was running with some of the Joe Manganiello crew. The restraint on that one was every character had to be a Wizard. It was the opposite of this. It was an all-Wizard party, which meant that at least when we were starting out, it was like sending children out into the world. We were like, “I can make a light come on. Also, if you touch me, I die.” But by the time you get to Level 3-

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** It’s pretty serious, but if anybody gets close to you-

**John:** You’re still fragile.

**Craig:** You’re pretty fragile. Now, that party, you get an all-Wizard party at Level 18, now everyone’s dead.

**John:** Good lord.

**Craig:** We win. You lose.

**John:** The rules of time and space have changed now.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** We’ll continue with our campaign and with the podcast in the next couple weeks.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** Craig, good to chat with you as always.

**Craig:** Thanks, John. Thanks, Drew.

**John:** Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

**Drew:** Bye.

Links:

* Follow along with our Three Page Challenge Selections: [PLANET B](https://johnaugust.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Planet-B-Three-Pages-Christopher-James.pdf) by Christopher James, [THE LONG HAUL](https://johnaugust.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/The-Long-Haul-by-Becca-Hurd-Three-Pages.pdf) by Becca Hurd, and [THE RIGHT TO PARTY](https://johnaugust.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/The-Right-To-Party-3-Pages.pdf) by Lucas McCutchen
* [Submit your script for our Three Page Challenge!](https://johnaugust.com/threepage)
* [David Zucker’s 15 Rules of Comedy](https://creativecreativity.com/2017/07/30/david-zuckers-15-rules-of-comedy/)
* [Space Cadet (2024)](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21469794/)
* [Movie Magic Scheduling](https://www.ep.com/movie-magic-scheduling/)
* [Scenechronize](https://www.ep.com/scenechronize/)
* [PIX](https://pix.online/)
* [Qtake](https://qtakehd.com/)
* [BOX](https://www.box.com/home)
* [Frame.io](https://frame.io/)
* [Evercast](https://www.evercast.us/)
* [Scripto](https://www.scripto.live/)
* [Fuzzlecheck](https://www.fuzzlecheck.de/)
* [Ripley](https://www.netflix.com/title/81678765) on Netflix
* [Watchmen – “This Extraordinary Being”](https://www.hbo.com/watchmen/season-1/6-this-extraordinary-being)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Check out the Inneresting Newsletter](https://inneresting.substack.com/)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/)
* Craig Mazin on [Threads](https://www.threads.net/@clmazin) and [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/clmazin/)
* John August on [Threads](https://www.threads.net/@johnaugust), [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en) and [Twitter](https://twitter.com/johnaugust)
* [John on Mastodon](https://mastodon.art/@johnaugust)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Eric Pearson ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by [Drew Marquardt](https://www.drewmarquardt.com/) with help from [Jonathan Wigdortz](https://www.wiggy.rocks/). It is 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/646standard.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.