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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: espenson

Scriptnotes, Episode 470: Dual Dialogue, Transcript

October 5, 2020 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can now be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2020/470-dual-dialogue).

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

**Craig Mazin:** Craig Mazin is my name.

**John:** And this is Episode 470 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show we’ll look at what happens when two or more characters–

**Craig:** Well, the thing is if you have multiple bits of dialogue then you need to have people–

**John:** — talking at once, the best ways for writers to think about it. And–

**Craig:** — say them simultaneously. But how do you do that–

**John:** — portray it on the page.

**Craig:** — when they’re – oh.

**John:** Plus lots of follow up on delayed movies, mergers, assistant pay, and more. And in our bonus segment for Premium members Craig and I will discuss Halloween.

**Craig:** Ooh, Halloween. I love it.

**John:** Yeah. Do you love Halloween?

**Craig:** I do.

**John:** I don’t love Halloween. So we’ll get into that.

**Craig:** Well, I get why. I know why. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] You’ll have theories.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** All right. So lots of stuff in the news. First off, almost all the movies are delayed or the release dates changed. So we haven’t talked about this for a while but there was a pandemic. I guess there still is a pandemic.

**Craig:** So they say.

**John:** So they say. Some movie theaters are kind of opened. Most movie theaters aren’t really open. Tenet released in the US, sort of. Other movies have gone straight to video.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** We’ll put a link in the show notes to an article that looks at some of the big release date changes, but essentially coming through the end of this year all of the Marvel movies got pushed back. Some of the Disney movies are coming out. Some of them are not coming out. Something like Free Guys, December 11. Dune, of course, is December 18. Wonder Woman is December 25.

**Craig:** I don’t think they are. I’ve got to be honest with you. I don’t think they are.

**John:** I don’t know if they are either. I was talking to some people involved with these movies and they said, “Yeah, I think it’s going to come out? Maybe it’s going to be out for like two weeks and—“

**Craig:** I would be shocked. Shocked.

**John:** I’d be surprised, too.

**Craig:** I think that this is going to be a while with these. If they don’t bite the bullet and just say, “We’re going to be charging you $30 to watch this at home,” then they have to wait. They just have to wait. Tenet was the movie that they all watched happen. And then they all looked at each other and said, “Ooh, no, no. We don’t want that.”

I mean, these things are economic propositions that have been well worked out with various formulae. A little bit like gambling where they’ve got it down to somewhat of a science, at least in certain ways. And not having a full theatrical release in the United States is simply untenable if you’re going to attempt to make your money back on some of these big bets. And they are pretty much all really big bets.

**John:** So I think the first question will be Pixar has some movies, Soul and the James Bond movie No Time to Die. Both of them are slated for November 20.

**Craig:** No way.

**John:** Yeah. That will be the first times we see. I mean, it’s not just the pandemic. It’s also it’s coming out of this election. I just don’t have a great sense for what America is going to be like at the end of November.

**Craig:** Normally if the movie theaters are open America is like I’m going to the movies. That’s normally what we’re like. But we’re not. We’re not going to be going to the movies on November 20. I don’t believe that. Unless something remarkable happens. It just doesn’t seem like it makes any sense. And the biggest moviemaking complexes are in the largest population centers. Those are the places that seemingly are most rigid and properly so about following the rules of social distancing. I just don’t see it happening. But, I mean, look, you can keep sliding things around on a calendar all you want. The nice thing is they don’t have to mail prints out anywhere anymore. It’s all beamed in electronically.

**John:** That’s true.

**Craig:** But, nah, and I mean, and the marketing campaigns are flexible as well. So, no, I don’t think so. I would be blown away if we were watching a James Bond movie on November 20.

**John:** Yeah. And I don’t want to sound callous towards movie theaters. Movie theaters are a crucial piece of our infrastructure and they’ve just been completely hosed by what’s happened. And so I want theatrical movies to succeed. I want these things to be possible. I just don’t know that it is possible now.

And just using myself as a barometer, I’m a person who really likes to go to the movies and sees things opening weekend. But if I don’t feel safe going to movie theaters here, pretty well run movie theaters here, I just don’t see it being profitable for everybody.

**Craig:** No. The movie theaters are probably facing an extinction event in terms of the way it has been to this point. The removal of the consent decree and the pandemic have combined to – I don’t know how a large independent theater chain survives this. I really don’t. Maybe they have secret plans that are somehow opaque to me. But it does seem like the large media companies in the United States are sitting back waiting to see what happens with the pandemic ending and waiting to see how attendance works after that, at which point they will swoop in and buy these things at a cheap cost as distressed properties.

**John:** Very, very possible. I mentioned the election, Craig, what is your voting plan?

**Craig:** My voting plan is to receive my ballot in the mail. Fill the ballot out. And then I believe I’m going to be dropping it into a ballot drop box. That’s the last bit of research I have to do is see where that is. I assume it’s going to be at my post office. But it might be elsewhere. I will find out where that is. I will go to it and put my ballot into it. And I will do that on the day I get my ballot.

**John:** That is essentially my plan as well. I actually already got my ballot because the county of Los Angeles still thinks I live in France. And so they sent me this ballot early so it can get all the way to France. So I actually got my ballot. If it becomes a question of whether this is going to be problematic for me to turn it in early because they think I live in France then I will take this to one of the early voting centers and actually vote there as soon as I can do that.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So that’s the alternative. That’s what I did at the 2018 elections.

**Craig:** Got it.

**John:** So either way I will be voting as soon as I possibly can vote, just because you never know.

**Craig:** Well, I have always been a vote in person guy because I like the experience of voting in person.

**John:** I do, too.

**Craig:** I remember as a kid going into the voting booth with my dad. Back in the day, I don’t know if it was like this where you were in gorgeous Colorado, but in glum Staten Island what we would do is we would go to – it was actually my elementary school’s gymnasium and they had set up these little booths with this sliding curtain. And there was a machine in front of you. To me as a small child the machine seemed enormous. I suspect today it’s not. And it had levers. And you would flip the levers. Clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack, clack. You make all your choices and then you would pull this big lever at the bottom from left to right and it would go…and it would register your vote somehow using, I don’t know, some ancient Babbage machine.

And then you would open the curtain and exit. And I just remember thinking that this was very high tech and very exciting.

**John:** Absolutely. So I remember my mom doing that once. And at some very early point voting in Colorado moved to the more sort of freestanding little desk kind of things where you’re poking holes and things, which aren’t nearly as much fun for a kid to see.

**Craig:** No. No. So in California we have the ink dot system, or at least we did, which I thought actually worked very well. You stick your thing in the thing and you flip the pages and you push down. The system now is more automated. It’s a little odd. When I voted in 2018 it was a little strange in that you tap the things on the screen and the thing comes out and then you have to stick the thing back in and then it comes back out. I guess for you to check and make sure.

Anyway, I’m filling my thing out at home. Bring it in. Let’s do this.

**John:** I’m going to fill my thing at home and make sure it gets in early.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** But voting day is still a priority this year and sort of every year. Our friends Beth and Travis sort of spearheaded a movement to sort of get the WGA to say, “Hey, shouldn’t voting day be a paid day off for our members?”

**Craig:** Yes. 100 percent. So Beth Schacter worked in television for a long time. She’s currently an EP on Billions. And Travis Donnelly is one of our re-elected, freshly re-elected, directors on the board at the WGA. And they are both absolutely correct. This is something that we do need to encourage. The WGA cannot force showrunners to say, “Go ahead everybody, take the day to vote if you need to.” But we should be encouraging it strongly. And that means that the showrunners then have to turn around to the companies and say, “FYI, I’m doing this, and we’re not going to not pay people and that’s the way it is.”

It is incredibly important. And until we have a national holiday for voting this is going to be something we need to do. So, it’s a great idea. And we should encourage – the WGA should be doing this officially, encouraging the people running shows. And then you and I should just keep doing it and talking to our friends and leading by example in saying let people go vote.

**John:** Agreed. And hopefully WGA saying this and encouraging this will get other unions to be thinking about this. Hopefully this industry can be thinking about this way and other unions down the road can be thinking.

**Craig:** The other unions do not listen to us. And we don’t talk to them, which we know. However, we can take the lead on this.

**John:** However, they do draft off of things we get. So that is a useful thing.

**Craig:** Sometimes they do. It’s true.

**John:** Yeah. I mean, there were no residuals until the WGA got residuals.

**Craig:** That was back in the ‘50s. That is true. That is true. Did you see the latest pandemic – there was this big agreement between the companies and the unions about how to proceed in terms of managing COVID and testing on sets. And again everybody involved accept the WGA. Do not know why. But you know what? That’s something the new board can figure out.

**John:** Yes. So let’s talk about our new board. The WGA elections were held. The results were that all the incumbents were re-elected plus Eric Haywood. So congratulations to the incumbents and to Eric.

**Craig:** Meet the new board. Same as the old board.

**John:** Obviously we’ll put a link in the show notes to the results. I know and work with all these people. I have nothing bad to say about any of them. You have bad things to say about Patric Verrone.

**Craig:** Nothing but bad. Nothing.

**John:** There was a big cliff between Patric Verrone and the next vote-getter after that. So it wasn’t even a close, tight election.

**Craig:** No, no. Patric Verrone happily inhabiting that eighth slot every two years. That’s where he lives. So, I was bummed out. I was bummed out because Daniel Kunka who was the one feature writer running did not make it in. I don’t think any of these people are feature writers. So, Betsy Thomas, Deric Hughes, Ashley Gable, Patti Carr, David Slack, Eric Haywood, Travis Donnelly, Patric Verrone. TV, TV, TV, TV, TV, TV, TV, TV, TV.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** And this is not tenable. It’s just not going to work. And I don’t know what to do about it because the membership is skewed. So we have a large and completely unrepresented minority in our union. And that’s just a recipe for disaster. I don’t know how this is going to continue like this.

**John:** OK. So, as a screenwriter who was just on the board pretty recently. It’s not that we have no representation. Michele Mulroney is a feature writer. Dante Harper is a feature writer. It would be awesome to have more feature writers on there. That’s why were both pushing for Daniel Kunka to be a representative of that.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Having talked to all the people who are currently on there, I know they are well-versed in feature issues. And I know it is important to them. It is not affecting them directly the way it would affect a feature writer. So, let us just remind the people who are elected there some things that are super, super important for them to understand about feature issues.

Free work abuses is a thing that feature writers encounter that TV writers don’t encounter to nearly the same degree, which is basically being held on a draft and turning it in, basically not being paid because they keep pushing more and more stuff for you to do. And so you are working endlessly on a “draft” whereas a TV writer would have turned a thing in because they’re more on a weekly basis. That is a thing that is so specific to feature writers.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, the problem that came out of mini rooms and the stretching of time where writers were getting paid the same amount in television for more and more time of work. The thing that made them crazy and led us to strike threat a couple of times. That’s been the state of affairs, times ten, for feature writers forever. So, if TV writers could just look at it that way. If they could just understand how much worse feature writers have had it in that area that they found so offensive for so long. If the 17 out of 19 people in board meetings could internalize that it would be enormously valuable for the thousands of feature writers that are in this union.

**John:** Yeah. Other things that are evergreen issues for feature writers is late pay. Basically you turn in your draft and it’s late coming. I will say there has been progress on this. Since the time I was on the board there would be more progress now that invoices and contracts are coming through to the guild. There’s already been work on this thing. It has to continue.

Teams. There are teams in TV. There are teams in feature. Teams in features, they’re screwed. You’re splitting a salary between two people. It makes it harder for everybody. So the issues that teams face are only magnified by the other problems in features.

And finally I would just want everyone to be mindful of the very definition of what is a feature film is in question. So if you’re writing a feature for a Disney+ or one of the other streamers let’s make sure we are using the terms of a theatrical feature and not getting dragged down to TV movie of the week. And we just have to be so vigilant that we are really treating these pieces of 110 minute entertainment that feels like a feature film that we’re paying these writers like they are writing feature films because that’s what they are.

**Craig:** Yeah. This is not unrelated to our discussion of a few minutes ago, the fate of theaters. If theaters eventually go away there are still movies. It’s just how we watch them. We don’t necessarily conceive of a massive difference at home. But the contract that we have with the companies dates back to the early days of television and the early days of theatrical exhibition. And that’s what it solidified into. Our contract is ancient. It is old and it is full of archaic language. None of which contemplated the Internet much less streaming and the blurring of features on big or little screens.

So all of that needs to be considered. But it can only be considered if it is a priority. And that means, again, that out of the 19 people in that room you have 16 board members and three officers. Of those 19 people, even though only two of them work in features all of them need to put features first. I don’t know how else to say it. Because all we’ve done is put television first and exclusively put television first for well over a decade. And I’m just going to keep banging this drum. I’m going to be – I’ll be that militant.

**John:** Be that militant. Several of the people I know who are on the board are also starting to do feature work. And I’ve had individual conversations with them about that. So I think as silos get broken down many of these writers will be more aware of what those issues are. It’s also the point in every one of these conversations where I also remind people that we have people who work in comedy and variety and they have it even worse than feature writers do. So, being mindful of those writers also facing challenges.

**Craig:** Sure. They will have to find their own Craig Mazin to bang that drum. I have one drum. One.

**John:** One drum. And he beats it loud.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Let’s talk about Quibi. So Quibi–

**Craig:** Aw.

**John:** Aw, Quibi. Quibi has short little videos for your phone. So, it won two Emmys this last week. Congratulations Quibi.

**Craig:** Oh. That’s pretty cool. I know that–

**John:** Yeah. It’s won more Emmys than I have. Fewer than Craig.

**Craig:** [laughs] No, Quibi has tied me for Emmys. Kaitlin Olson was nominated for an Emmy for her work on Quibi. I don’t know if she won or not. Was she one of the ones who won? I hope she was.

**John:** I don’t know. I didn’t see who actually won.

**Craig:** I’ll have to look it up.

**John:** So Quibi this last week engaged JPMorgan Chase to help the company review a range of strategic options. I’ll put a link in the show notes to the LA Times article about it. But let’s just talk about Quibi because we didn’t really talk about it when it launched. I had a conversation with Jeffrey Katzenberg, I don’t know, two years ago and there was a show I was going to do with Doug Liman and we just couldn’t make it work out financially or logistically.

**Craig:** At the Quib?

**John:** At the Quib. And I will say that the initial pitch I got from Jeffrey was kind of what the show ended up being and the problems that I sort of heard in the pitch became the real problems that were out there is that while it’s great in theory to have, oh, they’re videos that you watch on your phone, sort of like how you can watch YouTube on your phone. It wasn’t fundamentally compelling because those weren’t the kinds of things I wanted to watch on my phone. I wanted to watch things on my TV and I couldn’t watch things on my TV. I also couldn’t share anything that I thought was great about a show on clips on Twitter or Instagram. It couldn’t go viral because it was all locked down. There were fundamental things that were problematic about it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, I have never understood it. I may be the only writer in America who has not gone in and met with people at Quibi and pitched anything to Quibi. I never understood it. To me, the concept itself sounded like an old person’s thrilling idea of how the Internet could or should work. But we have Quibi. It’s called YouTube. That’s how Quibi functions. Right? If you want short videos to watch on your phone, there’s YouTube.

But what people generally never wanted on YouTube were little mini-series that just played on YouTube. They just didn’t want that. That wasn’t a thing. They didn’t mind it on like a big laptop screen, but like on your phone? Nobody wanted that. And there’s been people who have trying that crap for a decade. It’s not what people want in that format. They just don’t.

**John:** So I’m going to take the position that Quibi in the end was a good thing in that it paid a lot of people a lot of money to make content.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** Which is good. It increased employment. It got people to experiment and do new things. So even if it wasn’t a financial success for this company it basically took a bunch of stock market investor money and gave it to writers and creators and actors and other folks. And maybe that’s good.

**Craig:** Well, it gave the money to an executive who then gave it to a lot of writers and actors and folks. And if there’s a lesson here for the money people maybe it’s this. The guy who is famous for writing The Idea is Everything, Jeffrey Katzenberg, is not the guy who comes up with the ideas. He’s just the guy pointing at the concept of an idea and saying isn’t that important. Meaning what Jeffrey Katzenberg was famous for in the ‘90s was writing a memo saying, “Writers are everything. But let’s not pay them well. And also I’ll be in charge.”

Jeffrey Katzenberg, apologies to Mr. Katzenberg, doesn’t write anything. Doesn’t create anything. His big idea was to pay other people to have ideas. You don’t need him for that. What you need are people who come up with big ideas. Go to them. Go to them. You want them to be managed by somebody? I don’t know, hire four million mid-level managers for the same price of one Katzenberg. And his partner was Meg Whitman. She’s the Facebook lady, right?

**John:** Wasn’t she PayPal?

**Craig:** Oh, she was PayPal. She was PayPal and then she also ran for the governor of California at some point. Anyway, who needs them? They don’t do anything. They don’t do anything. I wish to god this capital would understand that. But I think sometimes the people who have billions of dollars only talk to other people that are like them. Oh, well Jeffrey Katzenberg is sort of like us. He’s an executive. And he talks in executive speak. Blech.

They don’t do anything. They don’t. Why?

**John:** There’s a struggle of disintermediation. So basically you’re objecting to the fact that people are giving money to Quibi who is then giving it to the people to actually make the things. And it’s like you should just give the money to the people who make the things. But someone has to build the distribution platform. So Quibi was trying to be that distribution platform the same way a Netflix is. The same way an HBO Max is.

It goes back to our discussion of theaters. You want to own the place where people see the thing because that is ultimately useful and powerful in your gatekeeper function. But I don’t know that it makes sense to – the same way that you don’t see a lot of tech money going into “we’re going to revolutionize movie theaters.” Or you see MoviePass trying to do that and it’s like well that’s a bad idea. Quibi is in many ways the MoviePass of video.

**Craig:** I think it is. And I don’t want to imply that there is no place for people that aren’t writers to run things in Hollywood, because there is. It’s just that most of the people that I work with are employed by a large corporation and their function is their utility in working with writers and filmmakers and directors and actors. They are good at it. So that’s why – at least most of them are good at it that I work with. And so that’s why they’re there.

But when you elevate a noncreative person to a kind of creative guru position then you are asking for trouble. Every time they do it. The Japanese via Sony truly believed that Guber and Peters they were gods of some kind. They knew something. They had cracked the code. And so if you’ve never read Hit and Run, which is a fantastic book about Sony’s purchase of Columbia Pictures you should. It’s amazing. And it really is just a story of how they got fooled by two guys who basically were just, you know, guys. One of whom may not even be literate. I mean, so I’ve heard. I’m not saying that in any actionable way. I’ve just heard that. It’s probably not true.

So this happens. Any time they escalate people like Katzenberg. And I have nothing against Jeffrey Katzenberg.

**John:** No. I think Katzenberg is very smart. And he deserves credit for the many things he has accomplished over the years.

**Craig:** Years.

**John:** And also congratulations you built a giant company–

**Craig:** Well, no. Now that one I’ve got to quibble – I’ve got to Quibi with.

**John:** You’ve got to quibble with Quibi?

**Craig:** A lot of people invested in that and are going to lose their shirts. And while the people–

**John:** I don’t think anyone is going to lose their shirts. I think it was money that was looking for a home.

**Craig:** Well, sure. But some homes are better than others. And these institutional investors, they themselves obviously are insulated from these losses because they’re fat cats. But they’re playing around with other people’s money. And those people ultimately get hurt. So anytime a business crashes of this scale, $2 billion, it’s bad.

**John:** And to stipulate it hasn’t crashed to – you know, $1.75 billion. It hasn’t crashed to nothing. It’s really hard to see how much it’s worth.

**Craig:** And on its way.

**John:** And who to sell it to. One of the interesting things about the Quibi business model which from the initial pitch is that the creators actually get their content back. And so after like seven years it goes back but they can also repackage it after it like two years, which does seem to be a tacit acknowledgment of like it sort of sucks to be working for somebody and have them own your thing for perpetuity.

Like I’m writing this movie for Netflix right now and it’s just it’s only going to be on Netflix. That’s all it’s ever going to be on. If Netflix goes away it gets sold off to somebody at some point.

**Craig:** Yeah. Somebody buys it.

**John:** It is locked away in ways that are frustrating for a filmmaker. So, Quibi was trying to acknowledge that.

**Craig:** Quibi was definitely spending money like a drunken sailor. And that’s the Netflix factor. This is why – I can imagine that pitch of just the only way to compete with Netflix is to out-Netflix Netflix. They’re a drunken sailor. We need to be an even more drunken sailor. And this is all in the short term good for folks who are receiving money for writing. In the long term it’s not good if it destabilizes because of eventually this all comes crashing down. Quibi has come crashing down way faster than I thought it would.

I’m confused by their insistence that this is related to the pandemic. The pandemic seems like it would be a gift from god for Quibi. But I don’t know.

**John:** Yeah. I think they built a user story experience where it was like you’re watching it on the train as you’re headed to work. That’s the ideal use case for it.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** But honestly that’s so New York centric.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** It’s such a view of one way that people live their lives.

**Craig:** Also, I’m sorry, but that’s not what people – in New York if you manage the catch the working wifi in between stations on the subway, yeah, you’re listening to music or you’re playing a game or you’re texting. You’re not watching a Quibi. For god’s sake.

**John:** Yeah. No. One place we can read all of the useful insight and criticism of this is in the trades.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** And so the trades are–

**Craig:** You mean the trade? [laughs]

**John:** Exactly. The trades are what we call – originally they were printed newspapers, but Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Deadline. They are the different places that report on our industry. And they’re now all essentially one company. They’re all one trade. So we will link to the Deadline piece on what happened. But essentially through joint ventures they’ve all basically become one thing.

Everything we think of being separate entities are basically one company.

**Craig:** Yes. And one of those companies is MRC which produces content in Hollywood.

**John:** Yeah. Funny that.

**Craig:** So you have a studio, essentially a studio, a financing arm of a studio that is the part owner of all of the major publications analyzing the entertainment industry. And that includes Rolling Stone, the Hollywood Reporter, Variety, Billboard, Vibe, and Music Business Worldwide. That’s all of them. That’s all of them. So, you know, you and I growing up out here in the ‘90s as young screenwriters we knew that there was Coke and Pepsi. There was Variety and there was the Hollywood Reporter. And I remember being astonished at how much they cost. Because back in those days, because it was a bit of a kind of duopoly to get Variety delivered to your office every day, Daily Variety, you had to pay some insane yearly subscription at that time. It was like a thousand dollars. I’m like, what, this is insane.

And now apparently Variety is free as far as I can tell to everybody in the world. And Deadline disrupted everything. And now it’s just all smashed together into one thing. And what happens now–

**John:** And so I don’t know what happens now. So, I mean, it’s worth noting that Deadline was actually – Nikki Finke drove me crazy, but Nikki Finke created Deadline as a separate independent site that was just journalism about the actual industry and became incredibly influential because it was actually just journalism about the industry. And it was gossipy and all the other things we can sort of throw at it, but it was outside the norm. So it does feel like there’s a potential for an outside disruptor to come in here and make the new version of Deadline that is actually independent. So that’s a possible outcome of this.

But I want to talk about the MRC of it all. So MRC is a company that is also tied up with the agencies and sort of the affiliated productions of the agencies in complicated ways. But they make actual TV shows and features. So, Ozark, The Great, The Outsider, The Golden Globe Awards, Fire Fraud, which I think it’s great that they were the people behind that.

**Craig:** Knives Out.

**John:** The Billboard Music Awards. American Music Awards. Knives Out. Baby Driver.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** So it’s just so complicated to be the trades who are supposed to be reporting on an industry that you actually are making the things you’re reporting on.

**Craig:** It is. And good journalists will often, you know, encounter this because of these multinational conglomerates. You’re always touching on something. And so they’ll say, “Full disclosure, this publication is owned by the same parent company as blah-blah-blah.” And so you say that out loud and they will say, OK, that they will have independence, which is fine. And I believe them to an extent because they know that if they don’t have independence then the property they just bought will become worthless. Because it will be pointed out and it will be skewered and devalued.

But what is not good is that there is the potential for – it just seems like an obvious potential for consolidation here. So you buy all this stuff and then you sit there and you go, so, um, we have somebody that does the same job at Variety as this other person at Hollywood Reporter. Why don’t we just fire one of them? And actually why don’t we just fire half of these people and just make one thing called the Variety Reporter. And then people will lose their jobs and also you narrow the diversity of voices.

**John:** It’s true.

**Craig:** That’s what worries me.

**John:** It’s the problem of any consolidation and having monopolies to control, or at least an oligopoly. It’s not even an oligopoly anymore. It’s just basically a monopoly. And particularly when it comes to, you know, creative expression and to journalism to only have one source of truth is very bad.

**Craig:** It’s not good. Even about something as frivolous as what Hollywood is doing. You know, I got to say I’ve gone full Bernie Bro on this episode. I’m just like swinging at corporations, Jeffrey Katzenberg for no good reason at all. I don’t even know him. Just throwing bizarre bunches in a wild podcast style. It’s been enjoyable.

**John:** That’s what we do.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s been enjoyable.

**John:** One of the wild swings we were throwing–

**Craig:** Segue man.

**John:** — months and months ago was about assistant pay.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** This last week UTA raised assistant pay across the board.

**Craig:** Excellent.

**John:** Minimum is $22 an hour. Goes to $24 an hour for agency assistants and the agent training program gets up to $26 per hour. This is good. This is progress. And so I just wanted to call out UTA for doing good work here.

**Craig:** That is good.

**John:** And also doing it in a time which is admittedly very difficult for agents and for the industry. It’s hard to say like everything is struggling and so we’re actually going to raise pay. It feels like the right choice and a difficult choice.

**Craig:** Yeah. I agree. And this looks to me I think the new golden standard here. I think that this is better than the Verve or CAA commitment.

**John:** This does feel better. And so the Verve and CAA had other things built in there in terms of like quality of life stuff, but–

**Craig:** Got it.

**John:** But money is money. So let’s focus on that.

**Craig:** Money is money. So this is very good. And I do agree with you that this is a challenging time for the agencies, of course. But if the people at the highest level of these agencies who make an insane amount of money are willing to forgo a little bit of their enormous lucre, because if you say to, you know, whoever – who owns UTA? Jeremy Zimmer or something? I don’t know who owns it, like how that works.

**John:** They’re privately held. They have outside investors. But they’re privately held.

**Craig:** Right. But whoever the biggest shot is there, if you say to that guy, oh, by the way, just because for reasons you’re not going to get paid anything this year. They’ll be fine. They’ll be totally fine. So, like it’s good to maybe hit pause on the money pipe – I’m Bernie Bro’ing again. And give the people who are holding your business up, you know, a chance to survive and flourish. Ooh, I’m telling you, man. I am just swinging the flaming sword of the workers of the world today.

**John:** All right. Let’s do a little bit of follow up here. This is Ezra. He writes in about How Would This Be a Movie.

Ezra: Hi John and Craig. This is a follow up to a listener email from Episode 465 on using the Battle of Blair Mountain on your How Would This Be a Movie segment. My wife and I spent two physically and emotionally taxing years trying to have our first child. After a successful round of IVF we had our first in 2017. This past February we had our second, also through IVF. Science. It works.

As a way to do with all of the feelings I accumulated over that time I began working on a pilot script for a show called Trying, a half-hour comedy about a couple with fertility problems. I thought this was my Chernobyl, but sadly it was my Winds of War. I was a new dad with a time-consuming day job, whilst still working to finish it in March 2020 when AppleTV announced Trying, a half-hour comedy about a couple with fertility problems.

I could get into the differences between the ideas, for instance they’re not actually trying anymore, they’re seeking to adopt. But the underlying lesson remains. I dragged my feet and someone else who had a similar and probably better idea got it made. Can’t say you all didn’t warn me.

So to my fellow listener, it’s not only that other people have the same general idea as you. They can have literally the same idea as you down to the title. For an aspiring writer the struggle of infertility could not have been any more real than to watch someone else get to have the little writing baby I imagined for myself.

This is all to say that I agree very strongly with both of you that no one has a 100 percent claim on an idea or concept, putting aside all that legal stuff about owning ideas. If you had the thought someone else has had it as well. In the best case you are in a race to see who can get theirs over the finish line first. I dragged and my heels and now I need to find another darling to work on. It’s OK. Grappling with infertility gave me a much more nuanced perspective on other people’s successes. Congrats Andy Walton. And what kind of let downs I am actually capable of absorbing.

**Craig:** Wow. Ezra, you’re a grownup.

**John:** Yeah. Listen to grownup Ezra there.

**Craig:** Yeah. What an adult. It’s refreshing to hear an adult speak in an adult fashion about adult things. And, yes, that hurts. I get it. I don’t necessarily know that it’s over-over, because TV shows come and go. And also there’s very different kinds of TV shows that often have very similar premises. I mean, if you had an idea for a show about a group of detectives that use forensics to solve crimes, well, if you heard about another one it wouldn’t stop you. There are 12 on the air.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** There can more than one show. And so one of the things is asking yourself what is it about their show that is inherently different than the way you would have done yours. Is there a different way to swing it around? Can you make it a different kind of couple? What is it inherent to that story that you love? Is there a way to repurpose it and rethink it? But it’s also perfectly fine to let it go and move on. And you’re absolutely right. Any idea that anyone is working on, it’s already in the work somewhere else.

You know what I love about Ezra is that he didn’t do the thing that seemingly 90 percent of ding-a-lings do which is like, “I’m suing.” No. Yes, sometimes people come up with the same idea. And even the title. Trying. It makes sense. That’s pretty much what people call it. Yup, we’re trying. So, yeah, you know, you’re going to be good, Ezra.

**John:** You’re going to be good. I want to go back to our conversation about loglines because it feels like really what it comes down is that the logline for Ezra’s show and the show that’s on Apple right now are the same. They have the same title. But that show by its concept is going to be incredibly execution-dependent.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** This is not like a meteor is headed towards the earth. This is relatable humans doing relatable human things. And the general situation, the framing, the premise has an overlap, but that’s really about it. So, the thing that Ezra is writing, it doesn’t just go away because this other show exists. And so Ezra you should finish that thing. It’s probably a great writing sample for you for working on your next thing and could be hired to do other stuff.

I’d pick a different title just so it doesn’t get confused with the thing that’s out there.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** But you did great. The reason why I wanted to play this is that so often on the show we’ve talked about like somebody stole my idea. And it just doesn’t happen. People have the same ideas. They have incredibly, specifically similar ideas. And this is an example of that. So thank you for sharing that.

**Craig:** Terrific. Thank you, Ezra, that’s awesome.

**John:** Also, last week we talked about lawyers and I asked our listeners, hey, if you have advice for how you got a lawyer or ways to get a lawyer if you’re an unsigned writer how to do it. People wrote in because we have the best listeners. So do you want to take Susan from LA?

**Craig:** Yeah. Susan from LA says, “Go to IMDb Pro,” I see you’ve got to get that account, “and pull up well-regarded recent indie films or documentaries. Scroll down the crew list until you find legal counsel. Then Google that person and check out their law firm home page. You can also look at Variety/Hollywood Reporter,” well who knows, Varollywood Reporter’s “power lawyer lists, but they’re a bit pricy and will require a larger retainer upfront.”

**John:** Susan’s first idea there is phenomenal.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And I don’t know why I didn’t think about that. But as I look at–

**Craig:** You’re bad.

**John:** Yeah. I’m bad.

**Craig:** You’re bad.

**John:** As I look at like the attorney who helped me out with The Nines and sort of does independent film like that, it’s exactly their kind of gig. It’s what they do. And reach out to them. They can probably do it for you and they have experience doing this kind of stuff. So that feels like a great place to start.

**Craig:** And a month of IMDb Pro is, what, like $12 or something?

**John:** Oh yeah. That’s fine.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So you can totally do that. Erin writes, “In my experience legit entertainment lawyers are not asking for money upfront, at least that’s how mine operates. It is for future commission. Granted, my manager referred me, but this is what I’ve anecdotally heard as well. I do my due diligence before paying cash for an option red line. There will certainly be good attorneys willing to do it for free with the idea that they will receive commissions once you start to get paid.”

I disagree with Erin there.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, I don’t think Erin is correct at all.

**John:** I don’t think so.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And here’s the difference. I think because Erin is coming in here with a manager I think that manager is talking to that attorney and saying like, “Hey, this is a kid who I think is going to do well here. Maybe you do this for free and then you become his lawyer.” That’s not the general case situation.

**Craig:** No. I mean, lawyers in the entertainment business do an enormous amount of work on commission. Your lawyer does. My lawyer does. But that’s based on the notion that they’re negotiating employment contracts or the purchase of literary material. Those are large sales or large employments. Something where someone is coming in and saying, “I need you to look through this option agreement,” which may absolutely turn into nothing – no, that lawyer is almost certainly going to charge you some kind of hourly rate. They would be nuts not to. Because they can certainly say, “And by the way if you’re happy for this and it works out when it’s time to do the employment contract come back. That is done on commission. You don’t have to pay upfront for that at all.”

But, no, I don’t think there’s going to be good attorneys willing to do these option agreements for free. No.

**John:** I agree. I think your first choice of find the person who does this for independent films or just get other recommendations from people in similar situations is going to be better serving you for that first contract which as I recall last week is about like a $1 option agreement and a red-lining.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** That’s not a situation – commission on a $1 – not worth it.

**Craig:** Ten cents. Five cents. Sorry, a nickel.

**John:** Five cents for an attorney. All right let’s get to a craft topic. I want to talk about dual dialogue because this week I’ve been writing scenes that have a lot of dual dialogue in it which is not something I often do. And I want to – we’ve discussed on Episode 370, we talked about simultaneity, basically when two events have to happen in the same time, but dual dialogue is a specific kind of that where people are just overlapping. And we may want the overlap for effect. We may need to hear information from two different sides. There’s a reason why we’re doing. It’s always a choice to do dual dialogue. And let’s talk about when you make that choice and how you might portray that on the page.

**Craig:** It is a little bit of a trap because if you watch movies, particularly certain kinds of movies where it’s very conversational, very dialogue heavy, almost all of it at times will seem like it’s overlapping somewhat. And so there’s a temptation to think this is going to make it realer. If I do dual dialogue it will make things look realer. The problem with dual dialogue is that it is such a heavy-handed instruction to everybody. Everybody is now going oh my god I have to actually – we are talking at the same time over each other very specifically. This isn’t a natural overlapping but a forced overlapping. So you have to be very deliberate, I think, about when you use it. It really comes into play rarely. I must say maybe three or four times in a script it’ll pop up. And even then I feel like I could probably get away with two of them, you know, get rid of two of them or something.

**John:** Yeah. So I think we often confuse and conflate it with people speaking quickly.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And so I think in a lot of movies that we see and we love we think they’re overlapping, but really they’re actually just speaking quickly. And they’re anticipating their next lines. There’s just not pauses between things. But they literally are not stacked on top of each other. So, we see a tool in Highland or in Final Draft that gives us the ability to dual dialogue and we think like, oh, that must be the way you do it. And I’ll tell you that on the page often that’s not how you do it.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So some of the choices you might make is as a parenthetical “overlapping,” basically saying like there may be scene description that says all of this is overlapping. Basically don’t wait to clear the other person’s lines before you start talking. That it’s meant to be sort of on top of each other.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** For example, Call Me by Your Name, there’s a sequence in which he’s sitting at the table and the parents and these other visitors are just all talking over each other. And it’s not important what they’re actually saying. It’s the experience of being there listening to that. And so that’s probably just an overlapping because it just doesn’t actually matter what the individual people are saying.

Other cases, you are very specifically trying to get information out there. So, we had Noah Baumbach on for Marriage Story. We had Greta Gerwig on for Little Women. And in those scripts, you can go back to those episodes and look at the PDFs, they’re very specific about where those overlaps are and you are supposed to be hearing what everyone is saying. And the fact that they are overlapping becomes very important. Be thinking about what the actual effect is you’re trying to achieve.

**Craig:** Yeah. But there are those moments where it really is the perfect tool. Like you say, it’s not frequent. I mean, for standard overlapping for casual overlapping you don’t want to do this. It is a heavy-handed instruction to everybody. But, then there are times where somebody is going to try and talk over another person. Arguments, for instance, where someone is going to be talking and the other person starts talking as if to say, “No, you stop talking,” but the first person will not stop talking. Or, situations in comedies sometimes where two people are trying to explain the same thing at once. It is a moment where it is absolutely required that two people are speaking intentionally over each other with knowledge that they’re speaking over each other and neither one of them is going to stop. That’s pretty much the best case use for dual dialogue.

**John:** Yeah. Basically neither one of them is yielding the floor to the other person to speak.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So even the conversation that you and I are having right now, we are anticipating when I’m going to stop talking and you’re going to start talking. But along the way I might try to shout over you a little bit. I may do an acknowledgment, which I think is a special case we should talk about here, which is the uh-huhs, the yeahs, if you’re doing The Daily, the New York Times podcast, it’s Michael Barbaro’s “Huh.” It’s that signal that you’re still part of it.

**Craig:** Huh.

**John:** So those are all meaningful things. And sometimes you’re going to choose as a writer to actually break up someone’s dialogue with that “huh,” that acknowledgment. But that’s rare. It would also be rare to put that “uh-huh” in a dual dialogue. So you’re going to make choices. Basically I’m saying you may not put every utterance of a person in the dialogue of your script.

**Craig:** And when you are there you are going to find some sort of naturalistic language that comes out. One of the stark differences between play text, from a playwright, and screenplay text from a screenwriter is that the play text is designed to be performed by as many different actors as possible. Whereas the screenwriting text will be performed by one. And unless there’s some remake of the movie 30 years later, it’s one person. So there is going to be a certain tailoring and idiosyncratic adjustment to that single performer as opposed to a play.

So actually I do see dual dialogue frequently when I look at plays, when I read plays. It seems like that gets called out quite a bit because it’s formalized. Whereas in movies not so much. It is a decent tool. It’s very useful for songs, when you’re writing songs in movies, and two people are singing at once. It’s perfectly useful. But I think it’s probably good to ask yourself do I need it. It is not fun to read.

**John:** It’s brutal to read.

**Craig:** I’ll say on the page. Yeah. If you see a page where it’s just strips of dual dialogue your eyelids will get heavy.

**John:** Yeah. Because you have to make the choice of, OK, am I going to read the left hand column and then go back and read the right hand column? It’s a lot of work.

**Craig:** It’s also hard to imagine. And you know we can play one voice in our head at once. We can’t play two. We just can’t.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So, you know, you’re asking something there. Just use it – when you use it know that it is very intentional, very purposeful. It is a heavy spice, so sprinkle it with restraint.

**John:** All right. Let’s get to a question. Patrick writes in, “I was hoping you could discuss the singular they/them/their pronoun in reference to many non-binary people. I used singular they pronouns in a recent script for a non-binary character. It was a period piece where singular they was never used in dialogue, but it felt like the correct way to identify this seemingly genderless character in action lines. I referred to the character as androgynous in an introductory character description, and aimed to avoid pronoun confusion so it would be clear when the they referred to this character specifically versus multiple characters at once.

“However, I’m still worried that readers may be confused or distracted by the singular they. I want to leave it like it is, but I’m not sure I should. Have you had any experience using singular they in scripts, or reading scripts where others have? Would you advise us to use or not use it? And is a disclaimer necessary?”

**Craig:** Well, there is a natural singular they/them/their usage anyway. It’s not completely foreign to our longstanding use of the English language. When there is a gender – what would you call it – ignorance, I don’t know–

**John:** You just don’t know.

**Craig:** Yeah, I don’t know if this is a man or a woman, so it says the police officers walk in, adjust their guns, I guess that’s plural. But there’s ways where you do use it. I think if it’s a non-binary character I would probably want to call it out early and say I’m going to be using, just for the reader, just let them know I’m going to be using they/them/their because they’re non-binary. And maybe I might capitalize it inside of sentences if I am using a lot of other pluralized they/them/theirs for other people so as to not create confusion. But probably I would just call it out early on and not let…

So it says I refer to the character as androgynous. I would have added and I will be referring to this character, meaning I will be referring to them as they/them/their.

**John:** Yeah. I think Patrick is right to plan for – there’s a difference between the dialogue that we’re hearing as an audience, are we going to get confused by the they/them/theirs which can be a challenge? Because in real life conversations, like we have friends who have a non-binary kid, and the they/them/theirs are–

**Craig:** It’s tricky.

**John:** It can be tricky just because sometimes you don’t know, wait, are they talking about the group? Understanding whether you’re talking about the individual or the group can be tricky with it. That said, we’ve used it in English for centuries. We’ve used this as a singular thing for a long time when we didn’t know what gender to apply to a person that we’re talking about.

So I would say for Patrick if the dialogue and it becomes important to say this person uses they/them/theirs I would call that out just so that it’s not confusing in dialogue. In many cases it may be possible, because you have the luxury of time, you’re not actually speaking this aloud, to find sentence constructions where it just doesn’t become an issue and where you end up using the character’s name rather than a they/them/their. Basically just use the proper noun rather than the pronoun and you may not have this much of a problem.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s going to be hard to only do that. Because it can kind of get–

**John:** For a supporting character. For a character who only has a certain number of scenes, maybe you’ll be fine.

**Craig:** Sure. You can avoid it. But, yes, you’re right. We have this usage where it’s like the child brought their pet in to show the class. That is a normal usage we have for a singular person with the their. It’s in our minds, so you just have to spell it out for people early on that that’s what you’re doing. And by the way, if people are confused then they’re confused. Because that’s part of the deal is like our pronouns have not caught up necessarily to the way we’re starting to look at people and their gender. So there’s going to be some confusion. And, you know, you can just acknowledge that. Sometimes honesty is the best policy.

You can just say, “If you get confused it’s understandable. That’s kind of how it goes.” And they will try. I think most readers when they see something like that they’ll at least know that you’re acknowledging it. If you don’t acknowledge it then they’re going to think like I don’t know if Patrick understands how confusing this is. If you acknowledge then they’re like, OK, he knows how confusing this is.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Or they know how confusing it is. I don’t know if Patrick is binary.

**John:** Let’s do one last question here.

**Craig:** All right. Theo asks, “I’m a big fan of the podcast. It’s a phenomenal resource to both learn about screenwriting and to distract myself from screenwriting. I have a question though for John about his #writesprints. They seem straightforward if the purpose of the sprint is to write scenes from an outline. But how do you structure them when the project you’re working on is still in the development phase and you’re doing more brainstorming and character discovery?”

John, can you explain the nature of your tyrannical write sprints to Theo?

**John:** So, with write sprints this is when I sort of declare on Twitter that starting at the top of the hour for the next 60 minutes I’m going to be writing and just writing, no distractions, no nothing else. And then I’ll see in 60 minutes, and if people want to join in and do it that’s great. And this is an idea I took from Jane Espenson who is another former guest who is just phenomenal.

I’m using doing write sprints when I’m in scenes. When I’m doing real scene work or in the case of the Arlo Finch books when I was writing chapters. But I will also use them for outlining phase. Basically if I want to do a solid hour of work and not be distracted that’s the same thing as a write sprint. And so it’s just being purposeful for a period of time about the work I want to be doing. That counts as a write sprint.

If you’re doing an outline, maybe you’re not generating the same number of words, but if you really are figuring out stuff that’s what this is. It’s basically just trying to be single-minded on a project for a period of time.

**Craig:** Yeah. I find sometimes that if I’m in the state of progress that Theo is in that the best version of the write sprint is the write walk, where I take a walk. And I just go, well, I’m going to go walking around thinking about this. And I’m going to turn around and head back when I feel like I’ve achieved something in my mind, some sort of clarity or construction.

I don’t do formal write sprints like you do for actual generating pages. I just mostly wait until I’m disgusted with myself and then I start – but I only write in write sprints. That’s just my natural way of doing it. When it’s time, it happens.

**John:** Yeah. I mean, I’ve just never been a slogger. I’ve never been a like I’m going to sit down for a three-hour session and get stuff done, because I just found that those were not productive to me.

**Craig:** No, like I know what I’m supposed to do. I know where I am. I know who is in it. I know what’s going to happen. I know what they say. Now just do it, stupid. And then eventually I do it. And when I do it I do it. I get lost completely in it and I do it until it’s done. So, that’s basically my day, day after day, every day for the last 25 years. Good lord. Geesh.

**John:** Good lord. All right, it’s time for One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is an article that Ashley Nicole Black linked to. It’s an article in the New Station with Judith Butler. And she’s a professor, writer, gender theorist. And it was a discussion of trans-exclusionary radical feminism, which I knew about only because JK Rowling was associated with it. Basically JK Rowling just kept saying dumb things. And everyone said like that’s a dumb thing to say. And she would just double down on dumb things.

What I liked about this article was that Judith Butler was just so masterful at being able to sort of cut through the questions. Basically just challenge the premise of the questions. If you’re just curious about like how to handle arguments, or how to sort of deal with controversial topics being thrown at you I thought she just did a very smart job of dismantling what was being thrown her way and presenting it back in a way so that you basically can’t even like hit the ball back. It’s like, oh, crap, I can’t even do that.

So, an example sentence here. She says, “Women should not engage in the form of phobic caricature by which they’ve traditionally been demeaned. And by women I mean all those who identify that way.” And so she can just take some of the arguments being tossed her way and look at them and saying, nope, I’m taking this apart and giving it back to you.

So I just recommend people check that out because it gave me a good education in some of the terms and thinking behind this and also going back 30 years. So, I’ll put a link in the show notes for that.

**Craig:** So far afield from what you just said. My One Cool Thing this week is you and your fellow party members in our Dungeons & Dragons game. You guys made me so proud.

**John:** We did pretty well last week.

**Craig:** You did great. So, one of the things about being a Dungeon Master is you are not in control of anything. You are gently creating situations and then your characters do things and you have to react in an endlessly improvisational way. You have to hold boundaries, but you have to know when to be flexible. You have to know when to be rigid. And the whole point is to create situations that ultimately are fun, not necessarily fun in a kind of I put my videogame on god mode way fun, but fun in a sometimes my heart is pounding a little bit and sometimes there’s danger.

And last week you guys just played beautifully. You were collaborating and you were being creative and you weren’t all seeking individual glory but working as a team. And you defeated a very difficult enemy. And you defeated that enemy I would say handily.

**John:** Yeah. It was surprising. And I was definitely the person who was most nervous going into that encounter. What I will say was galvanizing and this is probably applicable to anybody thinking about storytelling is that this group of protagonists were only able to come together after the death of one of their party members.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** And basically it took a death for us to analyze what went wrong and how do we avoid making that same mistake again. And so I feel like looking at those moments of failure and learning from them is such a fundamental thing in both life and in fiction. And I was happy that we were able to do that and sort of go into this next encounter with really not just a plan but – because stuff happens and you sometimes can’t follow that plan. But a set of principles in terms of what we are going to try to do and what are priorities are going to be. And by sticking to those principles and each person rising to do the thing that they are best equipped to do we were able to defeat this really far too challenging of a future for us to be facing.

**Craig:** Yeah. Well, you did it perfectly. And you guys have come a long way. And it makes sense. As you go through these things, just like in regular screenplays and stories, the character gains abilities and talents and insight and then the question is what are you going to do with it. That’s the booby prize of life is insight, as the great Dennis Palumbo says. What are you going to do with it?

And so you get all these powers and then, ooh, like we can polymorph people. And there was a session we had where one of our wizards polymorphed one of the bad guys into a dolphin while in a bar fight, which was smart on the one hand.

**John:** Don’t bring a dolphin to a bar fight.

**Craig:** Yeah, don’t. Because the dolphin doesn’t need to be in water to breathe. And the dolphin can hit people that are five feet away from it. And so it did. And everybody was upset. But I’m like that was a bad choice. You could have made it a lot of other things. And you chose to make it the worst possible water thing.

Well, this time around much smarter and thoughtful and just working things through. Because you’ve grown into your powers, which is exciting, because it’s going to get more and more dangerous as you go. Just like life. But I was so proud of you guys. You did such a good job. It was a joy to DM and I can’t wait to kill more of you later.

**John:** Aw. Nice. Tonight–

**Craig:** Oh, that’s right, tonight. You know what, I probably won’t kill any of you tonight. Not tonight.

**John:** All right. That is our show for this week. So stick around after the credits if you’re a Premium member because we’re going to talk about Halloween. But meanwhile Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Med Dyer. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust. We have t-shirts and they’re great. Go to Cotton Bureau to find those.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you find the transcripts. You can sign up to become a Premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you get all the back episodes and bonus segments. Craig, thanks for a fun show.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** Hey Craig. Halloween is coming up.

**Craig:** Yay.

**John:** It’s always the end of October. Growing up I loved candy so I liked Halloween for that.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** But if I’m being honest I was never a big Halloween person. Were you a Halloween person as a kid?

**Craig:** Well, I was. I was. So on Staten Island Halloween had more of an anarchistic feel. So, I was a good kid and my parents were very strict, so I had to put on my stupid costume. Remember the costumes, they were like vinyl? And then you had the plastic mask that you could stick your tongue out of the rectangular little mouth-hole that would then cut your tongue.

**John:** Uh-huh. And it sort of hurt your tongue. And it had the elastic that went to the back.

**Craig:** Bingo.

**John:** And the mask could crack really easily, too.

**Craig:** Oh, absolutely. And the suit, “suit,” was just like a vinyl apron that tied in the back and had a smell on it, like an off-gas and plastic smell that almost certainly took years off of our life. And I would go out with that and my little hallowed out plastic pumpkin candy holder.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** But the other kids, like if you were slightly older, it was shaving cream and eggs. They would throw eggs on everything and they would put shaving cream everywhere. So my memory, my sense memory of Halloween is the smell of Noxzema or whatever that shaving cream was, or Barbasol. Walking around, getting candy. And my sister and I after it was over would sit down in my room, we would dump it all out on the floor, and then we would begin to barter. Because I liked certain things and she liked certain things. And you make the swaps.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Loved it.

**John:** Bartering is important. And obviously I had an older brother and there’s, of course, the manipulation that happens both as the younger brother and as the older brother.

**Craig:** Of course.

**John:** Now, did you have something growing up where the school district, I think it was the school district, maybe it was the city, they really wanted kids home by a certain point. I think by 8pm they wanted all kids home. Maybe it was it was like 7. It was really early.

**Craig:** This was New York. They were dealing with Son of Sam. They didn’t have time to worry about us.

**John:** So we had a thing where at school we had to fill out this little form with your phone number and then parent volunteers would say this is the goblin calling to make sure you’re home.

**Craig:** Oh god.

**John:** And then it was like a raffle. If you actually were home you could win a pizza party.

**Craig:** Well that feels really actually quite frightening in a Handmaid’s Tale sort of way.

**John:** Goblin calling.

**Craig:** This is the goblin calling to make sure you are home before 8pm when the witches come out.

**John:** So basically they’re going to have a stranger call children at their house.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** That’s really what the whole plan was.

**Craig:** Yeah. This is all backward. But we grew up, you know, John, the kids today don’t get it. We grew up in a time of full-throated panic. Gary Goldman has an amazing – this is my second One Cool Thing, my bonus One Cool Thing. Gary Goldman has an amazing standup special called The Great Depresh about his depression.

**John:** Oh, yeah, I’ve watched it. It’s good.

**Craig:** And Gary Goldman is just a legendarily good standup. And he talks about how in the ‘70s growing up America was inflicted with this notion that children were being snatched off the streets constantly. Some guy went on the news and said 50,000 American kids are being stolen and kidnapped off the streets every year when it turns out actually it was like 200 people. So, everyone went crazy. We lived in a time when we would go to school, we would get milk at school, and there would be some lost child’s face on the milk carton.

Everyone was in a panic, all the time. As he said vans used to be beloved, and now they were objects of fear. So around Halloween there was this additional aspect of the whole point of Halloween is someone is going to put a razorblade in an apple. No one wants the apple. No one wants the apple.

**John:** It never happened. No.

**Craig:** No one wants the apple anyway. Go ahead, put razorblades in the apple. No one will ever get cut. No kid is eating the apple. And also, no, no. That’s not lunatics work.

**John:** But it got to the point where you would take your candy and they would x-ray it at the hospital, which is just absurd.

**Craig:** Insane. Now you’re radiating food. It’s just insane.

**John:** So, Craig, you’re saying things are much, much better now because all we have is QAnon.

**Craig:** Oh god.

**John:** I think there’s a natural progression from this fear of an outsider coming. Antifa is going to poison your kids’ candy.

**Craig:** Antifa and QAnon are the new razorblade and apple of our lives. One quick question. When you – because we grew up at the same time there were probably the same weirdo candies floating around that aren’t much of today. What were some of your favorites, like in terms of the weird ones?

**John:** I was always a Milky Way. Milky Way is go to. If I wanted a candy bar it was a Milky Way. Nothing against Snickers. No one wants a Three Musketeers.

**Craig:** You’re wrong. See, here’s the thing. You’re normcore. You’re so normcore.

**John:** Oh, 100 percent. I’m completely normcore.

**Craig:** Oh my god. You’re so normcore. I was all about the weird ones. I loved the Three Musketeers.

**John:** And the Marathons.

**Craig:** I loved how light it was. Marathon. I was also a fan of those old creepy candies from the ‘50s like the Mary Janes. Loved Mary Janes.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** I know. What is it? It’s made of plastic and nuts and dirt and sugar. I don’t know. Delicious.

**John:** A recent episode of The Boys, the second season, show on Amazon, they talk about the island of misfit candy bars. And people who are fans of the Bit-O-Honeys and stuff like that.

**Craig:** I love Bit-O-Honey. Love it. Most of the things that I liked tended to be mostly wax, I think.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Didn’t like those things that you have to like–

**John:** What was the wax bottles with a sugary thing inside? Who thought that was a good idea?

**Craig:** Those, the wax industry? Honestly the wax manufacturers of America had figured out. Those were called – I can’t remember what they were called. But, yeah, you would bit the top off and then drink the sugar liquid out and be left with just a tasteless thing of wax.

**John:** Wax. Yeah. Good stuff. Or like Wax Lips and other stuff like that.

**Craig:** Wax Lips. And of course the candy cigarettes which were the greatest.

**John:** It’s good stuff.

**Craig:** Teach your kids.

**John:** So this year’s Halloween, I thought Halloween would just get canceled, but then if you think about it it’s like, you know what, kids are already wearing masks. They put a mask over their mask. It’s actually not that dangerous. You’re outdoors. I say let the kids trick or treat.

**Craig:** Well, I think trick or treating has been somewhat canceled or something. I don’t know.

**John:** Over the years or for this year specifically?

**Craig:** No, for this year. I think that they have sort of said maybe don’t do it. I have looked up by the way what those things were called. The wax bottle liquid stuff. They were called Nik-L-Nip Wax Bottles. Nik-L-Nip. I don’t know why it’s called that.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** But that’s what they were called. Sounds kind of dirty.

**John:** It does sound dirty. Like some sort of…yeah.

**Craig:** You would bite it and drink it and it’s nasty.

**John:** Yeah. I just don’t know why the wax companies needed to do that. I mean, they said extra wax.

**Craig:** Well, yeah, I think that was probably what it was. Someone was like, “You know, we could take this extra wax and put some sugar in it and morons will drink it.” They were right.

They were right.

**John:** So, Craig, Happy Halloween.

**Craig:** Happy Halloween, John.

 

Links:

* [Movie Releases Pushed](https://twitter.com/ErikDavis/status/1308814242569580544)
* [Black Widow Shifted to Summer 2021](https://deadline.com/2020/09/black-widow-jumps-to-summer-2021-spurring-marvel-pics-release-date-shift-west-side-story-delayed-a-year-soul-stays-theatrical-1234582771/)
* [Quibi Sale](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2020-09-23/quibi-sale-value-bidders-katzenberg-whitman)
* [All the Trades are Basically One Company](https://deadline.com/2020/09/pmc-mrc-form-publishing-content-venture-that-brings-rolling-stone-thr-billboard-vibe-under-one-roof-1234582626/)
* [UTA Raises Assistant Pay](https://variety.com/2020/film/news/uta-raises-assistant-pay-agency-wide-new-average-hits-24-per-hour-exclusive-1234778549/)
* [WGA Election Results Board of Directors](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/writers-guild-west-unveils-board-of-directors-election-results)
* [Scriptnotes, Ep 465](https://johnaugust.com/2020/scriptnotes-episode-465-the-lackeys-know-what-theyre-doing-transcript)
* [Scriptnotes, Ep 370](https://johnaugust.com/2018/scriptnotes-ep-370-two-things-at-the-same-time-transcript)
* [Judith Butler on the Culture Wars, JK Rowling and Living in “Anti-Intellectual Times”](https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Med Dyer ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/470standard.mp3).

Scriptnotes Episode 465: The Lackeys Know What They’re Doing, Transcript

August 21, 2020 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2020/the-lackeys-know-what-theyre-doing).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 465 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the show we’re going to talk about not the heroes, not the villains, but the villains’ accomplices and how to write them more believably.

We’ll also answer some listener questions and give an update on what’s happening between the agencies and the WGA.

Plus, in our bonus segment for Premium members we will talk about travel tips during the pandemic.

**Craig:** That’ll be fun. Don’t do it. Is that it? It’s a short bonus episode. Stay home.

**John:** Yes. Stay home. Stay home everyone.

**Craig:** Stay home.

**John:** We’re going to start with some follow up. And you know my favorite kind of follow up is deep, deep follow up. So we’re going to reach all the way back to Episode 101.

**Craig:** Good lord.

**John:** Which as Craig will remember is the questions from Episode 100 which was our 100th Anniversary Episode, it was our first sort of big live show in Hollywood.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So in that Episode 101 we took a listener question and this is me and Aline talking in Episode 101. Important context that Aline and I had this conversation. Let’s take a listen.

Aline, do you want to do Winds of War for ABC?

Aline Brosh McKenna: I love Winds of War.

**John:** We should do that.

Aline: Who was the one – there was a blonde that was in it.

**John:** I don’t know.

Aline: Victoria something.

**Craig:** Herman Wouk wrote the novel.

Aline: Herman Wouk. Oh, that was so good.

**John:** So thank you for a great idea.

Audience Member: You’re welcome.

**John:** We’ll name a character for you. It’s going to be great.

So, Craig, that was so many years ago. That was 350 episodes ago.

**Craig:** We were children.

**John:** That we had this great idea. So some follow up on that is Aline and I actually did send each other the Kindle versions of The Winds of War and we talked about maybe twice again. So, you can understand my outrage, my absolute outrage this last week when it was announced that Seth MacFarlane is doing a redo of The Winds of War.

**Craig:** What? What? Dude. He stole your idea from 20 years ago. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah, so how dare he? After all, Aline and I did basically nothing to advance the project. For him to just swoop in and do it is just absolutely outrageous.

**Craig:** You said something that happened out loud and when you say a thing that happened it’s yours.

**John:** Yes. I mean, I basically called shotgun on the idea.

**Craig:** Right. It’s yours. I mean, that’s just a fact. Everybody knows that. What’s something happening right now? Oh, there’s this, in Belarus there’s these protests. I just said it. So, only I can write a show about it now. Because I said it. It’s mine.

**John:** I mean, he absolutely declared – just basic rules that once you see a thing, put your hand on it, and then it’s yours.

**Craig:** It’s like in cartoons when you would land on some weird planet and stick a flag in it. That’s it. The flag is there, so it’s our planet.

**John:** Marvin the Martian.

**Craig:** I claim this planet.

**John:** Mm-hmm. That actually ties very well into our first listener question. This is from Sadness Jackson. So he wrote a long email. I compressed it a little bit here. But let me read to you what Sadness Jackson writes.

“I’ve listened to you guys since day one and I knew this day would come. I spent the last few months researching and writing a story revolving around the Battle of Blair Mountain. And now you’ve shed a light on it and announced it on your podcast. Now, I like the segment of How Would This Be a Movie, but you had to use real instances and moments, we are all writers, it would be fun for us to toss imaginary scenarios at you and see what you would do with them. But I know you won’t do that because you hope some studio will listen to your show and this could be the movie suggested that gets you working on this project and you can gloat about how you were right.

“However, there are so many writers like me that are looking for that one great idea. I felt I had it. And now I might as well give that one up. I know what Craig will say. He will say that I’m a fool and that every idea and moment in the history of the world is already thought about by the studios.”

**Craig:** Pretty close.

**John:** “Which is wrong. If that were so, they would have no need to do constant research for good stories. But let me ask you something, Craig, why did you never use the moment of Chernobyl as a topic for the show? When you were first thinking about writing it and you were putting in the research why not shine the light on that in a How Would This Be a Movie segment? I know the answer because you thought it was a great idea and you didn’t want anyone else doing it.

“Please just know that there are struggling writers out there working on these stories that you do. And it’s hard enough out there without getting the rug pulled out from under you. I love your show. I think you guys are great and do a lot of wonderful things for writers in the community as a whole.”

**Craig:** [laughs] Does that work? Does that even work? Where you say stuff and then at the end you go, “By the way, I think you’re wonderful and I love you.”

**John:** So, Craig, so much to unpack here. And I hadn’t really meant to lead in with The Winds of War thing, but of course that’s exactly the same kind of scenario is that I had this great idea, like you know what, we should do Winds of War. And then someone else had a similarly great idea that they should do Winds of War. Separated by many, many years.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** You had the idea to do Chernobyl and as I understand you were not the only Chernobyl project out there.

**Craig:** Not at all. When I was working on Chernobyl there was another project in active development I think with Scott Rudin who is a producer of great note. So the question, or at least your premise here, Sadness Jackson, is just not true. I was not at all concerned about somebody else doing it, that I didn’t want anybody else doing it. Somebody else already was doing it. And that was just that version. There were also other things that had already been done.

So, how can I be worried when there had already been a number of things that had been done about Chernobyl? That makes no sense at all. And also I’m sorry but Blair Mountain has been done, because that’s Matewan. Right? It’s already out there. What are you talking about, dude?

**John:** So, going back to this general idea of How Would This Be a Movie as a segment that we’ve been doing not since the beginning, but we’ve done it for quite a long time here. The reason why we pick real life events is because we can all be looking at the same set of facts and say like out of this set of facts, out of this true story that’s out there, what are the interesting movie stories to be telling. It’s useful for us to be taking a look at actual real things that happened in history or that are happening in the news because there are some objective facts behind there.

If we just said a movie about a tiny dragon and a shoe fall in love, well, we could talk about that but there’s no common set of things for us to discuss.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** This last week the trailer came out for the Zola movie. Remember way back when you and I talked–

**Craig:** Yes. Yes.

**John:** So way back at the Austin live show we were sitting down with Steve Zissis and Jane Espenson and we did a How Would This Be a Movie segment. We talked about Zola who had this amazing Twitter thread about how she was hustling and it was great and we watched sort of how much was real and how much was invented, but it was cool. So like this could be a movie. It would be challenging to make. That movie got made. And if we didn’t have that common set of things for all to be looking at we couldn’t be having a meaningful conversation.

**Craig:** Yeah. I literally don’t understand this. I don’t think you get it that you’ve spent the past few months – OK, so this is hardly years of your life – but regardless the past few months researching and writing a story revolving on the Battle of Blair Mountain. If it’s good then people are going to love it. No one is going to say, “No, sorry, we’re all full up on Battle of Blair Mountain stuff.” That’s not how it works, at all by the way. Unless, I mean, it seems to me, I mean you do say that you are struggling writer and I guess like an up and comer, so if you write a great script the good news is now all these people will know how good of a writer you are and they will want to both talk to you about the making of that script and also the making of other stories, all of which is part of history.

You cannot put your arm around a piece of history and say, “Mine.” It doesn’t work that way. Nor does it need to work that way. The most remarkable stories about history, the ones about things I already knew but just from some beautiful interesting angle and done splendidly. You know? The premise here is so confusing. I think you thought that just putting the words Battle of Blair Mountain on a cover page was going to be the deal. It’s zero percent of the deal.

The quality of the script is 100 percent of the deal.

**John:** To be fully transparent here, when we were putting together that last episode we did of How Would This Be a Movie one of the other stories in it was the nuclear sub that had gone down and sort of the whole CIA plot to make it seem like there’s a whole different thing happening, the Manganese. And so in the staff meeting I was describing it to everybody else and Nima who works for me said, “Oh man, you shouldn’t put that on the show. You should do that yourself.”

And I had this moment of hesitation of like, wait, should I just do this movie? Should I just pitch this movie? And then I was like, no, we’ll just leave it in the segment. And you know what? I’m really glad I did because the first emails we got back saying like, “Oh, by the way, there’s three of those movies in development right now.”

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** Am I not so much happier that I didn’t try to take out and shop this movie because other people were trying to do it, because you know what, it’s a good idea. It’s an actual thing that happened. The cinematic possibilities are really clear. So, I am sort of in the same situation where it’s like I’m a tiny bit bummed that I wouldn’t be working on this movie, but also relieved that I know now that this thing is out there.

Sadness Jackson, I would also stress I think because you’re living in this cocoon where you thought you were the only person who knew about the Battle of Blair Mountain you would naturally assume that you are the only person to have the idea of making a movie about it. But I guarantee you there were at least five other people out there working on Battle of Blair Mountain movies at the moment. So someone will probably write in listening to this segment saying like, “Oh, you should know there’s one in development at this studio right now.”

So, it’s not the first time this has happened.

**Craig:** No. And by the way if you had wanted to do the story of the Glomar Expedition then you could have done How Would This Be a Movie and then just turned around and called your agent and said, you know what, I’ve got a pitch on how I think this could be a movie. And if nobody else is working on it, or maybe one other place was but another place was looking for their Glomar movie, then you could go in and pitch it, or you could write one yourself.

Because here’s the other thing. They can develop 20 Glomar movies.

**John:** 100 percent.

**Craig:** And maybe none of them go. And then you write one script where everybody goes, “Oh my god, John August cracked it. This is how you do this.”

There were two animated films about ants in movie theaters months apart. And they both were hits.

**John:** Remarkable that.

**Craig:** Sadness, if you love your story and you are writing and I hope to god you love it for some reason other than the fact that you thought it was some unique, undiscovered thing. It’s not. And if the story is terrific the story will be terrific nonetheless.

**John:** All right. Now onto a marquee topic here. This actually was going to be my One Cool Thing, but as I thought about it more I realized like, oh, it’s actually kind of a segment for the show itself. So, the inspiration behind this is this book I’m reading based on a blog by Keith Ammann called The Monsters Know What They’re Doing. So I’ll put a link in the show notes to that.

It is a book that is really intended for people playing the fifth edition of Dungeons & Dragons. So it’s not a general interest book for everyone out there. It’s just to me and to Craig.

**Craig:** Yeah. Great blog. I love that blog.

**John:** So, why I thought that this could be generalized into a topic for discussion overall is one of the things I liked so much about Keith’s book is that he talks about the monsters that you’re fighting and how they would actually think and how they would strategize in combat. And one of the points he really makes very clearly is that they have a self-preservation instinct. They’re going to do things, they will fight, but then they will run away and they will flee when it makes sense for them to run away and flee, because they exist in this world and they’ve evolved to survive. And so that survival instinct is very, very important.

It got me thinking about movies I’ve seen. I rewatched Inception recently which is great. It holds up really well. The third section of Inception, or the fourth or the fifth, however many levels deep we are in Inception, there’s a sequence which very much feels like a James Bond movie where this mountain alpine sequence. And in there there are a bunch of just faceless lackeys who just sort of keep getting killed and offed. And it struck me that, wait, no one is acting – like why are they doing what they’re doing? And you can see this in a lot of movies. A lot of action movies but also I think a lot of comedies you see them in where the people who are not the hero, not the villain, but are working for the villain do things that don’t actually make any sense. And they will fight to the death for no good reason. They don’t seem to exist in any sort of normal universe or world.

And so I want to talk through this. I don’t necessarily have great suggestions for this, but I think we need to sort of point it out and maybe nudge people to be thinking more fully about the choices they’re making with these henchmen characters.

**Craig:** That’s probably the best we can do is just be aware of it. Because it’s more than a trope. It is bizarre. All right, so here’s a movie that did it fairly well, and for a reason. In Die Hard there are all sorts of lackeys.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** There are some lackeys that are front and forward, and then there are some lackeys that are in the back. But one of the things you understand from this whole thing is that this organization is a worker-owned business. So, they’re all going to split the money. Sure, maybe Hans Gruber gets a little bit extra because he master-minded it, but they’re all splitting it. So, they’re all the heroes of this job. If John McClane gets away with his shenanigans they’re not going to get their money. So I understand why they fight. And then if someone’s brother happens to be killed, now it’s personal.

But when it is not a worker-owned collective but rather a standard boss and employees it is odd that they seemingly fight as if they were trying to protect their own dad or something.

**John:** Yeah. And so they will fight and fight and they will get thrown over the edge and get the Wilhelm scream as they fall and it will move in. They’re basically just cannon fodder there to be shot at, to be taken down.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So you see this most obviously in Bond movies. The Spy Who Loved Me has the whole crew of that tanker at the end, the Liparus. Moonraker, Drax Industries has all these people who are doing these space shuttles and like who are they? Why are they doing this? Are they zealots? Are they science zealots? You just don’t know. And this is really very well parodied of course in The Simpsons. There’s a whole episode with Hank Scorpio where he recruits Homer and he sees sort of like why these people are working there because he’s a really good boss and he’s really caring and considerate.

So, I would just say pay special attention to those minor characters, those guards, those watchmen, and really be thinking about why are they doing what they’re doing. And you don’t necessarily – you may not be able to give dialogue or even a lot more time to those characters, but do think about what their motivations are.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And sometimes if you do that you can come upon some surprising choices. Like Iron Man 3, one of the henchmen just says like, “Oh, no, I’m not being paid enough,” and just walks away. Or just runs. And those can be surprises that let the audience and the reader know that you’re really being paid attention and that can be great.

**Craig:** There is a really funny parody of the henchmen syndrome in Austin Powers, I want to say is it in the first one? Yeah, I think it’s the first one. So, everybody remembers – I think most people remember the scene where Austin Powers is driving a steamroller very slowly at a henchman who doesn’t seem to be able to get out of the way. And then he rolls him over. There’s a deleted scene, I think you can watch it on YouTube, where they actually go to that henchmen’s home and you see his wife and child mourning the loss of the henchmen. And it’s like he was a person.

It’s true. One of the things that that stuff does is both limit our interest and also in and the capacity – or the impact of death in a movie, or a TV show. And it also I think makes the world seem less real and therefore the stakes less important.

**John:** I agree.

**Craig:** Because, look, if everybody is dying that easily, it’s the Storm Trooper problem, right? Who is afraid of Storm Troopers anymore? If you make a Star Wars movie now, I think just your hero being actually killed by a rando Storm Trooper like in scene one would be amazing. That’s it. We’ve got to find a new hero because one of those randos – they can’t all miss all the time.

**John:** No. And I think one of the good choices The Force Awakens made was to have one of the heroes be a Storm Trooper. And he takes off his helmet and you realize like, oh, there’s an actual person there. John Boyega is an actual person.

**Craig:** He’s the only one. [laughs]

**John:** Yup. And he’s special but I think the point is that he’s not special. That actually all of those people that you’ve seen die in all of these movies were actually people as well.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** In the Mandalorian in a later episode there’s a long conversation happening between two Storm Troopers and they’re just talking. And it’s recognizing like, oh, they are there for not just the plot reasons. They actually were doing something before the camera turned on them.

**Craig:** So it’s the red versus blue, you know, the Halo. Generally speaking when we do see henchmen talking to each other they’re talking about henchmen stuff. So it’s like purposefully pointless and banal. And then they die. They die every time. They don’t go on. They do not live on. So, yeah, just be aware of it I guess, right?

**John:** Yeah. And so the henchmen problem is a variety of the Redshirt problem which we’ll also link to there. John Scalzi’s book, Redshirts, talks about sort of in the Star Trek series notoriously the people with the red uniforms who beam down to the alien planet are the first ones to die. There’s actually statistics about how often they die versus people in other color uniforms. I think we’re all a lot more mindful of that now with sort of the good guys. And I think we see lot less Redshirting happening. You still see some of it.

I just rewatched Aliens and there’s a little bit of Redshirting there, but not as bad as the classic.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** I would just urge us to be thinking the same way on the villain side and always ask ourselves is there a smarter choice we can make about those people who would otherwise just be faceless deaths.

**Craig:** Yeah. And that’s why the Bill Paxton character was so great in Aliens because it was an acknowledgment that not everybody is brave in a psychotic way. I mean, some of those characters are nuts for engaging the way they do with this incredibly scary thing. They don’t seem to have fear. They don’t seem to be thinking ahead like, “I had plans for my life. I have investments. I have a girlfriend, a boyfriend. I’ve got things I want to do.” They’re just like, screw it, if I die, I die.

Well that’s crazy. That’s just a dangerous way of thinking. Bill Paxton was like, “No way, man.” He was the only person that was sane and he was correct. They should have gotten the hell out of there.

**John:** And nuked her from space.

**Craig:** Yeah. “Nuke her from orbit, man.” There’s nothing wrong with being afraid and rational. Because that is in fact how people are. And as we – it’s not that every – look, a lot of it is tonal. So some things are going to have henchmen. That’s just the way it is because the show or the movie is pushed a little bit. For instance, Snowpiercer, which I love, they’re henchmen. They don’t have faces. I don’t know what the arrangement is exactly. I assume they get a slightly better car maybe. But they’re going in there and people are getting shot and they’re like, “Oh, OK. Well I guess it’s our turn to go in there and get into a shooting—“

I would be terrified. They never look scared. But that’s also a movie about everybody on the planet living on a train that’s going around a frozen earth. And they’re eating bugs. It’s sci-fi. It’s different. But if you’re talking about Breaking Bad, you’re not going to see a ton of henchmen there because people live in the world where they can get scared.

**John:** Yeah. And so in TV obviously you have more time to sort of build out universes and scenarios, so it would be more likely you’d be able to understand the supporting characters. On The Sopranos you have a good sense of who they are. And so that’s all built out. In feature films it’s tough because you cannot divide focus so much. In a Robert Altman movie you really could see everyone’s point of view, but you’re not going to encounter that in a more traditional feature. That’s just not sort of how it works.

So I guess I’m just asking you to be mindful of it. If you’re writing in a pushed universe in science fiction or fantasy or an action movie, yes, some stuff is going to be a little bit more common. But I also see this in comedies, especially high concept comedies, where everyone just seems to be there to service this plot, this sort of high concept plot. And I don’t see a lot of attention being paid to, wait, how would a real person in the real world respond to this? And is there anything useful to be taken from that? Because people just accept the premise a little too easily.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, it’s kind of amusing that they’re like “this job is so good, I need to die.” [laughs] Well it’s not that great if you’re dead.

**John:** No. No. Defend your own interests first.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Everyone is selfish enough and wants to survive enough that they’re going to pull back and defend themselves when they need to. So just be thinking about that for your characters.

**Craig:** Yeah. Probably if you’re writing Guard 3 and Next Guard and Tall Guard, then yeah, there’s trouble.

**John:** There’s trouble. All right, shifting gears completely, let’s talk about the agency situation. So it’s two or three episodes ago we talked about how UTA had signed a deal with the WGA which was largely like the deals before it. In that was a sunset provision on packaging that required that one of the other agencies had signed. That agency has signed. So ICM signed. That sunset provision is now in effect. Starting in 2022 there will not be packaging from any of the agencies that have signed, which basically means all of the agencies except for the two that are left, which is CAA and WME. So that’s sort of the first big thing that happened since we last spoke.

There’s also news on the lawsuit front, and this is confusing even for me who is sort of being subpoenaed by one of the lawsuits. There are sort of two things happening simultaneously. One is that the WGA has sued CAA and WME and then CAA has sued the WGA. And so they’re kind of the same lawsuit but they’re sort of different lawsuits and they work on different time tables. And there were developments on both of those fronts this past week as well.

**Craig:** OK. Well, I’m all ears because I don’t know.

**John:** OK. So the first is that the trial in the agency lawsuit, so the agency is suing the WGA, that got pushed back to next summer. So the actual trial dates are like August of 2021.

**Craig:** Are they pushing trials because of COVID?

**John:** Yup. Basically it’s impossible to sort of get people in person.

**Craig:** Makes sense.

**John:** And everything has just really slowed down because of all of this. So, if the trial ends up happening it would be next summer that that would happen.

**Craig:** There is not going to be a trial.

**John:** I think it seems unlikely that we would get to all that space, but then again unlikely things happen on a daily basis.

**Craig:** True. But there won’t be a trial is sort of my version of the “it’s not Lupus” line from House. There won’t be a trial.

**John:** The second development was that the Writers Guild prevailed. They can seek an injunction over packaging fees. And so this is confusing, but so back in April the judge ruled that the WGA did not have standing to pursue anti-trust and fiduciary duty claims. The complaint was amended. The agencies moved to just dismiss the whole thing. And the judge said no. So basically the guild has standing to bring their part of the lawsuit against the two remaining agencies, so CAA and WME saying that the practices of packaging negatively impact the WGA because they negatively impact the money that members get.

So, that’s what has happened there.

**Craig:** Which is a fact. That is true. Legally whether it’s true or not is one thing, obviously. But effectively whether it’s true, I believe it is true. Just trying to get a little clarity here. Was it that the judge said, OK, you don’t have standing to pursue anti-trust or fiduciary duty claims, but you do have standing to pursue this new claim? Or, is it that the WGA amended the way they were pursuing the anti-trust and fiduciary duty claims and the judge said, OK, now you have standing?

**John:** I could not tell you the exact precise things. I do know that the thing that is proceeding forward relies more on some state law stuff versus federal RICO. But I don’t know at what point that amendment had happened to the complaint. So I’m not sure whether this latest wrinkle was because of that. But I know that basically new paperwork came in, the motion to dismiss came and was denied. So that will proceed along that track.

**Craig:** I mean, just from what you said it sounds like it’s probably the former of what I said. That there’s a, OK, those two things the WGA said, fine, we’ll let those go. But we want to do this one. The agencies said we don’t want them to do that. And then the judge said, no, that one they can do.

By the way, RICO, another thing. It’s not RICO. It’s not Lupus and it’s not RICO. It’s almost never RICO. Ken White, former federal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney, who tweets as Popehat on Twitter is basically anytime somebody uses the word RICO it’s like a bat signal to him. He’s drawn to it the way I’m drawn to managers telling you what you can and can’t do. It’s like, uhhhh.

So not surprising there. But all of this, of course, practically speaking was always about trying to pressure a result, which did occur. So the good news here is that the result that we had with UTA was a dependent result. It needed one other company, one other of three companies to sign on for it to be real. And one of them did. At this point it is now real. At this point effectively I think packaging is done.

Well, it’s going to take some time. Packaging, by the way, was going to be done anyway, just because of the way the world is changing. But we have accelerated that time table happily. What happens between now and when CAA and WME figure out how to settle with the guild I don’t know. I don’t know what’s required. I don’t know what they’re looking for. I don’t know what they’re waiting for. I don’t know what else there is to do.

In my mind it’s kind of over. It’s all over except for the shouting, as they say.

**John:** Yeah. We’ll see. We’ll link to a story where CAA’s Bryan Lourd said that obviously we want to get this resolved, so we’ll see if that comes to pass. CAA counsel Richard Kendall wrote, “This is simply the court saying the guild has the right to try to prove their false allegations. We remain confident we will prevail at that time.”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So they’re still talking as if the lawsuit is going to happen.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** Realistically the next steps in the lawsuit is going to be discovery which is where people turn over a bunch of documents. I get to turn over a bunch of Scriptnotes transcripts, so that’s kind of fun.

**Craig:** They’re already there, out there for people to read.

**John:** They’re already there and they’re emailed. So that will continue.

**Craig:** Well, I’ll tell you, man, lawyers are real good at keeping on billing. Keep on billing. They have to keep playing chicken, obviously, until such day it is all dropped. The Writers Guild must insist that its case is winnable and CAA must insist that its case is winnable. And, again, I will eat my Lupus-covered hat if either of those end up in a trial.

**John:** Yeah. We’ll see. We will mark this podcast. We will check back in a year from now to see whether Craig needs to eat his Lupus hat.

**Craig:** [laughs] I probably will.

**John:** Here’s a really simple question. Andy wrote in to ask, “Can a project from a collaboration be used in my own portfolio? For example, can I use a project with a cowriter to get an agent for myself? My collaborator already has his own agent. I come from the musical theater world where writers can be polyamorous when it comes to collaborations. Does this make sense in screenwriting?”

**Craig:** Sure. This comes up quite a bit. Yes, you can. I have some guidelines to suggest. I think the most important of them is get permission from your cowriter. You want to at least let them know so that they don’t find out that you’re doing that. I mean, you can say do you mind if I include this in my portfolio, obviously fairly crediting you as the cowriter, because that’s only fair. At that point I don’t see a problem with it. Just be aware, Andy, that people are going to look at that differently than they would look at a singular credit. And they will adjudicate accordingly because, you know, who can say who did what. That’s the problem there.

**John:** Yeah. So, Andy, probably don’t say the word portfolio because that’s actually not a term we use for screenplays a lot. So just like samples is really what you’re saying. Can I use that as a sample? And the answer is yes you can use it as a sample, but it does get dinged a bit just because they don’t know what it is that you’re writing versus another person’s writing. I know writing teams, and obviously there are many writing teams in Hollywood, but when writing teams split apart one of the first things both those members have to do is write their own scripts so that people can say, “Oh, it turns out that she really was the writer and he was not the writer.”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So you can use that as one of your samples, but you’re going to have to have some stuff that shows you writing by yourself because that’s the only way they know that you, Andy, can write the thing they want to hire you to write.

**Craig:** Yeah. There’s a bit of conventional wisdom in Hollywood which I don’t think is always true, of course, but the idea is in every partnership one is the real one. I think there are plenty of partnerships where that’s not true at all. Neither of them are real. [laughs] And some where both are. I wonder, this is just a usage term, do we have any sense if Andy is from the US or from overseas? Because now I’m curious about portfolio.

**John:** Yeah. I think he’s British. That’s my guess.

**Craig:** So maybe in the UK portfolio is what they call it. I don’t know.

**John:** Entirely possible.

**Craig:** Yeah. Or maybe he’s just wrong.

**John:** Yeah. You never know.

**Craig:** Andy, let us know.

**John:** Lastly, someone on Twitter asked this past week, “Hey, how do you and Craig record Scriptnotes? What software do you use? How is your setup?” And I was like, oh, I have a blog post about it, but the blog post was from 12 years ago. And enough stuff had changed that I updated the blog post. So if you’re curious about how Craig and I actually record this show there’s an updated blog post. We’ll put the link in the show notes.

The very short version is Craig and I are almost never in the same room together. As we’re recording this he is in his office in Pasadena. I am here at my office in Los Angeles. We are talking over Skype. And that’s how we’ve done it since the very start. And so even when I was living in Paris we would just Skype and we each record our own separate sides of the conversation. Matthew, our editor, puts the two sides together. And it makes it seem like we are together.

It’s more challenging than you’d think to actually keep the conversation going a little bit. Like that takes some practice. But it’s a really good way to record a podcast in that by having separate audio for both of us Matthew can edit out all of my fumbles much more easily.

**Craig:** So we have been socially distancing for 10 years now.

**John:** We are experts.

**Craig:** We are so good at this. So nothing new there. I think that the way we do it, although yes takes a little bit of time and effort to master, does lead to more interesting podcast conversation. Because the way we do it forces one person to wait and be patient and listen. I’ve noticed when we’ve done some other things together or with other people when everybody is in a room together it can get a little overlapped, which is fun. Overlappy and conversational and everything. But week after week that can be exhausting because it’s audio only. And audio only in general is harder to follow when you can’t see all the people jumping all over each other. So, every now and then it’s fun, but for a week after week after week thing I like the way we do it.

**John:** I do, too. And so I think it would be natural to assume that we’re doing this on Zoom or on FaceTime so we can see each other. We’re not. So we don’t look at each other. And I think that also helps with the flow of the audio because there’s no visual cue. So we really do have to listen to each other and figure out when is it an appropriate time for the other person to speak.

**Craig:** Yes. And so we also miss out on those nonverbal things that make no sense to the people at home. You will never hear us say, OK, for those of you at home listening who can’t see what we’re seeing. We don’t do that because we don’t see a goddamn thing.

**John:** No, we certainly don’t. All right. Now it is time for our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is something that we’re bringing back which I did a long time ago. It’s called Inneresting. So this is all based on Aline Brosh McKenna making fun of how I leave the T out of interesting.

**Craig:** Gently noting is all she did.

**John:** Gently noting. That’s really just a feather top of gently noting. Oh, it’s so interesting that you don’t say the T there. So I had this newsletter called Inneresting which it was about a year ago I was doing. And I enjoyed doing it. It was sort of like a bunch of One Cool Things and other links. And I was enjoying it and then it just got to be way too much work. And so I sort of put it on hold.

Chris Sond who works for us now is now taking over Inneresting, so it is sort of a newsletter about writing and things that are interesting to writers. It comes out once a week, usually on Fridays. It’s just a bunch of links to interesting stuff and also like blog posts and articles that writers will find enjoyable, interesting. So if you’re curious about that there’s a link in the show notes. It’s a very low commitment thing. You just sign up and you get a newsletter once a week.

**Craig:** Inneresting.

**John:** Interesting.

**Craig:** That is interesting. My One Cool Thing this week, short and simple, Leonard Mazin, my dad, passed away last week. So, adieu. Adieu to Len.

**John:** Yeah. I’m so sorry for you, Craig.

**Craig:** It happens. It happened to you. It’s happened to me. And it will happen to us all.

**John:** Hard to bring us up joyfully out of that.

**Craig:** No, no, I want you to. Now do it. [laughs] I want you to come right out of that into Scriptnotes. In fact, I’m going to do it. Scriptnotes is produced – I’m saving you. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Outro this week by Michael Karman. As always, if you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For shorter questions on Twitter, I am @clmazin and John is @johnaugust.

John, we have t-shirts and they’re great. Did you know this?

**John:** I did. I wear almost nothing but our own t-shirts.

**Craig:** I’ve got to tell you, I do too now. Cotton Bureau which makes the t-shirts. All of those t-shirts are as Stuart Friedel once said, “The softest shirts in the world.” They really are. I love them. And this is not an ad. I’m not doing an ad for them. I should get money, but as we all know I won’t. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you will find the transcripts. We try to get them up about four days after the episode airs.

You can sign up to become a Premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you can get all the back episodes and bonus segments. And, John, we do have some Scriptnotes membership gifts.

**John:** We do. So if you want to give Scriptnotes to somebody, like let’s say there’s somebody in your life you can say like I really want you to have the Premium version of Scriptnotes. Go to Scriptnotes.net and you can actually buy it for somebody else. So people asked us to be able to do that and you can now do that.

**Craig:** And if you are one of those Premium members you will hear our upcoming bonus segment about travel during a pandemic.

**John:** Craig, thank you for a fun show.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** Craig, so since the pandemic struck have you taken any trips, any vacations? Have you gone anywhere outside of your home turf?

**Craig:** No. I had one trip at the very beginning right before everything shutdown. This would be early March I want to say. Like maybe the first week of March. I was visiting my son and when I got back to LA maybe a few days later the wall came down. But, no, I have not been in a plane, in a bus. I haven’t even been in an Uber.

**John:** I would not want to be in an Uber. So when the lockdown happened we took it really seriously and we still take all of it really seriously. And I do remember there was a point where you just got so stir crazy that we just got in the car and drove to Angeles Forest and just looked at nature and drove right back. So we interacted with nobody, but just literally getting out of the city for two hours was terrific. And I took Matthew Chilelli’s suggestion. He found us a great hike and so my family and I took a great hike in Angeles Forest a few weeks after that. And small, safe escapes felt really good and reasonable.

I also needed to see my mom who lives in Boulder, Colorado, and whose health is – knock wood – good, but there was no guarantee that it was going to stay good. And so we decided to take a trip to Colorado and normally we would fly there. Flying felt like not a smart choice to be making. So we’ve taken two car trips this summer, both of which we drove from Los Angeles to the place and back.

And so I have some suggestions for people who might be considering a car trip. All under the umbrella of like also consider not taking a car trip. Also consider just staying put. But if you do need to go someplace here is what I would suggest.

Drive if you can drive. Driving is good. If you’re going to book hotels we looked for brands whose reputation we sort of trusted. We looked for low floors. We looked for maybe not the highest end, but an advantage to the thing that’s the kind of hotel that is above a motel but not super fancy is that they tend to have their own air-conditioning unit which is actually part of the room. And so therefore you’re not getting the whole–

**Craig:** The centrally circulated. The Legionnaire’s Disease problem. And now it’s the COVID problem.

**John:** Avoiding the cruise ship problem. Obviously we were not eating in restaurants. We were ordering takeout. We were off and using whatever that restaurant’s app was to have it curbside so we were interacting with as few people as possible.

My job in this was to be the wiper down of rooms. And so when we get a room before anybody unloads anything spray bottle and rags and wipe everything down.

I think we’re going to ultimately learn that surfaces are less of a big deal with COVID-19 than we might have thought at the beginning.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** But it also felt like a smart choice to be doing. And then we followed protocols and really thought about our own safety at all moments. So, that means using a mask, all the time. Keeping distance from people. And in situations where you say like in the back of your mind thinking, hey, is this safe for me to be in this place, if it doesn’t feel safe to be in this place don’t be in that place.

There were situations where I said, oh you know what, we made this reservation thinking we would be outside. And you say we can be inside. And we are not going to be inside. This does not feel safe or good. And just leaving. And recognizing that momentary awkwardness and inconvenience is much better than putting yourself at risk.

**Craig:** We do struggle with that. We don’t want to come off as, you know, unreasonable people. The problem is sometimes situations are such that you do – it’s reasonable to do something that is borderline impolite, like not staying somewhere. I mean, it is awkward. Most of us are programmed to avoid it. Then there’s the world of Karens and what’s the male Karen?

**John:** It’s not Ken. I forget what it is. Is it Todd?

**Craig:** OK. I like it. Karens and Todds are constantly demanding the manager. But for most of us we don’t want to be that guy, that woman. And it is important to say, oh yeah, you know what, I’m just not comfortable with that right now. And if there were ever a time where you could say that phrase and have people say I understand, it’s right now. If somebody says, “Really? Really” Yeah, then you definitely don’t want to be there because that culture is pervasive from top to bottom.

So, I mean, it sounds like you did everything right. The tricky part is that you’re traveling and you’re still – but the family is still together. So it’s like Conestoga Wagon. You’re in it. And you can’t get out of it.

**John:** Our pod is our pod and our pod has moved from being at this house to being in this hotel room, but we are still this pod.

**Craig:** You’re still the pod.

**John:** And I will say the second trip was a year ago we booked reservations at Yosemite for my birthday. And so this was a trip there. Yosemite closed. It reopened at half-capacity. It ended up being sort of a weirdly perfect time to be at Yosemite because Yosemite gets really crowded. It was not crowded. And so it was lovely to be there at a time when most nobody was there.

Was it a hassle? Yes. A lot of things you would like to be able to do were not possible. And that’s just the reality. So you can’t both have safety and perfect convenience. Those just aren’t reasonable choices. And so you just had to accept that lots of things were closed. Some things were more difficult. You couldn’t get to some things you wanted to get to.

The choices that are better for everyone’s safety I am 100 percent for. And if there were a new lockdown order saying like, “Oh, no, no, everyone literally has to stay home all the time now,” that’s also fine by me.

**Craig:** Yeah. We’re all adapting. I’ve noticed that everyone is starting to make presumptions about what next year will look like in terms of COVID. Talking to everybody in our business. Production and all the rest of it. It just seems like there’s a presumption that a vaccine is around the corner. And COVID will be a thing of the past. I don’t know if that’s correct. I mean, I think there are vaccines around the corner. I don’t know if it’s going to be as soon as January. And I don’t know how fast it’s going to take for them to work. And we don’t know how effective. We got to wait this one out. And I’m trying to make peace with the uncertainty of it.

But a huge part of it is avoiding high risk activities. What I will say that I have loosened up on is if I know people and know them to be generally responsible people. For instance, you and Mike, generally responsible. That’s not to say that you couldn’t get COVID through some mishap, because you could.

**John:** Totally. 100 percent.

**Craig:** Generally you’re responsible. Generally Melissa and I are responsible. So people who we feel that way about we can have a backyard – we can be in their backyard. We stay 10 feet apart. Use a mask when you’re moving through inside and through close spaces. But otherwise if you’re 10 feet over there and I’m 10 feet over here in the backyard and we want to have a drink, I don’t see a problem with that.

And so you do need to loosen the pressure valve a little bit, especially with kids. Because you do have to balance the kind of need for other people. I don’t have it, but I’ve been told it’s a thing. That’s what I’ve been told at least.

**John:** Yeah. So we do the same with our family in Colorado. We wear masks outdoors the entire time we were around them. It was nice to be able to see them in person, but I didn’t have the expectation that I was going to be able to hug them.

**Craig:** Right. Hugs are out.

**John:** Yeah. It’s not where we’re at. And that’s sad but it’s also the reality of what we’re at. To the point about this assumption that we’ll have a vaccine and it will all get better, I think it’s important that we sort of step away from that idea a little bit. That it’s going to be a simple thing. As quickly as we shut down we can just reopen and everything is going to magically be OK. It’s going to be a ramp out of this. And it won’t be as quick. It will be frustrating. We won’t kind of know how to deal with it.

We won’t know how to handle people who have had vaccinations and who haven’t had a vaccination. When we stop requiring masks for people, I don’t know. So, that’s all going to be a struggle. I just hope that it’s a struggle that we have under a different administration and sort of consistent – in which scientific decisions are being made by scientists rather than just sort of popular opinion.

**Craig:** Well, why would that ever happen?

**John:** Who knows? So my travel tip is if you need to travel just be smart about it. Be outside. And avoid situations you can avoid.

**Craig:** What else can we do?

**John:** That’s all you can do. Craig, thanks.

**Craig:** Thanks John.

 

Links:

* [Scriptnotes Episode 101 Transcript](https://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-ep-101-qa-from-the-live-show-transcript)
* [Seth MacFarlane to do Winds of War](https://www.slashfilm.com/the-winds-of-war-limited-series-seth-macfarlane/)
* [Redshirt](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/REDSHIRT)
* [John Scalzi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Scalzi)
* [WGA Agency Trial Pushed to 2021](https://variety.com/2020/biz/news/wga-agency-packaging-trial-date-1234733042/)
* [How We Record Scriptnotes](https://johnaugust.com/2020/how-we-record-scriptnotes-2020)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Michael Karman ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Gift a Premium Subscription at Scriptnotes.net
* Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/465standard.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 451: There Are No Slow Claps, Transcript

May 19, 2020 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2020/there-are-no-slow-claps).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 451 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show Craig will offer some guidance on how to flip the script on tropes without landing on your face. We’ll also answer listener questions about phone numbers, slug lines, and short films. And in our bonus segment for Premium members we will discuss personal videogame histories and the possibility that I was raised in a cult.

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**John:** Craig has no idea what the Premium topic is until I read it aloud, so he’s excited.

**Craig:** I mean, both of those sound amazing.

**John:** Amazing. What else is amazing is if you are listening to this episode when it comes out on Tuesday then you are only two days away from our next live show.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** Thursday, May 14, we will be having a live conversation with Empire Strikes Back writer Lawrence Kasdan to celebrate the 40th anniversary of that film.

**Craig:** Wow. 40 years. 40 years and I don’t know, can we do spoilers? 40 years of Darth Vader is Luke’s dad. We not only will only be talking to Lawrence Kasdan but I believe we will be able to share either visually or through some sort of method of relaying his handwritten screenplay. And I’ve been looking through it and it’s kind of amazing because sometimes there will be things he’s written and you’re like that wasn’t in Empire Strikes Back. And then sometimes it says, “Yoda, you will be, you will be,” and you’re like oh my god. It’s written down on paper. So, it’s pretty awesome. I mean, it’s kind of a cultural document.

I’m excited. And always fun to talk to Mr. Kasdan. He is a good friend of the show and the greatest living screenwriter.

**John:** Yeah. We like all of these things about him. So, we will be doing this on video, but we’ll also have audio for it. So, you can anticipate this being a future episode, but if you want to join us live at the time you can join us on Zoom. There will be a link in the show notes and more information as we have it for how you can participate in it. We probably won’t be inviting guests to actually come on and ask questions. But Megana will be monitoring the feed and if there’s questions that come up we will try to get those answered while he is there with us.

**Craig:** OK. That’s a good plan.

**John:** Yeah. We’ll see. We’re winging it. So again this is done with the Writers Guild Foundation who we often do live shows for. So it’s exciting that even in this time we can continue to support their great mission.

**Craig:** You know, you and I, I think, are charitable people.

**John:** We try to be. We do.

**Craig:** We’re charitable. We like the charities. Now more than ever.

**John:** Let’s get to some follow up. Now, a few shows back I asked previous Three Page Challengers to write in with updates and so we have a first update from a previous Three Page Challenge entrant. Do you want to talk us through what Patrick wrote?

**Craig:** Sure. Patrick McGinley writes, “I sent in the first three pages of my science fiction script, Destination Earth, back in 2014. And you were kind enough to discuss them on Episode 159. I was never under the illusion that someone was going to make an expensive sci-fi spec without an underlying IP so I spent the last five years turning it into a feature length audio drama.”

That’s fascinating.

“It launched in March. All ten episodes are out now and you can listen to them at destinationearthaudio.com. In a recent episode you talked about how difficult it is to get a spec sci-fi or fantasy script made. I think audio dramas are a viable path. You can produce them for almost nothing and you can get your story out in a way that can be enjoyed as entertainment and not just read as a document. Thanks to your great advice over the years I made the jump to fulltime writer in 2018. I’m writing on a show that’s currently streaming on Amazon Prime.”

That sounds like it should be a planet, by the way, in a science fiction thing.

“I always draw inspiration from your podcast and it makes it easier to sit down in front of the blank page every day and do the work.”

Well that’s great, Patrick.

**John:** Yeah. I’m happy for Patrick. So that’s one success story. People continue to write in with your experiences after this Three Page Challenge. Even if it’s not great news. I’m curious what’s happened to people.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Now on this idea of the audio drama, I’m struck by a previous One Cool Thing of mine was the show Bubble which was a fiction podcast by Jordan Morris which I really enjoyed. And just last week it was announced that they are developing that as a series now. I think it’s over at Sony. So that seems like a viable way to do it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I know that basically every podcast that is vaguely adaptable into something is being sold. Remember when there was the graphic novel gold rush?

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** It’s podcast gold rush now. I mean, that’s what’s going on. So I get pitched a lot of podcasts. But what I like about what Patrick did was he just got super creative and flexible. Flexibility is not necessarily something that comes easily or like second naturally to writers. Sometimes we can be a bit rigid. We get fixated on our creative expression as a way of being artistic and it can’t not be that. And what I like is that Patrick was like well what if I do get flexible and turn away from film to this other entirely different format and thus bring it to life. And it’s a really smart thing to do. I think that’s really clever. And I wonder if this is going to be something that’s more popular. That instead of trying to bomb people with your spec scripts via cold queries and so forth you just start reading them out loud.

**John:** Yeah. I will say that just reading them out loud is unlikely to really engage people. Like if you look at the audio dramas that work, if you look at things like Homecoming which obviously became a big series, they were really good as audio things. And the people who created them had very smart instincts about how it could work in an audio format. So it’s not going to simply be I’m going to sit at the microphone and read this thing aloud. You’re going to have to shape it to fit the medium. But that is work that a writer can do.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, definitely if you just read it that would be bad. That would be sort of “oh I need to sleep, put on that boring man reading a screenplay.” But hiring some folks or just bringing some folks together who feel like just doing, you know, having some fun and reading something and adding some sound effects. I mean, production for something like a little audio drama is easier now to do in a professional manner than ever before in the history of mankind. And that’s not the case necessarily with making films and television, although they are somewhat easier.

But, yeah, go for it. It’s fun.

**John:** Now, on the topic of reading scripts aloud, last week we spoke about table reads. And Craig you had a strong opinion that you thought table reads for production in features was generally not a helpful process for you.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Aline Brosh McKenna, our friend and the Joan Rivers of Scriptnotes, she writes in, “I was really interested to hear your conversation about table reads. I had a couple perspectives. I agree they can sometimes be detrimental in movies. Also sometimes on pilots where cast members don’t know each other and there are tons of execs. But for a TV comedy and series they can be super important. And on Crazy Ex-Girlfriend they were incredibly helpful. Not only to find where the laughs are, or aren’t, although that is useful, but to check the sturdiness of stories when you hear them out loud. We really relied on them.

“Also when I started writing I did multiple readings of all my scripts in my apartment with friends and that was probably the most useful thing I did and it’s something I always tell first time writers to try.”

**Craig:** Yeah. There’s a great distinction being made here. If you are working on a show, a repeating ongoing show with a stable cast, and definitely this is the case with comedy because of the aforementioned joke issue, but you can actually get a much more reliable sense of how the script is going to be when you shoot it from that reading. That’s a helpful reading because everybody knows their character. They have the benefit of god knows how many episodes behind them.

When you’re dealing with features, they haven’t done it before, and they don’t want to do it for the first time in front of you. They want to do it, you know, for the first time when it’s safe and they have takes and there aren’t executives around. Great distinction there. I can’t imagine any sitcom, whether it’s something that’s kind of quasi-experimental like Crazy Ex-Girlfriend or not, not having read-throughs. You just need them for those. And also for your features if you want to have friends then that’s for you. And no one is judging you. There’s no professional fallout if it’s a bad read. So it totally makes sense. But yeah.

**John:** Yeah. Your distinction about safety I think is really crucial. It’s not a safe environment in features generally and people do get cut and no one feels secure in doing it. Which if you’re coming back and this is episode seven of this series and you are a regular on it, you feel like you can be free and experiment in a table read and other people wouldn’t be able to do that.

**Craig:** Precisely. It looks like we’ve got another comment here that sort of jibes with that if you want me to take that one.

**John:** Do it.

**Craig:** Anonymous writes, “In Episode 450 Craig commented that table reads are useless. Most actors couldn’t agree more. In television they’re often used as an escape hatch to fire an actor prior to shooting a pilot. An actor friend of mine went through three screen tests for one show. Yes, three definitely screen tests before being hired. The executive producer of the show, whose name I won’t use, even called my friend personally after hiring them to say how excited he was to work with them. The director echoed the sentiment and even execs at the network approached my friend prior to the table read and said they were excited to have him on, or her, on board. It’s this person.

“Then came the table read when apparently one exec who’d likely never even had read the script decided they ‘wanted to go in a different direction with the character.’ This happens all the time to actors. It’s almost a badge of honor to make it through a table read with a job when you’re a working actor but not a name actor. So the studio pays a handsome sum to the actor under contract to walk away, but they at least didn’t drop $4 million on shooting the pilot.”

**John:** Yeah. So what he’s describing here is it is expensive to fire an actor after the table read, but it’s much, much, much more expensive to have to reshoot a pilot because you don’t like that actor in that role. And so execs are sometimes taking this as an opportunity to go like, “I’m not sure this is really the right person,” and get rid of them.

**Craig:** And if I were a network executive, like a broadcast network, I would want to go ahead and commission a scientific study to find out how often we have done a good job making that decision. Because I suspect that perhaps a Pop-O-Matic would be just as useful. Do remember Pop-O-Matic?

**John:** I don’t. But as we get into the bonus segment you’ll understand why I don’t know what a Pop-O-Matic is.

**Craig:** Oh right. Because you were possibly in a cult. So there was a board game called Trouble when we were kids.

**John:** Oh I do remember Trouble. We had Trouble back in the cult.

**Craig:** And so the Pop-O-Matic was that little plastic dome with the die inside of it and you would push it down and it would go click-click and then the die would go boing because it was in this little flexible diaphragm thing. So, Pop-O-Matic is a great way to revolutionize dice rolling which as we all know was just excruciatingly difficult without it.

**John:** It is. The worst. I think it’s because you can’t lose the die because it’s inside the little bubble. That’s why it is. Because Trouble is exactly the same game as Sorry really, but it’s just the Pop-O-Matic makes it so you cannot lose the actual thing that tells you how far to move your little pegs.

**Craig:** That is a very practical explanation of why they put Pop-O-Matic in the world. I think the not practical and more commercial reason is they were like look at this gimmick. Look!

**John:** Makes a noise. Kids like making noise.

**Craig:** Sugar-fed lunatics watching this commercial at six in the morning on a Saturday will go bother their parents immediately.

**John:** Good stuff. Last week we also talked about virtual writer’s rooms which is where you are gathering together a group of writers and they’re meeting on Zoom or some other sort of video sharing service rather than being in a room physically together. And I wanted to make a decision between entirely virtual rooms, which is what people are encountering right now, and semi virtual rooms.

So Annie writes, “I work in a virtual room now and for all the reasons you mentioned on the podcast that’s not so much an alternative to a traditional room as a necessary evil to get us through this weird situation. But two years ago I was an assistant in a room where one writer had to Skype in for a few weeks while his visa was being figured out. It was pretty terrible. He had such a hard time being completely involved in the conversation, even with his writing partner in the room trying to help facilitate his participation. When he finally did come to LA his personality and presence were so much more than we’d experienced through the computer screen.

“I can’t imagine having a room with multiple writers in this situation. Plus, they’d be missing out on all the bonding that happens in the kitchen around lamenting snack options and comparing caffeine consumption, all of which actually becomes very important to the room dynamic.”

So what Annie is trying to draw a distinction between is if everyone is in the same boat, OK, you’re in the same boat and you sort of muddle through. But this idea that, oh, maybe I don’t have to move to Los Angeles from Milwaukee and I can just Skype into the room is probably not a realistic option for those writers who don’t want to come to Los Angeles.

**Craig:** Oh yeah. I mean, if you’ve ever had the experience of being in like a minivan type of vehicle and you have a bunch of friends who are in the second and third row and you’re all the way up in the front, you’re left out. They can’t hear you. You’re talking forward. You’re not part of the thing. And you’re in the van with them. Separation does have an impact. It just does. There’s nothing you can do about it. And the more you try and include yourself the more kind of frustrating it is for everybody. So I completely agree. This is a great indication to people that, yeah, while everyone has to do it, sure. But if not everyone has to do it, you want to be in the room.

**John:** Yep. Do you want to take this comment from Greg?

**Craig:** Yeah. Greg writes, “I’m working in a room for a big streamer right now and there’s one topic that keeps coming up that I wanted to add to your list – video lag. One day my connection was spotty and the effects of lagging in the room felt almost like I was having a stroke. I couldn’t control my voice or image and others were looking at me as though I needed some sort of professional help. Then my connection dropped the chat and it felt like a digital bouncer had forcibly removed me from the room. For the next ten minutes I worked in sheer panic to get back in and when I finally did I sat there sweating, wide-eyed, trying to pretend I was as calm and good-humored as everyone else for the rest of the day.

“I thought I was alone in this until it happened to one of the head writers. Her image froze. Then she logged back in on her iPhone, appearing next to her own frozen face.” That’s awesome. “We all laughed at this even as she looked confused and afraid and as we tried to explain to her what we were looking at she froze again. When her second video resumed it was of her rushing down a hall with sheer panic in her eyes. It was the look of someone trying to find a life raft off a burning island.” Greg is very dramatic, by the way.

**John:** Yeah, I was going to say.

**Craig:** “The worst part was that if any of us attempted to call out her terror in any way other by cracking a light joke it would have been like saying the emperor has no clothes. We would have imperiled the room, the comfort of the other writers and our productivity because Zoom chats are founded on the fundamental lie that we’re actually together when in fact we are alone and one second away from digital annihilation.” Again, I have to repeat, Greg is a very dramatic person. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah. But I wanted to include Greg’s full description there because it is a thing I have experienced and feared is that like when you can’t get into a group, when a discussion is happening without you and you feel like you’re pushed to the outside of it it is really panic-inducing. And you always feel like, wait, will I be able to rejoin this thing? You might have flow that is now broken. Particularly if you’re trying to run the show and then you’re not able to actually get into the conversation. It is, you know, it’s scary.

**Craig:** Yeah, so I don’t know what’s wrong with me but when I’m on one of these things and suddenly my video glitches up and I get booted from the room I feel a slight sense of relief. [laughs] Like, oh good.

**John:** You have an excuse for why you’re not there.

**Craig:** Yeah. I feel like I can just go now and do whatever I want. And later just be like, yeah, Zoom right? Geesh.

**John:** I heard about this on Twitter but – not this last session but the session before – the six of us were playing Dungeons & Dragons and it’s like midnight and I felt an earthquake. I’m like, oh my god, there’s an earthquake. And the other five people on the chat were like, including you, were like, “There’s no earthquake.” And then the next nearest person felt the earthquake. And the next nearest person felt the earthquake. And it was such a wild moment because I was closer to the epicenter of the earthquake I felt it first and then there was a lag before it got to Phil and then to you. It was just such a wild experience that even though we were all there virtually we were physically in the same city and so therefore we were feeling the same effects.

**Craig:** Yes. And that’s something that you don’t normally have access to, right? It’s a weird thing. Because normally when you’re experiencing something together you’re together. And in that sense you could actually kind of chart the movement of the shockwave, which dissipated dramatically by the time it made it to me and to Chris Morgan.

**John:** It was a long way to get there. The other thing I’ve noticed with video lag that can be so frustrating is obviously the big networks have gotten much better at all the live from home stuff and they’re generally faking the live-ness of it all. They’re not really live from home.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** But one thing I do watch which is more live is Drag Race has this Werq the World Tour where they’re raising money for drag queens. My daughter is obsessed with it. And so we watch it and it’s two very funny drag queens. One is in Los Angeles and one is in New York. And they have great patter, but just that one or two seconds lag really makes it awkward.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** And you just cannot do it. It’s tough.

**Craig:** It’s brutal. Timing is everything. And when you have a forced lag it’s over. There is no – it’s why sometimes they’ll bring a comedian on to one of the news shows, like the kind of talking head news shows. And their stuff always dies because of the time delay. It just kills it. The expiration date on a joke is precisely 0.0001 seconds after it is said. I mean, if you wait any longer than that it’s just like stale air, stale air. “Oh, OK. Yeah. That was funny, the thing you said a little bit ago.” It’s the weirdest thing. Yeah. Timing.

**John:** Timing.

**Craig:** Timing.

**John:** All timing.

**Craig:** Timing.

**John:** All right. Let’s get to our marquee topic. Craig, talk us through what you want to tell us about tropes.

**Craig:** Well, you know, I’ve been working on some new things lately and especially now that I’m in television – television, there’s so much more material you have to shovel into the engine of creation because there are episodes. Everything in television is longer than it is in film. And so you’re thinking about a lot of scenes, a lot of moments, a lot of scenes, a lot of ideas. And over and over it’s inevitable that you’re going to start to bump into places where tropes could go.

**John:** We should probably talk about what do we even mean by tropes? Because it’s a term that you and I throw around, but other people might not know what we’re talking about.

**Craig:** Cliché is a word that people use. So these are the moments, dialogue lines, scene, sequences, things that we have seen over and over and over in movies and television. It’s the guy walking away slowly from the explosion that he caused behind him. It’s the person saying something mean about somebody and then saying, “She’s right behind me isn’t she?” It’s that stuff. It’s crawling through the air duct to get to a place.

**John:** Absolutely. So they’re moments of narrative that are almost like stock photos that we’re so used to seeing them that we can kind of anticipate what they’re going to be like. And you could just string them together in forms that look like popular entertainment, but as a viewer we recognize that they are clichéd moments or they are sort of stock moments. And cliché would be too hard of a thing to bang them on because they’re natural bits of storytelling device in some cases, but we’ve seen them so often that they no longer feel fresh.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Jane Espenson often refers to clams. They’re old dead jokes for example.

**Craig:** Yeah. And there are also things that maybe in and of themselves aren’t considered tropes, but when you think of them naturally in the course of writing a scene you get a whiff of familiarity about them anyway. I mean, it’s not necessarily a trope that when there’s a horse racing scene and a character loses they rip up their little bet slips, but I’ve seen it so many times. So it’s like a little thing is like is there another way to do it?

And so I just kept thinking like, OK, what I’m really trying to do is every time I run into something like that I’m asking myself, OK, don’t do that. But then there is a question. Well then what do we do? Because that trope emerged in your mind for a reason. It’s accomplishing something. So we’re going to talk a little bit about how to handle that.

And I think the first thing we have to acknowledge is that tropes are not inherently bad. In fact, weirdly they’re inherently good. That’s how they became tropes. So, I looked this up. Everyone has heard somebody at some wedding say, “Throw your hands up in the air and wave them around like you just don’t care.” This has happened four billion times. But about 41 years ago Sugar Hill Gang wrote “Just throw your hands up in the air and party hardy like you just don’t care” and that may have been the first popularized use of that and it was awesome. Because no one had heard it before and so it was cool.

That’s why it became a trope. Tropes become tropes because they’re surprising and they’re fresh and they entertain and they solve problems. They solve problems. It’s like the first time you taste Hamburger Helper. You don’t know it’s garbage. It helped the hamburger. It worked.

**John:** Or first time someone said like, “Well let’s never do that again,” when something disastrous happened. It was actually a novel response to that thing that had just happened. But if we say that now it is still and is a trope. It’s shining a light on this thing which just went wrong. It doesn’t work anymore.

**Craig:** Yeah. It does not work anymore. The problem with saying, OK, well then I’m not going to do that is that we are disallowing ourselves from using something that at the very minimum accomplishes a thing. Hamburger Helper does accomplish something. It just doesn’t accomplish anything original. So our job here is to replace the trope with something that actually also accomplishes something. Different and good is original.

Different and bad just sucks. And so we have to be careful when we say, all right, no tropes please. We also have to caution that when you zig where everybody else would zag there is the potential that you might do something that’s just boring or self-indulgent or confusing or unimpactful or not believable. So, the challenge today is to figure out how to not do the tropy thing but still get all the tropy goodness from the heart of it while being fresh and surprising and entertaining.

**John:** That sounds great. And I think part of the reason why we’re emphasizing that tropes are there in the first place is that people approach anything we write or anything that they see with a set of expectations. They have expectations about the genre, about the kind of thing that they’re watching. So, they’re aware of what they expect to kind of happen in this. And if you’re so trying to avoid every possible trope then it’s not even going to resemble the genre it’s supposed to be in.

If you’re trying to write a vampire thing and all the vampires aren’t hurt by sunlight, or wooden stakes, or any of that stuff then at a certain point you’re not writing a vampire thing anymore. So you have to be aware of what the overall scope of tropes is for this and how you’re making your choice about what you’re doing and what you’re not doing and how you’re hopefully aware of the tropes and remixing them in a way that makes it feel fresh.

**Craig:** That’s a great example. The vampires. Because vampires are just like drowning in tropes. But you want the vampire to bit someone in the neck. That’s a thing, right? OK, or at least bite somebody in a vein. So, that’s something you need to do. And as you’re creating your vampire story you may come to that place where suddenly the vampire has to bit somebody and drink their blood. So that’s a trope. And I think the first thing you should do is not just deny it. Not say, “Well in my movie vampires don’t do that.” Just first say to yourself, OK, I’m going to allow myself to play out the tropiest version possible in my mind. What am I getting out of it? What are the things that matter?

Is this character particularly scared? Are they excited to be bitten by the vampire? Is the vampire reluctant, guilty? Is the vampire ravenous? What are the things that at least I want out of my characters in the middle of this tropy thing? Learn from that. That’s the stuff that actually you can keep and use. Because tropes are just expressions of intention. They’re just often clever or once brilliant expressions of intention that now become stale from overuse. But keep the intentions.

So, first off, listen to the trope as it happens and learn from it. So you’ve listened to the trope in your head. You’ve heard what the intention is. And now it’s really important for you to say to yourself I’m not going to actually do it. I think sometimes we get into a self-delusional state where we think, well, I mean, you know, we can get away with it. We can do just one. Or, it’s not like it’s that tropy, because instead of the usual vampire biting somebody in the next in a castle he’s biting somebody on a neck in a rooftop bar in modern day New York. No, look, if you blindly walk into a trope, that is to say you didn’t realize it was a trope in the moment, which happens, and then someone points out and says, “Oh, yeah, you know, I’ve seen that,” then you go, OK, OK, got it. Let me change that.

But if you know, don’t do it. Just resist the siren song.

**John:** Absolutely. So I think what your call to action here is like just don’t be lazy. Don’t use the trope without examining what the trope does and why you would be using it. So don’t go for the trope without thinking about what the trope actually does. In the vampire example why is a vampire biting someone’s neck? Well, it’s biting the neck to feed. Is that the most interesting way to show feeding? Is it worth spending the shoe leather to change that vampire behavior and go at it a different way? Is there something about the biting of the neck that you’re going to do differently that is important to your story? For instance maybe the vampire doesn’t have these pop-out fangs and so biting the neck is actually really difficult because they just have normal teeth.

Like that’s a change that you’re making which could be worthwhile. But basically your challenge is to always ask yourself why am I doing this thing that is sort of a stock photo in this kind of story.

**Craig:** Yeah. Because ultimately the audience will be sitting there going, oh, OK, well you know, see you borrowed that. You’ve started to bring up techniques like, OK, so what do we do.

So let’s go through, I’ve got seven suggestions. But I’m sure there are many, many more. But we’ll start with the easiest one which is just reverse it. So if the trope says boy meets girl when they bump into each other and you want them to have a meet-cute and you want it to be in the middle of the street because that’s kind of where they are maybe you just reverse it and they each bump – or they amazingly avoid bumping into each other. Like they’re heading towards each other with all of the attributes of a bumping together scene and they miss each other. And in missing each other they kind of turn back and realize that they had a near miss. And that’s the way it works.

Any trope there is you can just simply try, at least in your mind, to just do the reverse. If we know that vampires feed on people by drinking their blood then is there a way that vampires as it turns out need you to bite them so that they drink your blood. Whatever it is, reversal is always at least a simple strategy. If it works, great. A lot of times it doesn’t. But a decent first shot.

**John:** Absolutely. So you’re taking a look at, again, this is all going back to what does the reader, what does the audience expect. If the audience comes into it with a certain set of expectations and you’re able to kind of acknowledge those expectations and flip them then the audience is going to be hopefully even more engaged because they know that you know what they are expecting and that you’re taking an action to subvert that.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly. With that in mind, one of the kind of more comedic ways to handle tropes is by being meta. So the idea is that the characters or the filmmakers are kind of silently acknowledging that they watch TV and movies, too. They know the trope. They are either – when they engage in a trope they’re commenting on it, or the movie is commenting on it, or it doesn’t go the way it’s normally supposed to go.

So parodies kind of truck in this steadily. We did something in one of the Scary Movies where it was the trope of somebody in a moment of kind of anxiety and the camera is moving around them in a 360. We’ve seen this so many times. And we were doing this and then the character kind of puts their hands out and goes, “Stop,” and the camera stops and they vomit. And so it’s like you just acknowledge that the trope is happening.

Lord and Miller are by far the masters of this. So if you want to study this kind of meta trope behavior look at 21 Jump Street or The Lego Movie or any of the work that they do. They’re brilliant at it.

One of the simplest methods of being meta about tropes is doing the trope exactly as it is except taken to its absurd extreme. So, classic trope. You remove the cover of a bomb and there are four different color wires and which one should I snip. We’ve seen it a billion times. But in MacGruber you take the cover off the bomb and there’s a thousand wires. A thousand wires. And that’s great. I mean, it’s essentially like you said, it’s playing off of the audience’s expectation.

**John:** Yeah. And again the movie MacGruber it’s a joke they keep playing again and again is that it’s about diffusing this bomb and then they don’t actually do any of the work to diffuse the bomb. They’re having a completely unrelated conversation when you know you are supposed to be focusing on the bomb.

**Craig:** Right. For drama, sometimes all you need to do to kind of subvert and untropify a trope is to just change the dynamics. So I’ll call it loud to quiet in this instance. So we’ve all seen a prison riot. There have been four hundred zillion prison riots on movies and TV shows and they all look the same. In the prison riot there is a bell ringing somewhere. There are prisoners running around in a violent scrum. There’s always two levels to the prison and on the top level they are throwing burning mattresses to the bottom level. Every. Single. Time. Burning paper, burning mattresses, and people are getting stabbed randomly. And everyone is screaming.

That is what a prison riot looks like in everything. OK. Well, if you’re writing something and it’s time for a prison riot is there a quiet prison riot? Is there a way to do a prison riot where basically the prisoners are methodic and strategic and careful, which is actually kind of terrifying to consider?

So just deciding I’m going to do the same thing but just way quieter, or way louder, may be enough to kind of detropify your tropy intent.

**John:** Absolutely. And that shift of dynamics could also, it doesn’t have to be the entire universe, but whoever the central character is in that we have an expectation of who that person is generally in that story and to put a different kind of person in that slot is incredibly helpful.

And so if you have the charismatic cult leader and we have an expectation of what a charismatic cult leader is, and instead you have somebody who seems just the opposite of that, or just dialed in a very different direction, that is fascinating because we understand the general dynamics of how this is supposed to work but that’s not the person we expect to be doing that. And that gives you opportunity.

**Craig:** Precisely. Again we are playing with their expectations. I mean, last week we were talking about comedy as a magician’s trick. It’s just subverting expectations. It’s misdirection. That’s what we’re talking about here.

Another method is just analogizing. You take the same kind of thing but if there is something that has been done to death and yet useful, find something else that has the same kernel of psychological payload but is just different in circumstance in a way we haven’t seen. Typical thing in a lot of movies, particularly sports films, is the wise old coach who used to be something but isn’t something anymore because something tragic happened to them like they lost the big game and now they’re a drunk. And they’ve got to pull it together to help the young hero. That’s pretty much a stock trope.

If you want that character, if you need that character, maybe just look at the drinking part and say is there some other kind of self-destructive addiction that I can put here that isn’t that. Because we’ve seen it. It’s been done a billion times. So what else? I mean, weirdly enough one of my suggestions was are they in a cult? Are they obsessed with following something? Are they and end-of-the-world prepper? Are they running from a crime they committed? Are they trying to win back an ex-lover who has clearly moved on? What are they doing with their lives that has consumed them and pulled them away from what they maybe should be doing?

So you don’t have to turn your back on the useful aspect of self-destructive mentor, but you just have to change the nature of it I think or you end up being tropy.

**John:** Absolutely. And so in this case we’re probably talking about that sounds like he’s either a protagonist or an antagonist. We’ve seen stories in which that coach figure is the central character, so The Way Back, the Ben Affleck movie recently, he’s sort of that central character. We’ve also seen that as the antagonist, the one who is helping but also challenging our protagonist along the way.

What we’re pushing for is to look at sort of what the outside frame is of that character and are there things about that stock version that you can strip away and subvert so that we can actually see something really interesting and find ways to sort of do the same effect but without the usual details that we’re used to in the story.

**Craig:** Yeah. You just get different lines, you know, different expressions. It frees you in a lot of ways. It really does. It frees you.

OK, we’re getting closer to the end of our list here. We’ve got three more. Mourn the loss of the trope. So tropes make things easy. And sometimes would benefit from the inclusion of a trope. If your 16-year-old protagonist is struggling with her physical identity or her sexuality, I think it’s OK for a moment where she acknowledges that there is a world where tropes exist which is fantasy world, where ditching your glasses or getting a haircut makes you a new human being to everyone. That doesn’t work that way in real life. And it’s OK to acknowledge the trope as almost like you the writer and the character are mourning the loss of it. If only the trope would world. But it won’t.

**John:** So let’s take Booksmart as an example. So in that script you have so many opportunities for these two young characters to engage in tropes, and instead we don’t engage in tropes, or we actually push against those tropes. So you have two young women who want to have the perfect night of high school, of partying, and in some ways they are longing for that trope. They are longing for this idealized version of what a high school party night is supposed to be like. And again and again they are not able to achieve it.

They’re also aware that they’re sort of going for this impossible thing at the same time. So the script is very smart about not letting them do the things that they kind of want to do. And sort of the sadness that it’s never as simple as you sort of wish it could be.

**Craig:** Yeah. And you’ve said an interesting word there which is smart or intelligent. That there is an implied intelligence when you fight back against tropes. Whether we like it or not, and whether we intend it or not, the use of tropes implies a certain kind of lack of intelligent or intelligence horsepower, because it’s a borrowing. So you will seem smarter, which is good.

OK, two more. This is an easy one. Eliminate the lines. Because tropy dialogue is what we consider to be written dialogue. It’s never going to be heard as authentic because it’s been said by a billion other characters before. And now one talks like that.

**John:** It’s hack.

**Craig:** It’s hack. Nobody in real life talks in trope lines. So, don’t have your characters say them. But those trope lines became trope lines because they did express something authentic at one time. So, whatever that authentic feeling is, it’s OK to have your actors express it. It’s OK to have your characters feel it, just not out loud.

**John:** Just don’t say those words.

**Craig:** Yeah. Just sometimes all you’ve got to do is if the trope comes to mind just delete it. But change nothing else and it just might work.

**John:** Absolutely. And if you are able to find that line that so perfectly encapsulates what that moment is like, congratulations you have now created a new trope.

**Craig:** A new trope.

**John:** A new trope line.

**Craig:** A new trope line. And finally, and this is really I think the best advice, and it’s the one I try and use the most. Be real. Tropes or at least are psychological processing of them is such that they feel connected to a glossy or melodramatic representation of life. They feel movie-ish. They feel TV show-ish. So the lines are kind of fake witty. I mean, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character wasn’t really witty but he would always have these snappy little one-liners, you know, because it’s fake. The behavior is fake macho. Nobody walks away slowly from an explosion. That’s fake. The choices are fake brave. The emotions are fake sentiment. There is never a slow clap in real life ever. There are no slow claps. [laughs]

So the question you have to ask yourself is in the moment that you have created what would really happen. Think about that carefully and then do that. Because there are mechanical ways as we’ve described to change tropes, subvert them, hide them, acknowledge them, but nothing is as interesting, I think, ultimately, than letting a trope happen in your mind naturally, you arrive at a point. Your brain says, oh, the trope would fit right here. And then you say that’s great. But what would really happen? And then you might get something.

**John:** So we have many listeners who are film historians and so I challenge them, can you tell us where the slow clap came from? What was the first cinematic depiction of the slow clap? Because as Craig points out–

**Craig:** The first slow clap.

**John:** It’s a thing I only associate with movies and I think I’ve seen people try to do it in real life and it feels incredibly weird because it doesn’t actually make sense. It doesn’t work. And so if someone can tell me the history of the slow clap I’d be delighted to hear it.

But Craig’s underlying point here about being real, like what is the actual real behavior that people in real life situations would do is the cornerstone advice here. Is that the way you get to making your characters feel grounded within the universe of the story you’re telling is to be consistent within that world. And so we’re not saying nothing can be heightened. Obviously things are heightened. And so Veep is heightened. That’s not how real people would speak. Never Have I Ever, a show I just watched and really loved, is heightened. And that’s fine.

Social Network is heightened. People are speaking at a clip that they couldn’t speak at in real life. But within that heightened universe there is an underlying reality that you’re never reaching for sort of stock ways to get through things. In any of those things if they reached for a clunky line like “Let’s never do that again” it would thud. It wouldn’t work.

**Craig:** Yeah. It just wouldn’t. And so, yeah, you are allowed to be not realistic in your tone, but in moments where tropes would fit the best way to untropify the trope is to say what would actually happen here. Let’s not gloss this over with some tropy paint. Let’s embrace the realness of it.

I thought that, you know, the movie that we were looking at the other week, Bad Education, did a really good job. I mean, there’s so many opportunities for tropes in that movie.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** And it seemed like, you know, they dodged most of them. I really do think so. I mean, you could feel like everybody was working hard, including the actors. Because, I mean, remember, some tropes aren’t just written. Some tropes are also acting tropes. Here’s one that I see all the time. In the place of somebody allowing themselves to experience something they just do a heavy breath out. No one does that. Normally in real life no one is like, [deep breath], well, but they do this sometimes. So everybody worked really hard to not do the tropy tropes and it’s appreciated. It really is.

**John:** It is. Here’s my actor tropy trope. I’m frustrated so I’m going to take off my reading glasses and throw them down on the desk and then rub my temples with my hands. That is my tropy trope.

**Craig:** Yeah. No, I mean, I think there’s a pretty great – there’s a few great Denzel gifs. A lot of times I feel like tropes begin with Denzel. Like Denzel does something amazing and then everybody else is like, ooh–

**John:** Oh, I’ll Denzel that.

**Craig:** I want to Denzel it. And then it’s like, mmm, but Denzel Denzeled it. So you can’t Denzel it, because he Denzeled it. So, anyway.

**John:** Craig, I think you Denzeled this topic and for that I want to offer you a—

[Clapping]

**Craig:** Da-dum.

**John:** I don’t know what it means. But it’s a thing that happens.

**Craig:** Just sometimes, yeah, it’s a thing that happens. It’s just so funny. The whole psychology of the slow clap is that everyone is stunned. And no one is quite sure if they’re the only person who thinks what they saw was great. And then one brave soul is like not only am I going to express that this is great, but I’m going to do it so deliberately–

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And then everyone is like, yes, I will too. One by one. And then the applause. And then it has to turn into like the full applause.

**John:** Yeah. But it would be better if it didn’t turn into full applause and instead it was like they were keeping time, where everyone just starts clapping the same way, like are we supposed to start singing?

**Craig:** That’s terrifying.

**John:** That’s a way to subvert that slow clap trope.

**Craig:** That is absolutely terrifying. Yeah. And there’s always that moment where the person like when the slow clapping is happening the person on stage is like “what’s going on?”

**John:** Wait, what?

**Craig:** They’ve never experienced the slow clap phenomenon. [laughs]

**John:** Well, the challenge of the slow clap though is it’s also a mocking thing. You can make somebody by the slow clap. So it’s impossible to read what it actually is. And it’s a thing that just happened in movies.

**Craig:** In real life the only time you hear a slow clap is in a mocking reference to slow clapping. So, yes, in a movie if someone gets the slow clap their response should be like, “You know what, screw you man. I know what you’re doing.” Oh, slow clapping.

All right. Well, we’ve got some questions we can shuffle onto here if you’d like.

**John:** Let’s go for it. I’ll start with Paul in Wales. He writes, “I have a question about slug lines. I’ve seen them be bold, underlined, and with scene numbers if it’s a spec, but how about different colors? I’ve written a half-hour TV pilot that uses parallel realities, showing how different characters deal with the same problem. Because scenes from both realties are intercut I’ve given each reality a different colored slug line, pink and blue, and the rest of the scenes are in black. As someone with dyslexia I find this easy for myself to keep track of where I am in the story. Are there easier ways of showing a jump between realities on the page? I have written Reality A and Reality B in parenthesis at the end of each slug line. Should I instead put this before the INT or EXT?”

Craig, what’s your thinking on this kind of slug line questions and color overall in scripts?

**Craig:** The risk is just being distracting with the colors. That said, I don’t think it’s a bad idea. If you have something where you’re moving back and forth between various realities and you want to color code those slug lines, that to me is not a killer. If I were reading the script and enjoying it I think I would find that to be kind of a delightful help. If I were reading the script and thought it was boring then I would think of it as – honestly, I would just think I wish the writer had spent as much time on the writing as they did on the color coding.

So it always gets filtered through the quality of the writing itself. I am tempted to say that if the script is done properly and well you won’t need those. But, I don’t think it’s a huge problem. And if readers do say, “Listen, I really appreciate it,” go for it. It’s not like we’re dealing with the 1990s where everything was being Xeroxed on black and white machines. So, why not?

**John:** So when we had Greta Gerwig on the show her script for Little Women had pages in red, so the text was in red, for when we were in the past. And it was helpful because that was constantly playing with which timeline we’re in. And so she did not just the slug lines but the whole scenes would be in red when they’re in the past.

And that worked for her script and I thought it was a good choice for it. What Paul is suggesting I think could work, but I don’t know that going in color is really going to be more helpful than putting the past or present over it, or putting some little symbol, or maybe just bolding the ones that are in the present versus the past, or the different realities. The pink and the blue feels like a lot to me. And I do wonder and worry for Paul’s sake that someone who is picking it up is just going to go, “Huh,” and might toss it a little bit earlier than they should because they’re so thrown off by the color.

So I think a simpler choice that works is going to be better than a color choice which might work a little bit better honestly, but will just throw people off.

**Craig:** Sure. I mean, I think it’s also – you could also say, look, as a little note beforehand, “I have dyslexia. This is how I am able to write and navigate through the script. So apologies if you find it distracting.” I think sometimes just being honest about those things and people will go, well, I’m not going to be a dick and just be like, well, I don’t care about your dyslexia. Throw. You know? And fling it virtually across the room.

I mean, I would probably give somebody a bit more of a break because I understand the intention. As opposed to I am self-indulgent and I think that I’m going to make things pink and blue. Do you know what I mean? So, yeah, you know, I think in general he should be – I would be – let’s put it this way. That’s not going to be the problem. Do you know what I mean? In the end ultimately if there’s a problem it’s going to be because of the writing.

Alexandra from West LA writes, “Could you do an overview of all the ways a screenwriter could make money screenwriting?” Such a good question actually, Alexandra. Thank you. “How is the screenplay market structured? Where is most of the money? I know as screenwriters we aren’t here for the money, but current insight on this could help funnel my overrunning cup of creative desires, especially as so many different storytelling formats open up. Thanks. Thank you.”

I like that she said thank you twice. Alexandra in West LA. So, John, let’s do a quick rundown on how you can make some scratch doing this gig.

**John:** All right. So, the classic ways screenwriters, we’ll talk about film and TV as one big pile of writing, the classic ways they make money is I write a script all by myself, a spec script, and I sell that to somebody for a sizeable chunk of money and they say, “Fantastic, we love this script. We will make this into a movie. We will pay you this amount of money for the script you’ve written. We will hopefully pay you some more money to do the rewrites on it.” And that goes out into the world. I will get some sort of residuals and profit participation on that movie when it gets made. That is a classic way that people get paid as screenwriters, but it’s actually not the way that most screenwriters make money.

Most screenwriters instead make money by being hired to write a specific project. And so it could be their original project that they have an idea for, they pitch it to a producer, to a studio. That financier says, “Great. I will pay you X dollars to write that script for me.” Or it could be based on a piece of property that the studio or the producer owns and they are looking for a writer to adapt this into a movie. They come to you and say, “Do you have an idea for how to do this?” And you pitch them your idea for how to do this and they pay you money to do it.

Those are classically the ways that screenwriters make money is by creating material themselves and selling it, or by being hired to write screenplay material for somebody else.

**Craig:** Yeah. So there is open writing assignments where you’re hired to rewrite things. There is roundtables where they bring screenwriters together to have a kind of group effort to punch up a comedy script for instance. Or talk about how a dramatic script might be improved, sort of development style. And in television there are similar entrepreneurial avenues. You write a spec script, you set up a show. You can also be hired as a high level executive producer or story producer for a show that somebody else started. And of course you could be hired as a staff writer where you are helping break stories in the room and then you are assigned a script.

**John:** Yeah. So in our earlier conversation today about like writers in virtual rooms, those writers are being paid for their time in that room. And based on how their contracts work that time that they’re in the room may also be applied towards the script that they’re writing, or that script that they’re writing may not be part of that time that they’re spending, that weekly money they’re getting for being in the room. But that is probably the bulk of overall writer income in the WGA is TV writers who are in the room writing on a show.

**Craig:** Yeah. And then there are sort of nontraditional areas. I mean, well screenwriters also can work on variety shows. So they’re working on jokes and sketches. You can write on game shows, which do need writing. And then there are things that you can do sort of independent. I mean, you can write for commercials. Is it screenwriting? Well, it’s writing for the screen. It’s not necessarily unionized, but there is that.

But basically that’s kind of the run of it. I’m sure we’re missing a few things. But by and large 95% of the money that we make as screenwriters is through open writing assignments, through rewrites, through original material, through working in a room, or collaborating with other people on a television show. That’s kind of the run of it.

**John:** I would also say that a not insignificant part of income that comes into writers is stuff that’s not really writing, but it’s teaching writing, or it’s doing other stuff that’s sort of adjacent to that process. And so Peter Gould who is a fantastic writer and a director on Better Call Saul was my screenwriting, actually my film basics professor at USC. And so there’s a long tradition of also teaching or doing other things. We talked about assistants and readers, there’s other ways that these writers make their living while they are writing.

**Craig:** Yeah. So there are kind of screenwriting-adjacent gigs that you can do like teaching for sure.

**John:** Great. Jason asks a question. “On his blog recommended changing your phone number to have a 323 or an 818 area code. Is this still necessary in 2020?” So he’s referring back to a 2007 post I had done about moving to LA. And back then I had recommended that, yes, you should change your number to an LA number just so that people think of you as being an LA person.

That is just dead advice. That is not relevant anymore. Because people keep their cell numbers from wherever they were.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** So don’t change your number.

**Craig:** No. Nobody has a number anymore. You’re a name. So, the numbers are gone. There’s a comedian did some joke about getting arrested – it was Kathleen Madigan I think. She gets arrested and they give her one call, but they take all of her possessions. It’s like I don’t know anyone’s number. You took my phone. I literally have no – I can’t call my own parents. I don’t know their number. [laughs] And that’s kind of where we are right now.

**John:** Mm-hmm. I still dial my mom’s number as numbers. I think part of it is just so I don’t ever forget it, just because it otherwise – that’s the number I grew up with. I can’t ever let that go.

I feel like I would be losing a part of myself if I didn’t dial that number.

**Craig:** Every day I wake up thinking I would like to lose a part of myself.

**John:** Ah-ha.

**Craig:** I’m all into Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.

**John:** So while your phone number does not matter anymore, the area code for that, I will say that don’t use a goofy email address. So, I think proper email addresses are – Gmail is fine. Everyone has Gmail. AOL is still fine. Some people still use their AOLs. It’s fine. But never use Roadrunner. Never use like the free email that came with your Internet service when you first set it up. That always feels kind of weirdly unprofessional to me. So, pick something that is – if you’re putting your email address on the title page of your script, which is fair and genuine, you can do that, just make it an email address that you’re not embarrassed by.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, AOL is kind of a red flag. If you’re an older person and you’re using AOL and you want to make it some sort of a virtue of loyalty then that’s fine. Yeah, Roadrunner, Hotmail.

**John:** Yeah, if I see a Hotmail I’m like I’m a little dubious of this.

**Craig:** EarthLink.

**John:** Yeah. All right. It is time for our One Cool Things. I have two One Cool Things that are sort of related. The first is a book. It is my friend Jordan Mechner who created Karateka and Prince of Persia and is an amazing videogame designer and screenwriter, he has a book out now called The Making of Prince of Persia, 1985-1993. It is a collection of all his old journals. And so he was a person who actually just kept a journal about what was going on day by day as he’s building what became an incredibly seminal game and helped change the videogame industry. And you’re just seeing this college kid working out sort of how to make this game and largely do it himself. Everything from how to sort of figure out the bit maps to some of the programming stuff, but really more the business and the logistics of how it should all fit and work together.

So, I really enjoyed it and I think the closest comparison I would have for it would be I remember reading Sex, Lies, and Videotape, the book, that Soderbergh wrote which is both his production journal and the script for Sex, Lies, and Videotape. It was like the first real screenplay I had read. But the actual production log, his sort of notes about what he was doing day by day were so helpful in seeing like, oh, you know what, it’s just a lot of hard work and he didn’t know what he was doing through a lot of it. And so if you are a person who aspires to make things I think you might really enjoy Jordan Mechner’s The Making of Prince of Persia, 1985-1993.

We’ll put an Amazon link there. We put Amazon links for most stuff. But we’re also going to start putting Bookshop links to things we can. Bookshop.org is a website you go to and it’s like Amazon but it actually feeds through local book stores. And supporting local bookstores in this time is incredibly important. It’s a really well setup system and so we’re going to try to be providing Bookshop links to anything we talk about on the show that we can find on Bookshop.

**Craig:** Yeah. It sounds good. It is a really cool read. And like Sex, Lies, and Videotape part of the fun of reading about Jordan’s process is that you’re looking at somebody who is dealing with enormous limitations. And so so much of the story of The Making of Prince of Persia is how do I deal with the fact that I have no resources. I don’t have a lot of money. I don’t have a lot of time. And I also have very little memory to work with to actually make a game that functions.

So, the way that a kind of deprivation can sometimes lead to creative epiphany is fascinating to me and so the story of how for instance the main antagonist of Prince of Persia is a direct result of a memory limitation and how that comes to be is really fascinating. So, it’s an interesting – it’s a really interesting journey. And Jordan is a great guy. So, well-chosen there, John.

My One Cool Thing this week is I think I’ve mentioned Maria Bamford as a One Cool Thing in the past before. She’s a standup comedian out of Minnesota. She is brilliant. She’s also odd. She’s like one of the great odd comedians. She has no problem being weird. Her eccentricity is sort of front forward. And she also has absolutely no shame about talking about her struggles with mental illness which were quite serious. And she did have to take a lot of time off because she does suffer from pretty significant mental illness.

And she talks about mental illness all the time. In this latest comedy special Weakness is the Brand she doesn’t talk about it a ton, but when she does it’s still pretty impactful and pretty – there’s funny and then there’s funny because, my god, that’s really, really true and you said it and it’s funny, which is different. I think she’s terrific. And so if you’re looking for some laughs and slightly challenging laughs, which is great, check out Maria Bamford: Weakness is the Brand.

**John:** Is it Netflix? HBO?

**Craig:** I believe it is on Amazon Prime.

**John:** Fantastic. Which is of course the–

**Craig:** Distant planet.

**John:** Distant planet where the Amazons actually came from.

**Craig:** Yes. Amazon Prime.

**John:** Amazon Prime. In our bonus segment we will talk about my cult history and our early experience with videogames. But until then that is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Special thanks to Dustin Box and Chris [Sont] for their help.

Our outro is by James Llonch. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter Craig is @clmazin. I am @johnaugust.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you find the transcripts.

You can sign up to become a Premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you get all the back episodes and bonus segments.

Craig, thanks for talking us through the tropes.

**Craig:** Thank you, John. And remember there’s no slow clap.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** All right. So, our bonus topic. A couple of things made me think of this. First off is Jordan’s book. Craig, you are adapting The Last of Us. And I’ve been playing a lot of Animal Crossing.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** So videogames are having a big cultural moment, but they’ve kind of always been a cultural touchstone. They’ve always been reflecting and sort of making the popular culture. And so I wanted to talk about our videogame histories. And I guess we’ll start with the distinction between videogames and arcades and videogames at home. Because I did go to the arcade with my brother some and I would play stuff, but I wasn’t a big arcade person. Were you an arcade person?

**Craig:** I wanted to be a big arcade person. My parents generally if they saw me deriving pleasure from something would put a stop to it. [laughs] So the arcade in the Staten Island Mall which I think was called something like Space Port. I think it was called Space Port. It was all I wanted to be in. I just wanted to be in Space Port. And they were like, no, that’s full of teenagers and trouble.

**John:** I just completely picture you on the most recent season of Stranger Things being one of those kids.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** In the Star Port Mall.

**Craig:** So Star Port – god, I really want to check. So the Staten Island Mall, which is still there. I lived about, I don’t know, like a ten minute walk from it, and it was just classic. It’s like a classic mall. And Space Port as I recall it was just poorly made up to look like you were entering some sort of space station.

**John:** Were there some black lights?

**Craig:** Yeah, I think there were. I think there were. I think there were some black lights. There was that carpet that had planets and crap on it.

**John:** Oh yeah. Absolutely.

**Craig:** You know that carpet.

**John:** Yeah. It’s good stuff.

**Craig:** And then a lot of delinquents. But I really wanted to. But mostly my early gaming was limited to the Atari 2600 and then games that I could play on the Apple II.

**John:** Yeah. So this is where we sort of get into the John was raised in a cult thing because so much of what people will talk about in terms of their videogame history but also their popular cultural history I don’t have the references for somebody who is my actual age. It’s like I did not live through the same timeline. And so I don’t seriously believe I was actually raised in a cult or I have missing years, but things like H.R. Pufnstuf or Fraggle Rock, people will bring up these things. Like, “Oh my god, I loved that,” and I have no idea what it is you’re talking about. It just didn’t exist for me.

And part of it was growing up in Colorado, you know, in a pre-cable universe you only have what the local stations would carry. And sometimes they wouldn’t carry those things. But it is just strange that there’s stuff I don’t know about that everyone else my same age seems to know about.

**Craig:** Well, Fraggle Rock was HBO, right?

**John:** So that’s cable again. So I didn’t have cable TV.

**Craig:** Yeah. And so I think that that’s fair. I mean, if you couldn’t afford HBO – I mean, first of all in New York we didn’t even have cable. I think New York was like the last place to get cable for some weird reason. We had these odd forerunners to cable like scrambled broadcast networks like WHT and weird stuff like that.

But if you didn’t have cable then you did miss out on things like Fraggle Rock. Honestly, I think I’ve only seen one or two episodes of Fraggle Rock. That wasn’t a thing for me.

So H.R. Pufnstuf was slightly before us.

**John:** OK.

**Craig:** A little bit older. Or at least the bulk of it was I think. It was like early ‘70s. Super early ‘70s.

**John:** All right.

**Craig:** I mean, I remember seeing some of it but I wasn’t super into it either.

**John:** Obviously there’s stuff which is just based on geography, but clearly I think a bigger factor for me was that my father was inherently a contrarian and so if there was a thing that everyone else was getting he would do the research and get the other thing which he thought was better.

**Craig:** Ah. Yes.

**John:** So I never had an Atari 2600. Instead we had the Sears Pong game.

**Craig:** Oh dear.

**John:** Which I had to Google to make sure that it actually was a thing and it really was a thing. But Sears came out with their own version of Pong and that’s what we had on our little black and white TV. We never had an Apple II. Instead we were an Atari family, so we had the Atari 800, then the 400, then 600XL.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** So I would get whatever videogames would also be made for the Atari computer systems. But instead of Pac-Man we had Jaw Breaker.

**Craig:** [laughs]

**John:** We didn’t have Chop Lifter. We had something that was kind of like it. So we would always have these things that were approximations. Or games that my brother and I would have to type out of the magazine. So they’d have these games written in Basic and you would type them out of the magazine.

**Craig:** Oh yes. I remember those. I remember typing those.

**John:** Yeah. And then you’d save them. Once we had a cassette drive you would save them to a cassette drive and keep them there.

**Craig:** Yes. I remember. God, that brings me back. Typing them in. And that goes to show you how poor those games were in terms of their visual appeal because you could literally type them from a magazine into your computer. And save them on a cassette tape which was always fun to watch.

Yeah, I went down this memory lane about a month ago when we announced that we were doing The Last of Us because someone asked me what are your favorite videogames of all time. And so I had to go all the way back to kind of the beginning and ask like, OK, in the early days – because it’s easy for me to say like now I love, for instance, Fall Out and Bio Shock and GTA. That’s easy, right?

But in the beginning the first game that I remember falling in love with that pushed into my brain something was Adventure.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** On Atari. It was magical.

**John:** So, again, Adventure is a thing I never actually played myself. But I can picture it. I can just picture swinging across that little pit. But I could only play it at friend’s houses.

**Craig:** No, that was Pit Fall.

**John:** Oh, Pit Fall. Then I don’t what Adventure is. Oh, Adventure is the dot where you’re moving through the castle?

**Craig:** Yes. So Adventure is the dot.

**John:** Yeah, I never had it.

**Craig:** So it’s the dot. You have three castles depending on the difficulty level. There’s a white castle, a black castle, a gold castle. There’s a white dragon, a black dragon, and a gold dragon. The dragons looked like ducks. I don’t know how else to put it. They looked like ducks and they made this sound. [Groaning sound] And you had a sword which was a dash and a less than sign. I’m pretty sure. And you were a dot. And there was a bridge. The bridge is why the game was magical.

Never let anyone tell you that Adventure was magical because of the sword or the dragons. It was the bridge. And the reason why is the bridge allowed you to move through things you otherwise couldn’t get to. So there was like a little maze section that was sort of invisible. But as you moved through it would reveal itself. And you had to get from one part of the maze to the other, but there was no way to get there unless you had the bridge. The bridge allowed you to travel through an area you couldn’t. And that bridge was part of how you could start to screw with the game and go places you weren’t supposed to go and get your dot stuck in a corner. Or, get to the first real Easter egg of all time. So much fun.

So, Adventure was the first one that kind of lit me up. And never looked back. But I am concerned that you were not raised in a cult but rather you were manufactured and certain things were just left out. [laughs]

**John:** That’s entirely possible. And so I would say that during the time when I should have been playing some of these early videogames we had the proto Internet very early. My dad was an engineer for AT&T. And we had a terminal in our home where you could dial in and dial in to BBSs, Bulletin Board Systems. And so I was on that really early before most people were on that. And so the time in the afternoon when I would have normally been doing videogame stuff I was doing this.

And so message boards and chat boards and sort of chatting with people online. That’s probably how I got to be kidnapped into the cult. I do remember because unlike modern Internet where you just connect anytime you want, there were only a certain number of lines going into a bulletin board system and so you would get the busy signal a lot. And if I couldn’t get to the main bulletin board I wanted to get to I would try other bulletin boards. And so did join some bulletin board that I recognized along the way was some sort of religious kind of cult bulletin board. But I could always get into it. So I would log in there and check my email messages within that culty bulletin board.

**Craig:** That does sound like cult stuff. Yep. Yep.

**John:** But early videogames I did love from the Atari system we had, Karateka which is Jordan Mechner, and then ultimately we made a new version of Karateka with Jordan 20 or 30 years later. Castle Wolfenstein I loved.

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

**John:** A sense of story was great there. It was the first videogame I really played where I was a character in a story, which I loved. And they’re making a Wolfenstein now again. They will always make Wolfenstein.

**Craig:** Oh, they’ve made so – there’s been tons of them. And they’re quite elaborate now. But back in the day it was a flat green monitored scroller with levels walking upstairs. It was very similar to Aztec, another early game I played. And you had the key and you had to open the locker and it had a three-code digit. And they would occasionally say Kommen Sie. And you would have to shoot them with your little gun and it was, you know, it was – weirdly I got more enjoyment out of that then some of the new Wolfensteins which are rather elaborate and pretty impressive, like especially the one on the moon.

**John:** Now, Craig, have you gone back and tried to play any nostalgic games and what has been your experience going back to play those nostalgic games?

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Like the simulations or the–?

**Craig:** Sure. Like the mime simulator and all that stuff. It’s pleasant. It’s pleasant because it’s nostalgia. But rather than play it now what you can do it is instead of going through all that rigmarole – I don’t actually want to play it. I want to watch it.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So I was able – so the other game that I said early on was – there were a few. There was Adventure. There was Star Raiders. And there was Aztec. And so I went on YouTube and sure enough somebody had kind of a whole play through of Aztec which is – well when did Raiders come out? ’81? So somewhere in that zone of 1982ish this kind of copycat game called Aztec came out. And it was so much fun to watch it again and remember the enormous amount of time I spent playing it. But I don’t need to play it myself.

**John:** Yeah. Dark Castle, once I finally had a Macintosh.

**Craig:** Oh yeah, of course.

**John:** Was of course important and classic.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And the Atari game which was like – it was called Star Raiders – was the classic thing where like you warped to the next place and you have to defend your star bases. Loved it. It was all good. And that was actually a game that came on a cartridge.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Which made me feel like I was actually part of a videogame universe at that time when it was cartridge rather than having to load something up off a tape.

**Craig:** Star Raiders was a great game. So Star Raiders, like so many videogames, was inspired by a popular movie. It was clearly designed to look like you were in an [X-Wing] Fighter fighting [Thai fighters]. But it looked good. I mean, it was first person. There was like a reticule. And kind of the whole system was really brilliant. And it was just a great, great game. It’s funny how over time things have sort of flipped around.

For a long time they were trying to make Halo into a movie. And I always thought how do you make Halo into a movie when it’s a rip-off of a movie? I mean, it’s a great game. Don’t get me wrong. But it’s Aliens. It’s space marines fighting Xenomorphs and it’s Aliens. And there are a lot of games like that. Then you’re like, well, if I adapt it into a thing…

So, now that’s starting to change because videogames are getting more and more creative I think. And certainly more and more ambitious. And they’re taking you to places you wouldn’t otherwise go to and they’re also going to different time periods and historical periods. It’s fascinating. So, I mean, look, I think one of the reasons why videogame adaptations have struggled for so long is that people have been trying to adapt things that were already adaptations so there was a familiarity and tropiness to all of it. That could start to change. I hope it does.

**John:** This last week we rewatched Starship Troopers which I had not seen since it came out in theaters. And it was fascinating watching it because I had forgotten how Aliens Xenomorphy kind of it was. And so a lot of things I think as being, oh, that’s a thing that was established by Alien or Aliens, Starship Troopers also did quite a number on as well. It was a better movie than I certainly remembered it being.

**Craig:** Well, yeah. It’s this weird tongue and cheek quasi – it’s hard to tell if it knows it’s being funny. I think it does.

**John:** My take on it was that the filmmakers knew that they were funny and none of the actors knew that they were being funny. And that’s actually probably what makes it work is that the actors are so earnest in this absurd thing that they’re doing.

**Craig:** Yeah. “It’s afraid!” Yeah.

**John:** Good stuff.

**Craig:** Pretty cool.

**John:** Craig, so thank you for helping me deprogram my cult.

**Craig:** You will never be deprogrammed. You are the function of a program.

**John:** I am the program.

**Craig:** You are the program.

**John:** Thanks Craig. Bye.

**Craig:** See you next time.

 

Links:

* Join us Thursday, May 14th for a live talk with Lawrence Kasdan 4pm PT on Zoom here: [Online Conversation: Revisiting The Empire Strikes Back with Lawrence Kasdan](https://www.wgfoundation.org/events/all/2020/5/5/online-conversation-revisiting-the-empire-strikes-back-with-lawrence-kasdan)
* Submit to the [Three Page Challenge](https://johnaugust.com/threepage)
* [Jordan Mechner’s: The Making of Prince of Persia, 1985-1993](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005WUE6Q2/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0) and Bookshop.org
* [Maria Bamford: Weakness is the Brand](https://comedydynamics.com/catalog/maria-bamford-weakness-is-the-brand/)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by James Llonch ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/451standard.mp3).

What is a #writesprint?

March 19, 2020 General, How-To, Psych 101

A #writesprint is a timed writing session. For a set period — often 60 minutes but sometimes shorter — you sit down and focus all your attention on writing.

No checking Twitter. No Googling lyrics. No running to the kitchen for a snack.

Just write.

It doesn’t have to be screenwriting; you can #writesprint a term paper, a novel or a blog post. The important thing is that you’re writing *something you want or need to write.*

**A #writesprint is about showing up.** It’s designed to get your butt in the seat, fingers on the keyboard.

When the timer ends, stand up and walk away. You can come back to do more writing later, even another sprint, but definitely reward yourself for having done the work.

You can do a #writesprint by yourself, but it often helps to have the social pressure and accountability of others. I’ll occasionally announce on Twitter that I’m about to start a #writesprint:

https://twitter.com/johnaugust/status/1240315695331590144?s=20

If you want to write along with me, reply or favorite or just start. You never need permission. If you want to brag about how much you got done during your sprint, go for it!

### Frequently Asked Questions

**Do I need any special equipment or software?**
Not really. You can set a timer on your phone. If you’re using [Highland 2](https://quoteunquoteapps.com/highland-2/), the built-in Sprint function will keep track of your words, which is handy.

**Do I need to start at the top of the hour?**
No. It’s convenient but not necessary. When I was [writing the Arlo Finch books](https://johnaugust.com/2018/how-and-why-to-write-a-novel-in-highland-2), I found it useful to schedule two sprints a day, generally at 10am and 2pm.

**Can I use a #writesprint to do non-writing work?**
Of course! If it’s something you’re kind of dreading doing, but a timer and some social pressure helps, go for it.

**Where did this idea come from?**
I *might* have created the #writesprint hashtag, ((I’ve deleted my old tweets, but the earliest appearance of #writesprint is in 2011, which is when I started doing them.)) but I definitely got the idea from [Jane Espenson](https://twitter.com/JaneEspenson), who’s been doing these for years. (She calls them writing sprints, which sounds better but doesn’t hashtag as neatly.) And of course it shares a tradition with the [Pomodoro Technique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomodoro_Technique) and other productivity hacks.

**Will this really boost my productivity?**
If you’re spending a fixed amount of time at the keyboard concentrating on one thing to write, you’re going to get more accomplished than if you’re jumping between email and YouTube and various news sites. It’s like putting blinders on a horse. It keeps you focused.

**How short can a #writesprint be?**
You can get a lot done in just 10 minutes of focused writing. Don’t be afraid to set short sprints.

**Can I go longer than 60 minutes?**
If you’re in the flow and decide you want to keep working past the bell, that’s your choice. But don’t set out to write for more than 60 minutes. The idea of a sprint is that it’s intense and focused. It’s a different energy than a marathon.

« 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.