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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: hero main character protagonist

Scriptnotes, Ep 74: Three-Hole Punchdrunk — Transcript

February 1, 2013 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2013/three-hole-punchdrunk).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 74 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Craig, I hope you have Diet Dr. Pepper in hand, because we have a very busy show this week.

**Craig:** I’m opting for Diet Coke.

**John:** [gasps]

**Craig:** I feel like that gives me a little extra boost.

**John:** Well, you may need it, because we have five main topics today.

**Craig:** Oh god. Oh, god!

**John:** Can you handle it?

**Craig:** Yes! [laughs]

**John:** We’ll go through some feedback on the Raiders episode we did last week.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** We’ll segue to the results of the listener survey that we put up. And we had a bunch of people who wrote into that, so we want to get to some of the responses.

There’s a new report that just came out this last week that tallies up all the spec sales and pitches from 2012, which is kind of crazy that someone did that, but good for them.

I want to talk to you about a brand new type face called Courier Prime.

**Craig:** Exciting.

**John:** And we have three listener questions.

**Craig:** Great. That is a full docket. Let’s get to it.

**John:** Let’s get right to it. Well, let’s start with Raiders. So, last week we did a special episode which was just about Raiders of the Lost Ark. And it was just sort of a trial run, like what would it be like if we just talked about one movie the whole time. And people seemed to really dig it. I got a lot of good response on Twitter about that.

**Craig:** Yeah. I saw a lot of it. And I think my favorite comment was somebody was like, “Oh god, they’re just going to talk about a movie the whole time and it’s Raiders, and everybody has seen Raiders so who cares?” But they were like, “No, actually, it was really good.” [laughs] So, that was great to hear.

And I love talking about Raiders. I wish every podcast were about Raiders.

**John:** Yeah. Some podcasts should probably be just about Raiders. I’m sure there actually is a Raiders podcast. And we’ll find it and Stuart will link to it. But, what I really liked is people would write in with their theories about sweater guy. And sweater guy is the guy who puts the apple on the desk as he’s leaving, and they’re like, what is his deal, is he gay, what is it?

And so my favorite response was from Christopher Wilson who tweeted, “Raiders sweater guy has written ‘I love you’ on the apple, which Brody then reads and wipes off on his sleeve before pocketing it.”

**Craig:** Hmm. Interesting. Interesting. It’s not true…

**John:** Nope.

**Craig:** …but I wish it were.

**John:** That would be fantastic if it were. And I think in the ret-con version, I think if we were to go back and sort of redo it or see Indiana Jones from sweater vest guy’s perspective, that would be a very good explanation. The Rosencrantz and Guildenstern version of Raiders of the Lost Ark, that would be a feature film.

**Craig:** And what happened the days leading up to the apple incident. How he dealt with the aftermath of the apple incident.

The other thing that someone tweeted which I really liked, and I had never noticed it, and it’s funny how you just don’t see the things — and no matter how many times you’ve seen a movie you just miss these things. The famous shot of Indiana Jones going under the — in the beginning, when that wall is closing down on him and he rolls under it at the last second, then reaches back, grabs his hat, and then goes through again, the hat is actually dropped from above.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And somebody put a GIF on there and you can just watch it over and over. And once you see it, you cannot unsee it. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] Just ruined it.

**Craig:** I mean, everybody knows the shot of the snake that’s reflected in the protective glass between Indiana Jones and the snake. Everybody knows that goof. But that hat, how did I miss that? Incredible. Just incredible.

**John:** Sleight of hand. The GIF has ruined it for you. Or the “JIF.” And I guess you can pronounce it either way.

**Craig:** I say “GIF,” because it’s graphic interchange format, so it should be “GIF.”

**John:** I agree with you, but apparently the people who make it say it’s “JIF.” We’ll never resolve that issue as we will never resolve many sort of big, important movie issues.

**Craig:** I disagree with you; I think we just resolved it. And it’s “GIF.” [laughs]

**John:** So, one of the other things that happened on Twitter is I asked, well, if we were to do another one of these movie-centered episodes, what movie should we do? And, of course, a lot of people wrote in with responses.

It was interesting, a lot of people wrote in with like, “Do North by Northwest.” “Do Casablanca.”

**Craig:** Oh, come on.

**John:** And I say, “Oh, come on,” because realistically those are fantastic movies, but no one is going to be writing those movies now. I don’t think it’s actually a helpful exercise. And that’s why I get so frustrated when I see those brought up in, like, How to Write a Screenplay books, because those aren’t movies that people actually get made.

So, I think if we are to do another one of these in the future, and I think we should, it should be a more modern movie that reflects the kinds of movies that listeners are actually making these days.

**Craig:** Yeah. Plus, also, if you want to read insight or analysis of Casablanca, go pick up every single book on film ever written. It’s been done. We get it. There’s nothing left to say about those movies.

It’s far more interesting, I think, to hear an analysis of a film that perhaps academics don’t think is worthy of analysis or isn’t sufficient for analysis, but we who write movies for large mass audiences do think is valuable for analysis. Why would we ever, ever waste our time analyzing North by Northwest? What else is there to say?

**John:** Yeah, instead of Casablanca, I think it should be Caddyshack.

**Craig:** By the way, it would great to have fun with… — I mean, the thing is Caddyshack is actually really hard to analyze because the story is all over the place. I mean, for instance, if it were me, if I got to pick the next one, Groundhog Day. That would be fun to go through.

**John:** That is a great one. But Groundhog Day is done a lot, though. There’s a whole book on sort of — there’s a lot of stuff written about how Groundhog Day was made. That doesn’t mean it’s not a great movie and you can learn a lot from it. It’s a high concept comedy. That’s a good choice; you’re right.

I was going to — if we we’re going for comedy — I was going to go for Clueless which is just a brilliant movie. Or Animal House.

**Craig:** Yeah, I mean, there are so many that we could talk about. But, what we should never do is analyze the same old movies that everybody else analyzes, for all of the reasons that you’ve mentioned, and all the reasons I’ve mentioned. So, there — there is your dose of umbrage for the day. Come on!

**John:** Now, one of the readers also sent through this script page which is apparently from Harrison Ford’s actual script from Raiders of the Lost Ark. And I guess the backstory is that at some point this original script was up for auction, and so online there were scans of some pages, or photos of some pages. Now, I haven’t found a link yet from some other site that has it, because I kind of want to post it up ourselves, something that’s not really supposed to be out there in the world. But this page was really interesting, and what I liked about it was it was actually a page that we talked about in the podcast.

This is the moment where Indiana Jones is talking to the two Army guys and they’re in the big lecture hall. So, I want to read a little of what’s actually written in the script and then we can talk about some of the notes that Harrison Ford has scribbled on the script which I think are important as well. So, this is page 18, at least what I’m reading.

“…through rings in the corner of the Ark. The painting is…” So, he must be talking about the book. Basically the book has been flipped open and you see the Ark and the painting of the Ark. “The painting is very dramatic, full of smoke, tumult and sinewy dying men. But the most astonishing thing in the picture is the brilliant jet of white light and flame issuing from the wings of the angels. It pierces deep into the ranks of the retreating enemy, wrecking devastation and terror.”

So, it’s a very kind of literary block of scene description there, but it really gives you a very good sense of what that drawing is ultimately going to be in the book, and why the other characters are responding to it in that way.

This is the section where Indiana Jones says, “Lightning…fire…the power of God.” What I like about the handwritten notes in this is it says, “Imp,” which I think means important, and the question is, “Is Indy a believer?”

**Craig:** Oh! There we go!

**John:** “Where in bible?” And it’s scratching out some lines and it’s suggesting alts for things. And it’s just fascinating to look at while they were making the movie, these are the kind of questions that do come up on set. And as you’re on set working on Hangover II, or Hangover III, that kind of stuff does come up and that’s why it’s so valuable to have you as the writer on set is that you can say like, “Why am I doing this right here? What if I did this thing? What’s important about this scene?”

Even as you’re making a movie you’re asking these questions, and sometimes those questions get reflected in the text of the scene you’re shooting probably that day.

**Craig:** Well, yeah, and first of all the question that he asks, “Is Indy a believer?” goes right to the heart of what you and I were talking about last week. That is the core of the movie. And the answer to that question, for me at least in that point in the movie is, no, he’s not, but he will be.

And it’s interesting that… — If you want to be a screenwriter, this is the way you have to think about movies. It is quite likely that no one sitting in the movie theater, save for a very select few people, ever watched Indiana Jones and thought this is a movie about faith, and belief, and this is a movie about one man’s journey from skepticism and scientificism to religiosity or spirituality.

But that’s what it is. For the actor who has to play the part, he must understand in those moments why he’s saying the things he’s saying, or else it just will be bad acting. And no matter what the movie is, actors need to understand what they’re saying and why they’re seeing it in the moment.

And because they are performing the character, inevitably they’re going to come to a line that is not consistent with the way they’ve been performing everything else. And in those moments, those lines get tested by everybody before you shoot, you know, on the day. “Why am I saying this? It doesn’t feel right.”

And when you’re a screenwriter on set, the last thing you can say is, “Well, I don’t care how it feels. That’s what I wrote. I believe it’s right. Just do it.” You’ll get a terrible line reading, or you’ll get an angry actor. Either way, it’s not productive. So, the question you have to ask yourself is: Is this person correct? Is the line reading incorrect for…is it inconsistent with the character I intend? Or, is the line inconsistent with the character that I intended as currently being portrayed by this actor? Or, is the actor just wrong?

And if the actor is wrong, part of our job is to explain our intention and see if they agree. Sometimes it’s that no one is wrong. It’s just that this other person is a human being and they need to make it feel real. And if it’s not real to them, you have to rewrite it so that it is real to them. Otherwise it’s going to stink.

So, for instance, at the bottom of the page, why don’t you read what it says there.

**John:** “Indy goes and shuts window, lost in thought.” That part? Or, the “Oh, please.”

**Craig:** Yes. Exactly. [laughs] So, what Indiana Jones as scripted is supposed to say…

**John:** “Most certainly.”

**Craig:** …in response to the CIA guy. And Harrison Ford wrote next to that, “Oh, please,” because in his mind he’s like, “That’s not how Indiana Jones is going to talk. That’s not consistent with the character that I’m building in my mind. That’s not going to be consistent with my performance.”

Now, sometimes as screenwriters this hurts. You’re Larry Kasdan. You’re an amazing writer, and here’s a guy going, “Oh, please,” in response to some line you’ve written. But, by the same token, it’s an emotional response, and it’s just as emotional for them as it is for us when somebody suggests a line to us and we think in our minds, “Oh, please. That’s ridiculous.”

But, you have to be able to trust the people you’re with and even give them room to be a little brusque, because everybody… — The thing that scares us the most — and “us” includes writers, directors, and actors — is being embarrassed by the totally wrong thing. And that fear oftentimes comes out in a bit of a harsh way.

**John:** That’s true. What I’ll go back to with actors needing to change things on set is the challenge as a writer, and a director, and a producer, when you have actors who are trying to change lines is the actors are sometimes not aware, or sometimes they are aware but they’re being sort of deliberately blind to the fact that if they change their lines then all of the other lines change, too.

And that can be a very difficult situation on sets where writers just have to sort of negotiate between these actors who are starting to change their lines and suddenly it becomes a less-than-happy situation.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** On good sets, with good actors, it’s a delight. And everyone is finding the exact right moments and they’re handing lines to other actors because they’re like, “I don’t need to say this, you can say this instead,” and everything is happy and joyful.

Sometimes it’s not that situation.

**Craig:** That’s right. And what you’re looking for, hopefully, in your creative partners and the main cast certainly fits that bill, you’re looking for people who act in good faith. We don’t always agree about things, but everybody should be working towards the notion that they want the movie to be good.

There are times when actors, and writers, and directors, behave badly. And they put their ego first, or considerations that have nothing to do with the movie first. And when those things happen they are toxic and they often ruin movies.

And they are scary. I mean, we’ve all — anybody who makes movies has been through those situations and they’re very, very difficult. Very difficult. I would so much rather have an incredibly, physically arduous shoot of difficult material with people that are working together than an easy, slam-dunk, walk-in-the-park movie production where the two main actors don’t see eye-to-eye about what the movie is supposed to be, who the star is, who the hero is.

I mean, I’ve sat in rooms with actors while they explain to me what their vision for the character was, and I thought in my head, “Oh no! They think they’re the protagonist. OH NO! What do I do now?” That’s a rough one.

**John:** Luckily in this situation we have Harrison Ford who is playing Indiana Jones. He is clearly the hero of the movie. And he seems to be making the right choices and asking the right questions. So, maybe it’s just one more sign of how Raiders of the Lost Ark became so good.

**Craig:** Yeah. And you can even see on that page that he circles a big chunk of dialogue and gives it to Denholm Elliott.

**John:** Yeah. Nice of him to do.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** All right. Topic two. Two weeks ago on the podcast we asked, “Hey, we are trying to do a survey of who our listeners are and figure out what is interesting to them about the podcast, what we could be doing better, where these people live.” We asked like eight questions and so many people wrote in with responses.

As we’re recording this show we have 1,811 responses, which is nuts. So, thank you so much to everybody who chimed in and gave us their opinion. If you still want to do it, the survey form is still up there. It’s johnaugust.com/survey. And you can weigh in with your thoughts, and there is also a free response section.

But I thought we’d run through some of the stats. There will also be a link to the PDF that shows all the stats at johnaugust.com.

Geography: This was different than I would have guessed. So, we asked, “Where do you live?” And 30% roughly of our listeners live in Los Angeles, which is understandable because that’s where a lot of movies are made. Somewhere outside of Los Angeles but still in the US is 46%. The UK is 9%. And somewhere else in the world is 16%.

**Craig:** That’s still pretty high though, right?

**John:** It is high. But I would have guessed the somewhere-else-in-the-world would have been higher than that. That’s just based on the questions that actually come into the podcast are, I would say, almost 50% sort of international readers. So, I was surprised that we are still so North American centric.

**Craig:** Well, maybe it is that for those people who live elsewhere we are the most convenient place to ask questions.

**John:** That’s a very good point. See, you’re providing answers. I like that, Craig.

**Craig:** Yeah, you know, I’m here for solutions.

**John:** Most of our listeners listen every week. 72% said they listen every week.

**Craig:** That’s gratifying.

**John:** That’s so gratifying. So, I wondered whether people were cherry picking based on the kinds of things we talk about, but it sounds like most people really do listen every week. And most of our listeners have been listening since the beginning, or nearly the beginning. 62% said they’ve been listening right from the start, which is great.

**Craig:** That is good.

**John:** At least 62% of the people who filled out this survey, I should say. There could be a selection bias there because it’s our really dedicated listeners were the people who filled out the survey, but still, that’s awesome.

This was surprising to me. “Do you currently make your living in film or television?” 32%, yes.

**Craig:** Now, I am surprised that that’s actually that high. Are you surprised that it’s that high or that low?

**John:** I am surprised it’s that high.

**Craig:** Yeah. Me too. And it’s cool. I mean, look, you know, sometimes we talk about stuff that really is only applicable to people that make their living in film and television. And I think, “Oh, what are we doing if only 4% of people listening actually care?” So, it was very cool to see that the number was as high as a third.

And, you know, the great majority of the rest want to work in the business.

**John:** Yes. 57% want to work in film or television. I guess, keep in mind that the “yes”s in that 32%, those could also be people who are working as assistants at places, who are working in those very entry-level jobs, which is great too. So they can also be people who are still aspiring screenwriters, but they are currently working at least in some aspect of the industry.

**Craig:** You’re right. Yes, you’re right. We may have a lot of assistants there, but they count.

**John:** Assistants count. Assistants are awesome.

Next question was, “How do you listen to the show?” 23% of listeners listen directly on johnaugust.com. That is, they go to the blog, they press play there, and listen to it playing in the browser. 16% listen to it just directly on iTunes. 47%, so almost half of the people, are listening to it on the iPhone or i-gizmo. Android, only 5%.

**Craig:** Yeah, well, you know, because Android stinks. And I like to think that the people that listen to us are cool and understand that things that are technological and aesthetic rip-offs should not be rewarded. [laughs]

**John:** See, what’s so unfair, Craig, is that I’m the one who actually has to check the email account, so when people write their angry things I’m the person who sees all those. Actually, well, Stuart sees them. Eh, Stuart can deal with it.

**Craig:** You know what, Stuart? Enjoy. Enjoy the avalanche from the 5% on their goofy Android devices.

**John:** They’re a very loud 5%. I will say that your Twitter handle is @clmazin, so if Android users want to talk to you about Android usage they can do that right there.

**Craig:** Yeah, bring the noise from your little pieces of plastic. Go ahead.

**John:** This was also important and surprising to us is that 35% of people do read the show’s transcripts, or at least sometimes read the show’s transcripts. So, every episode of the show has a transcript where Stuart and other folks have actually typed out everything we’ve said — god bless them.

And so we were wondering, “Well, is that good? Is that useful? Are people finding it helpful?” And people are apparently finding it helpful. So, if you don’t look at the transcripts, here’s what I can tell you: Every Tuesday we come out with an episode. Usually by Thursday, sometimes by Friday we have the transcript ready and up. That transcript shows up as a link at the bottom of the post, the original post on johnaugust.com.

You click through that link and it shows up as a special post that has all the text. And so if you are someplace where you can’t listen to the podcast but you want to read up on it, that’s an opportunity.

**Craig:** By the way, how do you listen to the show?

**John:** I listen to it on my iPhone with Instacast, which I think is the best podcasting app for the iPhone.

**Craig:** Interesting. I’m one of the 23% that listens to it directly on johnaugust.com, although I’m also one of the 35% that sometimes just reads the transcripts.

**John:** Ah. And how do you find the transcripts, because I honestly don’t read them. I just don’t have the time in the day to actually look through. Stuart sort of proofs them. Do you find them largely accurate?

**Craig:** Yeah. For sure. I mean, occasionally you see some slightly goofy typo or something in there, but by and large they’re very accurate. And I have to say the two of us come off so well in transcript form.

**John:** Ha! [laughs]

**Craig:** There’s something about the text that strips away all the goofiness. And I will also say you and I have a tendency to speak in complete sentences, which isn’t something you always see, or hear.

**John:** I want to answer in a complete sentence somehow because you just said that.

**Craig:** And you just did.

**John:** I did. Thank goodness.

Next question was about the Three Page Challenge, because I was curious whether people like it, don’t like it so much, they get sick of it. We try to space them out. We try to never do two Three Page Challenges week after week, because that’s just a lot we know. And some people don’t want to be able to do it.

But 35% of people say they love it, so that’s great. And 60%…58% of people say it’s just fine at the current levels, so don’t do it any more, don’t do it any less. And so we will keep doing them, but I think we will keep spacing them out; so, we don’t want to do it every week.

Some people had suggested like, “Oh, maybe just do one at the end of every show.” That doesn’t feel right either. I think we will keep them as sort of blocks, and some weeks we’ll have some of them, and most weeks won’t.

**Craig:** Sounds good to me.

**John:** People have asked for more guests. Well, you’re in for a treat because we are going to have more guests coming in soon, as soon as next week in fact.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** This was an interesting question we had to do a little more digging on. So, we asked, “If we were to do another live session like the one we did in Austin, would you come?” And 54% of people said probably not. But then when you actually looked through the responses of people who live in Los Angeles, a ton of people would. So, it sounds like we could probably schedule one of these for Los Angeles, and we should try to do that at some point.

**Craig:** Yeah. That would be fun to do. It would be nice to meet the Scriptnotes Army. Should we have some…you know, like Lady Gaga has her Little Monsters and stuff, shouldn’t we have some sort of name for the people who listen to us, other than nerds, you know, ScriptNerds.

**John:** ScriptNerds, yeah. We could also probably have tee-shirts. I’ll talk to Ryan about tee-shirts, because tee-shirts are awesome.

**Craig:** Sell tee-shirts like we’re at a concert. I like it.

**John:** I like it. We need a big tee-shirt cannon to shoot it to the back rows.

**Craig:** That’s the vibe we’re going for!

**John:** Totally. It’s a party vibe. And finally we asked about how old people were. And our audience is largely, like 47% is between 25 and 35. 38% is over 35. So, we don’t have a lot of teenagers, which is great.

**Craig:** Yeah. Because, frankly, teenagers are annoying and stupid.

**John:** Yeah. That’s @clmazin on Twitter.

**Craig:** [laughs] Yeah. All these teenagers with their Android devices. We don’t need you. Keep not listening. Don’t want you.

**John:** Now, we also had a section for sort of free comments, where people could write in and say whatever they wanted to say about anything. And so the most common thing filled in the little box was “Thank you.” It’s like, “Oh, how lovely!” People are so nice.

There were a couple of comments that sort of came at both sides a lot, so, more umbrage/less umbrage. I think we have plenty of umbrage.

**Craig:** [laughs] The great thing about umbrage is I just don’t care. I think the only way to have gotten more umbrage out of me is if 98% of people had said less umbrage.

**John:** Yeah, some common comments, I had Stuart sort of go through, because there were so many to look for. So I asked Stuart to sort of find common themes and threads. So, here’s his sort of sampler platter:

He said that some folks say we’re too kind. We shouldn’t be afraid to disagree with each other or say when we don’t like something. I think I speak up when I don’t agree with you.

**Craig:** Yeah. For sure. I’m pretty sure that you hate my guts. I’m not sure what they’re talking about. I mean, sometimes they may think that we are over-agreeing with each other on these Three Page Challenges, but I think that’s only because usually there’s a right answer to those Three Page Challenges. Usually they are good or they are bad. I mean, we both do the same job. We’ve both been doing it for awhile. There’s a reason we have a podcast together.

I mean, and you know, I like you.

**John:** Aw…Craig!

**Craig:** [laughs]

**John:** Some listeners said that they wanted to bring back comments, and that must be reflecting the blog, because I used to have comments turned on on the blog. I turned off the comments on the blog and I’m just so much happier without comments, so those aren’t coming back.

But, if you want to respond to something that happens on the podcast, send us an email ask@johnaugust.com, or just tweet us directly: @johnaugust or @clmazin.

People asked for chapter marks or section time stamps.

**Craig:** That’s a good idea.

**John:** Yeah, it’s a good idea. I did that for the flashback episode, the one where we did stuff from previous episodes. So, we’ll try to get chapter markers in, and maybe this episode will actually have some chapter markers in it.

People said that Lindsay Doran is amazing, and gosh, she really is just great.

Since the show started people say that they’ve had various things of success and they couldn’t have done it without us, which was lovely. So, thank you. If you have a success story and we’ve been helpful, a lot of you have been writing nice emails. And so thank you for that and continue to write those nice emails, because it does give us warm fuzzy feelings.

**Craig:** Yeah. And tell us your story, too. I mean, it would be cool if somebody had a success story and we actually did have some slight bit of help with it, tell us the story. We’ll read it.

**John:** Regarding the Three Page Challenge, a common comment was something like, “I don’t read along with you. Instead I read them myself and then I see if I agree with you.” That’s a great strategy. So, if you’re tuning in for a Three Page Challenge and you have the opportunity to, I might stop the podcast, print those pages, read them, and then look along with us. Because if you are just listening to what we’re going to say, by the time you read the PDFs you’re probably going to agree with us. But it’s great to sort of develop your eyes and your ears for sort of what the good and the bad things about some of these scripts are. But, looking at them yourself and then seeing if we agree with your opinions.

**Craig:** Yeah. Smart idea.

**John:** People asked for a ten-page challenge, an act one challenge, a full script challenge. That’s not going to happen.

**Craig:** No!

**John:** Sorry. That’s a terrifying amount of work.

**Craig:** Not as long as I’m on this podcast!

**John:** [laughs] People have said, “Do an episode with some of the worst Three Page Challenges submitted and why they’re bad.” And this is a misunderstanding of, I think, the point of the Three Page Challenge. And also Stuart really is picking some of the best ones. And so he’s not deliberately, like, throwing the turkeys in there. There are some really, really bad ones. And I don’t think that really helps people.

I think what probably helps people is saying like, “This is what was promising about this, and this was what didn’t work about this.” Or, “This was just so fantastic and here’s why it’s fantastic.” It’s easy to write something terrible.

**Craig:** I saw that suggestion and I have to say part of me thought it might not be a bad experiment to try, and what we’ll do is we can leave off the names of the people so it’s not so personally gross for them, but the possible value is if people are listening and they hear us say, “Okay, so let’s talk about why these are huge, fundamental mistakes,” maybe they’d think, “Oh, I’m making that mistake right now.”

So, that’s one reason that we might want to do just like a horror show Three Page Challenge one week, just to kind of talk about some of the real glaring mistakes people make.

**John:** But here’s my problem with that. Anyone who sent in that Three Page Challenge, they are a listener to the show, so of the — who knows how many listeners we have — that one person is going to tune into that episode and see us saying that this a terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible sample, and how is that person going to feel?

I just feel like there’s sort of compact of trust that has been entered into by sending it into us. I just don’t want to…

**Craig:** That’s a good point. You’re right. You’re right.

**John:** All right. I’m the nice one.

**Craig:** [laughs] So true.

**John:** People wrote in to say do a prompt-based challenge, which I think is sort of going back to — I used to do on the blog the scene challenge, where I would say, “Write me a scene that takes place in a laundromat and involves this kind of thing.” And so people would write in, in the comments, they’d write in this little scene that did that. And I would get like 200 of them. And it was exciting to do for awhile, and then it just got to be such an incredible drain.

I worry that with as many listeners as we have right now, it would just be unmanageable.

**Craig:** I don’t even like that kind of stunt writing anyway. You know, that’s like…I don’t like it. [laughs] That’s as articulate as I can be. I don’t like it.

**John:** So, we had a couple topic requests that I wanted to respond to. One topic was what to do when you first move to LA — where to live, where to get a job, how to approach your contacts out there — which I think is a really good general topic. So, we should do that sometime, sort of that first, you-just-arrived kind of thing. And that might be a good topic for a special guest, like a newer writer who is just getting started.

We had a lot of requests for certain kinds of guests, for directors, and writer-directors, and people in different things. And you’re going to see a lot more of that this year.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** We had a specific request to do a cross-panel with the Nerdist Writer’s Panel, and that’s something we actually talked about with Ben Blacker. And that show is great. We love them. So, if we can find something to work out this year to do with them, that would be great.

And last topic was they really want Stuart on the podcast at some point.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, at some point it does seem like he’s got to be on the podcast.

**John:** I just feel like Stuart is sort of our Maris from Frasier. And that if you actually reveal who she is at this point it sort of spoils everything.

**Craig:** Well, what if we just have Stuart on the way that Marcel Marceau is in Mel Brooks’ Silent Movie. You know, he was the only person that said something and he said one word or something, [laughs] and then left.

**John:** Well, here’s the thing. Stuart actually is in every podcast. He’s just downstairs, you just don’t hear him. So, he really is part of every podcast.

**Craig:** He lives and breathes through ever second of this.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Good point. Yeah, maybe, see, I’m the nice one now because I’m feeling like, “Oh, it would be nice to talk to Stuart.” But then, you know, I also feel like here’s what’s going to happen: People are going to listen to Stuart and they’re going to go, “Nah, I liked him so much better when he was a man of mystery.”

**John:** Yeah. Stuart is sort of a man of mystery, but this last weekend I went to a party at his house, and there’s a whole separate podcast which is just talking about Stuart’s crazy, insane house that was clearly built by 1980s drug dealers and is somewhere on the top of a mountain in East Los Angeles. It was just fascinating.

It was also fascinating to do some introspection on myself as a 42-year-old at a party of like young 20-somethings and what that is like.

**Craig:** Yeah, you know, you can’t go back.

**John:** No, you can’t go back. But, we can go forward. And let’s go forward to our next topic which is…

**Craig:** What a segue!

**John:** I’m just getting so much better a year into this whole podcasting thing.

A reader — thank you so much reader for sending this to me — sent this thing called the Scoggins Report. And it’s done by Jason Scoggins and Cindy Kaplan. And there will be a link to it, and there’s a PDF you can download.

But what it is is they’ve taken all the spec sales and pitch sales from the year and calculated them up by studio and by agency and sort of genre and sort of what happened over the course of the year. And god bless you for sort of quantifying this information that would otherwise go missed. They call it a “terribly unscientific analysis of Hollywood’s movie development business.” And I think that’s the way to really look at it. I wouldn’t look for the exact percentages, but you can definitely notice some trends among what’s actually selling in Hollywood.

So, you got a quick chance to look at this, but I want to highlight a few things. The top buyer of spec scripts this last year was Paramount, and spec scripts and pitches was also Paramount. So, Paramount bought 20 specs and pitches this year, tied with Universal when you factor in pitches as well. That’s a lot. And that’s compared to like the lowest of the big studios was Fox with six. So, Paramount was buying a lot more.

The agencies that sold specs, William Morris sold the most specs according to this listing. UTA, then CAA, then APA, then Paradigm.

**Craig:** Yeah. That was actually interesting to me. The studio buyers, I think, kind of wobbles up and down each year. Sometimes one is on top, sometimes the other. I mean, for instance, they called out Warner Bros. as having really reduced the amount that they bought and suddenly Paramount really increased the amount they bought. And sometimes that just has to do with their own development cycles. So, sometimes they have a development cycle where they’re like, “We’re short on original material. Let’s just buy stuff this year.”

But that means next year they won’t as much. The total number of spec sales for 2012 was 132. In 2011, it was 132. [laughs] So, there is actually incredible stability to the overall appetite for specs. I was surprised by the sellers, the piece of data you just called out there. William Morris sold 35 specs. UTA sold 24. CAA only 16. That’s a fascinating number. I suspect that part of that has to do with the fact that CAA represents a lot of writers who do a lot of assignment work. And that William Morris may be willing to take more of a flyer on writers who are younger, or breaking in, or newer, or just more oriented to selling speculative material.

That was an interesting number to me. I mean, CAA’s numbers are quite low, frankly.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And when you look at combining specs and pitches, CAA’s number comes up quite bit, but William Morris doubles — nearly doubles — to 62. So, William Morris seems to be far and away the most entrepreneurial agency when it comes to selling specs and original material.

**John:** Now, one thing to keep in mind is that it’s not always clear how they’re getting their data. Are they getting data based on what gets reported in the trades? Or are they talking to individual people at studios?

For example, Fox only listed six scripts sold, but is mine one of them? Because I have a project that’s sort of at Fox that’s, you know, it’s a spec, it’s at Fox, but it’s sort of a special/unique situation. So, am I one of those six or am I not one of those six? It’s hard to know.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** I guess I could probably look at the end notes and figure it out, but I’m just spitballing.

What is probably more useful for most of our readers is to take a look at spec sales by genre, because what they do is they break down into six rough categories and see what percentage of sales came from the different genres. So, the most common genre for a sale this last year was thrillers. 27% of spec sales were thrillers. 22% were action-adventure movies. 21% were comedies. 11% were science-fiction. 10% were horror. And 8% were drama.

So, that 8% drama, that feels true. Selling a drama spec is very, very tough these days. Horror and thriller, I think, kind of overlap a lot, so I’d be curious sort of where the distinction is made between those two. But, I would say those numbers feel kind of true to what gets sold, not necessarily always what gets made, but to what gets sold among specs.

**Craig:** Yeah. And one thing to remember when you’re looking at numbers like this is that the numbers are skewed somewhat by the nature of the original material versus material that’s adapted. Thrillers tend to be original because there frankly aren’t a lot of underlying properties that specifically fall into the thriller category. So, we know that when it comes to things like comedy or action-adventure or sci-fi, a lot of times there is underlying material. There’s an article, there’s a remake, there’s a sequel, whatever it is.

Thrillers, there’s not — it doesn’t seem like there’s a lot of, for whatever reason, thrillers that people are interested in adapting. Most of the stuff I see out there for adaptations are sort of in the adventure area, or sci-fi, or comedy. So, that may be part of why thrillers are so high. I mean, in short, they buy more thriller specs because they have less other avenues to generate thriller material.

**John:** Yeah. I also have to say: dramas, even though we make very few dramas over all, I would say most of the dramas we make tend to be based on books and sort of big sell, big books that sold out of New York. So, it’s not surprising that of spec script sales there aren’t going to be a lot of them.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** And I just did a quick check, and no, the script that I have at Fox did not show up on this thing, so there could be seven for Fox. The numbers could be off a little bit.

**Craig:** Bump Fox up to seven.

**John:** So, if you are thinking about a spec, if you are thinking about a pitch, I think it’s worth taking a look at. This is just how the movie business worked this year. I would say most writers these days are doing both film and television, so your career is not sort of pigeonholed into one or the other as much as it used to be, but useful to take a look at.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I just want to give one final caveat, because I was talking about this actually on DoneDealPro the other day in terms of specs: You could look at this report and say, “Well, if I wanted to be a spec selling machine I would have an agent at William Morris, I would have a manager at Energy,” — which is a company with which I was up until this day unfamiliar — “I would be selling that script to Paramount or Universal. And it would be a thriller.”

However, please note that Paradigm sold the fewest specs, and say Fox bought the fewest specs, and say drama represented the genre of the fewest specs, and yet they exist and sales occurred. In the end, this is interesting to look at, but honestly irrelevant to you, because if you’ve written something that you love, that’s what you write. And if you love your agent, that’s who he is. And if there’s a company that’s really into it, that’s the company.

So, don’t chase. I guess that’s my advice: Don’t chase this stuff. The best agent to sell your spec is the agent who represents the spec you’ve written who loves it. Simple as that.

**John:** I agree. I would also remind listeners that a spec script might sell, but if the spec script doesn’t sell it is a writing sample that gets you a job, and gets you hired for another bit of work. And so writing the thing that you can write the best is always going to be your best option.

**Craig:** Yeah. For sure. So don’t chase.

**John:** Don’t chase.

Topic four. I think we’re at four. Maybe it’s five. Our next topic is type faces. And so, Craig, I think we may have talked about this on the podcast before. In my career and life before I became a screenwriter I was actually a graphic designer. And so I was the kid who walked around campus with the box of fonts. I had like the 3.5-inch floppies. It was full of fonts. And back in those days you had your bitmap fonts and you had your laser writer fonts. And I was the one who had sort of the alternate versions of things.

I was a big font nerd. And then I entered into a career in which my entire output is 12-point Courier, which is just…I don’t know if you can really say it’s irony, but it’s just sort of sad. It’s just sort of sad that I love fonts so much and most of my work was coming out in a really not-attractive Courier face. To the degree that when I bought my first laser printer, which was back when I was at USC, I hated the Courier that was in it so much because it was super really thin Courier, that I actually had this utility that pulled the outlines out of the printer and I used Fontographer to make myself my own Courier, which I called Dorphic. And my first scripts are printed in Dorphic.

So, if you actually look at my original things, like Here and Now, they’re printed in a face that basically looked like Courier, but it’s a little bit jagged, it’s a little bit off, and it’s Dorphic. And that was like my own little type face.

And so I used that for several years and then eventually Courier started looking better. I liked the standard Mac Courier. It was fine. And for awhile I was just satisfied with that. But now I’m not really satisfied. So, a couple months ago a very talented font designer named Alan Dauge-Greene wrote to me. He said, like, “Hey, would you ever be interested in doing a custom font for any of your app stuff?”

I said, “You know what I really want? What I want more than anything else? I want a much better version of Courier.” And so I’m so excited because now it exits. We made a type face called Courier Prime. And I had just sent you the webpage that sort of announces it, so you’ve had a chance to take a look at that.

**Craig:** I have. And John, how much is this new Courier type face going to cost me, the consumer?

**John:** Would you believe that it will cost you absolutely nothing?

**Craig:** What?! [laughs]

**John:** It’s completely free.

**Craig:** I mean, how cool are you guys? It is a really nice looking, I mean, I also — it drives me nuts. And I hate Courier. Courier is aggressively ugly. It is a pointless tradition as far as I’m concerned. I would love for you and your elves to figure out how we can get a fixed width font that looks cool and doesn’t look like butt, which is what Courier looks like. But while we’re all stuck with Courier, it is a much nicer Courier.

And the Courier marketplace is getting really confused, because when I started writing screenplays it was just Courier. And then there was Courier New. And there was Final Draft Courier. And there was Movie Magic Courier. And there are all different Couriers. And I never understood what’s the difference between all of these.

And they didn’t always match up right, you know, like suddenly if you changed Courier and then you moved to another program you get pages moving up and down. So, this sounds like a great universal solution to all of that.

Your Courier is cool. I already have it installed on my computer and I think it looks great. But can’t you just make a better one? Like a better font?

**John:** So, here’s the thing: I think Courier gets knocked because it so often is so incredibly ugly. And it was designed for an age of typewriters. And it is a mono-space font. Mono-space fonts have great qualities to them that things will always line up and every character can actually fit the same space. But they have some drawbacks.

They tend to be not as readable because your eye likes to see some differences between letter widths, and there’s not a lot of color on the page.

I think Courier for — first off, if you have Courier New installed anywhere on our computer, just get rid of it. It’s just the worst the worst face ever.

**Craig:** So bad.

**John:** Just the worst. A couple sort of unique challenges for any type face that is designed for screenwriters, and Courier Prime is specially designed for screenwriting. So, you could use it for coding. You could use it for a letter you’re sending to your grandma. But the reason why we did it for screenwriting is if you actually look at page of a screenplay, there’s actually not a lot of text on the page. There’s a lot of white space.

And so most Couriers look kind of thin and the page looks kind of — doesn’t have a lot of good color to it. You want something a little bit bolder. So, we were able to beef it up just a little bit more than you would normally see for a Courier. The letters are just a tiny bit fatter. The other thing we could take advantage of is like resolution of not just printers, but also your screen has increased as well. So, we’re able to open up the space inside letters a little bit more, and it just gives a little bit more — I don’t know — it helps the readability and it makes it look a little bit nicer and more inviting on the page.

The other thing we did, which I’m surprised that more Couriers haven’t done along the way, is right now Courier, basic Mac Courier and Courier Final Draft, for their italics they just slant the letters. What we did is we created a true italic where the font actually looks better and different when you go into italics.

**Craig:** I know. It’s cool. I like that a lot.

**John:** So, the lower case “f” is sort of the classic example of this, is that it really sort of leans forward in a kind of scripty sort of way. And yet everything matches fine. So, we had to pick metrics so that things wouldn’t break and that you could feel safe swapping it. So, we matched the metrics of Courier Final Draft. It just looks a lot better.

**Craig:** Yeah. Good job. I mean, and what a lovely service for you to provide to the screenwriting community. I hope it is wholeheartedly adapted by many.

**John:** Thanks. Cool. And so if you go to Apps, there is a link there for Courier Prime. It’s free to download. You can install it on Mac or on PC. If you’re installing it on Windows, it works great. If you’re using it with Windows Final Draft, there are some special warnings because Final Draft does crazy things, because Final Draft has to do crazy things. So, there are some special caveats for you there. But, you’re free to use it in any way you want to do it. And we have it on a very open license, so if you are an app developer who wants to use it inside your app, you can do that with immunity.

**Craig:** Cool.

**John:** Cool.

Lastly, we’re getting into some questions. First question comes from April in Ohio. She writes, “A few months ago a friend of a friend of a friend said he would help me make some industry contacts, but I would have to contact them through Facebook. Their friend followed through and I’m currently Facebook ‘friends’ with several people working in the industry. Most of them are mainly actors, but a few work in other areas as well. I haven’t had any ‘conversations’ with these contacts via Facebook because I’m not really sure how to approach them. What’s the proper etiquette to reach out to somebody through social media?”

**Craig:** Oh, I mean, you know, you just send them a message and just say, “Hi, my name is so-and-so. I’m a friend of so-and-sos. I’m sorry to bother you.” You know, just be very humble and polite. And just ask your question and don’t expect an answer. And if you get one, you know, respond politely. Don’t stalk. Don’t be a weirdo. You know, the usual stuff.

**John:** Yeah, that’s exactly my approach. And I’m barely on Facebook. I don’t sort of accept friend requests from people on Facebook, but I’m very much on Twitter. And so sometimes people will send me something on Twitter and if I’m in the right mood for it, and it strikes me right, I might watch their little movie on Vimeo or read their blog post. That kind of stuff is fine as long as you feel like you’re just being, you know, appropriately respectful to what the relationship is, then it’s great.

So, I wouldn’t be afraid of doing it with those people. If they are, you know, friends of friends of friends, and they’re some actor who like occasionally works on a TV show, it’s unlikely that that person is going to be a huge asset to you as an aspiring screenwriter, but that doesn’t mean that you can’t like their video when they show up in something, or just participate a little bit in their online life.

**Craig:** Yeah. You know, the Twitter thing is great because everybody is forced to write as concisely as possible, so you’re never stuck with these long screeds. I mean, if you send somebody this long thing they’re just not going to read it.

And the other thing is, I want people to understand that this is not about ego or we think we’re so cool we don’t have to respond. You cannot imagine the asynchronous aspect of people who want to send material and talk to people who are in the business and the available amount of time we have to do that. And frankly the available amount of will we have to do that.

I mean, we’re reading and talking about movies all day long. It’s our jobs. And then we go home and all we want to do sometimes is watch TV, or talk to our children, or take a nap, or just play a game, you know. And so at some point, it’s unfortunate, you start to get forced into being rude. Not overtly rude, but rude in the sense that sometimes I just don’t answer people because I just don’t have time or the will. I’m sorry.

**John:** Yeah.

Next question comes from Pat in Stamford, Connecticut. She or he…we’re going to say it’s a he. “I reached the point where I occasionally have to send out physical scripts, not just PDFs over email. The only hole-punchers I can find that would cut through an entire screenplay range from $180 to $300 and up. This seems far too expensive for something I will only use a few times a year. Is there another possibility I’m simply missing? Is there a model you recommend?”

**Craig:** [laughs] This can’t be real.

**John:** No. It’s completely real. “I feel slightly foolish asking, but somehow I don’t want to make sure I miss something somehow.”

**Craig:** He definitely missed something.

**John:** No, but here’s the thing Craig. I actually have two really good answers for this, and this is why I picked this question.

**Craig:** This can’t be real! [laughs] It’s just impossible.

**John:** No. It’s going to be great. I have three good answers. While you’re laughing I have three good answers.

**Craig:** Okay, good. Give them.

**John:** First off, the simple solution by far is if you go to Staples just get the three-hole punch paper.

**Craig:** Yeah!

**John:** Get that. That’s by far the easiest solution.

**Craig:** They did it for you!

**John:** They did. They already drilled the holes for you. It’s perfect and it works great. And honestly, you can kind of leave it in your printer most of the time because most of the stuff you’re printing out, eh, it’s still on three-hole paper, who cares.

So, first choice: Three-hole paper.

Second choice: This is something I actually found out about through Big Fish is there will be times where you have to do like colored revisions or you have to do something and you just can’t find the three-hole paper that’s already been drilled. They make a really big punch that can actually punch up to 130 pages at a time. The one that we ended up getting is a Stanley Bostich 3200 Heavy Duty Hole Punch.

This thing is actually kind of terrifying. You have to lean on it with your entire body weight, but it does punch through all of those pages at once. And if you had to do it for a bunch of scripts, that would be a solution. But, really, you’re going to use the pre-drilled white paper if you can possibly be on white paper. It’s really only if you’re going to do it on colored paper, something that you can’t find pre-drilled that it makes sense.

**Craig:** I just can’t believe that this person was not aware that they manufacturer three-hole punch paper. I can’t believe it. I can’t believe that they knew enough about computers to send us this question, but not enough to Google “three-hole punch paper.” I can’t believe it. It’s a setup. It’s not real. This can’t be real.

**John:** I think it’s absolutely completely true.

**Craig:** Good god.

**John:** My last solution for you is this: You know, you don’t have to punch through the whole thing at once. You can just take ten pages, punch them, take ten pages, punch them. That’s what honestly you had to do back in the day.

**Craig:** That’s what I used to do, but you missed a fourth option which I have done which is you take your screenplay, and this is an extreme — when you don’t have the three-hole punch paper and you don’t have a hole puncher or anything — you take the script and you put it vertically like on a music stand or something. And you get your rifle.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** You’re going to want to use a high caliber, but not hollow point or anything. You want to make sure that there’s no spread on the slug when it impacts the script. And naturally a laser site is really helpful here. And you’re going to fire three times. And, you know, for typical brads I think you’re going to want to maybe do, like 22 sometimes is just not big enough. Try a slightly higher caliber. Avoid ammunition manufactured in the Middle East or China. It’s just not reliable.

**John:** So, what I would say: make sure you really aim right, because there’s nothing more embarrassing when you’re just a little bit off and like, oh my god, it won’t actually fit in. And then you have to make a second hole right next to it. And that’s a tough shot, too.

**Craig:** Yeah. And everybody knows what happened. And, of course, we would be remiss if we didn’t make sure if you do have a friend or assistant that’s helping you with this that they are not behind the script when you do discharge your weapon.

**John:** If they’re holding the script in the music stand, then you can sort of crouch down behind the music stand, not right in the line of fire.

**Craig:** I mean, listen. I’ve done that in a pinch. Don’t be like me. Don’t be stupid. I mean, I got lucky, but don’t do that.

**John:** You never know what’s going to happen. I would also say they do make the very powerful green lasers which are somewhat controlled, like you’re not supposed to shine them at an aircraft, because they could blind a pilot. But, when you’re not blinding a pilot with them you can use them to burn holes through the paper.

And so, again, the challenge may be that it’s a white paper, so you may need to find some sort of solution to actually make the paper dark enough so that the laser light will burn through it. But I can imagine you can build some sort of, like, sled, possibly out of Lego, that could slide in the right ways and so it could burn through a hole. And then you slide it to the next, they can burn it through the hole.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s not a bad idea. I mean, the other option is if you’re friends with Cyclops from the X-Men, you could always have them come over and just give a quick, you know.

**John:** Well, Craig, I just don’t think you’re taking it seriously anymore. I mean, Cyclops is a fictional character.

**Craig:** No, he’s not. Oh, he is?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** That’s James Marsden. And James Marsden is hugely talented and a very handsome man, but he can’t actually shoot light out of his eyes.

**Craig:** Oh, really? Oh.

**John:** Anonymous writes, “I’m a writer from the UK and have optioned two screenplays to people in Los Angeles.” Congratulations, Anonymous.

**Craig:** Well done.

**John:** “One of these options is now 14 months old and I’ve done several rewrites for the producer, and the producer hasn’t asked for any more rewrites. There’s a director circling the project, and I was wondering if there’s an action I can take other than sending emails asking what’s happening to move the project forward, or is it just a matter of waiting?”

Simplest answer of all: It’s waiting.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s pretty much waiting. I mean, you can occasionally lob in a check-in email, but just understand it’s not paused because you haven’t checked in.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** It’s paused because it’s paused. They don’t have an interest there, or the person that they need to get interest from has not turned their focus upon it. The amount of waiting that occurs in Hollywood is extraordinary. It almost seems sometimes that this town has two speeds exclusively, just nothing is happening in a weird purgatorial way, or things happen so fast you can’t even catch your breath.

Nothing ever seems to proceed in any kind of regimented, expected way.

**John:** I completely agree. And that happens at every stage of your career. You just have to sort of get used to it.

One of the nice things about writing this pilot for ABC is that things do come more quickly, but then they just come way too quickly. And as we’re recording this podcast, I don’t know if the show got picked up or not for pilot, so I’m just waiting.

And I can lob in a phone call and say, “Hey, what’s happening?” But the answer is they don’t really know. Nobody really knows. There will be a decision and we’ll shoot a pilot or we won’t shoot a pilot, but my asking the question, I’m powerless to change anything at this point.

**Craig:** One thing that comes to min — sorry to jump back to the other question — If you have a large drill press you could drill press three holes through your script, but just wear eye protection.

**John:** Yeah. That’s actually what Kinko’s would do for you. Kinko’s actually has a drill and they can do that kind of stuff.

**Craig:** Yeah. Yeah.

**John:** Yeah. That’s very practical. A nice thing.

Speaking of practical things, do you have a One Cool Thing this week, Craig? I forgot to email you to remind you.

**Craig:** I mean, no, but the truth is now my One Cool Thing is Cyclops. And here’s the deal: I refuse to believe what you’re saying to me, because I’m a believer. And I do think, and I’m going to find James Marsden and I’m going to bring a script that was printed not on three-hole punched paper. And watch what I do, buddy.

And I’m going to take pictures of it and we’re going to put it on johnaugust.com. James Marsden, call me. We’re going to do this together.

**John:** I would just argue that if such a fantasy creature existed, Triclops would be much better because he could do all three holes at once. I’m just saying.

**Craig:** You know, now you’re not taking it seriously. [laughs] Okay, because Triclops is ridiculous.

**John:** My One Cool Thing is actually a video that, well, I posted a video that a reader sent in about a casting director named Pat Moran. And she is sort of a legendary casting director from the Baltimore area. And I just loved it because it’s something we don’t really talk about on this show that much is sort of everyone else’s sort of jobs. And casting directors are so great and wonderful and can make your life so much better, or so much worse if they’re really bad.

But I thought she was a fascinating example because she is a casting director for a small market. So, she gets to know everybody who’s available in that market, and that’s just a great insight. So, there will be a link in the show notes for this video about Pat Moran. And everything else we talked about it the podcast this week will also be in the show notes.

And, Craig, thank you again for a fun podcast.

**Craig:** I think this may have been our best podcast, frankly.

**John:** Okay.

**Craig:** Pat, wherever you are, I love you. Thank you for that gift. This was a great podcast. And I’ll be back with Marsden. I will be back!

**John:** Cool. Thanks sir.

**Craig:** Thank you. Bye.

LINKS:

* [IndyCast](https://itunes.apple.com/podcast/indycast-indiana-jones-news/id275916349?mt=2) on iTunes
* The truth about [Indy’s hat drop](http://pikdit.com/i/indiana-jones-hat-didnt-fall-off-someone-off-camera-threw-it-at-him-cant-be-unseen/)
* [Harrison Ford’s shooting script for Raiders](http://bid.profilesinhistory.com/Harrison-Ford-heavily-annotated-complete-shooting-script-for-Raiders-of-the-Lost-Ark_i10030668)
* [Scoggins Report](http://scogginsreport.com/2013/01/2012-year-end-spec-market-scorecard/) on spec sales for 2012
* [Scriptnotes survey results](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/scriptnotes_survey.pdf)
* [Courier Prime](http://quoteunquoteapps.com/courierprime)
* [Stanley Bostich Heavy Duty Hole Punch](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000H0XFSC/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000H0XFSC&linkCode=as2&tag=johnaugustcom-20) on Amazon
* Casting director [Pat Moran](http://www.thecredits.org/2013/01/the-queen-of-casting-meet-emmy-award-winning-baltimore-legend-pat-moran/) from The Credits
* OUTRO: [Ben and Kate](http://www.fox.com/ben-and-kate/) opening theme by Michael Andrews

Scriptnotes, Ep 69: Eggnog and Dreadlock Santa — Transcript

December 30, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/eggnog-and-dreadlock-santa).

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

**Craig Mazin:** And my name is A Very Christmas Craig Mazin.

**John:** This is our Christmas episode of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Now, Craig, we’re recording this a few days early so we’re not literally just sitting by the tree. There’s probably no eggnog in our hands. Maybe you have eggnog, I don’t know.

**Craig:** No. I think eggnog is gross.

**John:** I love eggnog…

**Craig:** Ew!

**John:** We might have to have a big fight about this. Eggnog is amazing. It’s essentially just melted ice cream that you get to drink out of a cup. And it’s just the best.

**Craig:** It’s melted ice cream with weird spice in it.

**John:** What is weird about nutmeg? Nutmeg is one of the most wonderful spices if used in moderation.

**Craig:** You know what it is? It’s the word “egg” and the word “nog” are so gross. Plus you have those two Gs, eggnog. It sounds like something that Orcs would say, and I don’t like it.

**John:** Yeah. It has a very Germanic quality to it, but I have always loved eggnog to the degree that I remember once I came back from, like, a summer scouts meeting and it was, like, a hot day in August —

**Craig:** Oh god!

**John:** — And I was like, “Mom, I really want some eggnog.” And my mother, who is so generous, was just like, “Okay, I’ll make you some eggnog.” So, she literally made — like the skim milk in the fridge, and some eggs, and some sugar, and some vanilla, and some nutmeg, and she made in a blender some eggnog. And that’s why I love my mom.

**Craig:** You know, my grandmother used to tell the story about how when she was a child on a really, really hot day back in Russia she would drink iced cold buttermilk. [laughs] And, you know, that sounds pretty good because it’s butter, and it’s milk, and everybody loves butter, and everybody loves milk. But buttermilk is just rotten milk.

**John:** I would disagree. I would say buttermilk is soured milk. And it has a certain quality to it that makes it fantastic for biscuits, or for ice cream. Buttermilk ice cream.

**Craig:** You mean rotten quality? [laughs]

**John:** I think it’s delicious. But everyone has their own tastes. For example, do you like crème fraîche? Is that a taste you like?

**Craig:** It’s funny that you mention that because I was explaining to our video playback guy last week that I actually have a weird thing about white food in general. And crème fraîche is a great example of white food I do not eat. There’s something about white sauce type food — mayonnaise, crème fraîche, tartar sauce, there’s more I’m sure. Tahini. Even that’s something — I just can’t do it. I can’t go near it.

**John:** Yeah. There’s a puss-like quality to it that might turn some people off. Cottage cheese, I’m sure, falls into that.

**Craig:** No. I can do cottage cheese if I mix it with fruit.

**John:** That makes no sense at all, Craig.

**Craig:** If I mix it with fruit. That one is an exception. And I can do like certain yogurts and stuff like that. But there’s a lot of white food that just horrifies me. Mayonnaise is my number one, but crème fraîche, sour cream, because that’s what crème fraîche is, right? Isn’t it sour cream? Which is a lie…

**John:** It’s a special kind of sour cream, yeah. You’re just a food racist and we should probably move onto another topic.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t like white food.

**John:** So, you’re making a list at Christmastime. There is a famous person who makes a list around Christmastime, well, Santa, but even more important than Santa, Franklin Leonard makes a list around Christmastime.

**Craig:** Yes. Dreadlock Santa makes a list.

**John:** And Dreadlock Santa this year made a list called the Black List, as he does every year, in which he surveys the development executives to ask them what their most liked scripts are. He always wants to make it clear that this isn’t the “best of” list; it’s like the most liked screenplays that people have read this year.

And so that came out this last week, or actually two weeks ago for people who are listening on Christmas day. And there were a lot of great titles there. Some people that we know, mutual friends. Eric Heisserer, Story of Your Life, was one of the highly liked scripts.

**Craig:** Great to see.

**John:** Jonathan Stokes, who is one of my WGA advisees, his script Border Country was listed there.

**Craig:** Oh! Awesome. Yeah, good for him.

**John:** And a person who wrote into our site for the Three Page Challenge, Austin Reynolds, his script, From New York to Florida, was also on the Black List.

**Craig:** What script did he send in for us?

**John:** So, the three pages I think we read was something that you liked much more than I liked in the first three pages, where there’s a kid in class who is scribbling…

**Craig:** Oh, I remember that guy, yeah.

**John:** So, you apparently have great taste.

**Craig:** Well, see that? God, I know what I’m doing.

**John:** Yeah. So, maybe we’ll go back through and re-edit that so we sound really knowledgeable and that we should single that out as being highly praise-worthy. But congratulations to Austin Reynolds; that’s fantastic. I’m happy that these people had good outcomes.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** As I was looking through the list, one of the things I was trying to look for — patterns — in addition to, like, names I recognize was: what are people writing about, and what are these spec scripts that people are working on? And one that really stuck out was by a writer named Young Il Kim called Rodham. And it’s the story of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s rise as a young lawyer, sort of rising in politics, and she falls in love with this guy Bill Clinton.

And I was like, that was a great idea for a spec. I have no idea — obviously the spec is pretty good because people like it, but people want to know like, “Oh, what kind of spec should I write?” That seems like a great idea for a spec. That’s public domain. It’s interesting. People are going to want to read that. Good choice. Good subject material.

**Craig:** Yeah. It is a good choice. And it’s accessible. And people can actually compare what you’ve written to their understanding of reality and see in evidence the drama that you have created. It’s a very smart way of approaching it.

**John:** So, today I thought we’d talk through some of our mail bag questions, but one of them was actually really relevant to what we’re doing right now which is an email we got from Brantley Aufill. And so it’s kind of long but I’ll read it because it’s nice. It’s happy. And so it’s a good thing for this time of year.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** Brantley writes, “In September of 2011, I sent you an email about something you said on the podcast. Well, it’s like, ‘I mostly want to write period detective stories with monsters.'” I kind of remember saying that. So, talking about, like, what genre is your genre.

Brantley writes, “I remarked that I had just done exactly that having written a spec called The Hooverville Dead which found me my manager just a few months prior. Over the following months, I listen to Scriptnotes every week, and so many times it seems to be recorded just for me, as I was writing and rewriting, as the script started going out, as I began to get generals, as I began to do pitches, as I signed with my agents, as I tried to think over what to write next.

“The topics you and Craig were covering often coincided exactly with where I was navigating this crazy world as a new screenwriter. Flash forward to today. The Hooverville Dead has become my calling card and just made this year’s Black List.”

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** “I’m still doing generals. I have yet to make that first writer’s paycheck, but I have quite a few projects in ‘this might be the one’ column. I’m taking my next spec to a major studio with a producer already attached. I developed a TV show with a producer that we’re talking to networks about next month. I have different pitches at different studios, four of which I set up over a 26-hour period later this week.

“So, I’m reading book after book, writing up treatments, and pitching my take, and I’m on people’s minds as they think of a writer they want to work with. And I’ve been loving just about every minute of it. So, thanks to you and Craig for Scriptnotes; the last few months have been a bit of a whirlwind but I like to think the advice you two have been providing has helped me keep up just a little bit ahead of it. Thanks, Brantley Aufill.”

**Craig:** Wow. You know what? Thank you man. That’s really nice of you. I’m glad that you are obviously doing well, you know. I mean, the fact that you haven’t gotten that first writer’s paycheck is a quirk of the timeline. It sounds like you will be soon enough. And, you know, as we’ve been doing this and you and I interact more and more with people who are aspiring, and particularly people who are right on that bubble where it seems like all the pieces are in place, and people are noticing their writing and they actually have the facility to do this, they just haven’t quite gotten that first purchase yet.

What’s been salient to me more than anything is attitude. And it’s the people with the great attitude who strike me as the most likely to succeed. And that’s a terrific attitude to have. The attitude of the student, and it’s one that I think you and I both maintain to this very day.

So, good for you. I’m glad that we’ve been of help to you.

**John:** Yeah. I would also say in terms of attitude: acknowledging good fortune, and success, and people who have helped you along the way. Because so much of this business, and sort of getting started in any business, are going to be the frustrations and all the things that go wrong. But when things do go right, when someone helps you out with something, it’s great to acknowledge that. And the people who help you out along the way, just take a moment to thank them for that.

So, thank you for writing in.

**Craig:** It’s certainly no sign of weakness. We all need help desperately. I remember Scott Frank years ago saying to me, “I need more help than any writer I’ve ever met. When I’m figuring out who I should work with on something — producer, studio executive, agent, whomever — it’s entirely about who will satisfy my deep need for help.”

So, you’re dead on with that.

**John:** Cool. Let’s continue that thread with some other questions that people have written in with and maybe we can answer a few more things for other people and get them started on their way.

**Craig:** Cool.

**John:** So, this first one comes — a writer who had written into the site and it was in the backlog of questions, and then he reached out to you on Twitter. And so you flagged it and so now we’re following up.

It’s a guy named Christopher in London who writes, “Having written my first feature screenplay a year after moving to London I began to get as many people to read it as possible. By your normal chain of events — basically, through my girlfriend — the script found its way to a producer who had made one other feature, and a few shorts.

“He loved the script and wanted to make it, so we began a second draft with the promise that after typing the script he would send it to potential ‘financiers, directors, and cast.’ Fast forward two and a half years, after draft number 13 he still hasn’t shown the script to another soul. In the meantime, I’ve shopped the script out myself, and now that I’ve secured an actual production company interested in making the movie I want to move on from this producer.

“Now, after asking him to sign an agreement to state that the rights to this script reside with me, he has said he won’t sign it and is suggesting he has some claim to my script. What do I do?”

**Craig:** Okay. Well, he does not have a claim to your script. Legally speaking, in terms of copyright, you are the author of your script. You have written every word. He has not created any unique expression in fixed form. What he’s done is act as an editor, and just as editors in the book world don’t have copyright claims on Stephen King’s novels, nor does this person have a copyright claim on your screenplay.

What this person may have a claim for is the right to be associated as a producer with this film. That claim is not something that’s adjudicated against you. That is something that they would have to deal with with a new producer that comes onboard. And, frankly, it’s kind of not your problem to the extent that it’s not specifically your problem.

However, when you’re talking to these new people you have to say, “Look, here’s this person. I don’t want them to be involved. They didn’t write anything. They’ve been acting as a ‘producer.’ They’ve been nothing but a hindrance, frankly. You should be aware that they’re there and so that’s something you guys have to work out.” And most likely the actual producers, the new financing entity would reach out to this “producer” and say, “We want to settle you out.” Or, “We want to exchange this guarantee of an onscreen producing credit for your release of the material and disappearing.”

There are all sorts of ways to make people go away. But, the two prominent ways are money and credit.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** That said, it’s hard for these people to actually claim anything, because when push comes to shove they don’t have a contract with you beyond a verbal and implied contract. And so it’s one of those deals where that would have to be hashed out if it actually got to a lawsuit. You want to avoid lawsuits.

So, my recommendation here is that you, in conjunction with your attorney and the new producer, go instruct them to handle this person and make them go away as need be.

**John:** I agree. I would also say just take a step back and imagine that the other person was writing this question. And he would probably phrase his question to us this way: “So, I’ve spent the last two and half years working with this writer, reading every draft, giving notes on every step. Today he shows up at my door saying that he wants me to sign this release that I have no involvement with the project whatsoever. What do I do? I feel like this kid is being incredibly ungracious for all the hours, and hours, and hours of work I’ve put in on this script. What do I do?”

And it’s easy to see his perspective on this, too. I would say he hasn’t done a terrific job of all the other things of producing. Maybe he actually gave you good notes? Maybe he really did help you get the script into good shape, but he hasn’t been able to sort of move the project forward. So, I don’t blame you for wanting to move forward on your own. But, you are going to need to figure out some way to have him taken care of in this process because it does sound like he was involved for quite a long time.

Where it gets really frustrating for me is when, like, literally something kind of passed over a person’s desk and they’re claiming producer credit on it.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And that happens far too often and it’s really maddening. And especially newer writers can find themselves in frustrating situations with that. And I wish I had a magic wand to sort of make that all go away and be better, but it does happen.

And there’s people whose names are on lots of movies who are just really stubborn and they get their names on movies, even if they weren’t involved in the actual making of the film.

**Craig:** This is certainly not something that’s unique to our business, although you see it all the time. Very annoying people often are rewarded for being annoying. And this may be one of those cases. I would point out — he’s in London and I’m not quite sure what the differences are because, you know, here in the United States we have work for hire. Frequently what you’ll see is an option agreement between a producer and a writer which does contractually codify the relationship and grant the producer certain exclusive rights to represent the screenplay as the producer.

That may not be the case in England, but if it is the absence of that agreement speaks volumes.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So, this is really where you would need to speak to a lawyer, or a barrister, as the case may be.

**John:** Find somebody with a nice white wig who seems to know something about the law.

**Craig:** Yes. Yes. Go speak to Rumpole of the Bailey.

But, I think the fact that you’re dealing already with the financing entity — they have their own attorneys. They should be able to handle this. This is one of those areas — I look for these all the time. This is something to always keep your eyes open for: Moments where your goals and your needs align with those of other people. And then use them, [laughs], so basically draft behind them. It is in their best interest to get rid of this guy, therefore you should line up with them and allow them to do it for you.

**John:** And it may only be a series of phone calls between these people that it just gets taken care of. And if this guy doesn’t have a lot of other credits then that may be the case.

Our next question comes from Will in Seattle who writes, “On your most recent podcast you and Craig were expressing disdain at the lack of description in some of the Three Page Challenge scripts, specifically the use of ‘INT. OFFICE — DAY.’

“Your criticism came from not knowing what kind of office we’re in. However, in some of the most professionals scripts I’ve read, like Sideways or Up in the Air, the respective writers had a very minimalist style and often do little to describe in more detail the settings. Is it simply your assumption that we’re not Alexander Payne or Jason Reitman? Does the fact that they’re already industry professionals give them license to leave out the little things?”

**Craig:** I think in those cases the fact that they’re directing the movie gives them the license to leave out those little things. And this is something that I brought up on the DoneDealPro board.

There’s a backwards thinking among a lot of new screenwriters that only if you are directing the movie are you allowed to be specific about camera motion, camera action, and be very specific about things that would theoretically fall under the purview of the director, like, you know, perfecting the location and so forth.

And in my mind it’s the opposite. When Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor write a movie together, they can write “INT. OFFICE” because they’ve already discussed what the office looks like. No one is coming in to rewrite them. And Alexander is going to go out and scout for the office he wants and he’s going to tell people the office he wants, so he can save some space and time on the page. He’s quite likely not writing the script to do anything other than service him as he makes the movie. Similarly for Jason Reitman.

But if you are a writing the screenplay to attract a director, and to attract financing, it is critical to me that you use your one and often only chance to express the entirety of your dramatic intention for what this film should be, look like, sound like, and ultimately how this film will impact the audience.

**John:** Yeah. I don’t want to tell Alexander Payne and Jason Reitman how to write, and they can use their minimalist INT. OFFICE — DAY; if that works for them, that’s awesome, great.

But I’ll say that even if you’re the director, throwing just the tiniest bit of description to that — sort of like, is it a strip mall office, is it a corporate glass monstrosity office — it does help. And it helps everybody else who needs to read the script to get a sense of what kind of world that you’re pitching this story for. So, everyone else who needs to read the script to sort of do their jobs would be a little bit serviced by having a little more description there.

Again, totally your choice and what you want to do.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s how — Todd and I, I mean, no one is coming in to rewrite us. We’re writing a screenplay for him to direct, we still do that stuff. I mean, for that very reason: we want the army of people that are going to be working on the movie to have that many fewer questions.

**John:** When you’re first sitting down with the location manager, he or she is pulling out a bunch of folders, and he’s showing you things that are probably closer to what your vision is of the thing so they don’t have to first ask you, “Describe this office to me; what should I be looking for?” I think in that first meeting they’ll have some sense of what you might be looking for and what might be appropriate. That’s why you give that kind of stuff.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Chris from San Francisco Bay Area writes, “I’m trying to find a musical script writer. What is this person even called? A book writer? Scriptwriter? Probably not a screenwriter. Are there resources, networks, or hangouts where these people exist? I’m looking for both options of partnering or hiring somebody to write the book or reviewing books that people have already written.”

So, sort of in my wheel house here. “Book writer” is usually what you call the person who is writing all the stuff that happens in a musical, a stage musical, the stuff that isn’t sung. So, the book is all that stuff. So, for Big Fish I’m the book writer.

Stuff that happens for Broadway tends to be centered around New York. Dramatists Guild is the organization that sort of loosely represents the interests of people who write for the stage. It’s not a guild the way that the Writers Guild is a guild. It’s a looser sort of association. Doesn’t have like collective bargaining power.

The Dramatists Guild is where you probably first want to check out because their house magazine is actually really good and has good interviews with book writers, and musical writers, and playwrights who are working on all this stuff, and will get you started there.

In terms of reading books, you can find published versions of some of the musicals you would want to see. And that’s going to get you started. There’s not the same kind of script libraries that you’ll find for screenplays. But you’ll figure it out. And I figured it out. I didn’t have great firsthand examples to look at, but you sort of figure out like what gets said and sort of how it fits in with everything else.

**Craig:** Can you tell me what is the difference between a book writer and a dramaturge? Or is it dramaturgue?

**John:** I think you can probably say either one of those. And, again, I may be slightly wrong here, so if I speak incorrectly someone will write in and correct me. A dramaturge is a person who is responsible for working with the playwright, and eventually the director, on the dramatic engineering of a piece. And so if it’s an existing work it can be working with the director to figure out how to mine all of the goodness out of it. If it’s a new play, it’s someone who is working with the playwright to facilitate things.

So, it’s not a writer per se, but it’s in some ways like a creative producer I would say.

**Craig:** I see. Got it.

**John:** A person who’s helping out that way.

**Craig:** Got it. Okay, great.

**John:** Cool. Our next question comes from Hamish who writes, “In podcast 67 you and Craig talked about how hacky it is to establish a character’s backstory via magazine covers. The same day I read the shooting script of Frankenweenie and spotted the following…”

**Craig:** [laughs] I love it already.

**John:** “Burgemeister unfolds the newspaper to read the front page. INSERT NEWSPAPER: The headline reads MAYOR BURGERMEISTER TO KICK OFF DUTCH DAYS. A photo shows Mayor Burgemeister complete with sash and hat.”

**Craig:** That’s totally different.

**John:** “Burgemeister is pleased with the photo.”

**Craig:** That’s totally — how do you not see that that’s totally different?

**John:** I think it’s similar enough that it’s a valid criticism.

**Craig:** I don’t think so. Here’s the deal. The difference is expositing — am I allowed to say “expositing,” by the way?

**John:** Absolutely. Totally. It’s your podcast.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m going to invent it if it’s not actually a word.

It is creating the exposition for an event or fact as opposed to creating exposition for a character’s essence or quality. That’s the difference to me. I don’t want — and I would presume this isn’t the opening of the movie of Halloweenie. [laughs] I’m going to call it that forever.

You know, when you’re meeting a character in the beginning of a movie it is super hacky to give us key bits of information on a magazine cover about them. It is all too common to use every day news delivery sources in a film to deliver actual news. That’s fine.

**John:** Yeah. So, I think sliding back towards the hacky column, it is in his first reveal. So, you’ve revealed that you actually haven’t seen Frankenweenie, but I’ll tell you that the paper arrives, you see that he’s meticulous with his lawn, he picks up the newspaper and we see his face in the photo and it’s also revealed that that is his face as well. So, it’s meant to be the joke that it’s exactly the same shot as we’re seeing is the photo that’s on there. But, it is hacky backstory in the sense of, like, that’s how we are establishing that he is the mayor.

**Craig:** Well, you know what I like though is that you took something that has the potential for hackiness and you put some spin on it so that there was more than just the information. You made a joke out of it.

**John:** Yeah. So, there’s a little bit of a spin. But I don’t want to run away from the criticism that it is a little bit hacky to do it. And I feel that in Frankenweenie the nature of our world and sort of how it all works, it’s less awful than it could be in other situations.

The truth behind why I did it in Frankenweenie is that there’s so few frames and minutes and seconds in that movie to get crucial information out, it was the only time that we were going to be able to establish that he was the mayor of the town.

**Craig:** Well, I’m going to stand in stronger defense of your work than you have here.

**John:** Thank you very much.

**Craig:** You’re welcome.

**John:** Mike in Los Angeles writes, “Let’s say hypothetically I have 12 weeks to write a script from idea to finished first draft, like my thesis script for example. How do you or Craig break down your work into daily goals to make sure you hit that deadline? I understand once I get into the writing that I can divide it out in a daily page count, but I’m more interested in how you do it prior to the writing. How are you breaking story, working with characters? How do you do it?”

**Craig:** Well, for me I am, because I outline very thoroughly, I am less concerned about how much time I’m taking during that process. I sort of feel like if I get that right then I look at what I’ve got left. Presumably it will be at least half of the remaining time. And the process of then dividing pages by 5 days a week to give myself a couple days off isn’t going to leave me with some crushing burden.

Sometimes I will sort of work backwards. I’ll say, “Okay, I have 12 weeks. I know I don’t like writing more than four pages a day. I feel like that hurts. That’s 20 pages a week. Presume that the screenplay is 120 pages and then I’ll narrow it down a bit, so we’re talking about six weeks. So, I have six weeks to break this outline out.”

And then I take a nice breath and I feel like I have lots of time, but I don’t do that so I’ll waste it — don’t waste any time. I start right away. And I begin — we talked about this before — everybody has different ways in. I like to begin with some big basics, the premise of the movie, a protagonist who is appropriate for that premise, a theme that is appropriate for that character and that premise, and instigating a beginning that is appropriate for that person, that matches to the end that is appropriate for that person.

And then sort of laying out the second act as a proven ground for that individual to go from where they are in the beginning to that very different character place at the end. And then what happens in between is writing. Even if you’re not actually writing, if you’re just doing cards or scene ideas or thoughts, that is truly where half of — 70%, 80% of what matters goes.

So, that’s my method.

**John:** In the question he’s saying, “from idea to finished draft,” but I honestly feel like the ideas phase can be a very long, amorphous period. So like for the ABC thing I just wrote, the idea phase was, you know, there was the idea, and then it was talking to Josh about it, and going to pitch it. And so by the time I was actually writing an outline everything was really, really fleshed out. So, at a certain point we had it up on the board and I had act breakouts and then I had to write up this outline. So, it’s really hard to say sort of when the clock started ticking on it.

But that was a case where TV — a lovely thing about TV is because there are act breaks I can say, like, “I’m going to write an act today,” and then it’s just done. And that was really simple and it’s very quick to write a TV script for those reasons. And actually the last acts are really short, so it goes even faster than that.

For a feature project I try to give myself daily page counts. Once the clock is really ticking and there are 12 weeks to turn this thing in, I will give myself daily page counts. And if I do set myself to five pages a day you get done really early. And so some days you won’t actually hit that, but other days you will hit that and it will all get finished.

What I will tend to do is a little carrot and a stick. And so I’ll make some deal with myself at the start of the week saying that if I write five pages every day then I get to buy myself something that I really want. And if I don’t actually hit those five pages a day then I don’t get that thing.

Other times I’ve had to sort of punish myself where if I don’t hit — any day that I don’t hit my pages I will have to make an anonymous donation to an organization that I despise.

**Craig:** Ha!

**John:** So, I try to sort of get the work done and feeling good, and feeling great, but sometimes it is just a matter of like cranking through the pages so you can get something finished.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Yeah. So, our last question is from Adam Pineless. Pineless, like a treeless mountain. He writes, “I’ve heard some films have 10 to 15 other writers come in and punch up a script. What’s up with that? What actually happens?”

So, punching up is a thing that happens largely on comedy scripts, before they go into production. Craig and I have both been part of comedy punch-ups. Are they a good thing, Craig?

**Craig:** I do think they’re good things. But it depends on what kind of punch up session you’re describing or punch up employment you’re describing. Very often on true comedies that are very joke driven, there will be one day where eight or nine comedy guys will be invited to sit in a room with the screenwriter, and the director, and the producer, and typically a studio representative, and you’ll go through the script.

Sometimes you go through the script and just talk about the script itself and kind of get the collective wisdom of people who have written comedy scripts before who can give you advice on character, plot, theme, things that don’t work, things that do work. And sometimes it’s literally just a page-by-page, “Any ideas for some jokes here?”

And we do this for each other. Typically the pay is somewhere between — it used to be $5,000. It has dwindled as low as $1,000 at times. Sometimes it’s $2,500. And we tend to do this for each other. I go to a lot of these things. And I have a little roster of people that I rely on when I want to do one for something I’ve written.

So, that’s fine. And I should point out that those writers are never eligible for credit. It is accepted from the credit process as not considered writing; it’s just “stuff” really. It’s just thinking, group thinking.

**John:** Yeah, because none of the writers in the room are actually writing anything down on paper. There is no literary material being created. There is just a discussion happening.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. Sometimes I’m hired to punch up a script where I’m given a screenplay. It’s almost always very close to production. And I’m asked to go through and fix some dramatic things, fix some character things, and add some comedy here and there. And they usually give you a cheat sheet of where they believe the hot spots are and what they feel needs help. And this is typically done on a weekly basis, one week, or two weeks, sometimes three.

That is where movies can be greatly helped by the right person, but if the studio is chasing subsequent writers and there is a succession of people coming in and doing these things the script becomes a sort of flavorless mush. This is all separate and apart from a general parade of rewriting which can occur in development where people simply don’t know what the movie is supposed to be. It hasn’t been green lit yet and they just keep hiring writers to try different versions of the same idea.

And it’s quite rare that films like that work out well. There is one movie in particular I was asked to write, and I chose not to, and it had been around — this was a couple years ago — and it had been around and in development for so long that the friend of mine who had actually done work on it at one point, the draft that he did work on had the World Trade Center as a major plot point. [laughs]

So, it had been well over ten years in endless rewrite hell. And the movie that resulted was not a particularly good film. It’s just one of those things. At some point studios can’t stop chasing something and they should just stop. But, you know, these punch up groups, these occasional roundtables are actually quite useful, I think, and I always say if you get two really good jokes out of five hours of nine writers pitching jokes, it’s a victory. You got two great jokes.

**John:** I agree. So, the sessions that we’re describing, I hear them called “punch-ups,” I hear them called “roundtables.” Sometimes they’ll be preceded with a reading, so they’ll either bring in the real cast or just funny actors to read through things so everyone can hear it together and see sort of what’s working and also hear what’s not really working.

They mostly happen in comedy because that’s where a day’s work can actually achieve something. It’s finding some jokes. Because if you get two great jokes, and one of them makes it to the trailer, that was money really well spent and time really well spent.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So, that can be really gratifying. And just sometimes it’s not even like a brand new joke, but just like a slightly better version of a joke can help. A character saying a funny thing can be really useful.

So, I think they’re useful for comedies. You don’t see them very much in dramas. Craig’s point about a long parade of writers over the course of time, I worked on Tarzan which is at Warner Bros. So, recently they announced a new version that they’re trying to do at Warner Bros. And god bless them, you know, maybe there are 15 writers who’ve tried to do Tarzan there.

So, if that movie were to get made at a certain point I’m probably still on the chain of title for that, that long history going back, but I don’t know if a single thing I’ve written resembles what’s in Tarzan right now. And that’s an example of like, well, of course you’re going to keep trying to make that because that’s a great property, that’s a great brand. It’s just a really hard movie to make.

**Craig:** Yeah. And, you know, studios experience internal turnover as well. People who control the development of properties are fired, they’re hired. Producers lose their deals. They come and go. Things go in and out of style. There are movies that are written of a certain kind that are seen as outdated or out of step with what people want, and then suddenly another movie comes along that makes it instep and in line with what people want.

And so these things happen in fits and starts. Personally, if I were running a studio, and I looked down at my development slate and saw a few of these things that had been kind of lumbering along, soaking up development dollars year, after year, after year, I’d kill them. Or, I would hire a writer-director, or a writer-director team to develop it because ultimately the conventional process is just simply not working for this project.

**John:** Yeah. One of the projects — we may have both worked on this. Did you ever work on Scared Guys over at Sony?

**Craig:** I remember reading it at one point. I don’t think I — no.

**John:** So, it’s a project that was at Sony for — it probably still is at Sony, probably someone is writing it right now. Probably it’s like literally on somebody’s screen right now.

It’s a pretty good premise, and when I was brought in to do a rewrite on it it was Kevin James and Ray Romano as two incredibly agoraphobic guys who have to go on this adventure. I don’t even really remember the premise that knocked them out of their agoraphobic little happy niche, but they had to go on a road trip. So, it was two agoraphobes on a road trip.

And it was fine and I enjoyed writing it. It was like a true comedy comedy, which I don’t do very often, but I was just writer 14 out of 29 on it at this point. And it will be fascinating to see if that movie ever gets made.

**Craig:** Did you ever work on Stretch Armstrong?

**John:** I did not. But that’s another legend, isn’t it?

**Craig:** I don’t know how you even have a WGA card if you haven’t worked on that movie. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** That movie has had… — I worked on that very early in my career. I think I was the four millionth writer. I believe they’ve hit a billion. I believe they are officially in the billions. And the movie moved from studio to studio to studio. I mean, at some point someone — either someone is going to blow everybody away by figuring it out, or everyone will suddenly realize you can’t make a movie out of Stretch Armstrong. It’s boring.

**John:** The thing is Stretch Armstrong is like two-thirds of a good idea, but it’s that missing third that’s going to be really hard to ever reach. Because it’s sort of a good trailer, but I don’t know that we’re going to want to see that as a movie.

**Craig:** Yeah. The version that I wrote back with my partner, and this was sort of I would say 1997-ish, was a Tim Allen comedy, so there you go, it’s 1997. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** And it was Tim Allen in basically a family comedy where he’s a single dad raising a couple of kids and he gets stretchy powers. And it was very broad and goofy, but it was really about family and stuff like that, you know. And it wasn’t at all — it was so minimally about being a hero because, you know, at least then… I would say now I don’t acknowledge that stretching is a heroic property. [laughs] It’s simply odd.

**John:** There’s a reason Mr. Fantastic isn’t really that fantastic.

**Craig:** No. No. Not at all. It’s such an inappropriately named character. He’s Mr. Vaguely Interesting.

**John:** Ha! Yeah.

**Craig:** So that was that one. And that still hasn’t been made.

**John:** The other example you gave which is where during production there is a series of writers that come through is usually a giant disaster. And the exception would be the first Charlie’s Angels famously had, like a bunch of people came in during production. I was off shooting DC, my doomed television show, and they went into production. And all sort of the A-list kind of people came in and did a week. And they were like, “What is this movie? It’s going to be a disaster. This is going to be the worst thing ever.”

But, god bless them, everyone, like, did the best they could. So Zak Penn was on, and I don’t know if Simon was on the first movie, but everyone — people you couldn’t believe helped out for a week and god bless them.

And the movie was a wreck, but it all kind of pulled together in a way. And it was the weird kind of movie that can actually support the like 15 different tones all happening at once. And then I came back in and sat in the editing room for a long time and we reshot and it worked. So, sometimes it does work, but it’s a brutal way to make a movie.

That’s why you shouldn’t go into production without feeling pretty darn good about how your script is, unless you want to kill yourself.

**Craig:** Yeah, no question. Charlie’s Angels is one of those movies that almost its charm is almost in its strange, funky nature. You know? That because the title implied a very kind of drudging remake of what was basically a very bad TV show — I’m sorry, you know, just a goofy ’70s era procedural, very cheese ball show. To kind of come at it from such a wild angle really made it fresh and was cool, you know. Charlie’s Angels was a cool movie. McG did an awesome job on it.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And you did, as well, of course. And I guess Zak. I’ve got to give Zak credit. You know I hate that.

**John:** Oh, god, the worst.

**Craig:** The worst! I love him.

**John:** Just the worst.

**Craig:** I mean, I love giving him crap. And I love him also.

**John:** Yeah. I think he listens to the show, so right now he’s…

**Craig:** Hey Zak!

**John:** …he’s enraged.

**Craig:** He’s enraged. How can you tell? [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] How can you tell when Zak Penn is enraged?

**Craig:** I know.

**John:** That’s a good sort of a Zen question.

So, that’s the end of our questions from listeners this week. There’s actually a ton more but this is all we have time for today. But you and both had like cool new things come out this last week.

**Craig:** Yeah!

**John:** I just saw your trailer for Identity Thief, like the longer trailer for Identity Thief, and I loved it.

**Craig:** Oh! Awesome! Great.

**John:** And so I love Melissa McCarthy. And I love Jason Bateman, so these are good things. And I can stand you. But I was just really, really happy with it. I’m so happy for Melissa and that you gave her good stuff to do. And a lot of physical violence takes place against Melissa McCarthy. She gets hit by cars, and things are thrown at her, and…

**Craig:** Yeah. We put her through the ringer. I mean, I didn’t love the first trailer that came out, only because as a teaser it really was just about, like, “Here’s a couple of kooky jokes and here’s a basic idea for a movie.” And this longer trailer gives you a better sense of the fact that there’s a cohesive story and that there’s something happening and a bit of a journey.

What the trailer — and I love it, actually, too. I mean, I’m really happy with the trailer. And I don’t mean that in a braggy way because I didn’t make the trailer. Trailers are different things; they live apart from movies. And so I think the marketing guys did a really great job with it. And they are — as they should — they are selling the comedy because it is a comedy and there’s a lot of really funny stuff.

What the trailer won’t impart at all, and I don’t think any TV commercials will, so I’ll just sort of impart it, is that the movie actually has a lot of really touching stuff in it. And Melissa McCarthy, she makes you cry. I mean, there’s a couple of spots where she gets you.

And so I like sort of selling big comedy, which we have, and then kind of surprising people with something that’s quite human. So, I’m looking forward to it, but I’m glad you liked it. I liked the trailer, too, and naturally you will include a link.

**John:** Oh my god, of course.

**Craig:** And the movie is coming out February 8. You’ll be hearing about it consistently until then.

**John:** I didn’t realize it was coming out that soon.

**Craig:** Uh-huh.

**John:** Wow, that is really quick. So, that’s why you’ve been so busy getting that picture all finished up.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah, yeah, scrambling. Sitting with Seth Gordon, our terrific director today, and Scott Stuber, our awesome producer, and it’s been a real family on this movie. Everyone has gotten along and just… — It’s a funny thing, when people like a movie then your romantic notion of how everyone should work together is real. Everybody starts to feel like a family that’s raising a kid together, and everybody is looking out for the kid, and everybody is watching each other’s backs, and respecting each other and what they bring.

And, you know, when it’s not that way, that’s when things can sometimes go completely awry. But in this case everybody’s been just dedicated to it. Melissa and Jason have been just dedicated to it. And on the one hand I’m a little sad that I stole Melissa from you. On the other hand I’m full of glee.

**John:** Yeah. I can always get her back.

**Craig:** Try! You try. [laughs]

**John:** It’s not like she’s not busy at all. She doesn’t have a TV show…

**Craig:** I’m like — I’ve got a death grip on that lady.

**John:** Yeah. She’s just great.

So, people have to wait till February 8 to see the movie though, right?

**Craig:** They will have to wait until February 8 to see the movie.

**John:** Now, what they could do right now is my new thing, which by the time people are listening to this podcast is available on the App Store, which is — finally — Karateka, which I just sent you the download code so you can get an early sneak peek of Karateka.

**Craig:** Yes I did. And even though I know the name is Karateka I will always call it what I called it when I when I was a kid which is “Kerotica,” as in erotica.

**John:** That’s how I called it when I was a kid, too.

**Craig:** That’s what I used to say.

**John:** When Jordan Mechner and I first started talking about making it, one of the first questions I had for him was like, “So, how am I actually supposed to say it?” Because I just remember the box that I got when we bought it, you know, it was a summer gift for ourselves, and I said “Kerotica,” because I didn’t even know what erotica was, but that’s just how you would pronounce.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** But Jordan says Karateka. His official word is that you can actually pronounce it however you’d like to pronounce it. He will gladly take any pronunciations.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** So, we’ve been out on Xbox, and Steam, and PS3, but now the iOS version is out and done and I’m so happy because this is the one I’ve spent the most time myself doing, because while I play Xbox and PS3 they’re not my sort of native things. And I’m very much iPad. And so this is the one I sort of got to sink my teeth into and figure out how we’re going to translate all of the stuff that would happen with controllers, how we could do it in a touch way, and sort of how we could figure out how to make this game feel right and playable when you’re just on an iPad.

So, if you have unwrapped your iPad that you got for Christmas, your iPad mini, and you’re sitting by your tree and you’re listening to this podcast, and you feel like downloading it, go to the App Store right now. Because it’s only $2.99, which is a bargain. And we don’t have sponsors on the show per se, but if you felt like, “Wow, I wish I could give John and Craig a little bit of money to help pay for the costs of the show,” that’s one way you could.

**Craig:** Yeah. And it’s a good game. The things I like about it: One, I mean, just the nostalgia factor; being able to say I’m playing Kerotica again is really cool. And I don’t play Karateka but I do play Kerotica.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** The iOS games that are not puzzle-oriented sometimes suffer from clumsy controls. I don’t like playing shooters on iOS. I just find it really annoying. But the controls here are elegant, and simple, and transparent to you while you play, which is great.

**John:** Cool. One of the things we had to figure out is the interface for — it is sound-based, so as you’re playing the game you can sort of hear the rhythm of like sort of how they’re going to attack. You can figure out your blocks based on the music that’s playing. The problem with the iPhone, or the iPad, too, is like, what if you’re on the subway and you’re playing and you don’t have your headphones on? You don’t want to be annoying around other people.

So, we had to figure out an interface for how to show you, give you symbols that would show you what’s coming up, even if you have the sound turned off. And so that was the stuff that took like the extra months. People kept asking, “Hey, when is it coming out on iOS?” It was figuring out that stuff.

**Craig:** Well, time well spent. And the other thing I like is the — and you talked about this before — a rather unique approach to handling death in a video game, because usually you get unlimited lives and death comes with either no penalty or kind of a setback penalty where you have to go back to a checkpoint.

And here your lives change who you are and your character and the possibility of success. There are levels of success, and if you can manage to play through the whole game without dying you achieve the true success of the game. But if you don’t, your character actually becomes sort of different. And in that way you have also kind of created a very novel approach to difficulty management because the typical scheme is that you start a game with a setting — easy, medium, hard.

In this game there is a setting and as you fail the game gets easier, but in doing so rewards you less should you succeed in the end.

**John:** Exactly. The reward of the game is completing the story with your true love, and that’s the ultimate mission. So, you’re going to be able to keep fighting and keep going, but as a slightly more powerful but slightly less desirable guy. And it was Jordan’s idea, god bless him. And the next thing about a screenwriter, like Jordan, figuring out how to tell game stories is like he really thought about like, “Well, what is the story consequence of dying?” Well, the story consequence is that she doesn’t get to marry her true love. She gets to marry the next guy who comes along who’s not… — but it’s not love.

So, it’s been fun to see that play out and people really respond to that.

**Craig:** Very cool.

**John:** Cool. Craig, it’s time for One Cool Thing.

**Craig:** One Cool Thing!

**John:** Me first or you first?

**Craig:** I don’t know. I actually have one, so that’s already a shocking thing. But you decide who goes first.

**John:** Let me go first. So, my One Cool Thing is a book that everyone can buy. And so, again, if you have your iPad in your hand, the first thing you should do is download Karateka for $2.99 on the App Store. Second thing you might want to do is go over to Amazon, or your bookseller of choice, iBooks, whatever. Mr. Penumbra’s 24-Hour Bookstore. Mr. Penumbra’s 24-Hour Bookstore, by Robin Sloan, which is really great and fun and a great Christmas time read.

It’s sort of big nerd adventure story, so adventure story in the sense of like it’s Da Vinci Code or like a Raiders of the Lost Ark, but very, very nerdy in the best possible way. And it involves fonts, and fantasy novels, and Google Books scanners, and it’s just really terrifically well done. And so I think people who are interested in things that screenwriters are interested in, who are listening to this podcast, would probably dig it.

**Craig:** Very cool. I still, in the back of my mind, you’ve told me that I haven’t done this before, and in the back of my mind I feel like I have. But I’m sure one of our intrepid listeners will call me out if I’m duplicating.

But, you and I both attended a party thrown in John Gatins’ honor last night. John Gatins is the screenwriter of Flight, which is getting a lot of attention this awards season, as well it should. John is a terrific guy. And at that party I met a gentleman who used to sing on Broadway. In fact, he played Marius in Les Mis on Broadway.

And I’m a big musical fan. Obviously you are, you’re making a musical. And for awhile now I’ve been listening to SiriusXM on Broadway in my car with satellite radio. And SiriusXM on Broadway has this fantastic — it’s not fair to call him a DJ because he — I don’t know how you would describe him.

**John:** Host. He’s a host.

**Craig:** He’s kind of a host. I guess he’s sort of a host of huge, long, four-hour blocks of programming. And his name is Seth Rudetsky. And Seth is an accomplished musician and he works on Broadway, typically as an accompanist and a musical guy. And he’s been around for a really long time in the Broadway world and he’s amazing. He’s just a really smart, smart guy.

And what I love about Seth Rudetsky is that he combines these things that mean something to me only in combination. He has an excellent grasp of music theory, dramatic theory, and the theory of musicals if we can posit that such a thing exists, so a very good sort of intellectual theoretical understanding of that stuff. He also has amazing practical experience. He’s actually done it. He knows what it means to start a show from start to finish, succeed — he knows what it means to succeed, he knows what it means to fail. He knows how the sausage is made.

And lastly he is incredibly good at actually conveying those insights that he has to the average listener and the lay person. So, when you combine all three of those things you learn so much from him, sometimes in these little short bursts. And it got me thinking that that’s really, I think, what you and I aspire to when we talk about screenwriting are those three things in combination. And Seth Rudetsky is the Scriptnotes of Broadway.

And I am a big fan of his. I’ve never met him. You have met him?

**John:** I feel like I met him. In the travels I’ve encountered him in someplace, and so I think I shook his hand. But I listen to his show as well and I think he’s terrific. And, again, I would aspire that our show could do a little bit more of that. And as we start doing more interviews in 2013, I think that’s a good place for us to be in is to have people talking about the craft in an enjoyable way.

And we can interview people as they talk about their experiences the way he interviews them talking about how they made their shows.

**Craig:** Yeah. And you know what he does that I love? Sometimes before he plays a song he’ll talk about a tiny little moment in the song that you would never notice. But he’ll talk about why it’s good. And he has such a passion for it. And so he’ll say, “Just listen for that moment and here’s why it’s important because of this.”

And then you hear it and you go, “Oooh!” Like, for instance, there’s a song You Can’t Get a Man with a Gun. And it was written for a belter. And he was talking about how when you write songs for belters like Ethel Merman who originated the performance of that song, that you want to find those moments in a song that allow the belter to belt.

And he says, listen, you know, in the chorus, [sings] “You can’t get a man with a gun. With a g-uUN.” And that whole like “g-uUN.”

That whole thing is really designed to let Ethel Merman just be Ethel Merman.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And I’d never really thought about that before. And then he plays the song and you’re like, “Whoa, he’s right.” [laughs] “There it is! Brilliant.”

**John:** I second your recommendation. He’s terrific. And that’s on XM. And XM is actually kind of wonderful.

I never had XM until we got this new car and it came with three free months of XM and you quickly become addicted. And so, of course, then you start paying the monthly subscription.

**Craig:** Well worth it, for Seth Rudetsky alone.

**John:** Great. So, those are our Christmas presents for you. We have Mr. Penumbra. We have Seth Rudetsky. We have Karateka. We have Identity Thief. Hopefully some answers to questions people had. If you want more information or links to any of these things you can look at johnaugust.com/podcast where we’ll have the show notes for each and every episode of the show.

And, Craig, Merry Christmas. Happy Early New Year.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I guess we’ll see everybody in 2013.

**John:** That’s awesome.

**Craig:** Unless those Mayans get us.

**John:** By the time this podcast airs won’t the Mayan Apocalypse have already happened?

**Craig:** So this podcast won’t air?

**John:** Yeah, oh my god. We just wasted a lot of time didn’t we?

**Craig:** A lot of our last remaining minutes. Brutal!

**John:** I should have spent it with my family but instead I spent it with you.

**Craig:** Yeah. I like that. Feels right.

**John:** Thanks Craig. Take care.

**Craig:** Bye.

Scriptnotes, Ep 67: The air duct of backstory — Transcript

December 14, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/the-air-duct-of-backstory).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 67 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Craig, how are you?

**Craig:** Oh man, I’m good. We’ve got one more week of shooting to go so I’m hanging on. I’m kind of hoping that I don’t get that weird body let down thing when you — it seems inevitable after you shoot you get a week or two off and you get sick.

**John:** Yeah. It’s like your body was so tensed up, it’s like it couldn’t possibly get sick, so it sort of sequestered all the germs. And then once you possibly can get sick you just get super sick all at once.

**Craig:** Yeah. So, I’m hoping that doesn’t happen because I get basically a week to relax and then, you know, vacation stuff and traveling.

**John:** I always found in college I would get sick right when I came home for Christmas. It was like I was able to get through the semester, make it to my finals, and then I would get sick.

**Craig:** Yeah. But it’s a great way then to avoid your family at Christmastime.

**John:** Perfect. And I love it. Now, what is your family’s tradition around the holidays? Do you do Christmas? Do you do Hanukkah? Do you do other stuff? I don’t even know.

**Craig:** I’m so glad you asked that question because it allows me to go on a mini rant.

**John:** I love it.

**Craig:** So, I’m Jewish. I’m not religious at all, but I’m ethnically Jewish, and I was raised in the Jewish tradition.

**John:** Ethnically Jewish or culturally Jewish? Is there a distinction between those for you?

**Craig:** Well there is, yeah, because Jews are both a people and a religion/culture. So, there is a genetic component to being Jewish. That obviously is affixed to me, and happily so. But culturally speaking, even though I grew up in a culturally Jewish home and in a vaguely religious home, sort of moderately religious — I suppose we were religious the way that most Christians are religious. Sort of Christmas/Easter type Christians. You know, we were Hanukkah/Passover type Jews. Or, I should say Rosh Hashanah/Passover type Jews.

But now I’m not religious at all. It’s just not part… — I never felt connected to religiosity in any way. When people talk about being spiritual I literally feel like an autistic person who doesn’t understand something like emotion. I don’t even know — I know what the word means technically. I have no actual connection to it.

I am the least spiritual person in the world. I don’t believe in such a thing. So, I’m not religious at all. [laughs] My wife is also not religious, but she comes from an Episcopalian background and we celebrate Christmas in our house because Christmas is an awesome holiday.

And frankly also from a storytelling point of view, the story of Jesus is an awesome story. It’s a great, great story with wonderful…

**John:** It has good Star Wars elements to it. It feels, you know, desert, and someone comes out who is chosen. It’s nice.

**Craig:** And then the idea of enduring terrible things as part of sacrifice to save others who had condemned you. That’s all good, rich stuff. Whereas Old Testament stories tend to be far more simple and odd, like, “You all lied. I’m killing you.” [laughs] “You’re all drowning now because I don’t like you.” Stuff like that.

**John:** Well, also the Old Testament stories are so sort of transparently interpretations of very classic myths. Like all those things existed for a long time, they were just sort of woven together to become the Old Testament, but you find the exact same kinds of stories in other cultures at the same time, too.

Whereas the Jesus story at least has a lot of new elements to it even though there were other outside savior figures. And you can find the roots of the Jesus story in other cultures as well. It is newish.

**Craig:** It’s newish. I mean, if you read the story of Krishna it will shock you how Jesus-y it is. I mean, the idea of a virgin birth, someone who dies for your sins. Someone is convicted unfairly and who is perfectly sweet and good, that did pre-date Jesus.

But, that said, the story feels like a more modern story in part because it is.

**John:** But also it has three acts. It has an arc to it which is unique and different. I mean, there’s a saga to it that doesn’t exist in sort of the other Old Testament stores which is nice.

**Craig:** It’s true. I mean, there’s a saga to Exodus. That is, I think, the most interesting Old Testament story because it has the plagues, it has an adopted child who grows up in the family that he then rebels against. And then there’s plagues. And finally the Pharoah relents. But then there’s a reversal because he decides, “No, you can’t leave, I’m going to chase you down and kill you.”

But then God comes with a pillar of fire. But then fascinatingly and anti-dramatically then they just wander around for 40 years.

**John:** Yeah. That’s not so dramatic.

**Craig:** It’s a really bad third act. [laughs]

**John:** So, like you, my family is — we celebrate Christmas and we do all that stuff. We’re not sort of actively religious. And so I always sort of never kind of wanted the Christian label on me, but then when I was in Africa years ago working with this charity group, everyone was like, “Oh, are you Christian?” And it’s like you’re just sort of Christian — if you’re not anything else you’re Christian. So, I’m fine sort of being culturally Christian. That’s why I asked the difference between ethnically and culturally, because I’m ethnically nothing. But culturally, yeah, I come from a Christian culture. So, even though I don’t actively practice any of those religious tenets on a weekly basis, eh, culturally I’m Christian.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think all Americans to some regard are culturally Christian because, for instance, I consider myself in a weird way culturally Christian as well, because I really love Christmas, and I like Easter. It’s fun, I like those things. But I’m not at all a spiritual or religious person in any regard toward any religion.

I will say that Hanukkah is dopey. Hanukkah is a lame-o holiday. It was an event that is of almost no religious or historic importance to actual Jewish people. When I say “actual Jewish people” I mean like actual students of Judaism. Hanukkah is incredibly minor. It’s on par with Jewish Arbor Day.

**John:** But it got elevated just because it was so close to Christmas and it felt weird that they didn’t have an equivalent holiday around that time of year.

**Craig:** It is totally manufactured in the way that Christians manufactured Easter out of pagan holidays. And so the bunny is a part of Easter because it was the Spring Fertility holiday and they kind of just glommed in. It’s the same deal.

And Hanukkah is just dopey. I mean, the whole thing is that there was a minor miracle involving a couple people who they got lights on for a little bit longer than they should have.

**John:** Yeah. It’s like your iPhone battery lasting a really long time.

**Craig:** Yeah, “Uh, let’s have a holiday.” It’s ridiculous. The whole eight-presents-over-eight-nights is ridiculous, because really you only get one good present and then a bunch of dinky ones. So, basically, really all they’re doing is spreading out the stocking stuffers over seven nights.

You know, it just — I mean, I understand why it was important for us as kids to have something, but you know, frankly, Christmas is so much more religiously significant to Christianity than Hanukkah is to Judaism that even as a Jew I’m like, “I don’t even like the idea of putting up the Menorah next to the Christmas tree in the mall.” You know, I just feel like, no, just do the Christmas tree.

If you want to be properly-Jewish, then at Passover and Easter — which are connected because, of course, the Last Supper was a Passover Seder — do something there. That’s important.

**John:** I hear you.

**Craig:** So, anyway, that’s my religious rant for today.

**John:** Cool.

Today I thought we would talk about perspective within scenes and sort of perspective overall in a story and sort of how screenwriters work on shifting perspective and telling a story with a clear perspective. And then get into three more examples — actually four more examples of our Three Page Challenge, because we’ve had so many good ones come through and Stuart picked out four new ones for us to look at.

So, that will be our agenda today.

**Craig:** That’s our day.

**John:** That’s our day.

So, a small update on the last podcast, I talked about how for this ABC pilot I’m writing I wrote it all in Fountain for the first time. And I used this beta of a new software program that’s coming out which is really good and I liked it a lot. And so just an update on that: So I finished, and so stuff is handed in.

And so I ultimately ended up using Highland to convert the Fountain to Final Draft so I could go through Final Draft, because I needed to do starred changes. And that’s one of the things that’s still problematic to try to do in Fountain or any of the sort of non — any sort of plain text thing — is when you need to mark what’s changed from one draft to the next draft, so if I’m sending pages through to Josh I can say like, “Hey, just look for the starred changes.”

That’s a thing that Final Draft is really good for. And so while I think these writing tools are really great and really helpful, I’m still very much acknowledging that there’s things that big professional applications like Final Draft are really good at. And starred changes is one of the things that it does really well. Screenwriter does it well, too.

**Craig:** Yeah. Did you see that Fade In actually has built in Fountain exporting and importing I think?

**John:** Yeah, which is terrific. And where I find stuff missing, and I’m not talking about Fade In specifically, but as I was working with this draft in Final Draft I was making small changes, and so like literally just adding a few lines of dialogue, and I found it really maddening suddenly to have to use Final Draft Syntax for adding characters and stuff. Because I found myself typing I was like, “Well, that’s in parenthesis so of course that’s a parenthetical. Why are you making me go through and select it and tell you that it’s a parenthetical? It’s a parenthetical.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And that’s one of the things that in my fantasy Final Draft would just have a little mode, a little tick box you could set that’s like, “In the Fountain mode,” and it would just be able to interpret. It’s actually very hard to.

**Craig:** That’s a really interesting one because it’s the one thing about Movie Magic I love the most. When you’re in dialogue and you hit parenthesis, or if you are — before you type, if you have parenthesis it puts it in parenthetical.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Because their point is, and they’re right — how often do you have to type a parenthesis that isn’t a parenthetical?

**John:** Yeah. Or, how often is the parenthesis going to be in the very start of the line of dialogue?

**Craig:** Right. Just know open parenthesis means go command-4 into Parenthesis Mode.

**John:** Yup. Should be. So, anyway, it’s been interesting to sort of see that process sorting itself out.

And for people who are curious about Fountain we actually have a new Glassboard setup to talk over Fountain issues. Glassboard is a sort of semi-private message board system. So, if you have issues that come up in Fountain or questions about Fountain, myself and the other developers of Fountain are there to answer questions or talk about new stuff that can come up.

So, there will be a link to that new Glassboard for Fountain on the links for Scriptnotes at the bottom of this podcast. So, always just johnaugust.com/podcast and you’ll see a link for that.

**Craig:** Cool.

**John:** So, let’s talk about perspective because this actually came from you. You were talking about how with what you’re working on right now with The Hangover 3, there’s issues that come up sometimes about really conveying what the perspective is within a scene.

**Craig:** Well, it occurred to me because I’ve been — now that we’re getting close to the end I’ve been sneaking away from the set and spending time with the editors, just trying to kind of help get a few of the scenes together in shape for when Todd comes in and really starts working on his assembly. Because I’m there and I do it with him I know, “Okay, this is what he intended for this,” or “This is what he intended for that,” sort of like hopefully we can hand over an assembly-plus as opposed to just an assembly.

And one thing that I noticed is that a lot of times when editors are assembling all the footage, what they’re doing is following the lines. So, let’s say you have a scene where three people walk into a room to talk to one person. They will sort of follow the dialogue. But, of course, when you’re editing you have a choice. You don’t necessarily need to show who is talking. You could show somebody else.

And sometimes what ends up being missed is where the perspective of the scene is away from the dialogue. Sometime you’re writing a scene where people are talking but one person is staring at the person that’s being talked to. And that person is not saying anything. That person is falling in love; that person is growing angry; that person sees something in their hands; that person realized they’re lying. That’s what I mean by perspective.

And it started to occur to me that it’s something that we bake into our scenes a lot, but if you’re not you should be. And the notion that the scene, no matter what’s going on in a scene, ultimately the reader must be emotionally connected to a specific singular relationship — a person to another person; a person to an object; a person to an event.

And things should be going on around that. But there has to be a focal point of concentration for the reader and then ultimately for the audience. And it doesn’t have to be with who’s talking. Sometimes it’s not at all with who’s talking. And it’s important for us to think about where that perspective is and then come up with interesting ways to draw us out of it and switch it if need be.

**John:** So, the exact case that you’re bringing up is very classically what you want to do. The center of the scene, the most important person in the scene, the base of a scene, is not necessarily the person who has the most lines in the scene. And in many movies that will be kind of obvious, because if your hero is in a scene — if Indiana Jones is in a scene with other people who are doing more talking, well obviously it’s Indiana Jones’s movie, so we’re going to spend most of our time with him, so it’s really natural that we’re going to favor him in the cutting and in our head as we’re sort of shooting the movie in our heads. We always know that Indy is the most important person in that room.

With your movie, because you have multiple protagonists and you have a lot of stuff going on, it might not necessarily be clear who the important person is to follow in this thing and who should be at the center point of the scene. So, how would you bake that in on the page? What would you do to convey that? Are you just saying, like, hold on this person and throw the other dialogue in OS? How would you convey that on the page?

**Craig:** Well, you shouldn’t. I mean, in a sense you want to be able to shoot everything because you don’t know what you’re going to want to play off camera and what you’re not going to want to play off camera. But in action description you should do what you normally do, that is to say emphasize what matters. So, while one person is talking you could say, “While Jim rambles on, Sandra can’t help but keep staring at the man’s withered hand.” Okay?

**John:** Yeah, or “Sandra burns a hole through him with her eyes.”

**Craig:** Yes. Now, when it comes time, of course, you know, again, editors may make a mistake, but that’s okay. Everybody gets their first and second drafts, and the point is that the filmmaker, the director, should understand what the perspective of the scene is as well. But their understanding of it is going to come from the script and from their discussion with you, which is why it’s so important to emphasize perspective.

In fact, as I often do, I got angry [laughs] on DoneDealPro because somebody was saying, “How do I — I want to sort of describe how the camera is moving here.” And really it was about emphasizing perspective. And people were like, “Don’t put in camera directions. Don’t direct with script.”

No. No, no, no, no, no. Go ahead and put in camera directions if it’s important if that’s what’s going to convey the intention of where the perspective of the scene is. It’s important to know where the camera is going if it’s not doing what would be expected.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Okay? So, if we’re watching two people and it’s a spy thriller, and they’re having this discussion, and the intention is that we slowly pull back and away from them to reveal the back of a man’s head at another table listening, and he has a little thing in his ear and he can hear what they’re saying, it’s important for you to put that direction in.

Because it’s about figuring out what the perspective is and who we’re supposed to be with. I mean, think about the scene in The Godfather where Michael goes to have dinner with Sollozzo and Captain McCluskey. I think it’s McCluskey.

And his mission is he’s going to kill both of them. And he’s nervous because he’s never killed somebody up close like that before. He’s never committed murder like that before, even though he’s a war hero. And he’s sitting here in this restaurant, and the two of them begin talking — not him, the other two are talking — and while they’re rambling on we just stay with him and he’s just staring quietly. He even starts nodding in answer to what they’re saying, but we don’t even see them anymore because it’s all about that feeling you get in your head when you begin to swim in your own thoughts and you start to panic internally.

Well, you have to describe that on the page. You have to. And if you don’t, I think you’re missing the point of what it means to bake in the perspective of the scene.

**John:** I agree.

Now, as we’re talking about perspective, we’re talking about perspective within a scene. Also, a whole movie has perspective, and in the movie which characters are telling the story and which characters have storytelling ability.

One of the things I’m working on for the ABC pilot is we limit perspective very strictly to the four members of the family. So, every scene has to be driven by one of the four members of the family which is a huge opportunity and obstacle that we present for ourselves, is that we only have information that the four people in the family can see.

And when you setup those kind of limitations, you have to really think about like, “Well, how are we going to get this information across to the audience and which of our four people can have that information?” But, by limiting yourself to that perspective and letting it be clear that we’re never going to go off with the villains and see what the villains are doing, it changes the nature of it.

And the times when we sort of bend the rules and we can sort of follow this little bit of a conversation with people who weren’t originally in the scene, that’s nice; it gives you tension.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s good to — just the fact that it is part of how you’re approaching the show conceptually forces you to think about it. And I see sometimes when we read bad pages, a lot of times it seems like whoever is talking, that’s where the camera is supposed to be. And we just follow line to line, like a play.

**John:** And because we have limited perspective to these four people, obviously if there’s only one of our four family members in the scene, they are the most important person in the scene. There would be no question that someone else is going to be dominating that scene. It has to be our person. Even if our person is not doing the main talking, we know what it is. And it draws you in closer as an audience to those people because you’re seeing them all the time. You’re not going off and hanging out with other people.

**Craig:** Right. Good.

**John:** Cool. Great. Well, thank you for talking about perspective. Let’s get into perspectives on these four Three Page Challenges that we got in this week.

**Craig:** Awesome!

**John:** Awesome. What do we want to start with? Do you want to start with Hunter?

**Craig:** Hunter? Did you say Hunter?

**John:** Hunter. Hunter Altman.

**Craig:** Hunter did…is that the one with the swamplands of Florida?

**John:** Yeah. Why don’t you start with Hunter in the swamplands of Florida.

**Craig:** Okay. So, in these pages here, I don’t believe we have a title for this, we begin in the swamplands of Florida and we realize we’re in, it almost seems like the Everglades or something. An alligator surfaces and we move past the swamp to find an old, small old minor league baseball stadium. This is the home of the Swamp Gators and it’s pretty run down and pretty small-time. It’s at night. Everyone has left. Nothing there but the sound of the sprinklers over the fields.

And then we find groundskeeper Tony, who is 50s, and he’s cleaning up and he’s alone. He switches off the lights, hears a noise, turns back to investigate with his tiny little flashlight, and then sees something inhuman staring at him from the bullpen. The thing pounces on him and kills Tony.

**John:** And that’s three pages.

**Craig:** That’s our three pages. So, you want to start?

**John:** I’ll start. I like it. I thought Hunter has a very good ability to describe things. He uses that ability a little too much. I thought he had really good specific details about this place. I felt like I could sort of see it, and smell it, and live it, and breathe it. And for a horror movie, like, it’s kind of accepted that we’re going to be sort of a slow start. And you’re just going to be, like, painting the world. There was just a little too much painting for me. I could have just gone through and edited a little bit of this out.

But, he really has skills at sort of describing things, so good on him for that. My biggest issue with it was Tony, our guy. Because we’ve seen that trope of the groundskeeper who is there alone at night and hears a noise and goes out to investigate. It’s just so stock that I feel like you need to push back against that and give us something else more specific or more interesting to be doing here.

Because if you’re sticking with the idea that he’s a groundskeeper, okay, but give me something else. Is he hitting a few balls of his own at night because that’s the only time he gets to do it? Is he dying of emphysema? Is he cooking meth in the back room? Is he super Christian? Does he collect one kind of thing that he finds in the stands?

Just give me something more specific than just, like, he’s the guy who cleans up and then he finds some monster out in the fields.

**Craig:** Yeah, I agree with everything. I mean, to continue your theme, the initial theme of praise, good writing here. In particular the beginning, I really liked, “Around it, insects buzz, frogs croak, birds call. You can feel the sticky humidity just by looking at it.”

Well, what’s nice about that is I can feel the sticky humidity now just by reading that. So, that’s good. I felt there — I felt I was there. I liked the touch of how rundown the scoreboard was. But then I would say, okay, there’s only so many times you can make me read stuff. So, you have me read, “THE SWAMP GATRS THAK YOU FOR COMING. DRIVE HOME SAF,” which is bulbs burnt out — it was a nice touch.

Then I have to see the banner that says “1987 is The Year Of The Gator!” Then I have to read “Hit one over the Gator and win a free seafood dinner!” There’s a lot of reading going on. So, by the time I got to the bottom of page one with the sprinkler — the sprinkler sound was great, but then there were three more paragraphs describing what the stadium looked like and it was not required.

Yeah, absolutely, everything that happens on page two and three we have seen a billion times. The old disposable character gets eaten by something. And, you know, I understand to some point there’s only so much character building you can do there because the dude is about to get eaten, but I think John is right; you want to try and maybe give us some twist on the same old thing.

I would say that, a couple of suggestions for you, Hunter. One is on the bottom of page two, “He’s not more than 20 yards from the glowing EXIT sign, when he hears — [/] — SOMETHING. He’s not sure what. He turns back.” Well, someone’s going to have to record that later, Hunter, [laughs], so can you give us a little more, buddy? It’s got to be more than “SOMETHING.” Is it a clank? Is it a cling? Is it a growl? Is it a shuffling noise? Is it a drip-drip-drip? But it can’t be “SOMETHING” in all caps. That’s just malpractice.

**John:** That’s cheating. I agree.

**Craig:** And then, finally, the death itself comes exactly as you would imagine it. There’s absolutely no question that he’s about to get killed by a thing that he’s investigating, but it comes from the front of him, it doesn’t come from above, or from behind, or from below. There’s no misdirect. There’s nothing. It just sort of happens as it should happen. But I like the touches that you did. “A smeared brown trail.” I like the way his page is laid out.

Like if you look at page three — for those of you who are new writers, take a look at page three of Hunter’s pages. It is divided up perfectly. It’s the perfect proportion of scene headers, description lines, dialogue. Short. Punchy. Lots of good caps where it needs to be. That’s the way you should write. That’s the way it should look.

**John:** Agreed. Some of the dialogue wasn’t spectacular but I liked the breakup of the page a lot.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So, here’s what I’ll say about this trope is we have the maintenance guy, the minute he sort of calls out to, “Hey kid, park’s closed,” I would love to see that guy not go out and investigate but actually get out of there and call the police or call security. Just not do exactly what we expect him to do in this kind of movie. And I think to the degree you can surprise us, that’s great.

Also, in the middle of page two, this is — again, you need to go back through and really proofread. It says:

EXT. STADIUM – BEYOND THE OUTFIELD FENCE -- NIGHT.

Tony stands by a standard electric POWER BOX, as well as a gas-powered backup generator.

On the wall is the rusty old POWER BOX for the stadium. He twists a small key in, opens it, and flicks a switch.

Well, we’ve just established this power box twice, I think. Or maybe there were meant to be two? It’s confusing and not necessary. And, honestly, think about the cut. And literally the cut would just be like you put in the key to unlock something, or you turn something off. You don’t have to sort of establish that there is something and then have someone do something to it. Just have them do something to something and that will establish that exists in the world.

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s great advice. Think about the cut. Because that’s exactly what I was thinking about when I started feeling like there were too many things to read. Because, you know, I don’t want to just keep looking at signs. So, you get to look at one sign briefly. And, you’re right. The notion — for instance, another possibility is he goes, you know, “You kids, park’s closed,” and have him walk towards the bullpen and there’s a kid there. And they’re playing. And he gets rid of them.

And then he hears another thing, [laughs], do you know what I mean?

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** We have choices here of how to kind of subvert people’s expectations. But in these particular pages we just did the most expected version.

**John:** Yeah. And I should have said as we started this whole thing off is for people who want to read along with us at home, links to all four of these PDF samples will be at johnaugust.com/podcast for this podcast. So, you can pull them up and read along with us as we look through them.

So, the next one we’re going to take a look at is by Kevin Wolfe & Adam DeKraker. And, again, we don’t have a title on this, but here’s what happens:

We open in an operating room with a screaming pregnant woman. There’s two doctors, Juliet Abbas and Jonas, and they’re working on a delivery and they’re arguing about a C-section. As they cut the woman open Jonas gives an “Oh my god” as his eyes go wild in excitement. The EKG flatlines.

Next, we’re on a rooftop garden in Brooklyn with Ronnie Van Dam, a 30-year-old Hitchcock blonde. We see her condo building, her unit, her amazing kitchen. We see a New York Magazine cover that calls her the “Queen of Green.”

Later, as she’s cooking, she’s watching a syndicated talk show with Paula Cruz, whose first guest is Dr. Abbas from the first scene, who is a fertility specialist.

And that’s our three pages. Craig?

**Craig:** Well, you want me to start?

**John:** You can start.

**Craig:** Oh, boy. Okay. Well, look, the dialogue here on page one is pretty bad.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** First of all, the coming in mise-en-scene in this — in medias res, whatever the phrase is, in medias res.

**John:** As stuff is going on.

**Craig:** In the middle of it, sorry. It’s not mise-en-scene. It’s medias res. Coming in the middle of this woman, she’s screaming. This is the first line of the movie:

PREGNANT WOMAN

(screaming)

Stop! Please! Why are you doing this?

This would the first human being that ever said, “Stop! Please! Why are you doing this?” while people cut her. It’s just so wooden. I don’t understand what’s happening frankly in this operating room.

**John:** I know.

**Craig:** They’re doing what appears to be a C-section, however the woman is not anesthetized. I don’t know why. If that’s a point I think that needs to be called out. If it’s not a point then anesthetize her, for the love of god. “A steady drip of BLOOD trickles from the table and pools around their feet.” What hospital is this where that is allowed? [laughs] That doesn’t happen in hospitals, I mean, unless you’re in trauma surgery.

**John:** Yeah, but there’s nurses to pick that up. Is it just the two doctors and there’s no one else in the place?

**Craig:** Well, and also, blood doesn’t trickle from operating tables. You have suction. I mean, it just doesn’t work that way. I just doesn’t trickle like a horror movie and pools around their feet. I’ve never seen such a thing.

And then we have, you know, this dialogue. Dr. Abbas says, “Scalpel.” Dr. Jonas, who’s wearing wire-framed glasses, apparently that is super important in the middle of all this…

**John:** Yeah. I think he’s a Nazi.

**Craig:** Apparently. Pleads in a thick accent, “We need to slow the hemorrhaging.” Dr. Abbas says, “Focus on the delivery.” Dr. Jonas, “We can still save the mother.” Dr. Abbas, “Scalpel.”

Doctors don’t do this.

**John:** [laughs] And the woman is apparently still conscious to be hearing this.

**Craig:** Conscious. Yeah. [laughs] Not saying anything. Now she’s interested, I guess, in what they have to say.

**John:** So, it’s possible, is she being bound down to the gurney?

**Craig:** I don’t know!

**John:** I don’t know what’s going on.

**Craig:** I don’t know! And then Dr. Jonas places a scalpel into Dr. Abbas’ hand. So, now you have a doctor handing tools to another doctor which, again, speaks of complete ignorance of how surgery is done. And Dr. Abbas lifts back a flap of skin to reveal the womb. Dr. Jonas, “Oh my god.” Dr. Abbas is wild with excitement. But she drops the scalpel which hits the floor with a clang. Well, you don’t do that when you’re excited. you do that when you’re shocked or horrified. The others step back in horror. The EKG flatlines.

**John:** But the others step back in horror. Well, what others are there?

**Craig:** What others? Yeah.

**John:** There aren’t any others in the room.

**Craig:** Well, no, there’s “Four figures in surgical scrubs and masks huddle over a pregnant woman.” But two of them are doctors and the other two are just huddlers.

**John:** [laughs] Those mysterious huddlers.

**Craig:** But it gets worse. It gets worse from here. [laughs]

**John:** Why don’t we talk about this first page just because I don’t know if we want to go back through and look at these things twice. Here’s an example of the Dr. Abbas and Dr. Jonas — the character names and the headers over dialogue, get rid of the “Dr.”s because it actually makes it more confusing because it’s harder to tell them apart with those. So, those should just be labeled as “Abbas” and “Jonas.”

Now, so Dr. Juliet Abbas, we get Juliet is a woman, so that’s okay, fine. But “DR. JONAS (late 30s), wearing WIRE FRAME GLASSES, pleads in a thick accent.” So, I assume like, oh, Dr. Jonas, I guess is a man. But then the next paragraph of scene description, “Dr. Jonas places a scalpel into Dr. Abbas’s hand. For a split second, the light catches a TINY JADE TURTLE CHARM on her wrist.”

And that made me think, “Well, is Dr. Jonas a woman?”

**Craig:** Right, does she have a turtle charm?

**John:** Yeah. The “her” isn’t connected to either one of them.

**Craig:** This is an example of a mess. And, guys, I’m sorry — or ladies — I don’t mean to be mean about this, but this page is a mess. It’s a mess. You wouldn’t want to watch this the way you’ve written it. I don’t how else to put it. It’s kind of a mess. And tonally speaking it’s playing as high camp, and I don’t think that’s what you want, because then on page two we suddenly enter into a Nancy Meyers movie.

So, now I’m really confused because now we have this woman at a rooftop garden in Brooklyn and she’s the queen — we know this because a magazine tells us — she’s the Queen of Green, meaning that I guess she grows stuff. And she really wants to be pregnant. And I know that because in the elevator she looks at a pregnant neighbor and then she watches a show about pregnancy and has a reaction to the doctor saying, you know, “We can get people pregnant when they’re not pregnant.”

But there’s better ways to show me that somebody wants to be pregnant than that. That’s about the goofiest way.

**John:** Yeah, I also want to maybe make a new challenge to all screenwriters in the world: Let’s stop doing the thing where we show a magazine cover to establish who somebody is. It’s just so hacky to do that. Because you always have this fake headline that would never actually be on the magazine. It’s always people who never would be on the magazine anyway.

It’s just a terrible way to do things. It’s the air duct of backstory.

**Craig:** [laughs] It is the air duct! It’s the air duct of backstory and exposition. And, also, it’s so weird that they have at their own — like if you were on the cover of a magazine, to casually leave it around your own house is so weird.

**John:** I was on the cover of Written By Magazine, but I don’t leave it around the house just sitting out there.

**Craig:** No, it’s weird.

**John:** It’s weird.

**Craig:** And it would be even weirder to read it. And what happens is you start — something like that, just so that people understand. She comes in from her rooftop garden with her basket of stuff, her beets. Her basket of beets. She plops the basket onto the kitchen counter. “A carrot tumbles out and lands on a copy of NEW YORK MAGAZINE. Ronnie is on the cover with the headline ‘THE QUEEN OF GREEN.'”

Nothing can take me out of a movie more than a magazine cover with our character’s name on it with the fact describing that she’s the queen of gardening while a carrot that she just gardened tumbled onto it. Everyone in the audience will be thinking, “Oh, look what the movie’s telling us.” They’re not in the story at this point. There’s got to be a better way to get that information across.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** Must be. And then this talk show, you know, again, while we’re calling for moratoriums can we call for a moratorium on the introductory talk show that tells us who someone is?

**John:** Yeah. It’s not good.

**Craig:** So, we have a talk show now. And the talk show host, “Welcome back, doctor. We always love having you here and you know why? Because we love babies!” Ugh.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Eh, I don’t know what to say about all of this.

**John:** I would say it’s just not especially promising. So, this seems to be some sort of like mad pregnancy thriller, I think. That’s a valid genre, sort of. It feels a little bit Lifetime-y, but that’s a valid genre to do.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** I just think this didn’t start off in a very promising way.

**Craig:** No, it’s just playing incredibly campy right now. And you don’t want to be campy, unless you want to be campy.

**John:** Unless you want to be campy, but this isn’t the right kind of campy. This doesn’t feel like it’s going…

**Craig:** No. This is feeling pretty goofy. I think you guys need to really take a step back and if you’re writing a movie that’s sort of like Rosemary’s Baby or Coma or something like that, find your tone. This stuff is really over-the-top right now.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Sorry.

**John:** That’s okay. We agree. I think they were brave to send it in.

**Craig:** Yes. [laughs]

**John:** Thank you for sending it.

**Craig:** It’s the attendance award of Scriptnotes. You were brave for sending it in. [laughs]

**John:** Next up let’s talk about The Transcendentalist by Scott Gorsuch.

**Craig:** All right. Are you summarizing or am I summarizing?

**John:** You’re summarizing this one.

**Craig:** I’m summarizing this one. Okay. So, this story opens with the image of a small boy slipping down through water in a lake, fully clothed, apparently drowning, blood gushing from his head while a voice over asks, “Ever think about past lives? What you might have been?” As the boy disappears into the depths the man’s voice, voice over, “I didn’t used to.”

And now we’re back now, and presumably that little boy has grown up, we think, and he’s woken up with a shock on a bus. He looks sad, a little bit out of place. He walks to his house. There’s some furniture missing and it turns out his girlfriend has left him. She’s moved out, left him a note. He calls up his friend Steve to say, “Hey, can we meet for a drink? Lydia has moved out.”

The two of them share a couple of beers in a pub. They talk about the fact that she moved out. And talk about why it may be that David had sort of failed here. That’s our character, David. And those are our three pages.

**John:** They were kind of a dreary three pages. And dreary, partly intentional. I mean, you’re opening with a good image of a boy drowning. That’s bleak. You’ve got a guy on a bus, like a sad George Bailey. That’s kind of dreary. But I just felt like I was slipping into a dark and not especially inviting place reading through these pages.

And there were a lot of specific sort of problems on the page that I want to talk about, because we don’t get a lot of sense of plot here yet, so there wasn’t a lot to sort of get me there in terms of talking about story, but just the words on the page could be better and could help me out a lot.

Right from the very start, the small boy slips down through the water — SMALL BOY should still be capitalized, even if that’s a character we’re going to meet later on. If it’s an actual person, give us some uppercase there.

Capitalizing “Winter” mid way through the page felt weird to me. I know, technically I guess we’re supposed to capitalize “Winter,” but it felt weird to me. It stuck out.

And we do this weird thing at the bottom of page one where we’re outside the house and then we’re inside the house. And then he’s like, “Lydia, are you home?” And he’s been wandering around the house. But we never really got inside the house and so I kept waiting for like, “What, are we looking through the door? Oh, no, I guess we really are walking through the house.” Give us a new scene header there. So, “EXT. DAVID’S HOUSE – FRONT PORCH.” He can do the “‘Lydia? You home?’ No one answers.” Next, new scene header, “INT. DAVID’S HOUSE.” Then you can walk around.

And once you’re inside the house it’s fine if the style you want to use is that you’re just doing little slug lines for the different rooms of the house. That’s cool, that’s a valid style. But if you’re going from EXT to INT, those really are different places. Give us a scene header for those.

It has a really unrealistic phone conversation on page two. So, I’ll read it aloud here for you:

He dials an old rotary phone on the counter.

DAVID

(on phone)

I know, sorry about that, been really busy... Hey, can you meet me for a drink?... Really? Can’t you do that later?... No, listen Steve -- Lydia’s moved out.

So, it just started weird. Like on one just starts talking into a phone. And so there wasn’t a sense of, like, he called somebody and acknowledged who it was that he was talking to. That’s not how phone calls work. And so you could slip a jump cut in there and that would be valid. If you just gave me like, “JUMP CUT,” I’d believe that some time had passed. But it didn’t feel real in the moment.

**Craig:** Yeah. I really liked the opening. I didn’t mind the dark, sort of glum tone. Maybe this is going to be a cool mumblecore movie, who knows. I mean, I really enjoyed the opening visual. I thought it was well-written. And I liked him being on this bus and I liked how sad he was.

And I liked the way that he found out initially that Lydia had left him. “He scans the room. There’s an empty silhouette on the wall where a painting had been and impressions in the carpet from a missing chair.” Those are really nice details.

“He thinks maybe someone has broken in. He snatches an umbrella, creeps into the kitchen.” By the way, I agree with you about the slug lines. We have to be INT here, “INT. HOUSE.”

He comes around it, now there’s a note stuck to the fridge. And then on the note we hear the voice over of her reading the note and that I did not like. Frankly, I don’t think you need that at all. I don’t think you need the note at all. And I totally agree with you about the conversation. Really I would have loved to have picked that up in the middle. So, in other words, “He comes around the corner and he sees a note stuck to the fridge.”

We don’t have to read the note. The next thing we should see is him already on the phone. “I know, I’m sorry about that. Been really busy.” So, it’s a little bit of a mystery what’s going on. And then he says, “Listen, Lydia’s moved out.” And then we get the answer when he tells Steve. Don’t give us information twice.

You have information? Play the mystery of it. You gave away a gift you had built into the setup of the scene, if you think about it.

**John:** So, here’s an even more drastic cut that I serves you even better. So, “No intruder. A very conspicuous note is stuck to the fridge.” So, can either pull it down or you can just leave on the note. “Cut to: INT — PUB.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** He’s with Steve. And Steve is holding the note. Because right now the note happens about halfway through it and its this whole shoe leather to get the note out. Steve is holding the note and all he has to say is, “While you were at work? That’s harsh.” We know what happened then. And then you can have the conversation about Lydia. Like you don’t need to say her name before that point.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. Or, or, let’s go even further. So, he sees this note. The next thing is he’s in a pub with his friend. And let’s go back to our discussion about perspective. His friend is rambling on about something we don’t care about while David just sits staring at his beer. Staring at his beer. Staring at his beer. Then he finally looks up and says, “Lydia walked out.”

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** See, I mean, there’s 100 different ways of doing this, but this isn’t an interesting way. This is a very boring way of doing it. So, even in these things think about drama and think about teasing the audience along.

It’s great to leave them confused for 30 seconds. 40 seconds. A minute. You don’t want them confused for five or ten minutes, because then they’re not watching what they’re supposed to be watching. But confusion for a short burst that you can then satisfy is good to do.

The discussion that he has with Steve is boring. I don’t know what else to say about that. it’s just boring.

**John:** So, back to your issue of confusion and satisfaction: that’s what I want people to take out of this is that it’s great to be confused for about ten seconds and be trying to figure it out. Like basically you want people, your audience and your readers, to be curious enough to want to figure out what’s happening. “Oh, I figured it out!” And they get that little burst of dopamine when they’re like, “I figured that out. I’m so excited. I’m so smart.”

And you’ve rewarded them for figuring that little thing out, for figuring out like, “Oh, his girlfriend left him!” That’s great. And the trick of writing is anticipating how you’re going to get those little bursts of insight in your reader and your audience as they put the puzzle pieces together.

**Craig:** Yeah, you know what? Part of the fun of screenwriting is to keep the audience wondering if you’re in control or not. Because if you just lay everything out for them and spoon-feed them it’s boring. But if you let them think for 30 seconds, or however long, that maybe you don’t know what the hell you’re doing, and then you go, “No, no, no, no, no. See, I had you the whole time.” They start to trust you. And it becomes comfortable. And it becomes fun to watch, you know, because you know the movie is not going to let you down.

You’re not going to suddenly — because we’ve all had those moments in movies where we realize, “Oh no, I have no idea what the hell is going on, and neither do they.” Or, “They thought I would, and I still don’t.” That’s terrible. And it means that they’ve lost control.

**John:** Yeah. There’s a movie I was helping out on recently that really managed that problem where most of the movie was working really well, but there was this subplot which was just, like, from Mars and just didn’t fit in the rest of the movie. And so every time you cut to that subplot you’re, like, you lost a little bit of faith in the film because that does not make any sense. And if that thing that doesn’t make any sense is part of your movie, then your movie doesn’t really make any sense. And I don’t know if I trust this movie to get me to a solid place.

**Craig:** Right. Right.

**John:** So, our final script of the day is So We Had a Three-Way by Shawn Morrison, which is a great title. I just love that title.

**Craig:** Great title. Love it, too.

**John:** Let me give you a quick summary of this, and it’s going to be super quick because it’s almost all dialogue. We open at an Indian restaurant where 30-year-old married couple Daphne and Lucas Gilman are checking out the menus. We see that Lucas is a bit neurotic. He’s talking about should I have the Mango Lassi but he really wants a ginger ale. And he’s sort of talking himself into and out of things.

Daphne suggests they have sex in the bathroom. So, they go to the bathroom and they try to have sex. Lucas has a hard time getting aroused, partly because he’s nervous about touching the dirty walls. And there’s dialogue that’s happening as all this is going on. So, it’s really just a three-page dialogue scene.

**Craig:** Yeah. I liked it.

**John:** I liked it a lot, too.

**Craig:** And that’s nice for me because you know I tend to get hardest on comedies, and this is certainly a comedy. But, let me talk about why I liked it.

First of all, how convenient for me that so much of this initial scene over their Indian food is about perspective. So, this is what I’m talking about. Lucas is going on. He’s rambling on about what he should order. Should he order the chicken? Should he get the Mango Lassi? Should he get the ginger ale, because I can always get the ginger ale but I can never get the Mango Lassi. And she is lost. She is not in the moment at all. She’s somewhere else.

She’s staring at her bread and she’s looking at the bread. And she’s looking at the bread. And then suddenly her face lights up. And the way that Shawn wrote this, I get that the perspective is between her and her idea, and not at all about this guy yap-yap-yapping. It’s an interesting way for her to reveal what she’s about to say which is “Let’s do it.” And he doesn’t’ understand what she’s talking about until she makes it clear, and then he doesn’t understand when. And then she makes it clear and she convinces him to do it.

Inside the bathroom we get the comedy of — we get a very real kind of comedy. And that’s the collision between an exciting fantasy that you think would be fun and the unfortunate realistic circumstances you’re dealing with to actually do it. And there have been a zillion movies where two sexy people go into an airplane bathroom and have sex. But airplane bathrooms are not sexy. And I don’t even know how you have sex in an airplane bathroom. And I don’t know why you would want to have sex in an airplane bathroom. It’s hard to pee in an airplane bathroom.

And so this is really about that. It was about juxtaposing sort of fun, spark-of-the-moment with the reality of it. And then also playing off the comedic differences in their personality. She’s obviously just like, “Let’s go for it, let’s do it.” And he’s a germaphobe who’s freaking out about the walls. And then layered on top of that you have additional comedy of two waiters just listening to dialogue off-screen.

And this is — from somebody that has to sit and edit comedy — it’s a gift to structure scenes where you can hear things through the wall like that, because it gives you such wonderful options when you’re actually shooting and editing. You can do almost anything. The waiters could hear anything they want to hear there.

But what they heard was interesting. And there was great — the way that she kind of escalates her talk was really funny. He starts worrying about the curry smell. It’s the little details that seem so real. I know this guy. And I get what she’s doing.

But what’s the best part to me was at the end of page three when she says — I’ll read this:

DAPHNE

How about I talk dirty to you.

LUCAS

Nah, that’s OK.

DAPHNE

No, I’m good at it.

LUCAS

You are?

DAPHNE

I used to do it all the time.

LUCAS

With other men?

DAPHNE

Ride me you big strong jockey.

LUCAS

Jockey?

So, [laughs] she’s boasting about something, also giving him information that he didn’t know. Now he’s thinking about other guys she had sex with. And then when she finally delivers she’s terrible at it. This is all very good. I mean, this is really well-written. I thought they were great pages.

**John:** Let me back up to the first page. And I’ll read the scene description. “DAPHNE AND LUCAS GILMAN are the only people in the place. Daphne is 30, pretty, dressed like she’s from Vermont.” Which is great description. I don’t completely what that is, but it feels specific.

**Craig:** It’s like LL Bean, you know? I get it.

**John:** Exactly. “She idly pulls apart naan bread, mind adrift. Lucas studies the drink menu. He’s also 30 with a sensible beard and soft kind eyes.”

I get what that is. I can picture that guy. And then his first line of dialogue, “I hope their chicken is all white meat.” Tells you so much about Lucas.

**Craig:** [laughs] Right.

**John:** He’s just adventurous enough to go to the Indian restaurant, but he doesn’t actually really want to commit to the Indian restaurant. Now, the rest of the dialogue — you pointed this out, but I want to be really specific here — he gets all the first couple of lines but it’s broken up in a very smart way. And so:

LUCAS

I hope their chicken is all white meat.

Daphne stares at a piece of naan.

LUCAS (CONT’D)

The question is do I get the Mango Lassi? Feels like the right thing to order but I think I really just want a ginger ale.

So, by putting in that line of scene description it shifts the perspective back to Daphne. It also lets Lucas’s Mango Lassi thing all be one block and feel like one idea.

Daphne’s face suddenly lights up.

LUCAS (CONT’D)

But that seems like something I can get anytime, whereas the Mango Lassi--

DAPHNE

Let’s do it.

It’s just such a smart way to break up that thing which you could do all a one block, but the jokes wouldn’t play right if you didn’t have the scene description breaking that up.

**Craig:** Right. Because we wouldn’t know that we’re not supposed to give a damn about his Mango Lassi discussion. Without the breakup, without keeping perspective on her, we might think that this author actually wants us to care about this guy’s drink dilemma.

Interestingly, by the way, my take on Lucas from that first line was this is actually a hipster guy who goes to Indian restaurants all the time because he’s hipster and he eats adventurous food. He’s just also very fussy in a hipster way because he doesn’t like bad Indian food. [laughs] Do you know what I mean? I got like a whole other level off of him. I don’t know if it’s true or not.

**John:** I love a good, fussy, hipster.

**Craig:** Yeah. A fussy hipster with this beard and his eye. I mean, it was just all — I thought it was really well done. Three really good pages. I would definitely read more. And I also thought that these two together, and obviously we get from the title where this is going, and I like it.

**John:** Yeah. I like it, too.

**Craig:** I want to see what happens. And this is… — Okay, larger point about comedy, and I kind of brought this up a little bit before when we were talking about the Margarita Moms script, or Margarita Night. People will roll their eyes sometimes and say, “Oh, god, they’re doing a movie and the concept is this.” Yes, concepts are concepts. Okay. They’re going to have a threesome. It’s going to go poorly. It’s not going to be what they thought. It’s going to hurt their marriage, and it’s going to help their marriage, and they’re going to end up together okay or not. Whatever.

We all get where this is going. The point is it’s not where you’re going and it’s not what you’re doing, it’s who you’re doing it with and where they end up. And it’s the characters, especially in comedy, it’s the characters. And I like these characters. I thought Shawn did a really good job. Nice work.

**John:** Yay Shawn!

Yes, I mean, obviously we don’t know sort of what’s going to happen 20 pages from now, 30 pages from now. We have some sense of it by the title, but I’m rooting for this. I think it can work.

**Craig:** Me too.

**John:** Great.

Now, Craig, do you have a One Cool Thing this week?

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Ah! See, I know those reminder emails are doing their job.

**Craig:** They are doing their job. Maybe that will be my One Cool Thing one day is your reminder emails. I opened up my One Cool Thing to Twitter suggestions, and you guys can keep bombarding me with those because I’m going to need them as we move forward.

But this week I found my own Cool Thing. And it doesn’t exist quite yet. It’s not going to exist apparently for purchase until the end of next year. But, I love it so much because it combines two of my great loves. One is medicine and the other is gadgetry.

John, have you heard of Scanadu?

**John:** I don’t know what it is. Tell me everything.

**Craig:** Okay, Scanadu is basically a tricorder. It is, if you’re a Star Trek fan; I don’t know if you are.

**John:** Oh my…yes!

**Craig:** So, Dr. McCoy would have his tricorder. He’d wave it in front of you and go, “This man has a blockage in his left intestine and he’s going to die.”

So, Scanadu is intended to be a $150 palm-size device. And it will scan your vital signs in under a minute and give you a diagnosis on your phone. [laughs] Now, you might say, “Whaaaat?” Yeah. It’s pretty amazing. It is going to be combined — so it’s going to do very simple things like it’s going to measure things like heart rate; electrical heart activity which is basically a little EKG; pulse transit time; temperature; heart variability; and blood oxygenation. And then transmit all of that to an app on your phone which will then be able to essentially comb through it and say, “You’ve got nothing to worry about.” “You got a little something to worry about.” “Oh my god, get to a hospital.”

But, it’s then going to be combined with two additional tools. Once called ScanaFlu and the other one called ScanaFlo. So, ScanaFlo is basically a pee strip. And it’s going to give you a ton of variations to measure your pee and tell you what’s going on, particularly if you’re a woman there’s a bunch of things like pregnancy issues and preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes. But also can look for everybody — kidney failure, urinary tract infections, and stuff like that.

There’s also going to be ScanaFlu which will use your saliva and test for strep, flu, both A and B, Adenovirus and RSV, which is a particularly annoying respiratory illness that most children will eventually get.

What’s so cool about all of this is that it’s basically going to handle a lot of the nuisance stuff that puzzles parents. Your kids get sick and there’s really that, “I hope this isn’t a bad thing. It could either be a nothing or it could be something horrible. I don’t know. Is it strep or do you just have a cold?” Do you know what I mean?

And it’s so cool to be able to put these tools in people’s hands and have them be completely non-invasive. I just kind of love it. And I can’t wait to have one. I want it! I want Scanadu, ScanaFlo, and ScanaFlu. That is something I will pee on every day.

**John:** [laughs] Just pee on your iPhone. That’s really what you should just do.

**Craig:** [laughs] Eventually.

**John:** Because the iPhone already has a little dot inside the headphone jack to know if it’s been submerged in water. You know that? If iPhone is submerged…?

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** So, but you can just pee on your iPhone and it will tell you something.

**Craig:** That’s ultimately where we’re going. But I just love — and first of all, for $150, just to un-clutter pediatrician’s waiting rooms, you know, so that you can basically literally text your doctor and say, “Here are the ScanaFlu results. It’s strep.” And then they can write a prescription. You don’t even have to go in. It’s amazing.

**John:** Great.

So, my One Cool Thing actually exists. You can buy it today. I suggest you do buy it today. It’s an application for both the Mac and the iPad called Soulver. And so what Soulver does is somewhere between a calculator and a spreadsheet. And it’s really good for when you need to figure something out, or especially if you need to figure something out and sort of go back and change the variables later on.

So, it can do some natural language things where you can say like 15% of $60, or you can sort of build sentences they can sort of solve. I tend to use it on just different lines, just sort of setup where your variables are and then you sort of move things around.

I needed to use it this last month. We were figuring out stuff for Big Fish and box office stuff and number of seats. And there were a bunch of little variables we needed to sort of figure out. And you can stick those things in and then you just very easily change any of the variables in it. And I can save that and reopen it at any time. It’s great for those situations where you really don’t want to build a spreadsheet because it’s not like you have multiple columns of things. It’s just pretty simple equations, just there’s a lot of steps. It’s fantastic for that.

So, it’s available for both the iPad and the Mac. I really recommend it. I find myself using it at least two or three times a week. Soulver.

**Craig:** Soulver.

**John:** Yeah, it’s Solver, but just with a U in it.

**Craig:** Soulver.

**John:** Soulver. It’s soulves your soul.

**Craig:** Mm, nice. I’ll check that out. And, well, no, I’m not going to say anything about it. I’m going to try it and then it will be my next week’s One Cool Thing. There’s another app I’m hearing good stuff about.

**John:** I like it.

**Craig:** Yeah, from our Twitter brigade.

**John:** Cool. Craig, thank you for another fun podcast. People who want to read along with any of these samples, again, go to johnaugust.com/podcast and you will see links to these PDFs. You will also see links to the other stuff we talked about like the Scanadu.

**Craig:** Scanadu!

**John:** And Soulver. And Fountain. And the Fountain Glassboard. And I will talk to you again next week, Craig.

**Craig:** See you at the next podcast.

**John:** Thanks. Bye.

Scriptnotes, Ep 63: The Mystery of the Js — Transcript

November 16, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2012/mystery-of-the-j).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 63 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Now, Craig, I notice a change in your voice. I think you have location sound, is that correct?

**Craig:** I’ve got location sound. Wherever I go, [laughs], actually I bought a pretty nice headset/mic thingy because you know when we record and we’re talking what we — how we are going to do that, it is part of today’s podcast, but we have nice microphones, relatively nice microphones. But I can’t lug that around really.

So, I got this like headphone/mic combo thing of the sort that people use when they’re playing Modern Warfare and stuff, and it’s gone. Somehow someone in my house, some little person, has ferreted it away, so I’m using the — this is the built in microphone on the MacBook Pro.

**John:** All right. You’ve used it before and it sounds okay.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** We’ll be fine. But we should talk about our normal setup before we get into our actual business of the day, because people have been asking on Twitter, and I feel like every week I’m answering some sort of question about how we actually record this podcast.

So, usually Craig and I are not in the same room. In fact, the very first time we were recording the podcast live in the same room together was at the Austin Film Festival. Usually we are talking via Skype, which is what we’re doing right now. Usually you’re at your office in Pasadena. I’m here at my house in Los Angeles. And we are both talking into the same kind of microphone. I have this Audio Technica AT2020 something.

**Craig:** Yeah. The 2020. 2020? I don’t know.

**John:** I think it’s 2020, which is a good podcast microphone. It was recommended by Dan Benjamin, who runs the brilliant 5by5 podcasting network. So, we each have that kind of microphone. We each have good headphones. I have these Sony headphones that are sort of big cans that fit over my ears and they make me look like Princess Leia. And record.

And so the crucial things we learned early on as we were doing this podcast separately is that it’s important that we don’t have audio leakage, so that when we’re trying to put these two tracks together ultimately Craig is not talking — you don’t hear Craig talking on my side and you don’t hear me talking on Craig’s side. So, that’s part of the reason of good microphones and good headsets.

**Craig:** Yeah. And then the idea is we can hear each other while we talk via Skype, but we’re also simultaneously recording just our side of the conversation on GarageBand. So, we end up with two GarageBand projects, one that just has me talking, one that just has John talking, and then Stuart waves his magic wand and puts them together.

**John:** And actually figuring out which was the right application to put those together took some time, because originally we were just cutting the two tracks together in GarageBand, which worked, but wasn’t ideal. The best solution we’ve found so far has been the old audio editing app that used to come as part of Final Cut Studio, called Soundtrack Pro. And it’s fine. It doesn’t feel like quite a modern Mac app, but it’s getting the job done.

I think there’s room in this space for a better two-track editor to do what we’re doing, but it’s working fine for us right now.

**Craig:** So far so good. Eventually it will be awesomeness, with full stereo feel effects, surround, lasers.

**John:** All that stuff.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And one of the things you actually learn about podcasting is you don’t want a big stereo split between the two sides. Every once in a while you’ll hear a podcast where they left it in a stereo that’s not a happy kind of stereo, so you hear one person talking in one ear, and one person talking in the other ear, if you’re in your car or if you’re wearing headphones. That’s really bad, so don’t do that. You want things mixed together so it’s happening in the center of your head.

**Craig:** Yeah. That would be annoying. I mean, a little bit — I don’t know if Stuart ever like slightly pans one of us one way and one of us the other way, but full split left and right is just stupid.

**John:** It’s not good. So, today I thought we would talk about, we’re going to do more of our Three Page Challenges, because that’s a very popular feature on the site. And so we would do some more of those, but before we got into those I wanted to do a little bit of follow up on stuff we talked about on previous weeks.

First off, last week we talked about Star Wars and Disney, and some of the speculation is like well who is going to make these new movies? What filmmakers would be involved? And we have part of that answer this week is that they’ve hired Michael Arndt to do treatments for the first three movies of the new trilogy, which I think is a really terrific idea.

**Craig:** Yeah, it makes total sense. I guess it wasn’t — I don’t guess, I know — it wasn’t something that I had premeditated. Premeditated is the wrong word. I had not foreseen this. But, once I read it, it made total sense. Michael Arndt, aside from being a really, really good writer, has shown that he can write across a number of genres. He can be both funny and dramatic. And, most importantly, he’s very, very familiar to Disney because he has been working with Pixar not only on Toy Story 3, but on Pete Doctor’s latest movie.

So, he’s part of their family. He’s an excellent writer. He’s got a terrific pedigree. An Oscar award, of course, never hurts. I mean, the fan boy in me would have loved to have seen them give Larry Kasdan a call, but of course, this is the first step of a very long, long journey.

I mean, I’m always rooting for a writer to take the ball and run it from a punt return to end zone. But, who knows what will happy. I mean, Larry sort of was brought in and other people worked on things. And let’s see how it goes.

But, I thought it was a very smart choice. And he’s a great guy.

**John:** He’s a great guy, too. That’s why I feel no scriptenfreude about his being hired. It’s, like, he’s actually a really good guy. And you and I met him I think for the first time together. Because I remember, so we were putting together this Fox writer’s deal which we got a group of nine writers together and we made this deal at Fox to write original scripts for them.

And Michael Arndt was one of the people who was suggested to us, so we met with him. I think it was at the Grill in Beverly Hills. And so we just sat down with him, and chatted with him, and he was just completely lovely and nice. And at that point he had written Little Miss Sunshine and was still working on Toy Story 3. So, it was kind of a case where, “Well, you’ve written this little tiny indie movie; I don’t know how much, you know, you don’t seem like a big Hollywood writer.”

And then he wrote an absolutely fantastic script for Toy Story 3. So, I feel like he’s a great choice for this.

**Craig:** Well, obviously you and I both understood that, you know, you buy low, sell high. [laughs]

**John:** Exactly.

**Craig:** And, see, we should be running a studio because we knew.

**John:** Exactly. Although I don’t think he’s written his Fox movie yet.

**Craig:** Well, neither have I, so there. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] Done.

Second thing from a previous show, we talked about Karateka, which is the video game that Jordan Mechner and I did. We launched and we’re on Xbox. And so it was so exciting — this week, I could actually fire up my Xbox and see the game available for purchase and download. So, that’s been a good and weird and fun experience.

I had sent you the trailer for it, which is now up online. Adam Lisagor did an amazing job directing the trailer for our little show. And it was so strange to be spending time six months before release trying to figure out what this teaser trailer would be, but it was tremendously fun. So, I’ll have a link to that in the show notes as well, since it’s now actually out there in the world to see.

One thing that is different about Xbox which I’m discovering is we have an app that we’re releasing through the Mac App Store or the iOS App Store. You get stats — you can check stats every day to see how many people are downloading it and you can become sort of addicted to those stats. And it’s very clear how many you sell each day.

With this, you’re just sort of flying blind. And officially Microsoft gives you quarterly results on how your sales are going, which is not useful or helpful. So we’re trying to pull through faster numbers on that. But we’re ultimately going to be going onto some platforms that have more rigorous reporting, and so Steam, and PS3 and iOS. So, it will be exciting how that sorts out.

**Craig:** Awesome. Congratulations.

**John:** Yay! Also, a mutual friend of ours has a very big week as well. Derek Haas, who with Michael Brandt is a writing team, they created the show Chicago Fire which is on NBC which just got its back nine order.

**Craig:** That’s right. That’s right. Now they get their full season of shirtless men fighting fires.

**John:** [laughs] So, the show was originally picked up for 13 episodes, which is very common, which you love to be picked up for 13 episodes. And you’re hoping to get that back nine. That back nine brings you to 22 episodes, which is in modern world considered a complete seasons. So, very exciting for them to be having a full season order, but Derek by himself also has a brand new book which is hitting stores right now, and is available on Amazon, called The Right Hand.

Have you read this book yet, Craig?

**Craig:** I have not read this book.

**John:** I have not read this book either.

**Craig:** I read The Silver Bear and the follow up to The Silver Bear, but I haven’t read this one yet.

**John:** So, this is a new franchise he started that is more CIA/espionage oriented. And apparently it’s pretty good. Publisher’s Weekly said this about it: “This hard edge contemporary spy thriller from Haas covers a lot of ground with a great narrative economy. Forceful cinematic scenes show off the lean grace of Haas’ prose. Cleverly placed plot twists and spy craft details help make this a standout. Readers will hopefully see a lot more of Clay,” the protagonist, the hero.

**Craig:** A name that’s also Derek’s brother’s name, Clay. By the way, the first time that, what, “grace,” “lean,” what was that? It was “lean graceful prose?”

**John:** Oh, it said “the lean grace.” It’s the first time he’s ever been described as having “lean grace.”

**Craig:** As being lean and graceful. But I will say this: Derek is one of the — first of all, one of my best friends in the world. One of the greatest guys in the world. One of the most relentlessly positive, optimistic, good people. I just love — I like watching good things happen to people I love. It’s fun. And he’s had a great week. So, congratulations Derek. We love you.

**John:** Aw. And my mom actually really likes Derek’s books. Because I’ve had one of Derek’s books, like the hardcover version, just randomly, and I brought it with me to Colorado and I left it there, and so she just read it. And she loved it. And she reads these kinds of books, so she’ll be very excited this is coming out.

So, that’s enough reviews of Derek Haas’ work. Let’s get to some reviews of Three Page Challenges.

**Craig:** Let’s do it.

**John:** So, Three Page Challenges for people who are brand new podcast listeners, because there will be some of those, is we have invited our listeners to send us three pages from their scripts, and it doesn’t have to be the first three pages but it almost always is the first three pages. And we will look at them on the show.

And by look at them we mean that Craig and I will read them, but you as the audience are welcome to read them, too. There will be links to all of these Three Page Challenges attached to this podcast, or if you go to johnaugust.com/podcast and look for this podcast, you can download the PDFs and read along with us and see what the hell we’re talking about.

**Craig:** Yeah!

**John:** Before we get started here, we have looked at 19 different installments one the show so far, 19 different samples. But, Stuart — God bless Stuart — Stuart has read 511 of these.

**Craig:** Good god.

**John:** So, there have been 511 accepted entries. And by that we mean people who have actually followed the procedure — and there will be link to how you actually can submit these things — they followed the procedure and put the proper header in and gave us just three pages and didn’t throw in extra stuff.

So, 511 submitted. Of that, 78 were submitted by women. And two by teams that are half female. So, it’s 80 out of 511, or approximately 15.7%.

**Craig:** Wow. It seems like it’s getting worse.

**John:** No, it’s actually better.

**Craig:** Oh, it is? Okay, good.

**John:** So, the second wave increased to 18%, so we did bump up. So, 18% is still not high, but it’s better than it was.

**Craig:** Remarkable. Okay.

**John:** Actually the first batch was 12%. The second batch was 18%. So, it increased 6% over the last wave.

**Craig:** How are we doing with Irishmen? Are we getting enough Irishmen?

**John:** I don’t know if we can break that out, but Stuart did notice an interesting pattern and I tweeted about it last night. And I got some possible answers, but I want you to tell me what you think is actually happening here.

Of the 511 entries, 119 of the submitted names start with the letter J. So, that’s almost 25%.

**Craig:** You mean the last name or first?

**John:** First name. So the Johns, Jacobs, Joshuas, Jeanines, Jennies. So, that’s over 23%, which is much higher than the USA percentage of J first names, which is 11.9%.

So, do you have any theories about why that might happen?

**Craig:** Well, maybe it’s a generational thing. I mean, I would imagine that most of the people sending these in are aspirational which would put them in their 20’s, and curiously both of my children have names that begin with J, and you have a name that begins with J.

So, maybe it’s generational.

**John:** It could be generational. I think we would need to look more specifically about, like, most popular names of the ’80s and ’90s. I think demographic, the male/female split may be part of it, too, because I suspect there are more men’s names that start with J. Not enough maybe to tip us in that direction, but maybe.

I would also look at maybe our readership base. It is international; we have a fair number of international people who are submitting. And so maybe there’s a reason why internationally Js are more common.

**Craig:** It could also be that Stuart is just lying. I mean, we always have to remember that Stuart is in complete control here and he could just be making it up.

**John:** He could be our Keyser Söze.

**Craig:** Oh my god. Our Keyser Söze. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** I’m stupid. I’m stupid. But, you know, we had some interesting pages this week I thought.

**John:** I agree. I was going to suggest we start with Dammed by Mark Cowling. But if you have one that you wanted to start with that’s fine.

**Craig:** That’s good. Today I’m on iPad, so I’ve got it.

**John:** Great. So, let me give you a synopsis of Damned by Mark Cowling. So, we open in Minnesota at midnight where a rust-speckled station wagon smashes through a padlocked gate in front of a church. A man races out of the car; his name is John Cooper. He pounds on the door to the cottage behind the church, waking up Father Sweeney.

He wants to be baptized ASAP and offers a handful of cash. In the church they’re just beginning the baptism when a nice lady named Mrs. Wilkins enters. Only she’s actually some kind of undead screaming monster.

We cut to three months earlier where we meet Kevin Harris, a photographer at a failing pet photography business. As the three pages end he is trying to strike up a conversation with a Goth receptionist.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** Mm-hmmm.

**John:** Craig, talk to me.

**Craig:** Well, I don’t know about you, but I struggled just to get through the first bunch of description. And it’s not that the pages were bad, per se, but this first chunk of description is a really good example of something that we’ve talked about before which is not punishing your readers right off the bat with kind of dense overwritten action.

So, the very first line to me kind of is a signifier. This is the very first line: “Barely visible through the heavy falling snow, St. Jerome Church sits some way off the road.” And, you know, we could just say, it says, “EXT. ST. JEROME CHURCH, MINNESOTA – MIDNIGHT. Snow. The church is chained and padlocked.”

But instead we have, “Barely visible through the heavy falling snow, St. Jerome Church sits some way off the road. A chained and padlocked gate blocks the path up to the small building.”

[sighs] Then…

**John:** Yeah. It’s a little Dungeons & Dragons description.

**Craig:** Very much. And then, “A rust speckled station-wagon veers violently off the road and smashes through the gate. But this exertion proves too much for the battered old car, which shudders to a halt.” This is just over-written.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Not for a novel, maybe, but for a script I think this sort of thing is over-written.

**John:** I would agree. I’ll take back Dungeons & Dragons. It is a little bit novely.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** So Derek could use it in his book, but it’s not good for here. I have a lot of certain nitpicks on ways to make for a better read, but I don’t want to sort of lose, bury the lead. I actually really kind of dug how this started out. I mean, I liked the idea of like waking up the father to get baptized right away. It had mystery. It had drama. It had suspense. You sort of know that the woman coming in is going to be some sort of monster, but that’s kind of okay.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** And then when we cut to this earlier thing, I get it. A little bit over-written, and like I had some problems with the actual — the scene where we are sort of meeting our guy, because when you meet a guy who’s doing nothing that’s not a very interesting way to meet stuff. But it was specific in a way that I really dug.

And so I thought there was a lot of potential here, which is when I really nitpick and rip apart a lot of stuff it’s because I actually really thought this had a lot of potential. I liked — I had a sense of what kind of movie this was. And this was probably some sort of monster movie that had a sense of humor to it, which I love.

**Craig:** Yeah. I totally agree. In fact, that’s precisely why I’m calling this out, because then once we got into the church and we got into the dialogue, the writer suddenly showed up. And it was alive. And it was fun. And I like the tone of it. You know, here’s this, and again, too over-written, you know, “Father Sweeney is avuncular.” Don’t use words like avuncular in screenplays.

**John:** Yeah. I don’t know what avuncular means. I’m a smart person, but I would have to look that up.

**Craig:** Yeah. Father Sweeney seems like a nice lovely old priest, and this is guy is asking to be baptized, and then immediately Father Sweeney just like falls apart into a stream of F-bombs, which is fun, you know. Like, okay, this is actually an interesting person. They start to do this thing. We hear something outside, which our character obviously knows is not the wind, even though he says it is.

Then this woman comes in. I would recommend, by the way, not saying Mrs. Wilkins, because — so this woman walks in and the distracted priest sees her and says, “Mrs. Wilkins,” which is such a fake screenplay name. And, frankly, if he’s — if this is a small town and he’s a priest he might just call her Alma or something. You know, just so you don’t feel like you’re getting detached and into overly broad stuff.

She goes, she engages in this monstrous thing. And the character of Cooper who is getting baptized just turns to the priest and says, “Maybe you can speed things up a little.” So, there’s like a good — you got the tone. It was snappy and it was fun.

Then unfortunately we get a little broad here because we’re meeting what I presume to be the main character at his job, his business, which is called Yappy Snaps. And it’s a photography, it’s a pet photography studio, which I find to be overly broad. Maybe too broad for something like this when you have monsters, and villains — supernatural villains I should say — and people who react to them kind of in a quirky way. Maybe everything else should sort of be grounded. I don’t know; that’s just generally my feeling. A little picky thing.

“Slumped behind the desk in reception is NATALIE, an overweight goth who has made the very smallest possible concession to what is considered acceptable corporate attire.” Putting aside the fact that that’s a huge mouthful, what is the very smallest possible concession? [laughs] I mean, if you’re going to overwrite, be specific…

**John:** How do you visualize that?

**Craig:** Don’t make me guess what that is, because that’s all I can see is what I can see. And you’re right: Meeting a character who isn’t doing anything is a little — I understand the author wants to get across that this is a fairly passive person who is unhappy with his boring life, but then maybe engage in something that is a little more active to show that.

**John:** Yeah. Sort of starting at the end, with the Yappy Snaps, I don’t know that I even really necessarily need the exterior to get us there, but if we’re going to have that, fine. Once we go inside the studio, I would pan passed our photos of the dogs first, and then get to our guy. Because right now we’re meeting our guy who’s just polishing a lens, and then we’re like looking around at all of the stuff on the walls.

Probably better to sort of set the scene, meet the guy, and then have him do something, rather than just sort of sit there while we look at the scenery around him.

**Craig:** Exactly. You could also open with him, just looking at him setting up the lights and taking a picture, “Good, good,” and then he crosses over and we reveal that he’s got a little dog with a hat on or something. You know. Yeah.

**John:** Yeah. So, some more nitpicking stuff. The first sentence here, “…sits some way off the road,” it’s “some ways off the road.”

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** There’s a lot of sort of not careful proofreading here which was a frustration to me.

**Craig:** Oh yeah…

**John:** “…and smashes through the gate.” Things like smash, we tend to capitalize. Most screenwriters will tend to capitalize those things because those are big action words, and you like those big action words to let you know that something big is important. Because your reader will read that word even if they don’t kind of read the rest of the sentence. So, it’s a sound effect but it’s also a big thing that happens.

The writer is capitalizing half the character’s name, which just isn’t common.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So, it’s John Cooper. Capitalize both JOHN and COOPER. Even if you’re going to call him Cooper for the rest of the time, just capitalize John Cooper. It’s weird to sort of only do half of it.

And at the end of this third paragraph, after the semi-colon he capitalizes the next word which is strange.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** “A large amount of dried blood stains the cracked driver’s side window.” A large amount of dried blood sort of stops me. A large amount? It makes me think, like, well what is a large amount of dried blood? I’ve never really stopped to think about that. So, dried blood is all you need. You don’t need a large amount of it.

**Craig:** I agree. There’s a bunch of things, like for instance he hyphenates station wagon, which shouldn’t be hyphenated, but doesn’t hyphenate rust-speckled, which should be hyphenated. So, there are things like that. I’m not one of these people that freaks out about adverbs. There are writers who say, “Never use adverbs; they’re the devil’s work.” An occasional adverb is fine. But we are buried in them here. And adverbs do tend to slow you down, especially for screenwriting.

**John:** Now, you and I have both talked about the passive voice before, and defended the passive voice. And there are times where the passive voice is really helpful. I saw two cases where exactly the opposite is true here. In the second scene, “Finally a light is switched on and the door lurches open.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** No. You don’t need, “is switched on.” “A light switches on. The door lurches open.” Break those into smaller sentences for starters. But the passive is not helping you there.

Page two. “The heavy oak doors are flung open as if made of plywood.” Are flung open? “The heavy oak doors fling open.” “The heavy oak doors blow open as if made of plywood.”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Again, being passive is not helping you here.

**Craig:** I totally agree. It’s a shame, because there’s interesting things going on. This is a great bit of advice for this writer, Mark. Don’t worry so much about crafting pretty sentences with your action. Just paint the picture for me in an exciting, fun, crisp way.

You know how Dana Carvey, Dana Carvey’s impression of George Bush, Sr. in large part rested on dropping the subjects from a lot of things, which I find also useful when you have a lot going on. You know, “Mrs. Wilkins throws her head back violently. Eyes bloodshot. Skin flaking. Produces an ungodly scream.” You know, just shorten, tighten, punchier to match what you want the scene to be. And these scenes should be tight, punchy, suspenseful, surprising, startling. So, if that’s the tone of the scene, that should be the tone of your description.

**John:** Yeah, this feels like quick cuts and Dutch angles. And let your sentences indicate that.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** Cool. Let us go onto our next piece. Who do you want to do next? We can do any one of these. Why don’t you do one that you have the synopsis for?

**Craig:** Tell me which one I’m doing the synopsis for? [laughs]

**John:** Either Margarita Night or Photo Op.

**Craig:** Photo Op. And who wrote that one?

**John:** Photo Op must be Nick Scott.

**Craig:** Nick Scott is Photo Op, yes. Yes. Okay, so in Photo Op we begin in an unnamed city somewhere in the Middle East. A photographer, a photojournalist is running down the street. We hear a rumbling behind him. He stops, turns, and then a huge crowd of protesters surges forward chanting in Arabic. He’s taking pictures. His cell phone rings. He ducks out of the way of this sea of humanity and he begins a phone conversation with his editor and boss, Vincent.

And Vincent is basically unimpressed it seems with the pictures that our hero, Caleb, is taking. He’s more interested in the fact that an actress is heading towards where they are. Oh, it’s Northern Algeria we find out. And they have a brief argument about what that means, but he has to go take pictures of this actress.

He runs back into the crowd to take photos and a bomb goes off and there is mayhem.

**John:** And a lot of gore.

**Craig:** A lot of gore. A lot of gore and mayhem. Yes.

What did you think?

**John:** Um, [sighs].

**Craig:** Mm.

**John:** I wanted to love this a lot more than I did. So, first I want to talk about the description of our hero because it got to be so Ken-dolly that I… — I’ll read it aloud to people who don’t have it in front of them.

“CALEB MILLER (30s) races around the corner, hauls ass down the middle of the street. Stubborn, experienced, driven by determination. A beard covers his chiseled jaw.” And then later, “A backpack hugs his strong frame.” I just kept feeling like, I didn’t — I just got this visual description of him that made me sort of not relate. It felt very stock to me. I felt like I was looking at a Gerard Butler character, which is not a good first thing for me to be encountering. No offense to Gerard Butler.

I also got a little bit frustrated by, I understand the instinct to, like, “We’re going to pull this editor’s phone call up into the action so it’s like part of it,” but it’s not really part of it. It’s sort of halfway part of it. Like he’s ducked into an alley to have this conversation that I don’t really believe or buy while there’s all this mayhem happening all around him. And then we get back into the bombs and the explosion.

I don’t know where all this is going. I suspect that he is going to meet this actress and they’re going to have some sort of relationship.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** But I don’t care about that right at this very moment. If you’re showing me a crowd of people and humanity, my instinct would be to stick with that and get to this phone call in the aftermath of that and not try to interrupt this action with a phone call that is not successful.

**Craig:** Yeah. You know, Nick Scott, here’s the bad news for you: I completely agree with John in every way. I mean, first of all, I didn’t like, I understood what you were going for with the setup which is this individual running down an empty street. It says, “The street is devoid of life, almost silent if not for a low RUMBLE in the distance.” Then this hero comes running up, stops, turns, and then waits, and then here comes this huge crowd.

That just seems fake to me. And I understand that you were trying to be interesting, frankly far more interesting is to just open, boom, in the middle of it. It’s absolute chaos. There’s this huge protest. And then suddenly we reveal someone is in the middle of it taking photos that doesn’t look like everybody else. And then he’s in the action, because here he almost seems like Superman. How the heck did he get out in front of this crowd? [laughs] Why, frankly?

I mean, the point is to sort of be in the action and take these photos, so it just started a bit fake. Certainly tonally though the first page until Vincent calls is very serious, very dramatic. Nick takes time to sort of call out a few people in the crowd to sort of paint the picture, which I liked, because we’ve talked about that before, so it’s not just an anonymous crowd.

But the conversation with Vincent suddenly becomes very light and kind of ’90s comedy, where the two of them are having almost screwball-esque banter about the value of his work.

**John:** Let’s read a little bit of this. So, I’ll be Vincent.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** “Anything happen?”

**Craig:** “Not yet, but it’s gonna. Still no cops!”

**John:** “You’ll get the same old shots and file the same old story.”

**Craig:** “I knew you loved my work! Why the fuck are you calling?”

**John:** “Because I pay your bills and you pay mine. Got an assignment.”

**Craig:** “I’m working one.”

**John:** “Then where are my shots of the village? Or my interview with the militants?

**Craig:** “They’re coming.”

**John:** So, it’s that whole same old story — you love my work. I just don’t buy it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t buy it either.

**John:** I don’t buy that he’s taking this call and having this conversation right now when his job is happening right outside there.

**Craig:** I mean, if Vincent is his editor he sent him to Northern Algeria to take photos of a protest. He’s obviously interested in some of it, but on the other hand so disinterested that he’s going to just talk to this guy — first of all, it’s the middle of the night wherever he is. [laughs] But he’s just going to talk to this guy while the actual event is going on.

Here’s a thought, Caleb: Don’t answer your phone! [laughs] You’re in the middle of a near riot with all this stuff going on in an incredibly dangerous part of the world. You’ll talk to your boss later.

I totally agree with you. This scene should be very real. It ends in a very dramatic startling, depressing way that sets a tone for something that’s incredibly real and disturbing. You want to let that happen, see the emotional aftermath of it. I mean, this is the kind of scene where after this is done you find Caleb now at the bar where the ex-pats, or the foreign journalists are, having a drink in the relative safety of their bubble, and he gets a phone call from an editor who is saying, “I’m really sorry, are you okay? Yes. Listen, this is weird, but there’s this woman coming.”

And now we understand in the context of what I just saw how disturbing that kind of frivolity would be for him. But to do it before it? Just the whole thing is just all backwards and messed up.

**John:** I would agree. And another logic problem that just occurs to me on the second read is right now it is set up that we hear this rumble coming and then he comes in. Like, what could this rumble be? Oh, it’s the crowd of protesters. But the protesters have an Arabic chant, so they would have been chanting before this. So, it’s not there’s a herd of elephants coming. We know it’s a chanting crowd. So, they wouldn’t start chanting right when they came around the corner.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** It’s like a false reveal.

**Craig:** It is. And tonally I am concerned about where this goes, because I agree with you. Once we say that there is this broad, strong, large-framed, square-jawed, daring man who is about to encounter a famous celebrity, we know what’s going to happen, to some extent. And that’s fine. But I’m just worried how that’s going to fit into the tone of severed hands, crying children, blood and bodies.

I’m worried about this one.

**John:** I’m worried about the tone, too.

**Craig:** But I think frankly there is, for Nick, I think you just have to kind of be a little less clever and cute here and just tell the story in a more engaging way.

**John:** I would agree.

**Craig:** All right.

**John:** How about I will do Kelli Bowlden now?

**Craig:** Do it.

**John:** All right. So, we open with a voice over by Ali who is talking about how the world is overrun with beautiful people with perfect bodies. The voice over continues as we see women around Los Angeles and at the gym where Liz is working out. In an editing room Wendy is eating and watching a bouncing babe on a monitor. At Spirelli Surgery, Mrs. Stern, a woman in her late 40s, is in for a consultation. We finally arrive at Ali who is in her 20s, cute, classy, curvy, who works at a casting agency.

She talks on the phone with her male friend, Alex, who works as the receptionist over at Spirelli Surgery. And that’s what we got in three pages.

**Craig:** Yeah, well, you know what? I liked it. And this is an example where I don’t get worried about voice over if the voice over is over things that are sort of interesting. And I thought that there was an interesting — we bounced around in an interesting way and the voice over was making an interesting point. And the point, essentially, is about how women are faced with these impossible examples, exemplars, of perfection — physical perfection — and the lengths that they go to for physical perfection.

When we landed on Ali, I sort of went, “oh,” because the thing is when we finally find her she’s eating a chocolate bar, and she’s eating it messily, and she’s dipping it into a jar of Nutella. And I thought, “You know, the tone of the beginning was sort of promising something that was pretty smart. The introduction of Ali feels really broad.”

And I’m not, frankly, a huge… — To me, sort of average girl bemoans hot women while she eats peanut butter and chocolate together, or hazelnut spread and chocolate together, is sort of the distal side of the bro comedy coin. It’s very cliché. So, I was kind of excited in the beginning. I got kind of bummed out there. Then I’m guessing the gay friend shows up, and now I’m really twitching a little bit. You know, if Alex isn’t gay then I’d be happy. But I’m sensing gay friend. [laughs] I don’t know if you were.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So, I’m just worried that we’re going to sort of head into cliché forest here.

**John:** Yeah. I did not enjoy this as much as you did I would say. So, we’re assuming this is a comedy, correct?

**Craig:** Oh, for sure.

**John:** Yeah. Was it remotely funny?

**Craig:** No, well, and it was trying to be with the Nutella and the chocolate, and that’s when I started getting worried.

**John:** Yeah. So, here’s the thing: This kind of a voice over…we’ll start by talking about the voice. So, voice over would need to do two things. First off there’s the content of the voice over, and I thought the content was a little bit obvious. She’s making the same point again and again. Like, “They’re everywhere. Staring at us with those ridiculously bright eyes. Judging us for being mere humans with non-airbrushed skin and unevenly lit, naturally colored hair.” Kind of awkward.

“Okay, sure, some women have the discipline to look good. Some just have the metabolism, which is really unfair, and some women have the funds to fake it.” So, it’s a kind of a Sex and the City kind of voice over, but not particularly clever. And my bigger concern with the voice over is that there’s not a voice to it. There’s not a specificity to who this young woman is who’s talking.

It feels like something you could read in any kind of magazine. I didn’t know anything about the character of Ali by the time I met her hearing this voice over.

Compare that to one of my favorite movies of all time which is Clueless. And Clueless has scenes that are kind of like this where it’s just a shot of like, you know, a bunch of high school kids walking, and there’s nothing funny about the shot, but her analysis of what’s happening in that shot is so funny that it’s an amazing thing. Like, you know, “I don’t want to betray my generation, but I don’t get how high school boys dress. It’s like they just pick up, find clothes off the floor and stick them together.” It’s a better written version of what I just said, but it’s very specific to her character.

And there wasn’t anything specific to Ali’s character that we got out of this voice over. And because it was just a boom, boom, boom of scenes, nothing actually could happen. Like it was three pages just to get to two people talking on the phone.

**Craig:** Yeah, I mean, basically I agree with you. If the kind of intro — which I agree was a little sort of flat and we’ve heard it before — had arrived at a perspective or a point that was interesting to me, then it would have been okay. But where it landed was I’m a chubby girl who dips chocolate bars into Nutella spread while sort of bitchily mocking the hyper thin models that are in the waiting office at this casting thing, which the male receptionist at the plastic surgery place gives me a call and has sort of a very — I’ve seen and heard it before — bitchy chit-chat about their clients.

So, it just didn’t — it sort of had potential. I just feel like we know where this is kind of going to have to go. I mean, so…

**John:** Let’s take a look at sort of the words on the page. So, on page one a couple things stick out for me. First off, often in scripts you won’t actually put the number on the first page, so that one can go away on the first page.

Right now it’s starting “OVER BLACK: ALI (V.O.) They’re everywhere.”

Then we “FADE IN: EXT. LOS ANGELES — DAY.” I think you get rid of either “OVER BLACK” or “FADE IN.” Because it’s too much. If you’re not giving us an image we know that it’s over black basically.

We fade in on Los Angeles — Los Angeles is such a generic thing to have as your first slug line. Like where we are in Los Angeles? What are we looking at? Because that first sentence description there is, “Perfect women have infested the world. Half shirts show off taut bellies and proportionately impossible breasts.” But what are we actually looking at? Are we looking at pictures of women or actual women? If they’re actual women, capitalize that so I know that we’re looking at, you know, essentially extras.

But, I didn’t even know what I was looking at, so it took me awhile to get even started there. And ultimately in the same paragraph we’re looking at billboards, and benches, and posters, so that lack of specific imagery was hurting me.

When we get to the next scene we’re at a gym, I’m just pointing out, “LIZ, 20s, 2 sizes skinnier than she should be, steps off.” She’s the number 2 rather than the word two. General sort of journalism kind of rules still apply here. Numbers that are less than 11, so up to ten, type them out. Other numbers you can use the numerals as long as it’s not in dialogue, but it feels really weird to have that 2 sitting there.

**Craig:** Particularly right next to the number of her age.

**John:** Yeah. On page two she’s trying to do a cut here but it doesn’t really work for me. It’s like we’re in the doctor’s office and “Dr. Spirelli nods, he can do that. A fabricated image of a BEAUTIFUL WOMAN smiles from a BEAUTY MAGAZINE cover.” Ultimately “A blob of CHOCOLATE drops onto the Beautiful Woman’s face.”

**Craig:** That did not work.

**John:** And that’s the cut to take us to the next place, but I got really confused, like, why are we eating chocolate in the doctor’s office?

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** It just didn’t really work as a transition that we have right now.

**Craig:** Yeah. You can’t do that.

**John:** I really…

**Craig:** Yup. [laughs] Yeah, you can’t do that. If you want a blob of chocolate dropping onto a beautiful woman’s face then he can do that “INT. CASTING OFFICE — DAY. A fabricated image of a beautiful woman smiles from a beauty magazine cover.”

You’ve got to put the chocolate dropping where the chocolate is dropping.

**John:** Or if it is truly a montage, and you’re sort of playing it like more of a montage, then we’re going to be able to do that, but you’re going to have those transitions — it can’t be the first time we’re doing that kind of transition, because otherwise we’re going to assume that that magazine is in that office there. And that it’s in Dr. Spirelli’s surgery office.

**Craig:** Right. And this would be tough to kind of montage out because there’s sort of like…

**John:** Anything that makes a reader read twice is bad.

**Craig:** No, it wouldn’t actually, you could do it.

**John:** How would you do it?

**Craig:** You could do sort of like, you know, “MONTAGE — VARIOUS.” And then big capital action line — “GYM” and then description “EDITING SUITE,” description, “SURGERY,” description, “OFFICE,” description. But , yeah, it just didn’t — that chocolate thing, absolutely, I was so confused by what was going on there.

**John:** Yeah, so “A blob of CHOCOLATE drops onto the Beautiful Woman’s face. We are actually at the casting office.” Even that might make it clear to the reader. The reader is not going to have to stop and go back and try to figure out again what happened there.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** I want to point out one nice thing on page two. “She’s more than a montage away from being comfortable wearing a bikini in public.”

**Craig:** I like that.

**John:** That’s kind of nice. I like acknowledging sort of the genre, being a montage away from something.

**Craig:** It made me smile. And it was also a good way of — I understand her weight actually from that.

**John:** Yeah. On page three there’s an intercut here, which is nothing fancy, but I like that she actually knew how to do it. We’re intercutting between the two people having a phone conversation and the graceful way is just INTERCUT. So, you don’t actually necessarily need to spell out where you’re intercutting between. You just have the word “intercut” and we will get it as long as we’ve had two locations close to each other and you recognize that people are talking on the phone; “intercut” can be your very best friend.

**Craig:** Yeah, this is one of those areas where there were fewer issues with the specifics and more just that this felt very sort of episode of 90210-ish to me.

**John:** I would agree. The only other suggestion I have for her is Ali and Alex, two characters with such similar names, is going to get annoying and frustrating at about three more pages. Because when you’re just like looking at someone’s dialogue, if you’re going to have to remember, “Oh which one is the boy, which one is the girl?” I would go for a different name.

**Craig:** Yeah. I don’t know even know how she can — Kelli, you know, you wrote an entire script where you couldn’t just type A and then have the character. You couldn’t even type AL and have character.

**John:** Yeah. Smart Type couldn’t even help you.

**Craig:** We’re trying to help you . [laughs] Also, if Alex does turn out to be quirky gay friend, I just feel, again, just be careful of cliché-ville. Because, again, it just feels like we’ve been done that road.

**John:** I would agree.

Let’s do the last of our Three Page Challenges today, which is Margarita Night by Steve Marcarelli & Billy Lalor.

**Craig:** Yes. Otherwise known as Hangover for Moms. [laughs] So, we begin with some 40 year-old women who are in the middle of a debauched night out. They’re at a bar. They’re getting loaded. They’re doing bad karaoke. Smashing windows with lawn jockeys. They’ve lost their pants. It gets uglier and uglier. And then in the morning one of the women, our hero, we suppose, Mel — Melody, goes by Mel — wakes up and she’s woken up by her eight year-old son, Robbie, who is exhorting her to take him early for cello lessons before school.

He is super duper responsible. She is super duper hung over and seemingly witless and does not know even how to make — or tries to make him breakfast, he already made it himself. He made her the coffee. And they go to drive and her car is gone. And she doesn’t know where it is.

The last little bit we see, we’re now actually at a radio station where an overweight, morning time, drive time disc jockey begins chit chat with his sidekick, The Roach, about women being trouble.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Well…?

**John:** Yeah. [crosstalk] So, there were specific, I know, the writer had a voice and specific jokes. And not everything worked and there’s a lot to improve here, but I felt like I recognized the intention of what these pages were, where this was going. Some of it was a little too familiar, but there were some jokes that I really liked.

One thing I didn’t like: there’s literally an alarm clock slapping moment. No more slapping alarm clocks in movies. Stop that.

**Craig:** Moratorium.

**John:** Never needed. So, on the first page, right now, “An alarm clock GOES OFF and the sounds of a crass talk radio show fill the room. Mel MOANS. She SLAPS at the clock.” Robbie, “Mom.” We have Robbie’s description. “Mom, are you driving me to school?”

The first line of the scene should be, “Are you driving me to school,” because he’s already there, and that’s the question, “Are you driving me to school?”

I really liked on page two, “Where are my keys?” Robbie says, “They were in the front door.” I liked that that was just nice and specific. I like that.

The coffee beat gets a little bit cliché, like the kid is a little too perfect for this. He’s too sitcomy, overachieving kid because his mom is a wreck and a mess. But I liked the build on the joke of they get out and like the car is not even there. It’s well handled. I dug it.

**Craig:** Well, not so much for me. I think that the opening bit was nice and taut. There’s essentially a third of a page that shows a night going out of control, and it would be fun to see. And then when she wakes up in the morning, and the alarm goes off, we understand: she’s hung over. It was all fine.

Where it started to go off — and look, I’m going to talk in a larger way about this idea — but where it went off for me was this kid. Because here’s the deal: we’ve got two pages of an impossible eight year-old. And I’m going to guess that our authors Steve and Billy do not have children, because eight year-olds cannot talk like this, cannot act like this, cannot function like this.

A slightly older kid, a ten year-old, I think, or an 11 year-old, maybe. Maybe you got a shot. Eight year-old simply can’t do that. They’re in second grade and third grade. They’re not capable of this. And I also felt like the writers have missed an opportunity to imply that this is not the first time this has happened, and it’s clearly not on her side of the conversation it’s not the first time.

And in a way on his side, too, it doesn’t — he’s not shocked by this behavior. So, he’s seen it before, so in a way…

**John:** If he made coffee for her, no.

**Craig:** It shouldn’t be a surprise. I think maybe he just hands it to her might be more interesting. And sort of like this is the usual deal. You know, if I were rewriting this I would make it that the kid was waking her up and sort of saying, “Here’s your coffee. I basically have done everything. Please just drive me,” because we’ve been through this before.

So, I think shorter. It treaded water and it wasn’t like, I don’t know, I wasn’t laughing during that scene, so it felt like it should just be shorter and more interesting.

**John:** Agreed.

**Craig:** And then the car is gone, which is definitely, you know, so we’re kind of drifting towards Hangover area, or I guess closer to like Bad Mom, or Bad Teacher, Bad Mom, Bad Santa, Bad Something.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And that’s really my issue is that I feel like this is a copycat. And it’s a copycat idea. I’m going to read a script called Bad Mom basically. And it’s actually called Margarita Night, which is closer to like Hangover, or there’s a lot of those out there.

I think that these guys have a pretty good grip on the rhythm and flow of how something of this should work, and I like that they’re taking a few chances. Frankly I’d be bigger and more outrageous. I think if you’re going to be outrageous, be outrageous. It felt a little mild, frankly, and a little PG as I read the first three pages.

And I’m not here to say to promote being gross, or sexual, or stupid just for its own sake, but rather just be realer. If this deserves a movie, I want to see a wreck, and I want to really see a wreck. But, I’m just concerned that this is just following the leader and not really blazing its own trail; that it’s kind of behind the curve a little bit.

And I had no idea what’s happening in this little final bit, but that’s fine, that doesn’t matter. I guess my final comment is this: For a movie like this, I want to laugh, and I’m not laughing. I’m sort of smiling, nodding, and going, uh-huh. Eh, that part was not a good reaction.

**John:** I get that. My hope for this, and the reason why I’m optimistic about it is I feel like there’s a movie that is 9 to 5 pushed into the Bridesmaids world. And I think there’s an opportunity for this to be that kind of movie.

I mean, if you think back to 9 to 5, we got those home life moments, and they were really good, but they were tighter than this. They were tighter and they were shorter.

As this is set up there is Ally and Mel, so it’s not a one-hander, it’s supposed to be a two-hander. We’ll see from both these women’s perspectives. I know we might be intercutting this morning. We might be seeing a little bit more of what’s happening there. I have hope in here.

And it was — I laughed at the keys in the door. I laughed at the car being gone. Well, that’s not actually fair; I didn’t quite laugh at the car being gone, but I was happy that the car was gone.

**Craig:** I liked that, too. I would also say, when you do this kind of Bad Blank genre, which has become a little mini genre, that you need to kind of embrace it in a big way, because she’s now endangering the welfare of an eight year-old child. And so, man, just make me laugh when she does it. In a weird way, be more outrageous. Be more screwed up. This kid should hold her hair while she pukes. [laughs] Do something that makes me really go, wow. Part of the humor is that this is their lives, that it’s not just — I’m not just waking up with one weird thing where they kid is like, “What’s going on? Where’s the car? Why were the keys in the door? I made you coffee.” But I’m not…

I want this to be part of the deal. And part of that also is changing the age of that kid. Eight years-old is just not going to work for this character.

**John:** I would agree with you.

Craig, that’s four of these.

**Craig:** I like this. We blew through them there. And you know what? All of them had something to recommend.

**John:** I would agree. So, Stuart, thank you for picking these four out of the 511 for us to take a look at today.

Now, Craig, it’s come to that time. Do you have a One Cool Thing this week?

**Craig:** Uh, did I already do the fat-free peanut butter?

**John:** You already did the fat-free peanut butter. You know what? I should just remind you when I send you the email as we schedule the time for this, I should just put a little reminder in there. I should have a macro that just says, “Oh, and Craig, don’t forget your One Cool Thing.”

**Craig:** Yeah. God. What’s yours? Maybe I’ll agree with it.

**John:** When you were a kid did you forget your permission slip a lot in school?

**Craig:** Constantly. I constantly forgot my permission slip. Constantly.

**John:** That’s what this is. So, next time we’ll just pin a little note to you to remind you to do your One Cool Thing.

**Craig:** I thought your One Cool Thing was going to be, like, a permission slip app.

**John:** Oh, that would be great. Wouldn’t that be nice?

**Craig:** So, really, there’s no salvation for me. I’ve forgotten my permission slip again. All right, go ahead. What’s your One Cool Thing?

**John:** That’s fine. So, the fact that you didn’t do one this week makes mine like sort of extra sort of good little Girl Scout, which I feel sort of is my function in this podcast just to be like the one who does everything ahead of time.

And I’m also the person who is like lecturing people to get their flu shots. So, this is probably even more in that nagging territory. But, for most of my life I was not a flosser. I did not floss my teeth. And that’s just shameful but I just hated to floss my teeth and it was not fun, and I didn’t want to do it. And so I brushed carefully but I wouldn’t floss my teeth.

And so then every time I would go into the hygienist for stuff they’d say, “Oh, do you floss?” So I’d either lie and say, “Yes, I floss,” in the sense that I flossed right before I came here, which was the first time I flossed in maybe three months. Or I would be honest and say that I didn’t and then they would give me a little lecture and a little lesson on how to floss. Well, I know how to do it, I just choose not to do it.

The truth I’ve discovered over the last three years is that it’s actually not about technique or anything else, it’s just that all the flosses I was trying were terrible. And most dental flosses are just terrible. But there’s one that’s actually really good. And I feel like if you actually use this floss people would actually want to floss their teeth because it’s actually delightful.

So, the best floss that exists in my opinion is Reach Gum Care with Fluoride, Soft Woven Mint Floss. It is available at nearly any grocery store or drug store. It’s made by Johnson & Johnson. It comes in a white package. It has pink and black printing on it. And it’s terrific.

So, what’s different about this floss, it is not waxed. It is not thin. It is sort of two bits of string twisted together like a very light yarn. And it slides between your teeth nicely. It tastes really good. It actually gets all that gunk out between your teeth. And it is a delight to use.

So, my recommendation is dental floss.

**Craig:** Do you know I’ve never had a cavity?

**John:** That’s fantastic, Craig. You must have like good genetics, really strong teeth.

**Craig:** No question. Because in fact one of the side effects of never having a cavity is that I’m terrible about flossing. Frankly, I’m terrible about going to the dentist. I just sort of — it becomes one of those things. It’s like super thin people who are just born thin and stay thin just kind of eat what they want and they don’t really care. You know, they just have cake sometimes.

I have never even come close to having a cavity. I don’t have gum disease. I don’t have any. I just genetically got blessed.

**John:** That’s fantastic. That’s great.

**Craig:** So, I don’t need your floss, man!

**John:** I was going to point out that brushing your teeth is for cavities, gum disease is, the thing with flossing generally is that if you don’t floss people’s gums tend to puff up and then recede, and then there’s problems. And then you have to do horribly painful stuff to fix things. So, congratulations on your lucky mouth genes.

**Craig:** There actually is some benefit to your gums from brushing. I had a dentist once tell me that the most important thing brushing does is actually massage your gums. Because when you massage your gums you help them sort of naturally get some of that puffy infected stuff out. And have you ever done that rubber tip thing?

**John:** Oh yeah. The massage set?

**Craig:** She said if I were on a desert island and I had a choice between taking a rubber tip or a toothbrush with me, I would take the rubber tip.

**John:** I have definitely noticed on watching many seasons of Survivor is that they get really bored out there. But what they’ll tend to always do is like take little pieces of bamboo and pick out their teeth, because it does just make you feel much better and cleaner.

When you’ve got grit on your teeth it’s just never a happy experience.

**Craig:** Yeah. There are certain foods like seaweed salad and beef jerky.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** Will always get wedged in between my molars, and I go crazy. And that’s the only time I floss, really, and I hate to say it.

**John:** What about corn on the cob? Corn on the cob you have to.

**Craig:** I don’t like corn on the cob. I don’t like corn.

**John:** That’s fine.

**Craig:** Yeah, you know what? I don’t like it. And it’s a shame because it’s a weed that grows everywhere. But I don’t like it.

**John:** It’s a major American specialty. If it weren’t for the Native Americans we would not have corn on the cob.

**Craig:** How many people do you think we’ve lost just talking about floss and corn? Just out of curiosity, like 100,000?

**John:** Hmm. I don’t know. There should be some good metrics for that.

**Craig:** [laughs] Let’s see if we can get down to zero!

**John:** That would be fantastic. I will say, so, changing topics only slightly here. So, as you know this last week we’ve been studying sort of the metrics of the podcast and sort of how many people are downloading it. And thank you so many people for subscribing to the podcast, and downloading it, and listening to it.

But, podcast metrics are actually very, very frustrating. Because if you are listening to this podcast, you’re listening to it one of several ways. You might be listening to it on the website, and it’s loading up and you’re listening to it just there on the page.

You might be listening to it on your iPhone through the podcast app or through a much better app called Instacast which I’d recommend. I’ll put a link to that as well. But if you’re listening through the podcast app you might be listening in two different ways. You might have downloaded it to your actual iPhone, which basically one big file comes to your iPhone. Or, you might be listening to it sort of live off the server, and you’re like scrubbing your little finger through and listening to stuff.

And where that has thrown us off this last week is something like our numbers got just crazy and Ryan had to spend a lot of time going through and figuring out what it was. It’s like, it’s literally people dragging their fingers through on the little slider in the podcast app crazily jacks up your numbers in ways that are really misleading.

And so the numbers and the log is reported with such a granularity that like literally every time a person does that it shows up as a new person. And so we have to filter those out because otherwise a person who like skips through to eight different places in the podcast counts as eight different people.

**Craig:** Okay, so then here’s the question: How many people do you think, your best accurate guess? How many people are actually listening to this?

**John:** Next week I think we’ll know. So, we’re going back through old logs and figuring out sort of when it started, and then sort of figuring out how we could filter it out. And so we’re actually switching to a different stats package, because our files are hosted on Amazon right now, on Amazon S3, which has extensive logs that are challenging to parse.

So, we are sorting that through. I think next week I’ll have an answer for you.

**Craig:** Hopefully I won’t have to un-sing my song.

**John:** I think we’re over your 100,000 mark.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** But, here’s the thing: we’re not near that crazy number that I whispered into your ear.

**Craig:** That was crazy.

**John:** So, that’s better and good for us all.

**Craig:** Good.

**John:** We were concerned about the exponential growth of the podcast. Essentially that we would take over the earth with the podcast. And, rest assured, we’re not.

**Craig:** [laughs] It was getting a little logarithmic.

**John:** Yeah. We had a little bit of a hockey stick curve, whatever you call that thing where…

**Craig:** Not that. Well, great. Maybe we should have Nate Silver look at it.

**John:** He’s not busy anymore, so we’ll just have him come in there and do it. Nate Silver who, god bless him, I really like that a math nerd sort of won the election. Every time I see him, though, I just want to wash his hair. His hair looks so dirty to me.

**Craig:** From what I hear, Nate Silver might not mind you washing his hair.

**John:** I’ve heard that, too. I have not heard any confirmation however.

**Craig:** I think it’s great. And I, of course I sit here thinking can you imagine the amount of money that has suddenly in the last week been offered to Nate Silver to just, “You know, could you please stop blogging this stuff for free on the New York Times and instead just let us pay you millions of dollars to do this for us?” I mean, this guy must have had so many offers just in the last week.

I mean, he was disturbingly accurate, and I wasn’t surprised because I believe in math, and I believe in statistics. But, boy, boy, man, he was right on.

**John:** Yeah. Which I like to see. Yeah. A hero or villain.

**Craig:** Yeah. Finally. Now we can say who the hero of the election is. [laughs] Excellent.

**John:** So, our standard wrap-ups on the show. If you have questions or comments about things we’ve talked about I am @johnaugust on Twitter. Craig is…

**Craig:** @clmazin at Twitter.

**John:** All the notes for this podcast will be up at johnaugust.com/podcast. If you like the show, give us a little rating in iTunes because that helps other people find the show. And thank you so much.

**Craig:** Enjoy your corn and floss.

**John:** All right. Thanks man. Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (30)
  • 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 (73)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (88)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (66)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (492)
  • Formatting (130)
  • Genres (90)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (119)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (238)
  • Writing Process (178)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2025 John August — All Rights Reserved.