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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: logline

Scriptnotes, Episode 502: Free Will (Or, It’s Okay to Not Be a Screenwriter), Transcript

August 4, 2022 News, Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2021/free-will-or-its-okay-to-not-be-a-screenwriter).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 502 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the show we keep saying it’s important that characters make choices that effect the story, but of course they really don’t. We’ll tackle the problem of free will as it applies to both fictional heroes and real life screenwriters. We’ll also answer listener questions about unready scripts and what happens after an option expires.

And in our bonus segment for premium members let’s discuss AP classes. Are they worth it? And what did we actually learn?

**Craig:** Oh, you just put a big old pitch right there. Right down the middle for me. Oh, I’ve been sitting on that fast ball. Here it comes.

**John:** All right. As always what actually is being discussed in an episode is a complete surprise to Craig. He’s not allowed to look at the outline ahead of time.

**Craig:** I mean, I’m allowed to. [laughs]

**John:** So this is all going to be Off-the-Cuff Mazin.

**Craig:** Basically the way it works is I’m like a hostage that gets – somebody puts a bag over my head and takes me somewhere. I don’t know where I am and then the bag comes off and they’re like, “Talk!” That’s how I am on these shows. And you know what? It works.

**John:** Yeah. It’s like improv theater but he’s the only person who has to improv.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s like I’m an improv artist but I’m working with people that have read a script. It’s very weird. No one else is improving. Just me. I’ve got to figure out how to make it work. And you know what? It does work.

**John:** Yeah. That was probably Robin Williams on many of his films.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m the Robin Williams of Scriptnotes.

**John:** You are the Robin Williams of the podcast.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Last week on the show we talked about the Breaker Upperers. And Fred wrote back in who said, “I just heard the episode and I realize I wrote Australia rather than New Zealand.”

**Craig:** Whoa.

**John:** “A perhaps even greater mistake than Craig swapping of Liverpool and Manchester. If possible please relay my sincere apologies to all the New Zealand listeners. In my haste to promote a great, under-seen movie I committed a grave error.”

**Craig:** You know, Fred, it’s OK. And I’ve got to tell you it’s not a greater mistake than the one I made. So, football fans in Liverpool and Manchester are not known for their own calm demeanor and forgiving natures. But everyone I’ve met from New Zealand has been the loveliest person ever. Everyone. It’s not that I’ve met a ton of people from New Zealand, but if you ever go to French Polynesia, for instance, you will run into quite a few Kiwis because it’s pretty close and they can hop over there. And they’re all lovely.

Melanie Lynskey, one of the best actors on the planet, from New Zealand. Maybe the nicest person who has ever been born. That’s right. And I’m including Jesus in that.

**John:** Yeah. Former Scriptnotes guest, Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh.

**Craig:** There you go.

**John:** There’s a whole bunch of talented people there. So, and including Taika Waititi who has never been a guest. I should have noticed when I read Fred’s statement on the air that like, wait, it’s Taika Waititi, that’s probably New Zealand and not Australia, but I didn’t question it at that moment.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So I regret my part in–

**Craig:** Everyone, it’s going to be OK. Because no one from New Zealand is going to yell at you. That’s what I’m saying. They’re forgiving, wonderful people.

**John:** A second bit of follow up, we talked in the game show segment, so this is a premium segment, so a follow up on a premium segment which I think is fair. I think it’s fair.

**Craig:** We can do that.

**John:** We can do that. One of the questions asked of us like what did we say was the death of screenwriters. And the answer was apparently we said many times on the show that children are the death of screenwriters. I was just reading an article this last week and Seth Rogan pointed out, oh, the reason why I get so much done is I have no kids. And it’s the first time I’d seen a person in the last ten years actually say that out loud. But I want to link to the article about that.

**Craig:** Other than us.

**John:** Other than us. And so sometimes we look at people’s output of work and it’s like, oh, did they have kids/did they not have kids? And in the case of Seth Rogan who is like I don’t have kids, I don’t want kids, and that’s why I get so much done.

**Craig:** I’m glad we’re all talking about it. And this is not anti-kid actually.

**John:** No. I’m pro-kid.

**Craig:** Yeah. We love our children. And anybody that has children, look, so at some point they’re going to make you insane. That’s just a fact. Pete Holmes, the standup comedian Pete Holmes, has this great bit about how when his wife gave birth to their first child they’re in the hospital and all the nurses keep coming by and saying, “By the way, don’t shake the baby,” and there are all these signs like don’t shake a baby. Never shake a baby. And they’re like who shakes a baby? And he goes what they don’t tell you is you’re going to want to shake that baby. And it’s true. It’s really, really true.

But it’s something that’s so impactful in your life that it is beyond the concept of regret. It is sort of life-changing and wonderful. But it definitely – it will reduce your output. That’s OK. I think it’s a perfect tradeoff.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** Output and productivity are not the judge of a great life.

**John:** Yeah. So I just wanted to sort of point this out to acknowledge that like if you are going to have kids you’re going to take a hit in your productivity and that’s just actually fine and normal. And I think if we don’t talk about that then people might say like, oh, I used to be so much better, what happened. And it’s like what happened is you had kids. And so it’s something that every writer goes through when they have a new life in their house.

**Craig:** Yeah. We should acknowledge it impacts women more than men.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Yet it doesn’t not impact men.

**John:** It’s true. Also in the news this week, everybody is merging. So, Warners and Discovery. They’re going to be combined together. So Discovery is HGTV and Discovery Network and Food Network. A bunch of other what we used to think of as cable channels but are of course just slices of reality programming. They’re going to be merging together. And it looks like Amazon and MGM are also going to combine. So, really Amazon is going to swallow up MGM.

**Craig:** That one is really something else. I got an email earlier this week from Casey Bloys who runs HBO and it basically said, “Hey, just so you know, nothing is going to change in terms of what we’re doing together and everything is cool. Just business as usual. Don’t worry about it.” And I was like, great. What’s he talking about? [laughs] I had no idea what he was talking about.

And so I looked online and then I tried to understand what happened. And I must admit the concept of a corporate spinoff is not necessarily something I have a great grasp on. But what I could get was that AT&T sold Warner Bros, the whole Warner Bros conglomeration to Discovery but also still owns most of it. I don’t understand. They own like 70% but Discovery is in charge of it? Maybe that’s what it means?

**John:** Well I think it’s just like if they both extended pseudo pods towards each other and the pseudo pods merged together to form a bigger blob of a company.

**Craig:** I see.

**John:** That is better positioned to take on Disney.

**Craig:** I don’t see at all. [laughs] I don’t understand.

**John:** I think it’s also interesting because the guy who is running Discovery will probably end up running this whole new thing. And even as you said, oh, that’s right you’re making a show for HBO, which is Warners. And I’m making a movie for Warners. And so it’s weird that the Discovery guy is going to ultimately have an impact on sort of both of our lives, which is just weird. And the way that everything is streaming now, it doesn’t matter that I’m making a theatrical movie and you’re making a TV series. It’s kind of all the same.

**Craig:** Well, this seems like a great time to point out how wonderful the guy who runs Discovery is and how much I admire him, or her, and think they’re just beautiful, and handsome, and kind. And don’t take any money out of our budget please. That’s all I’m really asking here.

**John:** Not a bit.

**Craig:** Leave our budget alone.

**John:** What if it turns out that the guy who runs Discovery actually just hates videogames and hates anything post-apocalyptic?

**Craig:** He’s in a weird business. I mean, the Discovery Channel definitely loves everything.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I don’t know what impact – I suspect that I have always been shielded, like a child, from all of the corporate shenanigans that go on. And so I will never sense what they are in this case either. But the Amazon/MGM thing is startling. Because Discovery has been in business on television for many, many years. Amazon is purely an Internet company and now they own the oldest, I guess, even if it’s not technically old, it feels like the oldest film company in our business. This historic Hollywood studio that lately – and when I say lately I mean in the last 20 years – was really more of just a distribution channel for James Bond movies and not much else.

**John:** And Creed. But yeah. Rocky.

**Craig:** And Rocky. It had things it did, but mostly it was kind of living off of the library. And it is kind of startling that the lion going roar is now owned by Amazon.

**John:** Yeah. So in my time in Hollywood it’s always been a thing with MGM is like who owns the MGM library. The asset was really the MGM library which would keep getting shuttled around from place, to place, to place. I have no idea what MGM actually owns of their library at this point. Amazon gets the Bond movie. They get other things and potential things they can remake. And again it’s always about streaming. So they get more stuff for Amazon Prime Video which is how they make their money in the entertainment industry.

**Craig:** And how – so MGM released Wizard of Oz.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** But Wizard of Oz is controlled by Warner Bros because of some strange real estate transaction that occurred in the ‘80s I believe.

**John:** Yeah. I’m not sure how that all happened. But it has done very well by me, so I’m happy it happened.

**Craig:** Yeah. I feel like Warner Bros owned some sort of bit of real estate that Columbia – remember the whole thing when Sony bought Columbia and then they put those two guys in charge and it was a train wreck? And one of the things they did was try and get back some real estate from Warner Bros and trade it at MGM. Something crazy happened. I don’t understand it.

This episode should be called Craig Doesn’t Know How Business Works.

**John:** But at some point we should talk about LA real estate and the entertainment industry because it is so fascinating how much LA has been shaped by where those studios were placed originally and how the failure of Cleopatra is why we have Century City.

**Craig:** That’s right. And furthermore a studio that no longer exists like Fox, because Fox was purchased by Disney and is controlled by Disney mostly, that – my guess is that the real estate–

**John:** Oh my god. Worth so much.

**Craig:** Is worth more than Fox. That’s really the big prize there is the land. Because you can put at this point now soundstages – people just stick them out wherever. Like Santa Clarita, which is about an hour north of where you live, they got a whole bunch of soundstages up there because land is cheap. But Paramount and Fox and Sony, that land is invaluable.

**John:** Yeah. So at some point we’ll bring somebody on who can tell us about the actual history of the land in Los Angeles and how the studios shaped it. It feels a little bit more like some other person’s podcast, but we can do it.

**Craig:** You know what? It probably is. Maybe we’ll go on their show.

**John:** Yeah, that’s what we’ll do.

**Craig:** I’ll be just as unprepared.

**John:** All right. I want to talk about free will. And so the reason that this came up in my brain–

**Craig:** Do you want to talk about free will or do you have to talk about free will?

**John:** That’s really the question. Was it always predestined that we were going to talk about free will in this episode and that you’d be 15 minutes late because you confronted by production concerns? What got me thinking about it was this article I read by Oliver Burkeman in The Guardian and it’s really looking at this issue that philosophers have been grappling from the very start and now increasingly because of modern science they realized like, oh, you know what, free will probably is not quite what we think it is. And by free will let’s talk about sort of defining our terms. Free will being the ability for a person to make their own choices. To have agency. To decide what they’re going to do. That they’re not being forced to do a thing.

The problem comes from our understanding of physics and science these days is that things don’t just happen kind of spontaneously. There’s always a past event that sort of anticipated what’s happening next. And there’s just the billiard balls banging through the universe, except on a very small quantum level you can kind of always predict what’s going to happen.

**Craig:** Right. This is one of those great college chats. I sometimes think that it’s a bit of a pointless discussion because in the end we don’t know and we can’t know. But I side generally with the people who say we do not have free will as we understand free will. Because I literally don’t understand how free will could possibly exist.

**John:** Yeah. Where you are an independent agent who at this moment can make any choice you want to make because there’s nothing behind that.

**Craig:** Well, right, because I don’t understand how choices can be made without precursors. And we are nothing – I mean, when we try and analyze what consciousness is we really stumble around in the dark because we’re asking a microscope to stare at itself. So, just observer error is baked in. And we want to believe we have free will because we’re experiencing it, but that doesn’t mean it’s correct.

The fact that there are optical illusions should tell us everything we need to know about the accuracy of our brains.

**John:** Yeah. So there’s different levels of sort of how much people believe in free will on a philosophical level. And there’s people who truly think that we can do anything at any point. They’re kind of falling out of favor because that’s clearly not the case.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** There are strict determinists who say, no, literally you are on rails this entire time. You are not making any choices. And then there’s some compatibilism which is basically yes but it’s also – you can say that free will is an illusion, but it’s a common illusion to a lot of our other experiences. And like consciousness is an illusion. We recognize that what we experience from the outside world is not really the outside world. And that we are constantly living in this – it’s not even a simulation, it’s just like we are trying to synthetize a bunch of outside forces and it’s not really what’s happening outside of us.

**Craig:** Correct. The world that we see is not the world at all.

**John:** So that’s the struggle for us in the real world, but let’s talk about it in terms of people who really have no choice which are the characters in the stories we write, which is really what I want to focus on today. Because one of the struggles we have as screenwriters is we want to create characters who feel like they are making valid choices. That they are in a real world and that their choices have impact. But of course as creators we know they really don’t because we are limiting the choices they could make. We are basically making the choices for them and trying to make it seem like they’re making their own choices themselves. It’s like a very talented sleight of hand magician who says like pick a card, any card, but of course they are forcing you to take a specific card.

**Craig:** That’s exactly what we’re doing. It is that principle of magic. We are forcing cards. So, the trick to a lot of magic is convincing people that they are really choosing from a bunch of things. And that is what we do with our characters. We need the audience to believe, and we have to give the audience evidence that our characters have real choices to make.

And that means we have to bait those traps. We have to make them tempting. We have to make them reasonable. We have to allow the audience to experience a kinship with the character so they imagine themselves in that position and can feel what it’s like to be torn between two options. Even as the audience understands which of those will be chosen. And that’s the fascinating part to me.

We know what they’re going to do. We know what they’re going to choose in certain genres. But we still feel like maybe they won’t.

**John:** All right. Let’s zoom back and take a look at creating a story when we’re at sort of the whiteboard stage of the index card stage. And we need to make it feel like our protagonists are actually making choices that impact the world. And what are some of the things we’re going to do to set that character up for success and make it feel like they are making choices that are valid.

We talk a lot about where is this character coming from, what is the origin, what do they want. Really we’re kind of trying to decide what is a want to give that character that will help drive the story.

**Craig:** Yeah. And so the want generates a single sort of choice that you would imagine, right? I want that guy. So I just want to choose a guy. But then what do we have to do as screenwriters, we have to fire all of these other choices at that person to muddle their minds. We have to distract them. We have to pull them off the path.

There is of many, many Thief of Baghdad remakes there was one – I talk about this all the time. I just, maybe I’m wrong, maybe it wasn’t the Thief of Baghdad, but it was definitely a movie where there was a treasure cave and they had to go get something at the end of the treasure cave, it was the best treasure of them all. And the trick was you have to stay on the path to that treasure. But the cave would show you illusions on either side of the path and if you fell into that temptation and stepped off the path you would turn to stone. And so the place was full of treasure and statues.

**John:** Yeah. Aladdin has a similar kind of thing in the Cave of Wonders.

**Craig:** There you go. And so this is our job is if the choice is simple, I want that guy, then my job as a screenwriter is to show you different guys. My job is also to have somebody lie to you about the guy you want so that you don’t want that guy. This is what we do. We confuse and muddle and therefore create frustration in the audience. That frustration will ultimately be released. We want to see, just like when we go to a magic show we want to see the magician succeed. Also we want to see them fail. So it’s like they have to give us the sense that they are really struggling. That’s part of the showmanship. So that when they finally do pull it out you’re like, “Yes!”

**John:** Now, what you’re describing in terms of throwing other choices at that character and other options is valid, but if we just did that then it would seem like – you’d feel the heavy hand of the writer.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Because you’d feel like, oh, all this stuff is being thrown at them and they’re not actually proactively making choices. And so you’re also doing this thing where you’re looking at it from their point of view and it’s like, OK, what are reasonable things that that character could do in this moment? If they have their overall goal of getting that guy, what are their next strategies? What are their next tactics for what are they going to do next?

And so you’re trying to balance this like what is their overall thing, what would they actually realistically do next. And how do you set up those next choices in a way that moves your story forward but also feels valid for the characters, so it doesn’t feel like that character is just on rails.

**Craig:** And in this sense we are creating a maze. And there are lots of different ways to get to the end of the maze. It’s a very good thing as a screenwriter to lead your character into a place where you’re not quite sure how they’re going to get back towards where they’re going.

You allow three different doors and you imply that only one door is accurate or good, and the other two are doomed. But you know of course they’re not. As a DM when I’m DMing and you guys are playing you’re not on rails. You can do anything. And I know that I have to get you from A to B. Everything that happens in between A and B can be as squiggly and as backwards moving as we want. Moving away from things. Being inefficient in your path. These are all ways that we create the illusion of free will.

Especially when a character is choosing something that clearly is not going to move them toward their goal.

**John:** Absolutely. So D&D is essentially a conversation. Yes, you may have a map that you’re looking at, but it’s essentially a conversation about what choices are our player characters going to make. But I’m thinking back to fantasy videogames and so often you recognize that it feels like you can go anywhere. And really you can at any moment. I could go over there, go in this direction. But if you actually look at level design those levels are designed in very clever ways that like, OK, there really is one path through this. And it looks like you could go anywhere, but ultimately you’re going to go one way through. So how things are sloped, where you can walk, where you can’t walk, what doors are open, what doors are not open.

There is generally a linear path through that and careful level design makes it feel like you don’t sort of see the path, but it’s just there. And that really is what we’re talking about in terms of the whiteboard stage of a movie is that you’re doing level design. So there’s really one path the character is going to take through the story, and yet they’re not aware of it, and the audience is not aware that they were locked to that path.

**Craig:** And we can mess with the path. We can create gates. And in stories if it seems like there’s too direct of a path towards what the character will want through their will then you put a gate up. And the gate swings on a test. So, if you need to get – if you want that job and we say like if you work hard you get the job, well just work hard. Work hard for five minutes and you’ll get the job. In the movie it doesn’t work that way. The problem is there is a gate and that’s the person who already has the job.

Now, what do we do to move that person out of the job? And in D&D there may be a real simple, boring path that would cheat you guys of the story. And usually there’s a gate. There’s something that’s blocking you. And sometimes there isn’t. And sometimes you actually can just sort of go really fast and usually if you get through something really fast you should feel a sinking sense that perhaps you should not have wished for this. That there is something even worse – there is a punishment for essentially not having to work for what you want.

It’s punishing you for not exercising enough free will or enough illusion of free will.

**John:** Yeah. So let’s talk about those gates or really decision points, decision tree points, and it’s making sure that when a character hits one of those moments it really does feel like a choice. That the choice was not so predestined that like, well, of course they’re going to take this way. That there actually are pros and cons to both things. And there’s a cost to taking either version. And that’s something you do hopefully think about on the whiteboard version, but really as you get into scenes that’s where you have to be clever about how you’re communicating what the choice really is. And so that we actually see that character making the choice.

It may not be dialogue. It may literally be they can pursue her or not pursue her, or decide what they’re going to do. But we need to believe they actually could decide not to do that thing. And most times we’re going to want them to take an action versus not take an action, because we want to see characters actively engaging in their environment. But, we have to believe they could just sit there.

**Craig:** Yes. And we can also emphasize the character’s inherent misperception of reality. It makes us feel like they have free will when they make a choice and within a scene they realize that they had misunderstood even what the choices were and therefore they reverse course and make a different choice. Or they stop in their path and question whether or not they should continue. Those kinds of things, those confusions, begin to mimic the way we move through real life. We may think we have free will because when we start the day we literally don’t know what’s going to happen next. We have some theories. And our characters have theories.

It’s important to give a character a theory.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** When they go into a scene they should have a theory of how it should go. An expectation. And then our job as screenwriters is to either reinforce that expectation so much that the character becomes paranoid that people are messing with them, or subvert the expectation in some way so the character has to figure out what to do next. Otherwise, you just end up with a boring day at the office.

**John:** Absolutely. So we want characters to have some sort of agenda. Basically you say expectation. Agenda would be a more proactive way of like this is how they see these things going. And we get to mess with them and interrupt their agenda. But just as important that we believe the protagonists are capable of making their own choices. We want to believe that the people surrounding the protagonists also have free will. That they actually could do things and they’re not just there to service that protagonist.

And when I see bad writing I often encounter characters, I don’t believe that they’re real because I don’t think they would do that thing that is just there to help our story. That it’s just there to provide an obstacle or provide support to our protagonist. You want to write these characters in a way that makes it feel like they could have not done that. They could have gone somewhere else. They didn’t have to say that thing.

And that’s one of the trickiest things to do in scene work sometimes is that you’re trying to make the scene efficient and also feel real and reality is not efficient.

**Craig:** Correct. Reality is a big old mess. And it’s confusing. If we think about The Matrix which is about free will as much as it is about anything, one way of looking at that movie is to think of the Oracle character as the Wachowskis. The Oracle is the screenwriter. If I put myself in a movie, me, Craig, as the writer in a movie that I’m writing and I’m sitting there and a character walks in I know everything. I know what’s happened. And I know what’s going to happen.

Also, I have total confidence that if that character says, “Am I the one?” And I say, “Uh, you’re not, sorry.” That they’re going to believe me and that that’s what they needed to hear. But I also know that that’s going to lead to them being free to do certain things because they no longer have the burden of feeling like they’re the one, so they’re going to start to do things, and thus they will be the one which they must be because I’ve written it.

And that’s the fun of that investigation. That you say to somebody, “You see this world you’re living in? You don’t have free will in this world. You’re actually part of a massive computer simulation,” which we all are anyway. “We’re going to show you the real world.” Except when you’re in the real world you’re also in a simulation. You’re in a freaking movie. And that’s the fun of it is that once you envelope people in the quirkiness and the backwards motion and the confusion they forget that it’s entirely determined.

The people with the least free will are the people we write. We literally chose everything for them. But it seems like they’re doing it. Isn’t that fun?

**John:** It is fun. And so we are creating these characters. We’re doing these things that we’re telling them to do. And it’s being played by actors who are reciting the lines that we wrote for them and having the whole scene being controlled by a director who is following our script but also following their own instincts. So, there’s so many levels of unreality being forced upon this.

And the fact that we can watch these stories and sort of believe and sort of accept them as being real is a testament to craft and our brains and sort of how art works. Basically even recognize that you’re seeing a simulation, you enjoy the simulation and it feels real to you because you can imagine yourself being in that situation.

**Craig:** Yeah. And when you’re writing these things, if you can try and surprise yourself then the odds are that the illusion of free choice/free will will be stronger. And of course we can’t really surprise ourselves because, again, it’s all determined. But if it feels like in your mind things are sort of unfolding in a fairly obvious, pat way, just try and throw something at it. See if you can – just surprise yourself. What would this person do that would be entirely unexpected?

Particularly if it feels like the scene you’re writing is something you’ve seen, or felt a lot. What do you do to make it different? And that will help also.

Because if you’re watching something and you think, oh, I’ve seen this scene quite a few times, the free will of it all kind of gets exploded. You just – it’s gone. Because those people are just copies.

**John:** Yeah. You’re watching a magic trick that you already know how the magic trick works because you’ve seen it a zillion times and it’s just not interesting anymore. There’s no surprise. Even if it’s really efficiently done, I can only see that magic trick a certain number of times to say like I don’t quite know how that magic trick works, but I know it’s a thing, and it’s just not interesting to me anymore.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** All right. So, in no part of our conversation about free will have we talked about three-act-structure and hitting plot points and how movies are supposed to work. And how official guidelines for sort of how things should be structured. And that’s sort of by design because I feel like structure as you often read in screenwriting books feels like it’s just – like here’s how you build the rails to sort of bring a character through a movie. This is how movies work. Put them on this track. And we’re arguing against that.

Yes, there probably is going to be a track and you’re going to build that track. But if you just are using somebody else’s track it’s not going to work. It’s not going to feel real.

**Craig:** Yeah. Those things are, as I’ve said, I think I said in my How to Write a Movie episode, those things are post-mortems. They are not guides for creating new life. They are simply excellent – sometimes – excellent analyses of dead bodies. They are things that already happened. They’re taking them apart and showing you, look, this connects to this and this connects to this. Has no relation to creation as far as I’m concerned. None.

And if you follow those things you will have something that looks kind of like a person, or it seems kind of like a movie, but really it’s just a boring kind of copy of stuff.

**John:** Yeah. Now, you may have started your interest in screenwriting by reading one of those books and at this point you may be questioning like, wow, do I even want to be a screenwriter, because what John and Craig are saying feels kind of unapproachable and sort of just how am I supposed to do all of these things at once. And I want to segue our conversation from looking at free will for characters to free will for screenwriters. Because a thing I think we don’t talk about enough on the show is it’s OK to not be a screenwriter.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And I’m reading this book by Adam Grant called Think Again. And one of the points he makes in the book is that so often people pick a career, pick an interest, and sort of like double down on that interest without ever giving themselves permission to sort of question whether like, wow, is this even a thing I really like?

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And I think we need to give people more permission to say like you can enjoy us talking about screenwriting. It’s absolutely fine if you don’t want to be a screenwriter yourself at all. Or never write a scene. That’s OK.

**Craig:** 100%. And similarly it’s OK if you are a screenwriter and want to stop.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** Dennis Palumbo who was with us on Episode 99 – feels like we’re due to have him back, right?

**John:** We should.

**Craig:** Oscar-nominated screenwriter. And now therapist. And he’s been a therapist for many, many years. And one of the areas of his practice is aside from helping writers navigate through their lives, he also specializes in mid-life career changes, which can be traumatic for people because it violates this concept we have vocation. Vocation as in a calling. You are called by some higher power to do something. And then at some point you realize, wait, I don’t like it that much. Or, I don’t know if I’m actually that good at this. Or, I’m good at it, and I like it, but I want to try something new.

All of these things can be very disruptive and it’s OK to go through that process of disrupting these things. If you are pursuing the path of being a screenwriter and it’s not going anywhere you are bombarded with these messages of “don’t quit.” Don’t be a quitter. And persistence. That’s the key is persistence.

**John:** That’s what it is. Yeah.

**Craig:** I don’t know if persistence is the key. I’ve got to be honest. I don’t know if it is.

**John:** Yeah. There’s a concept that’s in Adam Grant’s book, I don’t know if he created it or if he pulled it from someplace else called Identity Foreclosure. And that’s when you fixate on one vision of yourself, or who you’ll become to the exclusion of all other ones.

**Craig:** That’s great.

**John:** And it’s a thing that I see happening a lot in my daughter. Our kids are 15/16 and they get really – they go through phases where it’s like I’m going to be a rocket scientist. I’m going to be this. I’m going to be – and it’s so completely natural, but so unhelpful because it’s not asking the right question. It’s not asking the question like what are you really interested in. It’s thinking like, oh, I will do this job because then I’ll be this and I’ll make this much money and then I will be happy. And ultimately they’re getting to like they want to feel satisfied and happy and secure but they’re focusing on the job rather than what they actually would want to be doing on a daily basis.

**Craig:** And this is not new.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** When you and I were children they called it an Identity Crisis and I was always told teenagers go through identity crises where they are like who am I and what am I supposed to be. And I always felt like what a strange question who am I. I’m me. What other options are there?

But there is this desire to define yourself because if you do it’s like I’m finished. I’m completed. I no longer have to feel like I’m free falling or failing at things or grasping for who I am. It’s so much simpler to just say I am blank. This identity foreclosure has extended beyond just the notion of career. It’s also extending to notions of who we are in terms of our gender and in terms of our sexuality. I see my child’s generation grasping to immediately foreclose their identity because they can, whereas it used to be you couldn’t. And now you can. So this is a new area where they’re sort of like clamping down and at 15 saying I am this, or I am that.

And, of course, humans are, A, more fluid than that, and B, you’re still pretty young. So I think for a lot of people things are super clear because they are, and they’re factual. And for other people they’re still figuring it out. But the notion of foreclosing the possibilities is fascinating. I think that’s exactly right. And it’s a great thing to urge people to, as we would say to our son all the time, you have to sit in the discomfort of uncertainty. And that is very hard for people. It’s hard for a lot of people, especially if they’re neuro-atypical. But it’s hard for all of us to sit with the discomfort of uncertainty.

**John:** One of the things that can be helpful is to really plan for an audit. Basically twice a year to sit down and say, OK, what am I doing? Do I like what I’m doing? Is there something else I might enjoy more? And doing that might actually help you think rather than giving up something, like oh, I’m going to give up trying to be a screenwriter or give up trying to be a basketball player. Really think about affirmatively choosing something else you want to try. And not to think about it as a thing you’re going to be, but a thing you want to do. Because you can’t change – on many levels you can’t change who you are, but you can change what you’re actually doing on a daily basis, overall sort of what your activities are. And really think about it that way.

And so if you were to decide I’m not enjoying screenwriting, or I don’t think screenwriting is the thing for me, great. But if you can phrase that in terms of like I want to spend the time I used to be thinking about screenwriting in this other thing that I am more interested in, that’s great. To affirmatively choose something else rather than giving something up can be a useful way of making those tough choices.

**Craig:** And I think also it’s helpful, although scary, to admit that you are not in control. That the choices you make about yourself, the theories of what you think you want are not always accurate because, again, no free will. And that the world will collide with you in ways you cannot imagine and you cannot predict. And when that happens things change. And they change dramatically. When you look back at your own life, which you and I can now do and actually see five decades, man–

**John:** A lot happened.

**Craig:** Yeah. It certainly wasn’t planned. And you have to be ready for those things. I think the saddest thing that could happens is if you are so rigid in your identity foreclosure out of fear of uncertainty that when a collision occurs you do not allow it to change you, or you do not allow yourself to adapt and consider reforming your relationship with the world and reality because of what just occurred. That’s sad.

**John:** This is advice that’s been given a zillion times on this podcast, but it can be helpful to think of yourself as the protagonist in the story of your life. And so if you think about sort of you as that central character and the choices you get to make, maybe it’s time to pull out the whiteboard a little bit and say like, OK, where am I going? What is the story I’d like to be on? And that story you’re on may not be sort of where you’re at and think about sort of how might want to get to the story of the heroic journey that you’d prefer to be on. It feels like a time to be doing that.

**Craig:** Yeah. And just like we, screenwriters, when we throw things at characters we do it so they react.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I mean, if you throw a bunch of stuff at a character and they never react and they just keep turning away for 90 minutes, boo.

**John:** Not good.

**Craig:** Don’t be that boring character.

**John:** All right. It’s time for our listener questions. But before we get to our listener questions I’m curious, Megana Rao, our producer, does any of this spark for you? Because you’re a person who changed careers. You started at Google and then you came over to work for us here. Does this resonate for you at all?

**Megana Rao:** Yeah. Something that I was also thinking about as you guys were talking is that no matter how much you research or job shadow it’s really hard to know what the reality of a certain experience is going to be like before you try it. Maybe you love film. You love screenwriting. And you love the craft of it all. But the weight that comes along with the industry of Hollywood is unappealing to the point that it outweighs your passion.

I mean, you just couldn’t have known that until you put yourself in that position. And I think about all the identities that I foreclosed on before I could pursue this dream and looking back I can thread together the aspects and how I got here. You know, I thought I was going to be a doctor, and then I thought I would work in tech for the rest of my life. And those were really difficult paths to turn away from because all of these external signals were validating my choices. But ultimately it wasn’t right for me and I don’t know how I could have come to those conclusions until I explored them as options. So, I would just say that trying – the act of pursuing something and putting yourself out there is really hard and if you realize it’s not quite right, congratulations for trying, and have some grace for yourself as you figure out what you want to do next.

**Craig:** That is really interesting. Particularly the doctor part, because you and I are basically the same person. And I was in the same spot. And I’m wondering, Megana, if you had the same feeling I did. Because I didn’t – I liked medicine. I liked the notion of it. And a lot of it still fascinates me to this day. But did you have a moment where you suddenly just thought “I’m not like those people and I don’t know why?” What was the moment where you realized, ooh, I think I should be doing something else?

**Megana:** That’s interesting. I feel like in the question of free will I never felt like I had free will because everyone I knew was basically a doctor.

**John:** Having read your script, you’re also the child of immigrant doctors.

**Megana:** Exactly. Exactly.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** So no free will for you.

**Craig:** No. No free will for all the little Indian and Jewish children. That’s just how it is.

**Megana:** But the thing that I was interested in being a doctor was just people’s stories and talking to them. And when I think about how my dad is as a doctor I was like, oh OK, that is a very different approach to what this field actually is like. And the science aspect of it, like I like science and I think it’s cool, but it was never like oh that is what gets me going in the morning.

**Craig:** Right. So you were on a path and one day you realized I don’t have to be on this path.

**Megana:** Yeah. And I think I also realized I think in some ways I’m too sensitive to be a doctor. Because you have to be able to detach a little bit. And I’m not very good at that.

**John:** Yeah. Because all it takes is one “yup” from me and you’re questioning all your choices. [laughs]

**Craig:** This is why I think Megana you would have been a brilliant pathologist because they’re already dead.

**John:** Let’s see if we can help some of our listeners out with questions they have. Megana, can you start us off?

**Megana:** All right. So Jamie in Maryland asks, “I’ve had a situation come up a few times that I’ve never really gotten clarity on. I’ve had scripts optioned and been hired to rewrite. The complication arises when that script falls out of the option period but it’s been rewritten, and in most cases by me. Going forward, now that the material is back in my hands what do I own? And I don’t own the rewrite work how can I possibly forget improvements I may have made? Or what if I get similar notes from a producer who options the script in the future?

“I can’t really say, no, the old company owns that. What are the rules for dealing with this?”

**John:** This is a really good question. And Craig and I, we don’t write a lot of specs, and so we’ve not had this happen where we’ve optioned stuff out. So I ended up asking a lawyer friend about who deals with this a lot. And it’s actually more complicated than I would have guessed.

Let’s first start by talking about what an option is. Craig, can you remind us what an option is?

**Craig:** Well, an option is a payment to you, the writer, that says that producer who pays you the option has the exclusive right to arrange for the sale of that script to a studio and there’s a baked in price usually for what the price will be. And it lasts for about a year or so. And they give you some money for it. It could a dollar. It could be a lot. It’s not like a WGA thing because we haven’t been employed.

And then when that time is over the option ends.

**John:** And so in a vacuum you would get that script and it’s exactly the same script that you optioned to them, and so you still control copyright and it’s just entirely yours. Now the complication is generally they’ll option that script but then they will hire you, probably under a WGA contact, as a work-for-hire to do some rewriting work on that script. And that’s where it gets complicated.

So let’s say you make some changes to the script and improve it. And the option lapses. You get your original script back, but you don’t automatically get all the rewrites that you did back. And so if there’s things you changed that are not part of that, that is still owned by them, because they own that copyright on those rewrites because of work-for-hire.

So, it does happen some and here’s the advice I got from my lawyer friend on this situation. In your initial contract for the rewriting you could have had a clause in there saying that you get the rewrites back or for a certain fee at the end of this. That’s a thing that could happen.

More likely what’s going to happen is as the option lapses, and if you do want that stuff, you talk to them. And they may ask for all that money that they gave you for the rewrite back. They may ask for some percentage of that. More often what happens is that when you go to set something up someplace else, like you’re going to sell this script to someplace else, you then negotiate to sort of get that stuff back in. Or you put it as part of a – if you’re selling it to someplace else in that contract to sell it to this second company at the start of production there’s a payment made to the first place to get all that stuff back.

Here’s why you do that. Is because you can say like, oh, well yes, you had that idea to make those changes, but I also had that idea to make the changes and I did it slightly differently. It’s still copyright law and it’s still very clear that you had access to all the material. So, you could be in a lawsuit situation. Rarely. But it could happen.

**Craig:** Yeah. So, Jamie, the inflection point here is when you say hired to rewrite. You get hired. It’s a work-for-hire. So the person that’s hired you to rewrite, the person that optioned the script now owns that rewrite. They own it. They’re the writer. They are the legal author of that.

So, you can’t really undo that. Writing screenplays and developing screenplays is like cooking. So you should them a dish and they’re like, great, now I’m going to pay you money to take that and turn it into a stew. And you do. How do you un-stew a stew? It’s really not possible. You can go somewhere else and say I’ve made something new. It’s not the first thing I showed them, it’s something in between this and a stew. And then the people who own the stew are like, uh, you got stew elements in that.

So, my advice if at all possible is to not get paid to rewrite an optioned script. That sounds a little crazy, but hear me out. Your script is optioned. That means you own the copyright. They just have the exclusive right to shop it. Hold on. And if they want a rewrite, if they’re giving you advice on how to make it better and you agree, just say great, I’m going to do that on my own. And you can option that. But don’t give me money and employ me to do it. Because the most important thing you can have when a studio is interested in your script is ownership of it. And I can’t imagine the amount of money that they’re giving you to rewrite is as significant as the amount of money a studio will pay if they really want that script.

So if you can try and keep copyright all the way through until a real studio wants it. And then you give it away.

**John:** So, the con to that is that there may be reasons why, A, you need that money, or that money may actually get you into the WGA, or sort of keep you active in the WGA.

**Craig:** Yes. Yes.

**John:** So, there may be reasons to take that deal.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** But I agree with Craig in that if it’s sort of a shopping agreement, if you keep control over everything that’s kind of ideal. Ultimately what we’re talking about is how did the option lapse. What is the end of that relationship like? And if the end of that relationship is good, and they want to still keep working with you on other stuff you’re going to have a better negotiating what you’re going to do with the rewrite stuff you did for them before. And really the best case scenario might be just a lien against that script for – if it goes into production they’ll pay you whatever money that was owed.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** That’s fine and that’s reasonable. But it’s a good question to ask and I agree with Craig that if you’ve written this material and you can control this material it’s generally worth it to keep control for as long as you can.

**Craig:** Agreed.

**John:** Cool. Megana, what you got next for us?

**Megana:** All right. Maya asks, “I’m an up and coming writer that just got out of grad school. My program sent out loglines to industry folks and a manager who is now interested in reading my script. Problem is, it’s not ready. How much time do I have? Is it a bad look if I send in my script after a month of them asking for it? I just want to make the best first impression possible and I know that if I send my script right now that first impression is going down the drain.

“Should I let them know I need more time and expect my script in a month? Or should I just not reply until my script is ready? What I’m trying to ask, is there any leniency in this process or am I basically screwed?”

**Craig:** Aw.

**John:** I like that Maya’s default position is everything is terrible. Maya, you’re not screwed.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** My instinct is to send an email and say like, oh my god, I’m so excited you want to read this script. I’m in the middle of a rewrite on it now and I can’t wait to show you the next version.

**Craig:** This is one of those areas where if you could only imagine how little other people are thinking about you it would blow your mind.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** You know, like someone is like, huh, that’s an interesting logline. I’m interested in reading that. That’s literally all it is. Then they forget. They move on. Now the next thing they’re worried about is lunch. And what they’re not doing every day is waking up going, “Where the hell is Maya’s script? Where is it? I said I wanted it. Where is it?”

And similarly if you send kind of along Hamlet-like email, like I’m so sorry, I do, but I don’t, but I don’t know. They’re going to be like, “What? What are you talking about man? Also, who is this?” It doesn’t matter.

Here’s what matters. You’re going to send a script and they’re going to read it and they’re going to either like it or they don’t. A logline means nothing. I think we’ve said that a billion times on this show. You’ve certainly intrigued them with the idea. What they’re really saying is if that script is good that would be good. As opposed to if that script is good I still wouldn’t care because I don’t want anything about that topic.

So, there is no reason for you to rush something out that you don’t think is ready. Nor is there any reason for you to fret or sweat or freak out every day that you’re taking too long because they’re sitting there tapping their fingers on the table going, “It’s Maya o’clock. Where’s my script?” Just relax your body, you know, waggle your head around. Take some deep breaths. Don’t tell them you need more time or anything like that. Just send the script. And when you do say, “You might remember that you were interested in this logline. Here’s the script.” And then they’ll go like, oh yeah. Oh yeah.

That’s it. Simple as that.

**John:** So my argument for sending the email now is, again, to be very, very short but saying like, hey, I’m so excited for you to read this. I’m doing a rewrite. I’m going to send it to you. It might remind them that like, oh, that’s right, I did read that thing. So that when they get it a month from now they’ll remember sort of what it was.

**Craig:** Sure. That seems reasonable.

**John:** But it should be nothing more than that. And you should not fret about it. But also I think sending that email will light a little fire under you to actually really get that work done. Because nothing helps a writer more than having promised it to somebody.

**Craig:** I think that’s true. You have a certain accountability. Yes, you can send a little short email that’s just like, great, thanks so much. I will send you the script as soon as it’s finished.

**John:** Yeah. One more question, Megana. What do you got for us?

**Megana:** OK, Bill from Dallas asks, “I have a question about child screenwriting prodigies, specifically where the heck are they? We’ve got pre-teen violinists who can play with professional skill, young mathematicians who can solve problems at graduate college levels. And of course plenty of chess prodigies. So where are the screenwriters? Where is that 10-year-old kid topping the Black List and clinking glasses with the finalists of Nicholls? Are we just not finding them? Or are there really zero out there? If the latter is true, why?”

**John:** So I’m going to find this Ben Stiller sketch from The Ben Stiller Show a zillion years ago where they had this young child prodigy director. And the line I remember from it is, “My movie is called Horses are Pretty because horses are pretty.” And it’s great.

I don’t know why there are not more teenage filmmaker prodigies except that maybe there are prodigies and they’re making TikToks and YouTube videos that are stunning but they’re just not writing screenplays.

**Craig:** There aren’t really novelists prodigies either.

**John:** True.

**Craig:** I think it may be because writing fiction is harder than all the rest of this stuff. Now, I can already hear people going, “What?” Because, you know, that’s pretty braggy. Like a bunch of guys writing movies about cars smashing into each other and people over there with Fields medals in math are like, “Are you serious? I’m unraveling the fabric of the universe and you think what you’re doing is harder?” It’s not harder, it’s rarer. How about that?

There are actually fewer working, consistently working, impactful screenwriters than there are mathematicians like that. It’s crazy. I don’t know why. It’s weird. It’s not harder. It can’t be harder. It’s not harder than chess. I’m so bad at chess. John, do you understand how bad I am at chess?

**John:** I believe that you’re bad at chess because I’m bad at chess, too. And I’m smart enough person. I understand how it all works. But I’m just not good at it. My daughter beats me regularly.

**Craig:** Anyone could beat me. I think my dog could beat me. Yeah. But, I don’t know, it’s rare. It just is. And it may be that the neurological components required for writing well, whatever that means, just take way more time. And require way more integration. So, all of the parts of your brain need to be working. And working at a certain level. As opposed to one part that’s just skyrocketing early.

**John:** I think to Amanda Gorman who wrote the amazing poem that was read at the inauguration. And she’s young. She’s not necessarily that young. She’s not a teen prodigy necessarily, but she’s really, really good. But poetry is also a shorter form. And one of the challenges of a screenplay is it’s 100 plus pages and that’s just a lot to manage. There’s a lot to sort of do.

So it’s certainly not impossible for a teenager to understand that and do that. People can write in with examples of like, oh, this is a teenager who did this thing. But even like Lena Dunham who was super young as she started, she wasn’t that young.

**Craig:** No. Poetry is very flexible. You can define it essentially how you’d like. In that regard it’s a little bit like lyrics.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And my daughter is an up and coming budding songwriter. And she writes really interesting stuff that is getting legitimate attention out there. And she’s lyrically very advanced. But it is a different deal. Because there’s a freedom to it. And that’s the misery of screenwriting and it sort of ties into our main topic is that there isn’t so much freedom to it. You are required to make things function in an interesting way in a fairly rigid format.

And I don’t mean on the page format. I mean just the structure and the reality of what it means to write a two-hour-movie, or a one-hour-episode of television. Or a 30-minute-episode of television. So, my final answer is very rare skill, requires high functioning across all aspects of the brain, including visual imagination, language skills, empathy, IQ, EQ, all of it humming, all at once. As opposed to one area that is like through the roof but could Einstein tell a joke? Eh, I don’t know.

**John:** Einstein’s episode of Friends, his spec Friends, was really disappointing.

**Craig:** Atrocious.

**John:** Just atrocious. Now, I’m sure we have teen listeners. So if you’re a teen listener who has other insights for us please do write in, because we’re curious what you think.

**Craig:** I know what they’re going to be like. “Shut up old guys.”

**John:** Megana, thank you for these questions.

**Craig:** Thank you, Megana.

**Megana:** Thanks guys.

**John:** All right. It is time for our One Cool Things. I have two One Cool Things. Two TV shows to recommend. The first is Hacks on HBO or HBO Max. I don’t even know what the difference is between HBO and HBO Max at this point.

**Craig:** Oh, I can tell you.

**John:** Tell me what the difference is.

**Craig:** I’m so glad you asked. HBO Max is the service that delivers both HBO and other programming. Now, does that sound confusing? It does sound confusing. I’ve been described like HBO, the branded HBO stuff, is on a tab. So, you know, for–

**John:** So Chernobyl is on that tab and The Last of Us will be on that tab.

**Craig:** Chernobyl is on that tab. The Last of Us is on that tab. HBO Max covers a whole other world of programming that is a little bit, like for instance I guess a lot of the – like the DC shows probably are on HBO Max. It’s a very strange thing.

**John:** It’s very strange.

**Craig:** It’s so weird.

**John:** Having watched the pilot episode for Hacks I cannot tell you whether there was the static-y HBO thing before it started, so I can’t tell you if it’s technically an HBO show or it’s just a show that I watched on HBO Max. Regardless, everyone would watch it because it’s really, really well done. This is the show that stars Jean Smart as a Las Vegas comedian who is kind of forced into hiring on a young joke writer and it’s their relationship. And it’s so well done.

It was written by Lucia Aniello, Paul W. Downs, and Jen Statsky. Here’s the reason why I think it’s an HBO show. It looks so expensive. It looks like Succession in terms of like, wow, they spent some real money on that. And I just love that. I mean, I respect people who do a lot with a little, but I also respect when people do just a lot with a lot. And it looks just great. And everything about it is just flawlessly done, so please – I’ve only seen the pilot, but it’s just really good and I can’t wait to watch more episodes of Hacks.

Another show I watched the whole season of this last week was Girls 5eva, which is on Peacock. Do you know the premise of Girls 5eva?

**Craig:** No, this is the greatest. Is it like a girl band kind of thing?

**John:** Exactly. And so it is a 2000s girl band that had sort of one big hit and then broke up, or sort of they never had a second hit. And so it’s following them up 20 years later as they are trying to form the group back again. It stars Sara Bareilles, Renee Elise Goldsberry from Hamilton.

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**John:** Busy Philipps. Paula Pell. The fifth member of Girls 5eva died in a tragic infinity pool accident. And it’s written by Meredith Scardino. Created by her. But it’s under the Tina Fey sort of umbrella. And so it has the 30 Rock-y/Kimmy Schmidt kind of feel and music. Real joke density. Just delightful. So if you enjoy 30 Rock or those kind of shows you really will love Girls 5eva. Great songs throughout.

**Craig:** Well yeah. I mean, Sara Bareilles and Renee Elise Goldsberry, those two alone – I mean, I just watch them sing. So if they’re singing at all I would be thrilled.

**John:** Oh they’re singing a ton. And Sara Bareilles is a really good actor.

**Craig:** Isn’t that fun when that happens?

**John:** It’s so good when someone is from a different field but they can actually – she can act her little heart out.

**Craig:** A little bit like, you know, I think in a couple of weeks there might be an episode of Mythic Quest with another brilliant performance.

**John:** I’m excited to see it.

**Craig:** I’m going to just tease it like this. Craig with hair.

**John:** Oh my gosh. Oh my gosh.

**Craig:** It is so weird. I sent Melissa a picture from the makeup trailer. And I was wearing my mask and so she couldn’t see my whole face, but I just sent a picture of me wearing a mask, but with hair, and she wrote back, “Who is that?” She literally didn’t know it was me.

**John:** Did not recognize her own husband.

**Craig:** Yes. Correct.

**John:** Love it.

**Craig:** And happily she wasn’t like, “Hmm, who is that?” She was like, “Eww. Who is that?”

**John:** Elon Musk treatment there, yeah.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** The hair back.

**Craig:** Well, my One Cool Thing this week is sort of a redo of another one. At one point, I’ve been looking for translation apps because I’m working with a number of folks from other countries. And there’s got to be a really good one. And I was using one I think called Mate, and it was decent. It didn’t quite do a perfect job translating. And it would lose formatting. For instance line breaks and stuff, which was really frustrating.

And I’m so sorry, someone on Twitter, and I cannot find the tweet so I cannot give them credit, but I apologize. If you tweet back again I will give you credit next week. Turned me onto something called Deepl Translator. That’s Deepl Translator.

And like a number of these things there’s a cost if you want to use it fully. It works really well. And I ran a translation by Kantemir Balagov, our Russian director. Because I always feel like translating to Russian that’s a good challenge. And he was like this is really good.

So I’m using Deepl Translator. So if you do have needs for translating. And what I also love about the simplicity of it is, this is very good, you write a bunch of stuff, you want to translate it. You just highlight it and then you do, if you’re on a Mac, Command C twice. That’s all you do. You just do the copy command twice and it automatically brings up a screen and starts translating it. Very good.

**John:** Nice.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Cool. That’s the future.

**Craig:** The future is now.

**John:** One last request for our Scriptnotes listeners. We have a Wikipedia page like all things on the Internet. There’s a Wikipedia page for Scriptnotes. It’s really out of date. It’s like super, super out of date. And so if people want to take a look at that and bring it a little bit more up to date. I’m going to put links in the show notes to the Scriptnotes index that Megana worked on and also a Scriptnotes guest list that we have. Because I want our Wikipedia page to be just a little bit more up to date. And you’re not really supposed to do it yourself.
And so if you guys want to take that on as a little project that would be great to see our Wikipedia page be a little bit more updated if that’s a thing you like to do. I suspect we have some Wiki editors in our listenership right now.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah. I haven’t looked at it in a long time. Now that you’ve said that it’s just going to be like–

**John:** It’s going to be madness.

**Craig:** Massive vandalism on our Wikipedia page.

**John:** Wikipedia does a pretty good job dealing with vandalism. So I think we have responsible listeners who will do well by us.

**Craig:** We have the best listeners.

**John:** Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao, the best producer. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro is by Brian Ramos. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter I am @johnaugust. Craig is there but he just kind of sends gifs, so don’t really ask him any questions.

We have t-shirts. They’re great. You can find them at Cotton Bureau. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you find the transcripts. And you can sign up for weekly-ish newsletter called Inneresting which has lots of links to things about writing.

You can sign up to become a premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you get all of the back episodes and bonus segments like the one we’re about to record on the AP exams.

Craig and Megana, thank you guys so much.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**Megana:** Thank you.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** All right, so Craig this last week my daughter took the AP US History exam. And so she had the whiteboard filled with a timeline of all these things. And I recognized some of the names of these events that occurred in US history but I couldn’t tell you what actually happened in them.

I took AP US History and dropped it at the semester mark because I just did not like it. And I ended up finishing it on a tele-course over the summer and enjoyed that much more. I suspect, and you actually promised, that you have strong opinions about the AP exams.

**Craig:** I do.

**John:** Go.

**Craig:** They should be eliminated.

**John:** All right.

**Craig:** They should be eliminated with force. They should be all piled together, put on some sort of space vessel, and shot into the sun. And here is why. AP exams are entirely unnecessary. The initial thought about AP exams was that if you were particularly advanced in a certain topic that you could test out of having to take an introductory class at the college level, which I understand. You’re paying for college. You don’t want to necessarily just sit there in a boring class that is a prerequisite to get to the class you want when it’s already something you already know. That’s all it was meant to be. Just place out of stuff so you could start a little further along in college.

And what it has become in an insane arms race regarding your GPA, your grade point average. Because AP classes, which are classes that are taught to exams, and the AP classes should not exist in my belief, load on bonus points to your grade point average. And this insanity in our nation that every ounce of your existence as a child must be focused to the great prime achievement of getting into “good college” which therefore defines you as a good person and a future success. All of that is nonsense.

It is destroying kids’ childhoods. It’s also destroying the entire concept of what high school education is supposed to be. It’s not supposed to be that. The stress that we are piling on these kids over this AP stuff is insane. Not only do they have to study massive amounts to take these exams and do way more work than they normally would have to basically do extra high school while they’re in high school, they’re also doing 12 other extracurriculars because they’ve got to be well rounded. You’ve got to be well rounded all so that you a group of people sitting in a room somewhere at freaking Dartmouth can go, “Yes, this person is worthy.”

Horseshit. It’s horseshit. Look, if I could wave a magic wand I would eliminate most colleges entirely. OK? Because I think the entire higher education business is largely fraud and a certification Ponzi scheme. But if I can’t do that, and I can’t, then at least give me a want to get rid of the freaking AP exams. Or, if I can’t do that, keep the AP exams, get rid of AP classes, and say to kids if you really do want to advance yourself when you get to college just study on the side at home or over the summer and take this test and then you can. But we’re not giving you anything for your stupid GPA. So stop asking.

And just go back to, oh my god, the highest number you can have for a GPA is 4.0. There you go. We’re done. No more of the valedictorian has a 6.8.

**John:** Now, Craig, does it make you feel any better that colleges and many schools are actually already taking your advice and they are getting rid of AP exams?

**Craig:** It does make me feel better. But it has to happen – OK, so education is largely driven by the major state schools. A little bit by Ivy League schools. But for instance almost everything that happens in the California public school system has to do with the UC system. If the UC system accepts something everybody is funneling towards that. Everybody. And it’s the UC system that has to say we’re not doing this anymore. It’s over. Stop it.

**John:** Yeah. So no more Stand and Deliver for Craig Mazin. He believes that is a false promise, a false goal. That Edward James Olmos should be ashamed of himself.

**Craig:** I don’t know about that because I don’t remember – what was he doing in that? Was he teaching an AP class?

**John:** He taught his high school, he started the first AP Calculus class at his school.

**Craig:** I mean, look, I have a whole problem with the entire genre. Like John Gatins, our screenwriting friend, has a genre.

**John:** Inspiring teacher.

**Craig:** Yeah. I didn’t know that insert, you know, minority could do that. I didn’t know that Latinos could do Calculus. That’s not a genre of movie, but it sort of somehow became one. Like, wow, I didn’t – yes, of course they can. Of course they can. And you should be able to teach anyone calculus. And if kids want to learn regular calculus just teach them calculus. Calculus is enough. Why is there AP Calculus? “Well, it’s extra calculus because I don’t want to have to do regular calculus at college.” Fine, then go do that on your own time.

But this – what we’re doing is we’re putting college into high school. Then what the hell is college for?

**John:** Now, Craig, back when you were in high school did you take AP classes?

**Craig:** When I was in high school I was in a magnet program for medical sciences. So it was like a pre-pre-med program. We didn’t have AP classes. I don’t think we even had them at Freehold High School in New Jersey. What we did have were some specialized classes in topics that were not offered normally, like for instance we had a class in organic chemistry. It was called AP Orgo or anything like that. It was just organic chemistry.

So we did not have AP classes as far as I understood them. I never took an AP exam. What I did was take a few of the SAT achievement tests. Do you remember those?

**John:** Yeah. They’ve gotten rid of those largely, too.

**Craig:** Exactly. All of it nonsense. All of it unnecessary. And I can’t explain how much I’m retroactively angry at the process of being a high school kid with this college insanity looming over me. I’m angry at how happy I was to get into the school I got. I’m angry that they made me happy about it. And I’m not coming from a point of bitterness. Meaning it wasn’t like I got rejected so I’m angry. I didn’t. I got accepted. And it’s wrong.

It’s wrong. The whole thing is wrong. There are wonderful schools out there who teach kids terrific things as young adults in higher education and we don’t know their names because they don’t have marketing budgets or a $500 billion endowment. And so nobody cares about them. They’re just driven to whatever the hell, I don’t know, USC wants.

But why? Why? Why? Why?

**John:** This is not a defense of AP exams.

**Craig:** Oh good.

**John:** But I will talk about my high school experience was I ended up dropping AP US History. I did take AP English. And I learned a lot in AP English, but I think it was just the Honors English class. We read good stuff. We discussed it. Great. And so whether I took the test or not it doesn’t really matter.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** I also took AP Spanish Lit, which I think they still offer the test. It was a helpful test for me in that we read a lot of books and I took the test and I did well on it. And it was handy for me to get to college and I already had more than a semester done. And so it really lightened my load. In college let me sort of explore a lot more in college because I didn’t have to – I had so many literature credits going into it that I didn’t have to take certain classes which was great.

So I appreciated that. But I recognize that on this conversation you and I are both like stumbling blindly because we have someone else on the call who has much, much more experience with AP exams. Megana Rao, can you talk to us about your AP experience?

**Megana:** So, I just looked it up and I think I took like 12 or 13 AP classes.

**Craig:** Oh god. No.

**John:** And how do you feel about those AP classes and exams now looking back?

**Megana:** I mean, I agree with so many of Craig’s points, and like College Board and the whole thing is just a racket. But, I really enjoyed taking those classes. And I think at a lot of public schools it gives – just because it is so standardized it gives you a really rigorous curriculum that you might not be getting from your education in certain school districts. And I think like at Harvard they didn’t accept them, but if I were to have gone to Ohio State like I would have started off as I think a spring semester sophomore.

**Craig:** That’s crazy.

**Megana:** I mean, this is a larger conversation about, you know, higher education. But I think that does seem like a good option for people because college is so outrageously expensive. So I think that option of being able to, I don’t know, mitigate that at some level feels like maybe a positive thing.

**Craig:** But look what they’ve done? They’ve created a system where you have to jump through a thousand hoops as a child to then not have to pay them so freaking much because they charge so much. That is so warped.

And by the way, don’t get me wrong, I’m not against honors classes. I’m not against kids if they are at a certain level and they want to learn a little bit more they can. Honors classes are fine. But this thing where there’s any indication whatsoever that taking an honors class is going to move you ahead in college and leap frog you past other things in college is crazy. And the idea that you would get these weighted GPAs, so suddenly grade point averages are in these insane inflated numbers is crazy. And the fact that education, higher education, costs so much that you’re going to beat yourself up as a 16-year-old to try and get a bunch of free things, but you don’t have to pay as much. How about don’t pay them anything?

How about that? How about we shouldn’t even have to go to college? How about that?

**John:** All right. So let’s imagine AP classes go away and look at the pros and cons of that. So obviously from a college level once they’ve admitted you as a student they could just give you a placement test to see like, OK, which physics should you be in, which Spanish should you be in. That’s great and fine. They can absolutely do that. So we’re really not losing much there.

I want to get to Megana’s point which I had not considered but I think is really good is that if you’re looking across the country and different communities, where you have really good high schools or not really good high schools, the AP curriculum actually does give some comfort of like I know that if this student is taking this AP curriculum they’re going to actually at least have this. That they’re actually going to learn this and there’s going to be some kind of rigor, some sort of standardization. It may be too standardized. It may be sort of you’re teaching towards that test, but at least you know these people got this out of it.

And in a country where there’s such wild disparities of educational access and opportunity AP could help arguably to make sure that students have access to a certain kind of rigor that they might not otherwise get in their underfunded schools.

**Craig:** Allow me to rebut.

**John:** Please.

**Craig:** If the school can teach an AP curriculum then it can teach an AP curriculum. Just doesn’t have to call it an AP curriculum. Meaning it’s capable of doing it, therefore it can and should do it. But let’s be honest about the way our system functions. If there is a deal where there’s a specific thing called an AP class that leads to an AP exam that lets you skip ahead then rich kids will always do better. Always. Because they can afford tutors. And because they don’t have to work. They don’t have jobs.

I had a freaking job.

**John:** I had a job, too.

**Craig:** I couldn’t have been in those classes. Like I couldn’t do the things. But, you know, these rich kids – did we talk about, what is it, the Polaris List? Did we talk about that on the show?

**John:** I don’t remember what that was. No.

**Craig:** He’s a kid, he’s a young guy. And he’s put together this list that basically is like every high school in the country, private or public, how many kids did they send to either Princeton, Harvard, or MIT. I believe those are the three that they picked. And it is astonishing. Astonishing. The top ten schools, it’s just like, wow.

So Harvard Westlake. Percentages.

**John:** Or Marlborough. All of those.

**Craig:** It’s a joke. It’s a freaking joke. My school that I went to, this is so good. Because any time there’s a thing like that, they’ll all say we believe in equal access to education and all the rest of it. Somebody pointed out that if say Harvard, or Princeton, why not. I’ll go after my own. Let’s say Harvard or Princeton really was committed to equal opportunity of higher education for everybody in the country what they would do if they were really interested in that is kill themselves. They would dissolve their institutions and take all that money and create a whole bunch of equal opportunity programs spread out across the country.

We’re talking about billions. Billions. Do you know what the Harvard endowment is?

**John:** It’s probably a billion dollars itself.

**Craig:** Oh, I think it’s got to be more.

**Megana:** It’s something like $30 billion or $26 billion or something.

**John:** Oh my god.

**Craig:** $30 billion. $30. Do you see what I’m saying? Like when you really look at it, I know I sound crazy. I know I sound a little like QAnon here. But if you really look at the situation with just a very sober eye there is very little in our country that is as insane and Kafkaesque as the way we are educating our children to a purpose.

And the purpose is getting more education from some place and then when they’re done we go, ha-ha, have fun. With no job. Have fun. You did it. You achieved something. You rode all the way to the top of the rollercoaster and that’s it. You just get to the top and then you fall off and you hit the ground. That’s it.

**John:** Megana, I want to hear what you think about a life without AP classes.

**Megana:** So I do agree with a lot of what Craig is saying. I recently read this tweet that was like Millennials have 4% of the national wealth and I think Gen X had had 9% and Baby Boomers have had like 21% when they were at this stage. And it’s because we have gone through the system and taken on all of this student debt and it has not paid off with the job market that’s been available to us.

But, I will say that, you know, I did not come from one of those feeder schools and I was I think like the first kid maybe from my high school to go to an Ivy League, to go to Harvard. And when you get there and there are all of these kids from super elite prep schools and private schools from all over the world there is something reassuring in being like, OK, well we all took these classes and – like for some of the classes I just read those AP books on my own and then took the test and did well. And I’m not saying, I’m not advocating for AP, but there is something nice about having that standardization that I was able to have confidence that I was stepping up to freshmen year on sort of an equal playing field. And that those resources were easily accessible to me.

**Craig:** I’m like you. I came from the same situation.

**John:** Yeah. I want some clarification here. So, how many AP classes did you have versus tests did you have?

**Megana:** I think I took 10 AP classes and then I took two that I did not have the classes for and I just took the test from reading textbooks.

**John:** OK. So that’s something Craig would argue kind of in favor of to some degree, to be able to prove that on your own you did this thing.

**Craig:** But the problem is that there are far fewer – the AP – let’s call it a ladder to success. That ladder is far narrower for people that come from backgrounds like yours or mine. And it’s why you were the first person to go to Harvard from your school. I don’t know if I was the first person to go to Princeton, but we didn’t send many people to Ivy League schools from my school and we still don’t. Maybe one or two.

And there are dozens, dozens, of kids every year coming from Harvard Westlake. Why? It’s not because they are inherently smarter. It’s because everybody is getting a boost up that ladder. Everybody. This is what happens when you – you extend an opportunity and people game it because the entire thing is set up to be gamed and smart people are always going to figure out ways to mess with it. If the SAT is designed to be a standardized thing that gives everybody the same chance, well putting aside the inherent biases and however the test is created, it’s not an even playing field because now you have tutors. You have the Princeton Review.

If you can pay for the Princeton Review you’re already doing better. If you go to two of those classes and you learn their simple methods of process of elimination and all of that stuff you are already doing better. It’s not – it all gets – by the way, Harvard’s endowment is $41 billion.

**Megana:** Oh my goodness.

**Craig:** Thank you. So, it’s like a small country. And these things that are dangled, if we eliminated all of it, if we just eliminated all of those things and we just said write your application and we’ll take a look, and we expanded the understanding of what a good school is, we’d be vastly better off.

The problem for Harvard or Princeton, and if I worked at one of those admissions offices I don’t know what I would do, because I’m taking in 3% of the applications I receive. How the hell am I discriminating between all of these people? It’s impossible.

**John:** It’s really hard. So I’ve been on Zooms with college admissions things that are organized to sort of talk through what they’re doing. And those admissions offices are on some of those Zooms. And they’ll say, listen, we’re not looking at ACTs or SATs. They’re just looking it up – in both UC schools – Cal State schools and UC schools are not taking SATs or ACTs. They’re not requiring them anymore. And so all of these admissions officers have to look for other things to sort of determine is this kid going to be able to succeed at our school.

They look at grades. They look at where that kid falls in class rankings overall. What activities. And basically – and this sort of feels appropriate for a podcast about something – is what is this kid’s story? Basically how can this kid articulate sort of where they come from and what they’re trying to do? And that’s ultimately what they’re making admissions decisions based on. It’s tough.

**Craig:** I wish they wouldn’t. Because that’s gross. When we take a step back and we think about it, some panel of eight people in a room are examining what my child’s story is? F-off. They don’t know my kid and they’re never going to know my kid from an application. It’s impossible.

The whole concept of it is insane. That’s my point. The whole concept of deciding who belongs here is insane. And the notion of selectivity is kind of insane. I just don’t get it. I don’t. And I will remain forever angry about it.

Oh, and also US News & World Report should go to hell.

**John:** All right. But, the good news is I think we actually have a first candidate for Change Craig’s Mind is like if we can change Craig’s mind on some aspect of the college process then that will be a goal for this. I don’t even know what I want to change him to.

**Craig:** Or anything. Just change it.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Oh man, I feel bad for that person. Oh, this was a good one. I feel so good. I feel like I exorcised a lot of demons today.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** God, I hope some admissions officer writes in like, “Well, you know, we actually can tell about what a human being is like from their five pages and their dumb essay.” Oh please. Please. Beat it. [laughs] That’s all I have to say.

Thank you for tolerating me through all of that, by the way. You’re both incredibly patient and lovely people.

**John:** Thank you both.

**Craig:** Thanks guys.

**Megana:** Thank you. Bye.

**John:** Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

Links:

* [The Scriptnotes Index](https://johnaugust.com/scriptnotes-index)
* [Scriptnotes Guest List](https://johnaugust.com/scriptnotes-guest-index)
* Help us update the [Scriptnotes Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scriptnotes)
* [Seth Rogan on Productivity](https://www.insider.com/why-seth-rogen-and-wife-do-not-want-children-2021-5)
* [The clockwork universe: is free will an illusion?](https://www.theguardian.com/profile/oliverburkeman) by Oliver Burkeman
* [Hacks with Jean Smart](https://play.hbomax.com/series/urn:hbo:series:GYIBToQrPdotpNQEAAAEa) on HBO Max
* [Girls 5eva](https://www.peacocktv.com/stream-tv/girls5eva) on Peacock
* [Horses are pretty because horses are pretty](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYZOlwsMGFA&feature=youtu.be) sketch on child-director prodigy
* [Deepl Translator](https://www.deepl.com/translator)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew Chilelli ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by [Megana Rao](https://twitter.com/MeganaRao) and edited by [Matthew Chilelli](https://twitter.com/machelli).

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/502standard.mp3).

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

January 19, 2022 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found here.

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

Craig Mazin:
My name is Craig Mazin.

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
100 %.

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Yeah. Someone said it somewhere.

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

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

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

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

John August:
Why would you stay?

Craig Mazin:
If you’re any of them?

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

Craig Mazin:
Do you all love each other now?

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

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

John August:
That’s what it is.

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
What?

John August:
Yeah. Regardless of interest.

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Yep. Little hiatus over here.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Which they will do.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
Oh, yeah, we do.

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

John August:
Yeah, you picked that place.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
Is watching money burn, yeah.

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

John August:
That says a lot.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
I can answer that question.

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

Craig Mazin:
No.

John August:
No.

Craig Mazin:
No.

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

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

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

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

John August:
No. I’ve done it.

Craig Mazin:
It’s picked.

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

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

John August:
No, they shouldn’t.

Craig Mazin:
No.

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

Craig Mazin:
They do.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
Yeah. I was confused too.

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
How are things in unison?

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

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

Craig Mazin:
What is that?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
No.

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
That’s interesting.

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

John August:
Her description is-

Craig Mazin:
Cold and distant but without angst.

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
As Megana laughs.

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

Megana Rao:
I see. I see.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
Daddy, I want a peppercorn snail.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
Maybe start with rabbits.

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

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

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

John August:
Everyone’s weathered.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
What?

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

Craig Mazin:
I see.

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

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

John August:
No, it’s not.

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

John August:
Yeah, to strangle a sparrow.

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

Megana Rao:
Can I ask you a question?

Craig Mazin:
Sure, of course.

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

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

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

John August:
No, shouldn’t be.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Is she?

John August:
Yeah.

Craig Mazin:
Yes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
They are 16 and 14.

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
No.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Megana Rao:
A bunch, yeah.

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

Craig Mazin:
Five.

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Slap wrist bracelet.

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

Craig Mazin:
Sorry. SlapLit.

John August:
SlapLit, LED Slap Wrap.

Craig Mazin:
SlapLit.

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

Craig Mazin:
Oh, SlapLit.

John August:
SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
I thought it was Slap Let.

John August:
SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
Like a Slap Let like a bracelet.

John August:
SlapLit.

Craig Mazin:
So, SlapLit.

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

Craig Mazin:
How much does that cost?

John August:
It’s really cheap.

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

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

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

John August:
All right, tell us.

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

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

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

John August:
Oh, yes. Faster, yeah.

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

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

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

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

Megana Rao:
Thank you.

Craig Mazin:
Thank you.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
100%.

Craig Mazin:
Through the roof.

John August:
It’s crazy.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

John August:
You can stop writing.

Craig Mazin:
… it’s over.

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

Craig Mazin:
Which is-

John August:
Something.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig Mazin:
Precisely.

Links:

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

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

Scriptnotes, Episode 516: 10th Anniversary, Transcript

September 21, 2021 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found here.

John August: Hey, this is John. Heads up that today’s episode has just a little bit of swearing in it.

Julia Turner: Hello, and welcome. My name is neither John August nor –

Craig Mazin: Craig Mazin.

Julia: But this is Episode 516 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. My name is Julia Turner, and I’m a deputy managing editor at the Los Angeles Times, and a co-host of Slate’s Culture Gabfest Podcast. And John and Craig have invited me here today to mark the 10th anniversary of Scriptnotes, 10 years –

Craig: Whoa.

Julia: By interviewing them about their first decade in podcasting. Hi, guys.

Craig: Hi.

John: Hello. Hi, Julia Turner.

Julia: I’m so honored to be here. This is a dream come true.

Craig: Oh, well, I would imagine the honor should be ours as you’re a legitimate journalist, and we are not.

John: Not even close.

Julia: We’ll get to your journalistic similarities later on in this conversation.

Craig: Hmm.

John: Hmm, all right.

Julia: Today, I’ll be grilling John and Craig about the legend and lore of Scriptnotes. And I’ll also be presenting them with some brilliant listener questions about the history of the show. Then we’ll have some listener follow up featuring a real life Scriptnotes love story.

Craig: Whoa.

Julia: And for our bonus segment, we’ll ask how would this be a movie about the first 10 years of Scriptnotes?

John: Oh, god, I’ve got some casting suggestions, so cool. Do stay tuned.

Julia: Might be low on pop, but I think there’s a couple ways to play it. We’ll get into it.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: Before we dig in, I should clarify for your listeners that my primary qualification for this gig is years of obsessive listening to Scriptnotes, which has made it really, really fun this past week to see how Scriptnotes works behind the scenes. Listeners will not be surprised to learn that when I say John and Craig have invited me here, I mean that John has invited me here. Craig did you know that I would be here until this very moment.

Craig: I knew that you would be here at some point. Oh, boy, that’s so true.

Julia: It all works exactly the way it sounds like it works.

Craig: Yes.

Julia: I also got to take a look at the show’s infamous WorkFlowy doc frequently referred to on the podcast.

Craig: Hmm, yes.

Julia: And I have to say it reveals John’s robot tendencies, like –

Craig: Thank you.

Julia: Beautifully. John, having invited me to come in and interview you in the document had laid out a whole set of things that perhaps I might want to cover, and a loose order and also some intro text, all of which I think is –

Craig: You get it? You get it now?

Julia: Intended to be very generous and welcoming. But I –

Craig: Yeah, you know –

Julia: I’m allowed to tease you, John, because the joke on my podcast is that I’m the robot. So from one robot to another, I salute you.

Craig: John used to write these things in machine language. So it was just hexadecimals.

John: Yeah.

Craig: And I just begged him, I said, “John, please, please, let’s put it in human language.” And he did. He got a new compiler. It’s now in human language. I love it.

John: Absolutely. I, I try to just map out like the shape of the show. So that it feels like, oh, okay, this is how we’re going to get through it. But I would say like over the course of 10 years, I’ve tended to write more and more in the actual Workflowy about like the things I’m going to say just because I’m not a great spontaneous speaker. It’s just the secret truth behind Scriptnotes. And so I just love having things to look at and read off of.

Craig: Whereas I don’t like to prepare anything. And I sometimes don’t know how my sentences will end when I’m three quarters of the way in.

Julia: Well, I’m going to take some but not all of John’s suggestions. And judging by the fact that you don’t seem to have looked at the Workflowy yet, Craig L., my questions will be surprises for you. So –

Craig: I love surprises. Yep.

Julia: We can dig in. I’m going to start with a few questions about the history of the show. And then we can move on to discuss its impact on the world and also on you guys personally. And then if we have time, we’ll do maybe a lightning round of –

Craig: Oh.

Julia: Some questions on the mechanics of the show and a few wildcards. There’s a lot to get through.

Craig: Yay.

John: I’m excited.

Julia: But let’s start with the zoom out. First, congratulations on 10 years of podcasting.

John: Thank you.

Julia: And, John, why did you start the show?

John: I’ve been writing this blog for years and years and years, the johnaugust.com blog, answering questions about screenwriting. And it’s just a monologue when you’re a blogger. You’re just talking to the void. And for a while I had comments turned on so people could answer back, but I hated comments so I turned them all off. Craig had his own blog that he gave up at a certain point. And I just decided, like, rather than have me talking, us talking together would probably be better. And I was listening to a bunch of podcasts that I liked, tech podcasts, but also like the Slate Culture Gabfest and Political Gabfest, and it’s like, oh, we should do something like that, which is just me and Craig talking. So I pitched the idea to him, and he had no idea what I was talking about but said, “Sure, we could try that.”

Craig: I thought for sure he had made a mistake. But he meant to call someone else but he called me. So I said, “Yeah.”

Julia: Did – by the way. John, were there backups? Like if Craig said no, were there other advice-dispensing screenwriters out there?

Craig: Great question.

Julia: Or was there anyone you asked before Craig who shut you down we’ve never heard about?

Craig: Oh, yeah, that’s a better question? That’s a better question. I like that one.

John: Craig was the first person I asked. I don’t think I had a backup list because I didn’t really have a fully formed idea of what it was even going to be but I just felt like he’d be the right person to talk with. But Olean and I were kind of friendly at that point, so she would have been somewhere in there. Derek Haas and I knew each other. So there were probably some backup contenders. But I, honestly, I don’t think I would have done it if Craig had said no.

Craig: Hmm, aww.

Julia: Craig, why did you say yes? You make a lot of noise about how you don’t know what podcasts are still practically?

Craig: I didn’t. Yep. No.

Julia: And certainly not then.

Craig: I didn’t.

Julia: So why – what was in it for you?

Craig: Well, in terms of knowing what podcasts were, it didn’t really matter because I trusted John. He was very web-forward is how I would put it at the time. And in fact, I had called John early on when I was putting my blog together just to have some technical questions about blog design and things like that. So I had been working on this blog, and it had been a bit draining. It had become a thing during the strike. It was a raucous bar of comments during the strike. And the Wall Street Journal wrote it up, and it got unwieldy and drifted apart from its purpose. And so, I – and also, you know, we write. So we write for a living and then I had to like –

John: Yeah.

Craig: Suddenly felt like, oh, my god, in this like, job, I had given myself that I don’t make any money off of to write more. So when John called it was the perfect time because it didn’t involve writing. And also, you know, John was like, he’s a big shot, you know, and I thought, well, you don’t say no to a big shot.

John: So I would say, interestingly, at the start of this podcast, I was a higher profile screenwriter than Craig was, and Craig had made movies, but I had a bigger sort of platform and was probably better known. I knew that Craig actually knew a ton about the industry. He and I worked together to try to set this writer’s deal at Fox. And so, I knew sort of how his brain worked. And I really thought he would have strong good opinions that were not exactly the same as my opinions and it would be a good conversation.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: You know, you both mentioned the blogging and the internet writing you were doing with sort of a similar audience of working screenwriters and aspiring screenwriters in mind. And, you know, the listener engagement in the show is such a big part of the show now. What’s the difference between that relationship you had sort of in the aughts web with written commenters versus the teens and 20s audio internet of audio listeners? What are the differences, similarities?

Craig: Yeah. Tell them about our commenters, John.

John: Yeah. So, I mean, comments on blog posts are just such a scourge because like, they’re going to be positive ones, but then just people will just write paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs. It’s like, “Oh, no, this is my space. It’s not your space.” And so, just be cool. Or you try to have like living room rules. The good thing about a podcast is like, we only can invite people in that we want to invite in even when we do live shows, we will stop a questioner if they’re just being a jerk. And the fact that it is really a conversation that we can invite you into versus you can just pile on at times is, I think, the big difference between writing online versus being on a podcast.

Craig: Yeah, it’s a bit like the difference between curation and moderation. All you can do on a blog is just go, “Oh, god, stop it or you’re booted,” but then they just change their name and come back and keep acting like jerks. And we can curate exactly what we present here. Which, weirdly enough, turns out that’s what people like. They think they want just unfettered access, but what they actually do want is a connection to a platform that has some kind of moderation so that there’s quality control.

Julia: All right, so it’s early days. You’re doing this show. You’re figuring out the format, and you’re figuring out whether you’re having an impact. How did you first begin to appreciate that you were finding an audience? Like what were the early inklings that this was not just you talking into microphones and in vain?

John: Well, with podcasts, you can see sort of how many people are downloading the show. So you get some sense of listenership through that, although in the early days, it was really hard to get good metrics. And like early podcasts really had no sense of how many people were listening to them. Now, you can get a better sense. For me, it was I think, probably when we went to the Austin Film Festival and did a live show there. And really could see like, oh, my gosh, these people know who we are. And they’re showing up because they do listen to the show. That was the first time I really felt the impact of it. Craig, did you have an earlier time?

Craig: No, no, I mean, to this day, I still repeatedly am shocked when people say they listen to the show. I know that people listen to the show. I don’t have access to those metrics. I mean, I suppose if I ask John nicely, he would tell me. But he just knows that I don’t really care. Like every now and then I’ll be like, “How many people do actually listen to the show?” And he’ll tell me and I’ll go, “No,” and then I’ll forget. But –

Julia: Wait. Hold on. How many people do actually listen to the show?

Craig: Yeah, how many people do listen to the show, John?

John: Megan is also on the line, so she can probably tell us, give us some specific figure, but it’s around 40,000, I want to say. Megan, correct me if I’m wrong?

Megana Rao: Yeah, it’s about 40,000 a week and then –

Craig: Good god.

Megana: Like, looking at the monthly metrics, like each episode usually gets to about 80,000.

Craig: What? Okay, well, that’s terrifying.

John: And I think the thing that’s been most surprising to me is I assumed that it would just be L.A. people who would really be listening to the show because it’s so Hollywood-centered and yet it turns out we have a lot of listeners in Europe. We Have listeners in Antarctica. We have listeners everywhere who are listening to the show because they want to write things for their own countries or to come to here. And also a ton of people listen to the show who have no interest in writing at all. And, I mean, Julia Turner, you’re not a screenwriter. So there should be no reason for you to listen to the show.

Craig: Yeah.

John: But you listen to the show, which is just terrific.

Julia: No. And I now edit the entertainment coverage of the L.A. Times. So your discussions are relevant to things that the journalists I work with cover. But that was much less true when I started listening to the show, you know, back when I was running Slate. So –

John: I’m sorry to play host here for a second, but do you know why you started listening to the to the podcast? I’m curious.

Julia: You’re allowed to play host on your own show anytime you want, John.

Craig: Right. Can I?

Julia: Well, I think Andy Bowers, who ran podcast at Slate, put me on to it. And I just love the way you guys, I mean, I am a culture critic on that show, right? So I’m, you know, the scourge of Craig’s mind, one of those baddies.

Craig: Yes, correct.

Julia: But I think it’s really interesting when you’re conducting criticism to know about how things are made, and why they’re made and what the mechanics are behind them. And so, I love learning about that from you guys. I loved the rapport, I mean, any chat show that you listen in on regularly, and I can say this, because I do one is just basically like a book club you like to go to where you don’t get to talk, like, you know, you just feel like you’re kind of hanging out with your friends. And I like the way you guys would kibitz and squabble and have interesting insights.

And then maybe it’s because I see parallels in this to journalism, but I love the way you guys balance appreciating screenwriting for the difficult creative art that it is, and knowing that a successful screenwriting career means having a lot of practical skills and –

Craig: Yes.

Julia: Qualities of temperament and comportment, for lack of a better word –

Craig: Mmm.

Julia: That are actually as important to your success as your creative genius. And I feel like you are so generous to the listeners we have who are aspiring screenwriters and encouraging their art while also encouraging them to be steely and practical. And something about that balance and the way you guys talk about screenwriting as a trade and a craft. It really appealed to me. I think there’s –

Craig: Thank you.

Julia: Aspects of that in journalism too where it’s a lot of people are writers and thinkers, you know, but got to turn things in on time. So long answer.

Craig: That is the problem for all of us, right. No, that’s a beautiful answer. And I think what I found along the way, it’s certainly, when I said yes to John, it really was because I admired him. And I thought, this sounded like fun. But what I found along the way was a natural instinct to save people from the trouble I had seen. And this business is full of trouble.

There is so much trouble in our business that if you’re a certain kind of person, and in this case, we’re both guys, there were layers of trouble we weren’t even seeing. So there’s so much trouble. And there’s so much trouble for writers and there particularly is a lot of trouble for writers in features. And so, trying to just save people some of the misery and strife, and also to debunk so much of the cottage industry of nonsense that had sprouted up to add insult to injury by taking money from people and preying on their fears and their ignorance and their worry and their desire and ambition. That felt great. I mean, the part of doing the show that makes me the happiest is the part where we provide this to new people, like you’re showing up, you’re new, maybe you don’t look like the sort of person that Hollywood has hired as a screenwriter before. There are no books that are really going to teach you how this business works. As far as I know, we’re the only game in town when it comes to telling you the truth. Uh, because Hollywood is very ashamed of the truth, and for a good reason.

John: I would say at the start of the podcast, I felt like there was an objective truth that we could sort of share, like this is our experience. This is how it actually really works. And I think one of the sort of journeys over 10 years is recognizing that we sort of don’t know everything and that our experience rising as screenwriters in the ‘90s is not going to match necessarily writers’ experience now, and that we sort of needed to invite more people onto the show to talk to us about their actual specific experiences, be it like genres that we’re not writing or for mediums that we’re not writing in that I think we just both developed a little bit more curiosity about how the other parts of this industry work.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: Yeah, I’ve noticed that. And actually, that brings me to one question I wanted to ask, which is sort of how did the show find its format over time? And how has that evolved? You mentioned bringing in more people, but how did you find the right mix between interview episodes, advice episodes, you know, Three Page Challenges, all of the different kinds of recurring rubrics you have, how did that evolve?

Craig: Well, mostly John, I mean, I’ll tell you, the Three Page Challenge thing came out of something that I used to do on this old board called Done Deal Pro. And it had its roots in a basic theory, which is, ah, I could probably tell you, I think it was at the time five pages. I can tell you in five pages if you’re going to make it or not, because it’s just, you could tell, right? Like there are people, they just write five pages and you go, “No, no, no, no, do something else, just do something else.” But out of that came this interesting notion that there is a lot you can learn just from drilling down into a very small amount of pages.

The vast majority of the format of the show is John’s conception. In my normal life. I’m a bit of a bossy person. I’m a producer, I’m a director, I run shows. I’m in charge. I’m alpha. It is so lovely to just – I’m even the DM in our Dungeons and Dragons.

John: Oh, yes, he is.

Craig: But it is so nice to not be that guy and to let somebody else who’s incredibly competent, and good, be that person. And I can follow. I love following John’s lead on the show. It is my place on the show, and I’m extraordinarily comfortable with it. I’m a sidekick. I’m Ed McMahon.

John: Which, in terms of the format, I think I originally sort of pattern them off of the Slate show, so that the Gabfests tend to have three topics per week, and then the equivalent of a One Cool Thing, our inaudible recommendation at the end, and then some boilerplate. And so initially it was just that, but then when Craig had this idea of like, “Oh, what if we would like a Three Page Challenge?” “Like, oh, that’s great.” And that became our first like recurring statement, so every once in a while we’d come back to that. And then How Would This Be a Movie became one. We’ve tried other things like This Kind of Scene. Listener questions were always really kind of from the start were an important part of it. So it just started to evolve that way.

In terms of bringing on guests, originally, they were just like our friends, like people we knew and we’d bring them on. And I think increasingly over the last couple of years, we’ve just reached out to people we don’t know and we bring on complete strangers onto the show, because we want to learn about their experience.

Julia: We actually have a listener question related to guests from listener Todd. Megan, do you want to cue that up?

Megana: Todd asks, “I’d love to know from both John and Craig who’s the dream guest who they’ve yet to land?”

Craig: Mmm, mmm.

John: Mmm. The White Whales. I just saw the Matrix trailer and we’ve always talked about having the Wachowskis on. And we’ve never been able to make that happen. But I feel like we could get Lana Wachowski on to talk Matrix. That’d be amazing.

Craig: I mean, I would love to. It would be a lot of weird fanboy gushing for me. You know, who I would love to get on the show, and maybe I just haven’t asked her and I should, is Shonda Rhimes.

John: Well, with Shonda Rhimes, we tried it for many times, so I think we actually got pretty close to Shonda Rhimes once for a live show.

Craig: I see. And then she was sort of like, “Nah, I got 12 shows I got to do.”

John: Yeah, so it becomes like a publicist thing. And if her publicists gets involved –

Craig: Oh, yeah.

John: As a guest, it’s just doomed. We just know that it’s doomed.

Craig: Right.

John: But I think Shonda is great. James Cameron, obviously a talented filmmaker, but it’s hard to overstate sort of how important he was as a screenwriter for us coming up, just like sort of how much he shaped like the early ‘90s action writing is sort of a James Cameron thing. So I’d love to have him on the show.

Craig: Uhm, it’s a good one.

John: Any other folks that we’ve just kind of always had on our dream list?

Craig: I mean, you know, I don’t think about the show much in between. I’m so tired.

John: Yeah. So there you go.

Julia: All right. If you guys were starting the show today, what would you do differently?

John: I don’t know if it would be just me and Craig, just to be fully honest, two White guys in their 50s. I think we would have reached out so it’d be a three-person show rather than a two-person show. It’s just my guess.

Craig: Yeah. I mean, what’s the joke? What do you call a group of White men? A podcast. So, just like, yeah, I’m sure that’s true. That makes sense. And, you know, in, I guess, in a way, we are kind of like a legacy act, you know.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: I mean, by and large, when people put things together these days, I think in a reasonable and appreciable way, they’re trying to present a diverse group of voices. So you don’t put together a panel of all White people. You don’t put together a panel of all men. You don’t put together a panel of all people in their 50s. So we’re sort of a bit of a legacy act. And, you know, I’m okay with that. I think what is important, if you are a legacy act, is that you keep up and you also open the doors as much as you can.

One of the things that we’ve done over the years that I’m really proud of, is, as John said, bring people onto the show that aren’t the traditional voices. We try and feature people from all different walks of Hollywood life, not just successful people, but also up and comers and also assistants. We’ve gotten involved in how people are paid in our business, including not writers, the Writers Guild spends a lot of time figuring out what writers should be paid. Nobody but us, as it turned out, was worrying about what assistants were getting paid, other than the assistants I mean to say. And it was really gratifying to kind of connect with the assistants and work on that with them.

So we do our best to kind of help move the ball forward because we know the world has changed, and for the better. And I’ve changed for the better. I think just being part of it and being exposed to different people, it helps you see things from other points of view. Hollywood is, and has always been, an utter mess, but it is getting better. And I can’t say that that was always the case. For a while, I guess, when you know, John and I started at the same time in the mid-’90s, stretching through really to, you know, about 2016 or ‘17, it was just sort of a flatline of bad. And then there’s this sort of fairly impressive upward curve towards better. I’m not going to say good, but I’ll say better. And so, it’s been nice to at least go along with that and do what we can as a couple of older White guys. And yeah, I agree with John. If we had started it today, I don’t think it would be him and me. It would be him and someone else. Let’s face it.

Julia: I want to hear more actually about the work you guys did on assistant pay. I mean, I think you guys haven’t been shy on the show ever about expressing opinions about things in Hollywood that were terrible or should change. In addition to the assistant pay issue, you guys have tried to reform the way executives give notes and offered to give them advice on how to make their notes better.

Craig: Yeah. Mm-hmm.

Julia: And, your podcast, I would argue, played a big role in kind of airing some of the concerns and grievances about agency behavior that presaged the WGA talent agency fight. You know, I’m curious how you think about that power you wield. In what ways do you think Scriptnotes has changed the world of screenwriting?

Craig: Geez.

John: Geez. I don’t know if we’ve changed the world of screenwriting. Because there’s always screenwriters, I mean, who have no idea that I host a podcast or this podcast even exists. What I do think we’ve done in our sort of limited way is because enough people listen to the show in the town, if we’re talking about an issue, at least someone is talking about that issue in their ears, and they’re thinking about it. And they might make some different decisions about what they’re going to do. And so, be those executives who invited us in to do that Notes on Notes session.

Or as we’re talking about assistant pay, for me personally, it was like recognizing my own blinders in terms of how I thought about assistants, having been an assistant, how I thought sort of like, oh, this is where you start and this is how you grow. And this is how it all works and not recognizing that the system was really fundamentally broken, and that I hadn’t been sort of inflation adjusting the expectations about sort of how that all works. And so, we weren’t the first people to discover that assistants were underpaid. I wanted to stress that. But we certainly were not shy to use our platform to push people to pay attention and to think about the ways they’re paying assistants and how they’re treating assistants to make sure that we could make some progress on that front.

Craig: Yeah. Yeah, I think we are both aware that people listen. At least, if I’m not aware of how many people listen, I’m aware that there are people that make decisions and run things who listen. And we, I think, handle that quasi influence fairly well. We don’t really go out of our way to change the world. But when we see things that seem pretty much like slam dunk easy ones, we go for it.

The nice thing about this podcast is that it is entirely pro social. This is not a, you know, profitable enterprise for me. I just want to underline that. So, we’re doing this because it’s a good thing to do. And when you’re doing something that is just for good, it is remarkably freeing, especially when you work in Hollywood where you start trying to do things for good. And then everybody gets in there and sort of throws a little muck on it and tries to steer it towards what would put money in their pockets, which I, you know, that’s a business, I get it. This is not.

So when things come along that we can kind of activate on, it’s really lovely to be able to do it. And we do it fearlessly. I was never concerned that any agency was going to yell at me for saying that they should pay their assistants more. You know, I had some interesting conversations in the days leading up to the divorce between the Writers Guild and the agents, with my agency, about the things I said about them, you know, and I stood by my words.

Julia: What kind of conversations?

Craig: Well, they took exception to some of my assertions and opinions. And I stood by them because they were correct. But it was a good conversation. And I just said, guys, this is how this is going to go. And this is the way the world is, and you can’t keep doing this the way you did it before. And there has to be an answer. I don’t know what that answer is. And I don’t know how to get to that answer. But I urge you to get to it. Because I would like to come back to my agency, because I do like my agency a lot. And I like my agent a lot.

And then, the nice thing about having a show like this is that I tend to get yelled at by everybody. So then I got yelled at by writers, because once we did sort of hit our divorce, and occasionally I would question the way the Writers Guild was doing things then the writers would yell at me. So if I’m being yelled by both sides, it’s a good day. And I have a feeling that for John, when no one is yelling at him on either side, it’s a good day for him. It’s just like we’re different that way.

John: Yeah, we are different that way. I’ll say one of the things about being a screenwriter, especially a feature writer is you just have so little control over the finished product. We’re there at the very start. And we are building the engine of the thing. And then it goes off. It takes off. And then we sort of see the finished movie. And maybe we had some input, but we didn’t have all the input we’ve wanted.

For me, what’s been great about Scriptnotes is every week like, it’s the show I want it to be. And so if I wasn’t taking notes from anybody else, it’s like, this is the conversation we had. And it’s what we talked about. And it’s not beholden to anybody else. We are not part of any network. We’re not part of any sort of overall structure. We don’t have to make money. It’s just the thing we wanted to make. And to be able to do that every week has been great. And to have a generation of producers who sort of come up through it and helped us do it, it’s been amazing.

Craig: Yeah.

John: So that’s been the real treat is like it’s a structured conversation every week between me and Craig. So it’s like therapy. But also there’s a thing, there’s a tangible thing you can say, oh, we accomplished that this week, and that’s great. Because so often, as a feature writer, you can spend a year on a project that just never happens.

Craig: Yeah.

John: Those pages just disappear.

Julia: That’s so interesting, because that sounds like you’re describing the satisfaction of creation and unfettered creation. Although, part of what strikes me about the role you guys have played in some of these Hollywood conversations is that it’s not the role of being an artist or a creative. You’re sort of quasi-journalistic because you’re reporting things out sometimes. You’re sort of an organizer role because you’re connecting people who have similar grievances sometimes. Sometimes you’re just making observations. Sometimes there’s a reforming zeal, I think would be fair to describe some of the umbrage taken with the agency practices.

Craig: Mm-hmm.

Julia: It’s a place in which you get to wear these other hats, but it sounds like your primary emotional satisfaction is actually the creation of the thing. Is that fair, John?

John: Yeah.

Julia: More to the point, how do you feel about those other roles that are wrapped up within it sometimes?

John: I think the advocacy thing was always there from the start, because, one of the real goals of the show is to debunk a lot of sort of the myths of screenwriting and sort of that everything had to follow the Syd Field formula or that the proper logline was the key to success, just all that sort of nonsense that screenwriters are constantly taught, and to really talk about the actual daily life of a screenwriter and sort of what really goes on and sort of dispel those other things.

Journalistic is sort of an interesting word, because I don’t think we’re reporting that much. We’re sort of reacting to what’s happening. So we will talk about sort of the stuff we see around us. And while we try to be accurate, we try to sort of be fair, I don’t see it fundamentally as a journalistic enterprise. It’s really just a conversation. And it’s hopefully, an entertaining conversation. It’s like, you described being the other person at the bar who’s overhearing a conversation but can’t contribute. That’s sort of what we want people to feel is that these two friends are having this conversation about things that are hopefully interesting to screenwriters and people who are interested in things about screenwriting.

Craig: I know that slogan.

Julia: Okay, fair, you’re not breaking much news unless it’s Craig Mason breaking the news of how many episodes of his next show to write.

Craig: Right, right. Yeah. Yes. Incredible, hot headline.

John: Yeah.

Julia: Do you have examples? I mean, in 10 years of screenwriting, there must be people who had no foothold in the industry who started listening to you 10 years ago –

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: Who now have successful careers, what kinds of interactions have you had with folks who’ve had that story?

John: Yeah, it’s been great. It’s terrific when you hear those success stories, or folks who read the blog, and then listened to the podcast, like Craig’s assistant right now, I guess, was like in high school or college listening to the podcast?

Craig: Yeah, it’s college.

John: It’s just – it’s impossible.

Craig: Yeah. Yeah, we – I do get these stories particularly when there are some sort of large event, if we go to a – if we do a live show or something like that, that’s where people come up and tell you these things. And sometimes it’s overwhelming.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: I don’t quite know what to say. You realize fairly quickly, and you’ve probably encountered this, Julia, because you’ve been doing your own podcast for so long and you have a connection to the public, that people who listen to you, especially for a show that goes on as long as ours has, they have a relationship with you.

John: Yeah.

Craig: You don’t have one with them. But they have one with you. And when you meet them, you are confronted with it. And it’s it can be very beautiful. It can be very emotional at times. There are times where I’m just overwhelmed by the things people say to me, I don’t know what to say in return because you realize that you have silently, and without any awareness, been an important part of another person’s life.

John: Yeah.

Craig: And that’s very gratifying and beautiful.

John: There are people who would drive across the country to come into a live show, which is crazy, but I also sort of get it because we’re talking about things that they’re interested in and they do feel like they know us because they do kind of know us. I mean, Craig and I are careful to keep some stuff out off of the podcast just for some little zone of privacy, but you are hearing our kind of unfiltered opinions. And that can be nice. It’s interesting, like some of the folks who I saw like the first live show, who then I see eight years later in another live show, you see oh, they actually grew up, they changed. They got married. They had kids. That’s kind of cool to see too. When we were just doing blogs, those were little forum posts. People are – you can connect with them. But like when you see them at a live show, oh, that’s that same person. I got to see sort of where they’re at in their life right now.

Julia: All right, we have a listener question from Dana.

Craig: Okay.

Megana: Dana asks, “Is it easier or harder to be a working, meaning paid, screenwriter now than it was 10 years ago?”

Craig: Well, I guess the first question would be feature or television, I’m going to presume feature because she said screenwriter. I think it’s harder. I think it’s harder because there are even fewer movies being made now than they were before. And the movies – where the movies have been expanding have been in the streaming area. I think that salaries have been pushed down quite a bit in those areas. I think a lot of the stuff that’s made is even more than it was 10 years ago, retreads, remakes, reboots, they’re adaptations of toys and things. Paramount just literally said that’s pretty much all we’re going to do just today. So I think it’s harder. And I think that doesn’t necessarily reflect some areas that have gotten better.

What’s gotten better? They are hiring more women. They’re hiring more people of color. The dark lining of the silver cloud there is that it’s the new hires that get paid the least. It’s the new hires that worked the hardest, and in many cases abused by being asked to do more and more work for free. So unfortunately, a lot of the people that are coming in, if they are diverse writers, they’re also being treated poorly. So that’s not a good outcome either.

I am not particularly optimistic about the future of feature screenwriting. It was always the worst place for writers to be in terms of how they were treated. And the way things are going, I don’t see that necessarily getting better. And of note, in the last five negotiations the Writers Guild has had, feature concerns have been minimal. They’ve mostly concentrated on television writers. I know that there’s an effort to at least think about trying to concentrate on feature writers. Problem is the Writers Guild is essentially a TV writers union, by demographics. So bad news feature writers, I don’t think it’s gotten easier. And I’m not sure it’s going to get easier from here, either.

John: So I agree with a lot of what Craig said. But that actually sort of points out like one of the areas of conflict that’s always been on the show is because Craig will say like the WGA doesn’t care about screenwriters and like, oh, I was actually on the board for, a two-year term, and was involved in all these negotiating committees so I actually know sort of the other side of that story, and sort of why these things happen and don’t happen. And so, I get frustrated when Craig says like the WGA doesn’t care because I was elected and I cared then and we did a lot. And so, there has been a lot of stuff that has happened for screenwriters through the WGA, but just not through the contract, and the focus on the MBA negotiation as the sole thing the Writers Guild does for feature writers, I think, is a very limited view.

Craig: I don’t – I don’t think that the Writers Guild doesn’t care about feature writers. I too was on the board and I too did things for screenwriters.

John: Yeah.

Craig: I think that you care about screeners. I think I care about screenwriters. I think some people care about screenwriters. I think the institution is designed to serve the membership. And the membership mostly is not feature writers. Also, feature writer problems are just harder to negotiate.

John: Yeah.

Craig: And they’re tricky.

John: It’s absolutely true. So I think on the pros and cons of being a feature writer now versus when we started is that when Craig and I started, there was a lot of development. So it’s not that more movies were getting made. Also, a lot of movies were being developed. And so you could work for quite a long time on movies that never shot, but you were still getting paid. And that was awesome. Now, for better or for worse, writers are being hired to write stuff for the studios or for the streamers. And those things are only for projects they think are actually going to get made. And so, the jobs you’re getting are these high-pressure cooker things for this thing has to work because it has a slot, it has a thing and it’s just a different environment than what Craig and I grew up in. Things are just changing and because the whole industry has warped itself just to make things for streamers.

Craig: Can I just say that one of the things I like about our show is that we do model, I think, a way to disagree.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Do you know what I mean? Like, we don’t always agree. I think we agree a lot.

John: Oh, yeah.

Craig: I don’t want to present us as Crossfire, but when we disagree, we figure out how to disagree. There’s precious little of that in the world right now. People just yell at each other and then just take sides and become teams and squads and things. And I’ve heard this fed back to us a few times from listeners that they just appreciate that we can disagree with each other respectfully and thoughtfully and that’s nice. I like that we can do that, and that’s a credit to you and to me. I’m going to take half the credit for that.

John: You deserve half the credit as well.

Craig: Thanks.

Julia: I have been part of some podcast fights that have led listeners to write in and be like, “Are you guys okay? Are you still friends?” Have you guys ever had a podcast contretemps that either caused your listeners to worry about your bond and/or actually tested your relationship?

Craig: I mean, we faked one once for our conflict show. That was great.

John: Yeah, the conflict episode. That was really great. That made people really, really nervous. People pulled over there car on the side of the road because they’re like, “Oh, no, they could crash.” Just true confession, during the middle of the agency campaign or sort of early in the agency campaign, it got really uncomfortable between me and Craig. And so when we would need to talk about this stuff on the show, we’d have to sidebar and really figure out, okay, how are we going to talk about this in ways that we can both honestly express what we want to say but doesn’t blow up our relationship or the podcast or everything else around us. And that was probably the hardest time over the 10 years for me doing this podcast was our genuine disagreements about what was happening in the agency campaign.

Craig: Yeah. And a credit to both of us again, because, I have values and I believe in the value of the questioner and challenging authority. I’ve always been that guy. I love dissent. And I’ve always had a weird relationship with the Guild because I love my union. It’s why we do the shows is because John and I both love and care about the status of screenwriters and television writers. So then there’s this organization that sometimes does really good things, and then sometimes just blows it. And I get angry at them. And I get angry at them, in part, because, I’ve also been on the inside as well. And during that whole time, it was challenging, and I appreciated that John was in a really difficult spot. And I think he appreciated that I was in a difficult spot. Because, I’m supposed to be me. And he’s, you know what I mean?

John: Yeah.

Craig: And he’s supposed to be him. And so, we had to negotiate it without feeling like we were abandoning principles or anything like that. And we did. And I will say that, underneath all of it, as dedicated as I am to challenging authority and questioning whether or not things are going the way they should, that John and I have been doing this for a long time. I would never, in any circumstance blow this thing up for that. I would not give the Writers Guild the satisfaction of being the cause of blowing this up. Hell no.

John: But I will say that whole period was probably toughest actually on Megana Rao who had to listen in on those conversations and deal with the stress and anxiety of, like, dad and dad are not getting along, so.

Craig: Yeah. You know what, Megana? It’s okay.

Megana: Thank you so much for acknowledging that because I was sitting here and I was like, this is incredibly triggering for me.

Craig: Aww.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Well, what happened was, we would start to argue about something and then eventually just because psychologically it was beneficial for us, we would triangulate and blame Megana. So, you know, I get it. I get it.

Megana: I do not. I call bullshit on that answer. That’s just not –

Craig: Yeah. No, I don’t. I definitely made that up.

Megana: Since I have invisible relationships with you of a decade long, I can tell.

Craig: Yes.

Megana: Because I know you so well. That’s not what happened.

Craig: Yeah. No, that is not what happened.

Julia: All right. I want to ask you guys a zoomed out question about the state of the industry. And it’s connected a little bit to that, that question about the changing status of feature writers. But just looking back on where the industry was 10 years ago, you launched Scriptnotes 18 months before House of Cards launched on Netflix –

Craig: Oh, wow.

Julia: I believe in the months around your show they were like quietly launching streaming services in Bolivia. But like broadly –

Craig: Wow.

Julia: Streaming was not yet the primary way that American entertainment consumers got their media. You were both pretty firmly film writers, if I’m remembering correctly.

John: Oh, yeah.

Craig: Correct.

Julia: I’d love for you guys to project forward 10 years. I mean, we’re living in a moment where as you guys say, it feels like the TV writer is ascendant and the film writer is under duress. But if you zoom out a level further and look at what the average 18-year-old is doing with their time and how much gaming they’re doing and Twitch they’re watching and how many YouTube personalities they aspire to be rather than movie stars, which they haven’t heard of, and maybe they do or don’t watch sitcoms. Where will screenwriting be in 10 years? How do you think that industry will have changed in 10 years by 2031? And what do you guys imagine your places in it will be?

Craig: Well, you know, my place will be obviously as the emeritus. I will be considered the grandfather of – I have no idea. I don’t know. I think that movies, theatrical, the theatrical experience is in trouble. I think that the combination of COVID, streaming and the dissolution of the Paramount decree is probably going to lead to a large amount of movie theaters being purchased by large corporations like Disney Marvel, Pixar. And they will – you know how Disney has got that lovely theater in Hollywood, El Capitan, I suspect that maybe in 10 years, the theatrical experience will be really more of an extension of the studio theme parkish experience, where there will be Marvel theaters that play Marvel movies and charge a lot of money for them.

I think that the generation coming up will bring their interests forward in terms of the kinds of comedy that shows up, I think that’s where we’ll see at first. My son and daughter’s generation have an entirely different concept of what comedy is. And I love it. I mean, it’s great. We will not recognize it. We will watch it. And as we should, as old people, we will say, “Ah, it’s not funny,” and then they will look at us and say, “You’re old, just go back to watching your Friends reruns old people.” And we will because that is the way of the world.

The structure the business will continue to accelerate along the paths of just piping things directly into your home. And even homes will change. As they build homes, I do think that where you used to have certain things that – like large dining rooms are no longer necessary. They will be eliminated entirely. Nobody needs a dining room. But you will have home theaters. People will just have little rooms with little seats, and a big screen TV. Because the movies are going to your house. It just feels like that’s where it’s going. I can’t imagine that it doesn’t accelerate even more than it has been, especially because you have entire studios like Paramount just giving up. They just gave up officially. Paramount, that made, you know, The Godfather, they’ve given up.

John: I am much more bullish on the future of roughly two-hour movie experiences that are shown outside of the house. I think that is an experience that will still be around in 10 years. I agree with Craig that with the fall of the Paramount consent decree, you’re going to see the big studios buy those things out. But I think people want to leave their house. They want a reason to leave their house and a movie, going to see a movie is a way to do that, especially for a teenager, it’s just the thing – it’s a place you can go and a thing you can do. I think that will continue.

I also don’t think that the home theater thing is going to be such the bonanza because I look at my own kid and she wants to watch stuff on her computer or on her phone. She just doesn’t care about it being on the biggest screen possible. So I don’t know if that persists. But for the writing of it, I think there’s still going to be writers who are writing those two-hour features. There’s going to be a lot of writers writing all the streaming television. I think that will persist and continue. I don’t see a real coming crisis for that.

Where it’s going to change though is like this blurring of lines, we have to talk about video game writing and how video game writing is writing. And it’s very analogous to what we’re doing. I think there’s going to be universe building that requires a tremendous amount of writing. And it’s going to be really murky and awkward to figure out what covers that and when it should be that becomes advertising and promotion writing or copywriting or toy making versus screenwriting. I think it’s all getting blurrier. And that’s only going to persist and continue in the next 10 years.

Julia: Right. I mean, I guess my question is, are the people who write games going to consider themselves screenwriters? Or, you know, the biggest celebrity in my kid’s mind is like some guy on YouTube who narrates his Minecraft world.

John: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Of course, like a Jacksepticeye, that kind of person. Yeah.

Julia: Yeah. And, you know, there’s no writer for that entertainment. And they watch hours of it, and they’re not watching whatever is on – I don’t even know –

John: Yeah.

Julia: What the popular Nickelodeon shows are right now because they don’t watch them or care about them, you know. Like, Are you concerned about the rise of content that’s not written in the way that you guys talk about writing things?

Craig: No. No, nope because it’s different. It’s just different. It is a lovely thing to watch. But to me, when my kids or your kids are watching a Twitch stream, or YouTube, just people putting makeup on YouTube or something, it’s a little bit like when my sister and I were just parked in front of the TV and watched The Brady Bunch, or I Love Lucy, meaning it wasn’t new. It was just sort of there. And it filled time and we enjoyed it. Now that was obviously scripted. This is not. But watching I Love Lucy and watching the karate movies on channel five and watching The Brady Bunch didn’t keep us from wanting new content that was scripted. We did like that. And similarly, I do see – or here’s something that, you know, John knows. So his daughter and my daughter are the same age, and we watch these things sweep through that cohort.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: And so, for whatever reason, what was it last summer?

John: Yeah, Criminal Minds.

Craig: Yeah. Every 15-year-old girl was obsessed with bingeing Criminal Minds. I don’t know why, but they work, which means it still works, right? It still works. And we know that as you get older you do gravitate more toward narratives. That’s always, I think, been the case. For my parents’ generation, they probably got more of their narrative from books, but they also would watch movies that we would find boring. I think that the world of narrative is not only alive and well, it’s thriving. There’s more of it than ever. It’s everywhere. And the people who make it and make money off of it are spending money in ways that we’d never thought was possible. Never. I mean, the amount of money that Amazon is spending on the Lord of the Rings show alone is mind boggling. And it’s not slowing down. And in a good way, the amount of money that they’re spending on reliable show runners who produce quality content is also skyrocketing.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: We will always, as a group of professionals in Hollywood, struggle with income inequality. Our income inequality is even more grotesque than the income inequality in the United States. But one of the things that I think John and I talk about and that I think we should continue to ring this bell as much as we can, is getting the salaries of writing staffs up. We think that the Writers Guild can solve all these problems, but I will point out for the one millionth time, writers are in charge of television writing rooms. It’s the writers who do the hiring. It’s the writers who figure out the budget and allot what they allot. So hopefully, the rising tide will start picking up a few more boats as it rises. But narrative is not going anywhere. If anything, there’s too damn much of it.

John: The other point I would make about 10 years down the road is ultimately, you don’t need a studio with a history and library necessarily to get started in this business. You just need a ton of money and there are people out there with a ton of money. So I think there will be new players that come online and it won’t just be mergers of the existing ones. Other folks are going to come online like Apple did, or Amazon did just because they have so much money they need to do something with that money. So there will be some new names that we – we’re not even thinking of 10 years from now.

Craig: I think Apple is going to buy Netflix.

John: Could be.

Craig: I’m just putting that out there.

John: Yeah, yeah.

Craig: Not, not anytime soon.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Don’t – don’t take that as a stock tip. I’m just saying eventually.

John: Like Peloton will inevitably start doing like scripted series. There are just companies that have big money and who will want to do things and ultimately those people will write those things and hopefully that’ll, you know, Megana.

Megana: Right.

Craig: Oh, no, come on, we can do better than Peloton for Megana.

John: Well, okay, all right. The next step.

Julia: We’re going to – we’re going to check back in 10 years and see whether in fact Apple has bought Netflix and Peloton has started making television shows.

Craig: Yeah, I think we should. Yeah.

Julia: Your predictions are officially recorded here.

Craig: Nice.

Julia: We got so many wonderful listener questions that I think are informed by that dynamic of people who feel like they know you as people and care about you as people and are curious about you as people. And I think we should ask a couple of those before we do our One Cool Things.

Craig: Sure.

Julia: Let’s take a question from John from London.

Megana: John from London asks, “From all of the guests you’ve had over the years, what’s the best piece of advice you’ve applied to your own writing? And what’s the one thing that someone has said that stuck with you?”

John: I am thinking back to Katie Silberman. So I don’t remember what episode she was on. But she came on to talk about her writing on Booksmart. And she prewrites. She will have two characters talking about nonsense and just really get a sense of character’s voices independent of the scene. And it’s one of those things like, I always felt I probably should do that. But I don’t know anybody who actually does do that. And her doing that got me thinking oh, I should try to write some unimportant plot scenes just for the character so I can hear their voices. And I’ve started actually doing that. So that’s a Katie Silberman piece of advice that I took to heart.

Craig: I don’t have any, just flat out. I don’t have – I don’t remember any of it. Yeah, I don’t. I love having these conversations. But I can’t – we’ve had a thousand of them. I can’t remember the individual things. This is why I think it kind of works. John really does plan and he thinks these things through and there’s so much intention. And I really do fly by the seat of my pants through it and try and be as experiential as I can within it.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: Everything is a surprise to me. Everything is in the moment. So when we have these conversations, I do think to myself, oh, that was amazing. It was such a great – like we had a great one with Dave Mandel and Julia Louis-Dreyfus. And I just remember being delighted with it. But then if you ask me what did we talk about, I can’t remember. I’m old. And I can’t remember. I’m being as honest as I can. I think this is probably what no one ever does, right? They just pretend. They just make up something, right. And I have to just be honest. I can’t remember. How did you remember that?

John: Because I actually did it. But I also, it was in the WorkFlowy.

Craig: There we go. There it is.

John: I thought about the question ahead of time.

Craig: You thought about it ahead of time.

John: I did my homework. That’s really how I thought of it.

Craig: All right. You know what, I will say, I know that we talked to Lindsay Doran.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: And whether or not Lindsay Doran said this in our podcast, it is a piece of advice that has stuck with me ever since she said it. So I will repeat this advice. And it is that it is incredibly important to know what the central relationship of your story is. If you don’t have one, you’re in trouble. I, at least, think of everything through the lens of relationships. And what Lindsay points out, there are all these relationships and people can get stuck viewing everything kaleidoscopically. But humans need one. You can have other relationships, but they need one central one. They need the one that matters the most.

John: That’s me and Craig.

Craig: Yeah.

John: That’s the central relationship.

Craig: It is. Well, you know, I think the central relationship is me and Megana. But I appreciate that you do what you do.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: All right. We’re only taking questions from listeners in London, let’s hear it from Anna in London.

Craig: Great.

Megana: Ana in London says, “I’d be interested to know if there are any opinions you’ve expressed over the years that looking back now you’d like to edit, especially if you’ve changed your mind on a craft thing.”

Craig: Oh.

John: Oh, I’d be surprised if I changed my mind on a craft thing. Although, I think before I started this podcast, I had gone to a single space after a period. So I used to be a double space writer and I went to a single space.

Craig: Oh.

John: Single space is where it’s at now.

Craig: Yes.

John: But if there’s any opinions I’ve expressed that I want to take back, you know what, we tend to get like a lot of listener mail when there’s like a really bad opinion expressed. And then sometimes we’ve addressed it in follow up, actually, I’d say our follow up on this show is an important part of the history of the show. The early tech podcast I was listening to would always have follow up at the start of their show. And I really liked that. And it’s not a Slate thing. And that’s a thing that I took from other podcasts. And so, we try to address when we misspoke or said too much or said something that was incorrect or inaccurate. But I don’t know that I have an opinion that I want to go back and erase.

Craig: Yeah, I’m sure if I were confronted by a number of the stupid things I’ve said, I would be embarrassed by most of them. Obviously, since I can’t remember anything that I said, it’s hard for me to answer this question. I don’t remember what I’ve said either. But I can say that over the course of this show, I have learned things from John that I think have made me a better person. I’m still very different. I’m still much more fiery. And I get very passionate, and I get angry, which I appreciate. I value that. But I also think about people more. And I think about their feelings more. And I try and temper myself more because I think John sets a really good example that way. And also over the years, I think I have required myself to be a little less – there’s this kind of old guy thing that happens where you just start to insist that –

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: Everybody that makes it makes it because they did it. And if you don’t, you didn’t, and it’s a meritocracy, brah, brah, brah. And I have weeded quite a bit of that out because it’s not a meritocracy. And I think the more that we discuss that and appreciate it, the better off we are. It’s not an ameritocracy. It’s not random. And that’s not what anyone is going for. But it is additionally challenging for a lot of people in a lot of different ways. And almost everyone has some kind of challenge. But some people have more than others. And so I’ve tried to – I change my point of view and the context with which I evaluate things. That certainly has changed over time.

Julia: I want to note as part of the beautiful synchronicity between you guys sometimes that among the things that John proposed is things I might ask about and that you might answer. One was what we got wrong, and a bullet under that was meritocracy. So –

Craig: Ah, there you go.

Julia: I take it.

Craig: See? And you know I wasn’t cheating because I didn’t read it.

Julia: I take it from the WorkFlowy that John agrees. Is that fair, John?

John: Absolutely. And I remember trying to defend meritocracy at some point on the blog, even pre-podcast and it feels as a White guy growing up and having some success you feel like, oh, well, I earned it. And it’s like, well, yeah, you did things that actually helped you. But it’s so hard to acknowledge, oh, but you’ve had many advantages coming into it. And I think over the course of the 10 years during the podcasts, and really just talking with a bunch of other writers, I’ve really learned a lot more about oh, these were the challenges that I did not face just based on who I came into this industry as and when I came in. So I think meritocracy is just a bad word that we just shouldn’t say.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: All right, a couple last lightning-round questions. Craig, did you retire sexy Craig of your own volition or did John make you do it?

Craig: He’s not retired. Oh, no. Oh, no. Sexy Craig is right there. He’s right there with you in those moments when you’re alone, and your mind starts wandering, he’s there.

Julia: Oh, no. Have I started another fight, John? Tell him to –

Craig: Oh, yeah.

John: What’s John answer to this question?

John: It’s somewhere between a shudder and a cringe anytime Sexy Craig shows up.

Julia: It is somehow audible, as a listener –

Craig: Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Julia: Even though you make no sound.

Craig: Yeah, inaudible shudder. You shudder already.

Julia: All right. Next question.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: This one is from listener Chris.

Megana: Chris asks, “If you both ran for the presidency, who would be president and who would be VP? And who would you have in your cabinet?”

Craig: Oh, well, I mean, I’m, I’m not going to do any of that. So VP, for sure.

John: Yeah. I think Craig is the VP.

Craig: Yeah.

John: But the cabinet is going to be full of really fascinating people. A recent addition to the show, but also just a superstar is actually Nicole Black, she needs to be in there providing comedy and context and warmth. Love her. Alene has to be in there because she’s an all-star. I don’t know what department she’s running.

Craig: Department of good taste.

John: Yeah, that’s what Alene is doing in there. Does Malcolm makes the cabinet cut?

Craig: I hope so.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Because I need somebody to talk to.

John: We have a lot of really great guests who can come in there and help make things run properly. And also, we have friends with many show runners and the showrunners get stuff done. So it’ll be a somewhat chaotic country, but stuff will happen.

Craig: It’ll be organized by WorkFlowy.

John: That – there’ll definitely be a WorkFlowy behind it all.

Julia: All right, my last question, what do you each hope for the next 10 years with the Scriptnotes?

Craig: Hmm.

John: Hmm. Oh, that, it presupposes that there will be 10 years of Scriptnotes. And I have no intention of shutting it down. But also just recognizing that stuff happens and things change. And podcasting could change. If Craig got really busy doing his show. If I were directing a movie at the same time Craig was doing a show there could be no Scriptnotes. But if we make it to 10 years, I hope just continuing to evolve and feeling that there’s new segments that always feel like they always should have been part of the show that it feels like it’s a continuity, but you can see that was Scriptnotes in black and white and this is Scriptnotes in color.

Craig: Yeah, I don’t know what 10 years will bring. And if you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans. But I would imagine that somewhere along the line, somebody should really replace me, don’t you think? I mean, somebody should just gradually replace me. I think that would be great, you know.

John: I could also – I could also imagine at some point, the show is me and Craig. And so, there was at some point a suggestion, like, Craig and John should just give the show to other people to do Scriptnotes. Like –

Craig: Mm-hmm.

John: As is Scriptnotes is the thing that is just independent of me and Craig.

Craig: Right.

John: But there probably would be a way to transition out and become the occasional hosts, or just how to be a thing that exists independent of us the same way that the Slate shows, even if all three hosts are gone, it’s still is the show, kind of. But we have no intention of doing that. We have no plans to do that. But if we were to move on at some point, I think we would try to do a gradual fade out and handover the torch to somebody else.

Craig: Like when Blue’s Clues changed the guy.

John: Absolutely. It was just too abrupt. You got to send Steve off to college in the right way.

Craig: Right.

John: And Craig I’ll send you off to college.

Craig: Yeah. Exactly. Oh, you sent Craig to “college.” And if I died, you know, like, if I died.

Julia: On that note, I think we have one piece of follow up.

Megana: Yeah. So on an earlier episode, I think you guys said that we have heard a lot of stories of screenwriters who’ve had professional success, but we haven’t heard any Scriptnotes love stories. So Isaac wrote in and he wanted to share his love story and prove you guys wrong.

Craig: Okay.

Isaac: Howdy, folks. Back some time ago, I was listening to one of your episodes and heard Craig mention that, though you both hear plenty of stories about people succeeding in their screenwriting professions with the help of this podcast, you’ve yet to hear any good Scriptnotes love stories. Well, back in 2019, I was walking to work and listening to a podcast where John mentioned a live recording was happening at theater of the Ace Hotel. And it just so happened to be taking place on that very day that I was walking to work. There were a few tickets left. So I nabbed one and left work early.

Once I arrived alone and introverted, I went to the bar and was immediately drawn to the bartender. She chatted me up and encouraged me to come back and talk more, which I did several times. I would pour out each drink in the bathroom and wait a few minutes so I wouldn’t actually get drunk. I had no interest in alcohol at that point. The show started. You killed it with Melissa McCarthy and Rob McElhenney. And I ran to the bar again the moment that it ended, but she was gone. I hung around, bought a Camp Scriptnotes shirt to kill more time, which I wear every week, but she never came back.

Back home, I came up with a simple plan to see her again, just go back to the Ace. Problem is I needed to buy a ticket to the event. And the only one in the near future was a $600 VIP ticket to the Sundance Institute presenting The Farewell. I was desperate and dumb. And worse came to worse, I just get to hang out with Lula Huang and Awkwafina for an hour, I crossed my fingers that I wouldn’t have any medical emergencies in the near future and bought the ticket.

The next day, however, I got an Instagram DM from the bartender. It turns out she had clocked me as well. And thankfully, I paid with the card, because she took that opportunity to memorize my name so she could look me up later. We joke now that both of the things that we did were sort of creepy if the other person wasn’t quite into it. But it worked out. We went to get coffee the next day, and I told her about the farewell premiere, but not the price because I’m not a psychopath. She said that she’s glad that she remembered my name and reached out because she was about to leave for a family vacation and wouldn’t be working at the Ace for a few weeks.

Yes, I still went to the Sundance event. It was wonderful and surprisingly opened up a lot of doors that were closed to me originally. The bartender, who turned out to also be an exceptional actor, and I saw each other as often as possible after the first date. And a little over two years and one seemingly unending pandemic later, I asked her to marry me. Anyway, I just wanted to reach out and thank you two for putting this podcast together. To this day, when we get especially starry-eyed about the future, we’ll look to each other, smile and say, fucking Scriptnotes.

Craig: Fucking Scriptnotes.

John: Ah, that make – that just makes my heart my heart sing.

Craig: Wow.

John: Yeah. And so, I love the Scriptnotes wedding. I love the Scriptnotes baby. I love, you know –

Craig: Oh, my god, look at that.

John: Any people brought together by these circumstances.

Craig: You think, John, that Isaac knows her name yet because he’s just calling her the bartender. Do you think maybe he never found out?

John: Yeah. Or maybe there’s – she could be in witness protection. And that’s obviously a possibility. Yeah.

Craig: Oh, either way, man. That’s pretty awesome.

John: Yeah.

Craig: That’s, you know what, that’s pretty – I’m glad.

Julia: Wouldn’t she still have a name if she were in witness protection? She would just have a new name?

Craig: Yeah.

John: Yeah. A false name.

Craig: Yeah, I think that that’s one of the things they try and do otherwise they know it’s, yeah, if you just like, “What’s your name?” “Bartender.” And they’re like, “Oh, you’re in witness protection.” Now, they get – she has a name, I just don’t know if he knows it. Look, if you want to stay with her because John and I have been married for a long time so we can tell – not to each other. But we can tell you.

John: Yeah.

Craig: One of the keys is knowing your partner’s name.

John: It’s really good. Name, birthday, just the basic facts. You know, be able to recognize her face in a crowd –

Craig: Yeah.

John: So you can actually see here. Yeah.

Craig: Oh my god, like there’s like this sad part where she never came back and he was hanging around. Aww, I, you know, I feel like even though Isaac is saying that it’s Scriptnotes brought him and his wife together really it was just alcohol. I don’t think it was us at all. I mean, if you – if you really interrogate what he’s saying, he’s saying that he left the show to go drink and talk to her. So we actually were kind of in the way. Fucking Scriptnotes.

John: And so it 10 years.

Craig: Oh, ah.

Julia: Ten years, a lot of impact.

Craig: Ten years.

Julia: Is time for One Cool Things? I don’t feel like I can say that unless John decrees that it is.

John: It is time for One Cool Things.

Craig: Whoa.

Julia: So who goes first, John? You go first?

John: I’ll go first. Sure. I have two One Cool Things. My first one is a hawk named Spencer. So Spencer is the hawk who flies around the new Academy Museum and scares away all the other birds who might poop on the amazing glass dome that they built there. So I just love that there is a trained hawk who comes out there twice a week to fly around there and scare birds away. I just love that we still use hawks to do things like this. So this is a story in the L.A. Times. For all I know Julia, you may have been the person responsible for the story, but it’s written up by Deborah Vankin. I just – it’s cool that there’s like a hawk flying around Los Angeles to protect our new museum.

Julia: I can take no credit for that story because I’m on maternity leave, but I was delighted to see it.

Craig: Good job, Deborah.

Julia: Deb is a specialist at finding – she did an amazing story this year also about how the Getty fights moths, which is apparently a terrible thing you have to fight at a museum.

John: Oh.

Craig: Ooh. Oh, yeah.

Julia: She’s got a sub beat of museums, and they’re animals.

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: Yeah.

John: My second One Cool Things is actually just kind of a humble brag. Not a humble brag, just to brag. I built this typewriter out of Lego and it’s so cool. It took me nine hours to do but it looks great. I love vintage typewriters. And now I have a vintage typewriter made out of Lego. You guys can click the link in the WorkFlowy and see what it looks like. But, uh, it turned out great. It was my first Lego kit I’d ever done as a grown up and I just loved it and it actually makes little clacky sounds and the cartridge moves as you type. It’s delightful.

Craig: I see in your Instagram that Alex and A. Smith says, “My money is on this being next week’s One Cool Things.” Correct.

Julia: I saw that on your Instagram.

Megana: I was just going to say I’ve watched John make this Lego typewriter the pictures do not do justice to how complicated this was.

Craig: You are talking to the guy that built the 5,000-plus Millennium Falcon. So –

John: Wow. So really nothing – doesn’t mean for you.

Craig: What I’m saying is LOL to your Lego typewriter.

Julia: Hmm, I don’t know. I also am engaged in some high-level Lego building over here with my 8-year-sons –

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: And have also been given adult specialized Legos. So maybe we need to have a Lego off.

Craig: Ah, I would totally be into that. The key to building Legos is to just commit.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Just commit.

Julia: You know, but I remember hearing before I had kids like, “Oh, Legos, it’s so terrible. There’s no creative building anymore. The kids just want to follow the rules and build these sets.” And like as a non-kid haver and non-Lego doer, I was very sympathetic to that kind of cranky Gen-X argument. It’s not like we were when we were little. And then having kids, these sets are so cool. Like, they’re really fun –

John: Yeah.

Craig: True.

Julia: And you learn a lot like, I mean, yes, there’s the problem that they make you buy new Legos and capitalism, etc. But I anticipated loathing Legos in parenthood and instead have found them a great source of parenting pleasure.

Craig: Yeah, of course, the sets are amazing. When I was a kid, and I didn’t have sets. I just had a huge, big bag of Legos. I built a large brick. I built the largest Lego brick ever. It’s the kind of thing that gets you institutionalized.

John: Yeah.

Craig: If people really consider what you’re doing as a child, “What does your son do with those Legos? He built one massive Lego. Okay, well, he’s a danger to society.”

I’ll tell you what is my One Cool Things and some people consider it dangerous to society like for instance, Stephen King who doesn’t get the genius of this, Ketchup Doritos. So in Canada there are all these ketchup things like they have ketchup potato chips, and they have Ketchup Doritos. And it sounds disgusting for I think a lot of people. I thought it would probably be disgusting.

Ketchup Doritos are wonderful. They’re the greatest thing ever. I have a bag of Ketchup Doritos that I keep in my trailer and I try and work through it slowly like over the course of a couple of weeks. So I’m like – I don’t eat out of the bag. I like take a handful, put them on the table, put the bag back, eat my eight Doritos and I feel super happy. Although I will say, I’m pretty sure that Bo steals a lot of the ketchup Doritos because there was a time I think she ate through one-and-a-half bags. Nobody can eat food like Bo by the way. Bo is my assistant, Bo Shim is very small, and she can eat more food than I can. It’s amazing. Regardless, Ketchup Doritos, I don’t know if you can get them in the US.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: But if there’s some sort of Canada deal where they can ship it to you from Canada, and you got a few extra bucks and you feel ketchup-ing it up, hmm, so good.

John: Well, then, it sounds great.

Julia: All right. I’ve got two One Cool Things as the vernacular has it. The first is just a book that I want both of you hosts to read and actually Megana too given her background as I learned about it on the show. Have any of you read Empire of Pain by Patrick Radden Keefe, the book about the Sacklers?

John: Um, it is sitting on my Kindle to read. I’m excited to read it.

Craig: I have read it.

Julia: I found it to be such a great mix of really impressive reporting and really gripping storytelling. It’s very hard to write nonfiction that is both rigorous in its standards of accuracy and inquiry and reads like a fucking potboiler. And I could not put this book down. I found it so impressive on both levels. And it’s fascinating about the evolution in the pharmaceutical business and all of the terrible decisions that brought us the opioid epidemic.

Craig: So many.

Julia: But if you haven’t read it and those subjects sound at all interesting to you, read it. It’s not a beach read, but it’s a page turner, yes, page-turner.

Craig: it almost is a beach read. There are these moments where the stupid humanity of it all. Like, first of all, the way that they ended up with the name Purdue Pharmacy is incredible. So weird and shabby. And then the fact that the whole thing ultimately can be traced back to one poorly cited study in a journal that shouldn’t have even been in there. It’s awesome, and terrible, and wonderful. Definitely, great read.

Julia: All right, so that’s my first Cool Thing. And my second one, possibly stepping outside my role here as the ruthless journalist come in to interrogate you guys. But my second Cool Thing is Scriptnotes. You guys have built something really extraordinary here.

John: Aww.

Megana: Aww.

Craig: Aww.

Julia: And it’s been lovely over the years to hear all of its ramifications, all the different people you’ve touched, all the impact you’ve had, all the interesting knowledge you’ve surfaced. And as a longtime listener, that’s my Cool Thing in honor of your 10th anniversary is you guys.

Craig: Oh, Thank, Julia.

John: Thank you.

Craig: That’s so sweet. And thank you for doing this.

John: Yes.

Craig: This is awesome.

John: Now, Julia, you have the opportunity, but not the requirement to do the boilerplate at the end of the show. Do you feel like doing that or would you like me to do that?

Julia: Oh, man. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It’s edited Matthew Chilelli. Our outro today is by Matthew Chilelli. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also a place where you can send longer questions. For shorter questions on Twitter, Craig is sometimes online as @clmazin, and I am always @johnaugust. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts and the sign up for our weekly-ish newsletter called Interesting, which has lots of links to things about writing. We have T-shirts, and they’re great, from the Cotton Bureau. You can sign up to become a premium member at Scriptnotes.net, where you can get all the back episodes and bonus segments.

Craig: Thank you, Julia.

John: Thank you so much for doing this. And please stick around after this because you have a bonus topic for us to talk through which I’m very excited about on How Would Scriptnotes Be a Movie.

Julia: Very briefly, I know we have a cutoff, but I have one question I had wanted to ask you was, “What is the story of the Scriptnotes theme, where those notes come from? What’s the deal?”

John: So the Scriptnotes theme comes from, the bump, bump, bump, bump, bump, actually came from a short I did called The Remnants. It was a pilot for a web series, which we can put a link in the show notes to that, and I just wrote that as the opening jingle to The Remnants and I needed some intro music. So just like grabbed those, and so the actual name of that is Bloops and that became the basis for all of our outros. And so, all the outros should have that same pattern in there. And sometimes we get outros that are like really cool but you can’t actually hear the bloops in there. And they get dinged because we have standards.

Craig: Stuff I don’t know. The stuff I don’t know about this show is just a mountain of stuff I don’t know.

John: Oh, also, one thing we didn’t talk about, who came up with the name Scriptnotes? It was Craig Mazin.

Craig: Oh, also didn’t know that. Is that right?

John: Yeah, that’s true. You were the one who said Scriptnotes and –

Craig: Oh, okay.

John: Scriptnotes is meant to be – only the “S” is capitalized. There’s – the “n” is not capitalized, and it drives me absolutely crazy when people capitalize the “n” in it. So it’s, it’s one word, just to capital on the “S” whatever. And Craig –

Craig: When John sees it, he has a kernel panic.

John: I really do. Like, the camel case is not appropriate for this kind of work.

Julia: Why one word instead of two?

Craig: Yeah.

John: Just because I – it should be one word. I don’t know why. It just feels like it should be one word.

Julia: All right, mysteries, mysteries persist –

Craig: Yeah.

Julia: At the end of this conversation.

John: Just taste. Yeah.

Julia: Just taste.

John: And thank you, Julia Turner, for coming on to do this. But you should listen to her every week on the Slate Culture Gabfest which is phenomenal. And of course, subscribe and read the L.A. Times, which is a great local newspaper. Julia Turner, thank you so much for doing this.

Craig: Thank you, Julia. That was great.

Julia: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

Hello, and welcome to the bonus segment of Scriptnotes. I’m doing the Slate Plus intro tone of voice here, but you guys will just have to roll with it. Today we are playing How Would This Be a Movie with the first 10 years of Scriptnotes. Is it a buddy comedy? Is it a bracing Hollywood critique? Is it kind of Norma Rae where you get the assistant’s better pay? And who plays each of you?

John: That’s the crucial question. All right. My choice for Craig –

Craig: Oh.

John: Is Paul is Paul Giamatti.

Craig: I mean, he’s a little too old.

John: He’s a little too old. That’s the problem. So –

Craig: I think you’re thinking of 10 years ago, Paul Giamatti.

John: I’m thinking 10 years, so like, Josh Gad, could you – who else could do it? Now, who do you want to play you?

Craig: I don’t know. Just somebody sort of Jewy and grumpy, who’s sort of Jewy and grumpy. There’s so many of us. I don’t know. I have no idea.

John: And maybe Craig plays himself honestly.

Craig: I mean, I am an actor.

John: You’re quite a good actor.

Craig: Thank you.

John: You are an actor. Yes.

Craig: Thank you. Thank you.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Yeah.

John: Maybe Craig plays himself. But I am played on the show by – I think by Jim Parsons of Big Bang Theory, that’d be my choice.

Craig: Yeah, that sounds reasonable.

John: Yeah, because he could do that sort of, like, good-natured, but gay and also can be robotic at times.

Craig: Yeah.

John: That’s –

Craig: I mean, he’s sort of got that market cornered, actually.

John: Yeah.

Craig: Yeah.

John: So I’m saying Jim Parsons. But what is the tone?

Julia: Yeah, yeah, casting is fun. But like what’s – yeah, how would it be a movie?

Craig: Hmm. It’s a boring goddamn movie. I’ll tell you that.

John: Yeah. So the drama-drama came out during the agency stuff, but much of that is especially good. It could be like one of those sort of backstage comedies like getting ready for a live show. Because that’s always sort of interesting and scrambly because here’s what tends to happen, especially an Austin is Craig would put together a dinner before the show.

Craig: Yes.

John: And we have like 30 or 40 writers around this big, long table, and we take forever to get our food and like, “Craig, the show is going to start in 10 minutes, we have to go.” And Craig is like, “Oh, great, Who should we have on as guests, and so that we bring really drunk people on the show?” So that stuff behind the scenes would be half the fun. Like, we’re sort of like, Game Night. It’s like Game Night, but without trying to put on a live show.

Craig: That’s not bad. I mean, there is a version where we do the show, but really, we’re spies or something, I mean, the whole thing is a cover. We’re not even screenwriters.

John: Yeah, no.

Craig: But –

John: That’s a very long con.

Craig: There could also be a version of this where we hate each other.

John: Yeah. Oh, I love that version –

Craig: Yeah.

John: Where like, it’s all we just detest each other. And so like –

Craig: Yeah.

John: So, you and I both know, it’s like some TV shows where they’d be cast members just despise each other.

Craig: Yes.

John: And could not actually – they could like, cameras rolling, they’re great. And they never spoke offset. That could be us.

Craig: I think that would be kind of fun. And then I guess in that regard, the hero of that show would be Megana.

John: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Or she’s like sort of trapped in the middle of the first shot.

Craig: Yeah, she’s like, so it’s from her perspective, like Megana wakes up, and she’s like, “Oh, my god, I got to go to work with – ” And everyone is like, “Oh, my god, you’re so lucky. You get to produce that show with those guys. They’re so great.” And she’s like, “Mm-hmm.” And then she gets there. And we’re screaming at each other and she’s like, “My life sucks. And then and then she falls in love.”

John: Yeah. But I think –

Megana: Ah, with who?

Craig: Exactly. See, you’re into it. So I’m feeling like, there’s another podcast that we’re super angry about because they’re getting into our stuff, and we hate each other but we hate other podcasts more. And you and the producer of that podcast –

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: Start to commiserate over some drinks. And then it happens. And then the thing – it’s like Romeo and Juliet.

John: Yeah, so we may be begging the question, Craig –

Craig: Oh.

John: Because we’re assuming that this is supposed to be a movie, but I don’t think it really is a movie. I think it is a –

Craig: It’s inaudible.

John: It’s a series. I mean, it really is –

Craig: Great use of begging the question. Great use of everything.

John: Thank you. I want to take all the praise you can give me. I think it really is, though, a – it’s a comedy. I think it’s more like Veep, honestly, where like, we are incredibly dysfunctional.

Craig: Right.

John: And Megana is the equivalent of that chief of staff like trying to hold us all together.

Craig: Right?

John: And that’s Craig…

Craig: Perfect. It’s like the first – maybe it’s not the first comedy – but it is of a model where finally the millennials have to take care of the diapered up Gen-Xers. You know what I mean?

John: Inaudible.

Craig: Like, we’re just cranking and out of it. So out of it.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: And I like the idea that you are super racist behind the scenes.

John: I think that – well, you know, I’m Southern. I try to keep my accent hidden but I’m actually from the deep, deep south, the really racist south.

Craig: Yeah. Yeah. And so like –

John: So –

Craig: When once the thing, like, you know, it’s Hollywood, nothing is ever what you think. Like I’m the nice one. You’re a dick. And then, Megana, she’s like, deal with that, but you know, I think it would be wonderful. That’s – how would it be a show?

Julia: Reverse Odd Couple where the odd couple you play on the podcast, you are the opposite odd couple behind scenes.

Craig: Correct. Reverse odd couple plus generational babies. Yeah. I love it.

Julia: Yeah.

Craig: Plus romance. Romance is the key.

John: Oh, so much romance. Yeah.

John: I’m really excited about this whole Megana romance angle. We do it to figure this out.

Megana: I’m excited about it, too.

Craig: I know. Megana, let’s talk. We got to figure this out.

John: Yeah. But it has to be like, like fumbles along the way. So it has to be like, sort of like –

Craig: Of course.

John: I mean, because it has build over the course of season like will they or won’t they? But then of course, stuff will sort of pull them apart and there’s terrible stuff about him too.

Craig: You know, I feel like that’s something that is from our time. I think that for millennials, there’s no will they or won’t they.

John: Mm-hmm.

Craig: It’s you will – we will.

John: Yeah.

Craig: But then what?

John: Yeah.

Craig: That’s exciting.

John: But then it got awkward. Yeah.

Craig: Yeah, exactly. Now it’s like, oh, my god, am I on his Insta, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. This is great. Love it.

Julia: All right.

Craig: I’m just summing up an entire generation with the word Insta.

Julia: Okay. I think we can conclude that Scriptnotes should remain a podcast based on this conversation. But thank you for indulging my inquiry.

Craig: Of course.

Julia: And thank you listeners for supporting John’s effort to enrich himself at the expense of Craig.

Craig: Thank you. Hey, finally, someone gets it. We did it!

John: Yay!

Craig: Yay!

John: This was so much fun.

Craig: Whew! Whew!

Julia: Thanks, guys. This was really, really fun.

Craig: Thank you so much.

John: Thank you so much, Julia. This was amazing.

Links:

  • Julia Turner on the LA Times and Slate Culture Gabfest
  • The Matrix Trailer
  • Scriptnotes, Episode 411: Setting it Up with Katie Silberman
  • Empire of Pain by Patrick Radden Keefe
  • The Academy Museum Hawk Deborah Vankin for the LA Times
  • Lego Typewriter, check out John’s finished project!
  • Ketchup Doritos
  • Check out the Scriptnotes Index for our first 500 episodes
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!
  • Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription or treat yourself to a premium subscription!
  • Julia Turner on Twitter
  • John August on Twitter
  • Craig Mazin on Twitter
  • John on Instagram
  • Outro by Matthew Chilelli (send us yours!)
  • Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode here.

Scriptnotes, Episode 508: Creating a TV Comedy, Transcript

July 20, 2021 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2021/creating-a-tv-comedy).

**John August:** Hey, this is John. Today on the show we have some clips with some bad words in them, so if you don’t want your kids to hear those words maybe listen to this one on headphones.

Hello and welcome. My name is John August and this is Episode 508 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Craig and I could not get our schedules to sync up this week, but lucky for all of us we have a remarkable replacement in the form of Jen Statsky. She’s a writer-producer whose credits include Broad City, Parks and Rec, The Good Place, and my previous One Cool Thing Hacks, a series which she co-created. Welcome Jen.

**Jen Statsky:** Hi. Thanks so much for having me.

**John:** I’m so excited to have you here. So we’ve not really met in person I don’t think, maybe at a WGA thing?

**Jen:** Maybe at a WGA thing. But I think this might be our first in-person meeting.

**John:** It very well could be. So on Twitter I congratulated you on your show, but I think we probably retweeted the same things in the past, but that’s about as much as we’ve done together.

**Jen:** Yes.

**John:** Well today on the show I want to talk about how you got started and particularly how you got started in comedy because that’s a thing I know nothing about. And then I really want to dig into the form of single camera comedy, because Hacks is just great and Hacks and Broad City are both single camera comedies, but they’re very different. And I want to talk about writing those, writing towards act breaks, writing without act breaks.

**Jen:** Sure.

**John:** And we have the pages in front of us, so we have some scenes. So I really want to get very specific if we can.

**Jen:** I love it. Let’s get into it.

**John:** And you know who else has questions? Our listeners. I put out a call to the premium subscribers and they sent in 130 questions about comedy that Megana has sorted through. So, we will not 130.

**Jen:** Let’s do them. Let’s hit them all.

**John:** All of them. We’re going to knock them all out.

**Jen:** 130 questions.

**John:** And in our bonus segment for premium members I want to talk through the cat person discourse, so cat person which is that short story that everyone is talking about years ago, well now there’s an update to that, so I want to get your take on that.

**Jen:** It’s so funny that we are once again reliving cat person on Twitter. It’s all come full circle from 2017.

**John:** Yeah. I feel like there’s people who were in a coma all this time and they wake up and we’re still talking about cat person.

**Jen:** On one end of a global pandemic there’s cat person discourse, and on the other end of the global pandemic there’s cat person discourse.

**John:** It gets into those questions about like who owns a story. And we’re all sort of drawing from real life, especially writers. And I’ve run into situations where an event will happen and it’s like, oh, do I get that event, or do you get that event?

**Jen:** Exactly. I know. It’s a super nuanced conversation about art and who owns certain life things that have happened to people. So it is a really interesting conversation.

**John:** Cool. Two little bits of news and follow up to start with. First off, the WGA put out this pilot deal guide, which was kind of cool. So coming out of the agency agreement we now get all the contracts, and so we can see everybody’s contract and we can see how much people are getting paid for their deals, not just as writers but also as producers, and how much they’re getting paid to write pilots. And so they have all this information. The guild looked through 700 pilot deals from 2020 and 2021 to see what the averages were.

Jen, were there any surprises in here for you?

**Jen:** No, no real surprises. I mean, I think it’s so helpful to have this information out there. I’m just so delighted that the guild did this because you know so much of what happens is people get kept in the dark about what other people are getting paid. And in doing that it allows studios and networks to have all the power, because we’re not talking. We don’t know what our counterparts are making. And so just to have this information out there is I think wonderful.

I remember when the guild was asking for people’s contracts I had a couple of friends reach out and be like, hey, is it OK to send them this. And it’s like yeah it’s to help us, it’s not for nefarious purposes that the Writers Guild wants to look at your contracts. It’s all in the name of the information being out there and just being super helpful and give writers a stronger place to be in for negotiations.

**John:** Yeah. So if you have an agent or manager or lawyer getting your deal, great, they should have some of this information. They should have a sense of what this is. But this is a chance for a writer to say like, OK, this is above the median, this is below the median. If it’s below the median, why is it below the median? There could be a good reason. I mean, half of writers are going to get paid more. So, there could be a reason why you’re below median. But it’s helpful to understand. And if there’s a reason that you can solve about this, great.

**Jen:** Totally. Were there any surprises to you in looking at it?

**John:** I was happy to see that there were changes from 2019. So that a pilot script went up $17,500. That’s great.

**Jen:** That’s great.

**John:** And so that’s progress people are making. And the split between one hours and half hours is also good. So you deal for Hacks, was it a streamer at that point? Was it clear that it was always going to be something that was made without commercials and made for not a cable?

**Jen:** Yeah. It was always – the idea was always to go to the cable streaming places. Like we didn’t really ever entertain pitching this to networks. I and Mike Schur under overall deals at Universal Television, so it started out – we pitched to Universal and then kind of going from there we plotted out where we were going to take the show. But, yeah, in the very early iterations as Paul – my co-creators Paul Downs and Lucia Aniello and I were talking about this idea. We just always knew it had to be for streaming or cable. It’s just baked into the idea.

**John:** Great. So we’ll put a link in the show notes to this, but it talks through sort of what broadcast network and streamer deals are like and you can see where things are at right now. And the good news is that it’ll keep going forward. So each year they’ll be able to put up an update to see what progress is being made, or if stuff is retrenching at all.

A bit of follow up here. Two episodes ago we talked about getting fired. Phil in LA wrote in. Megana could you tell us what Phil said?

**Megana Rao:** Yeah. So Phil wrote in and said, “I listened to Episode 506 where you discussed how to handle being fired. While bad communication isn’t limited to screenwriting, it doesn’t need to be the practice. In Episode 399, Notes on Notes, instead of accepting the status quo on notes you and Craig created a program to help producers learn to give better notes and fix communication issues. The same could be done on this issue as well. And industry build on relationships and communication needs a bedrock of respect. And important moments like firing need to have established norms.”

**John:** Yeah. My daughter just applied for her first job. She’s a high schooler. And so she applied for her first job and she keeps asking like when do you think they’re going to tell me if I got the job or didn’t get the job. And I’m like they’re never going to tell you.

**Jen:** Oh, you’ll never know. I’m still waiting to find out if I got a job at Jimmy Kimmel from a packet I submitted in 2008. So, you just never know.

**John:** Well you’re in a position now to hire people, or to fire people if you need to. So, what are some things that you’re thinking about in terms of communication outward with people that are either under your employ or want to be under your employ?

**Jen:** It’s a good question. I mean, I think when it comes to hiring, and especially firing, there are just difficult conversations that you have to have. And with the privilege of getting to be a showrunner, getting to be a show creator, getting to be the boss you are also taking on the responsibility of having difficult conversations. And so I think you can’t shy away from that. I think you have to say, OK, if this person is being let go we’re not just going to do it in an unethical way where we don’t treat them like a human being. We’re going to have a conversation.

And so it’s about being a human being and just treating that person like a human being and saying, OK, this is going to be a difficult conversation and it’s probably not what I want to do with my day to day, but I at least owe this to someone to talk to them about it.

**John:** Well from a writer perspective the golden rule really applies. You know what it would feel like to be ghosted or to be fired in a bad way. We can understand what that’s like. And so even though we may not be trained as managers, which is a whole separate issue, we do have a sense of what it feels like to be the writer who is not getting the full information. And so just being honest with the person and just being thoughtful and human with the person seems to be great progress.

**Jen:** I listened to you guys talk about it and as someone who works primarily in TV, not in features, I knew this as a fact but it is so fascinating that in features it does seem like you have to get so much more used to being fired than in television. Like in television, you know, maybe you work on a show for a season and they don’t ask you back, but even that doesn’t totally feel like firing. It feels like in features it’s a much more common occurrence that people have not figured out how to handle well still.

**John:** Talk to me about not being asked back. Because that is a different thing than being fired. And it doesn’t have the same negative connotation as being dropped off of something.

**Jen:** No, not at all. You know, I have friends who have run rooms and they’ve not asked people back the next season and it’s never necessarily because, oh, that person was bad and didn’t work. Sometimes you’re just like oh you know what going forward we found that the tone of the show is way more dramatic than we thought and so we’re going to try to hire some people with more experience in drama for example. And so that really just becomes looking at every single, the makeup of your writer’s room, who do you need, what are you feeling you need more of, what direction is the story headed, and who can help you serve that?

So a lot of times I think if someone doesn’t get asked back, like yeah sure there are situations where it was just a bad fit and that person didn’t gel with the room, but it doesn’t – like you said, it doesn’t have the same stigma. It’s not quite the same as being fired and told like, OK, you’re not doing this job again on Monday basically.

**John:** It also strikes me that with so many shows being done in mini rooms are being entirely written before anything is being shot, there’s not that same expectation that you’re going to be coming back season after season on a show. Because those people will not be available necessarily. So you’re just kind of assembling a team for one heist.

**Jen:** Exactly.

**John:** And then you go off again.

**Jen:** Exactly. Like there’s so many shows now, so many opportunities. So you can’t really expect – like we have some wonderful writers who wrote on season one of Hacks, but they might get their own. They’re doing their own stuff. They might get a pilot. They might not be available for that reason. Yeah, it’s very much so one heist at a time, one season at a time.

**John:** Let’s talk about the staffing up on a show. So, this is a good transition between your role as a showrunner now versus when you were first starting up. You mentioned that you had submitted a packet to Jimmy Kimmel. What were your first jobs in the industry? What were your first attempts at writing in the industry? Because you were an intern also, correct?

**Jen:** Yeah. So long before I worked I was a kid who just was like obsessed with television. Reruns of the Mary Tyler Moore Show on Nick at Nite was like that’s what raised me. Because my parents kind of kicked the can down the road on that one. And so I was obsessed with television from a very young age. I didn’t really know that it was a job someone could do until maybe towards the end of high school. And then I realized like, OK, it seems like NYU has a very good film and TV program. I’m going to apply there. And I got in. And I studied film and TV there.

I went through the film and TV program which is actually more for directors, but pretty quickly learned that I did not like directing and only wanted to be a writer. And so at NYU the thing that was an incredible privilege of being at NYU was that you’re in the city during the school year so you can apply for these internships that people at other colleges can really only do during their summer breaks. So my senior year I interned at Late Night with Conan O’Brien and Saturday Night Live. Kind of found myself in this insane situation where I was going to 30 Rock six out of seven days a week as a 21-year-old because I was able to do, yeah, three days at Conan, three days at SNL, which was an incredible learning experience.

It was actually 2007, so it was an incredible learning experience which was then cut short because of the writers’ strike. So I got to also see how all of that stuff was going down.

**John:** Tell me like it was an incredible learning experience because they had set it up to be, or because you were doing something that you actually – were you being entrepreneurial about your learning there?

**Jen:** Kind of a combination. They definitely were very kind people who I think wanted interns to learn from being there. But I lucked into a very specific role at Saturday Night Live which was I was a photography intern, which made no sense because I have absolutely no photography skills whatsoever. But that’s just the department I ended up in. And in being a photography intern you are tasked with going down – at least this was how it was in 2007, I don’t know if it still is now – but we were tasked with going down on the floor and taking photographs of the dress rehearsal, like on the Friday, the day before the show on Saturday. And so I had like this firsthand front row view of the sketches being worked out, the actors running through them, the writers whose sketches it were being on the floor, figuring stuff out, what works, what didn’t.

And that was just so incredibly fascinating. So it was kind of a combo. Any time you’re in an environment like that hopefully your eyes are wide open. You’re listening and you’re just trying to take in as much as you can to learn. And then I also kind of lucked out with the position I got.

**John:** That’s great. So you were there to see the tension of sort of like these are the sketches we think are going to work. These are the tweaks we’re making. Just all of the stuff that gets cut.

**Jen:** Exactly.

**John:** And you’re seeing the writers trying to save their things along the way.

**Jen:** Exactly. And just seeing firsthand what a high pressure environment it is. I mean, it’s been well documented, but that show it’s like really crazy that you are under that kind of time limit. And there’s a gun to your head and it’s like, OK, the show happens Saturday, figure it out. You’ve got to write 12 sketches or whatever it is. And they need to be done by Saturday by 11:30 and it’s Tuesday or whatever. And so that was also just kind of a good intro into realizing like, oh yeah, a lot of these TV writing jobs are super high pressure and can be really intense.

**John:** Were those writers on the show talking with you? I mean, I guess you were the photography intern at SNL, so you weren’t probably interfacing so directly with them. But something like Conan O’Brien did you have a role of actually working with them?

**Jen:** Yeah. SNL was like you said I was more in the photo department for that. But I remember at Conan there’s a long term Conan writer, I think he might be at Colbert now, this guy Brian Stack who is just the funniest, loveliest man and he would always come into the bullpen where the interns were and talk to us and say like how are you guys doing, and any questions we had we were able to ask. So like, yeah, you did mingle with the writers there a lot, which was amazing, because you’re getting to see the people doing what you hopefully – what you want to be doing. And so that was a great experience, too.

**John:** So you come out of these internships and NYU with a degree, but also hopefully some writing samples? What were you trying to do next after this experience?

**Jen:** I knew that I wanted to work in comedy. But I wasn’t quite sure what lane I wanted to pursue. And by that I mean I was taking classes at UCB. I was taking improv classes. I was taking sketch writing classes. I had some half-hour samples that I had written at NYU. But I was also doing standup. And that’s kind of an interesting thing about comedy is that there’s so many – if you are like I want to write movies, you’re like I’m writing movies. But if you’re more broadly like I know I’m interested in comedy and I want to work in comedy there are a bunch of different kind of paths you can dabble with.

And so I was doing a bunch of that and pretty quickly like the things that I was having no fun doing I realized like, OK, that’s not for me. I’m not meant to be a standup. That’s not going to happen. And so the way it happened that I got my first actual job in the industry is that when the writers’ strike happened and so SNL and Conan kind of shut down and didn’t really need interns for a bit there was a satirical newspaper called The Onion which I’m sure people are super familiar with.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Jen:** Which was like a huge touchpoint for me comedically. Like one of my first big comedic influence was The Onion. I just loved it. And I spent my last semester at NYU interning there because they at the time were doing web videos based on Onion headlines and articles. And so I worked there at The Onion and then as I graduated I just got a job in a coffee shop because had rent to pay and wasn’t sure the exact path I was going to take to make it in comedy.

But my two bosses there at the time, Will Graham and Julie Smith, they were tasked with running shows – The Onion did a show for Comedy Central and then they did a show for IFC. And these shows were happening at the exact same time, which was pretty crazy. And so they offered me a job of being their assistant and I took it. And so that was my first kind of real TV production experience.

**John:** These internships were clearly so important for you because you met the people who both inspired you but also gave you a job. So what advice do you have in sort of pursuing one of those internships and how do you land one and how do you make the most of it if you’re in one of those spots?

**Jen:** I think that’s a great question. You really just can’t underestimate what it means to be a kind, good person who seems happy to be there, which sounds like the most simple advice in the world, but I think sometimes people forget it. I think like treat those opportunities like they’re really great opportunities and work hard. And I think you will reap the benefits of it. It’s also a tricky thing because even in the ten or so, 13 years since I was doing that we’re having more conversations about what is free labor, are these internships totally ethical? So I also understand that you might find yourself in a situation where you’re like am I being taken advantage of.

But hopefully in a situation like mine was where I was being compensated in the form of school credit and I was treated with respect. I was able to I think work really hard and be available and engaged with the people I was working for and serve their needs and learn from them. And I think it led them to be like, OK, maybe she’s someone we should bring on in a more fulltime capacity.

**John:** What was the first thing you were hired to write, that you were paid to write for film or TV?

**Jen:** So the first thing I was paid to write freelance was actually Onion headlines. While being an assistant there I wanted to also be writing and so I asked if I could submit headline. And Megan Ganz actually who is a very talented writer who co-created Mythic Quest on Apple, she was an editor at The Onion at the time. And so I submitted to her and she gave me such helpful notes on why this headline works, why that one didn’t, and all this. And she kind of guided me through that.

**John:** Talk to me about an Onion headline. Because I have a sense of what it is, but it’s hard to break down specifically what it is. But is it really the order of words?

**Jen:** That can be one part of it, right? Like, oh, this needs to be more succinct. There’s too many words here. You can cut these ones out. Other times it would be like just the general premise of the idea. It’s like I kind of get the observation you’re going for here but it’s not clicking for me. Things like that. And then I eventually got hired as a freelance Onion headline writer. And so that was every week you submit Onion headlines and they send back, OK, here’s the 40 we picked and your initial would be next to yours if yours made it in. And then you don’t even know if they’re going to use them, but those are at least these the ones they’ve culled down they’ve picked that they’ve liked.

And then if they did eventually use them I think you got a $25 check in the mail. So that was my first freelance job, which again I loved because I just loved The Onion so much and I felt so grateful to be getting to write for it.

And then my first fulltime staff job was writing monologue jokes at Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.

**John:** So that was a job you probably went through a packet process?

**Jen:** Yes. That was a packet process. I was lucky enough to get a manager through a UCB class I took. The teacher very nicely said, “Oh I think my friend who is a manager would like your stuff, can I pass it along to her?” And he did. And to this day she’s still my manager. So through that I started submitting packets to late night shows. And, yeah, did a bunch of those that I am pretty sure I didn’t get the job for because I never worked at those shows.

**John:** In all those cases you’re submitting – you or your manager are putting this in and you just never hear back? For all you know they’re just going into a void?

**Jen:** Oh, you never, ever hear. Basically like, OK, SNL is looking for sketch packets. Conan is looking for monologue joke packets. And so you just do it and you send it out into the world and, yeah, you typically don’t hear.

I remember the monologue one for Fallon, it was like a weeklong, almost challenge or something. You would every night get sent premises and then you would have to send in your jokes either later that night or by the next morning. And you did that for like four days.

**John:** And you’re not getting paid for that.

**Jen:** No, you’re getting absolutely no money for that.

**John:** That’s why the WGA sort of stepped in there and said like, OK, you have to limit that.

**Jen:** Exactly. Yeah. I mean, it’s a good question. I’ve been out of the late night game for so long now. What is the situation with packets now?

**John:** So, here’s what happened. Both on the east, but also some on the west, we were getting these complaints about, OK, this has just become abusive. They’re asking for just tremendous amounts of just free labor to do these things. And even if that stuff is not making it into show, it’s just abusive.

**Jen:** It’s not cool.

**John:** It’s not cool at all. And so there are limits to sort of how much they can ask. And trying to get some standardization of like what packets really mean, so that you can theoretically submit a packet to more than one place, so it’s not all specific work to this. And if there’s real research involved at some point they have to pay you for like those later rounds, because some of these shows were having round after round after round you have to go through.

**Jen:** So crazy. Yeah. So unnecessary to make people jump through those hoops.

**John:** And it was clear when you talked to some of the people who were hiring it’s like they were just doing it because they were doing it. And it wasn’t actually helpful in their process.

**Jen:** Yes. That’s one of those things. And I do feel like in the late night world this happens even more than in half hour of like ways of doing things just get calcified and people go, “But it’s just because it’s the way it’s done. That’s how we do it.” Even on SNL they still stay up all night writing when I don’t know that that necessarily needs to be the process. It’s so good that the guild got involved to challenge these ideas of like, yeah, just because it’s the way it’s always been done doesn’t mean it’s actually cool to be doing to people.

**John:** Yeah. So it sounds like you knew in the general sense you wanted to write comedy, but you decided I’m going to try all the things and then decide from those things which things are not my things. So standup was not your thing.

**Jen:** Standup was not my thing. I am really not a performer. It is not where I shine.

**John:** So UCB was learning sketch writing.

**Jen:** Yes, UCB was sketch writing, which I liked OK, but I still wasn’t great at. And so what happened actually was around this time, I guess this was probably now 2010, before Twitter became a hell scape it was a place where people were just writing stupid jokes. And in a really cool way it kind of democratized comedy writing a little bit because anyone could just write a funny joke. And if it was funny enough a ton of people would see it and get retweeted. And a lot of people made their careers by doing that, which was cool.

And so I joined Twitter in like 2010 and started just kind of writing little one-liner jokes, which like I said there were things I wasn’t great at. I wasn’t great at standup. I wasn’t great at sketch. But I found that one-liner jokes I had a lot of fun writing those. And so I always tell people when they’re starting out in comedy like kind of follow the fun. The thing you’re having the most fun doing is probably the thing you’re best at.

So I just was doing that on Twitter and what’s funny is I had submitted – like I said I had submitted to Fallon many times. I had done that week-long challenge of sending jokes in every night, not getting any sleep, and never hearing back. But what happened was is A.D. Miles, the head writer at that time, learned of me through Twitter and then just sent me a direct message being like, “Hey, do you want to submit a packet for Fallon?” Which I was like, yes, of course, even though what I could have said is, “Yeah, I’ve done it hundreds of times. Just hire me off one of those.”

But they were actually looking for sketch writers at the time, so I had to a sketch packet. Got hired off of that. And then though quickly again since sketch is not really my strong suit I started also – even though it’s divided into up into sketch and monologue writers at that show, or at least it was when I was there, anyone is allowed to submit monologue jokes. You can just send them in.

So I started doing that and getting a decent amount on. And then it kind of became apparent, oh, this is more your skill set. We’re going to move you over to here. And then I became a permanent monologue joke writer for the rest of my time there.

**John:** What I hear you saying is that you didn’t go in saying this is exactly the kind of writer I am. You actually sort of discovered and you just tried a bunch of things. And then winnowed out the things that didn’t work. And so if people are listening to this at home who say, oh, I want to write comedy, maybe take a broad approach to what kind of comedy you’re writing and see where your natural strengths are.

**Jen:** Exactly.

**John:** Rather than assuming I’m the person who is going to write this exact show.

**Jen:** Exactly. I think that when I started, you know, growing up, even though I loved – like Mary Tyler Moore was, again, a huge influence, I also loved SNL. And I think a big part of me was like oh I’m going to be a sketch writer for Saturday Night Live. That’s what I want to do. And I think if I had just tried to like force myself into that it would have been a much tougher path because, again, I don’t think my natural skill set, I don’t think sketch writing is something that I’m great at. And so by trying a bunch of different things and allowing myself to go, right, I’m having the most fun doing this thing, let me follow that, I think that’s the thing I’m best at, it allowed me to find what my path was.

And so, yeah, I think anyone starting out, especially in comedy when there are so many different ways to approach it, I think give yourself the freedom to try a bunch of stuff, and be bad at some of it. And just because you’re bad at one part of comedy writing doesn’t mean you’re bad at the other parts. You know?

**John:** Now, what’s the segue from Fallon to writing for shows, writing for Broad City, writing for Parks and Rec? What was the step in there?

**Jen:** So I was at Fallon for about 2.5 years, which I always say felt like 20.5. Not because of the people there. They’re lovely. But because monologue joke writing is so grueling. You basically – I think every morning by 11:30 in the morning I would have to have like five pages of monologue jokes written, something like that. And let me be clear. Most of them bad. They’re not good. It’s not a good five pages. But still you’re expected to produce this volume of stuff. And it’s all based on the news. And it really – I think the people who can do it forever, like I truly tip my cap to them, because it’s really challenging and it’s really hard. And especially as the world seems to be getting darker and darker it’s hard to write topical jokes based on the news. That really, really weighed on me after a while and I was gone in 2013.

So I really appreciated the job there because – I say it was comedy writing boot camp because I just had to produce so much material every single day. But pretty like towards the end of my time there, like the last year, I realized I think I want to tell longer stories. I want to explore writing for characters and characters that have arcs and just get into that. So I knew that half hour was the place I wanted to be.

And so I made the decision to just leave. I didn’t have my next job lined up, which I remember at the time people were like why are you doing this. But sometimes I think you just have to force yourself to make the move. So I left Fallon. My then boyfriend at the time, now husband, we moved across the country. Came to LA. I wrote a spec of, wow, this is going to date me. I wrote a spec Happy Endings. Do you remember that how?

**John:** It’s a good show.

**Jen:** Yeah, I loved Happy Endings. Very funny show. So I wrote a spec for that and that was my sample, because I think even back then half hour people were looking more for specs than original pilots. And, yeah, I got hired. My first half hour job was actually the show Hello Ladies, on HBO, which was co-created by Stephen Merchant and Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky. So that was my first half hour experience.

But that was a pretty short – it was like an eight-episode HBO show. One of those shows where you kind of are going to write everything in preproduction and then they’re going to go off and make it. And so towards the end of my time in that writer’s room I also came to know Mike Schur via Twitter. And he I guess, yeah, liked jokes I had written there. And then I think he read my spec, but I honestly think he also hired me based off of Twitter and just meeting me and being like, all right, she’s not a total crazy person.

**John:** So that was for Parks and Rec?

**Jen:** That was for Parks and Rec.

**John:** And again these are very joke dense shows. These are things where there’s expectation that there’s going to be a joke every 10, 15 seconds.

**Jen:** Yes. Totally. Yes.

**John:** So from there then back to New York for Broad City?

**Jen:** Yes. I did my first season of Broad City in between the last two seasons of Parks and Rec. It kind of worked out beautifully where I think the day we ended season six of Parks I got on a plane and went to New York and started the Broad City season two writer’s room. And I did that for a couple months. And then came back.

And then going forward Parks and Rec ended. I went on to a show, Lady Dynamite on Netflix. I did that in the interim. And then once The Good Place started I was always kind of – I was never again fulltime in the room in Broad City. I was always just writing a script from LA while they were in New York and giving notes on episodes and punch ups and stuff like that.

So I was very lucky in that I was able to be on The Good Place fulltime, but also be working on Broad City as well.

**John:** Great. So you’ve mentioned all the people who seemed to be involved with Hacks. So talk to me about where did the idea for Hacks come about and how did the three of you, but also Mike Schur and everyone else come together on this property?

**Jen:** So Paul W. Downs, and Lucia Aniello, and I, we met doing comedy in New York. Lucia and I were the only two women in this sketch group that was kind of like an offshoot. It was all people who had met at UCB. And then slowly but surely the sketch group stopped emailing us to come to the meetings and we both realized, OK, I think we’ve been let go from this sketch group. Cool.

But, we instantly connected and shared a sense of humor. And I loved her and I was desperate to make her my friend. And then she was dating Paul and was also comedic partners doing sketches with Paul. And same thing. We hit it off. And I was lucky to just kind of be in their orbit for a while. If they had sketches and stuff I would pitch jokes and they went and they made their movie Rough Night. And I was on set as a punch up writer for that.

And so we just always loved writing together and knew that we wanted to make something together one day. So what happened was Paul was doing a Netflix Characters special, which I don’t know if you guys have seen, but it was basically just a bunch of sketches he was shooting. I came along just to pitch jokes for them. And we went to Maine. We were going to a monster truck rally. So the idea for Hacks was born out of a monster truck rally.

Paul has a character called Jasper Cooch, whose catchphrase is Big Trucks. And he was being allowed to just host the monster truck rally in Portland, Maine. They gave him the mic even though – like he could have absolutely said there’s a bomb in here and caused and incredible panic. But they trusted him. And so on this road trip we met up in Boston and then we drove to Portland, Maine for this monster truck rally.

And I don’t know how we got on the topic, but we started talking about comedians, particularly female comedians, and women in the arts in general and how maybe they hadn’t gotten their due the way their male counterparts had. And how it’s just such a harder path for women, like how they had to keep their heads down and pound the pavement and put up with so much bullshit frankly while, yeah, for other comedians who were maybe straight white men, they didn’t have as hard of a path.

And so we just kind of started talking about characters like that. And wanting to tell a woman like that story. And that was sort of the birthplace of Hacks.

**John:** All right. So for listeners who haven’t seen the show yet, let me give you the briefest logline so you get some sense of what we’re going to be talking about today. Hacks is a limited series, well now it’s going into its second season, so it’s a series about a legendary Vegas comedienne who hires on a disgraced, young Hollywood writer to freshen up her act. And their relationship is alternately contentious, very contentious, and maternal. And it feels like it’s mostly a two-hander.

**Jen:** Yes.

**John:** And yet other characters have some storytelling power. So Paul W. Downs plays an agent who can drive scenes by himself. Marcus who is her COO can also drive scenes by himself. How early in the process did you know who the characters were and sort of what the shape of the show was going to be?

**Jen:** Well, I think you’re right that it is a two-hander. That’s very much so like in the DNA of the show. That’s kind of what it was born out of. It was this idea of, OK, what if it’s this woman who has been through so much and has so much trauma from what she’s done, but also amassed this empire, making so much money doing it. And then what if there was a younger woman who didn’t fully appreciate what this woman has been through and has also maybe like so many women like this, the younger writer has the story about her wrong. Because so often we get women like this, we get their story wrong. And something gets pushed in the media and people just blindly go along with it. And only in the last few years when we look at when like Britney Spears or Paris Hilton have we started to reevaluate these stories we’ve believed about women in the public eye.

And so that was kind of the genesis of, OK, they’ll be forced to work together and they will butt heads, but actually they both really need each other. And at the heart of it it’ll be a love story. It’ll be about these two women falling in love with each other through their friendship, through their working relationship, and how does that change them and what new places does it bring them to.

But then you also are correct to bring up Marcus and Paul’s character and Kaitlin Olson who plays Jean Smart’s daughter so wonderfully. We knew we wanted to fill out Deborah’s ecosystem, right? We’re very interested in the idea of people like Deborah who are empires. Like I said they have a very carefully curated ecosystem around them. They have enough money and enough power that they get to choose all the people in their world, and there’s a lot of people in their world whose job it is to only fulfill their needs and think about them. And so someone like Marcus, played by the wonderful Carl Clemons-Hopkins, we wanted to explore the idea of well what does it mean that Marcus has devoted his entire adult life to working for Deborah and building something up for her. And also taking from her this kind of workaholic attitude and how does he reckon with but is that fulfilling him, is that fulfilling his soul.

**John:** And it’s not into late in the series that we learn that he’s actually a fan. That he got the job because he was a super fan.

**Jen:** Exactly. And we just I think never wanted any one character to feel purely like an accessory, which is a challenge to do that because even though it’s streaming you only have so much time. You only can afford to shoot so many pages in a day. So it’s definitely a balancing act of trying to give – when it’s a two-hander but also kind of also an ensemble, giving the other players in the ensemble rich storylines that feel and grounded and interesting.

So, I hope that we achieved that because that definitely was our goal going into it.

**John:** Let’s take a listen to a scene. This is a scene from the pilot in which Deborah Vance is meeting with the owner of the casino who is trying to tell her that basically she’s going to lose her theater and this job that she has is going to be ending. Let’s take a listen to it, then I want to get to what’s actually on the page.

[Clip plays]

**Marty:** You know how I’m redoing the casino’s east tower?

**Deborah:** Oh yeah.

**Marty:** So the contractor double orders everything. And what the hell am I supposed to do with two tons of fertilizer?

**Deborah:** Dumb it on Steve Wynn’s doorstep.

**Marty:** Bingo.

**Deborah:** Marty, you set me up.

**Marty:** Deb, 2,500 shows. Now, I think it’s a Vegas record.

**Deborah:** It is.

**Marty:** Well cheers.

**Deborah:** Cheers.

**Marty:** And they’re naming a street after you.

**Deborah:** I know. Deborah Vance Drive. It’ll probably be a dead end with an abortion clinic on it.

**Marty:** [laughs] Now that the big show is all planned, maybe it’s a good time to talk about the future. You know you’ll always be a part of the Palmetto’s history. But maybe it would be good if you did a few less shows a year.

**Deborah:** Good for who?

**Marty:** Yeah. I need some marquee dates for new acts. Like Pentatonix.

**Deborah:** What the hell is that?

**Marty:** They’re a beatbox forward acapella group. They do medleys. They won the Sing Off.

**Deborah:** Who gives a shit?

**Marty:** I have two buckets to fill. Families and idiots in their 20s. The families want to see singing and dancing and the college kids want to spend a grand to watch a guy in a helmet hit play on an iPod.

**Deborah:** You’re forgetting about your third bucket. People from Florida. They love me. And my numbers are strong.

**Marty:** You’ll still be doing shows, just not Friday and Saturday.

**Deborah:** Oh, just the most important nights. Un-fucking-believable.

**Marty:** Deb. Why do you even want to do 100+ shows a year? It’s not like you’re having fun. I mean, you’re on cruise control up there.

**Deborah:** I fucking wish – wish I was on cruise control. I’ve been defense my entire career thanks to assholes like you.

**Marty:** Deborah, calm down. Please.

**Deborah:** Oh, what do you care, you own the place. The service sucks. Where’s my fucking doggie bag? I’ll take his, too. And the fork! There was a cockroach in my salad.

**Marty:** Shit. Comp everybody.

**Waiter:** OK.

[Clip ends]

**John:** Great. Let’s take a look at the words that are actually on the page. So this is starting on page 5. This is scene 114 of the script. There’s a lot of changes at the head of the scene. So the script starts with another conversation about being wealthy. It’s about a yacht and an infrared sauna. At what point did that change?

**Jen:** So what you see here on the page we did shoot. We came into it writing the scene like first thinking OK we need to set up what is the dynamic between Marty and Deborah. And the idea being, OK, well one they connect over rich people shit. So they’re talking about their yacht and infrared sauna and that. And then also as – spoiler – but I don’t think we have to worry about that, as the series progresses you see that they have romantic history these two characters. And so there’s also a line here where Deborah says, “Oh yeah.” He says, “Remember my first 70-footer,” talking about his yacht, “Remember that one?” She says, “Oh yeah, we had some fun on that.” And it’s kind of a coy moment where they’re alluding to their sexual history.

But as we got into the edit room it just felt like this is such a lesson in storytelling you learn time and time and time again. Get to the action, get to the crisis. Also, I think once we saw obviously Jean Smart phenomenal. Chris McDonald is incredible, too. Their characters feel so lived in from the moment they appear on screen. We realized like, oh, we overwrote. We didn’t need to write stuff to establish their dynamic.

**John:** You gave them a big onramp that they did not need.

**Jen:** Exactly. Exactly. Trust your actors. Capable actors can communicate that even without words. It’s how they’re interacting with each other. It’s how they’re laughing at each other. It’s how they’re truly sitting across the table from each other. So what happened was is that in the edit we just realized oh their dynamic is clear. This is overwritten probably. Let’s just get right to the heart of the scene which is Deborah finding out your dates are getting taken away from you.

**John:** Great. So the lines we hear in the show, are those just looped lines that you threw in? Did you shoot alternates on the day?

**Jen:** We shot alts on the day. Because it comes in about the Steve Wynn stuff. One of the benefits to having Paul, Lucia, and I are always on set. I mean, Lucia and Paul direct, so they’re of course there. But the three of us are able to pretty easily rewrite on the fly. If we feel something isn’t working there’s three brains. We can huddle up, come up with something. And so that Steve Wynn kind of leading into it that just came from us at village being like all right let’s try this. And credit to Jean and Chris, too, because they’re so nimble and quick that they can have something thrown at them like that and knock it out of the park.

**John:** Great. On page 7 I want to call out some things you do here. So there’s a great moment early on page 7. So she tells a joke, Deborah Vance Drive, and then she writes it down in her notebook, which is just such a great little detail. Is that something you’ve actually seen in real life, or just something you created for this character?

**Jen:** Yeah. It’s something that I think comes from all of our lives. Like I have on my phone Notes app of just like if a joke or if I see something going into it and writing it. And I know on Broad City they had – I think it was a doc of convos we could have. Things we could just talk about. Things that would be funny to see Abby and Ilana talk about and we’d just go into the Google Doc. So that’s something that feels very true to – I mean, I don’t know if it’s all writers. Maybe it’s more specific to comedians, but just constantly observing things and not wanting to forget them so you write them down in your notebook or on your phone.

**John:** So this lunch is set up on the pretense of just like oh let’s get together, but of course he actually has news to deliver and it’s going to lead up to this argument here. A thing you do on page 7 which works really well is Marty’s dialogue is interrupted by a scene description line that is just actually Deborah’s action here. So Mary says, “Now that the big show is all planned maybe it’s a good time to talk about the future.” Deborah puts down on her drink. “What’s this?” in quotes. He presses on.

And so the “what’s this?” is a reaction that she can give. It’s a line that she can say just with her face.

**Jen:** Yes.

**John:** It’s such a great use of breaking up the dialogue here so that we can actually see what the shift is that happened here.

**Jen:** Yeah. It’s a great way I think to show that Deborah is incredibly perceptive and very smart when it comes to business. And so when someone is gently trying to guide the conversation and maybe sneak something by her it’s like, no, no, no, you’re not getting anything by Deborah Vance. Just come out with it, man. And I think Chris does a great job then of like shifting uncomfortably in the seat because he’s a little bit scared of Deborah Vance. So yeah.

**John:** Without that line in there the delivery of his whole thing wouldn’t work. You’re going to need to have some kind of break in there so to call it out in the text is great. You also on page 7 have “Beat” just as its own line as a sentence. And listening back to it she doesn’t actually take that beat, but it’s a nice – Beat is just used as a placeholder like there’s a shift, there’s a moment, there’s a little air here.

**Jen:** A little air to show that Deborah – and again it’s not really in the version that ended up in the final cut, but yeah to show that Deborah is trying to process this tornado that’s been thrown at her of like what are you talking about, I’m losing these dates. These are the most important thing in the world to me.

**John:** Moving on to the next page, here’s an example of I bet you shot all this and people don’t realize that in the edit you have magic scissors and you can cut anything out. So what was actually probably shot was she says, “My numbers are solid and presales from the holiday are on par with last year.” That shows that she’s savvy and that she’s on it. But you probably recognized you did not need the line, so you just cut back to him and her line disappears.

**Jen:** Exactly. Exactly. It was really like – and I had been in the edit a lot on Parks and Rec and The Good Place, always for our episodes. Mike was super like, yeah, get in the edit and do stuff. But this was, running my own show, I was the most in the edit I’d ever been before. And I was just like oh yeah you can truly do anything in the edit room. So, yeah, we shot those lines and then, again, at this point the conversation is getting heated and they’re kind of speaking on top of each other. And so we just wanted to amp up the pace and the frantic energy of it, so it just made sense to lose those lines.

**John:** Now, the decision of when she actually loses her cool, and even when she loses her cool it’s kind of a performative losing her cool. She recognizes she’s doing this in front of a crowd and that she has power because she’s doing this in the crowd. You’re going, “This hits Deborah, then she explodes.” That’s done as scene description but then there’s a parenthetical, hitting the table, getting loud, really emphasizing that this is going to color her vocal performance in this next piece.

**Jen:** Yeah. We knew that this was the moment where we wanted her to lose it because someone like Deborah Vance being told you’re on cruise control, even though it is somewhat maybe true with regard to the quality of her material or how much she’s updated it, she is a woman who like we talked about has had to fight and claw for her position. And so the idea of someone telling her, especially a man telling her, you’re on cruise control is so opposite to what she believes about herself to be true, which is that she is a shark. She just keeps moving. She’s never on cruise control. She’s always fighting, and fighting, and fighting. And so hearing this makes her really lose her top. And yeah.

**John:** So this is a dramatic moment but you’re still in a comedy, and so that’s why you have the runner of the doggie bag coming back. And so can you talk about the shape of this scene and sort of how much did this change in the writing from its initial conception. Was this the scene you kind of always envisioned it to be, or how much did it change as you approached it?

**Jen:** This one I would say of all the scenes in the pilot this one changed quite a bit. We definitely reworked this one more than we reworked some others because it’s such a pivotal scene. It’s the inciting incident for this change Deborah is going through.

**John:** The series would not happen if this scene didn’t happen.

**Jen:** Exactly. Exactly. So, yeah, it was a lot of rewriting in terms of like we talked about at the beginning, OK, how much of their dynamic do you need to set up, do you understand who Marty is. I think we got a note at one point that like someone didn’t understand his role, that he owned the casino. So I think that’s where some of the Steve Wynn stuff came in from.

So we rewrote it a decent amount. And I think the beat where she grabs the fork and stabs his steak and throws it, like that came later. She always was going to freak out, but I don’t remember that – that was a later pitch. And, again, you’re also rewriting on the day. And I got to give a shout out to Jean Smart. That “I found a cockroach in my salad” line, that was improvised. She just yelled that as she walked out and we thought it was hilarious and we kept it in.

So this scene went through a lot of rewriting. It was always, OK, he’s telling her he’s cutting back her dates. That was always what was happening. So that never changed. But a lot of the pieces around that inciting incident did change.

**John:** Now the pilot is working on basically parallel tracks. So we’re seeing what’s happening in Deborah’s life, and what’s happening in Ava’s life. And as she’s going to Las Vegas to meet with Deborah about potentially writing for her. They finally meet at the end of the show at it does not go well. It’s a long scene, so we’re going to play just a smaller clip from it, but let’s take a listen to the actual interaction between Ava and Deborah.

[Clip plays]

**Deborah:** So why are you here?

**Ava:** Oh, well, obviously it would be a huge honor to work with someone like you, who has been working so successfully for so long. I mean, you’re a legend.

**Deborah:** Wow. A legend. So you’re a fan?

**Ava:** I mean, of course. Would I be here if I wasn’t?

**Deborah:** What’s your favorite joke of mine?

**Ava:** Man. You know. That’s so hard.

**Deborah:** Well it shouldn’t be. I’ve written over 30,000. Just pick one.

**Ava:** Uh…you know what? I would have to say that your TV show is my personal favorite thing that you’ve ever done.

**Deborah:** You mean my sitcom from 1973? You’ve seen it?

**Ava:** Oh yeah. I mean, yeah, I’ve seen clips.

**Deborah:** Clips? Wonderful.

**Ava:** Um, yeah. Well, you know, a lot of the actors on the show that I most recently worked on were standups.

**Deborah:** You know, I’m going to stop you right there. I don’t work with writers.

**Ava:** You don’t?

**Deborah:** No. Jimmy sent you against my wishes.

**Ava:** I’m going to kill him.

**Deborah:** No, I’m going to kill him.

**Ava:** Great. Well, this sucks.

**Deborah:** Yeah. Sucks. Well at least you didn’t waste too much time researching me.

**Ava:** I’m sorry. Did I do something to offend you?

**Deborah:** Other than walk those chimney sweep boots on my silk rug? Um, no.

**Ava:** Sorry, I didn’t realize it was a shoes off situation.

**Deborah:** Well it’s shoe-dependent. Thank you for your time.

[Clip ends]

**John:** Great. So they’re finally meeting. In the actual episode they start to meet and then of course DJ the daughter interrupts and so you see all of that drama happen and then they finally get to their discussion. This scene was clearly always going to be part of this first episode, because we have to get these two women together in the room. How early on did you know who Ava was in the show? Like who her character was?

**Jen:** I think pretty early on we knew, too. But that one was certainly more – we learned it more and more as we cast. You know, we had this incredible thing where Jean signed on to do the show and you’re like holy shit we’ve got Jean Smart, and then you’re like holy shit we’ve got Jean Smart. Who is going to be play opposite her that’s like 25 and can go toe-to-toe? Oh no.

So the casting process for Ava was really, really long and intense. We saw I think maybe over 400 women for it. Watched that many tapes. And it was always this thing of what Jean has, what Jean is so incredible at is she can in equal parts do comedy and drama. She’s so skilled in both. And so we knew we were looking for someone who also could do that. Someone who could tell jokes and realistically seem like a comedy writer, so someone who is in their bones funny and you believe that, but also can play the more dramatic parts of this show. And so they had to have some real acting ability.

**John:** So what were you looking at for this? Did you write up sample scenes? Or were they scenes from this pilot?

**Jen:** They were scenes from the pilot. So everyone auditioned with the initial Ava and Jimmy scene in his office where he’s telling her he can’t help her get her job and she’s kind of laying out her situation. So they auditioned with that and then they also auditioned with the Deborah/Ava meeting scene.

**John:** OK. So a version of what we just heard?

**Jen:** A version of what we just heard, yeah.

**John:** And that didn’t burn a hole in your brains? Because I’ve always been reluctant to do that because I don’t want to hear that same scene a thousand times and then actually have to deal with it on the day.

**Jen:** Totally. Mike Schur is a big fan of doing fake audition sides because that’s I think part of it. He does not want to hear the same scene over and over and over. And it definitely at a certain point did burn a hole in our brains. I remember just being like I can’t hear this Ava/Jimmy scene one more time. It’s not working.

So, but what was interesting is that there were a lot of really wonderful, talented women who read the part, but for whatever reason a lot of the times we heard the scene Ava just came off as pretty whiny and it was not what we wanted it to be. And then when Hannah Einbinder, who plays Ava, auditioned it just felt different with her reading it. She was like projecting the strength and confidence of a 25-year-old who thinks they know everything, but also there was some very obvious vulnerability right below the surface that felt like she was also accessing, which made Ava not feel whiny and made her just feel like a very interesting character to us.

And so I think what was helpful was even though we had to hear these scenes over and over and over and go through the process of like oh no this isn’t working, junk all the thing in our darkest moments, once we heard it with Hannah and certainly when we heard it in the screen test with Jean and Hannah reading it it was like oh this works. This absolutely works. Which I don’t think I would have felt that if they were dummy sides that weren’t actually from the pilot.

**John:** We had that experience on Go. As we were seeing a zillion actors for Go, and I started to question like did I even write something that is even castable. And then suddenly you get the actors like, oh, that’s Sarah Polley. I get it. It all works.

**Jen:** Exactly.

**John:** And I wasn’t imagining that there was a person who could fill that.

**Jen:** There’s a certain chemistry that happens between the writing and the actor. And when it’s the right actor you’re going to feel it in your gut in ways that you’re not if it’s maybe not the right person reading it.

**John:** So Hannah Einbinder has the vocal fry of a 25-year-old. Did you hear that voice as you were writing this? And also her tendency to kind of stop in the middle of thought. You write with a lot of ellipses in her dialogue. Was that always part of the voice for it?

**Jen:** Yeah, I think we knew that Ava felt more like kind of a drier sensibility, so that was very baked into the character. I think there are a lot of ellipses, but then I also think that Hannah’s natural – she’s also a very talented standup and if you see her perform she has a very interesting, unique cadence, which is much slower than probably your average 25-year-old up on stage. And so it kind of like naturally lined up that way. But, yeah, that was always kind of – she was written on the page the way we imagined it.

**John:** Looking at the words on the page, on page 29 there’s some cuts here and I’m just curious when the cuts came or if they all came in the editing room. So Jimmy actually sent you against my wishes/I’m going to kill him/no, I’m going to kill him, but feel free to kick the corpse. It’s a joke. Did you try it and it didn’t stick?

**Jen:** So this scene, it’s I think a 7.5 page scene or something. It’s incredibly long. And so we always knew – we knew two things. We knew, well, this show lives or dies by the chemistry between these two characters. So, hopefully the chemistry you’re interested in watching them for 7.5 pages. And if you’re not we’re in trouble anyway. But then we also knew when we get in the edit we’re going to need to trim this down, but let’s just shoot it as is and then see where we’re at.

And so, yeah, that was this “I’m going to kill him but feel free to kick the corpse” line, it totally worked. Jean delivered it perfectly. It just felt like the scene was running a little long.

**John:** It’s a little bit of a detour also. It’s pulling attention to somebody–

**Jen:** Exactly.

**John:** Off the focus here. What happens in the rest of the scene is like we finally get to see Ava kind of monologue and actually have her voice and express her power which is ultimately what impresses Deborah. It’s so fun to actually see somebody sort of cut loose eventually, because we’ve seen Deborah be able to go off, but to actually see – it’s a strange place for an audience to be kind of rooting for both sides of the equation. Because it’s really a true two-hander we’re sort of seeing both sides of the story. And to see them go after each other was just sort of delicious. Just a nice job here at the end of this.

**Jen:** Oh, thank you. Yeah, I mean that was always by design that that was how the scene was going to end. That Ava would let loose and in letting loose and kind of they would start roasting each other the way comedians do and that is their love language. Jokes are their love language. And Deborah would be impressed by Ava’s ability that way. And, yeah, I think it’s written that way and then Jean and Hannah just perform it so wonderfully together. They have such amazing chemistry that we were very happy with how it turned out.

**John:** We have a ton of listener questions, so maybe we can do some speed rounding through some listener questions.

**Jen:** Love it.

**John:** Megana Rao, if you could get us started.

**Megana:** Awesome. Joel asks, “Standup comics seem to get far more freedom to go more controversial while TV writers have to be far more careful with jokes and topics. First, do you think that perception is accurate? And if so how do you find that balance?”

**Jen:** Interesting.

**John:** So standup versus sitcom writers.

**Jen:** I think that, sure, there’s probably a little more leeway given to standups because you are just one person getting on stage one night. You might say something controversial but on the flip side when it’s in a TV show it has to go through so many layers of approval before it actually makes it to air. So I think in the case of jokes that are seen as offensive sometimes I certainly think this when I see it, I’m like how did the – so the initial writer, then the showrunner, then the entire writer’s room, then the studio, then the network, like no one gave a note on this? There are lots of rounds that that could have happened.

I think if it is true that standups are allowed more leeway that way it’s probably because it’s just one person getting up on stage saying something one random night and it’s not going through so many levels of approval. But I have to say as a TV writer it’s not something I think about. I never think like, oh, I wish I could say this controversial thing but I got to get up at the Improv to do it. I don’t really think about, oh, can I get away with saying this or not.

**John:** The incentives are also different for the standup comic. And one of the episodes sort of goes into her trying new material and the standup guy who she confronts. And the incentives are trying to get the laugh, to keep the audience laughing is so different than in a sitcom situation. When it’s just you up on that stage you’re going to say whatever you can do. You just keep saying–

**Jen:** That’s a good point. It’s almost like it’s survival. You just need them to laugh, so you’re probably – who knows what you might say to get that to happen. Whereas, yeah, TV you’re crafting characters and you need to make sure that if someone is saying something controversial it better not be punching down or something that makes this person seem like a horrible person if that’s not the intention.

**John:** Because you don’t have to go home with that standup at the end of the night, but with a sitcom character you want to come back the next week and see that character again.

**Jen:** Exactly. Totally.

**Megana:** Awesome. Nora asks, “So many of my favorite comedies get better the longer they go on. And audiences tend to say stick with it, it gets really good. Why do you think many comedies are growers and not showers?”

**Jen:** I think that is really true. I think it’s – well I think it’s for two reasons. One is, and Mike Schur, again, my mentor and the man I credit with teaching me how to make television, is fond of saying I wish I could just throw out the first episodes of a show when you make it. Because the first eight episodes is kind of this sludge pile of figuring out–

**John:** Parks and Rec, those first episodes are rough.

**Jen:** Yeah. And I think Mike – he would be happy to admit that they were figuring it out. Especially in an ensemble comedy. You are figuring out how are all these characters funny. How are they funny with each other? How does that actor mesh with that actor? And so you are really figuring it out. And so I think when comedies start out maybe not as strong as they get as they progress, it is because the writers, the actors, the crew, everyone is figuring it out a little bit. Comedy, I think there’s chemistry to it. It’s intangible. And you’re trying to capture lightning in a bottle in a lot of ways. And so it takes a little bit of trial and error until you really get there.

And then I think the other reason that comedies feel they get better as they go on is like great jokes come from character. You know, yes, there are some lines on sitcoms where if you just saw them written on someone’s Instagram page you’d be like that’s a funny one-liner. But for the most part jokes are funny because they’re specific to character. Like a Ron Swanson joke can’t be put in the mouth of Leslie Knope or Andy Dwyer because they all have very different character games and world views. And it’s why you love them, because they’re specifically drawn characters.

And so I think when you watch a pilot you don’t know these characters. You don’t know their game. You’re learning them. And it’s the writer’s job to introduce you to them and that takes some time. And so I think as a show goes on you learn these characters, you love these characters, you know their games, so you say like, oh yeah, of course Monica has 11 categories for towels. That’s so her. But you don’t know these characters as well when you’re first watching a show. So I think the longer you spend with them the more you understand them and the more the things they say and do are funny to you.

**John:** You just used a term which I don’t use at all in features. Character game. So what is game?

**Jen:** So character game in comedy is basically like – and this is something that I don’t know in the streaming world if it’s as relevant, but character game is like what is their specific trait that they exhibit over and over again in behavior that is how they are funny. So for example Leslie Knope’s game, and you could say she has multiple games, but one game is she is type A crazy optimistic to a fault. She is like the craziest, hardest worker you’ve ever met in your life. And she does everything in her life 150%. And that is both endearing but also sometimes exhausting to her friends and coworkers. And so that’s the character game.

In the most simplest of terms, like sometimes the character’s game is they’re the dumb one. And that is what gets hit over and over again in their jokes and dialogue and what they do. And so it’s a term that gets used a lot in comedy and I think maybe as comedies become a little more – or at least some of them become a little more grounded, a little more real, maybe we say that less and less because the characters – at least when we were making Hacks like we want the characters to feel like real people, real grounded people.

We don’t all have character games in life. Some of us do. But it’s something that maybe we talk about a little bit less. But certainly in a more traditional comedy network sense you do talk about character game a lot.

**John:** So on the Scriptnotes podcast Craig’s umbrage is his character game?

**Jen:** Exactly. Exactly.

**John:** He goes off and my desire to keep things moving along to segue, like this next question.

**Megana:** Leah asks, “In a previous episode Jac Schaeffer mentioned that she received good advice about staffing people in the room. Pick writers who offer something different from what she already had. Is there a type of comedy that is your strongest? And if so, what types of writers do you look for? For example, physical humor? Adept one lines? Etc.”

**Jen:** That’s a good question. That is really good advice for staffing a room. I think to look for people who fill in the gaps for you, who are stronger in things that you are maybe weaker in. Listen, I’m really good at formatting a script. I’m really good on the keyboard. That’s definitely number one maybe. I guess, let’s see, comedy wise probably I feel stronger in terms of jokes and one liners, like just sort of naturally where I come from from the monologue writing world. I think that maybe in jokes more than I think in story.

Story is something that, you know, I think the longer you work in narrative TV you get better at it, but that certainly wasn’t my strong suit when I started out. And so for example I think I’m always, like when staffing Hacks, looking for people who are really great with story. Really great with coming up with story. Coming up with twists and stuff like that. So, yeah, that certainly is good advice. That if you are staffing you want to find people who do things that you don’t maybe do as well.

**John:** This is an obvious point, but something just occurring to me now. A difference with Hacks is you have two central characters, two women who are telling jokes and are aware that they’re telling jokes because it is their business to tell jokes all the time. So there’s two characters who are aware that they’re funny, which is really unusual actually.

**Jen:** Yeah. Exactly. Most times in comedy people are funny but they don’t know they’re making jokes. And in this show, yeah, they know they’re funny. Making jokes is their business. It’s also been an interesting thing because I think when you write about comedians or comedy writers the bar gets set pretty high I think about how funny they need to be in their every interaction. And it’s funny because as a comedy writer, like I personally – the comedy writers who are constantly making jokes in every day conversation are the worst ones to be around. They’re pretty rough.

I, you know, I’m like – I am a comedy writer, but I’ve had so many people, like my hairdresser one time who shares some clients, some friends with me, and he said, “You know, everyone says Jen is so funny, but I don’t see that side of you.” And I was like, OK, cool. I think comedy writers, you think oh this person is playing a comedy writer they better be cracking wise every line. And that’s just truthfully not – it doesn’t feel like a realistic portrayal of a comedy writer to me anyway.

**John:** Yeah. Our next question was from Jay who asks…?

**Megana:** “What’s the correlation between being funny in person and being funny on the page? How does one get better at one or the other?”

**Jen:** Well, I mean, my hairdresser would like me more if I could learn.

**John:** It’s been my experience, too, is that like there’s people who are really, really funny, but they cannot write it down. They don’t have the ability to write in anyone else’s voice. Actually just something falls apart when they actually try to put it down on paper.

**Jen:** it’s really two different skills. And I think there are some people who are so wildly funny in person and also incredibly funny writers. That certainly exists. Someone like my co-creator Paul Downs is an incredible performer, so he’s so funny in that way, but then also a very talented writer. So it’s not like it doesn’t exist. But I think it’s hard. I think there’s no way to learn to be funny. You know, you either have it or you don’t.

So, what was the second part of the question?

**John:** How does one get better at one or the other? So like obviously people can – you went through UCB and so you learned how sketches works and you also learned some performance stuff, but it wasn’t your natural thing. And there’s going to be an upper ceiling to how good you are going to be as a performer, right?

**Jen:** Yeah. I think so. I think I could have taken a million more classes and they happily would have cashed my checks to do it, but I don’t think I ever – it is not in my wheelhouse to be a dynamic, incredible performer. It just isn’t. And that’s OK.

**John:** And we all know some really tremendous comedic actors who could not be any funnier, but they just cannot write. It’s just not natural to them.

**Jen:** Exactly. It is two very different skill sets. And sometimes you’ll find someone who has both, but it doesn’t always line up. And comedy writing is an interesting, especially TV comedy writing, is an interesting hybrid. Because when you are writing on a TV comedy you’re spending all your time in the writer’s room. And the writer’s room is just sitting around a table, breaking story together, pitching ideas, and then going through a script and pitching jokes for that script. I was shocked to find out my first narrative half hour job how little time you spend in front of a computer. When it’s your draft, you’re out on script, you’re writing the episode, but that’s pretty much it.

And so writer’s rooms are a very social place. You have to be comfortable sitting with five, six, seven, eight – back in Parks I think we had like 16 writers. A room of 15 other people and you have to get comfortable pitching your jokes out loud in front of all of them. And that was a real – again, for someone who isn’t a natural performer, and I’m not like an extrovert, that was a real challenge is to get comfortable learning like, OK, I need to just kind of be performing to pitch this joke for this character. So it is two different skill sets. But when you do work in TV comedy in writer’s rooms both come into play.

**John:** Yeah. On the feature side, if you’re pitching a comedy there’s not an expectation that you yourself are going to be hilariously funny in that pitch, but they need to believe that you actually know what funny is. And so if you’re a humorless person going into that you’re not going to get the job. That’s just how it works.

**Jen:** Yeah.

**John:** It’s tough. What else we got?

**Megana:** OK, a different Jay asks, “How many story arcs ahead do you and the staff have a feel for from the start?”

**Jen:** 1,012. No. There’s no set number to be honest. I think basically from the start what you’re more looking at is kind of, especially in a serialized streaming comedy, you’re looking at your tent poles for the season. You’re saying, OK, tent pole one, they meet, they clash. Then mid-season she’s going to quit, but she’s going to go on this bonding trip and learn more about her, which opens her eyes to new experiences and brings them closer. OK, another tent pole, her old LA life calls her back and she gets an opportunity that way.

You’re laying out the very big story points that you want to hit over the course of the season. And then you’re kind of filling in in between that all the little stories. And that is how it works like on our show, Hacks, which is a little more serialized. On more network TV shows, or even Broad City, those shows they were able to withstand a little more one-off episodes I think. So, I remember Parks and Rec like the beginning of every season we would have a writer’s retreat and part of your assignment for your writer’s retreat was to come up with ten episodes and you would just go to the retreat and then you pitch your ten episode ideas to Mike and we would write them all down on index cards and by the end of this retreat we would have this huge board of all the index cards of just crazy one-off episode ideas. Because a 22-episode network sitcom you have a little more leeway.

One that I pitched I remember was like Donna sends a tweet that she thinks is from her personal account but is actually the Parks Department account and it spirals. And that was just a one-off episode that we did that wasn’t tied to a larger arc. But because there are 22 episodes you had the time and space to do that.

And same on Broad City. Broad City we had much more ability to do kind of like one-off episodes that weren’t tied to a larger arc, even though we did on both Parks and Broad City you’re still telling longer arcs, but for something now like Hacks which is only 10 episodes, there’s less of a need to go, OK, we need to generate 500 episode ideas. It’s much more about these tent poles like I said of knowing where you want your character’s story to start, what’s happening in the middle, what’s happening in the end. And then filling in in between.

**John:** Well in the case Hacks in this first season you established stakes for both of the characters right at the very start. And so we know as an audience that by the end of this series we should have an answer to these fundamental questions about what’s going to happen to these two women.

**Jen:** Exactly.

**John:** Which would not really make sense for something like Parks and Rec. That really wouldn’t make sense because the idea of characters leaving, it just wouldn’t track.

**Jen:** Yeah. And we did some stuff, like Leslie is getting recalled at the beginning of the season, what’s going to happen with that? So we certainly did that. But it was less central to the way the show was built.

**John:** Let’s try one more question from a listener.

**Megana:** Jerry asks, “I’ve heard Breaking Bad and Succession both described as comedies. Atlanta has had at least two horror episodes. And Insecure has had episodes that have brought me to the edge of tears. What are the biggest changes you’ve noticed in the form as of late and what do you see coming over the horizon?”

**Jen:** That’s a great question. And I agree with all those assessments of those shows. Those shows have made me laugh and cry similarly, too. I think it’s really honestly exciting to me. It feels like there’s no longer these strict parameters of like it’s a comedy so it needs to sound and look like this, and it needs to be this one way, and the tone always has to be comedic.

Something with Hacks we talked about all the time is like we wanted it to feel really grounded and we wanted it to feel like real life. And real life is equal parts drama and comedy and you’re switching in between the two tones in a matter of instance sometimes. And so what I think is so exciting about all those shows, you know, the question mentioned is like those shows all play with tone in such a cool way. They can be like, yeah, Insecure can be so funny, but then it also has these real grounded heartfelt moments that do make you cry.

And to me that’s so exciting. Like I want my art that I consume to reflect the real world I live in. And it feels like these half hour shows, or all these shows, not just half hour, are getting closer to reflecting the way the real world is in that it plays with tone and it isn’t just one thing.

So I love that shows are now able to do all these different things and it doesn’t feel like there’s hard and fast rules about what they can do. And as far as what’s on the horizon, I hope that trend just continues because I think it’s really exciting. And I think what’s in, I mean, maybe I don’t know if this is on the horizon, because I don’t know what the future of network comedy is, but maybe because these shows are so successful and people love them like maybe network comedies will also get to be a little more fluid with tone and a network comedy doesn’t have to like you know be just one thing. I think that was something Mike did with The Good Place in such a great way. That is not your typical network sitcom and he was given the chance to make it. And I think people were really excited by that.

So hopefully just kind of playing with tone and the rules and letting things be more fluid is something that will spread to not just streaming or cable but also network.

**John:** A thing I noticed about Hacks and Succession both is that they’re not very classically comedies, and yet the dialogue and how the characters are sort of presented are presented with a sort of comedic voice to them. Comedic things can happen in their universe and it makes sense for them do it. And characters talk in a way that I don’t want to say they feel like they’re written by comedy writers, but it feels like they’re writing at a pitch that can feel funny.

As opposed to something that’s done as a straight drama which just would never happen. And so you can basically take the same outline for a Succession episode and write it as just a true drama and write it as this. And the same things could happen in the scenes but it’s really just how characters are expressing themselves mostly that makes it feel like kind of a comedy.

**Jen:** Which is what I love about that show so much. It’s not just a straight drama. I love the comedic moments. And the specific character, again character games, that they kind of play with. I think that’s what makes that show so rich and run to watch.

**John:** All right. It’s come time for our One Cool Things. I have two short One Cool Things there this week. First is an essay by Zachary Zane that ran in the New York Times a couple weeks ago called You Are Bi Enough. And it’s just a nice way of looking, as we head out of Pride month, bisexuals always kind of feel like should I even be at this party. There’s that sense of like do I even belong here. Am I sort of stealing someone else’s valor for being in the room for this conversation?

And he does a really good job sort of laying out what to do if you’re a bi person who is in a mixed gender relationship and stuff like that. It’s just a really smart essay on approaching that.

Second is much more important for me personally which is that one of the things that has been hardest about the pandemic is it’s been impossible for me to get Caffeine Free Coke Zero, which is my go-to drink.

**Jen:** That is a tough one to find. I’m a Coke Zero drinker too and I never see Caffeine Free Coke Zero.

**John:** It’s really tough. So all the canned beverages took a real hit during the pandemic because there was not enough aluminum to sort of make all of our favorite sodas. But the niche drinks, like the Caffeine Free Coke Zero just became impossible to fill. So my two placeholders have been the Caffeine Free Diet Coke, which is OK. If you can find it, that’s great. And so Megana was able to find it this week. God bless you, Megana. But the other go-to for me has been I have a SodaStream and we always just use it for fizzy water. But they actually sell the syrups to put into it.

And so I was able to track down Caffeine Free Diet Cola syrup for the SodaStream. And if you use just under one ounce in a bottle it is a pretty good approximation of what Coke Zero should be like, what Caffeine Free Coke Zero should be like. So if you’re really jonesing for it – it’s not even really economically advantageous, because I worked it out and it’s $1.50 per liter which is not great.

**Jen:** Not great, no.

**John:** It’s not great. But I mean when you absolutely need it it’s there.

**Jen:** I love that you’re over here doing chemistry, too. You’re in your lab mixing.

**John:** One after another, I’m tweaking the formula to get it just right. And so I would say just under one ounce is what you need to make a perfect caffeine free diet cola.

Jen, what do you have for a One Cool Thing?

**Jen:** My One Cool Thing is my favorite show that I watched over the pandemic, and honestly one of my favorite shows I’ve watched, which is a British show called I Hate Suzie. I don’t know if you guys have seen it.

**John:** I have not. Megana is nodding that she has.

**Megana:** Yeah, I love it.

**Jen:** It is co-created by Billie Piper who stars in it as well. And Lucy Prebble who is a phenomenal writer/playwright. She also writes on Succession actually. But this show is just so, so good. Billie Piper plays this actress who is like somewhat famous. She was like a pop star and now is on a zombie sci-fi show which is like seen OK. And then she’s up for this big career opportunity which is Disney is maybe going to hire her to play an “aging princess.” And so she’s very excited about that.

And right as this opportunity is about to happen her phone gets hacked and compromising photos of her leak. Her with someone who is not her husband. And it is just an eight-episode series. They’re all available on HBO Max. And it’s kind of this exploration of what it means to be a woman in the public eye. What it means to be – just modern womanhood in general. And the performances are just so wonderful. Billie Piper is amazing. It’s one of my favorite performances in a comedy of all time I think.

The woman who plays her manager and best friend, Leila Farzad, I hope I’m pronouncing that right, she’s wonderful. It’s a wonderful show that I feel like not enough people I’ve seen talking about. So, I’m doing the work.

**John:** We’ll start talking about it more.

**Jen:** I love it. Great.

**John:** Great. We’ll do it. That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Peter Hoopes. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter I am @johnaugust. You’re on Twitter?

**Jen:** Yes, I am on Twitter. I’m @jenstatsky.

**John:** And we have t-shirts. They are great. You can find them at Cotton Bureau. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts and sign up for our weekly-ish newsletter called Inneresting which has lots of links to things about writing.

You can sign up to become a premium member at Scriptnotes.net where you get all the back episodes and bonus segments like the one we’re about to record on Cat Person and the discourse around Cat Person.

Jen Statsky, this was amazing. Thank you so much for coming in.

**Jen:** Thank you so much for having me. This was a real career highlight as a longtime listener.

**John:** Aw, thanks.

[Bonus segment]

**John:** All right, Jen Statsky. What was your experience with Cat Person before this? So you were aware of the original short story?

**Jen:** Yes, I was aware. I remember reading it back in 2017 and I remember being very struck by it because it came out during the #MeToo movement when I certainly as a woman and I think a lot of women I knew and globally were like reevaluating their relationships with men and interactions with men and just what kind of it meant to be a woman out in the world. And certainly a woman with a sexual life. And so I was very – I thought the story was – I remember reading it and liking it. And then was also was so – I was like, wow, this is like the first viral short story. I couldn’t believe how much Twitter was discussing it and talking about it. So, yes, I was very aware of Cat Person.

**John:** I remember when it broke as well. It was a New Yorker short story by Kristen Roupenian and it just spread everywhere. I think because it was a short story it wasn’t a huge commitment. It wasn’t like a book where you had to read the whole thing. You could sit down and read the thing and like, oh, that was really good. And what struck me as I first read it and it was a lot of part of the discourse originally was it felt like it maybe kind of wasn’t fiction. It felt like it was actually just an essay. It felt like it was a first person thing that she was writing about her own experience. And she said like, no, I’m not, it’s fiction.

The term auto-fiction came up there. The sense of like it felt like autobiography but it was actually fully fiction.

**Jen:** Yeah. And I mean I think partly is because it’s so well-written, or so confidently written that people found it hard to believe it wasn’t someone’s actual experience.

**John:** Yes. And that’s where we get to this week. So, this past week Alexis Nowicki, another author, wrote in Slate saying like, OK, well this is actually based on my own experience, even though she’d never actually met Kristen, the original author. And so we’ll put a link to both things in the show notes. This summary of what Alexis is writing is that she read this short story and everyone was texting her saying like, “This is about you, right? This is about you and that guy?”

And she’s like, yeah, but I never met this woman. I don’t understand how this could be the situation. And she eventually reached out to Kristen Roupenian who said like, yes, I knew that same guy. And while I’m not the person, you sort of are the person who is the other character in the story.

**Jen:** Yes. That must have been such a crazy – I found the essay by, it’s Alexis–

**John:** Nowicki.

**Jen:** Nowicki. I loved the essay. I thought it was really, really well-written and interesting. And she describes coming out of a movie and having like dozens of texts being like, “Is this about you?” People sending her the story. And that must have been such a bizarre, strange experience for a person to go through. And yet it goes into a really nuanced, interesting conversation about art and who owns the details of one’s life. Is it ever OK to just point blank take facts from someone else’s life and use them as fiction? It’s really interesting.

**John:** Well so often on the podcast we do a segment for How Would This Be a Movie and Craig is always arguing you don’t need people’s life rights because facts are facts. And the facts that Roupenian was using here are kind of facts. It was basically she didn’t know this person. She looked up and she had heard about this earlier relationship this guy had had and sort of imagined what this woman was like. And Googled and found real information about where she went to school and where she used to work and was just imagining what this life was. And imagined pretty correctly sort of how a lot of this stuff worked.

But it’s the issue of like nothing was illegal here, but where the ethical boundary is between sort of pulling that stuff in.

**Jen:** Yeah. I mean, I guess what was interesting to me and this Kristen when she did, if you read the essay, you’ll see she apologizes for this eventually. She says I’m sorry I should have taken some of the details and changed them so that it wouldn’t be so directly linked to you, which I do – as a writer myself I can’t picture, yes, it’s of course you don’t need someone’s life rights necessarily. You’re always pulling from different people’s lives and experiences. But I can’t really picture writing something and using such specific details that could easily be traced to a person and not just taking the extra step of changing them slightly so that person wouldn’t think it’s about them.

**John:** Yeah. People were pointing out that it’s always dangerous to be around writers because you never know if you’re going to be sucked into this, but in this case it’s dangerous to be around people who could be around writers.

**Jen:** Yeah. Right. There’s always a writer within a few degrees of connection to you and that’s really dangerous.

**John:** So a thing that I’ve always been aware of as I’ve been around writers is like events will happen, or somebody will say something or things come up. You were saying this before about Deborah writing a joke down in her book. Like as a funny thing happens, who owns that funny thing that happens? Who owns that moment?

**Jen:** I have friends who are standups who talk about this specific issue because they’ll go on tour together. And then when you’re on tour you’re living together. You’re going out to eat. You’re on the bus. And something crazy will happen and then it’s a race to who can craft the joke about it first. Who gets to tell it on stage first? It is a really interesting thing when creative people are together. Who has ownership over it? There’s not really a hard and fast rule about it.

**John:** I also – Dana Schwartz makes this point on Twitter that whenever there’s two people it always feels like you have to declare two sides. And it’s this or it’s that. And you can’t actually say that’s an interesting conversation about this thing. She was in the right, she was in the wrong. She’s trying to claim credit for something that she didn’t actually write. And it makes it more complicated than that. I’m not on either team here. I don’t think they should have teams. I don’t think we’re playing a game.

**Jen:** Right. Twitter always rushes to be judge, jury, and executioner, right? So someone always, yes, exactly, like Dana is saying has to be in the right and someone has to be in the wrong. And what I thought was so interesting about Alexis’s essay is that she wasn’t casting herself as the victim and Kristen as the villain primarily. I thought the essay was so well done because it’s a really nuanced, holistic look of like this very strange thing happened to me. I feel angry about it in this way, but I also see that this person has a particular experience of their own.

So I found it interesting that people didn’t take the hint from the essay which is like I’m not trying to cast, oh, this action was evil and this person should be condemned. I’m just working my way through this specific personal experience that happened and kind of exploring this conversation about art and the ethics of art.

So, yeah, that was interesting. Twitter is not great for nuance.

**John:** What’s also strange about this situation is that the third person in this relationship, so Charles who is the basis of the character, is apparently dead, which is dismissed in a single line and not explained.

**Jen:** I know. My jaw dropped when I got to that part of the essay. And then I don’t know if you saw this, but a lot of people – and again we have no idea – but a lot of people on Twitter took the extra step to say, oh, he killed himself. He must have killed himself because of the negative portrayal in this work of “fiction.”

**John:** I don’t think we know that.

**Jen:** We don’t know that at all. That’s just complete conjecture from people on Twitter, which again like rushing to try to put everyone into the category of villain and good person. It’s just so fascinating. But we have no idea how this man passed away. It’s very sad. It’s a very sad part of the essay and that both of these woman are left I think grieving this person is just like a sad bookend to it.

**John:** And there is theoretically a movie version of this, so the tie in to this is so Nicholas Braun of Succession is apparently supposed to be playing this character.

**Jen:** Right.

**John:** And so it just becomes complicated as reality and fiction and meta fiction overlap.

**Jen:** I don’t know what stage – do you know if they’re–

**John:** I don’t know where they are.

**Jen:** I wonder if the current writer is scrambling now to include this newest twist into the Cat Person saga.

**John:** The next Zola saga.

**Jen:** Yeah.

**John:** Thanks Jen.

**Jen:** Thanks.

Links:

* [WGA Pilot Guide](https://www.wga.org/members/employment-resources/writers-deal-hub/pilot-deal-guide)
* [Hacks on HBO](https://www.hbomax.com/series/urn:hbo:series:GYIBToQrPdotpNQEAAAEa) check out the pilot script [here](https://deadline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Hacks-Script-It-Starts-On-The-Page.pdf).
* [Jen Statsky](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4278387/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/jenstatsky?lang=en)
* [You Are Bi Enough](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/17/opinion/bisexuals-coming-out-anna-paquin.html?referringSource=articleShare) by Zachary Zane for NYT
* [Caffeine Free Diet Cola syrup by SodaStream](https://sodastream.com/products/diet-caffeine-free-cola-4-pack)
* [I Hate Suzie](https://www.hbomax.com/series/urn:hbo:series:GX6MziQh41pYSwwEAAAK4) on HBO Max
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Peter Hoopes ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))
* Scriptnotes is produced by [Megana Rao](https://twitter.com/MeganaRao) and edited by [Matthew Chilelli](https://twitter.com/machelli).

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/508standard.mp3).

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (75)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (489)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (238)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.