John August

Search Results for: notes on notes

Can you be just a screenwriter anymore?

Film Industry, QandA

Recently, I struck up a correspondence with a successful screenwriter and asked him for advice on how to move my career forward. He told me that I should focus on making films instead of writing them, because that now was the best if not only way to break in.

Do you think that is true? I was inspired to take up screenwriting by people like William Goldman and Richard Price, who worked in the business solely as screenwriters. That’s what you’ve been able to do thus far in your career. Is it still a possibility?

— Vince
Seattle, WA

While films, short and otherwise, are increasingly being used as the foot-in-the-door for young writer-directors, if your goal is to become strictly a screenwriter, I’m not sure it’s the best use of your time and money. Yes, it’s still viable to be “just” a screenwriter. Not only will Richard Price and WIlliam Goldman continue to work, but new screenwriters emerge every year, propelled by nothing more than the quality of their writing.

What may have changed over the last decade is the degree to which a screenwriter is required to have social interaction. The classic nebbishy writer who gets spooked by his own shadow would have a hard time in modern Hollywood.

Take me. I’ve produced and directed, but 90% of my work consists of pushing words around on the page. The other 10% is crucial, however. It consists of making phone calls, taking meetings, discussing notes, and feigning interest in terrible projects just to be polite. My writing is what makes me hirable, but it’s sociableness that gets me hired.

One reason this sucessful screenwriter may have given you this advice is because you’re in Seattle, and while it’s easy to shoot a film there, it’s harder to come in contact with the people (agents, managers, producers) who can help you get your career going as a screenwriter. Since you can’t do the social part of a screenwriter’s job in Seattle, making a film isn’t a terrible idea. But neither is moving to Los Angeles, which might be the better use of your money.

Transcript of my first meeting with Daniel Wallace

Big Fish, Projects

daniel wallaceI first met [Daniel Wallace](http://danielwallace.org), the author of BIG FISH, on October 26, 1998. We met at an IHOP in Richmond, Virginia, and talked about his book and the prospect of making a movie from it.

I had this interview up at the old site, but it was kind of buried. So here it is, reformatted and reader-friendly.

John: What was your original intention with Big Fish? Did you sit down thinking, “I’m going to make a novel about this,” or was it pieces that came together?

Daniel: It started with bits and pieces. Originally, the very beginning was my interest in myth. I’ve always thought of myth as being a way to explain things that we can’t understand otherwise.

John: Like, why there’s thunder.

Daniel: That’s exactly right. It’s always easier to have some sort of explanation, even when you may know it’s not quite accurate or not quite real. It satisfies something. Anything’s better than not understanding. Even untruth sometimes is better than not knowing anything.

John: Did you write it from beginning to end, or did you write in bits and pieces?

[Read more…] about Transcript of my first meeting with Daniel Wallace

Hiring a “script doctor”

QandA, So-Called Experts

I just got to LA a few months ago. I have written a few screenplays, well received from a manager, producer and teachers at my college. But have not landed an agent or manager, yet. I am writing a new script, it’s a hard write but very rewarding. It not only has commercial appeal but I think it is my step in the right direction.

A fellow writer suggested this script doctor to me, just to help me after I got through the “grunt” of my script and really help me polish it. I have tried workshops and things like that with my other scripts, but I do not find them very effective. I figure I would rather take the money and give it to a pro, get a one on one meeting with them and get good notes, of course do the re-writes myself, but getting someone else to look at it and help. My friend the writer tells me he would not send anything out before it goes through her. He swears by her. I think I might try it. Any advice about going to a script doctor?

–Silla Desade
Los Angeles

“Script doctor” generally means something different in the industry, so I want to draw a distinction between the kind of script doctor you’re talking about and the kind of script doctor [Variety](http://www.variety.com) would talk about.

In the industry, a script doctor is an established screenwriter with a bunch of credits who comes in on a project shortly before production and does a rewrite to fix some specific, nagging problems. (Or, depending on your perspective, destroys the things that made the project unique.) [Steve Zaillian](http://imdb.com/name/nm0001873/) is a highly-regarded script doctor. Arguably, I could be considered a script doctor, because I’ve done a fair number of these 23rd-hour emergency jobs. But no one’s business card reads “script doctor.” It’s a specific task within screenwriting, but not really a profession in-and-of itself.

A lot of times, the work you do on these projects is described as “surgical,” which fits well with the script doctor moniker. Generally, you’re not rewriting the whole script. You’re fixing a few key sections that aren’t working.

The person your friend is recommending to you may or may not be a screenwriter. In some cases, it could be someone analogous to a literary editor, who goes through a text and helps “clean it up” before publication. If so, great. Good writers are not always good proofreaders, and it’s important to have sharp eyes looking over your work.

If this person is truly going to rewrite your script, however, I have to question the legitimacy of your career aspirations. Screenwriting isn’t about banging out a first draft and letting someone else make it shine. If you really have limitations in a given area — dialogue, plotting, whatever — you need a writing partner, not a self-styled guru.

Seeing a rough cut of your film

Directors, QandA

If a screenwriter gets a film produced, will he or she get to see a rough cut of the film at its earliest stage?

–Geoff
Nova Scotia

That mostly depends on the writer’s relationship with the director and producer(s). If the screenwriter has been an active collaborator throughout the process, then definitely. If the relationship hasn’t been as close, it’s more likely the writer won’t see the first few rough cuts of the film.

And that’s a mistake. The writer should absolutely be included in the editing process. While the rest of the team has been bogged down in weeks or months of production hell, the writer generally has fresh eyes to all of the material shot. He’s not sick of the actors, the locations, and the scenes which took all night to shoot. Instead, he remembers the movie everyone was trying to make six months ago.

By WGA policy, any writer who works on a given film is supposed to have the opportunity to screen a cut of the film early enough in the editing process that any notes or suggestions he may have can be incorporated. For a long time, this rule was never enforced. Over the past few years, however, the studios have gotten better about making sure these screenings happen — although they often occur too late to be productive. For instance, I’ve sat in writer screenings where the film was already color-timed. No matter what I wanted to suggest, the movie was already locked.

Recently, there’s been a push to invite the writer to the first test-screening, assuming the screening happens in the Los Angeles area. It’s certainly a good idea, since huge decisions are often made based on the results of these screenings, and the screenwriter may be needed to implement them.

The movies I’m proudest of are the ones in which I was able to take a significant role in post-production, whether that was sitting down next to the Avid or talking through specifics with the director. I don’t always get everything changed the way I’d like, but I do feel the films are better for the input.