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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: outline

Scriptnotes, Episode 577: The One with Daniels, Transcript

February 24, 2023 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.

Hello and welcome. My name is John August.

Craig Mazin: Whoa, whoa, my name is Craig Mazin.

John: This is Episode 577 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show, we’re sitting down the writing/directing team of Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, collectively known as Daniels, to discuss their film Everything Everywhere All At Once and all the stuff that led up to it. Welcome, Daniels.

Craig: Daniels!

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god, thank you guys.

John: Oh my god, hello.

Daniel Kwan: As a longtime listener-

Daniel Scheinert: Congrats, 577.

Craig: Woo!

Daniel Kwan: Wow. I know, it’s crazy. I’ve listened to every episode. That’s not true, but I’ve listened to a decent chunk, so this is very exciting. Thank you for having us.

Craig: A decent chunk is a lot, so thank you.

John: We’ll happily take it. We want to talk to you about Everything-

Craig: Everywhere.

John: … and how you got started, how it all came together. If you could stick around for our Bonus Segment, we would love to talk to you about music videos and other things you guys shoot that are not movies, because somehow, we’ve made it through 576 episodes, and we’ve never talked about music videos and commercials and all the other stuff that writer-directors get to make, which is I’m sure a crucial part of your learning process.

Craig: (singing)

Daniel Kwan: That’s exciting.

Craig: God, I love that music video so much.

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god.

Craig: That is a music video that occasionally, if I’m feeling down… If you don’t know what we’re talking about, Turn Down for What. If I’m feeling a bit down, sometimes I’ll just turn it on. It’s instant mood lift.

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god.

Craig: I’m sure for the two of you it’s nothing but traumatic memories, but for me it’s instant mood lift.

Daniel Kwan: You have no idea. I’ve gone to so many weddings since that video has come out. Any time I’m at a wedding, someone tells the DJ, “You have to play Turn Down for What.”

Daniel Scheinert: “He loves it.”

Daniel Kwan: Truly, it’s now a traumatic experience hearing that song. Even you jokingly saying that is making me want to leave.

Craig: Good. That’s my job on the podcast is to try and shorten the length of each episode by driving people away.

Daniel Scheinert: I like this.

John: Let’s talk about it. Let’s get into how you guys got started, because I first met you guys up on the mountain at Sundance Labs. You guys were great. You had a crazy script. I don’t think I worked with you guys directly on it, but I hear all these stories about, “It’s a farting corpse movie.” I’m like, “These guys are geniuses somehow.” That’s when I first saw your shorts, but I don’t know how you guys got started. Can you give us the recap of the origin story for you as a team?

Daniel Scheinert: Totally. We met in college, didn’t get along. We were taking an animation class. I participated too much. He thought I was an asshole. He didn’t participate enough. I thought he was wasting his money at film school.

Daniel Kwan: Classic rom-com.

Craig: I love it so far.

Daniel Scheinert: Our Harry Met Sally didn’t take as long. It didn’t take a decade. It was a year before we had a summer job as camp counselors for the New York Film Academy, which I don’t necessarily recommend, but I do recommend as a job. It’s a great job.

Craig: Get paid by them but don’t pay them is what you’re saying.

Daniel Scheinert: Exactly. Most film schools are [crosstalk 00:03:08] as far as how much they cost.

Craig: I love you.

Daniel Scheinert: They’re pretty great as far as who you might meet. We both have camp counselor vibes. We like to make art that way. We bonded and got very jealous of the kids. After work, we started making some short films together that the internet liked.

Daniel Kwan: I think the through line is that our collaboration has just been a series of accidents. We just decided to do a short film together. It was actually just like a quick test. I wanted to teach him aftereffects. He wanted to teach me how to shoot live action stuff. We put it online.

Daniel Scheinert: He had a new camera. Then it was like, “Oh, let’s try out the new camera.”

Daniel Kwan: “Let’s test this out.” We did something stupid together. Scheinert put it on his Vimeo account, and we were put on the front page of Vimeo. We were like, “Whoa, what happened? I’ve been trying to get on the front page for the past eight months, and we just did this thing randomly.” It just kept happening.

Daniel Scheinert: He was so jealous, because it was my page.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly.

Craig: Did you suspect that maybe Vimeo just puts white people’s videos on right away? Was there like a little bit of a, “Hm, hold on a second.”

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god, I don’t want to-

Craig: “I’ve been working pretty hard at this, and this guy literally-“

Daniel Scheinert: You were here first.

Daniel Kwan: Vimeo is racist. That’s a whole other conversation, not the Vimeo is racist thing, but just the way our race actually has played into our careers is fascinating.

Craig: We’ll dig into it. We’ll dig into that.

Daniel Kwan: Long conversation for later. I will say that we accidentally started working together. Through this very strange Pavlovian response, we got some rewards, and we’re like, “Let’s do it again.” We just kept doing it. Next thing we know, he asked me if I wanted to help him on a music video. We’re like, “Sure, let’s try that out.” We did that. A month later, someone from London says, “Hey, I saw your music video that you did for free. What if we gave you $12,000 to make another one?”

Craig: Hello.

Daniel Kwan: We’re like, “Sure.” We quit our jobs. I was working at DreamWorks Animation at the time as a low-level designer, and Scheinert was working at a VFX company as a runner. We quit our jobs, went to New York, did a music video. Then another month later, someone was like, “Hey, you want to do it again?” It just became this slow-motion thing where our identities became entrenched and we had to figure out our process. We like to say that the algorithm gave us an arranged marriage. The internet accidentally put us together.

The relevant part of the story is even the leap from music videos to screenwriting, feature-length screenwriting, was an accident. We were finding success in music videos. We got a manager, Josh Rudnick, for anyone who cares. He’s incredible. They started sending us scripts, and none of them were speaking to us. None of them felt like the kind of thing that we would actually feel passionate enough to spend years on.

Even though neither of us considered ourselves writers at the time, we took a step back and we’re like, “Hey, we’ve been writing all these music video treatments for a few years now, dozens. Every couple months, we just write a new idea.” It was like a boot camp. We were like, “What if we just tried doing that ourselves? None of these scripts are going to be the thing that makes us want to direct a feature. Let’s try to write our own way.” We naively jumped into screenwriting, thinking that it would just be like a long music video. Oh boy, we were so wrong, but lots of lessons learned. That was our path.

Daniel Scheinert: One of the lessons that’s fun, it was through writing music videos that we discovered our writing process. We didn’t even think we were screenwriting when we would do this. We would listen to the song. We were usually attracted to a story, not just visuals. We would structure our little short films based on the verse, chorus, verse, chorus of whatever song and designing moments that pop, to try to set them up and create. We were very much like visual screenwriters at first, because there’s no dialog in a music video. We would have to break it down beat by beat and time it out and find the rhythm of the scene. That still informs how we write.

Craig: You’re pulling something out that’s actually quite profound, that I don’t think we’ve actually talked about in our four billion episodes, which is that the very simple structure of a classic pop song, verse, verse, chorus, verse, chorus, bridge, chorus, is something that provides a fundamental and essential shape to a story, even though we don’t realize it’s happening. We are all taught, and I don’t know why it works. I guess our brains are designed around verse, chorus, bridge, chorus, but it does-

Daniel Kwan: I have a theory that I’ll tell later.

Craig: Tell me.

Daniel Kwan: Continue.

Craig: Tell me now. I need to know.

Daniel Kwan: I had a roommate in college who was a musician, very heady, philosophical guy. He was telling me about this essay about the pop song and why it’s so important to the human experience. It’s because it’s meant to imitate sex, reaching towards climax. There’s the tease. There’s the lift. There’s the comedown, the teasing again. Now you bring it to the bridge. That’s when you’re getting really close. You hit that climax. It feels like this really beautiful, cathartic experience packed into five minutes, which I think is incredible and very narrative. Very narrative. It’s got three acts. You’re right. It’s a really perfect way to think about story. Even when we were just doing music videos, people would tell us that, “Your music videos sometimes squeeze more story into four minutes than some features do.” Some people might say that’s a bad thing. For us, it was an exciting challenge.

Craig: We’re going to get into that. When we start digging into, which I’m sure will happen soon, into Everything Everywhere All At Once, I definitely want to talk about the… You guys call it maximalism? What is the word that you use?

Daniel Kwan: Maximalism, yeah.

Craig: A whole lot. There’s so much. I don’t know. John, should I short circuit things by talking about it? Should I just ask my question?

John: I think there’s actually a very nice segue though between the videos you’re doing… If you looked at Turn Down For What, we’ll put a link in the show notes to Turn Down For What, a tremendous amount happens in there visually. You’re constantly adding new layers to things. You’re literally falling down through the floor, into a new layer, a new layer, a new layer of a story. I want to talk about your short film, Interesting Ball, the 2014 film, which was an ongoing series of vignettes that all tie together and feed into one big thing. What is the process for you guys developing those ideas? You talk about [inaudible 00:09:42] song and then having to figure out what is speaking to me. That’s fine if it’s one person. If it’s both of you, do you have to give veto power over what ideas are happening? What is the process like for figuring out, “Okay, this is how we want to do this thing. This is a story. We should follow on this.”

Daniel Kwan: Before I answer that, I just also want to include Foster the People, Houdini is another one that has a very dense story, and then our Simple Song by The Shins, also way too much story in five minutes, just in case people want to see what we’re talking about. It’s too much. It was great.

Craig: It’s a great song.

Daniel Kwan: The collaboration, like I said, it’s all very accidental. It’s all very organic. A lot of times, we just constantly pitch things back and forth. The things that stick are the things that we chase, which is why me as an individual director and Scheinert as an individual director, we would be making very different things on our own.

Our Venn diagram is so specific and strange that it has to excite us both in order for us to chase it. It’s not fun to drag someone along on a journey that they’re not fully committed to. That really hones and sharpens what the story can be or the potential for what it is. Oftentimes, it is the stuff that scares us the most, because on our own, I don’t think I would be quite as brave. Together, it’s like, “Are we going to bite off way too much? Are we going to chase after something that we probably shouldn’t be chasing after as storytellers? That sounds exciting.” I think that’s something that at least within our relationship, that’s the strongest part of the Venn diagram is that’s risk-taking.

Daniel Scheinert: I think I maybe get a kick out of tricking Dan into making his craziest ideas actually happen.

Daniel Kwan: There’s that too.

Daniel Scheinert: I’ll become the cheerleader for the weird ones. There’s rarely veto power. In fact, in some ways, there’s tons of it. We’re just looking for that thing that makes us both excited. Over the years, we’ve learned to not sweat it if an idea falls flat for the other person and just be like, “Huh, okay. I trust his taste. For some reason, that idea doesn’t sing to him.” Then sometimes it’ll come up again a few months later. There’s a movie idea that I’ve been pitching to Dan for years that just recently got consumed by this other idea that we’ve been working on. I’m like, “Oh, it’s actually happening now.” It took years of throwing this dumb idea against the wall for it to finally find its home.

Daniel Kwan: It’s a slow-motion passive veto. If it gets buried by time, then that’s the veto. I think this is an acting metaphor that an acting coach once told us. The reason why you don’t want to say no is because you want to allow the bush to grow in every direction it needs to grow before you start trimming. Otherwise, you won’t know what shape it can be. I think that’s a part of our process working with actors, but also a part of our writing process is just letting things grow. If it’s meant to die, it’ll die. You never know what the bush could be until you see it in its biggest, most unruly form.

Daniel Scheinert: I love that metaphor.

Craig: There’s something beautiful about the permissiveness of your process, where you do allow each other to say and come up with ideas that maybe other people would reject out of hand. One of the things that struck me when I watched Everything Everywhere All At Once, or can we abbreviate it to EEAAO, is that…

Let me back up for a second. John and I, I think, do a decent job of generally educating people about screenwriting. I think in all the time that we’ve spent looking at say the Three Page Challenges and things, I think we are good at helping people get better, but I’m not sure that we’re good at helping people be Good with a capital G. I think that there’s something innate. Obviously, there is talent that exists. Watching your movie, I felt overwhelmed in the best possible way, by quality of ideas. There were not 1 or 2 or 12 fresh ideas. Movies oftentimes give you zero fresh ideas. There were 1,000 fresh ideas.

Daniel Kwan: Wow.

Craig: By the time I got to the Everything Bagel, which I think may be the single best metaphor ever immortalized on film-

Daniel Scheinert: Oh my god.

Craig: … I was just overjoyed by the amount of original thought. I just want to dig in a little bit to ask you guys, are you aware of how original all of these thoughts are? Is it something you pursue very purposefully? Do you worry about losing connection with some of the necessary conventional things, which I think in your film you did not lose touch with? How do you manage this fire hose of brilliant thought?

Daniel Kwan: Oh my gosh, thank you. That is such an incredible compliment. Regarding the bagel metaphor, I feel like Twitter would disagree, but it’s okay.

Daniel Scheinert: [Crosstalk 00:14:40].

Craig: I quit Twitter.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly.

Craig: Fuck Twitter. They’re wrong.

Daniel Kwan: I should quit. The first thing I’ll say is, in college I remember I heard someone say something funny and snarky about success that has always stuck with me. They said if you want to be successful, you either have to be the best or the first. From the very beginning, I was like, “I will never be the best, but I can be the first.” That was definitely a very inspiring moment. That was something that me and Daniel had a proclivity for is just surprising each other. That’s why the duoship works is because half the time, that’s all we’re doing. We’re trying to surprise each other, either with a joke or even with an emotionally resonant idea. How do we surprise each other so that we can surprise our audience?

A lot of it comes out to the fact that I’m realizing now as an adult, I’ve been recently diagnosed with ADHD, and people with ADHD are novelty seekers. I’m the truffle pig. That’s how my brain is defaulted to think about the world and look at the world. I think a lot of people look at it and they’re like, “Oh my gosh, this is way too much.” To me, I’m like, “Welcome to our brains. This is just how we think.”

I’ve been reading a lot about neuroanthropology, this idea of taking anthropology and going back to ancient traditions and the ways that brains worked back then to decode and understand how we can hack our minds for the modern world or whatever. One of the things they talk about is how important innovation is and novelty seeking is for the human condition.

A lot of people can be like, “Oh yeah, it’s just new for new’s sake,” as far as our movie goes. It’s whatever. It’s just random and fun. I do think that the newness and the freshness of our stories is very much intentional, because I think humans are so fickle. You learn a moral to a story or you learn this beautiful, life-changing idea, and two months later, you’ve already forgotten why you felt that way. I think we were constantly having to remind ourselves, as humans and as storytellers, these very simple, universal truths. Unless we wrap it in something new, it’s hard to penetrate our very hardened, logical, cold brains. Innovation to us is really fun and playful and inspiring but also feels important as a vehicle for story.

John: Innovation and novelty are amazing tools. They’re definitely going to help you find some new territory, but they’re not going to get a movie made. They’re not going to get a script written. How do you go from… You have all these great ideas. They’re great ideas you could’ve had in a dorm room, but you’re not actually getting them to a movie. You’re not getting them to a script stage. What is the process from these great ideas to, “Okay, now we’re agreeing on the words on the page to create this story.” What is that conversation? You have great abstract ideas, but you also have to agree on what is the scene.

Daniel Scheinert: It’s nonlinear. It’s still confusing. We’re still figuring it out. I do think that, back to music videos, we discovered our process on these short-form projects and discovered that we enjoy biting off something ambitious that we would have to keep trying to polish straight up until the final day. That the story wasn’t going to work until the effects were done was a fun way to make a story. I feel like that gave us the courage to write scripts, because we never look at our scripts as a final product at all.

Daniel Kwan: Great advice for a screenwriting podcast.

Craig: Nobody buys screenplays. It’s true.

John: It’s true.

Craig: They’re meant to be transformed.

Daniel Scheinert: They’re meant to be a blueprint to this other thing. That was a really freeing thought, I think, for both of us, because it meant we didn’t have to fight tooth and nail about exactly what the lines were, because we were like, “That’s just the line for now.” It gave us, I think, the courage to just write in a very iterative way, that wasn’t super OCD about the details. We did a ton of outlining, wrote a draft, went back and re-outlined it, drastically wrote a draft.

Daniel Kwan: We should send you guys… My whiteboard has an outline.

Craig: Please.

Daniel Kwan: It’s got 30 timelines across the thing.

Craig: Oh my god.

Daniel Kwan: It’s tracking everything. It’s a mess.

Craig: I would love that.

Daniel Kwan: It’s hilarious. I think that gets back to, process-wise, not only are we looking for innovation on a moment-to-moment and idea-to-idea level, but structurally I think that’s where we find the most inspiration, and that’s how we organize all of it.

With Swiss Army Man, structurally what we wanted to do is we wanted to ask, “What if we started this movie with just the worst idea ever, a man who is farting so much that he’s able to be used as a jet-ski but it’s cathartic and beautiful? What if we started with that image and we still found a way to justify this film’s existence?” It felt like a very interesting challenge to us. The classic line that Paul Dano used to use at all the Q and As was, “It was a film that started with a fart that made you laugh and ended with a fart that made you cry.” It’s a semiotic experiment. It’s very academic. Structurally, that was what we were going for, and everything else was trying to be thrown into that bucket.

With Everything Everywhere, we asked ourselves, “Okay, what if we could create a multiverse movie that went to too many multiverses? What if we took the hero’s journey and deconstructed it beyond anything recognizable, where you had way too many stories, way too many wants, way too many needs?”

Originally, we wanted the whole film to fully collapse. Basically, we wanted the main character and the audience to not care anymore, to actually believe in nihilism, like, “Nothing matters. This story doesn’t matter.” Then we were like, “Okay, but what if structurally we got there, but then we still found a way to pull everything back together and make it make sense?”

When we came up with that structure, we were like, “Holy shit, this is amazing, because this reflects the lived experience right now that everyone… ” Twitter and social media and the constant news cycle that we were experiencing. We started writing this in 2016. Everyone knows what was happening then. This film was very much… That structure was like a reflection of that moment.

To us, we’re like, “Okay, great, we have a lot little, fun, innovative ideas, but we have this very big, structural, big swing that we’re excited to use as a blueprint for us to drop those ideas into.” That structure has stayed the same. I don’t know how many drafts we did, but many, many, many drafts. That structure was always the goal throughout, even though entire characters got thrown away, scenes got rewritten. Everything changed except for that structure. I think that’s something that maybe some people miss in the innovation conversation when talking about this script in particular.

John: We’re looking at a script that you guys sent through. It’s not quite clear what the script is that we’re looking at, because it has side-by-side the Chinese dialog for characters, it has some ADR stuff and other things thrown in. What was the script that you first went out to actors with? What was the first script that you had that’s like, “Okay, this represents our intention of the thing to make.” How long was that script? The script we’re looking at is about 125 pages. It has the end at Page 83. Then it restarts at 86. All At Once begins 124. Was the script you were going out to actors with similar to the script we’re looking at?

Daniel Scheinert: It was relatively similar, yeah. It was an interesting thing when the movie was done and we were like, “What script do we release?” I always think it’s funny when you get these award [inaudible 00:22:30] with a screenplay, and you’re like, “I think they hired a kid to transcribe the finished film.”

Craig: Exactly. It’s usually not a kid, but that is exactly correct.

John: We know a guy who does that.

Craig: In fact, we know somebody who has done that quite a few times.

Daniel Scheinert: We didn’t want to do that. We kept in stuff that got cut out. We wanted to keep in the stuff that changed, like when we did pickup shoots and ADR and stuff. That cracked the movie open. That was part of the writing process. It’s like, “That is screenwriting we did, so I guess we’ll put that in there.” It’s a mix of things.

I was just going to summarize that first we went out to Michelle years and years ago. We met with her right before Crazy Rich Asians came out, which I think was 2018 or something. That was pretty different script. I don’t think that character had a grandpa in it.

Craig: You mean you were Hongless at that time?

Daniel Kwan: Yeah, we were Hongless. [Crosstalk 00:23:25].

Craig: I have a huge problem with that, because James Hong is the greatest actor of all time.

Daniel Kwan: Agreed.

Daniel Scheinert: I think in that one, it wasn’t a Chinese New Year’s party. It was a wedding. Joy, the daughter, was getting married to her partner and hadn’t invited her mom. To Dan’s point, it had the same structure, like about a family, it goes to too many universes, come back, they hug at the end. Then we refined it. Michelle helped us refine it. Going out to different actors… We’d sometimes talk to actors and go home and be like, “Oh, that conversation totally helped you crack why the wedding’s a bad idea,” for example.

Daniel Kwan: The one thing I’ll add is it changed a lot, it changed a lot, it changed a lot, but the most important thing we learned on Swiss Army Man was making sure that the script was good enough before we shot, because we were rewriting as we were shooting, and it was miserable. What we ended up doing with this script is… Even though it was constantly changing up until the shoot day, by the time we were shooting, it mostly remained blocked. It was pretty close to the final thing. The script that you guys got is pretty close to our shooting script. The only difference is we added some ADR and stuff like that. Otherwise, the structure of it, the order of it, what you guys are seeing is basically what our crew saw when we started shooting, which I’m very proud of. It was very important to us.

Craig: I don’t know how you could’ve… I’m thinking about your poor first AD. Literally, I was thinking about your poor first AD while we were watching the movie. I’m in Calgary, watching it in this lovely little theater, and my mind is blown, but at some point, I think it was maybe one of the first super-montages, where we see Michelle Yeoh a thousand different times in a thousand different places, where I was just like, “Is the first AD okay? Did they take care of him?” because the thought of doing that movie without a locked, I mean locked script gives me hives just thinking about it.

Daniel Kwan: I think we knew that, and then we also got lucky, and Rod, our first AD, was also very good at his job and very zen about it.

Craig: You would need to be, I would imagine.

Daniel Kwan: He was just like, “We got this, guys.” Sometimes I’m like a part-time AD when we’re shooting. I worry about that a lot. I’m teaming up with whoever it is, to just be like, “What was the schedule today? What do we have to get? What are the priorities? If we get behind, what are we going to cut out? Does it matter? If we have time, what’s the fun stuff we’re going to sneak in there?” trying to manage expectations.

Craig: How many days did you guys shoot?

Daniel Kwan: It was 8 weeks, 38 days.

Craig: Wow.

Daniel Kwan: Then we had several days of pickup shoots and stuff during COVID, but they were small.

Craig: If by several you don’t mean 14,000, I am amazed. It’s really amazing how much you did in the time you had. Question for you. You’re making this movie. From your point of view, I hope you felt that you had covered all these brilliant bases. You had written this really interesting story full of very specific… We always go on about specificity. I can’t think of more specific writers than the two of you. It’s not just hot dog fingers. There’s cheese inside of the hot dog fingers.

Daniel Scheinert: Oh, cheese.

Craig: Every single thing has been thought through. I hope it was cheese. Maybe it was something else. Was it mayonnaise?

Daniel Kwan: Mustard.

Daniel Scheinert: Mustard.

Craig: Oh, it was mustard. I thought it was cheese.

Daniel Scheinert: That says a lot about you, actually.

Daniel Kwan: It’s whatever you want it to be.

Craig: It had that American cheese color. Fair enough. Mustard. See, even specific enough that it was mustard. You also had these incredible costumes. Stephanie Hsu, who I became obsessed with after seeing your movie, is in like 400 costumes that are each brilliant. At any point, or perhaps at lots of points, did the two of you look at each other and say, “Either we are going to succeed fantastically or this is going to be pointed at and laughed at for all time?”

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god, you’re getting at our sweet spot.

Craig: Good.

Daniel Kwan: It’s the big swing. It’s the disastrous, ambitious… I don’t want to speak ill of other movies, but I actually love these films. It’s films like Southland Tales.

Craig: It’s funny, I was thinking of Southland Tales, because we’re big Richard Kelly fans here.

Daniel Scheinert: Totally.

Craig: I really like that movie a lot, but it’s out there. That one, people didn’t quite connect with the way that they did with your film.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly. I think I find that film so inspiring, more inspiring than most other films, because he just went for it and he put everything in it. It was trying to be political and funny. It was way too ambitious.

Craig: Weird.

Daniel Kwan: And weird. Films like that, they were our North Stars for this film. We were like, “We want to do what they did, but can we stick the landing? Can we stick the landing in a way in which our mothers might actually appreciate the film?”

Daniel Scheinert: A lot of times, we’ll pick something bonkers and something really broad as our two North Stars and be like, “Oh, can we land somewhere in the middle?” It was It’s A Wonderful Life and Southland Tales. Those are very different movies, but it’s fun to bounce between them.

Craig: Incredible. That’s a fun way to walk into a pitch at A24 and say, “Southland Tales.” They’re like, “Goodbye.” That’s awesome. The bravery is really just something else. When you say stuck the landing, it’s a wonderful phrase, because I do feel like the way I feel when I watch Olympians do really complicated things. If they don’t stick the landing, they’re probably just going to break their neck and die. I feel like you guys are so brave, braver than I am. That’s for sure. You’re just like, “Here we go. Might not live.” Amazing.

Daniel Scheinert: We also have a bag of tricks we’ve collected over the years that make it not as scary for us as it would be for other filmmakers.

Craig: Tell us about those.

Daniel Scheinert: You mentioned Interesting Ball. That was an experimental film that we made for almost no money. Part of the experiment with that one was the script was five short films that we thought would be fun to intercut. We didn’t actually know what would cut to where or how it would work. Even on the day, some of them were too ambitious, and we only shot some of the script. There was a whole sequence with these broformers where a bunch of dudes hug and turn into a big mech warrior made of dudes. That’s a hard thing to photograph. We ended up shooting only pieces of the script and being like, “I don’t know, let’s see if it works in the edit.” That one, we spent a long time in the edit. It was very hard finding this flow. It was wild to see just how much you can fix in the edit. It was part of the experiment of that short film.

We held onto that while making this. In this case, we designed how it would cut. It was in the script, so that we wouldn’t overshoot it or have to figure it out on the day. We did know in the back of our heads, we’re pretty good at montage, we’re pretty good at finding music to guide an audience through a scene that isn’t good. We’ve fixed our movies in the past a lot. We had some crutches that made a scary screenplay not as scary for us as it was for the producers.

John: It sounds like you guys have a good faith in Future Daniels. Writer Daniels have good faith in Director Daniels, and Director Daniels have good faith in Editor Daniels. You’re going to do your very best at that moment to give Future Daniels what they can use. You know that in the future you guys are going to be able to solve some of these problems and you’re not catastrophizing things on the day. If you can’t get that shot, if your shot list doesn’t get completed, it’ll work out. You’ll find a way through it.

Daniel Kwan: That’s such a wonderful way to put it. You’re collaborating with past, present, and future versions of yourselves. I think that that trust comes from the fact that we’ve gone through the process so many times in a very quick amount of time. I recently calculated. I think we’ve done about a dozen commercials, a dozen music videos, maybe close to a dozen short films, seven or eight TV episodes, and then of course we’ve done three features between the two of us.

Because we were able to do that so quickly, we really quickly understood what our strengths were within each other’s sections, the pre-production, the production, and the editing, in a way that… Even in the writing process, we always say that we want to start writing a movie that we have to grow up and mature to become the directors who can direct that movie. Right now we’re working on another film that is way too big, way too ambitious. We are not good enough directors to make that movie yet.

Craig: Yes, you are.

Daniel Kwan: That’s what you think.

Craig: Do it. Do it.

Daniel Kwan: That’s the fun of it.

Daniel Scheinert: It’s aspirational. We’re like, “Oh, I’m excited to become the guy that can do that.”

Daniel Kwan: Who can do that one day.

Craig: The reach is part of the process for you guys.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly. Also, the other thing that we have in our back pocket is, if something doesn’t work, we can just turn it into a joke. It’s such a cheap trick. Within the context of our films, so much stuff doesn’t work at first. We have all these different ways to repurpose it or recycle it, or worst-case scenario, we just cut it out, because like what you said, Craig, we have so many ideas that if something doesn’t work, we’ll be like, “There’s plenty of other things, so get rid of it.” The first cut is this crazy monster of a film that has all these appendages that are wonderful and beautiful but so bloated and so confusing. Our process has always been throw everything at the wall. We don’t know if it’s going to work, but at least some of them will work. Some of them will work really beautifully, and that’s enough for us for now.

Daniel Scheinert: With this movie, more than ever before, like Dan said, we really wanted to like the script and have something locked before we shoot. Some of that was being better writers, and some of it was a mental exercise. You just have to tell yourself, “Turn off the writing and focus on the filmmaking.”

Swiss Army Man, Dan and I had this argument, we’ve been having it ever since, about how much of it was not a good script and how much of it was just bad process on our part. We just shouldn’t have been rewriting it as frantically as we did. It wasn’t good. Shot listing might have been a smarter move with our time. This time, in addition to liking it, the scriptwriting process was so helpful in helping us figure out the priorities. The format of a screenplay forces you to essentialize. You can’t describe every costume, or else it becomes a 200-page script. We were constantly having to make hard decisions to get the page count down. It helped us know what really mattered. It was like, “We have all these gags, like with Raccacoonie, but they’re not essential to the story,” and so we’d cut them out.

Craig: Oh, Raccacoonie. It is essential to the story.

Daniel Scheinert: We’d remember them and be like-

Craig: Raccacoonie.

Daniel Scheinert: Stuff would rise back in.

Craig: God.

Daniel Scheinert: It’s essential to us. We knew these details were why we wanted to make the movie. The screenwriting process really was about killing darlings a lot of times. It was about like, “No, we have to focus on the family. We can’t get too enamored with what Jobu’s costumes are going to be. We’ll figure that out later. For now what matters is where’s our character at.”

Craig: Tupaki. The discipline that you guys applied to what seems like an absolute chaotic wellspring of ideas is why the movie works. You just mentioned Raccacoonie, and that brings up a question that I wanted to ask you guys. My grandparents were immigrants, and they lived with us. I grew up in a house where Raccacoonie type mistakes would happen all the time. I’m just interested in… The movie is so much about existentialism and what it means to survive and love in the face of what I think is true, which is none of this means anything, but at the same time, so much of the movie’s built around the immigrant experience, in a very honest way, a very eyes-open way. I’m curious how you came about smashing these two pretty disparate themes together in such a gorgeous little blend.

Daniel Kwan: A lot of it, I like to say that me and Scheinert are very naïve writers. We do things that we don’t have a plan for sometimes, or we don’t overthink it, because we’re drawn to it. We’re like, “We’re drawn to it. Let’s put it together. Let’s see what happens.” Oftentimes, what happens is some of the things don’t work. As you live with a script, that gets thrown out.

With the immigrant experience and the multiverse, as we were working on it, we realized, oh, these two things are actually a fascinating pairing, because both the immigrant story and the multiverse are talking about multiple worlds. Our parents and our grandparents, they live in-

Craig: Interesting.

Daniel Kwan: … different existence, very different point of views. This is what the multiverse is actually in real life. It’s just having a completely different outlook on life and that collision of those things. All this intergenerational immigrant narrative stuff is about the collision of the past, the future, and everything in between, as far as traditions and whatever goes.

Then also, a lot of the multiverse and the immigrant story is a questioning of life paths and decisions and asking yourself what if. When I talk to my mother about her past, a lot of it is like, “What if this happened? What if that happens?” The only reason why she came to America is because her family got the money together to send her there, as almost like a backup plan. They’re like, “Okay, if the family business in Taiwan doesn’t work out, you’re going to go to America. You’re going to get educated.” She was almost like the test subject. Then when the family company went under in Taiwan, her whole family moved over to Pennsylvania with her.

The whole immigrant experience is about this ever-branching list of possible life paths that you could’ve taken. It’s things like that that I love, where the pairings don’t necessarily make sense or the contradictions of what you’re trying to put together don’t make sense, but the longer you live with them, things get revealed.

I like to think of all of our scripts as these filters that we carry around with us, these fishnets. As we’re walking around through life, it’s going to catch real moments and real ideas. True emotions are going to be caught in that net. You won’t know what you catch unless you live with it. I think that’s one reason why our scripts take so long is because we want to live with them, and we want to see what we watch. People who are able to write a script in seven days I am so jealous of. Also, I feel like I wouldn’t be able to catch the things that I want to catch with it, because seven days isn’t a long enough time to live with something.

Craig: That’s a beautiful answer. Thank you.

John: Daniel, what you’re describing is a phenomenon I always felt when I’ve been working on features, but especially in the times I’ve been working on TV. I was working on a show that was supposed to be a 22-episode season. The workload was so great that I felt like my life became just about grabbing things in the air and saying, “Is this part of the show? Is this part of the show?” I was the net. I would catch anything that could possibly wrangle them into the show. We heard a song, it was like, “Oh, how does it fit into this thing?”

Daniel Kwan: Totally.

John: You make a very good point, that I don’t know that that’s healthy or a great way to make great art, because your whole existence just becomes transferred into being the person who channels reality into the show. I felt like I was living for the show rather than living my actual life, which is so frightening.

Daniel Scheinert: I feel like the worse thing is the opposite, if you’re working on art that has nothing in common with your life, and so it just becomes a reflection of maybe something you read once or you’re just mimicking a movie you made sometime, but if it can intersect with your life, then ideally it can be a really good therapeutic project, to be like, “Oh, I’m going to work through some real things. This is going to come from an honest place,” as long as you’re not a workaholic, you don’t go crazy.

Craig: These guys are healthier than we are. Don’t you feel like they’re the healthiest versions of us? They seem so put together.

Daniel Scheinert: I was just thinking what inspired this movie. You bringing up Raccacoonie made me think about our producer John’s dad. The movie’s dedicated to him, Alexander Wang. He loved movies but could never remember the names of them. Originally, it was just a joke about how Mr. Wang always got movies wrong. Also, Mr. Wang passed away right after Swiss Army Man came out. I think this movie was inspired a bit by his funeral. It was also inspired by Dan’s wedding and also inspired by Dan becoming a father and also inspired by Dan going into therapy and all these huge life events. You can trace back pieces of this movie, and it’s like, “Oh yeah, that a hundred percent affected the journey of the Wang family in the movie,” each of these real-life journeys we’re going on.

Craig: Amazing. I could talk to you guys all day. Let’s kidnap them.

Daniel Scheinert: Let’s do a four-hour podcast.

Craig: Everyone loves a four-hour podcast.

John: Daniel Kwan, I want to make sure to circle back to you, because early on in the conversation you said you wanted to talk about the experience of being Asian and working in the film industry. Is there anything more that you wanted to get into about that, or is the immigrant stuff more what you wanted to talk about?

Daniel Kwan: This is such a funny, unromantic way to look at our relationship, me and Daniel, and why I think we’ve been resilient through the fact… The industry’s constantly changing. The past 10 years, every few years, something has really shifted. Yet somehow we’ve managed to make a path through it all despite the fact that so many of our very talented friends and whatever have been having a harder time, if we’re being honest. The independent film landscape is just not a fun place right now. It never has been, but right now it’s definitely feeling… Especially now that even streaming is being turned over again. The whole thing is precarious.

They talk about in genetics, oftentimes when you take two people with very different backgrounds, it actually creates better genes. You become more resilient, because you’re actually knocking out things that… That’s why pugs look the way… They’re all inbred.

Craig: It’s why my children can drink milk. I can’t.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly. Oh my god, that’s so funny.

Daniel Scheinert: Wow.

Daniel Kwan: It’s a long-winded metaphor for the fact that when we first started, I didn’t think I was going to become a director, because I was an Asian dude. I was very quiet, very reserved. I wanted to go into animation, because I thought, “Okay, I can still create things, but I don’t need to be the leader or whatever. I can make things on my own.” Scheinert was a very confident white man who had been directing things since he was like 12. He came in, saw something in-

Daniel Scheinert: I was the kind of kid who was like, “Yeah, I could see myself going to film school. I could see myself becoming a director. Those dudes look like me.”

Craig: Wow.

Daniel Scheinert: It didn’t require much imagination.

Craig: That’s awesome.

Daniel Kwan: I also think having him interfacing with the record labels and interfacing with the bands or whatever in a way that I was not ready for, I did not have the confidence for early on, all those things made it so that we… I could sneak in on his back. It’s genetic hitchhiking a little bit, where I was able to navigate this world and learn. In some ways, our duoship and his whiteness was my training wheels. I learned so much from that process.

Then suddenly, #OscarsSoWhite happened, and the whole paradigm shifted, and everything changed. I remember distinctly the moment when we started getting scripts, and they weren’t necessarily for Scheinert, they were for me, if that makes sense. People started sending us projects that were very specifically Chinese. We were being invited to events because I was Chinese. Suddenly, the whole thing switched. Suddenly, he was on my back.

We talked very frankly about this, because again, it’s very unromantic. I feel very grateful that he found me when I did, and I was able to be ready for this moment. The fact that our relationship has been going on for 12, 13 years now, and we’ve been able to make the things that we do is in part because there’s two of us. We have very different backgrounds. Honestly, our belief systems were very different. Our upbringings were very different. Our inspirations were very different. We have very different ways of looking at the world. I think that makes us more resilient, both in just the race of it all, the race conversation of it all, but also just in the types of things that we make.

Daniel Scheinert: Hopefully, 10 years from now, as the world shifts, we still have something to offer, but who knows what that’ll be. Hopefully, we find something that we-

Craig: When the world shifts to white supremacy in the next couple years, it’ll be great.

Daniel Scheinert: Oh, sick.

Craig: You’ll be back again. Don’t worry, Scheinert. It’ll be your time in the sun soon.

Daniel Scheinert: They’ll trust what I look like, and then I’ll sneak in and I’ll rip it apart from the inside.

Craig: Not to overextend the analogy, but John and I are also very different people from different backgrounds, different walks of life, different all this stuff. It is the vive la différence. It is something that makes it work. I don’t listen to podcasts, but I have noticed that a lot of them seem like they are hosted by four clones.

Daniel Kwan: Totally. I know exactly what you’re talking about.

Craig: Differenceness is good.

John: I’m the Whoopi Goldberg. He’s the Joy Behar. It’s what makes The View The View.

Daniel Kwan: That’s amazing.

Craig: That’s exactly what I was thinking.

John: It’s time for our One Cool Things.

Craig: Fantastic.

John: I’m going to start with mine.

Craig: Great.

John: First, it’s a plus one on Craig’s previous recommendation of The Past Within, which is a very cool video game. Two people play separately but together in ways that… I was not expecting it to be so smart about how it works together. Recommendation on The Past Within, the Rusty Lake game. I have two movies to recommend. The first is The Territory, which is a documentary by Alex Fritz about-

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god. Sorry. We just met Alex last night at an event, at the Gotham Awards. He was incredible.

John: I bet he’s incredibly sweet.

Daniel Kwan: He is.

John: So smart.

Daniel Kwan: He might be listening right now.

Craig: I hate him.

John: [Crosstalk 00:46:36].

Craig: No, I don’t.

Daniel Kwan: Different walks of life.

John: Alex Pritz. I said Fritz. It’s Pritz. Such a smartly done movie. It’s about indigenous peoples in Brazil fighting to save their territory, their land from encroachment. So smartly done. You can imagine the bad, eat your vegetables version of this movie a thousand different ways. It managed to navigate through all that. It’s so smartly done. You can find that on Disney Plus. Check it out, The Territory. Second is My Year of Dicks, which is written and produced by our own Pamela Ribon.

Craig: Pam Ribon.

John: Directed by Sara Gunnarsdóttir. So smart. It’s up for an Academy Award, Best short. People should watch it. It’s really, really cleverly done. Based on Pamela’s book about her teenage years and trying to lose her virginity. So great. If you like Pen15, you will definitely love this animated short. It uses animation in such a smart way to be able to show you what otherwise you could not see.

Daniel Kwan: Wow.

John: I really recommend My Year of Dicks.

Daniel Kwan: A great title too.

Craig: Best title ever.

Daniel Kwan: Incredible.

John: You guys will love My Year of Dicks. [Crosstalk 00:47:39].

Craig: “You guys will love My Year of Dicks.”

Daniel Scheinert: It’s a great sentence.

Craig: It is. Continuing the theme sort of, at least etymologically, my One Cool Thing is spatchcocking. If you’re not familiar with spatchcocking, to spatchcock a turkey, you remove the backbone, then you flip it over, and then you push down, and you flatten the whole turkey out. Now, removing the backbone of a turkey, as it turns out, is incredibly hard to do unless you have-

John: It’s brutal.

Craig: … special poultry shears, which I did not have. For about 30 minutes, I was just in this war with a dead animal, almost lost, but finally won. The whole point of spatchcocking is if you keep the turkey on one flat level and put it in the oven, it will cook together at the same time. It will all cook at the same temperature. It will cook way faster. A 15-pound turkey took 1 hour and 10 minutes to cook.

Daniel Kwan: Wow.

Craig: It was perfect.

Daniel Scheinert: Wow.

Craig: If you do like cooking and you are responsible for the turkey in your family, strongly recommend. If you have a butcher that you bring the turkey to, they will often just say, “Yes, yes, we will spatchcock it for you using our spatchcockers.”

Daniel Scheinert: It sounds disgusting. When you said spatchcocking-

Craig: Of course.

Daniel Scheinert: … the last thing I thought was that I was going to want to eat whatever you were about to describe.

Craig: Spatchcocking sounds like something you would need to do to jump to a different timeline. I’m hoping that somehow, at some point, you guys do at least include a little bit of spatchcocking. I feel like if somebody asks a typical filmmaker, “Hey, can you include something in your next film?” they’re like, “No,” but you guys…

Daniel Kwan: I like a challenge.

Craig: What’s one more thing?

Daniel Kwan: Exactly.

Craig: What’s one more thing? Get the spatchcocking in. That’s all I’m asking.

John: Craig, last year we did spatchcock the turkey and, like you, had the same experience. It was so hard to remove that thing.

Craig: So hard.

John: Then it ended up working out much better. This year, we decided the only way to win the game is not to play, and so we did duck confit, duck legs instead of turkey.

Daniel Kwan: Whoa.

John: So much better.

Craig: Honestly, one of my favorite things in the world is a little duck confit. It is so delicious.

Daniel Kwan: Fancy. We did something similar, except for we went really far away from the tradition. We ended up doing a Chinese hotpot. It was amazing.

Craig: That does sound pretty good.

Daniel Kwan: Also, honestly, there’s very little prep too, so you’re not spending the whole day cooking. Usually, we’re on our feet, trying to get the turkey ready with the mashed potatoes, everything. It’s literally a nightmare, but some people love it.

Craig: Everybody’s basically chasing the French in Western cooking. The French just made cooking the most arduous possible thing. You’re just like, “There’s 4,000 steps.”

Daniel Scheinert: I know.

Craig: It’s the same ambition that you guys have for making films, I have that for cooking. I’m like, “Give me the recipe that no one else will want to do.”

Daniel Kwan: That’s great.

Craig: Hotpot’s just fun.

Daniel Kwan: Literally, give me some materials. I’ll dip it in the water myself. It’s the laziest. I love it. My One Cool Thing-

John: One Cool thing, Daniel Kwan.

Daniel Kwan: There’s this podcast that I’ve been obsessed with for the past couple years called Your Undivided Attention. I don’t know if you guys are familiar with-

Craig: You know I’m not.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly.

Daniel Scheinert: Two clones.

Daniel Kwan: Two clones talking to each other.

Daniel Scheinert: Two clones named Aza and Tristan.

Daniel Kwan: It’s Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin. They’re both ex-Silicon Valley people who were very much at the forefront of Twitter and Facebook and all those things. They realized their invention was slowly destroying our ability to communicate with each other, social media. One of them even is the guy who invented the infinite scroll. Now he’s trying to figure out what to… They have a very beautiful, clear-eyed vision of what’s wrong with social media and also what they think are some solutions to it. They bring in all these incredible guests who are thinking about the world in a completely different way, because there’s the social media level of animal conversation. It’s all about that limbic system, what makes you angry, what makes you sad, what will keep you engaged.

I think so much of the discourse about how to save the world exists in this plane of animal fury. I think this podcast tries to rise above it and think about things very much from a system standpoint, an incentive standpoint, instead of just from emotions. To me, it’s been really healing, and I’ve been learning so much. Go listen to Your Undivided Attention. I’ll say a couple of episodes. Audrey Tang is an amazing person you should listen to, Daniel Schmactenberger, Jessie Wheal. I won’t tell you what they’re talking about. These are people that I’m-

Daniel Scheinert: Isn’t it Jamie Wheal?

Daniel Kwan: I’m sorry. Jamie Wheal, yeah. I went a little too fast. A big fan of Jamie.

Daniel Scheinert: That way they can Google it.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly. If you’re someone who thinks about everything that’s wrong with the world and how we can fix it and you feel lost, for me it’s been a really good starting point for me to at least feel empowered in a world that does not want to empower us.

Craig: What about you, Scheinert?

John: Nice.

Daniel Scheinert: A bunch of my friends pitched in to buy my friend a stripper pole, because she’s been taking these pole dancing classes. It’s gotten her in touch with her body, her sexuality. It’s exercise. When we gave it to her, she taught me some of the moves. I had so much fun.

Craig: Really?

Daniel Scheinert: I’m on the hunt for some good heels. She’s going to teach me some more pole dancing.

Craig: Oh my word.

Daniel Scheinert: I just can’t wait to dress up in drag and do some more pole dancing with my friend. Just for anyone out there, just try cross-dressing. Try pole dancing. Just get in touch with another side of yourself. You can just go in the privacy of the garage. Also related is watching pole dancing. There’s a reason that’s the most popular thing at a strip club. There’s a way to do it respectfully, guys. You go and you pay well to watch someone who’s an incredible athlete. I’ve been going to one with some friends in L.A. and having a blast at Jumbo’s.

Craig: Can we ask where you go?

Daniel Scheinert: Yeah, Jumbo’s Clown Room.

Craig: Jumbo’s Clown Room, the best name for a strip club ever.

Daniel Scheinert: You’ve gotta tip well. If you go and you don’t tip, you’re a loser.

Craig: Yeah, don’t do the stupid $1 bills dumb thing.

Daniel Scheinert: Yeah, or just try it in your friend’s garage. Big cosign on the pole dancing.

Craig: You do look like you’re in excellent shape. If I tried pole dancing, I’m just sure that I would end up in the ER. I would end up in the ER with a wig on.

Daniel Kwan: That sounds great.

Daniel Scheinert: Step one is real easy. You just put your hand on the pole, and you just really slowly, confidently walk around the pole. That’s it. You just gotta work on your strut. Anyone can strut.

Craig: This is the problem is my confidence level. You know what? Something to discuss with my therapist. That’s awesome. Those were great One Cool Things. Those were Two Cool Things. Thank you for that. Incredible.

John: We like it.

Craig: Thank you, Daniels.

John: Daniels, thank you so much for being on the show.

Daniel Scheinert: Thank you for having us.

Craig: Oh my god, it was a joy.

Daniel Scheinert: It’s our pleasure. Thank you for helping us write our script. We listened. We took notes. It was helpful.

Daniel Kwan: We ignored half the advice, but it’s so-

Craig: Thank you.

John: That’s the crucial thing.

Craig: That’s almost as important. What to disagree with is very important.

Daniel Scheinert: Totally.

John: Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao.

Craig: Woo!

John: It’s edited by Matthew Chilelli.

Craig: Indeed.

John: Our outro this week is by Matthew Jordan. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. We’re actually running a little short on outros, so we need some more outros there, folks. You can send your longer questions to ask@johnaugust.com. Craig’s no longer on Twitter. I still am there @johnaugust for the time being. How do we reach you guys on the social medias? Are you guys there at all?

Daniel Kwan: Instagram’s good for me. Instagram, it’s @dunkwun, Dun Kwun.

John: Dun Kwun.

Daniel Kwan: Dun Kwun.

Craig: Dun Kwun.

Daniel Scheinert: My Instagram’s private, just for my friends. I’m sorry if you want to keep track of my life. Social media makes me super anxious.

Craig: I feel that.

Daniel Scheinert: Go check out our movie. I’m so proud of it.

John: You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find links to transcripts and our weeklyish 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 music videos and other things that people pay you to shoot. Daniels, thank you so much for a great show.

Craig: Thank you, Daniels.

Daniel Kwan: Thank you.

John: Congratulations on your film.

Daniel Scheinert: Pleasure.

[Bonus Segment]

John: Daniels, so in the bulk of the episode, you were talking about writing for music videos. Can you talk to us about what you were actually writing? As you were proposing to do a music video, what does that look like? What are you turning in as a document? I’ve seen some proposals, but I don’t think our listeners have ever encountered that as a written form. What are you writing up if you’re trying to get a music video?

Daniel Kwan: Normally, it starts off, and a record label or a commissioner or sometimes an artist will reach out direct, and they will send the brief over. They’ll say when they need to shoot it, when it needs to be done by, what the budget is, and a rough idea of what the band wants. Usually, it’s not enough money, not enough time, and the ideas are super vague. That’s where it starts off. Usually, the prompt is like, “Okay, the artists don’t want to play music, but they also don’t want to act, but they also want to be in it, but also they want it to look cool. Make cool stuff happen around them.” It’s the most frustrating thing to get sometimes.

Craig: Sounds easy.

Daniel Kwan: Also, it’s like, “We need a treatment in two days.”

Daniel Scheinert: Or sometimes it’ll be like, “Drake’s really into Hawaiian shirts lately. $100,000.” I’m like, “Okay, let’s run with that. Let’s see what we can come up with.”

Craig: That’s an interesting exercise.

Daniel Scheinert: It is.

Craig: Narrows down the paths.

Daniel Kwan: It was film school for us. You talk about how we have so many ideas in our movies. It’s because we were forced by this industry to pump out fully formed ideas within a day or two. They’d be like, “We need a treatment in two days. Come up with a whole idea. Pitch us… ” Usually, they want a treatment, which has reference images, execution ideas, and a rough idea of what the concept is going to do.

Daniel Scheinert: Can I talk about the Maroon 5 renaissance?

Craig: Yeah.

Daniel Kwan: Great. Do it. Do it.

Daniel Scheinert: Right when we were starting out in music videos, our first thing we pitched for money got green-lit, turned in, and turned out well, which is a miracle. It turns out we thought, “Wow, music videos are easy.” Then we proceed to get rejected for eight or nine months straight. To his credit, Paul Hunter, who runs the company that had signed us, was like, “Hey, Maroon 5 wants me to do a music video. Do you guys want to help me come up with an idea? You could maybe ghost direct some of it and get paid, because I know you guys are getting rejected all the time.”

Craig: Starving, yeah.

Daniel Kwan: Exactly.

Daniel Scheinert: Then we listened to the song. It was bad. We’d try to come up with ideas. We could not stop coming up with joke ideas that were just making fun of Adam Levine.

Craig: Oh my god. Oh my god.

Daniel Scheinert: We would laugh our asses off at these things, being like, “There’s no way we could do that, but it sure is funny.” We were really struggling to come up with something that we actually thought would be good. A lot of those ideas that we did not pitch to them, that started as just us making fun of the band and the song, became ideas that stuck in the back of our brains, that we loved, that we actually ended up making. Over the next 10 years, we’d be like, “Oh my god, we’re doing one of the Maroon 5 videos again,” because there was one where their music’s so good it gets women pregnant, and we ended up making that.

Daniel Kwan: For Chromeo.

Daniel Scheinert: There was one where their music’s so good the floor falls apart and they fall down into a bar mitzvah, and then the floor falls apart, and they fall down into a rave. That turned into Turn Down For what.

Craig: I love that that’s the weird [inaudible 01:00:04] wellspring of all Daniels work is just that three-week period where you guys were just destroying Maroon 5 in your minds.

Daniel Scheinert: You never know if this is productive or not. We were laughing. Our favorite one that I’ll pitch, that way the people who came for this 20 minutes feel really rewarded-

Craig: Oh, good.

Daniel Scheinert: We sort of made this. The idea was that there was a huge crowd. They’re all chanting, “Maroon 5. Maroon 5.” Then a stagehand comes out and says, “Hey guys, I’m so sorry, this show’s canceled. There’s been an accident. I’m so sorry. They’re dead. Their bus went off the road.” The fans are starting to cry. The stagehand’s like, “I’m sorry, what? Oh, wait. Oh, I’m sorry, apparently I’m wrong. Here they are, Maroon 1!” Then smoke starts to pour out. This weird Weta [ph] puppet comes out in smoke, and it’s all five of them smushed into one weird, mangled creature. Then out of a crevice comes Adam Levine’s face. Then Maroon 1 becomes more famous than Maroon 5 ever was. They rocket off to superstardom and stuff.

Craig: They should’ve done that.

Daniel Kwan: The bridge is they are so successful that every other band wants to recreate their magic.

Craig: Oh my god.

Daniel Kwan: Metallica gets in a car crash.

Daniel Scheinert: They start wrecking their tour buses.

Daniel Kwan: Sum 41 gets in a car crash. Everyone’s just trying to… Whatever. They’re all dying.

Craig: Oh my god.

Daniel Kwan: Also, I think it ends with Adam Levine opening up his shirt, and he has six nipples, and he starts breastfeeding [inaudible 01:01:41].

Daniel Scheinert: I think that was a different idea.

Daniel Kwan: That was a different idea.

Daniel Scheinert: I think that was a different one.

Daniel Kwan: We still haven’t made that video yet.

Daniel Scheinert: One of our Foster the People videos started with the band dying and then the record label puppets their corpses.

Craig: See, it’s all there.

Daniel Scheinert: Then that led to Swiss Army Man.

Craig: See, everything comes… If people aren’t paying the $5 a month to Scriptnotes to hear this stuff, they really should start. That alone was worth $80 as far as I’m concerned. That was awesome.

Daniel Scheinert: I feel like we never actually answered your question though about what does a treatment look like.

John: What is the document? Is it a pdf you’re setting up that has all the images embedded in it, or is it a deck? What are you sending over these days?

Daniel Scheinert: A lot of directors do different things. The process we discovered was that we would collect a lot of images. Kwan was very graphic design savvy and could mock up some really lovely pdf treatments that would set the tone. For the first few years, each page would have five or six photos, and then I would end up usually writing a persuasive essay, because Kwan was a little too long-winded. The longer you talk about a music video, the harder it gets to wrap your head around it. I would write my attempt at a concise essay, and he would collect images and put it into a thing. We would always get bored try to reinvent it after a while and try to stay interested. Sometimes we resorted to gift treatments, because we found out collecting gifts was really fun and helpful. We started making much longer documents that were 10 or 12 pages and just putting 1 or 2 photos on there, because that became a nice way to break up the different ideas.

We have one friend who shoots videos of himself and edits in clips and photos because he just finds that that’s fun for him. Also, he’s a really charming British man, and so the record label will be like, “Oh, he’s so cute.” It helps him book the music video.

It’s pretty cool that as a writer, we didn’t have to follow Final Draft screenplay format. We started off with this very experimental writing process of just write whatever document you think will get you hired. Just try to be persuasive, whatever tools you have at your disposal.

Craig: It worked.

Daniel Scheinert: The bummer is you do a lot of these that just get rejected. Then you spend a lot of time writing. We never thought of it as screenwriting, but we’re basically writing spec scripts.

Craig: Yeah, and you’re practicing.

Daniel Scheinert: Constantly.

John: You’re a writer going out for an open writing assignment. It’s the same idea. They want to make this thing. Nineteen people are going in and pitching their take on this.

Daniel Kwan: Yeah, except for we’d be doing three a week. Literally, we’d get three different projects, and we’d have to pump them out.

Craig: That’s amazing. That you could do that at all is just I think really a testament to the fertility of your minds. You guys really are special. It was such a special experience watching your film. It’s been special watching your music videos. I really am just in awe of… There’s the whole quality and quantity thing. Typically, as quantity goes up, quality goes down, and somehow, you guys manage to keep those lines in lockstep. It’s amazing.

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god.

Craig: There’s more and more of it, and it’s still good. That is just so special and rare.

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god, thank you.

Craig: I tip the hat that I am not wearing to you.

Daniel Scheinert: Thank you. Sometimes we feel like we use quantity as a crutch, where we’re like, “If there’s enough ideas in there, they’ll like a few of them.”

Craig: If they’re good… When it’s suddenly like, “Oh my god, there comes [inaudible 01:05:26]. Oh my god, there comes this. Oh my god, there goes that.” It’s everything, everywhere, all at once!

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god, you did it.

Daniel Scheinert: He went for it.

Craig: It’s really good.

John: You did it. Oh my god.

Craig: I did it, and it just works. I’m really impressed.

Daniel Kwan: Oh my god, thank you.

Craig: I hate everybody. I gotta be honest with you. I just really hate everybody.

Daniel Kwan: Oh, wow.

Craig: I love John.

Daniel Scheinert: Me too. Let’s do a podcast about that.

Craig: By the way, if you want to do a podcast about hating people, girl, I’m there. We’re gonna do it, and it’s gonna be awesome. We’re gonna be canceled literally-

Daniel Kwan: Don’t tempt Scheinert.

Craig: We will be canceled in the middle of the first episode. We won’t even make it to the end of the first episode.

Daniel Scheinert: Let’s go back and forth. Who do you hate? Who do I hate?

Daniel Kwan: This is the bonus bonus.

Craig: Bonus bonus bonus.

Daniel Scheinert: Bonus bonus.

Craig: Our first episode is 14 hours long. Amazing.

John: Gentlemen, thank you so much.

Craig: Thank you guys.

Daniel Scheinert: Thank you.

John: Pleasure talking with you guys.

Craig: [Crosstalk 01:06:19].

Daniel Kwan: Really exciting to be here.

Links:

  • Daniels on Twitter, Dan Kwan on IG
  • Turn Down For What by DJ Snake and Lil Jon, Houdini by Foster the People, and The Simple Song by the Shins music videos
  • Interesting Ball short film
  • Everything, Everywhere All at Once
  • The Territory
  • Pamela Ribon’s My Year of Dicks, directed by Sara Gunnarsdóttir
  • Spatchcocking
  • Jumbo’s Clown Room
  • Your Undivided Attention podcast
  • Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
  • Check out the Inneresting Newsletter
  • Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription or treat yourself to a premium subscription!
  • Craig Mazin on Twitter
  • John August on Twitter
  • John on Instagram
  • Outro by Matthew Jordan (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 580: Finding a Way In, and Out, Transcript

February 13, 2023 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2022/telling-real-world-stories).

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

**Craig Mazin:** No, my name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** This is Episode 580 of Scriptnotes. It’s a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show, it’s a How Would This Be a Movie case study. I’ll be talking with screenwriter William Nicholson about his script for Thirteen Lives, following the attempted rescue of a Thai soccer team trapped in a cave. We’ll get into issues of life rights, competing projects, narrative point of view, cultural sensitivity, and what happens when you and the director don’t agree about what kind of movie you’re trying to make. Craig, it’s a really good conversation. I was sorry to not have you there, but sometimes the one-on-one things are better when it’s just one on one.

**Craig:** What I’m hearing is that it was a really good conversation because I wasn’t there.

**John:** It was a good conversation. Also, I saw the movie. I think I was vaguely aware of the actual real-life rescue. You remember that one when it was happening, right?

**Craig:** Of course. I remember when it was happening. I remember Elon Musk doing what he seems to do on a daily basis now, which is say something incredibly stupid, so there was that.

**John:** There was that.

**Craig:** They got the kids out, which was great.

**John:** Yeah, which is great. I knew that the kids got out. We did talk a little bit about knowing the ending of the movie. Before we sit down and watch it, you know the kids get out. The specifics were actually a lot different than I realized or than I heard reported in the moment. It was really a question of point of view. Do you talk about it from the family’s point of view, from the kids inside the cave’s point of view? At what point do you reveal the kids inside the cave are alive? How do you reflect the balance of worldwide attention versus the actual very small, local story on the ground? It was a good conversation about the choices he made but the other choices that could’ve been made.

**Craig:** Nice.

**John:** Nice. Also, in our Bonus Segment for Premium Members, I want to talk about our non-work goals and aspirations for 2023. We are canonically not a resolution show. We’re not going to promise to do a thing. I always like to think about stuff we’d like to do more of or less of.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** Let’s be thinking about that for a Bonus. We’re going to ask Megana too.

**Craig:** As long as we’re asking Megana, then we’ll be fine.

**Megana Rao:** I have to think of something.

**Craig:** Get going, Megana.

**John:** Some follow-up from last week. We had Rian Johnson on the show. We were answering a question about variable frame rates. I said that I was going to watch Avatar right after we record it, and I would be able to tell you what I thought of the variable frame rates. They mostly worked for me. The times that you go into really high frame rate stuff, it tends to be underwater. There’s a lot of underwater. The underwater stuff is amazing and beautiful in the movie. There are other moments where I did notice things were shifting, but it’s also hard to tell, because it’s a 3D movie, so everything’s a little bit weird anyway. I don’t know, if I was watching a 2D movie, I might not have had the same experience with the high frame rate stuff.

**Craig:** How are the glasses these days? Feeling good?

**John:** So much better.

**Craig:** Good.

**John:** The glasses are pretty lightweight. This is my first time wearing them with a mask as well. A little trick for people is that if your glasses start to fog up, just pull your glasses a little bit further away, further down the bridge of your nose, and they won’t fog up so much.

**Craig:** That’s a good tip, or get Lasik.

**John:** I’m talking about the 3D glasses.

**Craig:** Oh, the 3D glasses. You have to wear the 3D glasses. I guess that makes sense. It would fog up. Maybe in a movie like Avatar, the fog might add a little something.

**John:** No, the fog will not add. James Cameron does not want you to have fog on your glasses.

**Craig:** Interesting.

**John:** He will come by and he will wipe off the fog on your glasses.

**Craig:** He does seem like somebody that would more likely just smack the mask off your face.

**John:** Interestingly, he was supposed to come to the Q and A after this, and all the chairs were filled and-

**Craig:** He got COVID.

**John:** He got COVID. He got COVID 20 minutes before. [inaudible 00:03:33] positive test 20 minutes before.

**Craig:** That’s very convenient COVID to get, by the way. There have been times where I’m like, “Come on, COVID.”

**John:** Craig is scratching a little line with a little thin Sharpie there like, “Oh, sorry, can’t go.”

**Craig:** Yeah, “I don’t want to do this thing. Oh, dammit.”

**John:** I really enjoyed the story in Avatar 2. It didn’t feel like three hours. I think what impressed me most is it’d been a long time since I’d seen a 3D movie, because I just didn’t really care about 3D. This was the first 3D movie I’ve seen that didn’t make me go blind at a certain point. There’s something that happens to me in 3D movies where my brain just stops being able to process what I’m seeing. In this, it didn’t happen. I felt like I could see everything [inaudible 00:04:14].

**Craig:** That’s good. There is a diminishing return. Watching 2D stuff, you begin to forget pretty quickly that it’s just a flat thing on a screen. Your mind turns it into 3D basically. Similarly, your mind turns 3D into whatever the 2D version of 3D is. It all just in my mind turns into the same experience, unless they’re doing the tricks, like something flying at your face. Otherwise, meh.

**John:** I think Cameron obviously couldn’t do whatever he wants to do, because it’s all virtually filmed and stuff, so that he could build shots after the fact to work properly to brain in 3D, which is helpful, because so much of the 3D we see these days was really shot to be 2D and then they do it in post.

**Craig:** They do a conversion.

**John:** It’s not the same. Let’s talk to smaller screens. The big news this past couple weeks has been how many shows got chopped off of HBO Max, and things that were already shot, things that were already on the system.

**Craig:** Gulp.

**John:** Old things, they’re gone.

**Craig:** My show’s still there. Yes!

**John:** Craig, are you checking Chernobyl every moment to see whether-

**Craig:** I am not checking Chernobyl every moment, but listen, who knows? I don’t understand it. I legitimately don’t understand it. We’ve talked about this before. It seems like there was some sort of tax benefit to merging companies and then offloading some assets or something like that.

**John:** That one was an example of that, where you could take a big write-off on it and just bury it. It doesn’t seem like they’re necessarily going to bury all these things. Patrick Somerville, who came on to talk about Station Eleven, he said he doesn’t know what’s going to happen. He keeps checking to see if Station Eleven is there. He promises that he will project it on a rock in the Mojave Desert if he has to. These other shows, they’re off HBO Max for right now, but it looks like they’re going to try to put them on some sort of ad-supported system that’s maybe not HBO Max. That could be someplace else. I want to talk a little bit about that, because that’s something we haven’t really gotten into a lot on the show. Megana, I think there’s a question we could frame this with.

**Megana:** Andy from Seattle asked, “Once a show gets sold from HBO Max to a free, ad-supported streaming television service, will writers and actors start getting residuals as the property starts making active money?”

**Craig:** They sure will.

**John:** They will. They’ll get some residuals. It’ll just be a different system for it.

**Craig:** Yes, but it will be a better system. We will make more money this way.

**John:** We’ll make more money depending on how it’s set up, because I can imagine two scenarios, which we’ll just set up. First off, HBO could sell it to a place like Pluto or one of the other existing services, in which case there’d be a license fee. That might be good.

**Craig:** There’s always that. That’s the only way we make money off of residuals. HBO made Chernobyl. Let’s say they put Chernobyl on CBS. The only money HBO gets is the licensing money. The ad money goes to CBS. We don’t get any of that. We just get the licensing money that goes to HBO. That’s the gross. Then the producer’s gross is 20% of that, because we lost many, many years ago. Then we get a percentage of the 20%.

What’s interesting is right now if you make something for a streamer, there is no licensing fee ancillary market. The residuals we get are these weird, imputed things that are not necessarily connected to anything real. You and I are old enough where we wrote movies, and then those movies ended up on TBS with ads in them. We would get pretty decent residual checks from the licensing of those movies to TBS. For writers and directors and actors, this could revitalize the dwindling residuals stream. Creatively, as we’ve discussed, it’s a little disconcerting that you can make a show and it just disappears from something like that. I think it’s gotten everybody a little wigged out, and for good reason. I’m curious. Is Station Eleven available on DVD?

**John:** Station Eleven does not have DVDs right now.

**Craig:** How does he have it?

**John:** I think he’s talking about whatever cut he has off of the non-linear editor. His actual tweet was, “If Station Eleven ever disappears, I promise to purchase one acre of land somewhere in the Mojave Desert and just play it on a loop projected on a rock forever.”

**Craig:** We’re going to have to download some of these things.

**John:** I’ll check into it. It’s entirely possible that DVDs were cut for that show. So many of these HBO Max shows have no DVDs. There’s no other physical way to see it. That creative fear is huge. Circling back to the issue of residuals, Chernobyl that’s on HBO Max, you’re still getting residuals, but those residuals right now are based on a declining fee per every year that it’s on the service and based on a certain fixed price. It doesn’t have anything to do with the actual success of the show. It’s just basically from the time it was made it just declines in value after that time. Chernobyl could in theory make more money being licensed someplace else and therefore create more residuals for you.

**Craig:** It would. It would. I don’t want people to watch it with ads in it, but yeah, it would. It’s really interesting, because what’s happening, this is again financially not necessarily bad news for artists, creatively potentially bad news, is that streamers are suddenly asking the question that all of the rest of us have been asking for a long time, which is, so wait, how do you make money? I know you sell a subscription, but okay, if they’re subscribing, why do you need to make anything more, or do you need to make this much more, or how much stuff do you need to have there, because where does money come from, because in the old days, if you could convert stuff to ad-supported or home video of any format, there was your reason to make more stuff. There’d be additional revenue streams. If all it is is streaming, that’s it. You’ve basically curtailed your own revenue stream as far as I can tell.

**John:** Your revenue stream is based on the monthly subscribers and the idea that having these vast libraries was going to keep them returning as monthly subscribers.

**Craig:** Sure, but that is the only revenue stream you’ll ever have, whereas in the old days studios would have ticket sales, airplane rentals, home video, and then eventually pay TV, licensing it to HBO and Showtime, and then eventually ad-supported television on TBS. Let’s just presume everything goes to TBS if it still exists.

**John:** A thing I’m always confused about when these announcements are first coming out is… Free ad-supported streaming television, or FAST is the abbreviation you’re going to see for that, it’s the same thing as AVOD, so advertising-based video on demand. The difference is that we usually talk about AVOD for things like The Office. If The Office was showing on NBC, and so you’re watching it there, but then a few weeks later it was showing on nbc.com, that was AVOD, and so where studios would show their own things on their own websites.

What’s different now is of course there are streamers that are doing that [inaudible 00:11:18] TV. There’s existing things like Pluto. There’s probably going to be new things presumably coming out of Warner’s that are going to be a service like that. I think figuring out what the appropriate licensing fee is for HBO Max to be selling it to their own service will be an issue.

**Craig:** That kind of self-dealing has been litigated many, many times before and will continue to be litigated now that it seems to be coming back. Making sweetheart deals with yourself is tricky. You need to sell it for what would be a legally supportable market price. You can’t completely jam people. It will be interesting. I feel like the wheel is turning back in time. We’re heading backwards in time. It’s funny.

Silicon Valley was so behind the explosion of streaming, if you consider Netflix. I consider Netflix to be Silicon Valley-esque. I guess the idea of just the new way of doing things, new media we called it. Meanwhile, what were those companies in Silicon Valley doing? Selling ads on everything. Google is an advertising company. YouTube, which Google owns, is an advertising company. Facebook is an advertising company and so on and so forth. Currently, the aforementioned Elon Musk is flipping out, trying to get more people to advertise on Twitter, because it’s an advertising company. They’ve always been ad-supported, and then somehow we got hoodwinked over here into being like, “No ads. No, we don’t need that. That’s old-school stuff.” I guess if you want to make money, ads.

**John:** Ads.

**Craig:** Ads.

**John:** The answer to the question is, what’s going to happen, hopefully this will be more residuals for the writers involved, but of course, those things actually have to be distributed someplace. I think it’s potentially good news assuming that they actually are putting those things someplace and not just burying them in a hole, which is I think the worry we had originally.

**Craig:** I could be wrong, but it seems like the things that are getting buried in holes are things that had very low viewership numbers. They’re pulling Westworld off of HBO Max. That’s going to land somewhere. That is be on another platform.

**John:** That was the marquee property of HBO two or three years ago.

**Craig:** There’s no question about that. It will be figured out one way or another. I think some of the things that got completely removed were probably… They had said in some article some of the… They mentioned one show. I can’t remember what it was. I think it was animated. Something like only 400 people watched it in a year or something. It was like, okay, I guess-

**John:** There were back-episodes. They had the whole catalog of Sesame Street. There were some episodes of that show that just no one had watched in-

**Craig:** No one had watched.

**John:** Yeah, because who wants to watch a 20-year-old random episode?

**Craig:** It makes me feel good sometimes to watch Sesame Street.

**John:** Nice. Let’s get to our main centerpiece of this episode, which is the conversation I had with Bill Nicholson. This is part of a Writers Guild Foundation event. We’ve done a lot of events for the Writers Guild Foundation over the years. There’s going to be a link in the show notes to the video of this whole Zoom interview we did. William Nicholson, Bill Nicholson, is great. I’ve never had a chance to talk to him before. Credits include Everest, Unbroken, Mandela, Les Mis, Elizabeth, Gladiator, going back many, many, many years, starting out as a playwright. We really got to talk about the whole process of figuring out from someone coming to him with like, “Hey, would you want to do a movie about this cave rescue?” to all the changes and drama along the way, shooting this during the pandemic, and then shooting it for Amazon, which couldn’t release it the way they wanted to release it. A really good conversation and just a really great writer. Enjoy this. Craig and I will be back afterwards for our One Cool Things.

It is my absolute pleasure to be talking to you today, Bill, about Thirteen Lives but also I’d love to talk about screenwriting in general and your career and many other things. Where are we talking to you today from? I see it’s dark there.

**Bill Nicholson:** I’m in South England, in Sussex, in the converted garage where I do all my work in the lovely English countryside.

**John:** Fantastic. Let’s start with Thirteen Lives, because I just watched it last night. I’m really curious how you came into the project, because I remember the story as it was happening in real time. It felt like, okay, obviously there’s going to be a movie coming out of this, but what was your entrance into this as a movie?

**Bill:** Like you, I remember it from when it actually happened. I wouldn’t say I followed every deet, but obviously, I did follow it. It was very moving, and then I forgot about it. Sometime later, as is the way of these things, a producer got in touch with me and said would I be interested in writing the screenplay. I was initially a little reluctant, because I thought maybe it was an oversimple story. Guys go down in a cave, get stuck. It’s all terrible. Then they get out and it’s okay. Of course, they sent me some research. They’d had a lot of research done on it. That amazed me and I realized what a rich tale it was. It moved me in a whole different way actually. I really like writing very emotionally valid and powerful pieces, so I said yes. The simple answer is I got asked.

**John:** That’s great to be asked. I’m not surprised you were asked. If you look at your credits and look at the movies you’ve written and going back to Gladiator and Shadowlands and those things, but more recently, Everest, Unbroken, other true stories, and finding the ways to tell these historical true stories in ways that are compelling. You seem like a very great fit for it. I guess my question is, when they came to approach you to write this, how much did they have? Off and on Scriptnotes podcasts, we get these questions about like, “Oh, what rights do I need to do to tell a true story?” People will see producers jockeying for rights, locking up this person’s life rights or this person’s life rights. As they came to you, what were they coming to you with? They had some original research, but what else?

**Bill:** You’re completely right. It was a writer’s nightmare. Lots of other projects were in the mix. There was another team that had the rights to the Australian doctor, Harry Harris. We did not have the rights to the Thai kids at all. The Thai government controlled that. The key rights, which are the British divers, those were the ones that my producer had obtained. That was the core of the project. The rest we had to… You know the process. We had to use material that was in the public domain. It’s worrying when you’re [inaudible 00:18:06]. It’s worrying on all sorts of levels. It’s worrying also because I’m dealing with real people’s real lives who are still there, especially the Thai people. I think we had a superb level of research, which fed me absolutely as much as possible. I just did my best to give a fair crack to all of those individuals.

**John:** You say you had research. How much of that was coming to you in written form versus your ability to talk to these divers? What was your ability to reach out and ask specific questions, or did you have to go through levels to get there? What was your connection to these characters?

**Bill:** With the two main divers, I went and visited them and talked to them and subsequently made very good relations with them, was able to check a lot of things with them as I went along. All the rest was [inaudible 00:18:58]. This was in COVID times. A superb researcher had amassed an enormous amount of material, mostly remotely, particularly on all the Thai details. I was supplied with that when I began, because the producer had also produced the documentary, which is called The Rescue. They’d done all the research for that. I was given all of that, and I was able to ask the researcher to ask the researcher to follow up whenever I wanted. I was very well supported.

**John:** One of the fundamental decisions you have to make as a writer is how you’re going to tell the story and when you’re going to start the story and what details are going to be at what point. How early in the process of the conversations with the producers about coming on to do this did you have an approach? Did you have a take for how you were going to tell the story?

**Bill:** Not immediately, but you’re completely right. People think if you have a true story, because you take down what happened. Of course, you sort of do, because you have an obligation to the truth. My job is finding the emotional through line and also the mini emotional stories within the overall one, because nobody is going to watch just to hear another fact. They watch because of what you make them feel about the characters, what the characters want, what the characters fear, and what then happens to them. It really is a kind of crafting of real events to create emotional drama. Of course, there is emotional drama once you’ve got kids threatening with death.

You’ve really got to do a lot more than that. I looked to the material. I drew up a timeline of my own, the peaks and the troughs. I looked at that very early on, because obviously, the producers, when they asked me to do it, they didn’t just say, “Go ahead and do it.” They say, “Tell us what you will do before any contract gets signed.” That’s fair enough.

I give them I suppose my pitch really. I said very early on the obvious thing which anybody tackling this story would say, which is, “We cannot afford to make this be a white savior story, so how are we going to deal with that? We’re going to look at all of the Thai stories. We’re going to look at what they did and the complexities of that and how much we can weave that in.”

I made the decision very early on that this was in a way not the story of the boys. This was partly because I did not have their rights, but it was also partly because they’re stuck. They’re in a cave. You have a choice. Are you going to keep cutting back to them inside the cave getting hungrier and hungrier or not? I said, “My way of doing this is we’re going to see them go in, and then we’re not going to see them again until they’re found.”

**John:** It’s 45 minutes into the film before we see them again. We see, oh, they are actually alive. This is a real open question. Obviously, as an audience who has some knowledge coming into it, we know that they’re alive in there, but everyone on the outside doesn’t. You set up a good expectation that maybe they are going in to find bodies ultimately. They don’t know where they are, how far.

**Bill:** It’s very interesting the way you can tell a story by being able to know the ending and still make it tense. I think it’s because as people watch, they accept that they’re within that moment. One of the reasons that I took the project on actually was because one of the things that really struck me, after the divers found the bodies, there was this ecstasy throughout this enormous camp, real cheers. The boys are there. The boys are alive. That was simultaneously experienced with the divers knowing that the boys are going to die, that there is no way to come out.

I find that sort of crunch very powerful. When I saw that, I go, “Actually, we have got a story here.” Of course, if you can communicate to the viewers sufficiently, this really is an insoluble problem, and then you proceed to find a crazy solution, which against all the odds works, and you have a story.

**John:** Now, let’s talk about decisions of classic characters and themes going through stuff. You have actors we recognize who are doing certain things. Also, what I was really impressed by with the movie, and you talk about making sure that the Thai people in their efforts are centered in this, for a lot of the start of the film and really throughout the film, we’re seeing the rest of the efforts from the Thai perspective. These are competent people who are doing their very best. It feels very documentary in a good way. It feels very matter of fact. You don’t see a lot of speechify. You don’t see people stopping to explain something about Thai culture and history and stuff. It’s very much focused on the moment.

Did you know from the start that you were going to have so many characters and that we as an audience might not even really know their names? I’m thinking about the engineer on top of the mountain who’s trying to divert the water. We recognize him, but we know very little about him. Do you know that from the start, that you’d have this wide array of characters?

**Bill:** Yes, in the sense that I had to place my heroic British divers in this much bigger context. I think the first thing that I thought when I looked into all this story was an enormous number of people volunteered. There was this great mass, like 5,000 people just gave their time or their equipment for nothing. I love that. It runs counter to the kind of story that we’re being told all the time, which is that we live in a competitive world where people will only get off their bottoms for money. I’ve wanted to celebrate that very much, which meant locating as many of these stories as possible.

There are very many stories. You simply don’t have the space. In that sense, you color code the characters so that people recognize them visually rather than knowing their names. You also give them each a little kind of trick so that you can spot how they’re likely to… You can only do that to a very small degree, because you’re juggling so many characters. You talk about it being documentary. Yes, it’s documentary in the sense that it did happen. We’re not grandstanding with it. We’re not trying to make out some sort of opportunity for people to make their own speeches.

I actually think the grand sentiments come over much more powerfully if you throw them away, if they’re not asserted, you ask the audience to find that for themselves. That’s a conscious decision, particularly with the main divers who really led me into this by their own characters. I was picking up from what they told me about themselves, which is, “We don’t do this for money. We’re amateurs. We’re not interested in publicity.” They’ve got a rather delightful… There were so many that got cut out.

When they were first asked to come, Rick, the Viggo Mortensen one, said, “How are we getting there?” John says to him, “They’re giving us business class flights.” Business class, I’ll fly anywhere. I love that. It’s very British, very undercutting heroism and grandiosity. I was working from the characters.

I also think it means that you can feed your actors with a role where they have very few words but a lot of emotional moments. Those emotional moments, they are going to act on. They’re going to be on their face. If you’ve correctly structured the emotional trajectory, the audience knows what they’re thinking and feeling, looking at their face. They don’t need words. That is what screenwriters do. It drives me nuts when people say… Somebody said to me, “Oh, you didn’t have much to do for the first 20 minutes, did you?” I say, “I wrote the damn thing. Every feat is written.”

**John:** Absolutely. What is the camera pointing at, what are we seeing, what are we living.

**Bill:** Exactly. Not just that. Ron and I talked a lot about structuring the dives, because too many dives are boring. Each dive has to have its own character, its own emotional little story. I literally listed them all with the emotions that accompanied them.

**John:** Let’s talk about the emotional trajectory of the Viggo Mortensen character, because he’s the one who I think… I would say your characters don’t protagonate a lot. They’re not going through this classic giant character’s arc where they come in as one thing and leave fully transformed. It’s small and it’s subtle but it’s there. Viggo Mortensen’s character’s probably the easiest one to see that. He’s initially reluctant to necessarily go on this dive, to even join on his trip. Then when he’s there, he’s skeptical a lot along the way. What were the beats you mapped out for yourself? Were they literally in an outlined form? How much were you thinking about how his character progressed over the course of the story? How did you chart that for yourself?

**Bill:** That’s kind of fairly simple really, because he starts out not wanting to go, doesn’t like kids, as he says. He gets there. He’s pissed off, because we then have all the beats about the local Thai divers don’t rate them, which is fun to have that. They’re old guys [inaudible 00:28:12] which gives him something to resent. Eventually, they do get allowed to dive, and it goes wrong. They pull out the pumping guy, and it all goes wrong. Then they’re stuck, and he wants to go home. I got that beat.

All the time, you’ve got John beside him, acting as the antagonist, his protagonist in a way, saying, “Yeah, but we’ve got to stay.” John, who knows, and I like this, John knows that Rick really wants to save the boys even though Rick says he doesn’t. That helps me a lot. I can write those little moments.

Of course, the big beat with Rick is that they find the kids, and he’s depressed. He goes down instead of out. Then you’ve got the interesting question of… This I had to argue out with both John and Rick, who had the idea to use anesthetics. I got it wrong the first time round, because it worked in my structure to have John suggest it. The real Rick said to me, because we’d shown them the script. This is no secret to them, of course. I always do that, by the way.

When I’m dealing with real, live people, I will say, “You can see anything I’m writing at any time.” Of course. It’s their life. I said to them originally, “You’re going to find this really peculiar, because I’m going to invent two characters, Rick and John. I have to.” They were really good about that. They got it. Then lots of stuff I just made it. They said, “That’s fine.” He did say, “That was my idea.” I restructured that beat.

Then you bring in the next group of divers. In the cut version, they come very abruptly. I wrote several scenes that introduced them, but it’s a long movie. Something has to go. You have the relationship with the incoming divers, which again reflects on Rick, because Jason is the one who thinks Rick’s a little bit [inaudible 00:30:19]. You then realize Rick is the leader. He has gone along with this idea. The failure will be his failure. We’re now emotionally engaged on his behalf, not just the boys’. That then takes you through the various beats of finding semi-failure along the way, until the moment when they’re sitting in a group and they’re just laughing. You can feel the release of the nervous tension and at the moments when he’s resisted contact with the families. I had so many moments I could track. There he is hugging families or being hugged I should say, because he doesn’t know how to do it.

It’s a gift really to just track all this. I did give him a little speech, which is not in the film, right at the end when they’re in their minibus and they’re going back to the airport. He’s saying, “You know what? This is something that should not have worked. This is like a one in a thousand chance that it worked, but it did work. You know what [inaudible 00:31:18] make a movie out of it, and everybody else think it’s easy.” I rather like that, but no, it didn’t come to pass.

**John:** The movie probably wanted to be over before they would’ve had a chance for that moment. Let’s talk about the dialog that’s in the movie and the dialog that’s not in the movie, because they both help in form. Let’s talk about the dialog that’s not in the movie, because there’s not a lot of talking. We have our characters mostly doing the work that they’re there to do.

There’s this misconception obviously that the screenwriter just writes the dialog and the director does everything else, but it sounds like if I’m reading the script, I get a very good sense of what those characters are, what’s going through those characters’ heads, even as they are silently observing, moving their way through the cave, stopping to get abreast.
I’m thinking back to Colin Farrell’s character half freaking out because his kid has woken up. There’s all those moments. Those were all scripted. I think it’s crucial that we remind people that those moments are in the script from the start.

**Bill:** That’s right. You’re right. If you were to see one of the drafts towards the end, you’d get a lot more dialog. It’s not so much more dialog, because there are several scenes, basically dialog scenes. This always happens to me. I guess I overwrite. I’m always writing dialog scenes which I think really help to get us sympathetic with the characters. They’re too long, and in the end the whole thing goes. The people along the way read them. Your point is correct. That feeds into their understanding. The director reads them.

I have no complaints about what is cut out. In fact, throughout my career, I’ve had the embarrassing experience of writing scenes that seem to me to be vital, having them cut out, and realizing they weren’t necessary. Each time, I think, “When am I going to learn? When am I going to write the 90-page script that they shoot instead of the 120-page script?” I don’t know why I don’t learn, but that’s the process. I’ve worked with some actors.

A million years ago, I wrote a film called First Knight with Sean Connery and Richard Gere. Sean Connery sat me down in his hotel room in London with a scene, and he said, “Look, I want to go through the scene with you. I’ll do my lines. You do the other person’s lines.” I did the other person’s lines. I would do the line, and Sean went, “Ah.” Then I did the next line, “Mm.” Then I did the next line, “Mm.” He never spoke a word. It all made perfectly good sense. He said, “Would you mind if we just [inaudible 00:34:01].” Maybe you have to start with more and hone it down.

You are dependent on the actors, because once you start dispensing with the words, you’ve structured it so that the audience knows what the actor is likely to be feeling, but the actor has got to deliver that without the acting. In my opinion, acting has become so sophisticated now. Actors are so extraordinary, film actors. You can see what they’re thinking. I can think of moments like the little scene where Harry Harris is being asked to use his skills [inaudible 00:34:46]. He’s saying no, and the other two, Rick and John, are disagreeing on how to deal with him. There aren’t many words, but that little trio, you can see what each one is thinking right the way through. There’s a couple of shots at the end that are just faces saying nothing. That’s also very skilled directing, of course.

**John:** It is. There’s a moment in Worst Person in the World, a film from last year, where a woman makes a fundamental life decision, and we see it completely on her face. It was the screenwriting that got us from her leaving a party to standing at that place and being able to think. The natural instinct would be for her to say something to someone to make sure we understood that, and yet the power of a camera and a really talented face, we can see all that information. It’s a great lesson to learn.

Let’s circle back to you say you overwrite and you need to learn how to write the 90-page version of a thing. Also, it’s just recognizing that the process of making stories is always going to be too much. There’s going to be a process of discovery there, so giving yourself permission to overwrite there a bit and recognizing and hopefully having good collaborators who will see, “Yes, there may be too much here, but we need all this too-much-ness in order to find the movie that we’re also going to want to make.”

**Bill:** I would definitely agree with that, yeah.

**John:** Let’s talk about your relationship with Ron Howard. At what point did he come into the process? Was he there from the start or only after you had a draft? What was his involvement in the film?

**Bill:** He was not there from the start. It was pretty much completely written. What happened was the producer, PJ, hired me. At that point, he had an arrangement with another director, a very good director. I worked on it with that director. I did I guess speed drafts. We kind of ran into a problem of how we saw the movie between me and the director. I have huge respect for the directors that I work with. I tried very hard to deliver the kind of tone that he was looking for, but it ran counter to my instincts. I argued it very strongly with him, but he was very clear what he wanted. There came a point when I said to PJ, “I have to leave the project. You must get another writer who’s in sync with your director.” They had a big think about it. The director had a big think about it. To his enormous credit, he said, “Look,” because PJ and Gabi Tana, the other producer kind of liked my take.

He said, “Look, I’ll withdraw. It’s not a problem.” He withdrew. I then proceeded with my version, which was, to put it very, very simply, more emotional. He was much more action and repression, which is a great way to go. I’m a very warmhearted person. We proceeded in my version. I did several drafts until both the producers were thinking, “This is good. We will shop it.” They then took it to their agents in LA. That is when it went to an agent, and that’s when Ron picked it up. Ron then came in, and I then worked with Ron for several more drafts.

**John:** We both had the experience of an existing draft and a director comes on board. It’s both a conversation with the director about what movie they see versus the movie that you wrote and what they need. You’re trying to explain what your intentions were with things. They’re trying to explain what they think they actually need from a movie. What guidance can you give to a writer listening to those conversations with the director? How do you approach that in a way that both sides benefit?

**Bill:** The first thing is you have to not be defensive as a writer. We writers have a very tough time, because we are not in control. That is the reality. If you want to be in control, be a writer-director, which I have also done. You are not in control. The director is going to have to make this damn movie. It’s no good, you demanding the director executes your vision. He’s going to execute his or her vision. Don’t be defensive. What you do is when the director says, “I think they need more of this or less of this,” what you’ve got to think is, why is he saying that? What’s happening here? Is there a valid point here? If there is, how can I enact it in a way that fits my vision? I’ve had some bad ones, but mostly they’ve been good. My experience has been that it improves when you do this.

I always tell people, and this applies to development as well, if you get notes, don’t obey the note. If the note says, “We think the dog should jump over the cliff,” don’t say, “Okay, I will write it.” Say to yourself, “Why did they say that? Haven’t I got a better way of giving them what they want?” because you will have, because you’ll understand the whole thing. They’re probably looking just at that beat. That’s the problem you have with some directors. Some directors aren’t good at overall structure. I’m talking now about really emotional storytelling. They’re good at a scene. They know that they can make a scene work. They can make that scene work when the guy comes in and we don’t even know what he’s seeing and he’s incredibly scared.

[inaudible 00:40:23] how that impacts down the road. What you have to do is say, “Okay, they want an emotional high point, which I have not delivered. I’ve got to find a way to deliver it, and then they’ll be happy at that point.” If you have a problem, I have had this with some extremely famous directors who have said, “I think there should be a scene like this here.” I’ve said to the team, “That will make no sense. That will wreck the whole flow.” They’ve said, “The boss has asked for it. You’ve got to do it.” I then do it. In my experience, always those the projects that don’t get made, because the director hasn’t understood what the story is, but the director is too powerful. There are too many directors, unfortunately, who never get anybody telling them boo. It’s just extraordinary to me.

I’ve said to the team, “Just tell him it doesn’t work.” They said, “You don’t do that. He’s our boss, literally our boss in every way.” [inaudible 00:41:25]. Mostly, you should be able to collaborate with the director in such a way that the director feels really safe with you as a writer, that the director can say, “I want more here and less here,” and you go, “Yes, fantastic, let’s do this. We’ll find the way together.” That is really exciting.

I have to say, with Ron, he was extremely respectful. I think he had taken on a highly developed script. It had been through many processes. His attack, it was a combination. It was very process-driven. He really wanted to understand how he was going to film the process and what impact that would have. A lot of his changes related to that. Other changes were he wanted more of a particular element. For example, he wanted more of the guy called the water guy, Thanet, who is up on the mountain diverting the water. Let me think. What else was there?

We did talk quite a lot. We played around quite a lot with changing some of my structure. We talked, and I was willing to, but in the end, we stuck with it. He will say that the last time we were on a giant Zoom together to talk about this at this stage, he said that the thing about the screenplay he received was that the structure was there already. He didn’t have to really mess with that too much. He’s a very nice guy.

**John:** He’s a nice guy. I’ve worked with him on a couple projects. He’s lovely.

**Bill:** He’s just amazing. I just wanted him to be able to do what he needed to do. Then the other thing that happened was he started shooting it, and I was not present on the shoot. I was in Australia. He was on the phone to me or on the email to me quite a lot, saying basically for budget reasons, we can no longer do this scene or that scene, “Find a way to write the beat that happens there somewhere else in another way,” or, “Could you please add it in to the existing scene?” There was quite a lot of that, which I was of course completely willing to do. I think you need to be in that sense a kind of craftsman who is there. “We’re now sailing the ship and it’s leaking. Please could you plug that gap?”

**John:** Absolutely circling back to this, in the first time you’re talking with the director or really anyone else in the project, a friend always reminds me that as the screenwriter, you’re the only person who’s already seen the movie. You see the whole thing there. You have everything that’s on the page, but you also have a whole movie in your head. Sometimes those initial conversations are really just aligning what movies is the director seeing in their head and trying to find the overlaps there and fix the things that aren’t overlapping quite right.

In those conversations, it varies director to director for me, but sometimes you are spending three days talking about the color of the paint on the walls, but that’s really the process for just trying to align your visions for what things really look like and what’s important to them or what’s important to you. You never know what it’s going to be as you start the process.

**Bill:** I don’t get into those sorts of conversations. I’m happy for him to paint the walls whatever color he wants really. What I want to know… I say I want to know. I don’t have any power over this person. It doesn’t get me anywhere. I would like to know that the director sees the same movie as me, but to be honest, I never know until it’s done, until it’s actually being shot, because people do the oddest things.

**John:** bill, you’ve made your living as a playwright and as a film writer and director. Do you have any experience running television shows or doing any of the series where the writer would be more in control, the writer would be telling the director what to do? Have you had that experience?

**Bill:** Not in the modern form. I’m doing a Netflix TV series right now, writing it. You’re right, it is very, very different in power terms. Back in the day, when I was working with BBC, I did I think four TV movies. The interesting thing about the BBC and television then is my name was the name that was in the newspapers, to the rage of the directors. It was William Nicholson’s latest. I really of course liked that.

I really disliked the filmed by thing, where directors act as if they’re created the whole thing. I’ve softened over the years. I used to be quite militant about this. I’ve done two movies myself as a director/writer. That has taught me to respect directors very, very highly. I do realize I need them. I just wish that the world out there understood what screenwriters do. I don’t know why this hasn’t got through. We need a movement like Cahiers du Cinema, which elevated the directors. We need a movement.

Maybe you’re right. Actually, it’s happening. It’s happening in TV. The people who create the great TV series are the writers. Our day is coming. That’s fantastic. You get astonishing things like Succession, which I don’t know who’s the hero of that, whether it’s Jesse Armstrong, Lucy Prebble, or whoever, I don’t quite know what’s going on, but somebody is doing something completely brilliant there. They’re also superbly directed, I have to say. Again, let’s all try not to quarrel over who gets the credit and be grateful if we can together do something good, because most things don’t quite work.

**John:** Circling back to Thirteen Lives, so much of the film is in Thai. It’s in a very specific Northern Thai dialect. I’m guessing you don’t speak it. At what point in the process did you need to think about how much of the film was going to be in Thai versus how much was going to be in English and what the balance was going to be. Did you need to interact with any of those language experts or did that process come later down?

**Bill:** It came much later. I knew all along that a large part would be in Thai. That was all part of respect for the people we were filming and not turning it into an outsider attack. I write it all in English, and it goes on the page in bold italics, meaning translate this please. The team making it under Ron then bring in Thai translators, but not just Thai translators, Thai filmmakers who are also Thai, who tell me about the culture. Back comes the message. You have this scene where this Thai Navy Seal speaks to his boss, his captain, in a quite strong way. They would never do that. That does not happen. We have total respect for authority people. You’ve just [inaudible 00:48:20] I change it. I just simply rewrote. That happened quite a bit.

I had a whole lot to do with the governor here, who had actually a very interesting story. I originally made him a rather ironic, wry guy, who was constantly saying, “They’ve set me up for the fall here.” There’s a little bit of it in the movie, but I had quite a lot more. I was told he would not speak of his superiors in this way. Even though he thinks it, even though it’s true, he just wouldn’t, so out it went.

**John:** Probably both choices about how that character would respond but also what the movie wants to do. The movie is so focused on the question of will we be able to get the boys out, anything that feels like it’s not to that point is going to be on the chopping block. It’s hard for it to last in the film. You made choices about how much we’re seeing or are aware of these characters’ personal lives before they get involved. Basically, the moment anybody shows up Thailand, we’re never seeing their homelands again.

Basically, we’re only going to stay near the caves here in Thailand. Talk to us about decisions to show Colin Ferrell’s home life and what you were trying to do there, the few glimpses we had outside of Thailand. Were there more scenes? What were your decisions about showing their life before they get to Thailand?

**Bill:** No, there were not more scenes. I knew that I wanted to just tell you enough about them to give you some anchor for how they were going to make their emotional journey and then just show you enough at the end to remind you where they’re come from and what it means. They’re two different stories, obviously. With Rick, Viggo Mortensen, he lives alone in this chaotic, machine-filled space. You would kind of sense that the guy’s asocial just from the images of him. Also, there was quite a bit of dialog there when he’s talking on the phone to John.

With John, with Colin Ferrell, all I needed to do was show that he’s divorced and he’s got a kid. Obviously, he’s going to identify the kids in the cave with his cave. I don’t need to say that. You just plant that, and that’s there.

In the early versions, there was another thread. They had a kind of office, the British Cave Rescue Council. There was a woman there who fed information back all the time. We did think whether to have her in England, but I really decided no, this is one of those stories where you need to maintain the pressure cooker, get them into the pressure cooker and keep them there. That was a very conscious decision, which is why I didn’t want to go into the home life of any of any of the Thai characters once the pressure had begun. I think it’s sort of like Aristotelian unities. It’s a unity of time and place, and they’re up against the clock, and just hold it there. Don’t play games. Don’t do cutting around with time. Give us a sense of the passage of time.

**John:** [inaudible 00:51:29] your theater background, it did feel like once you created the space of the camp outside the cave, that was your main set. That’s where everything has to happen within the space and within this place and time, which I guess helps answer the question of your decisions about which of the Thai parents we were going to follow, which ones we were going to identify and have some ongoing relationship with. You pick one mother, one father who we come back to more often and we [inaudible 00:51:55] which kid is —

**Bill:** And a boy. The boy, I made him up. That didn’t happen [crosstalk 00:52:00].

**John:** The smallest boy, yeah.

**Bill:** The smallest boy did happen.

**John:** That’s right, the boy [crosstalk 00:52:05].

**Bill:** The one who doesn’t go into the cave and who was out there. I wanted one boy who represented [inaudible 00:52:11]. That didn’t actually happen. They all went into the cave. The smallest boy, that was a real thing, because I had that in the research. Obviously, the mother is a competent mother, the father is a competent father, etc. All their names are changed.

**John:** Let’s talk about structure overall, because you have a time structure, which is very natural for day one, day two, and seeing the progression. With each day, there’s a change that has happened. Sometimes it’s the weather. The way that the weather is a huge villain in the course of the stories is really interesting. You also have the decision to overlay the map and show where things were and how far deep we are into things. Was that a decision that was made on a script level or does that come later on in the filmmaking process, the literal, how deep we are into the cave system structure.

**Bill:** That was not me. That was in the cutting room, in the final stages. That was Ron and his team doing that in the final stages, looking at it and saying, “It is really important that people know how far in we are.” In the longer version of the script, I’d incorporated that information in the dialog and things like that. That didn’t survive. I thought it was really good.

**John:** I think it’s a really smart choice.

**Bill:** It was really smart. In a kind of clever way, there was more information you could take in, but it didn’t matter. You got a visual sense. That was not me.

**John:** I think it’s another thing taken probably from some of the great documentaries of the last 10 years in that sense of as you see somebody climbing a peak in Yellowstone or a peak in Yosemite, seeing how far up they are, and it was just the right choice to give us that sense of-

**Bill:** It’s a very interesting challenge. How much does the audience realize? How much have they picked up? How much do they know? What do they need turning? On the whole, you’ve got to be ahead of your audience. If they’re left saying, “We’re underwater. I have no clue where I am,” which of course is the case. How could they? What we did was, and this was in the script, I characterize stages along the journey. I said, “This will be the stalactite one. This will be Chamber 3. This will be the T-Junction.” The T-Junction was what they called it and Pattaya Beach was what they called it. I gave a description of each stage so that when they built the sets, they would look a little bit different and would give us a bit of a sense that we’re not just always in a bath. We did think about that ahead of time.

**John:** You said you’ve written the script. You’re heading into production. Obviously, casting has happened. Was there a table reading? Was there any chance for everyone to get around tables to read this together? It doesn’t seem like it would have been necessary for this, but was there some sort of [inaudible 00:55:01]?

**Bill:** I simply don’t know, because it all happened in Australia, and I wasn’t there. They all had to fly out and go into quarantine for two weeks, and then they were in their bubble. I would say about this table read, which I’ve had on every film, I absolutely hate them.

**John:** Tell me why.

**John:** There’s a couple of reasons. For some reason, the person who reads the directions is the third AD, and he can’t read. That sounds like an illiterate monotone, which is awful, and I’m dying. I learned after a bit to say, “Let me read the directions, and I’ll put some [inaudible 00:55:37].” The second reason is the actors find it very, very difficult to know whether they’re performing or not. On the whole, they don’t want to perform. They don’t want to perform, because why would they? It’s a weird set of circumstances. The confident ones don’t want to perform because, “Why should I?” The un-confident ones think that they’ll perform and be found wanting. People will say, “Why did you cast him?” The whole thing is awful for everybody. I’ve come out of every reading thinking it is a disaster.

I wasn’t present at the readthrough of Gladiator. I was involved in the project. It was such a disaster that they practically pulled the whole thing. That’s when I came on board. I think they’re terrible, these readings. They do have a function, because I almost think you should get a whole team of completely different people to do the reading. The tech people, they need to know a little bit what this thing feels like. The actors, it’s hard.

**John:** I will make a mild case for the opposing view. I’ve had table readings that have gone as badly as Gladiator’s table read, where it’s just like, wow. Everything you’re saying about an actor choosing not to perform, the risk of performing, definitely been there, seen it. My argument for them is that it makes it clear that all the actors that have at least read the whole script once, because so often, actors, they’re reading, they’re focused on their part. It’s a chance to say, “Oh, you know what? This scene actually pertains to the scene before this scene.” It’s the whole thing feeling together chronologically for once, because movies are going to be shot out of sequence and it’s going to be hard to tell what things are where. For one moment, everyone was together.

The other thing, if anyone’s listening and this is helpful, I will tend to do, if there is going to be a table reading, I will make a special version of the script that is just for the reading, that greatly cuts down the scene description so it’s just getting you right into the dialog there, and it’s all clear. If we’re going to summarize things, everyone’s looking at the same page. I hear you there.

**Bill:** That is very smart. I think you’re quite right. The table reading should be treated as a kind of performance in its own right and thought about and almost directed. Each of the actors could be told, “Don’t worry about it. Just do it clearly. That’s all. You don’t need to emote if you don’t want to.” I have been at readings. When Shadowlands was done as a reading, it was amazingly successful, and it made everybody feel this is going to work. I just wish that happened every time.

**John:** My movie Go had a great table reading, and some other ones haven’t. Of course, in theater, the idea of a reading is actually super common, and those are ways you get financing and get to the next level. Everyone understands that it is a form of a performance there, but with movies it’s a special thing. Really, you have to ask yourself, who should be in the room for that? Is it just for the filmmakers and the actors? Do producers need to be in there? Do financiers need to be in there?

**Bill:** I really like your idea of having a special text for the reading, because that’s great, because you want to maintain the pace. I’ve sat there while somebody reads through a whole page of directions in a [crosstalk 00:58:53] tone where it needs to be tightened, performed, and move on so that we can get the feeling of it. I hadn’t thought of that. If it ever happens to me again… It’s quite a lot of work though, isn’t it, doing your own-

**John:** For you or for me, maybe it’s two hours of time to take and cut it down. If it saves a lot of drama down the road, I’ll do it.

**Bill:** Do you read directions yourself?

**John:** No. We’ll find somebody who’s actually a talented actor who’s not in the production to do it.

**Bill:** Good. Good.

**John:** My friend Dan Ethridge is fantastic at that, so I will draft him whenever possible.

**Bill:** You’ve thought about this much more than me. You’re smart.

**John:** During production, obviously this is happen in Australia. At most, you’re having a phone call or Zoom with Ron, so you’re not super involved in that. At any point doing post, do you come back in? Do you take a look?

**Bill:** Yes.

**John:** Was there anything for you to do?

**Bill:** Yeah. This is entirely at Ron’s discretion. He’s a nice guy, and he’s also a smart guy. It was cut in London. He said would I please come in, see the first assembly, talk about it. We talked together. I came in and saw the shorter version, and we talked about that a lot. I wouldn’t say that I did anything tremendously significant, but I was certainly there watching it and talking about it with him.

**John:** Great.

**Bill:** I was incredibly grateful for that. A lot of directors are frightened of writers, because they know the writer knows more than them what’s supposed to be there. They don’t want the writer on set. They don’t want the writer in the cutting room. They didn’t want the writer getting too much credit. Ron is not like that.

**John:** That’s terrific. This movie came out theatrically limited but then also on streaming. Did you have a chance to see this with an audience?

**Bill:** Not really. As you know, MGM, who financed it, got bought by Amazon after we finished the movie. It didn’t get the screen life that we would’ve liked. I’m old-fashioned. I like cinemas. I like theaters. They did put on a… This was in London. There was a premier in LA, which I didn’t go to. I was obviously invited, but I chose not to make the journey. There was a good screening in London. We were in France. We got the train back for that evening, and the train was delayed three hours in the Channel Tunnel, to my fury, so I actually missed about half.

**John:** Oh, no.

**Bill:** We got into the theater. I haven’t seen it much with an audience. Now it’s seen as a streaming event, and people see it separately. I’ve got this odd feeling. I don’t really know how people have responded to it.

**John:** I watched it again. I watched it last night at home, streaming it. My instinct though is that there’s going to be some big cheers when the first kid is brought on the stretcher up through the pulley system. That was a really emotional moment for me is seeing that the kids are getting out but also that everyone is there pushing the sled out together. I feel like that’s the moment where you’re going to get some cheers in the audience. I’m frustrated that you didn’t get a chance to hear those cheers, because I feel like it’s going to be a great sound. Bill, can you talk to us about what’s next? Are there any things that you’re working on that we can discuss?

**Bill:** I’m always a little bit shy, for the simple reason that I never know they’re actually going to get made.

**John:** Same.

**Bill:** That’s the life we lead. I’m doing a cinema movie. It’s with a very good director right now. It seems to be going a bit slowly. I’m not quite sure what’s going on. I’m waiting for my next instructions on that. I mentioned I’m doing a TV series for Netflix, which is about the crypto scam. It was a podcast actually called The Missing Crypto Queen-

**John:** Great.

**Bill:** … about a Bulgarian woman who created a crypto coin. It’s a wonderful story.

**John:** I think we actually maybe discussed that on our podcast in terms of How Would This Be a Movie. I’m excited that you’re doing that, because she’s a really flamboyant character if I remember correctly.

**Bill:** Exactly. It’s wonderful. It’s all about why do people believe what they believe, which is central to our current experience everywhere, politics everywhere. I’m just doing the first two episodes of that. That doesn’t mean it’s guaranteed. I’m also doing a small British movie about a guy, which is a true story again. You see, these are all true stories. I don’t like adapting novels. I don’t do it, because somebody else has [inaudible 01:03:41] the characters and invented the story.

Real life is a complete mess, so it needs people like me to come in and turn it into craft, something out of that. That’s what I like doing. I’m doing a small movie about a person who goes mad. The fun of it is, it’s kind of implying that madness is a choice, which actually serves a purpose. He thinks he’s a secret agent saving the planet. He ends up being sent to hospital and given heavy drugs and so on. You realize that being a secret agent saving the planet beats his real life. You kind of get why a guy would do that. Essentially, it’s dealing with the fact that all of us are prone to picking up clues around us and creating a narrative of our life that enables us to feel good about ourselves.

**John:** Absolutely. You are the story you’re telling about yourself.

**Bill:** Yeah. I’m doing that. There’s a couple of other longer-term projects. Those are three that are actually on my desk right now.

**John:** That’s amazing. Bill, an absolute pleasure talking with you and meeting you here. Congratulations on the film. I’m really excited to see these next projects as well. A delight. Thank you so much.

**Bill:** It’s a great pleasure for me as well, talking to somebody who gets these things, a fellow. I love it. Thank you so much.

**John:** Thank you.

**Bill:** Bye-bye.

**John:** Have a great night. Bye.

**Bill:** Bye-bye.

**John:** Craig, we are back in this moment. It is time for our One Cool Things. I have two TV shows to recommend to you and to our listenership. First is Andor, which everyone says it’s by far the best Star Wars series. It’s just phenomenal. It’s just really, really good. Craig, I was thinking about you as I was watching it, because there was this scene, I think in the maybe second or third episode, where the Empire, or what will become the Empire, is having this board meeting, just planning meeting. It’s in this big white room. It’s just so smartly done. It’s everything you always talk about how you admire the Empire for its efficiency and for its organization. I thought of you. If I could find the clip snippet of it, I want to send it to you, because you will just love that when you get a chance to watch it.

**Craig:** Obviously, I always root for the Empire. I’m just so confused after all these movies. How do they keep losing? It just doesn’t make sense. Why is everyone so scared of them? All they do is lose.

**John:** I’ll say that the whole premise of Andor is basically how does the revolution start, how does the rebellion start. It’s really smartly done. It’s no surprise. It’s coming from Tony Gilroy, who’s a great writer and is running this show. Just so, so smart. Everyone tells you to watch Andor. I’m just the 19,000th person to tell you to watch Andor, because really, it’s worth it.

The other thing is Fleishman is in Trouble, which I don’t hear people talking as much about. So good. As I recognize the names going past, Susannah Grant, who is of course fantastic, but Taffy Brodesser-Akner wrote the book and she wrote almost all the episodes of the series. It’s so smartly done. The POV storytelling on it is really, really great. Fleishman is in Trouble, another great thing to watch. That is on Hulu in the United States.

**Craig:** Excellent. My One Cool Thing is an article. It is in Wired. I don’t know if you’re going to need a subscription or not. Maybe Wired does a couple of free articles a month. This one is called Welcome to Digital Nomadland by Susana Ferreira. It’s a really interesting story about this class of workers called digital nomads, who work entirely virtually, and so can work anywhere, but they’re alone. These are a lot of people who don’t have families, etc, so they’re stuck alone in their homes. They want to go places. They can go anywhere.

This Portuguese island basically on the southern coast of Madeira created what they call a digital nomad land. It’s basically like we built some homes and some work areas for you, communal work areas. You can come here, live here, and you’ll have a community, instead of being alone. Theoretically, this would also be great for the actual island itself and the people who live there, because it would help the economy. It doesn’t work exactly the way they were thinking, but it’s really interesting, because I never considered this is a new way of building a community. All of our legacy communities are built around decisions that were made god knows when, based on there’s a lake nearby or there’s a river or whatever.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** This is like, “Ah, it seems like a good spot to put a bunch of people with laptops,” so a new way of creating communities. Check out Welcome to Digital Nomadland by Susana Ferreira in Wired.

**John:** Fantastic. That is our show for this week and our show for this year. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao.

**Craig:** Again.

**John:** It’s edited by Matthew Chilelli.

**Craig:** Still.

**John:** Our outro this week is by Michael Lane. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also a place where you can send questions. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find transcripts and sign up for our weeklyish newsletter called Inneresting, which has lots of links to things about writing. We have T-shirts and hoodies, and they’re great. You can find them at Cotton Bureau. You can sign up to become a Premium Member at scriptnotes.net, where you can get all the back-episodes and Bonus Segment. Reminder to use the promo code. What is the promo code, Craig?

**Craig:** Onion.

**John:** Promo code onion to save $10 on your annual subscription, but only through January 15th, so do that.

**Craig:** Onion. Onion. Onion.

**John:** Onion. Onion. Onion. Stick around after the credits, because we’ll be discussing our non-writing aspirations for 2023. Craig and Megana, thank you for a fun year.

**Megana:** Thank you.

**Craig:** Thanks, John.

[Bonus Segment]

**John:** Craig, I sprung this on you. We didn’t have time to prepare any sort of plans for 2023, but not work, because obviously you’re going to have a very busy work 2023. Maybe I’ll start with some of mine, and you can think of what some of yours are going to be for 2023. I’m excited to be DM’ing again. It looks like we’re going to finish up the campaign that you’ve been so generously hosting for the last three years.

**Craig:** It’s a long one.

**John:** It’s a long one.

**Megana:** Wow.

**John:** When you finish up, we’ve discussed in the group, I’m going to try to run a much, much shorter, not going to go three years, kind of campaign. I’m excited to get back into that and look at who our group is. We have a large group, but not everyone can come every time, so trying to plan for things that will work will if people are just gone, so their tokens aren’t just sitting there idly, that we can actually do things every week with the people that we have on hand.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** That’s probably the thing I’m most excited about in 2023.

**Craig:** I’m excited about that. I can’t wait to just play again. I guess that’s not really an aspiration. It’s going to happen. It’s an inevitability.

**John:** It’s going to happen. We’re going to finish. We’re going to finish the Dungeon of the Mad Mage, and then we’ll do something new.

**Craig:** Yes, we will. When it comes to non-writing aspirations, I don’t really have specific ones, or at least none that are tied to a new year. I have an ongoing project, which is to catastrophize less, take deep breaths, put anxiety in its proper perspective, and remind myself… Am I allowed to curse in this Bonus Segment?

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** Everything will be fucking okay. That’s great.

**John:** [crosstalk 01:11:27].

**Craig:** That’s what I’m working on. Megana, I feel like you and I are very similar in this regard.

**Megana:** Yeah, absolutely.

**Craig:** Tell me, what do you do, or first of all, is that part of your non-writing aspiration for 2023? If it is, how do you go about it?

**Megana:** I think it is. I am also trying to stretch more in 2023 because I’m getting older.

**Craig:** That’s nice. Yeah, you are.

**Megana:** I am. I think that getting myself to a place where it’s like, “Oh, I’m stressed out,” and moving my body in some way is always incredibly helpful. That is a new tactic I’m taking for 2023.

**Craig:** I like it, stretching.

**Megana:** Instead of just panicking alone in my room.

**Craig:** Right, and tightening up in a little stress ball.

**John:** Stretching also one of the things that you can do while you’re doing something else. You can stretch while you’re watching TV. Increasingly, I will just not sit on the couch. I will sit on the floor and try to stretch while watching Andor or Fleishman is in Trouble, because I can still fully enjoy the show, but I’m also hopefully getting my hamstrings a little less messed up.

**Megana:** I have a standing desk, but if we’re being honest, I don’t stand at it very often.

**Craig:** You mean your sitting desk? That’s your sitting desk, Megana.

**Megana:** Now it’s going to be my stretching desk. It’s going to be my stretching and less panic desk.

**Craig:** I like that.

**Megana:** Do you have a standing desk?

**Craig:** I do. Like you, it’s really… Look. Here’s the deal. I know what I can do. I know what I can’t do. I know what I might do. Part of everything is also just giving myself a break.

**Megana:** You deserve it.

**Craig:** I do a lot. You know what? I don’t want to use the standing desk. Screw it. I don’t want to.

**John:** If listeners are looking for things to help them think about their year and they want to try a book, a book that actually was genuinely useful for me was James Clear’s Atomic Habits, which really talks about how the best way to change your habits and get rid of some bad habits and start some good habits is just make them unavoidable. It’s literally like putting your running shoes by the door so you’re going to be tripping over them if you don’t do it. It’s making sure you’re setting yourself up for success. If people are looking for a book or something to read over the holidays, to make them think better about what they want to do in the new year, how to get that achieved, that’d be a good bet, Atomic Habits.

**Craig:** If your New Year’s resolutions or aspirations are to read less and sit more, I just want you to know I’m your patron saint.

**John:** We’re going to support that. Craig, a thing I’m going to try to not do in 2023 is recreate Twitter. I’m not going to try to, because obviously, Twitter is going to… It’s not dead, but it’s not going to be the same thing it was. If it’s around six months from now, six years from now, it’s still not going to be as useful to me as it used to be. I’m not going to try to find the new Twitter. I just don’t think that’s going to be a goal. I’m going to find other ways to encounter the ideas in people that I used to encounter and stumble across on Twitter. I’m not quite sure what that’s going to be. I can still miss the things that were great about it. I’m not going to try to look for the next version of it.

**Craig:** Which is totally fine. I think you probably won’t have to try too hard. I think that there are people right now salivating and rubbing their hands together, going, “We sense a vacuum.” That said, Twitter never really made money. I don’t know if anybody necessarily… They’re not going to want to recreate Twitter either, but they’re going to make something. Something’s coming. You remember the fantastic opening credit sequence for Silicon Valley?

**John:** Oh yeah. Great. The constantly churning, 3D, top-down view of all these companies building up and exploding.

**Craig:** Exactly. They would change it over the seasons to reflect other implosions and new risings. We don’t know what’s going to happen. We just know change is afoot. It just doesn’t stop. The churn doesn’t stop. Something new is going to come along that’s going to take over our lives soon enough.

**John:** What it has started doing more of as Twitter’s been declining is just going back to my RSS readers, the blogs I follow and stuff like that. That was actually really good technology. RSS is what’s actually powering podcasts like Scriptnotes to let new episodes come out there. People can use that for posts as well. I’m going to try to do a little bit more blogging on johnaugust.com. The thoughts that I used to try to cut down to 280 characters to fit on Twitter, I will expend a few minutes to make a longer blog post.

**Megana:** Nice.

**Craig:** Been a lot of that going on.

**John:** Craig, thank you for a very good 2022. I’m so excited to be doing more Scriptnotes with you in 2023.

**Craig:** Oh wait, we’re still doing this? Oh my god.

**Megana:** Wait, Craig, was that your answer for your resolution?

**John:** Catastrophize less?

**Megana:** Catastrophize less?

**Craig:** Yeah. What did you think it should be?

**Megana:** No, I think that that’s great. I also think that you deserve more vacation in 2023.

**Craig:** Aw, that’s very sweet. I don’t love vacations. I know I’m supposed to.

**John:** Maybe a different definition of vacation. It doesn’t have to be sitting on a beach someplace. It could just be like, Craig, for the next week you just get to play all of the video games.

**Craig:** I do love that.

**John:** I think we both wish a little more of that for you.

**Craig:** Thank you. You guys are very sweet. I wish you guys to have a wonderful and happy new year, no matter what it brings for us, which will be fascinating, no doubt.

**John:** It will be a fascinating year, I’m sure.

**Craig:** We will, as always, look back on this and go, “Aw, you guys didn’t know. You didn’t that the space weasels were coming.”

**John:** So naïve we were.

**Craig:** From the Planet Weasel. Yeah, they’re coming. We didn’t know. Until they do come, let’s have some fun.

**John:** Thanks, Craig. Thanks, Megana.

**Megana:** Thanks, John.

**Craig:** Thank you guys.

**John:** Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

Links:

* [William Nicholson](https://www.williamnicholson.com/) on [IMdB](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0629933/)
* [Watch the conversation between John and William here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ22OXQEyos)
* [Thank you to the Writers Guild Foundation for organizing the event!](https://www.wgfoundation.org/blog/category/FYC)
* [Use Promo Code ONION for two months free in our annual Scriptnotes premium membership](https://scriptnotes.net/)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Welcome to Digital Nomadland](https://www.wired.com/story/digital-nomad-village-madeira-portugal/) by Kyle Jeffers for Wired
* [Fleischman Is In Trouble](https://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/fleishman-is-in-trouble) on Hulu
* [Andor](https://www.disneyplus.com/series/star-wars-andor/3xsQKWG00GL5)
* [Check out the Inneresting Newsletter](https://inneresting.substack.com/)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/)
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [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 Michael Lane ([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/580standard.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Episode 576: What You’re Looking At, Transcript

January 17, 2023 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original transcript for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2022/what-youre-looking-at).

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

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

**John:** This is Episode 576 of Scriptnotes. It’s a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Today on the show, how do screenwriters place things in front of the reader’s virtual camera? That’s right, it’s a crafty episode, where we’re going to take a look at some really nitpicky word choices and how those make movies you can watch on the page. We’ll also tackle a bunch of listener questions on everything from outlining to maligning small villages, Craig.

**Craig:** Maligning small villages, finally. I have been waiting since Episode 1 for somebody to write in about that.

**John:** Absolutely. Those little, tiny villages that you drive past, what if you could just slander them, slander them to death?

**Craig:** Malign them.

**John:** Oh, but Craig, you’re going to really enjoy our Bonus Segment for Premium Members. Sixteen will enter. One will win. Which dessert will come out on top of our first ever dessert bracket?

**Craig:** I don’t know if people know this, but I do love making desserts. I like baking, cooking, mixing, whipping, folding. I love to make a dessert.

**John:** We’re recording this pre-Thanksgiving. Mike and I are planning on making three different pies. Pies are definitely in the entries here.

**Craig:** Of course. Of course.

**John:** Overall, in the general categories of desserts, we need to figure out which are the ultimate desserts and which are not the ultimate desserts.

**Craig:** Let’s rush through this shitty podcast so we can get to that.

**John:** I’m looking forward to it.

**Craig:** That’s what matters.

**John:** Let’s start with some news though, because Craig, Megana Slacked me this new on Sunday afternoon. I could not believe it. Bob Iger is back running Disney.

**Craig:** I could not believe it either. As somebody that owns a small amount of Disney stock, I was thrilled. Bob Chapek was an interesting choice to succeed Bob Iger. That was always going to be a tough gig to succeed Bob Iger. He was in a class of his own in terms of these uber-CEOs that ride over the whole corporation. Bob Chapek came in there and was like, “Watch what I do.” Then he did a bunch of stuff, and nobody seemed to like it. I think Bog Iger must have somewhere along the line thought, “I probably picked the wrong guy.”

**John:** Chapek was a handpicked successor. There was a whole plan for transition. There was a year of overlap. It was all going to be a very smooth transition in theory. Iger left, and then Chapek had a series of missteps and stumbles. The recent reporting we’re reading seems to be that it was really an investor call, that Chapek messed up on an investor call, was the inciting incident that got him out the door over the weekend. Friday afternoon, the call went to Iger. Then by Sunday-

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** … evening, Chapek was out and Iger was back in.

**Craig:** What did he do on that phone call?

**John:** The New York Times story, we’ll put a link in the show notes to that. The sourcing seems to indicate that he was too sanguine about the really dismal numbers and seemed out of touch.

**Craig:** Oh, I see.

**John:** His own lieutenants were basically going to the board and saying, “If you don’t get rid of Chapek, we’re going to leave.”

**Craig:** Bob Iger is back. One of the things that was really interesting was he came back on Friday and it’s currently Tuesday, he’s already changed 4,000 things. Look, from my point of view, obviously, you and I, we don’t swim in those waters. Different people do that stuff. We don’t really care about that stuff, only to the extent that it infects us. Bob Iger was always about the content and about making sure that you protected the creative output and made sure that the content was great and that the content would drive everything else. Don’t worry about it. Everything else will just flow from it. It appears that he is hard at work to reinstate that culture. I hope it accrues to the benefit of writers.

**John:** Another thing I’m thinking about this week is just how much CEO quality matters, because so often it seems like these corporations, they just are their own corporations. Many of the times, a well-run corporation is the one where you don’t have any idea who the CEO is. You look at Disney right now versus Twitter, and oh, wow, the person in charge of things can really have a huge impact on how stuff is happening, how stuff’s working. A good CEO can fix things. A bad CEO can break things very quickly, much more quickly than I would’ve ever guessed was possible.

**Craig:** The good news for CEOs is they’ll still make $400 million as they absolutely screw their company into the ground. Twitter, boy, wow. I quit. I’m out. I’m gone.

**John:** He’s out. He’s gone.

**Craig:** I’m gone. Pedro Pascal quit over the weekend. I saw that. Even internally, as we’ve been talking about gearing up for lots of marketing and stuff for The Last of Us, just incorporating the Twitter exodus into the planning. It’s now received wisdom that Twitter is a damaged product if you are not a MAGA troll.

**John:** It is fascinating, because if you’d told me a year ago someone’s going to build a rival to Twitter, it’s like, that’s a stupid idea, because there’s already Twitter. Now it seems like, you know what, you could probably find a bunch of engineers who are available to build you an alternative to Twitter. I don’t know that one thing will ever take off. I don’t know that we’ll ever replace it. I don’t know that Twitter necessarily will go away in a complete sense. It is just fascinating that something we assume, it’s Twitter, it’s always going to be there, can just disappear so quickly.

**Craig:** As a company, I think they always struggle to figure out exactly how to make money. When Elon Musk came along and offered them some stupid amount of money as a dumb, pot-inspired joke, I think, they were like, “Holy shit. Yeah, we’ll take that. Thank you. Thank you for overpaying for this thing that just doesn’t make money.” Now he has it, and he’s just flailing around and smashing it into bits. It’s very strange. I have to say, for something that I used every day for years and considered my main method of communicating things to the world, not only do I not miss it, I feel better. Not a little bit better, a lot better. I feel a lot better. Let’s put it this way. You and I, John, lived most of our lives without Twitter. Everything was fine.

**John:** Everything was fine.

**Craig:** It was fine.

**John:** I was on Twitter before I was doing this podcast, but the boundaries are blurry. I had my website before I had Twitter. I had some other place of truth of John August’s opinion. Twitter did become that, and I don’t know what’s necessarily going to replace that. I guess just the blog. Wrapping up the CEO talk, we have Bob Iger back there in charge. He’s not going to be there forever. He needs to find someone else to take over for him. That’s going to be even probably more difficult, because finding the person who can now do this job, it’s going to be challenging.

**Craig:** John, I have a real question for you.

**John:** Please.

**Craig:** What if they said, “Hey, John August, we want you to do it.”

**John:** I’ve been thinking about that, because Craig, I do consider a lot of alternative [inaudible 00:07:07].

**Craig:** That is the craziest answer ever. Ever. That was insane.

**John:** Craig, I have been thinking about it.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** I don’t think I would do a good job. Here’s the reasons why I don’t think I would do a good job. I know a fair amount about making movies. I know a fair amount about making TV shows, less but a fair amount. I do not know how to manage all the other parts of that company, including the theme parks and the streaming services and all this other stuff. That’s why when I look at who the people are who could potentially take over for Iger, it’s really challenging. Dana Walden is on that short list. Dana Walden is fantastic. I’ve met with her. I think she’s great. She’s really good at making TV shows and entertainment, and that’s not the whole job. Maybe it’s just too big a job for any one person to do.

**Craig:** It’s not. Somebody has to do it.

**John:** It’s not too big for Iger.

**Craig:** Nobody can know everything. You have your lieutenants and people that report to you, and hopefully you do a good job. I think the thing that would get you… I remember the very first time I directed, I was talking to my first AD. First ADs have seen a billion directors come and go in their lives. I said, “What’s the one rookie mistake you can advise me, that perhaps I could then avoid making?” He said, “Honestly, it’s never about any of the technicals.” He said, “The thing that no first-time director ever sees coming is the politics.” I suspect that would be the biggest problem, because you take over, and suddenly, there’s all these people trying to figure out how to assassinate you and take your job. If they could promise me that none of that would happen, I feel like I could probably make a few things up.

**John:** I could make a few things up.

**Craig:** I couldn’t have done worse than Bob Chapek. No offense, Bob Chapek.

**John:** Honestly, it seemed like the politics were a big part of why he didn’t succeed, because he didn’t have the trust of the people that were working for him.

**Craig:** When the Florida thing happened, I could feel myself sweating. I’m like, “What would I do? This is really tricky.” That’s tricky. You’re like, “On the one hand, I have my principles and I have my morals. On the other hand, part of my principles and morals is taking care of the 12,000 people that I employ in the state of Florida. What do I do?” That’s a tough one. I’m glad I don’t run a company.

**John:** I’m glad I’m not taking over for Nancy Pelosi, because I’ve also been thinking about that.

**Craig:** That’s a hard one.

**John:** That’s a hard job. That’s a lot of [crosstalk 00:09:37]

**Craig:** Thank god you’ve been thinking about that. Who do you not thinking about taking over from?

**John:** I’m involved in a project right now, which Megana knows has just an incredibly high degree of cat wrangling. I can do it. You got to think from each person’s perspective, what are they looking for, what do they need to hear. That’s a challenging job. That’s why whoever takes over for Bob Iger or the ruins of Twitter whenever Elon Musk gets bored is going to have a lot to do. Let’s get to some questions. We have two follow-up questions about your outlining process, Craig.

**Craig:** Fair enough.

**Megana:** Neil asked, “I just listened to the episode on writing difficult scenes, and Craig mentioned his go-to on preparation via an outline. I’ve heard his testament to outlines a bunch, but I’ve never been able to track down an actual sample of Craig’s. Are there any available in the archives? I’m an engineer, so less of a pantser and more of a plotter, or maybe a plantser.”

**Craig:** A plantster.

**John:** A plantster.

**Craig:** I don’t have any out there, but it’s possible that maybe after The Last of Us runs through, I might put that show bible out there, because it’s quite extensive. I generally avoid doing it, because as much as I enjoy informing and educating to whatever extent I can, I’m also… I don’t just teach cooking. I also am a chef. I don’t necessarily want to show people how my magic tricks are fully done. A little bit of the process I think should remain opaque.

**John:** Maybe if we can’t see the actual visual, can you describe for an episode of Last of Us or an episode of Chernobyl, how many pages was an outline? Was it paragraphs? How closely were you matching? Were there scene headers? What do your outlines look like?

**Craig:** I don’t do scene headers. It’s basically prose. For each episode, my guess is, I would say probably five to eight pages, single-spaced paragraphs describing what happens, and more importantly, why. That’s the thing, because I don’t write these for myself. I write them for myself and others, so that everybody can feel what we’re doing before we do it. That’s important to me.

**John:** Your paragraphs are largely matching up to what scenes look like. No paragraph is going to cover multiple scenes or it will [inaudible 00:12:05].

**Craig:** No, a paragraph could cover multiple scenes, because I know there are certain scenes that flow together. Two people have left one place. They’re on their way to another. Then the next day they’re there, and a thing happens. Then they move on. Those things could probably be a paragraph where we describe what happens and what’s discussed or why it’s important. I will combine.

**John:** For Neil’s edification, what Craig is describing is actually a pretty common length and size and scale and scope of an outline in television. A lot of one-hour dramas that you’re going to see are going to have a document like that at some point that goes to the producers, to the studio, to other people, to let them know this is what’s going to happen in the episode, and sometimes they’ll get notes off that outline, depending what the process is.

**Craig:** Just as important as those episode outlines, there’s also character breakdowns, and there’s general discussion of theme. I will also sometimes take a moment to talk about, for instance… There are no spoilers here for The Last of Us. I apologize to those of you who are looking for them. In the outline, in the show bible, one of the little sections was a section on violence and what our philosophy about violence was, how we wanted to portray it, and what we thought was important philosophically for everybody to know as we went ahead and writing and then producing the show. It’s your chance to basically get anything off your chest you want, that you want other people to know.

**John:** In some ways, that’s doing what a tone meeting might do, but way in advance. People are looking at documents. Everyone knows going into the project, this is what our goals are here. Then you’ll have very specific notes on individual scripts, individual scenes.

**Craig:** In fact, the outline, the show bible we did, it was very extensive. I think it was about 180 pages. It was also the document that our production team used initially to budget. It was thorough enough that they could essentially get within, it was really close, within actually 5% of what we ultimately ended up spending, because they had a sense of locations and set pieces and all that.

**John:** A follow-up question from Tommy here. He asked, “In the last episode, Craig talked about needing roughly 20 days to write a one-hour TV script. How much of that time is spent before that in the outlining phase?” Is it 20 days after this episode is outlined?

**Craig:** The 20 days is the length of time I need to write the script. The amount of time it takes to outline things ahead of that is considerable. None of that is really divisible by episode, per se. You have to figure everything out together. That process could be two, three months, where you’re really trying to figure out how you’re breaking this all apart and what the episodes are going to be. Then you can spend about a week just writing it all up in one massive document.

**John:** Cool.

**Craig:** Then after that, yeah, it’s about 20 days. For me at least, it’s about 20 days.

**John:** Great. Before we get on to our big marquee topic, we have a bit of follow-up here. Way back when, Craig and I each did episodes with Megana, just Megana, where we answered listener questions and tried to get some good advice to people. One of those people is Ben. He wrote in about some advice that Megana and I gave him. Craig, would you talk us through Ben’s follow-up here?

**Craig:** I will play the role of Ben. He says, “I wanted to give you all some follow-up on my question that John and Megana answered on Episode 543 about my boss’s boss’s boss inviting me to send my script in to the head of the studio that I work at as an office coordinator, and I wondered whether or not I could take a year to do so. I took John’s advice and sent my script to six friends to make sure what I was writing would be worth sending. All my friends loved it, and so I sent it to a couple of other people I made connections with at work, and they loved it too. I was a little skeptical, because I’ve never gotten this type of universal positive response before. I was wondering if telling them I had this opportunity made them forgive certain shortcomings in the script.” I like Ben. I like that he’s nervous about good news.

**John:** Thoughtful.

**Craig:** That’s the way to be. He goes on, “I then checked it over a couple more times and finally end it to my friends who are a little more harsh. They loved it too. Just a few easily correctable notes. I emailed my boss. As John predicted, my boss’s boss’s boss said she couldn’t send it in to the head, but she connected me with a few creative executives, and after signing a release form, I submitted my script for them to review. It took them a month to read, but they got back to me, and they loved it also. It was great timing, as I wrote a family spooky movie,” for spooky season, “and they read it three days before Halloween. The creative executive said my script was a really fun read and very well executed and invited me to the lot to, quote, talk generally. He made it clear that the script wasn’t quite right for their current slate, but he did invite me to have coffee with him. I just got back from the meeting. It couldn’t have gone better. We really hit it off. He invited me to send him another script when I have one ready. He’s a really nice dude.

“All of this to say thank you, John and Megana, for your advice and all the great tips. Also, I want to thank Craig as well,” thank you, “even though he didn’t answer my question directly,” and has done nothing for my life, “but has given me like 600 episodes of advice as well.” That worked out phenomenally for Ben.

**John:** It worked out so well for Ben. That’s great. Craig, you stopped where he said take a year to send in the script, which felt like too long for us as well. I think what Ben did, which is really smart, is really just double check, like, “Wait, is what I’m writing any good at all?” and actually get that feedback to say oh yeah, this is actually pretty good. He went through then proper channels, and people liked it. It sounded like he was doing the right things there. My question for you, and for us to discuss, is what should Ben be doing next, because he’s had this good meeting with a creative executive. That’s lovely, but that doesn’t do anything. What should Ben be doing next?

**Craig:** I think the very first thing Ben should be doing is dropping an email back to his new creative executive friend and saying, “Hey, would love to get myself an agent. Any chance you could slip this script and your general approval and good feelings to an agent that you think might be well suited for me?” That’s the very first thing I would do.

**John:** I think that’s the right choice, so agent and/or manager. “I’m looking for a rep,” is the general thing, and who does this creative executive think might be the right person. The way to think about this from Ben’s point of view is like, “Okay, I know what I get out of this, but what could this creative executive get out of this?” In some ways, there are reciprocal relationships between your agents, certain managers and execs. If this exec really does think you’re a pretty good writer, then sending you to this representative could be a good, sympathetic kind of thing. It could actually help both of them. Don’t feel weird about asking for that ask is what I’m saying.

**Craig:** No, not at all. This is how it all starts. I imagine that the creative executive is probably roughly in the same age bracket you are, Ben. As we all grow up together in the business, we meet each other’s friends and connect each other with people that we like to work with. By this point, I know a whole lot of people in this business that I’ve never actually worked with, but you never know. We like each other, and then they mention something to somebody else. Crazy things happen all the time.

**John:** That’s how I got my first agent was a friend sent my script to a producer, who read it and liked it and said, “Hey, could I take this in to the studio?” I said, “That would be great. Also, I need an agent.” He’s like, “Oh, I think I know the perfect person for you.” That became my first agent.

**Craig:** There you go. There you go.

**John:** Ben, keep us posted a year from now and let us know what’s happened next. Great. Marquee topic here. Julian wrote in with a link to this thread by David Wappel, a writer I don’t know. Wappel’s thread was showing how nouns and sentence structures, when used well, can feel like they’re directing on the page, in the good sense of directing on the page. They really give you a sense of what you’re seeing. In this thread, he’s pointing out the difference between, “Sally reaches into her back pocket,” and, “Her hand slips into her back pocket,” and the idea that the second one, we’re clearly focusing on her hand. We feel like we’re in a closeup there on that.

Another example from this thread is on apples. If I say the stem of an apple, you’re thinking very closely about that stem of the apple. If I say an apple, you’re probably picturing the whole thing. If I say five apples, we move wider. A bushel of apples, a row of apple bushels, you get the sense that we’re pulling out wider and wider with those shots.

Useful there, but in some ways I was like, “Obviously.” I think it’s a thing that I do subconsciously, that I’ve never actually put words to. You and I are doing this all the time. Every sentence, every scene, we’re really thinking about what is the visual idea and how I’m using that visual idea to direct the reader’s attention, but I don’t know if we talked about it so explicitly on the podcast. We probably talked about it in Three Page Challenges. I want to spend a little segment talking about how we emphasize and convey the visual information we need not just scene by scene, but sentence by sentence, word by word.

**Craig:** Which is why, when people say, “Don’t direct on the page,” I just want to slap the world, because what else can we do? If you are visualizing the scene appropriately, visualizing it in terms of, as you said, close, far, up, down, movement, still, then the language ought to flow naturally from that. If you were imagining a closeup of Sally’s hand reaching into her back pocket, slipping into her back pocket, so now it feels a bit furtive, you would never write, “Sally reaches into her back pocket.” Those words wouldn’t happen as a result of the thought you just had. [Crosstalk 00:21:57]

**John:** Craig, sometimes I think people do stop at the very most basic sentence that gets the idea across. I worry that sometimes as we look at Three Page Challenges, we are getting a little bit like, “Sally reaches into her back pocket.”

**Craig:** Then people, stop doing that.

**John:** I want to shine a bit of a spotlight on it, because I think it’s an automatic process for you and for me. I don’t think it’s necessarily an automatic process for other writers, especially because screenwriting is a little bit different. All writing is about word choices and sentence structure, but screenwriting is a little different. As an example, here is a paragraph from Pride and Prejudice, one of the great novels. Jane Austen, really, really talented writer. Let me read this to you, and you can see why it’s not screenwriting.

“Mr. Bennett was so odd, a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic humor, reserved caprice, that the experience of 3 and 20 years had been insufficient to make his wife understand his character. Her mind was less difficult to develop. She was a woman of mean understanding, little information, and uncertain temper. When she was discontented, she fancied herself nervous. The business of her life was to get her daughters married. Its solace was visiting and news.”

A terrific paragraph. The word choice, every little thing, every comma was deliberate, so smart, and that is not at all how you write screenplays.

**Craig:** No, because this is somebody that is relaying information to you about things that are not happening in front of your eyes-

**John:** Exactly.

**Craig:** … whereas in screenwriting, everything is happening in front of your eyes, unless you’re dealing with a voiceover or something like that. In a voiceover, you could do something like this. However, while the voiceover was doing all this, I need to know what I’m seeing.

**John:** Exactly.

**Craig:** This would actually be wonderful if I heard this in voiceover and then I-

**John:** Oh my god, a dream.

**Craig:** … witnessed Mrs. Bennett showing “little information and uncertain temper.” Because we are a visual medium and because we do not relay descriptions of things that have already happened, we are always in the business of thinking about what we’re seeing and hearing.

**John:** I think the challenge I want to put to our listeners is, as you’re doing the screenwriting, really be thinking about what is the visual idea of the sentence. Oftentimes, there’ll be a single visual idea in the sentence or a series of visuals that imply motion that gets you from place to place. If you have a sentence that has no visual idea in it, it has to have another really good reason why you need to put it there, because otherwise it’s not doing the job of screenwriting. Not every sentence in your screenplay is going to have visual information, but most of them should. That visual information should probably be at the start of the sentence rather than touch back in at the end of the sentence.

**Craig:** Let’s say that the word screen also encompasses sound.

**John:** Of course.

**Craig:** We are screen sound writers. That means we are visual sound writers. That’s what we do. That’s the description of the job. When you are putting these little moments together, there is no moment too small to be considering how to guide the mind’s eye of the reader to align with your mind’s eye as the writer.

**John:** I pulled some examples from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. This is from the very start. “Chocolate pours into a mold, one of hundreds inching along a conveyor belt. Complicated gears tug on oiled canvas ropes, slipping through swinging pulleys.” “With giant scissors, Wonka slices a fat red ribbon. One of the ribbon ends flutters up, obscuring Wonka’s face yet again.” “Wonka’s hand smooths out the blueprint for a massive structure, complete with curvy onion domes and twisted columns.”

Just four sentences picked at random from the script. It’s clear what the visuals are in the sentence. Also, if there’s multiple visuals, it’s clear how we’re moving between those multiple visuals. It’s not just the nouns. The nouns are very specific. The verbs used to convey action and convey meaning are also very specific. They’re tugging. They are pouring. They are fluttering. You could write more basic versions of each of those sentences, but they would not convey the visual information you’re trying to convey.

**Craig:** I particularly like that first one, because if I were handed that as a director, there’s an implication that I’m going to be shooting a closeup of chocolate pouring into a mold, and then I’m going to shoot a much wider shot to reveal that mold is one of a hundred. Perhaps I watch the chocolate pouring into the mold, and then I angle the camera slightly [inaudible 00:26:28] to reveal there’s this line of a hundred that are moving along, and that was just one of a hundred that are exactly the same. There’s all sorts of implications from the way that was written that you would not get if you weren’t considering what you wanted people to look at and see.

**John:** If I say, “A conveyor belt shows hundreds of chocolate bars being produced,” that doesn’t give you the same information, doesn’t tell you what you need to see.

**Craig:** It doesn’t. “One of hundreds inching along” is giving me a sense of speed. I can kind of hear it. There’s a vibe to it. There’s a lot of information there that is producible. As much as you can, if you think about… This is really what the job is. If you imagine a moment in your mind, what is the best way to describe that with the fewest words? That’s the game.

**John:** Its other general rules, I would say, general principles, is have characters doing things rather than things just existing. If you can have a character make a change within the scene, make a change within the sentence, the character is doing something rather than a thing just is, that is helpful. That’s not a condition on avoiding the verb to be. It’s just saying if a character can take an action that is part of the visual, that’s more helpful, and getting back to, again, showing us rather than telling us. Rather than just describing a thing, make it really feel like we are giving you a visual to really show what the thing is, rather than just being narrated to about what the activity is that’s going on.

**Craig:** Those are great rules. I would throw this one on the pile also. Watch out for certain words that mean lots of different things to you but may not mean lots of different things to the reader. For instance, let’s say it’s as simple as somebody smiles. We smile for a thousand different reasons. We smile because we are excited. We smile because we pity. We smile because we’re giving up. There’s so many reasons we smile. If you find yourself using one of those words that have a billion purposes, consider what you could do to relay the more specific aspect of it.

You could say, “John says, dialog, ‘Unfortunately, it turns out we’re not going to be able to offer you the job after all,'” and then in action, “Craig smiles, stands up, shrugs, shakes John’s hand,” or you could say in parentheses, in action, “Yes, as I figured.” You can try as best you can to not rely too much on people reading your mind, because they’re not always going to be able to, especially if there’s ambiguous action.

**John:** Here’s an example from Station Eleven I thought was really useful. “Jeevan faux-waves, straightens up, knows no one at this macabre gathering. He pats his jacket, looking for his phone, not left, not right, not back, not chest, remembers where his jacket is.” Very specific actions that Jeevan is doing, and it lets us know something about Jeevan. Clear visuals. We know what we’re actually seeing on screen. We also know why Jeevan is doing it. We know what he’s looking for. We can connect his thought process there. We’ve been that person, and we understand what he’s looking for. Another example from Station Eleven, “Kirsten’s attention has been drawn to the big windows, so huge they’re like the deck of a space station. She approaches the glass and puts her fingers on them, looking down at the lights of the pier.”

**Craig:** I could direct that. I know what to do. I even get a sense of alienation. All the things that they would want me to feel here, I understand. They’re just pouring off of these words. Note that you don’t have to say, “She approaches the glass and puts her fingers on them, a tiny person lost in the world,” blah da da, “separated by glass,” blah, whatever the hell it is. You get it. Any time somebody puts their hand on glass, I know what it means. I also know what to do. I know to shoot the hand. I also know to shoot back through the window at her, which would be great. “Looking down at the lights of the pier” implies I need to see what she’s seeing. I also need to see her seeing what she’s seeing.

**John:** The camera’s going to probably raise up a little bit so we can get the look down at the-

**Craig:** Yep.

**John:** Good stuff.

**Craig:** Then the reverse is a low angle back up. Distance would be great there, to get a sense of scope, because the windows are “so huge they’re like the deck of a space station,” so I need to be really wide behind her. There are all these things clearly implied by the writing there. Weirdly, for a craft where everyone is constantly admonished to not direct on the page, the one thing that will get your script bought, sold, produced, directing on the page.

**John:** This whole conversation I wanted to avoid, the “we see,” “we hears,” the wes of it all, because none of these examples involve the wes.

**Craig:** These don’t need them.

**John:** These are just good visuals, clearly communicated, giving us a sense of what it would feel like to be in the audience, seeing that produced on the screen.

**Craig:** As much as I love writing “we see” and “we hear,” I only do it when I need it.

**John:** In this case, we don’t need it.

**Craig:** We don’t need it.

**John:** Let’s get to some listener questions. Megana, can you help us out?

**Megana:** Yes. Adam asks, “How many montages can my 118-page screenplay have?”

**Craig:** 118.

**John:** Three.

**Craig:** I really do love the idea of a 118-page screenplay with 118 montages.

**John:** It’s all montages the whole time through.

**Craig:** Every page is a montage.

**John:** Everything Everywhere All At Once is honestly probably 118 montages.

**Craig:** It’s close. It is.

**John:** The answer is there’s no answer, but here’s what I’ll say. If you’re using the word montage more than three times in a script, something is probably weird about your script. It feels different. If you’re doing bullet-pointy montages a lot in your script, something is really strange about your script, and that’s worth noticing. Did you write a strange script?

**Craig:** Yeah, particularly if the montage is doing the most tropey of montage purposes, which is some sort of training/growth.

**John:** (singing)

**Craig:** (singing) I include makeovers as part of training and growth. There are certain kinds of montages that we almost don’t even notice are montages. For instance, very common when you’re watching a movie or television show and people are driving quite a distance from one place to another, there’s nothing happening along the way other than the driving, that’ll get montaged. We don’t feel like it’s a montage. It’s not the same thing as someone decides they’re going to start lifting weights and here we go, or the worst of them all, the novelist finally figures out what to write and 40 seconds later, there’s a book.

**Megana:** No, there’s papers flying first.

**Craig:** Of course. First, you have to throw… The wastepaper basket has to get filled up.

**John:** It has to overfill.

**Craig:** It overfills, and then suddenly you’re like, “I’ve got it.” Now, you’re just pulling the paper out, slapping it on that pile right to the right of you, and then threading in the next page, because everybody exists in 1963 when they’re writing a novel, and then clack clack clack clack clack. I hate that so much.

**John:** Getting back to the point of when you use the word montage and when you don’t use the word montage, I feel like I’ve probably used the word montage in my scripts maybe five times in a career. There are a lot of montages in there. Spring comes to the castle. A couple sentences describing what has changed and what we’re seeing. You don’t necessarily need to use the word montage to make that clear.

**Craig:** Agreed. How many montages? Not too many.

**John:** Not too many.

**Craig:** Adam is regretting asking us this question. He’s like, “These guys don’t know what they’re talking about?” What’s the next question, Megana? I feel like we’re going to crush the next one.

**Megana:** David asks, “My story takes place in a real town with a small population. After a recent draft, the townspeople have become way more complicit in the evil doings of the antagonist. Is this poor taste, since real people live in this town and are being represented negatively? Should I change it to a fictional town, or is this just part of the storytelling game and I shouldn’t worry about it?”

**John:** Interesting. It’s a real small town. David is writing some terrible deeds happening in this small town that people are complicit in. I don’t know. He’s not saying whether it’s a true story or not. If it’s a true story, then yes, you have to be much more mindful of the fact that people can be mashed together to be in your thing. I really wouldn’t worry about it. You cannot libel a town. You can libel people.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Unless you are making it clear that these are the specific people who are doing this terrible thing, I think you’re in the clear.

**Craig:** I would refer you to obscure author Stephen King, David, who has forced real small towns in Maine to go through all sorts of horrible things, and Massachusetts. As long as the actual people aren’t reading this and going, “Wait a second, that’s me,” then you’re fine. That thing at the end of episodes or movies that say, “Any resemblance to people alive or dead is,” what is it, coincidence? That’s the key. I would not worry about this too much.

**John:** Agree. Megana, it looks like we have a question about shooting scripts.

**Megana:** Yes. CH asks, “I keep being told by a fellow writer that I shouldn’t put things like establishing shots into a script. He tells me that this is something that is done when you write the shooting script.”

**Craig:** What?

**Megana:** “Can you tell me about the process that happens to a script when it goes into production and a director gets his hands on it? What is the difference between a script and a shooting script? Who writes the shooting script?”

**John:** Wow, some fundamental questions here. I also want to point out “gets his hands on it.” Their hands on it? It could be a woman. It could be a person who identifies as a he.

**Craig:** It could be a person without hands.

**John:** By the way, it could be a person without hands.

**Craig:** Just saying.

**John:** I want to start by saying we could probably put a link in the show notes to a previous episode where we talked about some of the things that do change when you move into production. You don’t see numbered scripts until you get pretty close to production, until someone tells you, “We need scene numbers.” Then you put scene numbers in. You don’t put them in scripts up until that point. There’s not a big difference between a shooting script and the script that you’re writing. It’s a mistake to think that they are completely different things or that some other person does them.

**Craig:** CH, here’s what I would like you to tell your fellow writer. You’re wrong, fellow writer. Apologies, but you’re wrong. The shooting script is not a thing. The shooting script is just like, “Okay, we’re shooting now, so I guess this draft is the one we’re working with for now,” but you can revise that one. There’s no special skill to writing a shooting script. There is absolutely nothing other than, as John says, scene numbers, that belong in that script but not in earlier script. If you want to say establishing shot so-and-so, of course you write that into your script. You don’t need to wait for some theoretical day where they tap a magic wand on your document and call it the shooting script. There’s no such thing really. For the legal purposes of figuring out credit, the Writers Guild essentially describes the shooting script as the last one. That’s the last one they got published. That’s it. I guess that’s the shooting script.

I have a feeling that your fellow writer either is not particularly experienced or is just deeply confused. In anything, just for all of you, any time anybody gives you advice that smells like, “Hey writers, know your place,” reject it.

**John:** Here’s where I think the friend maybe got confused is that online you will find screenplays and you will find screenplays that look just like the screenplays you and I would write normally, or you’ll find what are called shooting scripts, which all have half pages and A and B pages and stars in the margins, and they look crazy. They’ll be in different colors if they were originally in different colors. There’ll be weird headers on things. That kind of shooting script is the production drafts that go through multiple series of revisions and stuff. Things can look really strange in those. You don’t want your script to start that way. It’s just a way that we’ve decided to handle additions and deletions to shooting scripts while we’re in production. We don’t have to re-shoot the whole script. We can just re-shoot pages. That is the difference between a shooting script and the original script.

Sometimes it’s harder to read shooting scripts, because they are just messy, and there’s weird one-eighth pages, and things get broken, strangely. You’re not writing that. You’re writing a draft, and you’re writing the script that is meant to be read and goes into production. Don’t worry about the differences here.

**Craig:** Agreed.

**John:** Agreed. I think it’s come time for our One Cool Things.

**Craig:** Oh, exciting.

**John:** I have a big One Cool Thing and a very small, little, adorable One Cool Thing. My big One Cool Thing is, previously on the show we’ve talked about the Inevitable Foundation, which is a great group here in Los Angeles that helps match writers with disabilities and people who should be hiring those writers with disabilities. They’ve had a great track record of getting people staffed on shows and getting projects set up. This last week I went to an event that they were doing that was really focusing on their new class but also their concierge service. I want to hype up the concierge service. If you are person who is looking to hire on a writer with a disability for a specific project or if you have a show, and it’s like, “Man, it really would be fantastic to find a deaf writer from a Latin background for my show,” you call them, you [inaudible 00:40:10] them an email, and right away, they will give you a list of some really great writers and samples for you to be reading through.

Shoshannah Stern, who was a previous Scriptnotes guest, was one of the hosts of this event. She’s a great example of somebody who is working today in part because people recognized, “Wow, it would be really great to have a deaf writer to help us figure out how to do this show about deaf characters.”

Just hyping up the Inevitable Foundation. If you are a person who is looking to staff, you’re an executive who is curious about trying to find disabled writers for your project, they are the place you should go to first.

**Craig:** That’s great.

**John:** We’ll put a link in the show notes to them. My small, adorable One Cool Thing is, you can see it in the show notes here, I fell for an Instagram ad which was about these little crochet animals you can make. I bought the little kit. It was kind of difficult but actually really fun and rewarding. I made Pierre the Penguin that you see there, this adorable, little, plush thing that I crocheted just from a bunch of yarn.

**Craig:** This was not something I could have foreseen.

**John:** I’m a crafty person, Craig.

**Craig:** You are.

**John:** You’ve seen me-

**Craig:** You’re amazingly crafty. It’s just the crocheting was something-

**John:** Crocheting?

**Craig:** … that I did not foresee. I love it. It’s adorable. I will tell you… John already knows this. I watched John expertly duct tape the handles of picket signs for our last strike, not to be confused with the one we’re about to have. He watched me absolutely screw up. All I needed to do was just duct tape a wooden stick, and I really struggled.

**John:** It’s all about the angle.

**Craig:** His, it was diagonal, and it was layered perfectly. I have a feeling Megana would also be just amazing at that.

**John:** Megana has great craft.

**Craig:** She looks crafty as hell. I still do not know how to wrap a present. That’s me. This is wild. I love the way this thing looks. You’re a very good crocheter. Speaking of crocheting and crocheters and pronouncing French words, John, you mentioned that the Inevitable Foundation has a concierge service. Have you heard, and I have heard this so many times, people say concierge [said like concier]?

**John:** Yeah, they’re over-applying the language. They’re over-applying the rule. They think a French word, you have to not say the last bit of it.

**Craig:** They don’t understand that if the word were C-O-N-C-I-E-R-T, yes, concierge [said like concier], but concierge, G-E, the word’s concierge. I never know what to say when they say concierge [said like concier]. I don’t want to be that guy, but I am that guy. I am that guy.

**John:** While we’re in a digression about pronouncing things, where is the World Cup being held right now?

**Craig:** Qatar [said like cutter].

**John:** We decided it was Qatar [said like cutter] and not Qatar [said like ka-tar]. I’m fine with it. I’m fine with it, by the way. It’s just interesting that we’ve now all come to agree that we’re going to say Qatar [said like cutter] rather than Qatar [said like ka-tar].

**Craig:** I think we agree because the people from Qatar [said like cutter] were like, “It’s called Qatar [said like cutter].”

**John:** It’s interesting in what cases we decide to use the local pronunciation and not, because we call it Paris, we don’t call it Paris [said like Pari], but some people insist on calling it Barcelona [said like Barselona], which drives me crazy.

**Craig:** It’s too much. Part of it is when we learn these terms. Qatar as a nation is not… As a people, it’s been around forever, but as a nation, it’s relatively new compared to say China. The word for China in Chinese is not China any more than the word for Japan is Nippon. Why don’t we call it Nippon? I don’t know. It’s because just somewhere along the line they said Japan. Then we do change things. We don’t say Bombay. We say Mumbai. What are some of the other ones? Beijing is the best example. It used to be Peking.

**John:** Peking.

**Craig:** Now it’s Beijing.

**John:** Those were cases where it was like our colonialism had forced a word on there and we were like, “Oh, that’s not the real name for things, so let’s not call it that.”

**Craig:** Then other places, we have no problem forcing our colonialism on. It’s like, “Fine. You’ll just be called this or you’ll be called that.” Korea’s not Korea. That’s not the name for Korea in Korea. I don’t think it is.

**John:** No, it’s Hanguk.

**Craig:** Yeah. Anyway.

**John:** Anyway.

**Craig:** Any who.

**John:** That’s a digression. Anyway, the Woobles are adorable little things. I think they’re largely sold out. I can’t believe I’m hyping something I found on an Instagram ad, but I enjoyed it.

**Craig:** You’re hyping it. My One Cool Thing, this one’s expensive, folks. This will be more expensive than the Woobles. I use a Yeti mic for this podcast. I can’t remember what my headphones are, but they’re nice. I enjoy them. They’re nice. I had them brought to my house, because I was at home sick with COVID, and I’d left them there, of course, because that’s me. Here I am in the office, and I need to plug headphones into my mic so I can do this podcast.

As luck would have it, our amazing editor, Tim Goode, had gotten our amazing producer, Jack Lesko, a pair of new headphones, because she didn’t have really good reference headphones. I’ve immediately stolen them for this podcast. I will give them back. I promise I will give her her headphones back, but they’re awesome. These are AKG headphones. The model is K702. They are reference studio headphones, open back, around ear. What I love about these is they are incredibly comfortable and I can hear my own voice not solely through the microphone, if that makes sense. I’m hearing my own voice much more naturally, which is really nice. My ears don’t feel quite so stifled. In terms of actual sound reproduction, these I think are state of the art. I don’t even know what they cost. Should we dare to look it up and see?

**John:** Let’s dare. We’ll take a moment here.

**Craig:** Oh, boy.

**Megana:** They’re not crazy.

**Craig:** What are they?

**Megana:** It looks like they’re on sale for 289.

**Craig:** That’s not horrible. We are heading into the holiday season. They are a joy. I’m getting myself a pair of these for sure.

**John:** Craig, I’m guessing that the headphones you’ve been using have been the Sony MDR ones.

**Craig:** I think they are.

**John:** They’re the classic-

**Craig:** I think that’s right.

**John:** That’s what Megana and I both use. They’re great. They’re the standard. Obviously, if you have something that you like better, go for it.

**Craig:** These feel better. I’d say they feel better and they sound better, to me. If you are looking for some reference studio headphones that feel comfortable and reproduce sound nicely, and you’ve got a little dough to spend, or perhaps you want to shower somebody with luxury this holiday season, AKG by Harman, K702.

**John:** K702. That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It’s edited by Matthew Chilelli.

**Craig:** Yay yay, woo woo!

**John:** Our outro this week is by Matthew Jordan. If you have an outro, you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That is also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions, Craig’s not on Twitter anymore, I’m @johnaugust for the moment. We’ll see. We have T-shirts. They’re great. You can find them at Cotton Bureau. I think you can still probably get them in time for Christmas if you order today. You’ll find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you can find the transcripts and sign up for our weeklyish 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 the dessert bracket. Which is the ultimate dessert-

**Craig:** Ultimate.

**John:** … that will beat all others? Craig and Megana, thank you for a fun show.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**Megana:** Thank you.

[Bonus Segment]

**John:** This is inspired by several things. First off, it’s the Great British Baking Show just resolved, or Great British Bake-Off if you’re British, which was always a delightful show to watch. They were always making great, delicious, tasty desserts and some other tacos [said like tack-os] that they should not be trying to make.

**Craig:** Tacos. Taco [said like tack-o].

**John:** Tacos [said like tack-os].

**Craig:** Their pasta [said like pass-ta] and their tacos [said like tack-os].

**John:** Oh my gosh, don’t get me started on the pico de gallo [said like gall-o] and pico [said like pike-o] de gallo [said like gal-o].

**Craig:** I know. Come on, British people.

**John:** It’s also the holidays, which means there’s lots of good desserts out there. I thought we would actually just take a moment and really figure out which is the best dessert possible.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** In this bracket, we’re going to have 16 different desserts competing. I want you to imagine the best possible version of a thing. It can be a thing you make yourself or a thing you got from that one fantastic place. It’s the ultimate version of it. Don’t worry about the mediocre ones.

**Craig:** Perfect.

**John:** We will start with the fruit pies. Which is the winner, apple pie or cherry pie?

**Craig:** Apple.

**John:** Megana?

**Megana:** Apple.

**Craig:** It’s apple. It’s apple, for sure.

**John:** I don’t think there’s really a [inaudible 00:49:15] question. Cherry pie is delicious. Again, vanilla ice cream elevates both of them. Apple pie is the one you want to go for.

**Craig:** The only way to really make cherry pie is to over-sugar and glop the cherries. The cherries themselves become kind of gross and not really cherry-like, so yeah, it’s apple pie.

**Megana:** It’s just not as versatile.

**Craig:** I agree.

**John:** Apple pie also you could have for breakfast the next morning. It’s delicious.

**Craig:** It’s wonderful.

**John:** So good. So good. Next the battle of the breads. We’ve got banana bread versus bread pudding.

**Craig:** That’s actually tricky, because you’re asking me to imagine the best possible version. If you were going for just average probability of happiness, you’d go with banana bread, I think, but the best possible version of bread pudding destroys banana bread.

**John:** That’s where I’m coming too as well. Megana, what’s your feeling on the breads?\

**Megana:** I am bread pudding all day every day.

**Craig:** There you go.

**John:** I’ll pick a bread pudding at a restaurant almost any day, so let’s go for it.

**Megana:** I’m just going to say it. I think banana bread is over-hyped.

**Craig:** It’s fine. You know what it is? It’s a dessert that anyone can make, and so it gets over-made. That said, somebody did recently give me, as a gift, a wonderful banana bread.

**John:** Did it have walnuts in it? Should banana bread have walnuts?

**Craig:** It should not, and it didn’t.

**Megana:** I just think it’s a place that we’ve convinced ourselves that it’s good so we don’t feel guilty about our brown bananas and doing something with them. Let’s just end this charade.

**Craig:** It’s one of the most annoying things. Melissa’s like, “I’m making banana bread.” I’m like, “You’re rotting food on my counter. That’s what I’m seeing.” Next, we have cake.

**John:** We have cakes.

**Craig:** That’s a big one.

**John:** Which do we prefer? Do you want a chocolate birthday cake or a poundcake?

**Craig:** I’m going to be the unpopular one here. I don’t love chocolate cake. I find it to be cloying. It’s too much for my palette. I’m not a huge chocolate person. Actually, I think a good poundcake, a really well done poundcake can be fantastic. I’m actually going to go with poundcake.

**John:** Is the poundcake frosted in any way? Is there a glaze to it?

**Craig:** No, I would not do frosting or glaze. I’m a purist.

**John:** Megana, what are you thinking in this cake battle here?

**Megana:** I knew that Craig and I felt the same way about chocolate birthday cake, so I am also going to go with pound cake.

**Craig:** Nice.

**John:** I would generally go for chocolate birthday cake, but I will go with the majority here, so poundcake is the winner.

**Craig:** Poundcake.

**John:** Now we’re going to worldwide here, international. Crepes Suzette versus baklava.

**Craig:** Can I throw one other one on there?

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** Tiramisu.

**John:** Tiramisu’s also really good.

**Craig:** With that, my answer is tiramisu.

**John:** Again, we’re trying to only picture the ultimate versions of tiramisu. I’ve had some really shit tiramisus. I think I’m still leaning towards baklava.

**Craig:** Interesting.

**John:** Megana, help us out.

**Megana:** I know I’m taking this way too seriously, but this is incredibly difficult for me.

**Craig:** I know. You’re stressing out. I love it.

**Megana:** I’m going to go with crepes, just to mix things up.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** Now what do we do?

**John:** [Crosstalk 00:52:27].

**Craig:** I think what we have to do is maybe rank choice this, even though Sarah Palin does not like that system.

**John:** Absolutely, rank choice voting. Craig, rank them. Crepes, tiramisu, baklava.

**Craig:** I’m going to go tiramisu one, crepes Suzette two, baklava three.

**John:** I would go baklava one, tiramisu two, crepes Suzette three.

**Megana:** I’m going crepes one, baklava two, tiramisu three.

**Craig:** Oh god, did we just [crosstalk 00:52:54]?

**John:** Good Lord, I think we completely broke it.

**Craig:** Oh, no. Did we break our whole system?

**John:** We’re going to circle back to that. We’re going to cleanse our palette with other ones and circle back to the worldwide.

**Craig:** I’m happy to defer to crepes Suzette. It’s not that I don’t like baklava.

**John:** It is one note. It is one very sugary and honey sweet-

**Craig:** Very sugary. I don’t tend to like Middle Eastern dessert profiles, whether it’s Israeli or-

**Megana:** It’s so syrupy.

**Craig:** It’s so syrupy. Exactly.

**John:** It is syrupy. We’ll go for crepes Suzette. It has fire. Fire is exciting.

**Craig:** Fire is exciting, and it’s French.

**John:** Alternative pies. We have pumpkin pie versus key lime pie.

**Craig:** Wow. Oof. Man. You’re kind of catching us at a weird time in the calendar here.

**John:** That’s true.

**Craig:** Going for the best possible version, the ceiling on pumpkin pie is higher than the ceiling on key lime pie.

**John:** I agree.

**Craig:** I would go pumpkin pie.

**John:** I’m going to go pumpkin pie too. Megana?

**Megana:** Yeah. That was a great analysis.

**Craig:** We think we’re on CNN.

**Megana:** Or ESPN.

**John:** The only ting I’ll say is, two bites of key lime pie, and wow, this is really great, but my 10th bite of key lime pie, I’m like, “I don’t want anymore,” whereas pumpkin pie, I can keep eating it.

**Craig:** I’ve made them both from scratch. They’re both excellent. By the way, tip on key lime pie, never use key limes to make key lime pie. They’re disgusting.

**John:** Just use normal limes.

**Craig:** They’re tiny and bitter. Mediterranean limes, which are the ones you would imagine in your mind, those make a much better key lime pie. This has been confirmed by the excellent people in the test kitchens at Cooks Illustrated.

**John:** Love it. The cold round, cheesecake versus ice cream, any flavor, including hot fudge sundaes.

**Craig:** This is an easy one.

**John:** Are we going for ice cream or cheesecake?

**Craig:** Best version for me, cheesecake all day long.

**John:** I’m also going to go with cheesecake. Megana, what are you thinking?

**Megana:** I imagine this is what it would be like if you asked me to pick between me children.

**Craig:** It’s Sophie’s Choice. This is your Sophie’s Choice. One of them has to die.

**John:** One of them will come with you. The other one will just melt out on the sidewalk.

**Craig:** You’re actually crying.

**Megana:** God, my first love is ice cream, but I’m going to go cheesecake.

**John:** Something about it. I love a hot fudge sundae, but cheesecake, the best.

**Craig:** A great cheesecake is a great thing.

**John:** Pure Americana here, chocolate chip cookies versus s’mores.

**Craig:** I would go chocolate chip cookies myself. Megana?

**Megana:** To Craig’s earlier point, the ceiling on chocolate chip cookies is just higher.

**Craig:** S’mores are required to be one thing basically.

**Megana:** Unless you’re Paul Hollywood.

**John:** S’mores are exciting in a camping situation, like oh, this is pretty good for around a campfire, but I’m never reaching for a s’more.

**Craig:** No. It’s actually very annoying to eat. God help you if you have a beard like I do. You can’t.

**John:** Crumbly?

**Craig:** The marshmallow just begins to embed itself in your face.

**John:** Lastly, some summer fun. Peach cobbler versus rice crispy bars.

**Craig:** Megana, I want to hear from you first on this one.

**Megana:** Rice crispy bars.

**Craig:** That’s where I was going, and here’s why. Peach cobbler can be excellent, but rice crispy bars are not only one thing. You can kick them up. You can mess around with them. You can do some interesting things. They have a unique texture. No other dessert can have what rice crispy bars have. I’m going to go with rice crispy bars.

**John:** Rice crispy bars are rice cakes with syrup on them.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** I do not enjoy rice crispy treats. I will eat them. I will eat them, but I won’t enjoy them the way that I will enjoy a great peach crisp. God, summer fruits, stone fruits are incredible.

**Megana:** I knew it. I knew it.

**Craig:** Unfortunately, the rice crispy bar people have spoken.

**John:** Fine. Now, we get to the next bracket here. Lead a battle between apple pie and bread pudding.

**Craig:** Bread pudding for me.

**John:** That’s bread pudding for me too. Megana, how are you feeling?

**Megana:** I’m going to go apple pie, but I guess I lose.

**Craig:** You have lost.

**John:** Bread pudding made it through the round, although now we have no fruits left in the competition.

**Craig:** Great. Good. Fruits are garbage. Let’s get to the real stuff.

**John:** Poundcake versus crepes Suzette.

**Megana:** Can I switch over to tiramisu?

**John:** You can switch to tiramisu.

**Craig:** If you switch to tiramisu, then I’m going with tiramisu for sure.

**John:** Great.

**Craig:** In that case, this is hands down tiramisu for me.

**John:** I think tiramisu deserves it. It’s a weird stacked dessert. It’s a trifle. It’s got come coffee in it potentially.

**Craig:** Definitely.

**John:** Perfectly made [crosstalk 00:57:36].

**Craig:** Required. Mascarpone cheese, delicious.

**John:** Pumpkin pie versus cheesecake.

**Craig:** I would probably go cheesecake. It’s just more versatile.

**Megana:** You could have a pumpkin pie cheesecake.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. You can have a pumpkin cheesecake. Bingo.

**John:** You can have a cheesecake pumpkin pie, but you would still call it cheesecake.

**Craig:** You would call it cheesecake.

**John:** I think cheesecake’s going to win this one. Chocolate chip cookies versus rice crispy bars. No competition.

**Craig:** It’s chocolate chip cookies there.

**Megana:** Yeah.

**Craig:** That’s an easy one.

**John:** Final four. Bread pudding versus tiramisu.

**Craig:** Tiramisu.

**Megana:** Yeah.

**John:** I’m pretty much a bread pudding. Let me see if I can sway you to bread pudding. Bread pudding, it’s coming out hot. It’s coming out with little bits of chocolate melted into it, maybe some caramel melted into it as well. It’s like French toast. It’s a little bit eggy. You got to eat it with a spoon. Maybe it’s in the middle of the table and you’re sharing it.

**Megana:** Yeah, and some caramel.

**John:** Or maybe it’s in a little cast iron pan.

**Craig:** It’s amazing. Now let me try and sway you to tiramisu, because I recently made it.

**John:** Great.

**Craig:** Delicious espresso coffee. Ladyfingers have soaked it all up, this delicious, spongy yumminess. Then you’ve got a mixture of cream and Mascarpone cheese adding a little bit of tang, lots of sweetness from sugar. Then the whole thing is dusted on top with a little bit of cocoa powder. It all just blends together. Each bite has five things going on.

**John:** Megana, it’s coming down to you. You have to decide between tiramisu and bread pudding. Your vote decides everything.

**Megana:** I’m going bread pudding.

**Craig:** Wow.

**Megana:** He got me at it’s hot.

**Craig:** I hope the nation of Italy visits its vengeance upon both of you.

**Megana:** Don’t put them on me.

**Craig:** You’re a racist.

**Megana:** Where does bread pudding originate from?

**Craig:** It feels Englishy to me.

**John:** It does.

**Craig:** Any time the word pudding is in there and it isn’t a glop, I think it’s English.

**John:** Cheesecake versus chocolate chip cookies.

**Craig:** Cheesecake.

**John:** I’m debating. I’m thinking of the ultimate versions of things. Maybe it’s because chocolate chip cookies, while they can be dessert, they’re not really an end-of-meal dessert. They’re a treat to be eaten other times.

**Craig:** You can eat them after lunch.

**John:** The same reason we haven’t [inaudible 00:59:55] blueberry muffins, which are delicious.

**Craig:** Yeah, because they’re not really dessert.

**John:** Megana, you agree with us?

**Megana:** I don’t, but you guys win.

**Craig:** We win.

**John:** Make your case. Are chocolate chip cookies as dessert as the dessert winner here?

**Megana:** I don’t know. They’re just my best friend.

**Craig:** That’s not what we’re talking about though. We’re not talking about what listens to you talk.

**Megana:** They’re all the time. They are just a universal, delightful treat for any time of day, year, season, whereas a cheesecake is an undertaking.

**John:** What I was saying is it comes down to the definition of dessert. If it’s something that’s uniquely a dessert versus also a snack, is that a difference?

**Megana:** Yeah, because a chocolate chip cookie is like a treat.

**John:** It is a treat.

**Craig:** It’s a treat. I made a cheesecake recently for the first time. It came out beautifully. It’s fun to make. A cheesecake, when you bring it out at the end of dinner, people are like, “Oho.” You bring out a plate of chocolate chip cookies, they’re like, “Oh, you don’t care about us.”

**Megana:** Yeah, “He phoned it in.”

**Craig:** “He phoned it in.”

**John:** That’s fair.

**Megana:** I guess we’re going cheesecake.

**John:** Cheesecake. Final round. This is actually a surprise. Not what I would’ve predicted.

**Craig:** Startling.

**John:** Bread pudding versus cheesecake. I’m astonished apple pie didn’t make it through to here.

**Craig:** We’re not that American, I guess.

**John:** We’re not. Bread pudding versus cheesecake. What’s going to win?

**Megana:** Cheesecake.

**Craig:** Yeah, it’s cheesecake. I know. I know. I know. I know.

**John:** I think it’s the effectiveness of presentation. Would I have a stronger impression of cheesecake, would I enjoy cheesecake more if it weren’t for the Cheesecake Factory? That is what definitely has soured me.

**Craig:** The fact that they put the word factory next to it is pretty brutal. The whole concept and experience of Cheesecake Factory is upsetting from the very moment you walk in. The faux Italianate design.

**John:** Yeah, oh my gosh.

**Craig:** The menu that appears to be a phone book. They are terrible at night but good at nothing. Then the cheesecakes themselves, they’re stupid. They’ve gotten so far afield from just the simplicity and elegance of a New York style cheesecake.

**John:** We’ve not even discussed the Basque cheesecake and the rise of the Basque cheesecake.

**Craig:** The Basque cheesecake is-

**John:** Burnt.

**Craig:** … fantastic.

**John:** It is.

**Craig:** It’s glorious. That’s another great vote in favor of cheesecake is that there are different families.

**John:** I think a thing that’s also been pushing it over is because there’s been recent innovation, at least within America, the popularity of Basque cheesecakes.

**Craig:** Discovery.

**Megana:** Watch the cheesecake space.

**Craig:** Watch this cheesecake space. I’ve always loved the combination of sugar and cheese in a dessert. Even a cheese Danish is delicious to me. Cheesecakes are not easy to make. Bread pudding is easy. It just is.

**John:** Yeah, true. Anyone could do a bread pudding. Craig and Megana, thank you for a fun dessert bracket.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**Megana:** Thank you.

**John:** Bye.

**Megana:** Bye.

**Craig:** Bye, guys.

Links:

* [Bob Iger Back As Disney CEO, Bob Chapek Out](https://deadline.com/2022/11/disney-bob-iger-returns-ceo-bob-chapek-out-1235178223/) on Deadline
* [Scriptnotes, Episode 543: 20 Questions with John](https://johnaugust.com/2022/20-questions-with-john)
* [David Wappel’s Twitter Thread on Anchoring Nouns](https://twitter.com/davidwappel/status/1202287786998390785?s=20&t=xSSMDkDRYaft-MmoMKhE5w)
* Learn more and support the [Inevitable Foundation here](https://www.inevitable.foundation/)
* [Woobles Crochet Kit](https://thewoobles.com/products/penguin-crochet-kit), check out John’s craft [here](https://www.instagram.com/reel/Ck6ShCeApLU/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link)
* [AKG K702 Headphones](https://www.akg.com/Headphones/Professional%20Headphones/K702.html)
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Check out the Inneresting Newsletter](https://inneresting.substack.com/)
* [Gift a Scriptnotes Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) or [treat yourself to a premium subscription!](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/)
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [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 Matthew Jordan ([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/576standard.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Episode 578: Any Given Wednesday, Transcript

January 17, 2023 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2022/any-given-wednesday).

**John August:** Hey, this is John. Heads up that today’s episode has just a little bit of swearing in it. Hello and welcome. My name is John August, and this is Episode 578 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters. Often when we have guests on the show, I am meeting them for the first time right before we start recording. My guests today I’ve known for almost 30 years, which is impossible, Al Gough and Miles Millar, the writer/producers known for Smallville, Shanghai Noon, Into the Badlands, and a zillion other movies and TV series. Their latest is the Netflix hit series Wednesday. Welcome Al and Miles.

**Al Gough:** Good to see you.

**Miles Millar:** Absolutely. Great.

**John:** We actually went to film school together a thousand years ago.

**Al:** Yes, we did, 1992.

**John:** 1992. I want to get into a little bit of that. Maybe in our Bonus Segment, let’s talk about film schools, because Craig hates film schools. It was actually incredibly important for the three of us. I think we can get the other side of film school and whether we would do it again.

**Miles:** I think the answer for all of us is yes.

**John:** I think it would be yes, but I might do it differently this time. We’ll see when we get into that. That’ll be our Bonus Segment. For you guys right now, I really want to start by contrasting… I remember as your whole career began. Usually, this would be the point where I would ask you to do an origin story. Let me see if I can give the origin story, Al and Miles, see how much I get right and what stuff I get wrong. Al Gough, before you came out for film school, you were working some place in the East Coast. You went to Washington University?

**Al:** No, I went to Catholic University in Washington, D.C.

**John:** Catholic University in Washington, D.C. Something like that. You came out to Stark with the intention of becoming a producer.

**Al:** Correct.

**John:** Miles Millar, you came from the UK. You had been working in London before that?

**Miles:** Yep.

**John:** You came into the program, the Stark Program at USC, with the intention of being a producer, or did you also know you were going to write?

**Miles:** I didn’t know what I was going to do. It was my excuse to get to America. That was really the reason. I loved the idea of film. I’d been obsessed with film my whole life. That was my dream. I didn’t really know how to navigate Hollywood. The program felt like a grab bag of you figure it out.

**John:** That’s honestly very close to my experience there too. I knew I could write in a general sense, but I had no sense of how Hollywood worked. It was my introduction to everything. We should explain to people listening what 1992 was like. It was pre-internet, basically.

**Al:** It was pre-internet. Also, we say the party was over, but the after-party was starting. Corporations buying movie studios was just becoming a thing. I think Sony had bought Columbia. I think at that point, Matsushita had bought Universal.

**Miles:** Turner had bought-

**Al:** Not yet. That wasn’t until ’94.

**Miles:** It was a gold rush era.

**Al:** It was a gold rush era.

**Miles:** It was incredible.

**John:** It’s important for how we all came up and rose into it, because it was definitely a period of great expansion that we were coming into it. You guys met in our very small film program. Only 25 students per year in that group. How quickly did you hit it off as friends and then did you start thinking about writing together? That’s where I’m not quite clear, because it was in that first year you must’ve started writing together.

**Al:** We were friends almost… I think we met the second day of film school.

**Miles:** Yeah, we had that cocktail party. USC film school had this bizarre, brutalist architecture. It had this garden well, where there was a bad cocktail party we had for students.

**John:** It was a kegger really.

**Miles:** Exactly right.

**Al:** A kegger, yeah.

**Miles:** We met there. At the end, I gave Al my phone number. I’m terrible. I’m the worst with numbers.

**Al:** Terrible.

**Miles:** I gave him the wrong number, so he couldn’t get in touch with me. A few days later, he said, “I tried to reach you.” I was like, “Oh, whoops.” We did hit it off immediately.

**Al:** Miles is terrible with numbers still.

**Miles:** I have to copy his-

**Al:** I do the WGA dues, and then I take a picture of it and send it to him.

**Miles:** I’m always [crosstalk 00:03:44].

**John:** You guys eventually hit it off. In our first year of Stark, we were writing scenes. We had a class taught by Bobette Buster. We were writing scenes for that, and we were writing individual scenes. You guys were separately trying to work on some stuff together?

**Al:** No, because remember, she partnered us up.

**John:** Did you?

**Al:** I think we all did an outline and 30 pages.

**Miles:** It was the outline and the first act of a screenplay. You had to partner up with someone. I love this story, by the way, because we had to partner up. I partner with Al. My story was the worst story. It was a very commercial idea, but found out later on it was the worst story as a professional writer, which was a story about a cop and an orangutan, because they were buddies, called Mango. Al lost faith in me pretty quickly and tried to bail. Luckily for us, the head of the program, Larry Turman, who is the producer of The Graduate, told him he couldn’t do it, that he couldn’t bail on me, and so he was forced to work with me. Lucky he did, because…

**Al:** Then that led to Mango, led to the first sale.

**John:** What was crucial to understand about this origin story is that you guys wrote this project together. You had the initial idea, but you end up working on it as a team. In our second year of Stark, you end up selling this spec script for a lot of money.

**Al:** That’s another thing too, which we tell young writers. Again, it was a different era. Where now we’re in the era of IP and everything, there it was literally the era of spec scripts. It was Shane Black and Joe Eszterhas and all of that.

**Miles:** Every day you’d go to Variety and you’d read five scripts sold for a lot of money, and they were high-concept stories, and first-timers breaking in every day. It really was this gold rush mentality of you just needed to get the story out, and people would buy the idea. It was really amazing, all of us, the three of us to launch at that point as writers, because it allowed us… We always talk about the [inaudible 00:05:36] to learn how to write. Without that sale, we wouldn’t have been able to do it. It was all about the gift of that era.

**John:** As we all know, Mango got an immediate green light and went on to make $200 million. It was a giant hit that made your whole career. No, Mango did not get made, and yet it did start your career. Let’s talk through that, because going from a sale, which doesn’t really happen so much… A spec sale of a script doesn’t happen that often anymore. There are scripts that get attention, and then people go off in meetings. That’s really an important next step for you guys is not that Mango happened, got shot as a film, but you guys were taken seriously. You got agents and managers, got started with a career.

**Al:** Exactly. As Miles was saying, we sold Mango. It was the week after Ace Ventura opened. Some of it, you hit the right moment. People loved the concept. They liked the writing enough. What we found is then you go for these general meetings at Disney, at New Line, Warner’s, and they’re offering you animal comedies. This is not what you want to be known for.

**Miles:** It was literally our very first script. It was total beginner’s luck. We didn’t know really the craft of writing yet, so we spent the next three years working every day. We’ve always had a really good joint work ethic. I’m sure John does too. It’s all about not the grind, but it’s really about treating it as a profession, that there’s never a day when we’re not writing. That’s something that’s I think stood us well in terms of we just keep on working. We’re workhorses, and we’ll always do that. Even when it’s hard, we’ll still work.

**John:** It’s also important though to think back to that time and the expansion of the industry. It’s not just that there were spec scripts selling. The reason why there were spec scripts selling is because they were trying to make so many movies.

**Miles:** Correct.

**John:** That was also an era where Disney was trying to do 40 feature films a year.

**Al:** Yeah, each division, Disney, Touchstone, and Hollywood Pictures were each making 25 movies a year, because it was also the era of DVDs. Basically, even if a movie didn’t make all its money back in theatrical, the DVD aftermarkets were huge. A lot of them got made.

**Miles:** There’s a similar era now in terms of content. The streamers desperately need content. It’s not dissimilar. I think for writers, it was a better period when we started out, just in terms of you could hit the jackpot, literally.

**John:** Coming off of Mango, what was the next big step in your career? I was trying to [inaudible 00:08:03] is there another big thing, like, “Oh, that’s a shining beacon,” before we get to Smallville?

**Al:** Oh, yeah. We wrote a couple more specs. The next one we sold was a political thriller called Favorite Son. We sold it to… It was a producer named Leonard Goldberg. He was Aaron Spelling’s partner.

**John:** Absolutely. He did Charlie’s Angels.

**Al:** Exactly. We sold it to Laura Ziskin, who was a producer we all had as a film school teacher, who was then running a division of 20th Century Fox. For us, that was the first script that was… It was a great sample, and it opened different doors. I think that’s the great thing about being a writer is you don’t need permission, and you can always write yourself out of any corner. Finally, with that script, we were able to do that. It just got us out of the animal comedy cul-de-sac.

**John:** Absolutely. I was pigeonholed as a guy who’d do movies about gnomes, elves, dwarves, and Christmas, very soft family things. Then Go was the thing that got me out of that.

**Al:** Go, right.

**John:** People could read it for whatever they wanted to do. You have written Favorite Son. That gets set up at Fox 2000?

**Al:** Fox 2000, yeah.

**John:** From that, you’re taking other meetings. Are you getting any rewrite work? What’s the next step?

**Miles:** We’ve been a little bit in the rewrite business but not really. It’s never been something that we’ve had time to do or focused on, because then we pretty quickly got into TV. We had an agency change. We changed agencies and went to William Morris, and then they put us with a TV agent as well as a feature agent, because we’d done… Our first TV credit was this British BBC show called Bugs. That was our first-

**John:** Oh, that’s right. I forgot about Bugs.

**Miles:** It was a really obscure but fun BBC show.

**Al:** It was an action-adventure series. The reason they liked us is because Miles is British and I was American. They couldn’t find British writers who could write Mission Impossible type stories, which is what these were.

**Miles:** That got us when we went to William Morris. They’re like, “Oh, you do TV. You should have a TV agent.”

**John:** Because it was a UK show, you were not in a room with a staff writing that show.

**Miles:** No.

**John:** You pitched an episode, wrote an episode.

**Miles:** We used to fax the pages to them in London. That’s how old we are. It was a great experience. Then that led to our interest in TV. Then we started staffing on TV. We met some writers. They said the way to be successful in television is, just fair enough, you have to learn the hierarchy, and you’ve gotta go up from staff writer to story editor to the various stages of TV writer. We did that. Our first TV credit in America was Timecop, which is based on the Jean-Claude Van Damme movie.

**John:** ABC show? I’m trying to remember.

**Miles:** ABC, yeah.

**Al:** ABC.

**John:** Did it run for a season?

**Al:** No, I think it ran for eight, and then it was out.

**Miles:** It was an era they thought TV drama was dead, but sitcoms were the king. The idea of doing that show… You have to sign a three-year contract. It was like, “Oh my god, if we do this for three years, I will literally die.” It ran for eight. We were heroes on that show, because there was such infighting with the young guys on the totem pole. We ended up writing… Was it three scripts?

**Al:** Yeah, we wrote three of the eight.

**Miles:** Three.

**Al:** One of ours became the new first episode, because ABC hated the pilot episode of the show. With writers too, we call it the “fuck you, I’m doing Nazis” approach. When they were pitching the show, ABC said, “Whatever you do in Timecop, don’t have them go back to Nazi Germany, because Germany’s a huge market for us, and we don’t want to do it.” What did they do? They go back to Nazi Germany and stop something. That started.

There was no room on that show. You’d go pitch to the executive producer. We did, and then we wrote the script. He came in, and he goes, “Yep, this one’s going to be the first episode.” Timecop. Then we got our first pilot at ABC from that, which got made but didn’t go to air. Then we staffed on a show that Carlton Cuse created called Martial Law.

**John:** That’s right.

**Al:** That’s the TV side of the story. Then meanwhile, on the feature side, we had done some work for Joel Silver and Dick Donner on these low-budget genre movies, which led to Lethal Weapon 4.

**John:** I remember visiting set with you on a movie you’d written that starred Heather Locklear.

**Miles:** That was called Double Tap. That was our very first feature credit. It was directed by Greg Yaitanes, who is now a huge TV director. He just did House of the Dragon.

**Al:** House of the Dragon.

**John:** That’s right.

**Miles:** It’s weird we’re all still here. Those were really cheap movies, but we learned a lot doing those. We never said no. That was also our thing. We always just said yes to anything, and still do. That’s part of our problem is never saying no. We’re not as selective as John.

**John:** There’s also two of you, so you can get twice as much done. Are we almost caught up to Smallville at this point?

**Al:** Yes. On the TV side, during Martial Law, we got a deal at Warner Bros, and we did this show from Lethal Weapon 4 with the producer, Joel Silver, called The Strip, which was an action buddy thing set in Las Vegas. We’d sold it to Fox. They had a regime change. A thing that did happen in 1999 was you’d sell a pilot to another network. They sold it to UPN, which was another network that no longer exists. Because it was on UPN and was so under the radar, they let us run the show. We really hit it off with Peter Roth.

**Miles:** He was the head of Warner Bros.

**Al:** He was the head of Warner’s Television, just retired a year or two ago. They made an overall deal with us. The Strip ran eight episodes, got canceled.

**Miles:** First-time showrunners, we had no idea what we were doing. I’ll say for the first three pilots, we had no idea what we were doing. Then it began to click in terms of what we needed to do and be set forward. There’s always this thing about showrunning, which is you’re basically two guys in a garage writing scripts, and suddenly you’re in charge of a huge business, and they expect you to know what you’re doing, and you don’t.

**John:** You also had very few opportunities for mentorship, because you’d been on some sets, with Double Tap and things like that, I guess Martial Law. You have seen some of it. Was Martial Law shot in Los Angeles?

**Al:** It was, yeah. You’re right, you don’t really get that much-

**Miles:** You’re stuck in the writers’ room.

**Al:** You’re stuck in the writers’ room. We had a deal. At that point, I always tell people there was no Marvel Cinematic Universe. The later iteration of Superman had been Lois and Clark. The last iteration of Batman had been Batman and Robin. This was like the Nadir of superheros. Warner’s, who was like, “Sure, TV, you can have Superman,” they didn’t care.

Peter Roth came to us and said, “I have the rights to do Superman, and I want to do kind of like a Superboy show. We were like, “We don’t want to do Superboy.” We came up with the pitch for Smallville, which was no flights, no tights, making the parents younger, introducing the idea of the meteor shower and all these different things.

Then we went out and sold… We only went to Fox and to The WB. What was funny at the time is The WB and Warner’s Studio did not have a good relationship. Peter was brought in to smooth it over. They had just pitched them the idea of like, “Oh, we’re doing a Superman in high school show.” They’re like, “Eh.” They weren’t interested.

**Miles:** This is the era of Dawson’s Creek.

**Al:** Dawson’s Creek, yeah. We went to Fox, and we sold it in the room to Gail Berman. Then that afternoon, we had to go to The WB, just because they’re corporate siblings. Peter’s like, “Just go in. Pitch it. It doesn’t matter. We’re not going to sell it. We’re going to sell it to Fox.” We go in and pitch it to The WB, to an executive named Susanne Daniels. It’s one of those things, you could tell during the pitch. In the beginning, it was a little like sitting back, and then as they heard the pitch, they were like, “Oh, this might actually be good.” Then by the end, we left, and we’re like, “Oh, that went better than we thought.” Peter’s like, “We’re going to Fox.” Then three days later, we were at The WB, which is where it should’ve been.

**Miles:** The great story there is that the other executive in the room, who’s a friend of ours, we’d had lunch with the year before, and she’d told us point blank, “You guys aren’t WB material. Sorry.”

**Al:** “You do buddy action,” because at that point we’d done Lethal 4 and Shanghai Noon. “You’re buddy two-hander guys.” Then the next year, we’re at The WB.

**John:** I want to compare and contrast that experience, taking an iconic piece of property, a piece of IP that people know, Superman, and turning it into a teen show, to Wednesday, which is, again, an iconic piece of property everybody knows, and taking the character from that and putting it at the center of a teen series. On the surface, kind of similar, but actually, the way we make things now is so vastly different between the two of them. I want to contrast the two of those experiences. Let’s talk through the pitch on Wednesday Addams. How does Wednesday Addams come into your universe?

**Al:** It was 2018. We had just finished doing this show called Into the Badlands, which we did for AMC for four seasons. We were, frankly, looking for our next thing, and knowing how IP-obsessed everybody is… The Addams Family seemed to be… We knew MGM had the animated movies, but Paramount had done movies.

In a similar way that Smallville tells an unknown chapter of Clark Kent’s story, it’s a story nobody’s ever told. We wanted to do Wednesday, but we’re like, “Teenage Wednesday Addams in boarding school.” That was really the eureka moment. We sat down. We knew we wanted it to be a supernatural murder mystery. We talked about do we just put her in a normal high school or do we do something different. We realized if we just put her in a normal high school, it becomes a very one-note show.

**Miles:** She goes home to her family at the end.

**Al:** She went home to her family. The opening of the first episode is her in a regular high school. She gets expelled, and then she goes to Nevermore, because it gave us the Addams ethos without being the… It’s like if you took the Addams mansion and the Addams vibe but then you put it in the school. Then it was the school where her parents met. Literally, we had the idea. We came up with the whole pitch.

**Miles:** We did it on spec.

**Al:** On spec.

**Miles:** We wrote a 20-page bible.

**Al:** Bible.

**Miles:** Then we approached MGM, said to the head of the studio, “Okay, this is what we want to do,” and he loved it. It was the first step. It was the first step with us coming up with the idea. It wasn’t like they approached us.

**Al:** Nobody approached us.

**John:** There wasn’t any notion, like, “Hey, let’s do a Wednesday Addams show.”

**Al:** No, it wasn’t.

**John:** [inaudible 00:18:40].

**Al:** In fact, they didn’t even know if they had the live-action TV rights. We were like, “Does Paramount have those?” We pitched the head of the Addams Foundation, who controls the estate. He loved it. That’s how it all got started. It was very different. Smallville was like, “We have this idea. Can you guys crack it?” This one, we brought them something they didn’t frankly even know they had.

**John:** Great. In both cases, the idea is now set up. Was the idea set up at Netflix, or did you have to write a script first?

**Miles:** Now it seems like a no-brainer, but it wasn’t at all. It’s been a three-and-a-half-year journey to get to this point. We’d written it. They loved it. In terms of the pitch, we went out and pitched it around to all the different streamers, to Apple and Amazon, Netflix. Actually, Netflix bought it. This is great.

**Al:** This was fall of 2019. This was this time 2019.

**Miles:** They couldn’t make a deal, so it fell apart.

**John:** It fell apart. They couldn’t make a deal because of underlying rights or your rights or just everything?

**Al:** Basically, whatever Netflix was offering, MGM said, “That’s not enough.” This was basically January of 2020. They had already basically given us the go-ahead to write the pilot script. They’d written that. We thought it was kind of dead. Then Steve Stark, who was the head of television at the time-

**Miles:** At MGM.

**Al:** … at MGM, convinced MGM to basically fork over money for a writers’ room, for a mini room, and said, “We’ll write a bunch of scripts, and then we’ll go back out with it,” which to be honest with you, is a terrible idea. Most streamers aren’t going to buy a show that they had no hand in developing. We were like, “If it keeps the project alive, great.”

**John:** That said, Station Eleven was a similar situation.

**Al:** Was it really?

**John:** He came on to talk through the Station Eleven process. Paramount did put together a mini room for that, so they could write scripts. It ended up working out really well for them.

**Al:** Same here.

**John:** At this point, there’s a pilot, and you have a room together. How many scripts are you trying to get out of this room?

**Al:** We’re trying to get another seven scripts out of the room.

**John:** Which is the whole season.

**Al:** The whole season, because we had the bible for the whole season, and so we were breaking it. Of course, we had to push the room a week, because it was literally the first week of lockdown. The pandemic started. We did it fully on Zoom.

**Miles:** Which I think was a really great… No one had ever done a Zoom room. It was actually incredibly efficient, because often my beef of writers’ rooms is everyone sits around talking about war stories. It’s so inefficient, whereas a Zoom, it’s actually much more focused. It can be exhausting, but we got an incredible amount of work done in a limited amount of time.

**Al:** Yeah, we did. We did. It was spring of 2020. Before we went out, we wanted to package it. Tim was always our first-

**John:** A natural choice.

**Al:** A natural choice.

**John:** Tim’s always wanted to do an Addams Family story.

**Al:** We’d heard. Of course, everybody’s like, “He’s not done television. He’s not going to do it.” We’re like, “If we don’t ask, the answer’s no.” Steve’s partner, Andrew Mittman, got the script to Mike Simpson, who’s Tim’s agent at WME. Mike read it and really loved it. We heard all this later. He sent it to Tim, and then four days later, we get a text, “You’re not going to believe this. Tim read the script. He really loves it. He wants to talk to you guys.” Tim lives in London. We thought, “Okay, great, so his assistant’s going to set up Zoom?” He’s like, “Nope.” Mike goes, “I’m texting you his number, and you’re going to FaceTime with him tomorrow.” It was Memorial Day weekend 2020. We called. We FaceTimed with Tim. He was in Oxford.

**Miles:** Oxford. He has an amazing house in Oxford with this beautiful garden with these life-size dinosaur models. He was out there wandering around in this garden talking to us about Wednesday Addams and how she would’ve been his girlfriend in high school. It was really, really great. He was a bit nervous, I think, about launching to TV, but also really intrigued about doing extended storytelling. Long-form storytelling was something he’d never done. It was really something that he thought would be a great challenge. He’d always loved the Addams Family, and Wednesday in particular.

**Al:** What we did know, the opening of the script, it opens with Wednesday terrorizing the water polo team. We didn’t know Tim played water polo in Burbank.

**Miles:** At Burbank High.

**Al:** He must’ve been reading the script going, “What is happening?”

**Miles:** That’s how it happened.

**John:** I want to also flash back to Smallville though, because bringing on the pilot director has always been a big thing. That’s a big deciding factor of which pilots get ordered is what kind of director you can get on board, but they’re never the iconic name that a Tim Burton is.

**Al:** Correct.

**John:** It’s never that level of [inaudible 00:23:23] directors. It’s always like Michael Dinner. It’s some person you’ve never heard of.

**Miles:** Michael Dinner, yeah.

**John:** Normal people don’t have that. It’s such a change from this. Also, in a classic way you pick pilots to make, it’s on a casting. For Smallville, talk through the casting on that, because I remember my WB show, the way you had to bring in actors to audition in the room in front of Susanne Daniels and everything else was a very specific, scary, terrifying process. I want to contrast it with now. Talk us through Smallville casting, and then we’ll go to Wednesday casting.

**Al:** Again, this was in 2000. We sold it in the fall of 2000. When we sold it, it’s interesting. In old-time network television, they usually didn’t let you cast a pilot until they green-lit the pilot. Here they bought the project and they said, “We’re going to let you start casting.” We hadn’t written the script yet.

**Miles:** We hadn’t written the script yet.

**Al:** This was actually a great exercise, which we’ve done. We don’t really do it in features, but we do it in television. We wrote a bunch of the scenes from the pilot that they could audition with. It’s good, because you realize you can give them handles. We always call it secret lines, where if they get that right, it’s like, “Oh, they understand it.” We wrote a Lex and Clark scene.

**Miles:** All of which ended up in the show.

**Al:** All of them are in the pilot. It was a Clark-Lana graveyard scene, which is in the pilot. There’s a Lex-Clark fencing scene, which is in the pilot, the parents, which was great, because when we went to write the pilot, we had a bunch of scenes written already. They let us do that. We actually got to spend about four months casting. The other thing was, we knew exactly who we wanted to direct the pilot, which was David Nutter, who certainly at the time-

**John:** He was [inaudible 00:25:08] him or Michael Dinner [crosstalk 00:25:09].

**Al:** David was the Steven Spielberg of TV pilots. His track record of getting-

**Miles:** He’d done a lot of great… Not The X-Files. He’d done a lot of X-Files to start off with.

**Al:** He’d done X-Files to start off. I think he’d done Roswell the year before.

**Miles:** Dark Angel.

**Al:** He’d done Dark Angel. What’s great is Peter Roth, who had just come over from Fox, knew David very well. He literally got on the phone, pitched him, sent him the same-

**Miles:** David was a huge Superman-

**Al:** He was a huge Superman fan.

**Miles:** It was the perfect marriage. The process, as John suggested, it’s so awful, which is the person, or they have to sit in the room outside, and have to come into a room with probably 15 people watching them, which is the most artificial experience for TV performance, and have to perform like they’re auditioning for a school play, in front of these people. It is the most nerve-wracking experience. For example, Zach Levi was our top choice for Lex Luthor. He came in and was amazing. Then he came in to do this network audition, and he really just didn’t click. Then we ended up with Michael, who was fantastic. It was just the whole process and the idea of having to perform in this really bizarre way for a TV show.

**Al:** It was always very weird. It’s stressful all around.

**Miles:** Absolutely.

**Al:** So artificial.

**John:** Also, we have to remember that back in those days, these truly were pilots. They were going to shoot a bunch of pilots and only pick up certain series, as they were trying to figure out what are the elements that are going to be useful in this show versus that show. It’s not the same situation with something like Wednesday, because it’s the first episode, but how that first episode goes is not going to determine whether the rest of the series shoots. You’re going to shoot the whole series.

**Al:** Correct. We even had this on our last couple shows. Everybody now does it online. They self-tape. I think actors must think it’s great, because they can do as many takes as they want until they get the one they like.

**John:** They don’t get the feedback.

**Al:** They don’t get the feedback, but they get that.

**John:** Also, we’re seeing what do they look like through a lens.

**Miles:** Exactly.

**John:** It’s really what it is.

**Miles:** That’s the point, exactly. It’s the old-fashioned screen test is how you should do it. On Wednesday, I’ll say we did do chemistry tests over Zoom. We’d all meet with the actor, talk to them, and then our screens would go black, and then we’d watch the audition. Then we’d give notes and Tim would give notes. I think it was intimidating, because it was the first time they met Tim, and over Zoom. The first time we did it, Tim just gave them one chance. They were so nervous.

**Al:** We did it once, and it was a disaster. What’s great about Tim is Tim Burton doesn’t realize he’s Tim Burton. We’re like, “Tim, here’s what we’re going to do. We’ll introduce them. We’ll introduce you, let you say hi. We’ll do it twice, so you can give them notes in between. Even if you don’t have notes, let’s just let them do it again.” Then he was like, “Great.” Once they got over the initial shock of the Tim Burton part, then they could ease in and do it. Even on the Brady Bunch screens, you could at least go, “Oh, okay.” You see what they look like side by side on camera.

**John:** Which is crucial. I want to back up in the process a little bit here, because you’d been in writers’ rooms before. You’d been in a writer’s room for Martial Law. You had that experience. This time you’re running a writers’ room on Zoom for your show. How did you go about thinking about who you wanted in that writers’ room with you? It was a mini room. Was that the only room you ever got together?

**Al:** That was a mini room. We frankly picked two writers, Kayla Alpert and April Blair. We knew.

**John:** Experienced.

**Al:** They were like, “We’re going to pay for a room. You can only have a couple writers.” It’s like, “We need people who we’ve worked with before, who we know are good, who can be helpful.” Obviously, we wanted the female voices in the room too. We heard a lot of Zoom room horror stories, but I think because it was a bunch of people who have never worked together, so I’m sure it was a lot of bad first date theater. We had that room. It was a 10, 11-week room. That was the only room we had.

**John:** What was your schedule? What was your writing process? How long were the rooms going for? What were you trying to get done in a day’s work in a room?

**Miles:** I think first it’s having a very clear idea of where the trajectory of the season’s going. We just had the first episode, so they had a sense of what the show was, which is important.

**John:** It’s crucial to set up… That first episode, you set so many plates spinning in terms of who these characters are, and each of them is going to have a thing. You had a sense of where they were going. You had to actually track out where that information would go. Those were the first weeks. You were just figuring out all the rest of those-

**Miles:** Yes. I think the first season, we certainly had ideas. I guess because we’re old-school TV people, every episode, unlike some binge shows, conceptualized. One episode’s about the school dance. One episode’s about Parents Weekend. Each one feels like a complete chapter of a book, rather than just… Sometimes shows are like mud. You couldn’t identify what the-

**John:** It’s like an eight-hour movie.

**Miles:** For us it’s much more compartmentalized. It’s figuring out the beginning, middle, end of each episode so it feels complete in itself, although it still leads on and has this propulsive energy, which is always something that we aim for, that it’s never boring. That’s our motto in terms of story breaking, that it has to keep going so it’s propulsive and delicious and you want to keep consuming. You want to be able to not turn it off at 3 a.m. in the morning and finish. That’s our goal as storytellers is that it has to be relentless. Then it’s really working out the beats and where are the characters going, so what’s the arc over the course of the season and how will that person get there.

The first week is just figuring out big ideas, what a great set piece is, where do you want to see these characters, what are the scenes you want to see with them. That’s something we learned from Carlton Cuse, which is what are the scenes you want to see in this episode, between these two characters. That was something that we always do, and just like, “What are the craziest ideas we can put Wednesday Addams in?” That’s something. It’s just an exercise. We always ask people when they first come to the room to bring a lot of ideas. I want to see a list of 50 ideas. Where could she be, what’s funny, and what situations or locations she could be at or just concepts for [inaudible 00:31:27].

**John:** What documents are you trying to get out of this? Ultimately, you’re going to get to scripts. At what point are you generating outlines? Are you generating beat sheets? How much are those shared outside of the room or just for your purposes?

**Al:** We do cards.

**Miles:** The first thing we do is we break out the stories. We do the little paragraphs.

**Al:** Paragraphs.

**Miles:** By the end of probably week two, we have eight one-page ideas for what each episode’s going to be. It has to be really quick and fast. You can adjust.

**John:** Is that a Google Doc, or how are you sharing that among your team?

**Miles:** It’s Google Docs.

**Al:** It is a Google Doc.

**Miles:** We have the writer’s assistant who takes notes every day and assembles that. We split up to write the one-pagers we call them, which is just each episode, so we have a sense of what the season is, because you can’t spend too long conceptualizing. We just need to start really thinking about the stories.

**Al:** We did the one-pagers. Then we do beat sheets. Those have, here are all the scenes.

**John:** The scenes.

**Al:** They’re in skeletal form. The other thing, we had never done a closed mystery, a cards down mystery, where you don’t know, it’s the whodunit.

**John:** Absolutely. We have the same information as the audience as Wednesday does.

**Al:** Exactly. We knew how it ended. Then it was working backwards. Then it was do we have enough red herrings. Even when we were shooting it, we’re like-

**Miles:** Oh, gosh.

**Al:** … “Oh my god, is this going to be too obvious?” It’s all the red herrings. You have to play by the rules, so that if you go back and did a re-watch, it’s… I remember there’s one thing we caught in the first episode. We’re like, “Oh, that character could never be there at that time, so we can’t do that.” You’re doing the math of it. There was that aspect. Then once we broke them out, then I think we verbally pitched out to the studio at that point, just to get their feedback.

**John:** The studio being Netflix.

**Al:** No, actually at the time, just MGM.

**John:** Just MGM, that’s right, because [inaudible 00:33:26]. You’re pitching them to make sure that they understand what the vision is for the things.

**Al:** Correct.

**John:** They’re not reading things.

**Al:** Not yet. Once we got their thoughts and sign off, then we went and we did 10-page outlines.

**Miles:** Our whole philosophy always is to, I’d say overshare. There’s no surprises is our thing.

**Al:** I think they got the one-pagers. They got the one-pagers.

**Miles:** For us it’s always about we have nothing to hide. If you try and hide things or keep people at bay… We’re really looking for great notes and not guidance, but it’s great to have some… You’re stuck in a room. Even if it’s a Zoom room, you’re stuck in this little bubble. To have some outside viewpoint about what you’re doing, for us is always very helpful. It’s true with the whole process in terms of what we do. We’ll take a good note from literally anybody.

**Al:** Because everybody’s a viewer. Even if it’s their job, everybody’s still a viewer.

**Miles:** It doesn’t mean we’re going to take it.

**Al:** It doesn’t mean we’re going to listen.

**Miles:** We’re incredibly open and say to the actors, to everybody that we want feedback and need feedback. It’s always about the best product. That process goes all the way to the end, to ADR, to the post, to everything. It’s always about evolving until you finish.

**John:** Let’s run through the documents again. We’re starting off with these one-paragraph synopses of episodes. Then it goes to a beat sheet. Then it goes to a 10-page outline. Then from 10-page outline, those are assigned to a writer to write the full 60-page script.

**Al:** Correct.

**Miles:** I will say before that as well, we have the bible, and then we usually do a look book as well, so they have a sense of what [crosstalk 00:35:02].

**John:** Before they got there, they were looking through that.

**Miles:** Yeah, so they have a sense of what the show will look like in our minds. We shared that with Tim. It’s always about the communication, and everyone’s on the same page about what we’re doing. It’s always about that clarity of vision, “This is the show we’re going to make. This is what we’re doing,” so there’s no confusion, and keeping the lines of communication open between every department, which is hard.

**John:** Are all these scripts written by the time this room finishes?

**Al:** No. I would say four of the eight were written, and there were four that there were drafts for.

**John:** Great. Let’s take a moment and contrast that back to Smallville, because this was not at all the schedule on Smallville. Smallville, you’re shooting, rather than 8 episodes over the course of however long it takes, you had 22 episodes to shoot.

**Al:** 22 episodes.

**John:** These are 40-page scripts probably?

**Al:** I think Season 1, they were probably 50-page scripts. Probably they were too long.

**John:** They were long. You’re responsible for delivering basically one of these a week.

**Miles:** It was an absolute nightmare. The first season of Smallville is a total blur of insanity and sleepless nights and just us hammering away. Also, in the middle of this, we had 9/11, and we didn’t stop shooting for that. It was just a really crazy time. That’s where we really learned how to run a show. The first season was absolute chaos. The writers hated us. We used to write all day, turn up at work at 6 p.m., work until 12. It was just [inaudible 00:36:29] horror stories of writers’ rooms, that first season was like, oh my god.

**John:** That was you?

**Al:** Yeah, that was us.

**Miles:** Yeah, because you don’t know. It’s like a freight train, and then it becomes a hit, so you have this added pressure and then the studio. It’s just overwhelming.

**Al:** You have a process that moves twice as fast, but you have two levels. You have a studio giving notes and then a network giving notes.

**John:** The other crucial thing though is you are also not writing these scripts in a vacuum like you were in this mini room.

**Al:** Correct.

**John:** You were trying to write these things while you’re actually trying to produce the show.

**Miles:** Exactly.

**John:** You’re dealing with all the fires happening on set while you’re doing this and dealing with the post. In this case, you had the luxury, you had these… How long was your mini room? Was it 10 weeks, 12 weeks?

**Miles:** Yeah.

**John:** To just focus on the writing and not focus on anything else.

**Miles:** I’ll say the difference is that I think [inaudible 00:37:13] on a streaming show, on a show like this, is every episode has to be a Faberge egg-

**John:** Wow.

**Miles:** … whereas on network, you know you’re going to have some clunkers. You know that not every script’s going to be great. It doesn’t take the pressure off, but it’s impossible to have 22 amazing episodes of network TV.

**Al:** What was interesting too with Smallville, it was the era where TV on DVD was starting to become a thing. We would say Wednesday is chapters of a book, where Smallville is short stories in a world. You have some mythology episodes and some bigger ideas that then tie the whole season together, because they tell you an avid viewer of a network show watches one in four episodes. There’s a certain amount of repetition, at least in the first season, where you’re starting, where you don’t want people to be like, “I watched the pilot, and then I’m coming in an episode. What the heck’s happening now?”

**Miles:** It’s not a sausage factory, but it kind of is, in terms of there is that repetition. Then once you get into the rhythm of a writers’ room, it’s still incredibly difficult to turn out 22 good episodes of TV. It becomes a machine. That’s certainly what we aimed for and achieved in subsequent seasons in terms of the writers’ room and everything else became a machine.

**Al:** We trained people. It’s another thing too. It sounds weird. The show tells you what it can and can’t do. I think in Season 1, we had to break so many more stories that didn’t work to get to the 22 episodes that did.

**Miles:** [inaudible 00:38:41] in terms of what it wants to do. Everything’s always too big.

**Al:** It’s too big, and I get blamed.

**John:** You’re learning what your cast can do. You’re learning what your crew can do.

**Al:** Exactly.

**John:** You’re learning, “Okay, we can do two stunts or whatever it is for your thing, so how are we going to budget our two stunts for this?”

**Al:** Exactly.

**Miles:** Exactly right.

**Al:** Exactly right.

**Miles:** You have to figure out what’s the pattern of what you can do. The first season of Smallville, we were resisting a pattern. It was like, “No, we’re going to do four stunts an episode. Then second season we’re going to make lives easier for ourselves. We’re going to find the pattern, then we’re going to do it.”

**Al:** We did, because at a certain point, a TV show either runs like a TV show or it implodes. Two of the Smallville stars are doing a podcast where they’re re-watching all the episodes. They had us do one. We watched this episode in Season 1, which literally four directors worked on, then we had to shut down for a week just to finish it. When we watched it back, it was actually a pretty good episode, but we’re like, “We were insane.” I’m like, “What were we thinking?”

**John:** Smallville was shot in Vancouver. For this show, you wanted to keep it nice and close and local, clearly.

**Al:** Absolutely.

**John:** You wanted to keep making life easy for yourself. Where did you choose to shoot Wednesday?

**Al:** We shot in Romania.

**John:** What was the decision for Romania?

**Al:** There’s a couple. One was, there was literally no studio space anywhere else in the world. We looked in Ireland. We looked in the UK.

**John:** If you were shooting this at the peak of coming out of pandemic…

**Al:** The studio wanted us to go to Toronto.

**Miles:** Toronto.

**Al:** The thing with Tim is, it’s the sets. You need the sound stages to be able to build these amazing sets.

**John:** Size.

**Miles:** It’s size. You’re looking at Tim’s work. It’s all about giant sets and physical sets. The studio was obsessed with us going to use The Handmaid’s Tale sound stages, but the roof with those sound stages is 12 feet or something.

**Al:** It was 19 feet.

**Miles:** 19 feet. [inaudible 00:40:37]. It was like, “We’re not going to do that,” because what you want with a Tim show is to have built sets. They also never accepted that. The show was budgeted like a CW show. As soon as you get Tim Burton directing the show, it’s not going to be a CW budget. They never understood that. The big fight with that show was always like, you don’t hire Tim Burton and give him that budget, because he’s not going to do it.

**Al:** We also said Tim doesn’t show up and go, “I’ll do the discount TV version of Tim.” Tim shoots as Tim shoots, one camera, very efficiently actually, but-

**John:** Romania.

**Al:** We ended up in Romania, because they actually had massive sound stages. There’s no tax credit there, but they do have crew. If you drew a longitude-latitude line from New England across, it actually hits Romania.

**Miles:** There’s an abandoned Soviet era studio, which was phenomenal, with huge sound stages. Then it had an area next to it of woods and a lake.

**Al:** Right outside the gate.

**Miles:** Then it had an area where you could build this huge town. It had these amazing architectural gems in the city of Bucharest, which we used as interior sets, with these beautiful decrepit villas. It just had such texture and reality to it. I went on a location scout with Tim. It was completely obvious we had to shoot there, and we did.

We’ve shot all over the world, in New Zealand and Ireland, Canada, but we’ve never shot in a country that didn’t speak the same language, the crew. It was challenging, and in the middle of COVID. Then we had the war happen in Ukraine, which neighbors Romania, which freaked out most of the cast. It was a very, very challenging shoot.

**John:** We were talking about the phases of getting things made. You have your writing phase. That’s all day. You have production phase. Challenging. Mostly done in Europe. Are you posting at the same time, or you’re waiting for all the post when everything’s done being shot? Were you shooting sequentially or were you cross-boarding the show?

**Al:** A couple things. We shot the show in blocks of two, but we didn’t go one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight.

**Miles:** Unfortunately.

**Al:** We did one, two, five, six, three, four, seven, eight.

**Miles:** Makes total sense.

**Al:** Part of it is because Catherine Zeta-Jones and Luis Guzman, who play Gomez and Morticia, are in Episodes 1 and 5, and we needed them to come to Romania once. Secondly, Tim was doing two blocks and needed time to prep.

**John:** A prep break.

**Al:** He wanted to do the first four. It was challenging, especially when you’re doing a mystery show and you’re trying to keep everything straight, and the actors are trying to keep their emotional arc straight. That was definitely a challenge. Tim’s editor was on site in Romania with us. We do all of our post at a place called Take 5 in Toronto. We’ve done that for the past three shows. What was interesting, even compared to our last show, is just all the technology.

**John:** It’s gotten so much better.

**Al:** It’s amazing.

**Miles:** Oh my god. In our last show, which is Into the Badlands, it used to be you go to a special studio and do a cineSync. It actually never worked. You’d talk to your editor live in Toronto, but the feed you’re getting back was slightly out of whack. It was never coordinated.

**Al:** Then you would have to go up for a week too.

**Miles:** I’d go up to Toronto.

**Al:** Just to sit in the rooms and finish everything.

**Miles:** Constantly fly up to Toronto. We were doing a show in New Zealand and Ireland at the same time, and then I’d fly to Toronto. It was an absolute nightmare. This was a dream experience. It’s completely synced up. You can talk to your editor.

**John:** You’re watching it on your laptop.

**Miles:** You’re talking to your editor on Zoom, watching the cut on your laptop. You can give notes in real time. It works incredibly well. The only thing you have to go for is now the sound mix. You go to a place in Hollywood, watch the sound mix. None of us went to Toronto. If we had to go from Romania to Toronto in COVID, you’d have to come back and spend 10 days in quarantine. It just wouldn’t have worked. Now technology is so… It’s really advanced in four or five years. It’s ridiculous.

**Al:** It was pretty incredible.

**John:** Great. We have some listener questions. I thought maybe you guys could help us out with some of the listener questions.

**Al:** Absolutely.

**John:** Let’s start with Hilary’s question.

**Megana Rao:** Hilary in Los Angeles asked, “I mentioned a feature idea I’m working on to an executive friend at a production company, and he said that if I tweak one insignificant bit of it, it’s exactly what they’re looking for for their new deal with a major streamer. He asked me to send him a one-pager of the feature and said that the streamer is paying for outlines and scripts. Is this different than No Writing Left Behind or is this essentially the same no-no, in that this executive could then use my one-pager at their will and cut me out completely?”

**John:** Let’s talk about No Writing Left Behind and when it’s appropriate to give somebody a written document versus not giving somebody a written document. You guys, you’re big on sharing. You’re big on showing stuff. In this case, it feels like Hilary’s written this original things, so she owns it and controls it. It feels pretty safe for her. What are you guys thinking?

**Miles:** I think maybe we’re dumb and naïve, but we always share. We have no problem leaving anything behind, because we’re fearless about what we have next. The chance of someone stealing something and executing something is minimal.

**Al:** I think again, she has the paper trail. The other thing too is you can always register with the Guild first so you have that stamp. Does that work?

**John:** It doesn’t really work. Let’s talk registering with the Guild, because obviously, I’ve followed the WGA for a long time. You can register your document with the WGA. Basically, they stick it in an envelope and say, “We sealed this envelope on this date.” It proves that it existed at a certain point in time. That’s no more meaningful than actually-

**Al:** Do it yourself.

**John:** … doing it yourself or showing an email that you sent it to somebody. It doesn’t do any more than that. It doesn’t provide an extra protection. I worry it’s basically what people feel good about, but it doesn’t necessarily do a thing. A situation where Hilary probably would not want to leave something behind, let’s say she’s one of six writers going in on a project, and you’re going out with your pitch, don’t leave them that pitch.

**Al:** Do not leave behind, because that’s when things can get used in the studio for parts.

**John:** Your details got moved into their thing.

**Miles:** That’s true.

**Al:** We have seen this, where you do have younger writers who are working with producers or a production company or a studio, and they’re just doing all this free work.

**Miles:** It’s just a bigger issue.

**Al:** You gotta stop. That’s just where it’s-

**Miles:** We worked with one writer. She hasn’t been paid. We’re supervising her. We were asked to come in for some producer friends of ours. She’s been working on this thing for three years. The pitch keeps getting delayed.

**Al:** It keeps getting pushed down. We’re like, “Guys, she’s been doing… This isn’t fair. She needs to be able to pitch this.” That’s incredibly frustrating.

**John:** Hilary should definitely, if she feels like writing up a one-page and sending it in, great, but if the guy keeps asking for more and more details-

**Al:** Do not. Do not.

**John:** … that’s when you start getting into problems.

**Miles:** That’s when you gotta say no.

**John:** Also, she has a whole script, so at some point just share the script.

**Miles:** Is it a script?

**John:** Yeah, she says it’s a script, or it’s a feature idea.

**Miles:** If it’s a finished script, then she’s fine.

**John:** Cool.

**Megana:** Mike from San Jose asks, “For someone who’s equally open to starting a career in either features or TV, does it even make sense to write spec feature scripts in the current environment? What I mean by that is, it appears that the vast majority of professional work nowadays is on the TV side of things. If a writer was to write a great feature spec, at best, it might lead them to an increasingly narrow field of work that appears to be getting narrower at a rapid pace, whereas a strong television pilot may perhaps help open the door to a much larger field of work opportunities. If equally interested in both, why would someone choose to write a feature spec in this current marketplace?”

**John:** This is a great question for where we were at 30 years ago versus where we’re at right now, because some people are writing TV spec pilots, but not really 30 years ago. Now, if you’re trying to staff a show, you might read a spec pilot, you might read a pilot, but you’d also read a feature. You’d read whatever, right?

**Miles:** Absolutely.

**Al:** Yeah, but I think it seems a sad reality that features are dying. I would never recommend anyone writing a feature, starting out now. I’d definitely aim at TV. That’s not a badge of shame anymore. We have Tim Burton directing now a TV show. It’s really changed everything. It’s an amazing opportunity now, what has happened. I think writing a 90-minute movie or a feature script is not the way to go, starting out.

**Megana:** Would you guys read a feature spec as a sample for a writers’ room?

**Miles:** Absolutely.

**Al:** Absolutely.

**Megana:** It’s not like what he’s saying.

**Al:** No, it’s not even church and state. We’d read it. It’s just the writer might have more opportunities with a spec pilot script to sell versus a spec feature script to sell. We read both.

**Miles:** Also, in terms of it takes half the time to write. It’s not as strict as a… It’s an easier option. It’s definitely I think the way to go. There’s more opportunity just for employment in television. What’s great, when you’re looking at a stack of scripts to read when you’re staffing a show, the shorter scripts are attractive. It really is.

**Al:** It’s true.

**John:** Although somebody could read the first half of the feature script and say, “Listen, I know this person can write. I want to meet this writer.” There are examples of TV pilots that are just… People read a random pilot, and they say, “I want to make this show.” Severance is a case of where it was just a great script and they said, “Let’s make this into a show.” That’s really rare from a person who has no TV experience, where they wrote a spec pilot and suddenly they’re shooting a show, where some movies can get made in different ways. There’s always cases of… Go was a spec script, and it sold and got made.

**Miles:** It’s just that I think the market for movies has shrunk and is shrinking. I think you have more opportunity in terms of selling, or even if you staff on a show and you have written three spec pilots that you can bring out and say, “Hey, I got this spec pilot that I wrote four years ago,” and present it as a new thing. It feels like there’s opportunities for your war chest of scripts.

**Al:** That’s where TV has gotten a little more like features, because it used to be with networks you’d write pilots every year. Then if that pilot didn’t go, it was like the pilot never existed. They didn’t go, “You had a great version of this last season. Why don’t you just do that pilot again?” Nobody ever did. Now it is more like you can have it in your drawer, because there’s not that machine of you’ve got to pick everything up in May, be shooting in July to be on the air in September. That whole system is gone with the wind.

**John:** One thing I think listeners may not understand is that… Let’s say you staff on a show. Let’s say you staff on Wednesday or staff on some other show, on a streamer show. You may have writing credit on some of those episodes, but those aren’t necessarily going to be good things for people to read, because they don’t know what you did on that versus someone else writing on that.

**Al:** Correct.

**John:** They may look at your work history and say, “It’s great that you worked on this show,” but they want to read something that’s original to you.

**Miles:** Hundred percent. That’s something that’s important. Usually, we like to read an original piece of work. In the old days, we also used to write spec episodes of shows that existed, which is a less-

**John:** Very uncommon now.

**Miles:** Yeah, but it was actually useful, because they could see if they could imitate your voice. That was something that I think has been lost. You can hire somebody who’s an amazing writer, but they have no aptitude to write our voice, because that’s what you want when you staff people is that they have that facility to be able to mimic you, which is an odd thing for some writers to do.

**Megana:** Jack says, “I’m Jack from England, and I’m a screenwriting student. I wanted to ask you about procrastination. I love writing. I’ve written several shorts and two pilots. I really want to take the next step and write a feature. I keep putting it off, and I know why. I’m terrified of it being terrible and discouraging me. Instead, I find myself procrastinating, and I’m stuck in a terrible place. Do you guys have any tips of squashing procrastination and finally getting around to starting that project?”

**John:** We’ve talked about procrastination a lot of times on the show. Episode 99, we have a big segment on it. I’m curious, the two of you together probably is a good barrier to procrastination, because you hold each other accountable.

**Al:** Exactly. We can also get together and kick around ideas, and it gets that process going, because a lot of times when people are like, “I have writer’s block,” you probably have story block, and you’re trying to work through things or you just hit something. I can see that getting in that cycle of like, oh, is it going to work or not? I think that is the nice thing about a partnership is you do… We always treated it like a job, so you do hold each other accountable.

**Miles:** If we get, as Al says, story blocked, we usually go get pie or doughnuts.

**Al:** Sugar’s great.

**Miles:** Sugar’s great. We just figure it out. The ability to talk it out with someone is often… How you get motivated is usually with a writers’ group or someone who can help you work through the story issues.

Also, often, it can mean that your story isn’t fully formed yet, so spending longer on the outline, making sure that works, so you haven’t written 40 pages of your script and realize the story’s not working, which that leads to depression and starting again. It’s really not launching too early. It’s always wanting to start too soon before you’ve actually… The heavy lifting is the story break, so making sure that you feel confident and you’ve pitched the story to people so you know the structure’s working. Once the structure works, then everything else should be much easier in terms of flowing.

**John:** Advice for Jack, what I hear Miles and Al saying is that having someone who you can work with is incredibly useful. If you don’t have a writing partner, having someone else who can be on your side or just hold you accountable to getting stuff done could be great to get you over the procrastination.

Jack’s also worried about, “The thing I write is going to be terrible,” and it’s going to be discouraging to him. Maybe try approaching it from the opposite way, like, “This is going to suck. This is going to be terrible. This is going to be awful, but I’m going to just do it anyway. It’s going to be bad. I’m going to learn from it.” Try to get yourself started that way, but don’t hold yourself to some impossibly high standard. Hold yourself to actually a pretty low standard [inaudible 00:54:58] to get the work done. You’ve already finished two shorts and two pilots. Great. You know you’re able to actually get stuff done. A feature’s a longer thing, but you can get a feature done.

**Al:** We were talking about this the other day. When we got Lethal Weapon 4, and it was our first big thing, and then you’re like, “Oh shit, how are we going to write this?”

**Miles:** You’re overwhelmed and intimidated.

**Al:** Overwhelmed and intimidated, because movies you loved in college and things like that.

**Miles:** Mimi Leder had written an article actually in Written By, which is the Writers Guild magazine, about this movie Deep Impact and how she got through that. She got through it one scene at a time. It’s really not thinking about the big picture. It’s thinking about every scene is a building block to something. Really, what got us through that script was just focusing on the scene where it was ahead of us and just writing that. We just accumulated scenes.

**Al:** It got you past the intimidation of the-

**Miles:** You just needed to get through a page and a half of a scene, and then you’re fine.

**Megana:** I really like that distinction of story block. Is that something that you’re encountering when you’re going from outline to scriptwriting phase?

**Al:** Our outlines are pretty detailed. When we look at the paragraphs for the scenes, sometimes there’s dialog in them. In some ways it’s kind of a little like a first draft, because you’re trying to work through… We say if it’s a roadmap, it’s giving you all the interstates, so that when you sit down to write, it’s like, “Oh, I can go off to this back road and try this.” It actually frees you up to I think be more creative when you’re actually writing the scenes and not be worried about the math and the architecture, and just being able to focus on writing the scene and knowing it works, so if all else fails, you can go back to this. It does give you opportunities.

**Megana:** You’re figuring out more of that before you even start the outlines.

**Miles:** Absolutely. That’s the key element, that you don’t start before you’re ready. It’s knowing when you’re ready. We’ll spend weeks, months, years sometimes working on just the architecture before we launch in, because you don’t want to launch in and realize, oh, that’s where the story block happens.

**Al:** That’s a lot of what you’re working through in the writers’ room. This was interesting, because we love Zoom rooms, and it’s great when you got the big picture stuff, but then sometimes when you’re writing and you’re getting into the more granular pieces… We’ve said this a couple of times, “I wish we’d all just get in a whiteboard, and we would totally figure this out in a couple hours.” I think there’s that element of it as well.

**John:** The two of you, what is your process for that early stage stuff? Are you guys index carders? Are you whiteboarders? Do you have a thing you go to, or is it just conversation and notes?

**Miles:** A lot of conversations at cafes. We go to the [inaudible 00:57:37] and sit upstairs and eats doughnuts, just sit there for hours talking through the store.

**Al:** We’re like, “Let’s write this down before we forget.” It’s a lot of that. Again, we’ve been writing together for nearly 30 years. I always know if we get together, whatever kind of problem or block we’re having, we will ultimately figure it out. Might not figure it out today. Might be two days from now. It takes a lot of talking through it.

**John:** Either you’ll solve the problem or you’ll realize that you’re trying to answer the wrong questions and figure out something different.

**Al:** Exactly right. You’ll, exactly, do something different.

**Miles:** It is just hours of talking.

**Al:** Even in the writers’ rooms, like we said, we really want the outlines. Everybody knows what it is. The writer knows what the scene’s about. It’s not just the logistics of the scene. It’s what’s the scene about.

**John:** Let’s talk through the last stage of what the scene’s about is really that tone meeting discussion. The script’s been written. It’s there. Everyone can agree on what the words are that are going to be said. The actual approach to how you’re going to shoot the scene and how you’re going to edit the scene, that last conversation is really important too. Can you just talk us through, working with Tim or working with any of your other directors, what is the tone discussion going into a given scene or a given day’s work?

**Al:** What’s interesting is what we… Tim is different than obviously the directors, because what we would do with him… We worked this out, because he’s obviously never had showrunners before. We wanted to respect his process but be available, because it’s keeping a bigger story in your head. What we would do is, we would meet with him in the trailer in the morning and go through all the scenes. He would ask any questions he had. he would then say, “Are there certain things you want to make sure that I hit?”

**Miles:** That’s right.

**Al:** He was also like, “You guys are keeping the big mystery, and so I want to make sure I’m getting all the… ” We’d say, “This is important. That’s important.”

**Miles:** He was amazingly collaborative in all stages, except when he was directing, when he got into his whole directing… He was different in terms of he got into…

**John:** I knew that from Big Fish. I was really curious what that was going to be like on the set, because on Big Fish, it’s like this garage door goes down in front of him.

**Miles:** Exactly.

**John:** He doesn’t want to have that conversation.

**Al:** There were a few days of a pre-shoot so the crew could get their feet. We realized on the first day, we’re like, “We gotta figure out… ” It was a little awkward. We went to him and said, “Look, we want to figure out a system so that we’re respectful of you.” He was like, “I’m glad you guys talked.” He said, “Let’s do it this way.” In the old days, we would just have one big, long tone meeting with the director, and they’d go off and shoot. Then what we started doing, I think it was on Shannara, is we would meet with the director on the weekends, because it’s a block. It’s actually two episodes you’re shooting.

**Miles:** There’s a long-

**Al:** It’s a long-

**Miles:** It’s like 35 days.

**Al:** To keep in your head. We’d go and meet with him and just go through the week’s work when it was a Sunday afternoon and there was no meter running.

**Miles:** They’ve now worked with the actors. Also, we’d sit there and say, “These are the actors’ strengths and weaknesses. This is the crew’s strengths and weaknesses,” just so they have a full picture of what we’re doing. Then we also talk about how we want the scenes shot. We usually have a specific way we want them shot and understanding the visual effects element or whatever it is. It’s making sure that’s communicated so it has a consistence. It’s all about consistency, so every episode feels like it’s the same vision rather than five different directors. That’s always the goal.

Each thing you do, I’m sure John would agree, you learn something new about the process. You never get there. It’s always like, “Oh my gosh.” This one was all about the camera operators, how important they were. It’s always a fascinating learning experience.

**John:** The most difficult people, the most dangerous people you’re going to meet in this business are the ones who’ve had some success and will never change from the way they’ve always classically done things. Those are the situations where you cannot convince them otherwise. The ship can be sinking, and they’re going to stick to their plan, because that’s what’s always worked for them.

**Al:** Exactly right. It’s so true. The other thing too, on this one specifically, is the other directors got all of the dailies. They got to watch all of Tim’s dailies, just to see his process.

**Miles:** [Crosstalk 01:01:59] to match the style.

**Al:** To match the style.

**John:** Great. You have an ongoing crew that’s going to help with everything else, but still, you want to make sure they’re making the same choice about how you’re coming into scenes.

**Al:** Exactly.

**John:** It’s not just about lenses. It’s really what the approach is.

**Miles:** Exactly.

**John:** Great. It’s time for our One Cool Things. Do you guys have things to recommend to our listeners?

**Al:** My One Cool Thing, because I have a one-track mind, I’m reading a book. It’s called The Way They Were, which is about the making of the movie The Way We Were. It is a fascinating look at the studio process in the ’70s. That movie is a total studio movie. It’s not an auteur movie.

**Miles:** Say what the movie is.

**Al:** The Way We Were.

**John:** The Way We Were.

**Al:** The Way We Were.

**John:** The Redford, Streisand movie.

**Al:** Redford, Streisand, Sydney Pollack.

**John:** I remember that there was a poster of that in our Stark classroom.

**Al:** Yes, there was, because Ray Stark, who was the benefactor, it was his movie. I always forget Art Murphy, who was the first head of the Stark Program, who used to review movies for Variety. He met Ray Stark when he wrote a review of The Way We Were, which he didn’t like. His first line of the review was, “Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be.” Anyway, it’s a fascinating book just looking at an actual studio movie getting made. It was rewritten by every top screenwriter in town in the ’70s. You had Sydney Pollack as the director, who was a classic studio prestige movie director. It’s a great read, because everybody talks.

**John:** The nice thing about a movie with that much time going past, no one has an ax to grind.

**Al:** Exactly.

**Miles:** Mine’s a little more practical, which is I always use a Moleskine notebook, which is lined, for just jotting down lines or observations or lists, just so it’s actually not just a random thing, so it feels special. I always keep it with me. I think it’s a really good writer’s tool, that you actually physically write stuff, not just note it down on your iPad or iPhone, so it really feels like you’re writing. I think that’s something that’s very useful and I’ve really come to love as a tool.

**John:** Let’s get very Moleskine-specific here. What you’re talking about is about six inches wide, eight inches tall?

**Miles:** Yeah. It’s the hardback small book.

**Al:** It feels like it’s a book.

**John:** Are you a both sides of the page or one side of the page?

**Miles:** I’m both sides.

**John:** You’re both sides of the page. Do you date the pages?

**Miles:** I don’t.

**John:** It’s just continuous going through it all. When you’re done with the notebook, what do you do with it?

**Miles:** I keep them in a stack.

**John:** Are they labeled on the spine, or how do you find them?

**Miles:** No. I got five of them. They’re all full.

**Al:** It’s like a serial killer book.

**Miles:** Each one’s a horrible memory of a different production. They’re sitting there like scars. They’re incredibly useful. I think that’s a really valuable tool, just the physicality of writing what you need to do. That’s my One Cool Thing.

**John:** Absolutely. I use the notebooks for actually taking notes, not just my to-do list kind of stuff, but for taking notes. I’ll find it’s really useful in meetings just to note who said a thing, and a lot with WGA stuff, who made a point, and so you can go back to it and remember that person was actually a smart person. I have found that being able to go back through and actually find my old note has been really, really useful.

**Miles:** I always do that with casting, when I’m looking at Zoom stuff. I can write all the people down, because sometimes you don’t get the person you want. Just having that physical book rather than just a piece of paper, you can go back to refer to. Even years later you can go back and say, “I like that kid,” or, “I like that actor. What was their name?” You’ve starred that person. It’s really a great tool that’s been lost. I think that’s something that’s great.

**John:** Yeah, because the casting sheets we always used to get were two or three sheets of paper stapled together. You don’t hold onto that. You might take little notes on it, but you’re not going to hold onto it for a while.

**Miles:** The person you like is the one you pick. There could be three other people that are actually pretty good. Also, you don’t necessarily get the first person you want. People can evolve. It’s really I think useful.

**John:** I remember Josh Holloway, who became Sawyer on Lost, came in for a pilot of mine. He was supposed to be playing this Alaska State Trooper. He’s the least Alaskan person you’re ever going to meet. I think I said to him in the room, “You’re not right for this, but you’re fantastic. You’re absolutely going to kill it.” I was right. Those are the kind of people you star and you remember and you keep-

**Miles:** Who did we have? Rachel McAdams came to see us.

**Al:** Rachel McAdams.

**John:** Wow.

**Miles:** For Lois Lane.

**Al:** Lois Lane. This was in Season 3 of Smallville. We didn’t get Lois until Season 4. We met with her, and she had just done a pilot for ABC.

**Miles:** She hadn’t got it, remember?

**Al:** Nancy Drew. Was it Nancy Drew?

**Miles:** She was up for Nancy Drew and she hadn’t got it. We said, “You know what? That’s the best thing that’s ever happened to you, because you’re going to be a movie star. Don’t worry about it.”

**Al:** You said, “This has been a great meeting. A year from now, you will not be here.”

**John:** I’m sure you’ve had this experience where the network of the studio will have an actor they absolutely love, and they’ll send them to you, and you’re like, “I don’t understand what you see in this person.”

**Al:** A lot.

**Miles:** A lot.

**Al:** We got a lot of that from The WB.

**Miles:** We’ve put people in the show as well. I won’t mention names. It’s like, “Oh my goodness, what were we thinking?” We want to play ball. Whatever happens happens. We don’t really now take that pressure, do we?

**Al:** No. Also, shows are different. Obviously, ’22, you had a lot of guest stars. You had a lot of those, more opportunities.

**John:** We’ve all been there. My One Cool Thing is incredibly self-serving. For Scriptnotes, we have our Premium subscriptions where you get all the back-episodes and Bonus Segments, like the one we’re about to record. People can sign up for that scriptnotes.net. Also, scriptnotes.net, you can click on the Gifts tab, and you can buy a $29 gift pass for Scriptnotes Premium for six months or $49 for a year. You might want to give that as a gift.

Actually, I think the more clever thing to do, as many of our listeners have done, is… You know how you always have that parent or that grandparent that’s like, “I want to get you something for Christmas. I don’t know what to get you,” and you’re like, “I have no idea what to get me.” Ask them to get you a Scriptnotes Premium subscription, because you’ll actually learn something about screenwriting. They’ll feel happy that they got you something that’s going to advance your career. You’ll be happy because you’ll get to hear all the Bonus Segments and Megana laughing at the things we’re saying in the background. If you would like a gift subscription to Scriptnotes or just general Scriptnotes Premium, scriptnotes.net, and there’s a Gifts tab at the top. Al and Miles, thank you so much for a fun show.

**Miles:** Thank you.

**Al:** Thank you. It was great.

**Miles:** Great.

**John:** It was really great. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It’s edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Adam Locke Norton. 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, Craig is no longer on Twitter, I’m still @johnaugust for the moment. Are you guys on Twitter or any of the social medias?

**Al:** Not on Twitter, no, on Instagram.

**John:** We’re going to probably take this out of the outline, because no one’s on Twitter anymore. You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find the transcripts and sign up for our weeklyish newsletter called Inneresting, which has lots of links to things about writing. We have T-shirts and hoodies. They’re great. You can find them at Cotton Bureau. You can sign up to become a Premium Member at scriptnotes.net, where you get all those back-episodes, the Bonus Segments, like the one we’re about to record on film school. Al and Miles, thank you so much.

**Al:** Thank you.

**Miles:** Thank you.

[Bonus Segment]

**John:** The three of us met in film school. I applied to the Stark Program coming from Iowa. I knew nothing about the film industry. I knew what I’d read in Premiere magazine, and that was it.

**Miles:** Premiere magazine.

**John:** I miss Premiere magazines.

**Miles:** I know.

**Al:** Me too.

**John:** Oh my god, it was so good. We all showed up here. We knew nothing, and we came. This was an era before the internet. One of the reasons why I loved USC film school was it had this giant script library. I remember checking out scripts in the library and learning so much. [inaudible 01:09:55] had her own script library. You could check out two a week. It was an invaluable resource. Now that’s just the internet. Any script you ever want to read, it’s there.

Let’s think about recommendations for people who are thinking about film school, pros and cons, who should, who should not be thinking about it. Would the three of us go to film school in 2022 if we were similarly situated? Would you, Al?

**Al:** I probably would. We all have now college-age or almost college-age kids. I don’t think I’d go to film school undergrad.

**John:** I wouldn’t either.

**Al:** I think that’s kind of a waste. I think that was great about our program was it was 25 students. They were all type-A personalities. It was like a reality show before reality shows. I think a lot of these schools cater to the graduate students. I certainly felt like we got all of the information, equipment, everything we needed. It did open doors. We all had internships. We were able to really learn the business. I only wanted to go to film school in Los Angeles. I only applied to USC and I applied to UCLA, both to the producers’ programs, and got into USC, thank god. That really was the entrée in, because we were all coming up together. None of us knew anybody.

**Miles:** Or anything.

**Al:** Or anything, because like you said, it was pre-internet. I would still do it again.

**John:** Miles, would you do it again in 2022?

**Miles:** I would a hundred percent do it again. I would be absolutely nowhere without that experience at film school in terms of a career. It was really what launched us totally, utterly. We still have friends who employ us every now and again from that experience.

For me, it was literally a kid in the UK, “How do I get to Hollywood?” because I had no interest in making films in the UK, because that sensibility was not mine. It was a way to come to America, which was a huge deal as an international student. That was great. I always loved Hollywood movies, so being in LA, that to me was like… It makes sense to come to LA, because that really is still the center of this business. I know there are great film schools all over America and all over the world. I always wanted to make Hollywood movies and be here, so for me it made total sense.

Then I also didn’t know what exactly I wanted to do within the business. Our program in particular was like a grab bag of writing, directing, producing, all of it. I think looking back now, I would like to have directed a lot more. Would I like to have gone to a directors’ program? Probably. That’s what I should’ve done. I’m not complaining about my writing career. It’s an interesting thing.

What I didn’t realize before I came to film school and what I learned very quickly at film school was writing is the essential element of this business. Without a script, without an idea that is executed well, there’s nothing. Writers really are kings. I think that’s amazing that we’re still so undervalued and underappreciated and our lives are hell most of the time. It’s still true. That’s still the lesson I think I learned, which is a revelation when I came, because I always thought the director was everything. Oh my god.

You read the scripts, as John says, from the film library, and you see everything is in the script. You read a great script for everything. There it is, written down, interpreted and executed by the director, but it actually comes from the mind and imagination of the writer.

**Al:** It’s funny, I thought that was interesting. The Oscars I think a couple years ago put the page all the description and answered the question, which we all get, “Do you guys just write the dialog, or do the actors just make that up?” No, they do not.

**Miles:** Exactly. It’s, “What do you guys do?” It’s like, you work it all out.

**John:** Miles, would you go to undergrad for film school?

**Miles:** I wouldn’t, no.

**John:** I agree with you both. I don’t think undergrad film school makes a lot of sense. I think if someone who is an 18-year-old is super into films, great. Go get a liberal arts degree in something else that you also really enjoy. Makes film on the side. Do a bunch of stuff. That should be your complete hobby is making films and learning about films, but it doesn’t have to be your main focus of those four years. Maybe save some money in those first four years. Go someplace that’s not super expensive.

If you really want to go to film school, go to film school for grad school, because that is where you’re going to meet a group of people who are trying to enter into this business at the same time, because as much as I learned in my two years of Stark, it was my classmates.

**Al:** Totally.

**John:** 100%. It was you guys being successful and incredibly competitive at the start. It was all of the drama and all that stuff. It was really helpful.

**Miles:** Of course. Absolutely.

**John:** Of our 25 students, 12 or more are major players in the industry now, because we all rose up together. You guys read my stuff. I read your stuff. Finding a core group of people was essential. I could not have this career without it.

**Miles:** That’s right.

**Al:** Agreed.

**Miles:** It is always a class of 25. 12 of us have been very successful. I feel bad for the others, because it’s a big financial commitment. Nowadays, obviously, you can sit in a room and make amazing stuff on your computer. You have an iPhone, which is incredible. If you want to be a director, there’s no excuse. You can go make a movie tomorrow, five minutes or an hour. Whatever you want to do, you can… The technology is there, and it’s dirt cheap. That’s a difference from our period. You can put it online. It can go viral. It’s amazing what people do. The guy Wes Ball, who did Maze Runner, it’s all from his thing he did in his computer at home in his basement. It’s huge opportunity. I think film school is great in many ways, but that networking element for us was critical.

**John:** I want to circle back to something you said, Miles, because you said as a person coming from the UK. Our program that we went through is now mostly international students. If you are a person who wants to get to Los Angeles, who wants to get to America just to learn about doing stuff, getting into a college is a way to get yourself into the US. You wouldn’t have been able to get a work visa to come here and do stuff.

**Miles:** No, it’s impossible. It wasn’t my motivation for coming, but in terms of coming to Hollywood, it was like, “Oh my god.” I couldn’t believe I got in, for one thing. It was a dream come true to come here to the epicenter of the movie business. It was a big deal.

**Megana:** Would you choose to do a producing program again?

**John:** It was the right choice for me because I didn’t know anything about anything. I think I imagine myself as a 22-year-old in 2022 who has listened to Scriptnotes and knows that I want to be a writer, maybe I would’ve done that. I may have done a more true production program. I’m sometimes skeptical of the pure writing programs in that it’s a lot of theory and you may not actually get a lot out of it. The nice thing about the program we were in or a production program is that you’re around people who are making stuff and that you’re seeing, “Okay, from what I just wrote here, this is the scene that actually come out.” You get [inaudible 01:16:55] a lot more.

**Al:** Also, I think what the Stark Program was was incredibly practical. Very few of our classes were actually at USC. They were out at Sony. They were at lawyers’ offices. They were at different things. You were just immersed in it right away.

**Miles:** From what John said, a lot of writing programs are navel gazing, over-intellectualized. That’s great if you want to make arthouse movies, but if you want to make commercial Hollywood movies or TV shows, that’s not a great place to start. You’re always going to be resisting, like, “This is my personal story.” It’s like, “That’s great, but that’s not going to be a global sensation or it’s not going to travel. It’s a small movie.” I think for us, USC was about commercial, like Spielberg, George Lucas. That was the goal, wasn’t it?

**Al:** Yeah.

**John:** The other crucial thing people need to remember is that unlike law school or medical school, how you’re doing in your classes does not matter at all. I have no idea what grades I got. I’m sure I did great, but I don’t care.

**Miles:** Remember the documentary class?

**John:** Oh yeah. Classically, people who don’t know the stories, we had this documentary class. Mitchell Block I think was who was teaching it.

**Miles:** Exactly.

**John:** He was so great and so dedicated about how you make documentaries, really about how you raise money to make documentaries. I remember one night he was talking through about PBS grants and how you can get up to $6,000 from PBS for this kind of thing and talking about how you cobble it together. Net to me, our friend Jen, her cellphone goes off. You should not have your cellphone in a classroom. Her cellphone goes off. She runs out into the hall. She comes back, she says, “Al and Miles just sold their script for a million dollars.” Poor Mitchell Block then had to go back to saying how you could get $9,000 from this other little-

**Miles:** Remember he had a great thing about, “You can become your own church and get a grant.”

**Al:** That’s right.

**Miles:** It was like, what are you talking about?

**Al:** I know.

**Miles:** You can’t be serious. Oh my god.

**Al:** So funny.

**John:** The other thing which I would say was really helpful that I got out of Stark, which I would never have really learned otherwise, is that budgeting and scheduling class. It was a drag. I did not enjoy doing it. The fact I can actually read a budget and a schedule and understand what those choices are how to make them… I don’t ever want to do that again, but I can actually understand. I would’ve had a hard time learning how that all worked if I hadn’t had a class that really just walked me through the whole thing.

**Miles:** That gave us a global view of everything, didn’t it?

**John:** Yes.

**Miles:** In terms of the TV thing and the legal element, which is really useful in terms of contracts. It was really a great thing. I think the issue for many people though is just owning what you want to do. Sometimes you don’t know it. I want to be a writer is a hard thing for someone to say and admit, because people will think you’re… Like, “Really?” How do you prove that? It’s like I think declaring you want to be a director. Then you’ve gotta direct and do something, which you can do on an iPhone. If you want to be a writer, you’ve gotta write. It’s not talking about writing. You’ve actually gotta do it. I think that’s something that is difficult for people. I understand why it’s difficult, because it’s really a declaration of your life, a life choice. It’s hard.

**John:** Let’s think through some of the below-the-line skills as well. If you want to be an editor, should you go to film school, if you want to be a cinematographer? I’d say maybe. The pros of it is you’re going to be taught by people who actually have some theory behind stuff, which is great. You may make relationships with people who will actually make a lot of movies down the road too. That could be great. You could DP on their things while they’re in film school, and they keep you around. There are people who have been building whole careers out of that. Yet that’s still not the same kind of practical experience you’d get just working on a set. Being a PA might teach you more about what that all is than [crosstalk 01:20:37].

**Miles:** I agree. The best experience is practical. There’s also a wealth of production now. I think if I were in the UK right now, this is the dream period. There’s so much production in the UK. It’s like, why to go film school? You can work on a Marvel movie or a Star Wars show. It’s about persistence. It’s about the hustle. That’s a great lesson.

I love this lesson from film school. We had this really aggressive producing instructor. He was an old-school Hollywood. He drove this huge Mercedes. He came to his class and said, “I was just pulled over in Beverly Hills speeding to this class. It was the best lesson I’m going to teach you right now about producing, which is beg. When the cop pulled me over, I said, ‘I’m going to get out of this ticket. You know how I’m going to do it? Beg.’ That’s what Hollywood’s about. You beg until they say yes.”

**Al:** Is this Jack Brodsky?

**Miles:** Yeah, Jack. He said, “Guess what? I got no ticket. I bluffed my way out of it, and no ticket.” It’s like, oh my god, that is such the Hollywood hustle.

**Al:** It is true, yeah, because that’s the thing sometimes I think writers forget is that you are an entrepreneur. You do have to really generate your own material. Again, you can change the perception of you with one script. It’s always that. You can’t wait for people to hire you or put you on staff or rely on agents or managers. You really do have to do it yourself. Then the rest comes from that.

**John:** Great. Thanks.

**Al:** Thank you.

**Miles:** Thank you.

Links:

* [Al Gough](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0332184/) on [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/goughalfred/?hl=en)
* [Miles Millar](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0587692/) on [Twitter](https://twitter.com/milesmillar)
* [Wednesday on Netflix](https://www.netflix.com/title/81231974)
* [The Way They Were](https://www.amazon.com/Way-They-Were-Battles-Hollywood/dp/0806542322/ref=asc_df_0806542322/) book about the movie The Way We Were
* [Moleskine Notebooks](https://www.moleskine.com/en-us/shop/notebooks/)
* Looking for a Christmas Gift? Buy a [Scriptnotes Gift Subscription](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts) $29 for six months, or $49 for a year for a friend, click [here](https://scriptnotes.supportingcast.fm/gifts)!
* [ChatGPT](https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/) by OpenAi
* [Get a Scriptnotes T-shirt!](https://cottonbureau.com/people/scriptnotes-podcast)
* [Check out the Inneresting Newsletter](https://inneresting.substack.com/)
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [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 Adam Locke Norton ([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/578standard.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 (237)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.