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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: outline

Workshops: An invitiation to idea theft?

December 5, 2006 Psych 101, QandA, Writing Process

questionmarkI was wondering how you feel about workshops. I am an aspiring screenwriter, and am about to enter a workshop of about 20 other writers. My concern was protecting my work. I don’t have a complete treatment yet, and god only knows how much my story outline will change before I really write it. I can register something, but it might be pretty different from the final work. Do I run the risk of as yet unmet peers stealing parts of my idea?

— Frank
Los Angeles

Get over it. No one wants to steal your crappy idea.

Honestly, Frank, your idea might be terrific. But the reality is, none of the other aspiring screenwriters in your workshop are going to realize it’s terrific, because they’re all busy working on their own crappy-slash-terrific ideas. They came into the workshop with the same false confidence in their genius that you did, and it’s this equity of delusion that will protect you.

Had you written in something like this…

I am an aspiring screenwriter, and am about to enter a workshop of about 20 other writers. My concern was protecting other people’s work. I’m unsure of my ethical backbone, and worry that I might poach other aspiring screenwriters’ stories. Do I run the risk of as yet unmet peers realizing that I’m a thief?

…I might be worried. But I’ve been getting a slight variation on your email every week for the last five years. “Idea poachers” are the WMD’s of newbie screenwriter angst. They’re not really there, no matter how hard you look. Just write your script, and do everything you can to help your workshop-mates.

Follow up: That crushing doubt

November 17, 2006 Follow Up, QandA

[follow up]Today’s [follow up](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2006/follow-up-please) comes from a reader who asked a question on my imdb column, which somehow never got copied over to this website.

Yes, for the record, I’m aware that this “Follow Up” feature has become self-congratulatory. If it’s any consolation, I hate myself. (Not really.)

The original Q and A went like this:

That feeling where you sink low in the stomach and begin to doubt the really great thirty pages that leaked out of your head -­ which eventually leads to utter disappointment in yourself, your talent, your words. That’s good right?

I know the old “Don’t give up” or “Give it time” advice. But tell me from your personal experience how you get through those famine times in writing.

— Carey O. Malloy

At a workshop last week, one writer said her trick to getting through these bleak times started before she even began working on a project. She would write a half-page letter to herself about why she was excited about the project. Then she’d take this letter and seal it away. Hopefully, she’d never need to look at it again. But if she hit hopeless despair, she could rip that envelope open and be re-inspired.

It’s a smart idea. Unfortunately, it does nothing for you, Carey, right-here-right-now, with no hope, no confidence, and no damn letter to inspire you.

Self-doubt is essentially an argument with yourself, and it’s impossible to win a battle when you’re fighting both sides. So concede defeat and move on to the real questions: Do your thirty pages really suck? What changed that led you away from thinking they were great? Do you really know what the movie is that you’re trying to write?

This last question is usually the killer. I’ve gotten lost in scripts many times, and had to throw out material I really loved but that simply wasn’t part of the movie I was trying to make. It was too slapstick, too showy, too Ivory-Merchant or too Bruckheimer for the project. But I realized something amazing: Nothing ever really goes away. You’ll re-use or re-invent things, sometimes without being aware of it.

The short film script that begat Go was in turn begat (begotten?) by an aborted modernization of “Alice in Wonderland.” I didn’t even realize it at the time, but I was using a lot of my ideas for Alice in it. Later, I wrote a damn cool split-screen action sequence for Charlie’s Angels that didn’t survive, but as God is my witness, one day it shall be filmed.

I guess my best advice for grappling with self-doubt is to reassure you that every script has its crisis point in the birthing process, before a certain critical mass is achieved and it comes out wet and shiny and crying. If a certain scene is troubling you, skip over it and tackle something further ahead. If the story is getting confused, take a break and outline the scenes. Ask hard questions of the script and the characters, but lighten up on yourself. You’re only human, and they’re only paper.

__Here’s the follow-up, more than six years later.__

You answered a question of mine WAY back in July of 2000 on IMDb. Here’s the [link](http://us.imdb.com/indie/ask-archive?date=20000707).

I lived in Nashville then, and at 22, had just decided that year to combine my one real talent, writing, with my insatiable love of films. (Apparently I had also decided to use my middle initial. Go figure.)

So in 2004, armed with a spec that was fueling opportunities to rewrite other people’s specs, I moved to Los Angeles. It took a couple of years, I worked jobs that had nothing to do with writing, as new Angelenos are wont to do, and in April a good friend (and an ex-agent) asked if she could make some calls around town on my behalf concerning my spec (which had basically been a drink coaster for a year and a half.) I said, uh sure.

A week later it sold. She cold-called a big company about a script and a writer no one had heard of because she dug the script and wanted to be a part of it. I had zero representation, no management, no professional guidance really, just that nagging instinct that storytelling is what I’m here for, and someone who believed in my writing.

The project’s in active development, much to the surprise and excitement of just about everyone involved.

And because of that deal, I pitched and met and pitched and met and I’m now adapting a comic book for one of the Big Five.

Less than six months ago, my life started down the road to becoming what I sometimes thought it could be. And it simply came down to a combination of an honest-to-goodness NEED and ability to write, getting people to believe in what you do and wanting to go to bat for you, but mostly, getting the best you have on that page.

Back then I emailed you because starting out I wondered, is this normal? What is this? This sinking, desperate feeling? And of course, now, I know it’s normal. I know what it is. It’s the critic, it’s the “realist,” it’s the southern upbringing telling me that making movies in Hollywood is a fairy tale. Or it’s a problem with the script.

I had to learn the difference between self-doubt and a bad idea. And I think reading your response first helped me realize there was a difference. But if I hadn’t asked, if I hadn’t sort of reached out to someone who I knew I could trust professionally, a guy I knew had been there, who knows…

I like to think I would’ve still pushed through, but asking then, helped get me here now, and I’m grateful for the nudge.

Thanks, Carey Malloy

Corpse Bride article in Script magazine

September 1, 2005 Corpse Bride, Projects

Corpse Bride />The new issue of [Script magazine](http://www.scriptmag.com/) has a long-ish article about [Corpse Bride](http://imdb.com/title/tt0121164/maindetails), interviewing both [Pamela Pettler](http://imdb.com/name/nm1017135/maindetails) and yours truly about the story and process.  Pamela, [Caroline Thompson](http://imdb.com/name/nm0003031/) and I share writing credit on the movie, but I was never really clear who wrote what and when.  From the article, it appears that Caroline wrote a detailed outline, while Pamela wrote the first real script.  I was the in-production guy, who did tweaks and fixes, smoothing out rough spots and writing lyrics for a few new songs.</p>
<p>Since it wasn’t a WGA-covered movie — animation often isn’t, [much to the WGA’s chagrin](http://wga.org.master.com/texis/master/redir/?u=http%3A//www.wga.org/negotiations/juris04_1.html) — there wasn’t a normal arbitration process to figure out who got what writing credit for the movie.  Fortunately, the final credits as determined by the studio seem right to me.  Again, since it’s not WGA, none of us will get residuals.  Which blows.  But we knew that going in.  </p>
<p>The movie, incidentally, is great.  </p>
<p>One of the cool/weird things about working on an animated movie (this is my second, after [Titan A.E.](http://imdb.com/title/tt0120913/maindetails)), is that you get to see the entire movie a lot while it’s in production.  Every couple of weeks, I’d get a new tape via FedEx from London, showing the newly animated scenes and the pencil storyboards for what was about to shoot, with a mixture of real and temp voices for all the characters.  In all, I’ve probably seen the entire film 20 times in various incarnations.</p>
<p>About a month ago, I finally got to see the finished product at a test screening in the Valley.  The movie is flat-out gorgeous on the big screen, with the stop-motion animation having a realer-than-real quality.  It’s so sharp that it looks 3D.</p>
<p>But what really surprised me is that all the story tweaking we did along the way feels so seamless.  You wouldn’t know that characters got added and dropped along the way, or that significant points of backstory were still in discussion midway through shooting.  Or that it wasn’t always so musical.</p>
<p>All films, including live-action, go through major changes during editing, but with this kind of animation, there really is no distinction between production and post-production.  Once you shoot a frame, it’s finished, forever.  So it’s heartening to see that the nail-biting decisions paid off.  It feels like it was shot from a locked, finished script.  It wasn’t.</p>
<p>The other great lesson you learn from writing animation is surrendering your monopolistic control over every little word, the cinematic [“Not Invented Here”](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here) syndrome.  Moving from the page to the (miniature) soundstage means going through the storyboard artists, who often find new ways of playing a beat that you never considered.  During production, a lot of my job was tweaking dialogue to match new bits of business that the artists had invented.  While actors in a live-action movie will improvise, that kind of multiple-voices collaboration doesn’t happen as often.  In the case of Corpse Bride, it really helped.</a>  </p>
</div><footer class=

Organizing reality

June 21, 2005 Television

Yesterday, the WGA [announced plans](http://www.wga.org/subpage_newsevents.aspx?id=493) to begin organizing writers working on reality television shows. Unlike writers working on traditional dramas or sitcoms, these writers haven’t been covered by the guild, which means they receive no health insurance, no residuals, and no set pay minimums.

As WGAw president Daniel Petrie put it in the press release:

The secret about reality TV isn’t that it’s scripted, which it is; the secret is that reality TV is a 21st-century telecommunications industry sweatshop.

Most readers of this site are familiar with one kind of writing when it comes to film and television. It happens on three-holed paper, with uppercase scene headers and neatly indented blocks for dialogue and parentheticals. But the truth is that much of the work a professional writer does in Hollywood takes on other formats: treatments and beat sheets, outlines and season patterns. Even in non-reality shows, a lot of the writing takes place before you type “FADE IN:”. So it’s a mistake to confuse “unscripted” with “unwritten.”

Many of the people who the WGA would like to organize are currently called producers — which is the norm in television. Be it [The Simpsons](http://imdb.com/title/tt0096697/combined) or [The Sopranos](http://imdb.com/title/tt0141842/combined), many of the writers in television are called producers of some stripe: Executive Producer, Co-EP, Supervising Producer. Despite the title, there’s no doubt they’re writing. Every episode says “written by” or “teleplay by.”

In reality TV, there’s usually no “written by” credit. But it would be a mistake to think there’s no writing.

In addition to the obviously-scripted moments (someone has to tell Jeff Probst what to say), every episode needs writers to figure out what the hell the story is. Yes, video crews will capture the action, and a team of editors at Avids will ultimately cut the footage together, but the decisions about what actually happens in a given episode fall upon the writers, who have to tease plot, character development, comedy and tension out of hundreds of hours of “real life” taking place.

These people are, in fact, organizing reality. Which is why they deserve to be able to organize under the WGA umbrella. You can read more about the situation [here](http://www.wga.org/organizesub.aspx?id=1088).

UPDATE: After reading a note left in the comments section, I don’t want to understate the role editors often have shaping the “what happens” in reality TV. They’re often performing functions that would normally be the purview of writers; the question is, why aren’t they being compensated for it?

[Formatting a reality show proposal](http://johnaugust.com/archives/2004/formatting-a-reality-show-proposal)

« 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.