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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Search Results for: protagonist

Scriptnotes, Ep 79: Rigorous, structured daydreaming — Transcript

March 8, 2013 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2013/rigorous-structured-daydreaming).

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

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

**John:** And this is Scriptnotes, episode 79, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Now, Craig, how often in your daily life does somebody say, “Oh, I listen to your show,” or, “I like your podcast.” Does that happen to you very much?

**Craig:** It’s been happening more and more. In fact, I was at Paramount a couple of weeks ago for a meeting and they didn’t have my pass to get on the lot. And they send you to a little security hut. And in the security hut I had to give the guy my name. And there was a woman there who was also a security guard. And she said, “Oh, you do that podcast. I listen to the podcast.” And then we talked about the podcast.

It seems like it happens three times a week now.

**John:** That’s great. I’ve been in New York, so it doesn’t happen to me quite as often in New York because it’s not a film town, but weirdly in the cast of Big Fish no one seems to listen to the podcast in the actual cast, but two people have friends or loved ones who listen to it.

So, Kate Baldwin, who is a part of our cast, her husband listens to the show. So, I am going to embarrass him publicly by mentioning him, calling him out. And also Bobby Steggert has a friend who listens to the show. So, that’s just odd, because these aren’t film people. But they do listen to the show, or they know people who listen to the show which is just odd, and strange, and small town-ish.

**Craig:** It is. It is strange. And it occurred to me that you and I have been screenwriting for many, many, many years. And this is sort of the screenwriter’s lament: The second we do something that is vaguely peripherally performance-oriented, suddenly we are noticed and we get attention. It’s just one of those things. There’s nothing like being onscreen or on the air. There’s no substitute, if your goal is to be noticed or recognized in any way — and mine is not, I don’t think yours is either.

**John:** Not a bit.

**Craig:** But it is an interesting sociological observation.

**John:** Yes. So, today Craig I thought we would take a look at this old post of mine that suddenly got a lot of attention, it got on Reddit this last week for kind of no good reason, but it kind of had relevant stuff that we should talk about on the podcast anyway.

And then we would do some Three Page Challenges because we hadn’t done those for awhile.

**Craig:** Yes. I’m excited. And I’m prepared.

**John:** Let’s do it.

**Craig:** I even have One Cool Thing today.

**John:** Oh my gosh, you are just so prepared!

**Craig:** Yeah, well, ever since you embarrassed me.

**John:** Yeah. That’s nice. Embarrassment is actually a good motivational tool. It’s not really a carrot or a stick; it’s its own kind of third thing.

**Craig:** It is. And I am particularly susceptible to shame.

**John:** Oh, good. See, we’ve learned so much already in the podcast.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** Mm-hmm. Now, we’ll start with this post that I did which actually was way back in 2007. I wrote this post called How to Write a Scene, which was a post on johnaugust.com, and it was just 11 little steps of, like, these are things you need to be thinking about when you’re writing a scene.

And so it was sitting up there for a good long time. And this last week a guy named Ryan Rivard made a little graphic version of it, basically made the list and sort of nicely types up the list. And it just sort of got kind of weirdly viral. He passed it around and linked it to me on Twitter. And I said, “Oh, that’s nice,” I linked it back out. And then last night it showed up on Reddit on the front page.

And so our music coordinator from Big Fish emailed me, said like, “Hey, you’re on the front page of Reddit,” which is just really strange.

And so if you read through the comments on Reddit they’re kind of maddening because it’s a lot of people who are sort of writing in with like their reactions to the graphic version of it rather than the full version of it.

**Craig:** [laughs] Well, Reddit is definitely chaotic.

**John:** Yes. But you sort of embrace the chaos of that. And some people did link to the actual real post. And so I wanted to get back to the actual post. And so if you are going to read along at home with us there will be a link to this on the show notes at johnaugust.com.

So, this is the post. And I asked sort of 11 questions. And I thought we would talk through it and see what you agree with, what you don’t agree with, and sort of elaborate more fully.

**Craig:** Let me give you a preview: There won’t be much fighting today.

**John:** Okay. It’s not going to be one of those cantankerous ones?

**Craig:** No. There is almost no umbrage to be detected.

**John:** Great. But we could maybe push further. Maybe even find a 12th or a 13th point.

**Craig:** I like it.

**John:** The first questions I always ask is what needs to happen in this scene. And this is deliberately a reaction against sort of the classic advice which is always to be thinking about what does the character want, what does the character need. To me character want and character need are hugely important, but they’re hugely important in like the macro sense.

They’re important in the what is the actual goal of the story, but when it comes down to the individual scene I find that it’s not a very useful question to be asking because, well, you could say that that character wants to get this piece of information out of somebody. Well, yes, that’s sort of the point of what you’re actually going to do in a scene, but if you want to say that character wants recognition, or that character wants love from her father, that’s not going to be an achievable thing within that scene.

**Craig:** Right. Very true. We had said a few podcasts ago that one way of thinking about the scene that’s about to follow is not “and then” but “so then.” The scene must be required or it will be lifted out of the movie for sure.

One thing that I do when I outline, you know, I have my card that says “What happens in the scene?” and then I do a card next to it that says “Why it’s happening?”And if you can’t explain why it needs to be there in the story then maybe the stuff that’s happening in that scene is unnecessary or should be folded into another scene. Nothing wrong with a combo.

**John:** Well, that anticipates point two on my list which is the question, what’s the worst that could happen if this scene were omitted? And that’s really the point of your second card is that if you can’t say clearly and definitely, “This is why this scene must be in the film,” then that scene probably won’t be in that film. If you’ve actually gotten some movies made you’ll recognize that. A scene could be perfectly lovely, but if it’s not advancing your story in a way that needs to happen, or it isn’t integral to the point of the story, it’s not going to last in your movie.

And so if you have things that are funny, or great, or meaningful, or emotional, make sure those are happening in a scene that actually has to be in your movie. Because if you look at director’s commentaries or like DVD versions of movies that have deleted scenes, you’ll say like, “Oh, that’s a fascinating scene,” but you’ll also usually say, “I can totally see why they deleted it because it wasn’t integral to the story.”

**Craig:** Yeah. I was talking to a friend a couple of months ago. He showed me an early cut of a movie that he had made. And there was one scene that I thought should just come out because it was doing precisely what we’re talking about, not moving the ball forward.

And he said, “Well, you know, that’s a good point. And the good news is that we could lift it right out and nothing would change.” And I said, “Ah-ha! That, my friend, is not a happy accident. That is probably why you should lift it out.” If you can, and nothing is disrupted around it, well, we have point two of your excellent list.

**John:** Great. I want to sort of go back to both of these points and look at them together, because in looking at what needs to happen in the scene, sometimes you will have an outline. And sometimes you’ll be able to look at your outline and say, okay, this is the two-sentence version of what needs to happen in this scene.

But a lot of times I find writers are approaching the scene with a bunch of ideas, it’s sort of like a bucket of, like, “These are the kind of cool things that could happen in this thing,” or “I just get the characters talking and I sort of listen.” Okay, that can be a good way to hear characters’ voices. That’s generally not a good way to get the actual purpose of the scene achieved. Like, a scene tends to be as short as it possibly can be to achieve its goal. And if you just get stuff started you’re unlikely to come out with a really meaningful scene.

So, you have to look at like why is this scene here. Because sometimes I’ve — this is my own personal introspection — but sometimes I’ve written some really nice scenes that are just really nice scenes that don’t actually achieve the purpose I need to achieve and I’ve wasted two hours of my time.

**Craig:** And as screenwriters we have to be not only aware of this in the work that we do, but also aware of it when other people are making suggestions for the work we do. Directors, in particular, can be susceptible to places, actions, scenarios, “cool stuff.” And they want you to put it in.

And you must always remember that simply because somebody thinks it’s cool and wants you to put it in doesn’t mean it ought to be there. So, you have a choice of either saying, “No, and here’s why, but,” or, seeing if you can put something like that in and repurpose another purpose from another scene. But to just shove stuff in… — And sometimes we’re the only people in the room that get that. And so, don’t worry about that; just know that you’re right.

**John:** Yeah. I think I’ve told this story on the podcast before, and in no way am I trying to libel McG who I do deeply adore, although you’ll understand my frustrations as I tell you the story.

McG directed the two Charlie’s Angels movies. And I described our relationship as being like together we are trying to bake a cake. And he would keep saying, “No, no, more sugar, more sugar, more sugar.” It was like, “McG, I have to add some flour. It’s going to fall apart.”

“No, more sugar, more sugar.” And the minute I would turn my back to grab a bowl he would dump more sugar into it. And that was the frustration of like I know the things I need to actually put in this in order for it to do its goal which is to bake properly in the oven. And too much sugar and it just doesn’t actually work.

Some people like things really, really sweet and that kind of break their teeth. That was a point of frustration at times.

**Craig:** But also the inspiration for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

**John:** Exactly, in some ways.

Point three: Who needs to be in the scene? This is a fundamental question, but I often find people aren’t asking the question when they’re starting the scene. A lot of times they’ll say, “Well, here’s the characters I have, so let me put them in the scene.” And so you’ll end up with like five characters in the scene and you recognize like, “Oh, you know what? This character didn’t actually say anything in this scene, or in the scene before, but we’ve established them in the world so therefore they need to be there.”

I call this the Kal Penn problem because in Superman Returns, Kal Penn is a whole bunch of scenes but doesn’t actually have anything to say or do. And he becomes this weird extra in these scenes.

So, look at who absolutely has to be in the scene, who can do meaningful things in the scene, and if you can possibly help it don’t put anyone else in the scene who doesn’t need to be there unless they are genuinely background — they’re there to make the world complete in that they are lovely set dressing but they are not actually characters.

**Craig:** Great, great point. And it’s okay if you have a character that you’re “stuck with” because they’re very important for a scene here and a scene 12 scenes later, and they’re on a trip. But, give them one thing. Give them a line. Have them drop something. Have them mess something up. Have them make an interesting point. Sometimes the silent person can surprise us by the fact that they’ve been silent. Use that.

I mean, Zach Galifianakis, his favorite kind of scene is the scene where he has one line. And he’s just quiet, and sitting back, and then suddenly, boom, three-pointer, and then right back to the background. Nothing wrong with that. And in the emotional space of experiencing the movie, those little moments sometimes seem to expand in our minds more than just the word count involved.

So, don’t neglect those characters.

**John:** I will say that there might be times where structurally some character needs to be along on some part of the journey, but there may be a reason why you don’t want them part of the scene. And by asking the question and thinking about the question, and getting to this next question of where the scene could take place, you can sometimes separate them off or get them out of that tent so you can have the characters who actually have something meaningful to do in that conversation have their privacy and have their moment just to themselves.

So, you don’t feel like it’s… — Two people can play ping pong. Three people playing ping pong is always going to be weird. And the more people you add in, the harder it is to have any scene have a shape to it.

**Craig:** Yeah, I’ll give you an example. In the Hangover II there’s a scene toward the end of the movie where Stu, Ed Helms’s character, has given up. And he’s given up even on the idea of being married. And he’s tossed his passport into the Chao Phraya River. And he’s basically saying, “I deserve my fate.” And this is a scene really between him and Bradley Cooper. But, of course, Zach is there.

Well, we just gave Zach something to do, and it was funny. Because here are these two guys dealing with this terrible existential crisis and Zach is merrily eating ice cream and playing Ms. Packman. And it was great. It was a little character moment for him.

So, yeah, go ahead, separate them off. Give them a little tiny piece of something to do. The audience gets it, as long as it seems natural that they wouldn’t be involved in the conversation.

**John:** So, we anticipated this question, but where could the scene take place? And so often you’ll see things that are written towards generic locations just because like, well, they would be in their house because that’s where this would take place, or it would be at a police station, or it would be in a parking garage. And those are almost never the right choices. They are exactly the kind of places we see in movies all the time.

A lot of times you’ll see television shows and they are written towards those locations because those are their sets, those are their standing places where they need to be. But there is no reason why your movie, especially if it’s a spec where it has nothing to do with anything else in the world, it doesn’t have to take place in those boring environments. So, look for what are the interesting locations you could set these stories.

I’ve told this on the podcast before, but one of the directors I’ve worked with, she does not want to see any set twice. And one of her rules is that once something has cleared the stage she doesn’t want to see it again, and she doesn’t want to come back to those places, because subconsciously we think, “Well, we’re back where we were before.” And rarely do you really want to go back to the place you were before. You want to keep moving forward.

**Craig:** Yeah. Exactly true. And I’m a big believer in specificity in all things. If you are not specific in your location, well, fellow screenwriter, somebody will be specific on your behalf. But you name is on the script. And while we don’t always get our way, it would be a shame if you didn’t try and get your way. So, be specific.

**John:** Yeah. If something needs to take place in an office, like it genuinely is a business kind of thing that needs to take place in an office, throw us a line or two of color that make this office specific and different from any other office. If it’s a bank, do something with the bank that it’s a different kind of bank than just the generic sort of Savings & Loan kind of thing that we see so often in films.

It doesn’t have to be sort of magical, it doesn’t have to the fanciest richest bank of all time. It just needs to feel like it’s one place in one time. And it’s not just a slug line with no color to it.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Question five is probably the most controversial thing in the short version of the list, which is what is the most surprising thing that could happen in this scene? And by this I mean as you start to write the scene, take a second and think, “Okay, I have my outline. I think I know what is supposed to happen in this scene, but let’s step back and say what wouldn’t I expect as a person watching this movie to happen at this moment?”

Answering these other questions — who is in the scene, where it’s taking place — is there something that is genuinely surprising? Because so often I will read scripts where almost everything that happens in a script is exactly what I would anticipate is going to happen in this script, be it a drama, be it a comedy, be it a horror movie. I’ve seen it before. It’s the same pieces, just assembled in a slightly different way.

If there’s something you can genuinely surprise me with, I’m going to be excited and keep reading. Not every surprise is a good surprise, but there should be a couple of real genuine surprises in your film. And always look as you’re starting a scene — could this be that surprising scene?

**Craig:** And obviously there are big surprises that we do in movies, twists and turns and dramatic reversals. But there are also those little tiny, tiny surprises. Nobody expects someone to lean in for a kiss in a romantic moment and knock a drink over. Always look to subvert what is “supposed to happen.”

That is the number one thing, when people say things like, “Well, the scene could just be a little more fun, or a little more interesting,” they never know what they’re asking for. But what they’re asking for is to be surprised, in little tiny ways and big ways.

**John:** So, as you’re doing that last sort of check before you really start writing, think about what do you have in your arsenal. What came before? What’s coming up? And what is in that little space that’s right there that would throw you off your game if it were to happen? And this could be that scene.

Most things won’t be that scene, so I think the danger with this surprise question is you think, well, every scene has to be completely brand new and original and like nothing you’ve ever seen before. Your readers would stop trusting you if every scene goes in completely bizarre different directions that they don’t know what’s going next.

Readers have a sense of expectation. They’ve followed you in this journey and you’re asking them to trust you on this journey. So, you want most of the times the things that happen in a scene should be the kinds of things that the reader would expect could happen in it. But every once in a while you subvert that expectation. It’s the same way that jokes are funny because you build a set of expectations and then every once and awhile you pull out the rug and surpass your expectations.

**Craig:** Yeah, you know, there’s this great moment in Due Date where Robert Downey, Jr. on the heels of Zach’s character talking about his late father tells the story of how his father walked out on him. And he never heard from him again. And Zach just laughs in his face and says, “Oh my god. That sounds ridiculous. My dad would have never done that. My dad loved me.” [laughs] And it’s not at all what’s supposed to happen.

And frankly if you look at that scene on a card, there’s no surprise to that scene.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** It’s a very typical dramatic scene where somebody is giving an emotional backstory. But it’s a surprise in how it was executed. And so that’s what we mean by these little micro surprises. They don’t throw you off your story. They don’t knock you out of the formula of your narrative. But they do keep the moments fresh and interesting.

**John:** Yeah. And in that case it was a major character who was doing something you weren’t expecting. But sometimes it can be that minor character, that day player who is basically the cashier. And so we sort of know how the cashier transaction is supposed to work, but if that cashier just suddenly clocked you in the face, that would be surprising. And that’s the kind of jolt that could work in some movies.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Next question is, is this a long scene or a short scene? And this is a trap that I know I have fallen into a lot where I will write like the two page scene of something and realize, like, “Oh man — that really shouldn’t be two pages. That should be three-eighths at the most. It’s really meant to be a transitional moment to take us from this thing to that thing.” And I’ve made a meal out of something that was supposed to just be an appetizer.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I guess this… — All of these go really to the question of preparation. When you sit down to write your scene, do you know what you’re doing or not? So many of these come back to that basic question. I’m not one of these people that sits and just starts typing and where will I go and where will the muse take me. Be prepared.

Some scenes should be short and punchy. And some scenes deserve breadth because what’s happening in them wants to be elongated. You have to know, dramatically speaking, if what is happening wants to be elongated, or wants to be staccato.

**John:** Yeah. And there may be a reason why that certain card on your big corkboard, it’s written as one card, like it’s one scene. But it’s really part of a sequence. Or like you’re going through a series of spaces to achieve this thing. It’s a walk through a restaurant, and a park — it’s a conversation that’s happening in different places, so it’s not all one block of conversation.

Just expect that it’s not going to necessarily be a two page scene, a two page scene, a one page scene, a two page scene. There are going to be a lot of little chunks. And every once and awhile you will get that bigger thing and people will be excited, like, “Oh, we’re actually staying in this moment for a good long time.” And then it’s worth it because you do it. But, you have to anticipate that from the start.

And I will back track a little bit. You said you’re not a person who sits down and just starts writing and sees where the muse takes you. I think that sitting down and writing can be very helpful early on in the process where you kind of don’t know who the characters are. You don’t know what the characters’ voices are, and so I’ll often just like start the characters talking and just listen to them for awhile. But that’s not the finished scene. That’s just sort of work for myself.

Sometimes I’ll except little bits of that or I’ll find little things that are funny from there, but that’s not the actual scene itself.

**Craig:** Correct. Correct.

**John:** Seventh step for me is to brainstorm three different ways it could begin. And the reason why I say three different ways is that so often you will just go with like your first instinct, and your first instinct may not be a great instinct. It may be sort of a very safe common instinct. Sort of the “walking through a door” kind of instinct.

Look for ways to start the scene that isn’t the most obvious way. A lot of times you’re looking for what is the first line that somebody says in a scene and that’s the first way you’re going to start it. But sometimes it’s a reveal. Sometimes it’s an image. Sometimes there is a different way to begin that. And it’s worth pausing for a minute or two to think of different ways you could start the scene.

**Craig:** I have a — I don’t know if you’d call this an additional, but it’s whatever number you’re up to, part B, or part A — and that is to think transitionally, always. Because, again, if you don’t come up with the transitions somebody will volunteer and do it for you.

So, when I’m planning a scene, usually the day before I’ve planned the transition out of one and into the other, which is a great way of thinking about how to start the scene because it’s intentional and it’s editorial and it will help all parties involved.

So, when I’m working on the scene today I probably know from yesterday how it should start. When I figure out how it should end I start thinking about the next scene and how that one should start.

And in this way, hopefully, you create a sense of seamlessness throughout. So, excellent advice to think about beginnings. And I would just add: Think about them transitionally.

**John:** Now, I often write out of sequence, so I will write just a given scene devoid of knowing exactly how the previous scene started, or how the next scene would go.

But, if I’m writing that scene independently, I’m really thinking about how I’m getting into the scene and thinking about how I’m getting out of the scene, and what works best for that scene. By the time I’m writing the scenes that surround it I’ll some idea of — I’ll know sort of what it’s going to go into, and so it will influence the scenes around it.

So, even if you’re writing out of sequence, it’s good to think about how you might get into that and how you might get out of it when you actually get those other scenes written.

**Craig:** Correct. Yeah. Just know that that’s part of your job.

**John:** And be aware of how you’re doing it in other scenes, because you don’t want to do every scene the same way.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You don’t want to always just come in in the middle of a conversation. Sometimes you really do need to walk somebody through the door. Other times you’re going to want to start on an image and go shot by shot. A lot of times scenes are going to be scenes that don’t have any dialogue, where you’re just watching something happen. And be mindful of how you’re doing your scenes and how to vary them so it doesn’t feel the same.

**Craig:** Yeah. Variety is key. There are very simple stock transitions that aren’t to be avoided because they’re common; sometimes they’re exactly what’s needed. Sometimes you just need a shot of a car driving down the road and then we’re inside the car. That’s okay.

But think in terms of audio and visual. Sometimes you can do an audio transition. Sometimes you want the transition to be visual. Sometimes you want it to be a little tricky and a little clever. Sometimes you don’t. Think about big. Think about small. Think about how your scene ends. Does it end small? Try and start the next one big. Scene ends big, start the next one small. Little tricks.

**John:** And big and small, sometimes that means visually, but sometimes it means big sound, little sound. Sometimes that transition is the chime of an open car door, and like that’s the reveal that’s getting us into this next thing. So, be thinking in more than just one sense.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** Step eight for me is to play it on the big screen in my head. And I stress the big scene. Literally, you close your eyes. You sort of see what it is that the scene is that you’re trying to write. And sort of visualize what it’s going to look like on a screen.

Sometimes I feel like I’m in that space and I’m just looking around. I’m sitting in the room with the character. Sometimes I’m watching it sort of on a flat screen. But the important part is I’m just watching it sort of happen. And I don’t sort of force it to happen in any specific way. But I’m sort of observing it. It’s loose blocking in a way of like these are the kinds of things that are going to happen in the scene. This is what is going to be talked about. And you just let it loop.

And for me I just let it loop, and loop, and loop until I can start to hear what the characters are saying, if it starts to be, like, okay we’d start here, we’d go to here. These are the things that would happen. And you’re seeing a sort of rough version of it playing in your head.

Do you loop? Is that a way you tend to approach a scene? Or you just start writing on the screen itself?

**Craig:** No, I absolutely do what you do. It is a form of daydreaming. If you’re not fond of or good at daydreaming, find another thing to do. Because that’s what’s screenwriting is. It’s rigorous, structured daydreaming.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And so because it’s so important to write visually, you know my whole shower fetish. So, I get in the shower and I start thinking about the scene and I start absolutely building it and watching it in my head. And when you start to watch the scene in your head it forces you to account for things that I think you wouldn’t otherwise account for.

Like what does the room look like, and smell like, and is it bright, is it dark, is it cramped, is it smoky, is it noisy? All the things that you can use inside of a scene are suddenly available to you by requirement because you’re watching it.

So, I don’t know how else you could do it.

**John:** There have been a couple times where I’ve really been slammed on getting something done, and in television especially where it literally was sort of brute force. Like, okay, I sort of know where this is going and I would jam it through. There are times where it’s the one-eighth of a page where you’re literally walking somebody through a room, or it’s just really quick, sort of mechanical writing.

But for any scene that actually has meat and substance to it, where characters are going to be talking, and something is going to happen in this scene that’s going to transform the story, you owe it to everybody to really loop that scene and really get the best version of it playing in your head.

And it doesn’t need to be perfect, and I won’t know every line of dialogue, and I won’t know exactly what it is, but I’ll get to a point where it’s like, “Okay, I can see it, I can see it.” And I get to the next step which is what I’ll call the Scribble Version, where I just make sure to get it down on paper or on screen in just the worst possible form as quickly as possible, just notes for myself so I can remember what it was, and so I can recreate that looped version and I want forget it when I start writing the real scene.

**Craig:** I do that, too. Sometimes after the shower I will go to my computer and type an email to myself that’s just the dialogue, because I know what the dialogue is connected to. The dialogue helps me — that essentially is the spine that I will reconnect all the visuals and the transitions and everything to. But that’s the stuff that’s so wordy it needs to be memorialized or I’m going to forget, particularly if I really like the way I said some line or another.

And then I’ll send that to myself, and that’s basically my cheat sheet for the day’s work.

**John:** Yeah. So, that scribble version — I should stress — it shouldn’t be perfect. And even if you’re writing dialogue, it won’t be the best dialogue. It won’t be perfect dialogue. There is probably some stuff in there that you love, but it’s not going to be perfect, it’s just going to be enough to let you know how you’re getting through the scene. And then when it comes time to write the real scene you will do the laborious exacting X-ACTO Knife work of getting all those words to fit together just right. And figuring out like that tense is tipping this off. You will do all that precise detailing.

But the scribble version is just meant to be scribbling. It’s not meant to be the final version of the scene. And the few times where I’ve tried to make that scribble thing too perfect, I’ve ended up forgetting what my intention was when I started writing it down.

**Craig:** Yup. Exactly.

**John:** In writing the full scene, use your notes. I find as I’m going from the scribble version to the real version, sometimes I will have a better idea. And that’s great, that’s fine. If in writing the more precise version of the dialogue you recognize like, “Oh you know, there’s actually a better opportunity for what I could do in the scene, or a different way I could do it.”

Take advantage of that. Just like you shouldn’t feel lockstep bound to your outline, don’t feel lockstep bound to your scribble version. Just write the best possible scene you could write.

**Craig:** Yeah. You know the first version is not going to make it anyway. It’s funny. I play this little game with myself every time I see one of my scripts turned into a movie. And it’s called the What Words Survived Game.

And the idea is you will write tens of thousands of words. And you will revise, and revise, and revise. Which ones will make it? [laughs] So few as it turns out take the journey all the way from beginning to end. So few.

So, know that and accept it. And suddenly, ah, isn’t that freeing to know from the start that it’s okay that 80% or 90% of the words you’re writing today that you are appropriately fussing over, they’re not your last shot.

**John:** I want to stress that “appropriately fussing,” because it doesn’t mean that they’re not important. They’re incredibly, insanely important. They need to be ready to be shot tomorrow.

**Craig:** Yes!

**John:** But…

**Craig:** They just won’t be. [laughs]

**John:** …they won’t be. It’s not going to end up being exactly what you thought it was going to be. Things will change. Accept that as well. It doesn’t give you permission to not be great. And that full scene needs to be shootable. And I get frustrated — and some of the samples we’re going to look at today — they aren’t shootable scenes. They aren’t anywhere near what they need to be to get onto the page. They feel more like what my scribble version should be.

**Craig:** Yeah. Think of your first draft like ancestors. If they’re not alive then the eventual chosen one will never be born. So, they need to be crafted correctly because they’re what get you to the next one, and to the next one, and to the next one.

**John:** Absolutely. Every draft along the way should be shootable. You should never turn in something that’s not done. If you are — if you’re writing a scriptment, if you’re writing one of those James Cameron Alien scriptments, god bless you. That’s great. That’s fantastic. That’s a helpful part of your process. Do like the thing where you don’t have full dialogue, you just sort of have big blocks of pieces. If that’s useful to you, fantastic.

But that’s not a screenplay. That’s not a final script. And when you’re writing real scenes, write real scenes.

**Craig:** Yeah, you won’t make it otherwise.

**John:** No.

And my last point was also kind of misinterpreted in the Reddit version. It says: Repeat 200 times. And by that I actually meant that most scripts you’re going to write like 200 scenes for them. People think like, “Oh, it’s 120 pages, so maybe it’s 100 scenes or something.” No, actually most scripts consist of a lot of smaller little moments.

And we think about, like oh, you’re writing those big moments, you don’t recognize that most of the bulk of a screenplay are those little scenes. And you’re going to be doing that again, and again, and again. It’s a much more intensive process than you realize.

**Craig:** Yeah. I guess the 10,000 hours thing applies, huh?

**John:** Yeah. So, by the time you’ve written a screenplay you’ve written probably 200 scenes. You’ve spent a zillion hours on it. And you’re going to spend a zillion more hours on that script, and then a zillion more hours on the next script. And that’s the nature of it.

**Craig:** Yup. That’s what we do.

**John:** That’s what we do. Another thing we do on this podcast is sometimes read Three Page Challenge samples that were sent in by our listeners.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** And so there’s a frequent question. People who follow us on Twitter will ask, “Hey, are you still accepting Three Page Challenges?” And the answer is always yes, We’ve decided we are having an open, no-deadline for Three Page Challenge.

What you do if you want to submit a sample of your three pages to us, go to johnaugust.com/threepage. It’s spelled out “threepage.” And there are guidelines there for if you want to submit your samples, how you do it, what you need to include, some boilerplate legal text so you don’t sue us. And Stuart takes a look at any of those emails that have the proper boilerplate and picks them out and sends them to me and Craig.

So, I don’t read all of them, Craig doesn’t read all of them, but Stuart — god bless him — does read all of them.

**Craig:** God bless him.

**John:** God bless Stuart. And three of the ones that were sent to us today we will be reading. And let me start with — this is actually a rarity, which is a script by Josh Golden, and one of the ones that does not start on page one.

Most of the times people send in these scripts they’re starting on page one, and so the very start of the script. Josh sent us page 14, 15, and 16.

**Craig:** I liked his moxie. I loved it.

**John:** I loved his moxie.

So, while I loved his moxie, I was also a little confused by how it started, and so I just chose to kind of ignore the first three-eighths of the page on page 14 because it involves monsters, I think. And Drake — I had no context of who these people are.

**Craig:** I tried the same thing. I took at stab at the little remnant of the scene that we don’t see on page 13. It didn’t make sense because we don’t know the context, so I just forgave it and moved onto the middle of the page.

**John:** Great. So, let me give the summary for Josh Golden’s script. We don’t know the title of the script, so it’s a script maybe with monsters in it.

**Craig:** Untitled Josh Golden Project.

**John:** I love it. And big seller on Variety.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** We start in The Summers Home. It’s evening. It’s a ranch house that’s a little bit run down. 37-year-old Sarah Summers, she’s getting ready for a date. She’s being helped by her 18-year-old daughter, Alex. Sarah is concerned she looks “mom-ish.”

Downstairs her date, Nick, maybe it’s not downstairs, but elsewhere in the house her date Nick, who’s 35, is talking with Ben and Maggie. Ben is 13, Maggie is 6, who are apparently also Sarah’s kids. Sarah comes out. Nick brought her a single rose, just like on The Bachelor. And as we leave these pages they prepare to go out the door on their date.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** So, in terms of the mechanics of things, the way the pages layout, everything seems quite nice. The descriptions, I thought, were appropriate length. The dialogue sounded natural. I guess this is one of those three pages where I shrug a little bit only because, well, let’s tie it back to an earlier discussion — surprise.

There’s no surprise here.

**John:** Nothing.

**Craig:** It’s pretty much…seen this kind of confrontation a gazillion times. It’s a mother whose husband has died or left, she is off on her first date. She says something woeful that we’ve heard — it’s a version of something we’ve heard before. We have the somewhat precocious teenage daughter who is helping her out. Quite a few pop culture references. And more precocious children who are suspicious of the new guy.

If there’s really any crime here — because all of that sort of rises to the test of sort of general rookie sin of mundanity — the only crime really is that this Nick character who is the guy who is coming for the date is incredibly bland. And since we’re meeting him for the first time his blandness is a huge problem, particularly if we are meant to actually care that he ends up with this woman.

**John:** Yes. I forgot in the preface to say that if you’d like to read these pages with us they’re all at johnaugust.com/podcast and you’ll see all three samples are PDFs right here.

Nick is a problem. But I’d also say I think this is the first time we’re meeting Sarah, and the kids, and everybody else. They’re all capitalized and we’re getting their ages, so this is probably the first time we’re meeting any of these characters.

And so it made me wonder whether their setup kind of deliberately generically so that something bad or funny could happen to them because we’re on page 14. It’s a little bit late to be introducing primary characters, but maybe introduce some characters who are going to be involved in complications along the way.

I agree with you that it was mundane in a way that made me wonder why Josh would send us these pages.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Because this felt like they could be pages in any script and there wasn’t anything sort of special or unique about them. There wasn’t anything that says like, “Oh, well this guy is fantastic.” I can say with these pages, like, well this guy knows how to format words on the page and it feels just fine.

The pop culture references, we talked about this on the show before, it really is a frustration to see — there’s a Wisteria Lane reference to Desperate Housewives, Kate Gosselin. It’s like: those are not going to date well in a feature film.

**Craig:** They don’t date well now.

**John:** No. And it’s one of those things where like if you’re doing a television show you can kind of get away with it sometimes because television gets made faster, it expires faster. That’s kind of accepted and okay. But these didn’t work out great.

I also had some challenge with some of the references here. Nick is described as, “Nick, 35, attractive in a scruffy Chicago flannel sort of way.” I have no idea what that means. I don’t know what Chicago flannel is. I don’t know what’s special about Chicago flannel.

**Craig:** Maybe it’s there’s no such fabric as Chicago flannel, I think he meant in a Chicago guy who wears flannel sort of way.

**John:** Okay.

**Craig:** But then maybe flip the word “scruffy flannel Chicago sort of way.”

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Maybe like a “Chicago scruffy flannel wearing sort of way.”

**Craig:** Also, one thing that sort of popped out to me, also, was “Clearly uncomfortable, can’t decide which way to cross his legs. ‘So, you guys are Sarah’s kids, huh? How long has that been going on?'”

A couple things. One, that line is just too doofy. Adults don’t make that mistake. It is — you’re setting up precocious 13-year-old Ben to slap him down with an easy comeback line. But, frankly it is such a weird goofy thing to say that an adult would either not say it or would correct themselves upon saying it.

And also you can’t really decide which way to cross your legs if you have the first line in the scene and nothing else is going on.

**John:** The other challenge with that line is it doesn’t pass the logic test. It doesn’t pass the logic test that this would be the line he could say at this point, because how did he enter into the house? It’s meant to establish sort of who these people are in the scene, but it’s not a thing that the character could actually say.

**Craig:** You’re right.

**John:** And “How long has that been going on,” it feels clammy. It feels like I’ve heard that actual phrasing before.

**Craig:** I agree. If you want to set up a scene where people who are suspicious or displeased are looking at someone who is trying to win them over, and it’s an awkward situation, then maybe you just show them all sitting silently. And then one person lifts a glass, drinks a little water, puts it down. More silence. Then…

If the object is to portray awkwardness, portray it. but to just jump into a line, you’re right, it seems quite odd. It seems a little sitcomy, because they don’t have the time for that sort of thing. But these are movies; we do have time.

**John:** One of the opportunities I felt like, so “Maggie, 6, clenching her stuffed monkey,” which she’s a little bit old for a monkey, but that’s okay. Nick could call them, “You seem kind of old for a monkey.” It’s like, “Oh, I’m 6.5.” There’s pointing out sort of the oddness and the awkwardness of it felt like a better opportunity.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** I also noticed that Maggie’s age is sort of impossible. So, she’s listed in the scene description as “Maggie, 6, clenching her stuffed monkey.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Ben says, “Well Maggie’s 7, I’m 13, you do the math.” Then, “Maggie nudges her brother and whispers in his ear, ‘My mistake. She’s seven and a half.'”

So, is she 6, 7, or 7.5? It’s been two-eighths of a page and we can’t seem to agree on that.

**Craig:** Certainly for Josh, if you’re going for sort of comic patter, you don’t want to distract with that kind of mistake. It’s okay, it happens sometimes. It wouldn’t be a good deal if it said, “And Maggie, 6, clenching her stuffed monkey,” and a woman says, “Excuse me, have you seen my daughter? She’s seven, she was just here. Oh, I think I saw her over there.”

Okay, you made a mistake, whatever. But, if you’re actually doing dialogue based on her age you can’t really get the age wrong in the description. You’re kind of blowing it.

**John:** Yeah. So, I’m giving Josh the benefit of the doubt. The fact that page 14 clearly involves monsters of some kind, I’m thinking maybe the Summers family is going to get eaten and that could be fascinating…

**Craig:** I don’t think so.

**John:** You don’t think so?

**Craig:** No. Because there’s too much time and too much characterization for characters who are merely to be eaten. [laughs] I just don’t believe it.

**John:** Yeah. But here’s the thing: Everything is competently done and I want to stress that that gets you somewhere. Some of these other things don’t achieve competence.

**Craig:** For sure. Look, sometimes we read pages and I think, “Well, this person can’t do this.” And I don’t think that here, Josh. I think you can do this. I just suspect you’re new at it. And you have a facility, which is a wonderful thing. So, build from that facility and now you have a way of writing scenes that seem properly shaped and so forth. Okay, but now really think. Let’s go a little deeper. I suspect that you have better in you and better to come.

**John:** Yeah. And your pages are better than Craig’s pages from a long time ago.

**Craig:** Well, I mean, whose aren’t?

**John:** [laughs] Let’s do Willa next. Do you want to do that summary?

**Craig:** Sure. So, Willa, by Kate Powers, opens on the exterior of O’Hare Airport, also Chicago, at night in Winter and we follow some footprints into the airport. And the footprints are matched with a drop of blood along the left footprint of each footprint. And we follow the track into the airport. We are trailing the blood and the muddy footprints into a public restroom where a cleaning woman is wiping away the blood and finally gets to its source which is behind a locked stall. There are no shoes visible but she can smell a homeless person in there and she leaves.

The homeless woman emerges, filthy, early 30s, she’s wearing rags which we get the sense maybe were once actually nice clothes, but something quite awful has happened to this person.

The cleaning woman and an airport cop are about to head in there to apprehend her. We fade to black and now we are flashed back. There is a title card that says, “Denial,” and we’re flashed back to the control room of a studio for a talk show named Willa which is an Oprah-style show.

The woman in the bathroom now looks quite lovely and nice. Her name is Corey. And she’s with her producer. They’re watching Willa conduct an interview with a woman who had fought off a rapist, and they’re sort of critiquing the fact that Willa is about to shift away from this brave woman to switch to a different guy who’s going to give away gifts to the audience.

How was that?

**John:** That was good. That was a good summary.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**John:** This is, again, competent. There’s nothing in here that was sort of badly done. I have some questions about sort of use of time and use of our attention. So, from the very start we fade in and we’re in italics the whole time. And maybe this was a mistake, or maybe this was a deliberate choice to show that this was in the past, but don’t do that. Italics are just a burden to read. So, don’t do italics.

Italics are fantastic for emphasizing that words are in a foreign language, some special emphasis or unique case. Don’t do it for a page. I got a little bit confused with are we following a set of feet or are we following footprints? And ultimately I decided we were following footprints, but because she was saying “sets” and the way we were tracking, I just didn’t believe that we were following footprints.

And I didn’t know that it was necessarily the right image to be getting us into seeing Corey in the bathroom there. I didn’t fully believe it. I didn’t believe that we would be following these footprints through an airport. And if we’re not believing your first image, then that’s an issue.

The cleaning woman smells her, and it’s like, yeah, you can do that sort of sniff-sniff thing, but I don’t — again, sense of smell is not a movie thing. I mean, if you’re going to see that there’s a person in there, you could always sort of look through that crack and see that there is somebody in there. That felt like a more realistic way to get in there.

But, she’s doing a very kind of classic technique, which is where you’re seeing somebody in a terrible situation, and then you’re flashing back to an earlier place in their life where they weren’t in that situation. That’s fine. That’s accepted. And I suspect that this Denial tag is going to be some sort of Kübler-Ross stages of grief. I think there’s going to be some journey that we’re going on. So, I was willing to buy it sort of at the start.

**Craig:** Yeah. I agree with what you’re saying. First, let’s talk about these footprints. Here’s what I got hung up on. It says in the second paragraph, “Footprints march across the ice-crusted sidewalk, mostly headed towards, loved ones, home. But one set heads into…”

**John:** That’s what I got confused about!

**Craig:** Here’s the thing. I wasn’t confused. I understood “footprints march across” implies feet marching across. I was looking at it, okay, I know what she means. She means tracks, not actually feet. What I got hung up on was how in god’s name am I in row 15 going to figure out… — First of all, it’s an airport. People are going in and out of an airport constantly. There’s no airport where everyone walks out and then one set of footprints walks in and I’m supposed to be able to discern the heel and toe pattern of an inward bound footprint.

It is a clever thought, but somebody at some point is going to have to make footprints into an airport. You’re going to be there, if you’re lucky, and no one is going to know why they’re doing it because you’ll never notice. All you see in the audience, because you don’t know — remember, no one hands these pages out to the audience.

Here’s what the audience is going to see: Chicago O’Hare Airport. Night. Snow.

That’s it. They won’t even register the footprints, because footprints are irrelevant. What they will register is blood. Start with the blood. [laughs] That’s my advice. You can have people walking through and you can land down and you just arrive at a little patch of snow with a blood drop. And then you move, and you see this blood drop. And then you start to realize that the blood drop is next to a very distinct shoe print.

Okay, great. Now, we follow the blood drop into the bathroom. And then there’s this woman in a stall who comes out. My advice is get rid of this cleaning woman. You don’t need her. First of all, again, think about the audience because they don’t have these pages. A cleaning woman in a bathroom sniffing at a closed stall is a poop joke. That’s all that we’re going to get, because we don’t even know a person is in there. We don’t know what they can smell.

There’s no reason for this woman to be in there. Of course, when you get to this point in the movie when you catch up to this point there’s going to be a situation where a cleaning woman brings a security guard in. But just do it then. You don’t need to introduce this cleaning woman now. It’s not interesting.

You can have just a regular civilian knock on the door and say, “Sweetheart, are you all right?” “Go away.” So that woman leaves, and then — alone — out comes this woman and she looks in the…

So, there’s just some staging issues here. And there is some disconnect between what you are putting on the page and what we could ever experience.

Yes, for sure, we’re going to be dealing with denial, anger, bargaining, and all that stuff. And that’s fine. I think it’s a perfectly cool thing. And I actually really liked when it faded to black and then a title card came on that said “Denial.” That’s fun. That’s interesting.

**John:** Let me pitch you my opening to do the same thing.

Chicago Airport. Big wide shot. We’re at Chicago Airport, it’s winter.

Next shot — in the bathroom, underneath the stall. The door is closed but there are no feet going down, and blood drops down, and drops down from her foot which is cut and bleeding.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** Great. So, you gave us the wide shot, we’re in Chicago Airport. You gave us the bathroom shot — we’re in the bathroom. Here’s our girl and there a cleaning woman, someone else, that scene, that moment can start. And we didn’t need any of that rigmarole of having to track through an airport. Because it’s set up as a Hitchcockian kind of thing, but it’s not a Hitchcockian kind of moment.

**Craig:** Well, that’s exactly right. What you’re doing is you’re reverse engineering a beginning that fits to the scene that we then see. Because the scene we then see feels like a slightly bubbly, maybe even comedic world, but a light world. I mean, the Willa character feels comedic to me. And the opening sequence, which would be the sort of thing you might see with a credit sequence of us tracking a blood trail into an airport bathroom feels like a thriller opening.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So, there is a tonal disconnect there, for sure. So, you have to either fix the tone of the Willa studio, which seems to light and breezy for the opening, or fix the opening to be less of a thriller vibe, and more of just the shock of this disheveled woman in trouble.

And, you know, look, and this script is called Willa, so this gives me some concern. The talk show character is deadly, to me. And now this isn’t really a critique of how you’ve written it, it’s just a general thing. It’s so hard to write the fake Oprah, because it just feels fake. The whole thing feels fake.

It’s like fake talk show host. Fake late night host. Fake news anchor. It always feels fake.

**John:** I would like to single out that Kate Powers does hang a lantern on the fact that Willa Lear is an Oprah-like character. This is how she describes her: “Self-help author/TV host, Willa Lear, late 40’s, intensely maternal. And, no, it’s not your imagination. Her clothes, the stage, everything echoes a taste of Willa’s idol, Oprah.”

So, at least you’re calling it out saying, “Yes, I acknowledge this is an Oprah kind of character.” It’s deliberate and we will probably reference that somewhere in the actual show itself. Fine. That’s great.

My bigger concern with the Willa studio here is that we’re coming in Corey Ryan who is this woman we saw in the bathroom, but she doesn’t have anything interesting to do. It’s not about her. And so we get sort of a close-up, but then it’s just all the other studio business for the next two pages, and that’s not interesting.

If she is our protagonist, which you’re definitely setting the expectation that she is the important person to follow because that’s who we started the movie with, she doesn’t get to do anything interesting in this next page and a half.

**Craig:** It says that Willa is her boss. Well, is she Willa’s assistant? Is she Willa’s producer? I mean, there’s another producer there. Is she Willa’s what?

And if she has a job, show me her doing the job.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** And, look, here’s my thing about these fake talk show hosts is that inevitably the first scene is a very shopworn critique of talk shows. And we see it right here. Willa is not emotionally genuine. Well, yeah. Yeah, okay. We’ve seen it. We’ve seen it, you know.

**John:** Yeah. That you’re going to show us a cruel Nazi.

**Craig:** [laughs] Right. Exactly. Uncaring, venal, ratings-obsessed talk show host, that is not well-mined territory.

**John:** Yes. What I would like to say about Kate’s writing though overall is that she does get it. And she actually can sort of push stuff around on the page in a way that’s nice. I didn’t think everything worked here especially well, but I feel like she can write a script. I feel like this is probably part of a full script, she didn’t write just three random pages. She wrote this whole script and there probably is a thing to it. And she probably has an idea because it’s set up with — the bathroom didn’t work exactly right — but she’s flashing back to an earlier time.

She has some sort of structural idea behind how these chapters are going to work. So, there could be something interesting here. I just felt like it wasn’t the best execution of these pages.

**Craig:** Totally agree. I think it’s a very similar situation to our first writer. Kate is somebody that could do this and was in control of the pages, even when they went wonky. And so it’s just about now asking what is real and what can people see. Even the thing that you cited, “It’s not your imagination — her clothes, the stage, everything echoes the taste of Willa’s idol, Oprah.”

And I in the audience know this how? If I’m drawing my own conclusion than maybe there’s another way of putting that. But, regardless, there is nothing here that jumps out as disqualifying in any way. The dialogue wasn’t clumsy or rough.

So, I think that there’s better yet ahead from Kate Powers as well.

**John:** I agree. I do want to shout-out for Aline Brosh McKenna’s Morning Glory, which features a young producer who gets drafted on to work at first a local TV station and then for a national news program. There was a specificity there that was worth taking a look at. Because we know what all those sort of tropes are, and we’ve seen it in Broadcast News and all these other things. And Aline found new very specific things about those characters in those situations and their worlds. And that’s what the script could benefit from.

**Craig:** Yeah. And Also remember that our first glimpse, when we’re writing about shows, our first glimpse of backstage tells us everything. Is it panicked, frenzied, pathetic, depressed, chintzy? The backstage here tells us nothing about this job, the show. It just tells us nothing.

And so really try and relay a vibe. Give us a little crackle, a little energy, or the opposite, but impart information.

**John:** Yes.

Our third and final three page sample is Another Man’s Treasure by A.H. McGee.

**Craig:** A.H.!

**John:** A.H.! I know an American McGee, but I’m guessing this is probably not American McGee.

**Craig:** I guess probably not, no.

**John:** Probably not American McGee. A summary. So, we meet Bruce Hodges as he drives his Audi through a gated community. He answers a phone call in his car and he hears a struggle on the other end — a woman’s scream and then a gunshot.

A title card comes up for “Last Week.” We’re starting at the Langley building, a big office building, where Rudy Franco, a guard in his 60s, is up in the front. Meanwhile, a new security guard named Rosie Chaplain, who’s in her 20s, is getting into her uniform and she struggles to get her walkie-talkie working right.

Our last scene, Rudy is starting her training, apparently. Maybe it’s her first day, or one of her first days, and they’re going off on training.

**Craig:** Yeah. So, you know, if you guys have noticed we’ve gotten a ton of Three Page Challenges where there is an opening scene and then “Last week,” “last month,” “a long time ago,” “how did we get here.” This is becoming almost routine.

Take note, if you will.

It is fine, but if your script doesn’t need it, it’s a little cheap. It’s getting a little cheap. So, consider that.

**John:** Maybe Stuart just loves when scripts do that and that’s why he picks them out for us. Maybe it could be a sample bias.

**Craig:** [laughs] I just like the idea of Stuart going, “Whoa!,” like every time he reads them he goes, “Whoa! I did not see that coming. Oh my god, top of the pile. Whoa!” And then he does it again, like three times a day, he just shouts “Whoa!” And he’s so startled and pleased by the time shift.

The first sequence suffered a little bit from slug line whiplash. We have, in a car, in a gated community, in front of the home, in the car, right outside of the car, right in the car. I think at some point we kind of get it and maybe we could thin those slug lines out a little bit.

**John:** I think so.

**Craig:** Because it was getting a little bit much. It’s a cool — we don’t know what’s going on. We don’t know who the dude is. And then on top of that we add another mystery, which is the fact that someone is calling him. He knows who it is. He has something to talk about with them. He’s sad about it. And then there’s a gunshot and a crime on the other end.

I almost feel like there’s only so much mystery you can put in my face before I start feeling like I didn’t get anything out of it at all. If I had to guess, I would guess that Bruce Hodges is a PI. I would guess that he is being hired by somebody to track a possible straying spouse.

He arrives at a house, and yup, sure enough the straying spouse is that house. The person calling is his client and he has to sadly tell them. And then there is a gunshot. I’m just guessing.

It would be nice if I just knew a little bit more, because it’s enough of a mystery and enough of a shock that there is a crime on the other end of this phone call, for me.

**John:** I did not get that PI thing at all out of this page and half, which is odd.

**Craig:** I wonder if I’m right. Oh, you know what, I’m looking on the PDF, it’s Andre McGee. A.H. is Andre.

**John:** Oh, I’m so sorry.

**Craig:** No, no, it’s fine. The title page is A.H., but the title of the file is Andre. So, hopefully Andre will check in with us and tell me if I’m crazy or not.

**John:** I was taking it as he was having an affair with the woman on the other side, and that he heard this and then got away.

**Craig:** Well, let’s see. Either way, the point is, Andre, I think you failed — you did such a good job of hiding the ball from us that we stopped caring, you know, because it was just basically like a jumble of stuff that happened and it’s like we…

**John:** We forgot there was a ball.

**Craig:** We forgot there was a ball. [laughs] We forgot there was a game.

Now, when we go to “Last week” — cue Stuart, shrieking, squealing with joy — we meet Rosie Chaplain who I suspect is our protagonist. A nice description of her.

This is a tough one. She’s staring at her reflection in the mirror. And she says, into the mirror, “This is only temporary. Hang in there.” I just…forgot whether or not people do that, here’s the problem: A character that does do that is weird to me. Talking to yourself in that kind of self-affirmational way into a mirror is goofy.

And so now I feel like she’s goofy. And I know you don’t want that. So, in a way you have to figure out how to get across this information that this is her first day. The game of smooth, elegant exposition is one that you need to play. So, I would try another tactic there.

**John:** Yeah. I would agree. I would also try figuring out what words need to be capitalized and what words don’t need to be capitalized. I’m not talking uppercase/lowercase.

**Craig:** Like two-way radio?

**John:** Like two-way radio. But really from the very start, just odd choices in sort of what got capitalized. And the Audi pulls into a “Gated Community.”

**Craig:** Right. Yeah.

**John:** Home is in capitals. The “Mini Van.” It’s just strange, almost like not common English usage of what’s being capitalized and what’s not. And does it really matter? Is it going to affect how a film is shot? No, not at all. But it affects your read because it’s like, “Wait, why is that weird and different?”

**Craig:** It does give one pause. For instance, “The kind of homes Hedge Fund CEO’s go to jail for,” is a cool way of describing this gated community, it lets me know where I am. The problem is that you capitalize, not all caps, but initial capped Hedge and Fund. Why? Why? It’s confusing and it’s disrupting what is otherwise an interesting line. I do agree with that.

**John:** The bottom of page, “The call is on speaker, undulating through his top notch stereo system.”. It’s like, ohh, what, ooh?

**Craig:** Yeah. That’s not a good one.

**John:** We’re already in an Audi. You don’t need to talk about the stereo system being special. Just like, “Call is on speaker.”

**Craig:** And calls don’t undulate. Sorry.

**John:** No. Also, most phone calls don’t happen the way they happen here. “Bruce, saddened, ‘Hey, there’s something…'” So, a call is coming into him and he answers, “Hey, there’s something I want to talk…”

**Craig:** Right. Yeah, people actually do say hello. I mean, if you wanted to do this because of the tick you’re playing here, he answers, “Listen, before you say a word…” you know? [laughs] Come up with some way of doing that.

**John:** Or, “Thanks for calling me back.”

**Craig:** Yeah, “Thanks for calling me back.” But, you’re right, calls don’t happen that way. Yes, it’s kind of a weird movie trick that a lot of times people don’t say goodbye in movie conversations. But to just pick up and just do that is a little odd.

Do watch your over-thesaurusizing, like “undulating.” And also, you know, when Rudy is talking to Rosie, you have her “Two-Way Radio,” again, two and way are capitalized, and radio. “Her Two Way Radio CRUNCHES. She snaps out of her routine.”

“Rudy,” in parenthesis (O.S.) for off-screen, and then in parenthetical (from two-way) and then Chaplain, in italics. So, that would be triplicate. We get it. He’s off-screen.

**John:** [laughs] Oh, Rudy is not actually in the physical space? He’s not right next door?

**Craig:** He’s not hiding in the radio. He’s not a little man who lives in the radio. So, yeah, triplicate, no. Duplicate, no. I think Rudy, in parenthesis, (on radio), would have been fine. And then Chaplain, “Yes, Sir,” capitalized S for sir, not sure why. “Yes, Sir, I’m here getting dressed.” Again, “Rudy (O.S.) (two way),” and this way two way is not capitalized, “Well, you shouldn’t be. Meet me by the main elevators. Move it.”

Why shouldn’t she be getting dressed?

**John:** I don’t know.

**Craig:** I don’t understand that.

**John:** I don’t understand it either.

**Craig:** So, you know, then she looks at her watch. She just noticed that she’s late? There’s a whole bunch of stuff going on in there that wasn’t connecting. “Rudy paces back and forth, shielding his frustration from the public.” Because she’s a couple of minutes late? Or she was dressing? I don’t know.

I was having trouble with this character. Rudy felt fake. She felt a little stock as kind of nervous, disappointed with her life girl who talks into a mirror. We’ve got issues here.

**John:** We’ve got issues here. And a lot of the issues here, I would say, can come back to how we started the situation. Let’s look at how you write a scene and how you start a scene. And you don’t have to take my template for those 11 points, but I didn’t feel like he’d done that work on really any of the scenes we saw here, or any of these moments that we saw here.

Well, who’s in the scene? Where is the interesting thing? What needs to happen in the scene? How could this begin? How are we getting through it?

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** These are sort of fundamental questions. And it very much felt like he started typing the scenes and let whatever happened in the scenes happen. And this could very well be a first script and things like the triplicate of O.S., two way, “Well you shouldn’t be,” that feels like the kind of situation where like I don’t know how do to this. I don’t know what the proper formatting is so I’m just going to do all of it. I’m just going to overdo it.

**Craig:** Yeah. Andre, I’m going to give you a suggestion here. This is how I would approach this kind of thing with Rosie and Rudy.

— And by the way, Rosie and Rudy is a little bit of an issue, too.

**John:** Don’t repeat character names if you can possible help it.

**Craig:** Especially when they’re right after another. But here’s what we want to get across, right, we want to get across that this is Rosie’s first day on the job. She’s not happy with this job. And Rudy is kind of a jerk.

So, what I would suggest is lose the whole “I’m late” thing, because you don’t need it. Frankly, don’t give Rudy a reason to be angry. It’s more interesting — if you want to show that a character is a grumpy, grouchy guy, show him being grouchy and grumpy without a reason.

Maybe Rosie is in this locker room and she has — she looks at herself, she sighs, and then she looks down at a security guard uniform that’s like still in the shrink-wrap plastic because it’s just come from the uniform service, you know. And her name tag, she has to peel that plastic off, you know, just to get that she’s opening up and putting this stuff on and she doesn’t like it.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And then she comes out and then all of a sudden this guy is on her. And he’s like, “I was trying to get you on your radio. Why aren’t you answering your radio?” And then she picks it up and she’s on the wrong channel because she’s new, and “I’m sorry, I’ve never used this.” “Just follow me. Do exactly as I…”

Then, just be a little bit more creative about how we present these facts. And be a little more visual about it. And less worried about two-way radios, and back and forths, and “Yes, sir, I’m here,” and all that stuff.

**John:** My guess is that she is a more important character than Rudy is, and so coming into this part of the sequence we really should have started with her and not started with Rudy outside. Because we don’t care about that lobby. Is something interesting going to happen in this lobby? Eh.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** She’s probably your actual character, so starting with her. And I like your idea of the specificity of ripping off plastic and sort of getting started feels really good. So, we don’t need to meet him first. We meet her, and through her we meet the guy who is going to be training her. That’s a nice way to sort of get into a world. So, a suggestion.

**Craig:** It’s also because just like the three pages before by Kate, this is a backstage scene. So, maybe start backstage her. Don’t show the lobby at all. First of all, you’re right: obviously this is going to be Rosie’s story. We don’t care about establishing Rudy. Don’t establish the building at all.

We’re in a locker room. We don’t where we are. Are we at a police academy, at a school, at a jail? But it’s a junky locker room. It’s junky and it’s full of cleaning products. And it’s greasy. And then she walks out this door and she’s in this gorgeous lobby full of very wealthy people who are moving around making billions of dollars.

Find ways to surprise us. The best transition in any movie ever probably is when Dorothy walks out of her black and white little crappy Kansas home and there’s this gorgeous Technicolor fantasy world in front of her. It’s so surprising.

So, go ahead. Find those moments.

**John:** Agree. So, we want to thank all three of our people for writing in with their three page samples, because they’re very, very brave, and thank you for sharing them and letting other people learn from what you wrote, and hopefully from some of the conversations we had about them.

It’s time for One Cool Thing. Craig, do you have a One Cool Thing this week?

**Craig:** I do have a One Cool Thing. Woo!

**John:** I’m so proud of you.

**Craig:** It’s an app.

**John:** Now, I know that shame is a motivator, but is pride a motivator?

**Craig:** No!

**John:** Does that help? No, I should never say that.

**Craig:** Actually it hurt. God, I don’t want to do it anymore.

**John:** I’m sorry.

**Craig:** What are you proud of me? Ugh, I guess I can stop.

No, no, the shame is perfect.

So, cool app, I love games on the iPad, but I’ve found so few that I truly love. Actually your recommendation of Ski Safari is one that stuck with me. I loved The Room, and that’s such a great game. Have you played The Room yet, by the way?

**John:** Oh, I played it all the way through. It’s amazing.

**Craig:** So great.

**John:** They need to add new levels and new boxes.

**Craig:** I know. Well, they’re working on The Room 2, so I’m super excited about that. And I’ve tried other Room-ish games, and none of them are even close.

So, what ends up happening is I just end up getting stuck with playing the oldies over and over because I’m so rarely impressed by iPad games. There’s so much junk out there. But, very cool interesting game called Waking Mars. Have you heard of this one?

**John:** I have. But tell me everything about it.

**Craig:** Well, it’s real simple. Basically you play an astronaut, a human, who is on this little exploratory mission on Mars, in the future. And you’re moving through caverns. And you move by walking or flying around with your little jet pack which beautifully has no fuel meter on it because it’s so frustrating. I hate crap like that.

If you want me to fly, let me fly. What’s fascinating about it is the game is essentially a puzzle-based platform where you encounter different life forms. And they’re mostly sort of Martian plants. And the Martian plants do different things. Some of them give off little seeds. Some of them give off water. Some of them eat certain other plants, or other animals. And your job is to basically start managing the increasing bio-complexity to create more life to affect your ability to move through the cave and explore Mars. And there’s a sort of macro mystery around the whole thing. And there is kind of clunky voice acting, but okay.

Interestingly, your protagonist is an Asian American which you don’t often see in video games. But, I don’t often encounter a different game scheme, you know? This is a different game scheme. I’ve never played a game where the idea was to figure out what to feed to what. And realize that if you feed this to that it may get you closer to opening the wall, but that thing is dangerous. Whereas if you make a lot of these little things it will take more time and it will be a little more difficult to do, but it’s safer. It’s a very cool game and it’s beautiful. I mean, the graphics are gorgeous on the iPad. Actually put nice music to it.

So, check out Waking Mars. Pretty cool game.

**John:** Great.

My One Cool Thing, there’s not even a possible link to it, because I want to make sort of all of America for not spoiling Homeland for me. So, Homeland is a great Showtime show that I just didn’t watch, and it was one of my sort of broken leg shows in the sense that I figured once I would break my leg at some point, or get laid up, then I would watch Homeland.

And being stuck here in New York, just with my Apple TV, I’ve been able to catch up with Homeland. And I just really appreciate sort of all my friends and everyone else in my life who watched Homeland and said it’s really, really good, but never spoiled it for me. So, this is just a shout-out thank you to everyone who watched Homeland and didn’t run it for me.

**Craig:** What nice friends you have. By the way, John, you know New York is my hometown. Without giving away your exact location, what part of Manhattan are you calling home these days?

**John:** I’m in Midtown Manhattan. I’m pretty close to our rehearsal theater. And I’m actually staying in David Strathairn’s old apartment.

**Craig:** Oh wow.

**John:** So, it sounds much fancier than it really is. Essentially when actors or people who need to come to do Broadway plays who don’t live in New York, this is the kind of hotel, hotel-apartment kind of thing, they stick people in. So, David Strathairn was the person who was here before me. And I know that because the guy downstairs said like, “Oh, Mr. Strathairn,” and I’m like, “No, no, that’s not me.”

**Craig:** [laughs] So, you’re right by Times Square/Theater District and that sort of thing?

**John:** I am right in that area.

**Craig:** Isn’t that nice to be able to walk over there?

**John:** It is so good.

**Craig:** God, that area used to be just a cesspool.

**John:** Yeah. And now it’s lovely.

**Craig:** It’s amazing the transformation.

Well, thank you from me to our three page listeners and hopefully you took that all in a positive spirit. It is not too late for you. And good job.

**John:** Well, Craig, have a great week.

**Craig:** You, too. We’ll see you next time. Thanks.

**John:** Bye.

LINKS:

* [@RyanRivard](https://twitter.com/RyanRivard)’s How to write a scene [graphic](https://twitter.com/johnaugust/status/306566727867711489/photo/1)
* The [Reddit post](http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/19ehyv/for_fellow_aspiring_screenwriters_how_to_write_a/)
* The [original 2007 blog post](http://johnaugust.com/2007/write-scene)
* Three pages by [Josh Golden](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/JoshGolden.pdf)
* Three pages by [Kate Powers](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/KatePowers.pdf)
* Three pages by [Andre McGee](http://johnaugust.com/Assets/AndreMcGee.pdf)
* How to [submit your three pages](http://johnaugust.com/threepage)
* [Waking Mars](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/waking-mars/id462397814?mt=8) for iOS
* Homeland on [Amazon Instant](http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008QTV3X0/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) and [Blu-ray](http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005LAJ17M/?tag=johnaugustcom-20)
* OUTRO: [New York (Daviglio cover)](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hz6QsE1dhfU)

Scriptnotes, Ep 75: Villains — Transcript

February 9, 2013 Scriptnotes Transcript

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

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 75 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Now, Craig, originally we were supposed to be airing a different episode this week, one that we’d already recorded with our dear friend, Aline Brosh McKenna.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And I saw her this last week and I said, “Oh, we’re going to air you episode this week.” And she’s like, “That’s so great and so exciting.” And now I feel like she’s become the Matt Damon to our Jimmy Kimmel Show.

**Craig:** Yeah. We’re so sorry. Apologies to Aline Brosh McKenna; we ran out of time.

**John:** So, we do have an amazing episode saved and banked, and that’s partly why I can sleep well at night is knowing that we have this great episode to share in the future. But this week a lot of stuff happened suddenly and we realized like, wow, if we didn’t talk about it this week then it’s going to be two weeks until we talk about it, and it’s going to be far too long to talk about it.

So, we’re doing a new one. We’re recording this actually on Sunday night, after the Super Bowl, but I haven’t even seen the game, so I have no idea what happened.

**Craig:** It was amazing.

**John:** Oh good.

**Craig:** Yeah. Stuff happened in it.

**John:** That’s awesome.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** With that kind of precise description we could have just recording this on Saturday.

**Craig:** I know. I really want to talk about it, but I can’t spoil the game for you because you have it TiVod so, alas.

**John:** Cool. I’ll watch it and I’ll skip through that part where they throw the ball until I see the commercials and that will be great.

**Craig:** [laughs] I know. Kevin Williamson had a pretty funny tweet. It was something like, “I don’t understand all this stuff that’s surrounding the Beyoncé.” [laughs]

**John:** Oh, Kevin.

**Craig:** Oh, Kevin.

**John:** So, this is a busy week for a lot of reasons. First and by far most importantly, your movie opens this week. Your movie opens this Friday.

**Craig:** That’s right. This Friday, in theaters near you.

**John:** Hooray.

**Craig:** Please, all of you loyal listeners, we don’t charge you for this, and you all are so nice to give us nice reviews, and you send us tweets and emails. But, nothing says love like a little bit of money. So, would you consider this wonderful weekend, beginning on February 8, Friday, seeing Identity Thief, of course if you are 17 or older, or if you’re not, accompanied by a somebody who is 17 or older.

**John:** That would be very nice.

**Craig:** Yeah. But I’m proud of the movie. And I’d love for you all to see it. And we will, probably a couple of weeks after the movie comes out, maybe I’ll wait for three or four weeks just so it sort of has it’s run in theaters, I will put the script up on your site so people can check it out.

**John:** Oh, that’s very nice of you. Very generous. Now, tell us a little bit more about Identity Thief and what we should be looking for as we’re watching this movie. Is there anything that people who are fans of the podcast should really keep an eye out for?

**Craig:** Well, you know, in general I think people should just watch the movie and enjoy it and not think about it in any other way. But, I will say that of the movies that I’ve done, this one is probably the closest to being… — Well, I guess it’s probably the purest expression of what I’ve wanted to do in movies for a long time. And as it turns out, you often just don’t get the chance. Sometimes you are either writing movies that, because you can, and people have asked you to do it, and you’re happy to do it, and you want to do it, but it’s not necessarily your thing.

Sometimes you write screenplays that are your thing and they don’t get made. And so I’ve been doing this for a long time; I have a decent number of credits. This is the first one we’re looking at and I go, “Okay, well, it’s mine.” You know, even Hangover II, it’s not mine. Those characters were there. I came along, and I love that movie, and I loved working on III as well. But this one is mine, in a sense.

And, so, I’m very pleased with it. It’s very funny, I think, but it’s also very sweet. And there’s some nice emotion to it. So, I’ll be happy to talk about it more. I mean, obviously, when we do our next podcast we will have the verdict.

**John:** Yes. Both critically and…

**Craig:** Exactly. [laughs]

**John:** …financially.

**Craig:** Critically I’ve given up. [laughs] I just have to say I’ve given up. I mean, I don’t think this is the kind of movie, I don’t expect that critics will beat this up. My expectation is that they will like it, but I’ve had that expectation before and been, you know, bathed in icy cold water of rejection.

More than anything, I just want the audience to enjoy it, and I want people to go see it. Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy are spectacular in it. And so go out and check it out. And then we can talk sort of about the differences between — and there aren’t many, you know — of what I wanted to do and what happened. I mean, there’s not too many of those. But, you know, we’ll go through it.

**John:** Cool. Also on today’s podcast I wanted to talk about some other bits of news. Big Fish tickets are on sale.

**Craig:** Nice!

**John:** I want to do some follow-up on Courier Prime. The TV show that Josh Friedman and I set up at ABC, Chosen, did not get chosen, and so it’s not going to pilot.

**Craig:** Aw…

**John:** But, I want to talk through what that process was like, because it was actually really interesting to see what TV was like this season versus like five seasons ago was the last time I tried to do a TV show.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** I want to talk about villains, because both in trying to do Chosen and this other project I’m trying to set up, and actually a lot of listener questions this last week were about villains. And I want to sort of dig in on villains. And then get to some One Cool Things.

So, let’s start.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** Big Fish. Tickets for the Broadway Musical version of Big Fish in Chicago, which is where we’re doing our out-of-town tryout, they’re on sale right now. And you’re going to hear this on Tuesday, and so they went on sale yesterday, which was Monday.

If you live in Chicago, or if you’re planning to head to Chicago this spring, you should come check out Big Fish. Our first performance is April 2 at the Oriental Theater. We run for five weeks and five weeks only, because another show comes in and takes over for us. So, if you’re a fan who wants to see what Big Fish is like as a musical, with singing, and dancing, and lights, and hopefully some tears, go visit broadwayinchicago.com and get some tickets.

**Craig:** Cool.

**John:** Next topic. Courier Prime. So, last week on the podcast we talked about Courier Prime, which is this better version of Courier that we made. Alan Dague-Greene designed it and did a fantastic job. And people seem to really like it. And nice people wrote up nice things about us in Boing Boing and the New Yorker blog and Paris Review.

And that’s fantastic. And thank you so much for sharing it and it’s been weirdly the most popular, successful downloaded thing we’ve made.

A couple people have written with questions. I wanted to talk about a few common pitfalls and see if I can talk people through before they become pitfalls.

So, Craig, if you are going to be delivering a PDF to somebody, how do you create that PDF? What is the method you go through?

**Craig:** Well, you’re going to tell me I’m doing it wrong.

**John:** Okay. Usually, probably. That’s how I function.

**Craig:** Usually because I use a Mac, and so I find the simplest thing to do, typically, is to print the document and then select “Print to PDF” or “Save as PDF” and then I save a PDF. Although I think in Final Draft sometimes I run into trouble with that method. So, they have an actual menu option to print to PDF.

**John:** Yeah. You should always do your first choice there. Going to the print dialog box is almost always your best bet on a Macintosh. The reason why is that when you go through print the system really treats it like, “Okay, you were sending it to a printer and we will send all the information that we need to send to a printer to this document that we are making.” And that’s really helpful, especially when you’re using a different font because it sends that font information along with the file.

So, when you go through the print dialog box and print that way and do the “Save to PDF” as part of the print process, you’re much more likely to have a great outcome. And if you send that file to somebody else who doesn’t have your fonts installed, who’s on a different system, who’s on something else, there’s a very good chance it’s going to look and print perfectly.

If you go to Movie Magic Screenwriter’s “Export as a PDF” or “Save as PDF” in Final Draft, a lot of time it will work, but a lot of times it won’t work because it won’t have quite set all the information right. So, I would encourage everyone who is experimenting with Courier Prime, do that. If you’re going to send somebody a PDF that you’ve made with Courier Prime and you want them to actually see Courier Prime, do the print method of that.

Here’s a question for you, again. If you are in Final Draft and you want to change from another Courier to Courier Prime, how do you do that?

**Craig:** I think that there’s a set font command in there. You can change everything globally, I think.

**John:** There is. And it’s a little bit buried. Here is what you typically do in other programs. You might do a select-all, and then just choose a new font. That’s unlikely to have a very good outcome in Final Draft. And so the best way to change your fonts in Final Draft is you go into the “Elements” dialog box, and Elements being like scene headers and character names and dialog.

Go into that dialog box, pick General, or pick of the things, change that to Courier Prime or whichever face you want to use, and then there’s a button that says, “Apply font size to all.” And that will tend to do it globally.

Where people often run into problems and run into page count problems or other weird, spazzy things where suddenly like scene headers are in mixed case or they’re not all uppercase/lower case, is that they just try to globally apply, if they try to do a “Select All” and change the font.

So, especially in Final Draft, do that. I would recommend — you will have a good outcome that way.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** Cool. So, Craig, what are you writing right now?

**Craig:** Good question. I’m actually, I’m in that fun place. This is the most fun time for a screenwriter when I’ve finished my writing assignments. So, I finished Identity Thief which you think, well yeah, because it’s coming out on Friday. But, the truth is that movie was supposed to come out in May and then they moved the date up because Melissa McCarthy’s other movie, I think it’s called The Heat, tried to jump in front of us into April.

**John:** How dare they!

**Craig:** So, of course, Universal properly said, “Well, wait, we want to be the first Melissa McCarthy movie. We don’t want to be the leftover.” So, they pulled the date up all the way up to February. And then Fox went, “Well, okay, if you’re going to be in February we might as well go to July.” I think they moved the other direction. [laughs]

But, suddenly, this movie that was supposed to be released in May had to be released in February. So, actually, I didn’t really stop working on that movie in terms of just all the stuff that happens even during production and post-production until, I don’t know, maybe a month ago.

So, I’d been working on that. And, of course, I’ve been working on The Hangover, and I’m working with Todd right now in post, just helping out in the editing room. But, I’m starting to look at what the next thing is. And it’s fun because now the way the agencies work is there’s sort of a red light/green light system. Either the writer is available, or they’re not available. And when they switch to green light, then you sort of feel like a, [laughs] like a newly single woman walking into a bar, and everybody is saying, “Well, would you like to write this? Would you like to write that?” And so I get to look at all these things.

It’s fun. So, I don’t know. I’ll probably figure it out in the next week or so what I’m going to do.

**John:** That’s nice.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** I’m in a sort of similar situation. There was a book that I was going to adapt and the deal took an incredibly long time to get to happen, and ultimately it just didn’t happen, which sometimes is the best situation where, “You know what, this just doesn’t feel quite right.” And so something didn’t feel quite right, and so the deal did not make, and so suddenly I had a free spot on the dance card.

And so there is this possibility that the TV show that Josh Friedman and I did, Chosen, was going to get picked for pilot, and it did not. And so I am kind of free right now, which has actually been kind of remarkable and nice.

So, there are these looming things like, “Oh, I would work on this, but then I have to do this other thing first.” And so actually this last week I got to do some stuff that I really wanted to do that had been pushed back for quite a long time.

I do want to talk a little bit about Chosen going away because that’s one of the weird thing about television is sometimes things just stop and they really are done. And I really kind of like that. One of the things about being a feature writer is that you work on these projects, and you work, and you work, and you draft after draft, and you’re just never quite sure if it’s going to happen.

You get a green light, sure, but there’s a large sort of like yellow light period where it’s just like, maybe, maybe, maybe you get an element attached, maybe something happens. Because TV has a season, and they have to decide like, “We’ve got to start shooting some pilots,” if they don’t decide to shoot your pilot, well, then you’re done. And it’s actually a lovely, nice thing.

**Craig:** There is a lot of built-in certainty. And there is a conclusion in television. I mean, well, if they do pick up your pilot then you’re right back into the yellow light zone because they won’t necessarily say that your pilot is going to get a series order. And then if you do get a series order then you don’t necessarily know if it will be back for another season, or is it going to get a full season, or a half a season.

But, you never get this in movies. Never once has anyone ever said to me, “We read your script. We don’t want to make it now, and actually we’re never going to make it.” [laughs] It just doesn’t work that way.

They’ll keep… — I was talking to a producer just this week about a script I wrote five years ago that he’s trying to get started again. It never ends. But in television, I mean, if we’re going to find a silver lining I guess is that there is a finality. You get to actually take a breath and say, “Well, that chapter is done. Let’s move on.”

**John:** Exactly. So, the TV show that Josh and I did, and I didn’t talk a lot about it on the podcast before, and we really never released the log line and we still are not going to quite release the log line, but it is a family drama with a supernatural element. And the sort of space it occupies is kind of like My So Called Life with Rosemary’s Baby quality to it.

Like, there’s something very, very wrong in the world and yet you’re following this family that’s entering into the situation. And it was a good experience. I wrote it. Josh executive produced it. Josh did an amazing job with the notes and getting everything to make sense and sort of helping me get the best version of the script together.

What was different this time than previous times, for this project I was writing it for 20th. And in television you call the part of Fox that makes TV shows, you call that 20th. And you call Fox the part that actually airs the shows. And so this was 20th, but instead of being for Fox it was 20th for ABC.

And so the studio was 20th and the network was ABC. And so every draft you turn in, I turned in a draft to Josh. Josh reads it quickly, gives me good notes and feedback. Both, sort of these are my notes and these are the notes that I would anticipate getting down the road. And he was always spot-on accurate with the notes that were down the road.

I would do some work there, turn it into the studio. The studio would call with notes. And in feature land when studios call with notes, it’s like, “Oh, give us a week or two and we’ll give you notes.” It would be like later that afternoon. Like you turned it in the morning and, like, whoop, here’s the notes call.

You might do some work on that. Once again, they’ll give you their notes and they also give you what they’re anticipating the network’s notes are going to be. Then you go into the network. They read it over the weekend. They call back with notes.

And, so, there’s a really fast churn through these things, but it’s also kind of exciting. And partly because the form of a one-hour drama, it’s only 60 pages, so you really can do some major changes on things if you want to.

We ended up collapsing two acts down into one act, building a new fifth act. And it was a good, rewarding experience. And it was all very, very fast, up until the point where it just became this waiting game where everyone had turned in all their pilots. And so the studio gets to look through all their pilots. And then it just became this game of listening and hearing people talk about what the network was looking for.

And so you’d hear these words like, “Oh, they’re looking for these four qualities of things,” or like, “they only want one-word titles.” And it was sort of amusing, but it was also sort of pointless to sort of pay that much attention.

So, once I stopped hearing a lot about our show, I was like, “Uh, you know, I don’t think we’re going to happen.” Also, we started to see what other shows they were picking up. You’re like, “I don’t know where we fit into this world. I don’t know how they would put us with these other shows.”

So, it wasn’t a big surprise when we got the final call that it wasn’t happening. But I just like that there was a call. I have so many movies that I’ve written over time where like eventually you just stop getting calls back from the producers and you just know that the project is probably not going to happen. Here there was actually some closure and everybody who I worked with could call and say, “Hey, great job. This didn’t go.” From the studio’s level, at some point they go to cable and they go to other places, but like this part is done. And that was nice.

I did enjoy that part of the process this year.

**Craig:** It’s good that you can. There is an art to dealing with bad news.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And we have it all the time. And it’s very easy to internalize and to take it personally. And that’s simply no help at all.

**John:** One of the things that came up in Chosen, and it’s also come up in this other project that I’ve been working on this last week, is the idea of who the villains are and what the villain’s goal is. And so I thought would be something we could dig into this week. Because many properties are going to have some villain. There’s going to be somebody else who has a different agenda than our hero, and our hero and that villain are going to come to terms with each other over the course of the story.

What happened in the discussion on this other project, they kept coming back to me with questions about the villain, what the villain’s story was, and what the villain’s motivation was. And it became clear that eventually they were really seeing this as a villain-driven story rather than a hero-driven story. So, I want to talk through those dynamics as well.

**Craig:** Great.

**John:** Craig, who are the villains you think of when you think of movie villains? Who are the big ones?

**Craig:** Well, you know, immediately one’s mind goes to the broadest, most obvious back hat villains, like Darth Vader, and Buffalo Bill, you know, people like that.

**John:** Well, it’s interesting you say Buffalo Bill. It’s like Buffalo Bill versus Hannibal Lecter.

**Craig:** Hannibal Lecter is not a villain.

**John:** And I think that’s an important distinction. I want to get into that as well.

When you think about villains, you need to really talk about what kinds of genres can support a villain that is actually a driving force villain. Because Identity Thief has bad guys, clearly; I’ve seen them in the trailer. But, do they have their own agenda that could be thwarted by our heroes?

**Craig:** No, they don’t. I mean, that’s the part of the movie that I think least reflects what my initial intention was. And to me those villains really are obstacles. To me, the villain in the movie is Melissa McCarthy. But, she’s an interesting villain that you sort of overcome and find your way to love. But she’s the villain.

**John:** Yeah, she’s the villain. She’s the antagonist.

**Craig:** Right. Right. Dramatically she’s the villain.

**John:** Yeah, so I think I want to make that distinction that almost all movies are going to have a protagonist and antagonist structure. So, you’re going to have a protagonist who is generally your hero. It’s the person who changes over the course of the movie. You’re going to have an antagonist who’s the person who is standing in opposition to the protagonist and is causing the change to happen.

So, sometimes, just based on the trailer, you can see, “Well, there’s two people in the movie.” They are going to be those two people generally.

A villain is a sort of different situation. A villain is somebody who wants to do something specific that is generally bad for the world, or bad for other people in the world. So, we could talk about sort of general categories of what villains could be. There’s the villains who want to control things, who want to run things. So, your Voldemorts, your Darth Vaders, your General Zods. I would say Hal from 2001 is sort of that kind of controlling villain where he has this order that he wants to impose on things. And if you don’t obey you’re going to suffer for it.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You have your revenge villains. You have Khan. You have. You have De Niro in Cape Fear.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** I would argue the witch in The Wizard of Oz is really a revenge villain. If you think about it, this outsider killed her sister and stole her shoes and she wants revenge.

**Craig:** She wants revenge. She also sort of falls into the power-hungry model also.

**John:** Yeah…

**Craig:** Dual villain motivation.

**John:** She does. But I think the power hungriness is something we sort of put on the movie after the fact. If you actually at what she’s trying to do in the course of it, like she doesn’t have this big plan for Oz that we see over the course of this movie.

**Craig:** You’re right. Basically, “You killed my sister and I’m going to get you. And your little dog, too.”

**John:** “And your little dog, too.” And, speaking of animals suffering, we have Glenn Close who is sort of the great villain in Fatal Attraction.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** Who wants revenge. I mean, basically, “How dare you jilt me, and this is what I’m going to do to show you.”

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Then there’s the simpler, you know, this villain wants something and is trying to take something. So, you have Hans Gruber in Die Hard.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** What I love about Hans Gruber is Hans Gruber probably sees himself as he’s Ocean’s 11. He probably sees himself as like, “We’re pulling off this amazing heist. And it would have been an amazing heist if not for John McClane getting in the way.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You have Salieri in Amadeus. And Salieri is like he’s envy — he wants that thing that Mozart has. You have Gollum who wants the ring. Like those are really sort of simple motivations.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** The last kind of villain I would classify is sort of the insatiability. And these are the really scary ones who like they’re just going to keep going no matter what. The Terminator. You can’t — unstoppable. Anton Chigurh, from No Country for Old Men, he scares me more than probably anybody else I’ve seen on screen.

**Craig:** Well, yeah, and they embody the same sort of thing that attracts us to zombies as a kind of personality-less villain, and that is inevitability. They basically represent time.

**John:** They represent time and death.

**Craig:** Mortality. Exactly.

**John:** You will not be able to escape them. So, Freddy Krueger is that, too. Michael Myers, he’s the zombie-slasher kind of person.

**Craig:** Freddy Krueger actually, I think, is really revenge.

**John:** Oh yeah, that’s a very good point. His underlying motivation for why he hates — why he wants to kill all the people he kills is a revenge by proxy kind of.

**Craig:** Yeah, because they burned him, because all he did was rape some kids.

**John:** Yeah. Come on. Can’t a guy have some fun?

So, one of the challenges with screenwriting I’ve found is that you’re trying to balance these two conflicting things. You want your hero to be driving the story. And yet you also want to create a great villain and that villain wants to control the story as well. And finding that sweet spot between the two is often really, really hard. And this project that I was out pitching this last week, I pitched it as very much a quest movie, and here’s our group of heroes and here’s what they’re trying to do, and these are the obstacles along the way. And this is the villain. And so all the questions sort of came back to the villain.

And the questions are sort of natural, fair questions to ask, which I hadn’t done a good enough job explaining and describing was: What is the villain’s overall motivation? What is the villain trying to do? And because we had just done the Raiders podcast I kept coming back to like, “Well, in Raiders what is the villain trying to do?”

**Craig:** Well, he’s trying to do the exact same thing that the hero is trying to do, which is kind of interesting. He just has far less moral compunction. And I guess really the point there is that what the hero was trying to do initially wasn’t what he should be doing. And you can see that that chance occurs.

And this is how I tend to think of really good villains. What they want… — It’s a good topic, because I think there’s a very common screenwriting mistake, and it’s understandable. You have a character, your protagonist, and you have perhaps his flaw, and you have the way he’s going to change. And then you think, “Well, we need a villain.”

And you come up with an interesting villain. The problem is the villain’s motivation, and the villain’s villainy has to exist specifically to fit into the space of your main character of your protagonist. They are the villain because they represent the thing that the main character is most afraid of, or is most alike and needs to destroy within himself.

And if you don’t match these things together dramatically, then you just have kind of a kooky villain in a story with your character.

**John:** Yes. One of the challenges to also keep in mind is that you want a villain who fits in the right scale for what the rest of your story is. You want somebody who feels like the things that they’re after are reasonable for what the nature of your story is.

Let’s go back to Raiders. And so you could say Belloq is the villain. And Belloq wants the same thing that Indy wants. He wants the Ark of the Covenant. But Belloq is actually an employee. He’s really working for the Nazis. And I felt like this pitch that I was going out with this last week, people kept asking for like, you know, it was also a quest movie, so you could sort of think of like Raiders in the sense that it’s a quest — you’re after this one thing.

Well, they kept pushing me for more information, like, well basically who are the Nazis and what is their agenda? And you can’t really stick that onto Raiders of the Lost Ark. I mean, I guess with Raiders of the Lost Ark, we sort of know what the Nazis are and you can sort of shorthand them for evil. But you can’t literally stick Hitler there at the opening of the Ark of the Covenant. It just wouldn’t make sense. It’s the wrong kind of thing.

**Craig:** It would be bizarre. Absolutely. You need to, and in that movie, they very smartly said, “Okay, we’re going to have a character who is obsessed objects and needs to become more interested in humanity, so let’s make our villain just like him, except that guy won’t change at all.” And so we watch our hero begin to diverge from the villain, and that’s exciting. And that’s smart.

And I have to say that there’s a trend toward this. You can find villains like this throughout film history, however, even in broader genres, like for instance superhero films, or even James Bond movies, there was a time when you could just put a kooky villain in because they were interesting. There is nothing thematically relevant about Jaws for instance from The Spy Who Loved Me.

There is nothing particularly relevant even about Blofeld. You know, they’re just mustache-twirling villains. Sometimes people will get this note, “This villain is too much of a mustache-twirler,” meaning he’s just evil because he’s evil. “Ha, ha, ha.”

And if you look at Batman, the Batman villains were very typically just kooky. They were nuts. The Riddler is a villain because he’s insane.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** He’s so insane that he spends all of his time crafting bizarro riddles just because he’s criminally insane.

But, what’s happened is, for instance, take Skyfall. And whatever people’s beefs are with Skyfall, I think honestly one of the reasons the movie has done better than any Bond movie before it, in terms of reaching an audience, is because the villain was matched thematically to the hero. The hero is aging and he is concerned that he is no longer capable to do his job.

And along comes a villain who is aging, who used to do his job and was thrown away. And so all of the internal conflict and sense of divided loyalty that our hero has is brought to bear by the villain. And so suddenly things begin to suggest themselves. Maybe the opening sequence should be one in which the hero’s life is tossed aside by the person he trusts. And then he meets a villain whose life was tossed aside by the same person.

And they just take different paths to resolution. Look at, the Nolan movies I think very notably have taken Batman villain out of the realm of broad and silly and thematically matched them specifically to Batman. The first one, you have Scarecrow, who is right on target. Batman is a hero born out of fear, and your villain is a master of fear.

**John:** Yeah. Fear personified.

**Craig:** Yeah. So, it’s a trend. It’s a trend to do it more and more. And I don’t think it’s going away any time soon. And, frankly, I think it makes for better stories.

**John:** What I would point out is the challenge is you can go too far. And so I look at the second Batman movie, in which we have the Joker who is phenomenal, and we love it, and we love every moment of it. In the third Batman movie I became frustrated by sort of villain soup. And I didn’t feel like there was great opportunity for a Batman story because we’re just basically following the villains through a lot of our time on screen.

It’s also dangerous because it raises the expectation, like, “Well, the villain has to be this big, giant, magnetic character.” And any time your villain is driving your story, then your hero is going to have a harder time driving the story.

What it comes down to is, like, movies can only start once. A movie can start because the hero does something that starts the engine of the film. Or, it can start because the villain does something that starts the engine of the movie.

In many movies with a villain the villain is really starting things. And so even Jaws, like you know, the shark attacks. The shark is the problem. The shark happens first. It’s not that you can envision a scenario in which a scientist found the shark and tracked it down and became the whole start of things. But, no, the shark happens first.

Where I ran into this, both with the TV show and with this other project we’re pitching, is this fascination of who the villain is and what the villain’s motivation is, it’s good to ask those questions, but in trying to dramatize those questions on screen you’re probably going to be taking time away from your hero. And your hero should be the most interesting person on screen.

**Craig:** Yeah. You know, I just don’t know enough about TV to… — I mean, I watch TV, but I don’t watch it the way that I watch movies. I don’t think about it the way I think about movies.

But certainly if you have a very oppositional kind of show, where it really is about one person versus another, they both ultimately will occupy a lot of screen time, I suppose. But, you know, that’s why I think it’s pretty smart what they do in Dexter, for instance. Every season there is one new arch villain who thematically tweaks at some part of Dexter.

But when that season is over, they’re gone because they’re dead.

**John:** Yeah. Did you watch Lost? You probably watched Lost.

**Craig:** I didn’t. My wife watched it and I should say on behalf of our friend, Damon Lindelof, my wife loved the final episode and cried copiously. I don’t know anything about it. [laughs] I know that there was an island, and a smoke monster, and in the end they were in a church.

**John:** Yeah, okay. The point I was going to make about Lost, which I could also make about Alias or many other shows that have elaborate villain mythologies, is that while it become incredibly rewarding that you did know what the villains were and why the villains were doing the things they were doing, if you had known that information from the start of the project — if you’d known what the villains whole deal was at the very start — it wouldn’t have been nearly so interesting.

Or, you would have spent so much time at the start explaining what the villain’s motivation was that you wouldn’t have been able to kick start the hero’s story. And so I guess I’m just making a pitch for there can be a good cause for understanding what the whole scope of the villain is, but you have to realize in the two hours or the one hour or the amount of time that you have allotted, how are you going to get the best version of the hero’s story to happen and service the villain that needs to be serviced.

**Craig:** Yeah. I tend to think about these things in a somewhat odd dichotomy. So, forgive me if this sounds bizarre, but villains — hero/villain relationships are either religious or atheistic in nature. Meaning this: The case where there is a villain who is doing an evil thing, and there is a hero who is trying to stop them is basically religious in nature. It’s a morality play. And good tends to win, obviously, in those morality plays. And, in fact, the satisfaction of the morality play is that good does triumph against seemingly impossible odds.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** And we want to believe that about the world that we live in, that even though oftentimes it is the evil who are strong and the good who are weak, good still triumphs. So, there’s a religious nature to that struggle.

But, there are also atheistic type of stories. Or, actually they’re areligious types of stories, because they’re not making a point about the existence of god, but rather they are saying the drama that exists between the hero and the villain is one of absurd dread, the kind of existential nausea.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** For instance, the classic PBS series, The Prisoner, where the nature of evil was Kafkaesque. It was uncaring. It was inexplicable. It would simply emerge out of the ocean like a bubble or oppress you by simply being a disembodied voice. It was essentially that kind of unquantifiable dread of mortality and death. And so that will color — if you’re trying to tell a story that is steeped in existential dread, don’t over-explain your villains, because the point is there is no explanation. It’s absurd, as absurd as existence is, which is scary in and of itself.

**John:** Yeah. I think the root of all slasher films which, you know, Terminator is sort of an extension, like a smarter extension of a slasher film, but it’s that wave is coming for you and you will not be able to get away from it. Zombie movies work in the same situation, too. It’s not one zombie that you’re afraid of. It’s the fact that all the zombies are always going to be out there and the world is always a very, very, dangerous place.

**Craig:** Yeah. Zombies aren’t even evil. They’re just — they’re like the shark basically.

**John:** Yeah. They’re like the shark.

**Craig:** They just eat. And you can’t stop them. That’s why, by the way, so many zombie movies end on a downer note. They don’t make it. Heroes just don’t make it. You can’t beat zombies.

**John:** So, what I would say though is if you look at, regardless of which kind/class of villain you’re facing, you’re going to have to make to make some decisions about perspective and point of view. And to what degree are we sticking with the hero’s point of view and that we’re learning about the villain through the hero? And to what degree do we as the audience get to see things the hero doesn’t know from the villain’s point of view, and from the villain’s perspective?

And making those decisions is a very early part of the process. How much are we going to stay in point of view of our hero and to what degree are we going to see other stuff?

In Die Hard we stay with John McClane through a lot of it, but eventually we do get to see stuff from Alan Rickman’s point of view, and we see like what he’s really trying to do. With slasher movies, we tend to stay with our hero’s point of view for most of the time because it’s just actually much more frightening to not know where the bad guy is and what the bad guy is trying to do.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** If you have a villain who is smart, if you have a Joker, at some point you will want to see them explain themselves and have that moment at which they can talk about what it is they’re trying to do. And ideally you’d love for them to be able to communicate that mission and that goal to the protagonist. That’s often very challenging to do.

In Silence of the Lambs, to the degree that Hannibal Lecter is a villain. Hannibal Lecter is a person you fear in the movie. He’s in jail, so he can talk to her through the bars and we know that she’s safe and it’s reasonable for her to be in that situation and not be killed.

When we talked about Raiders, Belloq and Indy have that conversation at the bar. Indy’s able to get out of it, but Belloq is able to explain himself. If you can find those moments to allow those two sides to confront each other without killing each other before the end of the story, you’re often better off.

**Craig:** Yeah. You need some sense of rationality. It is discomfiting to watch a villain behave randomly. Random behavior is inherently undramatic. Even if your villain’s motivation is, in fact, just mindless chaos, they need to express that that is their motivation.

The Joker in the second Batman movie, they say, “Some men just want to watch the world burn,” and the Joker can express that. But, okay, that’s a choice, you made it. Your job now is to create chaos because you love chaos. But you’ve articulated a goal.

And if we don’t have that, then we’re just watching somebody blow stuff up willy nilly and we start wondering why. And you never want anyone to stop their engagement with the narrative.

One of the great things about all of those wonderful scenes between Clarice Starling and Hannibal Lecter is that while they are doing this fascinating dance with each other, and falling in love in a matter of speaking, what Hannibal Lecter is promising her, and in fact the entire context of those meetings, the plot context of those meetings, is he is explaining to her why the villain of the movie is doing what he’s doing.

He is grounding that villain in some kind of rational context.

**John:** Yeah, which is spooky.

What I would recommend all writers do is if you have a story that has a villain, especially like a bigger villain, like someone who is doing some pretty serious stuff, take a second before you begin and write the whole story from the villain’s point of view. Because, remember, every villain really does see himself as the hero of the story. So, if you’re making Michael Clayton, Tilda Swinton sees herself as a savior trying to protect this company, and protect herself. But she sees herself as the good person here. And if she’s being forced into doing murder or whatever to protect herself, she will.

Even, god, the Queen Mother in Aliens, she is protecting her brood. From her perspective, these outsiders came in and started killing everything. She’s going to protect. And when you see things from their perspective you can often find some really great moments.

Figure out where the story is from their point of view. But, remember, you’re probably not going to tell it from their point of view. You’re going to tell it from our hero’s point of view, and make sure that you’re going to find those moments in which our hero is going to keep making things worse for the villain, and therefore the villain is going to be able to keep making things worse for the hero. And there is going to be a natural confrontation, but that the final confrontation won’t come until the climax that you want to have happen.

**Craig:** Yeah. There is a nice way of approaching certain villain stories where the movie is in many ways about figuring out the rational context for the villain. You’re trying to unearth a mystery, and that in fact if you figure out why the villain is doing what they’re doing you can stop them.

Mama, which is out in theaters right now, I don’t know if you saw it. It’s a good horror movie. It’s very thoughtful and is very thematic. It’s about something. I thought they did a good job. And that movie is sort of a good case-in-point of if you can figure out why Mama is so violent and evil, then you might have a shot at getting rid of Mama. So, you build the mystery in. And the mystery is, why is this bad person doing these bad things?

Se7en sort of worked like that, you know, with a kind of nice nihilistic ending.

**John:** Great. Well, fun to talk about villains. And our villain talk fits very well into what I want to bring up for my One Cool Thing, which is a book, a bestseller, so it feels really weird for me to be hyping a bestseller because people are buying this book anyway. But it’s Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn.

And I read it just because I wanted to read a fun book that I didn’t have to think about adapting, because so much of what I read for fiction is something that has been sent to me, like, “Oh, would you consider working on this?” And this one was just a fun book that I just bought on the Kindle. I was like, oh, I’ll read it on the plane. And I loved it.

And, of course, I couldn’t turn off that adaptation part of my brain. Because I loved it so much and was thinking, oh, this is a clearly a movie. And I later found out that Reese Witherspoon had the rights and now David Fincher is probably going to direct it.

But, the reason why I’m recommending it on this podcast for people who are interesting in screenwriting is it’s a great book, but it’s also a really fascinating exercise in figuring out how you would adapt this book. Because, the book is structured as alternating chapters about a woman’s disappearance. So, you have Amy who is the wife. And her chapters go forward in time from when they first met, when she first met her husband, Nick.

And so it’s how they fell in love and how they moved to a small town and everything that happened, up to the point of the day that she disappeared. The husband’s chapters start at the day that she disappeared and move forward. And so you’re alternating between the two of these chapters.

And so, when you first start reading the book you’re like, oh, well this will work really nicely. I can see this working as a movie because you would probably start the mystery, of her disappearance, and go forward in time, and you could intercut it with this backstory stuff. And you find out more stuff about the real nature of their relationship as you’re intercutting it.

But then Flynn, to her credit, does something really, really difficult and smart at sort of the midpoint of the book and you realize that, wow, this thing that you thought you could do so straight-forwardly is just not possible. So, I highly recommend it. It’s really nicely done. It’s a good, fun, quick read. So, Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn.

**Craig:** Yeah. My wife read it and loved it, too. I guess I will put it on my iPad Mini.

**John:** Do it.

**Craig:** Sounds like a good one.

**John:** Great. And, Craig, you have a One Cool Thing, too, which is sports-related.

**Craig:** It is. It is Super Bowl Sunday when we record this. And I don’t know how much you follow football, or football-related news stories, but for the past, really the past few years, but accelerating there has been a rash of serious medical concerns and studies surrounding football.

And it basically goes like this: Large men smashing into each other at high speed is not good for their brains. They used to think that concussions were sort of the worst of it, and if you got a concussion in the old days they would have you sit down for two or three minutes, make sure you didn’t throw up, and then send you back into the game.

Eventually they figured out that was a really bad idea, that concussion and concussion related illness is very serious and the brain is even more susceptible to permanent injury if you get hit again while you’re in a state of concussion.

So, they treated that more seriously. But what they failed to consider was that head injuries that don’t result in concussion are still actually quite bad for you. And even worse, they are cumulative. One study suggested that even in a high school football game the average kid on the line who’s either a defensive linesman or offensive linesman smashing into each other, that it’s like being in four, or five, or six car crashes in an hour. It’s just not good for you.

And, here’s the really scary part is that as they’ve been doing studies, bad things have been happening. Specifically, former NFL stars have been killing themselves. And suicide and severe clinical depression is one of the side effects of what they call cerebral encephalopathy, which is just basically brain damage.

And very popular, I mean, Junior Seau — who was an amazing player, and also, you know, for a league that’s full of surly types, just a smiley happy guy, sort of famous for being smiley and happy — killed himself. And he’s not the only one. And these guys that are killing themselves are, now there’s this weird thing where they’re shooting themselves in the chest or stabbing themselves in the chest because they want somebody to study their brain. That’s how involved they are in their own illness.

There are also a lot of cases of just elevated, what you’d call other neuropathies, Parkinson’s and ALS, and it’s a bad deal. In fact, we have a friend, I’ll tell you once the podcast is over, whose father-in-law played in the NFL. And he had fairly early onset Alzheimer’s. So, everybody is looking at football and they’re wondering what are we going to do. And this is why I don’t let my son play football. But he does play baseball.

And in baseball no one is running into each other, but one thing that’s been coming up is that pitchers are getting injured by hit balls. So, basically they make a pitch, the hitter sends a line drive right back to the mound, it strikes the pitcher in the head. There have a been a couple of big cases recently in the MLB where pitchers have been severely injured, nearly blinded, shattered jaws.

Bu there’s at least one case I know of where a little league player got killed. And part of the problem is that really up until the major leagues, or their farm systems, even all the way through college, players can use aluminum bats. And they love aluminum bats because not only are they cheaper, and they don’t break, they send the ball back much, much quicker.

There’s just more energy. They impart more kinetic energy to the ball. And so the speed of the ball off the bat can be over 100 miles an hour. It’s scary. There is a product now that they’re starting to look into. So, this is sort of a One Cool Thing for hopefully this season, that’s basically a pitcher’s helmet.

And pitchers don’t want to wear helmets because they’re goofy and it’s hard to pitch, frankly, with this big, chunky piece of metal, or rather plastic, on your head. But it almost looks like the top of a bike helmet, you know, that sort of foamy part.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And it can go underneath your cap and basically protect you from the worst of it, should you get hit in the head. And I know Easton, which is a very big sports supply company — sports equipment company, I should say — is developing one of these. I think Wilson is developing one of these. And so I kind of keep track of it and I’m hoping that they do bring it to market and that it is available for my son to wear, because I do get worried about that.

So, for those of you out there whose children play football, please be careful and monitor them carefully. And for those of you out there whose kids are pitching, look into this because I think it’s, frankly, I think Major League is going to have to adopt something. It’s just getting too dangerous out there. Protect your brains, people. It’s all you got.

**John:** Absolutely. What is the center of a person? It’s their brain. And so any trauma that is hitting you there is not going to be a — you’re going to be in trouble. You look at the boxers. You look at the boxers who got hit a thousand times, and there’s a reason why they’re not able to put a sentence together.

**Craig:** Yeah, for sure. Boxing is essentially the worst thing you could do for your brain, but it is odd to me that in Major League Baseball for the last, I think, 30 years, you know, if you walk into the batter’s box you must wear a helmet so that if you got hit by a 90-mile-an-hour baseball you wouldn’t get brain injured. But, the pitchers…

**John:** The ball is flying in the other direction, they’re not worrying about that.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, they’re sending the ball back just as fast at their heads, and they’re not wearing anything but a wool cap. Scary.

**John:** All right.

**Craig:** There. Sleep on that.

**John:** There we go. Very good.

So, we’ve talked villains, and so the inevitability of death. This is a way to possibly avoid the inevitability of death.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** We’ve talked about affairs and murderous husbands, possibly in Gone Girl. Big Fish.

**Craig:** Big Fish. Tickets on sale.

**John:** Identity Thiefy.

**Craig:** Tickets on sale.

**John:** People can go see that. And Courier Prime, which is available for downloads. It’s at quoteunquoteapps.com, if you want the Courier font.

Links to everything we talked about on the podcast today are going to be at johnaugust.com/podcast. And, Craig, thank you for another fun episode.

**Craig:** This was a good one. And it was our 75th.

**John:** 75th. So, what is that, Diamond Jubilee?

**Craig:** You know, we are now that old married couple that’s the last one on the dance floor at a wedding when the DJ does that, “All right, everybody who’s been married for 50 years.” You know, we’ve got to do something for 100.

**John:** Oh we will. It’s going to be a blow out for 100.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So, I should be back from New York by then, and we’ll do something great for that.

**Craig:** Maybe a big live one here in town.

**John:** I think a big live one here in town. People seem to like that idea. So, if you are a listener with a suggestion for something we should do for the 100th episode, please let us know. And thank you all for listening.

**Craig:** Awesome. See you next time.

**John:** Thanks.

LINKS:

* [Identity Thief](http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/universal/identitythief/) trailer on Apple
* [Big Fish tickets](http://www.bigfishthemusical.com/#tktsinfo) on sale in Chicago
* [Every Villain is a Hero](http://johnaugust.com/2009/every-villain-is-a-hero)
* [Writing Better Bad Guys](http://johnaugust.com/2012/writing-better-bad-guys)
* [Screenwriting and the Problem of Evil](http://johnaugust.com/2010/screenwriting-and-the-problem-of-evil)
* [Gone Girl](http://www.amazon.com/dp/030758836X/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) by Gillian Flynn
* [Researchers Discover 28 New Cases of Brain Damage in Deceased Football Players](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sports/concussion-watch/researchers-discover-28-new-cases-of-brain-damage-in-deceased-football-players/)
* [Easton-Bell Sports unveils pitcher’s helmet](http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22297882/27795470)
* OUTRO: [Last Dance](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oAkDLsvI3g) by Ariana Grande

Scriptnotes, Ep 74: Three-Hole Punchdrunk — Transcript

February 1, 2013 Scriptnotes Transcript

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** I’m opting for Diet Coke.

**John:** [gasps]

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

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

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

**John:** Can you handle it?

**Craig:** Yes! [laughs]

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

**Craig:** Great.

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

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

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

**Craig:** Exciting.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Nope.

**Craig:** …but I wish it were.

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Oh, come on.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** “Most certainly.”

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah.

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

Sometimes it’s not that situation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yup.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** That’s gratifying.

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

**Craig:** That is good.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Ha! [laughs]

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

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

**Craig:** And you just did.

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Sounds good to me.

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

**Craig:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I mean, and you know, I like you.

**John:** Aw…Craig!

**Craig:** [laughs]

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

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

People asked for chapter marks or section time stamps.

**Craig:** That’s a good idea.

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah. Smart idea.

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

**Craig:** No!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yup.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** What a segue!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Don’t chase.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** It’s completely free.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** So bad.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Cool.

**John:** Cool.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

**Craig:** He definitely missed something.

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah!

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

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

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

So, first choice: Three-hole paper.

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Good god.

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** No, he’s not. Oh, he is?

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Oh.

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

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

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

**Craig:** Well done.

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

Simplest answer of all: It’s waiting.

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah. Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Okay.

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

**John:** Cool. Thanks sir.

**Craig:** Thank you. Bye.

LINKS:

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

Scriptnotes, Ep 69: Eggnog and Dreadlock Santa — Transcript

December 30, 2012 Scriptnotes Transcript

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** I love eggnog…

**Craig:** Ew!

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Oh god!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Great to see.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Great.

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

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

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

**Craig:** Great.

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, thank you for writing in.

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

So, you’re dead on with that.

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

**Craig:** Cool.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Right.

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** That’s totally different.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Thank you very much.

**Craig:** You’re welcome.

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

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

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

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

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

So, that’s my method.

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Ha!

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

**Craig:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** [laughs]

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

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

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

**John:** [laughs]

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

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

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

**John:** Ha! Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

**John:** Just the worst.

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

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

**Craig:** Hey Zak!

**John:** …he’s enraged.

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

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

**Craig:** I know.

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

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

**Craig:** Yeah!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Uh-huh.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah. She’s just great.

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** That’s what I used to say.

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

**Craig:** Right.

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

**Craig:** Fantastic.

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Very cool.

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

**Craig:** One Cool Thing!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Host. He’s a host.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** Yeah.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

**John:** That’s awesome.

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

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

**Craig:** So this podcast won’t air?

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

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

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

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

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

**Craig:** Bye.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (75)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (489)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (238)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.