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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Scriptnotes Transcript

Scriptnotes, Ep 173: The Perfect Reader — Transcript

December 10, 2014 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2014/the-perfect-reader).

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

**Craig Mazin:** [laughs] My name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 173 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today, we are going to be talking about the perfect reader, loan-out companies, and how to record a podcast. But, Craig, all of our listeners want to know first and foremost, how was your heritage turkey?

**Craig:** I got to say home run.

**John:** Oh, fantastic. Glad to hear it.

**Craig:** Home run. So changed up a couple of things this year for those of you playing the home turkey game. I got a heritage turkey from a company called Mary’s Turkeys, about a 17-pounder because I had a lot of people. I brined it — I always brine but this time, instead of brining it in a bucket or a cooler, I went with a brining bag.

**John:** Ah, those are the dry briners —

**Craig:** No, no, I’m a wet brine guy. I believe in the wet brine. But that’s a whole north/south, east/west civil war but I’ll —

**John:** Yeah, which is the right barbecue sauce, too, while we’re at it.

**Craig:** I mean, I don’t even get in the middle of that.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** But, no, I’m a wet briner. But the nice thing about the brining bag is that you put the turkey in this big — it’s basically an enormous super heavy-duty Ziploc bag. So it goes over the turkey, you fill it up with the brine, and the nice thing is you can put it in your fridge. Because, otherwise, you got to put it outside in the garage with a bunch of dry ice in a cooler. It’s a big pain in the butt.

And the other thing I did this time was I added some brown sugar into the brine. By and large, you know, people throw in, like, what I call potpourri into their brine. You know, like lemons and sprigs and things. That stuff, all those oil-based things, like, from citrus, that’s not going to dissolve in the water and it’s not going to go into the turkey. You’re wasting your time. Anyway, it came out fantastic.

**John:** That’s great. And how long was your bird in the oven?

**Craig:** This is also the simplest oven-cooking of all time.

**John:** Right.

**Craig:** I went with no basting. I did an olive oil rub.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** Put it in at 325 degrees.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** 3.5 hours later, it was done to perfection.

**John:** Fantastic.

**Craig:** Did not do anything.

**John:** So this year, I did what I’ve been doing the last couple of years which is the high-heat method.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** So you think yours is simple. This is how simple mine was. A little olive oil rub into a 475-degree oven.

**Craig:** Woo.

**John:** For two hours. Done. And so not only do you not have to do anything other than sort of clean and dry the bird —

**Craig:** It’s faster.

**John:** Yes. And you don’t even truss it. You sort of deliberately untruss it. So you have to stick forks in to sort of hold the legs out away from the bird so the heat can get everywhere.

**Craig:** Interesting.

**John:** And it worked really well.

**Craig:** Yeah, I did fail to mention that I trussed. I’m a trusser.

**John:** You’re a trusser?

**Craig:** Yeah, my method is —

**John:** Well, that’s really your bondage thing coming through there.

**Craig:** Yeah, Fifty Shades of Grey’d that thing.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Yes, the turkey will see me now. I did the slow-and-low method. But the truth is that if you put it in, you know, as long as you don’t have to do stuff with it, it doesn’t really matter.

**John:** It doesn’t matter. Time is irrelevant as long as —

**Craig:** Time is irrelevant. But I have to also, well, I’ll save my One Cool Thing because I did a — I made a lot of different things. I made a pumpkin pie. I made an apple galette, I made acorn squash, I made garlicky green beans with roasted pine nuts. I made a ton of things. But one thing I made, oh, pumpkin scones, which were spectacular.

**John:** Oh, good. Yeah.

**Craig:** But I’ll save my favorite thing for my One Cool Thing.

**John:** Fantastic.

**Craig:** Yeah. How about you? So did you have a great Thanksgiving?

**John:** We had a great Thanksgiving. We had some friends come over. We had a good simple outdoor Los Angeles Thanksgiving.

**Craig:** I know. My sister is in town with her husband and kids and, you know, it’s freezing in New York and they’re swimming today, so they’re super happy.

**John:** Yeah, life is good.

**Craig:** Life is good.

**John:** So life is also good on December 11th. That is the live Scriptnotes show in Hollywood. So as we record this on Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, there are still some tickets left. I don’t know if they’re still really out there, because you, Craig, are bringing in a whole entourage. So I know that you requested, like, 20 tickets for you and your posse so —

**Craig:** I believe I’ve requested four tickets.

**John:** All right.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** A lot.

**Craig:** [laughs] That’s too much. That’s way too much.

**John:** Way too much. You’re disrupting everything.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Our other guests are going to be, so it’s me and Craig, Aline, Jane Espenson, B.J. Novak, Derek Haas, actress/singer/funny person Rachel Bloom, all those people will have entourages as well. So we’re not sure how many tickets are going to be left but if you would like to come, you should come. So go to wgfoundation.org, click Events and you will have the option to purchase the tickets. Come join us on December 11th at 8:00 pm.

**Craig:** Let me do a little hard sell on this, by the way.

**John:** All right, sure.

**Craig:** For those people that listen to the podcast but haven’t been to one of these things, they’re great. It’s just a more relaxed, fun atmosphere. There’s something about it just being all together in a room is fun. You also get to meet other people that listen to the show and people have made friends at these things. You know, it’s like a little community.

**John:** Yes, and we’ve had some babies created out of —

**Craig:** We must have had some podcast babies. I probably made a few podcast babies. I mean, don’t tell anybody. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] Don’t tell Melissa. Does Melissa listen to your show?

**Craig:** Hey, Melissa, I made, like, 14 podcast babies. [laughs]

**John:** That’s absolutely not true and is the worst.

**Craig:** Not at all true. No.

**John:** Not at all true.

**Craig:** I don’t do that.

**John:** But the shows are genuinely fun and while we’ll, of course, ultimately have this show up for listening, it’s not going to be same thing as being there because we will cut it down and we will cut out, the audience Q&A will probably get cut out.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So that’s why you kind of want to come.

**Craig:** Yeah, there’s a great Q&A. I’ll probably do 40 minutes on She-Hulk again [laughs], so that should be terrific.

**John:** Oh, don’t, no, don’t.

**Craig:** Oh, I shouldn’t do that? I shouldn’t?

**John:** No, no more She-Hulk. I think we’ve banned that discussion ever happening again. What I will say what’s interesting is because for my Kickstarter I had a video of me talking about it, some people wrote in and said, like, “Wow, you look nothing like I thought you would look like.” And that is a strange thing about listening to podcasts is that —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** You have, just human nature. You form an image of, like, who you think goes with that voice, and apparently, I don’t look like my voice at all.

**Craig:** I also don’t look like my voice. Neither of us look like our voices.

**John:** Yeah. That’s a good thing.

**Craig:** I remember as a kid, you know, it’s funny, podcasts have kind of brought back an experience that you and I had when we were kids. And then I felt like it sort of went away because radio started to go away.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** When I was a kid, I remember wondering like what does Howard Stern look like? And what does Robin Quivers look like? What do any of these people look like? And then that sort of went away because — and now, it’s back.

**John:** I remember being in Los Angeles, well, as I first moved here and listened to KROQ, and there was Kevin & Bean in the morning. And I had this image of who I thought Kevin and Bean were.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And then I saw them at some live event and like, wow, that’s not even remotely what I thought that would be. It’s jarring.

**Craig:** They looked pretty much like I thought they would look like.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Yeah. I used to listen to Kevin & Bean every morning. Kevin & Bean, and you know, people don’t know, like, that’s where Adam Carolla came out of, that’s where Jimmy Kimmel came out of.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** Yeah. It was a great show but, you know, it’s radio. What are you going to do?

**John:** Yeah. I remember when Go was being launched, I mean, that was an incredibly important platform for us to get our actors and I think Doug Liman may have even been on that. And like Doug Liman on the radio, it’s just, “Why would you do that?”

**Craig:** [laughs] I know.

**John:** But we were promoting our show. But, like, Breckin Meyer, Jay Mohr on that kind of show killed it.

**Craig:** Right, absolutely. Yeah, I know. It was a big deal back in the ’90s, yo.

**John:** Yo. Another thing we talked about on the previous show was Franz Kafka and we had a reader, Kevin, from Tokyo wrote in with a long response to that and I thought it was great so I thought I would read this aloud. “It was a pleasant surprise to hear Franz Kafka come up on the podcast. I spent many years studying his work and life, visiting the places he lived and wrote, archives, holding his manuscripts and so on. I’m writing to let you know that Craig’s literature professor lied to him.”

**Craig:** Mm-hmm, liar.

**John:** “The mention that Kafka’s works were only published after his death and against his wishes is a persistent myth. The truth is, Kafka oversaw the publication and translation of many of his short stories and novellas, including Metamorphosis. He fretted over details and illustrations, cover designs, and tracked the sales records of his books.

“It is true they asked his friend Max Brod to destroy his unpublished manuscripts in fragments which he considered incomplete. One justification Brod later gave for ignoring this was that after making the request, Kafka continued to actually publish his work. He was working on correcting his proofs for the collection that contains The Hunger Artist when he died. I certainly do not mean to criticize you since Craig brought up Kafka as a springboard for talking about writers’ feelings about their work. Your podcast is not about Germanic literature and the whole thing started by Craig’s professor lying to him.”

**Craig:** [laughs]

**John:** “I guess the professor wanted to leave out the facts to make a juicy story like the entertainment journalists who were the target of your umbrage. Thank you for your entertainment inspiration. Kevin in Tokyo.”

**Craig:** Well, thank you, Kevin in Tokyo. You know, this does happen. Sometimes these myths persist. And look, we are trusting Kevin because Kevin sounds informed. He could be lying to me also, [laughs], right? I mean, we now know that I am susceptible to these kinds of lies. But in this case, I think Print the Legend, that’s my theory.

**John:** I think it is a Print the Legend situation. So I was doing just a little bit of cursory research and it does seem that Kevin has other people in his corner backing him up. There’s a book by James Hawes and there’s a review I read by Joanna Kavenna in The Guardian, and I’ll read a little quote from her because I thought it actually really summed up sort of what we’re talking about. “Hawes strongly believes the myth surrounding Kafka has clouded the perception of his writing to the extent that his translators believe he should sound like some ghostly, plodding sub-Sartre rather than someone whose, ‘black-comic tales of what happens to modern people who can’t give up on the Old Ways’ could hardly be more timely.”

And I think that’s actually a really fascinating aspect of the Print the Legend because when you print the legend, it’s going to influence all the choices you make about that person’s work.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And in the case of Kafka, you are translating these things and so if your image of the person you’re translating is, like, “Oh, he’s dark and it’s all about, you know, gloom,” then you’re going to make choices that support that thesis rather than try and define, you know, the funny or the satirical aspects of what it is that he’s writing.

**Craig:** That’s true. And I suspect that this is all accurate because I know that I didn’t study Kafka anywhere near the extent to which Kevin has, obviously, but I did do a lot of Nietzsche studying in college and there are a ton of myths surrounding Nietzsche as well, that he had syphilis, which is not at all the case, that he was an anti-Semite, which is not at all the case. There’s just a lot. It happens, you know, and all these guys lived well before the time of over-examination. No more myths can possibly exist, it seems to me. Unfortunately, we repose mythology now.

**John:** Yeah, it’s very possible we are. I can think back to Columbus, for example, if you want to talk about a person who is sort of built around a myth. And so you and I grew up celebrating Columbus Day and, like this was the day of discovery and there’s all this imagery about sort of who Columbus was and now as we sort of discover more things about, like, “Oh, you know what? Maybe Columbus wasn’t such an awesome guy.” We have to sort of look at all this text we’ve read as a kid and say, like, “Wait, huh? Is this really the right thing to be talking about with Columbus?”

Or Thanksgiving, for example, Thanksgiving is a wonderful holiday. I would not want to change anything about the modern celebration of Thanksgiving. But if you look at sort of what is the legend behind it, it probably wasn’t anything like what we want it to have been.

**Craig:** Oh, no question. America itself, essentially, is the product of, I mean, the American dream, the American stories, all mythological. I see mistakes cropping up all the time. In fact, I was listening to, somebody had put on Facebook this bit that David Cross does in an audio book where he’s rebutting Larry the Cable Guy who was complaining about him. And at one point, Larry the Cable Guy is complaining that America’s on the verge of banning Christianity which David Cross correctly finds absurd and says, “You know, this is a country where, you know, George Washington was christened.” Actually, most of those guys weren’t Christian.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Most of the Founding Fathers were Deists. They weren’t even Christians.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** There’s just a lot of bad info circulating out there. And now, I’m circulating it as well. So good. Tune in next week for more disinformation.

**John:** Well, speaking of David Cross, David Cross’ frequent collaborator, Bob Odenkirk, is associated with our next —

**Craig:** Segue Man. [laughs]

**John:** A follow up. So on the last episode, we were talking about Simon Cowell and the aspect of, like, criticism and how criticism itself becomes a form of entertainment. And I said, like, “Oh, well, somebody should make a show where they just like criticize a stick of gum and it should be all about that.” And Jonathan Bell, a reader, wrote in, a listener wrote in and pointed us to this great Bob Odenkirk sketch which is on Funny or Die, which is all about — it’s called American Contestant.

And it’s a spoof of American Idol but it’s really just about the judges criticizing this woman who thinks she’s on a singing competition. It’s, like, “No, no, this isn’t about the singing.” It’s, like, “Well, I really want to go to Hollywood.” “We want to see that you want to go to Hollywood but, you know, you have to prove it.” And it just becomes about the nature of criticism and how criticism becomes a popular culture. So of course, I did have a good idea but about six years ago, Bob Odenkirk did a funny series of sketches about it.

**Craig:** Once again, trumped by Odenkirk.

**John:** Yeah. It’s not going to be the last time, I suspect.

**Craig:** No. No.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** Did you see the new Star Wars teaser?

**John:** I did. So we we’re recording this on Friday. So as we’re recording this it is a big deal because this new teaser came out so —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Craig, how erect were your nipples when you saw it?

**Craig:** Like I could’ve cut glass with those things.

**John:** Yeah. I’ll pause for a second. When did cutting glass with nipples become a thing? Because it is a common phrase. How did it happen?

**Craig:** Well, I don’t know how it happened out there. I cut glass with my nipples all the time. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] Indeed.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah.

**John:** Basically, whenever you need to do a jewel heist, you have to get really, really excited so you can actually cut through the security glass and steal the jewel.

**Craig:** I have to sort of rotate my torso in a planar, circular fashion. Yeah. No, I do it all the time. I loved it. But rather than talk about the teaser trailer, I just want to tie in to what you were saying that it just seems like these things come out and then there’s just this horde of people just waiting to say, “Meh,” and “I don’t like it.”

**John:** I have to say, as we’re recording this on Friday, I have not heard a single “meh.” I’ve heard a lot of sort of like, “Holy cow, that was much better than I was expecting it to be.”

**Craig:** Well, look, it is exactly as good as I was expecting it to be but then again, as we know, I’m a positive movie-goer. I expect every teaser trailer to be awesome. I truly do. And then, you know, I start from a place of hope and then, you know, we’ll see what happens. But yeah, there was just a bunch, but you know what, sometimes when I’m on the Internet and this is a weird thing for somebody who does a podcast to say, I just want to — I wish there were a button like a shush button, and I could just shush the Internet, just shush. Everybody shush.

**John:** You can. You can close the window.

**Craig:** No, no, no, no, I want other people to shush. [laughs] I want everyone to be quiet, even on their own.

**John:** So on a previous episode of Scriptnotes, we talked about this list that a guy put out saying, like, you know, a list of reminders, sort of an open letter to J.J. Abrams and a list of reminders about Star Wars. And it is interesting that, J.J. Abrams is not a stupid person and it seems like he did a lot of the things on the list not because that list existed but because, like, they’re the right kind of ideas.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So the universe does definitely feel old. It doesn’t feel new and shiny. And, like, the helmets look battered and damaged. It definitely looks like it takes a place on a frontier.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** It looks, you know, like there’s mysterious things happening.

**Craig:** Well, it also looks like it is part of the universe of the first three movies. It has the palette of the first three movies, those wonderful Ralph McQuarrie illustrations. It looks like those. The colors are like those. Obviously, we know from advanced publicity that he’s been erring towards the side of practical objects that are maybe enhanced by CGI as opposed to pure CGI creations. It just looks like a Star Wars movie whereas the other ones just didn’t, you know, so —

**John:** Very shiny.

**Craig:** Yeah, they were shiny. So, I’m super excited. I do believe that this movie will be the biggest. I believe it will be the biggest movie. I think —

**John:** It could be the biggest movie of all time.

**Craig:** I think it will be. I think it’s going to outdo Avatar.

**John:** Yeah. I think you’re probably right.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Hooray for everybody involved.

**Craig:** All right.

**John:** Last bit of follow-up. On the last episode, I asked if there were listeners who had insights about retail that could help me out as I’m trying to figure out Writer Emergency Pack and in 2015 we’re going to try to put it out in the world, both retails like physical retail and online retail. And about half a dozen people wrote in with like really, really good helpful suggestions. And so I just want to thank everyone who’s written in and if other people have thoughts about that.

And it’s a good segue to our first topic which is, I recognized this last week that we’re actually going to have to put Writer Emergency Pack in a whole separate company because right now I’ve been running it through my own loan-out company and it should not, for accounting reasons, it should just not be part of the loan-out company. So I thought we’d start by talking about loan-out companies.

**Craig:** The loan-out company, which is a quirk of the entertainment business. It really is, you know. It’s not something that anybody really should know about unless they are considering becoming a writer, an actor, a director. That is to say an individual who sells their own art that isn’t — and they’re not objects but rather us, our expression, our individual expression. So what happens is if you achieve a certain amount of success and you want it to be success that you expect to be repeated, not just a one-time deal, then everybody, every tax person, your agent, all of the people around you, your lawyer will say, “You need to form a loan-out company.” What is that?

It is a corporation. Typically, it’s an S-corp. Some people do a C-corp. And you become a company. So for the sake of argument, you’re the Joe Smith Company. The Joe Smith Company is controlled entirely by Joe Smith. Joe Smith owns all the stock. Joe Smith is the sole officer of the company. When you are hired to do things, let’s stick with writing because we are Scriptnotes, the studio makes a deal with the Joe Smith Company, not with you. The studio pays the Joe Smith Company. The Joe Smith Company, in turn, warrants that it is there to provide the services of Joe Smith. And then, of course, you set up something where the Joe Smith Company then pays Joe Smith.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** What’s the deal with all these hoops? What does it come down to? No shock, taxes.

**John:** Mostly taxes. So let me back up and make sure that a few terms are clear along the way. So when we say success, it’s not, like, “Hey, you got an Academy Award nomination.” Success means that you are earning a certain amount each year.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** And so when I first became a corporation, that threshold was about $200,000. They said, like, if you’re making more than $200,000 a year, then you should incorporate so that you could have a loan-out and things would just become much simpler. That bar may actually be a little bit lower now just for —

**Craig:** That’s what I read, yeah. Now, I think maybe even $100,000. But back when we were starting, yeah, $200,000 was the number that I heard as well. So every actor you see in movies, pretty much every working writer, every director, everybody has a loan-out company.

**John:** So some of the advantages for this are taxes. And so it’s a way of, Sony is paying through a loan-out corporation. Your loan-out company has that money. Your loan-out company can take write-offs against that money for things like your agent and things like your manager and things like your lawyer. Some of the things are going to being paid as a corporation, so they’re not being charged to you individually. That’s very useful.

In almost all cases, the overall balance of your company will be zeroed out of a year. So they’re ultimately going to pay you but it’s a way of delaying paying you as an individual writer for a little bit longer, and that can be very, very useful. It can also be useful because if you have legitimate research that you need to do, trips you need to do to study something for something you’re writing, if you have an assistant like Stuart Friedel, that person can be paid out of your corporation.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And it’s generally much better to pay things from a corporate perspective than to pay as an individual.

**Craig:** Yeah. As an individual, taking business deductions is arduous. It is often a red flag. A real simple thing, for instance, I have an office in Pasadena. That’s where I am right now. If you’re an individual and you have a home office, the IRS is, like, “Do you really? Because that’s something that a lot of cheaters say they have but don’t really have. Is it really just your bedroom?” But if you have an office-office and it’s a corporation, it’s an office. They don’t have a problem with that. They expect that.
So you’re right. And there’s something called the alternative minimum tax where as an individual they’re like, “You can deduct a bunch of stuff but then where if you deduct too much, we’re just going to add on a new tax because we don’t really believe you.” That gets circumvented when you’re talking about the — having a corporation.

The other huge tax benefit to having a loan-out is that you can then access different levels and expanded levels of tax-deferred savings. I’m talking about retirement plans. So you can save, you know, as an individual, you have your IRA where, I don’t know, they let you put in $2,000 a year. As a loan-out, you can put in six figures. You can put in a lot of money in tax-deferreds for retirement. You will pay taxes on it one day but it gets to grow without you having to pay the taxes upfront and it’s better.

**John:** Absolutely. And I think we should stress for writers is that if you were a screenwriter, you’re going to be a member of the WGA. And so there will be a WGA pension. The WGA pension, while good for most industries, it’s probably not going to be sufficient for you to be carrying on for the rest of your life. And so socking away money as a screenwriter during your most productive years is really quite important. And to be able to do that in a tax-deferred way through a corporation is fantastic.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s a must-do.

**John:** Yeah, it’s a must-do. I mean, it’s not just silly, it’s actually dangerous not to do that.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** Well, an interesting that’s happened to me is like I’ve had some employees long enough that they have actually become vested in the corporation and therefore, like, they have retirement plans with me, which is just weird but also kind of great. So assistants who’ve been with for, like, five years —

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Where now they have a pension, which is wonderful.

**Craig:** That’s amazing. Yeah, that’s terrific. You have all sorts of options and flexibilities when you are a loan-out corp. Some people will say that the other benefit is that, you know, you’re shielded a little bit from some legal issues. Not really.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** The truth is that if you do something wrong as an individual, you can’t really hide behind that loan-out corp. That’s so easy. They call it piercing the veil. It’s so easy to say, “No, it’s really just you.” The other thing is that when we sign contracts with studios, one of the things we sign is a certificate of authorship that says, “We’re going to write this.” The individual is going to write this. That’s what the loan-out company is promising. And as an individual, we are warranting that we’re not ripping anyone off. We’re not infringing. We’re not making any, you know, bad mistakes.

**John:** Yeah. So let’s talk about this from a newer writer’s perspective. And people might be listening and saying like, “I’m an aspiring screenwriter. Do I need to form a loan-out corporation?” The answer is unequivocally no.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** So it’s one of those things like getting an agent, getting a lawyer, getting all that stuff, it’s all stuff that happens down the road. And when it has to happen, it just has to happen. Actually, here’s the best parallel. It’s the kind of thing like joining the WGA. You don’t need to join the WGA until you need to join the WGA. Like, at the minute you sign to write a script for a studio that’s a signatory or you sell a script to a signatory, then congratulations. You have to join the WGA and you are now a WGA member. The same kind of thing holds true for incorporating is that at the minute you need to incorporate, your agents, your lawyer, your manager will tell you, “Oh, about that time. You got to incorporate.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And there will be a whole process to do it because literally thousands of people have done it before you.

**Craig:** That’s right. There’s a fee involved to incorporate in the State of California. You know, it’s tempting to think, “God, what I should do is incorporate in Nevada because they don’t have taxes there the way that we have taxes here.” Yeah, it don’t work that way. You got to —

**John:** No.

**Craig:** Incorporate where you live, in the state you live. But they will tell you — it’s good information though to have in your pocket for those of you, especially if you’ve just sold your first thing, if you’re on the verge, this is something you should start talking about with your attorney because it’s a huge benefit to you. You will actually save a lot of money. By the way, do you, question.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** Do you use a business manager?

**John:** I do use a business manager. So I will get into that. But first I want to back up one step and say that the first thing I sold, Go, was the first, actually, that wasn’t my biggest sale. I sold two things which I was paid as an individual, neither of which got produced. And those were just paid to John August. And I sold Go and that was just paid to John August. It was after Go that I incorporated. So I still get checks sometimes for just John August money. It’s not my loan-out money.

**Craig:** Yup.

**John:** And it’s fine. It’s just a little bit weird that there’s some stuff that falls outside that veil and falls outside that —

**Craig:** I’m in the exact same boat. My first two movies, RocketMan and Senseless, were both —

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I didn’t have a loan-out.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So the residuals go to me personally for those. But everything else, they go to the corporation.

**John:** So actually back to your question about a business manager, yes, I do have a business manager, Carrie, and I love her to death. And so she is responsible for keeping track of the corporate money and keeping track of sort of the individual John August money. So I get quarterly statements. She files, you know, the estimated taxes, the quarterly taxes that have get through and make sure that all of the stuff happens.

And again it goes back to the heart surgery thing. She does this for a lot of other writers, a lot of writers that you and I both know. And because she’s seen all the stuff before, it’s just gets done, and it gets done right. But you do not if I can remember correctly.

**Craig:** I don’t, no. Because I kind of like this sort of stuff. I mean, some people have different arrangements. Some business managers do everything for people. They pay their bills. You know, they talk to, “Oh, I need to switch my, the guy that does my exterminating.” Okay, we’ll handle it. So I don’t do any of that. I pay all of my bills. I like Quicken, you know, I’m a Quicken guy. I do have a tax guy that I work with and I have financial investment managers that obviously I don’t , you know, I don’t know what stocks or anything like that. I don’t do that sort of thing.

But the other stuff I handle, you know, it’s not that bad. It’s pretty simple. And, you know, with computers now, it gets even simpler than it used to be.

**John:** So the conversation I had to have this last week with my business manager and with my accountant, and ultimately with my lawyer is that my company, my loan-out company, has been doing all the stuff we do for apps and it’s worked out just fine. So I have employees and we do stuff. The challenge is the company works, the corporation loan-out, works as a cash-based business. That’s fine when you don’t have inventory. But once you start having inventory —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Things get a lot more complicated. So the only inventory we’ve had to date, has been literally like our 150 episodes Scriptnotes drives and our t-shirts and those just sell out and then they’re done and nothing sits around.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** But these will sit around and there will be orders coming in and orders going out and there’ll be this whole timeline thing, and first in, first out. And it’s just going to be very complicated and wrong to try to bend this company to deal with that kind of situation. So it will end up being, I think, a whole separate company that will end up being the distributor of Writer Emergency Pack and other things we hope to make.

**Craig:** As well as it should, yeah, because when you have — I remember talking with my late father-in-law about this. He was a Burger King franchisee. So he owned a couple of Burger Kings and you would have to do the same thing with your new company if they get in to profit and loss statements.

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** It’s just a whole other world. See, the loan-out company exists and can exist because it’s so simple.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** You know, we don’t have stock, we don’t have inventory. We don’t even have profit and loss because our overhead is such a joke, you know. I mean, let’s put it this way. If your overhead is so great that it’s eating up all of your money, I mean the idea is whatever your overhead is as a writer, that plus the money you pay yourself should equal all of the money you’ve earned.

**John:** Exactly. The goal is to zero out everything, every —

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Every year, every financial year. And as a writer, that’s really simple to do. As someone who has inventory, that’s just not going to be possible.

**Craig:** Right. Because if you don’t, then ultimately you end up paying taxes twice.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Because the corporation is making money, it has to be taxed. And then it’s going to send it to you, and then that’s going to be taxed again. Anyway, this is something that you, I know it’s all wonky, money, annoying stuff. But if you want to be a screenwriter, you kind of got to know about it.

**John:** You do.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And you need to think about it at the time that you need to think about it. And so awareness of it before it happens is great. And then when the time comes that you need to do it, you do it.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So my questions are mostly the writers I know from loan-out companies are feature writer people but it happens in television too.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** And at a certain point you’re getting paid enough money, and you’re being paid as both a writer and producer, and that’s going to be enough money that that will happen. But I wonder, are professional athletes a loan-out company?

**Craig:** I believe they are. Yeah, I can imagine —

**John:** And musicians are probably the same. Like Taylor Swift, I’m sure is.

**Craig:** Absolutely.

**John:** She is a multibillion and whatever. But I think any time that you’re being paid a lot of money as an individual —

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** That’s when you want to be paid as a loan-out.

**Craig:** And particularly when you are essentially an individual actor not performance actor but an individual person doing something. So, you know, it’s the difference between now becoming an employee of a company temporarily as opposed to a corporation that’s being contracted and providing a service to somebody. It’s just a better thing. By the way, a little bit of advice for those of you out there who are successful enough to incorporate and have your loan-out company. Don’t name it something stupid.

**John:** Because that name will stick with you for the rest of your life.

**Craig:** And it’s super hard to change it. So —

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** When I started out, I was working at Disney. And when I had to set up my loan-out, I remember that my business card from Disney, it said The Walt Disney Company. I thought, “Oh, if it’s good enough for Walt Disney, it’s probably good enough for me. I think The Craig Mazin Company is probably, that sounds like a good name.”

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Did you pick something silly?

**John:** I picked something good, it’s Quote-Unquote Films Inc.

**Craig:** Oh yeah, that’s totally fine, it’s respectable.

**John:** But unfortunately, it doesn’t actually make sense with things that aren’t films, so —

**Craig:** True.

**John:** You know, the new company name will be something different that it makes more sense for that. And if you want a good advice on picking a good name, I would go to the recent South Park episode, I think it’s Go Fund Yourself where they actually picked names for their startup venture. And it’s fantastic.

**Craig:** Those guys are the best.

**John:** So our second topic is the Perfect Reader. So this is the third installment of our Perfect series. We have no idea how many installments there’ll be. Craig, how many installments will there be? Thousands?

**Craig:** Thousands, yeah.

**John:** So we previously talked about the perfect studio executive. We talked about the perfect agent. Today, we want to talk about the perfect reader. And by reader, we really kind of mean two different things. We mean a reader who is a professional gatekeeper, somebody who is the difference between your script moving on some place and not moving on some place.

We’re also talking about the sort of casual reader which is the friend or acquaintance or compatriot who you’ve given your scripts to and that person is reading your script and they’re both looking at your script and judging it and hopefully giving you some feedback on your script. But there are very different goals behind it.

So we just want to talk about what it’s like to be a great reader.

**Craig:** Well, why don’t we start with the friend version?

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** And then we’ll get to the professional version. So I do this all the time. Just in the last month, I’ve read a script by Scott Silver. I read stuff by Koppelman and Levien. And the first thing that I think that the perfect reader has to do is make sure they understand what the person giving them wants.

**John:** Exactly.

**Craig:** And you don’t always get it right, you know. Sometimes you get it wrong. But it’s important for me to know, okay, has anyone read this before? Are you looking for a wide open what do you think? Or is this something that is already set up and you’re having questions about A, B, or C?

Is this targeted? Do you want to know what I think about what I would call like inside the scenes or do you want to think about the total thing? And you try and get a sense of that so that you don’t, so that you don’t go too far or just bore them with stuff that’s irrelevant or that they can’t do anything about.

**John:** I sent a script to a friend and her first response back was, “Do you want me to tell you that it’s really good or do you want notes?” And it was such an honest response. And I sort of split the difference saying like mostly I want you tell me that it’s really good. But if there’s anything that sticks out that says like, uh-uh, that part doesn’t work, please let me know. And it was such a wonderfully, upfront way of addressing sort of what I was looking at —

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** For the experience.

**Craig:** That’s the other thing is that sometimes people send you something and that’s what they want. They want validation with some little bon mot of easily done work.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** Sometimes people really do want shotgun to the face. In general, when I read things, what I say to people is, look, my default position is what I would want which is shotgun to the face. But if you’re not looking for shotgun to the face, let me know, and I’ll adjust.

And again, you know you don’t — everybody’s different. Like not every reader is right for every writer. You know, so like Scott Silver and I, we have a good, like I really like reading his stuff and I feel like I have a good, and the same thing with Brian and David. And Scott Frank and I read each other’s stuff. And so you find people that you’re like, okay, yeah, this is actually working, this is a good deal.

Then other people maybe you’re like I don’t think I helped them or whatever. But when you’re doing this for somebody else, the most important thing, I think, the perfect reader does is not think how would I rewrite this, which is a mistake I think a lot of writers make. And it’s natural because most of the time when you’re a professional writer and you’re reading someone else’s script it’s because the studio has given it to you and said, “Would you rewrite this please?”

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So your natural instinct is to go, all right, I’m going to read this now and imagine what would I do. That’s not helpful for your friend. What’s helpful for your friend is, I’m just going to read this and then I’m going to say to you here’s where I got confused. Here’s where I wasn’t sure what to think. Here’s where I thought what you wrote didn’t feel good. You know, it’s all about just pure audience style reaction. And then ideally you offer some solutions. They don’t have to be hard and fast solutions or overspecific because you want the writer to feel like they’re going to write their work.

But it’s not enough to say, “You know, this scene felt a little bit too much like that other scene.” It’s better to say, “You know, this scene, when these two people talk like this, these two other people are talking the same way in this other scene. So what if instead they did something like this or this or this, just so I didn’t feel that repetition because I like what’s happening in the scene. I just feel maybe, it felt repetitive to me.” That kind of thing.

**John:** So it’s a different experience when you know the person whose script you’re reading and when the person is a stranger. And so I love reading scripts from friends who are tremendously talented writers. A lot of times I’m reading scripts for things like Sundance, The Sundance Institute. And so I’m reading their scripts and but the first thing I always think about is, “What movie are they trying to make?” And I’ll never sort of — it’s dangerous — you should never ask that question first because that just sets you off on a path of like talking about things rather than talking about the movie itself.

But again, I don’t want to think about, “What movie would I want to make?” I’m saying like, “What movie did they seem to be trying to make on the page?” And when I think in the sense of what movie is it that they’re trying to make, then I can really look at it from perspective of like, “Are these scenes helping them tell the story that they seem to be wanting to tell?”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Which scenes best encapsulate this vision of what they have and which scenes stick out because they’re not actually getting to where I think they want to be going. And that way, I can sort of start the conversation with them, saying like, “Here’s what I think is so awesome and amazing. Here’s where I think this movie is. Tell me if I’m wrong, tell me if this is the right thing you’re aiming for. And if so, then let’s talk about how well these things are working and why these things might not be helping support that vision of what you have for your movie.”

In general, if you can talk about your reactions in terms of this future thing, the movie rather than this thing that’s sitting there in front of them that they’ve been slaving over, they’re going to be much more free to extrapolate and expand and move away from decisions they have made because it took them so long to write that moment.

**Craig:** That’s right. And I think what you’re zeroing in on is that when we are reading things for our friends, we have to read them like we’re producing the movie rather than that we’re rewriting the movie, you know. And a good producer is there to say, “I’m going to tell you how I felt not as a writer because I’m not a writer. I’m an audience member. I watched this movie in my head. Here’s what I thought of the movie. Here’s where I thought it worked, here’s where I thought it didn’t work. Here’s what I think, like you said, the movie is or wants to be. Here’s something that I loved and wish there was more of.”

It’s just an honest expression of your reaction. And it is not at all clouded by anything other than a pure audience member rooting for the movie as opposed to, “Oh, I don’t like this sort of thing,” or, “I don’t write like that,” or “Why would you? Your character, you know, is always like the way you do action.” No one needs that, you know. And particularly when it’s a fellow professional, one of the nice things about reading scripts from fellow professionals is that I never worry that there’s a subtext of, “I’m evaluating you as a writer.” Because I’m not. We’re all good writers, we all are professionals. I’m just evaluating the movie.

**John:** So let’s talk about the other kind of writer, the other kind of reader, I should say. This is the kind of reader who is working for a production company, for a studio, for a producer, a director. Is reading through a bunch of material and has to render a decision about like, “This is a script that I think is worth this next person reading or I think we can pass on this right now.” And I used to have this job. I think you used to do some reading as well.

One of my first jobs in Hollywood was as a reader at TriStar. And so I would have to read — I was reading 14 scripts a week and writing up coverage on them. And that’s a very different kind of reading because while you’re still flipping the pages and sort of taking notes and looking at what’s working and what’s not working, ultimately your audience is not the writer who wrote that script, but it’s some other decision maker. And so what your job is is to encapsulate, well, this is what is actually here and this is what’s working about what’s here. This is what’s not working about what’s here.

And there’s a third thing which I think is also really important which is a thing you don’t do when you’re talking to an individual writer is you’re saying, “Here’s the good writing and here’s the bad writing. Here’s strengths I see in this writer and here are the weaknesses I see in this writer.” It’s a very different experience because you’re not trying to think about being supportive, you’re just trying to be kind of blunt.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And honest about sort of an assessment of what this is in front of you.

**Craig:** And these people not only read, I mean we’re all familiar with the notion of new writers who are sending their work in and it’s getting coverage somewhere, and they’re hoping that it gets passed to somebody, and that’s true. But frankly, for you and for me, this also occurs where studios, internally, have work that they’ve commissioned to be covered by their own readers. They want that as well.

So we all live in the world of these people. And by and large, I think they do a good job. I’ve read some, lots of coverage, some of my works, some of other people’s work. And what I think is the best kind of gatekeeper reader is not so concerned with jamming the movie into a box. They’re not a production executive, they’re not trying to figure out what would be good in our slate or would this make a lot of money or any business concerns. They just concern themselves with the script and with the craft of the script and whether or not the script is true to itself and is well written. So they avoid some of that stuff.

I find that the good ones tend to leave out what feel like personal axes. If you don’t like violence, if you think that violence is distasteful, don’t cover bloody R-rated action movie scripts. They’re not for you and that’s just not an appropriate, you know, reason to ding a script. So you leave out your personal ax grinding.

I remember Todd Phillips showed me coverage that was done of a script that he and Scot Armstrong wrote many years ago and it was really, I really like the script and so did the reader. But then the reader — there was one joke. It was a 9-11 joke and it was, I think it was — the script was covered like on 9-12. And the reader was just outraged and wrote an entire paragraph about how this joke was the worst thing ever. And I just thought that’s a bad reader because that’s not relevant.

The joke will be cut — if it doesn’t work, guess what, it gets cut. We don’t even shoot it at all. That’s not why you’re there, to argue about a line in the movie, you know. So that’s less than ideal. But, you know.

**John:** Yeah. So quite earlier in my career, when I think I first had an agent, I was working at a production company and I had readers who worked for me. And so there was a slow week and there really wasn’t quite enough to cover. So I’ve slipped this reader, who I thought was a really good reader, my own script under a different cover page. Just to see like, oh, let’s see what he thinks about this. And he slammed it. He just really ripped it to shreds. And it was so fascinating. Both to see what he wrote, but also to sort of internally look at my own reaction and sort of like how I was gauging my own work that other people really liked because this one reader has sort of slammed on it and it sort of gets to the nature of all criticism. But I will tell you that that never actually kind of stops.

And there’s one project that I have that is dormant at a studio. And I’m pretty sure one of the reasons why it’s dormant is because someone snuck out the coverage, the internal coverage at the studio. And it’s really negative coverage on this project that they paid me a lot of money to write.

And it’s just so fascinating that after, you know, being employed to write this thing and having people like it and, you know, getting directors on board, this one piece of coverage apparently does, I’ve heard from other people, continues to hurt it.

**Craig:** When you say snuck out, you mean put it online?

**John:** No, no, no. Like somebody at — I think my agency or someone else’s agent said like, “You know, the coverage there is really bad.”

**Craig:** Oh, yeah. And this can, this is a real problem because you would think, “Well, look, all of these people are paid a lot of money to decide what movies to make. They’re the president of a studio or the senior vice president or whatever.” And then there’s a guy that they pay, I don’t know what readers got paid, but not a million dollars a year. And this person takes a dump on the script and they all go, “Well, it got bad coverage.” And that becomes kind of the path of least resistance to sort of yield to that.

**John:** Yeah. I think it has been a bit of a momentum killer on this particular project. Now is that insurmountable? Hardly. We can totally get past that and getting one director or one piece of talent on it will completely change everything. If Cowboy Ninja Viking gets bad covered someplace and then it gets, you know, Chris Pratt attached, well who cares about that coverage.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** But it is a piece of momentum, you know, early on in the process.

**Craig:** It’s true. And frankly, you know, I was — happily Cowboy Ninja Viking got very good internal coverage. If it hadn’t, the problem is there’s just suddenly less of an impetus to get the script out to agents, and managers, and big actors because internally they kind of lose a little bit of their love for it and that’s a weird thing. But it’s a true thing, and I have to say that those people, we don’t know them. They’re very powerful.

There’s one reader at Universal, in particular. I don’t know him, I don’t even know his name. I just know the legend of him that he’s kind of their guy. And he’s a very powerful person. And, you know, in a way I’m glad he’s there because he’s like that silent, unseen person that is in the back of my head when I’m writing. I’m just thinking, you know, you can’t really get away with stuff because one day that guy is going to read it. And that guy isn’t thinking about marketing. He’s not thinking about the schedule or, “Oh, we need a movie that fits into this particular box because we don’t have anything like that.”

He’s just going to read the script and say is this good or bad and I like that. Actually, if you’re writing a script that’s off the beaten path a little bit, then that reader actually could be your best friend which, let me just say is another thing that I think the perfect gatekeeper reader does. They don’t shy away from different or ambitious. They kind of like it.

**John:** Well, I’m going to disagree with you on a bit of this because I worry about mythologizing this terrifying reader as the person who is going to stop you from being able to make your movie. I know I just said that it was a momentum killer on this one project. But I don’t want to sort of ascribe too much power or fear among this one person because if your studio executive loves the project and it gets bad coverage, yeah, you’re going to be fine. So it’s not the one sole gatekeeper. It’s the person who’s writing their opinion down and therefore it matters.

I will say as the person who was reading at TriStar, so you know, I looked through my coverage when I left and I had just covered like 110 scripts. And I had given two really enthusiastic recommends on two things. And in both cases I was called to the matt for having wasted people’s time.

**Craig:** Ooh.

**John:** With these enthusiastic recommends. And that was incredibly frustrating. One of them was a really good Billie Holiday biopic and they were just like, “Well, who would want to see a Billie Holiday biopic?” And I was like, “You know what, I bet you can make a really good one now and I bet it could be really kind of great.” But I got called to the matt for wasting people’s time.

**Craig:** Really? See, to me that’s outrageous. Because I mean, and this is why I — look, I wasn’t a studio reader and I would have been fired immediately because I would have said, “That’s not my job. My job isn’t to tell you who would go see this or why you should make it. My job is —

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** “To tell you is this good or not? How about this, you didn’t waste your time. You’re not going to make a Billie Holiday pic but look how good this writer is. Do you have something else you want to make that this person could write? You know, she’s really good, read her stuff.” That’s just dumb.

**John:** The other one I remember recommending was a script called Full Honeymoon. It was by a writing team. And it wasn’t perfect but it was a very good solid romantic comedy. And you could sort of see where it was going but it was a very good version of that. And the ability to say like this is a really good version of this kind of movie. So, while you may not make this movie, these are writers you should probably consider hiring for other stuff. And I remember being called to the floor for that too. So I have tremendous sympathy for readers as well.

**Craig:** Yeah, I do, too.

**John:** And many screenwriters are going to be readers along the way. And my recommendation is reading is really a great way to learn about scripts and learn about sort of what things never work on the page. But you have to get out of being a reader before you just get that hole burned in your brain. Because it’s impossible to read 15 scripts a week and actually write your own.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah. I totally agree. I think that any overconsumption of something is bad for you. Overconsuming movies the way that critics do because they have to is bad for them. It skews their appreciation of movies because they’re not intended to be consumed that way. And the same thing is true for scripts.

If you’re writing, I mean, I know, I don’t know about you. But when I’m writing something, sometimes someone will say, “Hey, do you want to read this script? It’s kind of in a similar vein.” I’ll say, “Absolutely not.” That’s the last thing I want to do is read anything that’s in the same tone because I just know the way I am. It’s going to bother me, it’s going to affect my choices. I want to be able to choose freely and not worry like, “Oh, but they kind of did a thing that was sort of like that. Or I didn’t like the way they did that, maybe I should do something else.” I could see where it would become a little toxic.

**John:** Yeah. And I have a hunch, though, as we do with Perfect series we’re going to come back to the same characteristics for every perfect person. But I think they’re going to come down to honesty, clarity, kindness/forthrightness, the ability to sort of to speak the truth but speak it in a way that understands what the audience for it actually is.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And as we talked about a studio executive, those are the characteristics to look for. As you look at an agent, those are the same characteristics. And the same is true for a reader, be it a professional reader who is, you know, deciding which movies the bosses should read or it’s a friend reading a script. You want those people to take their jobs seriously and be able to communicate effectively what it is that they’re seeing.

**Craig:** I agree. And I guess I would throw on there another unifying quality to all these perfect professionals is a lack of cynicism. That they approach their tasks with a rooting interest and a desire to see success occur as opposed to the opposite which I think does affect quite a few people.

**John:** I agree. So our last topic for the today is Dan Benjamin who runs the 5by5 podcast network has been doing podcasting really from this whole new area of podcasting. You could trace a lot of the stuff back to him and sort of the shows that he created on his network. And so when we started to do our show, I remember looking for like what equipment should we use. It was one of his blog posts that became the go-to for sort of which microphone should we use, how should we do this. And so this last week he updated his blog posts with some new recommendations and so I want to point to that because it’s really, really good.

So if you’re thinking about doing a podcast, this is probably the first place you should look in terms of hardware and software recommendations. So it’s Dan Benjamin. The URL is podcastmethod.co and it’s just a really terrific expert’s opinion on sort of how stuff should work.

**Craig:** Are we still doing it right?

**John:** We’re doing it right. And so it’s interesting because we are using a lot of the stuff that he is recommending. And so let’s talk about our microphones. So we used to use these accent microphones. So you still use the Audio-Technica 2020?

**Craig:** I don’t. I now use the Apogee —

**John:** Ah-huh.

**Craig:** Something, something.

**John:** All right. And so you are using a condenser microphone. And a condenser microphone classically records voices really well but also records the surrounding environment, which in your case, your office is pretty well padded, so there’s not a lot of —

**Craig:** No.

**John:** Bouncing around happening.

**Craig:** Right, yeah.

**John:** So other than the sirens, it’s all good.

**Craig:** If there were no sirens, it would be perfect.

**John:** And so I used to use the Audio-Technica 2020. I just switched three episodes ago to the Heil PR-40 which is a dynamic microphone. And that is because my office is really bouncy and noisy and so my side of the audio I always felt was a little bit too live and a little too present and echoey. And so after some negotiation and discussion, we switched to this microphone. And I think I’m happier. So I’m going to give you an example of what’s so different about my microphone.

So here, I’m talking into the microphone. And if I move a little bit off to the side, my voice really completely fades away.

**Craig:** That’s right. Whereas if I do that same test, I’m over here, I’m over here, I’m over here, it’s probably the same.

**John:** It’s about the same.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So that is one of the useful differences. And because I’m working in a busy office, honestly the guys downstairs can have a conversation, you wouldn’t hear it up here. So it’s really useful this dynamic microphone. If I’m directly talking into it, it’s awesome, otherwise you can’t hear me at all.

**Craig:** Well, I’m glad that our setup is still pretty good for what we do. But, you know, it’s not about the setup, man. It’s about the content, bro.

**John:** It’s all about the content. I would much rather hear a poorly recorded podcast that has interesting things being discussed than a terrifically recorded podcast that’s boring.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So we are recording this on Skype. So you and I are very rarely in the same room together. So we are on a Skype call. You’re recording your end locally on your own device, I’m recording my end locally on my own device. Just QuickTime, hit record. Recently we started using Call Recorder, so we actually are recording the Skype call as well. So when Matthew Chilelli edits the podcast together, if he needs to, he can grab this Skype recording of the whole thing together and use that if anything goes wrong on one of our sides.

We cut the show, I believe Matthew’s he’s cutting it on Logic these days, but we still end up going back to GarageBand because GarageBand let’s it put in chapter markers. And I want to step up for chapter markers for a second because so many podcasts don’t do it. I think they’re so useful.

So in our podcast, in most podcast players, you can hit the jump forward button, it’ll jump to the next topic. And so Stuart puts in those little chapter marks, so if you really don’t care about loan-out companies, you can skip over that whole segment.

**Craig:** But who doesn’t care about loan-out companies?

**John:** Everyone should care.

**Craig:** You know what we should do? On the chapter marks for this, under loan-out companies it should just say sex tips.

**John:** That’s nice.

**Craig:** Yeah. Everyone will check that out.

**John:** So GarageBand is also where you put in all your metadata, so information about the show itself. And that’s what shows up when you are in your podcast app and you want to see what the episode is about, it’s all there.

**Craig:** You know who loves sex tips?

**John:** Who?

**Craig:** Sexy Craig.

**John:** I walked right into that.

**Craig:** Hey, dude, how was your Thanksgiving, man? Did you stuff that turkey? Did you stuff it?

**John:** So it’s time for One Cool Things.

**Craig:** [laughs]

**John:** My One Cool Thing is A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night. It is a great Iranian vampire western. Did I say Iranian?

**Craig:** You said Iranian and I thought maybe you meant Randian like Ayn Rand had written a vampire Western.

**John:** No. Iranian, Iranian, both of those would be better choices than what I just said.

**Craig:** Iranian. Yeah, Iranian.

**John:** Iranian vampire western. It’s by Ana Lily Amirpour. It’s just great. It is black and white. I saw it at Sundance. It is terrific. It is, you know, set in Iran. It is a vampire movie. It is a western. It is sort of period, it’s black and white. It’s just terrific. And so I highly recommend people go to see it. It’s in five theaters in the Los Angeles area, including the Sunset 5. And so if you have a chance to see it in a real theater, I would definitely go and see it in a real theater. If not, come see it when it comes out on video. It’s just great.

She’s really talented. And I don’t think all the details about her next movie are released yet. I am fascinated to see what she’s able to do with it because it’s really ambitious and could be really, really cool.

**Craig:** All right.

**John:** But this movie that she made is a great example of picking things that, you know, you can do and letting your limitations be empowering. And so she didn’t shoot this film in Iran, but she was able to find places in Southern California that looked like Iran. And by shooting it in black and white, she can create this really unique and special world that supports, you know, just cool things we’ve never seen in a vampire movie before. So I highly recommend it.

**Craig:** All right. That’s good enough for me. I’m there. I’ll go check that out.

**John:** Cool.

**Craig:** My One Cool Thing is something that you need to file away for next year.

**John:** Right.

**Craig:** It’s a recipe.

**John:** I love it.

**Craig:** I don’t know if I’ve ever cited the best recipe as my One Cool Thing. It should be. The best recipe is the big Omnibus Cookbook put out by Cook’s Illustrated and America’s Test Kitchen where they take lots and lots and lots of recipes of things and they basically do every version they could find, get a hold on and then say to you, “This is the best one and here’s why.” And they’re very scientific about it. They love to talk about molecules and things. It’s great.

However, sometimes the best recipe is not the best recipe because one size does not fit all, you know. However, I did make the best recipe stuffing, specifically the bacon, caramelized onion, sage, and apple stuffing.

**John:** Well, that sounds great.

**Craig:** It was spectacular. Rave reviews from everybody. Best stuffing I’ve ever made. Best stuffing they ever had. If you’re looking for a good stuffing, and I’m not a stuff inside the turkey guy. I don’t do that.

**John:** No, no.

**Craig:** Yeah, that’s just —

**John:** Dangerous.

**Craig:** It’s dangerous, it’s going to dry your turkey out because your turkey takes too long to cook, blah, blah, blah. Anyway, the point is it’s not easy to make, it’s annoying to make, it’s spectacular. It’s really, really good. That is the stuffing recipe.

**John:** And Cook’s Illustrated could probably point out the reason why it’s so successful is you’ve combined, you know, smoky, salty, sweet —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Carby.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Because it is stuffing.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Whatever you quality you want to say sage has, it’s —

**Craig:** Savory. You’ve got the tartness of the apples, a little sour from the apple because you’re using Granny Smith’s. It really does hit every part of your tongue. And texturally, it’s super crunchy because you start with a baguette that you slice up and leave out overnight. Then you chop that up into cubes and leave that out overnight and then it burns really super hard, which is great because then as it cooks, it sucks up some of the liquid so it’s still crunchy but soft. It’s just perfect.

**John:** So I have two stuffing related bits of follow-up. First off, Ike Barinholtz who is a talented writer and actor on The Mindy Project, he Instagrammed today, “Oh, this is my breakfast.” And so he basically took leftover stuffing and then cracked an egg on top of it and baked it with some cheese on top. Is that not a genius idea?

**Craig:** I mean, generally the day after Thanksgiving is when you’re trying to unclog your arteries, but yeah. [laughs] That sounds awesome.

**John:** And so my only stuffing modification this year, because I had a very classic, you know, celery, onions stuffing — cranberries. And just, you know, we had fresh cranberries. And so I microwaved them a bit so they softened up, added some sugar so they weren’t incredibly tart, and mixed those into stuffing. Delicious.

**Craig:** Well, spectacular.

**John:** Spectacular.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Our show is produced by Stuart Friedel.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And edited by Matthew Chilelli.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah.

**John:** If you would like to know more about the things we talked about on the show, join us at johnaugust.com/scriptnotes. There you’ll find show notes for this episode and all of our other previous episodes. You’ll also find transcripts for our previous episodes. We’re one of the few shows that does transcripts, so please look those up if you’re curious.

If you would like to find us on iTunes, just search for Scriptnotes. You can also search iTunes to find the Scriptnotes app for your iOS device or also on the Android Store and the Amazon Android Store. And that’s where you can find episodes of our premium show. Premium subscription is $1.99 a month.

**Craig:** That’s it.

**John:** $1.99. A bargain.

**Craig:** So easy.

**John:** Let’s you get to all the back episodes and bonus episodes that we put up as well. If you would like to come to our live show on December 11th, go wgfoundation.org and join us for that. If you would like to reach Craig Mazin, find him on Twitter. He’s @clmazin. I’m @johnaugust. Longer questions, go to ask@johnaugust.com.

And our outro this week is provided by Betty Spinks.

**Craig:** Yeah, Betty.

**John:** Thank you for running that in. Yay, Betty. I think Betty Spinks is a pseudonym for somebody but —

**Craig:** Okay, all right.

**John:** Thank you, Betty Spinks. If you have an outro for our show, something that uses the [hums theme] in a clever way, please write it and please send us a link to that so we will know to find it and use it as the outro to our show. And that is our episode this week. Craig, thank you for a fun podcast.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

**John:** All right, talk to soon.

**Craig:** Bye.

Links:

* [Mary’s Heritage Turkeys](http://www.marysturkeys.com/)
* [Get your tickets now](https://www.wgfoundation.org/screenwriting-events/scriptnotes-holiday-show/) for the Scriptnotes Holiday Show
* [American Contestant with Bob Odenkirk](http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/da114dc7e4/american-contestant-delicia)
* [Dan Benjamin’s podcast guide](http://podcastmethod.co/), and [Marco Arment’s](http://www.marco.org/2014/11/29/easy-listening)
* [A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night](http://www.analilyamirpour.com/#!untitled/c13ay) by Ana Lily Amirpour
* [Bread Stuffing with Bacon, Apples, Sage, and Caramelized Onions](http://heatherhomemade.com/2011/11/bread-stuffing-bacon-apples-sage-caramelized-onions/) from [The New Best Recipe](http://www.amazon.com/dp/0936184744/?tag=johnaugustcom-20)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Scriptnotes listener Betty Spinks ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Scriptnotes, Ep 172: Franz Kafka’s brother, and the perfect agent — Transcript

December 1, 2014 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2014/franz-kafkas-brother-and-the-perfect-agent).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 172 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the show we’re going to be talking about Franz Kafka, Jonathan Nolan, and finishing a script, and other things.

**Craig:** Yeah. All of which are interesting to screenwriters or people that are interested in screenwriting, is that — or things that are interesting to screenwriters? I’ve only heard it 172 times.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** Nevermind.

**John:** Well, actually Craig insists on actually never being present for this opening intro thing. So, he just sort of leans in to say his little bit, but he doesn’t listen to the rest of the show.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m in the green room.

**John:** Which is crucial.

**Craig:** Yeah. Getting makeup.

**John:** Mm-hmm. Craig, we have so much to get through that I think we should just start into our follow up, because otherwise we’ll never finish this episode.

**Craig:** Let’s do it.

**John:** All right. You wanted to say something about the Black List.

**Craig:** Yes. So, Franklin Leonard sent us an email and he was — I believe his comment regarding our take on the fivethirtyeight article was, “Nailed it.” And so I was happy about that. And he also mentioned that, in fact, they do do the thing that I was hoping they would do, which is provide score distributions. So, when you get your average score they do show you here’s how it breaks out for how many 1s you got, how many 2s, and so on and so on through 10s, which is helpful because then the distribution will show spikes at the higher and lower boundaries.

**John:** So, when we looked at that fivethirtyeight article it was all based on data that they’d gotten from the Black List and Franklin’s concern, which was also your concern, is that the data itself doesn’t necessarily reflect the real experience of what that is. And a distribution is a crucial guide to showing what the actual trends are.

**Craig:** Well, it’s not like fivethirtyeight is a website specifically about statistics and statistical analysis, so they wouldn’t know that perhaps a distribution and sigma and various things like deviation from the mean would be useful to data analysis. They’re just a statistical analysis website.

**John:** They want the data to tell a story. And the story they were telling was not necessarily, we felt, the most accurate story.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** I have an update about the Scriptnotes app. So, if you are one of our subscribers who listens to episodes through the Scriptnotes app, or actually you can listen to recent episodes even without being a premium subscriber, the app just went through a bunch of updates on iOS and some of the updates were terrific and some of the updates were not terrific.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** We believe the current app that you have out there in your hand right now is stable, but if it’s not, let us know. Because this is a rare case where we don’t actually make the app. It’s Libsyn who makes the app. But if people have problems with it, let us know so we can yell at Libsyn to try to get the app fixed. The app that you’re using for Scriptnotes is actually the same app that a lot of other podcasts use. And so it’s the same app that Jay Mohr uses and Marc Maron uses. But it should work properly for you. So, if it doesn’t work properly for us, please tell us and write in to ask@johnaugust.com and we will yell at the Libsyn people.

**Craig:** And feel free to use poor language, get angry, obviously rant in your email about this app, because that’s what motivates John and his staff.

**John:** That’s not actually true at all.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** But if, no, but if you are using the app and you are a premium subscriber, you will find that there are two brand new episodes that just posted this week. We have Simon Kinberg’s interview for the Writers Guild Foundation. That was me and Simon sitting down, talking about Days of Future Past and his whole writing career. And we also have the Three Page Challenge that we did in Austin, which was me and Franklin Leonard from the Black List, and Ilyse McKimmie. So, if you’re a premium subscriber you get those episodes, too.

**Craig:** Fantastic. That’s a hell of a deal.

**John:** That’s a hell of a deal. And maybe you’re off for a few days around Thanksgiving. Maybe you have family in town. Maybe you’re trying to hide from them. Or maybe you have to be present in the room, but you can have your earphones on and then not really be present. That’s a good —

**Craig:** Yeah. Let us help you isolate yourself from your useless family.

**John:** We’ve actually had to sort of make a rule in the house where sometimes — both of us like to listen to podcasts a lot, but if we’re in the same room together and we’re listening to different podcasts it can be a little bit frustrating. So, not always a great choice to do that. But sometimes through the holidays you need to check out a little bit.

**Craig:** Not surprisingly that doesn’t come up in my house.

**John:** Because you don’t listen to podcasts.

**Craig:** Nope.

**John:** Nope. You had an update about Cowboy Ninja Viking.

**Craig:** Yeah. So, that was something that we had talked about way back when you and I did the Nerdist Writers Panel podcast crossover thingy. And somebody had asked what we were working on so I mentioned that I was writing this thing called Cowboy Ninja Viking which someone actually knew about because we were at, what is it, Nerdmelt? Melt Comics? Melt Nerd? Meltdown?

**John:** We were at Meltdown Comics. We were at the Nerd Melt stage at the back of Meltdown Comics.

**Craig:** Got it. And so somebody actually knew about the graphic novel. Regardless, Chris Pratt is going to be in the movie.

**John:** Which is fantastic.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Chris Pratt is a great actor and a gentleman and seems like a perfect choice for movies about cowboys, ninjas, and/or Vikings.

**Craig:** Well, he kind of is a perfect choice because the character, I mean the idea of Cowboy Ninja Viking is that it’s a guy who has these three personalities in his head and they are really spectacular at what they do. He doesn’t feel like he does anything. So, you need an actor who is physically a match for an action hero, but who at least in his face and in his persona can also be meek and humble and not at all and scared.

**John:** There’s a softness to Chris that’s great.

**Craig:** Exactly. And there are not too many people that could actually do that. So, and he’s a big movie star now and he’s the husband of one of my good friends, Anna Faris.

**John:** Which is lovely. Craig, is someone directing your movie? I don’t even know.

**Craig:** No. Right now, well, somebody will be directing the movie. Right now that’s the big thing is they’re talking to multiple folks about possibly directing it. And so I get lists and things and then we all talk about it. But I think before the end I believe we should have our answer for that.

**John:** It’s always an interesting case about whether you attach an actor or star like him without having a director on board. Because in some ways it can hamstring the director a little bit because the power relationship between sort of who is driving the ship can be a little bit off. But sometimes it can work really well. So, Drew Barrymore was attached to Charlie’s Angels along with Cameron Diaz before McG came on board. And so we were able to sort of set the tone as the wheels were turning. And then we would find like, oh, who is the right director to make this version of the movie. And so that can work really, really well.

But, we can all think of horror stories where a big actor was attached to something without a director and then the director came on board and had to sort of wrestle with these decisions that had been made in his absence.

**Craig:** Yes. That is absolutely true. The benefit I think to having the star in place before you get a director is that you know that you’re getting a director that wants this version of the movie.

**John:** 100 percent.

**Craig:** So, the director is not going to sign on if they love the actor, don’t like the script, or like the script, don’t love the actor, whatever it is. This is somebody coming on and saying, yeah, I like this package and I think I can work with this and I want to do it.

Obviously there is a certain amount of ease to getting a director for a project when you have a big movie star in place.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** Because now they realize it’s a real movie and it’s happening and it’s going to have, you know, an ability to connect with an audience and a fan base. But the nice thing here is that Chris really seems to love the script. I mean, that’s the other thing. Sometimes you don’t know. You get a big actor and the big actor says, “I love the idea, you know. Let’s rewrite everything.” You know, that can happen, too. But happily, at least so far, it doesn’t seem to be the case here at all. So, anyway, I’m very excited. I just thought it was the best possible outcome and I’m really happy that he responded and that he’s going to do it.

**John:** Fantastic. Congratulations.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**John:** So, this was a big week for us. We closed the Kickstarter campaign for Writer Emergency. That was on Thursday at noon. And so inevitably at 12:01 I got a bunch of tweets and emails saying like, oh no, I missed the deadline. And I feel like I’ve done nothing but talk about this for far too long. And people would say like, oh, I was three weeks behind on the podcast. And I was like, well, you were three weeks behind on the podcast.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** I can’t bend laws of time and physics.

**Craig:** Yeah, I mean, that crap didn’t work on your history teacher in junior year. I don’t know why you think it would work on us.

**John:** But the good news is that if you missed out on the Kickstarter campaign there is a site now called writeremergency.com. If you want to know about when the packs will become available for the rest of the world, just put in your email address there and we will send you an email when they’re available to purchase.

We’re not quite sure how they’re going to be purchased. And we kind of can’t even think about that now. So, the campaign did really, really well. So, we are printing 16,000 decks.

**Craig:** Wow!

**John:** That we have to get out. So, it’s about 8,000 to backers and 8,000 to the youth writing programs that we’re supporting. So, that’s going to be everything we can possibly do through the end of the year.

But sometime in January we should be able to make more of these and get them out to other people who would want one. And that’s where I’m actually going to ask people who are listening to this who might actually know about retail or dealing with Amazon, because we’re trying to figure out the best way to get these out into the universe. Because when we’ve done t-shirts for Scriptnotes and stuff, that’s like maybe 1,000 t-shirts we’re making and sending out. This is going to be such an order of magnitude beyond that that we just cannot do it ourselves. And so if you are a person who sells through Amazon or a person who deals with like sending stuff to retail stores and have good experience, just write me and tell me about your experience, because I genuinely want to know. And I’ve found it really frustrating to try to find out that information.

**Craig:** You should go on Shark Tank.

**John:** I should totally go on Shark Tank. And just have them just cut me down.

**Craig:** No, they wouldn’t cut you down. I think they’d be respectful. I mean, you’ve got a high profile. You go on there and you’re like, look, they always want to know how many have you sold already. What’s your margin, blah, blah, blah. And now you’re margin is terrible, obviously, because you’re giving half of them away, but they won’t let you do that.

But then you have a lot of sales. You did really well. And then you get like Mark Cuban to help you out or something. Or the QVC lady. That would be a good one.

**John:** That’s the one you want, the QVC lady.

**Craig:** Or Damon. You know, Damon is really good because, you know —

**John:** I have no idea who Damon is.

**Craig:** He’s the clothing magnate.

**John:** I love that you don’t watch any TV, but you know Shark Tank really well.

**Craig:** Well, here’s the deal. If you want to understand what I watch, I choose to watch Game of Thrones.

**John:** Well, who could not watch Game of Thrones?

**Craig:** Right? I choose to watch Game of Thrones. And that’s pretty much it at this point.

**John:** Everything else is just the TV is on and you’re in its presence.

**Craig:** Everything else is what Melissa watches on TV. And my kids. So I’ll actually see more Disney sitcoms than any normal programming.

**John:** Than anyone should ever see.

**Craig:** Right. But Melissa and Jessie love Shark Tank. So, and you know, when they’re watching it you get sucked in. It’s actually —

**John:** Oh totally.

**Craig:** It’s fun. It’s so obvious that each one of them is playing a character. But, I don’t know, they do a good job.

**John:** Whenever you watch a show about judging, it’s always like, well what would I say in that situation? And then you’re trying to predict what each person would say based on what this thing was. That’s really the fun of it. I think somebody out there should make a parody of a judging show that there’s actually no content sort of being judged. It’s just sort of the judges performing their shtick to whatever. So, basically like a stick of gum is put there and then you have each of the judges performing their shtick to that stick of gum.

**Craig:** The whole judging dynamic is fascinating. I know this is a tangent, but so the other show that Jessie and Melissa love to watch is The Voice. And so, you know, I’ll drop in on The Voice with them and all of the judges are super positive on that show. I never hear any of them say a single bad thing. And, you know, for me Simon Cowell, he’s the greatest because he was the only man to ever tell the truth on TV. And I just find it fascinating that somewhere along the line, I mean, you know those things aren’t — that’s not haphazard. That is a carefully planned decision that came out of months of committees and meetings that they’re not going to do that.

Like everything on TV is carefully, carefully planned. So, I’m just so fascinated by that that they decided no one is going to be the heel or the villain on that show, whereas on Shark Tank, Kevin O’Reilly is clearly the villain, which I love. He was like make Mr. Burns.

**John:** So, Kevin O’Reilly, not Kevin Reilly?

**Craig:** Oh, is it Kevin Reilly?

**John:** Well, no, Kevin Reilly was the Fox president.

**Craig:** No, no, I think it’s Kevin O’Reilly. Maybe I’m getting his name wrong, but he’s one of the sharks on Shark Tank and he’s some sort of investment guy, which that tells you everything you need to know about what I know about money. “Investment guy.” But, he likes to put his fingers together and make a little tent with his hands like Mr. Burns.

**John:** Oh, yeah, Mr. Burns, yeah.

**Craig:** And if he makes someone an offer and they don’t take it, then he says, “You’re dead to me.” That’s his catchphrase. He’s like me.

**John:** [laughs] He’s like you.

**Craig:** He’s like me.

**John:** So, the thing I’ve had to figure out is basically the supply chain and sort of like how you make things and physically deliver them to a place where they could be delivered again. And that is just so new to me. And it’s really genuinely fascinating. But I’ve found it very hard to investigate because if you look up sort of like selling stuff on Amazon, you get a bunch of like Amazon links to here’s how you do your stuff, but it’s hard to find the real information about that kind of thing.

So, our friend Quinn Emmett, Dana Fox’s husband, who is a great writer in his own right, his brothers actually run a health food thing that sells through Amazon. So that’s one resource. But they’re giant and they’re health foods. If people have experience with games and books through Amazon that would be incredibly valuable if you want to drop me a note.

**Craig:** Well, all right. So, help John.

**John:** Help me is what I’m saying.

**Craig:** Help him.

**John:** This is going to be an interesting segment because I think this is going to be one of those rare cases on the show where I have tremendous umbrage and you can maybe talk me down off the ledge a little bit.

**Craig:** Oh. My. God.

**John:** It’s a very special episode.

**Craig:** Oh, I’m so happy.

**John:** This is something that was actually tweeted around last week. And it was this vulture piece which is also New York Magazine, and I don’t quite understand where the boundary is between New York Magazine and Vulture, but it was an article by Nate Jones. And Nate Jones may not have written this headline, but Nate Jones wrote the article. Here is the headline: Christopher Nolan’s Brother to Adapt Isaac Asimov’s Foundation for HBO.

**Craig:** Hmm.

**John:** This is the actual article. “After spending years on the screenplay to his brother’s Interstellar, Jonathan Nolan is going back into space: The Wrap reports that the younger Nolan is working with HBO on an adaptation of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation series. It’s Nolan’s second project with the network after J.J. Abrams’s planned Westworld adaptation and his third TV show overall. (He previously created Person of Interest.)

“If the Foundation show takes off, Jonathan Nolan will finally be ‘Christopher Nolan’s brother’ no more. At least in the career sense. In the fraternal sense, they will likely remain bonded.”

**Craig:** Oh boy. [laughs] Wow, that’s really good writing.

**John:** Ugh. So, I did slice out a little bit of sort of unimportant stuff, but that’s the gist of the article. Okay, so from the headline forward, Jonathan Nolan has written like three or four giant movies. And he’s written on a lot of stuff that’s not Christopher Nolan things. So, to set up in your headline the idea like, oh, we’re not going to say his name. We’re going to say like Christopher Nolan’s brother. That’s ridiculous. Then, to continue on and say, you know, this wrap up at the end, “Oh, if this succeeds then he’s no longer Christopher Nolan’s brother.”

He never was just Christopher Nolan’s brother. His show Person of Interest has been on for like three or four seasons, has 80 episodes. So, just, grr. I wanted to say a bad word, but I want this to be a clean show.

**Craig:** [laughs] I have to say, look, I completely agree with you. I’m only laughing because that was adorable. I mean, you tried so hard to be angry and you couldn’t because you’re just a nice person. And you’re such a good guy.

**John:** I kind of always have some beta blockers in me that don’t let get to full umbrage.

**Craig:** I know. You have natural beta blockers. [laughs] That actually made me love you more.

**John:** Oh, thank you. So, let me continue my rant, my attempted rant, because I was reminded of the Jonah Nolan story. You can say Jonathan or Jonah Nolan interchangeably. They’re the same person.

This past week on the episode of Scriptnotes I said, oh, I’m going to be adapting Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And so that was announced in the world. So, here are some of the stories written about that. This is Time Magazine. Headline: Frequent Tim Burton Collaborator to Pen Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark Movie.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** An article by Nolan Feeney. And the article includes, “Screenwriter John August, who has written multiple screenplays for director Tim Burton, will write CBS Films’ upcoming Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, Deadline reports.”

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s like we’re not enough on our own. We only exist within the context of a director.

**John:** That’s really the thesis I want to get to is that journalists only want to talk about the director even if there’s no director. So, with this Jonah Nolan story, they’re talking about Christopher Nolan even though he’s not involved with the project at all. They’re talking about Tim Burton, even though he’s not involved with the project at all. I swear to God he’s not involved with the project at all.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And they want to stick him on because a writer by himself is not worth talking about.

**Craig:** Yeah. They will always gravitate towards things that they think their audience will know. And so rather than educate people on who someone is, they just make it easy. Oh, you know, here’s a name you know. Well, this guy worked with that name. It’s just lazy and dumb.

**John:** It’s lazy and dumb, but here’s the danger. And so I’m going to skip ahead to Meredith Woerner writing at iO9. And so the headline is, “Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark Movie Writer Could Change Everything.”

**Craig:** Ooh.

**John:** So, I’ll read some select paragraphs from here. “But now this befuddling movie adaptation has a whole new screenwriter, John August. Yeah, Tim Burton’s John August.”

**Craig:** Ooh.

**John:** Tim Burton’s John August.

**Craig:** Now you’re possessed.

**John:** I am possessed. “Deadline is reporting that John August (Big Fish, Corpse Bride, Frankenweenie, Titan A.E.) will be writing the script for CBS Films. If you noticed, August likes to work with Tim Burton, a lot.”

First off, Titan A.E., there’s like five credited writers on Titan A.E., so please put Charlie’s Angels Full Throttle if you want to stick a credit on me, but don’t do that. And also Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a much bigger movie than the other ones listed there.

**Craig:** Well, particularly since the point is that you like working with Tim Burton. It just seems so dumb.

**John:** Yeah, also, Go, maybe my first movie. People like that movie a lot.

“Then there’s the matter of Tim Burton.” So, continuing on with her story. “Then there’s the matter of Tim Burton. This project has Burton written all over it,” except not on the title page, “but that might not be a necessarily good move. When was the last time Burton was legit scary? Beetlejuice? Sleepy Hollow? HOWEVER the classic Burton ‘nightmare face’ would really feel at home in this world.”

So, there will be lots of pros and cons to having Burton helm this work.

**Craig:** Wow. [laughs] So, now even Tim Burton is getting attacked for something that he is not involved with at all. You’re basically being belittled as some sort of pinkie on his hand. You know, I have to say, you want, let me give you some umbrage. Let me help you.

**John:** All right.

**Craig:** Let me help you because —

**John:** Can you spare a little umbrage?

**Craig:** Yeah. I can.

**John:** All right. Craig, teach me how to be angry.

**Craig:** First you start way back. And it’s like you’re going to slowly run and then you’re eventually going to hurl yourself off a building. Journalism as a whole has always been a disaster of a business. You can go all the way back to Remember the Maine and yellow journalism pushing us into the Spanish-American War if you want.

It’s always been a mess. And it continues to be a mess to this day. But entertainment ‘journalism’ is a cesspool of stupidity unlike anything else. Everyone in it, everyone in it is doing it wrong. I don’t know, there’s no one that does it right. And what they will do is this nonsense where they literally go on to IMDb for — I honestly believe there’s a rule, if you’re going to write an entertainment journalism article you can only use IMDb as your source and you are only allowed to look at the page for four seconds. That’s it.

Four seconds. Scroll. Okay. Done. Now, start writing.

**John:** Blink twice, then begin writing.

**Craig:** It is the most insane. And first of all, think of what you just read. That article really sounds like someone who heard something from someone who heard it from someone who is now telling a friend over some coffee.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** And just rambling about it.

**John:** Yeah. Bobby Moynihan has a character on Saturday Night Live —

**Craig:** Drunk Uncle.

**John:** No, different than Drunk Uncle. He has a guy who overheard some news, some second hand news.

**Craig:** That guy. Right. [laughs]

**John:** And it does feel a little bit like that. So, my frustration though is that from now on because people write these stories, from now on whenever we do announce a director for this movie this article is going to come. I guarantee you it’s going to come. “While Tim Burton was rumored to beó”

**Craig:** Oh, of course.

**John:** “…directing this movie.” It’s like, he was never rumored to be directing this movie. You know, Tim could direct the movie, but I swear to God there is no director on this movie. There is nobody.

**Craig:** You haven’t even written a script yet.

**John:** There’s been no script.

**Craig:** There’s nothing.

**John:** There’s been no script. No one has been talked to.

**Craig:** There is a book and there is a contract for you to write a screenplay. That’s it. And these people are already now critiquing the work of a man that isn’t involved and deciding if he should be — like anyone gives a damn what they think. It’s so dumb. It’s so dumb. Everything —

**John:** Oh, it’s dumb, but it’s so much fun though, isn’t it, because the fun is just to take any random director and apply them to this project and think about how much that could go wrong.

My favorite example would be, “I think we should go to Nancy Meyers,” because can you imagine the Nancy Meyers version of this movie?

**Craig:** It would be great.

**John:** So, I think Something Wicked This Way Has Got to Come.

**Craig:** Yeah, it’s got to come.

**John:** It’s got to come.

**Craig:** And then there’s like a kid is confronted by a ghost. And then they dance.

**John:** Yeah. But you know that the house in the movie is would be so well decorated.

**Craig:** Is going to be gorgeous.

**John:** And the kitchen would be great.

**Craig:** Gorgeous. With a lot of depth and really just glinty lighting. It would be gorgeous.

So, years and years and years ago, when I was hired to write Scary Movie 3, and it was this crazy rush job. And Bob Weinstein said, “All right, I’m going to hire you to write, and David Zucker is going to direct it. And maybe, I called Kevin Smith, maybe he’ll get involved.” And I was like, okay, and then Bob put a thing in the trades about it and said, you know, and possibly talking to Kevin Smith. That’s what he said. It was something like possibly talking to Kevin Smith.

Kevin Smith never worked on the movie. He was never hired on the movie. He didn’t have anything to do with the movie as far as I know. And I was there from the first day.

The Kevin Smith thing persisted not only throughout but even in reviews of the movie.

**John:** Oh god.

**Craig:** People would talk about the screenplay by me and Kevin Smith. [laughs] That’s how dumb these people — they literally just go back to IMDb, they look at the first, like the news article in IMDb. It’s amazing. It’s amazing. Let me tell you something. If there was one person out there who is really smart and really driven and ambitious and believes in quality and wants to own an entire an entire marketplace, wants to corner the market on quality, go into entertainment journalism. Go into it. Because there are so few people out there doing it right.

**John:** I agree with you.

**Craig:** Which is going to endear me to all these people once again. I’ve just ensured myself another 20 years of great reviews.

**John:** Well, the thing is I actually know some entertainment journalists who I really like and I can personally really like them and in some cases like their work and still have just tremendous frustrations at what the net result ends up being most of the time.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m with you on that. You know my other — can I just say my other pet peeve about a lot of these guys, some of these people work on websites and they’ll do, like they’ll play good cop/bad cop. So, the good guy will call you up and do this really lovely interview with you and it’s full of respect and admiration. And then that will run on the website with a link to the website’s review of the movie that trashes it by the bad cop. What? Why? I know. Anyway.

**John:** Never good.

**Craig:** So, anyway, congratulations Tim Burton. Good job.

**John:** Yeah. Thanks. So, let’s segue to a writer whose life was actually just delightful and full of cheer. And someone who I think embodies sort of this like laissez-faire, whatever may happen, happen, spirit that I think all screenwriters should aim for, and that’s Franz Kafka.

**Craig:** Yeah. Happiest fellow in the 20th Century. Franz Kafka, great, great — I guess you would call him, well, he’s a modern European author, possibly existentialist, absurdist.

**John:** Kafkaesque.

**Craig:** Kafkaesque. The amazing thing about him is really he is a self-defining guy. He is his own style.

**John:** In some ways the same way like Tim Burton is Burtonesque. Like there’s a definable style to Kafka’s writing, the same way there is to Tim’s world.

**Craig:** Yeah. Tarantino. I mean, some of these people sort of self-define. And Kafka self-defined. And what’s interesting about Franz Kafka, well, among other things, one thing is that he was not at all famous when he was alive. He was posthumously appreciated and tremendously so.

But what I find so interesting about him and what I wanted to talk about with you today and for all of our listeners out there is this interesting fact. Over the course of his life, Franz Kafka, we believe, burned 90 percent of the manuscripts he wrote. 90 percent of what Franz Kafka wrote is lost forever. As for the remaining 10 percent, when he died he asked his friend, Max Brod, to destroy everything. He said, I’m leaving this to you. Please destroy it. Max Brod opted to not destroy it, and that is why we have Metamorphosis and The Hunger Artist and all these —

**John:** Castle.

**Craig:** Castle. And Penal Colony and all of these incredible stories that have fueled many, many a modern lit class. And I wanted to talk a little bit about, well, it came up in mind because over the summer I took a little class at my son’s school. The headmaster offered a class for adults on great books and we sort of moved through, from Socrates on forward. And at one point we got to a Kafka story, The Hunger Artist, which is one of my favorite stories. And it came up that Kafka had destroyed a lot of his work and wished that all of it could have been destroyed. And one of the people in the class said I cannot understand that for the life of me. Why?

And all I could think of was I completely understand that. I understand that 100 percent. And I don’t know if you’ve ever had that impulse.

**John:** I’ve never had that impulse.

**Craig:** I guess here is where I would come down on it. I’ve never actually destroyed my work, although I’m sure some people which that I had. But, what I do understand is that when it’s done, I have the instinct of wishing to god that no one would ever have to see it. That just that there could be a job where you get paid to write a screenplay and then when everybody agrees it’s good, you just put it away.

**John:** I’ve had the experience after watching a first cut of something, where watching the first cut of Go where I wanted to bargain with the lords of fate that the movie could just never be released because it was just — it was soul crushing. But I think that’s a different thing than what you’re describing, because I don’t think what you feel and necessarily what Kafka felt was that their work was horrible, but maybe just that you didn’t want to put it out there in the world and have a reaction to it. Is that correct?

**Craig:** That’s right. It’s not a question of being embarrassed. In fact, it’s the opposite. And this is particularly tempting I think for screenwriting because you get your script to a place where you feel this is it. This is good. And then you know that this is a snowy field that must be trod upon. And simply by people reading it, you lose it. It’s no longer yours. Now it’s ours. It belongs to everyone. And that’s a hard thing sometimes to get around. And I do feel that sometimes this protective feeling that I don’t want this to belong to everybody, it’s mine, is the thing that keeps some people from wanting to finish.

**John:** I can completely understand that. You’re describing sort of what is a creator’s responsibility to his creations — is it to protect them from all possible harm, or to send them out into the world. In some ways it’s a parent’s function as well. Is that you want to keep your child safe and yet you know that they must go out into the world and fend for themselves. And that’s so challenging.

So, finishing — delivering your script, you know, turning in your manuscript is very much like sort of sending your kid off to school and you’re not ready to have them be out of your care and control.

**Craig:** Well, yeah. And there is something paradoxical about the nature of creation of work and then what follows, the sharing of the work. The creation of the work is — it’s solipsistic. And not only do you have complete control, but complete control is required to do the work well. And so you do control it in a way that you can’t really control the raising of another human being.

And then you send it out and just by being read it is changed. And you can feel that — it’s most notable when you go to that first test screening after you’ve edited a film and you believe you know this film upside, downwards, and backwards, and then you sit in a theater with people. And as you watch it with them, you see a different movie because it’s almost like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The observation changes the object.

And so a lot of times I think, you know, we’ve talked about why people hold on to work too long. I think sometimes we have to acknowledge that we have a fear that the observation of the work will change it. And that’s a natural fear to have. Unfortunately, destroying 90 percent of your work is not a good idea.

**John:** Well, let’s play devil’s advocate. The other 90% of his work, the odds are there was tremendous work that was lost to time, to all the ages, because he destroyed it. But some of that work would not have been his best work. And so it’s part of the reason why we have Franz Kafka as such an amazing, great author is that everything that survives is the brilliant stuff. So, it’s silent evidence of all the stuff that wasn’t so good.

**Craig:** It’s possible. I mean, we do have authors who have written great things and then not such great things. And we tend to ignore the not such great ones. But considering that Kafka very strongly felt that the remaining 10 percent also needed to be destroyed makes me think that perhaps the 90 percent that was was probably quite good. I mean, he was, after all, Franz Kafka. [laughs] And it’s just — that to me is an extension, an extreme extension of what I’m talking about here. Frankly, I think if Franz Kafka could come back to life today he would be horrified that everyone has read it and that not only — it’s almost his worst nightmare. In a sense it is a Kafka story.

A man creates something for himself that no one is to see, because they will destroy it by looking at it. He begs that it be destroyed when he is too sick to do it himself. It is not. And not only does everybody look at it, but everybody then analyzes it and teaches classes on it and writes term papers on it. I mean, it’s a horror show. Poor guy.

Anyway, I guess all I’m saying is, hey, this is a natural thing if you’re a writer and if you feel this, just know that you feel it, but tough, you’ve got to put it out there.

**John:** So, the only reason we have Kafka’s work is because Max Brod saved that 10 percent. So, let’s talk about people who take 10 percent and let’s talk about the perfect agent.

**Craig:** Segue Man!

**John:** I am Segue Man. So, this is the second part of our Perfect Series. So, last week we talked about the perfect studio executive. This week let’s talk about the perfect agent and what makes the perfect agent. What that person should be doing for a screenwriter. What our expectations should be when we’re talking to an agent. Craig, get us started.

**Craig:** Well, I think that we do have quite a few agents and agent assistants who will soon be agents listening to us, so hey, lean in, listen carefully. I’m very simple about what I look for in an agent. Primarily, let’s talk about the real simple stuff. Call us back.

**John:** Always good.

**Craig:** Okay? Call us back. Don’t be impossible to reach. Call us back within a reasonable amount of time. That’s the big one.

**John:** Let’s define reasonable amount of time. A reasonable amount of time is 24 hours at the outlier and if it’s not 24 hours than it’s some communication that acknowledges got your message, I will get back to you ASAP.

**Craig:** Yeah. My feeling is if I call before lunch, I get a call before the end of the day. If I call after lunch, I should still get a call by the end of the day, but if not, first thing the next day and an acknowledgment that the call was received. So, that’s a real simple thing. I know that this is something that is talked about a lot in the agency hallways as a kind of nuts and bolts things. I cannot stress how important it is. Ultimately, the constancy of communication is the glue of the agent/client relationship. It’s as simple as that.

The other thing I look for in an agent is clarity. When a writer asks an agent what should I do, should I do this job, or this job, should I pass on this, should I accept it? Who should we give this to? Is this the right producer? What we want desperately is the same thing that the people that hire us want. Clarity and comfort. We want our agent to give us an answer.

If there is no answer, then explain why there’s no answer and then explain that either way will be okay.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** But this wishy-washiness or asking questions back — we’re not looking for an Ericksonian therapist to just rephrase our questions. We want answers.

**John:** So, when you proposed this topic I went through and sort of made my list of archetypes of sort of the things I think about when I think of an agent. And not all agents are going to be all these people, but generally these are the kind of roles an agent fulfills in a writer’s life.

One is as adviser, which is just what you described, the person who has an informed opinion about what should be done on a project, in a situation, what is the overall shape of what this experience should be.

Secondly is an advocate. You want your agent to be someone who is like on your side. And so when people are pushing you around, they’re pushing back. And that’s a really crucial role because sometimes the agent has to be the bad guy. The agent has to say like, no, he delivered, pay him. And convince on the next step if you want the next step. That’s a critical function of an agent and sometimes one that they are reluctant to perform because they’re trying to maintain all these other relationships.

But, from the writer’s perspective, we just need you to like stick up for us.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Third archetype is sort of the connector. And really good agents are smart at being able to put people together who they think can work well together. So, that’s putting writers in rooms with studio executives who actually know what they’re doing. Setting up a lunch between a writer and a director because there’s probably something they could work on together. Bringing the right material to the writer because this is a book we have and we think you would probably like it. That’s a crucial function of a good agent.

**Craig:** Let’s stop there on that one because a lot of these things are sort of constitutionally required for agents. Some of them are things that agents have to earn their way towards. The truth is that we want from our agents a certain amount of connectivity. And there are all sorts of words for this, juice, or whatever you want to call it. We want our agent to be able to get the people we need to get on the phone on the phone.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** And if you can’t get those people on the phone, then you need to have a relationship with a senior agent who can.

**John:** That’s a crucial point. Because a lot of times as newer writers you’re going to be working with a junior agent, someone who doesn’t have all the history and all of the contacts and all the access that the top people have. But in some cases, those younger agents have tremendous numbers of contacts, they’re just at a lower level. And those can be incredibly valuable and they can actually be faster than some of the very top tier people can actually get that information. So, that can be really useful.

So, obviously if you’re agent is plugged in at CAA and they have this vast knowledge network of how everything is set up, that’s awesome. But even if your agent is at a smaller sort of boutique agency that deals with like just TV writers, that can be exactly perfect if that’s what you’re trying to do.

My first agent was just a terrific agent but his client list was mostly very esoteric indie writer-directors. And he was really good at dealing with sort of specialty film arms of things, but that wasn’t who I ultimately was. And it got to be very frustrating because he didn’t know the people who I needed to be in rooms with. And that’s why it didn’t last.

**Craig:** Exactly right. There’s another thing that I think the perfect agent is capable of doing, and that is switching their tone from every kind of communication they have, except for their communication with their writer clients, and the communication with the writer clients. We know when we’re being agented. So, what is being agented? It’s being handled, cajoled. There’s that agent talk that’s smooth and fast and all facts have suddenly become fogged by war. And everything gets twisted around. That’s what they do. And they need to be able to do that.

When they’re dealing with other agents, when they’re dealing with producers, when they’re dealing with studios, when they’re dealing with business affairs they need to agent people. That’s their job. But when you’re talking to us, before you get on the phone with us, take a breath and say this, “This person I don’t agent. This is my client. This person I can just calm down, relax, and be honest with.” I know. Sounds crazy. But we actually appreciate honesty more than anything. Don’t hide bad news from us. Don’t sugar coat bad news.

Don’t flimflam us. And if we challenge you on something and we’re right, don’t think that by saying, “You know what, that’s a really good point, you’re right,” that it makes you weak. It doesn’t. It makes us like you more.

So, save a certain tiny nugget of honest, normal you for us. And agent everybody else.

**John:** So, part of that honesty is being honest about why a project is coming to you, or why a project is not coming to you. And that’s a very difficult conversation to have.

Craig, you will be able to better articulate what the legal definitions and differences are between an agent and a manager. But my perception is that any time somebody comes to my agent with here’s work, here is work we would like John to do, I think he’s legally obligated to tell me about it. Is that correct?

**Craig:** It is. Yeah. I mean, a lot of times they will glide over that because they know that you’re busy and unavailable and wouldn’t want to do that. So, I don’t need my agent to call me up and say, “Hey, listen, we got an offer. You just started writing a script. We got an offer for you to do an episode of an animated program in Albania.” I don’t need to hear about it, you know.

**John:** Yet, I think one of the crucial things is, and this is the conversation I have quite often, is in one of those sort of check-in calls there will be like four things we’ll talk about. And the last thing will be, oh, and I got this thing for you. Here’s the project. Here’s the producer. Here’s why I think it’s a pass. And that is just a godsend when you sort of hear what that is.

Agents are fairly describing what it actually is and why it’s probably not interesting. And sometimes I’ll say like, you know, actually that does sound really interesting, or like I’ve always liked that person, so I do want to take a look at it. But a good agent is able to say, this is why it’s probably not going to be right. In some cases, especially for a newer writer, they might say, okay, there’s this project over at this studio and they’re meeting with writers. They asked about you. I think it’s a fishing trip. I think they’re just basically bringing a bunch of people into the room and seeing what might stick. And you could be wasting a tremendous amount of your time.

I so appreciate that. And as a young writer, I might be panicked like, wait, I’m not going to go in for this job? A smart agent might say, you know what? I don’t think anyone is ever going to get that job. I think it’s basically just a let’s see what sticks kind of situation.

**Craig:** Yeah. For sure. There’s another nice benefit to letting your clients know when you’re passing on things for them in that it makes them feel good, that people want you to work for them. I mean, look, if you say don’t do something, we’re not doing it. We’re very simple that way. You know, I mean, we want to do everything. We want you guys to be able to help us say no to things. It’s obviously a very valuable part of this. And, you know, sometimes as agents you will smell some blood in the water and we won’t smell the same blood.

I’ll get a call, “Something came up at the agency, our biggest movie star is excited about doing this thing. It’s a book. And everybody is running around like crazy. But, you know, I put your name in and they really responded to that. I mean, this could be huge.” Well, look, again, we’re being agented there a little bit.

**John:** Yeah. But at least he’s being candid about what’s actually happening there.

**Craig:** Right. Exactly. And it’s good to know. And then if we don’t smell the same blood and we go, you know what, I get why they would love that. I just don’t think it’s for me. Then, you know, you let it go. That’s okay. Just don’t jam us in because we know, I mean, we’re not dumb. We know how the agent business works. You guys make 10 percent of what we make. So, the person who makes the most amount of money, that’s the most important person.

We know that. And it’s okay to shepherd us all together. That’s part of your job. But then if we don’t get it and we don’t want to do it, just be respectful and let us not like it. That’s okay.

**John:** That shepherd function is really crucial, too. When Aline was on the show last she talked about how her agent of many, many years, they were on a phone call and Aline was venting her frustration about this project and these people and the people being impossible. And the agent basically pulled her aside and said like, “Get over yourself. Call me back tomorrow. And figure out how you’re going to actually do this project, because you’re being crazy.”

And that’s a crucial thing. That shepherding role of saying like, you know what, you’re not actually being reasonable here. This is, you know, it’s almost like a parent. Like, you know, reminding you like, you know what, this is your job. Your job is to write this movie. Write this movie. Get it over with. Get it done. And move on. And that’s a crucial thing to have happen, too. Sometimes you as the writer are the problem and a very good agent can find the right way to tell you this is a you thing. Get through it. And let’s get onto your next project.

**Craig:** No question. Yeah, Aline and I actually have the same agent and I can hear him saying all that. And, frankly, we want that specificity. It goes back that we want to be spoken to honestly and we want clarity. If the clarity is you’re being insane, I mean, if my agent ever said to me, “You’re being insane,” I would think I’m being insane.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** A good agent should not be afraid of his client, or her client, right. So, if you’re an agent and you’re worried that your client is not going to respond well to the truth, so your job is to somehow figure out how to hide the truth in a thing, like the way that I feed medicine to my dog by putting it in pudding. We’re going to know. Don’t be afraid of your clients.

If your client can’t handle what’s true, then they’re not going to be able to handle it with their next agent, or their agent after that. Truth is a great defense.

**John:** I absolutely agree. The last thing I would say about the great agent is like the analogy I think I’ve often made is that if you’re having heart surgery, you don’t want to go to the woman who only performs heart surgery three times a year. You want to go to the surgeon and she performs it seven times a week. You want the person who is sort of the pro at doing this thing. And sometimes as a writer you have to step back and realize like, oh, you know what? You actually do this job. You’re actually the person who makes this deal. So, I’m not going to sort of worry about every little step of this process.

I’m going to let you — and maybe my lawyer — go off, make this deal, figuring out all that stuff, and then report back to me what the results are. And I can say yes or no. But I see sometimes, especially newer writers, freak out about each little bit of a deal and that’s not generally a helpful thing.

**Craig:** It isn’t. I totally agree. There are times when we have a disagreement. And what I end up saying is, listen, let me tell you why I don’t want what they’ve offered, even though you think it’s good, because of this and this. It’s important to me. It’s important enough that I’m willing to say, no, I don’t want to do this.

And a good agent hears that and goes, “Fantastic news.” As long as you’re in sync with your client, and they’re saying, “I don’t want to do it. I would rather not do it than this,” that’s empowering, and don’t fight anymore. Now just go with that. Unless you feel that they’re being insane and then tell them they’re insane.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** There needs to be that just honest communication. The most important advice I can give to you on your path to becoming a perfect agent is to not agent your client.

**John:** I think that’s great advice. Cool. It’s time for some One Cool Things. So, mine is a web series that I just started watching, but it’s actually in its third season. It’s called High Maintenance and right now this new season is on Vimeo. And so it’s $1.99 an episode. And the episodes range in length from, the one I watched was 18 minutes, but they get longer and shorter. There’s two prior seasons you can also find.

The show is set in New York. The show is created by Katja Blichfeld and actor Ben Sinclair. And it follows this guy called The Guy who is this pot dealer who has a whole bunch of clients. And the show is kind of like an anthology. So, it just follows — he’s delivering weed to different places and then you’re just staying with mostly those characters he’s delivering weed to.

The episode I watched was called Ruth. I thought it was fantastic. And it’s dramatic and comedic at the same time. The episode I saw involved chili peppers and testicles and milk. And it was really just terrific. So, I highly recommend it. It’s on Vimeo. I think you can probably get it everywhere in the world, but I know you can at least get it in the US. And so High Maintenance.

**Craig:** High Maintenance. Well, my One Cool Thing of this week is maybe an uncool thing, but I love it. On YouTube, you can find it under the Worst Line in Scriptwriting History. And I like that they called it Scriptwriting History as opposed to screenwriting history. The Worst Line in Scriptwriting History. And I don’t know who wrote it. And I don’t mean to pile on here. It’s actually quite beautiful.

Have you ever listened to — do you know the story of The Shags?

**John:** They’re the ones that their father ran the band?

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And they had no idea how to make music?

**Craig:** I think I’ve mentioned it on the podcast before. Three daughters. I think they were from Vermont and their dad was like I’m getting you guys into the kind of teeny band craze of the ’60s. And he bought them a guitar and drums and a bass guitar. And they practiced and then recorded an album and they wrote their own music and it’s impossibly bad. It’s impossibly bad in a way that you could not do intentionally. And this line is a little bit like that. It’s beautifully terrible. It’s wrong in a way that you could have never done intentionally.

Simply, it’s an exchange between a woman and her mother. And the woman says, “Mother. You’re alive.” And the woman says, “Too bad, you will die.” That’s perfect.

**John:** Let’s pause here so Matthew Chilelli can insert the actual audio so we can actually hear how great this line is.

**Craig:** So there it is. That’s the worst line in scriptwriting history. It’s from the movie Mortal Combat: Annihilation. And it’s gorgeous because, I mean, the first line is normal enough. She’s surprised that her mother is alive. She’s stunned. Her mother was supposed to be dead. We’ve seen that in movies before.

It’s the mother’s response that is so syntactically disruptive. I don’t know how else to put it. She’s saying something to someone else.

**John:** Yeah. The “too bad you’ll die,” let’s try to think of a setup line that could actually make that second line make sense. I’m not sure there is one.

**Craig:** I think the setup line would be, “Thank god you’re going to live.”

**John:** Oh yeah, okay.

**Craig:** Right?

**John:** Going to live. Too bad you’ll die.

**Craig:** Too bad you will die. So, thank god you will live. Too bad you will die. But that’s, see, even that would be so crazy, because nobody would ever say thank god you will live to somebody who would then say, “Too bad you will die,” with glee. But what she just says is, “Mother, you’re alive.” “Too bad you will die.” So, you are, you will, the too bad is fascinating.

Anyway, it’s just gorgeous. I love it. I love it so much. It’s beautiful.

**John:** It is beautiful. What’s also beautiful, and the reason why we’re talking about this at all, is I had mentioned before we started recording that when I finished the Kickstarter for Writer Emergency Pack, Nima Yousefi who works with us, he bought us all copies of the Mortal Combat novelization. So, it’s the novelization of the movie of Mortal Combat. And it’s an actual book. It is in my hand. It is 216 pages, which is just kind of amazing that this thing exists in the world.

**Craig:** Who is this for? I mean —

**John:** It’s for people who are giant fans of the movie Mortal Combat.

**Craig:** See, I think it’s for people who love Mortal Combat, but also love reading.

**John:** Absolutely true. Or, love Mortal Combat but hate movies.

**Craig:** Exactly. [laughs] It’s just the weirdest — that’s a very small Venn diagram overlap. Regardless, I don’t know if you ever saw any of the Mortal Combat movies.

**John:** I did see the very first one.

**Craig:** First one is not bad.

**John:** So, I remember seeing, I’m pretty sure it was the first one I saw. I remember going to the Beverly Center and we went on like a Saturday morning, like the first show. It was me and my friend, Jen. And we sat down and watched it. And this is the experience of watching Mortal Combat: trailers, trailers, trailers, screen fades up, MORTAL COMBAT. [hums] And it’s literally the first seven minutes are just kind of that.

**Craig:** Yeah, that’s why I wanted to go see it.

**John:** Then we left.

**Craig:** Oh, you mean you didn’t even stay longer than?

**John:** It’s one of the very few movies of my life I’ve walked out of.

**Craig:** Oh, no, I stayed with the whole thing. And by the way, I’ve got to tell you, that’s it.

**John:** That’s it?

**Craig:** It stays on that flat line through the end. Anyway, too bad you will die.

**John:** And that is our show this week. So, some reminders for you. Tickets are available for the December 11 live show here in Hollywood. Scriptnotes Live. It’s with me, and Aline, and B.J. Novak, and, oh, we get to announce our special musical guest finally. That is actress-singer-funny person Rachel Bloom.

**Craig:** Yeah. Very cool. She’s got this show coming on to I think it’s Showtime that she and Aline Brosh McKenna have created. She’s very funny. Very, very, very funny. And she’s going to be doing an original song for us?

**John:** I think she’s doing an original song for us.

**Craig:** Spectacular.

**John:** But in the show notes I will put a link to a song that she wrote about Ray Bradbury. I can’t tell you the real title because that would make this a not safe podcast.

**Craig:** That is correct. But it’s an excellent song. She’s very, very good.

**John:** So, our other guests include Jane Espenson and Derek Haas. It’s going to be a great time.

**Craig:** I’ll be there.

**John:** Craig will be there. So, as we’re recording this on Friday, I think there are still tickets available. So, anyway, don’t dally. Go to get those tickets.

**Craig:** I think we’re down to the dregs here. You better speed this up.

**John:** It’s Writers Guild Foundation, so it’s wgafoundation.org. But, of course, there are always links in the show notes. And you can find the show notes for this podcast at johnaugust.com/scriptnotes. And there are links to the things we talked about on this episode, including many articles about how Tim Burton will be not maybe making this movie. And news of Craig’s Cowboy Ninja Viking.

**Craig:** Cowboy Ninja Viking.

**John:** If you would like to subscribe to this podcast, do so in iTunes. Search for Scriptnotes and click Subscribe. That’s also where you’ll find the Scriptnotes app, both in the iTunes and in the Android store.

If you would like to become a premium subscriber and listen to those bonus episodes and the dirty episode we will be recording, go to scriptnotes.net and that’s where you sign up to be a premium subscriber. And then you can listen to episodes all the way back to the beginning of the show, both in the web and in the apps.

Our show is edited by Matthew Chilelli. It’s produced by Stuart Friedel. Our outro this week is also by Matthew Chilelli and I think it may be the best outro we’ve ever had.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** Did you listen to it? I will send you a link to it if you haven’t listened to it yet.

**Craig:** Send me a link to it.

**John:** It’s really good. So, we are going to stop talking so you can hear this in its entirety. But, Craig, thank you very much. Have a wonderful Thanksgiving.

**Craig:** You too, John.

**John:** All right. Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

Links:

* If you ever have issues with the Scriptnotes app, [please let us know](http://johnaugust.com/ask-a-question)
* Get premium Scriptnotes access at [scriptnotes.net](http://scriptnotes.net/) and hear last week’s two bonus episodes, plus our upcoming 1,000th subscriber special
* [Chris Pratt Circles Cowboy Ninja Viking](http://deadline.com/2014/11/chris-pratt-cowboy-ninja-viking-1201291185/)
* If you missed our Kickstarter, [sign up at writeremergency.com](http://writeremergency.com/) to be notified when packs are available for purchase
* If you know a lot about retail, [reach out to us](http://johnaugust.com/ask-a-question)
* [Christopher Nolan’s Brother to Adapt Isaac Asimov’s Foundation for HBO](http://www.vulture.com/2014/11/jonathan-nolan-to-adapt-isaac-asimovs-foundation.html?mid=twitter_nymag), on Vulture
* [Frequent Tim Burton Collaborator to Pen Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark Movie](http://time.com/3590944/scary-stories-movie-john-august-tim-burton/), from Time
* [Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark Movie Writer Could Change Everything](http://io9.com/scary-stories-to-tell-in-the-dark-movie-writer-could-ch-1659822243), on io9
* [Franz Kafka](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Kafka) and [Max Brod](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Brod) on Wikipedia
* [High Maintenance](http://www.helpingyoumaintain.com/), and on [Vimeo](https://vimeo.com/ondemand/highmaintenance) and [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Maintenance_(web_series))
* [The Worst Line in Scriptwriting History](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIt0VY7Yg2w) from [Mortal Kombat: Annihilation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortal_Kombat:_Annihilation)
* [Mortal Kombat: A Novel](http://www.amazon.com/dp/0812544528/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) on Amazon
* [Get your tickets now](https://www.wgfoundation.org/screenwriting-events/scriptnotes-holiday-show/) for the Scriptnotes Holiday Show
* Rachel Bloom’s [NSFW song about Ray Bradbury](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1IxOS4VzKM)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Scriptnotes editor Matthew Chilelli ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Scriptnotes, Ep 171: Finishing a script, and the Perfect Studio Executive — Transcript

November 25, 2014 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2014/finishing-a-script-and-the-perfect-studio-executive).

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

**Craig Mazin:** Sshh, me Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 171 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

**Craig:** That are interesting to screenwriters.

**John:** Oh, you’re my echo now.

**Craig:** You have latency.

**John:** Oh, do I have latency?

**Craig:** No. [laughs] I’m just pretending to be your latency.

**John:** Ah, you’re the worst.

**Craig:** I’m the worst. No one gets it.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** By the way, people do get it. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs] Today on the podcast we are going to be talking about finishing a script. We’re going to be talking about this data that fivethirtyeight crunched about screenwriters and their screenplays. And we are going to be talking about the perfect studio executive.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm.

**John:** Mm-hmm. But there’s follow up to start with. And follow up about future events, including the December 11 live show.

**Craig:** So exciting.

**John:** I’m so excited. So, I put a little teaser at the start of last week’s episode, but now you and I can both talk about how excited we are that on December 11 at 8PM in Hollywood we will be welcoming our guests including Jane Espenson. B.J. Novak. Derek Haas. Aline Brosh McKenna. Plus one special musical guest that’s not even announceable yet.

**Craig:** Fantastic. I mean, that’s a great roster even including the person that’s not announceable yet. I was watching, you know I’m a huge Quentin Tarantino fan.

**John:** I do.

**Craig:** And just the other night I decided, you know what, I’m going to watch Inglourious Basterds again, because I want to. And I forgot, because I hadn’t seen it in a long time, B.J. Novak.

**John:** B.J. Novak.

**Craig:** He’s Utivich. Utivich, I think that’s his name. He’s awesome.

**John:** Yeah. Just yesterday I was reading The Book With No Pictures, which is a kid’s book that B.J. Novak has at the top of the bestseller charts.

**Craig:** Very, very creative.

**John:** It’s a great little book. And so I was reading it to Chad Creasey’s little daughter who was over, and she loved it. And this is a kid with a limited attention span. And she loved it. Because whenever you get the chance to make silly noises to a kid at that age, they’re in heaven.

**Craig:** She’s also notoriously picky. Not an easy review to get out of her.

**John:** Oh, absolutely, no. She has set opinions. And they’re usually about where is my mother, where is my father, why are you not either of these people.

**Craig:** Right. I’m tired.

**John:** So, last week Chad Creasey, who is a writer on Castle, was live tweeting his show, because the new thing is you’re supposed to be live tweeting your show so the fans can talk with the creators of the show as the show is actually happening.

**Craig:** I see this all the time. Derek Haas does this.

**John:** Yes. And sometimes it’s wonderful, and sometimes it’s kind of annoying, because maybe Derek — I don’t need to see like the 20 tweets about Chicago Fire and Chicago P.D. Or the crossover episode between Law & Order and Chicago P.D., which is just — that’s like two hours of Derek Haas tweeting.

**Craig:** Wait, that was Law & Order?

**John:** So, Law & Order, the New York show, or Law & Order SVU, I’m sorry.

**Craig:** Oh, okay, yeah. Okay. SVU. Right.

**John:** SVU crossed over into a Chicago P.D. episode. And so I happened to catch part of this change over because I don’t, honestly I’m sorry, I don’t actually watch either of these shows.

**Craig:** Oh!

**John:** The TV was on and I saw this crossover. And it was just so weird like, oh, that’s a thing that happens.

**Craig:** Yeah. Well, you know, it’s actually a very rare thing to have happen now because there are very few, I mean, Dick Wolf kind of stands alone. Dick Wolf and Chuck Lorre are the two people that have multiple shows. Oh, no, and Shonda Rhimes.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So, actually the three of them could get away with it.

**John:** Yeah. But no one else can get away with it. And so I was watching this thing happen. Of course Derek live tweets his show. Chad was live tweeting his show. And I had to interrupt Chad live tweeting his own TV show in order to arrange childcare for our children.

**Craig:** For both of your children?

**John:** Because that’s what it’s like to be a Hollywood writer is basically you’re supposed to live tweet your show to the mass audience and then figure out who is going to take care of your kid because you’re working late hours making Castle, the TV show.

**Craig:** Sometimes I’ll send out some tweets to people just because I’m at home and I need to arrange childcare for my kids because I’ve got to go score some heroin. Do you know how you know that I don’t have a heroin problem?

**John:** Uh, I don’t know how. How do I prove a negative?

**Craig:** Here’s how. I just said, “I needed to go score some heroin.” That’s not what they say. Right?

**John:** Yeah. Scoring is actually a really interesting word, this is going to be my awkward segue into Writer Emergency Pack, or maybe it’s a brilliant into Writer Emergency Pack.

**Craig:** It doesn’t really matter, does it? [laughs]

**John:** Because I made the transition?

**Craig:** That’s right. Transition Man.

**John:** We’re here now.

**Craig:** Segue Boy.

**John:** So yesterday we were going through all the text on all the cards just to make sure that everything was right and we were not disagreeing about any commas, and Stuart Friedel who genuinely loves basketball was arguing that I had said, in the card I said, “You could score three baskets in a certain amount of time.”

And he’s like you can’t score baskets. You can make baskets. But you can’t score baskets.

**Craig:** That’s right. Correct.

**John:** And I’m like, well, you’re being nitpicky. And then we looked on the Internet and he was right.

**Craig:** Yeah. Of course he was right. That’s correct. Just as you can’t make runs in baseball. You score runs. It’s just the parlance of the sport.

**John:** It is the parlance of the sport.

**Craig:** And similarly there is a Stuart Friedel of heroin out there listening to me and saying, “No, no, you don’t say I’m going to go out and score some heroin, you dork.”

**John:** Yeah. What do you need to score heroin? How do you get heroin? What is the verb for obtain heroin from a person?

**Craig:** I think we’ve established that I don’t know. At all.

**John:** [laughs] If you do know, if you are a heroin addict who knows the lingo, or even better yet, a heroin dealer, please write in to @clmazin on Twitter and let him know.

**Craig:** Let me know. By the way, this is one of the best arguments for drug legalization I’ve ever heard was from my friend [Gene Yin]. Because I remember I was saying, well you know, yeah, sure, legalize drugs. But heroin, I don’t know. And he said, “Let me ask you something. If you wanted heroin, do you think you could get some?” And I was like, yeah, I guess I could.

**John:** I don’t think I could. You know, honestly, that’s a fascinating sort of six degrees of separation. Like how many people would I have to go through to get heroin. And the way my life is set up right now, it would take awhile.

**Craig:** It would take awhile, but you could get there. It’s not hard. By the way, anyone can. Especially now. Go to the marijuana dispensary. Get your marijuana card. Hang around the people in the lobby of the marijuana place and be like, “Anybody have any heroin?” Somebody will hook you up.

The point being, if you want it, you can get it. But we don’t get it because — the law is not what’s stopping us. It’s our understanding that heroin is just bad.

**John:** Yeah. Heroin is bad.

**Craig:** It’s bad.

**John:** Lessons we’ve learned on podcasts.

**Craig:** Heroin is bad, you guys.

**John:** It’s not good at all.

**Craig:** Breaking news.

**John:** So, going back to the Stuart Friedel basketball conversation, the reason why we’re editing all these cards is because we are nearly done with the Kickstarter campaign. So, this is the last chance if people want one of these cards in the early part of 2015 is to go to our Kickstarter page. So, we are nearing 5,000 backers, which is crazy.

**Craig:** That’s great.

**John:** We exceeded our fundraising goal. Thank you, Craig Mazin.

**Craig:** Yeah. I’m one of those backers.

**John:** Which is fantastic. So, this podcast comes out on Tuesday. Thursday at noon the campaign shuts down. And it’s a hard out. Because when you actually set up the campaign you set the end date and that is the end date for all time.

**Craig:** Forever.

**John:** It’s done. No more. So, if you’d like a pack, that’s where you can get it. If you’d like to support the youth writing programs that we’re partnering with, that’s also a great place to go.

**Craig:** Hey, not to undermine the Writer Emergency Pack situation, but our live show on December 11th, tickets are on sale now for that?

**John:** They are on sale now. I can’t believe we left that out. Yes. So, if you would like to come to our live show in December 11, go to the Writers Guild Foundation. They’re the people who are selling the tickets. It’s wgfoundation.org. There will also be a link in the show notes. And the seating is quite limited, so really if you haven’t gotten tickets yet, you should maybe pause this podcast and go over there and get some tickets, because it will sell out, especially with those great guests.

**Craig:** And the money goes to charity. Once again, we lose.

**John:** Yes. Once again, a money-losing podcast.

**Craig:** Awesome.

**John:** Awesome. The last bit of follow up is previous weeks I described how I had this phone pitch and it was on a Friday at 4PM, which is the worst time for a phone pitch, but it went really well. And so now I think I can announce that the deal happened. It closed. And I’m going to be writing this movie.

**Craig:** Congrats.

**John:** So, it’s called Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. It is a kid’s book that you kind of probably remember from your childhood.

**Craig:** I totally remember that book from my childhood.

**John:** Yeah. So it was one of the most controversial and one of the most banned or sort of like on a lot of parent not favorite lists throughout our entire childhood. It’s written by Alvin Schwartz. Illustrated by Stephen Gammell. It’s a great collection, an anthology of sort of all of the stories that you sort of remember being creeped out by as a kid, so including like “the worms crawling, and the worms crawl out, the worms play pinochle on your snout.”

All of that stuff is in there. And so it’s going to be I think a potentially really cool movie, but I’m not supposed to spoil how we’re going to do it, but I think it’s going to be a very interesting and innovative way to make this movie.

**Craig:** I think that’s great. That’s a very cool project. My daughter in particular is a big fan of, there’s a current kid’s series that’s like a Goosebumps kind of series, but I can’t remember the name of it. Anyway, the idea of horror movies for children is great.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** I loved like all the ghost stories when I was a kid. I loved all that stuff.

**John:** So, what I will tell you is that while this book is for children, the horror movie that we’re making out of it, I think hopefully captures how scary those books were when you were a kid, but is not strictly a kid’s movie. In fact, you should not take certain younger kids to this movie. To the degree like I can’t actually take the art into the house, because if my daughter saw it we would have nightmares.

**Craig:** Is the idea that it’s a — you don’t have to say anything that you don’t want to say, but is it a PG-13 kind of thing?

**John:** We are aiming for a PG-13.

**Craig:** Got it.

**John:** The same way that I loved Poltergeist.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Or that I loved The Ring. Movies that are not gory, but man they can freak the bejesus out of you.

**Craig:** I love that. That’s the best kind of horror as far as I’m concerned.

**John:** So, we have high hopes. Lord knows anything can happen, but it’s been a very fun couple of weeks getting this all put together.

**Craig:** Where is this?

**John:** This is at CBS Films. And it’s such a strange experience going into CBS Films because I get there and I’m talking with the producer, and he’s like, “Oh, I don’t know if you saw in the trades today.” And I’m like, oh god, what was in the trades today? And so Lions Gate is not distributing CBS Films’ films. And that was a change, but also like, oh, well Lions Gate is kind of awesome at doing this exact kind of thing. So, it feels like it’s going to be a change that will benefit the making of movies like this.

**Craig:** Who was distributing their movies prior?

**John:** They were self-distributing. They had their own distribution company.

**Craig:** Oh, yeah. You know what? Good. That’s smart, frankly. Nothing wrong with —

**John:** Distribution is expensive.

**Craig:** Distributions are.

**John:** And distribution is expensive to maintain even if you don’t have a lot of movies going through it. That becomes the real stumbling block, without enough product like you have this team that you can’t keep continuously employed.

**Craig:** And distribution, we know as we discussed before that the big trick of distribution is that you need big huge right hand punches to sell your left hand jobs, you know. So, a movie like this that’s new IP and it’s not like say Hunger Games, right. A movie like this needs the weight of a Hunger Games behind it, so that Lions Gate can say, “Hey everybody, you want Hunger Games? Here is our package. Hunger Games, Scary Stories You Tell in the Dark.” You know what I mean?

**John:** Yeah. And that package is important throughout the entire process. So, that’s how you get the great theaters. That’s how you get the ArcLight versus the thing in Gardena. That’s how you get —

**Craig:** The thing in Gardena. By the way. Terrible name. Great, great cinema.

**John:** It’s one of the highest qualities that you can find anywhere.

**Craig:** Heading down to the thing, yeah.

**John:** Except for that one stain on the screen where somebody threw their Coke at the screen.

**Craig:** That was me.

**John:** All right. The old theatres that were across from USC, the USC Cinema Schools, there was this village, I think it was a three-plex or a four-plex. I remember going to see Last of the Mohicans and there literally was like this brown stain on the screen, because someone had just like taken a Coke and thrown it at the screen. And like they never washed it, they never cleaned it.

**Craig:** Wow.

**John:** And so you’re watching this movie that obviously a lot of care went in to making it. And there’s this brown stain.

**Craig:** Why do you think someone did that for — was it that movie or a prior movie?

**John:** No, I’m sure it was some previous movie. Some previous movie that really deserved to have a Coke thrown at it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, that movie didn’t really.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** I mean, unless somebody was like, “Look, this is an embarrassment to the work of James Fenimore Cooper. [laugh]

**John:** “Stay alive no matter what occurs.” Splash.

**Craig:** Splash. “That was not in the book!”

**John:** No.

**Craig:** Yeah, some USC lit major.

**John:** Yeah. Daniel Day Lewis hater.

**Craig:** Oh, all one of them.

**John:** All one of them. So, anyway, it’s incredibly fun to be making this. My last point about sort of distributing in a package, it becomes important to get your film into a theater. It’s also important for getting your money out of that theater, which sounds really obvious.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, that’s right.

**John:** They will pay you very slowly unless you say like, “Oh, wait, you still haven’t paid us for that movie and we have The Hunger Games coming.” They are more likely to actually total up that money and write you the check that they need to write.

**Craig:** That’s true. Plus, you have a marketing department that likely just through the experience of marketing more movies and generally larger movies will be very, very good.

**John:** That is the hope.

**Craig:** Terrific.

**John:** Excited to be writing that.

**Craig:** Awesome.

**John:** But, Craig I’m so excited that you just finished your script.

**Craig:** I did. Well, let’s just say that the two words that screw writers up more than any other two words in the English language are The End. We type The End and it is not at all the end. But, you do feel kind of an ending. It’s a very strange feeling, isn’t it?

**John:** It’s a little post-partum depression. You’re so excited to be done. And at the same time you’re like, but, but, but, especially in those last few weeks as you’re finishing something up. You are a person who writes this script. Like your entire being becomes consumed in the writing of this thing. And so when that thing is done, well, who are you?

**Craig:** That’s right. You have molded your day-to-day life around a routine of creating this thing. You are living in that world. And it is a world of possibility. And it’s still a world of possibility. But when you write the end and you get to the end of it, no matter how good you have felt along the way, or about the moments, suddenly it’s just a script. Isn’t that the hell. It’s just the worst feeling.

Like I’ve been living this thing and breathing this thing and imaging a world, creating — all the wonderful woo-woo stuff that writers say about being kissed by the cosmic joy. But then you print it out. And so it’s a PDF. [laughs] It’s like, huh, all that and this isn’t shooting rainbows out of its butt. It looks like every other script.

**John:** A couple memories that brings up. The first is finishing something and printing it out for the first time, and laser printers used to be quite so slow. And so a page would print out and I’d take it out of the printer and look at it. Inevitably I would find a typo just because I had pulled it out of the printer. And so it was like these weird things where like because it’s coming to you at a page at a time I started to recognize all these things and want to go through and fix them.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Second is that advice that I remember being told like all the way back in probably junior high school is like well when you finish something, you put it in a drawer for two weeks and you don’t look at it. And then you pull it out so you can look at it fresh. I’ve never been able to do that. I’ve never been able to sort of just completely walk away from something and look at it fresh. It’s like one of those great ideas in theory that rarely is practical or possible, partly because I’m generally giving it to someone trusted to read and I want to be able to have that conversation with them before two weeks from now.

**Craig:** Yeah. You can look at things in a fresh light, I suppose, after a year or two. No real reason to put something away for a year or two. Better to just hand it to somebody you trust. Or, if you are writing professionally, you don’t have a choice.

**John:** Nope.

**Craig:** You’re a week late. No matter how fast you write it, you’re a week late.

**John:** Yes you are.

**Craig:** Yeah. If you write it in three days, you’re a week late.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** It’s like reverse Scotty.

**John:** So, in your situation, you were showing pages the whole time through. So, did that change your process? Because that doesn’t seem like what you would normally do. I think of you as being a Craig does the whole thing himself and then someone gets to read it. In this case, you were showing stuff all the way through. Did that change the process for you?

**Craig:** Not as much as I would have thought, in part because part of my process — this is one area where I know you and I are very different. You quite religiously don’t go backwards when you’re writing. I quite religious do go backwards. I’m constantly — every day I’m reviewing the prior eight pages.

And then that’s kind of how I ramp in to the next work. So, by doing it this way with Lindsay I wasn’t doing actually anything different than I normally do in that sense. The other very helpful thing is that she was incredibly supportive. And so all of her notes came in the form of questions. It was never, “I don’t like this.” It was more, “What did you mean by this? What if this happened? What about this?” And these were all just very positive things. And, of course, there was a lot of praise along the way, too. Not, of course. [laughs] Surprisingly I should say, there was a lot of praise along the way, which is something I’ve actually never had because when I’m writing by myself and my creative associate, Jack, can attest to this, mostly I just sit and go, “This is the worst thing anyone has ever done. I’m the worst.”

Actually, what I used to say is, “I don’t even know what this is.” You know, there’s a lot of that that goes on. So, it was great to have somebody say, “I know what this is. This is good. I like this.”

**John:** That’s great.

**Craig:** Yeah. So, we’ll see what happens now.

**John:** Was there any good boy syndrome kicking in though? I wonder if having someone like Lindsay who is mom-like in the best ways, did that motivate you to work harder, work differently? How did it change your approach to the daily work? Did it?

**Craig:** It did a little bit. Yes. For one, she has a strong emphasis on clarity. Not just clarity for story sake, but also clarity for the reader. And her emphasis on clarity is actually very admirable and very optimistic. Her emphasis on clarity is this: we’re making this movie. I and you, and if it happens Scott Frank will be directing, the three of us are going to be in rooms with people who are going to ask us questions. Let’s answer as many of those questions as we can now, without breaking the script or making it — and sometimes, occasionally I would say, “Okay, I can’t do that. That’s just ridiculous.” [laughs]

And then she would agree. Mostly.
**John:** I should stress, when you say answer the questions, in some cases you’re really talking about taking away the questions.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Basically making it so that question doesn’t even come up.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. So, we had many discussions about where people were standing and how we could get across where they were standing and how far away they were and all the rest of it.

But, that did change the way I was approaching things because when I was writing I then kept in mind a certain amount of clarity, which in the end actually didn’t really — I think it helps the read. Actually, I liked it. I like that style of it.

There was a good boy syndrome in as much as there were times when I disagreed with her. But there were most notably what would happen is we would have a discussion, she would say here’s six things to consider. I would consider all six things. And then come back and say I’ve done four of them. These two, I do not. And you know what? She never once said, “No, no, no, you have to.” Every time she said, “Well, if you thought about it and that’s your reason, I agree.”

It was actually kind of great. I guess the point is that I’ll always have good boy syndrome because I want to make people happy. You can’t work in our business and not want to make people happy. But, it wasn’t a toxic good boy syndrome. And Lindsay also had good producer syndrome. It is interesting. She wanted me to like her notes.

You know, every now and then she would say something and I would go, oh my god, that’s why we get along so well. She would say, “Here’s something.” And I would say, oh, that’s very good. I like that. And she’d go, “Well thank you. I thought it was good. I was hoping you would think it was good.”

It’s the same. We’re the same. You know, so many of us are the same no matter the different jobs we do. We just want to be liked.

**John:** The other thing I think is probably crucial about the way she was framing these conversations was this is the movie we’re trying to make, so that way it becomes not a criticism of your words on the page, but it’s about this shared vision and this shared goal of like let’s make this movie. And so let’s always frame these discussions in how are we going to make this a great movie, not about this work that you just did, Craig, and whether it’s good or bad.

**Craig:** That’s right. And ideally if it goes well, then instead of what I normally have which is I wander into a room, at least initially alone, and then rally people to the cause through the script. Now I walk into the room with an ally, which is nice. It’s new.

So, I really enjoyed it. It’s not something that I would do I don’t think with anyone else. No offense to everybody else in the world. But, it takes a certain amount of deep trust there. And even then, who knows, it might have not worked, but it did. At least, I can’t speak to the [final] product —

**John:** Well, you can speak to the process. You can at least speak to like that you got through this script is terrific. And so I don’t know if you know that I was racing you and I wanted to finish my script before you finished your script, because we started our scripts at about the same time. But you finished and I did not finish.

**Craig:** Oh.

**John:** So, I am past the midpoint, but I got pulled off to do another job, and then of course this Kickstarter. So, you finished first. Congratulations, Craig.

**Craig:** Well, I can’t really take — there is no prize for first. Also, you had a good excuse. You had one good excuse, another job, and one ridiculous, awful excuse, a Kickstarter.

**John:** The Kickstarter madness.

**Craig:** Just disgusting.

**John:** I will say, I did write the last scene. And that is always an incredibly important part for me, because I tend to write that pretty early in the process so I know kind of where I’m going to. And the ability to sort of have that last moment fixed and encapsulated is in many ways as important to me as knowing what that first scene is going to be.

**Craig:** I agree. In fact, where I differ from you is I don’t write it, but I know what it is. And I couldn’t wait to write it because it should be your favorite scene in the movie, frankly.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And so it was held back as this little reward for finishing. And so, you know, but man, when I finally finished it I was, you’re right, when you finish a screenplay, even though it’s intermediate, even though there will be another draft. Even though there will be changes. Even though it will be transformed into a movie and the document will disappear, as it should. You do feel like you accomplished something and it’s a weird thing for us as screenwriters to acknowledge that we have accomplished something and yet also at the same time we have accomplished nothing. [laughs] It’s very odd.

**John:** It is. Yet, there’s something very special about that first draft, which is entirely yours, before the building starts to get built. Before all the necessary changes that have to happen to change it from this idealized form to its actual form, there’s something really terrific about that first draft.

**Craig:** No question.

**John:** Congratulations on that.

**Craig:** Well thank you. And congratulations to you on your new project and congratulations to Stuart for being — staying alive.

**John:** For being Stuart.

**Craig:** Staying alive.

**John:** Next thing we want to take a look at is this article that everybody tweeted at us this week by Walt Hickey. It’s in fivethirtyeight, the data science blog. The headline, which is umbrage-inducing, “How Data Can Help You Write a Better Screenplay.”

**Craig:** Hold me back. [laughs] Hold me back.

**John:** And so I read this headline and I’m like, oh no, that’s just Craig bait. That’s like little someone has an algorithm for like how can we make Craig Mazin angry. That’s the headline.

**Craig:** The best part was that when I saw that headline I thought, okay, calm down. It’s not going to be that bad. And it was actually worse than I thought it would be.

**John:** Oh, see, this is going to be fun, because I actually thought the article itself was not nearly as inflammatory and actually had some things —

**Craig:** I hated it.

**John:** That were interesting to talk about. I don’t think useful for screenwriters necessarily, but interesting to talk about as a general sense.

**Craig:** If your praise is “not useful for screenwriters” and the title of it is “How Data Can Help you Write a Better Screenplay,” I actually think that’s a brutal condemnation here.

**John:** I strongly suspect that Walt Hickey did not write his headline for his article, because it doesn’t — because his article does not support that headline at all.

**Craig:** Uh…

**John:** Because there’s nothing about helping you write a screenplay. There’s nothing about that in here at all.

**Craig:** Uh…

**John:** So, here’s the proper headline. Here’s I would say is the actual fair headline that does not attract as much umbrage or clicks, but is actually accurate to what the article is about: “In a statistical survey of the blacklist.com’s scripts, these are the patterns we’ve noticed.”

**Craig:** That, honestly, is useless. It’s useless. And this is shocking to me, because honestly these guys should know better. And Nate Silver who runs fivethirtyeight.com should have really said, “Hey, wait a second. I mean, our bread and butter is being rational.” And this is just irrational nonsense. First, yeah, go ahead.

**John:** We should frame what is actually happening here. So, this article takes a look at the data from fivethirtyeight.com and basically anonymized a bunch of the reviews — so they weren’t looking at the actual projects themselves, but just the genre, the reviews of things, the most frequent criticisms of these different projects. And they were able to look based on genre and based on response what types of scripts are getting positive reviews versus negative reviews.

Now, I think this article tries to go too far and say like, well these are the kinds of scripts that get these good reviews and therefore become these kinds of movies. There’s actually no evidence at all to support that. All they’re really looking at is the people who have put their scripts on the blacklist.com and had them reviewed, this is data that they’re pulling from that information. Nothing about the actual finished movies. So, when it says — the first two paragraphs where they talk about Interstellar, that’s just random BS that should not be in there.

**Craig:** It’s all bad. This is all bad. And let me get to the heart of why I was shocked by this. Shocked.

**John:** Shocked.

**Craig:** Shocked. Yes, obviously the massive flaw floating at the surface of this mess is that they are attempting to analyze what makes a good screenplay from a population sample that is not at all accurate. Sorry, a sample that’s not at all accurate to the appropriate population. The sample that they’re using are Black List screenplays, which has nothing to do, frankly, with the sample of say professional screenplays from which most movies are drawn.

The Black List is open. It’s just people throwing their stuff in there. But the real — the real problem with this is that what they’re doing is they’re looking at trends. Trends have absolutely nothing to do with success. In fact, I would argue that they have the opposite to do with success. Let me explain.

They’ll say things in here like, he’s talking about courtroom dramas, I think.

**John:** Yeah. We make a lot of courtroom dramas, don’t we Craig? Our cinemas are overflowing with courtroom dramas.

**Craig:** So, you know, he talks about these courtroom dramas, and he’ll say take courtroom dramas. “Because of the legal eagles writing them,” that’s an unfounded comment, “only two percent of such scripts were flagged as having logic holes or unanswered questions. However, a whopping 47 percent of them suffered from unnatural, clichéd or on-the-nose dialogue.” So, he’s finding this problem that seems to exist with courtroom dramas, but it’s not a problem. Because here’s the fact: success in screenplays is an outlier. Success should be anti-statistical. We are looking for things that are not a trend.

Here’s the most uncommon trend in screenplays: quality. Okay? So if you have a situation where, well, 50 percent of our comedies rate an average of seven out of ten, but only two percent of our courtroom dramas rate a seven or higher out of ten, you might think, well, comedy is the way to go.

Wrong. Because, we don’t know how many of those comedies sell. We also don’t know how many of them are seven, eight, nines, or tens. And here is the other important point: all the courtroom dramas, all of them, could be a one, but one of them is a ten. That’s a great script. That gets made.

None of this analysis has any relevance. None of it. It is flawed. It is both flawed internally and flawed externally. It is a terrible — this is terrible. And, Walt, I think you know. I think you know that this was a mess. Don’t do this anymore. This doesn’t make any sense.

I mean, come on, critical thinking here. Ugh. Look here’s my problem, honestly John, this paragraph made me angry. Following what they’re talking about, you know, the complicated relationship between genres and a best picture nomination, which again has nothing to do with quality.

**John:** These amateur scripts in Black List.

**Craig:** And not even anything to do with quality. Being nominated for Best Picture is just what the Academy thinks. Okay, anyway, he says, “This is also part of a larger question about the difficulties of writing a good movie. What makes a screenplay good? What makes it bad? Are writers in certain genres at an advantage or disadvantage when it comes to certain elements like plot, premise and characters? And if so, how can we show this?”

Get ready. Hold on. Hold on. Grab something now, because this is what he says, “And if so, how can we show this? All we need is a data set to draw from.” That’s all we need! That’s it! And we’ve solved —

**John:** More data!

**Craig:** Yes. All we need is a data set and we’ve unlocked the mystery. You’ve unlocked the mystery of nothing. First of all, your data set sucks. And, no, all you need is not a data set to draw from. You don’t have the answer. You’ll never get the answer from a data set because the whole point is that the answer exists counter to the data. Counter!

And that, my friends, that is the umbrage of the week.

**John:** And mic drop.

The final chart in this thing lists the most common problems in amateur screenplays. So, if you take nothing else from this article, the final chart in here shows the most common problems in amateur screenplays, which I think could actually be useful if you were a person who had your script on blacklist.com and you got flagged for one of these things. You would at least know like how often are they flagging for these things.

These are the list from most commonly flagged to least commonly flagged. Underdeveloped plot. Underdeveloped characters. Lack of escalation. Poor structure. Unnatural dialogue. Logic holes. Commercially unviable. Derivative or unoriginal. Not cinematic. Or too long.

The only reason I kind of like that too long being last is that it’s the first thing that everyone is freaking out about. They’re like, oh my god, my script is 122 pages, it’s going to be too long and they’re going to say it’s too long. No, that’s actually one of the least likely things they’re going to flag it for.

They’re mostly going to say like your story sucks, I didn’t believe your characters.

**Craig:** Well, yeah, okay. So, this is a list of problems that a screenplay can have. This is a percentage of problems that those readers had with that pool of screenplays. We can also point out that, again, on the outlier theory, any script that actually emerges from the Black List and gets produced, and that’s been happening happily, my guess is at least one or two of their readers would pick one of these things.

**John:** 100 percent.

**Craig:** So, again, it doesn’t reflect success. I have a different theory about the too long, and it’s a pessimistic theory actually, John, because I’m in a pessimistic mood.

**John:** No one sensed that.

**Craig:** Your theory is that people should feel free to ignore the admonition, the — I agree — inaccurate and unnecessary admonition, “Keep you scripts short,” because look they’re not really having a problem with the length of scripts. My theory is they’re not having a problem with lengths of scripts because everybody is freaking out over the length of their scripts and refusing to send in anything that is longer than 115 pages. So, they’re not getting long scripts anymore, because everybody has lost their freaking minds about page length.

**John:** Yeah. That’s probably more likely the case.

**Craig:** I read this thing and literally I needed beta blockers when I was done with it. [laughs] I don’t actually take beta blockers, but I think I could have used beta blockers.

**John:** So, here’s a possibility, and I wonder if this is a statistical study that would be meaningful. So, I don’t know if you know that there are districts across the country, they do this thing where they can sort of measure teacher’s effectiveness by taking a kid from one class and then checking to see in the next grade whether that kid progressed or did not progress in that teacher’s next room. So, it’s a way of sort of tracking kids through time. And therefore you can measure the kids in this teacher’s class tend to have progressed more than kids in another teacher’s class.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** So, it’s a rough way of doing that. I wonder if you could do the same kind of thing by basically rating the reviewers as a place like blacklist.com. Basically saying like how often does this reader give negative reviews to writers. Is there a specific genre that they always give bad reviews to? In cases where something has been reviewed twice, how often is it likely that they are the lower reviewer rather than the higher reviewer?

There probably is data there somewhere if they’ve done enough of these things. You could actually check and see sort of like, you know, a profile of what these reviewers actually like and what their tastes are and whether they agree with the consensus or are outliers from the consensus.

**Craig:** But the problem is what do you do with it? Because let’s say you have one guy that’s just remarkably grumpy.

**John:** Then if you’re Franklin Leonard, maybe you fire him.

**Craig:** Maybe. Or maybe or you go, this remarkably grumpy guy was the only one that loved this script that actually got bought and made.

**John:** Yeah. He was the truth teller.

**Craig:** That’s the problem is that this whole thing is all about trends and the middle, the big thick middle. So, for instance Ms. Hagen, this is Kate Hagen. Kate Hagen, does she work for the Black List?

**John:** She works for the Black List. Yes.

**Craig:** So Kate Hagen says to Walt Hickey, “Sports dramas tend to do really well on the site because you’ve got a fusion of a real-life concept or event to then structure a narrative around.” Okay. But what does that have to do with the purpose of the site? The purpose of the site isn’t to do well on the site. The purpose of the site is to get the hell out of the site. You see what my point is? So, that actually doesn’t mean anything.

It reminds me of a story that someone told me, and I don’t know if it’s apocryphal or not, but I love it. In the early days when they were first making Seinfeld, they had to test it, and it was notoriously the lowest testing pilot in NBC history. That, I think, has been talked about before. But as the story goes, what happened was they tested it and the numbers came back terribly. And they sat down with Warren Littlefield, who was running NBC at the time, and he said, “Listen, this one low number here for this particular thing, we know that’s an artifact. We know that in television shows that have this kind of arrangement,” for instance like a show set in New York, “will always get a lower number on this, but it actually doesn’t translate to the success or failure of a show. It’s a statistical artifact.”

And they were like, okay, well that’s good to know. And he said, “But anyway, we should change it.” And they said why. And he was like, “Well, because of the testing.”

Now, you’re just chasing the testing. You’re not chasing what the testing is supposed to test for. And my sense here is that all this is doing is really just trying to figure out how to get a pretty decent middling number on the Black List. Your job, if you’re on the Black List, honestly, the perfect script is the one that gets a bunch of ones and a bunch of tens. You know, like in my mind, who cares if everybody agrees it’s okay.

**John:** Yeah. A bunch of sixes is not the same. And so you could have two scripts and if the average score was a seven, that doesn’t mean as much as if there were a bunch of tens and a bunch of ones and it drifted down.

**Craig:** You want to be the outlier.

**John:** I’m trying to do a max/median/mode, and I don’t have the right numbers for it, but that’s the thing. If there’s people who love it, those are your champions and those are the people who are doing to say, “I want to make this movie.”

**Craig:** Yeah, the least useful thing, frankly, I mean, I suppose the only useful part of this average overall score is that it might inspire some people to read that script who might not have been interested to read it. But, see, if I were running the Black List, I don’t know how they do it. If they just provide a mean overall score, that’s actually not as interesting to me as a chart, a graph, you know, where you show a one to ten and then you show the amount of people that have broken out between one and ten. I think IMDb does this for their stuff.

Because if I see spikes at the bottom and the top, that’s way more interesting to me than sort of a blob. I want spikes.

**John:** A bell curve distribution opinion on your script is not likely to be a good sign.

**Craig:** That’s right. I want spikes. I want outliers. So, this article was bad. And Walt Hickey, I want you to do better. And I think you can do better. Nate Silver, no, no, no.

**John:** Let’s move on to our series, I think you’re proposing this as a series.

**Craig:** A series.

**John:** That’s the new trend in podcasts is series. So, let’s make this a series. And the first topic is the perfect studio executive.

**Craig:** Right. So, the idea —

**John:** Talk us through what a perfect studio executive might consist of.

**Craig:** Well, the idea of the series is that we want to do something called The Perfect series where we go through each kind of job in Hollywood and talk about what the perfect version of that job would be. So, we might as well start with the studio executive because they’re sort of the bosses sitting at the top of this whole thing making these decisions.

So, you know, it’s an interesting thing. The studio executive job has changed over time, even in my time. I think you’ve probably noticed it, too.

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** As the studios fell under a much more corporate control, and as they reduced the amount of movies they made, and as they began to rely more heavily on tent poles, there’s less of the old kind of job that they used to do which was read a bunch of drafts of a script and give a bunch of notes and try and try again. Now, it’s really about managing these projects that are sort of born as movies that cannot be stopped.

But to me, the perfect studio executive is somebody who is willing to focus on the filmmakers, the writer and the director. And who will support them and when things run counter to what we’ll call quality, to sit them down and explain honestly what’s going on and then ask how can we have our cake and eat it, too.

Far too often I think studio executives hide the reality because they’re ashamed. They’re embarrassed that they just got their leash yanked because there needs to be some character in there for some market. Or they’re having a bunch of problems, or somebody above them is demanding a car chase.

**John:** So, I think honesty is a fundamental quality you’re looking for in a studio executive. I would also say intelligence. And intelligence I’m going to sort of combine with knowledge, is that sometimes you encounter studio executives who will come to you with an answer, saying like we need to have a car chase here, or we can’t do this, or we can’t afford this. And they’re just — they’re basically telling you what they’ve been told, because they don’t actually fundamentally have the information about what it is that needs — why that thing needs to happen that way. They’ve just been told that, and they are parroting it back.

And so you want the person who has either the knowledge, or the intellectual curiosity to find the answer for why this thing needs to be a certain way. I remember being on the set of a film and we were doing this night shoot. And there was a real concern that like is there actually going to be enough light. And so the two studio executives showed up and they’re like, okay, where are the lights.

And I’m like, the lights are those giant condors above you that are providing the light. Because it’s actually the middle of the night and it looks really bright. Those are the lights.

And so it was frustrating to be talking with — I lost some trust and faith in these executives because, wait, I thought you’d made a bunch of movies. They really didn’t have a fundamental understanding of the filmmaking process.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** That’s crucial. You have to have had some time on the set, in the trenches, in the editing room. I have to believe that you really know what this is like, even if you’re not good at doing a director’s job. Great. That’s terrific. You’re a studio executive. That’s fantastic. But you need to know what it is a director is doing.

**Craig:** That’s exactly right. And it’s easier for them to wrap their minds around what writers are doing, because that involves reading. But directors and studio executives often clash because, you’re right, there are studio executives who are under-powered in the experience department. And that’s not helpful for them. And it’s not helpful or the director. The truth is, we want to make studio executives happy. What I always look for in somebody is somebody who will be honest with me about the why something has happened and then is respectful of the fact that I want to still make, do as a good of a job as I can. And there have been times when I’ve just, somebody has just pointed a finger at me and said, “No, I’m sorry. We’re actually saying we don’t want it to be good. We want it to be this.”

And that’s hard because you, I’m just saying to my imperfect studio executive, the Goofus, look at Gallant. Gallant sits there and gets what he wants with the filmmaker, and the filmmaker still feels good at the end. Goofus just points a finger and says, “Do what I’ve been told to tell you to do.”

And by the way, if you are Gallant, what happens is you will — the perfect studio executive has close personal loyalty-based relationships with key filmmaking partners. That actually is more job protection than just doing what you’ve been told, I’m guessing. I don’t know. I’m just guessing.

**John:** I think experience will — I think the data scientists will be able to figure that out. Because essentially if having a hit movie, that may buy you some time in that seat, but you know what — did you really make that movie? If you were the person who helped James Cameron get his vision onto the screen, that’s going to count for a lot more.

**Craig:** That’s right. Saying, look, this director that we trust wants to work with me. I’ll tell you something, studio executives, you have a nice situation in a weird way, the way that screenwriters kind of have a nice situation. There’s a lot of people out there doing your job poorly. It doesn’t take much to shine. So shine. And you will be rewarded. You will be rewarded. And if you get that pool of writers and directors that you know deliver wanting to work with you, that’s pretty great.

**John:** So, my next point about the perfect studio executive is that he or she is really good at the stuff that filmmakers are not good at. And that means a lot of times dealing with other departments. Dealing with marketing. Dealing with distribution. Dealing with all of the other layers of corporate stuff that has to be dealt with that we are not privy to and we’re not good at it.

So, the great studio executive has a vision for what this movie is. And when she goes in to talk with the marketing department and they throw a bunch of stuff back at her, she can say, “That isn’t the movie. That is not what the movie is. That’s not how this is going to be.”

It’s a person who can communicate the vision of the movie to all the different people, like the merchandising people from Hasbro about like this is what the movie is and can get their feedback and communicate it back to the filmmakers that it has to happen in ways that makes sense.

**Craig:** It’s funny. That actually is a way that I think things have changed. Because for a lot of studios now, the traditional relationship which is what you just described, has changed into, “No, the marketing department is telling me what the movie is. And the merchandising people are telling me what the movie is. All the more reason for the perfect studio executive to turn back to her writer and her director and say here’s honestly what’s going on, let’s not freak out, let’s help each other. Let’s together, I’m going to give you what I know, you’re going to give me what you know, and now I can go back to them with some substantive alternative plan. And let’s see if we can win this one.

So, something to think about, again, as you’re choosing between Goofus or Gallant, by two favorite twins.

**John:** They’re the best twins.

Now, some of what we’re describing overlaps with what a producer does, because a producer should also have some of that role of insulating the filmmakers from some of this craziness, but the producer is fundamentally CEO of this little corporation that is the movie, versus the studio executive who is part of this giant corporation that’s making ten movies at once. And there’s all this stuff going on that we’re not going to privy to and honestly we probably shouldn’t be privy to. But hopefully we’re going to have a champion in there who is making sure that when it comes time to our movie it’s being treated really, really well.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** All right. Let’s get on to our One Cool Things. Craig, I see what yours is on the list and I’m just so happy that you’re keeping true to the spirit of Scriptnotes in that we are a show about women’s reproduction.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** We are a show about razors. And we are a show about cooking.

**Craig:** Correct. I think in the past one of my cool things was brining. I’m a big briner. This Thanksgiving my sister and her family are heading out to the west coast to join us and I opted to get a Heritage turkey. And I’ve just been doing a lot of turkey reading, you know, so the turkeys that we get in stores like Butterball and so on, they are — essentially they’ve been bred over time, selective breeding over time to be super breast heavy. Yeah, hey, you know who’s back, Sexy Craig.

**John:** Uh-oh.

**Craig:** Hey.

**John:** Yeah, Sexy Craig comes back every Thanksgiving. It’s the holiday for Sexy Craig.

**Craig:** I like my turkeys with huge breasts. Huge. They’re so big that those turkeys actually can’t really stand up straight. I mean, it’s amazing actually what we’ve done.

**John:** We’ve created these deformed animals.

**Craig:** They are. But, you know, if you like breast meat and American stew, yeah, then that works. And they’re not, you know, for all people’s handwringing over corporate factory farming genetic freaks of nature, they taste pretty good.

But Heritage turkeys are turkeys that are essentially from an unselectively bred line of the original three or four different kinds of turkeys that ran around America back in the day when we were genociding our way across the continent. And they are different. They’re smaller breasted, bigger thighs, and wings. God, this is so sexy.

**John:** [laughs] I know.

**Craig:** It’s so sexy.

**John:** Yeah, when you talk about wings, everyone just immediately goes there.

**Craig:** Smaller breasts and bigger thighs. Honestly, that’s kind of my thing. So, anywho, and it’s a different kind of flavor. I’m not opting for this because, you know, I think GMO is perfectly fine. I’m a skeptic and a pro-science guy. And I know that almost everything we eat has been genetically modified either through science or just people growing stuff the way they grow them.

**John:** Look at the history of corn and you’ll see that corn is completely made up.

**Craig:** Oh yeah, bananas. Bananas, like the yellow banana we have, that’s the most GMO’d thing on the planet. Not by Monsanto, by banana farmers. Anywho, as Seth Rudetsky says, anywho, I’m giving this Heritage turkey a try just out of curiosity. I want to see if it tastes better, different, more interesting. It is certainly more expensive. I will say that. But I like the fact that it’s an option.

So, I will have a turkey review for you all post-Thanksgiving.

**John:** Fantastic. I did a Heritage turkey a couple of years ago and it worked out just fine. It wasn’t the best turkey I ever had, but it wasn’t bad, and it was interesting and it was different, so I salute you in attempting to do it.

You will discover that it will take longer to cook because it is heavier dark meat. You may actually just want to change some of your technique and basically pre-cut it down so that you’re doing your legs and thighs first before you’re trying to do your breast, because it may just be forever in there. But you’ll see.

**Craig:** What I like to do, a little method, I’m a big believer in Cook’s Illustrated, they’re geniuses.

**John:** Oh my god, they’re so smart.

**Craig:** You foil tent the breast, so you can actually let it — the legs and thighs and wings will cook faster — they’ll cook hotter, I guess.

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** Slows down the breast cooking, speeds up the, yeah, anyway. We’ll see how it goes. And if it’s a disaster, guess what? Everybody is there for the side dishes anyway.

**John:** 100 percent. So, my One Cool Thing this week is the show that perhaps people have already watched, but I just started watching it and it’s really good. It’s Transparent on Amazon. Jay Duplass is a friend who I got to connect up with again in Austin for the Austin Film Festival. He is great in the show. Everyone is great in the show.

And I will admit to being skeptical of Amazon when they started doing their TV thing. I was especially skeptical about this whole process where they shoot a pilot and then put it up for there for everyone to look at and then they decide what shows are going to shoot.

I’ve actually been convinced that maybe that’s not such a bad thing, because having shot pilots that never aired or never got seen by the world, at least in the case of the Amazon pilots, they exist out there in the universe. And so people loves Transparent from when it was a pilot. The rest of the show is also really, really good.

So, I would urge you to watch that if you have the opportunity to watch it.

**Craig:** Guess what’s coming?

**John:** It’s a siren.

**Craig:** Multiple sirens.

**John:** I love it. So, what have you done this time, Craig?

**Craig:** It’s not good. [laughs] It’s not good. I actually really, most of the time when I commit a crime, you know, I just do it because I feel like it. And I feel fine afterwards. That’s, you know, like a real sociopath. But this time honestly I crossed the line. I should not have done that.

**John:** Yeah. Somewhere between victim number three and number four, you stopped to think for a moment like, wow, I may have gone too far. But by the time you got to victim six or seven you’re like, you know what? This feels right.

**Craig:** Sometimes the only way out is through.

**John:** 100 percent. Sometimes you’ve just got to put the accelerator down and just keep killing.

**Craig:** Just keep killing. JKK.

**John:** And that’s our show this week. So, if you would like to talk to Craig about his murder spree, you can find him @clmazin. I am @johnaugust on Twitter. Longer questions you can write to ask@johnaugust.com.

That’s also where you’ll find the show notes for this show and all of our other episodes. On iTunes we are — just search for us on iTunes. We are Scriptnotes there. That’s also where you can download the Scriptnotes app, so you can listen to all the back episodes there and on the Android store of your choice.

We have just now crossed 1,000 paid subscribers.

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**John:** So, we are going to be recording a dirty episode that is just for our premium subscribers. If you would like to be a premium subscriber, go to scriptnotes.net and that will let you listen to all of the back episodes, some special episodes we’re putting up this week, and the dirty episode when we get that recorded.

**Craig:** So dirty.

**John:** It’s going to be so good.

**Craig:** It’s going to be filthy.

**John:** You can also join us on December 11th in Hollywood. The Writers Guild Foundation is throwing our live Scriptnotes Holiday Spectacular.

**Craig:** And that’s going to sell out.

**John:** That’s going to sell out. And that will be — I’ll bet it’ll be dirty in person, but then Matthew will probably cut it down so that it’s clean for air. So, if you want to hear the dirty version, maybe show up live. That would be great.

**Craig:** Yeah. For sure. And just get your tickets quickly because we are the Jon Bon Jovi of podcasts.

**John:** We’re the Elton John/Bernie Taupin of podcasts.

**Craig:** Correct.

**John:** Plus, our special guests are super special this year, so I think it’s going to be great.

**Craig:** It’s actually a spectacular lineup. Oh man, you know, B.J. Novak, he’s in that last shot of Inglourious Basterds, looking down at the swastika they’ve carved into Christophe Waltz’s head. It’s fantastic. It’s great.

**John:** It’s pretty great. This is the last week for Writer Emergency Packs, so Thursday at noon is the cutoff. And so if you want one, get one. Thank you to everyone who has joined us and backed us there. Our outro this week, well, I should say first off our show is edited by Matthew Chilelli. It is produced by Stuart Friedel. Our outro this week comes from RJ Sampson, who didn’t compose this, but he found this thing on the Internet. It is actually a TV spot for Restasis, an eye drop, for people with chronically dry eyes.

And, weirdly, it’s exactly our outro.

**Craig:** What the…Restasis.

**John:** Restasis. I just love that you pick five notes, people are going to pick the same five.

**Craig:** Of course. Restasis, do they list the side effects of Restasis on the website?

**John:** Yeah, umbrage.

**Craig:** Oh yeah, here we go.

**John:** It’s terrible. Craig, thank you so much for a fun podcast.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

**John:** I’ll talk to you soon.

**Craig:** Bye.

Links:

* [Get your tickets now](https://www.wgfoundation.org/screenwriting-events/scriptnotes-holiday-show/) for the Scriptnotes Holiday Show
* [The Book with No Pictures](http://www.amazon.com/dp/0803741715/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) by B.J. Novak
* [Writer Emergency Pack](http://writeremergency.com) is [on Kickstarter until Thursday](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/913409803/writer-emergency-pack-helping-writers-get-unstuck)
* [How Data Can Help You Write A Better Screenplay](http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-data-can-help-you-write-a-better-screenplay/) by Walt Hickey
* [Heritage turkeys](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_turkey) on Wikipedia, and the [Heritage Turkey Foundation](http://heritageturkeyfoundation.org)
* [Transparent](http://www.amazon.com/Pilot-HD/dp/B00I3MNF6S) on Amazon Prime
* Get premium Scriptnotes access at [scriptnotes.net](http://scriptnotes.net/) and hear our 1,000th subscriber special
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) submitted by Scriptnotes listener RJ Sampson ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Scriptnotes, Ep 170: Lotteries, lightning strikes and twist endings — Transcript

November 17, 2014 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](http://johnaugust.com/2014/lotteries-lightning-strikes-and-twist-endings).

**John August:** Hey, this is John. Before we start the show today, I want to let you know about the live show happening on December 11th in Hollywood. It’s Scriptnotes with me and Craig and Aline and special guests Jane Espenson, Derek Haas and B.J. Novak. So we did this last year. It was a tremendously fun time. You should come.

Tickets go on sale tomorrow, November 12th. So if you would like to come, please go buy a ticket. There’s a link in the show notes but you can also go to the Writers Guild Foundation site. That’s wgfoundation.org. As always, it benefits the Writers Guild Foundation which is an awesome charity. And we had a fun time last year. We’re going to have a fun time this year. So come join us if you’d like and we’ll get on with the show. Thanks.

[intro tone]

Hello and Welcome. My name is John August.

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

**John:** And this is Episode 170 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

So Craig, last Sunday I had a really strange experience.

**Craig:** Tell me all about it.

**John:** I went to Long Beach where I saw the West Coast premiere of Big Fish: The Musical.

**Craig:** Oh, that must have been both disorienting and pleasing at the same time.

**John:** It was. It was surreal in the best possible ways. So this is the production that actually bought all of our stuff when we closed on Broadway. So they bought our sets, our props, our costumes, our wigs. And so it’s that weird experience of seeing something that is incredibly familiar yet incredibly different at the same time. So it’s the same production in terms of the script and the music but it’s just different because it’s different people doing it. It’s a different stage. It’s at this really quite big house, the Carpenter Theatre in Long Beach. And I kind of loved it, at the same time it was sort of an out-of-body experience.

**Craig:** I know that it’s hard for a lot of people to have seen the Broadway show because it’s in New York only but it was my pleasure to see it. And one of the big show-stopping elements were these big elephant butts, which sounds kind of crazy when I say it like that, but they were. It was very impressive production design. Did they have the elephant butts?

**John:** They have the elephant butts.

**Craig:** Wow, that’s awesome.

**John:** Yeah. So here’s what was so fascinating is because this production is original theatre, it didn’t have automation of the stage. So they had a lot of our set pieces but they didn’t have all the magic under the stage things to make stuff move around. So they have to like push things around. And they did a remarkable job sort of accommodating what they needed to do for that. And they were able to do a lot of the choreography with the Broadway production but not all of the choreography.

So it was actually just genuinely fascinating. It’s an experience that, as a screenwriter, you and I would never have.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** To see the same text but with completely different people and being done without any of your sort of direct involvement. And so in many cases, people are making similar choices to the Broadway production because it’s just that’s the text. I mean like you’re going to play things a certain way because that just is what makes sense. But then sometimes a person will do something that is just different than intention. And sometimes that was kind of fascinating.

So Amos Calloway who, in the movie, is Danny DeVito, in the Broadway stage production it was Brad Oscar who was fantastic. The Amos that I saw in this version was sort of like I would say like a drunken cowardly lion, which is just a very different choice but it kind of worked. And so it was cool to see something very different.

So I would recommend anyone who makes a Broadway musical [laughs] to go visit a regional production of their own show because you’ll find it fascinating and surreal.

**Craig:** That’s spectacular. I’m glad it’s enjoying a second life and hopefully many more lives to come. I can see the show being done in schools.

**John:** We will be doing it in schools. So we have 60 productions this year of Big Fish across the country. Abilene Christian University did it in Texas. There’s a lot of university productions. Eventually there will be a Big Fish junior version like a school version —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Which will probably be different because I think a fifth grade musical about death is probably not the most ideal subject matter. So I will do some book changes to accommodate those needs.

**Craig:** There is actually some very interesting junior versions out there. My son was Jean Valjean in the Junior Les Mis in which some people actually were allowed to die.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** So Éponine was allowed to die but Fantine was sent to a hospital [laughs] but then returns later as a ghost. So you just sort of understood that maybe the hospital wasn’t that great. But various changes were made. No one ever referred to prostitution or things like that. But your show, I think, wouldn’t require much.

**John:** No. I mean, our show is incredibly wholesome and family-friendly. The challenge is just how do you , you know, the idea of a father dying is quite a bit to put on the backs of a grade school cast. And also the split between the past and the present, that’s kind of sophisticated. And then to be able to show that and really act that when you have maybe a 12-year-old doing that could be challenging.

So I think we will find a way to simplify aspects of the storytelling so that it can best be the story of a son wanting to learn the truth about his father’s tales within the framework of what Big Fish should be.

**Craig:** Yeah. And I think you’ll find also that a huge part of the job of juniorizing the musical is making it much, much shorter and taking out — choosing which songs should just go because they can’t sing all of them.

**John:** Absolutely. And which songs can move from being a solo number to a group number because —

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You have so many kids.

**Craig:** Right. That’s right.

**John:** So today on the program, let us answer some questions from listeners. We have a whole bunch that have been stacking up, so we’ll dig into that mail bag. We’re also going to talk about The Five Types of Twist Endings, this great blog post by Alec Worley. And I want to talk about lightning strikes and lotteries and sort of that sense of whether something becomes popular or successful because of its inherent awesomeness or just because magic happens.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So let’s get to it, but first a tiny bit of follow- up. Last week I announced Writer Emergency, this pack of ideas and prompts that we’re starting on Kickstarter. And Craig, you had to venture to the Kickstarter site.

**Craig:** Here’s the sick part is that I gave you money —

**John:** Mm-hmm.

**Craig:** Because you’re my friend.

**John:** Aw.

**Craig:** And then today, I gave our editor, Matthew Chilelli, some money because he does a really good job.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** But it’s killing me.

**John:** It’s killing you. I really just want to dig into what it felt like to press that green Back This Project button. How did it feel when you clicked that and knew that you were supporting the Kickstarter economy?

**Craig:** It felt like I was betraying everything that I believe in. [laughs]

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** That’s basically I felt like I had turned my back on my values and had contributed to the weakening of civilization.

**John:** Craig, I want to thank you for that because you’ve helped and I want to thank, we’ve had so many backers. We had more than 2,000 backers and we —

**Craig:** Yeah, you guys did great out there.

**John:** We did great out there. So we were trying to raise $9,000. As we’re recording this, we’ve crossed $57,000 which is just nuts. So that’s fantastic. So now it’s pushing through the rest of the Kickstarter and putting these out in the world and then getting them to the hands of kids in creative writing programs across the country and around the world who could hopefully benefit from these. So I want to thank you, Craig, personally —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Because I know this was not an easy thing for you. But you broke through that seal, that barrier just for this one and then you supported Matthew Chilelli and now you’re just not going to be able to stop supporting Kickstarter projects.

**Craig:** No, no, no, it’s very easy for me to stop. In fact, what I really want is for Stuart to have a Kickstarter that I don’t support [laughs] just as a matter of principle. I don’t care what it is. He’s getting nothing. By the way, do you think you’re going to make money on these things? Do you think you’ll profit at all?

**John:** We might profit a little bit. So here’s the deal. It’s like as I described on the first podcast when we talked about this, is printing playing cards scales pretty well. So they’re really expensive to make those first batch of decks, but the more you can make, the cheaper per unit it is. The challenge is we’re actually doubling that because we have to, we’re sending them out to kids. And then there’s some things that don’t scale like postage and like sending stuff out to backers around the world.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So we’re not going to make a lot out of it but I think we’re going to sort of do what I wanted to do out of the project which is sort of bend the universe in a slightly better direction. So it’s been exciting to do that and sort of engage with that community which has its own sort of esoteric rules and customs and try to both be a part of that world of Kickstarter and also introduce that Kickstarter kind of world to people who are backing their very first projects like Craig Mazin.

**Craig:** Well, now that I hear that you are going to make some money on this, I’m full of regret because I would have just given you the $9,000.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** I would just have bought you out, given you the $9,000.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** This is like Shark Tank for —

**John:** Oh, yeah, yeah.

**Craig:** For 100 percent equity in your company, it’s just, but now I’ve given money and —

**John:** But you’re going to be getting a deck of cards. And you said you actually wanted to donate —

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** The extra cards. So I think you did like the 12-pack.

**Craig:** Yeah. I want all the cards to go to the less fortunate budding screenwriters out there.

**John:** Great. And that’s a thing that backers can always do. So when you get your survey at the end of this asking for your mailing address, there’s this little field saying Special Instructions. You’re can just say I’m Craig Mazin and I want to give all my cards to the kids.

**Craig:** Yeah, that’s right. You can just say I want to Mazin this.

**John:** I want to Mazin this.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** That’s really the term that we’re going to use for this. And so when Stuart sees that on the instruction sheet, he’ll know, okay, this is the Craig Mazin special.

**Craig:** That’s right.

**John:** Awesome. Let’s get to our things today.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** So first up is this Five Types of Twist Endings, which is a blog post by Alec Worley, and whoever sent this to me, thank you because it was great. It’s been sitting in our show notes for a while. But it was really cool.

So this blog post talks through twist endings and it defines twist endings as “the moment of revelation within a story that throws into question all that’s gone before.”

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And it’s not hard for us to think about twist endings in movies because some of my favorite movies have twist endings.

**Craig:** Yeah, and I thought that this was a pretty good summary of how these things work. We can go through them one by one. I’ll take the first one, reversal —

**John:** Sure.

**Craig:** Reversal of Identity in which someone turns out to be someone else. So your parent is actually not your parent but your grandparent. Your best friend is actually a shape-shifting monster so —

**John:** Yeah. The Crying Game where the woman you love is not —

**Craig:** Is not a woman.

**John:** Ta-da.

**Craig:** Ta-da. Or in Fight Club, Brad Pitt is not actually a person. He is your alter ego.

**John:** That would also maybe play into the third version which is the Reversal of Perception. And Reversal of Perception is the way you thought the universe was built is not the way the universe is actually built. And so there’s a fundamental thing that is not the way you thought it was. My movie, The Nines, has that aspect where quite early on in the film you realize something bigger is going on. And so it’s not a twist in the sense of like, oh my gosh, I didn’t expect that at all. But you know that there is a revelation coming, that the universe is bent in a way that you were not expecting.

**Craig:** Yeah, the universe is a bent in a way or time is being bent in a way. So Alec cites An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge which is an amazing short story by the great Ambrose Bierce and was clearly the inspiration for Jacob’s Ladder in which it turns out the entire movie is the fantasy of someone as they are dying.

**John:** Yeah. And short stories are actually a perfect place for twist endings to happen because in some ways, a novel, a twist at the end of a novel could feel like a bit of a betrayal. But a short story, you have just the right amount of investment in the reality of the short story that the twist ending feels great and rewarding. Where I would wonder in a novel sometimes you spent eight hours on this thing and like then to say like, oh, I’m going to pull the rug out from under you, it might feel like a betrayal.

**Craig:** No question. Twist endings have always been the stock and trade of science fiction and fantasy short story authors. In part, it works so well for short stories because a good twist makes sense of some confusing facts. And we can only bear to be confused for so long before we just give up. So short stories work beautifully for that.

One of the other twist endings he identifies is the Reversal of Motive.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** I thought he was after this but he’s really after that. So he cites Seven where we realize in the end the serial killer isn’t actually helping them. He’s setting up Brad Pitt to become, Brad Pitt and Brad Pitt’s wife to become his final two victims.

**John:** Obviously reversal of motive is often found in comedies also where you have a misunderstanding of what a character is trying to do and that’s sort of driving things. So in Go, in the third section of Go, Burke and his wife, they seemed to be trying to seduce Adam and Zack like some weird kinky sex thing is about to happen and it’s revealed that they’re actually trying to sell them confederated products.

So their motive was very different and that was the surprise. That’s the jolt that you weren’t expecting. And part of what was fun about that is it was a good misdirect. So like, oh, that’s the twist and then the next scene, you’re going to see that they’re actually, Adam and Zack were a gay couple this whole time and they’ve been fighting.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So sometimes you can misdirect twice or like you can lead the audience into one misdirection and then surprise them with a second misdirection.

**Craig:** Yeah, for sure. And some of these things overlap. You know what just popped into my mind is that great character from Monsters, Inc. I can’t remember her name but she’s the one who talks —

**John:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** And she is both the reversal of identity and the reversal of motive. It turns out that she’s actually there under cover and she’s not a file clerk. “You forgot to file your paperwork.” But she’s the head of some sort of internal investigation and that was her motive. So those things always, you’re right, they work well in comedies.

And here he also has Reversal of Fortune in which, this one was a little, I guess it’s kind of a twist ending. It’s really more of the kind of Monkey’s Paw theory — what you thought you were going to get you’re not quite getting.

**John:** Exactly. So it’s pulling defeat out of victory or that thing that at the very end you realize like, oh, you actually didn’t get what you wanted. He cites someone we talked about before on the podcast, Emma Coats from Pixar who writes, “Coincidences to get characters into trouble are great; coincidences to get them out of it are cheating”. And so this is basically there’s a coincidence often at the end that ends up pulling the rug out from underneath that character. And that can be rewarding in the right kind of movie. I think of noir movies sometimes having this or certainly like that Twilight Zone kind of fiction —

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** May have that like suddenly at the end the great and short version where he finally has time to read and then he breaks his glasses.

**Craig:** Yeah. This is the hallmark of the ironic ending.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** One of my favorite Simpsons jokes was a Halloween episode. Homer eats the forbidden donut. He sells his soul for a donut, doesn’t finish it. [laughs] So he doesn’t have to go to hell but then he does finish it and he ends up in hell and he’s sent to the Department of Ironic Punishment —

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Where he’s put on a conveyor belt and —

**John:** And force fed doughnuts.

**Craig:** Force fed doughnuts except that he never stops eating the doughnuts. He’s perfectly happy to eat as many doughnuts as they give him. And the demon says, “I don’t understand. James Coco broke in 15 minutes!”

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** Anyway, this would be the Department of Ironic Punishment.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** And then we have Reversal of Fulfillment.

**John:** Which I found the most challenging of the ones he describes and how you differentiate that from reversal of fortune.

**Craig:** Yeah. And so what he’s saying is, somebody is going to achieve is kind of subverted by what somebody else achieves. And I think the best example he gives is the gifts, O. Henry’s Gift of the Magi where two people individually sell their most beloved possession to sacrifice for the other and then find out that they’ve done this.

**John:** Well, it’s not only that they’ve done this, but like one of them has bought a comb, but she’s sold all her hair.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** The gifts are now useless for each other. So that was, yeah, that works. Again, it’s a little bit of an ironic. That sort of kind of is also —

**John:** It’s ironic too.

**Craig:** It’s a reversal of fortune in a sense too.

**John:** Yeah. What I think is important about all these discussions about the twist ending is it’s really looking at what does the reader know? What does the reader know at every moment in the course of the story? Because in order to create one of these twist endings to make sense, the entire narrative has to make sense without the twist. And so that the journey you’re going on seems to make sense. And then when you provide the twist ending the reader needs to be able to go back and say, “Oh, it still completely makes sense with this new information.”

So you’re withholding a crucial piece of information and then at the end providing it and that changes the perception of everything that came before it. And that could be a rewarding experience for the reader. It can also be a very frustrating experience for a reader. And if that’s kind of the only thing you’re story has going for it, it’s unlikely I think to be completely satisfying.

**Craig:** That’s right. You don’t want to start and I think you can see the problem in the progression of the career of M. Night Shyamalan. You don’t want to start with this edict that the twist rules all.

**John:** Yep.

**Craig:** It does not. The script that I’m writing now is essentially a neo-Agatha Christie Who Dun It? All Agatha Christie stories had a twist ending, all of them, because the person that you thought did it wasn’t the one who did it and you never could figure out who did it and then you find out. And she used these reversals of identity and motive all the time.

Interestingly, never a reversal of perception, a reversal of fortune or fulfillment. It was always the motive and the identity were the things that were constantly shifting with her. And what’s so interesting about her success as a writer was that she understood that her audience knew it was coming. And that’s quite a high wire act to do when you, it’s not like — we all went and saw The Sixth Sense. I did not- I wasn’t sitting there thinking I wonder what the twist is. I just watched the movie and enjoyed the twist. But no one sits down to an Agatha Christie book and thinks, well… [laughs]

**John:** Well, this is going to be straightforward. I am going to know who did it.

**Craig:** Just like, yeah, it’s like a true crime story or something.

**John:** And so it’s sort of there’s a meta level of expectation is that she has to write the story knowing that everybody is expecting there to be a twist ending.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So therefore, everyone is going to be reading everything she writes into it with the expectation of like, oh, but that’s not really true. And so she has to both honor that expectation and then surpass it in ways that continue to be rewarding and surprising. And so that’s a challenging thing.

What the frustration would be is if Agatha Christie ever tried to write just like a straight story, something that didn’t have that at all, everyone would be a little bit weirded out by it. I could imagine her writing under pen names because anything with the Agatha Christie brand on it is going to feel like, well, that has to be that situation. M. Night Shyamalan has a similar kind of jinx to him because three times is certainly a pattern.

**Craig:** Mm-hmm. No, for sure. I mean, and frankly it started to feel a little desperate. I mean we don’t want to feel like our filmmakers are sweating to cook us the meal that they think we want. We want them to be expressing something competently and then we can enjoy it along with them.

By the way, Agatha Christie’s first big hit novel was called The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. I think it was called The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. And at that time, she was a new member of this Mystery Writers of England organization. That’s not the real name, but it was essentially that. And this caused a huge uproar with the mystery writers organization because they felt she had violated the rules of the craft.

Because the twist in the, and so The Murder of Roger Ackroyd is a first person account. A guy is living in this little town and Hercule Poirot is renting the house next to him and he describes how a man is murdered and Poirot goes about attempting to solve the crime. And at the end, spoiler alert, it turns out the murderer is the narrator.

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** And everyone just lost their crap over this. But boy, it really works in the novel. It’s great.

**John:** Yeah, we like that.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** In many ways, I think that kind of reversal of expectation, that’s a reversal of the form in a certain way. Like you thought this was going to play by the rules and it’s not playing by the rules at all. And I certainly love that when that happens.

**Craig:** Yes. Yes, yes, yes.

**John:** It reminds me of Too Many Cooks. I don’t know if you’ve seen Too Many Cooks yet.

**Craig:** Well, it’s my One Cool Thing.

**John:** Oh my god. And so Too Many Cooks is fantastic. And so I will let it remain your One Cool Thing. But I think that also reverses the form. You have an expectation of like, oh, I know what this is, I know what it’s parodying.

**Craig:** Repeatedly. [laughs]

**John:** Repeatedly. And then it just through its length and its form and just how nuts it goes, it becomes something really transcendent.

**Craig:** Indeed.

**John:** All right. I want to talk about two other little Internet things that came up this week. First is Alex from Target. Do you know this whole meme, this thing that happened?

**Craig:** I do. And I have to say, this is where the Internet just occasionally pukes something out. It just randomly decides you — I’m going to make you a star.

**John:** So Alex from Target for people who weren’t aware of it or who are listening to this six months later and wonder what the hell was that? So this is what happened with Alex from Target. There was a teenage checkout boy at Target, someone took a picture of him bagging groceries and another girl on Twitter wrote, “Yo, like so hot.” And that became like a viral meme sensation and then it got remixed and it just became this whole big blowup of a thing.

But then another company, a marketing company, claimed credit for having started it, but it looks like they really didn’t, which is juts nuts also.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** If someone can try to jump on and claim credit for something they didn’t do at all. But it’s just so obvious we check that they didn’t really do it. So it was just a fascinating moment of kind of these Internet lightning strikes where this is not a person who, this Alex from Target, he didn’t do anything.

**Craig:** He did nothing.

**John:** He was just, he did nothing. He was just suddenly in a place and his photo went crazy and by all accounts, at the time that we’re taping this, he seems to be handling it remarkably well in the way that I think young people now who’ve always grown up with the Internet are sort of just kind of ready to be famous in a way that we never were. [laughs]

There’s that expectation like you could be famous tomorrow.

**Craig:** Well, also, I mean Alex understands inherently that he didn’t do anything. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah, exactly.

**Craig:** I mean, there are people that want to be famous and start doing things to be famous and then they become famous either because what they do is legitimately good or it’s legitimately terrible.

**John:** Or it’s ambiguous in a way that’s, yeah.

**Craig:** Yeah. Or it’s just bizarre or amusing, whatever it is. Alex literally did nothing. [laughs] He did absolutely nothing. This is one of those, this is like when there’s a glitch in the matrix and this happens.

And I think for him I can only assume that he’s like, yeah, this is just the Internet being Internet. I don’t have anything to do with this. It could have been me, it could have been anybody.

**John:** Basically, all he did was reflect light. And that was the extent of it.

**Craig:** Literally, all he did, it’s not even a well-framed photo.

**John:** No, I think that’s partly what makes it so incredibly great and charming. So I wanted to just take a minute or two to talk through what the Alex from Target movie would be, because I guarantee you that at least a thousand screenwriters go like, oh, that’s an idea for a movie. Like what if you suddenly became famous and like for no good reason. And I wanted to think about sort of what that movie would be because we’ve made other movies, good movies, about sort of the rise of Internet culture. I mean, Social Network, one of the best of them.

And I guess in Social Network of course, he’s creating Facebook, he’s actually doing something. But that sense of being plucked from obscurity and put up on this great stage and suddenly weirdly having a platform when you kind of shouldn’t have a platform is fascinating. And there’s potential there’s something to be made there but there’s also so many pitfalls in a character who has and wants nothing and suddenly gets everything.

**Craig:** Well, one of my favorite movies of all time is the old school version of this and it’s Being There.

**John:** Oh, certainly.

**Craig:** Yeah, and I think that I could easily see an Alex from Target’s version of Being There. If you were to make Being There now, that’s probably how it would go. Somebody is bagging, I mean, I don’t mean to suggest that Alex from Target is mentally challenged in any way [laughs] the way that Chauncey Gardiner was.

But somebody who’s unremarkable and perhaps even sub-remarkable becomes famous because the Internet has a weird burp and they end up being the president.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Yeah, it could totally happen.

**Craig:** It could happen.

**John:** Yeah. So I think there will likely be competing Alex from Target movies in development. And I suspect none of them will happen. But I suspect we will see this idea in general explored not because of Alex from Target but just because it’s an idea that sort of needs to be talked about in the universe is this sense of suddenly out of nowhere you can just have this giant spotlight on you and you have no way of anticipating it, controlling it, making it start, making it stop.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And that’s a weird time that we’re living in.

**Craig:** Yeah, and somebody out there is pitching Jimmy from Taco Hut.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** And probably selling it.

**John:** Yeah, probably.

**Craig:** Yeah. Probably.

**John:** Low six figures, yeah.

**Craig:** Low six.

**John:** Low six. The management company is involved as a producer, they shopped it around.

**Craig:** Right. The studio is, even though they haven’t gotten the script yet, they’re already thinking about who’s going to come and rewrite it.

**John:** Yeah, they are. And they’re probably going after like some of the Teen Wolf cast like Dylan O’Brien or somebody like kind of person for that role.

**Craig:** Totally.

**John:** Totally. So in a related thing, this was already on my show notes to talk about, is this great talk that Darius Kazemi did at XOXO, this sort of, I’ll summarize and say it’s a sort of TED Talk like, but his speech was actually really fascinating because it was like the most brilliant parody of a TED Talk speech. And so I’ll link to it in the show notes, but essentially he talks about how he made it. And we’ve heard a lot of speeches about how people made it and sort of how they became successful and how they built a community.

So what he did was he played the lottery. And he would, every day he would play the lottery and really think about what numbers and he started a community and he started like a blog where like he talked about his favorite numbers and like he’d mix it up and like played numbers in different combinations or sometimes like on his mom’s birthday he’d actually play his dad’s birthday to really throw things off. And eventually like he hit it and he became like super rich.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And so it’s this brilliant parody of like how I made it but what’s so great about his speech is he actually segues into this idea of lotteries and this idea of lighting striking. And he’s a person who, this guy in real life, he makes sort of little Internet memes. And so he makes this little Twitter bots that combine random things. And so he gave a demonstration of like 50 of these different things that he’s made and combined.

And some of them are incredibly successful and some of them aren’t incredibly successful. And he can’t predict what goes viral. And his suspicion is that there is no reason. That it genuinely is just random, like Alex from Target, and that you cannot funnily predict it and shouldn’t therefore beat yourself up if something doesn’t work and you shouldn’t praise yourself when something does work because it kind of is random.

**Craig:** Yeah, I mean, look, there are way, there is good work and bad work. There are ways to do better and there are ways to do worse. But the magic that occurs when something takes off is unpredictable and does incorporate an enormous amount of random factors.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** And that fascinates me. I talked a while ago, one of my Cool Things was Gödel, Escher, Bach, which is a great book, which I think is —

**John:** Which I bought, which I —

**Craig:** Wait, I sent it to you.

**John:** No, you sent it to me.

**Craig:** I sent it you.

**John:** You sent it to me. You sent me the physical thing. It’s like 1,000 pages.

**Craig:** Yeah, it’s a massively long book. But Gödel was a mathematician and his — and I always worry that I’m not quite getting his theorem correct, but I believe this is essentially what he said was for any system of math with rules, there will always be things that are true that cannot be proven. There must be things that you can’t — that are true regardless of the fact that you can’t prove that they’re true which is fascinating to me. And I feel like entertainment is the same way. There will always be things that are good and there’s no way to prove why. And you could have never gotten to them intentionally. They just happen.

**John:** Yeah. I think that absolutely is true. What is interesting about this idea of lightning strikes or lottery tickets is that in a weird way you’re more likely to win the more things you do. And so I would say for people who are looking at a writing career or like trying to get into the movie business, the more times you’re at bat, the more likely you are to hit a home run.

And so you’re much less likely to sell a spec script if you’ve written exactly one script and you’ve shown it to one person. So that exposure to many opportunities and taking many chances is much more likely to get you into a situation where you can suddenly find yourself lucky.

**Craig:** Yeah, you have to strike the balance of course because there are people that shotgun a lot of things out there. One of them happens to click, but that’s the end of them because really their success was a product of nothing more than the shot-gunning.

When they talk about animal behavior, they talk about two reproductive strategies. I can’t remember, they’re defined by letters. But regardless, one of them essentially is a low quantity, high quality reproductive strategy which is a very human way of approaching it. Elephants do it this way.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** It takes a lot to have a child, so therefore you’re going to have fewer of them, but really put a lot of resources into protecting them and raising them. And then there’s the other way which is, screw it, I’m going to have as many kids as possible and then a bunch of them are going to die but maybe a bunch won’t. [laughs]

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And what you find, actually, even in humans, is that when humans are in situations where there is plenty, they will go for the low-quantity, high-quality reproductive strategy.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** And vice versa.

**John:** The other thing which I think the lightning strikes theorem kind of misses is, especially in creative work, is iteration, in that sense of like, you know what, that first thing may not be the right idea, but by going back and tweaking it and tweaking it and tweaking it and tweaking it, that’s sort of how you find what is the thing that takes hold. And, you know, with all the sort of Twitterbots this guy did, that’s not really iteration, it’s a bunch of like things moving in parallel versus sort of serially going back through and seeing like, what, how can I make this thing better? How can I take the system and tweak it and make it better, and how can I make that experience better.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And so, in rewriting a script, that’s iteration. That’s taking feedback and looking at the script again and saying like, okay, this is the better version of this. And you’re honestly iterating on your own ability to write because I’m certainly a better writer than I was 10 years ago because I’ve had the experience of looking at my work and saying, okay, these are strengths, these are things that are not strengths, and I can actually do things better through all that iteration process.

**Craig:** And for those of us who are making movies, our goal is to make something that is permanent. We don’t always succeed, but we try. Whereas when you’re doing pursuits like the kind that Darius is doing, there is no expectation of permanency.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** What you’re hoping for really is a combustion, you know.

**John:** That’s true.

**Craig:** But everybody knows that when the combustion consumes the fuel it’s gone. I mean, there’s no chance that a meme will last forever. You know, Grumpy Cat will not be popular 10 years from now.

**John:** Yes. And so, we can love Grumpy Cat now, we can celebrate its impermanence.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** But we can’t try to emulate its impermanence. We can’t try to like, to make the next Grumpy Cat. That’s probably not the right idea. We should try to make the next amazing thing. And the next amazing thing could end up blowing up like Grumpy Cat or could be a long slow burn that is remembered 10 years from now.

**Craig:** Yes, yes. But when you’re trying to make things that are permanent the high-quantity approach often will bite you in the butt.

**John:** I would agree. Let’s take a look at some questions.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** So the first one I have here is Jason from White Rock, British Columbia who has a location question. “How specific can you place action in the real world? Can you really place a scene on a specific street in a specific town with perhaps even a specific address? I’m a suburban Vancouver-based filmmaker, and we Vancouverites don’t have a lot of experience watching movies that are actually set in Vancouver. Mostly our city serves as a stand-in for other American towns. I probably know as much about the way addresses work in New York as I do about Vancouver itself. So when addresses are needed in your script, how specific can you make them?”

**Craig:** Well, yes, you can make the address as specific as you want. Generally speaking, it should be as specific as it needs to be.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** There’s no point in saying that the building is 35 West 56th Street if you can say, well, it’s a building, you know, Midtown, you could say, or corner of 56th and 5th. But, you know, if you’re telling the story where the address becomes a matter of importance, for instance it’s a crime story and someone has lied about where they live, sure. Well then, that makes sense, yeah.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Put the specific address in.

**John:** Yeah, I think Craig and I are generally always pushing for specificity. And specificity doesn’t necessarily mean the street address, but it’s describing things in the kind of detail that makes it this house versus that house and lets us know the kinds of people who live in this house versus the kinds of people who live in that house. And so really think about what information will help your reader understand what is unique and special about these characters and their world.

And if that means really nailing down to what that street is like, great, tell us the street, but also make sure you’re giving us words that describe what that street feels like so, because we’re not going to know this. Don’t just put in a link to Google Street View, like really describe the street.

**Craig:** Yeah. What we want to know really is about people more than anything. So places exist for people to be in and we need to know what that place says about the people that are there. So, yeah, be specific, but don’t be over-specific. If the detail adds nothing for the reader it’s probably dispensable.

**John:** It is. So anything that provides feelings, sentiment, emotional detail, that’s what you want.

**Craig:** Right. Okay, well, next question is Matt from LA. And he asks, “After a long time toiling in the entertainment industry, I’ve been lucky enough to make the leap into fulltime writing and directing. As a freelancer I’ve been very busy and I’ve taken every single job that’s been offered. Now, they may not be the best projects but I’ve learned a ton and I’ve always felt good about the decision to take the job. But I foresee a near future where the various companies that have been offering me jobs will present something I don’t think is worth my time or the paycheck. As two very successful writers — ”

**John:** Ah…

**Craig:** “Very successful writers, I’m sure you’re offered projects that you feel compelled to turn down by reputable studios.” I think he means I’m sure you’re offered projects by reputable studios that you feel compelled to turn down. “How do you turn down opportunities without souring relationships? Any tips would be greatly appreciated.”

**John:** That’s a really good question.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** And that happens a fair amount, I’m sure, I mean, to both of us. And so someone will send us something and say like, hey, we’d love you to do this thing. And I will read it, and I’ll say I don’t want to do this. And so how do you answer back in a way that doesn’t make you sound like a jerk saying like that’s a stupid movie, I don’t want to make it, but also doesn’t leave you on the hook for trying to write this movie for these people?

**Craig:** Yeah. There are a couple of reasons why you’re not going to want to do something. You either think it’s dumb or just not your thing, or you think this isn’t, it’s just not something that I want to do or that I think I could add something great to or that I could succeed with. What you want to do is always turn down things with that second reason, [laughs] even if they’re not always that second reason.

**John:** [laughs] Exactly.

**Craig:** Nobody minds if you say, listen, this is very cool, it’s not quite — I’m not quite sure what I could bring to it or it’s not quite what I’m looking for right now. John Lee Hancock has a great phrase, “This isn’t a pitch I can hit.”

**John:** Ah, nice.

**Craig:** You know, like so I’m putting it on me. I will often say, you know, it’s probably not something that I think I could succeed with, but I look forward to being embarrassed when this thing wins an Oscar for somebody else.

**John:** [laughs]

**Craig:** So, you know, I try and be humble about it. I mean, people are offering you things, you should be polite. But, you know, they’re not unaccustomed to this.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** Just as we are not unaccustomed to hearing no.

**John:** And that’s absolutely true. And so, often what I will say is truthfully I am too busy, so like, maybe I’m just not actually available to do it, and that could be a completely valid way to get out of something. The danger is sometimes they can come back to you with that same thing when it becomes clear that you are more available. Or they’ll say, we’ll wait. I’m like oh god, now I actually have to explain why I really don’t want to do it.

The other thing that I will say, which is often true, is that someone will come to me with a project and I’ll say, you know what, this is actually kind of like something I already planned to do myself. And so I sort of have my own version of what this kind of thing is, and yours is going to be great, but I sort of want to do mine at a certain point.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** That’s another way to approach it. So from you, as a writer-director, Matt, I would say, always say thank you. Make it clear that you really did really look at it, that you’re not just dismissing it out of hand, that you don’t want to work for those people. Just say like I didn’t spark to it. It didn’t feel like it was my thing, but I’m excited to work with you in the future. And if you mean that, then they will come back to you with more stuff.

**Craig:** Yeah. By the way, something that I will often do is I’ll say, after I’ve said no, I’ll say by the way, I really like this. For this part, think about this. I’m just saying like here’s just some thoughts in general. It doesn’t cost me anything and it shows that I wasn’t just being a jerk.

**John:** Exactly. And you may actually have a suggestion of like a person who is the right person for it. And so that’s always a good thing, too, if you can get someone else who would be fantastic for it involved.

**Craig:** Great point, great point.

**John:** Jay writes, “Can you go over the correct format for writing different scenes in the same room? For example, a bar where protagonists split up and do battle separately but in the same room. Do I still separate each scene with slug lines? If so, how should it look since they’re in the same master scene location? If not, can you give an example to how you would phrase this?”

**Craig:** Okay. Well, I personally wouldn’t do separate slug lines here. The slug line ultimately is a tool for the production to know where they’re shooting this thing. And if it’s all in one room, they’re shooting it all in one room.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** What you can do is, say something like OVER BY THE BAR, you know, in all caps, and then write some of that and then say OVER BY THE ENTRANCE and then some of that, you know, so that people will understand that the camera is picking off two different areas of the same room.

**John:** Yeah. So what Craig is describing is often called the intermediary slug line. So it’s not an EXT/INT. And you’re not changing going from a new, it’s not a new scene, it’s just like a new part of where you are at in a scene.

And you’ll see that a lot. And as you read more scripts, especially action things, you’ll see that happens a lot, when you’re in sort of the same general space but there’s sort of scene-lets happening. There’s moments happening over here, and there’s moments happening over here, and sometimes characters — you need to make it clear that characters are not in the same space and can’t interact, because they’re in different parts of an environment. That’s totally fine.

I would say, in general, as I read scripts from newer screenwriters, they tend to throw in too many slug lines and make things seem like there’s too many scenes. And a lot of like “same, continuous” they get so freaked out by the format, and sort of like moving through a house takes like three pages because there’s so many slug line.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** That’s not how it really works in the real world. If you’re in a house and the character is moving through space, let them move through space and don’t worry about each little new location.

**Craig:** Well, it’s just in part it’s the toxic impact of all these know nothing scripted advisers and so forth who fetishize the rules and put the fear of god into these poor people that their script is going to be thrown out if a slug line is misused. It’s absolute nonsense. The screenplay is there to inspire a movie in the reader’s mind and that’s what you should be aiming for. Don’t panic over things like “this is the way the slug line has to be!”

**John:** Yeah. Or that it should say “same” rather than “continuous.” It’s like no, it doesn’t need to be either of that. You probably don’t even need the slug line.

**Craig:** It’s just crazy.

**John:** In general I’d say like save those scene headers. Let’s really call them scene headers because it’s a header for a scene. The movie has moved to a new place and time in general and if you really haven’t moved to a new place and time but you’ve just like moved to a slightly different part of the room, just keep going and just let us be in that place.

**Craig:** I mean, there are times when you need a different slug because it’s the same time but you have two people in the bar and then at the same time behind the bar outside two guys are climbing in through the rear window.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** You know, people need to know, okay, it’s a cheat to not kind of call out that you’ve made a big location change, because again, it’s really, it’s for the production. I mean, that’s what it’s there for. Frankly, readers tend to glide through these scene headers. It’s not the stuff that our eyeballs snag on, so.

**John:** I think, honestly, I doubt, most times as a reader I’m not really reading those, I’m just aware that there was and INT and EXT and it was all upper case and so therefore, okay, I’m in a new scene.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So it’s a sort of piece of visual punctuation that lets me know that, okay, I’m in someplace new, and I’m going to figure it out once I start reading it.

**Craig:** Precisely. All right. Well, we’ve got a question here from Jim from Durham, North Carolina. And he writes, “My question concerns use of paragraph breaks in a block of dialogue.” All right, we’re in the format session of our Q&A?

**John:** We are.

**Craig:** “Admittedly, in most scenes, there’s a lot of back and forth, so it’s not common that a character goes on for half a page, but it can happen. My natural instinct when writing a long speech like that is to use normal paragraph breaks, a blank line. However, I was chastised for doing this. In fact, I was told by a person who seems to know all the rules that I had to put, in parentheses, beat, between each paragraph. I didn’t really intend for a pause any longer than the normal speaking pace, I was just trying to make it more readable and less run-on. ”

Well, there wasn’t a specific question there but I think that the implied question is who’s right? [laughs]

**John:** Who’s right? Can you put that blank line in a long speech?

**Craig:** Yeah. What do you say?

**John:** I think you can. But I would agree with whoever said that it’s not standard and that it does sort of throw you because we’re not used to seeing it. And if I were to encounter that in a script I might wonder is this a mistake, did something get dropped out, is there something wrong, because I’m used to seeing a continuous block of dialogue being a continuous block. And if it’s broken up by anything, it’s broken up by beat or something else.

**Craig:** I agree. I mean, the problem isn’t that you’re putting the break in there, the problem is that the reader might presume that something went wrong and obviously that’s not what you intend. Beat is a perfectly good way to break these things up. Most people don’t read beat as long pause. If I want a long pause I’ll write in “long pause.”

However, I have to also say, if you don’t intend for any pauses or anything and it’s a half a page of a speech, try it without the pauses. I mean, just write the half a page. I’ll tell you this much, if it’s a half a page speech, better be a damn good speech. But if it’s a damn good speech, I’ll read it.

**John:** And you have other options rather than just beat and for that parenthetical. And there may be some good reason why there’s sort of a special moment of action or emphasis that it makes sense, like sort of like in the parenthetical, you might say like, you know, (to Jim) or like (straight down the barrel), or like some kind of a color line that you’re putting in that parenthetical that actually helps make the speech make more sense, and it’s also visually breaking it up. I think Jim’s overall instincts, like oh my god, this is going to be a very long block of dialogue if I don’t break it up, that’s the right instinct.

**Craig:** It is.

**John:** I would just that overall a use of a parenthetical or honestly just breaking out in speech to put it in a line of scene description and then going back into the dialogue is generally a better approach.

**Craig:** I agree, I agree. It’s a good instinct to break it up unless you’ve got something that really works best as a kind of spat-out run-on deal.

**John:** Yeah. So Clarence, from Canada, asks a marathon question.

**Craig:** [laughs] This needed to be broken up by beats.

**John:** Yes. So it’s in little bullet points in WorkFlowy here. So I’m going to read this and it’s going to be kind of long, but I think it’s interesting, so I’m going to get into this here.

“Two years ago, I wrote, directed, produced my second feature film with a meager budget of $7,000. It was solely financed by me and my own production company. I had screened it at a film festival in Los Angeles and was fortunate enough to be able to attend. Before arriving in Los Angeles, I got in touch with a handful of sales agents that the festival announced would be in attendance.

“I met with those three who were interested in representing the movie for international and domestic distribution. Two wanted to make changes to the cut, so I went with the one that didn’t.”

**Craig:** Act one.

**John:** “The deal was this. The company would own the distribution rights for my movie forever and ever. And they would work hard to sell the movie to territories worldwide because otherwise they wouldn’t make any money either. They had a number of other movies under their belt that range in size from no budget like mine, to about the $1 million range.”

**Craig:** Midpoint.

**John:** “Since its initial release on VOD and DVD in North America last year, it has also been released in 30 countries. But here’s the thing, I haven’t made that much money. It’s not necessarily the number that bothers me, it’s still a huge return on a $7,000 investment. What bothers me is that my sales agent has made much more than I have, about a 60/40 split. They take a 22% commission right off the top of each sale, and they recoup $20,000 they invested into marketing, like poster design, travel to film markets, et cetera. What’s left is mine. Unless the film reaches $100,000 in sales, then they recoup $15,000 additional marketing expenses. The movie has pushed past the $100,000 mark, and most markets have now been sold, giving a little room for much more income to trickle my way.”

**Craig:** Denouement.

**John:** “So finally, my question, is it normal for a sales agent or potentially distributor to make more money than the production company that actually made the movie? Not to mention put up the cash in the first place? Is this just the cost of doing business?”

**Craig:** Okay, so let’s summarize this Cecil B. DeMille production of a question. So he’s made a micro budget movie for $7,000. He has some sales agents that have sold it on VOD and DVD, and basically he’s not getting as much money back from the sales as they are.

The movie has grossed, I think is what he means, pushed past gross $100,000. There’s not much more that he thinks is coming towards him. So while he’s made some money here, it’s not what he was hoping.

Yes, this is normal. And here’s the problem. When you’re in this micro budget business, and you’re having an independent sales agent going out there and slinging this thing around, you are essentially, it’s like the pink sheets in the stock market. You’re penny-stocking it, you know?

**John:** Yup.

**Craig:** And so there’s this enormous built-in risk to these things. Some of these deals, the fact that the movie cost you $7,000 doesn’t mean anything to them. What they’re worried about is that they have to spend in this case, $20,000 to actually market and distribute this thing.

That $20,000 is at enormous risk. So the only way for them to make money is to build in the failures into the successes. And unfortunately, you’re not just paying them for what they did for your movie, you’re paying them for what they did for other movies that lost everything.

**John:** Yes. They’re sort of building a slate after the fact. They’re gathering up a bunch of movies. And in some ways it reminds me of sort of like the housing crisis where they packaged up a bunch of mortgages, and like put them into different bins and sort of like, you know, marketed them as one thing.

They probably were able to cut deals with VOD places and other stuff for like a whole big bundle of things. And yours was one of those bundle of things. And I think it’s unlikely that you’re going to see a huge windfall from that sort of situation.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Here’s the good news for Clarence though, like he made a $7,000 movie which got released on VOD and DVD. That is full of win.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** And I think you have to take that as a victory. And the fact that your movie exists in the universe, is a really good thing especially if you like your movie. That’s a really good thing. Many, many filmmakers, Lena Dunham’s first films never had that kind of release, so you’re ahead of her from that perspective.

I wouldn’t stress out about this. I would kind of forget about this movie, this distributor. Work on your next thing, and then if you have a thing that has multiple people who want to distribute it, take a stronger look at sort of what those terms are and if there’s a possibility for better terms with a better person, maybe that will be the case.

**Craig:** Yes. Michael Eisner once famously said of negotiating for deals, “You can get what you can get.” And this is what you’re able to get.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** So when you roll with these kinds of guys that are doing these high risk investments, yes, this is the way it works. There’s just no way around it. But John is absolutely right, the victory here is that you made the movie, people saw it, now it’s time to trade up and see if you can get into business with some people that aren’t necessarily in the, what my grandmother would call the schmatta business. John, that’s Yiddish for low quality clothing.

**John:** Ah-ha, I learned something today.

**Craig:** You learned something. Patrick in good old Blighty writes, “If I’m a British writer, writing a US-based script, most likely targeting a US production company or agent, should I be taking measures to alter my language and spelling accordingly? Hopefully, the dialogue should read as authentic to the setting. But should I be writing mom and not mum even if it’s against my nature? Would this freak an American reader out? Or would be people be able to accept the British-isms if it’s not affecting the story?

“I want to be able to write the script the way I feel comfortable. And I would feel as if I’m being inauthentic or misrepresenting myself as a writer by trying to remove or hide part of my identity from it, but I’m also worried at the same time it will be jarring, or take people out of the script. So what do you think I should do?”

**John:** You should absolutely not write mum instead of mom particularly in dialogue. Anything a character says needs to be written in the way that the character would actually say it. I mean, not going crazy into sort of like regionalisms or colloquialisms or trying to describe specific dialects accurately, but you don’t say mum instead of mom if it’s an American kid. That’s just not going to be natural. I wouldn’t worry about sort of every last little spelling. That’s fine. If it’s spelling in scene description, that’s going to be fine, but the big words, the words that are actually going to be said, those have to be American words if this is going to be a US production.

**Craig:** 100%. This is a slam dunk answer here. It’s not you, you’re not saying these things. You’re writing a screenplay with American characters, they have to speak as American people would speak. I’m on my second script in a row that is primarily populated by British characters. They speak like British people. What I don’t do is, for instance, if it’s a word that has a different spelling but the same pronunciation, I don’t go that far.

**John:** So honor, color, valor.

**Craig:** Precisely. If someone is going to say color, I just write it C-O-L-O-R. But I certainly, I take very careful, pay very careful attention to not use words that they simply don’t use over there. I mean, specifically if it’s in dialogue. For instance, in Britain, dumpsters aren’t called dumpsters. So I’m not going to have a character say dumpster. I’m not going to have an English character say dumpster.

This is an easy one, Patrick. Go ahead and write them however you want when people aren’t talking, but when the characters are talking, they have to talk like the people that they are.

**John:** Yes. John in Orlando writes, “I’m an attorney and screenwriter who is in Florida. I have a good friend who happens to be childhood best friends with a major showrunner you both surely know.

Oh, now I have to think of who this could be.

“We have hung out in social situations, but I’ve never revealed that I write scripts. I really hate to be ‘that guy,'” in quotes, “lest it change the social dynamic between the three of us, but I would like to at least pick his brain about some things. My dream would be to have a project gain traction first, and then mention it, but I feel this guy probably knows a ton that could help me at this point. Any advice for broaching this subject? This must happen to you with friends of friends who want advice.”

**Craig:** Yeah, it does happen with friends of friends who want advice. I think what nobody wants to hear is read my script because they already have scripts they have to read. There’s legal issues with reading a script, and so on and so forth, and of course, what’s hanging over it more than anything, is that they don’t want to be in that terrible position of having to tell you that your script is atrocious.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** However, I don’t think it’s a problem if you’ve hung out with this guy in social situations and you live near him to say, “Hey, can I just buy you a drink or a cup of coffee, an hour of your time, no more, no less? I just want to ask you some questions.”

That’s an easy one for somebody to say yes to. Frankly, it’s also an easy one for somebody to say no to. If they say no, then you just let them off the hook and that’s the end of that. But if they say yes, at least then you get them there. And if your concept comes up in the discussion and they get really excited by it, then they’ll ask you if they want to read it.

**John:** Yeah, I think that’s exactly right. I think broaching it in a way that is sort of both direct but also not sort of confrontational, so like putting it in the context of like coffee or a drink is going to make things probably feel a little bit better. I’d be leery about having like someone else sort of broach the topic like having the wife call the wife or any of that stuff. That’s going to just be a mess. If there’s a friend of a friend and you are friends with this person, and it hasn’t come up yet, but it could come up, let that come up.

If it’s a situation which like you’re going to the Austin Film Festival and that comes up naturally in conversation, then clearly you are a screenwriter and they will know that you’re a screenwriter and that’s awesome.

**Craig:** Yeah, easy. All right. Here’s our last question, I think. Jawaad from Fort Lauderdale writes, “My question is about a recent fear I’ve been having about being trapped underground in a box.”

**John:** That’s not true.

**Craig:** No, I misread that, “About being trapped in one genre.” Sorry. I misread that word. [laughs]

“So my question is about a recent fear I’ve been having about being trapped in one genre. So far, I’ve been a comedy writer, I’m the head writer of my university’s sketch comedy show, done quite a bit of improv. However, lately I’m starting to realize that I may not love comedy as much as I initially thought. I realize with comedic features,” and he says here, “I just finished my first feature, a kids’ comedy and it’s definitely not as funny as it should be.”

All right. “There is a high expectation of laughs per minute and I’m not sure that’s the type of writing I ultimately want to be doing. Do you think there is an easy crossover for somebody who’s only done comedy to start writing dramas? I feel like sprinkling a little comedy into dramas would be an asset that would make my writing stand out.” John, what do you think?

**John:** So Jawaad is in college. He’s written one script and he’s worried about being pigeonholed.

**Craig:** Yeah, it’s pretty awesome.

**John:** That’s actually crazy. And so, I put this question on here because I love it because it’s that sense of like I worry I’m going to be trapped in a genre having written one thing and being in a comedy troupe in college. That’s not how it works. If you had like a hit sitcom that ran for five years, then yes, you might be pigeonholed as a comedy person.

But you are at the start of your life. You can literally do anything. And so you should go off and write the drama if you think you’re a drama person. You are not trapped at all. The sense of being trapped is completely an illusion.

**Craig:** Yes. If a tree is pigeonholed in the forest and no one’s there to read it. Yeah, no, Jawaad, you are pre-pigeonhole, my friend. Nobody knows what you’ve written here, and it doesn’t matter. Your gut is telling you something, however, that is important and that’s you don’t want to write a certain kind of movie. You don’t want to write broad comedy, and you may not want to write comedy at all.

The fact that you maybe identify as a funny person or that you like writing sketch comedy, so you like writing comedy in sketch format as opposed to feature format, that doesn’t mean that that’s all you can be or all you should be. You should write the kind of movie you want to write. That’s really the only sort of movie that you are ever going to have success with anyway.

Sprinkling a little comedy into dramas is a good thing if that’s what the movie wants to have. I would not think in terms of assets. There’s a lot of calculation inherent to this question that I would advise you abandon.

**John:** Exactly. It’s always like, it’s trying to figure out like, well, what if I build this mansion and I don’t like the bathroom in this mansion that I build. It’s like, well, you don’t have a mansion yet, so like, stop building your mansion and actually like, you know, go to work. It’s one of those sort of like, what if I don’t —

**Craig:** It’s a Steve Martin joke. You know, how to not pay taxes on $1 million, step one, get $1 million. You’re not there. This is not something you should be worrying about. You have all the ability and time to write precisely what you want in the manner you want to write it.

**John:** I agree. Craig, it is time for One Cool Things.

**Craig:** One Cool Things.

**John:** My One Cool Thing is so short. It’s Tim and Susan Have Matching Handguns. It’s a documentary by Joe Callander. It is 1 minute and 47 seconds long. So I shouldn’t say too much about it because I could actually talk longer than the actual documentary is. But it’s just a perfect little gem that I just love. And it reminds me of like an Errol Morris film, but it’s 1:47. I loved it.

**Craig:** You had me at 1:47. I’ll be watching it as soon as we’re done recording. My One Cool Thing is the aforementioned too many Too Many Cooks by Chris “Casper” Kelly. So Chris Kelly, who goes by Casper Kelly because there are four billion Chris Kellys out there, he’s done a lot of shows on Adult Swim which is the Cartoon Network, I believe. And he did this thing that may be the greatest thing actually that anyone has ever done in an Internety way. This is the best of the Internet. If Alex from Target is the sort of most pointless of the Internet, this is the greatest.

Adult Swim has this thing where they do these infomercials which aren’t infomercials at all, but they fill in an 11 minute gap at 4am.

And so he floated this thing out there and lo and behold, a few days later, it is a sensation. And it truly is a sensation. We talked about subversion. The concept is a simple comic concept. We’re watching the opening credit sequence of what is sort of like a Full House sitcom. And the gag is that the song is super cheesy and everybody in it turns and looks at the camera and smiles when their name appears underneath them.

And you think, okay. And then the joke becomes, oh, there’s actually way more characters than there should be on the show like there’s like way too many characters and you think, okay, that’s a joke. But every 40 seconds, Chris Kelly says, “No, that’s not the joke. This is the joke.” And then, about seven minutes in, it’s not a joke anymore at all.

It’s actually something brilliant, and subversive and kind of existentially gorgeous. And where it ends is quite beautiful actually. Smarf, that’s all I say is Smarf.

**John:** Smarf. I’m going to watch it again because I’m not sure I got to the moment of existential beauty. I got to a moment of just tremendous appreciation for sort of just the ongoing genius of it. And to me, where it crossed over is there’s a moment where a young woman is hiding in the closet, and it’s one of the most sort of bizarrely brilliant little ideas. So I just loved it.

**Craig:** I think my mind went into a Nirvana space when the names rearranged themselves as people, and the people appeared as the names. That’s when I just thought Chris “Casper” Kelly, and really, I’ll just say this, why I love it so much is that this is truly a marriage of chaos and discipline.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** We typically just get chaos on the Internet. It’s easy to be weird on the Internet. Super easy, and there’s lots of it. But this was absolute madness within a structure that was so good. So anyway, it’s out there, by the time this airs it’ll probably be, everybody will be like, oh, we all know about Too Many Cooks, but if you don’t, my god, Too Many Cooks.

**John:** Check it out. So we will have a link to that in the show notes, and also there’s a piece I read in Entertainment Weekly this morning about an interview with him talking about sort of why he did what he did and how he did it. It was just remarkable.

You’ll find links to that in the show notes in addition to other things we talked about. You can find those at johnaugust.com/scriptnotes. If you want to subscribe to Scriptnotes, you can join us on iTunes, and click subscribe there, you can also leave us a comment which is always lovely and helps us out.

If you want to listen to the back episodes, and also the special bonus episodes, we’ll have special things with the Three Page Challenge from Austin. We’ll have Simon Kinberg. Those are found at scriptnotes.net and you could subscribe there. It’s $1.99 a month, it gives you access to the whole back catalogue.

**Craig:** $1.99.

**John:** $1.99. Craig, we are super, super close to the 1,000 full-time premium subscribers, so we’re going to have to do that dirty episode and I’m so excited to do it.

**Craig:** You said you had a great idea. Do you want to say what it is?

**John:** I don’t because I’ve not reached out to that person yet.

**Craig:** Okay.

**John:** Yes, but it’s a great idea.

**Craig:** Okay. Well, I trust you.

**John:** Well, I told you who the person was, right?

**Craig:** No.

**John:** I did. Craig, your memory is failing. It’s a person who, I’ll tell you again after the show. But you said, I told you after the last show, you said oh my god, that’s a great idea.

**Craig:** Oh, really?

**John:** Yes. Wow, Craig. I’m sorry, maybe you should like have a medical professional because last week you asked about the whole Retina iMac and the display —

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** You said like you wanted to get the Retina display but without the iMac and I explained why. And I explained that I’d done it before.

**Craig:** Let me put your mind at ease. I have a 13-year old son. He’s destroying my mind. [laughs] It’s just him. It’s not medical. It’s just my son.

**John:** It’s not medical.

**Craig:** No, he’s just consuming me. He’s consuming my mind because I have to remember all of my stuff and all of his stuff.

**John:** Yes, it’s a burden.

**Craig:** Yes, huge burden.

**John:** If you would like to jog Craig’s memory, you can reach him @clmazin on Twitter. I’m @johnaugust. If you have a long question like the ones we answered today, you can write it to ask@johnaugust.com.

If you want to get a Writer Emergency Pack, you can just go to writeremergency.com, that’s a link to the Kickstarter. There will also be a link in the show notes. Our show is edited by Matthew Chilelli who also did our outro this week, who also has a Kickstarter project, so back that.

Stuart Friedel is out sick today. He will be back next week.

**Craig:** Good, good. [laughs]

**John:** How do you dare say that?

**Craig:** I hope it’s fatal. [laughs]

**John:** Craig gets very mean late in the episode. This is the one where everyone turns again Craig Mazin.

**Craig:** Exactly, I don’t know why. I think this is my new theme is that Stuart is bad.

**John:** Stuart is all things good.

**Craig:** I’m sorry, Stuart. But it’s, what if he’s dying?

**John:** Well, it could be Ebola.

**Craig:** Oh, sweet.

**John:** All my staff went and got their flu shots because the flu sucks and it’s much more likely that you’re going to have the flu than to get Ebola.

**Craig:** Slightly more likely, yes.

**John:** Just a little —

**Craig:** Just a touch.

**John:** Just a tiny bit, but I learned that everyone who works for me is afraid of needles.

**Craig:** Oh, what a bunch of babies.

**John:** I know. [laughs] Like it’s very rare that I run around with a needle and stab them.

**Craig:** Like what a bunch of, first of all, the flu shot, you don’t even feel that needle. It’s the tiniest, skinniest needle.

**John:** I know. And it’s so rare that I stab them. And for them to have this sort of, you know, instinctive reaction just because I’m running around with a needle is weird. [laughs]

**Craig:** Honestly, it’s so bizarre. Wait, you gave them flu shots?

**John:** Well yes. It kind of saves them money.

**Craig:** I like that you sit them down and just start injecting. No wonder Stuart is sick. It’s your latest concoction over there at Quote-Unquote.

**John:** I told them it was the flu serum.

**Craig:** Yes, it’s not Stuart.

**John:** You’ll never know.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** It’s not.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** Craig, thank you for another fun episode.

**Craig:** Thank you, John.

**John:** Bye.

**Craig:** Bye.

Links:

* Tickets to the Scriptnotes Holiday show are on sale tomorrow at the [Writers Guild Foundation website](https://www.wgfoundation.org)
* Big Fish: The Musical is now playing [at Musical Theatre West in Long Beach](http://www.musical.org/MusicalTheatreWest/bigfish2014.html)
* [Writer Emergency Pack](http://writeremergency.com) is going strong [on Kickstarter](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/913409803/writer-emergency-pack-helping-writers-get-unstuck)
* [The Five Types of Twist Endings](http://alecworley.weebly.com/blog/the-five-types-of-twist-ending) by Alec Worley
* [Alex from Target](http://nymag.com/thecut/2014/11/alex-from-target-fame.html)
* [Darius Kazemi’s XOXO talk](http://boingboing.net/2014/10/28/every-artists-how-i-made-i.html)
* [Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid](http://www.amazon.com/dp/0465026567/?tag=johnaugustcom-20) by Douglas R. Hofstadter
* Screenwriting.io on [intermediary slugs](http://screenwriting.io/what-is-a-slug/)
* [Tim and Susan Have Matching Handguns](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgrjhtbQlOQ) by Joe Callander
* [Too Many Cooks](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrGrOK8oZG8) by Casper Kelly, and [his interview in Entertainment Weekly](http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/11/07/adult-swim-too-many-cooks/)
* Get premium Scriptnotes access at [scriptnotes.net](http://scriptnotes.net/) and hear our 1,000th subscriber special
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Scriptnotes editor Matthew Chilelli ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

« 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.