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

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

Scriptnotes Transcript

Scriptnotes Ep 418: The One with David Koepp, Transcript

September 26, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2019/the-one-with-david-koepp).

**Craig Mazin:** Hi friends. Today’s podcast contains some salty language, so if you are in the car with the young ones put their earmuffs on or wait to listen to it later.

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 418 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the program we are joined by legendary screenwriter David Koepp whose credits include Jurassic Park, Death Becomes Her, Carlito’s Way, Mission: Impossible, Spider-Man, and Panic Room. His seventh movie as director, You Should Have Left, comes out next year. But his first novel, the bio-thriller Cold Storage, has just come out to rave reviews.

Welcome to the program David Koepp.

**David Koepp:** Thank you. Nice to be here, guys.

**Craig:** I have not heard of any of those movies. I’ve got to be honest. Can you say them again? Because I don’t recognize any of them.

**David:** I should mention I also wrote Guns of Navarone.

**Craig:** No. [laughs] Also drawing a blank.

**David:** That was 1958. No, but you know.

**Craig:** When you were a mere 30.

**David:** I was negative five.

**Craig:** I don’t know about you John, but of the many David Koepp films that you just mentioned that I love, it was Death Becomes Her that made me an early Koepp fan. What a surprising movie. I just had no idea what I was in for. And then it was just this wonderfully wicked dark thing. No one would ever make it today.

**David:** No.

**Craig:** In a million years. But it was so literate and smart.

**David:** Universal was kind of regretful while they were making it.

**Craig:** Oh wow.

**David:** I remember, OK, are anecdotes allowed–

**John:** Absolutely. This is an anecdotes show.

**Craig:** Mother’s milk on this show.

**David:** I wrote it with Martin Donovan who I did my first movie, Apartment Zero, with. And we wrote this script which we assumed would be another weird dark indie sort of comedy-ish.

**Craig:** Ish.

**David:** You know. But I sold this to Universal and Casey Silver who was very supportive at the time, he sent it around. And he called me one day and he said, “Bob Zemeckis wants to direct Death Becomes Her.” And he said it with such resignation.

**Craig:** Like we have to make this movie now? [laughs] Yeah, by the way, nothing has changed at Universal. That’s kind of their, “Ah, darn it, we have to make a movie.”

**David:** You know, he was just off like all three Back to the Futures and they wanted something big and great and hugely profitable.

**Craig:** You said I’ll show you.

**David:** And he said, no, I’m going to do this weird one. And I’m still going to throw her down the stairs.

**John:** Totally challenging.

**Craig:** But what a cast. I mean, you still got this great cast.

**David:** It came together beautifully and it was big and weird and stuck around. There’s a drag show of it that pops up in different cities from time to time and I tried to go in London and I couldn’t make it. Anyway, I would love to see it sometime.

**Craig:** We should go together.

**John:** We should.

**David:** Absolutely.

**John:** Well today while we have you on the show I would love to talk about adaptations, embargoes, books, the modern blockbuster, which I think you had an outsized role in helping to shape. But we also have some listener questions which are just for you because I tweeted out that you were going to be on the show. And so people wrote in with specific questions for you to answer on this podcast.

**David:** Great. Can I set that I always like – when I listen to a podcast I like to have a visual of what’s going on. So just in terms of what we’re wearing.

**John:** Absolutely.

**David:** I’m in a lightweight, dark blue, worsted, you know, suitable to the environment, but mindful of the calendar.

**Craig:** Sure.

**David:** John is in a t-shirt. Looks like it says, “It’s wine o’clock somewhere.” Craig is shirtless, which is cool.

**Craig:** And also worsted.

**John:** Craig is wearing an ascot. I think it’s important that people get the full visual.

**David:** Obviously that was a bit of material I worked on. Now everything else will be spontaneous.

**Craig:** No, this is nice. And we’re on the beach. Let’s go.

**John:** So I would love to start with the thing that I mentioned your name most in relation to is when people talk about adaptations and they talk about how difficult it is to take all the information that is in a book and put it in a visual form so that that author who could just directly tell you a bunch of a stuff as a screenwriter you have to find a way to show a bunch of stuff. And I always single out a moment in the first Jurassic Park where the audience and the people who just arrived on the island have to understand what it is that’s being done on the island and sort of how DNA processing works.

So I imagine in Michael Crichton’s book, which I read a zillion years ago, it’s probably 20 pages worth of material, going back all through this. In the film that you wrote it is an animated sequence which they are watching in a little exploratory–

**Craig:** In a theme park style goofy tone.

**John:** And so we’re watching the actors watch this little thing. Can I play a clip of what – this scene?

**David:** Please.

**Craig:** Think he’ll get money for this.

[Clip plays]

**David:** Kind of sounded like they’re taking a dump there in that last part. That’s a long time that it can directly download exposition into the audience’s head.

**Craig:** Today they would say to you, “OK that’s great. Now do it in one-third as much time, or maybe a quarter of as much time.” I feel like they wouldn’t let you go on that long today.

**David:** No. It would be problematic. It was a real gift that it was a theme park. And so we were wrestling all this exposition stuff to the ground and how do you have five or six scientists standing around talking to each other for so long and make it interesting. And we had two great advantages. One was Jeff Goldblum who is so charming and has such offbeat line readings that, you know, he can read stereo instructions and they sound witty and unusual. And the other was that it was a theme park. So I would love to say Mr. DNA was entirely my idea but it wasn’t. Steven said, “They’re in a theme park. Can’t there be a little movie?”

And one of us said, well, what’s there supposed to be like an animated guy, like Mr. DNA?

**Craig:** Yes!

**John:** Exactly that.

**David:** Mr. DNA.

**Craig:** Yes!

**David:** So it was kind of lifted from, I don’t know if you saw this in your seventh grade health class in middle school, but Hemo the Magnificent was about your blood. And it was a live action movie but it had an animated character in it, Hemo, and he would tell you all about blood. And I remember he had an accent for some reason.

**Craig:** They always would.

**David:** Because you have to throw in a little fun. It’s animation.

**Craig:** I’m in your body.

**David:** So they were there and they were getting the tour, well then you can have the little movie on the tour. And the idea of going into full frame animation in the middle of this great big summer movie kind of tickled us and was really fun. So we had these built in advantages in a great performer in a flexible premise that let us get away with a lot of that.

**John:** Well what was so clever about it is that usually the problem you run into is that there’s information that you need the audience to understand but some of the characters in that scene would already know the information. So the Sam Neil character would already have that information, so it does not make any sense to tell it to him. But the fact that it’s already a pre-filmed piece of animation.

**David:** And the scientists are beyond it. They want to go – they keep saying, OK, OK, they’re trying to get out of the little ride thing so they can go to where it’s more interesting. Because we know this and this is for nine year olds. But we’re like, yeah, but we want to sell tickets to nine year olds.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, I would argue that the real gift you had may have been more that there were kids there. Because somebody needs to explain this to kids. And when it comes to science the audience is probably not that far off from kids in the sense of well a lot of people don’t know what DNA is or how it functions. And they certainly don’t understand how you brought dinosaurs back to life. But if you have two kids, whether it’s a theme park movie or just somebody sitting down and going, OK, let me just draw in the sand with a stick.

Characters that don’t know things are the most beneficial for writers who need the audience to know things. Otherwise you end up with the terrible, “As you know…”

**David:** Exactly. How long have we been brothers? It’s why journalists and detectives are so great. Because they fundamentally have to find something out. So, asking questions doesn’t seem like it’s morally safer. You know, it seems like they’re working toward a discernible goal.

**John:** What happens at the end of this clip is that we do see Sam Neil and Goldblum and everyone are trying to push to get beyond just the information that was in this little thing. And that’s the other crucial thing about an information dump is like if there’s no conflict, if there’s no drive, if the characters don’t want anything in it it’s going to feel flat. So, we get to see the characters respond to that information by trying to push past. You’re still keeping the scene alive even as this information is coming at us.

**David:** Yes. Also the animation format let us jump to the really apropos visuals. We didn’t see it, we just heard the audio, but when they’re explaining how the mosquito is trapped in amber there’s one really great visual of a mosquito on a branch and amber oozing over it and the mosquito getting trapped. And you really understand in that image, because images always express it so much better than words.

**John:** So talk us through the process of adapting Jurassic Park into the screenplay. At what point did it come to you and at what point did you have to figure out these are the beats of the movie. This is how the movie wants to tell itself. What was the process for you in getting the book and then being able to report back like this is how I can make the movie version of this?

**David:** So I was at Universal and they still used to do overall deals then. So they had been through a couple writers on Jurassic Park and it wasn’t – it was really hard to work out so it wasn’t quite coming together. And they were a little bit running out of time which is always the best time to enter a project if you can.

**Craig:** Right.

**David:** If you can work it that way.

**Craig:** There’s only so much disagreement they can do.

**David:** Yeah. And so Casey Silver actually suggested me to Steven and said, “Try this guy, he’s on the payroll so he’s super cheap and seems like he’s relatively fast. Why don’t you see what you can get?” So I read it and I thought, wow, this is really difficult. But I had an approach, so I went and met Steven and told him this is what I think. And he said, “Great. Do that.” And so with really very little guidance up front. I mean, a few general – and to this day he’ll give you some general stuff, but he really wants to see what you do. And you go try. I know what I think. Avoid this, avoid that. I’d love to see this. And in that case he had a couple sequences where he said – the T-rex attack on the road basically was already storyboarded and he said, “I don’t know who the people are, but this is what happens in the sequence. See if you can figure it out.”

And so there was, again, built in advantages. But it was winnowing the characters and who needed to be combined. How does the tone of the book, which is pretty dark and not necessarily going to sustain in – it’s not that it was, well, we want a wider audience than that. It was Steven’s viewpoint is more uplifting than that. So if you give him something that’s, you know, this is the guy who found the uplifting tale about the Holocaust. It’s just his world view. So to try to find a lighter tone, preserve a few characters who used to die, and find a different approach for Hammond and stuff like that.

So I just kind of came in and told them what I thought. And then I went and did an outline. And it just kind of went well.

**Craig:** This is something that you probably thought had a good chance of going well. It’s Steven Spielberg. It’s a bestselling novel.

**David:** Well you didn’t. That was the thing. Because it was ’92 when we made the movie. So it was the dawn of CG.

**Craig:** Right.

**David:** So really the last reference of dinosaurs was still Ray Harryhausen, which is referred to in the movie with the “when dinosaurs ruled the earth” banner that floats down. So everything – stop motion was the last time we’d seen dinosaurs on film I think.

**Craig:** Or Guys in Suits.

**David:** The remake of King Kong didn’t do them. Yeah. So the notion that they were going to be realistic was just a leap of faith. And they could have been laughable. And I remember the test – there was going to be a lot more robotic dinosaurs initially. Stan Winston, you know, there’s a ton of robotic stuff in it. Stan Winston did great work but basically if you see them from the head up it’s robotry and if you see their legs it’s CG.

But I remember the day it all changed was this test came back from ILM that was a velociraptor running in place. And it was just the skeleton. There was no musculature, no skin or anything. And we were in the Amblin screening room and watched this test and it was so cool. And the movement was so smooth and not herky-jerky at all that everybody thought, “Oh, this might work. This actually might work.”

**Craig:** That’s so interesting. So your frame of reference was stop motion which is characterized by its herky-jerkiness because there’s only so many, I mean, you are moving it physically so you can’t make a thousand movements a second. You can make 24 movements a second, which turns out to be pretty herky-jerky, or even fewer.

So it was simply the smoothness of the motion. Before you see textures. Before you see anything. That’s what got you?

**David:** Yeah. It was.

**Craig:** Fascinating.

**David:** And also the only other big CG movie there had been, I may be wrong, but it seems was Terminator 2. But that used really fluid and inhuman stuff.

**Craig:** Right. It was shiny liquid metal.

**David:** Right. Which is totally cool, but it wasn’t like trying to create an animal. And dinosaurs were supposed to be real animals, not monsters. There was always a thing, you’d get fined on the set if you’d call them a monster. They’re animals. They’re not monsters.

Yeah, so it was very much a gamble.

**Craig:** And then on the other side of it coming out, now you’ve got this enormous blockbuster under your belt, a true blockbuster. When it’s time for you to write your next one do you now – I’m just always curious about how success impacts us as writers. Do things change? Do you now feel like, OK, I’m aiming for something now? Or do you just ignore all of it and do your job?

**David:** It’s really hard to – I feel like I stayed a very decent human being.

**Craig:** Oh, you are. I don’t mean according to me. I’m not a great judge of character.

**David:** And I think I’ve done good writing on and off. But it’s very hard. I was 29 when it came out, or just turning 30. And it became the biggest movie of all time. There’s no way that doesn’t just fuck you up. If only in that – can you ever be satisfied again? You know? And I really feel like it took me till my early 50s – I’m 56 now – to where I felt like I’m going to stop feeling like, gosh, you know, sure would be great to have another one of those someday. And I’m going to feel like, well, there will never be another one of those but I’m grateful that I had it. What an extraordinary experience. How lucky am I?

**Craig:** Right.

**David:** I feel like it took a very long time. And I did have, you know, I wrote a lot of bigger movies, but a lot of that – a lot of it is because I love those movies. And I had a great time writing them. Usually. Sometimes had a horrific time writing them. But those are the movies that I wanted to go see. And that was always my litmus test was would I want to pay, you know, whatever a ticket costs at the time to sit down and see this movie. Would it make me happy to sneak in a burrito at lunch time and watch this movie?

And I feel like I obeyed that all the time. And with varying degrees of success. Sometimes even if you say that you’re kind of doing it because it feels like well that would be a hit and wouldn’t it be fun to have a hit. But I don’t know, your sincerity gets sniffed out pretty quickly I think by the gods.

**John:** Well going from a giant blockbuster adaptation to this next movie you’re going to – the movie you directed, I Think You Should Leave, is based on an incredibly slender German novel.

**David:** It’s actually You Should Have Left.

**John:** You Should Have Left.

**David:** It’s much more conclusive. It’s not an expression of opinion.

**Craig:** That sounds even shorter. That’s so German. You should have left.

**David:** Really.

**John:** I’m confusing it with there’s a Netflix show I Think You Should Leave. And You Should Have Left.

**David:** This is after. And I’ve seen that show. It should leave.

**John:** Yes. So it’s a tiny paranoid, it’s almost more like a Panic Room situation where it’s a metaphysical kind of haunted house, you know, Borgesian sort of stuck in a place. What draws you to that kind of adaptation after doing these giant, you know, Da Vinci Code kind of adaptations?

**David:** Well, I’ve always tried – I like all different kinds of movies, so I’ve really tried to mix it up. And I also, you know how it is. If you’re lucky enough to have a success in any area that’s what Hollywood would like you very much to replicate.

**Craig:** Is that so? [laughs]

**David:** There’s a lot of unanswered questions from Chernobyl. I really think you could go back to them. I do. There’s at least 10 more episodes in that. What happened between the episodes? There’s 10 more shows in there, easy.

**Craig:** Oh, between. Everybody just sleeps. Of course. They just sleep. They don’t move. They just sleep.

**David:** But I, you know, try to throw them off the scent a little bit. Try to keep it fresh for yourself and do things that are interesting and different. I’ve always felt like in my original stuff, and I’ve tried to split my time about 50/50. And I have. It’s just the originals get made less often.

In my original stuff I’m drawn to slightly darker, certainly paranoid kind of things. And it also helped as a writer when it’s not an adaptation by having a very well defined bottle. You know, in Panic Room it was I never wanted to leave the house. And I almost succeeded. There’s a few minutes at the beginning and a scene at the end where they’re outside the house. The Paper is a movie I wrote about journalism with my brother and it was 24 hours. It was exactly what was then the news cycle, from 7am to 7am. And within that structure, once I have the box I feel like now I can decide what goes in it. And I feel actually freed by the constraint. Because when you can just pick from anything—

**Craig:** It’s overwhelming.

**David:** Exactly. It’s too difficult. Even Lawrence of Arabia had containment. It was a period of this guy’s life.

So, I feel like I forgot the question.

**John:** Well going back to You Should Have Left, it has a tremendous amount of constraint because essentially you get to a house and you’re at that house. It’s almost a Blumhouse kind of model where it’s a very–

**David:** It is a Blumhouse.

**John:** Oh, it’s literally the Blumhouse model.

**David:** As a matter of fact, yeah.

**Craig:** It is the Blumhouse model. Because it’s Blumhouse.

**David:** It’s a model for Blumhouse.

**Craig:** Well that’s new for them.

**David:** But even before they were involved I thought these are going to be the guys for this. That one I really wanted to do, heavily mixed feelings about directing, because it can be great fun and incredibly satisfying when you get something the way you want it. And whether it’s successful or not, it’s the way you want it. But it takes over your life and ruins it.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**David:** Just physically, emotionally, socially, domestically awful.

**John:** It’s been 10 years between my last directing thing largely because of that thing. I just couldn’t, you know, I had a young kid. I just couldn’t go off and do it.

**Craig:** I’m not. I don’t see any reason to direct. There’s all these wonderful directors out there.

**David:** It’s dog’s work. It really is.

**Craig:** That’s what John Lee Hancock calls it. Dog’s work.

**David:** I think I got it from him via Scott Frank.

**Craig:** Yeah, that’s probably right. It’s dog’s work. But you keep doing the dog’s work.

**David:** Yeah, isn’t that weird? I know.

**Craig:** You’re into it.

**David:** You should talk to my wife about that.

**Craig:** I will.

**David:** No, she’s articulate on the subject. But also resigned. She’s like, “No, I don’t think you should do it. I think it makes you unhappy. We’re fine. We’ll cope. We’ll miss you. But you’re miserable. But good luck, sweetie. I hope it goes well.”

But yeah, You Should Have Left, there were a couple things. Kevin Bacon is a great actor and I saw a potential for something really special for him to do. And he’s done a spectacular job with it. I wanted to do – I like a bottle. And I wanted to do this little family in this weird place and strange things happen to them. He’s not a writer. In the book he was a writer, but I don’t think the world needs anymore movies about writers.

**John:** He’s literally a screenwriter in the book.

**Craig:** Oh, that’s terrible.

**David:** That was the first thing we changed.

**Craig:** That’s awful.

**David:** Nobody wants to see a movie about us.

**Craig:** Nobody.

**David:** Unless you guys are writing one, in which case.

**Craig:** If we are we should stop.

**David:** I implore you to stop. And the last movie I directed before that was this kind of catastrophe in every way, shape, and form.

**Craig:** Which I liked.

**David:** And I couldn’t leave it like that. There are many likeable things in it and I thank you for that.

**Craig:** No problem. It’s really funny.

**David:** There are bits that are funny. But it’s inarguable that critically, commercially, and personally—

**Craig:** Oh yeah. Absolute disaster.

**David:** It was horrible. [laughs]

**John:** This was Mortdecai.

**David:** But I didn’t want to leave it at that. I felt like well I don’t want to ever direct again, but I certainly don’t want to leave it at that.

**Craig:** I can’t go out that way.

**David:** Yeah, right.

**Craig:** So you’re literally making a movie just to say—

**David:** No, because I liked the subject matter a lot and I love Kevin and I felt like he could do something special.

**Craig:** Good. And?

**David:** And I could cleanse the palate in what’s worse the hard way. Just one more man. Just one more. Just one more.

**Craig:** I have, well you know what I like about you?

**David:** Hmm?

**Craig:** So much. And, you know, full disclosure we’ve been friends for a while, so this is genuine. But aside from being a terrific writer who has this remarkable track record and really does deserve what John said at the beginning. You are one of our legends. You take huge swings. It’s not like you’ve sat on your laurels. You’re not one of those guys who said, “OK, well you know what? I’m going to make these two huge movies and now I’ll just show up every six years to sprinkle my magic fairy dust on something that was already going to be beloved anyway.” You take big swings. You’re always risking things to get out there. And whether it works or it doesn’t work commercially or critically or any of that stuff, I think that’s wonderful.

I think there are so many people who are so petrified of violating whatever it is, their own brand. I mean, when people say the word brand I lose my shit. Because it’s essentially the antithesis of what we’re supposed to be doing as writers or artists which is being genuine. And that should mean taking swings. So I just think that’s wonderful that you do it and that you’re still doing it.

**David:** I’m trying. You know, I admire Steven Soderbergh’s career a lot. And he’s a great guy. You know, he really takes a cut at stuff. Sometimes, you know, he hits that one. And other times you’re like, whoa.

**Craig:** That’s what a big swing is.

**David:** Exactly.

**Craig:** I mean, when you swing hard and you fall down everyone laughs.

**David:** I was a bit surprised as long as we brought up the M word, this movie I directed recently, I was a bit surprised not that it got bad reviews, because certainly by the time it comes to reviews you’ve shown it to enough audiences and enough people and you’re getting a sense that the reaction is less than enthusiastic.

**Craig:** You’ve caught trouble in the air.

**David:** But the anger does surprise you. Because I felt we didn’t hurt anyone. And it was by no means a safe choice. We were trying to make like a 1966 comedy like Terry Thomas would have made.

**Craig:** I’m so with you.

**David:** That’s gutsy.

**Craig:** I thought people just – at least, look, people, I can’t blame people for liking or not liking things. But I thought at least critically this pile on and this kind of orgy of delightful hatred completely missed the point of what you’re just saying, which is, you know, they will say, “Oh, well here comes another super hero movie, blah, blah, blah.” Well, OK, here’s someone taking a shot. If you think it doesn’t work, explain it. But you’re right. When was the last time a movie studio released a Terry Thomas style comedy which is sort of in and of its time, but out of its own time. And there’s slapstick. And the most bizarre stuff. And an entire plot line about a mustache. It’s just wonderful. I thought, I don’t know, listen, a lot of people think that my taste in movies is terrible because of so many of them that I’ve written.

I don’t care.

**David:** It’s also a thing about comedy, though. If a horror movie doesn’t work out they’ll say, well, that wasn’t that scary. If a drama doesn’t work out they’ll say, well—

**John:** They didn’t care.

**David:** Yeah, I didn’t like the guy.

**Craig:** “Didn’t love it,” is what they say.

**David:** Yeah, I didn’t love it.

**Craig:** I didn’t love it.

**John:** I won’t say that anymore.

**David:** Comedy comes out they say, “That was horrible. That was a terrible set.”

**Craig:** How dare they?

**David:** Exactly. Those assholes. You’ve really angered people.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, comedy is the hardest. It’s the most punishing. And even in great success people are like, oh, yeah, that was funny. You know what I mean? They don’t give you the Oscar. It’s, yeah. Yeah. Well, see. I’m grouching.

**John:** Talking about swings and doing different stuff, this is your first book.

**David:** This is really fun. I can write about stuff that will never see the screen. I can write what someone is thinking or feeling, which as you know there’s no way to access it other than their faces or their dialogue. And I just started having a lot of fun. So within about three pages I thought, OK, it’s a – then I began the lying the process. I said – because I didn’t want to face how much work it would be to write a book. And so I said, well, it’s probably a short story. And so by page 25 I was like it’s not a short story. It’s a novella. Yeah.

So I got to page 100 and my friend John Kamps said, “You must admit it’s a book.” Because I could digress. I could go into three – when I was in high school I worked at a McDonald’s for a couple of years. So there’s a character in the book, he’s not even one of the main characters, and he’s the manager of this storage place. And he’s a jerk. And I got to go three pages into where he used to work before he came to the storage place and talk about life working at McDonald’s, which I thought was fascinating. And it was to me anyway.

And, no, the book is not 600 pages. I mean, 30 years of screenwriting impulses came to bear. Exactly. But especially because the book was going to have a lot of science I had this incredible freedom to explore and expound and I like to learn stuff that I didn’t know before. And I like science that is somewhat accessible and compellingly told. When you come across somebody like Brian Greene or somebody like that who is just a really good science explainer. They’re fascinating. They’re like the teachers whose classes you loved the most. You know, there’s a reason like Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson and the really good explainers are popular.

**Craig:** Yes.

**David:** So I wanted to be able to – also I think science can be very funny because the natural world is really brutal. It’s just mean and nasty.

**John:** It doesn’t care about you.

**Craig:** No, no, good lord no.

**David:** No.

**John:** So, as you’re writing this as a novel, you’ve accepted that you’re writing this as a novel, some part of your brain must also be thinking like, Ok, well this could also be a movie. I mean, it’s a movie style premise. And so how are you balancing the David Koepp novelist versus David Koepp screenwriter who is going to have to adapt this? Did you try to balance that all in your head?

**David:** It’s hard. You and I talked about it a little bit from your books and your experiences with it. And you really have to actively squelch that part. Because the screenwriter part of you, the first thing I do when I’m adapting a book is I do scene cards for the whole book and I lay the structure out and look at it on a table and figure out how that happened. And then I start just – obviously we’re not going to have the scene where they go visit her daughter. That’s useless. And chuck out a bunch of stuff.

But the scene where they go visit her daughter may be the whole reason somebody wrote that book. It just doesn’t fit in a movie. So, I really tried to tell the screenwriter part of myself to shut up because they wouldn’t let me do the three pages on McDonald’s. And it’s not in the screenplay, which it’s a first draft of.

**Craig:** Oh, so you are doing the screenplay of this?

**David:** I did, yes.

**Craig:** Oh, you already did?

**David:** Or I am. It depends who you ask. I feel I’m nearly done.

**Craig:** Oh, and they do not?

**David:** We’ll see. Opinions vary.

**John:** So it’s a fascinating that a person with 30 credits and a giant career still gets that sense from a studio of like, oh no, this isn’t really the draft.

**Craig:** Not just 30 credits.

**John:** 30 giant.

**Craig:** Let’s just list some of them again. By the way, that’s the studio that is being held aloft by Mission: Impossible which was started by David Koepp. And they’re sort of like, “Uh, we don’t know if you’re done yet.” I kind of love that.

**David:** Everybody’s got thoughts, you know.

**Craig:** Everybody’s got thoughts.

**David:** That’s the thing, though. In a book–

**Craig:** No one has thoughts.

**David:** They don’t have their thoughts.

**John:** No, absolutely.

**David:** And your editor, Zach Wagman who is the editor of this, I was just stunned – it was the first time in 30 years someone had spoken to me about the writing as if they viewed it as essentially mine instead of essentially theirs.

**Craig:** It’s a lovely thing. That is a lovely thing.

**John:** So let’s talk about that. So we physically have a copy here sitting on the table, and what is so different about writing a book versus writing a screenplay is that this book is finished. Like you cannot go back and change stuff in it. It is actually done and the Cold Storage that you intended to write is that book. And it is just done and finished. In a way is it liberating now that you’re going to the screenplay knowing that you can make different choices and it doesn’t go back and change the original document?

Because so often when I’m approached to do an adaptation I’ll talk with the author and I’ll sit down with them and say like, “Listen, you wrote a fantastic book. I will not change anything in your book. But I will change some things in the movie because it’s a movie and just works under different things.” In some ways—

**David:** Some of them will appreciate that, and some of them—

**John:** And I’ve had both situations. And some really rough situations.

**David:** Have you ever forged a working relationship with the author of a book?

**John:** Yes. Daniel Wallace who wrote Big Fish. I sat down with him and he had never read a screenplay before until I showed him the screenplay for Big Fish. We talked about sort of all the stuff that’s sort of off stage in the book that he wrote. And he loved it. He became a screenwriter. And he’s still an active part of every version of Big Fish. And he’s in the movie Big Fish. So he’s deeply involved in it.

But something like Jurassic Park, were you talking with Crichton about stuff?

**David:** No. Almost always everything goes through the director and it’s better that way. The only time I ever really needed the author of the book and he was great was Edwin Torres who wrote the books that Carlito’s Way was based on. And I needed him because I could adapt the books but it was Spanish Harlem in the mid ‘70s. Not my background. It was his life story. Everybody in that book is somebody he knew. And I just – I needed to be able to talk to him. And he was great and loquacious. It helped that he wasn’t only a novelist. He was a New York State Supreme Court judge. So he viewed novel writing as novel. And he viewed a movie from one of his books as just like the greatest party of all time. So he was excited about it.

**Craig:** He had a day job so—

**David:** Yeah. He’d go to court. I ran into him in New York the other day. And he was colorful when I – this was 25 years ago and he was probably in his mid-50s. So now he’s probably closer to 80 and he’s just let his colorful flag fly.

**Craig:** I love it.

**David:** I said, “Judge Torres is that you?” He said, “You bet it is.”

**Craig:** What a cool guy.

**John:** Now, David, you brought up Carlito’s Way and I think that was the first screenplay of yours I ever read. So I was working as an intern at Universal when you guys were making Carlito’s Way. So I got to read the script for Carlito’s Way.

**David:** On paper probably.

**John:** On paper. With brads in it. The whole thing.

**Craig:** And the words Carlito’s Way written in Sharpie on the outside.

**John:** Yes. That whole process that young people will never understand. How you had to slam the script on the edge, and hold it down. You brought in the Sharpie so you could stack them or put them on the shelf.

**Craig:** Stack them in the shelf.

**John:** I remember reading that and as opposed to the James Cameron scripts I was reading at the same time, you wrote a really dense page. There was a lot happening. Those were dense pages. Over your long career have you seen the form of screenwriting change at all or at least the form of screenplays change at all? I feel like we are much lighter and airier now than when I started. I’m wondering if you’ve noticed any differences over the years.

**David:** Yeah. I try not to be as dense as that. Sometimes, I don’t often have a reason to go back and look at my old stuff, but like if I’m moving boxes around or something I’ll say, oh yeah, look at that. And I open it and then I think, wow, I used way fewer double dashes and spaces and I wrote whole sentences. This is pretty good. I had a decent attention span back then.

I don’t know if maybe it’s fatuous that all of our attention spans have changed and we want to assimilate information faster. But also that particular story was – it was ruminative. Because it was a guy’s memory in the last minute or two before he dies. I’ve ruined the ending.

**Craig:** He dies.

**David:** Yeah. So, it kind of seemed to suit it. And I had a wealth of literary material to draw on. But, yeah, I think things are a little more spare than they used to be. I think there’s no excuse though for not having good sentences. You know, even if they’re terse and Hemingway-esque sentences. Ideally they would be that. But you can’t write a semi-literate screenplay. You can’t use sentence fragments. You can’t – I feel – you can’t say, “He comes in the room. Sits. Looks around. Something’s not right.” Something’s not right is not bad because it has a noun and a verb.

**Craig:** Something’s not right has a, yeah, there is a certain kind of – you can trip over into a sort of laziness. But also a kind of lack of intention. I mean, John and I talk about this all the time. If you’re going to write things in sort of a short staccato then maybe it’s because the character is a short and staccato kind of person, or the situation is one that it requires fast thinking.

**David:** Or ideally you could vary your rhythms.

**John:** Of course.

**Craig:** That would be nice.

**David:** There are fuller paragraphs when the movie slows down a little bit.

**Craig:** Sounds like you’re thinking about things is what you’re doing and you’re being a writer. And I don’t know. If I were teaching a class on screenwriting at Stark for instance I would want to teach a class just on the stuff that isn’t dialogue. Because I actually think so much can happen there. So much more than people understand. And for fucking fear of “don’t direct on the page” everyone it seems like there is a generation of screenwriters that have abdicated responsibility.

**David:** Yeah. I hate that. The thing that drives me the craziest is when someone comes out and says, “There’s a spirited chase,” or a big set piece to go here. I’m like who is going to design it? This is your shot.

**Craig:** It’s also your job.

**David:** And you know what? Even if they throw the whole thing out and do their own, it’s still your job.

**Craig:** It’s still your job.

**David:** If it’s a four-minute chase you better cover about four pages to give us simulation of the rhythm of the thing.

**Craig:** Correct. And something surely is happening in this chase that’s relevant to character or–

**John:** And if there’s not then there really is a fundamental problem.

**Craig:** Then it’s just a fucking chase.

**David:** These fucking people.

**Craig:** I mean, you know what, let’s be as old as cranky as we can possibly be. Let’s go maximum crank.

**David:** But you also – you can direct on the page. You just can’t use the word “camera.”

**Craig:** You don’t have to. [laughs]

**David:** Or anything like that. I hate to keep referring to the early ‘90s, but I don’t know, it was a nice period. One of the early lessons I learned about writing for a director was Zemeckis in Death Becomes Her said, there’s a moment Meryl Streep’s character is teetering at the top of the stars. And then he pushes her down with like a finger. And when we wrote the script I put, “For a moment she just hangs there like Wile E. Coyote off the edge of the cliff.” And he said that told me more about the style of the movie than anything. Because it was sort of heightened Chuck Jones reality.

**Craig:** Exactly. Exactly. Tone.

**David:** It’s only a few words. It doesn’t take forever. And it doesn’t refer to any specific shot. It refers to a feeling.

**Craig:** Direction. Ugh.

**John:** The sense of what’s supposed to be there. We’ve got some questions that are specific to you, so can we ask you some questions?

**David:** Please.

**John:** All right.

**Craig:** Why are you such a legend? [laughs]

**John:** I would love to know how David’s approach to action sequences has changed across films like Mission: Impossible, Spider-Man, and Indy.

**David:** I don’t think it really has changed that much. I think you have to fully imagine the sequence. I mean, all those are different situations. So, it depends on the director. Like Mission: Impossible I worked out those set pieces De Palma specifically beforehand. The last Indiana Jones movie it depends. Sometimes Steven would tell me something or we’d work it out together. Other times he’d say, “Well take a crack at it.” And I’d take a crack at it first.
I think that – as we were just saying – it’s always a writer’s responsibility to do it first.
I would beware of dense paragraphs in an action sequence because you’re supposed to have a sense that the movie is moving faster. Because it has to be a reading experience first let the eye move quickly across the page. But I think I’ve preserved the same approach to action sequences, or suspense, which is that you have to take them really seriously and allow yourself – there’s a big set piece in the middle of the movie, say, OK, well that’s three day’s work. Take it seriously and don’t just dash it off. And certainly don’t abdicate. You know, make it as exciting as you would want it to be in the movie.

**John:** I always describe action sequences as being the musical numbers in an action. So it’s like you may have stopped the characters talking but you’ve moved into a higher register. And you’re communicating this thing, but it’s still just as important as all the dialogue that happened before it. So it has to feel like there’s a reason why we’re doing this big production number here. And we’re going to come out of it with a new place, with characters having gotten someplace new. And otherwise it’s just a bunch of–

**Craig:** It’s just stuff.

**John:** It’s just stuff.

**Craig:** Which is probably why some writers abdicate because if you think about your analogy, when people sing in a movie musical perhaps the writer is concerned that they don’t know what’s supposed to happen other than the singing. And similarly if there’s a chase, like what’s supposed to happen other than [makes car noises].

But environment becomes an enormous thing. How you’re interacting with the environment. What choices can you be making on screen that are not specifically about turning the wheel to the left or the right? What’s changing so that you’re not just driving or just singing?

It’s hard work. Those are the hardest things to write. I mean, well, they’re really arduous to write I find. You know, because there’s so many more decisions that are happening per page in those sequences then a conversation which maybe there are a lot of decisions but they come a bit – I’m a bit more – I find those more accessible.

**David:** I actually find in – because my outline will be 3×5 cards on the coffee table. And there may only be one card for the sequence. But then when I get to the sequence I get out a legal pad and I just put down all my ideas for the sequence with dashes. And that’ll be three or four pages. Then I go back through and number them because the order may be very different from – you know, you have moments in your mind that you think belong there.

And you know generally at the beginning they’re breaking into the bank and at the end they’re driving away in the car. But in between that are all your action-y moments.

The other thing to consider is consider carefully can you cut that sequence and the story still tells? Because you have a big problem if so.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** Totally.

**David:** And it’s the same with a song I would imagine. If you can cut it completely – I was watching them film a little West Side Story the other day and they were doing America, which is so beautiful and cool and fantastic. But what I hadn’t noticed but saw this time is it plays like an argument or fight scene. They have very different–

**Craig:** It’s a debate.

**David:** Yeah, it’s a debate.

**Craig:** This place sucks. No, this place is great.

**David:** The story can’t be told without it. And those characters can’t be fully understand without it.

**Craig:** It’s illuminating who they are, what their point of view is, where they come from. All that is necessary.

**John:** One of the reasons why action sequences can be so exhausting to write, and so challenging to write for screenwriters, is that there’s a tremendous amount of crosscutting. You’re generally going between multiple points of view. And so making that look efficient on the page is really tough. So, things that could be like 60 cuts in the actual cut film, you can’t be jumping back and forth so much. So you need to get the sense that you are seeing all these different points of view without–

**Craig:** That’s a great point.

**David:** And you also have to have those great little bridging phrases like, “Back with Craig. Things haven’t gotten any better.”

**Craig:** “Runs into a…” I find that every time I write INT or EXT I feel like I need a break. Honestly. I feel like I need a break. So, in sequences where you are shifting back and forth, I feel like I need a lot of breaks. There’s something about writing a good old scene where two people are chatting in a café–

**John:** I love it.

**Craig:** Where you get to write INT and then just live in there in that place and have them do their thing. But my god, every time you EXT, INT, blah, EXT. I’m exhausted.

**John:** Tim asks, “My question for Mr. Koepp is when working with directors who are not necessarily writers like David Fincher, Steven Spielberg, or Sam Rami, what is the process of writing and revising based on the notes they provide?”

So, I guess you’ve probably worked with more directors than nearly any screenwriter out there. What are the different ways you see in interacting with a director? So even if you’re not talking about a specific director, what is the range of sort of how you work with them? Because I’ve had every different interaction with a director.

**David:** A director who does write is usually harder to work with than a director who doesn’t. A director who doesn’t usually has a healthy amount of respect for it and is grateful that you’re doing that. A director who writes themselves – and they try hard. Even when they’re good people, like Curtis Hanson was great. And who else did I work with that writes? I can’t remember. But they do it. And they kind of wish you’d shove over and just let them do it. And sometimes that is the reality and they do shove you over and do it themselves. So they’re a little tougher.

But my relationship with the directors have been 90% really good. The ones that are bad, or, you know, unpleasant tend to end fairly quickly, either by me or by them. But I do after about the third draft of a script I do say a little goodbye to my script.

**Craig:** Sure.

**David:** Because that’s the way it is. And sometimes in the very – the way New York crews do, or actually New York deli guys also – I call the director “boss” in part to remind myself, because they are. And they want a collaborator and they deserve a collaborator, but they are the boss. And you better not try – you’re better served – your material is better served if you don’t try to talk them into something, because if they do it they’ll do it poorly because they don’t see it.

**Craig:** Right.

**David:** And if they don’t see it it’s just much better for them not to do it. And you’re also – you can talk them out of some stuff, but if it keeps coming back, and back, and back you better do your best with it, because it’s going to be in the movie. Either you wrote it, or somebody else did, or they just made it up on the day.

**Craig:** Have you thought about television, David Koepp?

**David:** I’m told it’s different.

**Craig:** Wow.

**David:** Yeah, but you got to keep doing it.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** No, you actually don’t.

**John:** You can just do five and walk away.

**Craig:** You can do five hours and that’s it. It’s amazing. You can do two hours from what I understand. It’s quite remarkable.

**David:** Yeah, I hear it’s better.

**Craig:** It’s something else man. Yeah. Everyone calls you boss. [laughs] It’s pretty nice. I know. You see? He just got a faraway look in his eyes.

**David:** But I do like working with directors and when it goes well there’s nothing like it, because you come up with something neither of you could have done on your own. And when the conflicts are too great it usually does end quickly.

And getting fired, you know, it’s kind of the greatest thing that can happen to you. It’s awful. And you get very upset. But you get to be righteous.

**John:** Absolutely.

**David:** You get to be totally self-righteous. You’re suddenly free. They usually pay you anyway. And sometimes they come back. And you say, “Well, let’s just see about that.”

**Craig:** [Crosstalk]. You two guys are not Jewish, because there’s no like – when you’re Jewish and you get fired you’re not righteous. You’re like, “Yeah…” [laughs]

**David:** I had it coming.

**Craig:** Pretty much.

**David:** I get it. I got fired from something once. And I heard it from my agent, because they had hired someone else. I was waiting for notes and they’d hired someone else.

**Craig:** God, that’s a terrible way to find out.

**David:** It’s awful. So I called the studio executive who I was close with. And I said, “You know, what are you guys doing? You hired so and so.” And he sighs heavily and says, “Dave, this is a really tough phone call for me to make.” And I said–

**Craig:** You didn’t make it!

**David:** Exactly. I called you! I heard it in the gutter.

**Craig:** This is a really tough phone call for me to get.

**David:** That’s beside the point. All right. But see, self-righteous. I get to be self-righteous.

**Craig:** Self-righteous. Where I would have apologize and said, “I know. I’m sorry.”

**David:** I’m sorry I made you hire that guy.

**Craig:** I’m so sorry. I’ve made you uncomfortable by dying in front of you. [laughs]

**John:** Not just self-righteous, there is a quality to like I know the movie that I wrote and the movie that I saw in my head and you’re never going to make that movie. And so I know that the movie that I was going to make is going to be better than the movie that you made. There’s that comparison, too.

**Craig:** God, I wish I were you guys. How do I get this? Is there a food I eat? Is there a drink?

**David:** But there’s other times, though, where you really are the horse staggering through the desert. Just waiting to be shot. Thank god, what took you guys so long?

**Craig:** Yes. I will say that’s – my new jam is I’m desperate to be fired and it doesn’t happen anymore. It’s sort of really bad. It’s been a while. And I’m not saying that to humblebrag. I’m saying it like it kind of sucks because there are times when I’ve been on things and I just think well some – I feel like the guy – it’s the only thing I truly love from Waterworld. I don’t know if you remember this. On the boat, so there’s that big oil tanker that Dennis Hopper, he’s the villain, he’s in charge of. And there’s this old wretched man in the darkness inside who is like, I don’t know, shoveling oil or something. And in the climax someone throws a cigarette down there which is going to ignite everything and blow him up. And he looks up and goes, “Oh thank god.” And it’s exactly – like he waited for somebody to do this. Please let me go and it won’t happen. That’s actually worse than being fired.

**David:** It’s the great moment in Kingpin when Woody Harrelson comes out of his trailer park and there’s this guy sitting in a folding chair, smoking a cigarette with an oxygen tank, and he says like, “Hey Bob, how’s it going?” And Bob says – or he says, “Hey Bob, how’s life?” And Bob says, “Taking forever.”

**Craig:** That’s basically it. I mean, why won’t you kill me? Please kill me. And they never do.

**John:** This past week a couple people tweeted at me a story, an article by Alex Billington. He is a reviewer. He’s writing how at the Venice Film Festival, we also just got through the Toronto Film Festival, audiences are seeing movies and the critics are sometimes being held to embargoes so they cannot write about the movie, they cannot review the movie at the time. So we are not film festival goers. We are not reviewers. But I want to talk a little bit about embargoes because it’s a thing I think people outside of the industry may not be aware of is that sometimes reviewers are seeing movies way in advance and they are sort of prohibited from writing about the movie until the embargo drops and they can suddenly write about the movie.

We’ve all had movies that have probably been under embargo and then the embargo is lifted. How are we feeling about embargoes, or that sense of like when it’s OK to talk about a movie and when it’s not OK to talk about a movie that has not come out yet?

**David:** I think once it’s done if you show it in a public forum you can get reviewed. I think, remember when [unintelligible] showed up and it was horribly destructive. You know, you’re trying to work out your filthy business in private.

**John:** And they’d review test screenings.

**David:** And it’s really destructive because sometimes you’re having a test screening to confirm that the ending doesn’t work.

**Craig:** Yes. Correct.

**David:** Before you go make a new one.

**Craig:** Sometimes you’re having a test screening because the studio insists on this terrible version of your ending.

**David:** And you’re like well I’ll show you this doesn’t work. I’ll put it in front of an audience.

**Craig:** It’s the same thing with these people who review scripts. I mean, I agree with David. Once you show it to an audience – I mean, the point of an embargo is we’re going to make a deal with you. We’ll give you exclusive access. In return you agree to not talk about until the day we want you to. And now it’s your choice as a reviewer or an outlet to agree or not agree to those terms. But once they’ve shown it to people it does seem bizarre.

Although I will say Walter Chaw who is a very smart guy and a film critic had this really great idea that he tweeted about which will never happen but I loved it. He said, “The real embargo should be that no critics are allowed to post their reviews of movies until one week after it has come out in theaters.” Because at that point they’re no longer trying to review or influence or crap on or anything. They’re actually – they can do the job of film criticism which is to analyze and think about and thoughtfully talk about. And I thought oh my god what a wonderful utopic notion that is that will never, ever, ever happen.

**David:** We’re endosymbiont.

**John:** I don’t know what that means.

**Craig:** Oh nice.

**David:** One creature that lives inside or with another to their mutual benefit.

**Craig:** Like Quato.

**John:** That also feels like that could be part of Cold Storage.

**David:** Well it actually is. My novel Cold Storage, available now.

**John:** I love it that you’re bringing it back to plugging your book.

**David:** Well I learned all this science.

**Craig:** Yeah, use it.

**David:** I’m not going to just throw it away.

**Craig:** Pepper it into every discussion.

**David:** But, you know, we need critics. We need people to know about our movie. Ideally they’ll say nice things about it. And they need our stuff so they’ve got something to write about. But I think reviewing anything you’ve got by, you know, unscrupulous means or unauthorized means, of course that’s off the table. Anything that’s not done. I think if you show a work in progress at Cannes you can announce this is a work in progress and it should not be reviewed. And that’s fine. That’s a decent set of rules.

But if you have a finished film and you take it to Venice or Toronto and you’re showing it to people with the purpose of exposing it, but you’re showing it to the world, it’s too late.

**Craig:** It’s out. It’s done.

**David:** Yeah. You can’t control that anymore.

**Craig:** I agree. It’s not like in Broadway they’ll have runs, but then there’s the official opening.

**David:** And everybody understands.

**Craig:** And everybody understands. And Ben Brantley doesn’t show up until official opening night, or I guess the night before, or a week before so he has time to write his review that either destroys you or lifts you up.

**John:** Been there.

**Craig:** But the whole point is that the show is and can be changing throughout that time period. So it makes sense that you’re showing it to the public. But you’re saying, “But we’re still moving pieces around.” A movie is a movie. It’s done. I mean, by the time you’re showing it at – you’re not going to recut something after Venice, right?

**David:** Well…

**John:** Sometimes it happens, but yeah.

**Craig:** Oh really? OK. Well. I don’t know anything about film festivals. That’s obvious.

**John:** So here’s a modest proposal. So let’s say you see a film early and it is embargoed or for whatever reason you cannot talk about it. But of course you’ve seen this thing and you want to say like, “I saw this and this is my opinion on it,” if you wait until everyone can say that, you’re just like one extra opinion on that. But you want to say like, “No, no, I saw this first. This was my opinion when I saw it.” What you could do is write that up, encrypt it, and publicly post it and then on the day the embargo lifts like post the password to see what you wrote back then.

It’s a way of deep-freezing your reviews so that–

**Craig:** You could. That’s presuming that I care—

**David:** That you value that.

**Craig:** That those people had that opinion first.

**John:** Yeah. But people always want to be first.

**Craig:** They want to be first. Yes. They want to be first. I don’t care who is first.

**John:** I don’t know. See if other people think that is a good idea. It’s probably not a good idea, but it’s something that occurs to me.

**Craig:** I mean, you can do these things where you can – well, I guess you can password protect it and then on the day you can just say here’s the password to my review.

**John:** Exactly. That’s what I’m saying.

**Craig:** You could do that. Which I guess that makes sense.

**John:** Because you can definitively say like, no, this really was my opinion. I’m not changing my opinion based on–

**Craig:** Because suddenly other people like it, or, right. OK, then I’m on board. I’m on board with your idea.

**John:** So we’ll build an app for that.

**Craig:** Yep.

**John:** It has come time for our One Cool Things. Craig Mazin, do you want to start us off with a One Cool Thing?

**Craig:** Yeah. So you know I’m old school. I like email. The kids don’t like email.

**John:** No, I don’t like email.

**Craig:** You know, my children don’t use it at all. When I look at their email it’s just spam. It’s all spam. Because they go to stupid sites and they do sign up for things and then it’s just spam. It’s useless. But I’m still an emailer. And I’m always looking for the best email client. The mail.app that comes with Mac, I don’t really love it at all. I’ve been using Airmail for a long time. But I’ve switched over again, this time to Spark. Which has been around for a while. It wasn’t quite like ready for prime time for a while. But now it’s pretty great. They’ve got it down to a really nice science. It looks good.

It organizes your inbox in an interesting way. So, there’s new stuff and then if you read it it goes to Seen Stuff. So your inbox has new and seen, it doesn’t just like leave it in its spot, which is kind of cool. It also has little icons to indicate if it’s like a regular email from somebody you know, or a notification email, or a spammy kind of thing.

So, Spark, I don’t know how much it costs. How much does it cost, John August?

**John:** I’m looking it up right now. So free for 5GB for a team. Then it goes up to $6 a month, $7 a month.

**Craig:** So if you’re just a single person I think it’s free. Yeah, so there you go. For the exciting cost of free you too can have Spark. And obviously it’s cross platform. It works on Mac OS and iOS. That’s what I call cross platform. I don’t care about other ones.

**John:** So, Craig, is this one of those services that is downloading your email to their servers and then sending it back to you?

**Craig:** Great question, John. I don’t know. I don’t think so?

**John:** Because that’s one of the concerns with some of these things is that they are potentially privacy nightmares because they’re able to do a bunch of stuff, that processing, because they’re actually intercepting the mail before it gets to your service.

**Craig:** Well why don’t you look on their thing and tell me, because if it’s doing that then maybe I should stop using it.

**David:** I can take back what I just said.

**John:** And a private team, comments, shared drafts. It feels like it’s one of those things, but–

**Craig:** Really.

**John:** We’ll look into it. Next week we’ll get back to you.

**Craig:** Yeah, look into it. Yeah, I don’t want to do something wrong. I mean, I do. [laughs] I’ve got to be honest. I do. But I don’t want this—

**David:** The horse is out of the barn. Everybody has got everything.

**Craig:** Everyone has got everything.

**David:** Cover your camera. That’s about it.

**Craig:** By the way, do you do that? You don’t do that. I always feel that’s dumb to put the little Post-it over your camera?

**David:** I don’t know. Sometimes I feel paranoid and I do.

**John:** Yeah. I mean, I feel like the Macintosh has pretty good lockouts, like hardware lockouts. But they can – people can override stuff.

**Craig:** If they can override it they can probably shoot a laser right through that Post-it.

**John:** That’s what they’re going to do.

**Craig:** Yeah, or just assassinate.

**David:** Do you remember Chat Roulette?

**Craig:** Oh my god.

**John:** I do remember Chat Roulette. Chat Roulette is still in existence I think.

**David:** It was for about 48 hours Chat Roulette seemed like, oh this is terrific. This is the dawn of the Internet stuff. And then, you know, my sons who were like 12 and 10 at the time, within 48 hours it was all dicks all the time. There was no…

**Craig:** Dicks really have taken over the Internet. All new technology, it used to be porn. Now it’s just dicks. Terrible.

**David:** My Cool Thing, you guys I would imagine know about it already. Many people may know about it already. But it bears repeating because it changes my writing life. Which is the Freedom App. I love to use it.

**Craig:** Yes. I believe it’s been one of our One Cool Things at some point.

**David:** Oh, darn it.

**John:** No, no.

**Craig:** No, no, it’s great that you. Tell them, because it’s been a while.

**David:** Let me explain.

**Craig:** We’ve been doing this for a long time, so years have gone by. People have been born while we’ve been doing this.

**David:** All right. Let me explain. As we all know the Internet has ruined everything. Well, the political process and human interaction.

**Craig:** Other than that.

**David:** Exactly.

**Craig:** But it’s much easier to buy a book.

**David:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** Way easier.

**David:** So, you know, like anyone I’m tempted by it. There’s tons to see and tons to do. Like, you know, so you can be writing and things are going OK for about four minutes. And then you realize, holy shit, I’ve got to click on the Guardian to check on Brexit, which is my – I’m crushed by the way because Brexit has been this fantastic TV show that has built to a climax.

Last night as we record this, Parliament was prorogued.

**Craig:** Yes.

**David:** And John Bercow resigned. John Bercow is like the greatest supporting character of any show ever. And now I’m bereft. Like what do I follow?

**Craig:** But they’ve also said that they’re not going to be a no-deal because they won’t support that.

**David:** Yeah. Well they passed a law that will get the royal ascent today I think. That they cannot leave without a deal.

**Craig:** So he’s prorogued for nothing.

**David:** Oh yeah, no, he’s screwed.

**Craig:** He’s done.

**David:** But what’s fascinating if you look at it as a TV show is this season was so great and they brought in a new character because the old Prime Minister character was a little boring so they got rid of her. They brought in this new crazy guy and he’s more interesting. It’s a terrible, terrible situation, but as a soap opera it’s been riveting. So, you know, reading Brexit news destroys my writing, as it does whatever your interest is of the moment.

And you know how it is. You’ll be writing along and you forgot to turn off alerts and a text pops up and suddenly you’re out of it and you’re in something else. Or an email comes in. Oh, I got to deal with that right now. Of course you don’t.

And Freedom is an app you can download and you enter in a certain amount of time for how long it will shut down your Internet and a degree of severity. You can shut down everything on all your devices. You can shut down just the computer you’re working on. Put your phone across the room. But whatever you choose.

I pick 60 minutes at a time. And within – that shuts down everything – and if there’s like a research question I have to just jot it down for when my 60 minutes is up. But really within about a minute and a half of turning on Freedom I start working. There’s no – it’s unbelievable. And your concentration is unimpeded. And I just think it has saved a lot of bad situations for me.

**Craig:** When I’m on a plane that doesn’t have Wi-Fi—

**David:** That’s outrageous first of all. That’s bullshit.

**Craig:** Which is outrageous. It’s a bunch of bullshit. How dare they? But my choice is write or clean up a bunch of files on the computer. In other words, or watch TV on that stupid little screen which I refuse to do.

So, yeah, you start working when you don’t have the Internet. It’s amazing. It’s actually disturbing.

**John:** Yeah. How [unintelligible] it is.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**David:** So I thought Freedom deserves another plug. Because every writer should have it. There’s no reason to not have it.

**John:** Yeah. I’m a big fan of working in sprints. And so I’ll start a 60-minute sprint. And I don’t use Freedom anymore, because I don’t need to shut down my Internet.

**Craig:** He doesn’t need it, dude.

**David:** You have mental discipline?

**Craig:** He’s beyond that.

**John:** No, because I start a 60-minute sprint and there’s a little timer that goes. And so as long as that timer is going I’m not switching to another window.

**David:** Great.

**John:** Especially if I go full-screen that also distracts me from–

**Craig:** So when I keep texting, like John, John I’m dying, I’m bleeding. John, this guy keeps stabbing me. Help.

**David:** He’s sprinting.

**John:** Sprinting.

**Craig:** Sorry, sprinting.

**John:** Can’t help. My One Cool Thing is a book I’m reading called The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes, by David Robson. I am liking it. It’s about how IQ tests don’t have the correlation to wise decision making you’d expect. So there’s some correlation but not really a very strong correlation. And sometimes the smartest people you know on IQ tests do really dumb things, or believe conspiracy theories. And he makes a pretty compelling case that being so smart on an IQ sense just lets you reinforce your mistaken beliefs again and again and again.

And it strikes me in a very D&D sense the difference between intelligence and wisdom. And those are two ideas that are related, but they’re not really the same thing. And some people who are not especially smart can be very wise. And so The Intelligence Trap, a book I’m enjoying.

**David:** If we’re doing books as well, can I throw in a Second Cool Thing?

**John:** Go for it.

**Craig:** Cold Storage? Out right now. By David Koepp.

**David:** Sure. But this came out about a year ago. It’s called Essentialism. And the title tells you pretty much what it’s about. But it’s a self-helpy thing. It’s actually more of a management book. It’s written for businesses. But it applied to your personal life.

As I’ve gotten older I’ve taken joy in what I get rid of, as opposed to what I accumulate. And asking yourself what is essential, not just among my possessions but in my interactions with other people. What’s really essential lets you focus on that and making them really be of quality, as opposed to a lot of incredibly superficial ones a few meaningful ones. And, you know, that book meant a lot to me.

**John:** Absolutely. It fits in with that sort of Marie Kondo, winnowing down to the things that are actually crucial, the things that you actually enjoy. We’ve talked about that in terms of screenwriting as well. It’s like getting rid of some of the frills and really focusing on what is fundamental to the story that you’re trying to tell.

**David:** Or in a scene. When you find that moment where you cut away like a page and a half at the beginning and a half a page at the end and you’re down to three lines but they’re great.

**Craig:** There we go. The one that Melissa is really into is Swedish Death Cleaning. Have you heard of that one?

**John:** No, tell us.

**Craig:** I guess the Swedes as they are so comfortable with death, their whole thing is you make sure that you’ve really gotten rid of a lot of stuff before you die. Because otherwise your family is going to have to get rid of it, which is a huge hassle.

**John:** My mom to her credit has totally done that.

**Craig:** Yeah. So just clean up as if you’re going to die next week.

**David:** You know that Billy Wilder story about – some movie that must never have been made. But he asked some poor writer to write a scene of marital discord. And so the guy wrote this couple, this middle-aged couple, they’re not getting along. And it starts out they come out of their apartment, they get in an elevator. They argue down the hall. Argue all the way down the elevator. Argue out on the street. It’s four pages long.

He says, “I don’t want to shoot this. We’ve got to do the hallway. I’ve got to do the elevator. I’ve got to do the street.” He says, how about this. They don’t say anything. They come out, they’re not talking. They get in the elevator. They get in the elevator and the guy is wearing a hat, of course. The elevator stops a few floors down and an attractive young woman gets on. The guy takes off his hat and his wife looks at him.

That’s great.

**Craig:** That works.

**John:** Yes.

**Craig:** That works. Yeah.

**John:** Fantastic.

**Craig:** Nice.

**John:** That is our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli who also did our outro this week. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions. For short questions on Twitter, Craig is @clmazin. I’m @johnaugust. David Koepp, I believe you are not on Twitter. Is that correct?

**David:** I am not. I’m on Instagram. Dgkoepp.

**John:** Fantastic. Find him on Instagram.

**Craig:** You can see all of his pics.

**John:** You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find the transcripts. We get them up the week after the episode airs.

You can find all the back episodes of the show at Scriptnotes.net. And you need to sign up there to use the Scriptnotes app for iOS or for Android. You can also download 50-episode seasons at store.johnaugust.com.

You can find David Koepp’s book anywhere books are sold I believe.

**David:** You can.

**John:** And overseas as well? It’s in all markets?

**David:** Yes. It’s all over the place overseas. I’m going to London next week to shit on the government and sell it a little bit.

**Craig:** Look out Boris Johnson. Here he comes.

**John:** Fantastic. David Koepp, thank you so much for joining us.

**Craig:** Thanks David.

**David:** Thanks for having me guys.

**John:** Cool.

Links:

* [David Koepp](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0462895/)
* [Alex Billington](https://twitter.com/i/moments/1170819858826584065) on [embargoes](https://www.firstshowing.net/2019/an-open-letter-about-the-harmfulness-of-embargoes-at-film-festivals/).
* [Cold Storage](https://www.amazon.com/Cold-Storage-Novel-David-Koepp/dp/0062916432) by David Koepp
* [Spark Email App](https://sparkmailapp.com/)
* [Freedom App](https://freedom.to/)
* [The Intelligence Trap: Why Smart People Make Dumb Mistakes](https://www.amazon.com/Intelligence-Trap-Smart-People-Mistakes/dp/0393651428)
* [Essentialism](https://www.amazon.com/dp/0753555166/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_U_ckaGDbP6DX727)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [David Koepp](https://www.instagram.com/dgkoepp/) on Instagram
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew Chilelli ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_418_david_koepp.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 416: Fantasy Worldbuilding

September 12, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this article can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2019/fantasy-worldbuilding).

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

**Craig Mazin:** Oh, ah.

**John:** You got it.

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

**John:** This is Episode 416 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the program we’ll be talking with a senior narrative designer at Wizards of the Coast about fantasy world-building as a profession. It’s a great conversation about what is probably a lot of listeners’ dream job.

But first we have a ton of follow up to get through, so Craig let’s get at this.

**Craig:** Let’s go.

**John:** All right. So in the last regular episode before the Veep episode I was talking about this movie The Shadows that I’m planning to go off and direct. We’re starting casting on it because there’s this one very specific role that’s going to be challenging to cast. It is a 15-year-old girl who is blind. And to find a 15-year-old blind actress could be a challenge. But luckily a lot of people have sent in stuff and, you know, I’m starting to get audition reels and people out there have been really great about passing the message out there. And so it’s been really gratifying over the past two weeks to see a ton of stuff come in from people who kind of want to be in the movie or want to help find the actress for this movie.

**Craig:** That’s great. And so how are you doing it? You’ve set kind of, you know, a tricky goal for yourself. You went to America and said–

**John:** America and English-speaking countries outside of America.

**Craig:** And English-speaking countries outside of America. And you said let’s crowd-source this. Let’s see if we can do it. How has it been going?

**John:** It’s been going pretty well. So the things I did for the announcement was obviously Scriptnotes and I put out a tweet. That tweet got shared a lot which was terrific. And people sort of reached out beyond and into their networks. Now we’re doing the systematic outreach to all of the organizations we can find in the US and English-speaking countries that work with blind youth because the theory is that this actor may not realize that she’s actually an actor yet because she may not have had the opportunity. And so we’re reaching out to them. We’re sending the casting notice which you can find at johnaugust.com/casting.

But we’ve also brought in a casting director who has done a lot of big movies, but has also worked on projects that involve actors who are blind or low-vis. And she is also helping us do some more outreach there. So I’m optimistic that we will be able to find the actress for this role.

**Craig:** Great. I am, too. I’m sure you will. When there’s a will there’s a way. And, also, let’s just say, people generally want to star in movies, don’t they? It’s not you’re looking for somebody to clear out your P trap underneath your sink.

**John:** No.

**Craig:** So, yeah, I feel like you’ll get there.

**John:** I think we’ll get there. Along the way in this process people sent through this link to something that was really great, so we’ll put a link in the show notes. It’s the Hollywood Disability Inclusion Toolkit put out by an organization called Respectability. It’s a really good website that talks through what to be thinking about when you’re thinking about inclusion in your project, in this case looking at people who have different abilities. And it’s just really great. So I was happy that this thing existed. I would not have known about it if people hadn’t sent me the link, so I’m going to pass on this link to you guys. If you are writing a project that includes people who are not in your realm of experience this may be a really good place to start looking and start thinking about the questions to ask and the issues to keep in mind.

**Craig:** And it’s good that we have these resources now. I mean, it’s one thing to say to creators, look, you have to do better, right? That’s the Twitter phrase, do better. It’s the all-purpose Twitter phrase for shame on you, I’ve noticed by the way. Any time somebody doesn’t like what you say or do they just go, “Do better.” But in some cases we really can do better. We have not done well as a community on this particular topic of casting people with disabilities. And people who don’t have disabilities, writing for characters who have disabilities, even just the amount of writers with disabilities is pretty low, like a lot of our marginalized groups in our business.

But you can say to people, well OK, do better. And then they think I want to, where do I start, what do I do, how do I get there? The last thing you want to do is call up your one blind friend and say, “So can you tell me about blind stuff?” That’s no good.

**John:** That’s what I do with Ryan Knighton all the time, but yes. Ryan Knighton cannot be everyone’s resource.

**Craig:** [laughs] He can’t be everyone’s resource. And also I should say like, yeah, there’s like three phases. There’s I don’t know you, so don’t talk to me. Then there’s I casually know you so this is awkward. And then, OK, we’re friends, I can ask you anything. If you haven’t crossed all the way over into we’re friends and we have a certain understanding and trust of each other. So, it’s nice that organizations are providing these resources. And when they do they’re not only offering you help, they’re removing one of the great excuses of all time: well I don’t know where to go, I don’t know who to talk to. Well, now you do know where to go and now you do know who to talk to.

**John:** So we have a couple listener questions about this. I’m going to mash two of them together because they were both long but they covered some really good territory.

**Craig:** Mash them up. Let’s do it.

**John:** So Ian wrote in to ask, “After listening to this week’s podcast I was very intrigued by John’s movie concept and casting call for a young blind actor to play Abby. At what point does an actor cease becoming an actor. Actors exist to portray people they are not. Some examples like gay actors should be able to play a straight person. A kind, caring actor should be able to play an unspeakable evil. A younger actor can portray an older actor, especially with the help of makeup. A native English-speaking actor can portray somebody from another country with an accent, for now anyway.” That was his parenthetical there.

“A qualified actor should be able to inhabit the role of the living person, for example Queen Elizabeth.” I’ll continue on with Matt who wrote in to say, “Perhaps you and Craig could speak to the larger trend of increased casting scrutiny currently coursing through Hollywood.”

So, Craig, what do you think of these questions? Have you noticed over the past few years a change in what is considered proper for casting in certain roles?

**Craig:** Oh yeah. I think what we’ve seen is there’s a change in what is considered inappropriate casting. So there have been a couple of very high profile incidents where white actors were being cast to play characters that either were not white in source material or were not really even white in an original screenplay for instance. So there’s a sense that you do want to – I mean, look, I’m with Ian in one sense. The whole point of acting is that you’re being somebody you’re not. Just like the whole point of writing is that you’re writing somebody that you’re not. In fact, you’re writing lots of people you’re not. And the last thing we want to do is balkanize everyone so that you can only write what’s in front of your eyes. That would be disastrous.

However, in the case of acting it is reasonable and I think it’s desirable to say to people there are certain actors that are underemployed and under-utilized and they have really interesting things to offer your part that others don’t. If I am making a show about the life and the challenges of an obese woman, OK. I could hire a thin actor. You may have noticed there’s quite a few of those. And pad her up. I could do that. And she can act that. That’s doable. In fact, it’s been done.

But, when you do that not only are you taking – you’re taking something away from a kind of actor that generally is under-utilized, but you’re also robbing yourself of an actor who may bring a certain emotional depth and truth to that part that someone else wouldn’t have access to. There is an authenticity there that you no longer have access to.

So, my feeling is this. If the part could be played by somebody who is of the sort that is under-utilized and underemployed, try and find the person that’s under-utilized and underemployed. Go for that. Yes, a gay actor can play a straight person because straight actors are not under-utilized or underemployed. Can a straight actor play a gay person? I would have said, you know, it’s an interesting kind of thing. And I’m interested in what you have to say about this. Because I feel like it used to happen all the time because gay characters weren’t really people, they were characters. And then there was a stretch there where it was sort of like, OK, let’s not do that. And now I feel like there are so many gay characters that maybe – for instance on Modern Family, Eric Stonestreet is not gay and he plays a gay character. And his husband is played by an actor who is gay. There are enough gay characters where maybe you can say well that’s OK. What about Jewish characters? There are a lot of Jewish characters, so I guess I don’t mind as a Jewish person that an Irish woman plays Mrs. Maisel. [laughs] It just doesn’t really bother me that much.

But, yeah, I think if you’re talking about under-represented characters then why not try and help people that have been ignored. It only works to your benefit as far as I’m concerned creatively.

**John:** Yeah. I think it does work to your benefit creatively. And I think a thing to look through in the examples you gave, but also the examples that Ian gave in his initial question, I think it may be interesting to draw a distinction between external realities of a character that we’re seeing onscreen and internal realities of that character. And so the idea of whether a gay person can play a straight role or a straight person can play a gay role that is internal acting that is 100 percent sort of what the actor inside is doing. That is not the physical reality of how that character presents onscreen.

And so I feel like we’re in a moment as we approach 2020 and probably this next bit of time where you’re going to try to cast the person who physically can inhabit that role sort of natively and naturally wherever possible. And so that’s part of the motivation behind looking for a blind actor for the role of Abby is that I don’t want the blindness to be a thing that the character is acting. I want the blindness to be a thing that is just naturally part of what comes in that performance.

**Craig:** So that’s a purely creative justification. And I would love to live in a world where you have purely creative justifications. There is a layer of our businesses is a very public business and it’s a very publicized business. And I think part of the reality that we have to steer through, I don’t want to sound like I’m naïve or a child, we also are aware that we live in a world now where these things are scrutinized.

**John:** Absolutely.

**Craig:** And if you’re going to make a film about somebody who is say deaf, or someone who is hearing-impaired, who is sight-impaired, who is blind, someone who is in a wheelchair because they are a paraplegic, and you don’t cast somebody who has that then you’re going to be criticized wildly and heavily. That’s something that did not exist ten years ago.

Now, let me take that back. We weren’t aware of it ten years ago. So what’s been happening is people have been yelling in their own homes. Right? People have been yelling at the screen saying, “Not again.” Right? And now we all hear it. So I think that’s the difference is that we now hear it. If we are not naturally responsive to it, and I think we should be, then at the very least there are enough people in this business who just from a cynical point of view are aware that products that we make here in Hollywood can be damaged if we are stepping on people’s toes and being dismissive of needs for representation.

So, we have to take that into account. And I don’t take those things into account with my eyes rolling like, ugh, I guess we have to. No, I mean, look, all we’re doing is working for an audience. If there are people upset in the audience then we screwed up. So, why not do it the right way?

**John:** Yeah. So I think we have at least articulated three reasons why at this moment it feels important. First it’s creative reasons. Second is looking for access for actors who would otherwise not get a chance to be in these movies. And third is the realities of putting out these movies and TV shows in our environment right now and that there is an increased scrutiny which is probably merited.

So, those are three reasons why I think anyone who is looking at casting these roles is going to be thinking about with this role written a certain way how do I find the actor to best fit that role.

**Craig:** Exactly. And that’s something that happens I’d imagine in the beginning. When you started working on this I’m sure the second thought after so a blind girl, dot-dot-dot, you went, “And I’m going to need a blind actor.”

**John:** Yeah. And so as we get into this process and hopefully this movie gets made, you never know if this movie gets made, I’d love to talk more about how this all comes together and sort of the specific challenges not just with the Abby role but with the movie altogether in the next 100 episodes of Scriptnotes.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**John:** Cool. Further follow up. We had a How Would This Be a Movie where we talked about ice cream wars. We talked about Mister Softee in China and in Brooklyn. Ed in DC wrote in to say, “I’m surprised neither of you remember the 1984 film Comfort and Joy which was a dark comedy about such a turf war between ice cream companies. If you haven’t seen it it’s great. And he puts in a link in the show notes. I didn’t know about Comfort and Joy. Did you?

**Craig:** No. And I’m surprised that Ed is surprised. It’s not that I’m not familiar with the director of Comfort and Joy, Bill Forsyth, because Bill Forsyth directed Local Hero which I think a lot of people have seen. It’s a fantastic movie. But suffice to say that Local Hero was far more popular than Comfort and Joy. I’ve never heard of Comfort and Joy. Obviously it made it over here because Ed is in DC, unless Ed is Edinburgh. I don’t know. I don’t remember Comfort and Joy rolling on HBO with the same frequency as Beastmaster in 1984. So, sorry Ed.

No, I mean, I will check it out because, again, huge fan of Local Hero. You’ve seen Local Hero I assume?

**John:** I’ve never seen Local Hero.

**Craig:** Oh my gosh.

**John:** The list of movies I’ve not seen is long and embarrassing.

**Craig:** You know what John? Here’s the thing. That’s OK. No one has seen everything except weirdos. But Local Hero is one of those movies that is just a ray of sunshine. It’s just an absurdly positive, happy-making movie. It’s sweet. It’s adorable. Yeah, you will–

**John:** I’ll love it.

**Craig:** You will love it. Everyone loves it. It’s just got this wonderful whimsy to it. You’ll think it’s great.

**John:** I’m excited to see it. Jason Pace also wrote in with a link to 99 Problems which is a short film by Ross Killeen in Ireland. I think it may be becoming a feature. But his point was that it’s definitely universal. This idea of ice cream trucks which might seem so specific to the East Coast, there’s a universal quality because they’re happening in other places.

**Craig:** [laughs] Is there? So wait, hold on. There’s been a movie in Scotland and a movie in Ireland. So we’re now saying that this is a universal thing?

**John:** It is universal. Because if you have Brooklyn plus Scotland and Ireland? Come on, that’s like three different islands. So come on.

**Craig:** So how many Irelands, Americas, and Scotlands are needed to equal one India? Just out of curiosity. I think like six. I don’t think that this is necessarily indicating that we have a universal property or universal cultural point of view. But that’s OK. It’s not that everybody needs to know about the same thing. Sometimes you’re learning about them. Yeah, no, the fact that something has happened with a topic does not quite get us into universal territory.

**John:** Maybe not. But speaking of specificity and universality, do you want to do the follow up on Akashinga rangers?

**Craig:** Akashinga rangers. Meg writes, “I was so excited to hear you guys talking about the possibility of making a movie about the Akashinga rangers. This past spring at the Philadelphia Environmental Film Festival I was lucky enough to see the Black Mambas, a short doc by Bruce Donnelly about the all-woman, all-badass anti-poaching crew who patrol Kruger National Park in South Africa. It was a great short doc and it was followed by an even more mind-blowing feature-length doc, When Lambs Become Lions, which I cannot recommend enough, even if you were already expressing some interest in how to make a story about anti-poaching units. Really gripping. It is hands-down the most stunning drama I’ve seen in years.” Hold on a second. Sorry. I’ve just got to back up a second.

Meg, I’m right here. Come on. I mean, I just – I tried so hard. Come on.

**John:** Yeah. I mean, Chernobyl, I don’t know.

**Craig:** I’m not saying it has to be the most stunning drama you’ve seen, but anyway. That’s Meg’s question. I’m just joking Meg. “I was constantly forgetting that it’s a documentary because it was just so beautifully constructed to keep you right on the edge of your seat the whole damn time. Its complexity hinges on the fact that the anti-poaching units in this small Kenyan town are so inconsistently funded that many locals go back and forth between working as poachers and working to prevent poachers, depending on which best allows them to feed their families. Friends and family members can easily find themselves on opposite sides and maintain close personal ties outside of the elephant refuge while hunting each other to death within. It is completely crazy. It is a fragile system to try and wrap your head around. And by the end of the movie you feel like everything you thought you knew about anything is maybe not so certain.”

Wow.

**John:** Wow.

**Craig:** I want to watch that.

**John:** Meg wrote a good review of When Lambs Become Lions. And, yeah, I think that if you’re going to make this movie about the Akashinga rangers that’s going to be a great aspect of this where even if it’s not our central characters that we’re following, the community that they’re in flips back and forth based on just economic need and necessity. And that’s great. That’s true. That’s human drama.

**Craig:** I mean, that does actually sound like possibly the most stunning drama I would see in years. I’m feeling a little bad.

**John:** Also, I mean, I’ve been to Kruger National Park and it is stunningly gorgeous. So just imagine that against that backdrop? Yeah, it’s good.

**Craig:** Ugh. [laughs] Darn it. We have another question. This is coming in from Leann and we’ve got an audio follow up from Episode 315, 100 episodes ago.

**John:** Let’s take a listen.

**Leann:** Hi John and Craig. Over two years ago on the show you gave your thoughts on a question of mine about waiting to hear back from a producer who is considering one of my scripts. A couple months later I briefly met you, John, at McNally Jackson Bookstore in SoHo after an episode recording. I told you that the producer had indeed come onboard the project and the film was now in development. You told me to write in again when my movie became ‘more real.’ I am very pleased to say that this film, my debut feature as a writer-director, recently wrapped production and is now in post.

We’ve had a wonderful cast and team behind it and things look exciting for the film’s future. Also, before we shot I submitted a different script to the Nichol and just found out it has advanced to the semi-finals.

I mention this because both of these events are a culmination of many years, hard work, and learning and your show has played a significant role in both my screenwriting craft and my understanding of the business. So thank you very much, again, for all your invaluable guidance over the years. You truly help so many people with your work. Thanks.

**Craig:** Aw.

**John:** Aw.

**Craig:** Aw.

**John:** Congratulations, Leann. So congratulations on wrapping your film. Post is a wonderful and terrifying time where you will question why you’ve made this movie in the very first place. But I hope it comes through in spectacular form and you get it to a good venue, be it a festival, be it a distributor. However it ends up in the world, congratulations. And congratulations on your script placing well at the Nichol.

**Craig:** That’s fantastic. First of all, thank you also for writing in Leann, or speaking in and letting us know. It’s really nice to hear those things. And it’s particularly great that after all of this time we can chart people’s progress from the very, very start to here you are with a movie. And I think what John’s saying is absolutely true. No matter what happens with this film, and I hope it is everything you ever wanted it to be, tons of great careers started by people falling on their faces immediately after the starter pistol went off. Like mine. Just, you know, just right away face plant. And that’s OK.

That is not a predictor of future failure or anything. It’s just great that you’re through this now. You have gotten the hardest part done. You are now one of the very few people in the world who has written a screenplay that has become a movie. You now have access to a certain experience and information that 98% of screenwriters do not have. And so take all the lessons from this. Think of this as this great opportunity to learn all these lessons and I’m very glad in particular that when you did run into John at that bookstore that he wasn’t a monster to you. Because you know that’s – I can’t tell you how many people I’ve had to talk down after they’ve had a run-in with that monster. [laughs]

**John:** The Jekyll and Hyde quality. Sometimes it’s just, ugh, it’s just the worst. I know.

**Craig:** How great would that be, by the way, if you really were a monster? Like every time people met you in person they were like oh my god he is not what he is on the podcast at all.

**John:** Yeah, I mean, it’s Matthew’s clever editing that makes me sound like a rational human being when in fact I’m just–

**Craig:** No, you’re a nightmare.

**John:** Completely crazy.

**Craig:** Nightmare on wheels. So, anyway, thank you Leann. That’s wonderful.

**John:** Hooray. Craig, I don’t think we’ve actually talked about the fact that there’s an election happening, a WGA election that’s happening for the West. So I don’t know if you’re aware of it.

**Craig:** Nope.

**John:** But it’s happening right now.

**Craig:** W, G, oh, the Writers Guild.

**John:** The Writers Guild. We’re both in the Writers Guild.

**Craig:** Here’s I think practically speaking this is my point of view about this election. Any Writers Guild election will favor the incumbents. I don’t remember the last time an incumbent ran for reelection and didn’t win, for anything. Officer or board. But this year is different because there’s quite a bit of controversy and the union has been undergoing an internal disagreement. Which I think is good.

I think there’s a generation of writers that have grown up inside a guild that has never argued. And you and I come from an earlier time when the guild would argue all the time with itself and I think that that was healthy.

I would love to see dissenting voices in the mix. I would love to frankly have more disagreement inside the room because I think when there is more disagreement ideas can be better stress-tested and evaluated and you will get better results. That’s my working theory here. That’s the board that I was on. I remember the way it functioned. In fact, in two consecutive years there were two wildly different leaderships and a consistent disagreement inside the room which was terrific.

So, I am supporting all the members of the, what is it, Writers Forward. I think they call themselves Writers Forward. They always come up with names. I don’t care about the names. Nobody cares about the names. But that, because I want to get some of those dissenting opinions in there, particularly as it regards the agency issue which I think is a terrific cause that has not been prosecuted correctly.

And so, you know, even if all that happens is everybody votes and it’s clear from the voting that a lot of people are unhappy with the way leadership has been doing things to this point that too will impact how leadership behaves following the election.

One last thing I’ll say. There has been this what I consider a very poisonous notion that has been introduced into our body politic and I’ve seen it – really this is the first time I’ve ever seen it. And the notion is this. That disagreement with leadership weakens the union. This is a terrible notion on its face. I don’t even think that people who are proposing it and promoting actually believe it in their hearts anyway. Because if Phyllis Nagy and her slate sweep the election, which is unlikely, but let’s just say that happens, those people aren’t going to immediately say, right, well we disagree with everything she says but she’s in charge now so now we have to agree with it completely. No one is going to do that. And no one should do that. That’s not what it’s about.

What’s behind the whole disagreement weakens us – the converse is therefore just do what we tell you to do. And agree with what we say. And I think that’s terrible. It’s particularly terrible for a writers’ union when the whole point is that our livelihoods are based on a kind of necessary free expression. So, I believe actually disagreement, public disagreement, rigorous discussion makes us stronger and actually makes our union mean something. As opposed to a kind of compulsory solidarity which is nothing more than a lot of people being ordered to drudge in together in the same direction.

I don’t want to be drudging in the same direction. I want us all to be running in the same direction thrilled. So, I think we get this from this agreement. That’s why I’m supporting this group. John, the floor is yours.

**John:** I disagree with this characterization that the folks who are supportive of the current agency action are poisoning everything with their trying to ask questions of the dissenters. What I’ve seen again and again is at any time that the folks on the Nagy slate are questioned or trying to hit down at specifically what they’re trying to do that theme portrayed that you are being too aggressive, you’re being too lockstep with the guild. I don’t see that actually being the case. But in terms of the folks I’m supporting, listen, I was part of the group that is prosecuting the agency campaign right now. So I’ve been in all those rooms and I sort of know what’s actually happening. That’s why I think the incumbents that I’m supporting are fantastic because I’ve seen them do the work day in and day out.

The folks who are not incumbents who I’m supporting I also saw them sort of independently reach out and do a lot of really amazing things for writers during this time. So that’s why I picked the other writers who I’m supporting. So voting is really important. I think it’s great that everyone vote and a big vote this time will show both the guild and the town sort of how active and engaged membership is.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think engagement is a sign of our power. The more we engage I think the stronger more formidable I think we are. And to be clear I would never ever defend anyone who has said, hey, you can’t question a candidate. Question them all you want. For sure. It’s just that there’s – it’s not even a support necessarily all supporters of the incumbents. It’s just a few people have made very public statements that no one should disagree openly with their leadership. I just think down that road is insanity.

**John:** I think it’s also unfair to put blame for that on the incumbents. Or that the incumbents are directing that kind of thing.

**Craig:** They are not. I would agree with you completely. In fact, I don’t think, I can’t speak for all of the incumbents but I can certainly speak for David Goodman on this because I’ve spoken with him. I mean, we talk all the time. And there’s no way that David Goodman would agree with that. I just don’t believe he would agree with that. I wish he would say it more. I wish he would directly rebut some of these people who do this in his name. But I agree with you.

I don’t think anybody that has gone through the process of being in guild leadership which you and I both know requires a certain kind of, oh, you know, magnanimity and responsibility to all would ever suggest such a thing. It’s really more kind of the people on the fringes or the edges of things. But, you know, that’s what Twitter and Facebook can do is they sort of magnify voices on the edges. And I don’t mean to say that the people are on the edges, but rather their positions where they’re staking themselves out in terms of political point of view is a bit far.

If anybody out there is feeling slightly guilty that they would disagreement with leadership please don’t feel guilty about that. You should always disagree with leadership. I’m an incredibly disagreeable person. My feeling is my job is to quiz and question leadership. I was doing that when I was in leadership. I think that’s how you get better leaders.

**John:** Cool. Two last bits of news. First off, Highland2 the upgrade to pro is on sale this week. So if you’re a person who has been using Highland2 and have been holding off upgrading to pro this is the week because it’s on sale. So you should do it. I guess it’s a back to school sale. I don’t know. It was Labor Day. We decided to put it on sale. We will do this like once a year. So this is your chance to get it for a break.

Also if you would like to order the NaNoWriMo classroom kit, so this is a kit that goes out to classes across the US, you can order it for your kid’s class or for some other class that you just want to have this thing. It’s a great program that gets kids writing in the month of November. It’s a really structured thing for teachers to use in grade schools and junior highs as well. Writer Emergency Pack is included is included in that. So if you want to get that for your school there is a link in the show notes to that.

And now it is time to get to our special guest. Alison Luhrs is Senior Narrative Designer at Wizards of the Coast where she works on properties including Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons. Welcome Alison.

**Alison Luhrs:** Hello.

**John:** Hello. Alison, where are we talking to you right now?

**Alison:** You are talking to me from a weird little phone booth thing inside of our office in rainy Renton, Washington State.

**John:** So Renton is near Seattle?

**Alison:** Yeah, it’s about 20 minutes south of Seattle. It’s sort of its kind of ugly cousin to the south. But I live in Seattle and commute down here.

**John:** Fantastic. So I introduced you as a Senior Narrative Designer. What does that actually mean? What do you do for a living?

**Alison:** So my job is to advocate for characters and story inside of the games that we make. So, it can be in the tabletop space for the tabletop version of Magic: The Gathering or Dungeons & Dragons. But right now I work for digital publishing. So it’s my job to be in charge of expressions of story within the digital games that we’re currently working on.

**John:** Great. So you’re a storyteller. So like most of the people listening to this podcast you’re involved with characters and worlds and story, but in a very different sense than sort of a normal 120-page screenplay. You are dealing with whole giant fantasy worlds and then populating those worlds with characters.

**Alison:** For sure. It’s super esoteric and weird. So I kind of do everything from actual writing of scripts and barks and different communications between characters in the game as well as doing a ton of documentation on the designer’s end for what is the overall arc structure. What are the different narrative choices that can happen in the script? As well as world-building. So coming up with what are the rules of the world. What does it look like? What is the structure of the different cultures that inhabit this place? And using that documentation to hand off to the folks who are in charge of actually doing the art and the audio and the creative verticals for game design.

**Craig:** So basically you have the coolest job ever. I mean, that’s what I’m hearing. You have the coolest job in the world.

**Alison:** It is the coolest job in the world and I had no idea it existed until about five or six years ago. Yeah.

**Craig:** Now one thing that I imagine you have to deal with that would be blow my mind – I mean, you know, John and I both love Dungeons & Dragons and my son is a huge Magic player.

**Alison:** Awesome. Nice.

**Craig:** So we’re Wizards of the Coast people.

**Alison:** We’re all nerds here. Yes.

**Craig:** Yeah. We’re all wizards here. But I would imagine that one of the things that you have to deal with as a kind of burden is this massive quantity of canon and lore that you need to consistent inside of. How often do you run afoul of this where you step on a landmine you didn’t even know was there? Or you create a character and someone says, “Oh actually there was a character.” I mean, what’s that like?

**Alison:** It is something that is constantly on my mind. And luckily we have folks in the building who I can go to as the experts to ask. Like, hey, have we already done this 25 years ago? And usually the answer is yes. One of the nice things about working on properties like Magic or Dungeons & Dragons that have been around for so long is that there’s only a certain point where you can really be specific to everything. You know what I mean? Like you can only match canon so much of the time.

And so one of the ways that we kind of approach this is by recognizing that canon is something that has to grow alongside your audience. There are things that we would do for an audience today enjoying one of our games that we wouldn’t necessarily do 25 years ago, or wouldn’t even really be on our mind. So, when we are producing a new character or producing some sort of new world or new work the question that we ask first is how is this appropriate for the audience that’s playing it today. If there’s a way to tie that into the old lore without stepping on anything, cool. But if it does step on something that’s a point to pause, talk to the experts inside the building, and say how can we make this work. Or, what do we need to actively address and actively shift to move forward.

So we never really want to get pigeon-holed into wanting to be dogmatic about sticking to canon. Canon is the most important thing of all. Instead we have ways to work alongside it and move it forward to a modern audience.

**John:** It sounds like what you’re saying is that canon is an incredibly useful resource. You have all these characters and all these worlds and in the case of D&D decades of history going back to like these characters Mordenkainen who was back there from the very start.

**Alison:** Yeah.

**John:** But you have to always be asking what is that helpful for the game right now.

**Alison:** Exactly.

**John:** How does that character fit into the universe that you’re establishing right now and the stories that you want to tell.

**Alison:** Right. Mordenkainen is a really good example, too, because what’s his personality? Origin story? What are the bits about this character, one who has been around for forever? There isn’t necessarily a lot that’s been written about the guy.

**Craig:** He’s a spell brand name. I just think of him as he’s got his magnificent mansion. He’s put his name on spells. Him and Mordenkainen.

**Alison:** Yeah. They’re both very busy dudes.

**John:** But I can imagine looking through the more recent hard cover books you’ve done on Mordenkainen is it’s a character who kind of feels like a Doctor Strange in the sense that he’s an incredibly powerful magic user and also bridges between different universes within D&D lore. So, he actually seems to have an awareness that there are other dimensions and other possibilities. Like he can talk about the elves in this universe versus the elves in that universe. So it’s a way of sort of bridging across things.

**Alison:** Absolutely. Right. And the really convenient thing as a creator is that that’s about as much as we have on him. With D&D specifically there’s a huge breadth of knowledge about these worlds and about all the space that D&D has to play in. But it’s very flat. There isn’t a lot of depth that’s been done about specific places. Because it’s been added to so many times by so many hundreds of creators, it’s very horizontal and not necessarily deep. So even though there is a lot of different things that you can cover, because there’s so many different things there’s a lot of chances to go really deep on character. So even though there hadn’t been too much written about Mordenkainen before, a lot of the textbooks about him recently came out, it was a chance to really explore the depths that hadn’t been established yet.

**John:** Let’s talk about the work you’re doing. So what kind of documents are you writing? And are these things that are just internal? Because we’ll put in links to some of the stuff that shows up on the web. So these are short stories you’ve written. They are explanations of new Magic: The Gathering cards or sort of the backstory behind this new character that you’re introducing into the world. But does the actual document look like? What application are you in? What is your cursor blinking in as you’re doing most of your work?

**Alison:** Sure. So when we’re developing a new set for Magic: The Gathering or a new world for D&D a lot of the work that we’ll do is creating the world guide. So the world guide is documentation not just for us narrative designers but it also guides our visual artists, our game designers to help come up with mechanics later. And these world guides are around 40 to 60,000 words. It’s kind of a Wikipedia article. The imaginary world that we’re coming up with.

So the world guide will go over not just visually going through the different cultures and environments and biomes look like here, but what are the cultures that live here. What are their real world inspirations? How do they function with inside the world itself? How do they operate with different cultures? What are the economies that work here? It’s really just like picking up on a Wikipedia article about a country and then translating that to a fictional place.

So even though it sounds really minute that we would need to know the tiny specifics of how an imaginary culture works within this world, we’re creating experiences that our fans will enjoy for 60 hours at a time. So we need to have all that information in our back pockets so that we can develop those long experiences they want to come back to again and again.

**Craig:** So you’re leaving room ultimately for everybody participating to do their own storytelling. I mean, that’s kind of the point of Dungeons & Dragons. So you’re creating all the details and the playgrounds and then people can come along and sort of grow inside of those things.

**Alison:** Exactly.

**Craig:** But there is – I mean, I know they’re trying to make a Dungeons & Dragons movie. And they tried that for a while. And there are some properties where I guess you can – you have two spaces. You have the space where people make their own stories inside of like the world guide. So I understand right now we’re running Dragon Heist. So, I can—

**Alison:** Oh fun.

**Craig:** Yeah. So I can tell these guys a lot about the city because I have the guide to Waterdeep and I can walk them through things. The stories inside obviously I’m playing off of the narrative prompts, but they’re kind of making the story as they go. That’s how Dungeons & Dragons works. You know that. I’m just telling it for people at home. But then there’s like living next to that is the opportunity to do fixed narrative where you’re telling stories, beginnings, middles, and ends, and people are absorbing it passively like they would a movie. Do you have interest in that? Do you think that Wizards is going to be doing more of that? Or are they going to kind of stay in that sort of hybrid space where they create a world and then they invite you to tell stories within it?

**Alison:** Our plan is to feature a variety of trans-media experiences. There’s going to be a world where we do have beginnings, and middles, and endings for experiences. And in narrative design the thing that makes it different from sitting down and writing a screenplay or writing a novel is the element of choice. There always has to be room for our audience to choose what happens to them. And the trick as a narrative designer is finding ways to make all of those choices feel like they were intentional and feel like they’re part of the experience.

And so the way that you nail that is by aiming for tone and theme rather than for specific arcs. So that way you can build in lots of different endings for your player experiences but they all still feel like they were intentional and part of the experience because they match the same tone. So, when we do end up doing some kind of TV show or a movie or whatever for any of our properties we would be aiming to match that same tone that we have when you sit down at the table to play with your friends. Or when you are playing a game of Magic against somebody else.

But the trick is managing to find a way to replicate that experience without having to have the same pitfalls. Like I said earlier, because D&D is so horizontal we don’t really have a ton of named characters. Those characters that everybody knows off the top of their heads. And so there’s our chance to establish that when we do eventually go down that path. But until then it’s my job to make sure that we’re maintaining the same tone that you have when you are playing at your kitchen table with your friends as when you sit down to a console game to play D&D or to play Magic.

**John:** So obviously in the fantasy space we think back to Tolkien who wrote the novels Lord of the Rings but also really did the rest of the world-building there. He was drawing his own maps. He was sort of figuring out everything around that, even if it didn’t necessarily directly fit into the books. Here it’s sort of the reverse situation where you had a lot of the landscape and you kept filling out the landscape, but now you’re trying to find who are the characters and what are the stories that are pulling us through this.

I feel like so many of our listeners probably kind of want your job rather than our job, because it’s a chance to sort of just really – you have this giant sandbox so you can just build and build and build and build and there’s not this responsibility that everything has to fit neatly into a two-hour chunk of entertainment.

**Alison:** Absolutely. Sometimes the challenge with doing this is remembering that you have to create a 60 to 80-hour experience. You know? Like there are people who play campaigns for years at a time. Or folks who return to the same Magic set again and again and again. I think that a lot of folks who want to create for the sake of constantly creating would thrive in this career. I had no idea this existed until a couple of years ago when I was inside the building.

There isn’t really a class structure that you can take to get in here. There’s no real college course to major in narrative design. It’s still a really young field. And what my job looks like from company to company is vastly different. So even though I’m writing world guides here inside of Wizards, if I were to go to another study I would likely be doing a much different job just because these two companies are different. And the value of narrative design inside of videogame design is still really undervalued. It’s usually not something that’s added to a game until it’s nearly out the door.

Narrative is the most flexible part of game design. You can change what the word in a sentence is while you’re having a conversation a lot more easily than you can change the mechanics of a how a videogame is actually played. So frequently a narrative designer won’t even really be brought in until they’re at the very end of the process of development.

**John:** Yeah. They may have figured out the art before they actually figured out the story that was really behind that art. And that’s a huge mistake. That’s an opportunity that’s missed.

**Alison:** Absolutely. Yeah. And I mean one of the secrets to Wizard’s success is that we include story from the very beginning. So my job has to always be ready to adapt to whatever the developers change. It’s kind of my job to sort of think on my toes and change whatever I need to change at a moment’s notice. So I can imagine that would be a little off-putting to someone who is more used to having story be the thing that’s driving the car.

**John:** Now talk about sort of you’re working with a team because some of what you describe sort of sounds like the experience of being in a TV writers’ room where there’s a bunch of people and there’s probably a whiteboard and you’re thinking through stuff. But I’ve also done some work with videogame companies and ultimately they might sort of – you describe it as sort of being like a Wikipedia article, ultimately their source of truth is this internal Wiki that basically lists everything and every character and everything that’s been established.

Obviously it’s collaborative, but is it collaborative with a bunch of folks in the room together, or is collaborative in the sense of someone breaks off a chunk of the world and goes off and does it and it falls into a bigger document? What is the work flow?

**Alison:** So the way that we work internally is that I typically will do world-building alongside other members of different creative verticals. So I’ll usually do it alongside maybe a member of the D&D team or the Magic team, but also our lead art director and our lead producers and the members of the creative team who are going to be involved with creating other aspects of the project. I want to make sure that their brains are in the room because they’ll usually be thinking about something that I’m not necessarily.

So, when we do those big brain-stormy meetings I’ll usually take the notes and then go back into my desk and dive in the writer hole for a few hours. And emerge, you know, days later with a couple 10,000 words worth of stuff that we just discussed.

My goal is to usually have that documentation finished early that way when folks are developing stuff later on they can refer to it and hopefully I was smart enough to include something that they’ll need an answer to later on. But if not they’ll come to me directly and say, hey, we want to have this kind of feature in the game. Can you find a creative reason why it makes sense we would ask the player to do X. And so it will be my job to kind of figure out, OK, what’s the high level creative of what we’re asking the player to do. How can we fit that in to what we’ve already established?

**Craig:** So I have a question about your audience, because I think that every writer should be and naturally is consumed with what the audience is going to think. You have a very particular audience. And I mean they are particular. At the same time I feel like Wizards is doing a really good job of kind of progressing. They’re moving the ball forward. I mean, classically speaking all of the kind of Dungeons & Dragons stuff was an echo back to European Middle Ages, just like Lord of the Rings was. So white guys with swords. And scantily-clad women being rescued from mythological creatures.

And it’s not that anymore. But as you—

**Alison:** No it’s not.

**Craig:** But as you go through and you tell your new stories how do you manage – this is really a personal question. It’s not about the company. It’s actually just about you as you’re writing. How do you manage the kind of push and pull knowing, well, I’m dealing with some people that may be resistant here so I have to figure out how to move the ball forward without freaking people out? But still I don’t want to be regressive. Talk me through that process.

**Alison:** I believe in listening to what the audience at large wants. We often talk inside the building about the bell curve of fans. So, on the left side of a bell curve that will be folks who don’t really have any knowledge of the lore or the stories that we already tell inside the building or in our games. And on the far right end you’ll have the people who know absolutely everything about it. And the bulk of your fans are going to fall a little bit to the left of center in this curve. Most people don’t know everything. And most people know a little bit more than the folks who don’t know anything about the game. But the folks that we’re aiming for live in that part that isn’t going to be angry at every major change and isn’t going to be upset that we aren’t featuring women being rescued in every single adventure that we have and having every single major character be played by a white guy.

What we’re aiming for is what the culture at large is moving towards. And I like to hold an audience responsible for keeping up. It’s our job to make sure that we bring in more people and we do that by listening to what the trend of the audience is moving towards, not trying to hold on to what it used to be in the ‘80s and the ‘90s.

**Craig:** Yeah. I think that’s great. I mean, I’ve noticed even as we’re running Dragon Heist that there are characters that are just casually gay couples. And what I liked is it wasn’t part of the story. It’s not particularly relevant.

**Alison:** No.

**Craig:** We just make note that he works as a blacksmith and his husband is in the back helping. So it is interesting to see how in a strange way – and I don’t know why it is that in imaginary world – imaginary world should be more progressive than our world. I mean, that’s the point, right?

**Alison:** Yes, they should. Absolutely. The last thing I want to do when I’m playing pretend is imagine that I’m in a world where I have to deal with sexism on a daily basis.

**Craig:** Right. Exactly.

**Alison:** Why would I want that to be part of my fantasy?

**Craig:** Right. And there’s more room in a fantasy world to do these things. And yet oddly, traditionally fantasy rooms have been more restrictive and more regressive in that regard because they were, I don’t know, this is like strange fake nostalgia for a time that really didn’t even exist.

**Alison:** No, that’s totally what it is. And a lot of it, too, has to come with who was creating that fantasy and those worlds. When you have creators who are from a background that hasn’t been traditionally represented you’re going to have fantasy that is more deep and more complex than you ever would if it was written by a specific kind of person.

**Craig:** Yeah, no, it’s great.

**John:** So, Alison, there’s maybe a new world or a new sort of section of an existing world that you want to sort of explore, so maybe thinking about it for a campaign or for some other materials. It could be based on some sort of world mythology or some idea that sparks for you. What would be the process of pitching that idea internally? Would it be just you coming in with an idea? Do you enlist artists to help you draw stuff up? What is the process of developing a new world or a new section of world inside the company?

**Alison:** Yeah, so we’re fortunate enough to have a couple of concept artists inside the building. So if I ever have an idea for something I’d like to do in the future usually I’ll find a concept artist that I get along with and sit down for a couple hours and just jam out some ideas. Like think what are some different visual approaches that we can use. What are some cool narrative approaches? How can we marry these together so we come up with an elevator pitch that everybody thinks is super rad?

A couple times a year we’ll have opportunities internally to pitch those kinds of ideas depending on what game that you’re doing. We usually plan out our products a solid three or four years into the future. So, when we are pitching and developing these ideas it’s for way, way, way down the line.

But that collaboration between narrative and art is what makes for a really cohesive experience. And so after we come up with the pitch for what a world could be we’ll typically bring on a game designer fairly early so we can try and figure out, OK, what’s a cool mechanical hook based off of these things that we know are happening creatively. And from there it can ideally enter into the development process for whatever game that we’re attaching it to.

**John:** Yeah, so for example if you want to bring back a Psionics mechanic there might be some interesting world in which the Psionics makes a lot of sense even though it’s not most of what we’re seeing in Fifth Edition.

**Alison:** Right. And Magic is really easy for this, too. So maybe I could go back and say, hey, you know what? I miss Morph. Morph was really cool. Let’s find some way to bring it back for a different setting. And then we’ll use that as kind of the jump-off point for, OK, we know that we want to use this kind of play style or this kind of mechanic, what creatively facilitates that in a fun and interesting way. And sometimes that’s how different world ideas start off.

**John:** So I bet we have a bunch of listeners who are eager to get your job. Let’s talk through how did you get hired into doing your spot? You were a community manager? What was your responsibility before then?

**Alison:** I was. I did social media management for my day job. But my background is in theater. So after I graduated from college me and a couple friends of mine cofounded a theater company up here in Seattle. And so while I was doing my crummy day job of slinging social media tweets and dealing with the masses, in my evenings I was playwriting and I was collaboratively creating. And I was working alongside a team of different artists to create and write different things.

So, I was playwriting. I was writing long-form fiction. And once I got inside the building at Wizards doing social media I remember learning that there were people who were paid to write about dragons and elves. And I said, well, I can do that. That’s easy. And it’s only because of all that time I’d spent creating with a team and grinding my narrative skills on my own and with my own play groups that I was able to kind of bring to the table and say, hey, I can do this too.

There really isn’t a straightforward way into doing narrative design professionally. You kind of have to do your own thing on your own and then make opportunities happen for yourself by applying smaller gigs and working your way up. I think a recommendation if someone wanted to start doing narrative design would be to just start DM-ing. Start running your own play groups.

**Craig:** DM-ing.

**Alison:** DM-ing will only make you a better storyteller no matter what medium you are writing in. You will learn everything you need to know about narrative by sitting down and forcing your friends to play through whatever you came up with.

**Craig:** And then being accountable to whatever they come up with.

**Alison:** Yes. Learning how to listen to other people’s ideas and respond to that and find ways to solve narrative problems. It’s the most valuable skill you can have. For something actionable that you can do right now if you want to practice using choice as an element of writing, Twine is a really excellent program. It’s free to download and you can use it to make sort of text-based adventures. So you know like Choose Your Own Adventure style narratives? It’s basically that. When hiring for narrative design jobs often we’ll ask people to just submit a short like 10 or 20-minute Twine game. And usually that can show how good you are at integrating choice into the narrative experience. And showing that you understand how different trees of narrative work.

So, start building a Twine game. It’s super easy and super-fast. And it’s industry standard for applying for a job.

**Craig:** I want to do it now.

**John:** It definitely feels like we’re at a moment—

**Alison:** Do it, yeah!

**John:** We’re at a moment where there’s a tremendous intersection between what we think of as cinematic writing, with film and television, and game writing, and comics, and other sort of fiction stuff, where people are building out these bigger things. And university programs haven’t quite caught up. USC’s School of Cinematic Arts has game design and has some aspects of this, but it’s really much more steered towards videogames.

**Alison:** Programming, yeah.

**John:** Programming and sort of animation and that aspect of it. But it’s really this meta concept of a sort of what is the universe of this idea and then what are the physical things we’re going to see come out of it. And balancing those two things is tricky but I think we’re going to find a generation that has less of a distinction between this person is this kind of writer or that kind of writer. They’re all working together to sort of make a cohesive thing.

**Alison:** Absolutely. It’s just different mediums. And being able to understand the rules of one will only make you stronger in the other. It bums me out that there aren’t a lot of opportunities, especially for college kids, to really learn these skills and develop them if you aren’t going to a game design specific school. But as far as like what kinds of writing that you can get good at if you want to do the things that I do, dramaturgical writing which is something that a lot of folks outside of theater don’t really know about is probably the closest thing.

So dramaturgy is the person in a usually well-paying show whose job is to research the time period that it takes place in or the world that the play is set around. And come up with a sort of similar document that I do for that specific experience. Weirdly enough there’s a lot of crossover between the skills that are necessary for theater and live performance and for videogames. And I think it’s that presence of choice or presence of an audience that you’re always trying to work around into your experience.

But, yeah, dramaturgy weirdly enough has a lot of crossover. I would also recommend studying screenwriting as much as possible since that’s still kind of the format that most people in the game industry use for writing scripts and such. But instead of a fairly easy to hold in your hand script we usually churn out one that’s a couple hundred pages long rather than a couple dozen.

**John:** Cool. Alison, thank you so much for this overview. I think we’re going to have a lot of follow up questions for you down the road. But if people need to find you on Twitter where should they reach out to you?

**Alison:** My handle is @alisontheperson but I usually answer work-related questions @alisonthewizard.

**Craig:** Of course you do.

**John:** Fantastic.

**Craig:** Of course you do.

**John:** We do a segment on the show called One Cool Things and so I’m going to start with my One Cool Thing. It is a book I just finished called Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language by Gretchen McCulloch. It is just terrific. It is a look at sort of how English is changing with the rise of the Internet. And in a weird way you’d assume like, oh, it must be changing faster because of the Internet, but she also points out things like spell check are slowing down some of the changes that would naturally happen. So it’s just a really great funny overview of what’s happening in our language right now, the rise of meme culture. So, Craig, you will love it because you love John McWhorter. Through him I found this book.

**Craig:** I do. And I read a fairly thorough article by her that was sort of I guess a chapter and it seemed great. By the way, did she talk about Grammarly? Because if I see one more damn ad for that stupid thing I’m going to lose every ounce of S in my body. I’m trying to stay Internet safe here. I can’t handle it.

**John:** Craig, we should put the transcripts of this show through Grammarly and see if they have suggestions for improving it.

**Craig:** F-in Grammarly. It’s like “Writing is hard. Sometimes you…” Shut up. Shut. Up. Also, your stupid program isn’t going to change anything. If you don’t know how to write you don’t know how to write. I swear to god. So, anyway, there’s my umbrage for that. I haven’t gotten angry in a while. Weird that I would pick a—

**Alison:** No, feel it. By all means.

**Craig:** Now Grammarly of all things is getting it.

**Alison:** Stand in your truth, dude.

**Craig:** Thank you. Thank you. Freaking Grammarly. So, the first thing I do when I install a fresh copy of Word or something like that on a computer I’m like turn off the stupid green underline. I don’t need you to tell me how to structure a sentence. How dare you, Microsoft Word.

**John:** How dare you.

**Craig:** How dare you. My One Cool Thing this week, it’s a little pricy. I’m just going to be honest. It’s a little pricy. But Thanksgiving is not so far off. We’re a couple of months away. Three months away. Why am I starting to talk about it now so early? Because if you were going to get a Heritage turkey you would need to think about ordering it now. What is a Heritage turkey? Have either of you had one for Thanksgiving?

**John:** I’ve had a Heritage turkey. It was delicious.

**Craig:** Alison?

**Alison:** I have. Yes.

**Craig:** Great. Well, you two are freaking cool. So here’s what’s up. The regular turkeys that you get in the store are – and I didn’t know this – there’s a name for them. They have a breed name and it’s called Broad Breasted White, which sounds—

**Alison:** Typical. Typical.

**Craig:** Yeah, it just sounds dirty. So, Broad Breasted White turkeys were literally manipulated in a laboratory by USDA scientists and the point of them was basically Americans like white meat turkey. Apparently. I’m kind of a dark meat guy myself. But regardless, they like white—

**Alison:** The same. It’s a shame.

**Craig:** It’s a shame. They like white meat so let’s come up with a turkey that has this massive breast and also grows really fast so we can make a lot of them and they’re huge. And that’s what they’ve done. These companies that sell Heritage turkeys, they’re basically unmanipulated turkeys. They’re the original breeds. They tend to be a bit smaller. Well, some people think of it as a gamier taste. I think of it as a more flavorful taste. There’s less white meat. There’s more dark meat. There’s lots of different kinds. They come in all sorts of sizes. But they’re expensive.

So it’s a little bit of a thing. If you’re feeling fancy for Thanksgiving, you know, I honestly say I think they’re way better. Brine it. You know, brine it. Because they can tend toward the dry if you don’t. But lots of places to buy them. I won’t recommend any particular place. I’m sure they’re all excellent. The one place do not get a Heritage turkey from Grammarly. Because you know what? Screw Grammarly. Honestly. How dare they?

**John:** I think we’re going to do a search through the transcripts to find how many times Craig has brought up turkeys on this podcast. Because I feel like it’s got to be at least 10 where you’ve mentioned something about Thanksgiving or brining turkeys. It feels like it’s a subtext for so many episodes.

**Alison:** It’s a really important topic. I’m glad someone is talking about the turkeys.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**John:** Someone has to talk about them.

**Craig:** Well Alison and I have our own podcast called Brinecast where we just—

**Alison:** Brinecast. Absolutely.

**Craig:** Where we talk about different brines. Wet brines. Dry brines. There’s a lot of different kinds.

**Alison:** Buttermilk.

**Craig:** Thank you.

**Alison:** Apple cider vinegar. There’s a million different things that you can pour on your dead meat.

**Craig:** Correct. And you can also kind of go sous-vide to maybe avoid the brining. That’s an episode.

**Alison:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** That’s our show.

**Alison:** It is.

**John:** Alison, do you have a One Cool Thing that you can share with our audience?

**Alison:** I do. Yeah. So, Airbnb has a search function where you can look for offbeat houses. So eight of my friends just went to Ireland for a friend’s wedding. He went to Dublin, found an adorable Irish lady, and they got married. Yay for them. And we just came back from staying in a castle for two or three nights. So, on Airbnb you can search to stay in an actual castle. And with eight of us staying in the same place at the same time it only came out to about $110 per person per night.

**Craig:** What? [laughs]

**Alison:** Yeah. It’s way more affordable than you think. You can live and sleep in an actual castle. Please do it.

**Craig:** Hold on a second. Is this castle like the one where Sauron is slowly regathering his strength? There’s got to be a reason that—

**Alison:** No. It was like a cozy Downton Abbey style. This used to be one tower and then someone added on a fancy estate. We had the whole run of the place. So we got out the nice goblets and celebrating in the dining room.

**Craig:** Did you guys LARP? I mean, you were in a castle.

**Alison:** No, we did not LARP. We did play hide and seek. Yeah. Had a really, really fantastic time celebrating in a fancy ass castle. Highly recommend it.

**Craig:** Wow. All right. That’s way cheaper than I thought it would be. Nice.

**Alison:** I know. I know. That’s why we did it.

**John:** Nice. Cool. And that’s our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Rajesh Naroth. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also where you can send longer questions. But for short questions I’m on Twitter @johnaugust. Craig is @clmazin. Alison you can find @alisonthewizard.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. You can also find transcripts. Those go up the week after the episode airs.

Alison, thank you so much for talking through your job. I think there’s going to be a whole new generation of senior narrative designers in the making who are going to be coming after your job hard. But you helped inspire them. So thank you very much for talking through.

**Alison:** I look forward to sharing the stage. Thank you so much.

**Craig:** Thanks Alison. Thanks.

**John:** Thanks. All right. Bye.

Links:

* [The Shadows Casting Call](johnaugust.com/casting) John is looking for a 15 year old blind actress for the lead role — please help by sharing this link with anyone who might be a good fit!
* [The Hollywood Disability Inclusion Toolkit: The RespectAbility Guide to Inclusion in the Entertainment Industry](https://www.respectability.org/hollywood-inclusion/)
* [Scriptnotes, Ep 315: Big Screens, Big Money](https://johnaugust.com/2017/big-screens-big-money)
* [NaNoWriMo classroom kit](https://store.nanowrimo.org/products/d5ce724ee44c89b2d2240da73f117eebf329e3364f629f8f-23)
* [Comfort and Joy](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0087072/)
* [99 Problems](https://www.99problemsfilm.com/) by Ross Killeen
* [The Black Mambas documentary](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8430900/)
* [Wizards of the Coast](https://company.wizards.com/)
* [Twine](https://twinery.org/)
* [Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language](https://amzn.to/2Z4gpLg) by Gretchen McCulloch
* [Alison Luhrs](https://twitter.com/alisontheperson?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor) on Twitter or [here for game related questions](https://twitter.com/alisonthewizard?lang=en)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Rajesh Naroth ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_416_fantasy_worldbuilding.mp3).

Scriptnotes, Ep 415: The Veep Episode

September 12, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2019/the-veep-episode).

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

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

**John:** And this is Episode 415 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

We are going to skip the usual bits because today we are joined by two of the executive producers of HBO’s remarkable and award-winning comedy series Veep. David Mandel serves as showrunner. Julia Louis-Dreyfus stars as Selina Meyer. It is such a pleasure to have you both here talking with us about your amazing show.

**Julia Louis-Dreyfus:** Thank you very much.

**David Mandel:** Thank you. Thanks for having us.

**Craig:** How about this? We are coming up in the world. I’ve got to be honest with you, John.

**John:** Yeah. We’ve had Alec Berg a couple of times.

**Craig:** Which is not great.

**John:** No, but I mean–

**Craig:** Not great.

**John:** But to have the better HBO comedy.

**Craig:** Well, so Alec Berg used to work in a three-part writing partnership with Dave Mandel and Jeff Schaffer.

**David:** A three-headed monster.

**Craig:** Correct. And as everybody used to say, Alec Berg was the worst of them. So we would always get the worst. And now we have – and I guess Schaffer is in the middle.

**David:** I mean, show 600 you might get Schaffer.

**Craig:** We’re working up to Schaffer. Working up to Schaffer. But now we have world famous television star Julia Louis-Dreyfus. And we have the greatest of all Mandels in Hollywood. Sorry Howie.

**Julia:** Hey, you know what?

**David:** I’m a fan of Babaloo. But anyway.

**Julia:** Mandel means almond. You know that right? OK.

**Craig:** It’s true.

**Julia:** I forgot to tell you that I took pictures of packaging at the grocery store where it said Mandel Mandel. Anyway, never mind. You can cut that part of the show out.

**Craig:** No, no, that’s staying.

**John:** That’s crucial.

**David:** Leave that in and let’s expand on it.

**Craig:** Mandelbrot.

**David:** Expand and sort of improv.

**Craig:** If you were fully Jewish, we had a little discussion of our Jewish provenance which happens when you’re discussing comedy. Mandelbrot is almond bread, right?

**David:** It’s kind of gross.

**Craig:** You know what? Like most Jewish pastries, disgusting.

**David:** It is a treat that is not much of a treat.

**Craig:** Yeah. It’s a treat relative to the things we’ve suffered as a people.

**David:** Like they gave it to us at Hebrew school and, yuck.

**Craig:** Here you go. Doesn’t this remind you of something good? But it’s not.

**John:** I hope that today we are going to talk with you guys about some things—

**David:** This is of interest to screenwriters, yes?

**Julia:** Yeah, really.

**John:** That do not include almonds. You probably don’t get asked so much about the process of writing your show and putting together your show, so we really want to dig into some process stuff. I want to talk about tone and likeability, which is a thing that Craig and I get hit on a lot.

**Craig:** Yeah. The number one complaint that I have about notes, whether it’s from a studio or a network, or when people ask us what do I do about this, the big complaint is my character is not likeable enough. And I always think like good, you’re on the path to success.

**Julia:** That note is a red flag to me. Likeability is overrated as a virtue. In fact, it’s not a virtue – certainly when it comes to writing comedy.

**David:** It’s blandness. It’s literally blandness.

**Julia:** Or drama for that matter.

**Craig:** Agreed. Agreed.

**David:** There was some executive back in the day in the Seinfeld days, not connected to Seinfeld, but the writers who had come from other shows and what not. And I literally don’t even remember who it was, but I just remember there was an impression of this person giving a note which was sort of like having listened to a script and then going, “Mm, I don’t like our guy.”

**Craig:** “I don’t like our guy.”

**David:** “I don’t like our guy.” And that was this sort of—

**Julia:** Oh, I know who that was.

**Craig:** Well, we’ll take that off the air.

**David:** OK. Fascinating.

**Craig:** But it is essentially a torpedo aimed at your work because the entire purpose of drama or comedy, and I think it’s particularly clear in comedy, is to underline the absurdity and the brutality of the human condition. And I’m not interested in doing that with people who are nice. I don’t mind people who are truly good. Those are interesting characters. Like Saints can be interesting in their own way. It’s like that line from Into the Woods, “You’re not good, you’re not bad, you’re just nice.” It’s such a bad note.

**David:** They just want to round those sharp edges off. And like I said I just keep going back to blandness.

**Julia:** Well, also, I mean, very fundamentally if you’re really reading a good story or watching a good story, dramatic or comedic, conflict is what you need, right? Aren’t you looking for that? And how does likeability fit into conflict?

**David:** Yeah, conflict. And I would add to that and then choices. Choices based on who you are.

**Julia:** Right.

**David:** And if you’re just likeable or whatever, well then what are your choices? What are you faced with? And it just seems like it eliminates a lot of those things, too. Or at least interesting choices I guess.

**Julia:** Right.

**John:** Julia, can we start with you and start with the sharp edges of Selina Meyer and sort of where that all came from and the initial discuss of this character Selina Meyer, the idea of doing a show. Can you take us back, that’s 2011. What is that initial conversation about the show like?

**David:** It was drinks with Armando right?

**Julia:** Exactly. It was drinks with Armando. It was pitched to me that – he was developing a show about a female vice president who was miserable. So I thought, ooh, that sounds like, oh, I can’t believe that this is – immediately I was drawn to it conceptually. We were supposed to meet for a cup of tea or whatever, just to chat it up. Anyway, three hours later we’re still yacking and we got along really well and I was pitching to him in this meeting ideas about behavior and in that meeting a couple of things I pitched were then worked into the script actually that were fundamental. Like the bending of the spoon that was made out of cornstarch and so on and so forth.

And so we got along really well. I was familiar with his work because of In the Loop. I had seen the movie. I did not know The Thick of It, however, which was this series about parliamentary politics. And so then he wrote the script and he folded it in and then I remember getting this script and loving it. Although at that point they hadn’t made a deal with me, so I was like, god, I hope they’re – some of my ideas are in there and I hope they include me in this show. But anyway, they did. And it was fabulous.

**John:** A lot of our writers who are listening to this show, they’re going to be meeting with an actor. They’re going to be meeting with an actor who they want to involve in a project and it sounds like he had a general vision but he also included you in from an early stage.

**Julia:** Totally. Yes, exactly. This was his—

**John:** You felt like the match was right?

**Julia:** Yeah. And I grew up in Washington, DC. They’re in New York. But I was very familiar with inside the beltway culture. Too familiar really. And so – and also I’m active politically, so I’ve been on the campaign trail as a matter of fact. I had experience to bring to this, which I think was intriguing to him. But his style of making entertainment was really intriguing to me. Because the gritty quality of his work was something that I was desperate to do.

And then off we went and we made this pilot and we rehearsed for I want to say something crazy like two weeks.

**Craig:** Oh my god, what a luxury.

**Julia:** Oh yeah. Can I say, so much rehearsal for the pilot and then subsequent – I think we made six or seven more episodes, yeah, seven. And rehearsal for that as well. So it was just gobs of rehearsal, which was fantastic. And the cast that we put together were very adept at improvisation which was very important to Armando. He really, really wanted people who could think on their feet and work on script from an improvisational point of view.

**Craig:** It seems to me that there are some actors that writers understand instinctively they can partner with in this way. And then there are others that you can’t quite do it with. And I’m sure you’ve noticed this along your path, too.

**Julia:** Oh yeah.

**Craig:** You know, some actors really are kind of receivers of stuff and they perform and they may have questions about it. But there is a writerly kind of actor. And one thing that’s always indicated that to me is an actor that has things to say about the other characters.

**Julia:** Yes.

**Craig:** That they understand everything actually comes out in relationships, not just me, me, me, but how does this work with the other person. And so early on I have to assume that you were talking with Armando not just about Selina but about everyone.

**Julia:** Oh yeah, completely. 100%. I mean, I was there for the casting of everybody other than Anna Chlumsky who had already been hired, because she worked with In the Loop, and so he was a huge fan of her. So she was on board. But everybody else we sort of went through the process and improvising and doing scenes in the audition with everybody who came through.

And in fact some of the people who didn’t get the roles as regular cast members subsequently came back as huge players in the show. Dan Bakkedahl, Brian Huskey, just to name a few.

**Craig:** You end up with kind of a theater troupe surrounding—

**Julia:** Correct.

**David:** And I know from talking to the guys that they had like – you know, Armando had done a lot of research and definitely sort of created these archetypes.

**Julia:** Tons. Yes.

**David:** But then obviously in the casting process the vision of what you think someone is going to be and then Tim Simons walks in and that’s not what you thought Jonah was, but then that becomes Jonah.

**Julia:** Well, Jonah was written as a tiny, I believe, balding, overweight guy.

**Craig:** Nailed it. [laughs]

**Julia:** Exactly.

**John:** So talk about that rehearsal and the improvisation part, because one thing I’ve heard about your show is that after a table read or during a table read there’s also an opportunity for the actors to sort of experiment. What happens in that process?

**Julia:** Well, just so you know, there was one way of doing it frankly with Armando and that worked really well, and then Dave come on board season five and that shifted. And neither one is better than the other, it just was a shift. And everybody was able to do it, which is great.

**David:** I think one led to another also in that—

**Julia:** Yes. Yes.

**David:** Because of the improv and the improvisational style of the early days which allowed I think all of the actors – this is just my take on it – I wasn’t there. But allowed the actors to imbue the characters with so much of their own stuff and really take possession of them. Then when you walk in in season five, I’m the first to say, a lot of the heavy lifting was done. And a lot of these characters were a lot more set in stone. And if you look at who the characters became in sort of season three and four they’re very different than who they were in one and two. Not in a bad way, but you can see in sort of the first season—

**Julia:** The evolution.

**David:** Everybody is a little similar. And then they start to find who they are.

**Craig:** And so you have the advantage of writing now for characters that the actors had sort of improved their way towards.

**David:** Yes. So I get this sort of slightly more – I shouldn’t say slightly – these more complete full-fledged people to play with. But I will say from talking with Armando who I spend a little bit of time with and he was just so gracious and wonderful with the handover and emailed and spoke on the phone and I flew to London. And then I think that first year I went to, he was getting an award at one of the comedy festivals – it must have been Montreal. And I went there and we did like a thing together there. And he just works differently. I mean, forget about who went first. He definitely experiments and looks to find things.

And one of the things I remember when I took over the show, it was like you have to have three editors. And I was like, OK. I don’t–

**Craig:** Seems like a lot.

**David:** Yeah. Seems like a lot. But you need three editors. And I was like, all right. And we hired three editors. And I worked with an editor and I finished a show and I went to the next set and I finished a show or whatever. And somewhere along the way I realized, oh I see, when he’s looking at all of this footage he is looking for stuff and he’s finding it in there. So he’s giving some notes in one edit room and moving to another edit room, and moving to another edit room. That’s just not me.

I am far from the most organized writer. I am a procrastinator. I have many, many bad habits.

**Craig:** We’ll get into those.

**David:** But at the end of the day the way I learned to write, which really from Seinfeld into Curb, you know, really Larry and Jerry but especially Larry, outline, outline, outline. And structure, structure, structure. And so I map the season out and it’s a pretty hard map. And things move from episode to episode, but when you look at our whiteboards, like at the end of the season it’s sort of like, oh no, no, no, it was all there. Do you know what I mean?

**Craig:** It was planned.

**David:** And so I didn’t quite need three editors. And obviously I think my scripts were certainly much more the script. But that being said, again, because I have these wonderful creatures, we would pick – maybe sometimes more pick and choose scenes to throw on their feet and try out and play with. And always good stuff came from that. And almost as a rule we always picked what I sometimes thought were the harder scenes.

**Julia:** Yeah.

**David:** And we always picked anything with you and Hugh. And you and Hugh scene was something we always almost took almost three shots at. We put it on its feet, did a big rewrite off of that and discovered so much stuff. Rewrote it, then put that back on its feet. At that point hopefully maybe even on the set. And then maybe a little fine tuning.

**Craig:** It would be a crime to not with those two together.

**David:** Yes. And so much, the physical – like a lot also the physical stuff that is never—

**Craig:** Right.

**David:** It’s hinted at in the script but it’s just not till you’re there that you get that kind of stuff.

**Julia:** Just to back up to the Armando process for a minute, when we were originally like in that first season and we were doing rehearsal and I just remember all of us were terrified. It was pretty scary. Because, you know, there was a script and we’d read it. And then he would say, OK, now just throw those out. Everybody come up. And let’s just – let’s pretend it doesn’t happen that way. Let’s pretend such and such comes through the door who wasn’t originally in the scene and needs this. And everyone was just sort of – it was scary.

But then after a while you sort of got used to it. And meanwhile writers are there taking notes furiously. And if anything works, you know, it gets folded into the stew. And this happened quite regularly. But that is to say it was also very written. So I don’t mean to imply at all that the show wasn’t written by the incredible writing staff. But it was just – we just came at it a slightly different way.

So the ability though to sort of think about a scene wholly was very much strengthened during that period of time. And it was something we could apply working with—

**David:** And I’m fascinated by that, but I would rather kill myself than work like – I just couldn’t even—

**Julia:** And by the way we tried it, didn’t we? We tried it like exactly that. That was not a good fit.

**Craig:** How was it for your anxiety level? Was it good?

**David:** Well, I’ll give you the [double] which was we read the first I think three scripts, or I can’t remember, I think we maybe didn’t read the third one. But we read the first two and we were scheduled to read three. I think it was like the Monday after they won the Emmy. And it was a goddamn disaster. And I know exactly what was wrong, but it was horrific.

And so then in a world where nothing was working we attempted our version of the Armando system because Chris Addison who had been a director in the old world and then we had him on that first episode sort of did—

**Julia:** Applied those same—

**David:** Applied the version. And to me it was just people marching in circles. I mean, I just remember going like blech. Because it was just like OK now you’re with a doctor. And the writers, the non-British writers, because three British writers had stuck around, but then I had put together this other team. And we’re all just looking at each other like—

**Craig:** What is this?

**David:** Yeah. And I knew what to fix. But for me it was just not it.

**John:** Now, back up though because both of you had worked on multicam. So in multicam traditionally the room has created a script. There’s a reading but you’re rehearsing over the course of that week. Isn’t that sort of the process that you’re getting to there where you’re trying a scene, you’re putting it on its feet, and writers are rewriting it?

**Craig:** Larry was pretty strict, right? In Seinfeld he was fairly strict?

**Julia:** Strict-ish. I mean, if we came up with shit in rehearsal and if it was good—

**David:** And you guys with Andy came up with a lot of business.

**Julia:** We came up with a lot of business.

**David:** Which became a lot of comedy that wasn’t necessarily in the script.

**Craig:** But it wasn’t, I mean, my understanding – like Seinfeld wasn’t like Curb for instance?

**David:** Well I was going to say no. Seinfeld had scripts. Curb has outlines. Although they are outlines that – and I always try and point this out. They’re like six, seven-page outlines that any writer worth his salt could take home and turn into a script in under 24 hours. It’s all there. It’s just not laid out. But it’s all there. And in some cases it’s all there plus we’ve got a couple of like secret things that we didn’t put in but we’re sort of saving for take three. So we’ve got even additional stuff.

But what I was going to say, just to back it all up somewhere, is the way Larry and Jerry ran the “writers’ room” is there was no writers’ room. Each writer was sort of individually crafting their episode, pitching their stories, and then being sent off. When Larry left Jerry rigged a sort of mini-version of the same system which was individual writers writing their episode and bringing it back in. And then in lieu of Larry and Jerry going through the script and sort of rewriting and making it better we did sort of a baby mini-room of usually Jerry, the writer, and then some combination of senior management so to speak.

But very much not the sort of group room write that I think has sort of—

**Julia:** That is the norm.

**David:** That has [ruined] the sitcom form in a lot of – you know, the reason that you’re not seeing multi-cams. But the process of, I guess, that week thing, it is different. This was really sometimes just wholesale just throwing things away and just going what if now you’re over here. I mean, I don’t know, I wasn’t there. But my one day of it, it was very loose.

**Craig:** Well it didn’t fit your—

**Julia:** It was very loose, but at the same time it was also not loose. It was a different, I mean, the looseness was important sort of fundamentally for a feeling of what you were doing. And it definitely informed, it was that gritty thing. So people talking over each other the way people do in life which you don’t normally see actually anywhere really.

**David:** Robert Altman movies.

**Julia:** Yes, exactly. Which I love. And that all stayed and we kept that in place. And in fact I would say when Dave came onboard and then moving forward from there, you know, sometimes I would say to Dave, “Is this feeling too written? We need to zhoosh this up, which is the word I use for it, which is to just mess it up, zhoosh it, make it—

**David:** Especially in that world of like take five. Everybody has kind of got it down. But it’s getting a little my line your line. You know what I mean?

**Craig:** Yes. Take the polish off. Go faster. My favorite direction of all time. Faster. Something about speed people start to lose a little bit of that sense of line-line. They will start to overlap. It will – I don’t know, I just always find that—

**Julia:** Speed can be really helpful. It can open up something that you didn’t realize. It really can.

**Craig:** It’s almost now you’re flying by the seat of your pants. Your instincts start coming out.

**David:** Seinfeld was crazy fast, and Curb was faster. And Veep was fast before I got there. And I think we made it faster.

**Craig:** Speed is wonderful.

**David:** I mean, I always think about like Billy Wilder, like One, Two, Three. You guys know that movie?

**Craig:** Yes, great movie.

**David:** Just boom, boom, boom, boom. And not only do we squeeze every ounce of air out of it in the editing room. Also by the way just to try and get more stuff in. But on the set I guess in that next step of the process which is when you actually get to the set, we’re getting it on its feet for the camera blocking. We’re making changes. And any hole that’s there, how do we jam another line in? And plus the realization—

**Julia:** Or behavior. Or behavior.

**David:** By the way, both. So there’s behavior here. And Richard is throwing a line away there behind her that she never hears. And it’s just all there. And we’re jamming it full.

**Craig:** Then you get that sense, and I love this in comedy. And it’s something that you can start to do on the page, but ultimately you do have to work together as a troupe to get it done. The sense of overabundance. We’re not short on jokes here. In fact, we have too many for you. If you miss something, good. Watch it again.

**David:** Watch it again. And every time people are like, oh, I have to stop and go back I’m like great. Fantastic.

**Craig:** That’s wonderful.

**David:** And in fact when we sometimes do these screenings, we’re always sitting near each other when the audience is getting to see it. And obviously it’s so fun when you do like a screening for a theater because that level of laugh is wonderful. But we’re always a little bit upset when they miss that second joke.

**Julia:** Oh, shit, they missed it. Shut up! Shut up!

**David:** They’re laughing too much at joke one and it just blew by them.

**Craig:** Good. Love it.

**Julia:** Yeah, totally.

**Craig:** Love that.

**Julia:** But it was also this idea too of things having an imperfect veneer over it. So, forgetting a line, or saying things wrong, or whatever, we carry – I mean, we just blow past it and maybe can use it because it seems real.

**David:** Right. If somebody screws up a line or stutters on it, Julia is more likely to make fun of the character in the scene.

**Craig:** Exactly.

**Julia:** Yes.

**David:** Which then may become something but now all of a sudden she’s jumping down, whatever, I’m thinking of like Matt Walsh’s thing. Jumping down his throat. But it feels very real. The other thing, too, is – and again this ties into I think sort of the—

**Julia:** Sorry to interrupt. I think that’s where that aye-aye-aye—

**Craig:** Came from originally. Because he actually did it?

**Julia:** No. He just said something dumb and I just started making fun. [makes stuttering noises]

**David:** And then he said please don’t do that and then you’re off to the races.

**Craig:** That’s the best thing you could possibly hear. Please don’t do that.

**David:** But I was just going to say and then this sort of Veep sort of doc style, also the same thing to this messiness which is we are big and wide at times where other shows would be close. We are close but we’re on the other person. We’re on the reactions. Because so much of—

**Craig:** Where it’s at.

**David:** Exactly. It’s all reactions. And so that kind of stuff. Or obviously that moving camera thing where you’re getting a little bit of both.

**Julia:** Pieces of this.

**David:** And not necessarily ending the scene on a joke, or at least a joke-joke. Sometimes even just maybe an angry storm out that just sort of Peters out with everybody feeling—

**Craig:** Avoiding the traditional rhythm.

**David:** Yes.

**Julia:** Yeah. And we are always very careful, because we got burned a couple of times, actually I think just once, to get a hyper wide shot. Because the wide was our friend. And also in so doing I would add we got away with a lot of broad performance. Because if you’re hyper wide you can do it.

**David:** You know, and occasionally you have a line and you go, well, that’s feeling a little jokey, you pull back about ten feet it’s a lot less jokey.

**Craig:** No question.

**Julia:** Right.

**John:** Can we talk about Selina as the center character what she wants seems to drive everything. It drives the whole ambition of the series. But within every scene it’s so focused on sort of what Selina wants. The thing she’s trying to get someone else to do. Or that she’s hungry. Or that she needs this thing that’s in her bag.

**Craig:** [laughs] She’s hungry.

**John:** So as you’re writing scenes is that pretty much always top of mind. Sort of like what she wants, what each of the characters want in that moment, what they’re trying to do?

**David:** I don’t know if it’s specifically that. But I guess I’ll go macro for a second which is – especially in the first season Armando had sort of written it into this sort of exquisite corner which was the Electoral College tie. So, so much of coming into the show – and this goes back to when Julia and I first sat down with this idea of maybe I’ll come in and do this – obviously we were talking so much about Selina and really the bigger picture of just how badly she just wants the presidency. And so in some ways I can’t say that we’re sitting there going, no, no, it’s all about what she wants in any individual scene. But that paintbrush, even in the season where she wasn’t in the White House just drives everything.

**Craig:** She’s defined by her wanting.

**David:** Yes. Exactly. And that’s definitely something we’re just always thinking about. Plus, I guess just a general, again, this for me goes back to Larry, which is just every scene has to move things forward. Something has to move forward. You can’t just—

**Julia:** Masturbate for a while.

**David:** And in our first season—

**Craig:** What a shame.

**David:** Once we got going and we sort of rewrote those scripts and everybody was very happy and we solved it all and we went going we reshot one scene from the first episode which was a scene of – Selina had this giant stress pimple from the tie, sort of the way George W. Bush had gotten sort of his own weird boil thing. And we shot of scene of her with the doctor, the president’s doctor. A very funny actor whose name is escaping me right now, but he was really funny. And there was some funny weird energy between him and Tony Hale, being possessive of each other. And this very funny way that like a lot of fans thought—

**Craig:** They were into each other.

**David:** It was all to do that was wonderful. But the scene was sort of dead on arrival.

**Craig:** It didn’t change anything or move.

**David:** Yes. Exactly. And we ended up – and it was something that kind of slipped through the first time, because there was fun dialogue and stuff about the pimple and all that kind of stuff. Second time through and it wasn’t until like sort of again you sort of realize it watching it in the editing room it’s like we know how to fix this. And it was just like add three more characters and add some—

**Julia:** Other conversations.

**David:** Yeah. There’s a disaster in the Midwest.

**Julia:** Flooding or—

**Craig:** Which led to a background thing that’s going on.

**David:** Which led to a funny conversation about favorite disasters.

**Julia:** Favorite disasters is unbelievably irreverent to say the least.

**David:** And just a whole bunch of other stuff. And the doctor dialogue and her dialogue with him and the Tony stuff, none of that ever changed. It’s just now—

**Craig:** Takes the pressure off of that stuff to be funny on its own.

**David:** The fear of trying to continue to govern, to be presidential, to seem presidential. That all now comes into this scene. When it was just talking to the doctor you lost – even though the scene was in the Oval you lost that, again, that feeling of she is obsessed with how do we get through this tie. And those things all come through.

**Craig:** Yeah. Well it does seem like once you have a character that is defined by this wanting that you’ve learned something about her which is – it’s too limiting to say that a character really just wants to be president. That’s a person that just wants. Right? So that never goes away. We kind of have this sense that people that really want to be president are trying to fill a hole that will never be filled. So everything is trying to fill the hole and it will never happen.

**David:** And one of the great things, and again I think this connects a little bit to coming in in season five that maybe you don’t do in season one is coming into the show as a fan of the show, but also now it’s season five, again, some of the stuff we started talking about right in that first sort of – and there was a series of them. I feel like – I don’t know, two or three lunches. And it sounds silly, but a lot of those conversations just informed the three seasons we did together.

**Julia:** Totally.

**David:** We didn’t know how long anything was, but the journey, the losing the tie, then ultimately the idea of losing the tie to another woman. Then the notion that the show would transform yet again into former president of the United States and then into the window opening and her throwing things away. All of these ideas, I mean, were in those early conversations. And we were so simpatico about like what to do with this thing. But in there was this initial idea that ended up being the fourth episode of the season which was Selina’s mother who had been mentioned – and again the fan, I remember thinking about these things.

**Julia:** Mee-maw.

**David:** Mee-maw had been mentioned three or four times.

**Craig:** Mee-maw.

**David:** As this hateful character. And we sort of had this idea of like she dies. And now season five we’re going to start digging into where do these wants come from.

**Craig:** Right. What’s the origin story here?

**David:** Why is she like this with her daughter? Well I’ll tell you why she’s like this with her daughter. Because her mother was even worse to her. And what’s her relationship with her dad? Well she thinks it’s good, but why is she with so many shitty guys? Because it wasn’t so good. And you get this chance to kind of dig in. And I do think – and again, it’s not good or bad or better or worse, it was sort of I think the three seasons we did together we got to kind of dig into that stuff in a way and start to – I hate to say it was home life, but you got a little more into the characters.

**Julia:** And I apply that, too, to other characters on the show. We were able to dig into Gary Walsh’s life.

**David:** We met his parents.

**Julia:** Anna Chlumsky’s life. My god.

**David:** Mike having babies.

**Julia:** Amy Brookheimer. Yes.

**David:** All of these things.

**Julia:** It was fun to delve.

**David:** And it was just a chance to kind of, because that’s what – I guess I’ll simply say I was both – that was what I was interested in. And it was an opportunity to also make it a little different.

**Julia:** Widen it out.

**Craig:** Yeah. Because they had already done the stuff that you have to do first.

**David:** A thousand percent.

**Craig:** Because there’s no context for it.

**David:** The second episode can’t be Selina’s mother’s funeral.

**Julia:** Nobody gives a shit.

**David:** But four years in–

**Craig:** Nobody Gives a Shit. That would have been a great title for that episode.

**David:** You start to kind of go, oh, this is interesting. Yeah.

**John:** Let’s talk about the plans for this season. So the blue sky-ing of what’s going to happen this season. Because you could have had a plan for like these three seasons, but then there was a break and there’s a new president. A whole bunch of stuff has changed. So when it came time to really think about what are the episodes of this season what is that process like for you, for the two of you together? What was the discussion like?

**Julia:** Well the first big discussion was are we doing seventh season and out or an eighth season and out. And that took a lot of personal, you know, there was turmoil in our hearts and souls over that. But we made the right call because I should say we did have an idea if we were going to do another season what that trajectory was if we were to do a season eight. So then when we decided it’s a season seven it was a question of crunching those ideas into season seven.

**David:** And again a lot of this all just starts with us sort of either, just phone calls sort of in the offseason, or even occasionally an email. But usually leads to a phone call. And sometimes she’s calling me going I had this thing that was funny. This could be a Selina thing. And I’m going, hey, I’ve been thinking about this thing of like this. And so a lot of it just starts like that during the sort of maybe – during the editing process. When I’m editing and we’re seeing each other to go over cuts and stuff. But it’s free form ideas as these things do.

But I always – this is for me – I always like to – when I go into a season I like to kind of know what the first scene is and I like to know what the last scene is. And that last scene also secretly informs the first scene of the next one if that makes any sense.

**Craig:** Absolutely yes.

**David:** And so we started talking, again, about how do we end this, how do we figure this out. And I will admit in my own mind I was pushing for two. It’s a good job. I like it. I like working with these people.

**Craig:** Sure. You have a lot of debt. Gambling debt.

**David:** Gambling debt. But as the show often does it was like – it was like one of those things where you start putting it up and it’s like, oh, it’s one. And it just was.

**Julia:** Yeah. Story dictated it.

**David:** Yeah. So we talk through a lot of stuff. I start meeting with the writers. We have a lot of special guests. We bring in all these people. It’s almost like a little salon.

**John:** Let’s talk about some special guests.

**Craig:** I was one of them.

**David:** That’s right.

**Craig:** I was a special guest.

**John:** What did you talk about?

**Craig:** Ted Cruz.

**John:** All right, oh great.

**Julia:** Oh.

**Craig:** The worst politician in the world – well, second worst politician in the world.

**David:** Exactly. He’s looking really good now.

**Craig:** Let’s not get crazy.

**David:** But when Jonah became a congressman, when he won, and then we were going into the notion of what’s next for him, and it led to his sort of mini Tea Party revolt. And we were sort of definitely kind of stealing a little Newt Gingrich, a little Ted Cruz and whatever, we brought in the Ted Cruz expert. Because we had this idea that we wanted Jonah to be the most hated member of the House of Representatives. And so we thought the most hated member of the Senate would be a good reference point.

**Craig:** No question.

**Julia:** In its inception the show relied tremendously, heavily on research. So, in the very beginning we went to DC and met with this person and that person. I mean, you can’t believe it. It was like field trip after field trip, in the best way. And we all did it together, writers and cast. And this happened every season and then when Dave came aboard we did another Washington trip.

**David:** When I took over we did a Washington trip as well. We took all the writers to DC. We were in the White House at like nine at night. I mean, we were in the Situation Room at like 10:30 at night on a quiet Wednesday or something.

**Julia:** We spent a lot of time meeting with consultants and lobbyists and chiefs of staff. I mean, really just a ton of people.

**David:** And the nice thing is obviously people are fans of the show from both sides of the aisle. So we had Mitt Romney in after he lost. And he was fascinating, but one of the most fascinating things for me just story wise we sort of said to him like what’s it like to lose. And he definitely – we stole a couple of lines from him. We definitely took some things. But one of the best things he said was he talked so much about—

**Julia:** If you’re explaining you’re losing.

**David:** Yes, exactly. And we just put that right into the show.

**Craig:** Wow. If you’re explaining you’re losing.

**David:** There were little phrases. Anytime anybody used a phrase, I remember somebody said simple block and tackle politics. And it’s like Ben is going to say that. So you get little bits of dialogue that give you that authenticity. And then obviously you just get stories. So that for example the Pod Saves America guys came in and told us about Obama flying to the wrong airport. And we know that’s—

**Julia:** Done.

**David:** Literally opening scene of the season.

**Craig:** Can’t not do that.

**David:** Sorry, back to Romney really quickly. He talked so much about the comfort of this large and extensive family sort of giving him solace that it was so clear like, oh, Selina would have no solace. It was sort of like a—

**Craig:** They were going to leave her alone.

**David:** Yes. It was just like oh my god she’s going to lose her mind. And we started the season with the notion of her coming back from basically the looney bin. And in those things you just get these wonderful pieces of reality that go into the stew.

**Craig:** That’s great.

**John:** Can we talk about the second episode which is the Aspen one, the Discovery Institute? What was the genesis of that idea? Just getting you out of the normal backdrops?

**Julia:** Well, I mean, because it’s a reality. These – what do we call them – retreat conferences led by billionaires.

**David:** Or you hear about these weekends in the Hamptons where like Kamala Harris is going to the Hamptons and she’s throwing a giant party.

**Craig:** Jeffrey Epstein used to attend quite a few of these.

**David:** I’m sure he was quite the guest.

**Craig:** Oh yeah. Not anymore.

**David:** And so again these things come at us and it seemed like just again obviously an interesting thing and this is – I’ll throw this out which is we started with a ten-episode season that was so complicated from a production standpoint that the episode shooting went from six-day shoots with three cameras to eight-day shoots with four camera.

**Craig:** Four?

**David:** Four.

**John:** Four cameras.

**Craig:** What do you do with the fourth one?

**David:** Our DP David Miller, I mean, he found usage—

**Julia:** Killed it. He killed it.

**Craig:** To be honest with you I’ve never seen a single cam four cam.

**David:** It was incredible. And it allowed us to – especially now that the group was back together, so you’re in a table or an office scene.

**Craig:** That makes sense.

**David:** That fourth camera is picking up extra coverage.

**Craig:** Tables are the worst. The worst.

**Julia:** Yeah.

**David:** But not with four cameras. Four cameras makes it a little easier. But as it grew and we ended up going, OK, I think from a – I hate to say – budget reality we’re going to crunch the season a little bit. I think in retrospect I do wish maybe one or two of the people hadn’t been at that retreat and just maybe a little less of a – it was almost a bottle show. And that’s not a bad thing. But in a seven-episode season when I look back on it I wish it maybe wasn’t quite the bottle. I wish maybe – and again the perfect writer’s hindsight. I wish maybe we had moved Amy and Dan going off on the abortion into that episode, taking them out of. I think it was a luxury in a ten-episode season. Again, this is all hindsight.

**Julia:** It’s all right. It’s all right, Dave.

**Craig:** No, I think you should torture yourself over it. Forever.

**David:** I will. I will. Do not worry.

**Julia:** He is.

**David:** But again it came out of this reality. It came out of this notion of—

**Julia:** Money driving politics.

**David:** Trying to show money. Exactly.

**Julia:** Money. Money. Money.

**David:** Basically we have that line in there somewhere, Ben says to you, “You’re going to have money so dark it’s going to get shot going into its own apartment.” And that was, if you had to pick a line of what is this episode about, that is what that episode is about. It’s about the money and all of–

**John:** And setting up the season. It’s also going to be the Chinese influence and a lot of other things that’s going to happen. Basically asking the question is there anything Selina Meyer won’t do. And the answer is, of course, she will do anything she absolutely—

**Julia:** The China thing by the way was set up in season five.

**David:** We were setting that up in season five. I don’t think we necessarily knew obviously, well A, we didn’t know the Russians were going to interfere in our election. So I can’t say to you we 100 percent knew how it was going to play out. But all of that Tibet stuff has been a constant thing.

**Craig:** It worked out great for both of our shows in its own way.

**Julia:** Yeah.

**Craig:** What I did not predict was that the Russians would explode another nuclear reactor and lie about it.

**David:** And lie about it for about, what, eight days or so?

**John:** HBO did really well by you getting that to happen.

**Craig:** And then have Scandinavia detect it.

**David:** Again. Almost the same way.

**Craig:** Sort of embarrassing.

**David:** A little smaller.

**Craig:** Thank god.

**David:** But where I was going to bring this all back around to was, so, let’s back up. Summer 2017, yeah, Summer 2017 we mapped these ten episodes out. When I’ve got it on the board, maybe not perfect-perfect, but at that point Julia has heard most of it, but not all of it. And then she and I go through it together and she adds her stuff and we move some more things around. And then at some point we get HBO to kind of sign off on it. And then we start writing the episodes.

And I think we had read like three or four episodes when it was September and we won the Emmy and the next day—

**Julia:** Breast cancer arrived.

**John:** Ugh.

**Craig:** Yes, yes, yes.

**David:** And we ended up shutting down.

**Julia:** How do you do?

**Craig:** Hello, breast cancer. Welcome.

**David:** And I don’t want to gloss over that period but I guess jumping forward when we were shut down Trump enters the second year of his presidency and as I sort of think about it he got very comfortable. Like all of a sudden like if you go back to that period he really steps on the gas. The lies go up. The craziness goes up.

**Craig:** All of his minders have been eliminated one by one.

**David:** Exactly. And so year two is where he really goes crazy. And as bad as it was in that kind of like it can’t get any worse, it started to get a lot worse.

**Craig:** Every day.

**David:** Yes. Every day.

**Craig:** There is no bottom.

**David:** And so now as this is kind of happening and I can remember these feelings in January and I will also say it also ties into, I think January is when you – forgive me if I’m not remembering exactly right – but somewhere towards the end of January you kind of got a thumbs up on the chemo had gone well and things were good.

**Julia:** Yes.

**David:** So knowing all is well and we’re going to – I don’t know when we’re coming back, but we’re coming back, it’s like what is this show? So many of the staples of what we did and talked about–

**Julia:** The bad behavior. In the pilot episode the big scandal is she says hoisted by your own retard. That’s the pilot episode.

**Craig:** Yeah. That wouldn’t even be a blink today.

**Julia:** That’s nothing.

**David:** It almost cost her her career.

**Craig:** Right. And that’s nothing now.

**David:** And the construct of Selina being constantly hoisted on her own petard, or retard, is a constant throughout the show in a way that it affects her. But it just seems like consequences have gone out the window. The notion of this is how we are secretly, but in public we’re different.

**Julia:** Public we’re somebody else.

**John:** So all of these sort of Veep staples go out the window.

**Craig:** He’s blown them up because you can’t compete with him because he’s real and he’s worse than you’ll ever possibly be.

**Julia:** Correct.

**David:** And then let’s go further. Our incompetent staff seems like geniuses compared to who he hired and vetted.

**Craig:** And this kind of goes to an interesting thing about comedy, we’ll go back to unlikeable characters, unlikeable characters aren’t stupid characters. In fact, you need to be rational in some way to be funny. Your rational pursuit may be insane. In other words the thing you want may be crazy. And the depth you go to and the lengths you go to. But it makes sense at least internally.

**David:** Or at least you can function to realize I’ve screwed up.

**Craig:** Correct. You have a sense of shame.

**David:** And that can create fear. Shame and fear.

**Craig:** This guy would be the worst character in a show ever because he just makes no sense. He doesn’t remember anything he did. He feels no shame or guilt. He would be a C or D character. I mean, he’s not even – he doesn’t even have what Louie De Palma had in Taxi. Like every now and then Louie would have a conscience.

**Julia:** Yeah. He’s too broad.

**Craig:** He’s too broad.

**Julia:** He’s too broad.

**John:** And he’s running the country. Yeah.

**Julia:** Yeah.

**David:** So all of this happens.

**Julia:** Ugh.

**David:** And now we’re starting to be able to get on the phone every now and then a little more. And I remember having this conversation of like I’m worried–

**Craig:** How do we compete?

**David:** And we were worried even when he won, but we kind of got away with it because it was our she’s not in office season.

**Julia:** Right.

**David:** We had shot most of that season, we were in the middle of I think our sixth or seventh episode, the Georgia episode. I can’t remember the order. We were mostly through the season when he won. And when we aired that season thank god she wasn’t in office because I honestly believe had she still been president—

**Julia:** We would have had a real problem.

**David:** And we’d been putting up these episodes of Mike doing bad press briefings.

**Craig:** It would have been embarrassing.

**David:** Yes. We would have looked very out of touch. And so my fears were not just what are we, what is our relevancy, how do we not seem out of touch, how do we not seem old fashioned, but also how do you deal with this, because so much for us when we are mining interesting real political history we have distance. Even when we did the Florida recount, I mean, we had distance. And we’re living in this thing. So it was a full reevaluation of I guess taking a darker paint brush and just going if we’re talking about the quest for power and this is now the example of just this insane, insane quest for power, and if Selina Meyer truly was willing to throw away love at the end of season six, what else is she prepared to do? And where can we go? And also why should she lose? Because our original version of it was she was going to lose the presidency yet again and then eventually become a vice president to Sam Richardson.

And so why does she lose when horrible people all over the globe are winning?

**Craig:** Correct. In fact, yeah, that’s the trend right now.

**David:** And dare I say some sense that I guess maybe was wistful but now I don’t necessarily think is true which is I guess early on I had this vision sometimes that at night he went up to his room and maybe was a little scared or like what am I doing here, which I now no longer think that’s even possible.

**John:** Oh no.

**David:** But that inspired at least the notion of let her make these decisions and then suffer consequences.

**Julia:** The consequences. Right.

**David:** And so we changed – I don’t want to say we changed everything, because on a story point of like where we went and the things a lot of it stayed the same.

**Julia:** But actually certain fundamental things really changed. I mean, people got shall we say killed off episode by episode until at the end of it we’re—

**David:** We got very Godfather and Godfather Part II. Which is by the end the family ain’t around anymore. And this idea which was at the end of the season she would be with no one we knew. I mean, we knew them but none of the regulars would be with her.

**Julia:** None of the core group.

**Craig:** She’s killed her whole family.

**David:** Yes. And she has to kill Fredo. Because as we started to think of well what can she do that’s bad, talking about her passing bills and what not, or burning down a forest, it’s relationships. And so who is the person she would never – and you get there. But it was a process and a real journey. And then, of course, if we’re playing all this darkness how do we also keep it funny? So it got very brutal but it got very funny in a really dark way.

**Julia:** And it got pretty dramatic, too.

**Craig:** Which is why it all kind of comes together and ends well.

**David:** Thank you.

**Craig:** I mean, not for necessarily the character—

**Julia:** No, no.

**Craig:** But ending a show is really hard. I personally, I don’t care, I love the last episode of Seinfeld. I do. At least I think I understand what was happening there which was essentially the show was saying these people you’ve enjoyed all this time are terrible and they deserve justice. They deserve it. Because they’ve done terrible things. And I thought that was wonderful. It was like a great way of a show kind of accounting for itself.

**Julia:** I could never really get an opinion about that for myself. I had never had an opinion about the final episode other than I enjoyed making it so much. Which I did. But in fact I know it was a controversial episode for a lot of people, but I think we were sort of set up in such a way that people would be disappointed regardless.

**David:** It was sort of a Game of Thrones of its time.

**Craig:** It’s hard. It’s really hard to end something that is designed to not end.

**Julia:** Yeah, yeah, yeah.

**David:** At the time I remember thinking, or the one thing I took from it and sort of I guess applied to us, which was it was what Larry wanted. Forget everything else. It’s exactly what Larry wanted. And all I cared about was there was a moment sort of like as we were finishing the cut of like we really like it. And the rest will happen or not happen as the world goes.

**Julia:** Yes.

**David:** Both in every phase, just the stories, the outlines, first draft, second draft, on its feet, rough cut, locked cut. And kind of we like it.

**Craig:** You’re accountable to yourselves. That’s the most important thing. I mean, then you can defend anything because there’s nothing to defend. We like it. We love it. We’re the same people.

**Julia:** Yeah. We like it. I think it’s funny.

**Craig:** Right. We’re the people that made the thing that you love. And we love this. So take it or leave it.

**Julia:** Yay.

**Craig:** Exactly, yay. But as it turns out I think it’s considered one of the best series endings.

**David:** When people do like it, don’t get me wrong, it’s quite nice.

**Craig:** No one likes it.

**David:** I was prepared for—

**Craig:** Sure, of course.

**David:** Like I said, to me the two most important people were me and her. And then I kind of had like a couple of my high school buddies in mind. This is aimed at them.

**Craig:** And where was I in there?

**David:** You’re like number 36.

**Craig:** That’s not bad actually.

**David:** It’s not bad. I only know about 35 people though.

**Craig:** I know. That’s still, I’m OK with that.

**David:** But I mean, I don’t know, when you make something for the world, what is that going to be?

**Julia:** You can’t do that.

**Craig:** Well I think it worked out great. It is considered, and I think reasonably so, and well deserved, a really good ending for a series that had been going for years and also had gone through so many changes. Sometimes those are the hardest things to end. When characters have gone through these wild journeys. You saw with like Dexter was sort of an infamously poorly-received ending where he had gone like seven, eight seasons, and then just didn’t quite figure it out I guess.

**David:** I think one of the things that also again going back to like you get to build on what was there in the past, I think one of the things that has always helped Veep is that despite the show being called Veep she stopped being Veep in season three.

**Julia:** And they blew up the premise.

**David:** And yet it was completely different every year and yet it was always this woman who suffered from having been the Veep. And the notion of—

**Julia:** And how we ended. She gets to be president, but something is off, isn’t it? So, she will never be satisfied. She’s a fundamentally unhappy human being. And she thinks X is going to give her joy. But she’s wrong.

**Craig:** I mean, there is a wonderful irony in somebody who is miserable because they’re the vice president because the presidency is right there. And then they get it and they still feel like the vice president. Because there must be something more. And there isn’t. And that’s when you realize you’re kind of in hell.

**David:** The life of a writer.

**Craig:** Yeah. The life of a writer. Exactly. It never ends.

**John:** So it’s the end of this series, but it’s not the end of what you guys are working on.

**Craig:** Oh no it is. They’re done.

**John:** They’re done?

**Craig:** Oh yeah.

**David:** Retired.

**John:** Retired?

**Craig:** I mean, I don’t think anybody – they’ve burned so many bridges.

**Julia:** Bonbons. Champagne. That’s all it’s about.

**Craig:** Actually sounds pretty good.

**John:** Julia, what will we see you in next? What’s the next thing we’ll see for you?

**Julia:** I don’t know. What do you got? I’ll do anything.

**Craig:** OK. Well let’s get to work.

**Julia:** I made a movie on the hills of Veep called Downhill which is a remake of Force Majeure.

**Craig:** Oh wow. Yeah. Love that movie.

**Julia:** Yeah. And I did that for Searchlight with Will Ferrell and, yeah, Faxon and Rash directed it. So I’m in post-production on that right now.

**John:** Amazing.

**Craig:** That’s a heavy—

**Julia:** Lift?

**Craig:** Well, I mean, it’s a great movie. But it’s really, that casting is fascinating to me.

**Julia:** I know.

**Craig:** I mean, I assume it’s not tonally similar?

**Julia:** Ish. Not completely.

**Craig:** Slightly funnier I would imagine.

**Julia:** Yeah. But, it is a dramatic film with comedic elements to it. But I would say it’s more drama than comedy. And it’s more comedy than the original.

**Craig:** Got it.

**Julia:** So that’s what I’m doing. And then trying to decide my next move. Maybe one of you boys has something I can do.

**Craig:** Chernobyl season two.

**Julia:** Yeah.

**John:** David, what are you working on next?

**David:** I have been gloriously taking a break and I will keep taking a break hopefully for about another month or so.

**Craig:** That’s nice.

**David:** I signed a deal with HBO and I obviously hope to create something. I’d like to start from scratch on something and then hand it off to some other schmuck later on about four seasons in.

**Craig:** Right. You want to Iannucci it is what you want to do.

**David:** Exactly. It seems like a really smart move.

**Craig:** And continue to collect money I would hope.

**David:** Oh yes. Absolutely. Absolutely.

**Craig:** God, how do you get that where you don’t do anything and they give you money?

**David:** Or I’ll get Schaffer to run it.

**Craig:** Get Schaffer to run it. Of course.

**David:** But, you know, look, everybody works hard. I was fried when we were done. And I have just recently been able to put sentences sort of back together.

**Julia:** Yeah. It was a hard show to make. I mean, we were really wiped by it.

**Craig:** That makes absolute sense. But tremendous success with it and really when I say tremendous success the only kind I really care about is creative success, because I don’t think I own shares of AT&T. So, it’s really just the creative success of it. And it is so lovely to see – that’s why we wanted you guys to come on together. To see actors and writers working together in this way where they are both writing and they’re both weirdly acting also. It’s like it all gets sort of blended together in this lovely and unique mixture that ends up with something like this. Where there’s not another show like this. I can’t imagine another one coming along. It’s got its own fingerprint. And I think that’s why it was so successful.

**Julia:** I consider myself very lucky that Dave – or I don’t consider – I am very lucky that Dave came onboard because we had worked together before, but never this intimately. It was as if we always had.

**David:** Yeah. I mean—

**Julia:** From the get go, right?

**David:** You know, I use the word, I mean I call her, she’s like my writing partner. I say that. And I will say, and I think I’ve said this in an interview somewhere or whatever, but it’s true. And I can truly remember it, which was when you were in the chemo stuff and obviously chemo is chemo, whatever.

**Craig:** No fun.

**David:** I would occasionally email you but I didn’t want to bother you also. But I was so palpably aware of how much at that moment we actually spoke every day and then weren’t.

**Craig:** You missed her.

**David:** Yeah, I don’t know what else. I mean, it was crazy. And I just realized like, oh, like we’re not speaking and I was sort of just losing my mind.

**Julia:** Ooh.

**Craig:** That’s how John is going to feel about me.

**John:** One day.

**Craig:** I’ve decided that’s how he’s going to feel about me. And I don’t want to have to go through chemo for it. Honestly. I would love just a long flu, like a two-week flu. But towards the end of those two weeks—

**David:** He starts to really miss you.

**Craig:** He’s going to feel an ache.

**John:** As I cycle through guest hosts and eventually it’s like, you know what, it’s just not the same without Craig.

**Craig:** You know man? Have the flu again. It’s working out better. For you and me. I like it when people explain to you that something is working better for you when it’s not at all. But mostly me.

**John:** Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao and edited by Matthew Chilelli who also did today’s outro. If you have a question you can write into ask@johnaugust.com.

Thank you very, very much.

**David:** Oh my gosh, thank you so much.

**Julia:** Thank you.

**John:** And have a great rest of your season and a great rest of your vacation. I cannot wait to see your movie.

**Julia:** Oh god, I hope you like it.

**Craig:** I’m gonna.

**Julia:** You are?

**Craig:** Yeah. I decided. It’s happening.

**Julia:** Oh goodie.

**John:** One ticket sold. Thanks.

**Craig:** Thanks.

**Julia:** Thank you.

Links:

* [Veep](https://www.hbo.com/veep)
* [Julia Louis-Dreyfus](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000506/)
* [David Mandel](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0541635/)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [The Shadows Casting Call](https://johnaugust.com/casting) John is looking for a 15-year-old blind actress for the lead role — please help by sharing this link with anyone who might be a good fit!
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [Julia Louis-Dreyfus](https://twitter.com/OfficialJLD) on Twitter
* [David Mandel](https://twitter.com/DavidHMandel) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Julia Louis-Dreyfus](https://www.instagram.com/officialjld/?hl=en) on Instagram
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Matthew Chilelli ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_415_the_veep_episode.mp3)

Scriptnotes, Ep 414: Mushroom Powder Transcript

August 27, 2019 Scriptnotes Transcript

The original post for this episode can be found [here](https://johnaugust.com/2019/mushroom-powder).

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

**Craig Mazin:** Yes, my name is Craig Mazin.

**John:** And this is Episode 414 of Scriptnotes, a podcast about screenwriting and things that are interesting to screenwriters.

Today on the podcast it’s How Would This Be a Movie with four terrific stories in the news that maybe, just maybe, could become feature films. Plus we’ll be answering some listener questions about narrators, personal crises, and song titles.

**Craig:** Ooh.

**John:** And Craig I thought we would do the questions up front because I always feel like we push the questions to the end and we may rush a bit. So we’re going to lead with the questions with the questions this week.

**Craig:** Yeah. We can really milk the answers. I love it.

**John:** That’s what we’ll do. But, I have news and a favor to ask of all our listenership. So, I’ll post a link here in the show notes, but I am trying to direct a feature film. I think I said this on the podcast before. Part of the reason why I’m not running for the WGA board again is I’m hoping to direct a feature film in these next two years. That film is called The Shadows. The central character in it is Abby. She is 15 years old. She’s smart, resourceful, anxious, and blind. That means I need to find a blind actress who is 15 years old-ish to play this role.

That’s not going to be easy. There’s not just a list of teenage blind actors who are ready to make feature films. So, if you follow through the link you’ll see I have a casting notice up that describes what I’m looking for. It has audition scenes. My hope is that we’re going to find someone who has probably never had the opportunity to act in a feature film before or television who will self-tape and present herself as the possible actress for this role.

But if I cannot find this actress I cannot make a movie. So, if you know an Abby or you think you might know an Abby the place to check out the information is johnaugust.com/casting. That’s where you go to see all the information and the audition scenes and stuff about self-taping of yourself to possibly be cast in this movie.

**Craig:** Good URL. Appropriate. So traditionally the way this would work is casting directors would be sent out into the world and they would cast a wide net and show up in malls and things, trying to just pluck out some diamond from the rough. But now we have these things. We have podcasts and Twitter and social media. So this is a great way to get the word out that you’re looking for somebody like this and I have to presume that there are tons of kids across the United States who are acting, or acting in school productions, or community theater who are blind who will hear this and say, yeah, what about me, John August.

**John:** Yeah, what about you?

**Craig:** What about me?

**John:** So classically the casting director would send out this notice and you might do searches in malls and such, but that’s not going to work for this very specific part. So ultimately there will be a casting director to help do all the other things, but if I cannot find this person it is sort of pointless to do anything more about trying to make this movie. So, this is not the first step. The first step was writing the script. But the second step is trying to find this actress, so that’s what I’m trying to do right now.

Ryan Knighton who was on the show once or twice, a fantastic writer, actually the reason why I met him was because I was writing this script. So that’s how long I’ve been working on this. This predates the Arlo Finch books. But now is the time where I can actually make this movie. So, if you can help me find this actress I’d be much obliged.

**Craig:** Now, here’s a question for you. Let’s say you don’t. Do you scrap the movie?

**John:** We scrap the movie.

**Craig:** You scrap the movie.

**John:** I don’t think you can make the movie kind of any other way. I’ll say that as I started writing this movie it was a real concern. Like is this an idea worth pursuing knowing how hard it will be to find the right person for this part. And I decided to go for it because it’s something I’d never seen before on screen and that’s really interesting to me. I want to make the movie I want to see most, and this is kind of the movie I want to see.

So, that’s why I wrote it and that’s why I’m hoping to be able to direct it.

**Craig:** Well, I think you will find someone. I can’t imagine that you won’t. That doesn’t seem possible. Sight is not required for acting talent. It’s just not. You know, I think of all the things that we do in our business and acting is so interestingly internal. In many ways I would imagine that there’s probably a lot of acting exercises where if you are sighted you close your eyes anyway and try and relate to somebody without the extra cues. So, I would be shocked if you don’t find not just one person but a lot of people. I think you will.

**John:** I hope so, too. And I do think it will be a process of working with this person to figure out a language for how we’re going to do the things we need to do and how to sort of best make this movie happen. If this were a supporting character we might not have the time and resources to make this all possible, but this is the central character and so it’s all going to be about figuring out the best way to make this movie. So, it’s going to be a very collaborative process.

**Craig:** No question. I mean, I’m just thinking ahead to the day you’re there and you’re shooting. I mean, other than figuring out how to assist the actor with hitting a mark. By the way, people probably don’t even know – a lot of people don’t know why this whole thing of the actor has to hit their mark even exists. It’s because film cameras and even the video cameras that we use now like the Alexa and so on and so forth, they don’t have automatic focus the way your iPhone does or an old school video camera because those auto focuses are actually very slow. I mean, you’ve probably noticed that when you’re shooting things that sometimes they’re blurry and then they get – well you’re not allowed to have any blurry ever when you’re making a movie.

So there is a focus puller whose job is to constantly adjust focus depending on how far away from the lens the actor who is being filmed is. So they measure where they are and if there’s a scene where they’re moving then during rehearsal we’ll watch them and then there is an assistant camera person, the camera assistant, who watches them and where they stop that person comes over and puts a little piece of tape down or a little bean bag. And the actor now has to reliably stop there each time because that’s a distance that the focus puller is relying on.

So I could see where if somebody was not sighted you would need to have a little extra assistance there to make sure that they didn’t fall short or go too far depending on their motion. But beyond that I think it’s probably the same as everything else, right?

**John:** Yes. So focus is one small issue. I’m sure they’ll be other things that come up. But I’m mostly just excited to meet this actor and see what she can bring to the part.

**Craig:** Fantastic.

**John:** Now, Craig, you actually had an unexpected bonus episode of the Chernobyl podcast that just came out today as we’re recording this. Tell us about this episode. And I especially liked your little prologue to it.

**Craig:** Oh, thank you. Surprise episode. So this is my Lemonade. It’s a surprise. Well, we were talking and so the podcast was surprisingly popular. We didn’t necessarily imagine that Chernobyl itself was going to be quite as viewed as it was. And I really didn’t think that the podcast would be quite as listened to as it was. But it was. And that’s very gratifying. And Jared and I were talking and he suggested kind of a little bit of a bonus, OK now that the show has come and aired and has been viewed and occupied a space could we/should we discuss it.

And so we got Peter Sagal back and Jared joined us. And I think maybe a day after or two days after we recorded it all of a sudden there was this news story and, huh, a nuclear explosion in Russia that they weren’t telling us about. Well that’s familiar. So I did a quickie solo prologue and, yes, that is available this morning. So if you subscribed to the Chernobyl podcast you got a little ding on your phone this morning. But if you don’t it’s available on all podcast platforms in the known universe, including YouTube and Stitcher and all the other ones that John knows I don’t know.

**John:** And we’ll also put a link to it in the show notes so people can follow through there. Because sometimes people are meticulous and they delete subscriptions just so they don’t have old things sitting around.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So you can follow through there. One final bit of news. There’s been an issue with the app, the Scriptnotes app for the premium listeners. Folks both on the Android side and on the iOS side have written in with some problems. So, if you are having problems with the app the general advice I can give you is make sure you’re using the most recent version of it. If you’re still having a problem write into the ask@johnaugust.com account and Megana can help steer you towards some resources or at least get reported to the actual folks who manufacture those apps to make sure that we get those bugs fixed. Sorry for anybody who is having problems.

**Craig:** Was the bug that somehow some of the money was going to me?

**John:** No. It was not a money flow issue. It was simply an authorization token.

**Craig:** So that bug remains is what you’re saying? The bug of money not going to me.

**John:** That bug – that is a feature not a bug.

**Craig:** [laughs] I am a feature not a bug.

**John:** You are a feature not a bug. Some follow up. Why writes in, “As a longtime fan of the show I believe you guys have made me a better writer. But that sadly cannot be empirically proven. My body weight however is easy to accurately measure. A few months ago I listened back to Episode 50, How to not be Fat. And John’s diet, slow carb, sounded really simple and easy. Having never attempted a diet before I went in with no expectations but the change was instantaneous. Now some four months later I’ve already lost over 30 pounds. So this is a thank you for helping me to not be fat at the very least.”

Craig, can you even remember back to Episode 50?

**Craig:** No, I thought we started at Episode 51. I don’t know if we even did this. What are these first episodes? They might be other guys.

**John:** I think this was like a random advice episode. I think this was maybe not a traditional craft and character arcs. But we did talk about it. I remember discussing it and back at that time I was doing this slow carb diet which is like the Atkins diet. It’s like all these things where essentially you eat fats and proteins and not a lot of carbohydrates. And it works. And at that point I was eating a lot of black beans and eggs. And you will lose weight if you do that.

I’m not doing that right now, but I’m sort of mindful of those things and I try not to eat a lot of carbs that I don’t need to eat. So, if you want to go back and do that, great. But we’re not really a good diet and health advice podcast.

**Craig:** No. Not at all. There are four billion of those. Listen to one of those waste of times. Because we would like to waste your time in different ways.

**John:** Yeah. But Why I’m happy for you that you‘ve lost this weight. I would encourage you to find other ways other than just a diet to maintain a healthy lifestyle. Because just eating alone is not enough.

**Craig:** Yes. Meth is not recommended. You will lose a lot of weight. A lot of weight with meth.

**John:** A tremendous amount. Because teeth – teeth are heavy, too.

**Craig:** Just the teeth alone.

**John:** Those last ounces, just pop them out one by one.

**Craig:** Yeah, man.

**John:** Tic-Tacs.

**Craig:** Meth. I mean, who doesn’t know not to do meth still?

**John:** My hunch is that some people who do meth – this is me talking with absolutely no expertise.

**Craig:** I like this. Go for it.

**John:** My hunch is that people who find themselves doing meth often don’t know they’re doing meth when they start doing meth or they’re coming from some other drug and when that drug is no longer available that’s how they’re ending up at meth. That’s just a guess. I’ve done no research or Googling before saying that.

**Craig:** Your theory is that no one is really sitting down and going, right, so I don’t have drug problems and I’m aware that this is meth. Let’s go. You’re saying that’s probably not happening.

**John:** I think that’s probably not the default pathway into meth abuse.

**Craig:** Well, meth. How about some questions. Should I start with Alison from Atlanta?

**John:** Go for it.

**Craig:** Alison from Atlanta asks, “I’m in the planning phases of my screenplay and I’ve come to fork in the road about whether or not to use a narrator. I’ve heard the argument that it’s lazy writing as you’re telling instead of showing, which I understand, but some of my favorite movies or TV shows use narration really successfully. I feel like it could be especially useful when there is significant dissonance with how a character feels inside versus how they are behaving. Do you have any advice for when the narration is useful or when it detracts from the story?”

John, what’s your advice for Alison?

**John:** The only project I’ve had that I think has a narrator – I take that back. Two projects I’ve used narrators for. The first is Big Fish. The second is Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. In both cases they were really, really helpful. But let’s take a look at why. In Big Fish that narrator is sort of the voice of Edward Bloom, the storyteller who is bridging between the real world and the fantasy world. It starts kind of in the real world and drifts into the fantasy world. Helpful for that. Could you do the movie without the narrator? Yes. But it is useful.

Second movie is Charlie and the Chocolate Factory which is very much a fairy tale, a storybook telling of this boy’s quest and Willy Wonka. In those cases, useful.

Those are situations where I think the narrator is helpful. Unfortunately we encounter so many movies and scripts where voiceover or narration has been applied in post. It was not part of the initial conception of the storytelling. And, wow, you can tell.

**Craig:** Yeah. Narration sometimes is a Band-Aid. But I want to say, Alison, when you say some of my favorite movies or TV shows use narration really successfully, that’s the answer to your question. Anybody who makes the argument that narration is inherently lazy writing, as you “telling instead of showing” is wrong. And you should tell them to their faces that they’re wrong. And that probably everything else that they say after that should be considered invalid. Because it’s the most ridiculous thing to say. Narration is a perfectly good tool if it’s used properly.

Like you, John, I have not written a lot of things that have narration in them, but I remember the first thing I wrote with narration was a movie based on a Philip Dick short story. This is many, many years ago. And it’s one of my favorite things that I’ve written, so of course it didn’t get made. But the hero was an immigrant who did not speak English. He was an Italian immigrant. He didn’t speak English. And the story itself had a kind of romantic fairy tale quality to it so a narrator felt appropriate. He was able to kind of fill in some things when the character was alone and wouldn’t necessarily be speaking in his own language. And if he did why would we subtitle. There’s a lot of weirdness in there. But it was mostly the fairy tale-ness of it that seemed to call for a narrator.

Similarly when you talk about Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, it is kind of a modern fairy tale. It is clearly taking place in a world that is a pushed version of our own. So the storybook aspect of it feels worth honoring and acknowledging. So, go for it Alison. If it feels right then do it. And if you’re doing it because it’s just convenient, or solving some problems, maybe not.

**John:** I would encourage people to think about the movie Clueless without Cher’s narration. It would be unwatchable. You would not like Cher in that movie if you did not have the ability to see inside of her head. And that’s really what it is. It’s honestly kind of like giving that protagonist a song in a musical. It’s allowing you to expose what they’re not saying to everybody else in the scene. So that may be another situation where you need to use it.

**Craig:** Correct. And if you think about Fleabag which is spectacular, all of Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s little discourse to camera to us, that’s narration. That’s what that is. The fact that she’s filmed doing it but talking to us doesn’t change the fact that it’s narration. And we don’t mind it, we love it. Because it fits. It makes sense.

Goodfellas needs narration. Narration – probably the same exercise worth doing. Watch Goodfellas and every time the narration starts hit mute. It just won’t work. Or it won’t work as well.

**John:** All right. Nicole asks, “I live in one of the cities that was recently devastated by a mass shooting. As I’m sure you can imagine you the depth and breadth of emotion in the aftermath is sometimes overwhelming. I have an appointment with my therapist and we’ll work through it with her, but in the meantime I’ve got a draft due to a producer I’ve never worked with before. Normally I’m super responsible about hitting deadlines, but it’s really hard to get my head into writing comedy right now so I’m struggling to get pages out and I am falling behind. How do you overcome your personal life crises when you have to get your work done? Should I let the producer know that the draft might be delayed or wait and see if I can get back on track soon? The draft is due in about two weeks.”

Craig, what advice would you have for Nicole?

**Craig:** Well, first of all fantastic question. And I’ve been there. Happily I haven’t been there a lot. But when it happens it happens. And I think Nicole your sense that this is not mentally doable for you needs to be listened to and respected. Yeah, you could soldier through it but would it be good? And is it good for you?

When this has happened to me, when there have been incidents in my own life – I just went through one myself again with my family – where either someone is ill or there is a crisis or trauma that befalls you or around you or you just on your own without any cause slip into a clinical depression or an unmanageable state of anxiety it is absolutely fair to call people up and say I need two weeks, because I need two weeks. This is where I am. This the page I’m on. This is why I need the two weeks, without getting into super-duper detail. I will be back after those two weeks and then I will finish.

There are not many things that will work as well as a break. And what you don’t want to do is turn your work, your writing, the thing that you love and that you rely on into a burden or more fuel for dysfunction and misery. John, what do you think?

**John:** Your advice is absolutely correct. And what I would caution Nicole to do is not to wait until the actual due date to lob in that email or that phone call, because then it just looks like, oh, you just ran out of time and now you’re telling us.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So, this is the time to reach out to that producer, even if it is a person you’ve not worked with before, and explain the situation. In this case you have – I don’t want to say the advantage – but because it’s a public event that everyone can see it’s pretty clear that there’s a basis behind this. That you’re not just making an excuse.

It can be tougher when it’s just your own thing. When it’s something in your own family that you don’t want to discuss. When it’s clinical depression coming up. When you’re having problems that can’t be sort of externally verified I know it’s scarier to reach out and make that call, but you got to reach out and make that call. And you need to do it before the time is up.

If you have an agent, manager, lawyer, someone else who is also on your side, a different producer if it’s about the studio, it’s worth clueing them in to just so that they have a sense of what you’re going through so that they can back you up a bit.

**Craig:** And you are working in a business that’s full of people that have all sorts of emotional issues and mental health issues. And after all you’re also working in a business that pedals emotion. That is our product. So the fact that you are a feeling person, that you have a sensitivity – that isn’t a bug, that’s a feature right?

You don’t have that thing that actors have where they can use their crisis to pump out tears on film or if they’re having a terrible, tragic day it theoretically could be turned to their advantage. Writing requires a lot of mental energy. It requires focus and attention. It’s spinning 12 plates at once. There’s a lot of logic going on. And then also all of that emotion. I think in general you will be met well by people. They will not say to you, “No, I want you to finish it anyway. You can’t take two weeks off.” Because at that point they’re kind of shooting themselves in the foot. What are they going to do, complain to you then when they get the script and don’t like it? You told them. You warned them.

Also, there’s really nothing they can do about it. You can just get sick for two weeks. If you feel, by the way, this is for anyone, that you’re working for people who truly will not get it, then lie. If somebody is so miserable as to not understand the validity of an emotional crisis then just tell them or having your agent or representative or manager tell them that you have a physical illness that is going to last two weeks. Because they can’t argue with that.

It’s a shame that sometimes you have to do that. But if somebody is going to be a total jerk about it then they forfeit their right for you to be completely honest and forthcoming.

**John:** I think that’s all true. The last thing I want to say is that just making that phone call or that email and telling them that this thing could come in late in my own experience has relieved so much anxiety on my side about the fact that I’m worried that I’m going to be late that it made the writing a lot easier. So some of what you’re actually feeling is the panic over a what if I can’t actually deliver this on time. And so by tipping them off that you may not be able to deliver this on time you’ve lowered the stress on yourself and you may actually be able to do the work that you need to do and be happy about the draft you’re turning in.

**Craig:** No question. Sometimes you say I need two weeks and they say sure. And then two days later you’re like I’m good. What you really needed was two days. And that’s the thing. You’re right. The worst feeling for writers is feeling that they have to write and yet they can’t do their best work. That’s a terrible feeling.

So, whatever you need to do to not have that feeling, do it.

**John:** Do it.

**Craig:** OK. So we’ve got one more question. This is from Seth who asks, “My question is about using a song as the basis for a movie. For example, if I decide to write a quirky rom-com about a grungy mechanic from the Lower East Side who meets a beautiful society girl from Central Park West and I call it Uptown Girl, do I owe Billy Joel a credit or money? I know that if the song is licensed that will cost. But what about the concept?” Well that’s an interesting question. Hmm, John, any thoughts on that one? We’ll be pretend lawyers for the moment.

**John:** We’ll be pretend lawyers. I think you’re in real jeopardy if you call that movie Uptown Girl. Uptown Girl is a title that everybody knows. It’s very clear that it’s inspired by that song. No, Seth, no. Don’t do it.

So, if a song inspires you, so if you wanted to do a movie about a mechanic and a society girl, you could do that probably pretty safely because it’s going to be generic enough that like there’s nothing in the song that you’re actually taking from that. But you call that movie Uptown Girl and you just put a giant crosshair on your back.

Honestly, if your movie has nothing to do with the song but you call it Uptown Girl you’re probably going to be getting some heated emails from some people who are not too happy about that. I don’t think that’s a safe choice. Craig, what do you think?

**Craig:** Yeah, I agree with you. I’m not sure where the legal line is per se, but you actually don’t want to find out. They’re going to make a problem for you. The point is that usually speaking the stories of songs in and of themselves aren’t really copyright – I mean, they’re copyrightable. Of course, lyrics are copyrighted. But the story inherent to those can be duplicated without fear of infringement.

For instance, I’m thinking of a good old story song like the Pina Colada song. Escape (The Pina Colada Song). So most people know the story of that ridiculous song. A guy gets tired of his marriage to his wife, so he is looking for singles ads, or I guess he writes a singles ad. Yeah, that’s what he does. He puts an ad looking for somebody who likes the following things, including Pina Coladas in the rain, and then somebody responds back and says, “I love all those things. Let’s meet.” And so he goes to a bar to meet up with this new woman that he’s going to cheat on his wife with and lo and behold it’s his wife. And then they laugh weirdly, which would not actually happen. In real life it would be a rocket ship to divorce.

But regardless, because it’s just bizarre, but the story of somebody looking to cheat on his wife and swiping right and ending up with his wife, anybody could do that. That idea is not intellectual property. If you call it The Pina Colada movie and he’s talking about Pina Coladas in the rain then oh yeah you’ve got a problem.

So I agree with you. I don’t see the point. I don’t really think the title Uptown Girl is so important to that concept anyway. If it’s the only attractive thing about that idea, well then you kind of are leaning on the Billy Joel-ness of it all and I would think he’d have a reasonable argument to make.

**John:** So titles we talked about before are – the whole process of getting titles cleared is complicated and there’s a whole division that sort of approves which movies can have which title. But it is complicated by songs. And I’ve been through several situations on movies and other projects where a title we would have wanted is a famous song. It becomes arguable like are we using it in reference to that song or not. It becomes complicated. Don’t call your movie Uptown Girl unless you’re making a Billy Joel related movie I would say.

**Craig:** Agreed.

**John:** Agreed. All right. Let’s talk about movies we do want to make. This is a segment we do every once in a while called How Would This Be a Movie where people send us stories that are in the news and we talk about them the only way we know how to talk about them is how do we turn these into narrative feature films or perhaps TV series. This time we have four of them because there were four really good ones and I just couldn’t winnow it down.

Different people sent in different things. I’m not going to credit who sent stuff through because in some cases it was multiple people. But they’re all compelling in different ways.

So let’s start with a podcast I listened to this past week. It is by Willa Paskin for Slate’s Decoder Ring podcast. She is a terrific writer and these are really well-produced episodes. I really loved listening to the whole podcast series. The one this week was about the soft serve wars. So the Mr. Frosty trucks both in Midtown, Manhattan but also in China and sort of the war of turf, of different companies competing, and break off groups, and the history of soft serve ice cream. I thought there was a lot of compelling stuff here. Craig, how did you feel about this as story material?

**Craig:** Well, it’s an interesting world. And it occurred to me you probably didn’t have this, right? I mean, where you were growing up in Colorado?

**John:** No, we didn’t have soft serve trucks.

**Craig:** Yeah. We had them everywhere. So on Staten Island, and this extends throughout New York in every part of New York, you would have these trucks. And there were two trucks that would come by. One was the Good Humor man. So he had the Good Humor brand of ice cream.

**John:** And Good Humor was hard ice cream?

**Craig:** It was. It was incredibly hard. It was the hardest of ice creams. It was so hard. And then there was the Mister Softee truck who would come by, and that was the soft serve. And frankly I did prefer the Mister Softee. It just didn’t come by as often. And they would play their songs. They had their little jingles. And we would get very excited and run after the truck.

So, right off the bat I think one of the issues with this is that it’s not necessarily a universal experience. The notion of this kind of turf war over this particular kind of product. It does feel a little niche to me. Obviously when people are trying to do it China studios get very excited when something may appeal to a Chinese audience, because they’re greedy. But I’m a little concerned about that.

The story though that this brought to mind, when you were a kid, John, did you ever read a book called The Push Cart War?

**John:** Called The Push Cart War. Yes!

**Craig:** Do you remember that one?

**John:** We said it at the same time. I do absolutely. And they had little pea shooters and they were shooting out the truck tires I believe.

**Craig:** Yes.

**John:** I do remember The Push Cart War. We’ll put a link to that in the show notes. It reminded me a lot of that.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, The Push Cart War is basically a classic story of the little guy versus the big guy. And the little vendors versus the big trucks. And in this case I could certainly see a kind of comedy – I think it would have to be a comedy – of competing ice cream vendors who are at each other’s throats scrapping over the last nickel and dime. And then they have to face a common enemy which is, I don’t know, suddenly a Starbucks or some massive corporation is taking over by sending their new things in which is better and bigger supposedly. So it becomes mom and pop, little guy versus the big guy, and maybe there’s a little bit of an allegory of the way that capitalism gets people on the lower rungs to beat each other up and leave a space for the big guy to just waltz in.

But I’m not sure – I’m a little worried about the whole ice cream aspect of it because I just don’t know if people in like you say Boulder or Denver are going to say, oh yeah, ice cream trucks. I think they might go, “Ice cream trucks?” That’s a problem.

**John:** Well let’s talk about that universality. Because even in the intro here I said Mr. Frosty rather than Mister Softee because I didn’t know that as a thing.

**Craig:** There you go.

**John:** That’s how little I knew about that. But I don’t know that this lack of universality really is necessarily a problem because I think, you know, I could imagine the start of this story very quickly setting up important it is for this community and really establishing the worlds. Because so many movies we see, like I don’t know anything about sort of how baseball mathematics works, but the movie is going to teach me how to care about that.

You know, there’s so many movies involve characters who are experts in things I don’t know anything about and that’s part of the experience of watching the movie. So I’m not so worried about the lack of universality in the sense of like places that don’t have ice cream trucks as long as I can establish why it’s important for these people who are selling ice cream and these people who are buying ice cream.

There were three kind of main threads and I think you’d have to pick one of them to make a movie. There’s the guys who are trying to start a Mister Softee business in China. And so that’s – you can picture that one. You’re trying to build something within a bureaucracy which is really complicated and you’re trying to explain to people what it is that you’re doing.

It was fascinating in the podcast talking about how McDonalds and I think KFC were the only places that were serving soft serve at that point and they had separate walk up drive-thru windows for just soft serve ice cream because it was so new and unusual there at the time they were launching. So China is one possibility and the rise and fall of that company.

Then the tension between the Mister Softee trucks and the competing brands within Midtown Manhattan. It’s probably a comedy. It’s probably like Adam Sandler is the godfather. Sort of a turf war kind of thing and it seems silly but these people are taking it really seriously. That section of the movie, I don’t know about you, but I got sort of PTSD trying to think about the logistics of shooting in Midtown Manhattan and how you’re getting all these trucks in Midtown Manhattan. The filming of it freaked me out.

**Craig:** By shooting in Toronto, of course. [laughs]

**John:** That’s naturally how you would do it.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** But they’ll get the New York City tax credit. And finally the single character who is probably the most compelling and interesting is a woman they interview. She’s the ice cream woman who took over her dad’s route. He was a Good Humor man who then had a soft serve truck. And so she’s the – actually she doesn’t have a soft serve truck. She’s still selling traditional ice cream in Brooklyn.

She had a fantastic voice. She just felt like a really compelling character. For a single protagonist this woman trying to defend her father’s route feels like a through line. But I don’t know if any of these are compelling enough movies that I’m rushing out on a Friday night to see them.

**Craig:** No. I think it would require – I think you probably got closest with the idea of Sandler. Of a comedic star taking something that’s small like the Water Boy and making it into something epic. I mean, Tim Herlihy is a genius at doing stuff like that and I could easily see Tim writing a really funny movie that’s centered around Mister Softee versus Good Humor, which is just already I’m kind of giggling at it. It sounds like a funny idea.

So that’s probably the closest I would think to actually getting it made. I mean, this other last little component of this is that there is – for those of us who grew up in New York – there’s a lot of nostalgia to it. There’s a strange kind of connection to the past with those trucks when I see them walking around, even as an adult, and I would see the Mister Softee. The logo is like a cone that’s got soft serve but he’s got a face like in the cone. And just his face warms my heart. It just does. His dumb, stupid cone face makes me happy.

**John:** Yeah. I also got thinking about sort of what’s the color scheme, what’s the world, like what’s happening in the day. It got me thinking back to Do the Right Thing which is an incredibly hot day and sort of what it feels like to have an ice cream truck on that hot day and sort of like passing through these neighborhoods. What would it feel like and what does it feel like to be the guy on the truck? And it’s a cash business and so you’re always vulnerable that way. The staking out of corners. Even if it’s not done as heavy drama, it felt like there were dramatic moments in there. There were reversals. That felt interesting and I think doing it – probably knocking it back a few years and setting it period is helpful for that way, just because you get the benefit of nostalgia and a simpler time when we didn’t have Uber and Postmates and all the other things that got you your ice cream. You might be waiting for that truck to come.

**Craig:** All right. So we’ve decided. This is going to be set in the ‘70s or ‘80s. Tim Herlihy is writing it. Sandler is in it. It feels like it’s going to Netflix. Sandler has got that huge deal at Netflix. I’m in. I’m watching that movie. What do we get for – do we get money for this? Do you we get money when they? Yeah, you know what? They’ll have to send us money. Yeah. Money.

**John:** Yeah. We’ve made a lot off this.

**Craig:** Cool.

**John:** All right. So our next story is about Zimbabwe’s female rangers. It’s a story in the National Geographic by Lindsay M. Smith, photos by Brent Stirton. So this talks about an all-female wildlife ranger team, the Akashinga. And so they are the defenders of the animals within this region. It’s a non-profit international anti-poaching foundation. The Phundundu Wildlife Area is 115-square-mile former trophy hunting tract in the Zambezi Valley ecosystem.

We’ll summarize some stuff in here, but it’s worth clicking through for the photos because I thought the photos were actually one of the most fascinating parts of this. Craig, what did you take from the female ranger’s article?

**Craig:** Well, I thought that this was a chance to do something more than what it was. I actually – the value here to me is that it can be allegorical. And I do like these stories where it seems like, OK, this is pretty straight up. It’s about women who are fighting off poachers to protect animals. That’s a very nice thing. Who cannot like that? That’s very sweet. But in and of itself there’s the problem. It feels a little just saccharine. Right? Like, ah, cool, women are doing that. And they’re beating poachers. And everyone hates poachers. And they’re saving animals. Hooray.

But I think there’s probably an interesting story to be told underneath where these characters who are doing this are in their own way reclaiming something about their lives that was taken from them. This is not easy. Living in Zimbabwe isn’t always easy. That country has been under the thumb of Robert Mugabe, a dictator and a thug, for decades. And that part of Africa is a tough area to live. And being a woman in any part of Africa seems like it’s an additional challenge.

And so there is a chance to tell the story where it’s not just well-minded women go, you know what, we’re defending these elephants, but rather it’s women who have lost a certain kind of power or have been traumatized or who have been marginalized finding a way to reclaim some power and defend something of great value. And ideally – ideally – have a really positive portrayal of Africa, because we don’t get it a lot. We get a lot of Blood Diamonds. We get a lot of Ghosts in the Darkness or whatever that movie was with the lions. We don’t get a lot of this. And I think that’s really – that’s what you’d hope for.

And they do hint at this in the article. They point out that a number of these women have suffered trauma. They either were orphaned by parents who died of AIDS. Or they were victims of sexual assault or domestic abuse or abandonment. And so I think that’s where I would kind of come at it. And I do think actually this could be pretty cool. I could see this being a movie.

**John:** I could see this being a movie, too. And I agree with you that focusing on the women is clearly the way to tell this story. You want to see why they are doing this and why they are better suited for this task than men would be. And so the article does talk some about that in the sense of when they’re trained to do this they just do a better job, because they’re better able to work with the community. They have these automatic weapons but they don’t turn to those automatic weapons as sort of the first way to get a problem solved. And they work well together as a community, so that is crucial. I think that’s really the center of the storytelling.

In this short story we meet Sgt. Vimbai Kumire. So she’s one of the main women we follow in this story. But Enterprise World also meet Damien Mander. So he’s described as a “tattoo-covered Australian and former special forces soldier who has trained game rangers in Zimbabwe for more than a decade.” And he’s one of those characters who seems kind of interesting and compelling at the start, and yet I kind of don’t want him in the movie. My concern is that no matter what you try to do with this character he’s going to feel like the white savior guy. And that’s the thing I want to see least in this movie is the outsider who tells people how to do something.

**Craig:** Right.

**John:** So in focusing on this I’d want to find a way to tell the story honesty but that focuses on the women themselves and feels like it’s them solving this issue and not some outsider telling them how to solve this issue.

**Craig:** An alternative way to approach that is to accept the truth of it and then use that to address the white savior-ness of it. Meaning in reality this guy I assume was very useful and he helped trained them. But he’s not the one out there doing it. He’s not the one putting himself on the line. He’s not the one who is going to stay. This isn’t his country. And pointing that out I think is reasonable.

There is a limitation to the value of those people. But there is also real value to them. And that’s interesting. I think even a relationship – and I wouldn’t have it be a romantic relationship in any way, shape, or form – but a relationship between one of the leaders or a leading character of the women and him which is a relationship of mistrust and concern specifically for that reason. Because remember Zimbabwe was not always Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe was Rhodesia not so long ago. And the idea of addressing certain aspects of colonialism and asking how do we move forward and how do we live or work together with this behind us is an interesting one.

So there’s an alternative point of view to embrace it and face it head on. But I agree the one thing you can’t do is this old school thing of white guy shows up, teaches black people how to be better Africans, and then leaves. That’s – we don’t do that no more.

**John:** That’s not going to work.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** So I think what we’re both saying is neither of us want this guy to be protagonist or antagonist in the story. He can be a character in the story. He can serve a function, but he should not serve one of those primary functions because that is something we’ve seen a lot and it becomes – I just get the bad kind of goosebumps when I see that.

**Craig:** Bad bumps. Nobody wants bad bumps.

**John:** Nobody wants bad bumps.

**Craig:** No.

**John:** Where does this movie go? Where do we see this kind of movie happening?

**Craig:** Well, this is a movie that if done at a certain level and a certain way could earn a theatrical release because it theoretically could be quite prestigious. I could see it being an award-y kind of movie depending on how it’s done. It could also just be a very down the middle obvious treatment of this material. With all of these movies it’s always more likely that they’re going to be done on a streaming platform because that’s the world we live in. There’s no superheroes in it. Nothing blows up.

But, there is still a space for independent film and even for major studios releasing independently made films that address issues like this, have really interesting casts. I think you can cast this really well. Now more than ever there are some awesome actors of African descent, both American and Caribbean and British. And, of course, African. So there’s a lot of really cool opportunities. I think it could actually be a theatrical movie, but it would need independent love I would think.

**John:** I think you’re right. I could see a Participant or sort of an outside financier being a key player in this to make it happen at a budget level where you can sort of get the production values you really want to see there.

I would say of all the movies we’ve done on a How Would This Be a Movie before it reminded me somewhat of the California firefighter story we read.

**Craig:** Sure.

**John:** About the female inmates who were California firefighters. In which you a have a setting and a world but you need to pick very specific characters within that story to follow. And we don’t have them quite yet. We have sort of a sense of placeholders for people who could be there, but we don’t have actual characters with journeys. And so any writer who is approaching this is going say like, OK, here is the backdrop, here’s the world. I need to create an entire story. I need to import a story into this or do the firsthand research to figure out what are the stories I can tell that actually have beginnings, middles, and ends and characters who go through transformations. Because we’re not seeing that in this story so far.

**Craig:** Yeah. And this may just be a matter of personal preference but I think I would rather see this movie than the firefighter movie, just because I find the subject matter more interesting and I get to see somewhere I don’t know and learn things I don’t know and be with people that I don’t know. And it’s not that I know those women, but I know California, I know brush fires, I know firefighters. A lot of this we have experience with it. It’s not foreign to us. And I’m attracted by things that are foreign because you learn more. I just do. I mean, it’s one of the reasons I wanted to do Chernobyl. It was not American. It seemed like an opportunity.

**John:** Here’s what’s also great about this story is that as you’re watching this you are aware that the danger to these women could come from any direction. So it could come from other humans in the world. It could come from animals. It could come from gunshots. It could come from poachers. There’s a lot of things that could happen and stand in the way or endanger any of the characters we care about in the story.

In the firefighter movie we’re afraid of the fire mostly.

**Craig:** Fire. Yeah.

**John:** And so we can see that coming. Where we can’t always see bullets coming. Or we can’t see that dangerous panther or tiger or anything else that’s potentially out there. So that’s an interesting difference with this movie. Our last How Would This Be a Movie comes from an advice column in The Cut as well. It’s the Ask Polly advice column written by Heather Havrilesky. This one is about a woman with severe mushroom allergies who becomes convinced that her in-laws are maybe trying to kill her. So it’s not just that they are insensitive to her food sensitivity. They seem to be finding ways to introduce mushrooms into things that have no business having mushrooms in them.

I loved the letter writer’s description, but I especially loved Heather’s response to how nuts this situation was. And she actually says that this feels like the pitch for a dark comedy on premium cable. And, yeah, it kind of does. It’s that idea of like are my in-laws trying to kill me. Maybe they are.

**Craig:** Yeah. Heather went ham, which I love. And she was right to do so. And the letter writer was so weirdly sweet about it and kind of underplayed the insanity of what’s going on here.

Now, look, we live in a world where people will say, “Look, I have this allergy to this thing,” and maybe there’s a little pushback kind of in the air, like a little silent pushback which is, ugh, everyone is allergic to something now. You can see people kind of groaning and rolling their eyes sometimes. Or if someone says, oh yeah, if you’re in a restaurant, “I want the surf and turf but instead of the lobster can I have this because lobster makes me slightly itchy.” You know, I understand there’s a certain kind of, I don’t know, self-indulgent griping you could do about people with allergies.

But the truth is that when somebody has a legitimately troublesome allergy it is life-threatening. It is terrible. As a parent it’s got to be absolutely nightmarish to be policing your own child and just every day wondering is this the day that somebody slips freaking mushrooms in. And the crazy part, the craziest thing, is when after it’s been made clear to her in-laws that she has been hospitalized over this and convulsed in an ambulance because of mushrooms they added mushroom powder to mashed potatoes at a holiday dinner.

What is mushroom powder? I’ve never even heard of mushroom powder. That’s literally poisoning. You are poisoning – you’re trying to poison her. And everybody knows it. And they say things like, you know, “Well, everyone except your wife likes mushrooms and we’re not changing what we eat for one person.” Oh my god. It’s not that she doesn’t like them. It’s that they’ll kill her. So, I think the deal is they want to kill this lady. They’re literally trying to kill her.

**John:** The fact that it seems like they want to kill her is what makes this so compelling. And I think it’s easy to feel sympathy for this woman and I find the husband character really fascinating. Like how much of a doormat is he that he’s not willing to stand up to his family for trying to kill his wife? That isn’t good. But it’s easy to imagine who that family is and how messed up that family must be and how tight that family must be to want to do this.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** I mean, this woman is an outsider marrying into a thing. It feels kind of great.

Now, this allergy by itself is not a movie. So, I think it’s suggesting a jumping off point for a movie, but there would have to be a lot of other things and this mushroom allergy is just like one sign, like a really clear sign of not just the undermining but the dangerous dislike that they seem to have for her. And that, you know, I think what’s relatable is we all kind of imagine that our in-laws don’t really like us, but to have it taken to the extremes is I think what makes it a movie.

**Craig:** Mushroom powder. So, one thing that I always try and remind myself when I read these things is we’re getting one person’s version. Now, it may be that this woman who is writing this letter and who is describing how her in-laws are trying to kill her with mushrooms, she could be awful. She could be an awful person. I’m not saying she is. But there’s a world in which she’s just a racist, nasty, abusive human being. And everyone reasonably loathes her.

Even then you can’t put mushroom powder in the mashed potatoes. You can’t. You can’t. You can’t mushroom somebody. You’re not allowed to mushroom people. There’s other ways to deal with them. You can’t mushroom them to death. That’s just wrong.

Is this a movie? No. It’s not at all a movie to me. I don’t think of it as a movie. I don’t think of it as a series. I think it could be an episode of something that’s kind of interesting. It could be a B-plot that you find out that somebody you hate is allergic to something and somehow mushrooms get – I don’t know.

**John:** I don’t think it’s a movie by itself. But I think the notion of are my in-laws trying to kill me – I think that is enough of a comedy idea that you could build something around it. I think there’s a tremendous amount more story you need to do there, but I think the mushroom aspect of it as am I crazy could work.

And a movie like Game Night comes to mind, where it’s just like it is funny but there is a real darkness underneath it.

**Craig:** Yeah. I mean, you could do a movie where a woman marries a man and it’s one of those interesting paranoid things. And Game Night has a similar aspect to it even though it’s a comedy. There’s a certain paranoia to it. Where she discovers that her husband actually has been married three times before that she didn’t know about and all three of those women died. And so now she’s thinking – and we’re all thinking – oh, he’s a serial wife killer. But he’s not. He insists that he’s innocent and she keeps finding clues. And eventually the big twist is it’s not him. It’s his mom. She keeps killing his wives. That could be cool.

I mean, I’ve just given away the ending.

**John:** To me the pitch is more like right from the start you’re worried about the mother-in-law, but of course she’s talked down, well everyone sort of feels that way about their future mother-in-law. And there’s ups and downs, but when it becomes clear like, wait, something really nuts is happening then there has to be a further step there. There has to be something more than just like, you know, oh, she’s trying to kill me. There has to really go to sort of why they’re trying to kill her, or what it is about that.

So, figuring out what that is – figuring out what’s really behind the family – that’s probably the key to what makes this a movie versus an advice column.

**Craig:** I want you to know there is mushroom seasoning. And there’s some mushroom powder. It’s really rare. I mean it’s just not – it’s not really a thing. You’ve got to go way out of your way – way out of your way – to find like dried porcini mushroom powder or something. They’re trying to kill her.

**John:** They are trying to kill her.

**Craig:** Sorry, based on what I read. I am not accusing anyone of anything. But based on what I read it would seem–

**John:** We don’t know the real family’s name, so they can’t libel us.

**Craig:** Correct. It would SEEM that they are trying to kill her with mushrooms.

**John:** Yeah.

**Craig:** Yeah.

**John:** Craig, of these four things we’ve talked through which do you think will become a movie and which are you most excited to see if it’s not the same answer?

**Craig:** The Zimbabwe female rangers.

**John:** I would agree with you. I would say that’s probably the most compelling story area. I can imagine some version of the comedy soft serve wars thing happening. That feels like the nostalgic space for that. But I’m probably most excited to see the Zimbabwe anti-poaching rangers.

**Craig:** If Tim Herlihy does agree to come onboard and do the soft serve thing, then that one. But only if.

**John:** Herlihy or bust.

**Craig:** Herlihy or bust. That’s my motto.

**John:** It’s time for our One Cool Things. My One Cool Thing is Game to Grow. So it’s this Seattle-based company and they use specially designed D&D experiences, modules and rulebooks, to help kids with anxiety and/or spectrum disorders relate to each other better and work through skills that they can use in real life. It seems great. So I have not met these people, the Adams, but I’ll put links in the show notes to an article about them, what they do. Also a Kickstarter for a thing called Critical Core which are sort of the slimmed down rulebooks that they use to talk through what they’re doing. But you look through this Craig and you’ll obviously recognize so many D&D things you love, but you’ll also recognize some things that are developmentally useful.

So there’s this one to nine scale of developmental capacities which is so true and accurate to sort of how kids process things which is basically how to think critically, how to cooperate going through stuff, how to plan ahead. All the things that you and I do all the time when we play D&D, which I think I probably got a lot out of playing D&D as a teenager, which is so useful and transfers so well to real life decision-making.

So it just seems like a great program, so I’ll tip people towards this and it’s something I’d love to see replicated in other places.

**Craig:** This is brilliant. And I love that the age range is so wide. So they’re looking at kids from ages eight to 20. So, this would certainly be relevant for one of my kids. And, yeah, I’m going to look a little deeper into this. For sure. This looks great.

My One Cool Thing this week is the National Puzzler’s League, otherwise known as MPL. The National Puzzler’s League is, like one hand there’s a magazine, The Enigma, that comes out with lots of puzzles in it. And they also have a national convention. This is not for your casual puzzler. I’m just going to tell you.

So I have friend Dave Shucan who is a brilliant puzzler and puzzle constructor and solver and he goes to the convention and he’s kind enough to say, hey, take a look at this puzzle that I did there. And they are awesome. They are really layered. When I say really layered I mean I tried explaining one to Melissa last night and she stopped me after about 12 words and said, “Please no more. I don’t want to hear anymore.” [laughs]

It’s layers and layers and layers. They’re beautifully done. They’re beautifully constructed. So I’m going to be joining the National Puzzler’s League and the membership for a year is a big whopping $23. I think I can do that. Online-only membership is just $15. So, yeah, I’m totally into that.

So National Puzzler’s League. If you want you can check it out at puzzlers.org and we’ll have a link in the show notes.

**John:** Fantastic. That’s our show for this week. Scriptnotes is produced by Megana Rao. It is edited by Matthew Chilelli. Our outro this week is by Med Dyer. If you have an outro you can send us a link to ask@johnaugust.com. That’s also the place where you can send longer questions like the ones we answered today.

Short questions on Twitter are great. So I’m @johnaugust. Craig is @clmazin.

You can find the show notes for this episode and all episodes at johnaugust.com. That’s also where you’ll find the casting notice. So, again, if you think you might know an Abby, a blind actress who is around 15 years old, I’m looking for her. So you can go to johnaugust.com/casting to find out more information about that.

You can find transcripts there as well on the site.

You can find all the back episodes of the show at Scriptnotes.net or download 50-episode seasons at store.johnaugust.com.

Craig, thank you for helping me figure out whether these things would be movies.

**Craig:** My pleasure, John. Let’s do it again.

**John:** Cool. Bye.

Links:

* [The Shadows Casting Call](https://johnaugust.com/casting) John is looking for a 15 year old blind actress for the lead role — please help by sharing this link with anyone who might be a good fit!
* [Bonus Episode, Chernobyl Podcast](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bonus-episode-with-jared-harris/id1459712981?i=1000446954276)
* [Scriptnotes Ep 50, How to Not Be Fat](https://johnaugust.com/2012/how-to-not-be-fat)
* [Decoder Ring: Ice-Cream Truck Wars](https://slate.com/podcasts/decoder-ring/2019/08/decoder-ring-explores-the-world-of-ice-cream-trucks) by Willa Paskin
* [Akashinga Women Rangers Fight Poaching in Zimbabwe Phundundu Wildlife Area](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2019/06/akashinga-women-rangers-fight-poaching-in-zimbabwe-phundundu-wildlife-area/) by Lindsay M. Smith
* [My In-Laws Are Careless About My Deadly Food Allergy](https://www.thecut.com/amp/2019/08/ask-polly-my-in-laws-are-careless-about-my-food-allergy.html) by Heather Havrilesky
* [Game to Grow](https://www.cnet.com/news/game-to-grow-the-dungeons-dragons-game-rescuing-kids-from-their-social-anxieties/?__twitter_impression=true), support on [Kickstarter here](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gametogrow/critical-core/description)!
* [National Puzzler’s League](http://www.puzzlers.org/)
* [John August](https://twitter.com/johnaugust) on Twitter
* [Craig Mazin](https://twitter.com/clmazin) on Twitter
* [John on Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/johnaugust/?hl=en)
* [Outro](http://johnaugust.com/2013/scriptnotes-the-outros) by Med Dyer ([send us yours!](http://johnaugust.com/2014/outros-needed))

Email us at ask@johnaugust.com

You can download the episode [here](http://traffic.libsyn.com/scriptnotes/scriptnotes_ep_414_mushroom_powder.mp3)

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (73)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (489)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (237)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.