We've been taught that the first ten pages are the most important time to hook a reader. While a point to be made, I think it's complete bullshit --

-- you have more like two point five pages at best!

I'm serious.

Does anyone disagree? Just hang around on sites like SS for a while... everyone's posting their 123 page gem that you only need to stay with for 99 pages...

The sci-fi snoozer that begins in a wheat field in Idaho.

The action/adventure that starts in an office cubical.

The horror story that starts in some geek's living room.

The drama that starts with a boring man saying hello to his wife in the morning before work and talking about God knows what.

The Western that starts... well, who gives a damn about Westerns?

Two and a half pages. Do we really have any longer to hook a reader?

Anyway, just a homage to what I learned here.

Thanks,

Tony.

You're a quick learner grasshopper!  

Double posting here...

You are right though. If you have read hundreds, maybe even thousands of scripts, you can tell after just the first couple of pages if the writer knows what he's doing, if the story is going anywhere and if any character seem interesting. If none of that is evident after those first few...yeah, readers will bail.

And to add, that's why practicing shorts is important because you get to refine your skills within a limited page allowance.

Quoted from TonyDionisio We've been taught that the first ten pages are the most important time to hook a reader. While a point to be made, I think it's complete bullshit -- -- you have more like two point five pages at best! I'm serious. Does anyone disagree? Just hang around on sites like SS for a while... everyone's posting their 123 page gem that you only need to stay with for 99 pages... The sci-fi snoozer that begins in a wheat field in Idaho. The action/adventure that starts in an office cubical. The horror story that starts in some geek's living room. The drama that starts with a boring man saying hello to his wife in the morning before work and talking about God knows what. The Western that starts... well, who gives a damn about Westerns? Two and a half pages. Do we really have any longer to hook a reader? Anyway, just a homage to what I learned here. Thanks, Tony.

Totally agree - and disagree.

For us slaving away on spec scripts - you're dead on cause no one is reading to ten pages if the first 3 don't grab them. That being said, pros can get away with it and in most instances end up with a solid script. Not to go to far back - but I just read the script for "To Kill A Mocking Bird" - a great film but a script that takes forever to get going. I don't think it would be sold on a spec basis.  

Not in this day and age. You are talking about a time of long ago, my friend. Not a fair example.

Quoted from TonyDionisio Not in this day and age. You are talking about a time of long ago, my friend. Not a fair example.

There Will Be Blood
Lincoln
The Kings Speech
The Assassination of Jesse James
A Space Odyssey
Che
The Thin Red Line
Best Exotic Marigold Hotel
etc.

I'll stand by my view on this - some stories are best told at a slow broil and many get screwed up by the clamor for the early hook. Again - spec writers can not get away with the slow broil. But that by definition does not mean a slow script is a bad one.

Quoted from eldave1 - spec writers can not get away with the slow broil. But that by definition does not mean a slow script is a bad one.

True...very true.  Sad...but true.

It's not a Spec writer's market these days.  Almost impossible to have a true Spec script and true Spec writer sell a script that gets turned into a "feature' with a wide screen release.

Not impossible, but oh so difficult...

Quoted from Dreamscale True...very true.  Sad...but true. It's not a Spec writer's market these days.  Almost impossible to have a true Spec script and true Spec writer sell a script that gets turned into a "feature' with a wide screen release. Not impossible, but oh so difficult...

Indeed

I don't think it's anything to do with the story, but the writer's voice. Some writers I don't mind reading the slow stuff. I never read the script to To Kill a Mockingbird but I remember reading the book as a youth and enjoying it immensely. Some writers have the knack of keeping you held to the page no matter what is going on. Not that I haven't skipped my fair share of King's droning, but he definitely has the knack of keeping my eyes glued to his words for the most part.

Conflict doesn't have to be in your face. It really can be achieved by the way a guy greets his wife in the morning. It just takes a good writer to achieve it. Most are not good writers, most of us are terrible writers, so we must rely on the action and story to do the job for us. Unfortunately though, even the most exciting script will be boring to read if the writer isn't competent.

So to sum up, for me it is about flow not content. Content is just content, there's always content, what's often missing is the talent to tell story the way it deserves to be told.

You can tell way before two pages.

If the title is poor there are warning signs. I can pretty much tell whether a story has got a shot from the title alone, these days.

If the logline is badly written, boring, unappealing or vague you know the story will be the same.

You can usually tell within the opening paragraph whether the writer knows how to write, and crucially whether they really understand filmmaking.

Even when all those conditions are met, usually the story is still too boring to be considered as something to invest multiple thousands/millions of pounds and three plus years of your life into.

Exactly Dustin. and that's why I love what you said a year back or so and try to repeat it often. And that is to pepper the reader with little blocks of vision or action - kinda like a morse code machine. But, you have to have something to pepper them with.

Eldave, I stil don't see how your list of movies reflects today's spec market, which has changed as recently as the Transendence bomb. I mean, you're referencing period pieces and adaptations.

There will be blood was a weird anomoly at best. It really only survived because of what's his names' creepy performance and this strange fascination people have with him as an actor. If by Odyssey, you mean 2001, then think about it... that is really a movie from a different age of filmaking.

I just don't see how you can "totally agree and disagree." I mean, that's like something Hilliary Clinton would say.

Quoted from TonyDionisio Exactly Dustin. and that's why I love what you said a year back or so and try to repeat it often. And that is to pepper the reader with little blocks of vision or action - kinda like a morse code machine. But, you have to have something to pepper them with. Eldave, I stil don't see how your list of movies reflects today's spec market, which has changed as recently as the Transendence bomb. I mean, you're referencing period pieces and adaptations. There will be blood was a weird anomoly at best. It really only survived because of what's his names' creepy performance and this strange fascination people have with him as an actor. If by Odyssey, you mean 2001, then think about it... that is really a movie from a different age of filmaking. I just don't see how you can "totally agree and disagree." I mean, that's like something Hilliary Clinton would say.

Tony - I will try one last time.

In terms of "totally agree and disagree." I totally agreed with your premise - i.e., you have to grab them in your first 2.5 pages (and I would argue even sooner - ala  your title and log line) IF  your are the run of the mill spec writer.

Where I disagree is that (a) the rule (and a ton of others) does apply if you are an established screenwriter and (b) adherence to the rule may or may not have anything to do with the actual quality of the script.

IMO, that is pretty much the case with all the sacred rules of screenwriting. Tarantino's opening scene in Inglorious Bastards was 17 pages long culminating with the killing of the Jewish family under the floorboards.  I thought it was brilliant (just my opinion). However, if it came from a spec writer - those gunshots better be going off by page 3. Woody Allen gets away with very lengthy stretches of dialogue that a spec writer would be skewered for - why? Simple, because he is Woody Allen. I'll bet he even gets away with the occasional orphan.

I think you have a false paradigm. And it is this - a script needs to grab someone in the first three pages in order to be a quality script. You point to what is being made today as proof of that. Here are the top ten grossing films from 2015.

Jurassic World     
Avengers: Age of Ultron     
Furious 7     
Inside Out
Minions
Cinderella
Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation     
Pitch Perfect 2     
Home
Ant-Man

Ugh!!!! I don't think that the selling or producing of these scripts had anything to do with whether or not there was a compelling hook by page 3 and everything to do with whether or not some studio thought they could fill theater seats.

So - again - yeah - I get the hook thing for spec writers who want to sell (my "agree") but just do not believe that it is a prerequisite for a quality script (my disagree).

Okay, fine. So, spec scripts = grab readers attention immediately. Get famous = do whatever you want.

Agree...once established you have room to play around because the reader already knows he's in capable hands...but spec...gotta have something moving. In fact, most of the specs that have made it..have something that makes you say WTF within the first page or two. I hate to admit also that I can be half a page in and already know if I'm going to put it down or keep reading. Thank goodness each reader is different I guess.

5 Openers That Make Readers GROAN

http://www.bang2write.com/2011/12/5-openers-that-make-readers-groan.html

Quoted from vancety 5 Openers That Make Readers GROAN http://www.bang2write.com/2011/12/5-openers-that-make-readers-groan.html

Interesting - thanks for the link

I don't know about slow that definition can change from genre to genre, premise to premise. I'm much rather put emphasis on is this shit interesting by page 1, and do I want to turn the page. Of course once you've been proven to be capable you are given more leeway. But, anyway, my two cents.

BLB

I have zero experience writing feature scripts, but this is an interesting topic. Personally, I don't know of any movie I liked which started right with the action within the first 3-5 minutes. Those movies tend to feel artificial in a sense that they rely more on quantity of action/shocker scenes instead of quality of the plot.

I'm a big fan of a slow intro which shows the hero(s) in their initial, normal life. That way I've got enough time to decide if these are characters I can root for or not. Take Independence day for example, I believe an airforce pilot who is worried about marrying his stripper girlfriend because he fears to be denied as a space shuttle pilot is probably something which you would say is a boring intro for a scifi/action movie, though I felt it was a great character introduction and combined with Will Smith's acting skills instantly made this guy likeable. Had the movie started with an alien ship blowing up a major city I probably wouldn't have continued to watch it, because it would have felt like 'just another alien film'.

You're confusing a slow build-up with great writing. When you write well it takes longer to figure out if the story is worthy or not.

If you're not a very good writer, then some will not get past your first action block, or even logline. Sometimes your script doesn't even have to be opened to tell that it will not be very good.

I don't like it when people throw around titles of classic films when talking about writing in 2015. As far as I know, every script written during the Golden Age of Hollywood was written on assignment. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD is no  exception. It was written on assignment by Horton Foote, who was the best screenwriter ever. (This is not up for debate.) It's also based on what would consider the perfect American novel.

What we forget that each story demands its own tone, pace, structure. No two characters are alike. Some stories have to start with a bang. Others need the build up. I'm not talking about a 20 page scene where nothing happens. The sign of a good writer is that he can keep us exciting. Either with foreshadowing, false starts, set ups, before anything big actually happens.

That all comes from character.

This is why so many films and TV shows start these days with an exciting scene with a cliff-hanger and then go.

SUPER – TWO WEEKS EARLIER

And then start the story proper.

I HATE THAT! OOOOHHH It annoys me SO MUCH!

-Mark

Quoted from MarkRenshaw This is why so many films and TV shows start these days with an exciting scene with a cliff-hanger and then go. SUPER – TWO WEEKS EARLIER And then start the story proper. I HATE THAT! OOOOHHH It annoys me SO MUCH! -Mark

Fully agree, I hate that too. I'm a fan of a linear narrative structure, feels much more realistic if you as a watcher don't get that super-view on events but 'live through' the events just like the characters do. Maybe that's oldschool but I can live with it...

Quoted from TonyDionisio Okay, fine. So, spec scripts = grab readers attention immediately. Get famous = do whatever you want.

That is exactly my opinion and the main reason why I put aside my most passionate and meaningful stories/ideas, at this point.

Top 100 earners from 2015 can easily be sorted in four or five type of movies and one thing is common for the vast majority of them, non-realistic/fantasy stories no matter the genre. People and very important kids/teenagers (they are big spenders in US) want to see something they can't experience in their lives from many reasons or they don't want to. Seeing a world that exist only in theater, escaping from everyday life, being allowed to root for a gangster and experience with him power and wealth for two hours and receive once again confirmation that everything he's doing is wrong and leads to misery or death, taking a journey with all of those heroes with superpowers and many other non existing worlds and people before getting back in real world. I am the fan of real life story telling because I love psychology and my curiosity awakes to find out how other people thinks, react, live etc. But I am still seeking for unusual and different stories, something I wouldn't like to experience for real or I possible couldn't for some reason. I love when I meet characters I never met in my real or fictional life before. I want to see difference but to understand them so I can experience same emotions as they.

I watched recently a movie named Cheap Thrills. What convinced me to watch it was premise that promise crazy excitement I don't want to experience. When film started I understood why hero is going to do that crazy things. But, just as title said, pretty much everything in the movie was very predictable and cheap. Lacking deeper character development, story dynamic and pace, lacking true thrills. With just a 2 or 3 scenes worth watching. Writer was lacking imagination and I was tempted to stop after slow, boring, total cliche setup. If I was reading script as reader, worst case scenario, I would be on a toilet bowl few hours later shitting paper I eat of torment in first not ten but more like 25 pages of that story. But, in more realistic scenario I wouldn't go further than page 3. Idea/premise was great but writer failed to deliver what he promised. If, for example, Tarantino got that idea, with his weird mind that would be a classic.

So, genre, title and premise is first that attracts but that just a beginning for you as writer and for the writer/audience. For aspiring writer well written, entertaining and captivating plot from first to last page is more important than story you write about because your goal should be to present your writing skills first. At the bottom line, you write for the reader.