Networking, being part of the film making process, getting a film degree from NYU, carrying coffee for Quentin Tarantino, living in southern California, having a studio executive in the family...these are all more important than what format you use, or a lot of other stuff we discuss. Absolutely. Unfortunately, we just can't all do those things. Some of us are stuck trying to write the best script we can, getting it out there, and praying. Like Ray said, that's like hitting a bullet with a bullet. But if that's all one has, at least try an aim well.

Like Kevin, I've really been trying hard to stay out of this, but you know me...I can't.

Janet is 100% correct in what she says. She's 100% correct with the examples she gives.  And there more than 5,000 other examples that apply as well.

It just downright shocks me that everyone can't see this, or admit to it.  It makes no sense whatsoever.

And on top of all that, this thread is about the draft of the script we were provided, as well as the movie that it turned into.  If you haven't read the script and/or watched the movie, how can you even think about posting here?

A Spec script is a blueprint for the writer's ideas of a potential movie.  It also has to be written well, formatted properly, and be an enjoyable, engaging read.

There are improvements available for any and all scripts ever written.  Nothing is flawless or remotely perfect.  If you truly believe otherwise, you are wearing blinders and following along like sheep to a slaughter.

Actually, it's downright insulting to take the position that because a script is written by a "Pro" that makes it untouchable and without criticism.

Quoted from Dreamscale Actually, it's downright insulting to take the position that because a script is written by a "Pro" that makes it untouchable and without criticism.

Agreed.

Heyman's 129pg adaptation of someone else's premise for his boss, as his director of development, got touched like a fresh twelve year old Philippine sex-worker.
It got to' up!

Aronofsky abused that poor thang!

RayW -

Hey, let's leave underaged Philippino sex workers out of it. (Unless we're discussing Territory.)

Still - I'm outta this discussion.  Jeff, thx.

Quoted from wonkavite All right.  I'm outta this discussion. Ghost?  You take a look at the formatting on this script, and tell me if you really think that any agent would've read past page one, if written by a simply scripter today. http://www.blueharvest.net/scoops/anh-script.shtml Or argue with a straight face that The Klumps would've sold as a spec script....especially from a non-pro. Ain't no-body here on SS that's arguing that there isn't room for improvement on their own work.  At least, I hope not. But a double standard?  Yeah, there is.  And it's due to the fact that a non-pro spec script has to shine brighter, when it's buried under the load of other scripts, all clamoring for the same attention.  Pros don't have the same competition - they've already got that first foot in the door. I'm done with this.

I know you're out of the discussion, but it isn't really fair to bring a 1976 script into this. Things have changed...and that's without going into the fact that NO-ONE liked the script. The guy that funded Lucas said he didn't understand the whole concept of the film but he was giving him the money because he was backing Lucas himself because he thought he was a genius.

Quoted from leitskev I have not been participating, and I plan on staying on the sidelines, but I actually find it really interesting. It goes back to the old debate for me, is a script a blue print for a film, or is it a written story. It's obviously somewhere in between and needs to be able to do both things, grab the reader and provide a direction for a film. Whether it should be more 'blueprinty' or more like a traditional written story is something I find of interest. I'll just keep watching the discussion, but I am interested in it.

It's changed. The studioes aren't run by filmmakers any more, but by Accountants and Lawyers.

They employ readers to evaluate scripts. These readers have to go through hundreds of scripts...it's a long and tedious process.

This has resulted in a situation where scripts that are easy to read have tended to receive better coverage.

Readers are not directors or producers, they might not get what makes a good film, or understand it as a blueprint. If it's more interesting to read (written in a sort of whizz, bang, boom stlye) it keeps them awake and has an edge. Your slow burning Epic has a serious disadvantage in this system compared to a 90 page comedy full of witty asides.

David Mamet gets quite upset about this in his book called Bambi vs Godzilla, where he basically blames this system for destroying American Cinema. (He writes scripts that read like instruction manuals though...his films are always good, and you can see the scripts are good blueprints for them...but damn they're often hard to read).

In pure sales terms readability>content.

I suppose in an ideal world what you want to try and do is get everything you want in your script and as strong a blueprint as possible, then refine the writing so it reads as quickly and as interestingly as possible.

'It is the story not he who writes it'...


Stephen King

Rick -

You're right...that one probably isn't 100% fair.  But there are plenty of current scripts that were produced recently for which it would be fair.  But I'm too tired now to drag around the web and produce the scripts as examples.

I stated my view already (which was simply that due to circumstance, "non-pro" spec scripts have to shine brighter than many pro scripts.  Creating an ipso-facto double standard.  Not even saying it's intentional. But it's there.  And I can't fathom how anyone who watches *some* of what comes out of Hollywood could doubt that.)  

Rick, as I mentioned in the 'Territory' thread, I grant that directing camera flow and using similiar writing techniques are signs of a superior script.  Kudos.  Plan to use that principle myself, since you brought it to my attention.  But I doubt that the majority of scripts that were produced in 2011, 2010, 2009, or 2008 - or further back - reach anywhere close to that level of expertise.  Yes, we should aspire to it.  But I can't - and won't - be blind to the fact that alot of pro scripts don't reach it either.  But they got produced.

NOW I'm out of the discussion.

--J

Oh, I agree very few pro scripts reach the level of expertise of Black Swan.

I'm never sure whether it's fair to judge the scripts on the films they produce. Speaking to the pros on the likes of Artful Writer...it's pretty clear that their scripts get butchered. Three scripts were even put together willy nilly into one for the Hulk for instance.

Hollywood also greenlights films without a script. They need a new Spiderman before the deal with Marvel runs out...it goes into Production and then someone cobbles something together at the last minute.

If you can find me some crap scripts that have been produced, I'd be interested. When you have time, of course.