SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 28th, 2024, 6:27pm
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Screenwriting Discussion    Screenwriting Class  ›  Screenplay Structure: Three Acts? Moderators: George Willson
Users Browsing Forum
AdSense and 4 Guests

 Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4 : All
Recommend Print
  Author    Screenplay Structure: Three Acts?  (currently 6118 views)
nawazm11
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 12:05am Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
945
Posts Per Day
0.21
Hello Everybody!

It's me, again. So I am currently writing a feature atm and I sent the first 7 pages in recently to see if the idea is solid. Anyway, while browsing the internet I stumbled across the Three Act structure.

http://scriptfrenzy.org/node/402156

Does anybody else use this? Is it helpful? Are there any disadvantages? IMO it would help a lot with writing the story but I have seen some films that don't follow the example like The Fountain.

Anyway, thank you for reading and hopefully you could help me

Mohammad
Logged
Private Message
Shelton
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 12:15am Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients



Location
Chicago
Posts
3292
Posts Per Day
0.49
I didn't read that link, but I can tell you right off that three act structure is pretty much industry standard.  It's only once in a blue moon that you see things that deviate from it.  

I wouldn't get into all the nonsense about hitting act breaks at a specific page, but it's definitely something to keep in mind when writing.


Shelton's IMDb Profile

"I think I did pretty well, considering I started out with nothing but a bunch of blank paper." - Steve Martin
Logged Offline
Private Message AIM Reply: 1 - 58
CoopBazinga
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 12:29am Report to Moderator
Old Timer



Location
Perth, Australia
Posts
1175
Posts Per Day
0.26
Hey Mohammad,

Firstly, good luck with your feature.

I think the three act structure is more of a blue print for how your story should flow and if it helps you with your feature then great. I wouldn't of thought that it's absolutely necessary to follow it as there are many great films out there that don't follow this but it is a helpful guide to where and when moments should occur.

I am actually writing a feature myself and I for one try to use the three act structure to my advantage but others will probably totally dismiss it. I guess it depends on how good you at putting a plot together, some do it with ease while others need this kind of advice to advance their story.

That's my two cents.

Good luck with it mate.

Steve
Logged
Private Message Reply: 2 - 58
sniper
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 5:07am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


My UZI Weighs A Ton

Location
Northern Hemisphere
Posts
2249
Posts Per Day
0.48
Hey Mo,

I've always liked Michael Hauge's structure sheet which is very similar to Blake Snyder's Beat Sheet, only it's got examples which is always cool. Like Shelton said, the three-act structure is the industry standard and Hollywood seldom deviates from it. Indie producers on the other hand are probably less likely to be as obsessed about the structure - as long as the three acts are there.

Also, I agree with Coop that you should use the three-acts structure to your advantage because it's a great help.


Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
Logged
Private Message Reply: 3 - 58
nawazm11
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 5:07am Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
945
Posts Per Day
0.21
Shelton

Thanks for the quick reply. So I'm thinking it has to be used in any feature unless there's a very good reason not to.

Hmmm, act breaks. I'd always though they were just at the next transition, except in some comedies where you're always left with half a punchline and it cuts to commercials!   Anyway, I will search them up.

Steve

Thanks for both the quick reply and the comment about my feature..

Yeah, I am terrible at putting a plot together so I do think that would help.

Also, you're writing a feature! Good luck. I'd love to read it when you finish so just pm away!

Mohammad
Logged
Private Message Reply: 4 - 58
nawazm11
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 9:15am Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
945
Posts Per Day
0.21
Sorry, Sniper!

I think we posted at the same time so I never saw your comment So, don't think I was ignoring you

Wowzers! That is a big page! I will look through the Michael H. sheet tomorrow/today because it is very late here

I downloaded the Blade S. Sheet and that is actually so sleeeeeek. I love it. I had this really bad plan in word that I was going to use so I would like to thank you a tonne for providing that. But, I can't seem to understand some of the things there. Does Blake have anything which builds upon that sheet?

Man! Am I way behind with these things!

Thanks for the help Snipez.

Mohammad
Logged
Private Message Reply: 5 - 58
Electric Dreamer
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 9:53am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Taking a long vacation from the holidays.

Location
Los Angeles
Posts
2740
Posts Per Day
0.55
If you want to sell a script in this town and you're an unknown, you better use three acts.
Industry folks want to know  that you can execute industry standard structure.

I believe it's key to know how to execute structure in order to learn when to deviate.
And it really helps "in the room" when talking to producers and developers.
They see you know the "structure game", they're more apt to take an interest in you.

It can also provide a great "short hand" when script doctoring for a producer.
Even if you don't want it in your script, learning classic structure helps your career.
It's a form of currency you demonstrate to send the message you're worth their time.

E.D.


LATEST NEWS

CineVita Films
is producing a short based on my new feature!

A list of my scripts can be found here.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 6 - 58
sniper
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 1:00pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer


My UZI Weighs A Ton

Location
Northern Hemisphere
Posts
2249
Posts Per Day
0.48

Quoted from nawazm11
Does Blake have anything which builds upon that sheet?

Indeed he does, in his book "Save The Cat"



Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
Logged
Private Message Reply: 7 - 58
nawazm11
Posted: January 16th, 2012, 5:54pm Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
945
Posts Per Day
0.21
E.D

Thanks for the reply. I think you've pitched a few of your scripts so it's best if I listen to you So, it seems that you'd be better off using it because it looks good in front of producers.

Sniper

Thanks for the reply. I shall look into that book
Logged
Private Message Reply: 8 - 58
Pale Yellow
Posted: January 17th, 2012, 4:51pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
2083
Posts Per Day
1.40
I love the book Save the Cat...I bought it as a Xmas pressie to myself and am trying to use the beat sheet as a guideline in my feature WIP.

I found another beat sheet calculator that is pretty cool...I think it's also based on Save the Cat's beat sheet.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 9 - 58
nawazm11
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 6:10pm Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
945
Posts Per Day
0.21

Quoted from Pale Yellow

I found another beat sheet calculator that is pretty cool...I think it's also based on Save the Cat's beat sheet.


Is it on the internet, Dena? If so, I'd like to read it
Logged
Private Message Reply: 10 - 58
mmmarnie
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 6:41pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
1085
Posts Per Day
0.22
I'm a big fan of Save The Cat but recently I've been looking for alternative structures.  I like the 8 sequence approach over at The Script Lab.  I think you can combine Blake's structure with this one...

BTW, for those of you who don't already know, Script Lab has a lot of very useful stuff.  


The Eight Sequences

ACT I

SEQUENCE ONE - Status Quo & Inciting Incident
Establishes the central character, his/her life, and the status quo and the world of the story. It usually ends with the POINT OF ATTACK or INCITING INCIDENT, but this plot point can sometimes appear earlier in the first few minutes of the film.

SEQUENCE TWO - Predicament & Lock In
Sets up the predicament that will be central to the story, with first intimations of possible obstacles. The main tension will be established at the end of the act. The sequence ends when the main character is LOCKED IN the predicament, propelling him/her into a new direction to obtain his/her goal.

ACT II

SEQUENCE THREE - First Obstacle & Raising the Stakes
The first OBSTACLE to the central character is faced, and the beginning of the elimination of the alternatives begins, often a time where EXPOSITION left over from ACT I is brought out. Since our character is locked into the situation and can�t simply walk away, the stakes are higher - there is a lot more to lose.

SEQUENCE FOUR - First Culmination/Midpoint
A higher OBSTACLE, the principle of RISING ACTION is brought in and builds to the FIRST CULMINATION, which usually parallels the RESOLUTION of the film. If the story is a tragedy and our hero dies, then the first culmination (or midpoint) should be a low point for our character. If, however, our hero wins in the end of the film, then sequence four should end with him winning in some way.

SEQUENCE FIVE - Subplot & Rising Action
The SECOND ACT SAG can set in at this point if we don�t have a strong SUBPLOT to take the ball for a while. We still want RISING ACTION, but we�re not ready for the MAIN CULMINATION yet.

SEQUENCE SIX - Main Culmination/End of Act Two
The build-up to the MAIN CULMINATION - back to the main story line with a vengeance. The highest obstacle, the last alternative, the highest or lowest moment and the end of our main tension come at this point. But we get the first inklings of the new tension that will carry us through the third act.
Note: Since most midpoints and endings are paralleled, the PLOT POINT at the end of act two is usually at a polar opposite of those points. So if our hero wins at the midpoint and at the end of the film, then she usually hs her lowest point here.

ACT III

SEQUENCE SEVEN - New Tension & Twist
The full yet simple, brief establishment of the third act tension with its requisite exposition. Simpler, faster in nearly all ways, with rapid, short scenes and no real elaborate set-ups. The TWIST can end this sequence or come at the start of the eighth sequence.

SEQUENCE EIGHT - Resolution
Hell-bent for the RESOLUTION. Clarity is important. If they turn left, all is well, if they go right, the world as we know it ends. Not that we don�t have complex emotions or ideas about what it all amounts to, but at this point we crave clarity. Will he get the girl, defuse the bomb, turn in his murderous brother and escape from the sinking boat surrounded by sharks?


boop
Logged
Private Message Reply: 11 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 8:43pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



Argh...

Just write a good story, write your script well, and see where the chips fall.

All these ideas that scripts have to be exactly a certain way is so fucking dull and pedestrian.  Seriously drives me fuckin' nuts!

ARGH!!!!!
Logged
e-mail Reply: 12 - 58
mmmarnie
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 9:03pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
1085
Posts Per Day
0.22

Quoted from Dreamscale
Argh...

Just write a good story, write your script well, and see where the chips fall.

All these ideas that scripts have to be exactly a certain way is so fucking dull and pedestrian.  



I wrote 3 features, blind...letting the chips fall and they all suffered from the same issue.  Lack of structure.  Some of us need help. I don't stick 100% to the formula but I need some type of guideline or I'll end up pushing out another piece of crapola.  



boop
Logged
Private Message Reply: 13 - 58
bert
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 9:03pm Report to Moderator
Administrator


Buy the ticket, take the ride

Location
That's me in the corner
Posts
4232
Posts Per Day
0.61
They're just tools, Jeff.

Nobody will argue that you aren't free to drive a nail however you choose -- with a rock or a shoe or your forehead.

But many people prefer to use a hammer, and there is nothing inherently wrong with that method based simply on the fact that so many use it.


Hey, it's my tiny, little IMDb!
Logged
Private Message Reply: 14 - 58
mmmarnie
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 9:05pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Posts
1085
Posts Per Day
0.22

Quoted from bert
They're just tools, Jeff.


That's a bit harsh.  



boop
Logged
Private Message Reply: 15 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: January 18th, 2012, 9:51pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



My forehead's been killing me lately...  
Logged
e-mail Reply: 16 - 58
Electric Dreamer
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 11:02am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Taking a long vacation from the holidays.

Location
Los Angeles
Posts
2740
Posts Per Day
0.55

Quoted from bert

They're just tools, Jeff.


In my mind's eye, I read this is, "You're just a tool, Jeff".
Maybe I should start drinking coffee in the morning!

E.D.


LATEST NEWS

CineVita Films
is producing a short based on my new feature!

A list of my scripts can be found here.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 17 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 11:03am Report to Moderator
Guest User



I need to use my tool much more often, as opposed to my forehead.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 18 - 58
sniper
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 12:34pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer


My UZI Weighs A Ton

Location
Northern Hemisphere
Posts
2249
Posts Per Day
0.48
You can hammer nail with your dick? Daaaamn, that's impressive, Jeff.


Down in the hole / Jesus tries to crack a smile / Beneath another shovel load
Logged
Private Message Reply: 19 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 1:05pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



I can definitely hammer, but I don't know how well I'd do against a nail...that would really hurt both me and my tool.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 20 - 58
Baltis.
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 11:18pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



I do and don't like the 3 act structure because, as Jeff said, it does make things pedestrian.  It allows me to know, in a 90 min movie, exactly where the big events are going to happen... I know Mike said something to the degree of it being industry standard -- that may be true and probably still is to some degree -- but if you choose to only write in that style you will no doubt fall into the "I can't help but be predictable" pit.

20, 40, 30 was the 3 act structure for a 90 min movie (at one time - I believe)

30, 60, 30 was the 3 act structure of a 120 min movie (at one time - I believe)

I think after writing in that style for so long you will always look at things: your story, your break downs, your pinches, your progressions, even your characters in this tight box where things must happen in accordance to these mathematics.

I honestly do believe Mike is right -- That it is industry standard to write this way... if for no other reason than it's the only possible excuse as to why we have so many damn movies that are the exact same.

But I don't totally hate the 3 act rule... I find it very useful for discipline and guidance... The 3 act rule allows you to know exactly, as I said above, when and where to get your story moving and into gear.

For that it's beneficial... What I'd do is write a 1st draft using the 3 act structure and then deviate from it on your 2nd and 3rd.  See where else your story and characters can go when you un-cuff them.

Revision History (1 edits)
Baltis.  -  January 19th, 2012, 11:57pm
Logged
e-mail Reply: 21 - 58
nawazm11
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 11:51pm Report to Moderator
Been Around



Posts
945
Posts Per Day
0.21
Hello, everyone. It's very interesting to see that everybody has different opinions on this.

Marnie
Sleek, 8 acts! I think I'll use that as well as the others to construct my plot.

Jeff
Wow!   I know what you mean. There isn't any originality if 95% of screenwriters follow the same structure. Guess I need to strength my forehead, perhaps having a headbanging routine each day would do the trick

Balt
Thanks for the thorough response. I like that everybody has a different opinion on this. I think I will use the three acts in my first draft and then with my second one, try and put more originality into it.

Thanks for commenting, guys

Logged
Private Message Reply: 22 - 58
jagan@spundana.org
Posted: January 19th, 2012, 11:54pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
LA, CA
Posts
42
Posts Per Day
0.01
Just tell the story as your heart wants to. Three Act Structure is definitely the industry standard here, but not a "Thumb rule" -- I have seen the "Most meticulously structured Scripts" just being thrown into the trash can --- mostly for no goddamn reason. The selling aspect of any Screenplay in this town is "Fresh Idea, never made before and one that definitely at one look moves like a POP CORN movie" Other story genres take a while to get picked, if that makes any sense.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 23 - 58
Jennifer
Posted: April 20th, 2012, 6:26pm Report to Moderator
New



Posts
7
Posts Per Day
0.00

Quoted from sniper
Hey Mo,

I've always liked Michael Hauge's structure sheet which is very similar to Blake Snyder's Beat Sheet, only it's got examples which is always cool. Like Shelton said, the three-act structure is the industry standard and Hollywood seldom deviates from it.



I would recommend Kal Bashir's youtube videos. You can see how all of the above fits into one.

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 24 - 58
Videoteq
Posted: April 21st, 2012, 10:51am Report to Moderator
New


To see is to hear what you smell with your eyes

Location
Stamford England
Posts
23
Posts Per Day
0.01
Dagenham Women was screened at our local arts centre last year and the screenwriter was there to answer questions at the end. He said he didn't consciously write in three acts, but did acknowledge that the film definitely had a three act structure.

Seems to me that proper stories, ie interesting ones, all have three acts. A universal truth of story telling.


Robert F
Logged
Site Private Message Reply: 25 - 58
Reef Dreamer
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 2:44pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Part time writer

Location
The Island of Jersey
Posts
2612
Posts Per Day
0.57
This has been interesting to read.

I had given up the idea of a feature until the 7WC came along so this kick started me to think about structure. Lets be honest, there is no shortage of advice out there, however, they mostly do ascribe to a three act structure, even if they break it down differently.

As a noob i'm not about to break protocol so I'm happy to go along with that, besides what i had in my mind fitted this quite well.

Since i am writing in the least preferred genre on this site, the Rom Com, i decided to invest in a book on the subject, written by Billy Mernit, aptly titled,  "Writing the romantic comedy".

I started writing the script with one eye on three acts but otherwise trying to make the story natural, i.e. flows in a sensible cause and effect manner. I was therefore pleased that it seems to ascribe to his format which is a seven point structure (has to be a different number to everyone else of course!).

Each genre seems to have it own ways, laws, rules - most of which i don't know - and learning the Rom Com style has been interesting.

However, i do have one issue with the advice given as sometimes it seems very prescriptive. For example, i have been told (not in this book) that the inciting incident MUST be on page 12 (not 11 or 13). Surely thats too formulaic? So, just to show I'm a rebel at heart, mine's on page 13




My scripts  HERE

The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville
Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final
Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards.  Third - Honolulu
Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place
IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
Logged
Private Message Reply: 26 - 58
Videoteq
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 3:19pm Report to Moderator
New


To see is to hear what you smell with your eyes

Location
Stamford England
Posts
23
Posts Per Day
0.01
My inciting incident in on page 2! (but then again, it's only 5 pages long!) I'm currently filming (badly) the script now - just a couple of scenes done so far - you can see it (and the 5 page script) at http://www.paralleluniverse.co.in It does have a 3 act structure - I think...

The .co.in is in fact an Indian domain (as only $3.22 per year) but you *could* interpret the .in as .indy so quite a good domain to register for your production blogs.


Robert F

Revision History (1 edits)
Videoteq  -  April 22nd, 2012, 3:30pm
Logged
Site Private Message Reply: 27 - 58
Grandma Bear
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 3:28pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
I sent my 7WC script out for comments today. I don't know if it follows a 3 act structure or not. Nor do I know if it has any of the other points at the right pages. We'll see what the feedback will be. All I can say is I know the first kill ended up much later than I wanted it, but I couldn't really figure out a way to change that without making everything happen too fast. I have STC btw, but I usually don't use it because a lot of what he's talking about I don't understand.  


Logged
Private Message Reply: 28 - 58
Videoteq
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 3:31pm Report to Moderator
New


To see is to hear what you smell with your eyes

Location
Stamford England
Posts
23
Posts Per Day
0.01
STC books 1,2 & 3 are well worth persevering with.


Robert F
Logged
Site Private Message Reply: 29 - 58
Scar Tissue Films
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 3:32pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3382
Posts Per Day
0.63

Quoted from Grandma Bear
I sent my 7WC script out for comments today. I don't know if it follows a 3 act structure or not. Nor do I know if it has any of the other points at the right pages. We'll see what the feedback will be. All I can say is I know the first kill ended up much later than I wanted it, but I couldn't really figure out a way to change that without making everything happen too fast. I have STC btw, but I usually don't use it because a lot of what he's talking about I don't understand.  


I haven't got time to read a full script at the moment, but if you want me to have a quick look and give you some suggestions of how to get to the killing a bit quicker without speeding the whole thing up, I can do.

Rick.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 30 - 58
Grandma Bear
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 7:09pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
Very generous of you! I sent it on....however, since the first kill is on page 60 now...you still need to do a lot of reading.  


Logged
Private Message Reply: 31 - 58
Ledbetter
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 7:36pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



I really try to come to a beginning, middle and an ending to a script in my head before I ever put it to paper. I really don’t visualize three acts in my head. That seems too linear. Instead I visualize a bell curve for my writing.

For those who might not know what this is, a bell curve starts from zero and begins it's accent upwards to a peak. From the peak, it begins its dissension back to zero. Like a hill.

If this is what a three act structure is, then so be it. That’s not to say that right in the middle is where the climax should be.

I wish my simple mind to get around all of the structure aspects many of you speak of, but it can't. I'm okay with that.

Besides, I'm going to be the guy who gets a script produced despite his lack of structure. Mine have no choice but to be produced on story alone because if you've ever read one of my scripts, you either enjoy it due to the story of discard it because of the errors.

I will say this-

I came to simply scripts pretty much not knowing how to write. I have a very bad deficit when it comes to my ability to read and write.

Being a member of this site has helped me quite a bit. In fact, because of the advancements over the last few years with the help of my friends here, I am light years from where I was.

Shawn…..><
Logged
e-mail Reply: 32 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 8:27pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



I actually appreciate the reverse bell curve.

Start big, lull the middle purposely, and then go back to even bigger for the finale.

Start big, end big, winning formula every time.  Love me, hate me...listen to me, damnit.



And always use Emoticons whenever possible!!
Logged
e-mail Reply: 33 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 8:58pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
It is amazing to watch how the big studio movies not only stick to 3 act structure, but it's eery how close they stick to it. The inciting incident usually actually comes at minute 12(yes, I have been trying to note in films), but NEVER later than that. The end of act one is clear when it comes. In fact, it's so clear, you can tell just from the soundtrack. The music changes right as the turn is made into two. And this always seems to come right at 25 minutes.

The midpoint is similar. It's almost annoying how it literally comes right at the midpoint. I mean literally within a minute.

The turn into three is a little more variable, but from what I've seen, tends to come exactly 25 minutes before the end. And as with the other turn, you can tell the turn from the soundtrack, which changes right on cue.

However, I did read an interview with a pro writer who said spec script writers do not need to concern themselves with this. This exacting structure, he said, is due to big studios making films, where there is a committee of people...writers, directors, producers...designing the story. Standard three act is just a common language between them.

Also, things like FF films clearly do not follow 3 act structure, at least as we normally think of it.

I don't discount Jeff's view, and I once held it, may yet hold it again. But at the moment, I take a different approach, one which emphasizes the midpoint.

My reasoning is this: we are unknown, unproduced spec script writers. The reader has made up his mind on your script LONG before the end. So you could have the ending to end all endings, and it won't matter. If you've lost the reader, you won't recapture him. If you've already captured him, you've already won the battle. A great ending is mere icing on the cake.

Are the times that a reader is on the fence, and the ending can make a critical difference? No doubt. But I think the overwhelming majority of the time, the reader has made up his mind. Can anyone think of any scripts they've read where that happened, where they really were not thrilled, but the ending turned things around?

I've had two people contact me about producing features. They were both smaller than small. Perhaps something could still be learned from the experience. Both of them fell in love with the script(different scripts, too)...but never finished it! Now maybe they are not indicative of a more serious producer. But I suspect, and there is evidence to suggest, that even major producers don't read the whole script before they decide. They are either excited about a script, or they are not. If they are not, you have no chance. If they are, they almost don't need to finish the script. They are gonna change things anyway.

So my current theory is that we need a killer first act. The first 25 to 30 pages. This act has to blow someone away. It has to literally get a producer excited. If you don't get a "wow!", you're cooked. If you get the wow, he'll keep reading, just to make sure things don't fall apart. If you can hit him with another "wow!" at the midpoint, that means there were only 10 or 15 pages between wows. You do that, and you sold your script. Just try not to blow it with the second half.

That's my theory. God knows I'll probably change my mind.





Logged
Private Message Reply: 34 - 58
Grandma Bear
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 9:17pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
That's impressive Kevin!

I have one thought though. I wonder if studying "too hard" can be a hindrance. Not saying that you are, just wondering in general. There are lots of people that are experts on screenplay writing. They study it endlessly, but I wonder if it makes them better writers.

IMHO, and I emphezise HUMBLE, I've seen some writers get "worse" the more they "know". I personally prefer organic, from the gut writing, even if rough around the edges...I'm weird though. I've been told many times.  


Logged
Private Message Reply: 35 - 58
rc1107
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 9:19pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer



Location
Youngstown
Posts
1241
Posts Per Day
0.20

Quoted from leitskev
The reader has made up his mind on your script LONG before the end. So you could have the ending to end all endings, and it won't matter. If you've lost the reader, you won't recapture him  ...  Can anyone think of any scripts they've read where that happened, where they really were not thrilled, but the ending turned things around?


I do agree with what you're saying here.  It is hard to win somebody back, but there were a couple films that came to mind that I was bored by, but ended up thinking they're great films because the ending was so awesome.

'Se7en' I thought was horribly slow.  There were some cool killings along the way, yes, but for the most part, I think it's really slow.  But the ending made it an incredible movie in my eyes, and is the reason why I will sit down and watch it again.

The same with 'The Sixth Sense'.  Very very very slow.  Yes, some interesting stuff happens along the way, but it's a very very slow movie nonetheless.  The ending though, I was so impressed with.  It made me go back and watch it again (and again) and it actually made the beginning and middle entertaining for me, seeing everything that I missed.

True, I did WATCH those films and didn't READ them, but I don't think I'd feel any differently if I had read them first.

Like I said, I do agree with what you said, but those came to my mind right away.


Logged
Private Message YIM Reply: 36 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 9:29pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
It's possible, Pia. I won't be a good test subject for that hypothesis, though. I have barely studied film theory. I have never taken a film class, and have probably seen less movies than anyone on this board. The above is a simple analysis based on limited experience. I've read Story by McKee, though not recently; and an online PDF of STC. That's pretty much the extent of my knowledge of film theory. So studying theory has not been a part of my approach.

I do absolutely think it's worth thinking about these things in terms of what works best. Look, nothing beats talent. A dose of talent is worth ten doses of analysis. But you're born with what talent you have. Work is something you can control. I can't make myself more talented. But I can work at learning.

I've had plenty of people tell me my work stinks. But no one yet has said it's getting worse!
Logged
Private Message Reply: 37 - 58
Grandma Bear
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 9:48pm Report to Moderator
Administrator



Location
The Swamp...
Posts
7961
Posts Per Day
1.36
I've read a lot of scripts, but not that many books on screenwriting. I just feel it's stifling when trying to write something if I try to follow what those people teach. I will admit that most of my feature attempts suck, but I just don't think I can write if I have to follow rules and structures. Most of the time I know the beginning and the end then my characters take the story where it wants to go. Maybe that's a hindrance for me, but it's the only way I can write.  Fuck! Did I mention that's why I love shorts?  


Logged
Private Message Reply: 38 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 22nd, 2012, 10:07pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
Hey, Mark. I agree. And even a few months ago, I wrote year that a movie is like a book: you need a hook(great cover), a strong beginning, and a strong ending.

It's not that I no longer think that. But selling a script when you're a nobody is very different from what makes a great movie. I think to sell a script, you better win the early battles. The war is long over by the time you reach the end of the script. You've either won or lost.

Pia, I was not suggesting anyone follow any formula. I don't. What I am saying is very simple: have a killer beginning(first 25 pages) where you really knock the reader out. And have something really unexpected near the middle that churns things up again, excites the reader. If you have a big twist, consider using it in the middle instead of the end. And that part's a little unorthodox, I know.

In war, you have to fire your big guns early. If you wait too long, they might do tremendous damage, but the tide of battle might already have turned. That's not film theory. That's Kev theory.

I do know there is some kind of film theory out there that revolves around the midpoint. I've never read it. I think maybe Rick mentioned it once. Someone did. Actually, I would read it, if I could find it online. I am curious now. i want to study! JK.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 39 - 58
Reef Dreamer
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 8:10am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Part time writer

Location
The Island of Jersey
Posts
2612
Posts Per Day
0.57

Quoted from leitskev
If you don't get a "wow!", you're cooked. If you get the wow, he'll keep reading, just to make sure things don't fall apart. If you can hit him with another "wow!" at the midpoint, that means there were only 10 or 15 pages between wows.


I'm cooked


My scripts  HERE

The Elevator Most Belonging To Alice - Semi Final Bluecat, Runner Up Nashville
Inner Journey - Page Awards Finalist - Bluecat semi final
Grieving Spell - winner - London Film Awards.  Third - Honolulu
Ultimate Weapon - Fresh Voices - second place
IMDb link... http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7062725/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
Logged
Private Message Reply: 40 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 8:22am Report to Moderator
Guest User



If you actually watch alot of movies, you'll see that many, MANY of them do not start with a bang.  Actually, more like a whimper.

I'm talking mostly about lower budget, non theatrical releases, which is what most here seem to aspire to.

Again, to tie this into another thread, watch movies and see what's actually making it onto the screen, and how it works and doesn't work.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 41 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 8:55am Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
Jeff, there are no doubt different access points. But please keep in mind what I've been saying this theory of mine applies to:

Non-produced, unknown screenwriters.


Once you are inside the gates: have a track record, have connections, etc., the options are much wider. Most of the films you see have not been written by unknown writers. So there is more leeway to do things different.

If you are an unknown writer trying to separate from the pack, unless your idea is so high concept that the premise almost sells itself, then every page at the beginning of your script that does not blow away the reader leaves you on the precipice. You can't risk it. There's no time to build. Something better be wowing the reader.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 42 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 9:18am Report to Moderator
Guest User



Kevin, I don't want to argue with you, nor am I trying to.

As I've said, I am in complete agreement that a script and a movie should start with some excitement, intrigue, terror, horror, or whatever the theme and genre dictate.

But my point here is twofold.

1)  First of all, actual movies do not ALWAYS follow this pattern.  There are actual movies written by complete no-names, as I am referring to low budget, non theatrical release fare.  In no way does a script have to do this, and when you...

2)...sacrifice story to make this happen, it's obvious to any astute reader or movie watcher.  The script and movie will suffer greatly because of it.

If you can do this naturally, that's great - you should.  But if your idea does not follow this, you shouldn't be too concerned.

If something works, it works, period.  If something doesn't work, it doesn't work, period.

You can trace along all the STC BS or any other guideline/spreadsheet all you want and cram square shaped pegs into round holes, all in the name of structure.

Or, you can write a compelling, well thought out script with a unique twist or vibe, and make it your own.  Eventually, the cream rises to the top.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 43 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 10:42am Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
Jeff, I don't have a problem with any of what you are saying. I just want to be clear on what I am and I am not advocating.

At no point have I suggested following STC. I have been consistently clear that I am opposed to paint by the number writing. I think it's wise to be familiar with these concepts if you are a writer, but I have always been adamantly opposed to following them like a bible. Which I think you know. I am opposed to any hard and absolute rules, whether it's paint by the number story building or rules of what's "right" in screenwriting. It's all about what works, and that goes for everything...writing styles, "rules" of writing, or STC structure guidelines.

What I am advocating is very simple: make the "beginning" kick a$s.

That doesn't mean a car chase, or ten bloody murders, or a meteor shower. It just means something must impress the reader, really impress. Tarrantino impressed people with the breakfast dialogue scene in Reservoir. If a writer can do that, great. Or if it takes a meteor shower, fine. As long as the beginning kicks ass, grabs the reader and doesn't let go. TTP. Turn the page. That beginning needs to be a page turner. It needs to be powerful enough that the reader can't stop reading.

I threw in a second part of my theory, which as I said, may change, and I am not telling anyone how to write: a kick a$s midpoint.

So real simple: kicka$s beginning, kicka$s middle. That's all I am arguing for.

the surgeon general has warned: this writer is un-produced. Any theory advocated is untested and should be tried at the writers risk.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 44 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 11:15am Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from leitskev
the surgeon general has warned: this writer is un-produced. Any theory advocated is untested and should be tried at the writers risk.


  That's funny.

OK, Kev, I am not in disagreement with what you're saying either, but I also find it a bit humorous, as it is or should be very obvious.

In some way or another the entire script should be kickass, right?  Now, we all know, based on all the pure shit movies available, that doesn't happen very often, or maybe more like rarely, if ever.

I have to laugh when I hear people telling others to write a really good script or the like.

For some reason, I always get this picture in my head of an awkward guy who doesn't know how to act around girls, going on a first date with a babe.  Before the date, he's at home reading a "How to Date Successfully for Dummies" book, and follows all the steps, dressing "nice", continually freshening his breath, fixing his hair, etc.  He arrives wearing a suit and tie and his date has jeans and a tight tank top on.  He gives her dorky flowers and even a box of chocolates.  He's polite, courteous, a total gentleman in every respect.  The girl gets up during a awkward dinner, goes to the restroom and calls her friend, saying how poorly the date is going.  At the end of the date, the girl thanks the dweeb, and gets her hot ass inside her place as fast as she can.  The guy goes home, and tells his friend how well the date went, when in reality, it didn't go well at all.

How in the Hell does this relate to the discussion at hand?  Well, advice and guidelines are great and often make perfect sense in the big picture, but each screenplay is a unique situation (hopefully) and worrying about this or that doesn't necessarily make it better, or good.

Does it make sense to start with a bang?  Sure it does.

Does it make every script better?  Definitely not.

Logged
e-mail Reply: 45 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 11:55am Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
I may have been that dorky guy when it comes to woman, who knows. But that is not only not what I am advocating, but I am starting to suspect you are not really reading my posts. There is no other way to explain how you keep misrepresenting them.

I have made it perfectly clear that I don't advocate any paint by the numbers approach. Somehow when I say "I don't advocate the paint by the numbers approach" it keeps coming back as though I do. Very, very strange. Especially considering some of the lengthy posts I've made in the past in other threads against that approach.

Is my advice of have a killer beginning obvious...so obvious that it becomes meaningless? Let me better explain.

One of the things a script normally has to do is introduce the characters, their conflicts, their goals and flaws, etc. If you are Aaron Soronsin the reader will give you a lot of leeway to do this. There is a presumption the story will become interesting.

If you are an unknown, there is little leeway. Your story has to grab the reader quick and not let go. You want to reveal some intricate character trait and make some profound statement on the human condition? Fine, but if you do that in the first "act", and the story is not interesting, good bloody luck getting a producer on board.

Maybe you have a brilliant idea for your story, something that will be revealed on page 60 and will change the world as we know it. Great. But you need time to set it up. And the set up is not going to be the kind of thing that blows people away. Well, if you are Tarantino, ok. Folks will stick around to page 60. But if you are unknown, your great story element that will change the world will never be reached by a producer.

These are decisions you face when writing. If you have not faced them, you will at some point. You have to look at each scene in that first act and ask yourself are the engines that are driving the story really powerful. You might look at a particular scene, for example, around page 12, and determine that is not driving the reader in a powerful way, but that it's necessary to set something up for later that is important. I'm saying no, don't do that. It's too risky. Unless you are established. If that changes your story, so be it.

So this is not generic advice saying "write a good story". To be honest, I hate when people say that myself. It's kind of a joke.

What I am saying is that you have choices in your story. Every scene should be necessary, should feel necessary; but not every scene can be kick as$. What I am suggesting is that if you have a limited number of kick as$, line up that butt smashing stuff near the front. Move that dramatic twist from page 100 to page 55. Make sure every scene in the front 25 pages is knockout. If it's not, start over.

You are in a war. Your foe is a producer. You win, he wants to produce your script. What I am saying is that tide of battle will be largely determined before page 25 or 30. After that, it's almost too late to turn it back. the second half of your story might be the greatest in film history. You got all your heavy artillery lined up then. Well, you wasted them. You should've rolled them up while the fighting mattered. In the first act.

The surgeon's warning applies: I make no claims to special knowledge. I am not a freemason, handed the secrets of screen success. This is my current theory. We'll see what happens.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 46 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 12:46pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



Kevin, my friend, I am reading your posts and I definitely understand what you're saying.

On the contrary, I think you're not really reading my posts or trying to understand what I'm saying.  You're saying the exact same thing over and over, while I'm trying to make my points by saying different things and throwing out different, maybe wacky things.

So, I'll try again, not to argue or beat this into the ground, but hopefully to bring a different perspective to the table and get my point across.

Of course you don't want to start off "too" slow or dull.  That is understood and agreed on.  But, it's a long race, and isn't won or completely lost, based on the start.

We can use a number of different scenarios here, be they sports, strategic games, war, or...how about this?  Sex.  Yes, I'm going to throw out an analogy, dealing with sex.

We've all heard the phrase, "Don't blow your load out of the gate", or something to that effect.  Right?  Why?  What does it really mean?

Well, it means if you do, you're (and/or your partner) going to end up with an unsatisfying situation.

Same can be said in a sporting event.  The team can come out on fire, open up a huge lead, but if you can't finish and close the game out, you're going to lose.

Now, this scenario obviously only holds up in a "timed" situation, meaning, the game isn't over until it's over.

In a boxing or MMA fight, that doesn't hold true - completely.  Sure, you can come out and deliver a knockout or quick sub, and by doing so, you win.  But, if your opponent survives the onslaught, and you've blown your load, so to speak, you're not going to win.

In any war type situation, you can indeed destroy your opponent with your opening strike.  But, if they survive and you've left yourself open for their counter attack, you could be in for some trouble.

A script/movie is a timed event, so to speak.  It's not over until it's over, and that's around 90-110 pages or minutes.  If you come out with a bang and engage or blow your audience away, that's great - and very important.  But remember, when the script/movie is over, the lasting impression isn't what occurred at the beginning, it's what happens at the end, how it all comes together.

And, the more I think about this, the more I wonder if this is exactly what's wrong in the industry as a whole.  Everyone's so fucking worried about getting and keeping a reader/agent/Producer's attention early on, that they're not taking the time and effort to actually craft a real story, that works from beginning to end, and wraps up on a high note, leaving a good taste in everyone's mouth.

If people don't have the time, energy, or gumption to read the entire script and think about what they just read, what does it say about these gate keepers and actual movie makers?  To me, it says they don't really give a fuck, and based on what the finished product of most scripts look like, it's crystal clear there's a huge problem that's very tough to overcome.

So, to surmise once again, I agree that a solid start is important, but you can't and shouldn't fire all your big guns early on.  You can't blow your load too early.  And most importantly, you have to understand that the end is the most important, not the beginning, unless you really don't care about creating a quality product.

Logged
e-mail Reply: 47 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 1:33pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
It is admirable that your priority is quality movies. But it makes you less likely to be produced. In my simpleminded, un-produced opinion.

Should you decide to change your goal to that of being produced, you might consider a new strategy.

Yes, in an ideal world, studio heads would read every word of each of the thousands of scripts that are sent to their studios. But reality being what it is, they don't have time. They are busy...making movies. So they hire entry level people to read. And these readers have to truck off dozens and dozens of scripts every week. They're probably young, hungover, trying to write, or work some other job related to film. And they don't have time to read every word of these scripts either.

There is nothing wrong with the process. One can always do as they did in the early days of film: make his own! But if we want to utilize someone else's business to do this, we have to run the gauntlet of thousands of scripts.

You want to run that gauntlet, be prepared to win the early rounds. That's what kind of fight it is. If we go with war theory, it's like mechanized warfare: overwhelm with speed and force. All that matters in mechanized warfare is the early days. Ask the French about that.

If you are an unknown writer, this is mechanized war. If you want to win, here's the key: Blitzkreig. Drive fast and hard. Don't let the enemy regroup...or have an excuse to stop reading.

If you want to go with sex...foreplay is for single people, you know that! Not for married people.

Foreplay is the perfect image for what I'm saying. If you are unknown, you're up against the clock. No time for foreplay. You start whispering in her ear kissing her neck, she's going to check her watch, get up and go to work. And you're stuck with Xtube.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 48 - 58
Dreamscale
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 2:08pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from leitskev
It is admirable that your priority is quality movies. But it makes you less likely to be produced. In my simpleminded, un-produced opinion.


That is definitely my aim and priority, and anyone who thinks differently is doing a HUGE disservice to the paying, movie loving audience.

I can't for the life of me see how that would diminish my chances at getting a script produced.  That just does not compute for me at all.

Again, I don't think you're even trying to understand what I'm saying, Kevin.  I didn't mention anything about foreplay or whether or not the couple in my sex analogy was married.

Foreplay has absolutely nothing to do with blowing your load "too early".  I'm referring to finishing on a high note, completing the process, and leaving everyone "satisfied".

In fact, my sex analogy really would have to involve unmarried participants, as the relationship is exactly the same in a unknown Spec writer selling a script, as there is no prior relationship involved.  Neither knows the other.  It's fresh and new.

Your blow your load theory assumes that initial, out of the gate load is a knockout blow, but it doesn't and cannot work that way in script/movie scenario.  It's impossible.

I think what it really comes down to in our disagreement is either an oversight or misunderstanding on your part.

If you break a story down to its most simple parts and use the most basic definitions or understandings of those parts, you're going to get structure - and the most simple structure is a 3 part structure - BEGINNING, MIDDLE, and END.

You're repeatedly saying the beginning is the most important and even have said that one should move a big twist ending to the middle, leaving your end flat or an afterthought - as if it doesn't really matter what happens or how things end.  You're saying to alter the entire story to achieve this, and IMO, that's flat out ludicrous and wrong.

The end is what the entire story is about.  The entire reason anyone is sitting through it.  The end is the culmination of the entire story, and if it falls flat, it fails.

It's basically a way of slapping your audience right in the face and saying "Fuck you...too bad.  I got you in and that's all I fucking care about'.  A great example is the recent shitfest called "The Devil Inside".  Yes, it was shockingly successful, but it was also shockingly terrible and 99% of the paying audience, as well as the critics, absolutely hated it and felt completely cheated.

In many ways, this is exactly what you're recommending and I for one, find it appalling.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 49 - 58
Scar Tissue Films
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 2:11pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3382
Posts Per Day
0.63
Interesting discussion with well made points on both sides.

I honestly don't know what to believe when it comes to screenwriting.

I read a little excerpt on the "From Babz" thread...seemed to suggest you have to follow the Synder beat sheet EXACTLY, write in EXACTLY a certain style etc and any deviation would see you in the bin before anyone has even looked at the story.

Seems absurd to me..but there you go.

Then you're told that the Unions won't allow new writers to have their work looked at, so you've got no chance anyway, even if you follow their rules.

Seems like a waste of time to write a screenplay for the studio system.

Seems to me anyone that wanted to get their stuff on screen would be better writing a Graphic Novel, a Novel, a blog...(Juno) or making a stupid Youtube video (the talking dog thing they're making into a film).

Unless you're living in LA and "paying your dues"...it looks nigh on impossible to break in if you believe what you read.

Leaving that aside...there's the weird conflict where writing a certain way in order to break the traditional system then means you're not writing stuff outside the mainstream enough to cause a stir in the underground...which could then give you mainstream credibility.

From an outside perspective, I'm not sure what I'd suggest.

Fastest way in from my way of looking at it would be to write something unique that gets produced to a high level by an up and comer that creates some heat. Or take the AJR approach and just get a project together yourself.

I'd also suggest targetting the scripts you like writing to the kind of Producers who like to MAKE them. There are other film industries out there.

I remember the guy who bought a script called Billy Elliot..a British film about a guy in a run down, traditional coal mining area in the North of England who wanted to be a ballet dancer.

He said eh picked it up, thought "What a load of shit, who wants to watch a film about THAT?". 20 minutes later he said his fingers were bashing the phone to call the writer to make a deal. It was a mega success and has even spawned a Theatre Production.

There's still going to be people out there who are willing to back films they LIKE...as well as companies who just need to keep the tills rolling. The huge companies, let's not forget, are the ones that create niche markets because whilst they are focussing on certain things...the ground is relatively clear for other stuff.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 50 - 58
Baltis.
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 2:25pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Scar Tissue Films


I remember the guy who bought a script called Billy Elliot..a British film about a guy in a run down, traditional coal mining area in the North of England who wanted to be a ballet dancer.


Didn't Joe Eszterhas already write that movie from a woman's perspective back in the 80's?

I'm not sure if I know who Babz is or not, but I know Snyder enough to know I don't follow him... He wrote a book, yeah?  People who write books on screenplays, I tend to avoid.  Adam Levenberg wrote a book, yes, and I'm a hypocrite in the sense I did get his book while he was consulting on my script Frostbite -- but it was to have a better understanding of what kind of things he was going to throw at me when he did the follow up call.  I wanted to be prepared for "his" way of constructing.  Little did I know, 20 bucks later, his book came into play about ZERO times.  He's a cool dude, helped me a great deal.  But I didn't learn much from his book.  His critique and phone follow up -- Yeah, learned a lot.  I'd gladly pay 400 to 600 bucks for my screenplay to be looked over by him than to pay 20 bucks for a book telling me general information in general ways.  His book is by far the most complete, though.  That I can tell you.  He covers a lot of ground that it took other people 5 books to convey.  People say "oh, you have to have Save the Cat on your desk when you write."  No you don't.  I have my copy wedged between a Three Billy Goat's Gruff hardback and a cowboy slang book on a wall shelf somewhere behind me... It's so damn crisp, you have to lick your finger tip just to turn a page.

I agree 100% with what you said, that writing your screenplays for Hollywood is a no win situation... You write your screenplays to be made.  That means by modest means.  Sure, we all have our epics.  I have two now -- Coffin Canyon and Frostbite... but I have a ton of other one's I'd shop around before them two.

I was taught a method for structuring last year called the A2Z method.  It's a slick trick when laying out your movie.  When I get to a computer I'll lay out 2 of the 26 steps that have helped me a great deal in structuring a better than 1st draft 1st draft.  My phone isn't the best means to post.

Revision History (1 edits)
Videoteq  -  April 23rd, 2012, 2:48pm
Logged
e-mail Reply: 51 - 58
leitskev
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 2:48pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
Jeff, while managing to appall you does provide me a certain guilty pleasure, I must admit, that is not my purpose. And I think the argument I am making in how we should approach it leaves room for this question: how much?

By how much, I mean how much emphasis should be transferred from the end of the script toward the front lines. Because I am certainly not suggesting that a script should be constructed so that it basically ends at the midpoint, and the rest is filler.

No, we want the rest of the script to be decent. And if you can manage another great twist at the end, that is the way to go.

Here's what I am suggesting, for anyone interested. And it is a little outside the box, so again, follow at your own risk(which means I'll be by myself!). When most people set out to write a script, they have the end as their target. Very normal, very understandable. That's how my scripts have been written too.

So what we end up doing is looking for that killer twist at the end, like The Sixth Sense. That dramatic, memorable turn of events that will leave a lasting impression. Like I said, very understandable.

But 98 out of 100 scripts seem to have what's called the "second half of the second act black hole." Or in English, the middle stinks.

Let's look at Fade To White. I'm not sure, I don't remember exactly where things happen, but ironically you might have avoided the black hole by doing exactly what I am here suggesting be done(wouldn't that kick you in the pants!) I could be off on this, but I believe we find out the good couple is actually the killers right at the midpoint! Right when the story needs a shake up.

I think when people plot their scripts(those using 3 act), they have the inciting incident, and then the 2 act turns as their main plot points. There's a midpoint point, maybe, but it tends to be an understated thing. Maybe some little change in the protag's arc or something.

I am recommending you aim your story like a missile right at the midpoint. Something big has to happen there to reboot the story. Use that to recharge things, to fuel the story right into the third act. If you can come up with another twist there, do it. But if you want to sell a spec script, and there is no one way, so this is just a suggestion, focus on the middle of your story. If you have a strong 25 to 30 pages, and then a recharging midpoint at page 45, your script is about to make orbit like a 3 stage rocket.

Rick, I don't know either. But I've read writers who have recently made it, and none of them really mention specific structure, certainly none mention STC. I think when studio developers sit around in a room, they speak STC language, and that ends up being reflected in the film's final state, but I don't think spec scripts need to be written that way.

And the rules are ever shifting. Babz posted recently a link to an article where a studio reader said he opens the script and looks for the turn into two on page 17 to 20, dumps the script if it's not there! But I've never seen the turn that early. It should be page 25 for a 100 page script. But page 17? And every movie I've noted it tends to be about 25 minutes into. So we have to be careful about what we read and what advice we get.

I think one should understand structure. And a script should have structure. But paint by the numbers...I'm not so sure about that. Hollywood wants writers with original ideas who can execute a story that they can make money off.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 52 - 58
mcornetto
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 4:23pm Report to Moderator
Guest User




Quoted from Scar Tissue Films

I read a little excerpt on the "From Babz" thread...seemed to suggest you have to follow the Synder beat sheet EXACTLY, write in EXACTLY a certain style etc and any deviation would see you in the bin before anyone has even looked at the story.


I've seen enough mention of this practice in various articles to believe it to be true - but only whilst selling in "Hollywood".

All bets are off when selling to independents.

I think a lot of the discussion about what you do when writing a script should be wrapped in where you're going to try to sell it.  It makes a huge difference.    

Logged
e-mail Reply: 53 - 58
Forgive
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 7:22pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Let The Sky Fall

Location
Various, exotic.
Posts
1373
Posts Per Day
0.27

Quoted from mcornetto

All bets are off when selling to independents.  


On a recent discussion with an indy co:
The ending was flat. My suggestion? Dark Night of the Soul. Blank faces. Snyder? Blank faces. Not a clue.

Snyder's a moron IMO.

14 scripts sold - two filmed. Both c'rap.

STC2 took fifty films (of about 600 per year) so less than 10% - and you're expected to write according to an invented form based on this tiny group.

So he used Saw (among others). Find the inciting incident on p12 exactly, 'cos I can't - I'm happy to be corrected. And isn't it 'roughly' 1 page per minute - and doesn't this change according to if you are writing mainly action vs mainly dialogue?

And doesn't STC depend entirely on what has happened in the past as opposed to interpreting the direction for the future?

The more I read about it, the more I see people checking completed work with BS-BS after they have completed their work. Has anyone here actually written TO a beat sheet?

And really, doesn't BS stand for Bullsh*t?

Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 54 - 58
steven8
Posted: April 23rd, 2012, 11:18pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer


The Ed Wood of Simply Scripts

Location
Barberton, OH
Posts
1156
Posts Per Day
0.22
I don't know, the three act structure makes sense to me, so I tend to write that way.  First 20-30 intro who what why and where and give them a task(s), middle 30- ish our protag jumps through hoops to find out how to solve the task(s) and the last 20-30 we bring it on home.  Most movies do tend to work this way, once you look close enough, and it just feels right to me.  I like it.

The Three Stooges movie made it easy on themselves -- They did it in three distinct titled sections.  Problem solved.


...in no particular order
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 55 - 58
RayW
Posted: May 26th, 2012, 9:26am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Freedom

Location
About a thousand years from now.
Posts
1821
Posts Per Day
0.36
(SS ghost from the past.   )

WRITE STORY --> PRODUCE FILM --> DISTRIBUTE FILM

Yeah, well... Who's producing it?
Who's ponying up the hundreds of thousands or a few million or tens of millions for this film?

A - Studio.
B - Independent Filmmaker.

Studio's definitely believe in the three act structure.
> Screenplay Story Structure Analysis
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsBznn8D13zOdEI1dGU1VUxaVDhCQmVnVFBLeUxSaWc#gid=0
     

Independent filmmakers don't give a rat's @ss about no stinkin' structure.

> 2011 Sundance Feature Film Distribution & Revenue Analysis
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsBznn8D13zOdGlCeDRmWTFCYXJRWjJ3SUphZDNzMGc#gid=0

> 2010 Independent Film Distribution & Revenue Analysis
https://docs.google.com/spread.....E&hl=en_US#gid=0


But here's the rub: roughly 3/4 of indie filmmakers are writer directors, meaning only 1/4 are looking to produce something someone else wrote.

Hollywood studios, on the otherhand, are inundated with product.

Some unpleasant stats:
Independent Film Profit Probability
http://abovethelineproducer.blogspot.com/2010/06/independent-film-profit-probability.html
"According to the Sundance Institute, the total number of U.S. feature films submitted to the festival was:
1,920 for the 2010 festival,
1,905 for the 2009 festival, and
2,021 for 2008.
Taking an average of these three years we arrive at  
1,949.

At any one time, there are about 1,949 U.S. films waiting to be picked up for distribution. This assumes, that all applicants to Sundance have no distribution already in place.

Films with no theatrical distribution in place prior to financing (i.e., most of the films applying to Sundance) end up opening at 1,000 domestic theaters or less, if they open theatrically at all.

The 2011 average was 135 theaters at widest (not total), F 76:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AsBznn8D13zOdGlCeDRmWTFCYXJRWjJ3SUphZDNzMGc#gid=0

"Hence, a good a place to turn for some rate of success analysis is this pool of limited opening films (specialty films).

The definition a specialty film is any film that opened theatrically at 1,000 domestic venues or fewer, “domestic” meaning the U.S. and Canada.

There were 286 English-language specialty films released into theaters in 2009 (and about 11% had studio financing). Using this 286 number as an approximation of U.S. specialty films, we can examine how they did and come up with a rough probability for turning a profit.                                                                                                                  


Of the 286 specialty films released in 2009, 52 English-language specialty films appear to be headed for a profit, with the rest not likely to make back their investment.

Films produced 2009 (1949)  
Films distributed in 2009 (286)  
Films returning a profit in 2009 (52)  
Profit probability (2.7%)"


This biz ain't easy.


In my research on how to write and construct a spec screenplay I noted how many films were written by established industry insiders and by those who knew someone already in the biz.
An exclusionary club, a cadre, nepotism, whathaveyou, it shouldn't be surprising - go with what you know, don't waste time looking for "the best".
It's all a crapshoot anyway in this industry.

Furthermore, I went and researched the beginnings of many many many screenwriters.
Most started out with little weenie projects.


Additionally I consistently noted the high frequency of writer directors there were for distributed films.
(If you can't get distribution... what's the point? Art for art's sake? Pfft. Yeah. Grow up).


700 to 800 MPAA rated films annually
+ 500 to 600 non-MPAA rated films annually
Page 13 - http://www.mpaa.org/Resources/93bbeb16-0e4d-4b7e-b085-3f41c459f9ac.pdf

"There are an estimated 4,000 - 5,000 independent films made every single year. Here's the unfortunate truth: Less than 5% of all these movies end up with distribution."
http://www.distribution.la/
Probably not the most reliable source of intel, but it doesn't sound like complete BS.

Maybe this'll be better...
"Only about 40 of the 3,812 finished films that were submitted to Sundance this year will get any kind of distribution at all.  That’s slightly over one percent.  The other 98% you will never get to see – not even on Netflix."
http://www.culturalweekly.com/indie-films-state-of-the-union.html
Looks somewhat more credible.
And considering that not every indie film gets submitted to Sundance (on a lark) their 3,812 number suggests the previous distribution.la numbers were low balling the total number.
I bet it's closer to 8,000, give or take a thousand. Or two.

Lettuce move onto spec screenplays...

"I often see the figure that 40,000 (or more) scripts are written each year... " (2004 figure)
http://messageboard.donedealpro.com/boards/archive/index.php/t-7081.html

"According to the Writer's Guild of America, 55,000 pieces of literary material are registered annually, 30,00 of which are screenplays."
http://www.screenwritingtostandard.com/

"An old adage in Hollywood is that in spite of the hundreds of thousands of rejected scripts every year, a good script will find an audience. Format properly, be professional, and write a killer script, and your chances are maximized for success."
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-spec-script.htm
Perhaps a little melodramatic, but point made - it's more than a few thousand.
Certainly more than the number of never-to-be-seen feature films made.
A LOT more.



So...

Who are you writing for?
Exactly.



Logged
Private Message Reply: 56 - 58
leitskev
Posted: May 26th, 2012, 11:17am Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients


Posts
3113
Posts Per Day
0.64
Hey Ray! Welcome back, buddy. The SS stat man.

Couple of points. First, on the 50k registered scripts per year. I recently read that this number is a distortion, because it does not distinguish what people are really registering. Many writers register treatments, shorts, and multiple drafts of the same script. So no one knows for sure what the number is, but it's probably much less than 50k. The writer who wrote that article speculated it was probably around 20k features.

Only 50 to 100 spec scripts get picked up a year, however. And I think it's about 400 major films produced a year. So it's still a daunting task.

A thing to keep in mind, though, is the paid writing that goes on behind the scenes, stuff we have no way of tracking. I recently watched a discussion with the Coen brothers, and most of their work is writing gigs for things that never get made. I'm not talking in the past, but now, even with their prestige and success.

This is where is gets tricky. I suspect it works this way,maybe someone with more knowledge can confirm or shoot down: if a writer can create a truly original spec script, while it's unlikely for it to get filmed, it may draw him enough attention to get him paid assignments. So for example our esteemed Ray writes a 400 million dollar script that's filled with deep characters that we care about. It really draws attention. Maybe he wins the Bluecat or something. He gets hired to work assignments. For 10 years, he never appears in credits. And his 400million dollar script does not get filmed. But he's working, old Ray is!

He's writing on assignment, making nice money, and developing connections in the industry. His work always gets rewritten by writers higher up the food chain, so he doesn't get the film credits. To us, it looks like he fell off the world, or is writing in a cave somewhere. But he's on the inside, thriving.

And eventually, he gets to a point where he either sells a big spec, or gets the credit for a major film. Then HE becomes the studio writer who is higher up the food chain.

As far as structure, I still believe things are a bit more flexible than it seems. I'm not arguing against 3 act. I just don't think most producers, agents, etc. look at a script and say, "jeez, I think we got a winning concept here, something we can really make money off...but there's no 3 act structure, so we have to pass." I just don't think they think like that.

Three act is something that is considered when teams of pros are developing an existing concept.

Again, I am not saying people should not try to seek the more classic turns into two and three. Use it where it's useful. But I don't think forcing stories is likely to get you work in the industry.

As I said in a post further up, I read an interview with a pro writer who explained that most films are developed by teams in the studio. They all speak a language similar to Save The Cat, so films always develop along those lines. But, he says, it's different when it comes to spec scripts. There are really 2 purposes to a spec script.

One is to get optioned. A producer will option a script if he thinks he can make money off the concept. It's that simple. And when it comes to any decent size studio, after the script is optioned, it will go their development team for a rewrite. But the key question is whether the concept can make money. Does it have a high concept pitch? Is there a hook? Will the characters appeal to actors who can put asses in the seats? Are there trailer moments? Those are the questions.

The second purpose of these spec scripts is that they serve as your portfolio, your writing resume, and hopefully lead to paid work.

When we watch most major films, the 3 act structure is usually evident. In fact, if you turn off the picture and the dialogue, and just listen to the rest of the soundtrack you'll hear the music change at the key turning points, like clockwork, right on cue. So that means we should write that way, right?

I'm not so sure, for the reasons I tried to argue above. Most of those big films were not spec scripts. And even the ones that were, the story was bought and then the studio developed it with its team. So I think as long as a script is not stagnant, and has some kind of structure, has a pacing with twists and turns every 10 pages, it should be fine.

Good to see you, Ray!
Logged
Private Message Reply: 57 - 58
Busy Little Bee
Posted: July 15th, 2012, 10:35pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Los Angeles
Posts
324
Posts Per Day
0.05
Hmmm, three act structure can be helpful and/or limiting. It's really just a guide and has nothing to do with content or how you choose to have the story unfold that comes from practice (read and write).

What ever format you feel helps you write a good story three act structure or some variant, use it if it gets you writing. You'll grow and develop as you go.

BLB



Commodus: But the Emperor Claudius knew that they were up to something. He knew they were busy little bees. And one night he sat down with one of them and he looked at her and he said, "Tell me what you have been doing, busy little bee..."
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 58 - 58
 Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4 : All
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Screenwriting Class  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006