I think in general, most screenwriters are opposed to the notion of a screenwriting 'formula', a write by numbers approach.

No matter what theory you subscribe to, there are always self professed gurus waiting in the wings, ready to peddle their latest A-Z screenwriting book, with the promise of offering a 'new' way of doing things . . .

This latest one, "Writing in Pictures: Screenwriting Made (Mostly) Painless", by Joseph McBride, it would seem, denounces this formula . . . only to offer a different formula!?

Not to knock the book, because I haven't read it, but the logic is a bit like creating a religon based on the dogma that it's against orgainsed belief . . .

You can read the blog here: http://honeycuttshollywood.com/writing-in-pictures/

Maybe he should've called it, Kill The Cat.


Phil

Quentin Tarantino goes outside the formula alot.  
Rule of the thumb for the story is to have beginning, middle, and end right?  Not true.
I've seen so many movies that start from the middle and have no end at all.  You have to guess the ending or take it however way you want it. For example, the Shining has no ending IMO.  50/50 has no ending...can't think of anymore now but there's alot.  If a script begins with a scene which actually is the ending, should we still call it a beginning of the movie or what?  
So, it's not really true that all big movies have followed the formula.

Although I really enjoyed 50/50, it was one of the most formulaic movies I had watched in a long time, complete with:

- An inciting incident on page 10 of the script.
- An event which propels our protag into the second act on page 22 (meeting the cute psychiatrist).
- A mid-point on page 48 (protag splitting up with his girlfriend).
- An event which propels our protag into the final act on page 74 (being told that they have to operate on him now, otherwise he will die).
- And a nice succinct end, tying up all the strands of the story (SPOILERS!!!!! - Seth Rogan's character stops being a dousche; our protag survives cancer, and gets the girl).

Toby.

What's weird is that most screenwriters feel like they have to write formula screenplays because they think only producers or agents or those that make the decision to pass on a script only want formulaic movies because that's what sells tickets and makes money.  So if you are "different" in your script writing, then that's certainly commendable, but you definitely have a tough slog ahead of you.

You can be unique with your screenplay, even if they have the formula beginning, middle and end.  Look at Memento or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.  You want a movie that doesn't have the classic happy ending but is still a powerful movie nonetheless, go find Breaker Morant.  Sixth Sense was different.  There are a ton of ways to write a script that isn't your typical "boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy wins back girl" movie (or nowadays it's zombie meets girl, zombie loses girl....).

I say throw away the screeenwriting books and find your own style whatever it may be--because if all you do is try to parrot someone else, then all you'll likely be is a pale imitation of someone else.

To me, a screenplay is like a resume.  I'm tired, but will try to explain.

A resume (screenplay) is just you (the story) on paper.  It is just to try to get you (the story) to the interview (the pitch).  Even then, in the interview (pitch), there's not enough time to convince the hiring manager (producer) who you (the story) really are.  If they do hire you (option), you (the story) really hope to show the hiring manager (producer) that you kick A$$ (the film).

Okay, it didn't come out as good as it sounded in my head.  Everyone tries to tell you that there is only one way to make a resume.  I've been a hiring manager and can tell you I've seen resumes in all shapes, forms, colors, and styles.  My mother has a resume business, and does pretty good.  That still doesn't mean that she has "THE FORMULA" to resume writing.

The main thing is that you have a GOOD STORY,  and you TELL IT WELL.  I think that is what will make things happen.  If you are too wrapped up in all the "rules," but your story sucks and you aren't telling it well (grammar, spelling, etc.) - that will be your undoing.

People on this site and others, give some good advice.  Just tell your story and tell it the best you can.  Format is important, but get the story straight first.

AMC says it all, "Story matters here."

Good night all.

I think each of us have our own inner formula, our way of telling a story.   That's what I should be seeing on the pages of your screenplay, your formula.

Another term for it might be your "voice", the way you tell a story.

What's paramount is to connect with the readers because when you do that's when really special things happen.

You can connect with the reader by telling stories you feel connected to.  

When you have a moment write down five things that are important to you.   Pick something off that list and write a short about it.   You'll be surprised what a difference that will make.

My favorite formula is Planting and Pay off.  I am still learning how to master it.  If you can do it well, it looks so good.  So, I tried it in one of my script and posted it here, but someone said the first ten pages wasn't exciting enough, and he was not sure he understands the beginning.  That's why I am rewriting it now.
  
I planted the old man and a baby in the first two pages.  He is packing up, and about to travel somewhere with the baby.  Later on. I bring them back around page 45 for two pages again where they are in the cave with a travel guide.  Then, finally I bring them back at the ending where they are climbing the stairs of the temple which the boy will grow up later in the sequel.
Except those three parts, the whole script is about the boy's parents so you will not see him at all, but the story is actually based on him.  The reader MUST read the whole script to understand why I put those three parts.  If he only read the first ten pages, he wouldn't have a clue.  

I don't know how I can plant better than I did without losing the reader.  

IMO storytelling is giving the reader/viewer an experience that moves them emotionally, evokes something within them, or enlightens them. An experience may have a beginning, middle and end of epic proportions that has a clear message, or it may just be a moment in someone's life that last no longer than a minute and gives us an emotional connection to the world and others around us. It's this experience that is important to me. Moving from point A to B and leaving me with something I can take away from what I've just read or seen (hopefully something positive)... regardless of the chosen path they take to get from A to B, as long as it ends at a B. B being the evolution from A, and the nugget of whatever wisdom, emotions, or ideas earned through that experience.

As I've always read numerous times, formulas are guide lines and not hard rules. I think it's a good idea to keep in mind who you're writing for. if you want to reach the masses than the formulaic guide lines would suggest to write a storyline that is the lowest common denominator. I guess you have to ask yourself, "who is the audience I want to write for?" I firmly believe that there is an enthusiastic audience for everything, it's just a matter of how big.

best
Kev

Hey Coldbug,
I didn't read your script, but I don't think that's a plant and payoff.
IMO, a Plant/Payoff is more of showing something that seems to be insignificant, then when we get farther into the story, realize that it is extremely important.
Think Back To The Future. There are tons of them.
When we first hear that the clocktower stopped ticking years ago because of a lightning strike, we remember it, but assume it's just useless information. Then, when our heroes are all but helpless to get back to where they need to go, BOOM!, we remember, the bolt of lightning from the beginning.

Also, it could be something as simple as having a squeaky front step in a few scenes in the beginning of your movie. Then possibly having the main character chased up the stairs in your third act and the assailant falls through it and blah blah blah.

Anyway, just a few thoughts.