Interesting. If you stayed to the end of this video a message flashes on screen - How long do you spend on act 1 vs act 2 and 3? Meaning the first act, the set up, is crucial. Quick answer - for whatever reason I usually fly through act 1. For me it’s the easiest one to write, and it usually received well. But where I really lose it and struggle the most is the second act. For whatever reason my story loses steam, or my brain becomes clogged or whatever. Maybe it’s because I’m not setting things up well enough in act 1 so I can come back to it in the second act. I don’t know. Definitely food for thought.

The first mistake a screenwriter can make is watching YouTube videos. The second is actually listening to whatever it is they have to say. The third mistake is putting what they say into practise.

If your screenplay doesn't sell, it doesn't mean it's a bad screenplay. It doesn't mean there is something wrong with it.

StevenClark - I think every screenwriter has struggled with what you describe. Recently I've realized this is why it's prudent to come up with your ending before you write.

Then the goal becomes building towards something clearly defined, rather than aimlessly wading forward in the hope that something materializes. It's like pro wrestling once upon a time. The wrestlers are given the finish before-hand, and it's their responsibility to build towards it in a believable fashion.

Quoted from GregT StevenClark - I think every screenwriter has struggled with what you describe. Recently I've realized this is why it's prudent to come up with your ending before you write. Then the goal becomes building towards something clearly defined, rather than aimlessly wading forward in the hope that something materializes. It's like pro wrestling once upon a time. The wrestlers are given the finish before-hand, and it's their responsibility to build towards it in a believable fashion.

If the first and second act of my features looks like a pro wrestling match I’m in trouble.

But I hear what you’re saying. I try never to start a screenplay (anymore) without a clearly defined ending. Or at least a resolution that lets the characters handle it the way they want to.

A good place to stay plotting is the ' Mirror moment'.

That's the part, usually the emotional centre of the film, that the main character has to look at themselves and realise what it is that they need and how they are a long way from it.

Once you know that you know how it will end, and you know what they're battling to overcome at the start.

Quoted from DustinBowcot The first mistake a screenwriter can make is watching YouTube videos. The second is actually listening to whatever it is they have to say. The third mistake is putting what they say into practise. If your screenplay doesn't sell, it doesn't mean it's a bad screenplay. It doesn't mean there is something wrong with it.

I’m not that highly evolved yet. What I mean is I think we’re always learning, or never too good to learn new tricks. I think everyone needs to go back to school every once in a while. That said, YouTube videos are like someone who posts a critique on your script. You can either agree or disagree. It doesn’t hurt to watch videos, especially by produced screenwriters talking about their methods or writing style. I take what I want, discard the rest. I would hope that most of us are smart enough to know we don’t have to take these informative videos as gospel.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films A good place to stay plotting is the ' Mirror moment'. That's the part, usually the emotional centre of the film, that the main character has to look at themselves and realise what it is that they need and how they are a long way from it. Once you know that you know how it will end, and you know what they're battling to overcome at the start.

I like that. It sounds like a good tool and, honestly, it’s the first time I’ve ever heard of the “mirror moment.”

I robbed it from this guy :

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/plotters-and-pantsers/amp/

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films I robbed it from this guy : https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.helpingwritersbecomeauthors.com/plotters-and-pantsers/amp/

Thanks.

Quoted from SAC I’m not that highly evolved yet. What I mean is I think we’re always learning, or never too good to learn new tricks. I think everyone needs to go back to school every once in a while. That said, YouTube videos are like someone who posts a critique on your script. You can either agree or disagree. It doesn’t hurt to watch videos, especially by produced screenwriters talking about their methods or writing style. I take what I want, discard the rest. I would hope that most of us are smart enough to know we don’t have to take these informative videos as gospel.

Yeah, completely agree with this.

In my professional life I'm a commercial director, so run and manage sales teams. The idea that advice (and good advice) or training shoiuld be discarded is usually the sign of someone who won't end up hitting the top numbers.

Writers should be open-minded to all sources, and always place the message > the messenger.

Fair enough if others see it differently, but I'm definitely of the view that it's important to be a sponge in life.

Quoted from SAC Interesting. If you stayed to the end of this video a message flashes on screen - How long do you spend on act 1 vs act 2 and 3? Meaning the first act, the set up, is crucial. Quick answer - for whatever reason I usually fly through act 1. For me it’s the easiest one to write, and it usually received well. But where I really lose it and struggle the most is the second act. For whatever reason my story loses steam, or my brain becomes clogged or whatever. Maybe it’s because I’m not setting things up well enough in act 1 so I can come back to it in the second act. I don’t know. Definitely food for thought.

Not sure if it fits or not - but if you lose steam in your second act it may be due to a lack of reversal(s). i.e., if you breeze through the set-up, goal setting, etc and find that your story loses steam, you may benefit from some reversals - e.g., just as your hero gets closer to his goal, he/she hits a speed bump that derails them.  Just spit-balling.

Not a bad video per se. I just always cringe when I see something like "Mistakes That Writers Make" because often they are not mistakes.

Mistakes are typos, format errors, etc. Personally, I would never apply the term to story structure.  

Yes, I've seen many good films that mirror the advice given in this video. Conversely, I've seen many good films that don't. i.e., one should use the structure that best tells the story. Sometimes that means the inciting incident takes place on page 1. Sometimes it means it takes place on page 30. etc. etc.  To me, the only thing that matters is that - from your title page on - are you generating enough interest for your reader to turn to the next page.

Quoted from eldave1 Not sure if it fits or not - but if you lose steam in your second act it may be due to a lack of reversal(s). i.e., if you breeze through the set-up, goal setting, etc and find that your story loses steam, you may benefit from some reversals - e.g., just as your hero gets closer to his goal, he/she hits a speed bump that derails them.  Just spit-balling.

It’s possible about the reversals, Dave. I’ll have to think on that - I’m already dealing with the “mirror” moment that ScarTissue spoke about, so that might have something to do with it.

I think the bigger problem is being able to develop a head of steam and see it through to the end. With Christmasville I knew exactly how it ended, no ifs or buts about it. But other features I’ve found that either I lost interest in it after the first act - all that set up - or worse yet, I was unable to think of interesting situations to put my characters in to navigate the second act. The second act, to me, has always been this gray area - fun and games they call it - where I’ve sat and stared at the page thinking where in the hell do I go now? Perhaps, just perhaps, I’ve been outlining too much and overthinking things. I’m working on a feature right now and So far I’m not having this issue. Then again, I haven’t done an outline for this feature at all, and that was a conscious decision. I wanted to try something different and let the story and the characters decisions unfold as I go. So far the experiment has been quite liberating.

Look forward to the new feature

Quoted from eldave1 Not sure if it fits or not - but if you lose steam in your second act it may be due to a lack of reversal(s). i.e., if you breeze through the set-up, goal setting, etc and find that your story loses steam, you may benefit from some reversals - e.g., just as your hero gets closer to his goal, he/she hits a speed bump that derails them.  Just spit-balling.

Or, not enough sub-plots set up in act one. It's a old screenwriting cliche, but it's not wrong: nearly every problem you have in act two has its genesis in act one. Just my minor take.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Or, not enough sub-plots set up in act one. It's a old screenwriting cliche, but it's not wrong: nearly every problem you have in act two has its genesis in act one. Just my minor take.

Solid advice

I checked out that youtube channel. Got some cool stuff on there. I'll watch more when I have the time.

As Steve said, I'll give anything a chance. The problem is there's so much content. My mailman probably has a youtube channel and three books on screenwriting. Most of it I don't find useful, so I stop looking altogether. Then I come across something randomly that makes me wonder how I ever attempted to write a screenplay without it.

For me, these two books are in a league of their own:

The Anatomy of Story by John Truby
Inside Story by Dara Marks

I don't know where I'm going with is... I guess my point is if you like either of those and know of other good sites/books, tell me what they are!

Quoted from MarkItZero I checked out that youtube channel. Got some cool stuff on there. I'll watch more when I have the time. As Steve said, I'll give anything a chance. The problem is there's so much content. My mailman probably has a youtube channel and three books on screenwriting. Most of it I don't find useful, so I stop looking altogether. Then I come across something randomly that makes me wonder how I ever attempted to write a screenplay without it. For me, these two books are in a league of their own: The Anatomy of Story by John Truby Inside Story by Dara Marks I don't know where I'm going with is... I guess my point is if you like either of those and know of other good sites/books, tell me what they are!

I've only bought one screenwriter book ever, and I got it this past summer. It's called Writing For Emotional Impact by Carl Iglesias. The gist of this book is that Hollywood basically sells movies by appealing to people's emotions. For instance, a blurb in an action movie poster or advertisement would be "thrilling" "a roller coaster ride" "will leave you breathless" etc. All of these descriptions play to our emotions when thinking of a good actioner - fear, worry, anxiety. So, pretty much this book focuses on how to make your characters more appealing to emotions of the genre you're writing in. Seeing as I'm a big fan of drama, I thought this was a good purchase.

Might be quite interesting to dissect a number of scripts from the vantage point of that first act, both where those scripts are agreed upon to have worked, and those which are agreed upon to have not worked.

For example, why did Terminator work, but Terminator 3 did not.

Things like that.

Quoted from Andrew For example, why did Terminator work, but Terminator 3 did not.

Ouch. I still think Rise of the Machines worked overall, but there were two major problems: the comedy in it was winking-at-the-camera stuff and the R-rating wasn't necessary. Just too light overall.

Quoted from Mr. Blonde Ouch. I still think Rise of the Machines worked overall, but there were two major problems: the comedy in it was winking-at-the-camera stuff and the R-rating wasn't necessary. Just too light overall.

It's an interesting one, cos the main structure has been lifted from the previous films. So arguably the structure isn't the problem, but I could see arguments for why it failed some of the tests laid out in the video.

Agreed that a lot of the problems are down to execution.

It makes for an interesting film to dissect. I didn't hate it, but it was following up two excellent films, which made its job so much harder.

Maybe it failed for the very simple reason that two films had come before and enough time had passed for that plot to lose any remaining lustre? I thought Rise was a pretty good movie but at the same time, could it ever have been more than "another one" with diminishing returns?

Despite the appalling dialogue, Dark Fate was a pretty strong entry too, but I felt like the whole audience was just kinda sitting there wondering what the point was.

Come to think of it, I feel like the vast majority of franchises only manage to get out two good films.

Quoted from SAC I've only bought one screenwriter book ever, and I got it this past summer. It's called Writing For Emotional Impact by Carl Iglesias. The gist of this book is that Hollywood basically sells movies by appealing to people's emotions. For instance, a blurb in an action movie poster or advertisement would be "thrilling" "a roller coaster ride" "will leave you breathless" etc. All of these descriptions play to our emotions when thinking of a good actioner - fear, worry, anxiety. So, pretty much this book focuses on how to make your characters more appealing to emotions of the genre you're writing in. Seeing as I'm a big fan of drama, I thought this was a good purchase.

I might try it. But if I don't like it, I'm gonna show up at your house and demand a refund.

Quoted from Andrew It's an interesting one, cos the main structure has been lifted from the previous films. So arguably the structure isn't the problem, but I could see arguments for why it failed some of the tests laid out in the video. Agreed that a lot of the problems are down to execution. It makes for an interesting film to dissect. I didn't hate it, but it was following up two excellent films, which made its job so much harder.

There's a detailed, scientific analysis of the Terminator franchise here.

Quoted from MarkItZero There's a detailed, scientific analysis of the Terminator franchise here.

Cool, will give that a view.

Quoted from Heretic Maybe it failed for the very simple reason that two films had come before and enough time had passed for that plot to lose any remaining lustre? I thought Rise was a pretty good movie but at the same time, could it ever have been more than "another one" with diminishing returns? Despite the appalling dialogue, Dark Fate was a pretty strong entry too, but I felt like the whole audience was just kinda sitting there wondering what the point was. Come to think of it, I feel like the vast majority of franchises only manage to get out two good films.

True. It's very tough for a franchise to keep its energy and keep pulling out winners.

Not that I'm a huge fan, but credit to the Marvel universe for kind of bucking that trend, but I guess it could be said that's down to it being multiple franchises.

Quoted from SAC I’m not that highly evolved yet. What I mean is I think we’re always learning, or never too good to learn new tricks. I think everyone needs to go back to school every once in a while. That said, YouTube videos are like someone who posts a critique on your script. You can either agree or disagree. It doesn’t hurt to watch videos, especially by produced screenwriters talking about their methods or writing style. I take what I want, discard the rest. I would hope that most of us are smart enough to know we don’t have to take these informative videos as gospel.

I prefer to write. I honestly don't care how other writers do it.

Quoted from DustinBowcot I prefer to write. I honestly don't care how other writers do it.

Absolutely.

Usually I forget what is said in the videos shortly after watching. But I do find some of them interesting. If ever I want to sharpen my writing I’ll read Tony Gilroy — Michael Clayton in particular.

"Mistakes that kills screenplays"

I've heard that in the UK having the kind of name on the front page that sounds White British and middle-aged(ish) is a big no-no.

So no Daves, Andrews, Stevens, Marks etc.

Mental eh. Hopefully not true (although a mate of mine was told to take his name off and put the main actresses on instead).

Quoted from Pleb "Mistakes that kills screenplays" I've heard that in the UK having the kind of name on the front page that sounds White British and middle-aged(ish) is a big no-no. So no Daves, Andrews, Stevens, Marks etc. Mental eh. Hopefully not true (although a mate of mine was told to take his name off and put the main actresses on instead).

I'm fucked...

Lol!

If you're planning on entering the BBC's script room this December, perhaps think about what you're willing to do to get ahead.

Me? I'm entering as Maxine, and if against all odds I make it in, I'm gonna have to go full Tootsie and rock up as a bird.

Or, you could just identify as someone who doesn't have a name

Go full on Prince and use a symbol

Written By

      ‡

Quoted from Pleb Lol! If you're planning on entering the BBC's script room this December, perhaps think about what you're willing to do to get ahead. Me? I'm entering as Maxine, and if against all odds I make it in, I'm gonna have to go full Tootsie and rock up as a bird.

Lol but the name thing is not true. I got to the final 4% of the BBC Drama submissions and with a name like Mark I may as well name myself white, male and privileged! Although saying that, I generally do better in US competitions than I do in the UK so maybe a pen name is in order!

Maybe if you didn't enter as Mark, you'd have made it all the way... Boom! (exploding head emoji)

Yeah I'm not sure what to make of it tbh. When I first heard it I just thought it sounded like someone trying to look for a way protect their ego, but when I took a look at those who'd been selected before it was made up of what I think would be an unlikely outcome if the writers were truly picked on merit alone. For example, half the writers would be women, with a third of the group being from ethnic minorities. And that seemed to be a reoccurring pattern too.

Funny you say about the US as the same chap who said he'd been told to use the actresses's name on his script said he hadn't had any of the same issues when dealing with American production companies. I was surprised as I thought it'd be an even bigger issue there than here in the UK.