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

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

I'm serious.

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

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

The action/adventure that starts in an office cubical.

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

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

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

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

Anyway, just a homage to what I learned here.

Thanks,

Tony.

You're a quick learner grasshopper!  

Double posting here...

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

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

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

Totally agree - and disagree.

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

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

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

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

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

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

True...very true.  Sad...but true.

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

Not impossible, but oh so difficult...

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

Indeed

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

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

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

You can tell way before two pages.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tony - I will try one last time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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